The 2.0 throwdown thread

[jwinterm]

With all the hype surrounding Ethereum launch, I'd like to start putting together a comparison table of all the 2.0 platforms/coins/tokens/thingamajigs. The ones I have in mind are Bitshares, Burst, Nem, Nxt, Qora, Counterparty (Dogeparty/Clearinghouse), and Ethereum. I'm interested in mapping out their similarities and differences, particularly what each is capable and incapable of doing, but also other differences such as validation scheme (PoW or PoS), initial distribution, etc.

With that being said, here is the table:



Link to html version of table: http://myrcraft.com/2p0platformtable.html

Please comment with features/similarities/comparisons/coins you would like to see added or modified and I will update the table (or if I have anything wrong). I honestly don't know that much about many of these systems, and I'm trying to use this as an exercise to educate myself, so if you have any very informative links or anything as well, please share

Edit10: Crypti is open source! Also, Syscoin has gone to beta with distributed marketplace. Bitshares has gone 2.0 now with privacy features, multisig, and high fees.

Edit9: Removed average block time as it was completely unfilled, and added a few unique features for NEM and NXT.

Edit8: Updated a bunch of links from (need link) to actual links. Added a bunch of centralized apps and changed formatting a bit.

Edit7: Updated - added syscoin, coinousd, and links at the bottom (maybe some other stuff...). Still thinking about removing Crypti since closed source.

Edit6: Updated again, thinking about removing Crypti since it seems to be closed source.

Edit5: Updated table to HTML and added some more info. None-image version found here: http://myrcraft.com/2p0platformtable.html

Edit4: Deleted NuShares, updated a bunch of other stuff.

Edit3: Added inflationary/deflationary row. Considering dropping Nushares, maybe add Shadow(coin).

Edit2: Added Crypti.

Edit: Added NuShares, but need to look more into it seems like it's only use/goal is to be a market pegged asset, so considering removing it. Also, need to check NXT/NEM pegged assets, and maybe separate automated and atomic transactions.

Last update: 2015-10-21

Disclaimer: I own some Bitshares, Burst, Crypti, Counterparty, Ethereum, NEM, and Qora, Syscoin.

[1714919265]

1714919265

[1714919265]

1714919265

[1714919265]

1714919265

[GTO911]

Qora was an ICO

[Sebastien256]

Nxt support atomic transaction.

From Nxt forum:

The account control is not a workaround, it was always part of the two phased transactions design but there was no time to implement it for 1.5. Of course the parameters of the voting model will be fixed with the transaction that enables account control for an account, and can only be changed or removed with a transaction that is also phased, under the same voting model.

From security point of view, account control is not 2FA, because it only increases the security from one password to two or more passwords, of the same type. The 2FA planned for 1.7 is based on hash chains, once enabled, each transaction of the protected account will need to be released by publishing a one-time hash, meaning that an attacker that knows the account password and the hash codes used so far still cannot produce the hash needed for the next transaction. It should be possible to combine this with account control too.

Often overlooked features of phasing are the by-transaction and by-hash (shared secret) phasing types, and those two can be used for trustless escrow or atomic cross-chain transactions even now, they do not require account control.

And have market pegged asset such as CoinoUSD.

For Nxt features, you can take a look at this comparison matrix:

http://i.cubeupload.com/WYbaSu.jpg

However, please note that only Nxt features are up to date. Features from the others platform are not update yet.

Edit: latest Nxt release 1.5.15 now support "offline transaction" too. This is a very good security improvement, imo.

[jwinterm]

Thanks for responses. I'm trying to figure out a better formatting. Can SMF handle HTML/HTMLtables? Let's see...

[HTML]
<table>
<tr>
<td> asdf </td>
<td> fdsa </td>
</tr>
</table>
[HTML]

Edit: seems not... 

[jwinterm]

Name	BTS	BURST	XCP (also XDP & XCH)	ETH	NEM	NXT	QORA
Initial distribution	Airdropped to PTS holders	Proof-of-capacity mining	Proof-of-burn using BTC	ICO now Proof-of-work (future Proof-of-stake?)	CFP	ICO	ICO
Validation scheme	Delegated Proof-of-stake	Proof-of-capacity	BTC blockchain	Proof-of-work	Proof-of-Importance	Proof-Stake	Proof-of-stake
Asset creation	✓	✓	✓	?	✓	✓	✓
Automated/atomic transaction	✘	✓	✘	✘	✘	✘	✓
Market pegged assets	✓	✘	✘	✘	✘	✘	✘
Blockchain Multisig	✘	✘	✘	✘	✓	✘	✘

Fixed it a little and added another category.
Another category for messaging needs to be added, but I assume by now most of these platforms include messaging.

Thanks BigSirko, I think I'm gonna move it to a spreadsheet and output a pdf then link image or something. It's just not really read-able at the moment. The image linked by Sebastien256 looks really nice, but I'd like to have the space to make some notes about the differences between the coins.

[Bisha]

Finally a thread like this. Hope people can keep discussing features in a civilized manner instead of flaming like most other threads. BitShares has some features that will only be added once 2.0 is released so they're probably subject to change.

Maybe you could also add a ''Pending'' clause or a "Pending*" and then explain the * below. BitShares will have a referral program for example, but I can't say it's implemented yet since 2.0 isn't out yet. But I would like you to add pending features (assuming they are being worked on!) so I and other people could know other features other projects would offer.

edit: isn't stellar 2.0 too? Also dunno if Ripple is too. Counterparty, NuShares?

[gjhiggins]

Thanks for responses. I'm trying to figure out a better formatting. Can SMF handle HTML/HTMLtables? Let's see...

[HTML]
<table>
<tr>
<td> asdf </td>
<td> fdsa </td>
</tr>
</table>
[HTML]

Edit: seems not...  

This ...

Code:

[table]
[tr][td]Cell 1[/td][td]Cell 2[/td][td]Cell 3[/td][/tr]
[/table]

renders as this ..

Cell 1

Cell 2

Cell 3

* gjhiggins gives up, reads: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=help;page=post#bbcref

Cheers

Graham

[Sebastien256]

From my understanding, automated (turing complete) and atomic (cross-chain) transaction are two different thing.
We can say that ETH has automated transaction too, I think.

[jwinterm]

Finally a thread like this. Hope people can keep discussing features in a civilized manner instead of flaming like most other threads. BitShares has some features that will only be added once 2.0 is released so they're probably subject to change.

Maybe you could also add a ''Pending'' clause or a "Pending*" and then explain the * below. BitShares will have a referral program for example, but I can't say it's implemented yet since 2.0 isn't out yet. But I would like you to add pending features (assuming they are being worked on!) so I and other people could know other features other projects would offer.

edit: isn't stellar 2.0 too? Also dunno if Ripple is too. Counterparty, NuShares?

I have Counterparty in there. I will add NuShares, though at the moment I know practically nothing about it.

I don't really consider Ripple to be 2.0 platform, more of just a quasi-decentralized settlement system, and Stellar seems like Ripple but they try to pretend they have some great distribution mechanism (via facebook, but people are recorded on youtube grabbing 100k+ STR by gaming the system), supposedly non-profit (but they're registered in Delaware I think, where they don't have to disclose earnings/expenditures and there is like no real requirements to be non-profit, and they still hold like 80+% of all coins. I'm really not a fan of Stellar (or Ripple), in case you couldn't tell, but I don't think they really qualify as 2.0 platforms anyway. Further recommended reading here:
http://observer.com/2015/02/the-race-to-replace-bitcoin/
(This article refers to them as Bitcoin 2.0, but still, I disagree.)

[Sebastien256]

Nxt also has something like multisig, it is call two-phase transactions. Right-now, the current two-phase transaction implementation is also like multisig but for each individual transaction. In the planned Nxt 1.7, account control (and 2FA, which is more complete than multisig and account control, see Jean-Luc quote above) will be introduce so that two-phase transaction could also be applied for every transaction made by an account effectively making the signature required for each flag account.

[yassin54]

hi jwinterm
good initiative
may be it can help you

Hébergé par Imagesia.com

 you can contact this person: https://nxtforum.org/index.php?action=profile;u=69
Good luck!  
Sorry english not good 

[Bisha]

Finally a thread like this. Hope people can keep discussing features in a civilized manner instead of flaming like most other threads. BitShares has some features that will only be added once 2.0 is released so they're probably subject to change.

