Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Kong – Physical Cryptocurrency

kong.cash

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 395 posts

Re: Show HN: Kong – Physical Cryptocurrency

#141

Post by luminiferous »

ccamrobertson wrote: post #7
lockit wrote: post #3

How does this work? Is the first 2,500 part of your own ICO?

There is no ICO. We're selling packs of Kong in a limited fashion to cover the costs of manufacturing the hardware. We have a limited number of units available so we're slowly opening up sales to our mailing list. Take a look at sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the paper for information on our lockdrop; this is the only other way to get Kong token. Lockdrops are a novel means of distributing token based on opportunity cost ra…

Just to clarify, that means that I would need to 1.) purchase some packs of Kong, which are unloaded, and then 2.) participate in a lockdrop to gain the tokens with which to load the Kong? Seems fine and dandy wrt the acquisition of bills, but how will adoption by vendors happen?

Re: Show HN: Kong – Physical Cryptocurrency

#144

Post by iudqnolq »

hanniabu wrote: post #130
Twixes wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would that be the case if you were to buy that sandwich with, say, euros instead? They too could appreciate between purchases.

If you're in the US and pay with euros then yes it would technically be the same.

No. The issue is because cryptocurrencies aren't classified as currencies like euros are by the IRS.

Re: Show HN: Kong – Physical Cryptocurrency

#145

Post by ccamrobertson »

sgarman wrote: post #123
ccamrobertson wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt this version would hold up well in a salt water environment. The chips will ultimately have a conformal coating leaving only gold contacts which should fare better. We have considered more robust variants that would fully seal all the components, but this is a v2 problem. I should add that even a corroded chip should ultimately still be accessible; you might have to pull it off of the bill and decap it.

Do v1 people just not get to redeem their value in x years since they become unreadable?

The secure element chip is pretty robust on its own. Even if most of the bill is destroyed, it will be possible to communicate with the chip in most cases.

Re: Show HN: Kong – Physical Cryptocurrency

#146

Post by darawk »

james_s_tayler wrote: post #120
paulgerhardt wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is how to make a sound cash instrument backed by cryptocurrencies. It matters because cash is the dominant form of payment worldwide. Section 4.1 goes into how to manufacture these so we're not the sole entity. Manufacturers of mining equipment set an...ok...precedent here. I think we can do better in this space which is why we're trying to minimize trust in these black boxes and move to open silicon with…

>The problem is how to make a sound cash instrument backed by cryptocurrencies. It matters because cash is the dominant form of payment worldwide In what way is cash failing that it needs to be replaced by your type of cash? The "it's decentralized and doesn't rely on a state level actor" argument has been thoroughly lost at this point.

Cash is controlled by a central authority. Governments can print as much or as little of it as they want. Kong does not have this property.

Re: Show HN: Kong – Physical Cryptocurrency

#147

Post by darawk »

arcticbull wrote: post #138
ccamrobertson wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Another simple flaw of Kong is that when I receive a Kong note, someone could have intentionally fried it with, for example, high voltage on the I2C contacts to damage the secure element without leaving any visible defects." That would "fry" the secure element chip entirely, thus destroying it precluding anyone from accessing the token in the future (NFC would fail as well).

Right but asking people to verify every single note they receive is a regression in usability. It also makes the notes less reliable to store than a gold coin or a paper note, which can't be damaged by things like water, high-voltage or microwaves.

You could make this same criticism of cash, though. It's not a usability regression, they just both have the same flaw. People pass off counterfeit currency as real all the time.

Re: Show HN: Kong – Physical Cryptocurrency

#148

Post by asdf21 »

james_s_tayler wrote: post #120
paulgerhardt wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is how to make a sound cash instrument backed by cryptocurrencies. It matters because cash is the dominant form of payment worldwide. Section 4.1 goes into how to manufacture these so we're not the sole entity. Manufacturers of mining equipment set an...ok...precedent here. I think we can do better in this space which is why we're trying to minimize trust in these black boxes and move to open silicon with…

>The problem is how to make a sound cash instrument backed by cryptocurrencies. It matters because cash is the dominant form of payment worldwide In what way is cash failing that it needs to be replaced by your type of cash? The "it's decentralized and doesn't rely on a state level actor" argument has been thoroughly lost at this point.

Engineers are generally more trustworthy than governments.

Re: Show HN: Kong – Physical Cryptocurrency

#150

Post by ben174 »

foobar_ wrote: post #128

Unless this is going to transfer ethercoins, this is a SCAM. They are trying to build a bank on top of smartcoins. The functionality seems like that of a promissory note. As they keep the kong coins in their kong bang ... they will try to make money using the volatility or something.

> CTA: "Request Access"

> Need more Kong? Reach out and we'll see what we can do.

Yes everything about this reads like a scam. Uses the most basic scam tactics, make it seem urgent, and desirable and exclusive.

Post reply on HN