Why is NXT not the number 2 coin?

[inBitweTrust]

I don't think NXT is dying.  They have a good, enthusiatic team.  And I think they are well funded.  They are a major sponsor in the upcoming Payment Expo.

A decent development team is about all they have going for them.

Waning user adoption and interest, lack of merchant acceptance, lack of VC investment and legitimate business interest.

Part of NxTs problem deals with not having first mover advantage and another part of it is its tainted and questionable ICO. Bitcoin has enough problems with Satoshi being anonymous and possibly controlling between 2- 5% of all Bitcoins that will ever be mined but at least it was a fair POW distribution where anyone can mine. It is very likely (based upon the evidence) that between 5-9 users control most of the stake with NxT which is very troubling and why most people are apprehensive about getting involved with NxT.

This will continue haunt them just like Paycoin, Dash, Maidsafecoin and many other coins that didn't have a fair launch.

[tokeweed]

I don't think NXT is dying.  They have a good, enthusiatic team.  And I think they are well funded.  They are a major sponsor in the upcoming Payment Expo.

A decent development team is about all they have going for them.

Waning user adoption and interest, lack of merchant acceptance, lack of VC investment and legitimate business interest.

Part of NxTs problem deals with not having first mover advantage and another part of it is its tainted and questionable ICO. Bitcoin has enough problems with Satoshi being anonymous and possibly controlling between 2- 5% of all Bitcoins that will ever be mined but at least it was a fair POW distribution where anyone can mine. It is very likely (based upon the evidence) that between 5-9 users control most of the stake with NxT which is very troubling and why most people are apprehensive about getting involved with NxT.

This will continue haunt them just like Paycoin, Dash, Maidsafecoin and many other coins that didn't have a fair launch.

Thanks for giving a fair and informative post.  So I guess it's in the hands of the NXT whales then if they want NXT to succeed.  Imo, they better make use of their stash than hoarding them.

[habraken]

What are you saying?  NXT is a bubble?

No. I actually typed what I was saying.

So if it's not a bubble its market cap actually means something.

Of course it does. Amongst other (imo more important) things.
If marketcap according to CMC is your holy grail, please explain Rimbit.

[tokeweed]

What are you saying?  NXT is a bubble?

No. I actually typed what I was saying.

So if it's not a bubble its market cap actually means something.

Of course it does. Amongst other (imo more important) things.
If marketcap according to CMC is your holy grail, please explain Rimbit.

I didnt mention CMC.  Only NXT's market cap.  Most coins at CMC are junk.  Like over 90% of them.

[inBitweTrust]

Thanks for giving a fair and informative post.  So I guess it's in the hands of the NXT whales then if they want NXT to succeed.  Imo, they better make use of their stash than hoarding them.

Another dillemma NxT has is that it is a small group of whales controlling most the coins which is helping fund development and keep the coin going. Any fork with a fairer dispersion of most of the assets would compromise some of the developers interest in the project succeeding. This is the dillemma of an open source project that doesn't have enough interest to bring in enough developers for multiple reasons. With bitcoin you have developers working and testing for fun, to pad their resume, because a private company backed by VC capital has a vested interest in BTC succeeding, security researchers writing researchers papers, ect ... with NXT the developers are essentially all motivated bagholders.

This is why most alts will be destined to fail ... first mover advantage for a protocol or currency offers a tremendous advantage. Judging from the fact that all of Bitcoins weaknesses have very probable solutions which are being tested and will be released soon it doesn't bode well for NxT or other alts.

[habraken]

I don't think NXT is dying.  They have a good, enthusiatic team.  And I think they are well funded.  They are a major sponsor in the upcoming Payment Expo.

A decent development team is about all they have going for them.

Which is actually the most important thing when it's only over a year old. These are just the beginnings.
Developing features, interconnecting features, slowly improving usability, ironing out bugs, etc.

Waning user adoption and interest, lack of merchant acceptance, lack of VC investment and legitimate business interest.

Not too important at the moment. There are plenty of (techie) users in NXT/SuperNET slack and fora. NXT is not primarily used for payments, so there's no real need for merchants accepting NXT. Leave that to BTC for the time being. VC's have trouble investing in decentralized community based opensource platforms, NXT is more like the Linux of crypto. Besides, VC's want to extract profits after a certain point of time, imo VC money is overrated and not always needed. There are some businesses using NXT (technology) by the way. Like smartcontracts.com, debune.org, and jetcoininstitute.com. And NXT is crypto sponsor of payexpo.com (not a crypto conference).

