Free audio plugins blockchain and coin idea

[mystran]

I find it funny that we're having this discussion the same day bitcoin dropped by 20% in a day, having lost 35% of it's value in a week. In fact at some point today it was close to 50% down from it's peak value a week or so ago. I think it should be fairly obvious from these numbers that we're talking about a speculative financial instrument, rather than a legit currency.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

Just because the blockchain is big now doesn't mean it is the solution for all problems.

The idea is to attribute mined coins not only to miners, but also to producers of free audio plugins, probably in proportion 10% to miners, 90% to producers.

Your system would be easily exploited by those who want to get rich for nothing. For example, I become a "producer" and register 1,000 variations of OnePingOnly that I created in an afternoon on the blockchain and watch the coins start rolling in. If the coin reward is linked to "consumers" downloading the plugin, then I would rent a botnet and (instead of using it for DDOS) have 100,000 infected machines download my stupid OnePingOnly plugins and then watch the coins rolling in.

In short, the blockchain has no way of checking if the plugins are of any value other than seeing if they are downloaded. And downloading can be done by the plugin creators to enrich themselves.

I've mentioned limits, central authority for consumers. Blockchain also requires transaction fees. It may be costy to spam the blockchain.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

I find it funny that we're having this discussion the same day bitcoin dropped by 20% in a day, having lost 35% of it's value in a week. In fact at some point today it was close to 50% down from it's peak value a week or so ago. I think it should be fairly obvious from these numbers that we're talking about a speculative financial instrument, rather than a legit currency.

As Castaneda's Don Jon would say, "it's a sign".

Beside that, cheap coins is better than no coins at all - for a lot of people in audio industry.

[Frantz]

I've mentioned limits, central authority for consumers. Blockchain also requires transaction fees. It may be costy to spam the blockchain.

A central authority is antithetical to a blockchain which is a decentralized network that no one is in charge of. You are proposing a blockchain with an AppleStore to watch the transactions which is silly.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

I've mentioned limits, central authority for consumers. Blockchain also requires transaction fees. It may be costy to spam the blockchain.

A central authority is antithetical to a blockchain which is a decentralized network that no one is in charge of. You are proposing a blockchain with an AppleStore to watch the transactions which is silly.

Well, not all things can be decentralized, especially associated with production and consumption. If you have an idea, you are welcome to share. Decentralization requirement is a myth - it does not exist in practice. e.g. a lot of coins with mining pools that have >50% hashrate.

Consumer registry is not an AppleStore, it is only used to check some basic constraints like consumer emails and IPs, for tangible goods it may require ID card proofs.

[Frantz]

The power of the blockchain is decentralization. The data can't be manipulated. There is no "central authority" for Bitcoin. See quote below.

Your idea is a cop out because it relies on a central authority to solve the difficult problems. And determining whether my TwoPingOnly plugin is legitimate and whether the download of it is legitimate would require human judgement and require arbitrary human decisions.

The whole thing would be subject to massive manipulation and would never work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchai ... ralization

This is where blockchain has its advantage. While centralized data is more controllable, information and data manipulation are common. By decentralizing it, blockchain makes data transparent to everyone involved.[40]

Every node or miner in a decentralized system has a copy of the blockchain. Data quality is maintained by massive database replication[9] and computational trust. No centralized "official" copy exists and no user is "trusted" more than any other.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

The power of the blockchain is decentralization. The data can't be manipulated. There is no "central authority" for Bitcoin. See quote below.

Your idea is a cop out because it relies on a central authority to solve the difficult problems. And determining whether my TwoPingOnly plugin is legitimate and whether the download of it is legitimate would require human judgement and require arbitrary human decisions.

The whole thing would be subject to massive manipulation and would never work.

Decentralization in cryptocurrencies applies to mining only, or inclusion of transactions to blockchain. In practice this criterion is met for some cryptocurrencies only. Most coins work without mining decentralization. The transactions themselves can't be forged, and are not truly decentralized - there's a global "mempool". Central authority is a similar pool. It can be designed in a way so that a consumer is included if 5 producers or masternodes like in Bytecoin confirm him. It's a matter of design.

With transaction fees and limits on consumption records by the same person, you can't spam the blockchain easily.

[Frantz]

There is nothing specific to plugins in your proposal. If it had any merit, someone would have already successfully implemented a similar blockchain marketplace idea. There is none because it would be subject to wide scale fraud and manipulation.

I am not wasting any more time on this discussion. Good luck.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

There is nothing specific to plugins in your proposal. If it had any merit, someone would have already successfully implemented a similar blockchain marketplace idea. There is none because it would be subject to wide scale fraud and manipulation.

I am not wasting any more time on this discussion. Good luck.

OK, as you wish. But it's truly not a marketplace. You have to have a very specific mindset to even believe in this idea.

[stratum]

I wonder why the product owner doesnt approve each purchase the way he would do with any other currency. The central authority seems redundant. Besides the plugins sold with this crypto coin aren't free, they are simply priced in social-coins, and if the coins are convertible to another currency, it just looks like another payment method with no added benefits.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

I wonder why the product owner doesnt approve each purchase the way he would do with any other currency. The central authority seems redundant. Besides the plugins sold with this crypto coin aren't free, there are simply priced in social-coins, and if the coins are convertible to another currency, it just looks like another payment method with no added benefits.

Product owner can't approve purchase, because noone knows the chance the consumer is a real person. As I've replied, this blockchain is about a different approach to wealth distribution and about global investment opportunity. Right now only audio production professionals invest into this industry, and that's very limiting to the growth, especially when income of these professionals are at the decline. (of course, "purchase" is only a convenient word, there will be no "purchases" only transfer of goods)

[Miles1981]

What would people do with these coins?

Exchange to USD.

For that, the coins need to have a purpose or a value. I don't yet see what could bring that value in your proposal.

[stratum]

It's like saying don't give away plugins for free, we can have an alternative system which is basically the idea of taxing a crypto-coin.

Makes sense from a producers perspective. To be successful it also needs to make sense from the customers perspective.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

What would people do with these coins?

Exchange to USD.

For that, the coins need to have a purpose or a value. I don't yet see what could bring that value in your proposal.

Bitcoin has no "sane" purpose yet it has value. Investments anywhere and always have a single purpose: speculative income. I do not see a reason not to use this urge for profit and speculation for production, even if on a small scale such as free audio plugins.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

It's like saying don't give away plugins for free, we can have an alternative system which is basically the idea of taxing a crypto-coin.

Makes sense from a producers perspective. To be successful it also needs to make sense from the customers perspective.

Well, plugins are still free. The only addition is a requirement to sign a transaction to receive product key. Behind the scenes, it's also psychologically comforting - because your signature gives money to producer without taking money from you. I would not care about crypto-coin taxing - investors do not care that miners tax them pretty hard in some cases.