Recheck our belief on PPC/XPM

General
61

[quote=“sabreiib, post:59, topic:3273”]Sentinelrv, I agree with SK about XPM is better than BTC if XPM grows up, but disagree the PPC’s future.

  1. Scarcity. As we known, this is basic economics concept. Scarcity is “necessary condition but not sufficient condition” to being valuable. Fresh air is critical for us without it we die but fresh air is not scarce so it has no price. When we check the PPC design WITHIN its whitepaper, it is scarce, however, if we put the whole society as our scope, Can PPC stop its copy cats?

2）Reduction to absurdity. Let assume XPM has grown up now and each XPM equals to $250. What’s the copy cats response to XPM? They rush to github download XPM newest software and modify some minor factors and claim their YPM is as good as XPM, just like what 500 PoW altcoins did to BTC in 2013-14. However, the free market don’t buy it because the hash rate/mining rigs behinds XPM is far greater than counterfeits(YPM). Copy cats can copy open source software freely but can NOT point guns to every XPM miner’s head to force them shift hashrate from XPM to YPM network. Last two years, LTC and Doge tried to compete with BTC but their hash rate(security) never close to BTC, that’s the reason BTC keeping scarcity. Is there any PoW coin whose hash rate near to 300P now? None. The copy task is difficult, if not impossible.

For XPM, its unique computing and supply curve besides potential side chain may incentive XPM mining(GPU, perhaps future ASCI ) and grow up, XPM may rebuild “Gold Standard” in future.

Now let assume every PPC equals $250. Those copy cats rush to github and download SK’s latest PPC version and modify some factor of course including name, the counterfeit called “QQC”, they intentionally set a very high PoW Sha256 difficulty and give out one third of all QQC to people on internet and shout " let’s PoS mining", thanks for SK’s design, the QQC network is same power efficient,decentralized environmental friendly and SECURITY.

People would doubt what’s the difference between PPC and QQC? Why PPC =$250 while QQC=$1 since both have almost network? If PPC fails to keep scarce, $250 is impossible. Gold Standard is unreachable.

Cryptocurrency is open source, author anonymous, they must hook something in real work to prevent copy cats, BTC has mining rigs/hashrate, Nubits has Fiat/BTC in their system, but what does PPC have in real world? Peerbox? Personal Computer? No. Because copy cats have those too.[/quote]

The way I’ve always looked at it is that every blockchain is independent of one another. For example, Bitcoin’s scarcity relies solely on the supply of Bitcoin and not any other crypto that also happens to use proof-of-work. The same would go for Peercoin. Peercoin’s scarcity relies solely on the supply of existing PPC, how many are being created through inflation and destroyed through transaction fees. Peercoin is Peercoin. Why should some other copycat proof-of-stake coin affect Peercoin’s scarcity? Am I wrong in thinking that copycat blockchains should have no effect on the scarcity of the originals as well as each other, since they’re all independent from one another?

62

[quote=“sabreiib, post:59, topic:3273”]Now let assume every PPC equals $250. Those copy cats rush to github and download SK’s latest PPC version and modify some factor of course including name, the counterfeit called “QQC”, they intentionally set a very high PoW Sha256 difficulty and give out one third of all QQC to people on internet and shout " let’s PoS mining", thanks for SK’s design, the QQC network is same power efficient,decentralized environmental friendly and SECURITY.

People would doubt what’s the difference between PPC and QQC? Why PPC =$250 while QQC=$1 since both have almost network? If PPC fails to keep scarce, $250 is impossible.[/quote]

good point. actually copy catting a POS is much easier than POW. all that matters is distribution. if someone is able to distribute a new coin to a wider network than the one already existing in the most capitalized POS it will easily take its place.

