I will have a go at this one, Klee…to check my own understanding.

"From what I've understood the rig doesn't matter. What matters is how many coins you have in your wallet…
Correct
And unless you have millions I don't think you will be forging much of anything. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Correct, in the same way that your laptop can’t compete with ASICs in Bitcoin. The percentage Return on investment is the same if you have one coin or 1 million. You’ll  only get one million by investing fiat or being really, really helpful to the community and getting it through bounties (bonuses for good deeds). Owning millions of coins is analogous to having a huge mining farm, both take a huge amount of money to get.

I agree that mining coins wastes of a lot of energy (Proof of work algorithms) but how does rewarding the rich for being rich (Proof of stake algorithms) make any sense at all?
It is the same for bitcoin and all its alts, those who have the largest mining power get more of the coins. Both reward the rich, those with the most coins/best mining rigs get the lions share.

An early adopter or developer that owns a huge percentage of a POS coin will be getting paid more and more for doing nothing.
The owners of the coins must forge to get anything, which supports the network to get coins. This isn’t doing nothing, without the network there is no coin.

In POW an early adopter gets richer only if the coin actually raises in value and once he spends the coins they are gone. In POS they just keep generating more out of thin air. That is just ridiculous.
The coins come from the transaction fees of the community, making payments, getting Alias’ and generally moving the coins around. They don’t come out of nothing. And when they are spent, they are gone (with transaction fees shared to the forgers).


Obviously investing in a successful POS coin would me much more beneficial for ME than investing in a successful POW coin. The problem is that it won't be beneficial for others. It's just not a good way of distributing value.
Perhaps, if you concentrate on the benefit of the coins to other people. I think the Chinese will value an anonymous P2P exchange.

For example lets say you managed to mine or buy a 1% position in POWcoin in the first month. Lets say this coin was successful and price and hashrate increased significantly after that. In order to maintain that 1% position you would have to spend ever greater amounts of money on either mining power or through direct purchasing of the coin to maintain that 1% position. If not then your position would continue to get diluted and it isn't a bad thing. For a currency to function it needs widespread adoption.

Now with POScoin you acquire a 1% position in the coin the first month and basically have to do nothing to maintain that position in the future except not sell.
Bitcoin is inflationary and this is one of the issues that Nxt was designed to avoid (at least at the start). Distribution is being achieved by giveaways and selling down the stake in the coins. We are monitoring the distribution and new research suggests Nxt is rapidly becoming more distributed than Bitcoin.


In the future when BTC prices would stabilize every coin I spent would be gone. If I want to make 1 coin back I'm going to have to provide value to other people in society for them to pay me it.
With NXT I don't have to provide anything at all. I basically get paid for being rich. I can just spend the extra coins that I generate from being rich and never lose my wealth despite that fact that I am a parasite to society and offer NOTHING back. Kind of like royalty, a birthright to be rich.
This would be true if Nxt was just a coin. The features, if all goes to plan, will make Nxt more valuable to society and the coin will just be the icing on the cake. It is mind boggling and quite opaque but there is already a POW prototype coin overlaid onto Nxts POS system being tested. Asset Exchange would allow BTC or any other asset to be traded P2P. No-one has grasped fully the potential of it yet because they can’t.

What initially brought me into cryptos was the possibility of making a monetary profit. What kept me in cryptos was the realization that it can offer humanity much more.
I agree.
 You post articles and videos of people like Andreas M. Antonopoulos all the time so you are already know what I'm talking about. I'm interested in the technology as a whole. The possibility of having aspects of society run algorithmically instead of legally. That is why it is of great importance for the underlying algorithms to represent the best social values that they can.
I agree.

I didn't say the situation will get worse for those holding only a few bitcoins. I said that all people holding bitcoins won't preserve their current percentage of the coins in circulation and that is a good thing. They won't be rewarded just for owning coins either and that is also a good thing.
They will be paid for supporting the network that supports many features, one of which is a coin. Look up to the horizon and wonder how asset exchange, arbitrary messages and transparent forging can change the current crypto and even digital landscape. Concentrate on the coin if you wish but you will be missing the big picture. Nxt is also not planned to be POS forever but the details are still under wraps.

It seems to me that the distribution of wealth in a bitcoin economy can be altered much more easily in comparison to a 100% PoS coin economy simply because of the fact that spent coins do not somehow reappear in the wallet of the spender just because he happens to own a lot of coins.
Spent coins go to whoever they were sent to. The transaction fee that was added to send the coins will then go to the next block to be forged. There is a chance he might get this back immediately but the way you characterise it is flawed. You could also think of the transaction fees as interest on his account or payment for keeping the network up that all the other smaller users depend (and probably not forging with) as well as the features that are just coming online.

One huge thing that bitcoin has going for it is that it is already very well established.
For now I'm waiting to see what new technologies will be layered over the current bitcoin network and what effects they will have on the bitcoin ecosystem. I just don't see a pure POS algo as being an improvement as far as social organization is concerned. In fact it seems like quite the opposite."
I disagree.



Hello everybody 

I have been reading the NXT thread on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.16820 for a while and just wanted to check something that made my ears prick up.

Specifically, on page 842 post 16825 by CfB. He said

"U'll get the secret phrase that opens the genesis account, everyone will be able to play a role of "BCNext"."

What did he mean by this? The genesis account started with and balance of 0 and went into negative "AntiNXT" when issued to the 73 founders.

If BCNext plans to give the passphrase away, does that others will be free to issue more NXT and each one would devalue the ones in circulations, causing inflation? Or is the genesis account capped at issuing 1 billion and if so, what would be the point of being able to access the genesis account? You can't send NXT (negative balance) and you can't receive NXT without it being destroyed.

Maybe I've got this completely wrong/misinterpreted/missed the joke.

Please could someone re-post for me in the forum above?

Thanks