Multi-Sig is released. Got a timemachine ?  I guess it doesn't count because it's on the testnet? you said it  looks good. would be interesting to see if it will function in the same manner as nems. in relation to nems, is it going to be possible to set only one account as the possible initiator of a transaction from a multisig transaction? i mean if i make an account multisig but i only want myself to be able to initiate a transaction and the others only sign, is that something that will be possible? same goes for removal of a signatory. ie. my sig is needed + others to remove another. From what I heard today it won't be possible - at least not in the near future - to have a co-signer that can't issue a tx. I don't know what you mean with the other thing. You need n-1 signatures to remove a signatory. ok.. by the last thing.. what if i dont want it to be possible for me to be the "-1". if it is possible for me to be the "-1", i can be kicked out of my own multisig account. i know this is all going to be in the future, im just wondering if it will be possible at some point in time. That's a good point. I'm not sure but it all comes down to NEVER MAKE ANYONE COSIGNATORY YOU DONT TRUST 100%. |
|
|
|
Multi-Sig is released. Got a timemachine ? I guess it doesn't count because it's on the testnet? you said it looks good. would be interesting to see if it will function in the same manner as nems. in relation to nems, is it going to be possible to set only one account as the possible initiator of a transaction from a multisig transaction? i mean if i make an account multisig but i only want myself to be able to initiate a transaction and the others only sign, is that something that will be possible? same goes for removal of a signatory. ie. my sig is needed + others to remove another. From what I heard today it won't be possible - at least not in the near future - to have a co-signer that can't issue a tx. I don't know what you mean with the other thing. You need n-1 signatures to remove a signatory. |
|
|
|
Multi-Sig is released. Got a timemachine ? I guess it doesn't count because it's on the testnet? |
|
|
|
Safe use of the NEM network has to begin with the first entrance after registration. I will try to explain a situation. After an institution to yourself the account on the main page of the client you get to the account, see at once before yourself in the top left corner the address (now it test), but, don't hurry to use it! The matter is that from this address which is at once inside, at the first entrance, you have no Private Key. And if there is something to the main files from this address with the .wlt and .adb expansions - that you will lose all the coins  How to secure itself against unforeseen circumstances? How to provide to the coins the best protection? Backup your wallet. Same as in any System that uses local wallets.
Here that I offer as the solution of this task :
When you carry out the first entrance, in the top left corner you have an address NEM. Forget at once about it. We go in the top left corner on a small gear, the menu opens. There, in this menu, we select item in English of Create Real Account Data, we press there. The new address will be generated. We write down from it in a reliable place only of Private Key. After wrote down - now your coins will be always rescued irrespective of even if above the files sounded by me with the .wlt and .adb expansions will be damaged or in files there will be any mistake and it will become impossible to use them...
I think that will be gone after launch. Afaik that was only meant to be there for redemption. Thinking about it we could leave it in with a massive warning. After at you is in a reliable place of Private Key, again we press above on that gear, we open the menu, we select in it the Add an Existing Account item, there we insert that Private Key, we appropriate to a new account a label and after you add it, it at you will be highlighted by the address in the left top corner. The address will be test as a network still test. Now you can send coins to this address and so far at you Private Key is stored in a safe place, you can doesn't worry for the coins.
I here for example even do so : I worked with accounts and after worked with them, before an exit I delete the accounts added by me from the client in the same place in the menu with pressing Remove Account. After removal of all addresses in an account it becomes empty. But except for that initial address, which I to whom I don't recommend to use.
And why do you not recommend it ? Because YOU don't know how to backup a wallet ? Ofc we're still missing an easy feature todo so.... But it's also not rocket sience to browse to a folder and copy a file.
It in general as it seems to me, developers need to clean. That as soon as you open for yourself the account, it was necessary to make a compulsory procedure which I described above for the sake of safety of users. Because Private Key from it can't be restored. The network works so - the main key one, and it closed. Any reminders.
