|
So wait am i reading this right does this new patch offers a way to prevent DOS on coinjoin without participants putting up collateral?
|
|
|
|
Oh, yeah. It indeed turned out to be a scandal. But the price doesn't give a shit.  I'm certainly not selling. Who cares about some stupid scammer. It doesn't change anything. you dont think this will effect people's tendency to trust the project's claims? -bm projects don't make claims. |
|
|
|
Every coin will experience a scandal sooner or later. It's rather unavoidable...
how is this scam on NXT? This could have happend with any coin  Scandal, not scam. Read better  @funnynews: Oh, yeah. It indeed turned out to be a scandal. But the price doesn't give a shit. I'm certainly not selling. Who cares about some stupid scammer. It doesn't change anything. |
|
|
|
|
If this john fellow was in fact a scammer than that is unfortunate, but what does this really change? is the code any different than it was yesterday? is the technology any different? did we suddenly not solve the proof of stake problem? everyone should quit being so dramatic and just for christ sake, use escrow next time.
|
|
|
|
|
is there anyone here who is versed on some of the technical aspects of this crypto?
|
|
|
|
Just reading your economic paper: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwAGADgnQcrtdXE5MkF5S05oaHM/edit?pli=1Some questions: -Do you want Nxt to be used as money (medium of exchange + store of value)? Because on page 4 I read "Deflation is not much better than inflation. 'Real' coins should be created on top of Nxt, and be issued in quantities that keep their value constant." -Do you want to increase the amount of 1 billion Nxt? On page 4 it says "there is no limit for a specific type of monetary expansion". I really like Nxt, but these economics discourage my enthusiasm  i too am quite interested in NXT, i'd be interested for an answer to this too as coming from a tradtional mine and trade crypto background I dont quite get the payment system platforms like NXT and Ripple nxt should always be used as "the money" inside of the nxt ecosystem because the security of the network is atleast partially a function of the price of nxt. the 1 billion amount can never be changed except with a hard fork. just like bitcoin. Here I read from allbits: "The reason why having a fixed never-growing supply is undesirable is obvious: it encourages wealth concentration and creates a static community of holders without an effective way for new people to get in, and it means that the coin has no way to incentive any specific kind of activity in the long term." CfB answers: "Antideflation is the last key element of Nxt. It's supposed to solve this problem." Does this mean that Nxters in the end want to inflate the Nxt supply somehow? I see no good reason to expect wealth concentration and a static community of holders. I mean its true that a large stake holder will tend to make larger transactions than a smaller stake holder meaning a smaller percentage of his wealth will be consumed in fees, but you need to also assume that larger stake holder will tend to redeploy a smaller percentage of their nxt worth than a smaller stake holder. Do we we have any data to support this? Granted wealthy people tend to consume a smaller percentage of their net worth but are they not, in general, more diversified in their investments than less wealthy people? The point is that, maybe its true, im not saying that it isnt, but we simply lack the data necessary to come to a determination either way. Yeah, I tried to compare it to the argument about how people are still willing to spend their money on technology items, fully knowing that they will become cheaper and obsolete soon after purchase. I'm totally against inflating the supply personally, as I don't think there's any proof that deflation (even though I wouldn't call nxt deflationary unless people start sending their nxt to the genesis account) is a bad thing. In fact, I think it's very advantageous for governments/central banks to 'teach' people the opposite, that inflation is good and deflation is bad bad bad. too me stable purchasing power is most ideal. i think this could be achieved in a crypto by having a supply that never stops inflating at a constant rate (i.e. 50 coins per block forever) because eventually the value of the new coins produced would reach an equilibrium with the cost to individuals of sufficiently securing their coins inorder to prevent an amount from being lost which is greater than the amount of coins being produced in each block. that is to say, eventually the money supply would be inflated to the point where its value was such that people took only enough care to protect their coins from loss that the amount lost in each 10 minute period equaled the amount of new coins produced in that block. (assuming blocks were produced every 10 minutes). If i made a crypto this is how i would do it. Sounds a bit like Doge. After 600,000 blocks the block reward will be 10k coins per block for every more. the only good thing about that coin. not enough though. i dont own any. |
