Hi guys, Just saw this one the nextcoin forums. Has this been seen yet? Can anyone give him an answer? Seems like a "hidden" cost for most users. https://nextcoin.org/index.php/topic,3755.0.htmlIs there any way to reduce or outright throttle bandwidth usage of the NXT client?
I've been running NXT client on Windows since mid Dec, upgrading to newest version when new ones are out. The client uses between 150KB/s to 500KB/s. This works out to 390GB to 1.2TB(!) per month. My ISP charges dearly for exceeding 300GB/mo. I first found this out because in Jan I unexpectedly hit 500GB of usage - thanks largely to NXT client. In the first 10 hours of the new month, NXT client (now version 0.5.11) has already racked up 18GB of transfers.
I have high confidence in this next-gen currency, and want to participate in the network. And I don't want to lose NXT due to transparent forging penalties if I don't participate. But I can't pay Comcast another $50-200+ a month to be able to run such a bandwidth hungry app.
Please let me know any way to reduce the NXT client bandwidth consumption, and/or to set explicit throttle limits on it. My apologies if this should be common knowledge, but I've already searched these forums and general internet for throttling or bandwidth related docs or posts and found nothing. Thanks. tell him to take his high balance hallmark off and to not advertise as a public node |
|
|
|
|
ive volunteered for the Nevada one later this year... so lets see if anyone else wants to participate for LA, count me as alternate though
|
|
|
|
Let's start using the forum NEXTCOIN.ORG ...
As BCNext said: Nxt has such features as ...
# Name doesn't contain "coin" ...
WOW, what a big problem. I am 100% sure it is impossible to change the domain... jesus let's worry about the important details! That the name is outdated definitely weighs heavier than the fact that there are 4500 active NXTers there  )) I asked Graviton long ago to change the name to be forums.nxtcrypto.org but he didnt want to, so nxtalk.org volunteered to change and become a part of the nxtcrypto.org family of sites. He specifically COULDNT do it because he knew that as a nxtcrypto.org site he would have to follow wishes of the community, and as official forums site of DGEX he just couldnt give up that control. |
|
|
|
Marketing has been decided at 3 million
Tech/Infrastructure the remaining 6 million. Once we know the cost for the 1000TPS hubs, then we will know the right allocation between tech and infrastructure.
OK Im one of the tech/infrastructure guys here... so lets talk about this component a bit. Q: What is needed for a 1Mtps hub to actually be useful? A: A forging account with a large balance. Thus: No one in their right mind will run this hub on a VPS until its possible to forge w/o fear of theft. These nodes will need to be high performance and operationally secure. Q: What is the point of a 1Mtps hub? A: To process LOTS of transactions with their associated fees Thus: The economy is that a 1Mtps hub is generating NXT for the forging account on it. Combine these 2 points together: Are we really going to pay from the community fund for someone who is already a whale to get even more NXT? |
|
|
|
Only let people vote with accounts from 2nd Feb and older? Don't know if the guys here all have an account yet on nextcoin.
this is one parameter. So that counts me out straight away (I don't even have an account on that forum).
And the account name must be the same.....if someone has squatted on your name then pls get in touch with the ADMIN.THE NAME MUST BE THE EXACT SAME TO QUALIFY.and if someone is squatting your screenname on NXTCrypto.org forums, let me know and Ill fix it |
|
|
|
Question: Has the voting thing been decided yet? Was it decided 1Nxt=1Vote?
That is what BCnext said it should be as much as I hate all these voting discussions, I hate the GW crap 100x more. Im glad we can all decide to just let the GW debate end. Regardless of what side a person is on, its just too polarizing to attach to NXT. Sure, energy efficiency, this is good but just dont even mention GW. Im disappointed with all the swearing and personal attacks from a few of our community members. I hate to say it but going off the deep end like that reminds me of frictionless coin |
|
|
|
|
does anyone have issues wit BTER? I deposited 2 days ago and still doesnt show up. I emailed them and they asked for proof and I sent that yesterday, but nothing else back from them.
|
|
|
|
Anybody running a NXT exchange interested in becoming the FIRST exchange for XCP?
