Re: Releasing RWW.IO

Would first users get currency for free? Or how would they get it in the
first place, do they need to buy it, in exchange for additional services
against direct fiat purchase?




2013/9/19 Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>

>
>
>
> 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 14:39:31 UTC