It´s time

It does
The more the product is used the higher the token is gonna be worth :)
Actual price of the token is not relevant for cost of using the product. Only for us Jow Forumscunts to get free gibs thanks to others hard work

The token's sole purpose is to be bought by Kyber automatically to pay the fee for using Request, and then get burnt.

>The more the product is used the higher the token is gonna be worth :)
This is how I imagine it's supposed to work.

Which is why this token burning thing seems scammy to me.

Not really. The price per transaction in fiat won't be effected at all. The people who actually use it won't ever notice. The token price only effects the investors, whom REQ needs to incentivize to keep selling. If a whale was able to accumulate a huge amount of tokens and manipulated the market enough to get people to become frustrsted and stop trading then they wouldn't be able to buy any off kyber and the REQ network would grind to a halt.

>The price per transaction in fiat won't be effected at all.
I know, it's supposed to be a way of inflating the price per token by reducing the amount of tokens.

Why not just put out a limited amount of tokens in the first place?
Why manipulate the market cap after the fact?

bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-08/ethereum-creator-wonders-whether-his-currency-should-be-scarcer

>“If the token is being burned, then you have an economic model that says the value of the token is the net present value of basically all future burnings,” he said. Otherwise, “it’s just a currency that goes up and down. It feels kind of like voodoo economics and the price of the token isn’t really backed by anything,” Buterin added. “That’s a very spooky thing.”

You fags realize this is how Binance/BNB works?

The economic model of an unburnt token is simply supply and demand.
There are X amount of tokens, and Y amount of people that want some.
The more people want some, the greater the value of the tokens.

It's a market buy. People will always sell when the price gets high enough.

its to accelerate adoption. that's it.

How does it accelerate adoption

anyone else buying the dip

Attached: 1521894271792.jpg (1000x882, 116K)

Just bought 8k more REQ. Anybody who reads that update and doesn't buy REQ has mental issues

>The price per transaction in fiat won't be effected at all.

Affected. But that's something I'm unclear about. How is the REQ price in fiat calculated? Since it's an ERC20 token I assume Ether? Seems like a liability.

the bigger the price of the req token, more people will buy it and so more people will be able to use the platform. both supply and demand boost accordingly.
the tokens burn rate will also diminish quite a bit as the price goes up.

New Crypto currency Zilliqa is breaking records + 11% per day 111% per week 1111% per month
The federal reserve invisibly invests in Zilliqa this crypto currency
Very sharp growth of quotations Zilliqa instantly enriched investors, block Zilliqa
The central bank of China secretly invests in Zilliqa top inside
secretly

+9% +25% +49% - 81% +121%
+3% +13% +31% -57% +91%
+5% +17% +37% -65% +101%

Attached: Zilliqa WERY UP! 2.jpg (3004x2616, 1.84M)

No it's not scammy, it's very clever. This is the only way that a token's price actually represents network usage. Say there wouldn't be any burning, then the price of a token is solely based on the price gamblers/investors are willing to pay for it, wether the network is only used by some biz neet or by Chad, Stacy, and the entire fucking world. Add token burning, the more it is used, the more the token is worth.

>This is the only way that a token's price actually represents network usage.
Well that's just not true.
The greater the network usage, the greater the demand for the token, the greater the price of the token.

i've literally sold almost 30k zil these last few minutes to buy about 5k req

Attached: 1514769673006.png (700x546, 437K)

New Crypto currency Zilliqa is breaking records + 11% per day 111% per week 1111% per month The federal reserve invisibly invests in Zilliqa this crypto currency Very sharp growth of quotations Zilliqa instantly enriched investors, block Zilliqa The central bank of China secretly invests in Zilliqa top inside secretly

Attached: Zilliqa 777.jpg (3004x2480, 1.42M)

The problem would be the price being too low. If most people FOMO at the top of a pump and then dumps nobody will want to sell the bottom and the supply could dry up

>the bigger the price of the req token, more people will buy it and so more people will be able to use the platform.
I thought you didnt need REQ to use the platform?

>req bitcoin oracle delayed
So this basically confirms chainlink right? Last month they said they were talking to chainlink, hard to believe they're still faffing about, and not just waiting for chainlink to launch.

Are you really this dumb or have you never thought about simple economics before entering the crypto market? I'll sketch a situation how your system without burning would represent a 'real company's' situation. It would be like Apple selling iPhones at the exact same price as it costs to produce them (read: 1 token). Then how Apple would make money is people buying stocks at higher prices. The price of an apple stock would thus be entirely based on speculation. I hope your IQ is high enough to understand that this situation is undesirable (and also why 99% of the current crypto market will disappear). So what's the solution? By adding a margin on products, so there is not only revenue, but also PROFIT that drives the price of stocks. Since margins are naturally not possible when you use tokens, price burning is the only option to mimic margins on token usage.