Part of NxTs problem deals with not having first mover advantage and another part of it is its tainted and questionable ICO. Bitcoin has enough problems with Satoshi being anonymous and possibly controlling between 2- 5% of all Bitcoins that will ever be mined but at least it was a fair POW distribution where anyone can mine. It is very likely (based upon the evidence) that between 5-9 users control most of the stake with NxT which is very troubling and why most people are apprehensive about getting involved with NxT.

But it does have first mover advantage. The first 100% PoS coin (no bitcoin clone), the first with a functioning Asset Exchange, decentralized Marketplace, Monetary System, etc. ICO is only 'questionable' in the eyes of miners that are angry they couldn't mine the shit out of it. Actually, there are some disadvantages if distribution is too even and there are no whales. There's less innovation, less sponsors, etc, mentioned in the NEM discussion iirc.

This will continue haunt them just like Paycoin, Dash, Maidsafecoin and many other coins that didn't have a fair launch.

There's no such thing as a 'fair' launch. Is 1000 people fair? Is 10000 people fair? How about 5 billion people?

[inBitweTrust]

NXT is more like the Linux of crypto.

Odd comparison to make as linux has extensive adoption, acceptance and development support from many large private companies. "Linux" is found within most consumer devices these days in one form or another.

the first with a functioning Asset Exchange, decentralized Marketplace, Monetary System,

False, false and false. I suppose the other first examples don't classify as functional in your opinion despite them functioning.

There's no such thing as a 'fair' launch. Is 1000 people fair? Is 10000 people fair? How about 5 billion people?

One great thing about PoW is that it allows for a fair and controlled distribution. Any ICO allows for shill accounts to distort distribution and than there is the added problem of the last minute change in NxT's ICO(Like was done with maidsafe coin) compounding the problem.

[Daedelus]

It has been a while inbitwetrust  too many people badmouthing btc again? 

No new arguments I see, shame. But I'll get my popcorn... 

[TheMage]

Why is NXT not the number 2 coin?

Why does it have to be a measure of penis's around here (or is it peni)?

So NXT's economy shouldn't be growing to more than a billion market cap, is that what you're saying?

I'm not saying that at all!


Instead of stating in the threat title "why arent we number two" how about celebrating what accomplishments that NXT has done? Hence the measure of penis comment.

[inBitweTrust]

No new arguments I see, shame. But I'll get my popcorn...  

Why would there be new arguments when the same problems persist and are getting worse?

Instead of stating in the threat title "why arent we number two" how about celebrating what accomplishments that NXT has done?

I like some of the improvements in POS security NxT has implemented with slowly migrating to a TaPoS mechanism. Ethereum has some neat ideas as well that look more promising than NxT. Really cool when we can start to roll some of these into a BTC wallet or protocol itself.

[box0214]

im betting on the platform... not the coin.

[Daedelus]

No new arguments I see, shame. But I'll get my popcorn...  

Why would there be new arguments when the same problems persist and are getting worse?

Links pls?


 

[EvilDave]

NXT is more like the Linux of crypto.

Odd comparison to make as linux has extensive adoption, acceptance and development support from many large private companies. "Linux" is found within most consumer devices these days in one form or another.

And just how much adoption did Linux have 18 months after its launch, back in 1993/1994 ?
The answer is: pretty much f**k-all, apart from an annoyingly vocal group of open-source nerds who were claiming to have the best OS evah!
Sound familiar......?

Never forget, we are still a very, very long way from having a mature crypto-currency ecosystem and economy, so a lot of interesting stuff can (and will) happen over the next 5-10 years.

[EvilDave]

One great thing about PoW is that it allows for a fair and controlled distribution. Any ICO allows for shill accounts to distort distribution and than there is the added problem of the last minute change in NxT's ICO(Like was done with maidsafe coin) compounding the problem.

