|
if anyone here is skilled with sketchup pm me please.
|
|
|
|
I seriously want to see what all those people that have been bitching about Nxt not having a user-friendly client will say after using this KICKASS client!!!  By the way... hate to be doing this... but how about repeating the message below even when people want to choose the passphrase themselves... Attention: Don't ever disclose your secret phrase. If you lose it you lose access to your account! not just this, but a warning that funds WILL be stolen if a strong password isnt used Also just for your consideration: perhaps add something about the advantages of using a high security password in conjunction with a low security password. What we may call a sloppy password. One that you can leave laying around unencrypted on your desktop, hard drives and cloud storage. Sloppy passwords protect you from rainbow tables while at the same time not requiring you to memorize anything additional. |
|
|
|
Give me a break, NXT is dead NEX is the NEXT NXT! um what. i must have missed the joke.  |
|
|
|
Chaos is plural form, chao is single. anyone have any idea about the capitalization. i realized that i just did it that way without actually putting any thought into the capitalization of the motto. |
|
|
|
I just wanted to ask you guys, if it is really safe to invest in NXT.
I mean, the address is just 64bits long: what would prevent someone (with a whole bunch of GPUs) to steal my account?
address != public key but you do have to make a transaction before your account will have more than 64 bits of entropy so make sure that you send atleast 1 nxt to some address before you put large amounts on there. |
|
|
|
im confused.. i see "Ordo ad chao" is incorrect Latin (correct: "ordo ad chaos")[5] for "order to chaos" – a reversal of the Latin expression "ordo ab chao" ("order from chaos") this |
|
|
|
2222 the mooon
edit missed the boat rocket
Anon, great bars. Are you planning on an IPO or just selling assets?
no ipo for now. im going to save what ever social capital i have in that respect for the event that you guys love my product and i cant produce enough to match demand at a reasonable price. if that should happen then i will use an ipo to raise the funds to start a mint. |
|
|
|
Nice. I hope you know you're going to be swamped with orders once you go live.  Also, if you want to get an idea of what the actual physical object will look/feel like, you can upload your design and print out a 1:1 size metal object at Shapeways: http://www.shapeways.com/createif someone wants to pay for it definitely  but not me cuz this project is going to cost a small fortune as is |
|
|
|
Final draft. What do you guys think? I'm pretty sure this is what the bars are going to look like.
Sweet!  Maybe it's just me... but I always preferred the dot... .999 probably not just you but i personally don't share that preference |
|
|
|
Final draft. What do you guys think?
that "chao" is a nonsense, at least in latin it must be "chaos" my research indicates that this is not the case. this is a well established motto used by high ranking free masons for ages (no connection i just liked the motto so i ganked it) I highly doubt they would have translated incorrectly and just not noticed for 200 years. http://translate.google.com/#la/en/chaohttp://www.masonicdictionary.com/ordoabchao.html |
|
|
|
what do you think of the idea of having parallel chains that draw security from the price of NXT on the main chain.
One of the reasons for wanting parallel chains is to address the "initial distribution problem" that has lead to clones. So although it could be something a parallel chain could do I would not at all want that to be mandatory (in fact the parallel chain should be able to use PoW rather than PoS if it likes). oh sure. i agree there. choice is always a good thing. let the market decide. im just imagining a future where we have thousands of DAC's, each one needing its own dedicated chain, it would be nice if security could be a function of the value of all chains combined rather than relying on the security provided by their own chain in isolation. |
|
|
|
So,these parallel block chains of Nxt can be called Nxt Blocktree?
No - there seems to be quite a bit of confusion about parallel chains - they are not "connected together" beyond perhaps "checkpoint" AMs being sent to the master chain. Think of it like Bitcoin and Litecoin - so people talking about "spreading the load" across chains are actually saying that you would go to buy something with 1 BTC and say 100 LTC - personally I don't think any vendor is going to want to bother with that so such ideas are not helpful. @ChuckOne - TF will be implemented in the main chain so you needn't care if another chain decides not to use TF as you don't need to buy any of those coins (it doesn't matter what you *think* about how someone should create a coin they are going to create one anyway if that's what they want to do). what do you think of the idea of having parallel chains that draw security from the price of NXT on the main chain. so for example the hits can be derived from the main chain but the targets would be derived from hashing a value that is deterministically derived from the geneses block of the alt chain. that way it is the ownership of nxt that entitles you to author blocks on the alt chain rather than the alt chain currency while the reward for authoring blocks could be alt chain currency while at the same time insuring that its almost always a different person who gets to author the block on the main chain and the block on the alt chain. the disadvantage is that you would have to run clients for the main chain and the alt chain at the same time inorder to author blocks on the alt chain. the advantage would come from the fact that the security of nxt is a function of the cost of buying up a significant portion of the total stake. By having the right to author all blocks on all alt chains be attained by owning stake on the main chain value resulting from legitimate utility provided by alt chains strengthens security of all chains rather than only strengthening the security to its own chain. |
|
|
|
Who are not satisfied and used escrow service, get the money back when you want.
