Fourth, it's financial software. Financial software in itself doesn't scream 'scam' but it does mean you absolutely cannot run it without completely trusting it because if you do otherwise then sooner or later a scam will take your entire life savings and/or livelihood.
Exactly! It is crazy that people are placing hard earned money on software that appears to be written in a week or two on the side! C'mon, look at the code base! It's a prototype that I would find written by any student as part of a course exercise. What I like to see is something like eMunie that takes months to work on to release. This is VERY DANGEROUS STUFF we are speaking of here. |
|
|
|
3. The system were full of bugs. The client I installed never ran properly more than 24 hours.
I had to delete the .nxt or re-download all client and block chain files to fetch the latest block info every time I restart computer.
And the block chain update progress always got stuck.
Not to saying the super user with huge amount of coins or negative number of coins.
Bitcoin had bugs once you know. It's years old now. Please note, NXT is built on a totally new codebase with different concepts. Do not compare it to Bitcoin clones which have only a few tweaks or deviations from the Bitcoin codebase. Yes, but all these other coins are built on top of a codebase that is well known to be secure. To build on a code base that is entirely new has greater risks. Just because it is new does not mean it is better. It still has a lot of growing pains to go through and only time will tell if it can make it through this. |
|
|
|
I think that solution have been already developed. Make a normal coin on sha256 or scrypt and let people mine coins, then you shall assign number of coins in the old coin blockchain to the number of coins in skycoin genesis block. This should be more fair than creating another scam like ripple or nxt. I think you can do method of generating priv addresses the same as in the old coin. So what you'll have to do is just type in your priv key in skycoin client.
Should Skycoin Distribute Coins Through Mining?- in CPU coins, all coins go to people with botnets - in GPU coins, all coins go to people with GPU farms - in SHA256 coins, all coins go to people with ASICs The vast majority of mined coins today are extremely well organized pump and dumps. The same trolls attacking innovative coins such as Skycoin, Nxt and Mastercoin are the people pumping Catcoin and Ripple. THIS IS A SCAM. I WANT FREE COINS.I will not address criticisms by people pumping Catcoin. Nor will I address personal attacks as my opinions do not reflect the opinions of the development team nor the Skycoin community. People who understand Bitcoin and the true altcoins understand what we are trying to do with Skycoin. Skycoin is not designed for scammers and people pumping Catcoin and Sexcoin. --- Ripple:The fact that the user defended Ripple, means the post was an obvious troll. I do not think Ripple was intended as a scam, but is highly questionable - Ripple has extensive private key reuse which is known to be insecure - Ripple has admitted to secretly selling large blocks of Ripple at below market price to wealthy investors - Ripple's protocol is too complex to audit - Ripple's user base controls less than 1% of Ripple - Ripple currently relies on very small number of nodes, most of which are controlled by the issuer of Ripple - Ripple has an extremely small free float and is easily manipulated - Ripple's price indicate manipulation because it moves with dollar instead of with Bitcoin - Ripple has almost no users (many fewer than Dogecoin) - Ripple's lead developer and designer has quit company and is very adapt at jumping sinking ships --- Nxt:Nxt coin is a legitimate coin. The Nxt coin developers are trying to build something new. They are not just copying Litecoin and changing the name and logo to create Catcoin so they can pump and dump it. Just because the Nxt IPO was "unfair" to people who did not receive cheap coins, does not make Nxt a scam. The Nxt IPO was very similar to the Mastercoin IPO and no one considers Mastercoin to be a scam. --- Dodgecoin:This is my favorite coin because it makes fun of Catcoin and the pump and dump coins that are constantly being created and promoted. Dodgecoin is a good meme and does not take itself seriously. Where as Catcoin, Sexcoin and Earthcoin are things that some people may make money on, but which will not be around in ten years. I think NXT is a scam based on my quick analysis of their code base. 28 classes without any special libraries. Furthermore, no peer review of source code at the same time, they are taking money from investors while alpha testing their coin. I am however here waiting to see what you've got in terms of 'distributed consensus with adversarial attackers'. Best of luck. |
|
|
|
Blinded token "cash" might be better than coloured coins because people keep seeming to imagine that coloured coins, being distributed / p2p, are somehow "secure" in some sense that Chaumian blinded token "cash" is not.
I think that is dangerous and misleading, and pretending that that does not matter "because buyer beware" or "because RTFM" maybe does to quite "cut it" when grandma gets bilked out of her retirement savings due to somehow failing to have it sufficiently strongly drummed into her that the things have no value other than any value the issuer might honour, regardless of how many distributed p2p people go on and on about how important it is and how wonderful it is that "the issuer is not required in order to trade this asset".