Maybe you could also add a ''Pending'' clause or a "Pending*" and then explain the * below. BitShares will have a referral program for example, but I can't say it's implemented yet since 2.0 isn't out yet. But I would like you to add pending features (assuming they are being worked on!) so I and other people could know other features other projects would offer.

edit: isn't stellar 2.0 too? Also dunno if Ripple is too. Counterparty, NuShares?

I have Counterparty in there. I will add NuShares, though at the moment I know practically nothing about it.

I don't really consider Ripple to be 2.0 platform, more of just a quasi-decentralized settlement system, and Stellar seems like Ripple but they try to pretend they have some great distribution mechanism (via facebook, but people are recorded on youtube grabbing 100k+ STR by gaming the system), supposedly non-profit (but they're registered in Delaware I think, where they don't have to disclose earnings/expenditures and there is like no real requirements to be non-profit, and they still hold like 80+% of all coins. I'm really not a fan of Stellar (or Ripple), in case you couldn't tell, but I don't think they really qualify as 2.0 platforms anyway. Further recommended reading here:
http://observer.com/2015/02/the-race-to-replace-bitcoin/
(This article refers to them as Bitcoin 2.0, but still, I disagree.)

I see. Was just asking because, tbh I don't know myself if I should consider them 2.0 or not.

Would you consider adding a "pending" clause so to speak? Instead of the "have"/"don't have" clauses only? Stuff you could also add: decentralized exchange, prediction markets, can't remember more atm

[jwinterm]

Thanks yassin54, I think that's same pic posted above, and yes, I do think it will be helpful.

I will add a pending category as well, Bisha, I think that Bitshares is supposed to be adding a bunch of new functionality with 2.0 release.

I'm going out for a while, but I'll try and update it some more later this evening, and go to bitsharestalk.org and /r/ethereum and /r/nushares or peercointalk or something and see if I can get some none NXT folk to come help fill in some more blanks.

[poloskarted]

hi jwinterm
good initiative
may be it can help you

Hébergé par Imagesia.com

 you can contact this person: https://nxtforum.org/index.php?action=profile;u=69
Good luck!  
Sorry english not good  

The potential for that chart to be a broad, objective comparison of some of the main 2.0 projects is there, but as it stands it is extremely biased towards NXT to the point where it's not even trying to be subtle about it (only green ticks and under construction in the NXT side...really now?), in addition a cursory glance shows glaring factually incorrect segments.

[jwinterm]

Table updated a bit. I'm gonna go spam respective coin's forums/subreddits asking for input

[Passion_ltc]

Hey jwinterm, would be great if you add Crypti to the table. It's also a "2.0" platform with the decentralized applications platform currently in alpha testing by our team.

http://crypti.me for more information, white paper here: http://crypti.me/crypti.pdf, first demo of our dapps: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9o5X4xHJnc



I already prepare the entries for your list:

- Total supply: 100,000,000 (fixed)
- Initial distribution: Initial coin offering with 750 BTC invested
- Validation scheme: Delegated Proof-of-Stake

Automated (Turing complete) transactions: Yes, but in a side chain
Atomic (cross-chain) transactions: Yes, between Crypti's side chains
Asset creation: Yes (later). After the initial release you will be able to create custom tokens in your side chain
Market pegged assets: Pending, maybe some developer will create it with a dapp
Asset exchange: Pending, maybe some developer will create it with a dapp
Blockchain Multisig: Yes
Marketplace: Pending, maybe some developer will create it with a dapp


Crypti will have complete decentralized applications functionality. The dapps will be coded in JavaScript. Every dapp has its own side chain and can be used to save its data. In principle nearly everything will be possible.

[Irontiga]

Burst has an asset exchange built in, and thx to the at's it can also handle multisig wallets.

[Sebastien256]

Hi Jwinterm,

I see you update the chart. That is good work.

However, you may note additionnaly that Nxt has a large asset exchange. You can take a look at the Nxt AE using those sites for example:
http://jnxt.org/jayex/?17554243582654188572
or
https://trade.secureae.com/#17554243582654188572

Nxt can also do atomic (cross chain) transaction with any chains. See again the Jean-Luc quote above (wich is the lead core dev of Nxt).

Thank you to compile all this.

[Sebastien256]

The potential for that chart to be a broad, objective comparison of some of the main 2.0 projects is there, but as it stands it is extremely biased towards NXT to the point where it's not even trying to be subtle about it (only green ticks and under construction in the NXT side...really now?), in addition a cursory glance shows glaring factually incorrect segments.

Please see the third post of this topic. I had already post the chart, but I mention the fact that it was only the Nxt collumn that was up to date. Nxt community will update the chart using the data in the current topic.

For your information, yes Nxt has every "green ticks" and "under construction ticks" for each element mention in the chart.

[Passion_ltc]

The potential for that chart to be a broad, objective comparison of some of the main 2.0 projects is there, but as it stands it is extremely biased towards NXT to the point where it's not even trying to be subtle about it (only green ticks and under construction in the NXT side...really now?), in addition a cursory glance shows glaring factually incorrect segments.

Please see the third post of this topic. I had already post the chart, but I mention the fact that it was only the Nxt collumn that was up to date. Nxt community will update the chart using the data in the current topic.

For your information, yes Nxt has every "green ticks" and "under construction ticks" for each element mention in the chart.

Nxt is NOT working on Smart Contracts, Automated Transactions, Multisig, Instant Transactions, Anonymous Transactions.

[Sebastien256]

The potential for that chart to be a broad, objective comparison of some of the main 2.0 projects is there, but as it stands it is extremely biased towards NXT to the point where it's not even trying to be subtle about it (only green ticks and under construction in the NXT side...really now?), in addition a cursory glance shows glaring factually incorrect segments.

Please see the third post of this topic. I had already post the chart, but I mention the fact that it was only the Nxt collumn that was up to date. Nxt community will update the chart using the data in the current topic.

For your information, yes Nxt has every "green ticks" and "under construction ticks" for each element mention in the chart.

Nxt is NOT working on Smart Contracts, Automated Transactions, Multisig, Instant Transactions, Anonymous Transactions.

Aye...

1. smart contract is already all written from Cfb, it need to be put into the Nxt code, however there is other priority for the moment.
2. AT, well it depend on how you see this (burst and crypti are Nxt clone, afaik). But I would agree that for now it is not a priority. So that tick could be remove, I give you that one  
3. multisig, yes they are working on that for whole account for next hard fork 1.7, now currently only support multisig for individual transaction with two-phase transaction.
4. anonymous transaction, yes coin suffling for NXT and MS is planned for next hard fork 1.7.
5. Instant transaction, I know a Nxt devs is working on this. but I can't remember his name. I would have to dig in the forum.

[Skerberus]

Qora has asset exchange including asset to asset trading pairs.

[hiddensphinx]

Is there going to be a marketplace for Ether in the future?

[Jean-Luc]

Nxt supports atomic cross-chain exchange using the pay on reveal secret method, as described here:
http://upcoder.com/11/atomic-cross-chain-exchange/#pay-on-reveal-secret

It was implemented and released in production in the 1.5 release:
https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/issues/224/proposal-new-tx-type-pay-on-reveal-secret

Automated transactions, which Nxt does not support, is one way of implementing atomic cross-chain exchange, but as you can see certainly not the only one.

Nxt does not support anonymous transactions, but it will support Coin Shuffling as described in this paper: http://crypsys.mmci.uni-saarland.de/projects/CoinShuffle/coinshuffle.pdf , here is the description of the Nxt implementation of it: https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/issues/135/coin-shuffling-monetary-system (note that it will work not only for Monetary System coins but for NXT itself too). The work as described in this issue is completed, what remains to be done is the so called "blame phase", making sure a rogue shuffle participant who tries to sabotage the shuffle is penalized for it. This will be released in 1.7.

[Passion_ltc]

The potential for that chart to be a broad, objective comparison of some of the main 2.0 projects is there, but as it stands it is extremely biased towards NXT to the point where it's not even trying to be subtle about it (only green ticks and under construction in the NXT side...really now?), in addition a cursory glance shows glaring factually incorrect segments.

Please see the third post of this topic. I had already post the chart, but I mention the fact that it was only the Nxt collumn that was up to date. Nxt community will update the chart using the data in the current topic.

For your information, yes Nxt has every "green ticks" and "under construction ticks" for each element mention in the chart.

Nxt is NOT working on Smart Contracts, Automated Transactions, Multisig, Instant Transactions, Anonymous Transactions.

Aye...

