Tried to claim my stake and got this msg "That token has not been registered in time. You will need to claim after launch" will I still get the full amount at launch?
Bumping this question 25% reduction if you register your token with in a month of the deadline for phase one. think you need to contact patmaster. There is no need to contact him. He doesn't have more information than what you just got from kodtycoon. |
|
|
|
Can we please stop the coin number discussion? People are talking about NEM when they are discussing it, not the "8 or 8.888 billion total coin cryptocurrency". Total waste of time this..
Isn't coin number about NEM? Or you want us to switch subject and talk about NOBLECOIN? That will be a waste of my time, too. Why are you involving noblecoin in this? I'm supporting them, hence my sig, but I'm not starting a discussion about them here.. Leave noblecoin out of this. I'm a stakeholder in NEM and that's why I feel useless discussions should end at some point. It's not good marketing towards new people if the main discussion about one of the greatest projects in crypto is about something as small as the total amount if coins. There have been discussions for weeks about something that's hardly used in daily practice and those discussions should end and make room for more constructive ones. You may think it is frivolous but the point is it needs consensus. With so many fuds, this must be discussed. If everyone thinks it is nothing, this wouldn't have been such a topic. Further, it will affect the market price of NEM. Shouldn't you be interested if you are a stakeholder? What affects your concern more? How to claim? It would indeed affect the price per NEM, but not the market cap or price per stake. Therefore, from a price point of view I couldn't care less whether we have a 4 billion or 888 billion supply. The stake will be worth the same. I understand the reasons to this number discussion and get that most people want an 8 rather than a 4, but to keep going at different variations of 8, especially in this stage of development just isn't efficient and fruitful. Concerns have been voiced, dev team took notice, alternatives were provided, and I'm sure a good decision will be made on the total number. I am not sure what you mean by "It would indeed affect the price per NEM, but not the market cap or price per stake." - the price of NEM will affect the market cap as the market cap depends on the price of the NEM to arrive at its market cap value. ... What he means is this... If you have 10 coins and a marketcap of 200 USD then each coin is worth 20 USD. If you suddenly split those 10 coins into 20 then the marketcap stays the same but each coin is only worth 10 USD. This would be correct if the price was dictated by pure logic. Which it isn't. |
|
|
|
Hey James, are we satisfied with Instantdex. As I understand it is a centralised solution. Looks like NODE is doing it decentralized. Their new algortihm is out and working. Of course till now with small amounts of transactions. Maybe NODE will be a good additive to supernets core, by adding instant transactions. Maybe you already know all of it, but if not, please take a look. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=590421.0disclaimer: of course I own some Node, but an irrelevant amount in comparision to my supernet tokens. Wether or not NODEs instant transactions - and the entire network for that matter - will work is still questionable imho. Their network "only" facilitates instant transactions because it's fully connected i.e. every node is connected to every other node. I have a feeling that won't scale very well but only time will tell. |
|
|
|
Rockethead in that post was purely focused on analytical and empirical justification to increasing the supply (he was not interested in superstition at least in that one post).
There does seem to be evidence that increasing the supply will produce a higher capitalization (stakeholders would be wealthier if that is what they are interested in) and induce more velocity.
It also allows somebody to maintain NEMillionaire status as currently all it takes is to spend 1 NEM and you cease being a NEMillionaire. So NEMstakeholders may end up getting a free silver coin and some little spending NEM so they can maintain their prestige title of being one of the initial NEMillionaires.
As for the superstition with 8 and 888. 888 in particular is an universal good luck number in Western European / Anglophone cultures, Latin American, Judaism, Eastern European / Greek and East Asian cultures. If people do round up to 9 billion in their heads then 9 billion is still considered a good number in most cultures too.
Are we sure increasing velocity is a good thing, at least for the first months / year ? People won't have that much todo other than trade on exchanges so increasing velocity during that phase might just increase volatility as well. Also 88 is a "not so good" number in Europe for completely non-superstitious reasons. |
|
|
|
Stupid question maybe, but when I launch NEM monitor, do I use any name for the wallet when I create one? Do I Need to keep this info?