The client needs cleaning up - no doubt about that. But not for the reasons you mentioned. Now even one conversation of two years old prescription was remembered. Business was in Btc-e chat. Someone started conversation on that that btc it salted and the wallet.dat files at it in a reliable place lie. I dug to the earth of type But here it was killed by one person who is familiar with btc long ago. He told it : And you naive  At any time can happen such that and your wallet.dat file won't help you. There were at people cases to these files something happened and already you will help nothing... Cases such aren't single. That person I don't know took it into account or counted for trolling, generally all and dispersed then. But now there is an occasion again to think of it. I and itself think and earlier thought that you store btc to yourself in the wallet.dat file and anything doesn't happen to them. There is it far not so. Always there has to be an access to Private Key, without it there is no guarantee of safety. All this, in general, sets thinking and reconsider the relation to btc and to all crypto at which in an account it is impossible to generate new addresses with Private Key and on Private Key there is no opportunity to add addresses. Pure binding only to wallet.dat file. This episode set thinking of that that the wallet.dat file is not protection. For me now, as well as for many who will understand, only NEM, in respect of safety, will be considered as the safest! Sorry but I'm not sure what you mean. I seem to be very bad at understanding broken english (really don't mean to offend, I just really am worse than others at that). I guess some wallet file got lost or broken ? You realize a file where you store your priv-key could be lost / broken too right ?
It is always necessary to have Private Key from the address but not to tie itself to files and to think that coins in safety.
The private key, stored encrypted in a file meant for only that reason sounds a lot safer to me than letting, potentially unexperienced users store a string somewhere they think is safe. You know how many people wanted to change their address in the remdeption portal because they already (after weeks) lost their priv-key ? You wouldn't believe it. Among them people who lost access to their last-pass account so don't come with anything like that either. Here such small overview or the guide (call as you want) I told you today. But that that NEM mentioned these very important points and that that there was at me an accident to these test coins and with two files (before I described that case here and in an English thread) I personally think that it everything was not just like that. Breakage was as me it seems specially that we reflected and reached truth that the binding to files is not safety. Safety in Private Key. And just (About coincidence! Or not? ) in NEM already from the very beginning, from BETA, there is inside such opportunity to get new addresses with Private Key. And developers that at us clever, specially showed this problem to people, simply not all understood, but someone reached Original here : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=455591.msg10373605#msg10373605So to sum up: Make an easier way to backup a wallet ? YES, that is necessary and will happen. |
|
|
|
Has anyone ever thought of creating NEM browser extensions for chrome or firefox? Just a thought.
Problem with that is that you'd need that extension to have access to your wallet which would have me very worried. I'm sure it could be done in a secure manner but still - accidents and mistakes happen. |
|
|
|
Has anyone ever thought of creating NEM browser extensions for chrome or firefox? Just a thought.
Or a simple wallet for smartphone so people can pay with Nem when they buy from me. In the making. |
|
|
|
I think that NEMs huge problem is that it wasn't launched in November before the current BTC slaughter and all ongoing ALT slaughter. I know, you might tell how NEM wasn't ready, multisig wasn't ready etc.. and I agree with this, but I think huge opportunity has been passed. Crypto is in a big slump and it will take time for it to get out of this slump. Problem with NEM is that will be launched in the midst of the crypto storm crisis.
It couldn't be launched in Nov as it wasn't ready in Nov. We still don't know when it will launch. Could be another six months of bug fixing. They said March. NO. This is exactly what I mean with people are taking any date that is thrown around as super official launch date and then go on complaining about delays. Rocket said he expected it to be early-mid march. I said it would be realistic but also went on to say that it could be later. |
|
|
|
While everybody ( not everybody) are crying about launch date i am
buying more stakes....Jiihaa!!
Question:
Can i use the same " real NEM address" what i have already used, when
i send my stake?
Yes you can. |
|
|
|
Is March a realistic launch date?
Will we see a more professional culture from those involved with NEM in the future?
Those are my current questions.
Only realistic dates are being given as estimates. So yes, march is realisitc. What that has been done so far do you consider unprofessional ? Well you even admitted yourself as being unprofessional and "shitty" on the NEM Forum, where all the "serious" discussion takes place. You also then claimed to not be a formal member of the team, but you are listed as a "Marketer/helper" on the OP, like it or not you are a representative of NEM, and some of the replies I have seen from you on forums if you were representing a business, you more than likely would no longer be employed by that business ... Yes I did and I stand by that. I also couldn't aggree more that xtester is the model NEMster. 2 things though. 1 - I've only been unprofessional on forums. Never have I represented NEM to an outsider in a an unprofessional maner. You gotta realize that this is btt. This is where trolls go to die and the worst kind of people gather around. I'm not going to take all the shit from clowns that think they can get away with anything just because they're anonymous. I have to be above that if I'm communicating officially for NEM but not when I'm talking to a troll who couldn't see a serious project if it bit him in the ass. Granted - people may disagree with that approach but that leads me to my second point. After launch I will not have that same role anymore. Once redemption is over I'll have done my "official" part and be just another member of the community. I'll keep supporting NEM and I'll stay active but I won't represent NEM in any way shape or form. None of the people that are mentioned in the OP (except core devs obviously) actually intended to be somehow officially part of the NEM team. Like xtester said - they just got things done. And here's another thing I want everyone to think about. Most people come here with their demands and expectations. Think about what happend so far when the devs asked you guys todo something for them. People were asked to test the alpha. What happend ? The testnet was practically deserted which is why many problems were only discovered in BETA which also led to delays in launch. People were asked to vote for NEM on hitbtc.com. Pathetic clone coins got more votes because the communtiy couldn't even get their asses up to klick a link once a day. Thankfully people with brains that work on exchanges saw the potential in NEM and actually approached us to work with them to add NEM (and ofc xtester did a fantastic job in contacting further exchanges and service providers). You guys may see reason to be dissapointed by the devs but they have just as much reason to be dissapointed in you or rather a big part of the community. There is a huge movement of great people growing on telegram. Those people have gotten more done in 2 months than the entire community has in the last year. BTT is just the necessary evil we have to deal with for the time being. You wanna help NEM and are excited about the project ? Join the official channels and best ignore btt. |
|
|
|
Is March a realistic launch date?
