fbpx

Preliminary Analysis of MinePi Crypto

  • View the white paper here: https://minepi.com/white-paper.
  • View the site here: https://minepi.com.
  • Download the app from the store and use haydenrear as invite code to investigate. You can only sign up once (the system will flag duplicate accounts)

This is a Cryptocurrency created by some Stanford graduates so that anyone can mine “Pi” from their phone, by being a member, for free. “Pi” is the name of currency. Try it out. The affiliate offers for this coin do not increase exponentially, and, in fact, the number of possible pi is fixed for each of the 100 million users:

In contrast to Bitcoin which created a fixed supply of coins for the entire global population, Pi creates a fixed supply of Pi for each person that joins the network up to the first 100 Million participants..

This is through the grapevine, but someone in the chat said that monetization would begin sometime in March of 2020. There is a chat in the app that you get added to. The future of the coin depends, to a certain extent, on the ability of the community to innovate. In the white paper, it talks about purchasing our attention.

Getting paid for your data, and removing the middle man between the content creator and the end consumer, freeing up the capital to allow content creators and consumers to get a better deal. By removing the middle man. Is it a pipe dream meant to garner attention, and thus users, without credibility? Or is this a golden opportunity of mass adoption, and we are cashing out on the research done by Stellar developers.

Project Libra by Stanford to Avoid Regulators

If Libra was a project built for Facebook, then maybe Stanford copied it into a social app and made it this. This is like the blockchain version of VenMo, with rules like a central authority built into it through the ability to aggregate preferences quickly, easily, and cheaply. That central authority determined through voting rights of the community of nodes, introducing a fault tolerance for each transaction. Apparently, as we move towards more users, the distribution of power through the nodes in the community will progressively decrease the need for any semblance of a governing authority, because of the ability of the system to identify problem transactions. And it is free right now because we are so early on in the development cycle.

Okay, this is like Bitcoin, right?

Consider that the price of Bitcoin was tied up with how much power someone is willing to exert to calculate the next block of the transaction (how much it costs to “mine”, with the power, as well as the depreciation costs of the mining machine), a function of the cost of the bitcoin, which is a function of the demand. It is so expensive to mine bitcoin that there are high transaction fees, and long lag times, when you have to wait for the transaction to go through. Furthermore, the concentration of bitcoin wealth is a security concern, when there are a few parties that could collude to take the system down. Bitcoin is missing a ceratain fault tolerance that will become increasingly relevant with quantum computers, or jumps in operational efficiency that represent the intermediate between quantum and the current binary computers.

Now, what does this have to do with MinePi?

Compare early Bitcoin to Pi, and there are not many differences, except that Pi is built on a more advanced network that increases the number of transactions per second, and the first-mover advantage is less than that of Bitcoin. In fact, it is clear that the individual can only scale in so much as they positively impact the community. Meanwhile, the next block of pi is so cheap to mine currently that we can do it on our phones. This is because there is not very many transactions yet. And so it is easy to get the next reward (pi).

So many questions… Good questions though.

Whether or not more equipment will be needed to verify the inreasingly complex puzzle that is the MinePi blockchain is a mystery. The dream of the project is that only a certain amount of Pi will be made available, and only to the first 100 million customers, however there seems some reservations when it comes to maintaining a scarcity important for the expectations for the coin. The white paper seems to do a good job of what the Federal Reserve does in it’s Forward Guidance., setting investor expectations for the future. 

Concluding Thoughts

We are early on in the project, so questions remain, such as when the project starts to scale, is the algorithm built into the system good enough to weed out duplicate users, as it says it will? If so, if means the system is built on advanced artificial intelligence, allowing it to weed out the fraudulent accounts. If it can weed out fraudulent accounts, can it flag transactions as fraudulent? As one of the core developers of Ethereum, Vlad Zamfir, reminds us that blockchain governance has always been a social design problem, will the new MinePi currency be able to have sufficient and effective distribution of control so that this design problem can become a new payment system that introduces the masses to crypto? Oh, I said it. Is mass adoption on the horizon? 

Incentives

These researchers at Stanford seemed to realize that in order to bring Crypto to the masses, they must distribute information about it equally, instead of gaining from the information asymmetry which usually characterizes ICO’s. The real question is whether or not the coin will make it through the initial phase, wherein too much centralization could allow for polluted incentives to destroy the project. Do the founders of the project have sufficient autonomy to do their work, while retaining safety from corruption?

The white paper made it sound like because of less concentration among initial members, there is more of a chance of corruption. Is the tech advanced enough, is the chain of custody properly established, and will the average person accept a gift that they don’t understand? This is me doing my part to try and explain, which the white paper says is duty for participants in the market.

Tried reaching out to the team developers, here, however I did not receive a response. Would love to ask them some questions, and perhaps have a podcast.

