This has been discussed before. XT is an altcoin, and services that move from Bitcoin to XT are altcoin services. On bitcointalk.org, altcoins and altcoin services belong in the Alt Cryptocurrencies section. On /r/Bitcoin, altcoins and altcoin services aren't allowed.
An altcoin that uses the same merkle root is by it's very nature just a forked blockchain... and the shortest chain would become the altcoin and die. So, you can call it an altcoin but it's not an altcoin, altcoins have their own unique merkle root. It's just a BIP, if it gains majority consensus it's Bitcoin and if it doesn't then it's nothing. Basically, any and all Bitcoin hardforks would be considered altcoins by your definition. So, just calling it an altcoin is an excuse to silence any and all discussion related to a blocksize change. |
|
|
|
someone could purchase entry credits without using FCT Good question. It is entirely a matter of perspective. From the perspective of the network, any entry of data must be paid for with Entry Credits, which can only be created with a corresponding decrementing of Factoids. The system is setup so that the person who holds the private key for Factoids can be a different entity that the the EC private key holder. Lets take the example of BIGINT, a large institution who's lawyers have forbidden it from dealing with any tradable token. ECs cannot be reassigned, so those are just fintech denominated in KiB, which the IT department can use no problem. Here is how BIGINT will use Factom without using Factoids: BIGINT creates an EC key, and issues a Purchase Order to a Intermediary A. Intermediary A's lawyers and accountants are comfortable with tradable tokens. Intermediary A purchases Factoids from the market and converts them to Entry Credits, crediting BIGINT's EC key. Intermediary A creates an invoice on BIGINT's standard NET30 terms and sends it to BIGINT's accounts payable department. BIGINT sends a USD$ ACH transfer 29 days after the invoice, per the terms. Viola, BIGINT has used Factom without using Factoids. Once the federated server system is up and running, does that mean FCT transactions can be processed in seconds? Yes, to a degree. It comes down to a matter of trust and time. Like in bitcoin, the confidence increases with time, but is more granular at short time periods. Here is a bitcoin analogy: assume that you knew which miner was going to win the next block. Now assume they promised to include your transaction in the next block. That might be considered processed. There is still the chance that all the rest of the miners will orphan that block, and not include your transaction later. Here are the levels of trust will occur in Factom: 1. Your full node client gets a transaction. It passes all the rules of the protocol + a few seconds 2. The designated Federated server for that Chain broadcasts an acknowledgement for that transaction, arbitrating between any malleations or doublespends. (note, I think we solved malleation from anyone without the private key. https://github.com/FactomProject/ed25519/commit/dadf2ec666e4abca02e8275370686855b9e419cf) + a few seconds 3. The other Federated servers do not reject the designated one for any misdeeds. + The rest of the minute 4. The Federated servers shuffle, come to loose consensus, and change which chains they are responsible for. + The end of the 10 minute period 5. The Federated servers add up all the acknowledgements and create the block structures. Then, the majority of them broadcast out a signature of the block. The Bitcoin anchor is created and broadcast on the Bitcoin network. + 10 more minutes. 6. A new block is created including the signatures of a majority of the Federated servers. + 1 hour 7. The Bitcoin anchor transaction has 6 confirmations, making it permanent, and also showing that Factom as a system is not itself forked. Thanks for the long thoughtful responses to my questions. It seems it's much simpler to just trade FCT than to bother with trading Entry Credits. As for the quick transaction processing, it sounds like there is a sort of "soft-confirmation" by the federated servers before coming to a more trusted "hard-confirmation" through the Bitcoin anchor transaction. That does seem like a best-of-both-worlds compromise. Cool. |
|
|
|
An update from the dev team would be nice at this point?
