Bitcoin Forum

It seems to me from my limited knowledge that these are the two new competitors to bitcoin and I was wondering which one had more advantages over the other.

Mainly I'm wondering about the underlying technology, i.e. NXT vs CryptoNote. Which one has a better chance of becoming a successful alternative to btc/ltc?

Are there any glaring problems in either technology that I should know about?

How about the dev teams? Are both technologies supported by a robust and active development team?

People's main argument in favour of bitcoin is that bitcoin can always add whatever features are implemented on altcoins. But from what I can tell bitcoin is the old dinosaur very resistant to change and anything but agile. Bitcoin doesn't even seem to be interested in addressing the problems that it has, let alone adding new features or upgrades.

So what features really stand out about either technology?

Does anyone feel that either codebase is objectively better than bitcoin? Or are we not quite there yet?

NXT and Monero, these two are completely different coins and they cannot be compared IMO.

I'm sure Darkcoin or(and) Zerocoin/Zerocash will overcome Bitcoin someday.

NXT look like a share rather than a currency.

Bytecoin

Why can two different coin technologies not be compared? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each tech?

Monero is maintained for anonymous transactions but it has some flaws in its code and other problems like being botnet raped.

NXT is the first pure PoS coin written from scratch. It brings asset exchange and some other features but suffers from unfair distribution.

Which one is better and how to compare them is up to you.

What sort of flaws have been discovered in the code for Monero?

I do know that NXT is mainly criticized for the initial distribution of it's coinbase. But if the technology is superior that doesn't mean that another coin based off NXT couldn't come along and solve that problem. If NXT's PoS system is superior to the CryptoNote PoW system that's vulnerable to botnets then that's a big plus for NXT.

NXT is a scam. No matter how you do it, distributing coins via PoS is unfair and will always be unfair. Those who get in on the "IPO" are the ones who always come out richer.

I think of NXT not as a currency....but as a platform to trade currencies, like Ripple.

There aren't any major ones, but there is stuff that needs to be cleaned up and fixed (like the database issue). The protocol is PoW, so security models similar to that of Bitcoin.

I'm not familiar with Monero.  I'm going with the assumption that it cannot compare with Nxt, in technical innovation.

Nxt, as mentioned, as has terrible distribution.  There may had been 73 original wallets but only 20 wallets invested the 1.5 BTC limit (this was before the November boom).  I'm going with a haunch, since it was such an obscure IPO without taint analysis, that those 20 wallets were probably only owned by 5 people with sockpuppet accounts.

IIRC - people who invested 1.5 BTC had received either 40 to 50 million NxT.  That means there are easily sockpuppet masters with close to $14 million USD in NxT.  These people will be billionaires if NxT rivals Bitcoin in capitalization (even wealthier than Satoshi).

Ethically - the last coin I would invest in would be NxT, you're contributing to some whale's get quick rich fund.




NxT did attract an amazing community but it all went down south after people realized how screwed up the distribution was  and the solution resulted in NEM, which is entering open Alpha by June 25.

NEM has been distributed to 3000 stakeholders and taint analysis was used to remove hundreds of sock puppets.  There may still be sockpuppets in NEM but, realistically, it's an unprecedented unparalleled distribution compared to every other coin in existence.

  Every coin is dominated by less than 50 real people (more often it's less than a dozen people, the developer and his friends).

 NEM is unprecedented and will launch with several thousand stakeholders.  Even if there are 200, 500 or 1000 sock puppets (unlikely due to anti-sock puppet measures), NEM still has thousands of real unique persons.  That is compared to the average crypto these days where a dozen or less people own everything.

Monero has mandatory stealth addressing and optional ring signature privacy. The application of ring signatures is unique to CryptoNote coins, and is novel applied cryptography using a well studied technique.

So, you can not tell how much wealth is concentrated in any one entity with Monero. You can also not tell where money is going or how much money is going there, or where it even came from. It is a coin that has privacy today, unlike DarkCoin, which has privacy (maybe) sometime in the promised future.

Additionally, Monero is set up with very high inflation for the first two years, so that everyone is welcome to get in on it cheaply at this time.

I am sorry to rain on your parade, but:

a) there is a coin like that - CommunityCoin, distributed to 500 stakeholders equally, and it proved that distributing equally doesn't necessarily equate with innovation and adoption;

b) NEM has been nothing but hot air for a few months now, they haven't shown a single line of code, you got to be out of your mind to seriously expect something out of it. I'll take my words back as soon as I see their alpha wallet on June 25, and might even buy a stake in NEM, but of course not at the current ridiculous price with absolutely nothing backing that price.

NXT is the frontrunner (marketcap wise) to using the blockchain technology for more than just transferring money. This is distinct from most of the bitcoin clones that merely try to improve upon some aspect of money transfer, such as ease of use, anonymity, speed, better micro-transactions, etc.

NXT/NEM is in what we can crudely call the "Bitcoin 2.0" category, along with Mastercoin, Bitshares, Ethereum, Counterparty, eMunie and others.

For a good metaphor of this paradigm shift, consider Bitshares. The idea behind the name Bitshares is to view the coins as shares in a company. Seen in that way, we can understand the bitcoin protocol as a Distributed Autonomous Company (DAC) and coins as a shares in that company.

At any rate, this is the line of reasoning offered by Daniel Larimer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mwmlJICyRA).

No one cared about Community Coin.  It may as well been called "Communist Coin" or "Karl Marx Coin".  The coin itself is already red, so they'ld only have to change the name.

The reason Community Coin flopped is the following

- No innovation.  It was a generation 1.5 proof of stake, these are a dime a dozen right now.

- Developer is named after the coin.  Developer named after coin = scam (99% of the time).

- Distribution to 500 but no serious anti-sock puppet measures were introduced, beyond (initially) requiring a Facebook account.   Requiring a facebook account is a major breach of privacy for most people (embarrassing too) and then there are people, out there, who own a dozen FB accounts.  I shouldn't need to point this out but community coin started months after NEM and largely stole the distribution concept.


Whereas NEM

- Innovative.  Proof of Importance.  Second generation crypto.
- Known developers.  UtopianFuture, Gimre, Jagaur, et cetera, were all reputable names in the NxT community.
- Community is awesome and largely FUD free so far
- Distribution to 3000 stakeholders w/ taint analysis
- Ad infinite

NEM currently has a capitalization of $10 million in the prelaunch token trading.  This isn't an accident, the hype behind NEM is such that people are convinced it will probably be worth $40 million within a month or months of launch.  Possibly even rival Litecoin or Bitcoin but that's dependent on the coin being good, the community remaining free of FUD & scandal, the effectiveness of the swarm team, P2P advertising, et al.    

