Are we creating Cryptocurrency for Sybirathia?
No. It's been asked a lot lately if Sybirathia will be using or creating some sort of Cryptocurrency that will be used in Game and the most basic answer is No. Not at this time.
SybirCoins are intended to be spendable points earned or able to be recharged in the game for purchasing such as user made content in the game world, but also keeping a cap on how much can be charged so it is not turned into something ridiculous or equating virtual merchandise at the same costs of their virtual representations. So it is not in and of itself a cryptocurrency as is all over the news lately.
There are several reasons why we are not doing this, and aside from the fact all digital currencies are speculative anyways, in order to develop an actually secured and stable form of such 'monetary value' in a 'real sense' would require us to change focus from developing the game and focus instead on a lot of extra work to focus proper development and deployment of such a crypto.
Here are some reasons:
A digital currency relies on encryption to generate new units and confirm the transactions. It has all the functions of the currency with the difference of running outside of a single centralized platform (such as a bank).
Coins require their own blockchain while tokens can operate on the existing ones.Tokens are limited to a specific project; coins can be used anywhere.Coins buy tokens but tokens can’t buy coins.
Tokens are like earned points and can only be used by the company that issues them. Coins equal real money you can spend or use anywhere. That is the key difference between Tokens and Coins.
The bottom line is that you need to build a blockchain if you want to create a crypto coin. Also, despite that they are suppose to be decentralized and not controlled by any nation to bank, the US Government has for nearly a decade taken such currencies from so called criminals or "bad guys" and redistributed them for sale to such as billionaires at a fraction of their costs.
Also, because of the way they are designed, if you loose the access code to your digital wallet which is not insured or backed by anything, they cannot be retrieved, and are from that point lost and whatever real money you put into them is also lost forever.
The hype is another issue
If your project or startup requires its own blockchain, you need to create your own digital currency to incentivize the nodes contributing their processing power. Many authoritative business analysts foresee a big future and a growing list of the markets and industries where the blockchain technology will significantly disrupt the status quo and generously reward the early adopters but that also makes the false assumption that their brand is going to have any actual transferable value and most don't.
The technology claimed to be here and now is also a half truth. The blockchain technology has never truly arrived yet. This is also used as a pitch that because of this it’s not too late to join the ranks of pioneers in the 'development of the technology' that all these various sources make it appear already exists.
Blatant fallacies:
Eliminating fraud risks — cryptocurrency is impossible to counterfeit and no party can reverse past transactions. Not true. In fact its been shown several times whether called a 'glitch' or whatever, someone with enough time can in fact hijack and counterfeit a digital currency and have. It also gives the false assumption that it is somehow insured, which it isn't. And the claim also ignores the reality that nothing is 100% secure.
Providing transaction anonymity — customers decide what exactly they want sellers to know about them. False, if someone has any sort of deep level spyware running in the background of their systems or platforms, someone can in fact track it and figure out who you are. Again it can be extremely difficult but not impossible.
Cutting down operating costs — cryptocurrency is free from the exchange or interest rates, as well as the transaction charges. Wrong, the fact the US Government has seized access to such cryptos for nearly a decade and redistributed them to other buyers, that equates seized and redistributed assets to the highest bidders or buyers.
Offering immediate transactions — state holidays, business hours or geographic location of the parties don’t affect cryptocurrency. False. This can be said of any financial transactions depending on communication between banking systems servers. So it is a misleading claim. The reality is there is still a processing time even in digital currency transactions and the only difference is instead of waiting days, it can be processed within a couple of hours. However, preset government digital direct deposits also can appear within a few hours or less in your direct deposit accounts in your banks,, so again such a claim is misleading.
Ensuring an immediate pool of potential customers — now you can make business with those without an access to traditional exchange resources. No more trade restrictions in any markets. False. A country has to accept what alternative currency it will recognize as valid funds in their markets. If they reject them they reject them and it is as simple as that.
Providing security for their funds — since cryptocurrency is a decentralized system, there is no Big Brother figure like banks or government institution that can seize or freeze your assets. False. If it can be seized and redistributed (which it has) that means 'Big Brother' damn well can and have done so for, a decade now in fact. Check this article.
Now, with that being said, here is the creation part that is time consuming:
Know Your Use Case
Choose a consensus mechanism
Pick a blockchain platform
Design the Nodes
Establish your blockchain's internal structure
Take care of APIs
Design the interface
Make your cryptocurrency legal
The last part should show that its not so decentralized as it seems if it still has to be made "legal" or recognized as "legal" by someone else. So not only is it a lot of work there is still an approval and "legalizing" process in the whole setup and also shows the complete decentralized, "no one" determines this or that claim is Bullshit. Decentralized means just that. 'No single authority be it composed of a group of persons or an individual person.'
As such the cons outweigh the pros and that is why its being avoided and why we are not setting up SybirCoins as any sort of "digital currency" AKA "crypto." All of it is speculative, and as an additional fact contrary to what many are lead to believe that this is a new idea, its not. The concept has been around since the 1960's literally known as cryptocurrency and was not a recent digital age invention.