This is an issue, but shill accounts can be kept to an acceptable limit through the requirement of purchasing an initial stake rather than giving the ICO stakes away for free. NEM took the latter road and it's clear by now how things have turned out for those idiots. Their own leader, the now-forgotten UtopianFuture, accidentally signed a post from one of his own shill accounts by his UtopianFuture name, mistakenly thinking he was signed into his main account, and went down in utter disgrace. But since NXT stakes had to be purchased with bitcoin one could not simply multiply their stakes limited only by how many new accounts they could manage to create. Anyone who wanted multiple NXT stakes would have had to pay real money for them and I doubt many would have wanted to risk more than 1 BTC on something most people saw as a simple scam at time of ICO. This is why I think the number of original stake-holders is much higher than the low-ball estimates NXT's critics are always repeating, which range from 2-10. Anyway there's no way to know the exact number. Was the ICO perfect? No. Is it a critical flaw in the NXT ecosystem? I don't think so. If NXT has a lot of valuable features to offer the crypto world I'd say those features outway any unfairness in ICO. I'm not that bothered if a few lucky or smart folks get rich off of unfair ICO, if NXT allows me to use a decentralized marketplace, currency exchange, voting system etc. I'll use it just because it's useful to me. If enough other people see it that way NXT will take off big!

Allowing for the crappy punctuation, this makes a lot of sense. At the time of the initial Nxt ICO/IPO/distribution, no-one gave a rats bottom about BCNext and his silly Java project, so I'm pretty sure that no-one would have bothered making shill accounts to waste even more BTC by throwing it at Nxt.
It was only after Nxts launch and immediate success that people started to play the ICO game and it became seen as worthwhile to create multiple puppet accounts for every single IPO that came along.

[inBitweTrust]

One great thing about PoW is that it allows for a fair and controlled distribution. Any ICO allows for shill accounts to distort distribution and than there is the added problem of the last minute change in NxT's ICO(Like was done with maidsafe coin) compounding the problem.

This is an issue, but shill accounts can be kept to an acceptable limit through the requirement of purchasing an initial stake rather than giving the ICO stakes away for free. NEM took the latter road and it's clear by now how things have turned out for those idiots. Their own leader, the now-forgotten UtopianFuture, accidentally signed a post from one of his own shill accounts by his UtopianFuture name, mistakenly thinking he was signed into his main account, and went down in utter disgrace. But since NXT stakes had to be purchased with bitcoin one could not simply multiply their stakes limited only by how many new accounts they could manage to create. Anyone who wanted multiple NXT stakes would have had to pay real money for them and I doubt many would have wanted to risk more than 1 BTC on something most people saw as a simple scam at time of ICO. This is why I think the number of original stake-holders is much higher than the low-ball estimates NXT's critics are always repeating, which range from 2-10. Anyway there's no way to know the exact number. Was the ICO perfect? No. Is it a critical flaw in the NXT ecosystem? I don't think so. If NXT has a lot of valuable features to offer the crypto world I'd say those features outway any unfairness in ICO. I'm not that bothered if a few lucky or smart folks get rich off of unfair ICO, if NXT allows me to use a decentralized marketplace, currency exchange, voting system etc. I'll use it just because it's useful to me. If enough other people see it that way NXT will take off big!

I agree that it was unlikely that the shill accounts came from investors. If I created an alt with a couple partners I would have taken some of my own BTC and invested it across many shill accounts to make it appear that the distribution is greater than appeared. It is impossible to know an exact number. Minimum would be around 5 controlling over 50% stake and max 73. Our estimates of 5-9 is a very rough guess judging from initial blockchain distribution graphs (which were subsequently removed because they were far too granular. https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution shows a rougher approximation with the highest category being between 1 million and a billion where a previous breakdown reflecting only a handfull accounts between the 10 million and billion. This data wasn't coming from Nxt "haters" but the NxT blockchain itself. Of course Nxt proponents will always claim that most of the initial coins have been sold off to new investors and distribution is much better now. The problem with this thinking is that there doesn't exist any evidence to support this and some good evidence to show that there hasn't been a rush of new investors into the Nxt Ecosystem.