|
|
|
Just reading your economic paper: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwAGADgnQcrtdXE5MkF5S05oaHM/edit?pli=1Some questions: -Do you want Nxt to be used as money (medium of exchange + store of value)? Because on page 4 I read "Deflation is not much better than inflation. 'Real' coins should be created on top of Nxt, and be issued in quantities that keep their value constant." -Do you want to increase the amount of 1 billion Nxt? On page 4 it says "there is no limit for a specific type of monetary expansion". I really like Nxt, but these economics discourage my enthusiasm i too am quite interested in NXT, i'd be interested for an answer to this too as coming from a tradtional mine and trade crypto background I dont quite get the payment system platforms like NXT and Ripple nxt should always be used as "the money" inside of the nxt ecosystem because the security of the network is atleast partially a function of the price of nxt. the 1 billion amount can never be changed except with a hard fork. just like bitcoin. Here I read from allbits: "The reason why having a fixed never-growing supply is undesirable is obvious: it encourages wealth concentration and creates a static community of holders without an effective way for new people to get in, and it means that the coin has no way to incentive any specific kind of activity in the long term." CfB answers: "Antideflation is the last key element of Nxt. It's supposed to solve this problem." Does this mean that Nxters in the end want to inflate the Nxt supply somehow? I see no good reason to expect wealth concentration and a static community of holders. I mean its true that a large stake holder will tend to make larger transactions than a smaller stake holder meaning a smaller percentage of his wealth will be consumed in fees, but you need to also assume that larger stake holder will tend to redeploy a smaller percentage of their nxt worth than a smaller stake holder. Do we we have any data to support this? Granted wealthy people tend to consume a smaller percentage of their net worth but are they not, in general, more diversified in their investments than less wealthy people? The point is that, maybe its true, im not saying that it isnt, but we simply lack the data necessary to come to a determination either way. Yeah, I tried to compare it to the argument about how people are still willing to spend their money on technology items, fully knowing that they will become cheaper and obsolete soon after purchase. I'm totally against inflating the supply personally, as I don't think there's any proof that deflation (even though I wouldn't call nxt deflationary unless people start sending their nxt to the genesis account) is a bad thing. In fact, I think it's very advantageous for governments/central banks to 'teach' people the opposite, that inflation is good and deflation is bad bad bad. too me stable purchasing power is most ideal. i think this could be achieved in a crypto by having a supply that never stops inflating at a constant rate (i.e. 50 coins per block forever) because eventually the value of the new coins produced would reach an equilibrium with the cost to individuals of sufficiently securing their coins inorder to prevent an amount from being lost which is greater than the amount of coins being produced in each block. that is to say, eventually the money supply would be inflated to the point where its value was such that people took only enough care to protect their coins from loss that the amount lost in each 10 minute period equaled the amount of new coins produced in that block. (assuming blocks were produced every 10 minutes). If i made a crypto this is how i would do it. |
|
|
|
Any idea when I will be able to order a TREZOR?
i assume the lack of an answer means no Can have my classic pre-order for 0.4btc if you want. is it metal? |
|
|
|
If these clones are really innovative, new and they stand on their own feet, then why don't you try to trade them in an independent place separate from this specifically opened for trading Nxt thread?? Which kind of attention are you trying to catch here???