Waiting until open alpha to buy a token is perhaps a bad idea - when people play with the open alpha, and make their conclusion on it, there possibly wouldn't be any cheap stakes anymore.

Show me :D


On the contrary, I believe, when people download the alpha client they will dump their stakes at an unimaginable speed, and that will be a good time to buy, maybe :) I'll start thinking of buying at the price of 3000 NXTs per stake, provided the alpha client is released of course, and is able to perform basic functions without major hickups.

In my opinion nxt and maybe NEM "will see, only air for the moment", nxt will always have the advantage of being the first and many features and projects running over it. The main advantage over monero and similars is that this "second gen" systems "more than a coin" are usufull for many things, monero, as well as bitcoin and their clones only for send money.
About the anynomos ongoing hype, I don't see it as anything important, is a feature which can be added in nxt, but not everyone will want to use it, if for example nxt comes mainstream and real companys use it, they could want transparency for the simple fact that if everyone start to hide their economy, the society as we know now can't work, who will pay taxes and everything?

I don't want to start with the distribition shit again... That stakeholders are the ones more interested in the good of nxt "if they use their brain" but if we have "more" initial stakeholders like in NEM could happen the same as in communitycoin "they gived the coins without any risk to (investors) and most of them will sell for quick profits because they don't care about crypto, they only care about $, in the other hand, in nxt, only the people who read about and risked their investment (because really seemed a scam) have their coins now", and the fact that if we move to a big scale "outside this forum" for the rest of people the distribution will be the same problem.

NXT and NEM. The only 2 coins beside Bitcoin I take seriously.

Have a look here: http://coinmarketcap.com/

Nxt only.

Plus, sending coins to an exchange with payment_id potentially breaks anonymity in one way.

Also, it's very annoying that I must generate a new wallet to create a new address.

Are you going to fix this miss?

So what? It's easy as hell to pump a coin if just 5-10-20 people have 99% of total supply.

take a look at the pics of the nem wallet it looks 1000x better than any other wallet i have seen.

Using an exchange based off an email address/IP address breaks anonymity for most people anyways. There's a line where the level of anonymity provided by Monero can never really break .. without the "exchange" itself in your example providing its own end of anonymity .. what can be done? They're working on getting an I2P c++ router for use in the protocol to at least address some identity issues.

You still have the ability to find someone OTC if you're looking for anonymity .. no payment id needed.

I'm making the statement that Monero can never force you to be 100% anonymous 100% of the time .. you're given the choice to be anonymous and/or private with your transactions to the extent that you would like. It's not the be-all-end-all of anonymity/privacy .. but it's a big head start.

So what I'm gathering from reading this thread is that:

Monero is a good solid coin with the best anonymity features and linear distribution curve. Seems to be a better version of bitcoin with the slight issue of potentially being dominated by botnets(although Satoshi didn't' think botnets would be a problem for bitcoin when it was cpu only).

NXT/NEM is the one with potentially groundbreaking features but it remains to be seen how it's used and how the public accepts this new style of distribution. If businesses and the public were educated on the potential benefits of using NXT it would have a good chance to make some real headway.

Interestingly enough it almost seems like if bitcoin were to decline/fade away that both these technologies might even be able to coexist successfully. Monero replaces bitcoin as the standard cryptocurrency for black market transactions, store of value, and general use. And NXT can capture the blue oceans of new markets and new uses for modern business and asset exchanges.

Good synthesis, this is more or less the point in my opinion too, although I believe that anonimity stuff could be implemeted in nxt systems too, anyways is good to have monero too in the case a fatal bug appears in nxt "same that could happens in BTC"

Botnets will always be an issue, if not cpu botnets, gpu farms, distribution will never be fair because fair is impossible, world isn't fair... I don't even think nem is fair, fair is become compensated proportionally to your work I think, I'm starting to think that for many people fair means obtain tons of money for have a beauty face...

For this reason, there are operating full anon exchanges on Hidden Services at the main two Dark Nets (I2P & TOR).
Probably there will be more of these services established, as the (full) coin-privacy-movement grows.

There are a ton of haters of NXT because of its distribution.  But hands down NXT is without a doubt the slickest thing in crypto right now and by far the best thing to come along since Bitcoin.  Ripple is up there too but is not a coin and is more of like a payment transfer system.  

Monero/Blackcoin/Cryptocoin are nice and are also better than bitcoin in many ways as far as what is under the hood, but won't do anything much that bitcoin can't do now or will be able to do in the future.  Right now some seriously well connected and intelligent hackers/developers are making "dark wallet" for bitcoin.  It is in alpha now and can be downloaded and played with.  When it comes out, it will give anonymity to bitcoin.  At that point people will have a choice, use Blackcoin for anonymity or Bitcoin.  One of these has a huge network, tons of connections and tons of end points for users.  One doesn't.  

Any bitcoin clone is a one trick pony.  Those clones often just add one feature.  If said feature is really important and people like it, it WILL be incorporated or hacked into bitcoin someway.  This is a very slow process.

NXT on the other hand has lots of features.  Right now it has aliases, leasing of NXT, fast block times that are meant to get much faster, messaging, an asset exchange and much more, and much more coming soon.  All that and in a nice package.  Right now it has high fees, but that should come down later.  Anything that any other coin can do, NXT can and probably will incorporate.  For bitcoin, it has to be a big deal for it to be added, but for NXT, everything can be added and is being added that people want.  One thing NXT can't add though, is a good narrative of how it started.  Many pros on this forum won't touch NXT despite it being leagues ahead of the rest.  

That is where NEM comes in.  Yes, it hasn't come out yet, and the first Alpha Alpha for testing won't be out until June 25, but it does have serious developers, as in as many as 8 working on it right now.  Not one dude like many of these other "privacy" coins.  NEM code is written from scratch too and unlike NXT is being tested and tested part by part so that it will be very easy to build on.  Devs regularly post their test outputs. On top of that, the NEM community has done everything very transparently and cleanly.  I am seriously putting my money on NEM, and when the big shots that constantly cry that they won't touch NXT because it wasn't "fair" look at NEM, what can they say?  Actually, with NEM having up to 3000 holders, I am thinking that many of the old timers crying foul about NXT slipped in and got a share of NEM themselves.  