Hi All, Since we recently decided to change the trust key expiration algorithm so trust keys expires in relation to how long your trust key has been active (1 day for every 7 days) rather than a set expiration time (3 days, 7 days, etc), the coding is a little more involved and is taking a little longer. The code will also be updated to reactivate trust keys so those that have lost them will be rewarded on some level. Viz will be on later to give an updated timeline for completion. Sorry for the delay in addressing this. Thanks, pdogg147 Just to clarify is that 1 day per 7 days upto some maximum? There is not really any reason to put a cap on the maximum. We are making progress on both wallet and miner, and we were hoping to have update out by Nov 25th but we did not make our deadline as we hoped however that's okay, because setting goals is always a good thing  Videlicet is making progress as we speak on implementing the algorithms into Nexus Core that we have been discussing publicly here and privately for the last 4 weeks. We are working it just takes time to get everyone on the same page. As for marketing we are planning to participate in some podcasts for discussing the technology that is developed in Nexus for quantum security -- specifically our vision to provide a path forward for Bitcoin should SHA2 be compromised by quantum computing. SHA2 is only one vector of attack in Bitcoin and make no mistake that Nexus is designed to solve ALL encryption weaknesses in Bitcoin. Will keep you posted as soon as we have more specifics about podcast. We really want to present the team to everyone through an audio format and to share our vision more in-depth, because we believe this will bring in many more people to the project as well as strengthen the resolve of the community to stay behind us and support us. Please continue to support us with your patience and positive feedback. Regards, |
|
|
|
Factoids are the only way to get Entry Credits, which is the only way to enter data in Factom.
Brian, It was talked about before that someone could purchase entry credits without using FCT. Have you guys changed your mind about that? If so, I am glad to hear this. We are now concentrating on meeting the milestones, which mean having a multiserver federated system up and running. Once the federated server system is up and running, does that mean FCT transactions can be processed in seconds? |
|
|
|
I think the ideal balance has been stuck with the system proposed where by those who have been staking for longer get a longer expiry.
That seems to be a good reward mechanism, rewarding those who devote time. Nexus is not based upon false time frequency, we are synchronizing with natural time frequency. Right now our ratio is 7/1 based upon 7 days per week, 28 days per month, 13 months per year. http://www.lawoftime.org/thirteenmoon.htmlNice.
To finish my point about subject. Between 100 and 300 is the minimum number for running wallets , for good security.
My opinion is that everything less than minimum 14 day, for ordinary average user, is problem and annoying for expiration time.
Lot of users agree about 21 day for optimum.
Let's look on another way.
what is more secure :
100 wallets with 7 day expiration or 300 wallets with 21 day expiration ?
whether it is possible to determine a correlation formula , about this ?
or at least approximately correlation ?
I'm not sure we can draw a correlation formula since every user has their parameters for running a node (time, electricity, devices). In other words, it is the quality of nodes not necessarily the quantity. And it is hard to measure quality since it is subjective to each individual's resources. This is why we reward trust keys and trust weight to nodes that are online more, because they are better quality. If those 100 wallets or 300 wallets were always online, the 7 or 21 day expiration would be irrelevant. It is a mechanism to reward those nodes that remain online and to penalize those nodes which do not remain online for long periods of time. We want nodes online all the time staking, not network hoppers. We need to basically make sure the system rewards full-node operators vs. network hoppers and that the system cannot be gamed. That's our goal for this, because the nodes will be a central part of the protocol that we build on top of. This trust network is VERY important for future feature sets and in order to have a strong trust network we must reward those people the most. In addition, we will be adding trust keys for miners as well, so that miners will be rewarded trust keys and gain trust weight as well, to reward them for not miner hopping from one coin to another. These trust keys will be important parts of the network going forward... first we must get the base protocol level of this done and then we can discuss why these trust keys are so important for the future of protocol. |
|
|
|
the question is (in general) :
If is in network 300 running wallets with 5000 coin this is much secure (300x 5000=1.5mil) , compared to 10 running wallets with 0.15 mil coins. ?
Yes , or no ?
