Q: What is the Freicoin Foundation?
A: The Freicoin Foundation is a non-profit organization, aiming to support sustainability and biodiversity by integrating Freicoin into economical relations.
Q: You said that Freicoin is decentralized. But the Foundation makes it centralized!
A: You are right. But we have no other solution. Initial coins should be distributed to the society.
Q: Why can't you just give these coins to miners (as in Bitcoin). Why do we need a bureaucracy?
A: The mining community consists mostly of enthusiasts, not ordinary people who use computers to browse the Internet.
Q: How many coins does the Foundation have?
A: The Freicoin Foundation distributes 80% of the total Freicoin money supply through grants. The remaining 20% is a reward for miners, who support the network with their computing power.
My gut tells me that somehow there is room for a "everyone gets N" style ~~virtual currency~~. Like you prove your identity and get the same amount that everyone else gets (scrubbed on transfer) because the whole early-adopters-win thing is sucky.
One does not simply invent a currency to solve a percevied problem in our economic system. A currency must also provide compelling economic reasons to actors for adoption. That is, what is in it for me to use freicoin?
I don't see any reason to give money, buy, or sell, or do anything with freicoin. To me, the fact that freicoin decays when not used is a bug, not feature.
Perhaps the advantages of bitcoin but without the instability.
If bitcoin continues to go through boom and bust cycles that change its value by orders of magnitude, then ironically an alternative with demurrage might prove to be a better store of value. You might lose some of your savings, but at least it'll be predictable.
Not globally, but to solve local economic problems people are making real headway. Local currencies that can only be spent with local businesses are solving a problem right?
Does anybody else feel that the current proliferation of P2P cryptocurrencies looks symptomatic of a pyramid scheme that has proven its viability (in the form of BTC) and is now being repeated by unscrupulous copycats who smell a quick buck?
I'm not calling the concept of BTC-style cryptocurrency a deliberate, malicious pyramid scheme in itself. I think this is an unintended side-effect.
Yes. Well, qualified yes: I don't believe that the new cryptocurrencies are more of a pump-and-dump than Bitcoin is. The pump-and-dump model is intrinsic to why Bitcoin is popular: creating lots of widely distributed coins early, then making them increasingly dear, creates a built-in base of... let me be charitable and call them "cryptocurrency evangelists", who have high incentive to go to their local online watering holes and claim that Bitcoin is the next big thing.
[Y]ou can create an arbitrarily high number of bitcoin-like electronic currency units. [These new varieties will have] guaranteed scarcity, anonymity, and a new goldrush phase -- so if you got dumped rather than pumped, you have a new opportunity to start at the top of the pyramid scheme this time.
The equilibrium is that sooner or later expected returns on starting a new distributed pump-and-dump dwarf expected returns of getting in late on bitcoins. And then poof.
Bitcoin is a wonderful engineering achievement: a spontaneously organized, decentralized, peer-to-peer boiler room from which arises a mediocre transaction processing network.
I wouldn't call it a side-effect but rather history recurrence. When fiat money became popular in 19th century almost each country started to issue its own currency. Issuing money gives real power. While the analogy is not complete because you can't dilute BTC-style currencies, the advantage here is in being bright and early adopter.
I think that demurrage proposed by Freicoin adds no value because hoarding isn't a real problem for Bitcoin or for any other currency. I suppose that the fear of hoarding comes from the fact that we still live in the world full of harmful keynesian ideas.
I would not call it a ponzi scheme because the idea of cryptocurrency does not entail any return, it is more like a seigniorage.
Some of these cryptocurrencies appeared in 2011, if I'm not wrong, in the middle of the first bitcoin price hike but they proposed different algorithms to generate coins, so I do not know if we can attribute their design to malice.
My main problem with it all is that users from these currencies built an identity around them, which mixes politics, ideology and hoarding of this currencies.
Funny, just this morning I decided to write a blog post about Gesell and the 'Schwundgeld' and his short usage in the city of Wörgl almost a century ago.
The real question, of course, is wether inflation isn't a much more natural way of depriving currency of it's value.
Who does the demurrage fee go to? I couldn't find any information about this on their site. If it is just recirculated through re-mining or something, great (though I don't know how that would work). If it goes to the creators of freicoin then it is a blatant scam. I don't suppose it does, but it's suspicious that they don't mention where the money goes.
>The destroyed money simply vanishes, being permanently taken out of circulation. However to keep prices stable an equal-valued batch of freshly minted coins is created and distributed to the diligent accountants (the “miners”) who maintain at their own cost the global ledger of electronic transactions.