NEM/NXT will never ever make it far. Wanna know why? It's not fair distribution, only the IPO/original investors get the majority of the coins, not to mention that the majority of the "stakeholders" are sockpuppet accounts, I even have 3 accounts that have a 3 btc stake in NEM.....not to mention those people with 10, 20, 30 sockpuppet accounts that they used to get stake in NEM(already sold the stake so Idc anymore). That makes NEM no different from NXT....

 Everyone is left hanging in the dust, it's way way way way x10000 more unfair than even an instamine...


Not to mention the other 99 problems with PoS coins.

hahaha and now you want to tell us POW is the future. And it´s better that miners invest 10k+ for equipment and they get all the money.  ;D
Bro POW will never become mainstream. And i don´t mean BTC-mainstream, I mean everyday Joe´s mainstream. NEVER EVER. POW is dying.

Ok, keep thinking that. Would you like to bet about it? No average joe in their right mind, would buy a coin like NXT or NEM, where 99% of the stakeholders are sockpuppet accounts for a few people, so they could dump on the exchange. That's 1000x worse than an instamine or even a hidden premine.

NXT is just a distributed exchange, like Ripple..not an actual currency or anything close.

Hey buying NXT or NEM is just like buying a share on stock exchange. But POW is buying something a computer made for nothing. What do you think Joe is familiar with?

haha, now they go even after NEM, which was supposed to be fairly distributed.
Like BCNext said, you just can't distribute fairly to all 7 bln. population of the earth, there will always be someone who was left out. Hence, no matter how fairly it's distributed, someone will always complain it's not fair to him personally, thus it doesn't matter if it's 73 or 4000 initial stakeholders, both systems will be criticized regardless.

NxT may had 73 but only 20 invested the full amount and such an obscure IPO (and no taint analysis) likely meant that 20 contained a lot of sock puppets.  I wouldn't be surprised if it was just 5 people and they now own $8+ million each.

 That is in contrast to NEM where population statistics were made available and taint analysis was conducted afterwards, without prior announcement, and every stake receives the same amount.

No one can have distribution to every person on the planet - this is a logical fallacy rhetorical argument repeated by NxT bagholders to excuse their messed up distribution and price manipulation.   An additional fallacy is trying to compare a distribution of 20 big wallets versus 3000, in a community where most cryptos are still 50%+ premined or (in NxT's case) dominated by less than 30 people.  A distribution of 3000 is unprecedented.  There are other coins, which started after NEM, which copied NEM's distribution model but implemented an inferior version thereof (not checking for sockpuppets, smaller distribution, et al).

Can someone explain to me why a PoW coin where miners put up their money/resources(equipment/energy) is inherently more fair than these alternative ways of distributing stake at the beginning? The main issue seems to be sockpuppets, which is understandable, but other than that is there an obvious distinction I'm missing?

I'm not a miner, so to me when I want to invest in a coin that I feel has potential I'm buying in at some point with my own money. So from my perspective, it doesn't really matter whether the initial stake was created by PoW or distributed some other way. PoW coins seem to be in the best interest of people who have already invested in mining equipment, but to people who haven't it generally seems like a waste of energy.

The way I see it is I could mine early on in a coin if I had the knowledge and the resources to do so, and on the other hand I could buy a stake/sign up early enough in a distribution cycle to receive a stake in a coin. The two methods both reward whoever gets in early, but that seems to be consistent across every cryptocurrency anyway.

Mentioning PoW is a joke - you almost don't see PoW coins coming out anymore - this is in contrast to six months ago when they were still the rage.  New PoW coins always get destroyed by a small number of miners who dump in order to pay for their electrical costs and overhead.

They can't explain that. Suppose, someone wants to get into bitcoin now, or any other coin from the top 10, they have to spend money to buy, can't mine anything with their normal laptop or even a gamer's computer. You have to buy either ASICs or buy coins at exchanges. But it's not fair! Someone could mine bitcoin with their office computer for years before it got to this stage! So, yeah, mostly people are pissed off because they weren't in the IPO for PoS coins, but they can't voice their complaint openly. Their ego prevents them from eating their pride and buying at exchanges at low prices while they last. They end up buying later at a higher price or not buying at all and missing the opportunity.

It's all simple risk vs reward with both systems I guess. There doesn't seem to be any tangible difference between PoW and PoS initial distribution other than PoS clearly being the more advanced and efficient tech.

Before this thread I just kind of assumed all this talk about NXT ect having major problems with the distribution method had something behind it. But it's really just fundamental capitalism, the capital takes the risk of funding and is rewarded proportionally. Just as people who choose to mine a new PoW coin are risking their time and their electricity.

It's actually kind of interesting how the community seems to be ignorant to the fact that bitcoin and other coins are fundamentally distributed in a similar if not even less fair way since you need both the technical knowledge to mine as well as access to affordable electricity.

Well, not the entire community is ignorant for sure. With each passing day more and more of the community is getting it that PoS is the future, just look at the number of PoW/PoS hybrids and pure PoS alts that popped out in 2014. There is just this old school miners mentality taking its roots a few years ago that is hard for people to overcome in their minds, but progress cannot be stopped, change is inevitable. Adapt yourself or die out, this is a basic natural principle.

...as opposed to distributing to big firms who waste electricity to earn the coins.

People here have made a good point.  Spend a lot of money on a miner and electricity and get bitcoins, or spend a lot of money and get coins made in POS.  For a person not used to crypto, the whole mining thing is confusing at the least and totally unnecessary.  Why not just buy the coins directly instead of doings some crazy POW work around?

Month after month the top 10 fills up with more POS.  By next year, there might be only one POW coin left on the top 10.  A lonely giant at the top.

Again, I ask you to show me any POW that is even half as slick and half as many options as NXT.  (except the original)

mining is so 2012-2013

I don't think PoW will last long. It will be here for some time because of the vested interests and all the big investments already made, but eventually will be replaced by some good PoS (there are already a few candidates).

Why won't PoW last long? Where did you come up with that idea? It seems like you're thinking PoS will "win it out" ... but why do you think it's a battle for one "candidate"?

When all the mining power becomes concentrated in 2-3 large mining corporations, which is inevitable given how the process unfolds, how is this different from centralized money printing by central banks? PoW will last another year or two before that happens. When only 2-3 large corporations control processing of all transactions, they will be regulated and dependant on regulators' decisions and rules, and this becomes the same as any fiat currency, except this currency is produced by solving blocks, but it will be far from the idea of decentralization that crypto currency came up with.