Will we see a more professional culture from those involved with NEM in the future?
Those are my current questions.
Only realistic dates are being given as estimates. So yes, march is realisitc. What that has been done so far do you consider unprofessional ? |
|
|
|
We all virtually lost money with those neverending delays. Except those smart enough not to redeem. Mid-march....errr. Starting to think that the team has pathological issues about taking the decision on actually releasing the damn thing I am going to tag on to your comment, but I will refrain from name calling. I do believe there is a good possibility that those of us that have claimed our stakes have pushed the market supply down and prices up for those still trading their stake. Anyone who says that is unlikely I would like to hear why. I do believe the delayed launch has hurt NEM. How much I do not think anyone can really gauge that. I do believe the "Developers" are working hard but I have seen an attitude shift in their posts as well. They are almost making fun of themselves at this point, so I think even they are frustrated with the delays and it is starting to wear on everyone, developers, investors, and believers. I myself find myself checking this thread less and less. I am sure many have lost interest at this point. But is there any real way to measure the damage without anecdotal evidence? I don;t believe so. So the proof will be in the pudding so to speak. The few times I or others have posted concerns about the never ending delays it is reiterated that everyone is going to see this through. I get excited and cheer on NEM once again, but I am starting to have serious concerns as a community member, as I am sure others are getting concerned as well. But I have claimed my stake and have no option but to ride it out until/if NEM launches and see if the roulette wheel lands on Black or Red, or if the ball ever gets rolling to begin with. But I will admit the constant trolling and unnecessary posts are beginning to wear on us all, and I see lots of disdain and even some broken hearts. Developers and community members I appreciate everything you have put into this "movement," but I would do everything I would to avoid a further delay, even if it means some sleepless nights, as I feel it is in everyone's best interest to see this milestone actually happen.Are you somehow under the impression that this isn't already happening ? |
|
|
|
Hey guys, any news about the launch??
Thanks
If everybody test vigorously and there are no hiccups, I should say latest by Mid-March. So, the launch depends on these tests and feedback. Damn guys, I am not trying to be negative but this is really taking a while. I kind a regret claiming my stake, when I claimed my stake it was worth 3 BTC and about a 1000$, now it is worth 2,2 BTC and about 500$. I could have managed this money in other direction without loosing this much of value. Again, I admire a progress that you are making but this just hurts, this "deadliness" of my money! Yeah that pretty much sucks. Latest for mid-march??? WTF. No more freakin delays.And that is an estimate. Maybe it's latter who knows. Every date that is official given are estimates - as stated 10000 times - so there are no delays. There are just estimates that didn't pan out. |
|
|
|
Some NEM please I found a bug : If at Create New Wallet there where to specify by Name of your wallet something from two words, or between words there will be some sign, for example a point, then there will be difficulties with such account. Therefore it isn't recommended to enter a name and a surname at creation, dividing a gap. Or a name and a surname, between them putting an end. It is better to specify in Name of your wallet only figures. For example 014578. Because if you will enter a name or a nickname in which there is a gap or my Mr.PortMan nickname (sometimes I put an end) is divided by a point, for example as, you will lose an account. Now as soon as didn't try to rename two files with the .wlt expansions and (new) with the .abd expansion - that it is impossible. The account for some reason can't translate coins. Now the obligatory requirement to store both files with these expansions. If .abd is lost, or at creation in the column Name of your wallet to put something from two words, or between words there will be some sign, for example a point, or a gap, access to such account will be impossible then, or is possible, at different combinations of renaming of these two files with the .wlt and .abd expansions, but it won't allow to translate coins any more. There will be an error of type it is impossible to contact the wallet file or it is impossible to contact the address book file. So be attentive, at an institution we specify in Name of your wallet only figure and any points and gaps. Coins are lost, it is a pity  Here such first bug found. I will look for further. And as coins those all are lost which to me sent before, it is possible to send still here to this new address ( TABDE4-SOSLXV-BQW4CH-ZDKHNC-WG7V6C-GXV2X3-3OO3) which was already got correctly where only figures were specified in Name of your wallet. Original here : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=455591.msg10350739#msg10350739If you find such things please log an issue on github https://github.com/NewEconomyMovement/NemCommunityClient/issues. |
|
|
|
Can we claim our stake now?