63

[quote=“sabreiib, post:59, topic:3273”][…]
Now let assume every PPC equals $250. Those copy cats rush to github and download SK’s latest PPC version and modify some factor of course including name, the counterfeit called “QQC”, they intentionally set a very high PoW Sha256 difficulty and give out one third of all QQC to people on internet and shout " let’s PoS mining", thanks for SK’s design, the QQC network is same power efficient,decentralized environmental friendly and SECURITY.

People would doubt what’s the difference between PPC and QQC? Why PPC =$250 while QQC=$1 since both have almost network? If PPC fails to keep scarce, $250 is impossible. Gold Standard is unreachable.

Cryptocurrency is open source, author anonymous, they must hook something in real work to prevent copy cats, BTC has mining rigs/hashrate, Nubits has Fiat/BTC in their system, but what does PPC have in real world? Peerbox? Personal Computer? No. Because copy cats have those too.[/quote]

You can make a PPC copy cat (there are already a lot of that), but it will NOT have the same security as Peercoin does have.
How will you handle the distribution of the copied coin?
With PoW like Peercoin does? How will you attract miners to that PoW process? This might look almost the same as for Bitcoin copy cats in terms of hash rate.
Without PoW? Like NXT did it?

Peercoin is scarce. The amount of PPC can’t be increased at will.
You need to mine or mint them.
With PoS you have an annual 1% increase, but assuming the total value of the Peercoin network stays the same, that increases the amount of Peercoins by 1%, but lowers the value per Peercoin by 1%.
So the only effective inflation comes from the PoW process that has a feedback loop adjusting the coinbase reward to the difficulty.
The more hash rate you put into the PoW process, the smaller the coinbase reward will be.
That’s why I say: Peercoin is scarce and stays scarce.
You can’t fight the scarcity of Peercoin by carbon copying the source code.
You don’t generate additional Peercoins (or equivalents) by copying Peercoin - you create something new.
This does not threaten Peercoin.

If you manage not only to create something new, but something different as well that is able to attract people, well, then you have earned it if that copy succeeds.
And that still doesn’t threaten Peercoin as I consider something different and successful an enrichment of the crypto coin world which will find its own niche just as Peercoin did.
…remember: Peercoin was forked from Bitcoin and altered in important aspects :wink:
That did never threaten Bitcoin, that doesn’t threaten Bitcoin, that won’t threaten Bitcoin.
Peercoin doesn’t create inflation to Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is threatened by flaws that are integrated into the Bitcoin concept.
Peercoin providing a solution for that flaws doesn’t threaten Bitcoin - it just offers a more feasible alternative :wink:
And that is only possible because it’s no simple carbon copy, but an improvement.
If a crypto coin arises that fits better in Peercoin’s niche (fair distribution, small block chain, secure and sustainable block chain protection, backbone asset for at least one DAC, etc) it deserves replacing Peercoin.
That would be a threat!
But you can’t just can’t generate a threat by copying the Peercoin code.

I very much welcome new ideas, development and competition.
Still I believe that Peercoin is and stays unique (and scarce).
I respect Litecoin, Primecoin, Dogecoin, Emercoin, Slimcoin, the Nu network, Bitshares, NXT and lots of other attempts for trying to create something new, something better, something important in some way. Some of those attempts face problems, have flaws or reasons to be criticized - some more serious than others. Some of them have in my opinion already failed, others might succeed, because they created something that is going to last.
I don’t see fundamental problems at Peercoin.
I don’t see a reason for Peercoin to fail.

This is focussed on Peercoin, but you already explained why Primecoin is here to stay :wink:

64

MoD, do you agree with my last post?

65

I disagree that all that matters is distribution. If all that mattered were distribution, Auroracoin would be popular at least at Iceland :wink:
Belief in the sustainability is important. Belief in demand is important (this is why scarcity is important: it limits the supply). And don’t forget the trust in the coin. Block chain solutions might limit trust that is required to execute transactions; in the coin itself (and each other) the parties need to trust!