With Open Transactions based "cash" tokens it hopefully is very very clear how totally dependent it is upon the issuer. Especially if the issuer is the server that must be used to deal with the tokens. Even just having some other issuer's tokens be used on a server could be dangerously confusing, because when one thinks of a term for what the server is doing when it gives out cash tokens a word that English speakers seem likely to have come to mind is that the server issues the cash tokens. Which is correct English but that kind of handing out of the cash is utterly different from "issuing" the Open Transactions assets themselves that the cash represents, which in turn only represents some real asset such as grams of gold or shares of a company etc.
So for total clarity it might be better, even if third party running an Open Transactions server/service that some company's shares will be traded on and/or handed out as cash tokens by, to set up a distinct server per such company, making it clear the server is that company's server so it is always totally clear that the assets tokens cash etc all totally depend upon that company not upon the hosting service or software as a service company that sys-admins the server/service.
-MarkM-
Well, my big question really is, which parts of OT can be used that will be synergistic with iXcoin? So right now, I am thinking, one would create new financial instruments using OT, this would be defined in Ricardian contract like fashion. The actual instrument is allocated into IXC. In short, issuance of currency is not free, one has to provide an allocation of IXC that gets converted to the new currency. OT scripting functionality would then be used to enforce the agreement of the IXC currency. The question though from the IXC p2p peer network is this. How does the network know of the details of the currency? How does the enforcement of the contracts work in a distributed fashion? In other words, there is some registry out there (hopefully not centralized), that the IXC network is aware of and employs to enforce contracts of all its minted currencies. Can the contract information be embedded in the genesis transaction? Are contract executions confined to the server that issued the contract or is it transferrable? Yes, you are entirely correct that there needs to be some linkage back from the issuer and the actual server that would deliver the contract. Unless what needs to be delivered by the issuer is a commodity. The function therefore of iXcoin based currency is to make transparent to both buyer and seller the total number of units that are available. The issue with a OT server only issuance is that one cannot discover the quantity that is actually issued. There is an element of trust that the issuer has actual created only what he can actually deliver (kind of like a fiat currency). In an IXC denominated currency, the amounts that have been issued are known in the ledger. |
|
|
|
Also so just realized that you can buy almost anything under the sun with BTC using Gyft.
IMHO, an alt-coin does not need be even honored by merchants. It only needs to be exchangeable with BTC and provide functionality that BTC cannot provide.
James Lee (jl777) is serving as a market maker within Ripple for several crypto and fiat currencies. He has recently started offering market making services for additional altcoins. Since the iXcoin dev team is planning to integrate with Ripple, having a good market maker supporting IXC will be a plus. Send James a message. I will have to agree with you that market maker functionality is necessary for iXcoin. The two exchanges, Vircurex and Cryptsy don't currently support Ripple. However, one can envision a exchange package that has integration with ripple to provide the market making functions. So are we saying then (1) Colored coins to allow issuance of various kinds of currencies, bonds, stocks, coupons etc. (2) OT gateway to provide richer feature such as cheques, recurring payments, escrow etc. (3) Ripple to provide market maker liquidity for the OT gateways Is that the overall architecture we envision here? |
|
|
|
Unfortunately, as far as I know, the "gateway" source code provided by the Ripple team is not recommended for real use, and I have not yet heard of any better gateway code having been released yet.
I don't know whether Ripple Labs actually supplied gateway code or if each gateway rolled their own using the API. If a gateway has low volume, everything can be done manually from the client until their usage pushes them to automate it. Regardless, Justcoin has released their gateway code as open source: https://github.com/justcoin/snowAs written, it has interfaces for XRP, BTC, LTC and fiat banking. It is a good place to start if you want to integrate additional altcoins. They are just starting a documentation project to make that easier. In terms of strategic focus, we have to focus on the international market or more specifically the remittance market. So yes, this requires some payment processing function however it needs to have some exchange function such that foreign markets are able to exchange their IXC to their local currency. So the OT (open transaction) functionality of supporting different kinds of bids/asks/limit etc orders may be a good starting point for providing a software bundle that different countries can use. So we're still trying to work out how to integrate colored coins, ixc, OT and perhaps ripple for an integrated bundle. Roughly we are saying, the system allows users issuance of new currencies using ixc colored coin functionality. Now unlike mastercoin, the amount of new currency is proportional to the ixc consumed. This effectively creates demand for ixc at the same time reduce supply. OT acts as a gateway such that these currencies are usable in a manner more similar to debit cards or gift cards. There is of course the open question as to whether more advanced transactions should be embedded in the IXC protocol or just be implemented as an OT layer using IXC as the underlying currency. We know that the latter does work. There is no evidence at the present that the former approach has any value. |