I do trade them there, but this is a NXT trading thread. Nothing here specifies that I MUST trade against BTC, or did I missed something? as long as nxt is on one end of the trade i dont think anyone can accuse you of any wrong doin |
|
|
|
Just reading your economic paper: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwAGADgnQcrtdXE5MkF5S05oaHM/edit?pli=1Some questions: -Do you want Nxt to be used as money (medium of exchange + store of value)? Because on page 4 I read "Deflation is not much better than inflation. 'Real' coins should be created on top of Nxt, and be issued in quantities that keep their value constant." -Do you want to increase the amount of 1 billion Nxt? On page 4 it says "there is no limit for a specific type of monetary expansion". I really like Nxt, but these economics discourage my enthusiasm i too am quite interested in NXT, i'd be interested for an answer to this too as coming from a tradtional mine and trade crypto background I dont quite get the payment system platforms like NXT and Ripple nxt should always be used as "the money" inside of the nxt ecosystem because the security of the network is atleast partially a function of the price of nxt. the 1 billion amount can never be changed except with a hard fork. just like bitcoin. Here I read from allbits: "The reason why having a fixed never-growing supply is undesirable is obvious: it encourages wealth concentration and creates a static community of holders without an effective way for new people to get in, and it means that the coin has no way to incentive any specific kind of activity in the long term." CfB answers: "Antideflation is the last key element of Nxt. It's supposed to solve this problem." Does this mean that Nxters in the end want to inflate the Nxt supply somehow? I see no good reason to expect wealth concentration and a static community of holders. I mean its true that a large stake holder will tend to make larger transactions than a smaller stake holder meaning a smaller percentage of his wealth will be consumed in fees, but you need to also assume that larger stake holder will tend to redeploy a smaller percentage of their nxt worth than a smaller stake holder. Do we we have any data to support this? Granted wealthy people tend to consume a smaller percentage of their net worth but are they not, in general, more diversified in their investments than less wealthy people? The point is that, maybe its true, im not saying that it isnt, but we simply lack the data necessary to come to a determination either way. |
|
|
|
The way I read it, the individual forgers will choose a minimum fee they are willing to accept.
The individual users will select a fee they are willing to pay. As long as the fee of the user is above the fee of the forger, the transaction goes through. The forger will get all of the fee offered up by the user, not just the minimum.
The the users fee is too low, then the transaction will wait for the next block or for any block that will process it.
I am not really sure if this is going to be implemented or not.
Originally, I thought it was strange, but after thinking about it more, it is a really nice system. After a while the free market will sort out an average known price for making sure a transaction goes through.
The problem with choosing a set price like 1 or .01 or .001 is it is so subjective and will constantly have to be changed as the price of NXT goes up and down.
Static fees just don't represent a free market.
Yes i strongly support this. I hope that JLP will implement this sometime. However it may be wise not to until the point at which at least even the most marginal demand exceeds supply. Oh wow. I hadn't heard of this before, but yeah, perfect idea. Let the free market decide on the fee like it should be. I hope this is implemented as well. I don't see any point in waiting though... The argument against waiting is that uncountably forgers would be willing to process transactions for free. This would mean that most people would submit transactions without paying any fee at all. This would reduce the incentive for people to forge. This would negatively impact the security of the network. Ah, I think I see what you're saying. So you (or others) think there would be some forgers that that wouldn't bother setting the fee up at all?... Idk. I mean im just making the argument, that doesnt mean i agree with it. It would be interesting because the only reason you would set it to 0 is out of generosity, but it probably wouldn't actually be good for the network for you to do that, meaning it wouldn't actually be generous at all. So i really dont know if anyone would do that. |
|
|
|
The way I read it, the individual forgers will choose a minimum fee they are willing to accept.
The individual users will select a fee they are willing to pay. As long as the fee of the user is above the fee of the forger, the transaction goes through. The forger will get all of the fee offered up by the user, not just the minimum.
The the users fee is too low, then the transaction will wait for the next block or for any block that will process it.
I am not really sure if this is going to be implemented or not.
Originally, I thought it was strange, but after thinking about it more, it is a really nice system. After a while the free market will sort out an average known price for making sure a transaction goes through.
The problem with choosing a set price like 1 or .01 or .001 is it is so subjective and will constantly have to be changed as the price of NXT goes up and down.
Static fees just don't represent a free market.
