Did i understood this update correctly... It means that the bank is not gonna use Node, but making their "own system" similar to Node ?
If so, devs will do some possible improvement to application and reach out another bank later ?
Here's what I suggest to do. People won't like that but at least some good would have come out of the project then. Publish a detailed whitepaper on how you would have wanted to achieve instant transactions and no empty blocks. Then the ideas are out there you can get credit for it and others can implement them possibly toegether with Silk. It imho just doesn't make sense to let a potentially good idea die because the project was run badly. |
|
|
|
Good idea. The devs or NEM foundation should pay a bounty for whom who is creating the first multipool. its not understandable how a project with so much potential as NEM attract so low market activity only explanation i can find is thats the downside of zero inflation no sell pressure = low trading activity only when utilization by services and apps finally starts that situation will change the marketcap and trading volume doesn't represent at all that NEM is one of the biggest potential coins fo 2016 i suggest NEM set up a multipool that allow mining on nicehash and convert earnings to payouts in XEM we run such a thing for DMD Diamond and it did redistribute over 10% of total coins in the last year thats exact the market activity impule NEM needs if u want to see a example how this could look check out https://multipool.bit.diamonds/We've had that debate about a year ago already. Personally I'm still against ist. Very much so actually. |
|
|
|
BitShares will launch on schedule with enough throughput to support all current needs plus all of Bitcoin and most altcoins combined (if they wanted to move onto our platform for some fiendishly wise reason).
We are still optimizing the network code, which is not part of the blockchain itself, so that in coming months we can continue to scale up to full design specs of 100,000 TPS without even a hard fork.
The test net is where we are doing this optimization, so when you hear about a test "fail" is has nothing to do with what is launching on October 13. We will have many more such fails on the test net side as we tune up to light speed, but the production blockchain where everybody's funds reside will hum along without breaking a sweat.
From what I read on the blog the benches were done without signature verification. Why would you bench without verification of signatures ? The actuall speeds will prob be much less impressive unless I missed something (just skimmed the post) or all delegates have an absurd hardware requirements. Even then you'll have a great time putten all those data onto the wire. I'll believe those 100k TPS when I see them. Luckily we probably won't see them anytime soon since there isn't really a need for it. Signature verification is parallelizable. The benchmark is for the One Thread that must remain serial. With that thread running at warp speed as demonstrated, we can add parallel feeders as the network scales and generates the revenues needed to pay for it. I'll remind you of the quote often attributed to Bill Gates that, "640 kB ought to be enough for anybody".  You still could have benched it with signature verification (done in parallel) to give people an idea of the hardware requirements for such speeds. Now we know that you can process it on a mediocre CPU with signature verification disabled which really doesn't say anything about the real world and is imho mildly interesting at best. |
|
|
|
BitShares will launch on schedule with enough throughput to support all current needs plus all of Bitcoin and most altcoins combined (if they wanted to move onto our platform for some fiendishly wise reason).
We are still optimizing the network code, which is not part of the blockchain itself, so that in coming months we can continue to scale up to full design specs of 100,000 TPS without even a hard fork.
The test net is where we are doing this optimization, so when you hear about a test "fail" is has nothing to do with what is launching on October 13. We will have many more such fails on the test net side as we tune up to light speed, but the production blockchain where everybody's funds reside will hum along without breaking a sweat.
From what I read on the blog the benches were done without signature verification. Why would you bench without verification of signatures ? The actuall speeds will prob be much less impressive unless I missed something (just skimmed the post) or all delegates have an absurd hardware requirements. Even then you'll have a great time putten all those data onto the wire. I'll believe those 100k TPS when I see them. Luckily we probably won't see them anytime soon since there isn't really a need for it. |
|
|
|
Roger is familiar with NEM, so I will try to see what we can do. It seems VNL has a subforum there. If they add that then there's no reason they wouldn't add NEM. |
|
|
|
The price retracts - inevitably - and look at that - all the shitheads all of a sudden are back as well.
Nothing new typycal crypto day one coin was pumped +100% to fall after pump. Do yoo kwow when asset exchange will be avaible and Node rewards will be active ? PS:For commununity quite low price is better more "fresh" people can join in resonable price early. Pumps attracts attencion and this is allso good. I generally think it was people getting exciting and buying, not an orchestrated pump. There is no announced released date for Node Rewards nor Asset Exchange. Although the devs are working on adding a new feature to NEM Mosaic called "levy". Yet another thing I haven't ever seen any other platform attempt. at some point it's probably better to just bring whatever is ready onto the testnet and bring the rest in with future releases it's not like all the features need to be there on day one (and they won't be anyway). |
|
|
|
|
The price retracts - inevitably - and look at that - all the shitheads all of a sudden are back as well.