This name is only stored locally, so please call it whatever you want. You should remember your password. What if my computer crashes and the wallet is gone? How can i reproduce it? save your wallet NAME from your NCC folder in a usb along with you private key. and public key if you wish. Save it in multiple usb if you want to be safer. it's all you need to get you NEMz back. Concur with me DEVS? did is get it right?  PS: your password as well Maybe not save everything on the same USB key! It may make it rather valuable to the finder or thief!! besthing should be to only stored the wallet-file (it's encrypted). You'll need the password but you can keep that in a password-manager or alike. On the subject of security, I'm not sure I'm happy with the client remaining not just running but logged on unless you actively log off. If I close the NCC tab without logging off I i can then undo the close tab and find NCC running and still logged in. As would anybody else hopping on to my computer after me! Will these little things be tightened up for full release? As someone who had a decent number of coins stolen in the early days of NXT I'd rather go overboard with security than under!! There's alway a security/convenience balance you have to find. Like everywhere you have to log-off to be logged-off. Other people might find it convinient to have NCC ready to go all the time. If you leave your computer and leave NCC running at all it's a security risk as your private key might still exist somewhere inside the RAM. I guess it would be possible to use certain events/hooks to execute a logout... Hmmmm. If I've hacked of the wife I'm not sure she could find a priv key lurking in ram or know what to do with it if she did but could quite easily undo a tab and screw with my NEM....:-).... I know, don't hack off the wife..! Depends on the wife I'll log an improvement ticket on github. |
|
|
|
Stupid question maybe, but when I launch NEM monitor, do I use any name for the wallet when I create one? Do I Need to keep this info?
This name is only stored locally, so please call it whatever you want. You should remember your password. What if my computer crashes and the wallet is gone? How can i reproduce it? save your wallet NAME from your NCC folder in a usb along with you private key. and public key if you wish. Save it in multiple usb if you want to be safer. it's all you need to get you NEMz back. Concur with me DEVS? did is get it right? PS: your password as well Maybe not save everything on the same USB key! It may make it rather valuable to the finder or thief!! besthing should be to only stored the wallet-file (it's encrypted). You'll need the password but you can keep that in a password-manager or alike. On the subject of security, I'm not sure I'm happy with the client remaining not just running but logged on unless you actively log off. If I close the NCC tab without logging off I i can then undo the close tab and find NCC running and still logged in. As would anybody else hopping on to my computer after me! Will these little things be tightened up for full release? As someone who had a decent number of coins stolen in the early days of NXT I'd rather go overboard with security than under!! There's alway a security/convenience balance you have to find. Like everywhere you have to log-off to be logged-off. Other people might find it convinient to have NCC ready to go all the time. If you leave your computer and leave NCC running at all it's a security risk as your private key might still exist somewhere inside the RAM. I guess it would be possible to use certain events/hooks to execute a logout... |
|
|
|
Stupid question maybe, but when I launch NEM monitor, do I use any name for the wallet when I create one? Do I Need to keep this info?
This name is only stored locally, so please call it whatever you want. You should remember your password. What if my computer crashes and the wallet is gone? How can i reproduce it? save your wallet NAME from your NCC folder in a usb along with you private key. and public key if you wish. Save it in multiple usb if you want to be safer. it's all you need to get you NEMz back. Concur with me DEVS? did is get it right? PS: your password as well Maybe not save everything on the same USB key! It may make it rather valuable to the finder or thief!! besthing should be to only stored the wallet-file (it's encrypted). You'll need the password but you can keep that in a password-manager or alike. |
|
|
|
Well now this is really getting out of control!! Let's just keep 4B coins as planed and finish this parade, I mean seriously!! thank you. from billions to trillions. from 4 bil to 8 bil to 3,9 bil 880 tril to 888 tril. sorry, but thats retarded. I think people are just having a little fun while we continue to test beta and wait for launch.  Actually, prepare to be surprised, some of the guys are looking into the numbers and I can tell you that 4 B may be woefully short. may god have mercy on our souls. |
|
|
|
How the hack do the devs want to integrate a dezentrelized USD wallet??!! Any explanation how they want to do that? Other whise I see no reason why I should Invest in Node, that is the only inovation I can see...but I have a hard time beliving its true  You’ve created an account using a secret phrase: 13612210224060154205; You automatically get 3 accounts, every account works with a separate module: a) 13612210224060154205 - NODE & Genesis’s Block decentralized module; b) 13612210224060154205USD - centralized module through a payment gateway; c) 13612210224060154205EUR - centralized module through a payment gateway; All the transactions are saved in its blockchain; Exp: You got your new account 13612210224060154205USD, now you can: add USD to it trough a secured payment gateway, send/receive USD to/from another XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUSD account for instance your friends, family, etc. or withdraw them through a convenient payment gateway. That is pretty cool but the USD would still lie in some actual bank account at a parter-bank right ? The way I understand it is that what's actually handled over the blockchain are IOUs. |
|
|
|
What's the deadline for BTT stakes?