Yes i strongly support this. I hope that JLP will implement this sometime. However it may be wise not to until the point at which at least even the most marginal demand exceeds supply. Oh wow. I hadn't heard of this before, but yeah, perfect idea. Let the free market decide on the fee like it should be. I hope this is implemented as well. I don't see any point in waiting though... The argument against waiting is that uncountably forgers would be willing to process transactions for free. This would mean that most people would submit transactions without paying any fee at all. This would reduce the incentive for people to forge. This would negatively impact the security of the network. |
|
|
|
The way I read it, the individual forgers will choose a minimum fee they are willing to accept.
The individual users will select a fee they are willing to pay. As long as the fee of the user is above the fee of the forger, the transaction goes through. The forger will get all of the fee offered up by the user, not just the minimum.
The the users fee is too low, then the transaction will wait for the next block or for any block that will process it.
I am not really sure if this is going to be implemented or not.
Originally, I thought it was strange, but after thinking about it more, it is a really nice system. After a while the free market will sort out an average known price for making sure a transaction goes through.
The problem with choosing a set price like 1 or .01 or .001 is it is so subjective and will constantly have to be changed as the price of NXT goes up and down.
Static fees just don't represent a free market.
Yes i strongly support this. I hope that JLP will implement this sometime. However it may be wise not to until the point at which at least even the most marginal demand exceeds supply. |
|
|
|
Just reading your economic paper: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwAGADgnQcrtdXE5MkF5S05oaHM/edit?pli=1Some questions: -Do you want Nxt to be used as money (medium of exchange + store of value)? Because on page 4 I read "Deflation is not much better than inflation. 'Real' coins should be created on top of Nxt, and be issued in quantities that keep their value constant." -Do you want to increase the amount of 1 billion Nxt? On page 4 it says "there is no limit for a specific type of monetary expansion". I really like Nxt, but these economics discourage my enthusiasm i too am quite interested in NXT, i'd be interested for an answer to this too as coming from a tradtional mine and trade crypto background I dont quite get the payment system platforms like NXT and Ripple nxt should always be used as "the money" inside of the nxt ecosystem because the security of the network is atleast partially a function of the price of nxt. the 1 billion amount can never be changed except with a hard fork. just like bitcoin. |
|
|
|
"Climate deniers".
Isn't that a stupid term?
Way to go, reddit. Like those climate scientists making threats to those who are publishing findings that are contrary to their hypothesis. Makes me want to consider speading climate change denialist propaganda.
The term is carefully crafted propaganda to associate people who do not agree with the man made global warming hypothesis with "holocaust deniers" which is legally a crime in some countries, and a hair short of calling someone antisemitic. So in short, in their mind, having an opinion of your own means you supported Hitler's extermination of millions of people. Clearly the Nazi party was very friendly to people with opposing opinions no? We used to be climate skeptics but skeptic generally carries positive connotations so the public relations scum bags put a stop to that. |
|
|
|
Words relating to pay expo
sending an ounce of silver to say thankyou for the hard work. How does this work? I saw you have silver listed on NXT somehow from a giveaway thread you posted(I think it was you anyway). When you say you're sending him an ounce of silver, does that mean you're sending him coloured coins or something at represent 1 oz of silver? How does one redeem them for real silver? Yes i am sending a colored coin. For the lower 48 in the US, inorder to redeam one must send an amount of tokens divisible by ten to the issuing address with an adjoined message containing the mailing address that you would like the coins to be delivered to. Shipping to anywhere else should pm me to discuss specific arrangements. This is really cool to see a real world application of coloured coins! Someone could even trade that silver token for some coffee beans or something if someone sold coffee tokens as well. I wonder what sort of commodities trading we'll see. It's an exciting prospect in my opinion. Im excited also! i really think this tool that is the asset exchange allows me to create a never before seen business model that will allow me to sell the cheapest silver on the market. Atleast if i can get out of the bootstrapping phase. If you would like to help support the project i'm always looking for more people to help source silver for me. |
|
|
|
Any idea if anyone is working on a wallet like Armory that lets you create/sign transactions on a warm storage device and then transmit them from a hot wallet?