> they think fundamentals mean anything
> they think you can break the bear by token burn
> they don't remember sub-ICO REQ

People always leave high sell prices. Fuck it, if no one wants to sell i'll leave sell orders up of 1 req=1000eth. Let this burn mechanism chip away at my lone req, i'll end up rich af and the network will continue working without a hiccup.

So how would that work? Think this through, where would the token go to? Why do users of network want higher token prices (I'll spell it out: they don't, because it will increase their costs).

this is my main problem with req. sure, price might rise a lot but thats no good if your coins get burned.

THIS IS WJY 4CHAM WAS SHILKING REQ FOR MONTHS YOU FUCKING IDIOT. DO YOU GET IT NOW. DO YOU GET WHY REQ WILL MAKE US MILLIONAIRES user. DO. YOU. GET. IT.

Attached: 1513887056443.png (290x251, 93K)

Get cancer pajeet.

Read this you faggot.

vitalik.ca/general/2017/10/17/moe.html

you just lost all your credibility there. If the token price is higher, less is burned. It's a percentage being burned, not a static amount.

Someone help please. I tried to use req and it locked my account. I also have less tokens? Did they burn them without my consent?

Attached: 66c319d4e1.png (511x206, 11K)

No it's adjusted to the amount of tokens left in circulation

>buying a token that has a negative amount of use

Attached: 16908187_1857657634519373_8969878965351088128_n.jpg (1080x1281, 99K)

My bad, the rate is adjusted to both price and supply left, but that still doesn't matter regarding my posts

You're not alone. I don't really understand why the token price would go up either. They buy tokens off of exchanges to burn, which makes the tokens more scarce. Okay good, but why does it matter what the token costs or why would you hold it?

WHAT THE FUCK
LOOK AT HER BACK!

Are stock buybacks also scammy? Who let all these brainlets in?

looks fine to me

Attached: 15802342_1339497522792331_3271583671487823872_n.jpg (1080x1107, 103K)

Supply and demand, reduce supply, price goes up, it's not rocket science.

But you have to have demand in that equation. Who demands the token other than Req buying tokens so they can burn them and speculators who think they will be valuable for some reason? Speculation is obviously not sustainable. If there's an explanation for this please share it so you don't have to type it out, searching for the answer hasn't turned up anything for me.

>So how would that work? Think this through, where would the token go to?
The network, wallets, exchanges.

>Why do users of network want higher token prices (I'll spell it out: they don't, because it will increase their costs).
This is completely irrelevant. The fiat amount they're spending remains the same.

People who want to use the REQ service have to buy tokens to do it. This all happens in the background with the help of kyber. A percentage of those req tokens is then burnt.

So if I'm buying something for $200 I click buy, it automatically has me purchase .001 req tokens that are then burnt. Why even have the fee at all if it just gets burnt?

So the token is the product?

That's scammy as fuck.

So the team and investors profit, this is not a charity.

Just a profit in terms of higher valued tokens that they can then sell?

Burning means that the REQ tokens will basically be handled like a mix between a hedge and a stock. The burning guarantees a decreasing supply and therefore an accelerate value growth while the price is still dependent on people actually holding the tokens and not dumping them on the market place which means you have to trust the network to grow or at least maintain a certain burn rate for the guaranteed growth.

REQ will rule the world. If you own 1k REQ now you will have made it in 20 years.

Yes, exactly.

The fucking brainlets in this thread
This is why it's dumping, the world is brainlets. If Jow Forums doesn't even get it reddit certainly does it. Time to buy before these idiots figure it out in a few months.

It's scammy, is what it is.
Instead of letting the product speak for itself, you're artificially inflating the price by artificially reducing the supply.

This seems to be the equivalent of printing money, but in reverse.

>artificially inflating the price by artificially reducing the supply.
DURR
People legitimately buying and using tokens isn't artificial brainlet.

I'm talking about the burning.

NONONONONO MY REQIES GOT BURNT NONONONO

this is what they call 'incentives'

He is just supa-jely that you got hoes

so what happens if all req are burnt?
project over, platform dead?

pretty much

Amount burnt is tied to USD, not REQ so presumably it would take a very long time for all of them to get burnt, if ever.

From what I understand the system buys the tokens for burning using the currency people use at regular intervals, so if there's no REQ to buy it just sits there in the wallet.

thats just ultra retarded
why not introduce a staking mechanic like neo and burn gas or something
this is just dumb
glad i didnt invest

Its going to take decades to happen,
until that happens they will probably come up with a work around or we all will be too dead to care...

