Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ryler Sturden

    Ryler Sturden Member Staff Member MC Developer

    I'm sure bigger things have been created with lesser titles. This is a thread designed to encourage debate/discussion/ideas on how to implement an economic model that is fair and reliable for all that participate. The economic model of MicroCash can be considered exactly like that of any country.

    All countries with fiat currency hope to keep inflation and deflation in check, to reach some balance, so that the value of goods and services does not alter too much. If goods and services varied in value too much then it is extremely difficult to business plan around such scenarios as people from countries like Zimbabwe could tell us.

    How does one create an economic system that no matter the amount of people participating, no matter the conditions, that one unit of currency always buys the same amount of items? In an ideal economic system the cost of a loaf of bread would not change over time unless the materials and labor used in making it change. Of course we are used to the concept of inflation, things taking more money to buy the more time goes on. This is due to non ideal expansion of the money supply. Even though we all hate this, and everyone complains about the "good old times when you could buy milk for 10c", civilization as a whole has come to accept this weird/unfair facet of existing fiat currency.

    So let us consider the scenario of what 1 microcash unit equals. Let us pretend in 2016 it costs 1 microcash to buy a loaf of bread. We would hope that in 2026, 10 years later a loaf of bread is still the same cost, 1 microcash. This would allow great planning for anyone who consumes bread, whether personally or for business reasons, and the same can be said for any good or service.

    So is there a way to develop such a system? Personally I feel any attempts would be like trying to prove the existence of a god. And that the best we could hope for is a compromise towards what people are somewhat accepting of in this day and age.

    Your model will supply a way to contract or expand the money supply by increasing or decreasing every MicroCash account by some amount. So in a simple model you may just increase MicroCash supply by 1% every day and that is the end of it. Everyone raises their hands in celebration at thinking about their bank account increasing by 1% every day! A more complicated version of that simple system would be , maybe for the first year it is expands 1% every month, then it expands by 0.5% every 3 months. Or maybe you don't like rich people and think if their wealth was redistributed it would stimulate more economic action, so you contract accounts which have over 50000 in them by 1% every month, and give it to the poor instead! These simple systems are provided to help illustrate what is required in a model.

    The metrics you can use to help ensure your model is closer to the ideal are limited to these at the moment. If you have any ideas for new ones please provide them.

    1) Seed amount / Current total MicroCash in existence. MicroCash has to be started with some amount of seed, as you can not start an economy from 0 as you can not proportionally rise or fall from zero so there has to be some seed amount. The seed amount is unknown and needs to be decided upon through debate. However its value, whatever it is may be able to be used to some extent. The total amount of MicroCash in existence is of course another metric.

    2) MicroCash Accounts. Each account stores X amount of MicroCash. Each account is owned by *someone*, but *someone* can of course have many accounts. There is no 1:1 correlation of an account to a person even if this may end up being the general ratio. Each account has a fee, applied on some cycle yet to be determined. (ie hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, a fee is taken from an account to pay for the network to keep it alive in memory).

    3) MicroCash Transactions.
    Each transaction moves X amount of MicroCash from one account to another with the cost of a fee. The number of transactions could be a decent estimation of network use, however users could attempt to game such a situation by creating artificially higher amounts of transaction to simulate higher MicroCash activity. Users however cannot artificially create LOWER amounts of transactions as they cannot control other peoples accounts or stop transactions being processed.

    4) MicroCash nodes. Each MicroCash node is participating in the open network and verifies and transfers every transaction on it. One person can run many nodes, and most MicroCash users will not run nodes if it is successful. Its use as a metric seems limited.

    If you have any such economic model, no matter how ridiculous it is, please create a new thread so it can be debated and if needed tweaked. And create a name for your model so it can be referred to by others. Thank you!
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2016
    notyep and SuperTramp like this.
  2. roméo

    roméo New Member

    The seed amount can use Solidcoin balance, like it was intended since the beginning.
     
  3. Sujiram

    Sujiram New Member

    Regarding of network usage estimation.
    1) All metrics depend on total money amount and current supply/withdraw ratio;
    2) Min/Max and acc activity thresholds for transactions to be counted in network activity;
    3) Manipulation detecting algo with result as probability 0-1 and corresponding weight in statistics;
    ....
     
  4. Sujiram

    Sujiram New Member

    How system itself can detect that all goods and services become cheaper or more expensive? Payment purpose can be added and it will contain such info.
     
  5. Sujiram

    Sujiram New Member

    Electronic purchases and automatic debit payments can be used for metric too ..
     
  6. yuppie

    yuppie New Member

    I wonder how the first units of MicroCash will be distributed. Maybe compensation for running a node, calculated by uptime. The longer you keep your node up, the more MicroCash you earn and collect to balance out the "fees" for holding an account. The "Final Amount" of total MicroCash in circulation would have a lot to do with the way it's distributed. Perhaps the alpha testers get a small sum for opening an account. Those who run nodes and keep them up earn a residual payment...
     
  7. MrCrazy

    MrCrazy New Member

    This indeed!

    as far as further distribution beyond what already exists in the form of solidcoin, I like the thought of low/slow distribution but that idea is flawed without mining being a thing
     
  8. Ryler Sturden

    Ryler Sturden Member Staff Member MC Developer

    Obviously the larger the initial distribution to real people the better. The less it is concentrated into the hands of a few the better. We save some time to come up with hopefully a great solution.