So in effect, the demurrage fee goes to the miners.
I don't think it goes anywhere. In theory Freigeld should simply decay into nothing (i.e. tax is collected by government who would depending on financial situation either print more or destroy existing). However I'm unsure where would in Freicoin decay go.
Also what makes me really suspect of it is the fact that Freicoin foundation centralizes the whole thing, so it's a bit pointless. I mean, why have an centralized P2P network? Another worrying thing is that under Silvio Gessel's original idea Freigeld is a local currency NOT a global one.
Some of the comments in the FAQ don't make any sense.
Q: Why does Freicoin use demurrage? I'm worried that my coins will just fade away.
A: Worried? It's a good thing. If the amount of money was stable, people would prefer saving it as opposed to spending it. This would decrease the quantity of money circulated, which in turn would act against the main purpose of money - a medium of exchange. With demurrage in place, you should think about money as it's meant to be, not as a storage medium of wealth.
This is quite an assertion--generally, money is taught to be both a store of value and a medium of exchange. What are you exchanging if there's no value in it?
There are also some really odd grammatical errors:
Q: With a zero interest rate, investments will be impossible!
A: It's already possible, for example, in Islam banking...
What tickles me is that the people who criticise Wall Street for the value-less financial engineering of real estate, equities, commodities, etc., i.e. productive assets, turn around and start trying to create value out of thin air in fiat/social financial engineering schemes. I'm not commenting on the value of either activity directly as much as the asymmetry in holding both views simultaneously.
I think if you drilled a lot of people you'd end up with them being OK with all the financial engineering stuff, but _not_ OK with Wall Street risking _other_ people's money, not their own.
Looks like demurrage is implemented simply by a rule for block validation: transaction outputs have to subtract from inputs based on the age of the coins. Don't know how they calculate age unambiguously.
There seems to be a lot of centralization in this particular implementation...eg., 80% of new coins go to the foundation for the first three years, which says it will distribute based on ideological motivations.
These are similar to concepts North Korea still cannot prove... I'm concerned that in the FAQ the creators think that private banks control money supply. While inflation and deflation are often painful, they're also the reason why cyclic growth is possible. Once upon a time, cycles enabled an American middle class. I'm optimistic we can revive that with historically effective method.
We all agree central banks stink in a recession, they are somewhat limited in what they can do, but during growth they double the fun.
I see the creator is intending income equality, and I think that's definitely just and purposeful. More research required.
Good try at separating transactions from holding currency. The 'killer app' is not a government-less currency. The killer app is frictionless digital transactions. A previous article expanded on it.
I'd like to hijack the daily Bitcoin thread for a tangential discussion. My dad used to have a stamp collection. Back in the day most people would give you a funny look if you told them you collect stamps, but it was pretty cool to browse the collection and see all those stamps from all over the world. And the really rare stamps could cost quite a lot of money. So here's the question: is Bitcoin more valuable than stamps?
Value is subjective. Water is very valuable in the desert, but not so valuable in the middle of the Pacific. Diamonds are valuable in downtown Chicago, not so much to someone surviving in a lifeboat. During the hyperinflation of Germany in the 20's, people were trading furs and antiques for food. It's all subjective.
So why would a reasonable actor choose to store money in this currency when there are easier to get, easier to use, demurrage free currencies available? I get the economic idea (I think) but it seems like something that would need a near monopoly to succeed. Otherwise it will just be a money pit for idealistic enthusiasts.
>>>Every Freicoin client is capable of performing these tasks, but in practice mining is the domain of computer enthusiasts and IT professionals with tuned top-level hardware
Given that my PC is obsolete crap, should I even bother getting the client?
[+] [-] runn1ng|13 years ago|reply
Q: You said that Freicoin is decentralized. But the Foundation makes it centralized! A: You are right. But we have no other solution. Initial coins should be distributed to the society.
Q: Why can't you just give these coins to miners (as in Bitcoin). Why do we need a bureaucracy? A: The mining community consists mostly of enthusiasts, not ordinary people who use computers to browse the Internet.
Q: How many coins does the Foundation have? A: The Freicoin Foundation distributes 80% of the total Freicoin money supply through grants. The remaining 20% is a reward for miners, who support the network with their computing power.
Hahaha... no.
[+] [-] n1c|13 years ago|reply
But this doesn't look like the answer.