Investing in cryptocurrencies and Initial Coin Offerings ("ICOs") is highly risky and speculative, and speculative means there are no clear and hard answers as to their viability, sustainability and are all at best experimental, and much of the hype, as shown is largely just that. In fact they are also insanely volatile.
PayPal for one is not interested in them because its trade margins are already quite low, and Amazon is still growing at tremendous rates already and has little incentive to take the risk of being involved in the current "crypto" market. NatWest which is a UK lender has categorized all cryptos/digital currencies as “ too high risk” and refuses to serve business customers who accept cryptocurrencies because it is a fact that by investing in crypto assets, consumers stand a much higher chance of loosing literally everything (which also puts the lender in direct conflict with other lenders in the JP Morgan umbrella). Then you have banks like US Bank that has changed its view and yet in 2019 Wells Fargo put a ban on customers purchasing such as Bitcoin and presently moved to a grey area stating in 2020 its because they can't yet hold cryptocurrency in their accounts.
The fact is only 16% of US dollars (higher in some countries) is nearly all digital already but is not cypto. Only 16% is physical paper notes and coins. So we already have digital currency. While some cryptos are backed by "real money" they are not real in themselves and that is another problem, and considering that the majority of "money/credits" are already digital, which is what cryptos are themselves, they are not "new" in concept and likewise even less stable and not insurable.
Furthermore, cryptos are starting to move from their initial concept towards the more traditional features of finance. but again when that occurs, and it will, that will once again become another centralized governing global network system and its just a matter of which government takes control of it, thus completely erasing the concept of "decentralized" and all the different brands will be no different than the various symbols used for current national currencies/credit notes. So its a massively misleading deception and that is the only reason why so many banks are starting to create "crypto" options. Let that sink in.
Where is the proof of this?
Centralized Cryptocurrency Mining. Within the world of cryptocurrencies, ASICs (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) are designed to mine specific Cryptocurrency brands. Also they mess with your Computer. In fact, ASICs are targeted pieces of hardware that aim to beat out general graphics processing units (your computer's GPU), when applied to the cryptocurrency mining process , which can also significantly slow down your system's functions and screw with the graphics cards.
What's the big deal? The problem for many cryptocurrency miners and investors has to do with the way that ASICs are created and distributed. Indeed, there are very few manufacturers of ASICs; this means that the space is highly centralized. When a small number of companies have near-total control over distribution rights to hashing power for a cryptocurrency (via the provision of unequaled ASIC technology), the process of mining itself becomes more centralized rather than less.
Bitmain is one of the largest and most prominent ASIC manufacturers. Bitmain has repeatedly launched ASIC miners for coins that developers had claimed were "ASIC-resistant," meaning that the mining process could not be made more efficient through a specialized piece of hardware.
The impact of this reality on the cryptocurrency is that companies like Bitmain will undoubtedly be able to continue developing hardware that allows for more efficient and more profitable mining, but that also makes it again more centralized.
Not only does this mean with big backers to help such in outmaneuvering other miners, limited and specific centralized ASIC developers could easily end up controlling more than 50% of the hashing power on a blockchain which then determines the value of said currencies and block out in the very near future from others from being able to do the same, effectively seizing control and a monopoly of the market. Its just a matter of who gets positioned to do so first.
That is because once a group or party controls a majority of hashing power, that group can then abuse the decentralized nature of many cryptocurrencies, even rewriting transactions on a supposedly-immutable distributed ledger which is what is called the 51% attack and not the same as what many have claimed is a hijack as in robbery of say, a false charge in your account. Instead its a takeover of that account and you answer to them or loose it all.
But then some will say one way to avoid this is for more companies to create and be funded to produce ASICs to drive investment costs down and drive value and accessibility up. The problem with that is the same with any business called conglomeration and old fashion buy out power otherwise known as subsidiaries and therefore puts it right back into the hands of the controlling few and the wishful thinking masses.
And that's even if in an attempt to address the centralization of ASIC manufacturing would be to implement a new hashing algorithm that could effectively obliterate all existing ASIC miners. This would level the playing field and thus, open the door to new manufacturers (and potentially give new manufacturers an advantage over established, heavily-resourced players already in the system) but those manufacturers can simply be taken over as well.
So called forking is an example of attempts to bypass this, but its also been demonstrably shown to be futile because even changing the algorithms in forks cannot counteract that ASICs catch up to algorithm changes quickly. Furthermore, forking can introduce other problems into the code and have the unintended side effect of centralizing power with developers because forking just means creating a branch off a centralized provider at the core of the forked clusters.
Catching on yet?
So don't fall for it as a way to gain complete freedom from someone else controlling your money as contingent to the future of global financial equality and liberation from someone else. It was a "nice idea" and it was tried, and still being tried, but its not how it will actually turn out and the only ones that have a chance on capitalizing on this are those who aggressively crush the competition, take full control and make the rest just branches in yet another centralized and entirely digitized system. In other words its just a deeper illusion backed by nothing. Do not get sucked into the Hype.