Correct? So better wait and see what will happen later on and then decide.
any time Interesting. How about if I wanted to sell my early-bird investment? Would you be willing to change ownership in your spreadsheet? Any offers on a 0.25 BTC investment? From Annon136 said early , he does not agree with your advise its a good idea in general. in general having a market in something is better than not having a market, it allows goods and services to flow from their less valued applications (scottj) to their higher value applications (rramires). the thing is that it would be a logistical nightmare if i opened that pandoras box. not to mention that there would be an externalized cost on exo_coin who would have to continually update the spreadsheet on his website without being compensated for that effort. i couldnt commit him to that without his permission even if i wanted to. |
|
|
|
International waters are pretty deep.
we would look for the top of an under sea mountain range. And it's not exactly clear that a spar platform fits this definition.
When a corporation builds an oil platform that platform extends its jurisdiction around that platform in a 300 meter circle. One might consider this precedent. though they do refer to it as an "artificial structure" so perhaps that doesn't count as new land. It gets pretty murky at that point. here check it out yourself http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part5.htmIf you just want sovereignty, there are much better methods.
pray tell what are these methods? But I don't see this as a goal capable of raising $1 million, let alone $1 billion.
probably not. just talking. i think the dialogue helps. |
|
|
|
Man I just typed out a huge response as to why this doesn't make any sense and in so doing realized why it makes sense. That is brilliant. Yes it makes perfect sense. Though you dont need a 24 hour limitation. You only need to time limit it to as many blocks as we expect a merchant to need in order to feel secure. 6 maybe 10. 24 hour time lock would allow you to do thinks like buy your own private island with an instantly secure transaction but there is a tradeoff there. is it really worth locking people out of spending their funds for a full 24 hours just so a couple of guys who do HUGE transactions can feel instantly secure. Or is the better trade off to not let people make instantly secure HUGE transactions but also not have to have their nxt locked away for so long. *edit* note that its still vulnerable against an attempted quintuple spend attack  . I agree, its a great idea to hold NXT for instant transactions, I just put a response in the linked thread to see why it can't be done using a reserve balance on the normal account otherwise we have further complexity for the user. also note that transparent forging would have to be proven first before this could be proven to be 100% secure. There is still no such thing as TF. i am aware of this. that is why i said "transparent forging would have to be proven first before this could be proven to be 100% secure". otherwise we may be protected against finney attacks but still vulnerable to more traditional forms of doublespend i.e. secret chains. |
|
|
|
You have not answered my question or responded to my concern. The initial early bird had a weight of 15% of total EXO BUT there was ONLY 6~10 btc invested in that stage. I still have the screenshot somewhere and i got really excited because i sent you my btc on the last day of the investment. on that day there was only 6~10 BTC invested in it. So lets see i sent you 1 btc out of the original 6~10 btc and i would have had to share the initial 15% with like 10 other people. Lets see now...early bird has become 23.5% AND i have to share that with 175 BTC's who missed the date prior to the whitepaper and who came in with a stronger hand after having read the white paper. So please do enlighten me on how that is even fare. wtf happens if people from the second stage only throw down 10btc. then the early stage gets to share it with 200 btc and the second with 10 as the early should have been? ? What is your logic/reason to think everything is okay??? Combine these two stages and apply different weights, e.g. Early bird=1.5 and the second stage=1.0. this is a smart solution but it seems like he already decided how to handle the situation |
|
|
|
Who are not satisfied and used escrow service, get the money back when you want.
Correct? So better wait and see what will happen later on and then decide.
any time |
|
|
|
Man I just typed out a huge response as to why this doesn't make any sense and in so doing realized why it makes sense. That is brilliant. Yes it makes perfect sense. Though you dont need a 24 hour limitation. You only need to time limit it to as many blocks as we expect a merchant to need in order to feel secure. 6 maybe 10. 24 hour time lock would allow you to do thinks like buy your own private island with an instantly secure transaction but there is a tradeoff there. is it really worth locking people out of spending their funds for a full 24 hours just so a couple of guys who do HUGE transactions can feel instantly secure. Or is the better trade off to not let people make instantly secure HUGE transactions but also not have to have their nxt locked away for so long. *edit* note that its still vulnerable against an attempted quintuple spend attack . I agree, its a great idea to hold NXT for instant transactions, I just put a response in the linked thread to see why it can't be done using a reserve balance on the normal account otherwise we have further complexity for the user. also note that transparent forging would have to be proven first before this could be proven to be 100% secure. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