Currently XCP is in the same situation NXT was right after genesis, they need an exchange XCP/BTC and XCP/NXT
wow this is really good news... i hope someone steps up BEFORE they get listed on a BTC/LTC exchange |
|
|
|
|
ok, in order to meet 1Mtps, wont blocks be forged much more frequently than 1 per minute? Is this necessarily a "bad" situation, or just out of the "normal" figure of 1 block per minute?
And what exactly does it mean to "send transactions directly to the next-scheduled forger"? How is this accomplished? Are these forgers going to have to act as some kind of service provider where their public IPs are known?
|
|
|
|
Besides real problems regarding binary formats, its psychologically most destructive property is that everybody has the self-proclaimed best encoding, the fastest encoding, the most space-efficient encoding, the most flexible encoding and so and so which only differ in one of two bits somewhere and therefore makes them 100% incompatible. Thank you.
Why? Because binary is the way to go if you want fast, efficient, direct, buzzword, buzzword, ....
Look at text-based format. Do all these requirements matter there? No. Their implementors focused primarily on the content in conjunction of readability, maintainability, flexibility, expandability and independence. All properties, which are required for the maintenance of long-term applications.
+1 Besides, in my experience good compression will almost always beat any attempts at "clever" bit manipulation and is mostly transparent. This paper looks like a typical case of a computer scientist with not much real world experience trying to teach programmers how to do things... From my experience, a well constructed binary protocol can provide tremendous advantage when used properly. Also from experience, I would recommend using a Type-Length-Value (TLV) messaging structure to facilitate expandability and maintenance. Endianness is easily dealt with. Additionally, the binary bytestream may benefit further with addition of compression algorithms, assuming the data is non-random. The P2P transport mechanism is THE core component of the platform, and should be optimized. Parsers can be built to translate into more usable structures. My 2 NXT, FWIW. ++ for example, see radius/diameter protocol |
|
|
|
No offense but: stop complaining, start doing.
I am sorry, but this may be the most silly thing someone has said to me in a while. It's best to just ignore. I am slowly coming to realize that there is sadly a big portion of this community that don't want anyone to raise any questions about anything. It's beginning to look more and more like politics. Being critical is politically incorrect and thus frowned upon. I apologize. It wasn't meant in any way offensive. That poll is just a fallback in case the committee solution shouldn't work out. Otherwise, it has nothing to do with it. I voted for the committee solution myself and I really appreciate its progress. You've done a great job. Continue concentrating on it. A contingency to prevent destruction is actually not a bad idea at all, but for reasons I'm sure everyone, even ChuckOne is unaware of... Has nobody thought of what it will look like externally if the coins get destroyed? There is already the hoarding thing. And Thanks to Anon136 for calling these people out in his video interview, but if the coins get destroyed then the net result will look like the hoarders are trying to increase the value of their hoard even moreso. Yes, it will be a linear increase based on an account owners stake, but still... Better to find a constructive use of the coins, a much needed side benefit of is to increase liquidity, since there are apparently still a few genesis hoarders. |
|
|
|
If the genesis account can be compromised in such a short time, then almost every Nxt account can be compromised.
LOL Yeah i cant believe that FC actually believes it either |
|
|
|
Qbtc is rreferring to the www.nxtcrypto.org site. She should not have to pay the fefees out of pocket. Come on people. Same for joefox on wiki and btc24 on forums and intel for info/download. Marketing fund. I We sent 50k + 5k for wiki to cover for last 2 months from the NxtMarketing. There is also a small support for new sites from these funds and there would be support for most important sites that also provide new content... Most important are consultations.. this page is not optimal for new users: http://www.nxtcrypto.org/nxt-coin/client-download but new clients would hopefully solve it I say we just all agree to authorize CfB to repay from unclaimed nxt, to qbtc the amount shes spent so far, along with enough to keep site running til end of year. Same for other sites. This shit aint free |
|
|
|
There is 200 Nxt especially for the conf. Other coins could be borrowed from the same acc from NxtMarketing, but it would be nice to give them back, because conferences have too high budget. There is already a loan for the radio spot (currently 250k). In past there were big discussions about funds, so I quickly published this acc, where I already had 100k before CFB's donation, so then I sent them to the different account. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgAGADgnQcrtdHRrV3V3Z1lzOXVEMWtqdElUaEtqV1E#gid=15Can you tell the community to which account you have sent 100k please thank you please quote me he has me on ignore This is bullshit. Salsacz, you have been doing a fantastic job. Takehim off ignore, hes said he will cut the bullshit out. You do the same and start workinworking as a team |
|
|
|
I have no problems with someone being critical about funds, but as regards to marketing a critical mistake is made: it's treated the same as a technical funding.