|
|
|
Why in the hell did you guys add NXT back? Its a total scam with rigged exchange, i dare you to go to this exchange, so called exchange from which you are picking up the price feed for marketcap site : http://dgex.com/ then click around and honestly ask yourself if you would want anyone putting their btc there. Fake volume, so I can start my own exchange and mod some shitcoin and just price it to what ever i want? wow come on, this cant be tolerated. Coins which are not accepted at at least 2 exchanges or traded on exchange set up by coin creators for the sole purpose of trading just that one coin, cant be trusted with price discovery this is absurd. unknown amount held by creators & created out of thin air then sold for real bitcoins to naive people who believe it is worth 20+ million $ in first few weeks , common if this coin stays on longer more abominations will follow. Please do all the new traders in this community a favor help them avoid this nonsense at least until this garbage is priced by a proper price discovery mechanism of the real market, not single coin exchange setup by people behind the coin itself. Thanks +1 wow absolutly right It is completely ridiculous that coinmarketcap lists currencies like NXT and Mastercoin considering that they are traded in exchanges that illiquid and possibly completely manipulated. ? Let's just look at NXT, have you seen the DGEX exchange? Would anyone in his right mind send BTC over there? Look as mastercoin, running a google spreadsheet is not the same as a real exchange. What if I come up with an Open Transaction currency. I'll issue 10 billion shares and price is at .5 cents.... does that automatically get me on the top of the list? |
|
|
|
what happens to open transaction
Likely to be incorporated into the iXcoin ecosystem to handle advanced financial instruments. What happens in this case? Will the price of iXcoin rise? Rise significantly? it does seem ixcoin falls into the prebuilt solution that will be better than master coin or maybe even IOCOIN It will be hard to fortell if it would be better. All that is know is that it will be based on more mature technology. In the world of financial instruments, it is better to err on the side of maturity over sophistication. |
|
|
|
what happens to open transaction
Likely to be incorporated into the iXcoin ecosystem to handle advanced financial instruments. What happens in this case? Will the price of iXcoin rise? Rise significantly? Unlike a mastercoin implementation, a colored coin implementation consumes coins proportional to the number of coins issued. In other words, say I need to create 20 million shares of a company stock, to do that we colored coins using iXcoin as the block chain, I would need to allocate 20 million x 1,000 satoshis = 20 IXC. So, as more financial contracts employ iXcoin, the demand for IXC goes up and the supply gets reduced. A mastercoin implementation by contrast allocates the same amount of bitcoin regardless of how many contracts are issued. In other words, the underlying coin does not benefit from the introduction of mastercoin. In fact, there is no correlation of the reduction of supply as mastercoin is used to create financial instruments. In other words, I can use 10 mastercoins or 1000 mastercoin to represent 20 million shares. Does not make a difference! |
|
|
|
what happens to open transaction
Likely to be incorporated into the iXcoin ecosystem to handle advanced financial instruments. |
|
|
|
I don't understand the niche of Mastercoin at all. Bitcoin has the first mover advantage and it has an obvious deflationary nature. Mastercoin seems to be based on the value of the contracts and securities it represents. Why does that give it value? Can't contracts and securities be moved to another ledger? Why not?
That's why iXcoin ( alt coin created in 2011 ) may in fact be a more economically viable alternative to hosting contracts and securities than master coin. iXcoin already has 1/3rd the hash rate of Bitcoin (via merge mining), so the blockchain is quite secure. Now as for the value of the contracts and securities, does it matter if these are printed on gold or on paper? |
|
|
|
Very nice read! Thanks! I stand corrected that MasterCoin may in fact be a workable solution. However, just like Colored Coins, what prevents a competing system from creating their own 'exodus address'? |
|
|
|
How does one invest (buy ixcoin) instead of donate? Also, it looks more like just an alt coin, no mention of p2p exchange, smart contracts, or other features MSC, PTS, or eMunie will have.
iXcoin will be taking the colored coin approach. To enable the p2p exchanges, smart contracts etc, we will be using Open Transactions ( read: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/2708/how-can-open-transactions-benefit-bitcoin ) These are both more conservative and robust approaches that these new code from MSC, PTS or eMunie. In short, we use only mature technology to secure your investments. If you want to gamble with untested and unproven technology, then certainly you can gamble with MSC, PTC or eMunie. In terms of investments, you can either acquire some coin for yourself and at the same time donate to the development of the coin. It is a much fairer approach than these other coins. In general, iXcoin aims to be the number one platform for creating smart property. iXcoin already is #3 in terms of total network hash rate, so there is without a doubt, a lot of potential. |
|
|
|
|
can't believe the extent of stupidity that is prevalent around here.
just so it is clear for the uninitiated.
(1) you don't waste resources mining scrypt coins with a CPU.
(2) you don't rent cloud resources to mine scrypt coins.
(3) use a profitability calculator before you waste resources mining.
.... finally....
(4) never underestimate the stupidity of eBay buyers.
|
|
|
|
Forging? or do you mean that side of it is not really important anyway?