How will you distribute a PoS coin better than with a hybrid PoW process? PoW might not be perfect, but it’s the best system I’m aware of for doing that. If you know a better distribution model, copy Peercoin and adjust the code accordingly. But that won’t be a simple copy. It will be an advancement. I’m not going into more detail here, because I already did in my last post.

How will you create confidence in a completely new coin? Peercoin has never fallen victim to pump&dump created by the developer(s) or the community; what traders do is not within the limits of community control.

How can a copy compete with Peercoin being here for close to 2.5 years now? Why would someone trust a copy more than Peercoin?
Do you know PayCoin? That danger comes with each new release of the newest, bestest and awsomestest coin (forgive me creating new superlatives :wink: )
That’s one of the benefits of established coins like Peercoin.

66

If you read this post, you know exactly how much I do :wink:

Quoting myself I’d say:

[quote=“masterOfDisaster, post:63, topic:3273”][…]…remember: Peercoin was forked from Bitcoin and altered in important aspects :wink:
That did never threaten Bitcoin, that doesn’t threaten Bitcoin, that won’t threaten Bitcoin.
Peercoin doesn’t create inflation to Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is threatened by flaws that are integrated into the Bitcoin concept.
Peercoin providing a solution for that flaws doesn’t threaten Bitcoin - it just offers a more feasible alternative :wink:
And that is only possible because it’s no simple carbon copy, but an improvement.[…][/quote]

67

auroracoin was a pow, that’s the problem.

ok let’s make a few examples.

bitcoin right now has, according to my estimates, about 250k users. here comes linkedin, they silently buy 10m litecoin (the price will shoot up let’s say to 0.02 btc while many people wonder what’s happening to that crappy coin) and then distribute them to their users, let’s say 100m people, or 400 times as much as btc distribution. on the announcement litecoin will shoot even further to 0.25 btc, its theoretical value, or even higher.

now what’s likely to happen? well, I believe that since btc security provided by its mining it’s way higher than ltc, people will start selling ltc to get btc. yes ltc mining will increase rapidly, but most likely not enough to match btc’s hashrate and security. so slowly ltc will come back down to a reasonable price. also, due to the switching from ltc to btc by most of those 100m people, btc will be much better distributed, even to the point of overtaking ltc new distribution.

after a few weeks facebook creates a new coin, facecoin, a copycat of btc and distribute it even to a wider user base, 1B people. lots of mining will swiftly switch from btc to facecoin as the price of the new coin will make it hugely profitable, but this won’t last long. people will most likely start selling facecoin for bitcoin (while the miners are selling for fiat) and we will end up exactly as before.

now, let’s say 2 years from now btc is dead and ppc has taken its place with about the same price and distribution btc has now. repeat the two stages. first linkedin adopt an existing copycat of ppc called linkcoin and distribute it to 100m people. istantly it will be 400 times more secure than ppc and even more fairly distributed. so it will takes its place. when facebook creates its facecoin, the same happens. facecoin will replace linkcoin because it has even a wider user base and a fairer distribution. and then, I don’t know but nobody today has more network than facebook (maybe some chinese social network?), in any case I believe the copycat process will end up with a winning POS that had the widest and fairest distribution.

68

Can we continue the discussion here please:
http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=3809.new#new

Seeing this every morning I check the Forum is disgusting:

Or even better, stop the discussion and focus on doing actual work for Peercoin/Primecoin. I don’t have time for that myself unfortunately.

Thread closed.

69

[quote=“Ötzi, post:68, topic:3273”]Can we continue the discussion here please:

Seeing this every morning I check the Forum is disgusting:
[…]
Or even better, stop the discussion and focus on doing actual work for Peercoin/Primecoin. I don’t have time for that myself unfortunately.[/quote]
I’m deeply sorry that you find no merit in discussing about Peercoin and Primecoin and why they have a place in this world.
Calling something disgusting that is valuable especially for those new to the Peercoin and Primecoin idea is beyond my understanding.
And I don’t understand what would be the benefit from continuing the discussion in a new thread as well.
I agree that doing actual work for PPC/XPM is important.
In difference to you I consider discussion actual work and being important.

nope :wink:

70

[quote=“Ötzi, post:68, topic:3273”]Can we continue the discussion here please:
http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=3809.new#new

Seeing this every morning I check the Forum is disgusting:

Or even better, stop the discussion and focus on doing actual work for Peercoin/Primecoin. I don’t have time for that myself unfortunately.