+1

I see where you're coming from, but central banks have been around for many years and I'm still alive ... certainly many more years than "another year or two" .. hopefully ;). PoW at worst invites central banks to assume power .. by taking control of most mining resources. PoS at worst makes the original stakeholders a new "central banK" whether or not they were one before, where they're still susceptable by flat out purchasing by a centralized banking system. It's little more than clenching your cheeks and hoping for the best .. anything else is speculation. I think I like both attempts.

PoW gives me the hope that there's a control based on some physical link to the real world, and PoS gives me the hope that maybe someone can do better than a centralized bank. Both seem like a lottery increasing my overall chances to win.

I've seen some interesting proposals involving both PoW and PoS that catch my interest .. MC2 being one of them. Any thoughts on that? I think I remember you favoring NXT, but what do you think of hybrid currencies?

Only the last 100 years, and just look at the mess the world is in! Yeah, you may be still alive, slavery is a form of life too.

Not really, before they purchase anything close to 50% of the PoS currency, the price will shoot through the roof and this PoS currency becomes world reserve currency at that point. Unlike PoW currency, where they can buy enough hardware for much less money and destroy the PoW currency or flat out ban mining/force it to regulation since it's all becoming centralized mining now in 2-3 places.

Hybrids are ok for now, but why not skip and go right to where hybrids will end in a couple of years - PoS.

It would be environmentally very sad if PoW survives.  The difference in energy required to do the same thing is enormous.

Here' what it costs to maintain a big part of Nxt network right now:

http://www.peerexplorer.com/

Compare that to litecoin. And it will probably get worse (difference).

In addition to that, in PoW, you are essentially paying a fee to maintain the network, which is a loss for you.

You guys do realize, PoW coins can just transform to PoS right...So if the dev of...idk.... Litecoin wanted to change Litecoin to PoS, he could..

So while coins like NXT may have the heads start by a little bit in the PoS department, Any other coin with terrific devs can simply turn PoS and destroy NXT's position in the PoS coin market...

But NEM will be POI (Proof Of Importance), PoW coins can't turn into that.

That makes no sense...But ok.

PoW cannot turn to PoS easily.

Because all these miners won't accept the new release of the software and the network will continue to operate as PoW. And why should they accept the changes? They invested thousands or even millions of dollars into ASICs and all the infrastructure, and now the dev wants it to go to PoS? F*ck the dev, they'll be using the old version of the software and because they are the majority of the full nodes, they will form the longest chain and the network will adhere to their rules. So Bitcoin can't switch to PoS, that's for sure. As for others - hard to tell, Litecoin probably can't switch to PoS at this point either and it won't. Smaller ones could, but would lose all the miners and quickly die due to very low adoption rates.

PoW coins like Litecon just can't turn into a PoS like NXT.  They are written on completely different code with totally different fundamentals.   Litecoin could maybe someday IF IF IF every agree to it become PoS Litecoin, but it would still be just Litecoin and wouldn't offer any extra value or function.  A PoW Litecoin and PoS Litecoin to me are just about the same and already outdated.  So even if it did somehow manage to switch, it is still behind on the game. 

The argument against central banks to me is not their centralization.  The problem is that they are reckless and print and print what they want and how they want, and yes, they do that because they are centralized.  But a good central bank that didn't do that would be just fine with me.  The problem is, how can we tell if and when that will happen?  We can't.  One centralized authority can just act reckless if it wants. 

With bitcoin, the production of bitcoins are set.  Everyone knows exactly how many will be created and more or less exactly when and how they will be created.  It's centralization is in its math and algorithms.  I can trust in that much more than I can a central bank's wild guess of how much money it should print this year.  So even if there are only three large mining pools, it is okay, because they can't change the rate of which bitcoins are produced. 

What can happen though that is bad, and is already happening is that mining pools are soooooo focused on just getting the block reward that they aren't even processing transactions to put in the block!  Lots of miners are refusing if the fee isn't high enough.  This is a big problem because when there are only three pools (which will probably happen), they can make back room deals and rig fees.  It is in their best interest to do so and we all know 100% the rationality and greed of acting in self interest miners have.  When and if that happens, bitcoin will be hurt. 

As long as the miners keep the bitcoins coming at a steady pace, they are like a good central bank.  But if they start screwing people on transaction fees or even not processing transactions, that is more like a bad local bank that has a total monopoly on how people can spend their personal funds.  It is just in bitcoin the bitcoin protocol is like the central bank, and the miners are like the local bankers.  So yes, centralization is very bad for bitcoin, but not in a central bank kind of way. 

PoW = people doing busy work for the lottery ticket of a block reward
PoS = big stakeholders forging so they can get fees, but nobody else has a stake in maintaining the network
PoI = anybody that is upholding the network is rewarded for it (kind of makes sense)

Hmm the PoI sounds well, i have probably slept because i didnt know how PoI works until now... However i worry about botnet risk. It should favour Linux machines (they are unbotnetable).

I've never heard of this PoI and I thought NEM was just a NXT fork with a different initial distribution system. No?

No

Well that is interesting to hear for sure. Any links where I can read up on some specifics?

It's amazing how little information about new cryptocurrency tech gets propagated in the bitcoin community. Things like this should be big news.

Sure, here you go:

http://static.squarespace.com/static/52fd44e2e4b0d3e64dc22c95/t/5391cfc4e4b0b99a8edc67a6/1402064836524/investor%20handout.pdf

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NhxTyi4Eo2D_1m1Ca8zvzQr0_RB0dgM2VuWXAIzcS-I/edit

https://docs.google.com/document/d/10ZVrzuS_krjRF5rMvt5oKl3IS3VOhF_qnn2faZb7KZQ/edit

I'm really looking forward to some fleshing out in the NEM department.

POW is fascinating, and has been essential to bitcoin's success. But POS makes much more sense, now that the crypto currency environment has matured significantly. I don't understand why nobody has tried a biometric offer yet, what with the iPhone's print scanner. Probably because that would be so easily exploited, besides the work involved.

lets be honest.

PoS is fair - for miners is unfair for sure... not for investors and users.

POS is different economy and philosophy you can't compare like that.

Good POS volume shows when coin were good distributed or not...
POW (80% premine bytecoin 1st crypto note ) have 10k $ daily volume
and POS Blackcoin no premine have 70k$-300k$ during last month
is better than NXT all the time Volume/Coinmarketcap ...
NXT is not scam - is different kind of distribution and Volume vs coinmarket cap is rising so distribution is increasing...

I wait NEM Volume/Coinmarketcap ... in future...

