And a few old farts like myself.........
Me too  Hi five?  I will wager Jinn's skyrim mod/distributed multi player will be the breakthrough for Nxt. Though something could come out of SuperNet without any notice, it's got a lot of people excited and working that I think only James has an idea of everything  But I'll stick with Jinn at the moment. 6-12 months before any of that happens though I'd say, in which time most other alts that take up people's time and effort on here atm will fall away into oblivion, clearing the stage for some exciting times ahead |
|
|
|
Re: I've seen a few threads lately blatantly fudding Nxt......
There is a new release in the next few weeks, the last two releases saw pretty concerted efforts to smear in the week running up to it from the usual suspects. It comes with the territory, you don't see anyone Fudding Wankcoin and there is a reason for that They can only delay people looking at Nxt, I am getting the sense of the early stage of the tide turning. More and more people come out to support Nxt now in these threads. Look at the "WTF Nxt..." thread if you're in any doubt. |
|
|
|
Update from kushti (one of the core devs) about 2 phased transactions (escrows, i.e. you send Nxt but it isn't released until BTC has been sent from other side). Also of the likely features in version 1.4. 1.4 looks to be a lot of new features, made possible in the backend changes done in v1.3. They had been queuing up and waiting for 1.3 |
|
|
|
Where did I saw Nxt was more successful?
If Bitshares is successful (2-10 years?) and the world is using it, 99.9% of the population of the world will look to you, a billionaire early adopter, and ask "Why wasn't there a fair distribution?" "Why were a few thousand people, the 0.1 %, allowed to get so wealthy?"
If you did managed to give to all 7 billion people on the planet, you would then have to overcome the pareto principle to stop the above scenario happening.
This is why 'fair distribution' debates are so tiresome. They are (d)illusionary on any sensible time scale.
I don't claim Bitshares to be of perfect fairness, but there's a difference between initial distribution of 76 people versus tens of thousands, plus Bitshares still have ongoing distribution for the next 30 years. I am saying the distribution of Bitshares is more fair than NxT. NxT distribution can nearly be called a scam. That's all. I understand what you are saying, I have been over this dozens of times. Congratulations, you are the current winner in the tallest midget competition. Until the next one that distributes over 31 years... What exactly is fraudulent about Nxt? The implication of the word suggest there was deliberate deceit, you must know what this was? Or do you just use 'scam' for it's shock value, another cheap debating technique, wouldn't you agree? |
|
|
|
i wasnt involved in nxt when UP trolled nxt, or at least if i was i dont remember so cant really comment on that.
You must be aware that UP, BloodyRookie et al were at Nxt at the start? The reason they left was ideological reasons (we're creating the 1%) etc. and it was quite emotional but after trying to get the 'unfair' forging algo changed to something else (0.5% max per coin per annum in the long term  ) they left to create the New Economy Movement with a "fair distribution". The language has now been softened to "fair opportunity for all" or such like since the reality set in of what this meant. PoI should be ground breaking if it lives up to expectations which is a bit of a shame really, it feels like they have come full circle now. Any moral high ground over Nxt during the spring fudstorms was sacrificed when UP/TS exposed himself. Nxt and NEM devs together would have been formidable, big shame. |
|
|
|
|
Edit: Forget it actually, I'm not that interested.
|
|
|
|
|
Where did I saw Nxt was more successful?
If Bitshares is successful (2-10 years?) and the world is using it, 99.9% of the population of the world will look to you, a billionaire early adopter, and ask "Why wasn't there a fair distribution?" "Why were a few thousand people, the 0.1 %, allowed to get so wealthy?"
If you did managed to give to all 7 billion people on the planet, you would then have to overcome the pareto principle to stop the above scenario happening.
This is why 'fair distribution' debates are so tiresome. They are (d)illusionary on any sensible time scale.
P.S. Taunsew is a mainly Nxt troll. Like Come-from-Above, he trolls several coins in series but rarely declares an allegiance to any for very long. So you can't attack him on the grounds of the coins he that he backs. And that is a bad tactic anyway if you are serious.
|
|
|
|
Alice wants to attack the blockchain.
She owns private keys of 400 accounts totalling to 75% of the stake.
She is planning to rewrite the history from block 5'000.
Legit chain is at block 5'300 (less than 720).
Cumulative difficulty at block 5'000 is 8'000'000.
Cumulative difficulty at block 5'300 is 9'000'000.
How many SHA256 operations in average it's necessary to do to find a branch where cumulative difficulty at block 5'300 is at least 9'000'001?
Hint: Blocks from 5'000 to 5'300 were forged by 100% of the stake.
Without a detailed further explanation of the so called Nothing at Stake 'problem', further discussion is quite useless.