I already did mine but I assume you can't distribute until all have been redeemed?
same as AE |
|
|
|
How the hack do the devs want to integrate a dezentrelized USD wallet??!! Any explanation how they want to do that? Other whise I see no reason why I should Invest in Node, that is the only inovation I can see...but I have a hard time beliving its true You seem to have missed the fact that Node is built from scratch on nodejs, which is s substantial innovation compared to all the Bitcoin knockoffs out there. And it is also a re-implementation of the ideas behind NXT, which in itself is already an innovation to all the Bitcoin knockoffs out there. Re-implementing another coin is not an innovation. Imho the innovation of NODE is that it uses a fully connected netowork which enables instant transactions (which I'm still eager to see in a live environment). |
|
|
|
I read somewhere that Gold has inflation of about 1 % per year....if NEM were to have inflation it should be no greater than this number....... 0.5% would reward the running of nodes very nicely in the long run no?
I should think that's impossible. Where did you read that ? What do you mean impossible?..... Production is on average 1% of total amount above ground per year. There is a limited supply of gold on our planet. So unless someone has found a way to create gold out of somethin else gold can hardly be subject to inflation. Of course if we're assuming that the price is affected by how much gold is actually on the market...hmmm...maybe? |
|
|
|
I read somewhere that Gold has inflation of about 1 % per year....if NEM were to have inflation it should be no greater than this number....... 0.5% would reward the running of nodes very nicely in the long run no?
I should think that's impossible. Where did you read that ? |
|
|
|
regarding inflation.... I think this isn't something we're giong to be able to settle until launch. We should think about it very carefully and maybe get a few experts opinions on the matter. Inflation as we see it currently in the "real world" are bad - no doubt. But that's because it's controlled by goverments and banksters. A controlled very minor inflation shouldn't be compared to that imho. If anyone knows some actually experts on the matter - bring 'em |
|
|
|
jkoil, you are not making any sense at all.
Just like the other disgruntled user, you accuse of fud, while you dont even understand half of the conversation.
Of course it is easy to make such a change, noone denied such a thing.
A whole lot of users are not accepting THE REASONING behind the change.
And since (the last month?) only 30-35 accounts agreed with it.
Dismissing the rest and saying that they (the 35) have more say than the 3000+ is utter nonsense and you seem to be defending them.
So tell me, wise jkoil, you who asked a month ago, and know so much of the distribution process,
DO YOU have a reasonable argument as to why make such a change, except for the extra coins you will receive?