POW and BTC now when BIG specialized farms mine BTC also have controversial centralized coin distribution...
...you won't never have perfect system no in Monero or NEM or NXT or BC or PPC.

PS: today REAL use have only BTC for sure... rest is just for speculations.
from pump to pump... volume up.

If i have to invest NEW win for me ( good distribution + core devs who created protocol are with NEM )

you open a post where you attracted two out of 4 coins to be POS.

of course they will cry POS > POW.

it's hilarious



Here is a simple very basic math.

POS coin = only way to get them is by buying some one else bag. only one limited gateway to enter the network

POW coin = two ways. buying some one else bag or mining. two gateways to enter the network

To me, with POW having more gateways to enter the network already beats POS at more option to distribute the coin


Why POW mining is still the best.

the moment a POW coin blows up miners from other coins start mining it (even more people join the distributive network)

Even though asic just came out for scrypt. Scrypt had a long run with fair mining. This means that if person A spent $2000 to build a mining rig and  person B spent $2000 to build a mining rig, they both would have the almost the same mining power/coin. Hence if you really want to join the coin all you had to do is simply build a mining rig and join the distribution. it was a fair distribution hence why a lot of people choose the mining route for litecoin , dogecoin and all the recent new scrypt coins circa December up until may.

Easy,trust-less gateway to join the crypto world by mining. POW made that. POS coins even at this day i have to own BTCs to buy POS coins. AKA all the new people are out of this category. POS coin have to depend to convince bitcoin holders to buy their bags and as i said are limited to people already in the crypto community. Bitcoin is still new and new people have hard time just buying BTC/FIAT. they have to look online. Look to find the closest exchange, which in turn ends up being in some shady country. They have to send FIAT and their personal info and pray to god two weeks later they receive a notification that a new account with the amount of bitcoin is ready. Can you see a regular joe do this easy ? can you picture some one in bumble fuck trying to buy bitcoin? Now can you picture the same person ordering a mining parts from secure trusted electronic sites such as newegg.com? can you picture it them choosing the POW path? ordering a mining rig and receiving it with in few days?  can you picture them mining and slowly building up Bits?  no need to trust sketchy exchanges or look for some one to sell them btcs on localbitcoin.

again there is tons of other POW algos now trying to market the "asic resistant" like scrypt did but Asic is not the end of the scrypt. not yet. only now for at beginning, for a period of 2-3 months then it will settle down and be fair. here is what i mean:

as we stand , with $2000 you can buy Gpus and mine with 3-4/mhs or buy Asic and mine 20-30 mh/s. This is what asic has brought to the table right now. Unbalance. before $2000 worth of minig rig was pumping up almost the same hashpower. Now there is a huge unbalance. but after a few months Asic will start becoming more popular and will loose value as competition and quantity>demand. then $2000 will buy you almost the same hash power and it will be back to being a fair.

kinda like people are still mining bitcoin. asic were a bad thing at first as they created unbalance but now is fair game. $2000 worth of bitcoin mining rig will give out almost the same from any combination of rigs you build.



So POS? it has the green efficiency but it lacks fair distributions. and its closed looped. with a minign rig i could mine around join all kinds of POW coins. with POS i am stuck to the one coin i bought.

no thanks jef

POS coin can be mined indirectly too by any alt mining POOL like coinking ,blackcoinpool...



Early POW miners allso have 10000+ BTC mined with simple laptops...
you forgot about pizza guy and 10 000BTC.

POW is preaty similar here in proportional distribution...Early movers WIN.
try now mine 10 000 BTC for pizza

You can mine NXT indirectly at http://hashrate.org if you're interested.

ironically they depend for POW coins to do this.

Nothing wrong with that.
NXT was bootstrapped with Bitcoins, it's generation 2.0, can't have generation 2.0 without generation 1.0, can you? :)
It doesn't mean than NXT needs PoW to exist, it just means miners can use their hardware to get NXTs same way they get PoW coins.

But how many people were minig Doge for LTC because of profitability ?
How many was minig LTC for getting BTC ?
many...
Both economies works similar here you took most profitable way...
you mine not for spending coin but mostly for selling bag for $$ next coming people.

your missing the point. POW coin as long as it miniable it keeps having one more group of people more then pos coins. the miners.


as far as earlyminers/insta mining that equivalent to = early investor or for Nxt case bad IPO distribution.

Yea but that laptop which mined 10 000 BTC in week before today can mine 0,00001day BTC...


While in POS to end eternity you mine eg 1% like with BC,PPC...you get proportional reward for whole life..
in BTC your reward is dropping.

In POW and POS early mover have advantage.

POS minig is fair for whole eternity always 1% early or later...
POW minig reward is dropping over time...

There is no perfect system.

its fundamental wrong. because they get to know about pow coins. and you will eventually loose miners because they will start to see that they can start mining some other coin , outside this pool for better profit. and hit jack pot and move over to that coin

ie:
nxt miner. mining multipool. eventually payout is bad. searches around and sees that is most profitable to mine new coin at lunch. so decided to mine dark coin. mines dark coin. get lucky and mines a nice chunk. dark coin blows up. doesn't sell the dark coin to get nxt but hold to it dear. now more interested in dark coin.   

see. the above path , while possibly not %100 accurate it still shows that there is a small percentage that such event can happen and slowly loose your miners/investors

the other crucial think i forgot about the miners is that a miner always have to be alert. alwyas has to check on his mining rig and always had to keep updating with the coins community. this couases the miners of one coin to form a bortherhood like bond. at the same times the interaction with the community keeps the coin healthy. while with POS the communities are slower. the on the topic of conversation is the trading volume. its a snooze fest

hashrate.org was set up to help miners with hardware get NXT coins automatically without having to worry about selling coins by themselves, watching exchange rates, etc. if they choose to go to another pool, that's fine, NXT will survive just fine. basically, hashrate.org is the same as any multipool with the same features, except it pays in NXTs, not in Bitcoins. What's fundamentally wrong with that? it's a free market :)

LOL what did LTC in last year ?

What did NXT,BC... much more while miners are focus on mine price POS communities are building kingdoms and develop to expand.
That is mainly different.

POS coin are building developing much faster than any POW one ( except BTC )...
POS coin have MORE motivation to do it than miners...

hey man. just having a chit chat with you on the topic. we can go deeper or leave it as it is.

truth the mater is that POW is still a better distribution method. Asics and rent-a-rig farms are making it more centralized sure. but it still the best method. Sorry POS

to me the number one reason is the trustless way a noob can start owning bits buy mining.

