Bitcoin Forum

RICKYJAMES PROPOSAL 3 - Unclaimed 9M NXT should be divided equally between marketing / tech-development / infrastructure committees at 3M each

Rationale:  OK, I admit it, this is a personal plug for something I feel is important - bumping up the funding for NXT infrastructure.  In the discussion on the committee thread, this started at zero and was bumped up to 1M NXT by James to Nxt.Chg's surprise.  I think infrastructure is just as important and needs just as much funding as marketing /  further software development and here's why.  

(1) We already have a lot of newbies getting the shock of realization that PoS means low amounts of NXT aren't going to forge get-rich-quick amounts of NXT on cheap Raspberry Pis instead of expensive ASIC rigs.  
(2) Discussion on this thread is casting into doubt the ability of Raspberry Pi and smartphones to participate in NXT forging anyway as the transaction rate gets higher and the blockchain gets bigger.  
(3) We have voted to drop the NXT transaction fee by a factor of ten, which is supposed to be the main motivator and financial incentive to set up infrastructure nodes in the first place.  
(4) We are getting increasing reports from the Good Samaritans who went all-in on NXT during the December DDoS attacks and set up lots of VPNs that their expenses - especially bandwidth expenses - are WAY more than they had bargained for or can maintain as a personal commitment to NXT.  

All of these factor point towards a total rethink about what infrastructure is needed to support NXT and just how much it is going to keep it running FOREVER.  People are not being motivated by forging to add personal nodes to the network, and cheap nodes are looking more and more unlikely.  Both the infrastructure and the finances required to keep NXT going are going to end up being larger than we think now, only three months in with a tiny active network.  And yes, I admit I want to be on the infrastructure committee as a voting member and push for a 1000 TPS network (the original NXT spec!!!) if that is all possible alongside our main network.  That's more infrastructure expense, but if we succeed, it is EXACTLY what will make people sit up and notice NXT.  And send the price to the moon.

Nevermind.

If our strategy is to set up a large enough fund to maintain the infrastructure and to support the network (with or without the 1000tps target) forever, then we have failed from the start. Any fund should be for bootstrapping only. If the concept & design of the 1000tps feature is such that it will not be able to incentivise users to support it without centralisation, then it will not be sustainable. It should be designed such that anybody can see the economic incentive of setting up a high powered high bandwidth node, and to keep it running forever. I don't have the answer for such a design, but I have the answer for a design that is dependent on large centralised funds to keep it running forever.

I support the proposal to increase infra fund size, but only for the design of a sustainable model and to help bootstrap it.

all are important.

I agree that the infrastructure shouldn't be forgotten. It's very important in a long term view. So I voted for 3 million infrastructure fund.

I agree that the infrastructure shouldn't be forgotten. It's very important in a long term view.