1. smart contract is already all written from Cfb, it need to be put into the Nxt code, however there is other priority for the moment.
2. AT, well it depend on how you see this (burst and crypti are Nxt clone, afaik). But I would agree that for now it is not a priority. So that tick could be remove, I give you that one 
3. multisig, yes they are working on that for whole account for next hard fork 1.7, now currently only support multisig for individual transaction with two-phase transaction.
4. anonymous transaction, yes coin suffling for NXT and MS is planned for next hard fork 1.7.
5. Instant transaction, I know a Nxt devs is working on this. but I can't remember his name. I would have to dig in the forum.

Nxt supports atomic cross-chain exchange using the pay on reveal secret method, as described here:
http://upcoder.com/11/atomic-cross-chain-exchange/#pay-on-reveal-secret

It was implemented and released in production in the 1.5 release:
https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/issues/224/proposal-new-tx-type-pay-on-reveal-secret

Automated transactions, which Nxt does not support, is one way of implementing atomic cross-chain exchange, but as you can see certainly not the only one.

Nxt does not support anonymous transactions, but it will support Coin Shuffling as described in this paper: http://crypsys.mmci.uni-saarland.de/projects/CoinShuffle/coinshuffle.pdf , here is the description of the Nxt implementation of it: https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/issues/135/coin-shuffling-monetary-system (note that it will work not only for Monetary System coins but for NXT itself too). The work as described in this issue is completed, what remains to be done is the so called "blame phase", making sure a rogue shuffle participant who tries to sabotage the shuffle is penalized for it. This will be released in 1.7.

1. & 2. Smart contracts/AT: Jean-Luc I think it was you, who mentioned that it will not go into the source. With that as the current standpoint you can't say that it's being worked on.

3. Ok.

4. Coin Shuffling is not anonymous transactions. It's another feature.

5. Instant transactions were planned by Matthew C., he is now at Burst. So no, it's not being worked on.


Crypti is NOT a Nxt clone. It's written from scratch, written in Javascript/Node.js. Uses DPoS for consensus.

[Sebastien256]

...
4. Coin Shuffling is not anonymous transactions. It's another feature.
...
5. Instant transactions were planned by Matthew C., he is now at Burst. So no, it's not being worked on.
...
Crypti is NOT a Nxt clone. It's written from scratch, written in Javascript/Node.js. Uses DPoS for consensus.

Thank you for these clarification. I see how good it is the current topic.  

On anoter note,
Imo, coinsuffling is a kind anonymous transaction. So it is good that the chart currently working by jwinterm can add some text to described the feature with better detailed.

[Passion_ltc]

...
4. Coin Shuffling is not anonymous transactions. It's another feature.
...
5. Instant transactions were planned by Matthew C., he is now at Burst. So no, it's not being worked on.
...
Crypti is NOT a Nxt clone. It's written from scratch, written in Javascript/Node.js. Uses DPoS for consensus.

Thank you for these clarification. I see how good it is the current topic. 

On anoter note,
Imo, coinsuffling is a kind anonymous transaction. So it is good that the chart currently working by jwinterm can add some text to described the feature with better detailed.

I agree. It's a cool feature. I just don't like it, when people bend reality to let their cryptos look better.

[Jean-Luc]

To focus on features already implemented and in production:

Voting System:

Nxt has that since 1.5, http://wiki.nxtcrypto.org/wiki/Voting_System , and it is being used to make decisions with voting weighted by NXT balance such as this one: https://nxtportal.org/polls/2751730409036026521 , or by asset balance: https://nxtportal.org/polls/14305781929821355952 . Several other voting models (by account, by MS currency, with or without minimum balance restriction) are supported.

Qora also has a voting system, but as far as I know votes can only be counted based on Qora account balance, the Nxt one is more flexible.


Prunable messages and data:

Nxt allows publishing up to 42 kbytes of data on the blockchain, as either a message, or tagged data (i.e. with additional searchable metadata fields). It deals with the problem of blockchain bloat by making those data prunable: http://wiki.nxtcrypto.org/wiki/The_Nxt_API#Prunable_Data , http://wiki.nxtcrypto.org/wiki/The_Nxt_API#Tagged_Data_Operations .

Qora also has the feature to allow publishing arbitrary data on the blockchain, and can present this data as webpage. However I don't know if Qora supports pruning of such data, if their design is that every node needs to store every piece of data published forever, they will have a scalability problem.

Unlike Qora, Nxt does not currently provide a way to view such data as a webpage in the default client, however third party applications such as FreeBird are being developed which use the prunable data feature to store tweets or blogs in a decentralized manner: https://nxtforum.org/freebird/ .

 

[jwinterm]

OK, updated table a bit and added Crypti.

Some of the feedback I got on reddit re: Ethereum and here from Passion_ltc re: Crypti makes it seem like these two systems are extremely flexible, and everything can (and will?) be implemented at some point by someone. So, I'm going to try and reserve the pending label for things that are actually being worked on at the moment, and credit the person, repo, company that is working on them. For instance, I think I need to change the x for asset exchange to pending on ethereum and credit Caktux:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/3h66zg/please_help_me_understand_what_makes_eth_unique/cu4lp6d

If I've got something wrong, please post it here or send me a PM. I'm really trying to get everything correct, but it's a bit trickier than I expected o_O

Also, I'm thinking of removing NuShares as it seems to only be a market peg tool with NuBits.

[Skerberus]

There are still some things wrong regarding Qora:
Encrypted messaging already possible
Asset Exchange possible ( afaik the only one that has asset to asset trading pairs)
decentralized applications possible

[jwinterm]

There are still some things wrong regarding Qora:
Encrypted messaging already possible
Asset Exchange possible ( afaik the only one that has asset to asset trading pairs)
decentralized applications possible

Possible means it exists right now, or could exist sometime in the future? Is someone working on them if they don't exist?

[Skerberus]

There are still some things wrong regarding Qora:
Encrypted messaging already possible
Asset Exchange possible ( afaik the only one that has asset to asset trading pairs)
decentralized applications possible

Possible means it exists right now, or could exist sometime in the future? Is someone working on them if they don't exist?

exists right now and can be already used!

[jwinterm]

There are still some things wrong regarding Qora:
Encrypted messaging already possible
Asset Exchange possible ( afaik the only one that has asset to asset trading pairs)
decentralized applications possible

Possible means it exists right now, or could exist sometime in the future? Is someone working on them if they don't exist?

exists right now and can be already used!

OK, updated. Could you provide some links to examples of the decentralized apps? That's not something I've heard of in the context of the NXT family.

[Skerberus]

There are still some things wrong regarding Qora:
Encrypted messaging already possible
Asset Exchange possible ( afaik the only one that has asset to asset trading pairs)
decentralized applications possible

Possible means it exists right now, or could exist sometime in the future? Is someone working on them if they don't exist?

exists right now and can be already used!

OK, updated. Could you provide some links to examples of the decentralized apps? That's not something I've heard of in the context of the NXT family.

First of all Qora is not part of the Nxt family . Nxt is really awesome, but it has nothing to do with Qora, Qora is completly written from scratch and is no clone or sibling of Nxt.
Regarding decentralized applications:
We introduced NameStorage in the last release which e.g. allows users to create interactive websites of arbitrary length on the blockchain. Through api (and that way through any blockchain website) you can write and read arbitrary data to the blockchain and use this as data storage for any application. If you combine this with automated transactions you have the possibility to create an own decentralized interactive crowdfunding website or make e.g. an own interface for ACCT! These are just examples the possibilities are endless.
Currently this is a little cumbersome, the next release will make this even easier and will also have some nice examples build by us.
I have already created an own send money panel, which is completly decentralized (so if someone copies the code of the website to his own website this will work too!).
That panel can be seen here and will be available in next version:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1015379.msg12089928#msg12089928

[jwinterm]

There are still some things wrong regarding Qora:
Encrypted messaging already possible
Asset Exchange possible ( afaik the only one that has asset to asset trading pairs)
decentralized applications possible

Possible means it exists right now, or could exist sometime in the future? Is someone working on them if they don't exist?

exists right now and can be already used!

OK, updated. Could you provide some links to examples of the decentralized apps? That's not something I've heard of in the context of the NXT family.