You want some evidence. Look at the Nxt Forum.... keep in mind that someone investing in Nxt is far more likely to participate in Nxt forum than bitcoin because it is an obscure and niche alt where you really have to be involved to own some.

https://nxtforum.org/

Most Online Today: 134. Most Online Ever: 509 (August 15, 2014, 01:19:36 pm)

This includes shill accounts as well reflecting a very small community.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

I agree that it was unlikely that the shill accounts came from investors. If I created an alt with a couple partners I would have taken some of my own BTC and invested it across many shill accounts to make it appear that the distribution is greater than appeared. It is impossible to know an exact number. Minimum would be around 5 controlling over 50% stake and max 73. Our estimates of 5-9 is a very rough guess judging from initial blockchain distribution graphs (which were subsequently removed because they were far too granular. https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution shows a rougher approximation with the highest category being between 1 million and a billion where a previous breakdown reflecting only a handfull accounts between the 10 million and billion.

You are assuming that BCNext was a liar, cheater and thief.  Imo, from what I have read, inquired and experienced this was not the case.  I'd like anyone who believes otherwise to run a taint analysis on the NXT funding address.  I think it is pretty obvious that BCNext was an idealist and not out to make as much money as possible by scamming others because he limited donations to 21 BTC.

Your belief of mining being more "fair" than a crowdsale is imo not accurate.  With mining a currency, you are simply abstracting the crowdsale from the coin and sending your money to the hardware manufacturers and electricity providers.  That doesn't make it more "fair".  There will always be people with more money who can purchase more mining hardware and pay a larger electric bill.

[inBitweTrust]

I get what you're saying and I don't know if there's a way to disprove that in a factual way. If BCNext and a few partners created a bunch of shill accounts and sent bitcoins to the ICO address they would have been paying the money to themselves and not really spending their money. However, that just doesn't seem plausible to me in the case of NXT, the whole thing from the get-go just doesn't seem like a scam. If it were a scam you'd think the whale accounts would have dumped most of their NXT by now, especially during that big pump when the NXT market cap shot up to $100 million. But instead they've held onto most of their NXT all this time. Why would they have done that if they were just running a scam and trying to cash in? Scam-coins tend to be clone coins with lazy coding, why put so much work into developing real features, which they did from the very beginning by writing entirely original code for the first all-POS crypto. And the dev team has been active ever since. All that evidence suggests to me that whoever started NXT was serious about making a crypto of real value and not just a get-rich-quick scheme. Why develop all these features if you're just looking to make a quick buck. I guess it is possible that they did both: develop a real crypto AND scam investors by setting up shill accounts. Who knows? But to me that's really not the issue. The real issue is whether NXT is a quality altcoin with valuable features. Even if there were some shady dealings going on there's really no denying the quality and originality of the platform.

This is completely ignoring my comments or the topic of the thread.

I haven't called NxT a scam coin. In fact I have been defending NxT for sometime claiming that it appears not to be a scamcoin based upon the dedication of a small team of developers.

What is undeniable is NXT is capitulating and dieing(Even compared to BTC crashing which has been drastic) . This can be proven by the numbers even if you add in all the assets to paint the most favorable outcome for the NxT ecosystem.

The ICO isn't the most important concern but is a real one that one should consider when investing in NxT and its future potential. Additionally , while Nxt does have much better development than many alts , it is pathetic compared to all the development from a software and hardware side in the Bitcoin ecosystem. Don't drink the marketing koolaid and compare the NxT wallet to Bitcoin QT. Bitcoin is much bigger than that with many projects and many hardware and software implementations..  

[DecentralizeEconomics]

The ICO isn't the most important concern but is a real one that one should consider when investing in NxT and its future potential. Additionally , while Nxt does have much better development than many alts , it is pathetic compared to all the development from a software and hardware side in the Bitcoin ecosystem. Don't drink the marketing koolaid and compare the NxT wallet to Bitcoin QT. Bitcoin is much bigger than that with many projects and many hardware and software implementations..  

BTC would be great if it wasn't centralized and its security wasn't dominated by the mining conglomerates instead of the currency holders

[rtrtcrypto]

Dying? Based on what? Coin market cap? The network is PoS and tokens change hands much slower than PoW, the network is secure and will remain secure even if things slow down even further. You seem to compare everything to BTC and only that - yes, BTC is ahead, but it doesn't and won't do all the things other platforms are going to do in the future. This won't be a zero sum game.  

