I really like the idea of asset backed cryptos the only problem I can think of is how you can do this in a way where you don't need to trust the people that are in charge of making sure the crypto is backed by an asset. Possibly some kind of open-sourced...bank? Storage Unit? Someone has to physically hold what is backing up this crypto asset and that leads to controlling the asset and corrupting the cryptocurrency.
I will look at your other posts and see if you've answered my question elsewhere.
I don't know if you've heard of algorithmic stablecoins? They are tied to the real time price data of assets like Gold, USD, global shrimp price, etc. Though this seems to fall in the same problem in that you could have more of this stablecoin than there is of the asset and can't back it up physically.
Just because I am offering arguments that don't agree with you doesn't mean I don't appreciate the conversation. And I never downvote people, especially not just for disagreeing with me. I think I've actually upvoted all of your "disagreements." I could never downvote someone for offering a reasonable argument against what I am saying. Debate is the only path to the Truth.
I couldn't agree more. I've really enjoyed our conversation so far, thank you.
I really like the idea of asset backed cryptos the only problem I can think of is how you can do this in a way where you don't need to trust the people that are in charge of making sure the crypto is backed by an asset.
I agree that this is problematic. I haven't spent enough time on this to come up with a solid solution, but once I present my report I intend to spend my time working on this very issue.
Possibly some kind of open-sourced...bank?
This was kinda my idea, but I'm not sure. I'm thinking a free market might provide a solution, but it would require some infrastructure, which is problematic. My current plan is to present a solution scheme to the problem and encourage debate to come to a better solution. I have a fair following on reddit. Once I present my report I think I can get some good debate going.
Though this seems to fall in the same problem in that you could have more of this stablecoin than there is of the asset and can't back it up physically
This is something that must be avoided at all costs. There can be no good economy (no fuckery) if this is possible.
This was kinda my idea, but I'm not sure. I'm thinking a free market might provide a solution, but it would require some infrastructure, which is problematic. My current plan is to present a solution scheme to the problem and encourage debate to come to a better solution.
Possibly the infrastructure could by a DAO and the DAO would be owned by a different cryptocurrency. Profits would be the least concern of this cryptocurrency and it would be more about decentralization of the crypto. This way users of the open source bank could vote on what should/shouldn't be changed and people running the infrastructure would be constantly cycled through. People have to take responsibility if they want to have nice things.
I really like the idea of asset backed cryptos the only problem I can think of is how you can do this in a way where you don't need to trust the people that are in charge of making sure the crypto is backed by an asset. Possibly some kind of open-sourced...bank? Storage Unit? Someone has to physically hold what is backing up this crypto asset and that leads to controlling the asset and corrupting the cryptocurrency.
I will look at your other posts and see if you've answered my question elsewhere.
I don't know if you've heard of algorithmic stablecoins? They are tied to the real time price data of assets like Gold, USD, global shrimp price, etc. Though this seems to fall in the same problem in that you could have more of this stablecoin than there is of the asset and can't back it up physically.
I couldn't agree more. I've really enjoyed our conversation so far, thank you.
I agree that this is problematic. I haven't spent enough time on this to come up with a solid solution, but once I present my report I intend to spend my time working on this very issue.
This was kinda my idea, but I'm not sure. I'm thinking a free market might provide a solution, but it would require some infrastructure, which is problematic. My current plan is to present a solution scheme to the problem and encourage debate to come to a better solution. I have a fair following on reddit. Once I present my report I think I can get some good debate going.
This is something that must be avoided at all costs. There can be no good economy (no fuckery) if this is possible.
Possibly the infrastructure could by a DAO and the DAO would be owned by a different cryptocurrency. Profits would be the least concern of this cryptocurrency and it would be more about decentralization of the crypto. This way users of the open source bank could vote on what should/shouldn't be changed and people running the infrastructure would be constantly cycled through. People have to take responsibility if they want to have nice things.