What next and any other PURE POS coins should do is create a sidechain/color coin in POW. So then any one, any where can start mining this POW token and be able to trade it for the POS  ;)  

Why is 3000 or 5000 or even 10000 stakeholder of NEM better than 70 in NXT. Nothing is fair when we talking about money. Money need to be transparent not fair. Is Bitcoin unfair because of his creator? Satoshi fortune is around 1M Bitcoins, maybe more.

calm your titties. i am not here to tell you which coin is better.

i gave you more then three points how a POW coins bring in more new people then a POS coin.

just wanted to share my thought why POW is better then POS. you guy started praising POS.

That's been my primary qualm with NEM from the start -- 3000 vs. 73 is meaningless.

NEM's PoI can be significant. 3000 initial stakeholders is not.

Having a chit chat is ok.
I only have a laptop, like many people, can't mine nothing with it, have to buy cryptos, PoW or PoS.
Which means I, like many people, use different criteria for my preference of cryptos than miners.

I just had a customer ask me about cryptos, he can't mine anything either, naturally he would like to invest into Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is everywhere, but I also introduced him to PoS, NXT. He will have to buy with cash, Bitcoin or not, what does it matter to him, if it's PoW or PoS, he will look at other criteria. Right now he'll probably be into Bitcoin mostly, because it's been around longer, but you get the idea, since he can't mine PoW, he'll eventually be interested in PoS coins too, because any coin requires that he pays cash to get it and he would like to diversify risks. There are many people like him, who just come to the crypto market and can't mine anything.

i'm not an expert but i seen a lot info in last days that nem is pretty scam. there were a lot of threads few days ago about this, just look for them few days back in this board

It was not equal distribution between 73.  There was a 1.5 BTC limit and only 20 people invested the limit, and without any taint analysis we don't know how many of those said 20 were socks.   We also don't know if those 20 people had any crony or nepotism connection with each other.  The other 53 or so people got the scraps.  For people who claim freeloading is an issue in NEM - there's NxT whales with 40+ million coins who haven't logged in months and don't contribute to coding, discussion or even funding.


A distribution of 3000 isn't intended to be a planetary distribution.  We know Aurora tried to give coins to every Icelander and its' value plummeted when the first batch were selling their coins for beer and salted herring.  Ironically, it echoed the original "air drop" that was the privatization voucher of the FSU in the early 1990s (which people promptly sold to door-to-door salesmen and used the proceeds to buy liquor.  

"So most people immediately sold their voucher on the street for about seven dollars. You could get two bottles of cheap vodka for the price of one voucher." are the results you can see on Google.  Some salesmen even traded chocolate snicker bars for vouchers.  A lot of the salesmen who acquired those vouchers later became very rich).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voucher_privatization


The distribution was to weaken the influence of any whales, sockpuppets or incidents of cronyism.  To match the power of an early NxT investor one would have to create 160 sockpuppets in NEM back in January (160 times of bypassing taint analysis which was only revealed later, 160 times of dealing with the anti-spam restrictions on this forum, 160 times of creating socks for a worthless coin, et cetera) and creating 160 socks for a worthless coin was beyond any normal person's patience.

its simple statistics. why do they use the word "fair distribution" "decentralized" ?

simply put.

if 5000 people took part and they are all unique shares (hence fair distributed). let say 10,000 coin for each.

even if no one else is interested into buying once it hits and exchange there is a 50-50 chance that it will be half sell and half hold between current share holders.  
assuming half selling then its 25 000 000 coins sold.
half holding mean that there is 2500 shareholders who will probably buy all this 25,000,000 coins back
hence leaving 50,000,000 coin between 2500 people. or considering a mass panic sells then 50 mill coin between 1200 people who held their coins and bought more.

doing it the other way with only 70 people. at 50 mill coins thats ~714000 coins per person.
very low number to think it will be 50-50 sell or hold. it wont mater. (hence bad distributed)
even if 10 people sell , that is massive sell order. leaving 60 people hoarding and 10 out
as a buyer will you jump and buy this coin once its out in the exchange?
its a bad distribution model.

I don't understand the point in your hypothetical ramble.

NEM is already being traded on the asset exchange and it hasn't been dumped to death, neither has NXT.  There's a difference between handing out coins to investors / pseudo-investors and then giving something out to everybody (Aurora).

... just to continue, and because he can't mine anything, distribution of any coin (oh, Bitcoin is now $600 but it was only pennies two years ago and someone got a lot of them!) will look unfair to him. Or not, if he understands (and he does), that fairness is a silly concept. There is nothing fair in life, it would be very strange if it was different in crypto currencies.

IMO this post explains it all excellently. Go read Szalasz blog (he is long standing nxt veteran and nxt champion) where founders explain how they released only 25% of coins and still control 75% (even if its not only bcnext but if its really 2-3 his friends involved, we are looking at 3-4 closely connected people).

So think about its security. for them to control over 50% of network they dont have to buy anything, they already control it. So its not problem of only initial distribution but of current one as well and its closely connected to how secure it is. Not to mention that almost all fees paid in nxt go directly to them too.

And nxt shouldnt be called first crypto 2.0, it copied everything from ripple that was made 2 years before it (and its still not even close to what ripple can do, so if ripple set standards for crypto 2.0 other shitclones dont even come close yet).

Also, look at what happened to ripple when 1 founder decided to sell his stash of only 9% of currency. In nxt case there is sword of demaclos in form of 75% of currency or 8X bigger issue.

We will see if NEM POI manages to solve risk associated with pos currencies especially ones like in case of nxt where 2-3 friends control almost entire network and can do literally anything they want with it.

Its an equivalent of qhash owning 75% of bitcoin mining, but even there its difference because qhash is consisted of many miners that they can easily exclude from network while in nxt case you cant exclude 2-3 friends.
 

okay bud.

i am not going to argue why that was a bad distribution. that's very obvious. but that also means that the top holder have tons of coin to grease/buy developments and push the coin forward. as we have been seeing. so i am not here to kick down any coins. I care less.

i can't read the future. all people been telling you is that is much riskier investment. you got a coin with bad history and serious accusation, but at the same time it is moving along and trying to find its spot. you seem to have chosen your path. good luck in your investment.

@atoni,

blockchain analysis reveals that more than 300 accounts have successfully generated blocks in the past 30 days (more accounts than that are staking, it's just those 300+ were successful).
You can see the block generation graph here:
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_charts
'Others' constitute more than 300 accounts.
NXT is nowhere close to 51% attack.