|
|
|
|
Why no one here has posted about Monero? I think this would be a good candidate for discussion, because a lot of people sure do like talking about it and has always had a consistent following over the past year. Other than that NXT might be a good choice as well... Another coin I just was looking into was eMunie (which hasn't been released yet) that shows a real potential of being, literally, the fastest coin to be put on the market. The thread for that is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1191535.0Not fastest, but probably eMunie will be good technology after it's will be finally released https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1191535.msg12550689#msg12550689PS: Unfortunately I lost patience of eMunue one year ago after waiting public beta release for 3-4 months We'll see! I still think there are a lot of misconceptions/issues about Bitshares speed (even disregarding the crazy power box you need to sustain it) and that when it comes to the crunch, it won't perform anywhere near what is claimed. As soon as we have enough testers available to push a few 100,000k tx/s I'll be sure to update everyone here. Problem is, we need about 500 nodes online to do that on a fully partitioned network (assuming each node can generate ~300-400 tx/s) and we don't have a pool of testers which is that large. Maybe I should start recruiting again soon I get the patience thing, but would you rather a sloppy, cut corner, pile of shit but out the door quick product? Or a good quality, performs as claimed, solid product with real innovation? So much stuff is released here with issues, silly mistakes, and other shoddy implementations of ideas just to make a quick buck. Hit me up if you need testers. I'm always up for testing new stuff. |
|
|
|
whats the update?
On Monday, I go to the bank Because of invitation or on the off chance? or maybe to rob it ?  |
|
|
|
NEM and NXT have active online communities and that is why they win online polls. Ethereum and Bitshares are worth more because they have institutional Bitcoin whales and networked with capital giants. Bitshares early on attracted investments from Chinese funds and Ethereum just got the support of some automobile group which pledged $50 million to 2.0 currencies. Networking is something NXT and NEM has not had any major success with yet. I think NEM and NXT just started doing stuff in Japan and Greece.
I'm assuming you haven't heard of mijin, dragonfly pay or the vc funding (that's prob connceted to one of these projects, I'm just mentioning it) for/with NEM ? That's what I mean when I say that success will not only be determined by technology. You need a lot of effort in the real world to go anywhere with your porject no matter how superior you tech may or may not be. |
|
|
|
...
I could have more than doubled my stake in NEM if i dumped it all on launch and bought back when it was 50 sat, im killing myself that i didnt but i did not want to take the risk, im glad i stuck with my stake from launch, because there is always a bigger picture. I probably will buy more, its only $135 needed to get my 3M needed for a node.
Yup and real big picture is NEM vs NXT Bitshares market cap in loing run those markets will seek balance aganis each other. Few more features companies and market will lead NEM over them if they wont make much progress simple. Today we can only bet. Safer bet is bet is 100$ today on NEM than 1000$ on NXT or 5000$ on BTS to get similiar market share. It is easier over time to move NEM market those others. I'd say the real big picture has nothing to do with marketcaps. |
|
|
|
NEM is a cheap copycat of NXT
earth is a disc I wonder if there's anyone who believes this poll wasn't rigged so far. The only options in the list anyone has ever heard of are Ethereum, Bitshares, and NXT, yet the one nobody has heard of, NEM, somehow got to #1. Can you say rigging the ballots? Polls on BTT are completely useless but I wouldn't call them rigged. Like how is this one rigged ? It's useless as - as always - it's a popularity and sockpuppet contest but does that really qualify as rigged ? Also stating that nobody has ever heared of NEM is imho quite ignorant. YOU haven't heared of NEM (or not much, seeing as you described it as a mere clone in the polo trollbox unless the r0ach there isn't you) but that doesn't mean noone else has. |
|
|
|
Just noticed that I forgot to fire up my node after a forced reboot yesterday... I bet there were a bunch of withdrawals happening in the meantime too... FML  you might wanna look into http://supervisord.org/index.html |
|
|
|
done! please everyone vote here That's the first random vote like that, that I've seen spawning an even semi-interesting discussion. Miracles do happen, even on btt. |
|
|
|
...
DPoS actually scales to world reserve currency better than any other consensus mechanism. The first transition for DPoS voting would be people like exchange owners and businesses that utilize the platform would run as delegates to make sure the network they depend on is secure. From there, the actors would just keep scaling larger until you had every nation state as a delegate. Some people would think this sounds like a bad thing, but unless every nation was colluding with each other, it would get rid of fractional reserve banking at the very least, which is the real root of all problems.
