Hmmm....if I get some spare time I'll fire up a NAS node and see how the network looks. I posted on the Apexcoin and BlockNet ANN threads, maybe we'll hear something from their devs about your attack. Apexcoin ANN BlockNet ANN |
|
|
|
Enough blue balls discussion, please guys. I have a very good imagination....  As some of you may have noticed, cynicSOB launched an apparently successful doublespend attack on Apexcoin: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897493.60Are the Apexcoin devs around to give some comment on this? |
|
|
|
May I suggest NAS as the NXT clone target ? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=523187.2060Poor little things been dead in the water for a long time, so the code is pretty much out of date as far as current NXT code goes, but I reckon it'd be a good next step. And I've got a couple of million NAS lying around somewhere I could lend ya........ Edit: Has there been any contact with or any sign of life from the Apexcoin devs/BlockNet crew? |
|
|
|
Not interested in a coin 80% distributed to 25 persons.
Sorry.
Sometimes the crypto world baffles me completely. People will happily throw their money at centralised corporate projects or insanely obvious IPO/ICO scams, and then moan that NXT has a dodgy initial distribution.  So heres my 4 cents on NXT distribution:NXT was announced widely here on BTT, it was basically born here, and the 73 people who invested a grand total of 21 BTC in the baby NXT project are simply guys like us, who got very lucky on an investment. So why all the hate on them ? Because they got lucky or had very good judgement ? Most of the initial stakeholders have also worked hard to build NXT up, and to support the dev and marketing teams with funding. Don't forget that NXT has had no external, corporate investment, and the entire project has been financed by bootstrapping itself, from the ground up. How many other top 10 cryptos can claim that? Big stakeholders are a feature of all cryptos, from BTC on down: 1 million BTC are held in Satoshi's original accounts, 70% of XRP is still in the hands of Ripple Labs....I could go on. Compared to some systems, NXTs current distribution is pretty good, and there are some benefits in terms of network stability in having some large stakeholders. The argument that the whales could kill the price by dumping all their NXT is, by now, not really an issue. NXT whales have proven over the last year that they will act for the benefit of NXT. Now, the bit you really need to pay attention to:NXT is playing a long-term game, not just pump, dump and run. NXT provides a suite of powerful tools that allows people to do whatever they want with their crypto finances, with no restrictions, which a lot of people are finding useful. There are already a lot of external projects built on the NXT core, and the network/eco-system is growing fast. NXT has the potential to grow much, much further in 2015 and beyond. So heres the thing: if NXT rolls up to, lets say $120 milllion market cap (which it has already hit once, back in the happy time of last year) then every dollar/euro/BTC invested in NXT today will rise by 1000%. Which is a nice potential profit, and will be 10 times larger than the profit that the stakeholders have made on it.Hell, even if NXT only doubles its market cap from here....an investor will make exactly as much profit on the NXT he/she buys now as the stakeholder did who sold it to him/her. So can someone please explain to me exactly how this is unfair? |
|
|
|
We want to know if NXT is the new bitcoin protocol!
Answer is going to be more complex that a simple 'yes': NXT is one of the most effective, tested and secure current alternatives to the BTC protocol and blockchain. It may even be the best BTC alternative blockchain, if you take a look at it's dominance of the Asset markets... http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/ |
|
|
|
Sometimes I wonder where all the hate comes from... First it started with "Nxt is not open source!" (hint: it was open source since day one, everyone could decompile the jar files) Then:"But the code is ugly, it's one large file!" (hint: It did the purpose, and look at it now, it looks very clean and well written) Then the famous J. Garzik said: "But the hashes don't match!" (hint: If you compile Java with different compilers, hashes usually don't match. Why didn't he just look at the diff of the source files?) Then: "But it could be attack with Nothing at stake attack!!!!" (hint: kushti wrote a scientific papers incl. hard math that states N@S is not a danger) Now: "OMG circlejerk scamcoin wtf dickriders"... Come on guys... seriously  Some Nxt followers may come across as nerdy and sometimes arrogant, but it's just because they try to defend against statements such as the above. you forgot about the fact that 12 accounts forge all the blocks. its an insider coin. either you are in the club or you dont make money. Here are the accounts that did all the NXT forging over the last 30 days: (Forging = 'mining', confirming transactions to secure the blockchain):  https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_chartsI make that 15 "whale" accounts confirming 60% of blocks, with 40% of block confirmations spread out over the little guys. Seems fair enough, though it could be better. But, still, it's not 12 accounts forging all the blocks, by a long way. It was never the intention of NXT to make serious money by forging blocks......NXT is a platform, not a simple currency. People can make money/add value by building applications on top of NXT.....like the Nxtty App:
Please add NXT is a joke, a small circle jerk of nerds who couldn't even get 5,000 downloads for its mess ever app..... as one of the options.
