What for? ----------- Also, who owns these kind of addresses and how: 100000? no one owns that. i guess who ever did that put it there for the miners some day. idk why they would though. thats a lot of nxt. Why does nobody own it? Somebody had to create it? Apparently who made that transaction to account "100000" is 12968364353024827435 which seems to be "Aysyr": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=86187right but no one made a transaction out of the account. its highly unlikely that who ever did that has the private key to it. Perhaps it was done by someone who realized that he has to distribute some of his nxt for the health of the network and so is doing it in such a way where everyone knows that the nxt has been genuinely given away by the original large stake holder and not traded back to a sock puppet account. Another advantage to doing it this way is that it will not drive the price down. |
|
|
|
What for? ----------- Also, who owns these kind of addresses and how: 100000? no one owns that. i guess who ever did that put it there for the miners some day. idk why they would though. thats a lot of nxt. |
|
|
|
I am offering 10k Nxt as a bounty for this.  This can be easily done with Alias System as a magnet link. that was a fast 10k you just made there cfb  |
|
|
|
No beta [snip]
The Nxt detractors really need to coordinate their talking points -- "It's still in alpha, client is half-baked, it's missing promised features, not listed on major exchange..." Which is it? did you see what bitcoin looked when it was 1+ months old? oh yeah bitcoin is still in beta too. Don't compare NXT and BTC, Btc is not pre-mining. At least btc is not pre-mining serious. You can compare eMu, EMu has a client, but beta is testing, and not pre-sale yet. Neither is NXT seriously. Sorry you missed the boat buddy. Hi, I am interested in Nxt and ready to invest some money in it. But first can you answer this one question for me, what is scarce about Nxt? With Bitcoin, if someone copies and pastes the source code, its not the same because nobody can just copy and paste the mining network. Please explain what prevents somebody from copying and pasting the Nxt source to make Nxt1, Nxt2, Nxt3, Nxt4 …. ?? As i understand it, the plan to combat this is to always have one feature closed source. So whenever a new feature is added, the previous closed source feature is made open source and the cycle repeats. this is the best explanation I have heard so far. Thanks for being knowledgeable. Also thanks for telling me not to dump my life savings although I was just kidding. I am particularly interested in the file sharing capabilities of Nxt. Does anyone know anything about this? edit: also, where's the best place to buy Nxt? You are welcome.  File sharing would never be efficient over a blockchain. Blockchains are for arriving at consensus. They are for making sure that everyone is "on the same page". If you want to share files BitTorrent is amazing  . https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345336https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=399205 |
|
|
|
Another question is how can an anarchist society work surrounded by states and how will it be represented in the international community.
probably a lot like the relationship between westeros and bravos  who ever has access to our credit and weapons would dominate other states, who ever doesn't would be dominated. So basically they would all be trying to out do each other at kissing our asses. they would give away more and more and more of their real property inorder to gain our weapons and credit. Eventually they would be their own undoing because eventually they will have sold everything to us and then the whole world will be like us. *edit* We would never allow one state to dominate. when ever one began to gain the upper-hand we would cut their funding and raise the funding of their opponents. That's just self interest. |
|
|
|
What happened to the original 21 BTC? Were they permanently removed from circulation? If so, how did the original donors feel about giving $210 to the Winklvii? Considering they own 1% of all bitcoin and the permanent removal of BTC means their BTC holdings went up in value proportionately
Is there a point to your stupid ramblings? Ya, I'm about to dump my life savings into Nxt and I want to make sure its legit first by asking all the questions possible. Do not do that. Seriously no. Go spend at-least half of your savings on something safe. Go buy a big brick of silver and bury it in your back yard. After you do that come back here and spend the other half on a huge gamble like this. Think of nxt like a lottery ticket, where you spend a dollar and have a 90% chance to lose all of your money, but if you win than it will increase way more than 10 times. Its a good lottery ticket that is a good gamble but no one should put their life savings in a lottery ticket, no matter the expected return on investment. You can trust that i have your best interest at heart when i say this because i would stand to benefit from you dumping your life savings in NXT, it would cause the value of my stake to appreciate. |
|
|
|
No beta [snip]
The Nxt detractors really need to coordinate their talking points -- "It's still in alpha, client is half-baked, it's missing promised features, not listed on major exchange..." Which is it? did you see what bitcoin looked when it was 1+ months old? oh yeah bitcoin is still in beta too. Don't compare NXT and BTC, Btc is not pre-mining. At least btc is not pre-mining serious. You can compare eMu, EMu has a client, but beta is testing, and not pre-sale yet. Neither is NXT seriously. Sorry you missed the boat buddy. Hi, I am interested in Nxt and ready to invest some money in it. But first can you answer this one question for me, what is scarce about Nxt? With Bitcoin, if someone copies and pastes the source code, its not the same because nobody can just copy and paste the mining network. Please explain what prevents somebody from copying and pasting the Nxt source to make Nxt1, Nxt2, Nxt3, Nxt4 …. ?? As i understand it, the plan to combat this is to always have one feature closed source. So whenever a new feature is added, the previous closed source feature is made open source and the cycle repeats. |
|
|
|
yeah, why founders deserve to get anything. Linux was made with no IPO. Ppl use it because it's cool and community built things on top of it because it's useful.
it was nice of the linux devs to work for free but people deserve to be payed for their work. still this is dumb. these devs should take a 1-10% premine for themselves instead of demanding bitcoin. that would actually put incentives in the right place for them to work hard to make the coin valuable. |
|
|
|
For those in this thread who are still supporters of democracy. |
|
|
|
If banned in China would difficulty go down?