First of all Qora is not part of the Nxt family . Nxt is really awesome, but it has nothing to do with Qora, Qora is completly written from scratch and is no clone or sibling of Nxt.
Regarding decentralized applications:
We introduced NameStorage in the last release which e.g. allows users to create interactive websites of arbitrary length on the blockchain. Through api (and that way through any blockchain website) you can write and read arbitrary data to the blockchain and use this as data storage for any application. If you combine this with automated transactions you have the possibility to create an own decentralized interactive crowdfunding website or make e.g. an own interface for ACCT! These are just examples the possibilities are endless.
Currently this is a little cumbersome, the next release will make this even easier and will also have some nice examples build by us.
I have already created an own send money panel, which is completly decentralized (so if someone copies the code of the website to his own website this will work too!).
That panel can be seen here and will be available in next version:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1015379.msg12089928#msg12089928

Coolyo Thanks for the clarification!

[erok]

You should remove scam coins and add fair launch coins.

imo btc 2.0 consists of the following:

aeon - mobile friendly version of xmr lightweight as hell cryptonite pow which would be good for iot chips and low power embedded devices. I am buying this all day long right now and have been since smooth took over.

sdc - sdt conversion erasing history an important step in obfuscation along with ring sig and other goodies; the market will create a real world use for it and boom goes the dynamite. ShadowGo is out of control neato as well. I buy this regularly

maybe eth if they actually create a better miner and wallet... but since it only costs 18c to mine right now and they sell for 1.50... that should show you that no one wants to mine it because it is a pain in the ass to mine and move. but as more eth hits the market the saturation will be too tempting for the wallets holding millions and people will dump. the curse of an ICO that even printed 12 million late in the game. I was hoping for a revolution and got a rotten vagina instead. bought it at .002 because i saw a pump coming and dumped at .007. This coin has big money in it so riding the fomo/whale waves isn't horrible if you are safe about it. ride the momentum.

xcp - the burn is concerning. not exactly sure that burning btc really does anything for anyone but I think that if genesis actually drops and the card game blows up and some other stuff happens it could be absolutely nuts. people will build on eth because it is easier but people will build on xcp because it wasn't a scam from the get like eth. But maybe eth was just rushed to launch because they ran out of money.

maid - I want maid to work so bad just for the rollback/refund/safety abilities of this coin and they have some dm plans? this one is one to watch but not buy yet.

also i dont think nxt is ever going to gain any real traction.

[Sebastien256]

@jwinterm

I'm not sure what you mean by decentralized applications. In my understanding, asset exchange, voting system, marketplace, messaging, etc, are all example of decentralized applications.

Do you mean decentralized applications made by "third party" on top of the system in question?

[jwinterm]

@jwinterm

I'm not sure what you mean by decentralized applications. In my understanding, asset exchange, voting system, marketplace, messaging, etc, are all example of decentralized applications.

Do you mean decentralized applications made by "third party" on top of the system in question?

Yea, I guess that just seemed to be the big selling point of ETH (and XCR), so I tacked it on there. But, it seems like having automated transactions is essentially the same thing. So, maybe I should remove that line, or change it to something else. I'm very open to suggestions (and explanations).

[Jean-Luc]

Applications such as Nxt FreeMarket http://nxtfreemarket.com/ , the Multigateway http://multigateway.org/ , and the FreeBird decentralized twitter I previously mentioned run on top of the Nxt blockchain, using its API to store and retrieve data. The MGW does use a few servers run by operators, the others are fully decentralized, as far as I know.

[jwinterm]

You should remove scam coins and add fair launch coins.

imo btc 2.0 consists of the following:

aeon - mobile friendly version of xmr lightweight as hell cryptonite pow which would be good for iot chips and low power embedded devices. I am buying this all day long right now and have been since smooth took over.

sdc - sdt conversion erasing history an important step in obfuscation along with ring sig and other goodies; the market will create a real world use for it and boom goes the dynamite. ShadowGo is out of control neato as well. I buy this regularly

maybe eth if they actually create a better miner and wallet... but since it only costs 18c to mine right now and they sell for 1.50... that should show you that no one wants to mine it because it is a pain in the ass to mine and move. but as more eth hits the market the saturation will be too tempting for the wallets holding millions and people will dump. the curse of an ICO that even printed 12 million late in the game. I was hoping for a revolution and got a rotten vagina instead. bought it at .002 because i saw a pump coming and dumped at .007. This coin has big money in it so riding the fomo/whale waves isn't horrible if you are safe about it. ride the momentum.

xcp - the burn is concerning. not exactly sure that burning btc really does anything for anyone but I think that if genesis actually drops and the card game blows up and some other stuff happens it could be absolutely nuts. people will build on eth because it is easier but people will build on xcp because it wasn't a scam from the get like eth. But maybe eth was just rushed to launch because they ran out of money.

maid - I want maid to work so bad just for the rollback/refund/safety abilities of this coin and they have some dm plans? this one is one to watch but not buy yet.

also i dont think nxt is ever going to gain any real traction.

I like aeon, but there is at the moment no use of the limited scripting capabilities of cryptonote afaik. By 2.0 I mean capable of decentralized exchanges, markets, applications, etc.

I'm not a fan of shadowcoin, and not sure about whether the market is really decentralized. I believe it is in wallet, but is it just run on a server somewhere?

If you want to call eth a scam, I'd say shadow distribution was more of a scam. I'd rather see an ICO followed by PoW than ninja mine all coins in a few days and then go to PoS, but this thread isn't about casting judgment on distribution methods, just comparing coins.

Maid seems like vaporware to me. I'll be happy to add it if it ever comes off test network.

I agree re: nxt, but it was really the first 2.0, so should definitely be in the table.

[Sebastien256]

@jwinterm

I'm not sure what you mean by decentralized applications. In my understanding, asset exchange, voting system, marketplace, messaging, etc, are all example of decentralized applications.

Do you mean decentralized applications made by "third party" on top of the system in question?

Yea, I guess that just seemed to be the big selling point of ETH (and XCR), so I tacked it on there. But, it seems like having automated transactions is essentially the same thing. So, maybe I should remove that line, or change it to something else. I'm very open to suggestions (and explanations).

Nxt has a plugin system where everyone can build apps on top of it and integrate their apps in the Nxt wallet.

For example, we have a complete decentralized plugin:
File sharing plugin https://nxtforum.org/nxt-plugins/file-sharing-plugin-v0-2/

We also have plugin that connect to third party web services:
Shapeshift integration plugin https://nxtforum.org/nxt-plugins/shapeshift-integration-plugin/
tothemoon plugin : https://nxtforum.org/nxt-plugins/nxtbubble-com-nxt-plugin-download-play-directly-in-nrs-1-5-x-clients-9127/

[ffmad]

I suggest adding Shadow (Project) : https://github.com/ShadowProject

- supply : 6,5 M coins
- initial distribution : POW then switch to POS
- Valisation scheme : POS

it has :

- encrypted messaging
- blockchain multisig
- anonymous transaction

in work :

- marketplace (decentralized & anonymous)

About anonymous transactions, Bitshares or NXT don't have it, they only have "more private transactions" than bitcoin (stealth & coinjoin).

Shadow has ring signatures (like cryptonote coins have, but on a bitcoin like blockchain), which is really anonymous.


What do you mean by "decentralized applications" ? (encrypted messaging is a decentralized app)

[erok]

its up there somewhere

I like aeon, but there is at the moment no use of the limited scripting capabilities of cryptonote afaik. By 2.0 I mean capable of decentralized exchanges, markets, applications, etc.

I'm not a fan of shadowcoin, and not sure about whether the market is really decentralized. I believe it is in wallet, but is it just run on a server somewhere?

If you want to call eth a scam, I'd say shadow distribution was more of a scam. I'd rather see an ICO followed by PoW than ninja mine all coins in a few days and then go to PoS, but this thread isn't about casting judgment on distribution methods, just comparing coins.

Maid seems like vaporware to me. I'll be happy to add it if it ever comes off test network.

I agree re: nxt, but it was really the first 2.0, so should definitely be in the table.

aeon does not have scripting abilities but should be considered for 2.0 status because it is designed for iot and embedded device pow. which is important. <-- not 2.0 ffmad corrected me along with wheat.

sdc was launched twice because of a ninja miner the first time but that mistake is frequently made. Relaunches should be considered more often *cough eth*...An in wallet marketplace is coming and you should check out what shadowgo is projected to be. You might like it. I think a good amount of people have the wrong idea about shadow. MOST IMPORTANT TO THIS DISCUSSION THOUGH IS SDT!!!



i agree on maid and on nxt.

I'll leave distribution methods out i guess... but i think that is the most important part and people are glossing over it. People are getting trapped every day.

[ffmad]

I'm not a fan of shadowcoin, and not sure about whether the market is really decentralized. I believe it is in wallet, but is it just run on a server somewhere?