If you're gonna rag on something, get it right. Nxtty is a third party project that utilises some features of NXT. It's not a NXT core component, but a project in its own right, seperate from NXT. Whether it succeds or fails has precisely nothing to do with how functional NXT and its network are. This is like saying that BTC sucks because of Gems. Heres another good effort: The most hilarious thing about NXT is the monetary system. It was hyped like crazy with supporters constantly chanting that it would be the thing that could finally take NXT to the moon.
It's literally nothing more than a way to donate NXT to proof of waste miners.
So...do you wanna show me any of this hype? MS is a good feature, might even be as useful as the Asset Exchange sometime soon, but right now it's a baby. Though, having said that, there are now something like 760 MS currencies created, and every single one of these currencies represents someone trying to set up their own project, whether it's just for a laugh, or a serious project. NXT allows people to do whatever the hell they want, and provides a selection of powerful features to allow/assist users. That's it. NXT is simply the Linux of crypto: complicated, powerful, de-centralised, completely open and somewhat controversial. If NXT critics would prefer to give their hard-earned cash to a more corporate/centralised project, there are plenty to choose from. |
|
|
|
So, having a bank involved actually lends legitimacy to a crypto-related project ? Yep, banks, you can trust them.......... |
|
|
|
Eh, why can't I vote?
The "results" of this poll look ridiculous.
To anyone reading this thread: be very, very careful.
Results look fine to me...... NXT, BTS, XCP, XRP is exactly what I'd expect from any BTC poll of this nature, given the relative communities size and dedication. |
|
|
|
|
One way out of our current shitty situation is to create a new demand stream for BTC, to help balance out the tendency of merchants (and miners) to cash out immediately to fiat.
There's been a couple of developments on this recently: employees getting paid in crypto. Overstock employees can now receive some/all of their monthly salary in BTC.
If more BTC-accepting companies offered this option, they would have a reason to hold the BTC they recieve, or maybe even to buy in more.
I think this is an area that the payment processing companies should be looking at....they already have most of the infrastructure in place to handle salary payments in crypto, shouldn't take too long to get systems set up.
|
|
|
|
|
They only safe buy I can see are concours standard classic cars, and pretty much anything with 2 wheels from the 1980's.
For crypto: there are no safe buys. Really. Everything is very much up in the air right now....
|
|
|
|
Fuck, I'm starting to like Stan. I'd consider BTS to be somewhere around plausibly decentralised, with good ol' NXT (or, ignoring the mining pool issues, BTC, LTC etc) as being fully decentralised. While I'm here....could we decentralise NXT any further? |
|
|
|
Two posts and there could be 50+ Nxters in here who definately wouldn't say it is decentralised. They would describe it as distributed, in the same camp as Ripple.
But what would be the point of that?
Bitshares definition 'sufficiently distributed' = 'distributed' in mainstream crypto. The core dev refers to it as distributed.
Node owners like StanLarimer seem to be promoting it as decentralized as they see marketing value in it, which feeds into their own bottom line. ~$2500 a month roughly in Stans case.
