[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Cryptography] Review of UBIC
- From: grarpamp <grarpamp AT gmail.com>
- Subject: Re: [Cryptography] Review of UBIC
- Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 15:39:54 -0500
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass firstname.lastname@example.org header.s=20161025 header.b=a5d8w4z9; spf=pass (google.com: domain of cypherpunks-bounces AT lists.cpunks.org designates 184.108.40.206 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=cypherpunks-bounces AT lists.cpunks.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=sender:errors-to:list-subscribe:list-help:list-post:list-archive :list-unsubscribe:list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:to :subject:message-id:date:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :dkim-signature:delivered-to:arc-authentication-results; bh=0IW7+llVWH/caGMYIvu5xaPunPIJQ4aH9R7LA7Tcc3k=; b=I18uZVWRMqIHTrXfHFO27wAkQv8Jt3JxK9i2Zrp8x5CJiMvulLSFohMJW8W6wktenF pmFI1scZtT/1/QLV4vnsgT9tZLF67T6ggLXnuAfvqY8D7vCFdh5Xx8+yfCoNCaeX5gu/ k/OofYTHKRrpSFEVAX0xNt9I/B5GG9q9q4kT7MvgunZ+dGlce55Wo0OIGJGPDB3CekLk qegFyyzmUMN5U7LygZteK8y5DXhYQWa+U013M5q7Ru5B9nxiBz28MVzC44XAWCB5C7dT ddfnyjb8+wB3z+4GLMfKkwgvaiAJaP3ypMUG0buxkm40MFr8GtFJMmHLBHJJZB+1mpgv XFsw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1519850519; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=TV09Evnm1zTuDtvmesIFkYY77B40Mz5rNwXb+S3mkKpBxC0Mte/iE6inZjKpoVFzVM XmbxtjLFs6DapB5/WHItQzQwI0nRuS0xSHf3npygS7Gp20TxDwcGkt13ijrIQt223su0 f5AVLHoamtMKn/YQzYkYkXltYfJJDczpIFE6jSdg8GIlBLCCqS4dlj55ASpUsuLhfCRD 06jmxQqYUoMw248t3qtVFBl3gdwcG4DkC11GLGvFGpJYwj+ykjwCnq3CyleXlV/S3sfk KE8IhQf5JR3Wkp4nzXwC5p423aBU2Znd2gjVYfgeDEhkANhzcwMNAL4AqU+cjosy03rP zvLA==
- List-archive: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/>
- Sender: "cypherpunks" <cypherpunks-bounces AT lists.cpunks.org>
- To: "cryptography AT metzdowd.com" <cryptography AT metzdowd.com>
> It would be a mistake to exclude Solar input from your consideration.
"Other than" is not exclusion.
> The links you gave don't belong to our project. I do agree with you on some points and a road map has been posted on the Bitcointalk since: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3021063.0
> A white paper will also be released soon.
> Regarding your point of view about UBI you can also see it this way:
> The UBI reward you get after registering your passport is a little bit the way Bitcoin worked in the early days when one could mine it with his or her personal computer. Nowadays you can still mine on your computer, but even after a year the amount you would have mined wouldn't be enough to cover the costs for doing a single transaction.
> At the beginning Bitcoin was the money made by the people for the people. It has now become the money made by the mining farms for the speculative investors.
> With UBIC the majority of new coins will always be generated by the people and without wasting precious energy.
> There will also be no hyperinflation because the amount of monetary units created with every block is static and it doesn't increase when more people join.
Makes no difference what way anyone sees or sells it.
It's just another exotic coin distribution scheme that does
not create anything, records no share ownership of external
ROI producing entities, and can't pull in forex forever.
Further, there's no holdback for faux "investment", or leveling,
so early UBI'ers are made rich, while late's likely remain poor,
and each new pki'd user acts as a forceful tax upon
the "UBI" stream of existing participants.
Though presumably country payouts are population ratios.
Further, the "UBI" mining airdrop it claims to distribute is actually
nothing more than money printing dilution, continuous zero
shifting rebasement, or deflation if burnt... not truly income.
Which again, were it real exernally sourced income, has
growth limitations / unbalances / wars in a closed cycle.
The E-passport pubkey sig verification / voting is interesting,
but can as easily be integrated and treated as a class
in any already existing mainstream coin tech.
Forcing "the masses" to fall to their knees before
force of governments to beg for passports to get
fake handouts... this will have problems, and be met with
resistance from various places, analysts, and movements.
Likely best to let agnostic coins work in open markets.