It would take thousands of years... the amount of REQ burnt decreases in tandem with the supply so if for example the fee today is 0.5 the fee in 10 years will be 0.00005 as the supply has changed but the price will still be the same.

don't forget, this is a new economic model. It's a decentralized model, in which one company doesn't hold all the profits that they can get by selling a particular product. It's now about protocols in which the value of tokens is how the community makes money for their initial investments. The token is not the product, the protocol is, but the token is an indicator of how much the protocol is being used.

its not the devs burning it all at once, its a fee to use the network. thats typical in many coins.

i like whole numbers, i dont like coins with a supply of 4219283
I like for example 1000000000
pretty autistic but i think im not the only one

>update and doesn't buy REQ has mental issues
you see how many brainlets here didnt even know what PwC was? thats what we are dealing with. you cant help them.

It doesn't matter. The system would probably still work, it would just pile up buy orders with the money it received on an exchange, waiting forever for someone to sell to it.

it just doesn't make any sense. If the fee doesn't actually pay for anything but lining the pockets of the developers by pumping their bags, there's really no point.

Something else that simplifies the sending and recieving of crypto and tokenized fiat will win in the end. Interledger, for example "Triple entry" accounting has nothing to do with the token price and will be put into production by the big four or smaller firms, and even if they work with req the whole system that uses the token is dumb because that's some superfluous add on that serves no purpose.

Req was always a good hold because to redditors its an easy sell "paypal for crypto" but it has no long-term future.

because staking is not the same mechanic as a transaction fee processing. plus staking rewards may be considered dividends and securities and taxed as such. the token burn is in ton of coins and is comparable to stock buybacks. not scummy at all.

If they're a non for profit organisation, how are the developers expected to get paid?
30m of, I assume the ICO money has been used as grants for Dapps

>If the fee doesn't actually pay for anything but lining the pockets of the developers by pumping their bags, there's really no point.
I guess every transaction fee is pointless and makes no sense then.

Attached: 1512234375832s.jpg (211x239, 6K)

Yeah, I'm going to need a sauce on that image

you might be genuinely retarded

>yeah man these devs should, like, work for free man!

It would be developed in the exact same way all the existing companies in the open source world make money and continue to be developed. Companies see the benefits and have their own developers develop on the platform, they offer consulting and support services, offering customized integration and updates, etc. Open source isn't new you dumb faggot. If it works well, it'll just be forked and supported by the companies who will save money from it and people who see an opportunity to make money supporting it.

Then they'll have a free system that doesn't involve pointlessly paying for tokens that are largely held by one company and burned for no reason so they can profit disproportionately

>hurr everything should be free
commie detected

So you are against all ERC20 tokens? They only exist for crowdfunding purposes after all.

The transaction fee is actually literally pointless in reqs case, other than in the extremely roundabout and contrived way of allegedly increasing the token price so Req can dump tokens on the dumb retail buyers.

Not at all.

Hardly communism, 67 percent of the web servers are linux, but you can bet your ass the companies using them don't consider them "free" and don't devote resource contributing to development or paying for customized services.

I have a coin just for you, it's called Nano. All the transactions are free and it's instant. Of course that means there's no incentive to run a node and people can overload the system by sending tons of free transactions.

the only person that makes sense itt
forced shittokens like REQ LINK or whatever DAPP that forces users to buy their shittoken to use the APP will never make it its just too fucking annoying.
No normie will buy ETH for $ and then REQ for ETH, sign up for atleast 3 websites with 2 fac auth and register his fucking bak account.
This shit will never work.

It's kind of comical that you think this is a good point, because this is literally not at all what the discussion is about.

Don't be disingenuous. You know damn well that happens behind the scenes and the users have nothing to do with buying the tokens.

I ahve yet to see any crypto platform that is easy to use.
Like something my mother could use.
It just doesnt exist and REQ wont be it.

No one is forced to buy req

Attached: 20180327_182221.jpg (645x729, 49K)

If you are not larping you are probably the dumbest person on this board I've seen all day. How old are you exactly?

and just to head off "you can't refute my point so you just name call," even though this is so dumb it doesn't merit a response:

The req fee doesn't pay for securing the network like a transaction fee on the regular network, so comparing the two is like apples to oranges. It's good req doesn't use a dag, because I agree you need an incentive, but even that may come into question if you can get enough corporate users to benefit from it (and cucks who will do it for free, as evidenced by the number of nano node operators) that you don't need to have regular joes getting paid to run nodes to have a secure decentralized network deemed secure enough by the companies that will use it.

Funny thing just like my name REQ will grow from this small seed that has been planted today to a megalith in crypto bringing crypto to FULL adoption with records.... cap this .... blade out