Cutting to the chase. The question is: Is Bitshares sufficiently decentralised/distributed to be regarded as a peer-to-peer crypto-currency, or is it in fact a centralised financial system like Ripple or the US treasury ? 101 delegates is not very many on a global scale, these people would become insanely wealthy if BTS achieved global adoption. I believe that BTS cannot be described as decentralised, simply due to the amount of control of the BTS network being concentrated in so few nodes, and the barriers that have to be overcome to become a node operator. In NXT, anyone with a fistful of NXT and a spare PC (or VPS) can run a node, forge, contribute to the network and earn fees. Anyone. Obviously, the guys with more NXT will earn more, but there are no barriers whatsoever to setting up and running a NXT node. Similarly, anyone with a mining rig could (at one time) contribute to the BTC network and mine BTC while securing the blockchain, again no barriers at all, no need to ask permission from anyone. It's this level of control that makes BTS centralised, they are a (semi-) corporate project, and not a genuine peer-to-peer crypto-currency. Sorry...... |
|
|
|
the Next NXT team has assembled an interesting Blockchain that is much quicker than bitcoin for confirming transactions but lacks bitcoin's security by several orders of magnitude.
That sounds like a bit of an overstatement I think if we're talking about cost to mount a successful attack. It's more likely one order of magnitude or two at the very worst.Without getting into a POS vs POW debate where a small army of NXT supporters show up to proclaim NXT has solved things whilst detractors show up to hotlink Poelstra pdf's.. I agree the "orders of magnitude" claim didn't come with any sort of citation and should really be removed, Not sure where those numbers were plucked from. Maybe saying that compared to bitcoin, nxt hasn't been equivalently battle-tested (at least in terms of the amount of eyes over it making peer-review during the last number of years, and relative $ invested in the infrastructure of each) would be a fairer and less subjective statement to make there. I'm happy with ENs estimate.....this doesn't mean that the NXT tech is inherently insecure, but that Bitcoin has survived 5 times longer and has had that much more development time, and (due to the sheer size of the network) is exposed to more bad guys hunting vulnerabilities. This is one of the main reasons why Bitcoin is gonna be around for a while yet, it's pretty solid. And, yeah, we don't need a debate. NXT has been solid, stable and secure for a year so far. Who knows what vulnerabilities may be discovered over the next year? Moving back to PB/Overstock: I'm fairly sure that whatever comes out of Medici, it won't be Counterparty as we know it, but will be based on/inspired by XCP. |
|
|
|
Eamorr: Do some of research on NXT and Java. Really......'needlessly heavyweight implementation' made me smile, as NXT was designed from the ground up to be a much more energy efficient, low-spec friendly crypto than BTC. Hell, you can run NXT on a Raspberry Pi, so heavyweight it aint. So far, your ideas/prejudices about NXT are mostly wrong. But it is written in Java, you get points for spotting that. Read peoples sigs, by the way. Could give you a clue as to what sort of zealot they are....... |
|
|
|
|
Sorry, the 'newbie' by your name kinda lead me to the wrong conclusion.
You do know that Ripple isn't a PoS crypto, though?
|
|
|
|
NXT? Is this a pump thread or something?
XRP. Without a doubt.
I'm sorry, but NXT just doesn't have anywhere near the backing Ripple does.
Oh, and NXT is written in Java!!! WTF?
Now that is a newbie. FYI: Ripple is not a crypto-currency and definitely not a Proof of Stake cryptocurrency. Sorry. Don't believe me, you can ask Ripple: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripple_%28payment_protocol%29NXT is at least non-corporate, open-source and de-centralised, as well as being written in Java. |
|
|
|
Yeah...PB wants an honest financial system, and he does not like high speed/high frequency trading, among other things.
So a blockchain-based exchange that explicitly doesn't alllow HFT (because all of the order processing happens on the blockchain, with 1-10 minute blocktimes) is probably what we are going to see from Medici and Overstock.
My prediction is that whatever system we see from Medici, it will be slow asset/stock trading, not instant.
So why not NXT? Good question.....NXT has everything in place right now, but 6-8 months ago (when we were pitching to Overstock) the AE was very new/just released. It was probably also a lot easier to choose for a system based on BTC, which is at least something the Overstock board had a track record with. Lastly, I always had the feeling that Overstock were more likely to launch a completely new system than to place their faith in a third party. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