Yes, this is technically more secure and a better outcome over time, but if we can attain 100 staking wallets (nodes) combined with our CPU and GPU mining channels this will be a very secure network. However, we also want to perfect the protocol before we have so many nodes spread out that it is hard to ensure they are all updated to latest core releases. So, there's no need to worry too much about having 300 staking wallets at this time. My goal is to promote Nexus enough to have 100 wallets staking (full-nodes) by the end of the year. I hope we can all work together to promote Nexus to cryptocurrency community as much as possible after our next wallet release. This will be a good time to get involved because we will have an updated stable wallet release for Linux, Windows, and Mac. We will also have a new GPU miner. |
|
|
|
|
Some of the additional innovations we are discussing as we develop a plan, are adding DNS capabilities to Nexus to improve upon Namecoin and fix the issue with name squatting, as well as integrate Nexus with MegaNet - Kim Dotcom's new decentralized internet framework dubbed "MegaNet", of which details are due to be released February 2016.
We are looking to expand Nexus in many directions over time, and right now we want to get in place the protocol specifics for trust keys, improve the miner software and wallets, get the digital recycler functioning on some level and then be able to move onto adding other features to the protocol.
One of Nexus main goals is to improve upon Bitcoin and give back to Bitcoin community. We believe strongly in developing a cohesive relationship with Bitcoin developers over time, and to offer them our technology for improving the Bitcoin protocol.
I would advise those of you following this blockchain protocol that I am not interested in hyping the price of Niro whatsoever. This project is purely non-speculative for me. I do not dream to get rich off Niro, instead I will focus my time on refining our image and marketing strategy for developing a powerful protocol for the 21st century and beyond. I hope this is a prosperous protocol and that all of you can share in the value that will gain over time.
We will dream big and accomplish big goals if we work together, and we are really just at the beginning of what Nexus will be.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
How about also features in the wallet being unlocked if you have trust, such as casinos, chats, whatever you can imagine. The trust network can provide a lot more than just interest rates... The interest rates now are just the beginning, the sky is the limit here.
Thank You,
Viz.
Note: I like to work around coin holdings as much as possible because there are some users in certain countries that have a hard time even accumulating 1000 Niro...
Point is to solve 2 separate thing separately. 10 000 coins is exemple. separate stimulations for run wallet 24 hour, and interest I you start looking on wallet like mining hardware ( both is the same = generate new coins) then someone is stimulated to invest to run wallet 24 hour. for network security more miners more security. more walets more security. That's actually a pretty good idea Macorcina and I support your idea that the trust key have more value by rewarding a fixed amount. This would even playing field and allow those who do not have lots of Niro to be rewarded fairly. See my post above as well. |
|
|
|
|
I kind of like what macorcina is saying here. If you have a trust key, you are rewarded a static amount per block, and then holdings staked are rewarded on a dynamic % basis.
I think we are going to go with dynamic trust expiration. For every 7 days producing blocks (wallet staking), you get 1 day grace period before expiration. So after 28 days, you would have 4 days grace period before expiration. For every 7 months, 1 month grace period before expiration. So a proportion of 7/1.
Here's some other ideas we are floating right now. Trust keys enabling advanced features such as domain/name registry.
We are looking to expand the "time is money" concept, and using time to add valuable features. Those with trust would be able to unlock more features in the protocol such as domain/name registry on the blockchain.
|
|
|
|
Some time ago, we all discuss about this, and make agreement about 21 day. And now again, same discussion from scratch. We will wait for Alzheimer to make proposal.  The issue is security, after analyzing the options, we realized that in order to encourage trust-nodes and staking for network security we should reduce the 21 day expiration to something more reasonable. We want full-nodes operating and want to reward them, however, we also don't want people jumping on and off the network every few days. 7 days seems like a good balance. Making progress on wallet and GPU miner. Still on target for Nov 25th. The team is certainly making progress in terms of developing consensus around core ideas and philosophy of Nexus.. hope to share our vision more intricately soon. Cheers |
|
|
|
This is really good news as this would mean that probably Ethereum would be Bitcoin's successor in the near future. Big companies such as Microsoft and IBM have gain their attention in Ethereum's decentralized app concept and are entering this scene. There is something that I'm concerced about, and that is the block size. as Bitcoin right now has been facing issues with it (remember Bitcoin XT?) Perhaps, Ethereum will solve this problem and go head to head with VISA, also with better TPS. Just my opinion.  Blockchain size is not a problem for ETH at the moment. Still on Frontier release, plenty of time to mitigate and strategize, imo |
|
|
|
i've imported a key into a fully synced wallet and it's reporting 0 balance.
repairwallet didnt help
does -reindex or -rescan work ?
or should i just try again from scratch :p
Were you able to get this resolved? |
|
|
|
It's been 7 days since launch - Lots of thanks to everyone who has supported the project and helped us surpass all expectations!