You don't seem close enough to the NXT ecosystem to realize that things are happening outside of crypto and outside of the purview of this forum. For NXT, it is barely past year 1, calm yourself. The pace is extremely fast and impressive when you really think about it. Where are your "numbers proving death"

Sometimes I wonder, if you (and people like you) weren't invested in BTC and worried about your own investment, would you write the things you write? How much of this is pure self-defense?  

I get what you're saying and I don't know if there's a way to disprove that in a factual way. If BCNext and a few partners created a bunch of shill accounts and sent bitcoins to the ICO address they would have been paying the money to themselves and not really spending their money. However, that just doesn't seem plausible to me in the case of NXT, the whole thing from the get-go just doesn't seem like a scam. If it were a scam you'd think the whale accounts would have dumped most of their NXT by now, especially during that big pump when the NXT market cap shot up to $100 million. But instead they've held onto most of their NXT all this time. Why would they have done that if they were just running a scam and trying to cash in? Scam-coins tend to be clone coins with lazy coding, why put so much work into developing real features, which they did from the very beginning by writing entirely original code for the first all-POS crypto. And the dev team has been active ever since. All that evidence suggests to me that whoever started NXT was serious about making a crypto of real value and not just a get-rich-quick scheme. Why develop all these features if you're just looking to make a quick buck. I guess it is possible that they did both: develop a real crypto AND scam investors by setting up shill accounts. Who knows? But to me that's really not the issue. The real issue is whether NXT is a quality altcoin with valuable features. Even if there were some shady dealings going on there's really no denying the quality and originality of the platform.

This is completely ignoring my comments or the topic of the thread.

I haven't called NxT a scam coin. In fact I have been defending NxT for sometime claiming that it appears not to be a scamcoin based upon the dedication of a small team of developers.

What is undeniable is NXT is capitulating and dieing(Even compared to BTC crashing which has been drastic) . This can be proven by the numbers even if you add in all the assets to paint the most favorable outcome for the NxT ecosystem.

The ICO isn't the most important concern but is a real one that one should consider when investing in NxT and its future potential. Additionally , while Nxt does have much better development than many alts , it is pathetic compared to all the development from a software and hardware side in the Bitcoin ecosystem. Don't drink the marketing koolaid and compare the NxT wallet to Bitcoin QT. Bitcoin is much bigger than that with many projects and many hardware and software implementations..  

[inBitweTrust]

BTC would be great if it wasn't centralized and its security wasn't dominated by the mining conglomerates instead of the currency holders

This is a fair criticism of Bitcoin but one that can possibly be overcome with solutions like the Lightning Protocol, ASIC appliances, and other algorithms being introduced to change the incentives. There some core developers who even think PoW should be migrated away from, others think a hybrid approach can be adopted, others believe that the laws of thermodynamics  and economics will naturally solve the mining centralization dilemma.

You are assuming that BCNext was a liar, cheater and thief.  Imo, from what I have read, inquired and experienced this was not the case.  I'd like anyone who believes otherwise to run a taint analysis on the NXT funding address.  I think it is pretty obvious that BCNext was an idealist and not out to make as much money as possible by scamming others because he limited donations to 21 BTC.

You are straw manning my position and I made such a claim. If I were to make an educated guess I would suggest that BCNext and a few other developers/partners decided to spread multiple investments across several accounts for multiple reasons. Protecting their privacy and insuring the best chance of success of their project they believed in. Humans can rationalize certain behaviors and believe they are doing the right thing at the same time.  Additionally, all it would take is one of the early partners /devs to create a bunch of shill investment accounts, who suggested it had to be BCNext ?

Your belief of mining being more "fair" than a crowdsale is imo not accurate.  With mining a currency, you are simply abstracting the crowdsale from the coin and sending your money to the hardware manufacturers and electricity providers.  That doesn't make it more "fair".  There will always be people with more money who can purchase more mining hardware and pay a larger electric bill.

By wasting resources on hardware and electricity you can make it very difficult for a few people to corner the market. It is no longer just about who has the most capital to buy the hardware and electricity but who can develop the fastest chips, who can cool the chips the best, who can find the cheapest space , who can contract the best support staff to maintain the hardware, who can source the cheapest electricity(notice all those poor chinese mining Bitcoin... why isn't all mining centralized in the US where most early bitcoin users came from and all the money is located?)