Distribution is still going on, by the way, and it'll take some more time. Whales are selling, again, blockchain analysis, which means sooner or later, the distribution will reach the Pareto principle.

So I disprove your FUD with simple proof and you retort with that?  NEM's distribution is better than anything out there unless you think POW is good distribution (maybe back in 2009 or 2010 when everything was pre-ASIC and pre-GPU but nowadays a small group of hardware kings dominate all the new mining coins).


http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/131/351/eb6.jpg

NEM is just reaction form jealous guys who missed the train. Get over it. NXT is still cheap. Distribution is not over!

Litecoin is just reaction form jealous guys who missed the train.  Get over it.  Bitcoin is still cheap.  Distribution is not over!

welp, you sure proved me wrong. again i am not here to attack coins but since you are looking for it . here is the latest successful distributed pow coin. dogecoin.

from http://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-dogecoin-addresses.html
Balance   Addresses   % Addresses (Total)   Coins   $USD   % Coins (Total)
0 - 0.0001   198270   23.65% (100%)    0.6240 DOGE   0.00016 USD    0% (100%)
0.001 - 0.01   2119   0.25% (76.35%)    10.05 DOGE   0.0025 USD    0% (100%)
0.01 - 0.1   19305   2.3% (76.09%)    593.52 DOGE   0.1476 USD    0% (100%)
0.1 - 1   21680   2.59% (73.79%)    8,291 DOGE   2.06 USD    0% (100%)
1 - 10   176094   21.01% (71.2%)    594,614 DOGE   147.89 USD    0% (100%)
10 - 100   107116   12.78% (50.19%)    3,676,873 DOGE   914.48 USD    0% (100%)
100 - 1,000   92202   11% (37.41%)    34,593,705 DOGE   8,604 USD    0.04% (100%)
1,000 - 10,000   104029   12.41% (26.41%)    347,793,802 DOGE   86,501 USD    0.4% (99.96%)
10,000 - 100,000   75569   9.02% (14%)    2,593,198,811 DOGE   644,961 USD    2.96% (99.56%)
100,000 - 1,000,000   34058   4.06% (4.99%)    10,276,964,639 DOGE   2,556,009 USD    11.73% (96.6%)
1,000,000 - 10,000,000   6961   0.83% (0.92%)    17,381,387,125 DOGE   4,322,967 USD    19.84% (84.87%)
10,000,000 - 100,000,000   707   0.08% (0.09%)    16,416,557,011 DOGE   4,083,002 USD    18.73% (65.04%)
100,000,000 - 1,000,000,000   58   0.01% (0.01%)    10,852,031,927 DOGE   2,699,035 USD    12.38% (46.3%)
1,000,000,000 - 10,000,000,000   7

there is 176094 wallet addresses holding between 10-100 doge coin..

and your NEM will distribute to what.. few thousands people. which last time i checked there is like ~1500 unique users in BTT. so already we can see there are people taking more then one stake.

and then what. where will the new influx of new people will come to NEM coin come from? What is it offering that is different? is it good enough to grow in numbers not just in $$volumes?

Maybe you should read these. "Litecoin's silver analogy" from the Litecoin creator: https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=21124.0

I am pretty sure that all of them will succeed in some way. The market will stay shared and will be shared even more.
There will never be ONE currency, and that is good!
I think that in 5 years we will have a overall market cap of some trillions.
BTC, NXT, NEM, MONERO, BYTECOIN will eventually have a share of 5-10% of it.
High likely a share of 5% to 30% will have revolutional new ideas like maidsafe or Ethereum and bitshares.

@devphp

Read again my post, its not only who got fees, its the security of network that is connected to 3 people only (which is still possible its all just 1 person).

And argument that 300 accounts generated blocks is laughable, nxt blocks happen each 1,7 minutes, how many times a day is that? of course some outsider got lucky since we are talking about 1,7 minutes * day * 30 days, thats quite a lot of blocks.

Thats why distribution in pos is important, because of its security, and not because who got rich when. That is talk for little kids. But security is IMPORTANT question.

@atoni,

I see, you're into conspiracy theories here, well, that's without me :)

Which conspiracy theory? Are you saying Szalasz blog with JL777hodl explaining it all lies? Are you actually saying that JL777hodl is making conspiracy theories to hurt nxt? lol

NXT is the best.You want know why?Just look the NXT official thread again.

this one ;D

And see what? how they plan to copy ripple?

Lets see:

Ripple native functions (made 2 years ago): instant transactions, asset exchange, aliases, currency issuing, gateways, and most important and what nxt will have hard time copying financial highway (send any currency anyway, trade in any order book, and all that for incredibly small fees).

Nxt development: we want to make instant transactions, asset exchange, aliases, we want to make currency issuing, we want to make gateways.....

For a copy cat.....

IMO nxt distribution is common knowledge of this forum, only thing unknown if it was 3 different people or is it all same person.

Only thing people on this forum confuse is telling how someone got rich on nxt, instead of focusing what distribution means for security of pos coins.

Let's agree to make it one person not to beat around the bush any longer and we can end this discussion ;D

Sure, who likes to read Facts U Dislike anyway :)

Doge with wallets over 1$ is... 153,956 OK but now...  fail build of doge is in POW...
when reward will drop to 10000 hash-rate will drop to 8Ghs while LTC will have 300Ghs one big farm
can wipe Doge network in future... and ruin your economy, this is fail of Doge POW build...
Doge moving into POS then will be some solution, and you will be forced into that this is only matter of time.
Mark my worlds after few double sped attack POW party will be OVER.


Coins without inflation can't rise forever Doge won't rise too...
Doge in 1st day didn't have 1500 users so is hard to compare to NEM today let it be released and observe...
Look at Doge network how is collapsing over time here you have number wallets over time:
85 000 wallet to -> 15 000 today... still impressive but i talk about trend and you will understand that ( 153,956 number addresses means not too much)
Doge is not in real use. that is the point Doge network is not expanding.
PS: I am Doge fan too but chart is terrible but true.

https://i.imgur.com/WTPGBEg.jpg

Nah, you just post disinformation, yesterday you said there are only 100 nodes in NXT network, now you say it all belongs to 1 or 3 people. Tomorrow you'll pull another rabbit out of your hat. I understand you want to buy cheap NXTs, everybody does, but it's as cheap as it will go now, so don't waste your time, another couple of weeks and the price will be higher because a lot of new things are coming to NXT.

I hope so, because i have to tell you I'm starting to get a little nervous at the moment.

Absolutely no reason to be nervous.
I am, on the contrary, excited about what August and the following months will bring, a lot of changes to the crypto world are coming, and NXT is on the edge of innovations!