If you want to call eth a scam, I'd say shadow distribution was more of a scam. I'd rather see an ICO followed by PoW than ninja mine all coins in a few days and then go to PoS, but this thread isn't about casting judgment on distribution methods, just comparing coins.

Maid seems like vaporware to me. I'll be happy to add it if it ever comes off test network.

I agree re: nxt, but it was really the first 2.0, so should definitely be in the table.

Sorry it's Shadow, and the "coin" is ShadowCash  . (see https://github.com/ShadowProject)

The market will be decentralized, it will run on ShadowChat (decentralized encrypted messaging system), and will use the anonymous features of ShadowCash to do payments & escrow.

nb : about the distribution I'm also more into ico distribution than pow ... (and it would have helped a lot to fund the development ...)

[Kewde]

I'd also like to ShadowCash added to the list!

Seems to fit as 2.0, is has some features mentioned in that list 

[jwinterm]

I'm not a fan of shadowcoin, and not sure about whether the market is really decentralized. I believe it is in wallet, but is it just run on a server somewhere?

If you want to call eth a scam, I'd say shadow distribution was more of a scam. I'd rather see an ICO followed by PoW than ninja mine all coins in a few days and then go to PoS, but this thread isn't about casting judgment on distribution methods, just comparing coins.

Maid seems like vaporware to me. I'll be happy to add it if it ever comes off test network.

I agree re: nxt, but it was really the first 2.0, so should definitely be in the table.

Sorry it's Shadow, and the "coin" is ShadowCash  . (see https://github.com/ShadowProject)

The market will be decentralized, it will run on ShadowChat (decentralized encrypted messaging system), and will use the anonymous features of ShadowCash to do payments & escrow.

nb : about the distribution I'm also more into ico distribution than pow ... (and it would have helped a lot to fund the development ...)

I prefer PoW, just not when all of the coins are mined within a few days of launch. Anyway, SDC is based on BTC codebase (Blackcoin, apparently), right? I know they've added ring signatures, but I have a hard time calling it a 2.0 when it's forked (in)directly from 1.0, and it doesn't (yet) offer decentralized markets/apps/exchanges/etc. If I add SDC on the basis of anonymity and messaging, then I should add Digital/Dark/Ducknote as well, right? Anyway, I'll consider it after I get a chance to look into the market feature I bit more. I'm leaning towards removing NuShares, so maybe I'll replace it with Shadow.

[Wheatclove]

I'm not a fan of shadowcoin, and not sure about whether the market is really decentralized. I believe it is in wallet, but is it just run on a server somewhere?

If you want to call eth a scam, I'd say shadow distribution was more of a scam. I'd rather see an ICO followed by PoW than ninja mine all coins in a few days and then go to PoS, but this thread isn't about casting judgment on distribution methods, just comparing coins.

Maid seems like vaporware to me. I'll be happy to add it if it ever comes off test network.

I agree re: nxt, but it was really the first 2.0, so should definitely be in the table.

Sorry it's Shadow, and the "coin" is ShadowCash  . (see https://github.com/ShadowProject)

The market will be decentralized, it will run on ShadowChat (decentralized encrypted messaging system), and will use the anonymous features of ShadowCash to do payments & escrow.

nb : about the distribution I'm also more into ico distribution than pow ... (and it would have helped a lot to fund the development ...)

I prefer PoW, just not when all of the coins are mined within a few days of launch. Anyway, SDC is based on BTC codebase (Blackcoin, apparently), right? I know they've added ring signatures, but I have a hard time calling it a 2.0 when it's forked (in)directly from 1.0, and it doesn't (yet) offer decentralized markets/apps/exchanges/etc. If I add SDC on the basis of anonymity and messaging, then I should add Digital/Dark/Ducknote as well, right? Anyway, I'll consider it after I get a chance to look into the market feature I bit more. I'm leaning towards removing NuShares, so maybe I'll replace it with Shadow.

I don't think it meets the requirements to be called a 2.0 platform, yet.

[jwinterm]

Updated again. Would like to put examples of what decentralized apps exist (as well as examples of the exchanges, asset creation, etc.), so if you know of them, and especially if you links, please share

[ffmad]

Updated again. Would like to put examples of what decentralized apps exist (as well as examples of the exchanges, asset creation, etc.), so if you know of them, and especially if you links, please share

Could you change "Anonymous transaction" to "Privacy Features" ?

I think it reflects more what they offer (Coinjoin / Stealth Addresses)

I hope to see Shadow meeting the requirements soon

[jwinterm]

Updated again. Would like to put examples of what decentralized apps exist (as well as examples of the exchanges, asset creation, etc.), so if you know of them, and especially if you links, please share

Could you change "Anonymous transaction" to "Privacy Features" ?

I think it reflects more what they offer (Coinjoin / Stealth Addresses)

I hope to see Shadow meeting the requirements soon

Good idea. I will update in my spreadsheet now, so next time I upload it will reflect, probably later tonight.

[Sebastien256]

@jwinterm

If you want to add
http://www.instantdex.org/
on the list of Nxt dApps example.
I just ask jl777 the dev leader of instandex and he says that it will be fully decentralized with the additional possiblity to trade centralized thing. It is build on top of Nxt.

This is an underdevelopment project, not yet release.


Quote from supernet slack:

sebastien256 [7:59 PM]
Will instantdex be fully decentralized on launch? Or possible only later?

sebastien256 [8:03 PM]
@jl777, I would a direct confirmation from you.

jl777 [8:04 PM]
there is no centralized instantdex model, it will be fully decentralized

jl777 [8:04 PM]
however it will allow trading of centralized things

jl777 [8:05 PM]
so not sure if that violates your "fully decentralized" requirement

[rockethead]

NEM

Market pegged assets - Yes
Encrypted message - Yes

Other features:

Asset backed by another crypto asset - Yes
mutable quantity assets - yes
Time to live assets (with expiration) - yes

[rwfreshmore]

@jwinterm

I'm not sure what you mean by decentralized applications. In my understanding, asset exchange, voting system, marketplace, messaging, etc, are all example of decentralized applications.

Do you mean decentralized applications made by "third party" on top of the system in question?

Yea, I guess that just seemed to be the big selling point of ETH (and XCR), so I tacked it on there. But, it seems like having automated transactions is essentially the same thing. So, maybe I should remove that line, or change it to something else. I'm very open to suggestions (and explanations).

CounterParty has decentralized applications in that context. Right from the get go.. automated transactions.

[Sebastien256]

For Nxt initial distribution, it was to exactly 73 participants.

[jwinterm]

OK, updated rockethead and rwfreshmore. I'd love to get some more examples of actual decentralized applications that are running, in wallet or especially that are accessible by website?

Also, I need to look into NEM a bit more. What market pegged assets are the using and what is the mechanism for the peg? I'm also needing to read more about this stuff:

Asset backed by another crypto asset - Yes
mutable quantity assets - yes
Time to live assets (with expiration) - yes

and maybe add some rows for them.

[Sebastien256]

@jwinterm

You can also add DeBuNe (Decentralized Business Network) as a Nxt dApps build on top of Nxt:
http://debune.org/

This is also a project under devellopement.

Please, I suggest you sort the apps alphabetically in the list.

[Skerberus]

OK, updated rockethead and rwfreshmore. I'd love to get some more examples of actual decentralized applications that are running, in wallet or especially that are accessible by website?

Well to give you one more exciting example. Qora has a built in social network, with posting, liking, sharing, custom blogs and everything decentralized on blockchain. Although the html pages for that are currently hardcoded (only the website for showing the results, all posts and data is on blockchain!) this relies completly on the namestorage that is accessible and modifiable through any third party application (or decentralized website). So the social network could have been done by any user and not only by the dev team, this just shows how powerful this is. All of this is automatically accessible through wallet so there is no need to download another third party application, it is all built in, easy to use and can be extended by anyone.

You can browse the social network here to have a quick look: http://qora.co.in:9090/index/main.html

[Sebastien256]

I think that "Full offline transaction signing support" label short as "Offline transaction signing" is an important security feature that any crypto should be able to do. I think that bitcoin offer this, but the new 2.0 platform might not support it yet or it might be a very complicated thing to do for the user without having the knownledge of a dev or equivalent.

The purpose of this security feature is to allow users to sign transactions
without ever entering their passphrase on a workstation connected to the
internet, thus avoiding the risk of having their passphrase stolen by locally
installed malware such as key loggers or copy/paste loggers, or malicious
plugins.

Nxt currently offer that security feature by following a simple procedure. I'm wondering which other 2.0 platform actually support full offline transaction signing.