(the groupthink is strong with this one, i said it before_i say it again)
While I agree that we shouldn't double the supply I do not agree with your reasoning. A very small part of the stakehodlers agreed to the change that is correct. However all of them had the chance to vote and the ones that don't bother to vote are people who shouldn't be considered. The majority of people who give a flying fart about that topic are in favor of that change. We may have thousands of stakeholders but the community is a lot smaller than that so you can't reason that not all of the thousands of people voted and so the result is dismissable. I'd actually like to bring the idea of a very minor inflation of below 1% payed out as block rewards back on the table. Why is that such a bad thing ? Inflation is being portraied as pure evil but a very minor inflation can be a good thing especially if it's used to strengthen the network. it depends on the source of inflation and where/who the New coins go to. If you mean rewarding nodes that are securing the network and using sock stakes for this that is an exceptional idea and I'm 100% for that., If you mean just a bot making transactions with x nem as a fee in each block then I don't see the issue here eitwe as long as it isn't an over the top reward. It would have to be a trivial amount. 1% per year is trivial when considering that many nations have 3-5/6% inflation, possibly more. And bitcoin having a vastly 10%. Inflation under the correct circumstances is very healthy for the economyname does promotw Using sock stakes for that wouldn't mean any inflation as those coins already exist at nemesis. What I'm talking about is using an inflation of <1% per year for paying people that are running nodes. Not even as block rewards but as node rewards. So even people with a very very small importance have an incentive to run a node. At some random time some random node will get a reward if he's harvesting. No matter what his importance. All that matter is that he is harvesting at that time. Since nobody knows the time you can't just turn on your node at "reward time" to join the pool. Of course there are prob some kinks that need ironing out but imho this wouldn't be a bad idea. Sounds like a good idea to strngthen the network. What is the argument against it? Just that most people hate inflation. But I think this very very minor inflation would do more good than harm. |
|
|
|
jkoil, you are not making any sense at all.
Just like the other disgruntled user, you accuse of fud, while you dont even understand half of the conversation.
Of course it is easy to make such a change, noone denied such a thing.
A whole lot of users are not accepting THE REASONING behind the change.
And since (the last month?) only 30-35 accounts agreed with it.
Dismissing the rest and saying that they (the 35) have more say than the 3000+ is utter nonsense and you seem to be defending them.
So tell me, wise jkoil, you who asked a month ago, and know so much of the distribution process,
DO YOU have a reasonable argument as to why make such a change, except for the extra coins you will receive?
(the groupthink is strong with this one, i said it before_i say it again)
While I agree that we shouldn't double the supply I do not agree with your reasoning. A very small part of the stakehodlers agreed to the change that is correct. However all of them had the chance to vote and the ones that don't bother to vote are people who shouldn't be considered. The majority of people who give a flying fart about that topic are in favor of that change. We may have thousands of stakeholders but the community is a lot smaller than that so you can't reason that not all of the thousands of people voted and so the result is dismissable. I'd actually like to bring the idea of a very minor inflation of below 1% payed out as block rewards back on the table. Why is that such a bad thing ? Inflation is being portraied as pure evil but a very minor inflation can be a good thing especially if it's used to strengthen the network. it depends on the source of inflation and where/who the New coins go to. If you mean rewarding nodes that are securing the network and using sock stakes for this that is an exceptional idea and I'm 100% for that., If you mean just a bot making transactions with x nem as a fee in each block then I don't see the issue here eitwe as long as it isn't an over the top reward. It would have to be a trivial amount. 1% per year is trivial when considering that many nations have 3-5/6% inflation, possibly more. And bitcoin having a vastly 10%. Inflation under the correct circumstances is very healthy for the economyname does promotw Using sock stakes for that wouldn't mean any inflation as those coins already exist at nemesis. What I'm talking about is using an inflation of <1% per year for paying people that are running nodes. Not even as block rewards but as node rewards. So even people with a very very small importance have an incentive to run a node. At some random time some random node will get a reward if he's harvesting. No matter what his importance. All that matter is that he is harvesting at that time. Since nobody knows the time you can't just turn on your node at "reward time" to join the pool. Of course there are prob some kinks that need ironing out but imho this wouldn't be a bad idea. |
|
|
|
While I agree that we shouldn't double the supply I do not agree with your reasoning.
A very small part of the stakehodlers agreed to the change that is correct. However all of them had the chance to vote and the ones that don't bother to vote are people who shouldn't be considered. The majority of people who give a flying fart about that topic are in favor of that change. We may have thousands of stakeholders but the community is a lot smaller than that so you can't reason that not all of the thousands of people voted and so the result is dismissable.
I'd actually like to bring the idea of a very minor inflation of below 1% payed out as block rewards back on the table.