Thread closed.[/quote]

Are you drunk?

71

There’s no need to be rude. When posting the initial reply to Ötzi, I hadn’t even visited the new thread.
Now that I’ve done it, I think I can grasp the intention: to discuss in a more optimistic way.

While that would be nice and taste sweeter, I think this is not necessary.
This community is mature enough to ask questions even if they seem to be ugly ones and discuss those topics focussed on facts rather than starting to insult each other.

Please let us keep this course!

Without questioning important things, Peercoin wouldn’t have been created!
It’s the mentality of asking radical questions and trying to answer them, that not only lead to the creation of Peercoin, but to all important things that have been created based on Peercoin!
We wouldn’t have Peershares or the Nu network if Peercoin could have solved all problems.
We need controversial discussion - as long as this discussion is meant to strive for something better.

72

Hi all! :slight_smile:

Very sorry - I didn’t want to be rude. I just felt that the title of this thread ‘Recheck our belief on PPC/XPM’ sounds like the last members of a small religious community reassuring each other about their “belief”. I am not a native English speaker, maybe it doesn’t really sound that negative to native English speakers.
When this title is all over the place in the “Recent posts” section, it can put off newbies, who read about Peercoin for the first time. So that’s why I wanted you to continue the discussions in a new thread.

This is different from Bitcointalk, where such a title wouldn’t matter. Over there it would just be a small drop in an ocean of simultaneous discussions.

Ötzi

73

auroracoin was a pow, that’s the problem.

ok let’s make a few examples.

bitcoin right now has, according to my estimates, about 250k users. here comes linkedin, they silently buy 10m litecoin (the price will shoot up let’s say to 0.02 btc while many people wonder what’s happening to that crappy coin) and then distribute them to their users, let’s say 100m people, or 400 times as much as btc distribution. on the announcement litecoin will shoot even further to 0.25 btc, its theoretical value, or even higher.

now what’s likely to happen? well, I believe that since btc security provided by its mining it’s way higher than ltc, people will start selling ltc to get btc. yes ltc mining will increase rapidly, but most likely not enough to match btc’s hashrate and security. so slowly ltc will come back down to a reasonable price. also, due to the switching from ltc to btc by most of those 100m people, btc will be much better distributed, even to the point of overtaking ltc new distribution.

after a few weeks facebook creates a new coin, facecoin, a copycat of btc and distribute it even to a wider user base, 1B people. lots of mining will swiftly switch from btc to facecoin as the price of the new coin will make it hugely profitable, but this won’t last long. people will most likely start selling facecoin for bitcoin (while the miners are selling for fiat) and we will end up exactly as before.

now, let’s say 2 years from now btc is dead and ppc has taken its place with about the same price and distribution btc has now. repeat the two stages. first linkedin adopt an existing copycat of ppc called linkcoin and distribute it to 100m people. istantly it will be 400 times more secure than ppc and even more fairly distributed. so it will takes its place. when facebook creates its facecoin, the same happens. facecoin will replace linkcoin because it has even a wider user base and a fairer distribution. and then, I don’t know but nobody today has more network than facebook (maybe some chinese social network?), in any case I believe the copycat process will end up with a winning POS that had the widest and fairest distribution.[/quote]

Agree! The extremely high hash rate is the most powerful weapon of BTC to beat its copy cats, if copy cat uses SHA256, they are under vast threat of BTC’s high hash rate, if a copy cat like LTC uses another algorithm such as scrypt, they cannot pull some hashrate from BTC network, and because copy cat has little innovation, they cannot compete hash rate with BTC.