    Though if successful MicroCash will likely be bought up by rich people who will then gain most of the benefits which is a negative. I don't really know how you can solve all problems with launching such a thing. I hope others can come up with some solutions.

    As for some seeding ideas, maybe forum users could get some, and people who do work for MicroCash prior to release can also be rewarded. Seems more fair that way but I am just one person with one opinion. There will probably have to be some amount that is just literally dropped in some form on all the people who know nothing about MicroCash and are simply there to make money, with the hope some percentage stick around. Ripple did that with some level of success early on.
     
  9. Ryler Sturden

    Ryler Sturden Member Staff Member MC Developer

    In regards to SolidCoin I don't know what use seeding with purely SolidCoins brings this project. Yes I know in the past I said that what was going to happen and at the time that is what I meant as there was still a SolidCoin supporter base which would support the project. Right now there is nearly no SolidCoin supporter base, so what benefits does it bring this project? And I say this as I think the 3rd largest holder of SolidCoin (I have around 100K and there was about 2 million on the site of the total ~2.8M that the SC chain actually had) which hopefully shows people it is not without some loss to myself to say such a thing. I didn't move the "CPF" funds to the exchange prior to the chain dying, that had around 140K in it so whether that can be counted or not in this "theoretical" discussion is up for debate.

    The other issue is the SolidCoin chain is dead and has been dead for a long period of time, the only record of SolidCoin balances is the one I have from the exchange. This will then raise trust issues as I am the sole originator of these balance claims, which makes it easy for the trolls to create the "He just made up huge a solidcoin balance and gave it to himself" story which is hard to dispute with evidence as all evidence comes from me, the person they are accusing.

    A compromise could be the Solidcoin supporters that are active in the MicroCash community prior to launch can obtain their balances, or some percentage of it. I think I would have to publicly list these facts somewhere so it is open if it does happen. So those people will have to be ok with some level of their identity (even if its just a nickname from the exchange) being put next to a balance. Either way that still opens up the trust issue because people could just then claim I am these people too.

    Some people who are financially motivated, but not project motivated, seem to want me to honor something I said 4 years ago when the project was in a different state and had different needs. The concept of "being true at the time" or liquidity in statements about software and design that was never finalized all boils down to lies to some people. All while I and others do all the work required to even have the project come to fruition which has a certain level of irony that must escape them. I'm not sure what the solution is but I don't want the launch mired by such ugly problems and either way I'm going to be despised by some group of people, whatever decision is made. I am used to that, but I want the best decision to be made for MicroCash, not myself or a select few with greed on the mind.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2016
  10. Ryler Sturden

    Ryler Sturden Member Staff Member MC Developer

    Another thing I want to add is I am not the final say on any of these decisions. I am not the creator of MicroCash I am just a coder, one of five who has worked on it. I hope all important decisions can be debated, discussed and voted on by the community. I hope we get a larger community than currently because the larger the ideas pool the better off we will be.

    Whatever position you hold, back up the reasons behind your position so that others can understand them. I am sure whatever is in the best interests of the project will be the choice taken in the end if the arguments are well reasoned.
     
  11. Sujiram

    Sujiram New Member

    IMHO solidcoin has become irrelevant. We should think out the box ;)
    Microcash wil be easy dividable ti 0.000000... Initial seed can be not in MC, but in nanoCash, or even picoCash. Give-out it in substantial numeric amounts (but ultralow value). If we want exponential adoption spread and supply grow.
     
  12. enagi

    enagi New Member

    I think the final balance of Solidcoin in mcxNow should be honored and converted to MC at 1:1, but that should **NOT** be the only seeding mechanism.

    To reach a broader user base, we may use something similar to Clamcoin which seeds any non-zero LTC/BTC/DOGE address at a selected block height with some coin. In Clamcoin's case, it distributed ~3.1M coins to about 700K addresses at ~4.6 coins per address. This mechanism is not perfect though, because some people (e.g. exchange operators, BTC/LTC service providers) will suddenly have a lots of MC for free - this is actually happening as there is one famous whale "digger" who happens to be in control of many thousands of addresses got hundreds of thousands of clamcoins for free.

    What I want to stress is: there were only about 2.8M SC in mcxNow, if other seeding mechanism can distribute many more MC (say, 28M MC) then even if SC is converted to MC at 1:1, the original SC holders represent a minority of MC holdings.

    There is simply no such thing as "completely fair distribution".
     
  13. Ryler Sturden

    Ryler Sturden Member Staff Member MC Developer

    I just looked up clamcoin, very interesting that they did that. I knew it was possible for a long time but it is good they actually delivered on it. Did it help with their marketing or whatever? It is the first time I have heard of it.
     
  14. Ryler Sturden

    Ryler Sturden Member Staff Member MC Developer

    If you guys know anyone that is educated in economics or has a strong interest in it - it would be great if you could ask them to give us their input on this important matter.
     
  15. Sujiram

    Sujiram New Member

    RS I suggest you contact https://www.linkedin.com/in/jonmatonis
    and try to interest him in our project.
     
  16. Ryler Sturden

    Ryler Sturden Member Staff Member MC Developer

    Thanks for the private and public discussion about this. Decisions have been made.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page