It's important, but u mentioned only mining and said nothing about other Nxt features. As soon as the source is revealed you can be sure this will be cloned and a much fairer initial distribution will be done. I took at look at the Java files, it is a typical web application with only 28 classes to manage its block chain. It's a centralized system where all the coins were issued with a purchase price of 21 BTC. How is this different from any non-centralized system creating virtual currencies? You could in fact create the same thing with even better and more robust technology using Open Transactions. There is absolutely no innovation here. Besides, if they were fair and confident with their creation, they would have the source code peer reviewed prior to anyone risking any of their hard earned money on it. |
|
|
|
WTF?
Hi It's a webapp with a bit of code that appears to manage the block chain.
It's a Java servlet that runs in a servlet container What is the P2P protocol used? What is on the payload?
JSON over HTTP with custom protocol. Set "communicationLoggingMask" to "7" in nxt/webapps/root/WEB-INF/web.xml to see all the payload. How are peers discovered?
Each node has a set of well-known peers (listed in web.xml and easily changed by a user). Upon a launch a node connects to these peers and gets other peers via "getPeers" request. Are people actually investing real money on this prototype?
Yes, but this is not a prototype. Too many open questions.
Feel free to ask all of them. Well, lucky for the folks who invested 21 BTC to own all of the coin!
This is impossible to launch a secure 100% PoS currency without distribution of all coins at once. Code like bitcoinj (written in java) doesn't even cover wallets and mining and its like 20 times bigger than the code we find here for NXT.
Coz bitcoinj is an application, in Nxt most of the work is done by the container (Jetty) Is this a complete joke?
No. This is an innovative cryptoplatform where payment transactions is just 1% of all the features. I don't see any specialized libraries for networking (i.e. Protobuf etc).
Coz most of the work is done by the container (Jetty) and Java Virtual Machine. So it actually is a centralized currency? What is the distributed consensus mechanism? What prevents attack? I mean, anyone can implement similar by grabbing a open transaction server and issuing 100 million coins. Oh well!!! Suckers born every minute. |
|
|
|
|
I don't believe there's even much underneath the implementation.
I did not bother to decompile it, however, we are talking only of about: 28 total classes
Everything else is just standard web libraries.
28 total java classes!!
This can't be serious.
I mean, I don't see any specialized libraries for P2P networking or the like.
This is bordering on ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
WTF?
It's a webapp with a bit of code that appears to manage the block chain.
What is the P2P protocol used? What is on the payload?
How are peers discovered?
Are people actually investing real money on this prototype?
Too many open questions.
Well, lucky for the folks who invested 21 BTC to own all of the coin!
Code like bitcoinj (written in java) doesn't even cover wallets and mining and its like 20 times bigger than the code we find here for NXT.
Is this a complete joke?
I don't see any specialized libraries for networking (i.e. Protobuf etc).
|
|
|
|
Yes... Basically, when you see an incoming UTXO, you want to know its colorvalue, so you run the computation... But there are several different computation strategies, like pre-computing everything, or computing on demand only.
Took a shower and realized the answer to my question. The miners merely validate if the input transactions are more than the output transactions. When the client sees the transaction that it targeted to its address, it can do what ever it needs to do to process that transaction. So the actual semantics of processing the transaction is decentralized. Did I get that correct? Further, why does the whitepaper alternative coloring mechanisms? Is there a preferred one? Are we at this time saying that coloring will be preserved only if we use a compatible client? |
|
|
|
I like this approach. Maybe it will help to relate how colored coins generalize existing concepts in Bitcoin.
Transaction validation is analogous to the colored kernel. Transaction validation is a function of the blockchain history, however it's not an arbitrary function - instead it's only necessary to check the UTXO index, which is much smaller than the blockchain and only contains unspent/active coins. Similarly, the color kernel can be said to depend only on a "color table", which associates a color state to unspent coins.
That's a very interesting point. As you say, one could model transaction validation as an example of a color kernel. However, it has the unusual (unique?) property that 1) this kernel is implemented by bitcoind and enforced by miners and 2) its execution depends only on information that can be derived from the blockchain. In the general case of colored coins, some form of bootstrapping is required: somebody must assert that a particular coin (or, rather, output), that was not previously associated with a particular color, is now so associated. Moreover, this "somebody" must be identifiable: the value of any coloring is critically dependent on the extent to which others believe they will make good on any promises associated with the claim. Moreover, in a decentralised world, the kernels would not, in general, be known to all participants in the network: so, by definition, they could not operate *on* the blockchain (e.g. by providing a verification role). Perhaps this distinction doesn't matter but it could help work through various scenarios... i.e. distinctions between kernels that require bootstrapping/external information and those that don't, distinctions between kernels that depend/provide blockchain verification function and those that don't, etc, etc. What I don't understand is, which actor executes the color kernel? Do you envision the miners executing the color kernel? Would that need an upgrade of the entire bitcoin network? Will wallets with the recepient address execute the color kernel? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
