well lets do some simple math.

ICONOMI - one of the linked addresses to receive byteballs.

ICONOMI linked 7k btc - giving them 9.766% of the total supply by the time all distribution is over.

so they currently own 9766 byteballs = 245btc = $221,446 US dollars.

mid feb is the next round. they enter the 7k BTC once again, and in turn earn another 9766 Byteballs

assuming the price stays the same =

ICONOMI will own over 2.2million dollars USD or 10% of a currency.

one single entity owns 10% vs the other 7billion people on earth.


and that is just ICONOMI.. not to mention the other people that own large percentage.. LISK etc.


how is this fair, your giving a small portion of about 10 people 95% of the supply.




your project is already set up to fail, another project will take its place with a clone of byteballs with a fair distribution, excellent idea, failed distribution method, logic = lets give millionaires massive portions of the supply.

First of all it wasnt 70k BTC they registered. Maybe it was 7k BTC. They got around 10k Gigabytes.
Then they wont get another 10k Gigabytes in the next round, because for every BTC in second round you get only 0.0625 Gigabytes. Their 7k BTC will give them around 440 Gigabytes in second round. In addition to that you get 0.1 byte for every byte you hold during the snapshot of second round. With their 10k Gigabyte that will bring them 1k Gigabyte. So Iconomi will roughly end up with another 1500 Gigabyte.

They dont earn another, next round each 1btc will give you 62.5megabytes only.

How is this fair? How is it in the real world, yet you are transacting with currencies? You think on your national economy that 1% or less of the population does not control the 90% of money supply? That 1 person can not crash your average western european countries economy? LOL. And extended to world economy, 150 people can move as much capital as the next 6billion combined.

If you are dealing with money, if you are buying and selling goods, you are contributing to inequality and unfair unjust world. Each transaction you make, and every one else makes with anything of value, is contributing to inequality. Rich get richer and poor get poorer, its not a dumb cliche its a realization of facts builtin any economical system. If you like to try alternatives go to Venezuela.

Can you point to any economy in the real world in any historical point in time where distribution is equal and is over time equalizing? LOL.

Money is the root of all evil, it is designed not to be equal and fair, any monetary system which goes against this basic truth fails and people dont consider it valuable to transact with.

Life is unfair, deal with it. I got my 1gb from 1btc, and bought more with the same 1btc, now I have +40GB. Now I am 1000001.23% richer than all the 99.9% of people of planet earth who didnt know how to buy a btc and sign a message with their wallet, those who still have 0gb. Unfair to them? Iconomi is looking down on my 40gb from their stash of their 9138312gb, so what?

What would you suggest would be a better distribution method? How would you do your byteball clone to be fair?

again wrong...not similar...in the end, Iconomi will have maybe 2% of the whole supply. LISK maybe 5%...Komodo maybe 1%. In the end, these big amounts are the same like in the real economy with shares of Daimler or UBS and Co.
So nothing bad. If Iconomi would sell all his stocks in one time, they would destroy their reputation. So nothing special.


P.S.: I am sorry for the word "crap"; but its already a never ending discussion here.


Greetz
Steve

Ok your "deal with it" approach isn't making things sound any better

how would i make my clone different? max of 10btc linked. fair. now its averaged against everyone somewhat equally, not 1 entity has 100000x times more than every other person, ready waiting to dump the market with over $250,000 usd worth.


i think with such a new approach, why set up for failure, is this method the absolute fairest and best method the developer could think of? or am i missing something?

its the equivalent of having 1000 people stuck on an island and finding a load of 500 apples, and saying ok lets give 4 people 448 of those apples, and the remaining 996 people will have to share 2 apples. its actually cringe worthy how they think this was ever fair, its setup the market for failure, this will continue to be a topic of weakness throughout the coins life.

@tonych

Why don't you change the distribution such that it rewards actual users of byteball? You could code a smart contract such that every tenth transaction fee is redeemed from undistributed reserve. This way the amount of bytes in circulation would grow with the same pace as usage.

Max 10btc linked you say? Oh much wow, now it will take me a whole 2 minutes to create 23370 btc addresses and transfer my btc amounts amongst them, then link them individually with each holding 9.99btc.

Dont worry, if the method of distribution was magically fair, somehow from a real helicopter drone dropped bytes to Yemeni people equally as to rich Germans, you would still find something to complain about for the coins life, did the helicopters pollute the environment too much and scare the bird-life? Discuss.

My idea is to reward frequent users. Right now, everybody can buy bytes at the market to pay tx fees. Let everybody pay first, than make a snapshot every so often, and redeem each address a fraction of fees which it payed (e.g 10%). This way it does not matter how many addresses one individual has, he still needs to pay first to be redeemed later. And this puts whales out of the loop unless they become frequent users.

For example, exchanges will be frequent users and get redeemed a lot, but this will benefit their users, since exchange can charge less fees.

Oh okay so you say "they arent about to" so that is the success formula for a fair distribution.

Just like that waves (or whatever dumb crypto pseudo company) guy said they would distribute their received bytes among their customers, and then a day later said "lol no we will give them btc 'tokens'".

Your way of thinking with your island analogy, 1000 apples in a basket arrive and their owner says "will give 1 apple for 1 piece of paper 1cm in square size", and you assume the guy holding a large sheet of paper several meters in size wont have a scissors to cut his big-sheet into smaller pieces to receive more apples instead of 10? Yeah, that distribution method you have is ingenious, if only there was other geniuses like you in the world to think of this before!

is it currently possible to make a paper only wallet using the seed?
or are files still needed to restore backup?