other.arkitech at protonmail.com
Mon Jun 8 03:09:15 PDT 2020
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday, June 8, 2020 5:50 AM, grarpamp <grarpamp at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I would not call it premine, just mined, the network is running and mining.
> > Premine implies that the genesis started with allocations
> That's one form.
> Another form is, as before... mining after genesis only by a
> select group of internal/closed/invitee people, not publicly
> announced till later, and not reset upon such announcement.
> Another form is... ASIC companies mining before selling and
> shipping the HW to users, and early shipping in qty to select
> purchasers, not telling general public buyers they are doing this,
> getting shafted with a partially mined out "new" die process.
> All three forms, of which there are probably more forms,
> are often frowned upon by large portions of the crypto space.
> Some claim it is free market to do.
> Others choose to boycott.
> Both have their arguments.
> But for every form, it do cause some controversy,
> that probably could be avoided from the start.
> The facts of how and when certain announcements,
> coins were generated, distributed, held, taxed, etc
> in some of the various coin projects are known.
> Lots of coins did preallocation, founder taxing, and various
> garbage-for-gold IPO scams.
> USPS mined with some private and invitee people after
> genesis before public posts.
> Satoshi posted to a pretty big public list of people, then a public genesis
> moment, then all public everyone including his own "self, and investor
> pay[back] purpose" were fairly mining publicly from that date onward.
> There was no private/invitee period after genesis before public post.
> Users could treat as color premined coins in a public crypto,
> but that is hard to do in practice.
> In a privacy crypto, or one with privacy elements, projects
> would even more want to meet some rather honorable ways
> to all the crypto space regarding their release process.
> Since at least 2013 there are pretty well recognized large
> announcement channels in each constituent and offshoot area.
> There might even be BCP now on how releases should
> maybe be done to help avoid some controversies.
> Many coin projects users still have weird feeling about "fairness"
> of release process that might naturally be holding any of those
> coin projects back from what would otherwise be stronger adoption.
> Many coin projects still struggle with the issues of their own
> history regarding choices about money they gave themselves.
> Just like banks that add a zero (0) doing fractional reserve lending.
Reseting a system breaks the promise. It is not easy action to do.
By doing this you are saying that the governance is weak, people who were trusting the system for long, running their hardware, would feel betrayed, and only because some potential new users don't like it to start after others.
Imagine if I say now that -because Bitcoin wan't announced on TV worldwide- the network has to be reseted so I join. Sounds crazy of course, but this shares the same aspects when dealing with a claim for reseting a blockchain.
Anyway the USPS was publicly posted soon after the genesis block, inviting people to try the system.
I think there are previous posts in reddit.
I can say again that the crypto earned by nodes since the network started has no exchange value as per today, nor the coins have a ceiling (like e.g., 21M). So they just count as a measure of the time they have been working for the network, and this is the fair status.
More information about the cypherpunks