Autonocoin: A Proof-of-Belief Cryptocurrency

  • Michael Abramowicz George Washington University
Keywords: Cryptocurrency, Autonocoin, Bitcoin, Tacit coordination, Focal point, Schelling point

Abstract

This paper proposes a self-governing cryptocurrency, dubbed Autonocoin. Cryptocurrency owners play formal tacit coordination games by making investments recorded on the blockchain. Such investments represent bets about the focal point resolution of normative issues, such as whether a proposed change to Autonocoin should occur. The game produces a result that resolves the issue. With a typical cryptocurrency, the client software establishes conventions that ultimately lead to the identification of the authoritative blockchain. Autonocoin completes a circle by making transactions on the blockchain that in turn define those conventions and the expected software behavior. The distributed consensus mechanism embodied by formal tacit coordination games, meanwhile, can make other types of decisions, including which of competing blockchains is authoritative and whether new Autonocoins should be rewarded to benefit those who have taken actions to benefit Autonocoin. This establishes a unique funding model for a cryptocurrency, and it addresses objections to cryptocurrencies issued predominantly to the initial founders, as well as to those that encourage wasteful mining activities.

Author Biography

Michael Abramowicz, George Washington University
Professor of Law

References

Abramowicz, M. “Cryptocurrency-Based Law.” Arizona Law Review 58.2 359-420 (2016)

Hertig, A. “A Controversial Bitcoin Alternative is Seeking a Comeback.” Coindesk (accessed 26 September 2016) http://www.coindesk.com/controversial-bitcoin-alternative-seeking-comeback/

Higgins, S. “Stellar Network Fork Prompts Concerns over Ripple Consensus Protocol.” Coindesk (accessed 8 December 2016) http://www.coindesk.com/stability-questions-dog-ripple-protocol-stellar-fork/

Keynes, J. M. General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. London: Palgrave Macmillan (1936). 7 Hosni, H. “Interpretation, Coordination and Conformity.” In O. Majer (Ed.), Games: Unifying Logic, Language and Philosophy 15 37-55 (2009)

King, S., Nadal, S. “PPCoin: Peer-to-Peer Crypto-Currency with Proof-of-Stake.” No Publisher (Aug. 19, 2012) https://peercoin.net/assets/paper/peercoin-paper.pdf

Kroll, J. A., Davey, I. C., Felten, E. W. “The Economics of Bitcoin Mining or, Bitcoin in the Presence of Adversaries.” Proceedings of WEIS 1-21 (2013)

No Author. “Auroracoin.” Wikipedia (accessed 8 December 2016) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auroracoin

No Author. “Ripple (payment protocol).” Wikipedia (accessed 8 December 2016) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripple_(payment_protocol)#Reception

Nyman, L., Lindman, J. “Code Forking, Governance, and Sustainability in Open Source Software.” Technology Innovation Management Review (Jan. 2013)

Ongaro, D., Ousterhout, J. “In Search of an Understandable Consensus Algorithm.” No Publisher (May 20, 2014) https://raft.github.io/raft.pdf

Schelling, T. C. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press 55-56 (1981)

Shwartz, D., Youngs, N., Britto, A. “The Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm.” No Publisher (2014) https://ripple.com/consensus-whitepaper/

Published
2016-12-21
How to Cite
Abramowicz, M. (2016). Autonocoin: A Proof-of-Belief Cryptocurrency. Ledger, 1, 119-133. https://doi.org/10.5195/ledger.2016.37
Section
Research Articles