It's totally possible (and should be really easy) to create a small app (not fully featured client) that signs transactions on offline computer and then you broadcast it on online machine. Maybe we can set a bounty on it? I'm going to have to write code to do this for the anonymizer I am working on. So, I could probably put something together from that. A bounty would motivate me. You should ask Anon136 for bounty as he is on community funds I don't think bounty should be large, as this should be really easy task as you just save the transaction to USB drive, sign it on offline machine, then back to online machine to broadcast it. All the API and error checking is already done by NRS You mean the tech dev committee? |
|
|
|
Words relating to pay expo
sending an ounce of silver to say thankyou for the hard work. How does this work? I saw you have silver listed on NXT somehow from a giveaway thread you posted(I think it was you anyway). When you say you're sending him an ounce of silver, does that mean you're sending him coloured coins or something at represent 1 oz of silver? How does one redeem them for real silver? Yes i am sending a colored coin. For the lower 48 in the US, inorder to redeam one must send an amount of tokens divisible by ten to the issuing address with an adjoined message containing the mailing address that you would like the coins to be delivered to. Shipping to anywhere else should pm me to discuss specific arrangements. Send me some silver plz U ship to Russia? Yes I can do that but shipping will be about 50 dollars according to usps.com |
|
|
|
Words relating to pay expo
sending an ounce of silver to say thankyou for the hard work. How does this work? I saw you have silver listed on NXT somehow from a giveaway thread you posted(I think it was you anyway). When you say you're sending him an ounce of silver, does that mean you're sending him coloured coins or something at represent 1 oz of silver? How does one redeem them for real silver? Yes i am sending a colored coin. For the lower 48 in the US, inorder to redeam one must send an amount of tokens divisible by ten to the issuing address with an adjoined message containing the mailing address that you would like the coins to be delivered to. Shipping to anywhere else should pm me to discuss specific arrangements. |
|
|
|
Ugh... Are you kidding me? Are there bots prowling the network with a boatload of password-account combinations stored watching the for transactions to known addresses or something?
I got some NXT a long time ago and kept it tucked away, but with the updated client it seems I didn't have a public key, so I sent a message.. easy enough... my balance was there, but I couldn't forge because it was unconfirmed... so I figure this has something to do with old balances being 'unconfirmed' under the updated protocol until it's seen activity.. So I flip my NXT into another account that I used in the past (tx 3603756272827733121), wait for it to confirm, and as soon as it does the NXT has moved on to an account out of my control (tx 10738856805317237622)...!!!
WTF? I sat here waiting for a confirm to flip it right back, and it vanishes before my very eyes! We're talking within 2 seconds of the first confirmation!
If the network is this compromised, how do you ever expect mainstream adoption... I've had an eye on NXT since the beginning and was really into the new look and feel, the asset exchange, etc.. My interest was building in NXT again (initially less than impressed by the distribution, but it seemed a lot of great work had gone into the protocol..) Too bad.. Nxt looked cool, but as it stands I'm out.. Not sure that this can be called a 2nd generation crypto when it's this vulnerable to theft. I'd say the target audience is even more specialized than bitcoin; the average joe can hardly remember "Password1"!
You should use 2 passwords. One that you save locally or on the cloud that has back ups and redundancies and that you dont actually memorize, and one that you do memorize and never save on any computer that touches the internet. Then simply concatenate the two passwords when entering your wallet. The first will protect you against rainbow tables (thats what got you) and the second will protect you against hackers. Its a pretty simple concept but it really should be spelled out, its certainly not peoples fault for not knowing this. Heck the client should even come with two password fields and concatenate them for people imo. This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Two passwords and one long passwords is the same thing. "Then simply concatenate the two passwords when entering your wallet." If your machine is compromised, both passwords could be stolen when you are entering them in the wallet. This doesn't add any security then just having one longer password. No i dont think so. Im pretty sure that a password that you store in a text file on your desktop and copy and paste into your client is less secure than one that you memorize and type into your client. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