Not NOW, but as soon as we finish beta testing multisig which hopefully will not take too much longer. For the record - you have been able to CLAIM for months now. Actually recieving NEM is a different story. That will happen at launch. |
|
|
|
i find it quite astonishing that we have thousands of stake holders and very little actual complaints about launch taking a long time. some frustration yes but thats most of the time followed by a show of support for what the devs are doing. this sort of tells me that over the last 6 months or so, we have shaken lose all the dump-at-launch-ers who would normally be the ones complaining saying that we should just launch and are left with people who have long term hopes for nem and will hold much longer. Interesting times ahead  Or nobody cares anymore  . |
|
|
|
|
I wish trolls had the guts to use their main accounts and not constantly create new ones.
Yeah...I'm talking to you coward!
|
|
|
|
just realised with our version of multisig, we can now do completely trustless, off-exchange trades.
the escrow is not even required to do a transaction.
the escrow would only have to step in during a dispute..
devs, you guys really kick ass haha
...
i think the current, initial implementation requires all co-signatories to sign. you mean like all 3 of 3 need to sign? is that not very risky in case an account is lost? Like i said...it will get more flexible with further releases. I think you only need n-1 to remove a co-signatory though. |
|
|
|
just realised with our version of multisig, we can now do completely trustless, off-exchange trades.
the escrow is not even required to do a transaction.
the escrow would only have to step in during a dispute..
devs, you guys really kick ass haha
...
i think the current, initial implementation requires all co-signatories to sign. |
|
|
|
I would like to remind everyone that when beta 0.5.0 IS released (which should be soon), the more you guys help test, the quicker we can get to actual launch. So please, everyone who wants launch to happen soon and without any issues, do everything you can to test the new beta as much as possible so that any possible bugs and glitches can be resolved for launch. also it'll probably be THE BEST way to test multisig before launch. And to understand the implications of it before you do it with actual NEM !!! although it might have not been clear, that is exactly what I had in mind gimre i see in the pictures, that a co-signer(not the account converter) can initiate a transaction from the main account and have it signed by another co-signer. That is pretty damn cool but i can see times when people may not want to use it like that. say for instance if i have funds and i only want 2 others to have keys to sign off on my transactions but not have the ability to initiate transactions between themselves? will there ever be a check box to say "allow co-signers to initiate transactions?" or something? it would put a huge amount more power in users hands. absolutely brilliant job on multisig. its far beyond my expectations its also gotten a great response on the btt thread that i posted the photos on. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=942352.0(i suggest others bump the thread) Here's how I understand it... If you convert an account into a multi-sig account, that account can NO LONGER ISSUE TX. ONLY THE CO-SIGNATORIES can issue tx from that point on. So say you have account A and you have all your funds there that you want to protect and you want you and your trusted friends to have to sign outgoing transactions. You'll need to create and account B for yourself and C for your trusted friend that are going to be co-signatories for A (your original account). Only B and C can now issue transactions. A is just a store from now on. To have a co-signatory not be able to issue tx - not sure if that is easily possible. This is just the first iteration of multi-sig though so there are going to be addded possiblities in the future (like x out of y) |
|
|
|
Wow, I had no idea bitcoin multisig was only client-based. It should indeed be blockchain (network) based so that visibility is equal for all parties. This looks big. I hope NEM's next trick is to decouple from BTC. I don't understand the difference between client-based and blockchain (network) based. Can you explain it in more detail please? I think what their getting at is that the "native" NEM client will have this feature right away when the btc qt wallet didn't for some time (maybe still doesn't ?) They're both integrated into the blockchain though. Saying that btcs multi-sig is only integrated on the client side is just wrong (uness I'm missing something majorly which is absolutely possible and I Hope you'll enlighten me in that case ). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