Why is that such a bad thing ? Inflation is being portraied as pure evil but a very minor inflation can be a good thing especially if it's used to strengthen the network.
i dont think you spotted my reasoning yet. Are you openly saying that the 35 positive opinions on nemforum carry more value that the 3000+ stakeholders? Are you openly saying that whoever did not vote for his own reasons that you cannot know of, agrees with your point of view? it sounds a bit like a totalitarian thing to say, and i'm pretty sure that is not what you mean. Let me help you, and whoever wants to see my point: Two polls were brought to nemforums, none of which gave enough votes for either side to go ahead and claim that a change should happen or not. Not enough people cared, if you like to think so. Does that imply that the change is accepted? I am saying that since there are not enough votes, this change cannot go ahead. I'm not saying they are agreeing with my point of view - which btw is similar to yours as i also don't want to double the supply - I'm simply saying they didn't vote which isn't enough to decide either way. Fact is most of the people that did vote voted in favor. Are we supposed to dismiss any idea because people that have already forgotten about NEM aren't showing up for votes ? |
|
|
|
jkoil, you are not making any sense at all.
Just like the other disgruntled user, you accuse of fud, while you dont even understand half of the conversation.
Of course it is easy to make such a change, noone denied such a thing.
A whole lot of users are not accepting THE REASONING behind the change.
And since (the last month?) only 30-35 accounts agreed with it.
Dismissing the rest and saying that they (the 35) have more say than the 3000+ is utter nonsense and you seem to be defending them.
So tell me, wise jkoil, you who asked a month ago, and know so much of the distribution process,
DO YOU have a reasonable argument as to why make such a change, except for the extra coins you will receive?
(the groupthink is strong with this one, i said it before_i say it again)
While I agree that we shouldn't double the supply I do not agree with your reasoning. A very small part of the stakehodlers agreed to the change that is correct. However all of them had the chance to vote and the ones that don't bother to vote are people who shouldn't be considered. The majority of people who give a flying fart about that topic are in favor of that change. We may have thousands of stakeholders but the community is a lot smaller than that so you can't reason that not all of the thousands of people voted and so the result is dismissable. I'd actually like to bring the idea of a very minor inflation of below 1% payed out as block rewards back on the table. Why is that such a bad thing ? Inflation is being portraied as pure evil but a very minor inflation can be a good thing especially if it's used to strengthen the network. |
|
|
|
I think the devs made the right decision. The 4 billion number was tied to the NXT narrative and it is a good idea to decouple from that. I agree that the asian superstition part was silly, as all superstitions are, but the devs listened to the community and made a good pragmatic business decision. This bodes well for the future of NEM.
Is it really set in stone ? Where was that announced ? |
|
|
|
What is technically going on here is actually appeasement of a minority opinion of stakeholders. The sample poll was in favor of 8 billion coins
TaunSew, sorry to be so blunt, but why dont you go crap somewhere else? You are refferring to a poll, where as of now ONLY 59 stakeholders OUT of MORE THAN 3000 asked for two times more coins. There is no consensus for the 8 billion coins, you are creating a fake image. EDIT: a poll YOU started on: October 18, 2014, 01:53:28 AM » and locked it on October 25, 2014, 01:53:28 AM59 out of 3000+ is not a majority.Also, on the superstition front, please give me a brake, if they were afraid of numbers, WHY ON EARTH DID THEY DECIDE to become stakeholders WHEN THEY KNEW that 4billion was the way to go?If they were afraid of the "death" number, why did they join in the first place, it doesn't make sense. Did they know that the coin supply would change at the end? Stop referring to "Asians" as a uniform piece of meat. What this is, is the personal greed of certain vocal users. Not the consensus in the community, in any way. The thing is that we dont know what the other members think because they couldnt be bothered to vote. Well, that doesn't mean that because 59 voted, they can take 3000 people along, does it? It means that the plan was shot down, from the people that either did not want to vote, or had the time. In any case, the excuses that people have put forth so far for this change is kindergarden level. I dont think so. They may not be kindergarden level but rational is something else in my book. Each to his own... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