[riceberry]

There is also this game currently being made, which will run on the NXT platform.
I think that would count as another DAPP.
http://voxelnauts.com/

[rnicoll]

Cross-chain transactions on Bitcoin-likes is trickier, but mostly solved: https://github.com/rnicoll/cate/

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Atomic_cross-chain_trading goes into the theory. Right now there's issues with transaction malleability risks; BIP 66 is a huge step in the right direction, but we need to go back to a lot of what was in BIP 62 for a full solution. Still, thought worth mentioning.

[jwinterm]

There is also this game currently being made, which will run on the NXT platform.
I think that would count as another DAPP.
http://voxelnauts.com/

The word "NXT" doesn't appear even once on that page. How is it running on NXT platform exactly?

[Irontiga]

Hmm, great, the table looks great.

Burst has got encrypted messaging. Post ur address and i'll send you one ;P

[riceberry]

There is also this game currently being made, which will run on the NXT platform.
I think that would count as another DAPP.
http://voxelnauts.com/

The word "NXT" doesn't appear even once on that page. How is it running on NXT platform exactly?

Voxelnauts is a sandbox MMO that will use Nxt as an "economy engine" for its universe.

Here are some other links:

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114443/voxelnauts-a-minecraft-inspired-game-with-nxt-backed-property-rights-and-drm
https://nxtforum.org/news-and-announcements/voxelnauts-mmo-economy-to-be-powered-by-nxt/
http://upstart.bizjournals.com/companies/rebel-brands/2015/06/08/a-new-breed-of-video-games-will-let-users-spend.html

And regarding the 'failed' kickstarter campaign: http://forums.voxelnauts.com/index.php?threads/thank-you-backers-but-our-funding-is-in-another-castle.103/

[jwinterm]

Hmm, great, the table looks great.

Burst has got encrypted messaging. Post ur address and i'll send you one ;P

BURST-M3N7-HEGB-JC3X-HASCY

[jwinterm]

Updated again. Table is getting big, gonna need to find another way to generate image soon o_O

Lots of question marks now. Any help getting them filled in much appreciated

[Sebastien256]

There is also this game currently being made, which will run on the NXT platform.
I think that would count as another DAPP.
http://voxelnauts.com/

This is not a dapps. It is a normal app that will use the Nxt blockchain. The voxelnauts game is not p2p.

However, since voxelnault is probably the biggest "third party" project using Nxt blockchain to date, I think it might be nice to add a section for project that will uses the blockchain in question. This would be to differentiate between decentralized apps and normal apps.

If possible, maybe listing the various project with a dot like list, it would be more easy to read.
I would also add "(p2p)" rigth after the "decentralized apps" label so that it clear that decentralized apps are p2p.

[Irontiga]

Should make an article on wikipedia...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Your_first_article

[SBOSS]

Maybe a category for public developer? 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=654845.msg12161462#msg12161462
NEM's core developer is Makoto Takemiya, a computational neuroscientist.  I think Bitshares, CounterParty and Ethereum are public too.  The rest are private / anonymous.

[yassin54]

wooooow Very nice @jwinterm 

[Brangdon]

"Block target time" is pretty meaningless. Nxt may target 1 minute, but it doesn't achieve it. Why not show the measured average block time instead? For Nxt this is about 1.8 minutes, or 104 seconds per block. For 10 confirmations you can expect to wait 18 minutes on average.

(Block 493582 was just before midnight on the 9th August, and block 499047 was just before midnight on the 16th, so 5866 blocks that week or 781 blocks a day over that period. I think that's pretty typical.)

(The reason the block-time is longer than was hoped is known. It's a coding issue that the devs apparently don't want to fix for now, because of transparent forging or whatever. If ever they do fix it, update the table then.)

(Sometimes the Nxt block time is vastly longer. I don't know how you'd capture that variance in the chart, but it's may be a concern if you are trying to base a business on Nxt.)

[jwinterm]

Thanks for ideas and input Sebastien256, SBOSS, Irontiga, and Brangdon.

Also, thanks for message Irontiga I actually have one wikipedia article to my name already, so this would be #2 if I try to set it up there:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Cecil_Jaffe

I'll try and update some more this evening or tomorrow...I want to try to figure out how to incorporate Ether's Gas concept versus just paying tx fees for other coins/platforms, but I need to read a bit more about it myself first.

[HCLivess]

Thank you!

[Passion_ltc]

There is also this game currently being made, which will run on the NXT platform.
I think that would count as another DAPP.
http://voxelnauts.com/

The word "NXT" doesn't appear even once on that page. How is it running on NXT platform exactly?

For me it's an application utilizing some Nxt functionalities. It's not a decentralized application as the definition allows it. (Running on several nodes, unstoppable, can-be-trustless..)

[Sebastien256]

There is also this game currently being made, which will run on the NXT platform.
I think that would count as another DAPP.
http://voxelnauts.com/

The word "NXT" doesn't appear even once on that page. How is it running on NXT platform exactly?

For me it's an application utilizing some Nxt functionalities. It's not a decentralized application as the definition allows it. (Running on several nodes, unstoppable, can-be-trustless..)

Yes, you are right Passion_ltc, voxelnaults is not p2p application, I already have mention the issue a few posts up.

Nevertheless, it is good to see what kind of projects that are build over/and/or use 2.0 blockchain functionnality, especially of the span of voxelnaults. I have suggest to jwinterm to add another category where normal apps that use 2.0 blockchain functionnality may be list. This will avoid any confusion with true decentralized p2p apps (dapps).

Edit: @jwinterm, for a label, I would add the category "Applications using 2.0 blockchain functionnality". I also think 1.0 non-decentralized blockchain application are not of interest in this topic (e.g. exchange, gambling site, etc...).

[Jean-Luc]

Maybe a category for public developer?

In the current political and legal environment, being public puts both the developer, and the project, at risk.

A financially independent, anonymous developer, can afford to do what he believes is right. There is less risk that he may be put under duress, have his kids or wife kidnapped, be forced to do something against his will by a totalitarian government (and put under a gag order about it), or receive a friendly visit from the local mobsters. Or be subject to a targeted access operation by a three-letter agency. Being open source (and in the case of Nxt, even GPL), the project will survive and someone else will take over, even if the anonymous developer decides to leave at some point. We are talking about established cryptocurrency projects here, not assets where indeed an anonymous asset issuer can decide to disappear with the shareholders' funds. Being public or anonymous does not make it more or less likely that a developer would leave the project, Nxt has seen a few public developers leave, and then new ones join (and even though anonymous, I am still around).

A public developer, funded by VC investments, must ultimately do what the VC's tell him. Being very profit oriented, some VCs will just run a company to the ground for the short term profit, and they couldn't care less about the cryptocurrency movement goals of decentralization, financial independence, being in control of your own money and investments, not having to trust third parties, etc. A public developer may need to do what is politically correct, rather than what is morally correct, or risk jeopardizing his future career.

Back on topic, I think we should limit this to an objective comparison of the technical characteristics of the 2.0 platforms, existing or being currently worked on.

[jwinterm]

Maybe a category for public developer?

In the current political and legal environment...

I agree with much of what you said, but if a public developer/founder is a possibly influential and objective aspect of a project, then why not include a row about the founder and current development team?

[SISAR]

Crypti (XCR) transaction cost is 0.1% and it has unique feature which is Avatars, user can assign an image to his account.

BTW, this is very useful thread. I've never found enough time to check all those coins myself so big thanks!

[Sebastien256]

it has unique feature which is Avatars, user can assign an image to his account.

I proposed an additional category. Many 2.0 platform has unique features, such as this one. The feature that are unique to each blockchain could be put in a list with a category name "Additional unique core features" or something like that. Doing so would take less space in the chart.

For example, Nxt also has the core feature Monetary System, which I believe is unique to Nxt.
http://nxt.org/about/monetary-system/

[Jean-Luc]

If you want to go into details about each team, fine, I just wanted to explain why anonymity should not be taken as a negative point. Actually, of the currently active Nxt developers I am the only one that is anonymous, see AUTHORS.txt for the full list: https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/src/369546f91ba32142562c18d224369ea64a3f0720/AUTHORS.txt?at=master

And if we start comparing developers' credentials, I did get my PhD from one of the top universities in my field (which is not computer science though), more than 15 years ago.

[SISAR]

it has unique feature which is Avatars, user can assign an image to his account.

I proposed an additional category. Many 2.0 platform has unique features, such as this one. The feature that are unique to each blockchain could be put in a list with a category name "Additional unique core features" or something like that. Doing so would take less space in the chart.