Why is that?

I don't even really want to bump this thread since I created it over a month ago and since then I've become much more familiar with both technologies. But your post has made me curious.

I have not that knowledge like some other have here in this thread but I guess I can explain you my opinion about this discussion.
NXT was the first POS.
Monero is something you can mine.
NEM will be the first Proof of Interest. I can see the quick proceedings in NEM. NEM brought already the alpha version. There is a great community standing behind this coin. Maybe bigger than in all other coin imo. But it is just what I guess.

Sadly I missed almost everything about Bytecoin. When came this coin up?

Dont forget I'm not that kind of pro like some others here and I'm not so often in btt but I'm very excited about some new developments.
I will keep an eye on NEM and NXT as the most popular second gen coins.

Peercoin aka PPCoin was the first PoS coin actually. NXT is the first "PoS 2.0" coin.

Which disinformation? I was using number from one of Deadelus forum posts where he was begging for people to leave wallets open to have secured network.

And your number of 300 wallets receiving a reward in an entire week is interesting too (thats 300 wallets in entire week lol) :)

I didnt say that entire network belongs to a couple of people but 75% of it and for that I used Jl777Hodl interview on Szalasz blog (one is founding member of NXT other is nxt champion so I couldnt have used better sources).

Care to comment on how JL777Hodl pays NXT community to fake volume on Poloniex while at same time he is unloading it to poloniex noobs (and sadly his own community members) at 100% profit in arbitrage?

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/price-speculation/msg66820/#msg66820

Not to mention that at NXT original thread he is congratulating to himself for having such high volume (which is not laughable because its only 5 btc, but because the fact that its paid fake volume).

Entire crypto 2.0 is debatable.

Ripple was first crypto 2.0 and it set the standards (2 years ago). It offers instant transactions, ability to send any currency anywhere (you can send even USD, EUR, BTC, or airline points) instantly, asset exchange (where you have the ability to make your own order books in any currency you want), gateways (where anyone can become a gateway) etc etc.

NXT so far managed only to copy asset exchange from ripple (but in next you cannot choose in which currency to list assets etc, nor can you make your own order books, its central exchange) and will try to copy gateways (but run by devs, not by anyone) and will try to copy instant transactions (but only in nxt, you cannot transfer other currencies).

So NXT and other clones of ripple can be called crypto 1.1 only for now since they managed to copy only small part of Ripple so far.

Ripple is centralised though so most people don't even consider it in the same category. Not that it isn't an interesting idea though.

@atoni,

I have no idea which blog post you're referring to. Whatever it is, there is objective information that you get from analyzing the blockchain (300+ successful block generating accounts) and there are subjective opinions in the blogs. You need to check the date of the post also, if it was some time ago, things have changed a lot.

Likewise, there are subjective opinions on which assets to invest into, why do you ask me to comment on one of them? It's not like all the NXT community invests in one and the same assets, community is decentralized just like NXT itself, unlike Ripple ;)

Ripple is not centralised, its distributed. There was good picture by some of nxt members that shows how it goes from centralized  - decentralized - distributed so one can argue that distributed is more advanced. And it has nothing to do with centralized, its actually the opposite.

Read Szalasz blog with interview with JL777Hodl where he explains how they released only 25% of currency to people and still control 75%.

It is not some random asset that I used, for that type of scam there is over 160 assets on nxt asset exchange that are blatant scam which I could use as example. I used post and asset from NXT Founder and its Developer so you can pretty much say one of Nxt Main Figures that pays for fake volume to unload his crap on noobs.

And there you go again with Ripple being centralized, you already saw that picture which shows you the difference between centralized - decentralized - distributed so I dont know why you are playing blind englishman here.

I will help you, here is quote from JL777Hodl.

"This means the active liquid NXT is probably around 250 million total, which is still plenty especially with the normal trading volumes of 1 million NXT per day."

Please post links to blog, etc., you can write anything here as you always do, I'll believe when I see the links. Chances are you're misinterpreting someone's subjective opinion.

And? The active liquid Bitcoin is probably 1 million or less, the rest is hodl'ed and never leaves wallets, what does it have to do with anything?

How is that subjective opinion? Its a quote

It has a lot to do with anything. First and more important stakes dont matter in POW currencies while in POS they are the only ones that matter. So if a couple of people control 75% of network its EXTREMELY important.

Where does it say that 75% of the NXT is held by one or two people?

That sounds like he just means that 75% of the NXT is locked away in cold storage or something not on the network. Which isn't too surprising really. Doesn't sound like he's saying it's controlled by one or two people.

You do know that

a) James is nót a founding member of Nxt as you state. He came to Nxt after the IPO in december.
b) Salsa is not the end all of all information on Nxt
c) The numbers you quote there are 'guesstimates'. Here's the link to the article, by the way: http://nxtcoin.blogspot.nl/2014/06/how-nxt-changed-our-lives-james.html

I have no problem with you disliking Nxt or its distribution (why should I), but methodologically it's suspect when you promote the sources of your links to greater status than they have to boost their believability.
That's just not done.

Also, yes, stake ís important, but so is distribution.
Have a look at the charts:

http://charts.nxtcrypto.org/cDistribution.aspx
http://charts.nxtcrypto.org/cDistributionTopAccount.aspx

The Top 100 hold 730 million of all Nxt. You can hardly call a hundred people a "couple of people".
None of these has the power to attack the network. They just don't hold that much stake. Neither is it in their best interest to do so.

Of course, there is the preference that you may have for a network with a "better" distribution, but frankly, over the past months, those kinds of discussions have yielded little real solutions, and tend to default to "fairness" instead of "viability" and "security", which is a pity.

Yeah, atoni likes to twist words to suit his agenda.

One thing that I've noticed over the last month and a bit since I posted this thread is the sheer ignorance of people on this message board when it comes to the topic of NXT. Everyone seems to have these preconceived notions of what NXT is and no one seems to have actually taken the time to research or ask about the truth.

That is not exclusive to Nxt.
In general it's fár easier to get through life repeating what fits with your beliefs.
We all do it, and it's a human trait. :)

Well, in atoni's case it's not ignorance, it's FUD, because there are facts that 300+ accounts generate blocks, but he stubbornly posts it's two people controlling the network.

Here is the java code that can be used to calculate active (who have forged blocks) forgers in the NXT blockchain:


He will likely come up with some excuse again, just like he came up with an excuse not to set up a NXT node to check the real number of nodes in the network.