BitUSD hype and its freaky price discovery lead me to some thoughts.
What if Peercoin would have multiple PoW diffs with different coinbase maturation times, f.e. 3 parallel diffs with 1 day, 7 days, 30 days respectively?
Miner/pool choose which one to mine.
Could diff changes/correlations be a base for price prediction, stabilization, discovery? If yes then we need opcodes(flags?) to make transaction inclusion in block conditional(f.e. diff3 > diff1 & diff2 > 200M ). This could bring far better price discovery mechanism than pegging(???). Since PPC security doesn’t depend on PoW i think that community consensus over changes would be quite easily reached.
if diff3 <= diff1 & diff2 > 200M
HASH160 EQUAL HX CHECKSIG(pubkey_a)
else
CHECKMULTISIG(pubkey_a, pubkey_b)
(this script would require third party to hold X and publish it only if both sides of this ‘betting’ include their bail-in TXs in the blockchain)
[size=18pt]Bets on diffA > diffB are wrong, % differences instead[/size]
Three PoW diffs for different coin maturation times (1 day, 7 days, 30 days).
Fist diff will be highest, last will be lowest. If miner predicts price fall he’ll mine on first diff, if he expects price to rise by the week he’ll mine on second diff, if he thinks that coin is greatly undervalued he’ll mine on third diff to earn most coins - even if he have to wait a month for liquidation.
Does it have sense?
What mechanism can be used to distinguish price changes from technology/miners-market improvements(sources of diff changes)?
I am intrigued by this concept as it seems clear that mining costs are going to continue exerting more and more influence over exchange rates primarily with Bitcoin and other PoW-only coins. I also believe that “industrial” SHA-256 miners are keeping selling-pressure on Peercoin which incidentally decreases its marketcap under low float conditions.
Your proposal will work if miners also become speculators, but it appears to me that in the high-speed, high-stakes PoW industry these days it may be unrealistic to expect many miners to risk postponing rewards while racking up expenses. In other words, I’m afraid that the respective 1/7/30 day difficulties would always move in tight unison to reflect current costs for running equipment over that period of time.
I do, however, hope to see more development of this idea. It would be particularly interesting to try to migrate the concept to PoS. For example, suggestions have been made toward adjusting minting rewards and/or probability based on how long stakeholders are purposely waiting to mint. What if there were also different PoS targets based upon how long one was willing to stake PPC (e.g. 520/1040/2080 confirmations)? Is it even worth the effort to try to implement “intrinsic” price stabilization in the first place?
Yup, it could be boring unison eventually.
What I’m looking for is a ~market for long maturing coins, miners will immediately exchange them for BTC or spendable PPC. I would buy long maturing coins with my spendable coins, many here too. PPC holders could get additional interest (in PPCs) from holding.
Exchange would be very simple in centralized environment- you set a deposit and offers in % on different maturation times, exchange locks your deposit, each time your address receive long maturing PPCs your deposit decreases. And f.e. address of last output of coinbase transaction would be recipient address of spendable coins. Such centralized exchange isn’t an issue, if offers will be locked for 7 days (to let miners safely set output addresses) we’re talking about ~1500PPC x 7 in total deposits right now.
What if there will be 4 diffs for 1,7,30,365 days maturation times? Imagine you can make year long ‘long position’ with additional profit! (you receive f.e. 5% more coins 365x coindays, directly ‘mintable’, lol).
Could it be additional price stabilization factor?
I do, however, hope to see more development of this idea.[/b] It would be particularly interesting to try to migrate the concept to PoS. For example, suggestions have been made toward adjusting minting rewards and/or probability based on how long stakeholders are purposely waiting to mint. What if there were also different PoS targets based upon how long one was willing to stake PPC (e.g. 520/1040/2080 confirmations)? Is it even worth the effort to try to implement "intrinsic" price stabilization in the first place?
I’m skeptical on experimenting with PoS as it’s security related, however after experiments with PoW we could judge if some changes could be valuable and then make them in core mechanism.
Is whole idea attractive? Isn’t it innovative? Does it strengthen Peercoin’s position as real alternative, bringing more attention to coins with fundamentals?
Thank you learnmore, I’d love to hear here sigmike’s opinion also.