For example, Nxt also has the core feature Monetary system, which I believe is unique to Nxt.
http://nxt.org/about/monetary-system/

Yes, that would help even more. Even if someone is full-time into cryptos there is so much going on it is hard to follow everything so a complete comparison table would be kickass.

If you want to go into details about each team, fine, I just wanted to explain why anonymity should not be taken as a negative point. Actually, of the currently active Nxt developers I am the only one that is anonymous, see AUTHORS.txt for the full list: https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/src/369546f91ba32142562c18d224369ea64a3f0720/AUTHORS.txt?at=master

And if we start comparing developers' credentials, I did get my PhD from one of the top universities in my field (which is not computer science though), more than 15 years ago.

Let's not forget Satoshi Nakamoto is still anon, not much negative effect on Bitcoin, right? I prefer anon devs over known ones, later ones are too easy targets and that is not good at cryptospace. Just wait until cryptos eventualy become the real deal (mass adoption), I can already see most known developers being kidnaped or blackmailed on a weekly basis.

[poloskarted]

Few corrections with regard to counterparty:

Counterparty absolutely does have a DEX Marketplace (actually to my knowledge, it was the first p2p smart property marketplace)
Counterparty does have voting (in fact the bitcoin foundation 2014 elections were for a while based off CounterParty) see here: https://blockscan.com/vote/A8911401948086144000 http://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/voting-on-the-blockchain-version-1-0/
And counterparty does have market pegged assets http://counterparty.io/docs/counterparty_features/#currency-peg

[jwinterm]

Few corrections with regard to counterparty:
...

Thanks for the info. I really appreciate the links. I'll update the chart later this evening probably. Does counterparty currently have any operational market Pierre assets atm, or is it just hypothetical for now?

[jwinterm]

Updated a bit, not too much, but converted table over to HTML, so it should be easier to customize and maybe switch to wiki format. Also, linked in OP to actual webpage where links are clickable ( http://myrcraft.com/2p0platformtable.html ).

Still got lots of stuff to fill in, and need to work on my color scheme a bit too I think 

[stoat]

It's transparent what OP is trying to do with his biased silly chart.  Trying to FUD down ethereum, the blockchain which makes those other shitcoins look like a pile of shit.

Sorry ethereum stole your thunder, don't act so butthurt.

[Sebastien256]

That is great work jwinterm!

There are couple of centralized "apps or platforms" using the Nxt blockchain (which write on it, i.e. they are not read-only apps). Maybe put the "Centralized apps utilizing blockchain" at the end of the chart and with another color instead of a green label. Indeed, those are not core features of the blockhain. I would also do the same concerning the decentralized apps since these are done third party.

I made some digging and here a few important one:

Drachmaeconnect
http://www.drachmaeconnect.com/
It use the unique Monetary System core feature of Nxt.

Secure Asset Exchange
http://www.secureae.com/
It allows to invest in Nxt asset with bitcoin in a very very simple manner.

Lyth, the Nxt MMO
http://lythmmo.com/
It plan to use the Nxt platform for it economy.

Nxtty
http://nxtty.com/
It use the nxttycoin of the NXT AE as well as account creation and p2p encryption of Nxt.

Freebieservers.
http://freebieservers.com/
In particular, it use the blockchain to manage account and some transactions on the Nxt network.

If I find something else. I will let you know. Keep up the good work!

Edit:
This one is another decentralized apps runing on top of Nxt:
Helix

http://finhive.com/fh_helix.html
"Helix itself is written as an decentralized app, means it can run signed sourcecode or even code fraqments directly from the NXT blockchain during runtime."

[Sebastien256]

It's transparent what OP is trying to do with his biased silly chart.  Trying to FUD down ethereum, the blockchain which makes those other shitcoins look like a pile of shit.

Sorry ethereum stole your thunder, don't act so butthurt.

Instead of posting non constructive comment. Pease try to post relevant data so that jwinterm can update the chart (concerning ETH)!

[stoat]

Your shitty NXT coin was a failure.  Ethereum has made your coin and your efforts at FUD utterly redundant.

Delete your silly biased charts and quit software development permanently.

[Irontiga]

Your shitty NXT coin was a failure.  Ethereum has made your coin and your efforts at FUD utterly redundant.

Delete your silly biased charts and quit software development permanently.

Wow man, ETH is good..but it's actually just a heavily funded something, which is no better than Burst...or i suppose nxt etc. if you're into the PoS thing.

How can any coin survive today if it consumes that much power from mining? I think any gpu/cpu mining thing is doomed. PoS and HDD mining are the future....no doubt about it.

[stoat]

What is burst even...oh wait that was made redundant by Ethereum too.

[Buratino]

@TopicStarter:
Please add FMA (First Mover Advantage) label or color for each feature in your nice table. Thanks!

[stoat]

"Please add another irrelevant biased field to your pathetic FUD table"

[jwinterm]

Sebastien256, good idea. I'll try to add that this evening.

Buratino...maybe. I'll try and play with the colors some more tonight.

stoat, I added a disclaimer at the bottom of OP saying which coins I own. I have Ethereum probably the least filled out because I know the least about it, but I do own some, and am not trying to discredit it in anyway. If you actually know anything about it, please share, otherwise feel free to keep bumping the thread

[stoat]

Why don't you delete all the fields and just put one field that says [turing complete]. X's next to all those coins and a big green tick next to Ethereum.

Ethereums programming language allows you to implement all those things in that list for far less cost in time and money.

Your coins are deprecated.

[jwinterm]

Why don't you delete all the fields and just put one field that says [turing complete]. X's next to all those coins and a big green tick next to Ethereum.

Ethereums programming language allows you to implement all those things in that list for far less cost in time and money.

Your coins are deprecated.

Didn't you hear that Counterparty recreated ETH on their blockchain?
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/counterparty-recreates-ethereum-bitcoin/

So, I'm pretty sure that's not true, but if you have some supporting info, maybe I'd consider it...

[stoat]

That article seems to be big on press releases and very light on detail. I think the network effect of Ethereum and the Ethereum DAPP ecosystem will render BTC and current Altcoins redundant.

You don't NEED SIDECHAINS in Ethereum so that counterparty press release appears to be complete bollocks.

[sebastien1234]

Hey all, please add Syscoin to this list:

current/total supply: 485million/2 billion
initial distribution: proof-of-work
inflationary/deflationary: Inflationary until 2Billion is reached
Consensus mechanism: proof-of-work
block target time: 60 seconds
recommended time for confirmation: 6 blocks
transaction load: ?
transaction fee costs: varies based on transaction type
founders: Sebastian Schepis, Dan Wasyluk, Jonny Heald, Sebastien DiMichele, Soeren Pedersen, Mike Wheeler
development team: http://syscoin.org/team
automated (turing complete): Currently in development
Atomic (cross-chain): X
Asset creation: Currently in development
Asset exchange: X via Supernet (in development)
Market pegged assets: Currently in development
Encrypted messaging: Yes; All QT wallets allow encrypted messaging.
Blockchain Multisig: currently in development
Marketplace: Yes (designed directly on the blockchain, can currently use via wallet console)
Voting system: currently in development
Privacy features: Like NXT, Syscoin is a superNET coin which will leverage this from the superNET
Decentralized applications: YES: blockmarket, Turing complete will leverage many more.
Centralized Apps: n/a but possible
Plugin / (D)App Store: in development
Unique features: Commands all currently implemented on the blockchain: Marketplace, Aliases, Data store, certificate issuance.

[jwinterm]

That article seems to be big on press releases and very light on detail. I think the network effect of Ethereum and the Ethereum DAPP ecosystem will render BTC and current Altcoins redundant.

You don't NEED SIDECHAINS in Ethereum so that counterparty press release appears to be complete bollocks.

I think some would argue that sidechains are a better solution, as then the mainchain doesn't have to be so humongous, allowing more people to run nodes and increase decentralization.