Well, first of all, if Alice has 75% of stake, then the simplest attack would be in the future: just fork and keep both branches as equal in cumulative difficulty as possible, never letting one get too far ahead of the other. Thus, there will never be consensus. In fact, for this attack, one needs only 51%. Or even much less if other stakeholders work on both branches. But for argument's sake, let's consider the original challenge. The math is pretty tricky, but let me sketch the rough idea of an attack. The regular history developed by picking, at each block, the minimum delay among the stakeholders. This delay has some probability distribution and some expectation which is the average block interval. If you reduce the stakeholders to 75%, then the distribution will shift to longer delays. BUT, Alice is not limited to single-step extensions. She can compute a huge tree of all possible k-step extensions. With 400 accounts, this tree will have 400^k leaves, and require roughly that many SHA256 computations. But for large enough k, one would expect one of these leaves to have a path with an unusually small sum of k delays, less than k times the average delay for all stakeholders. The question is, how big a k do you need. And this obviously depends on both the number of accounts, and percentage of stake held by Alice. For the given numbers, I expect a small k like 4 would suffice, but this needs to be worked out in detail. In that case, to cover 300 blocks, you'd need to compute 75 trees of 400^4 leaves each, for a rough total of 75*400^4 = 1.92*10^12 SHA256s, well within the realms of feasibility. For k larger than 6 this attack would become quite infeasible, but it's not clear to what percentage of stake that corresponds, unless one goes through the math... I like you tromp I'll add some detail that will mean you have to change this when I have double checked it. And we can go from there. I'll probably start a new thread, to get away from these baseless generalised assertions. N.B. just so I know, are you familiar with the Nxt Forging algo at all? Doesn't matter if you aren't. |
|
|
|
I believe this is the main reason NxT is often called a scam/unfair. You could look to Bitshare's distribution model for a fair distribution, the distribution was done over the period of several months, with half PoW distribution, half donation based. Also it now has an inflation schedule toward a final cap.
You got nearly 7 billion unique initial stakeholders? Impressive. If no one is calling Bitshares distribution unfair, it is because: you haven't had enough success, haven't been around long enough to have multiple waves or users or there isn't much interest. Or some combination. You are still in a honeymoon period. Bitshares will soon enough hurt the investors just like PTS (Protoshares) did. If you knew only little about this group is that they take the investors money to pay for the work is being done on the coin. This means, they have the same model as Ripple. Well then you guys should brainstorm a distribution model which works better. NXT case of handing over huge amounts to random people just leads to dumping. Even NEMstake broad distribution saw decline like 60% from peak (not as much as NXT going from 90 to 18). if we look at the list of coins then clearly the only winner in 2014 has arguably been Ripple, where most of the Ripple is held internally by a tiny small group who signed contracts stating they couldn't dump or sell. In the real world a lot of initial stakeholders of things cannot even sell until a real IPO some 3-10 years down the line. That is where MS is coming out. Yes I've been familiar with MS for some days now, since Ora mentioned it. There's other coins that are coming out with a similar mechanic or so they claimed. This stuff is all buried all over the announcement section. Don't pretend you don't have the Nxt threads bookmarked You are on here constantly and it took you a minute or so to reply to me in the Nxt Official thread when I raised AT was coming and you had fallen out of the loop. You never unsubscribed from any Nxt threads since you started. |
|
|
|
wtf? No! Nothing requires extreme amounts of computing in POS.
*Sigh* Which POS? |
|
|
|
Anyone who believes UtopianFuture left crypto, or these forums, after being caught and admitting to have multiple sock puppets is a fool.
no of course he is still here.. anyone who tries to say that he spends his days trolling other coins with out presenting solid evidence first is also a fool. text analysis is not solid proof by any means.. UP started trolling Nxt in January when he became upset about the distribution, this is the main narrative Taunsew tried to create for months using the same date. He tried to paint it as a 'surprise to the community' and a cause for the decline in price. Funny he mentions Come-from-Above as I believe that is also Taunsew's sock puppet. Come-from-Above only trolled NEM towards the end before quieting down again. In a world of crypto and tor, you won't get solid evidence. Especially from someone who concealed their identities for so long (unless they make a stupid mistake of course ). But juries aren't asked to say for certain if someone is guilty, they are asked to consider if a burden of proof has been met. Beyond reasonable doubt, balance of probabilities. My own experience of UP in Jan and Tuansew since gave me the feeling they were linked. CfB's claim, his care and diligence in other cases (Bluemeanie), his conduct in crypto relating to transparency and the importance he places on his own reputation. This is more than enough for me. You are free to disagree. |
|
|
|
I believe this is the main reason NxT is often called a scam/unfair. You could look to Bitshare's distribution model for a fair distribution, the distribution was done over the period of several months, with half PoW distribution, half donation based. Also it now has an inflation schedule toward a final cap.
You got nearly 7 billion unique initial stakeholders? Impressive. If no one is calling Bitshares distribution unfair, it is because: you haven't had enough success, haven't been around long enough to have multiple waves or users or there isn't much interest. Or some combination. You are still in a honeymoon period. |
|
|
|
I'm not familiar with nxt assets, I was referring to POS in general. This is the problem. What you are effectively doing is creating something with weaknesses and then attacking that, rather than looking at the best in class of what exists and trying to apply your thoughts there. This is the definition of a strawman argument. Investing in ternary hardware processors, payment processors and mining pools count as spending. |
|
|
|
|
Anyone who believes UtopianFuture left crypto, or these forums, after being caught and admitting to have multiple sock puppets is a fool.
|
|
|
|
So they said this was the NXT big thing, by far the best crypto 2.0 bla bla bla, I plow in this summer and what happens? Bitshares doubles, Counterparty quadruples, and NXT? Only went down, 2 cents a fucking coin. 0.00004500 btc now. All time lows. Lost 70% of my money!
Should I sell it all, hold on, or buy more?
I think you should sell. How much do you have? Post you're account and I might make you an offer, depending on how much you got. Bump. |
|
|
|
|
So you would accept that going from owning 1% of a coin today, then 0.9% in a year and ~0.5% in 5 years is good for long term value?
Inflation effects everyone at the same rate, it doesn't matter how much you hold.
|
|
|
|
|
The same reason people don't talk about it in real life. People don't know what it is and it's effect on value, especially when conflated with the word 'interest'
1000 + 50 newly minted coins = I have more coins, must be better off. yippee.
|
|
|
|
As for Economic Clustering.. Just 'Trust' wrapped up in a more complex way..
Please expand. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
