You want to create your own digital currency? Yikes, interesting, but well over it's head don't you think? I was just wondering how RWW.io could be making some cash with the service it's offering. On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > On 20 September 2013 01:17, Fabio Barone <holon.earth@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>>> >>> I was thinking about this a bit more. This is quite a smart model, but >>> I think we can do better! >>> >>> Why not let RWW.IO issue it's own currency which allows you use extra >>> bandwidth, storage etc. >>> >> >> Brilliant. How would you go issuing the currency though? Who would get it >> in the first place so that it later freely floats? >> > > The simplest way is to have a central ledger using linked data that is > kept by rww.io and use URIs to define the entities. Each entity has a > balance. > > This can either be a set of files or a triple store (or even use a > relational db backend). You have an entity that is the master account then > you have accounts for users. The master account can add credits to any > user it wants, and updates the triples. > > Then when doing a transfer you register it with the issuer and it updates > balances appropriately. > > The model can be distributed over many nodes using a replication algorithm > based on, say consensus, or proof of work. But to begin with you just need > a triple store ... > > > >> >>> Then free float the currency allowing people to buy it with real money >>> donations, purchases or bitcoins etc. >>> >>> Then since every user will normally have a key/pair allow the transfer >>> of credits at web scale using signing. Then RWW.IO credits becomes a >>> global currency like bitcoin that can be used in games to buy virtual goods >>> etc. or even across all different kinds of RWW apps. >>> >> >> This is intriguing. >> >> >>> A certain amount of credits can be issues on a schedule then then let >>> them expire as people use them for storage etc. This could tie in well >>> with the W3C payments work too. >>> >>> >> >
Received on Friday, 20 September 2013 08:44:22 UTC