No one is going to simply throw their asics in the trash because their government bans them. It may go down for a bit while they are being shipped to other countries but that would be temporary. |
|
|
|
So the result of saying someone is wrong, mistaken or outright lying is certain to get you called a denier.
hence my argument for why denier (atleast how its used colloquially) certainly must mean more than strict adherence to the dogma that would be "man kind is having no impact on the climate what so ever". I doubt you would be called a denier if you stated that countermeasures should be taken just ones that are not quite so costly as what your opponent proposes. And i certainly do think that you would be called a denier for stating that man is effecting the climate, but that its not so severe, or the costs of countermeasures would be so great, that nothing ought to be done about it. So yea i stick by my original assessment. Believing that no action ought to be taken in response to mans effect on the climate is probably right about where that line, which upon crossing, would cause you to be labeled a denier. |
|
|
|
This is the true revolutionary second generation in cryptocurrencies. I encourage everyone to read the white paper.
Posted From bitcointalk.org Android App
link to whitepaper? |
|
|
|
Shows how little you understand about science if you think believing in a scientific consensus is "blind faith in a centralized power."
I won't be posting in this thread any more, I've expressed my point. It's futile to argue with ideologues, which is why you were banned from the discussion on reddit.
I've tried to post from a number of angles why it is not even possible to define 'denier' and hence why banning them is ridiculous. It means someone is banning essentially anyone that does not agree with his particular view however he chooses to define it at that moment. And that's literally ridiculous - the discussion could be cap and trade, Katrina, Antarctica peninsula melt, bird migration, sea level rise, whatever. Disagree with someone and he shouts "Denier! You banned!" Leave the discussion if you like, but you should be able to understand my point. As for the ideologues, if you believe in a consensus then the number of ideologues on the warmie side vastly outnumbers the count on the non-warmie side. Hence, those doing the banning are all ideologues. Now a question. Are ideologues okay if they are warmies, but not okay if they are deniers, which is not even definable? Separate and non equal treatment by Reddit, right? Get it? I dont think it would be that hard to draw a box around a denier. Its probably something like a person who believes that expending resources to mitigate, prevent, or reverse the effects of anthropomorphic climate change would either not have the intended effect or perhaps would not have benefits that outweigh the costs. Wouldn't deniers be people that said stuff like global warming wasn't happening, or maybe it was not caused by man? Ideally but I would think that people who believe that co2 emissions are having 0 impact what so ever on the climate are an extremely tiny group of people. I highly doubt that reddit would feel the need to enact a ban against like a half a dozen guys on the whole of planet earth. Since there is little to no friction there between the global warming alarmists and the global warming skeptics i think, inorder for the word to be useful, it has to apply more to peoples perception of the severity of the problem, and their beliefs about what sorts of countermeasures are warranted. How do we qualify peoples beliefs about the importance of something? how much money they are willing to spend on it of course. so thats just the basic thought process i used to arrive at my previous conclusion |
|
|
|
^ No. What seller would ever send their wares before payment? Is there something I'm not getting?
I do for certain buyers. You are not trustworthy enough. That's all. I would be happy to provide escrow it would help you guys out. (jesus i hate situations where it makes more sense than not to say "y'all") |
|
|
|
What's the smallest worthwhile amount to get of nxt for an investment? I've got 16 LTC, not much.
If nxt makes it big than i would say that 10000 is about what you would need inorder to retire early and live well. it would be like having 210 bitcoins. (21million/1billion)*10000=210 Interesting. I'm currently invested in a BTC mining share, LTC and WDC. I've heard NXT is a possible worthy investment. The setup of the client was reasonable, could be easier though for mass adoption. What's the next big thing for NXT? Is anything being worked on to get it in the limelight or media attention? im working on something big for limelight/media attention but i cant tell you guys about it yet |
|
|
|
What's the smallest worthwhile amount to get of nxt for an investment? I've got 16 LTC, not much.
If nxt makes it big than i would say that 10000 is about what you would need inorder to retire early and live well. it would be like having 210 bitcoins. (21million/1billion)*10000=210 |
|
|
|
This is a sweet essay, Anon136! Thanks.
Thankyou for the kind words. Can I spread it around?
By all means, please do! |
|
|
|
i did! i showed the conversion, it was 25,000 nxt. I wouldnt have offered that much because i have limited funds, but since i started finding my offers rejected i figured i could stand to offer more. i cant believe they are still rejecting at 25,000  do you expect that they would read it if you offered 1 bitcoin directly? (they might not cope with the task of exchanging ) btw. missed the link to the paper, would you mind reposting? |
|
|
|
because nxt randomly selects stakeholders to author blocks but in a deterministic way. i know it sounds like a contraction but it actually works. what i mean is that you can often but not always predict who will author the next block. the often means that you can do all sorts of cool and crazy awesome things like match visas transaction load and make transactions that are instantly secure. the not always means that you can secure the chain even though you can often predict. there are other advantages. its more secure than peercoin. with peercoin someone can save up coindays and use their savings to doublespend. the randomness in the selection of stake holders in nxt prevents this. the concentration of stake means that nxt will continue to be a big gamble until more of those initial funds get spread out more evenly. but there are reasons to expect that it will, namely that it is in the self interest of the big stakeholders to do so, and it will probably pay off big time if the stakeholders do make the right choice. check out my essay for a more detailed explanation: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1E_ToOMG2l1XThx6YnyXEajXaf6H1k2yjq8XkAF0ScB4/mobilebasic?pli=1 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
