Don't reveal the flaw on 3rd of April, please
Let someone find it.
Are you seriously suggesting to break a promise? Where is the promise that the flaw will be revealed on the 3rd? All I see is the promise of reward before that date. |
|
|
|
If I have data stored on a p2p storage system, does somebody have access to my data?
If it's encrypted, no Does the encryption introduce lag for access time? What kind of encryption? I doubt it. Network lag would be 1000s of times slower |
|
|
|
You got a negative trust rating because you've hyped bogus and deceptive security claims multiple times and tried to charge people for exploit tools that didn't. But hey, you could still collect on that 50 BTC bounty I offered you for your last set of claims, and I'll even remove the negative trust to boot.
He also claims to have found a flaw in Nxt and wanted money before he writes the code to exploit it. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.msg5663483#msg5663483 |
|
|
|
Could you make this clearer?
Only after 3rd of April. Don't reveal the flaw on 3rd of April, please Let someone find it. |
|
|
|
WTB 7 M @ 0.00004 -
280 BTC? wow, not bad! Cheap though |
|
|
|
It is not compromised when used properly. |
|
|
|
my posts r getting deleted so i am not welcome here and can not free speech
nice one congrats nxt for censoring freedom of speech since my posts getting deleted here i have to search other media to vent and i will
are u serious dude? Everything he posts is a always a lie. You guys keep quoting him. Try this:  |
|
|
|
Deposit ANY amount of NXT, you'll get 500 more Don't see the extra 500 in my account |
|
|
|
I mean there wouldn't be anything wrong with having the name editable and that change would be stored on the blockchain. but it would be nice to have a general "notes" field that was stored locally. that would make it a lot more difficult for scammers to trick people with almost no cost.
Got it - although I would think that once you've decided on which AnonSilver you *trust* then you'd just get the client to *hide* any others with the same name (as it would be pretty unlikely that you are going to buy and sell more than one Asset of the same name). Even if not hidden, buying untrusted assets could be rejected by the server. You won't mistakenly buy an asset if you have not manually added the issuer to the trust list. |
|
|
|
|
How many coins exists right now? (excluding pre mined)
|
|
|
|
|
2 million Nxt buyer back on bter.
|
|
|
|
More on Ripple vs. Nxt
If you don't want people to compare them, then come up with new ideas that haven't already been done by Ripple, or at least do those things better. I am seeing neither thing happen.
Most here have used ripple probably before you. You aren't bringing any new information. Ripple has 100 billion xrp and something like 80% aren't yet even distributed. Ripple is like the worst case of premine where the copany controls 100% from the start. That's far worse than 73 stakeholders with 1 billion |
|
|
|
BrianNowhere, please put together a proposal to help Nxt find Java coders and submit it to the appropriate committee.
Considering how very much like Ripple Nxt is, I think it's pertinent. I have tried to offer solutions to at least get the thought process going but the developers are dismissive. I get the feeling of being talked down to whenever I bring up concerns and get the sense the feedback is not desired unless it consists of mindless praise and enthusiasm. I'm getting the feeling that anyone who is not a developer is viewed as an annoyance, especially anyone who has invested for speculative reasons, which is probably about 85% of Nxt holders. Developers seem to have issues with speculators, who I believe they need dearly and are dismissive of at their peril. That's their right. For the rest of us we'll vote with our feet, our wallets and our energy. You should sell all your nxt and move to ripple. Live happy ever after. Why keep repeating the same thing over and over about ripple? Almost everyone here knows about ripple and have used it. |
|
|
|
this will hurt a little sorry guys... soon it will be over hint bter
 It would be beneficial if you crashed the price to 0 on BTER, it would only shoot back up to where it is now, except more NXT would be distributed of course. You had to quote this fool... didn't ya?  Hey PSYCHOPATH... we all know it wasn't you on Bter... STOP QUOTING THIS TROLL PEOPLE!!!!!  Yeah, stop quoring him. He is nobody. No money. No nxt. He is all hot air. |
|
|
|
Sounds good so far. But the interface for the Average Joe.... How do you expect him to trust an account? There should be some way to verify that easily. Maybe, there could be a URL Joe could click on. That URL will provide Google's NXT account.
The user has to do some research. There would be warning in the client gui to make sure they are adding a trusted account ID to their trust list. The user will go to the right website (google, forums, research etc) and verify the account ID. Then the user adds that account ID to their trust list. After that, the user will be restricted to buy only assets issued from that issuer whose account ID exists in their trust list. You can make it even better by not displaying other assets to the user in the client if they don't have the issuer ID in the trust list. This will cut down all the scam very fast. The scammers won't go very far (if at all) if their assets are not even displayed to the users. Plus you avoid the problem of scammers registering all the good names. (1) No unique asset names (2) Restrict users to buy/display assets whose account ID they themselves added to their trust list. |
|
|
|
community input needed:
Unique names for assets? For example : BLABLA (only issued once)
Or non unique names for assets?
For example: BLABLA 12423434 and BLABLA 343434334 (you only choose BLABLA, the rest is the asset id - automatically generated)
(Perhaps, I'm not sure, the number can be shortened..)
If you have another idea, please specify.
I still vote for unique names. unique names is very very idea. If the scammer is able to issue "google" before the legitimate "google" the legitimate google will have to use "go0gle" while the scammer will be using the right name. The unique part should be the issuer's account ID, and forcing the user to add the ID to their trust list before they can buy that asset. That would limit the mistakes as the user will not be able to buy the asset issued by people that they have not added to the trust list. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