When you fund a technical or development effort, it's easy to put measurable parameters: "If we spend X, we expect to get Y" and that is cold hard fact.
With marketing, especially at the start, this is very hard to do, and sometimes downright silly. Anyone who has any experience looking at marketing analytics knows that at some point you just can't say: "X happened because of Y".
That means that sometimes money is spent unnneccessarily. That's what bad marketeers do! And most people, I am sad to say, tend to judge marketing and PR by that standard.
The other side is, that marketing gets subjected to over-auditing.
I believe in this case, this is happening. I'll be blunt: if people want hard facts on what the result of marketing efforts like LTB minutes and conferences would be, you won't be able to get them. I can tell you that if you don't get good people out there, Nxt has a major problem.
Take the Miami conference. If you'd have audited Nifty and JustaBit up front about numbers, that would have been silly. Even now, when we know that they have made very good contacts, it's still silly. All they can say at this moment is that things are in the pipeline. If you take the hard line now, you'd say: "you don't get funding, because you don't have results". And that would mean they wouldn't be able to get those results.
I sense a large amount of distrust towards the marketing efforts from some corners. Distrust is something different from critical questions.
I'll be blunt once more: marketing at this point needs trust up front. That means funding without too many questions, based on the fact that you know some people who know what they are doing are taking care of it. I put it to you that some developers in here would get blind funding because of their reputation and there wouldn't be as many questions asked as there are of marketing.
Also, from a "division of power" perspective, I would be less than happy if the person who does the audit also is the person who takes the end decision about actual spending. That is putting jury and judge together.
I'm not going to beg for PR funds, but I do want people to know that I really dislike being put in a place where I feel I have to defend my talents and job and explain I'm not evil.
+1 Those who are skeptical of funding marketing: ask yourself, where would NXT be without the work we've done already? People don't just randomly discover yet another cryptocurrency. Just look at how reluctant the exchange has been about adding NXT because it requires a bit of additional work, yet we have got more to add us, which has lead to a big increase in users. Look at all the info we have got out there which has made people trust NXT whereas just 1 month ago the consensus in the crypto world was that NXT was a premined scam. We have managed to turn this image around to "One of the most exciting developements in crypto". We got a ton of projects upcoming and we've basically only got started. Look at Ethereum, just look at the amount of marketing they have done and how they are repeaing attention for it. Without having really proved anything they got A LOT of people interested. There is really no reason for the funds to just sit there and do nothing. Let's actually spend them on making the community bigger and NXT more known to everyone. I'm voicing my opinion here and agreeing that marketing seems to be undervalued and those involved perhaps under-appreciated. My out of pocket expenses for a fast secure server for NXT($149 USD / month) and paid advertising and hours away from billable work is costing me too much. Honestly, I may need to pull back from my efforts if something doesn't change. I have given you a very developed and active Facebook page and Twitter account which I believe have very positively helped spread the word about NXT to the community outside of these forums. In fact, I have stats to prove that. I have given you original art. And I hope I've contributed positively to the marketing conversations. I haven't taken very much time to wander around asking for NXT donations or spouting what I do, but the few times I have there has been almost no response. The NXT that has been contributed to my efforts would have to reach a very high price to cover my costs. I had hoped to double my purchased NXT through my marketing efforts and at times wonder if I should have just bought more instead of investing out of pocket in these expenses. But I'm an idealist and a believer in the cause. If I abandon my marketing efforts, I won't do it bitterly—I'll do it when I can't justify the expense. Qbtc is rreferring to the www.nxtcrypto.org site. She should not have to pay the fefees out of pocket. Come on people. Same for joefox on wiki and btc24 on forums and intel for info/download. Marketing fund. |
|
|
|
Could we feasably get 200Ktps with full TF using JSON transport? Or will full TF just absolutely REQUIRE binary transport, regardless of the desired performance?
