The LTB Network Forum


Dogeparty! Counterparty on the Doge Blockchain! Proof of Burn? Or Proof of Charity?

Back to Listener Lounge

Jump to bottom
Pages: 123456

Comments

adam

http://dogeparty.io/ is launching next week, if you haven't yet listened to the intro of episode 129 I'd suggest taking ten minutes and getting up to speed

http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/lets-talk-bitcoin-129-dogeparty-and-delegated-proof-of-stake

Proof of Charity or Proof of Burn? What do you think?

1 like
  • Cryptonaut

    I was just thinking of posting this because I didnt see a thread for it yet :p

    Chief Architect - Let's Talk Bitcoin!
    Co-Founder - Tokenly
    Owner - IronClad Web Technologies
    BITCOINEX - SPECULATE - EARNFREEBTC - BOOKKEEPER - IRONCLADWEB
    Adbit.co Bitcoin Advertising

    Permalink
    0 likes
  • MikeJohnson

    Listening now and checking this out. Excited to see this launch!!!

    Permalink
    0 likes
  • headswim

    Proof of burn is an interesting concept - in addition to showing faith in the value of the created token, it also marginally increases the value of bitcoin holdings in the long term, as those coins are functionally unrecoverable and the max available number of total coins goes down.

    That said, as a non-doge user I think proof of charity is more in line with what I know about that community. You don't have to destroy currency and can help some people out!

    Permalink
    1 like
  • pairmike

    Adam, did you mean to put http://Dogeparty.io instead of http://Dogecoin.io in your post?

    Counterparty - 1Pa8fckbcdiMAA4twWyvdgbQ7QYoQMiBct

    Permalink
    0 likes
  • lainfinity

    The objective of Proof of Burn is to lock the value of n number of coins by keeping out of circulation forever.

    But I like the idea of Proof of Charity if the same objectives are met. One suggestion is if n number of Dogecoin to be burned are removed from circulation by converting to n number of XDP.charities token and pegged at the current market value of Dogecoin. Then the tokens are donated to the charities.

    This will enable locking the value of n number of Dogecoins out of circulation and at the same time transfer the value of the coins to the charities as XDP tokens.

    UNUM [.......01 ^ 10.......] PLURIBUS
    We are nothing but for the ONE
    Permalink
    3 likes
  • adam

    @pairmike Adam, did you mean to put http://Dogeparty.io instead of http://Dogecoin.io in your post?

    Thank you, I fixed it

    Permalink
    1 like
  • therealtwig

    @adam Thank you for your hard work! I love how Counterparty used proof of burn and think it was a very clever solution. However, like you mentioned, I too have always been troubled by all that value wasted that could have gone towards other uses.

    Therefore, I instantly gravitate towards your proof of charity solution. However, I was going through the reddit thread and read a comment from what appears to be a reference client dev "rnicoll" that is an interesting counterargument...I will paraphrase below:

    ...However... I'm going to be contrary and say I think Proof of Burn is a better idea universally. Proof of Charity effectively means having your cake and eating it; the coins are spent but also still exist, and new coins exist representing their old value. Proof of Burn is a much more elegant solution where the value is destroyed and created, rather than risking dilution.

    I personally don't view dilution as a bad thing with something like Dogecoin, where some 100,000,000,000 will be in existence. I mean, what is burning 1,000,000,000 really going to help with there will be so many more left? I am just curious if you actually view dilution as a valid argument against the proof of charity idea?

    Permalink
    0 likes
  • Doogy

    I remember @adam hinting about this just a few weeks back, its nice to actually see it come to fruition. I like the proof of charity concept and how it relates to what's happening here. Instead of charity its participation that is the metric for awarding charitytokens and then the free market does what the free market does... One thing that makes me feel uneasy about this is the fact that I read a few articles on the decline of the doge miners and how the halving of the reward is making a whole bunch leave the network at once. However, the scrypt ASICs are upon us so every scrypt network with participation is bound to grow by leaps and bounds. I hope doge remains strong as this platform may be the best thing that happened to 'charity' in a few decades. I guess we will wait and see. Congratulations and Best of Luck to the Team!

    Permalink
    1 like
  • adam

    @therealtwig @adam Thank you for your hard work! I love how Counterparty used proof of burn and think it was a very clever solution. However, like you mentioned, I too have always been troubled by all that value wasted that could have gone towards other uses.

    Therefore, I instantly gravitate towards your proof of charity solution. However, I was going through the reddit thread and read a comment from what appears to be a reference client dev "rnicoll" that is an interesting counterargument...I will paraphrase below:

    ...However... I'm going to be contrary and say I think Proof of Burn is a better idea universally. Proof of Charity effectively means having your cake and eating it; the coins are spent but also still exist, and new coins exist representing their old value. Proof of Burn is a much more elegant solution where the value is destroyed and created, rather than risking dilution.

    I personally don't view dilution as a bad thing with something like Dogecoin, where some 100,000,000,000 will be in existence. I mean, what is burning 1,000,000,000 really going to help with there will be so many more left? I am just curious if you actually view dilution as a valid argument against the proof of charity idea?

    My issues with PoC are almost all logistic. It is much much easier and cleaner to simply do PoB, and the way we have proposed to do PoC isn't the definitive solution.

    I do not view dilution as a valid concern - the issue is creating opportunity cost for the person generating XDP, so it doesnt matter who gets the tokens so long as it is not the person giving them.

    Permalink
    0 likes
  • Negative One

    I think proof of burn is the better way to go. I like the concept of proof of charity but I don't think it is the better of the two.

    Permalink
    0 likes
Jump to top
Pages: 123456

Post Reply

Please Login to post a reply to this thread.

© Copyright 2013–2016 The LTB Network. All rights reserved .