Some updated numbers:
Fractalcoin – 314,015 coins burned out of 1,003,589 = 31% of total FRAC supply
Keycoin – 279,051 coins burned out of 946,902 = 29% of total KEY supply
Sapience – 325,567 coins burned out of 690,460 = 47% of total XAI supply
BARR – 30,100 coins burned out of 522,780 in circulation = 5% (self-burned BARR, sent back to the burnfund)
OFFS - 15,000 coins burned out of 30,100 in circulation (permanently destroyed)
I was looking at data of XAI, KEY, FRAC markets and it appears that on Nov. 1st all of these markets experienced price increases due to people buying these coins for redeeming for BARR. |
|
|
|
The demand side, I do not understand yet. Who would want to buy BARR, and why?
What are your plans with BARR? What are income streams? Plans for dividends? Where will they come from?
Are you perhaps speculating with the remaining XAI, FRAC, KEY coins, and will distribute trading profits from that, to your asset shareholders? Then why is dividends better than simply holding XAI, FRAC, KEY?
Obviously BARR is attempting to burn the lower tiers of coins first. And as stated this gives 'bag holders' and option to trade up for BARR. And it pools these investors into a larger group. Again see the point that BARR runs on top of NXT so the 'Dev' is not needed. At this stage this is a Beta test. BARR finds case use by showing this works and can move up the tiers to coins like TIPS or CASINO or even lofty as PPC or LTC or maybe DASH will find reason to burn their ninja mine stash. I suggest another case use is revamp these coins being burned, that would make BARR a dev studio/lab. With these coins it would be nice to keep them alive, basic stuff nodes and blockchains (no forks or wallet updates). BARR_Official seems not so much interested in this? And rather not hold burned coins because of possible conflicts of interest? I very much like this BARR project. I have envisioned a system of shitcoin burning for a while and while this is very rudimentary - it is functional and showing results. Nexus is working on blockchain merging which will allow old blockchains to be merged into the Nexus network and economy, or possibly even upgrading older networks with valuable history - basically by running a sidechain of sorts. This would be for communities or projects that had value. We can't save everyone or preserve all capital, so it will be interesting to see how this "market capitalization" of BARR will be reflected in BARR/BTC markets. |
|
|
|
That's actually a different method than we are proposing, but it is an interesting one that I have suggested before. I think it's a good concept and complement our work. In fact, we might be able to help with the decentralized nature of that project in the future  Blockchain merging will be for coins with ultra-low security or network stability issues that communities would like to be grafted into the Nexus network to preserve the blockchain history... or even upgrading older networks to more secure and better technology. I would like to say thumbs up to BARR for taking initiative, given the ultra-low overhead of managing the BARR asset on NXT, it might be a good place to start. |
|
|
|
People might prefer to receive Bitcoin as reward. good luck anyway.
but then people are crazy got a friend coming round later who used to mess around with ascii art hopefully ill get a few pointers  Excellent. We look forward to your submissions |
|
|
|
People might prefer to receive Bitcoin as reward. good luck anyway.
The NIRO market is liquid so conversion won't be difficult. Our goal is to bring some awareness to our project and to get some great submissions. Thank you! |
|
|
|
The community has donated NIRO into a public address currently : ( 46,000 NIRO )
Fund Allocation
1ST : 60%
2ND: 25%
3RD: 15%
So the first reward will be
27.600 NIRO * 485 ( average price based Bittrex ) = BTC 0.13386
11,500 NIRO * 485 ( average price based Bittrex ) = BTC 0.05577500
6,900 NIRO * 485 ( average price based Bittrex ) = BTC 0.03346500
Reward quite reasonable , I will try my best for this
Thank you, we look forward to seeing your entry! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