We could switch to 200 tps rate but it's not that cool as switching to 1'000 tps, is it? Heck no! Ok so whats keeping us from switching to binary transport now, i assume there will be a phase with client releases supporting either then eventally a client that only does binary? |
|
|
|
As time goes on, everything gets faster and faster so maybe at first only high end smartphones can handle a sustained 1000TPS network, but later more and more can.
One of my old smartphones had constant 15 Mbps connection. I would be able to forge with 10'000 tps rate. U guys should stop and look at ur numbers again. U think they r big, but actually they r not. Were not just discussing network utilization now, but also cpu processor. Will smarphoes, raspis, etc be able to process that much load at 1Mtps, assumimg it had access to the required network bandwidth? |
|
|
|
I guess after the migration that the API as we know it now would cease to exist?
No. Why? I just guessed (incorrectly, apparently) that with you just talking about JSON p2p transport going away, coupled with that we also have the previous thread with all the talks of APIv2 and API1 going away, that APIv2 was related to the conversion of binary transport as the p2p mechanism, and I assumed that JSON API stuff would disappear. So with that out of the way. Could we feasably get 200Ktps with full TF using JSON transport? Or will full TF just absolutely REQUIRE binary transport, regardless of the desired performance? |
|
|
|
CfB can offer a minimum bound on bandwidth required for 1000 TPS (1 MBS) but can't say how many NXT service nodes that can handle the full blockchain are required.
I forgot about a very important detail. 1000 tps @ 1 Mbps assumes that we use binary protocol. Now all data in protocol is encoded in JSON, this adds 3x-5x overhead. We have to migrate to binary protocol before switching TF on. I guess after the migration that the API as we know it now would cease to exist? If so, how about if we did switch to full TF, but kept JSON transport? Obviously we couldnt expect 1Mtps then, but could we expect 200Ktps? If so that should sustain us well long enough to get a testbed setup to convert peerexplorer, block explorers, and custom clients over to a binary transport protocol. |
|
|
|
Vitalik, anthony and I brought the original team together and the whitepaper did the rest. I don't know what to think of these Nxt people to be honest. Apparently our tech sucks, Nxt is better. We have been Co - opted by evil bankers yet our entire team is transparent unlike certain other teams of 71 oh and vitalik is a time traveling android sent from a dystopian future (Btw there is seriously a graphic novel coming out about it called vitalik ad 2134). Levity aside, use common sense and good judgment. When we release the prospectus and business plan read them and do your due diligence. Look at our partners and strategy and most importantly our technology. There are some enormous frustrations in the financial world with how things are structured. It's unfair and corrupt also totally inaccessible to billions of people. Don't you think at least 2 people from the industry would like to be on a project that makes the world a better, more fair place? I understand how you guys feel. I really do see a lot of frustration and anger in these forums. I felt the same when I was in the Ron Paul movement back in 2008. It was terrible to feel helpless and ignored. The difference today is that we have technology that can accomplish anything you want. I just want the community to help us build it, protect it and evolve it to meet the challenges of then future. The problems we face are now too complex for a single hacker to resolve. They require a community, large investments in time and resources as well as a dream for a better world. Set the IPO aside and all the other petty grievances and help me make ethereum. Is your technology solid? If so none of that crap matters and ethereum will flourish of its own right. Im a NXTer by the way (will prob get in on some etherium IPO and mine it as well, just because it seems to be different/nonscam like NXT was) and my statement about the tech is how I feel about all the haters of NXT. No Im not one of the original 73 either. But if someone wants to phooey on NXT or Ethereum because of something as petty as a GS connection, or because only 73 people threw in during a SIX WEEK period during which there WAS a demonstrated operational client, then sure, let the fascinating tech (and monetary gains) pass you on by. Are there yet any instructions on building c++/linux? (that work? something about preempting some uber-new boost libs) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