For example, it is said that scrypt is just nested SHA256 for 1024 times, and slightly modification of BTC protocol, therefore LTC will never provide as high secure level as BTC and BTC’s scarcity kept.

The XPM, on the contrary, has more innovation than LTC,and indeed a upgrade of BTC so I hope XPM may grow up in future especially when side chain applied on XPM.

For 2.5 years, the PPC complete nodes are just several hundreds. Let’s wait for sigmike’s cold minting and check the change. But with several complete nodes, you just cannot stop IPO type PoS copy cats coins because they can get a better distribution by giving out copy cat coins to thousands people, they will say it is more fair than PPC while PPC initial mining reward was very high. The most important is that copy cat coin shares same or even better security than PPC’s network. That’s the problem.

For ordinary customers, they don’t care what’s the name, even don’t care what’s the original design, they care about security to protect their investment, perhaps they regard copy cat coin as an upgrade of PPC.

In 1985, Microsoft copied apple’s GUI(graphic user interface), and shifted from DOS to windows 3.1, although Mac had the first GUI OS. Of course Apple’s GUI came from Xerox lab and Microsoft actually had bought DOS from another programmer with 25 thousands dollars!

In 1999, the popular IM software was ICQ (I seek you), there was a tiny chinese company with just dozens of servers, copied ICQ, and called themselves OICQ, naturally ICQ accused OICQ, and the copy cat renamed themselves as QQ. The boss of copy cat company once wanted to sell his business for just 100 thousands dollars, and get refused by potential buyers! That boss is a typical copy cat, he even record motorola’s sound as QQ’s incoming sound.

It is the copy cat-- QQ–win the match for huge chinese population, that boss is one of the richest in china now.

Never underestimate those copy cats, if they have better distribution than PPC, Sunny King’s open source code is just copy cats’ free lunch. If you cannot stop copy cats, you lose scarcity, then you cannot restore Gold standard on internet.

I really hope both PPC and XPM succeed, my suggestion is that put more innovation into XPM and let XPM compete with other PoW coins even BTC and try to build Gold standard with extremely high hash rate. For PPC, we go to Hayek style, use PPC as share concept and issue a stable anti inflation currency in Nubits style. With millions of USD/BTC in custodians’ hands, our copy cats can only copy source code and they need to develop their business into our scale to copy our success, the scarce USD/BTC is our weapon to beat copy cats, we may not kill them all, at least we can survive since our system is as good as if not better than theirs.

If Gold standard is right, XPM win, if Hayek theory is correct, PPC win.

74

Good discussion. I think both BTC and PPC are “scarce”. I wonder if maybe Bitcoin can never be very secure on transaction fees alone, unless the block size is increased to allow more transactions to pay fees. If it costs $x to run the network for 10 minutes, and n transactions fit in the block, then each transaction needs to pay $x/n in fees, which might be too large a number in the long run.

PPC does not have this potential issue.

This can’t be true, because if it were, then bitcoin ASICs would work well for LTC mining.

75

[quote=“Chronos, post:74, topic:3273”]Good discussion. I think both BTC and PPC are “scarce”. I wonder if maybe Bitcoin can never be very secure on transaction fees alone, unless the block size is increased to allow more transactions to pay fees. If it costs $x to run the network for 10 minutes, and n transactions fit in the block, then each transaction needs to pay $x/n in fees, which might be too large a number in the long run.

PPC does not have this potential issue.

This can’t be true, because if it were, then bitcoin ASICs would work well for LTC mining.[/quote]

The real question here is if it’s a good idea for POW to switch from an economic model where security costs are paid by stakeholders via inflation, to an economic model where only those who do the transactions pay for the security of the network.
In my opinion it is a very very bad idea and i can think of a lot of potential issues that could arise if POW inflation drops below 1 or 2 %.
I agree with sunnyking, POW must have constant and moderate inflation in order to be stable, secure and work properly.