#minepi #stanford #blockchain #cryptocurrency #libra #graduates #free #development #paymentsystem #massadoption

WeWork – Cash Out Vibe

Cash out vibe? Loaning millions of dollars to yourself from a company posting losses in excess of revenues. Adam Neumann, the C.E.O. of tech “start-up” WeWork, which started in 2010, is what everyone is talking about. Investors are whispering to each other, so as to not ignite the herd to sell everything, silently off-loading as much as they can, buying safer assets to keep the index high and not trigger a greater sell-off. Or maybe they are huddled excitedly, waiting for a crash so they can cash in on short orders and buy everything back up. Adam Neumann is there with them, telling them what to buy.

Who is Adam Neumann? A diversified investor. A capitalist to the core. He loans out as much as he can to buy as much real estate possible, purchasing “assets” (they are really liabilities at this point, intuitively). Now, as we sit at the top of bursting bubble… or the crescent of a new era of stability *cough*, He has some money stacked away, loaned to his company and then distributed to him, as well as controlling rights of the company, WeWork.

What do you do to fight this? You can’t dummy. It is a qualified, rational investor taking his most profitable investment and selling it when it is worth the most. You can try to regulate the amount of money that a founder could distribute, but this would lower the drive for profitable investment because of the increased costs, whether it be in time or whatever.

This does bring the question, though: how much of the billion dollar losses that are music to investor’s ears, are just distributions to people with controlling interests?

In any case, we can marvel at the brilliance of someone taking the silicone valley principles of innovating the customer experience, and all that, to attract greater and greater sums of money to build, what.. office space? It is a different vibe though, for sure.

We should not make business any less desirable, because if consumption is up and everyone is paid, everyone is happy. In fact, we can probably look at his behavior, a well-connected real estate mogul, as a signal to the rest of the market. In any case, if WeWork goes broke because they provide some information more alarming than a $1.9 billion dollar loss (doubtful…) then we know who heard it first.

Side-note: ever wanted to deploy a website on AWS, with TLS and SSL, for free? Now, you can learn how to do so using this guide: learn to host on AWS for free, and even transfer a domain from another domain manager!

FIRES IN THE AMAZON.

Why is it important to fight fires in the amazon?

There is a war going on between Brazilian farmers, who want to expand and survive, the Brazilian president rallying behind them.

But this means expanding into land currently home to the most expensive and elegant biodiversity, for which we dont even know the value.

Essentially, because of a mismatch of incentives, real estate that could be worth millions and billions of dollars is being demolished. We don’t know the value, and therefore we assume there isn’t any.

The economic solution to a problem like this is to subsidize the farmers for what they would have earned, however lack of organization, and the transaction costs from an unstable political environment, have made this arguably impossible. Also, it’s politically unpalatable to invest into biodiversity, especially with the rise of populism, which is by definition driven by short-term interests.

So if our government, saddled in debt from a great recovery from the Great Recession, isn’t able to make a subsidy of that kind, the best thing we can do is support organizations (Greenpeace, for example) that fight the causes. These organizations hold the key to future generations benefiting from the mind boggling technology nature has created in the Amazon, however most people don’t have the money to support them. Also, mistakes in the past by these organizations coupled with loss aversion bias, or the human tendency to put further weight on those mistakes rather than successes, may lessen support.

Communication Monopoly

In a time where we can be reduced into digital identities, and then come out the same, communicating should be free. Unfortunately, this isn’t the case. Our communication is limited, because of something called monopoly power.

When a firm has monopoly power, it will reduce the quantity to that when the marginal cost equals marginal revenue. They do this because if you sell any less then you can still get marginal revenue over marginal cost, aka profit; you keep on selling until you get to that point. This means a lower quantity to artificially inflate the price for the people that will participate in the market.

To the extent that the increase in price ceases to lose as many consumer’s, they increase the price. Then, for the consumers that are left, the firm will make more profit than they would have at the lower price.

These are the connections that distinguish humanity in the 21st century. It is the speed at which new ideas can be communicated, a most important part of producing technology, fashion, and everything in between.

Being so important, they should be subsidized through government investment to assure that the economically efficient quantity have access, because of the increased benefit to society that this results in, specifically that benefit that isn’t captured in the price.

There is proof that utility companies (those companies that provide us with communication) underprovide the service. This means there is a market failure: subsidy or other regulation is necessary to achieve a socially optimum quantity.

The reason for centralized action: in Economics, when a product has positive spillover effects that benefit the society, more of the product should be provided than a firm will provide, because a firm will only provide up to the amount that it receives the benefit from.

The society should invest up until the society receives benefit that outweighs the cost of investment. It should invest up until a dollar invested will return a dollar in benefit, because up until that point a dollar invested will result in more than a dollar benefit. Up until that point there was net benefit, meaning more opportunity.

Teaming up as a society means working hard for the economy!

Theme BCF By aThemeArt - Proudly powered by WordPress .
BACK TO TOP