NEM is not a proof-of-stake coin, it is proof-of-importance.
And what about Blackcoin ?
As far as I understand, NEM is a Proof-of-Stake with a few modifications that developers call Proof-of-Importance, directed at artificially increasing velocity of money. Although these modifications need time to prove their efficiency, let's just call it PoS now to avoid confusion. You got to have something first, a stake, to participate in harvesting the blocks, right? So it's still a stake, not Proof of work. I haven't tried Blackcoin. I meant pure 100% PoS cryptos with original source code. Isn't Blackcoin PoW/PoS based on Bitcoin code? |
|
|
|
It's funny that people take him serious. He doesn't even understand how PoW works and spreads FUD about PoS. I double dare anyone on the planet who reads this to buy all the NXT that exists and then sell it all for 1$  Every 1% of all available NXTs he buys - the price goes up 25% in geometric progression, it will take all the money in the world and then some to buy 51%. Meanwhile other people will be competing with him to get their share driving the price even higher. It's MUCH cheaper to just build your own factories manufacturing ASICs all over China, and get 51% of Bitcoin hashrate than buy up 51% of a PoS crypto. |
|
|
|
I'd like to see how someone can agressively buy 51% of the coins It'll be much cheaper to buy 500m of equipment to get 51% of the Bitcoin hashrate. |
|
|
|
NXT - "Bitcoin", NEM - "Litecoin", Qora - "Dogecoin" of the Proof-of-Stake world  |
|
|
|
Ltc has issues since asics....
what is its use case v btc.
The only possible argument is it may have a better distribution that BTC, because of GPU's.....and perhaps algo back up.
Litecoin doesn't have a better distribution than Bitcoin, check the statistics. Most coins, no matter what good distribution they could have at some point in the past, end up in the hands of just a few people. It works like that with fiat or crypto. Distribution is a misleading word, only to attract newbs. |
|
|
|
Many coins have took risks with PoS by now, and no major problem have been found.
Dogecoin's developper consider that using PoS might be a good idea no sooner than the 600000th block, so that's plenty of time for other coins to thoroughly test it really.
Is he considering switching to PoS exclusively? Or having two independant algos: one block goes to PoW miners, another goes to PoS holders? |
|
|
|
I never had a PoS coin in my portfolio and never will have one. PoS is not backed by anything other than the belief there are worth anything and there will be an endless supply of PoS coins because one created today does not have a significant advantage over on created tomorrow, next week, next month.......
What currently is happening is new coins are created with PoW, mined for a week until a fixed number is reached and then change to PoS and then you can claim your stake at buying xyz coin. The only advantage a coin released today has over on made sometime in the future is, somebody already bought into it. The advantage quickly disappears if the new coin has a better catch phrase a flashier webpage or bigger marketing capital....There is no end in sight for stake claimed coins and all promising x % return if you know a bit of programming you will have your very one coin too and everyone can buy into your claim based coin.
Its a barrel without bottom and once it clicks run for the hills if you own a stake.
A new pure PoW coin can not compete with existing once on the market unless its cheats in some way by instamine, premine, ninjamine or some other scam which then prevents it form growing. The inflation handicap will always be with Litecoin in regard to Bitcoin and so it can not get in front, and equally stops new pure PoW coins in its tracks. Inflation also works in favour of Dogecoin in the short term so merge mining puts Dogecoin in a favourable position.
PoW is backed by energy. There is no better backing than energy because everyone needs it, wants it and i will never have any problem selling it. To create a PoW coin you need x amount of energy and you can not cheat. The best you can hope for is to have a more efficient miner. Because the energy has been spent the coin has a base value (many other things on top) and is a kind of a storage medium.
Mark my words
Like it takes banks a lot of energy to make a few mouse clicks to create new money, yeah right. And that money is then backed by nothing (in most cases), but valued by everyone. Go figure that one out. |
|
|
|
Thanks very much for the explanation. I am new to both xcp and nxt and would like to understand more details of pros and cons for both coins. Is that ture nxt is now so over valued and the initial distribution is as flaw as mastercoin?
Valuation is a subjective thing, you will have to decide for yourself based on certain criteria that you use as an investor, I can't answer that question for you. Initial IPO distribution of NXT is a known fact, NXT was distributed among 73 original stakeholders. Current distribution of NXT in ~40 000 accounts is nearing Bitcoin distribution percentage-wise. http://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-bitcoin-addresses.htmlhttps://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distributionBut please go to NXT thread to ask questions. I was only pointing out some inconsistencies in the image presented above. |
|
|
|
Dividends are possible as a third-party service running on top of NXT right now, and will be in the core of NXT in the coming month. Dividends are naturally paid in NXTs (because NXT is the accounting unit), and NXT AE runs on NXT network, so those two red checkboxes are irrelevant for NXT, but sure look good for XCP marketing  |
|
|
|
Okay NXT people, we get it. :-)
Ok, and just this last one from me for NXT and we're done Connect to a public node and use its API, easy as pie. |
|
|
|
The price is plummeting because there is no software as promised. It's June 25th in all timezones.
I'm not entirely sure what your definition of 'plummeting' is... You will soon see what I mean if the alpha is not released today. |
|
|
|
|
The price is plummeting because there is no software as promised. It's June 25th in all timezones.
|
|
|
|
Stop this logo circle jerk already, release the software  |
|
|
|
Being that Monero was out first...
Hm, you really believe a couple of weeks is a serious advantage? Anyway, it's all new, let's just wait and see. Yes, it's currently strongest. |
|
|
|
|
I am not doubting the network effect laws. I am doubting the 'Monero is strongest' part. Although I like the name, the name is best of them all. Some Hero members support is also good. But this race has just started. Bitcoin had a few years of network effect before others started to race with it. CN coins all begin at the same time, excluding Bytecoin for obvious reasons. Hence, the outcome is unclear.
|
|
|
|
...this is how network effect works; what's currently strongest gets the support, and it therefore grows stronger. Soon enough the strength is far harder to overcome.
Since that is only a theory, which has to be proven, we shall have to see if that is the case. Since before Bitcoin there were no Hero members, and Hero members just now are voicing their support for Monero that attracted their attention, this is the first precedent of this kind. |
|
|
|
They do this all the time. So? Coins are cloning Bitcoin. So what? Monero can clone good features too. If most things are being developed for monero as it is happening right now then the rest will just follow...
Bitcoin had a few years first mover advantage, which some people call network effect, Monero doesn't have that. BBR team doesn't follow, but innovates. Fantomcoin innovates - merge-mines on all CNs - potentially largest network. Where is Monero's advantage? |
|
|
|
I wouldn't worry about it.
But would you worry about other clones of Bytecoin that can quickly copy all commits of XMR? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
