Bwaaaaaahahahahahahahahaaa!!!

Evan obviously meant to say 0.05DRK. My MNs will perform services for DRK, you can take your filthy dollars somewhere else.

It's not that it's value would go down if a real world use was found, it's the fact that it ceases to be of monetary value if it goes out of circulation due to its utility.

Most of the world's gold supply isn't stuck in people's teeth or in your home Hi-Fi contacts. It's sitting in vaults doing nothing but functioning as a monetary unit.

A monetary medium that also has a utility value DOES detract from its monetary value because it makes it a targetable commodity in its own right and therefore inefficient in it's monetary role. Cryptos are almost perfect in this sense because they have almost zero utility value. They are pure monetary tokens and are therefore one step closer to monetary perfection than gold was.

If you really need it spelled out, think of it this way - a funfair uses plastic tokens as "money" to pay for rides. Those plastic tokens are almost worthless in the hardware shop where they only have utility value. On the other hand, inside the "funfair economy" their value accrues to maybe 10,000% of their utility value. The difference is their monetary value when used as a currency - i.e. the price you pay for their "monetary role".

Now lets say you increase the utility value of those plastic tokens by having them perform a function - say, monitoring your heartbeat. Now they will perform less well in a monetary role because a load of them go out of circulation and eventually there's not enough left to effectively use as a currency. A few are still traded and have high value (higher than before even possibly) but they're not used as a currency any more due to being a poor monetary medium.

Finally, one day along comes another company selling cheaper heartrate monitors and blows away the valuation because we no longer have "universal adoption", just utility in a very specific sector.

Mine too. Maybe it's possible to implement some sort of flexible pricing mechanism (in DRK of course) based on bids by the Masternode owners, or even by the users themselves, although that proabably wouldn't end well. I have no idea how it could work but I think the idea of a fixed price is not ideal, mainly because of volatility and  to a lesser extent - at the moment - inflation. If there is a workable solution it could be applied to miners fees and anonymisation fees too, because it now costs about twice as much as it did yesterday, in fiat terms, to anonymise funds.

Toknormal is raising valid concerns. This whole idea needs some serious discussion.

• Separate Module needed or built into the wallet for a tor network
• Maximum amounts of hops in network
• latency between MN's on the same server providing timing attacks
• Economic impact of tying a currency with a service
• legal repercussions for operating a node
• Maximum amount of nodes and cost
• Bandwidth impact on MN operators

Also, in the proposed design, I believe only one node would be selected for payment. This wouldn't work. Tor requires an entrance, relay's, and exit nodes. All of them have the same amount of data aka bandwidth going through them. If only one MN was paid in this proposed design, four other MN's would take a huge bandwidth hit and receive nothing.

Paying per day would be dumb. It would be more economical, to charge a set fee of say 15 dark a month for the usage of the network. The funds would have to be secured somehow trustless, and then depending on which nodes serviced the user, those nodes would receive the highest percentage of the 15.

But then again, the above paragraph wouldn't work because that would require every MN to have knowledge of the person paying for the service. It wouldn't be trustless. Also data would be retained leading back to the entrance node and finally to the unencrypted IP address of the user.

What is being proposed is a massive undertaking. Once again, a lot of different subjects need to be discussed about this.

Had an additional couple of votes over night, I locked voting now, looks like the community has made its recommendation:





That was fun...

Last time I was in this thread my posts were all deleted.  I don't come here much.

Yes, and just so you know, Evan had all those ideas just after he created Masternodes (can't remember, but it probably was prompted by discussion within the community)  But it was back in March already when these ideas came out.  It might be hand in hand with a tor system, but messaging or phoning system that is private need to be at the top of the list

O gods the witches are back. And somehow I now understand their voodoo babble, I must have absorbed it by osmosis or something.  

Yup...join the club...for some reasong...BCT finds it important to delete alot of my "on topic" posts...so to don't feel singled out.