Cause what could go wrong with nations and/or corporations being in controll of the network  I'd like to see consensus being reached like it is in most "fast confirmation" implementations right now (i.e. a set of accounts votes and everyone else accepts that) but I'd like the validating parties to be chosen in some way that doesn't require people having to or even being able to interfere. Pretty much what VNL claims to be doing just maybe backed by a proper whitepaper and not by one of the most shady projects out there right now. |
|
|
|
Obviously, PoS started with Peercoin. There was a reason I ended the sentence with "as it's accepted today". You should and I know that Peercoin's PoS is inferior to NXT's PoS implementation.
Inferior in which area? As I know Peercoin has less theoretical PoS security problems because it's using PoS and PoW simultaneously. AFAIK Peercoin uses centralized checkpoints and opens up the possibility of stake grinding. But I'm not 100% certain. In the end DPoS is probably one of the best PoS integrations, as it scales wonderful and allows the blocktime to be very fast/constant. I dislike DPOS because of the necessity for people to vote on delegates. Now this may work perfectly fine in such an enclosed envirement that we're in right now where the userbase is very small but I doubt it'll work very well if any DPOS ever hit's mainstream. No normal user wants to be bothered with stuff like that. They want stuff to just work so the majority of users prob wont vote which kinda defeats the point of the excercise. As always - maybe I'm missing something |
|
|
|
|
What is the difference between Qora and Qora 2.0 ? Are those 2 distinct projects ? If yes, they chould get their own poll option. If not then there is really no reason to mention both of them. Why mention versions especially if one is obsolete ?
On topic: Didn't vote cuz biased. I do wanna point out that success will not only be determined by technology though. Look at bitcoin. By now vastly inferior technology yet still the main actor in the main stream (if crypto has even penetrated mainstream yet).
|
|
|
|
|
I guess right now would be the time to liquidize some of the fundings, slowly, on multiple exchanges.
|
|
|
|
So what's the big differences between Ethereum and Crypti? If they are pretty similar then I don't know why anyone would choose Crypti over Ether.
Hey, sorry for the late answer. You asked for the big differences, therefore I will only list the bigger items below. Correct me if I'm wrong. I heavily suggest you watch the Crypti platform preview video and the preview video of our first dapp Encrypti. After you watched them you can understand much better, what I'm talking about below. Ethereum is a smart contract platform, Crypti is a decentralized application platform. Where is the difference? Well, Crypti offers an all-round package for hosting your decentralized applications, registering them on the blockchain and insertion into Crypti's own dapp store. One click on install and another click on launch, and your dapp already opens up in a new window. Ethereum only offers (as far as I know) a backend system, i.e. a system for the logic of decentralized applications. That means with Ethereum alone you can only combine several smart contracts to create the backend code of your decentralized application. After that you have to take care of the frontend, storage and so on for yourself. Take a look at Augur or Gnosis, the frontend is hosted on a centralized server. While at Crypti it will be hosted at a maximum of 101 master nodes. Of course at Crypti you can also download it yourself (a click on install) and launch it locally. Hundreds of sidechains versus one big mainchainAt Crypti you create a new sidechain for every dapp you create. This way the mainchain of Crypti will stay very small and will not get polluted/bloated with unnecessary or dead dapp data. On the other hand Ethereum saves everything on one chain, on the main chain. The future will show which model is better. Yesterday the size of the Crypti blockchain (after 6 months) was 335MB, while Ethereums blockchain size was over 790MB 40 days after launch. I don't want to imagine what happens once there are 1000 smart contracts on Ethereum. The same goes for the gas price in Ethereum, right now it's in a state where it doesn't need to grow. But once there are hundreds of contracts alive it will grow higher and higher beecause the computation power is saturated. Crypti dapps are coded in JavaScript, while Ethereum relies on Serpent and Solidity.I don't have any numbers to back my hypotheses, but there are probably 1M JavaScript developers world-wide. How many Serpent and Solidity programmers are there? A few hundreds maybe, Ethereum created these languages themselves. Crypti relies on a proven language instead to reinvent the wheel. Crypti is running on DPoS, Ethereum on PoWI'm no big fan of PoW and I'm sure there are many more like me. This is a personal preference. If you like DPoS/PoS more, go to Crypti. If you like PoW more (and want to ignore above points), go to Ethereum. Last but not least, here is a comparison table I made in the past days. I will begin to distribute it in the coming days. Gotcha. Thanks for the detailed explanation! I'll definitely look more into Crypti because DAPPs are obviously going to play a big part in the future. You are welcome, the best thing you can do is of course to do due diligence and take a moment for yourself to think about each others advantages. Looks good. Thanks for the comparison update I think PoW is only temporary for Etherum. Pretty sure they are working on something else but I don't have a link handy. It's prob on their blog though. |
|
|
|
Pat worked really hard all day today getting the Slack <-> Telegram bot back going.
Still in testing phases to see if it will crash or not, but its looking like he did it.
Yep, so everyone come back to slack. We have cookies ! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