[+] [-] kiba|13 years ago|reply
I don't see any reason to give money, buy, or sell, or do anything with freicoin. To me, the fact that freicoin decays when not used is a bug, not feature.
[+] [-] lolcraft|13 years ago|reply
They made a great attempt, but sometimes one's best try is just not enough.
[+] [-] nodata|13 years ago|reply
Might interest you: http://www.lietaer.com/2010/03/the-worgl-experiment/
[+] [-] wcoenen|13 years ago|reply
Perhaps the advantages of bitcoin but without the instability.
If bitcoin continues to go through boom and bust cycles that change its value by orders of magnitude, then ironically an alternative with demurrage might prove to be a better store of value. You might lose some of your savings, but at least it'll be predictable.
[+] [-] tptacek|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] chrisvineup|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maaku|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] h2s|13 years ago|reply
I'm not calling the concept of BTC-style cryptocurrency a deliberate, malicious pyramid scheme in itself. I think this is an unintended side-effect.
[+] [-] patio11|13 years ago|reply
The equilibrium is predictable:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2608891
[Y]ou can create an arbitrarily high number of bitcoin-like electronic currency units. [These new varieties will have] guaranteed scarcity, anonymity, and a new goldrush phase -- so if you got dumped rather than pumped, you have a new opportunity to start at the top of the pyramid scheme this time.
The equilibrium is that sooner or later expected returns on starting a new distributed pump-and-dump dwarf expected returns of getting in late on bitcoins. And then poof.
Bitcoin is a wonderful engineering achievement: a spontaneously organized, decentralized, peer-to-peer boiler room from which arises a mediocre transaction processing network.
[+] [-] gluczywo|13 years ago|reply
I think that demurrage proposed by Freicoin adds no value because hoarding isn't a real problem for Bitcoin or for any other currency. I suppose that the fear of hoarding comes from the fact that we still live in the world full of harmful keynesian ideas.
[+] [-] jimktrains2|13 years ago|reply
Sure, by getting others involved I increase the likelihood of it succeeding, but...that's everything.
[+] [-] hazov|13 years ago|reply
Some of these cryptocurrencies appeared in 2011, if I'm not wrong, in the middle of the first bitcoin price hike but they proposed different algorithms to generate coins, so I do not know if we can attribute their design to malice.
My main problem with it all is that users from these currencies built an identity around them, which mixes politics, ideology and hoarding of this currencies.
[+] [-] terhechte|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maaku|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jstanley|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mistercow|13 years ago|reply
So in effect, the demurrage fee goes to the miners.
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Ygg2|13 years ago|reply
Also what makes me really suspect of it is the fact that Freicoin foundation centralizes the whole thing, so it's a bit pointless. I mean, why have an centralized P2P network? Another worrying thing is that under Silvio Gessel's original idea Freigeld is a local currency NOT a global one.
[+] [-] jdotjdot|13 years ago|reply
There are also some really odd grammatical errors:
"Islam banking"?[+] [-] smnrchrds|13 years ago|reply
Funny thing is in Iran, which considers itself an Islamic country and says it follows Islamic laws in banking, interest rates are as high as 20%.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_bank [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riba
[+] [-] JumpCrisscross|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jimktrains2|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jstalin|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shawabawa3|13 years ago|reply
The fee is really no different from inflation in fiat currencies. Why would anyone save dollars when they are worth 1-2% less every year?
[+] [-] JonnyB|13 years ago|reply
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Gesell
http://geokey.de/literatur/doc/nwo.pdf (German)
[+] [-] DennisP|13 years ago|reply
Edit: I found this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=35705
Looks like demurrage is implemented simply by a rule for block validation: transaction outputs have to subtract from inputs based on the age of the coins. Don't know how they calculate age unambiguously.
There seems to be a lot of centralization in this particular implementation...eg., 80% of new coins go to the foundation for the first three years, which says it will distribute based on ideological motivations.
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] plaxis|13 years ago|reply
We all agree central banks stink in a recession, they are somewhat limited in what they can do, but during growth they double the fun.
I see the creator is intending income equality, and I think that's definitely just and purposeful. More research required.
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] diffraction|13 years ago|reply
Where do the coins taken for this fee go?
How can I apply for a grant from the foundation?
[+] [-] amalag|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rrrrtttt|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jstalin|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smurph|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikecane|13 years ago|reply
Given that my PC is obsolete crap, should I even bother getting the client?
[+] [-] darthhao|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ionwake|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kiba|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]