[jwinterm]

Hey all, please add Syscoin to this list:

current/total supply: 485million/2 billion
initial distribution: proof-of-work
inflationary/deflationary: Inflationary until 2Billion is reached
Consensus mechanism: proof-of-work
block target time: 60 seconds
recommended time for confirmation: 6 blocks
transaction load: ?
transaction fee costs: varies based on transaction type
founders: Sebastian Schepis, Dan Wasyluk, Jonny Heald, Sebastien DiMichele, Soeren Pedersen, Mike Wheeler
development team: http://syscoin.org/team
automated (turing complete): Currently in development
Atomic (cross-chain): X
Asset creation: Currently in development
Asset exchange: X via Supernet (in development)
Market pegged assets: Currently in development
Encrypted messaging: Yes; All QT wallets allow encrypted messaging.
Blockchain Multisig: currently in development
Marketplace: Yes (designed directly on the blockchain, can currently use via wallet console)
Voting system: currently in development
Privacy features: Like NXT, Syscoin is a superNET coin which will leverage this from the superNET
Decentralized applications: YES: blockmarket, Turing complete will leverage many more.
Centralized Apps: n/a but possible
Plugin / (D)App Store: in development
Unique features: Commands all currently implemented on the blockchain: Marketplace, Aliases, Data store, certificate issuance.

Thanks for the run-down. I'll consider it. Another one I saw was NXT Horizon(s?), not sure if it's still in active development though...

[Jean-Luc]

The development of HZ consists of plagiarizing the work of the Nxt developers, even including the changelogs and readme files that I write. With about 6-12 months delay.

[jabo38]

That is great work jwinterm!

There are couple of centralized "apps or platforms" using the Nxt blockchain (which write on it, i.e. they are not read-only apps). Maybe put the "Centralized apps utilizing blockchain" at the end of the chart and with another color instead of a green label. Indeed, those are not core features of the blockhain. I would also do the same concerning the decentralized apps since these are done third party.

I made some digging and here a few important one:

Drachmaeconnect
http://www.drachmaeconnect.com/
It use the unique Monetary System core feature of Nxt.

Secure Asset Exchange
http://www.secureae.com/
It allows to invest in Nxt asset with bitcoin in a very very simple manner.

Lyth, the Nxt MMO
http://lythmmo.com/
It plan to use the Nxt platform for it economy.

Nxtty
http://nxtty.com/
It use the nxttycoin of the NXT AE as well as account creation and p2p encryption of Nxt.

Freebieservers.
http://freebieservers.com/
In particular, it use the blockchain to manage account and some transactions on the Nxt network.

If I find something else. I will let you know. Keep up the good work!

Edit:
This one is another decentralized apps runing on top of Nxt:
Helix

http://finhive.com/fh_helix.html
"Helix itself is written as an decentralized app, means it can run signed sourcecode or even code fraqments directly from the NXT blockchain during runtime."

I like how there were links posted.  I think more claims on this chart need to be backed up with links.  Actually, every single square should have a link I guess.

[jabo38]

The development of HZ consists of plagiarizing the work of the Nxt developers, even including the changelogs and readme files that I write. With about 6-12 months delay.

well.... they changed the color of the wallet too. 

[jabo38]

Why don't you delete all the fields and just put one field that says [turing complete]. X's next to all those coins and a big green tick next to Ethereum.

Ethereums programming language allows you to implement all those things in that list for far less cost in time and money.

Your coins are deprecated.

Didn't you hear that Counterparty recreated ETH on their blockchain?
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/counterparty-recreates-ethereum-bitcoin/

So, I'm pretty sure that's not true, but if you have some supporting info, maybe I'd consider it...

Technically CounterParty only ported the Serpent language and EVM from Ethereum on their testnet.  It isn't yet on the mainnet and hasn't been incorporated into their wallet.  It might be in a few months.  

[jwinterm]

...
I like how there were links posted.  I think more claims on this chart need to be backed up with links.  Actually, every single square should have a link I guess.

I totally agree re:links in every box. Any reasonable links provided will be added,

[Irontiga]

That article seems to be big on press releases and very light on detail. I think the network effect of Ethereum and the Ethereum DAPP ecosystem will render BTC and current Altcoins redundant.

You don't NEED SIDECHAINS in Ethereum so that counterparty press release appears to be complete bollocks.

BURST and QORA both have turing complete at's, capable of doing ANYTHING which eth can do.

You really need to go and dyor....

[stoat]

That article seems to be big on press releases and very light on detail. I think the network effect of Ethereum and the Ethereum DAPP ecosystem will render BTC and current Altcoins redundant.

You don't NEED SIDECHAINS in Ethereum so that counterparty press release appears to be complete bollocks.

BURST and QORA both have turing complete at's, capable of doing ANYTHING which eth can do.

You really need to go and dyor....

No they don't why are you lying?

[Irontiga]

That article seems to be big on press releases and very light on detail. I think the network effect of Ethereum and the Ethereum DAPP ecosystem will render BTC and current Altcoins redundant.

You don't NEED SIDECHAINS in Ethereum so that counterparty press release appears to be complete bollocks.

BURST and QORA both have turing complete at's, capable of doing ANYTHING which eth can do.

You really need to go and dyor....

No they don't why are you lying?

Go away, you're the only one lying. Not gonna talk to you anymore. JWinterm, we need a moderated thread.

[stoat]

That article seems to be big on press releases and very light on detail. I think the network effect of Ethereum and the Ethereum DAPP ecosystem will render BTC and current Altcoins redundant.

You don't NEED SIDECHAINS in Ethereum so that counterparty press release appears to be complete bollocks.

BURST and QORA both have turing complete at's, capable of doing ANYTHING which eth can do.

You really need to go and dyor....

No they don't why are you lying?

Go away, you're the only one lying. Not gonna talk to you anymore. JWinterm, we need a moderated thread.

If you're not lying give me one shred of evidence. No actually you'll probably cook up one of your fake meaningless infographics

[riceberry]

It's transparent what OP is trying to do with his biased silly chart.  Trying to FUD down ethereum, the blockchain which makes those other shitcoins look like a pile of shit.

Sorry ethereum stole your thunder, don't act so butthurt.

You are lols

[jwinterm]

...JWinterm, we need a moderated thread.

I really lean towards keeping things unmoderated. I think stoat's posts (here and in other threads) make it clear that he/she isn't interested in civil discourse and rational discussion. I almost think that stoat is deliberately being obnoxious to drive people away from Ethereum because its supporters are so obnoxious...almost.

Anyway, I'll try and make some of the suggested updates and possibly a few more later tonight.

[stoat]

...JWinterm, we need a moderated thread.

I really lean towards keeping things unmoderated. I think stoat's posts (here and in other threads) make it clear that he/she isn't interested in civil discourse and rational discussion. I almost think that stoat is deliberately being obnoxious to drive people away from Ethereum because its supporters are so obnoxious...almost.

Anyway, I'll try and make some of the suggested updates and possibly a few more later tonight.

Nice conspiracy theory.  Maybe you should stop smoking canabis all day.

[jwinterm]

...JWinterm, we need a moderated thread.

I really lean towards keeping things unmoderated. I think stoat's posts (here and in other threads) make it clear that he/she isn't interested in civil discourse and rational discussion. I almost think that stoat is deliberately being obnoxious to drive people away from Ethereum because its supporters are so obnoxious...almost.

Anyway, I'll try and make some of the suggested updates and possibly a few more later tonight.

Nice conspiracy theory.  Maybe you should stop smoking canabis all day.

Maybe you should learn to spell cannabis. And if I could I would smoke cannabis at least part of the day, but sadly it's happening during no parts of the day currently.

[jabo38]

That article seems to be big on press releases and very light on detail. I think the network effect of Ethereum and the Ethereum DAPP ecosystem will render BTC and current Altcoins redundant.

You don't NEED SIDECHAINS in Ethereum so that counterparty press release appears to be complete bollocks.

BURST and QORA both have turing complete at's, capable of doing ANYTHING which eth can do.

You really need to go and dyor....

Please help me out here, but I am under the impression last i checked (it has been some time) that both Qora and Burst have set up Ciyam's AT found here. http://ciyam.org/at/  I have also talked to Ciyam about this at the time I talked to him and he said the only thing that had really been made use of was a couple of cross chain transactions, of which were actually a bit of a complicated dance, yet still it was accomplished and was the first time in crypto (first times aren't often all that polished, so that is understandable).  But that is a far cry from completely turing complete "ANYTHING".  In fact if you look at CIYAM's documentation that I linked above he has actually only made 5 transaction types.  Those being atomic cross chain transfers, auction, crowd funding, dormant funds transfer, and lottery.  

Can anybody please send a link to more information about how Qora/Burst have gone to these 5 to anything?

It would also be nice to read more about the specific examples of turing complete transactions on these platforms if somebody has a link for those.

[Irontiga]

That article seems to be big on press releases and very light on detail. I think the network effect of Ethereum and the Ethereum DAPP ecosystem will render BTC and current Altcoins redundant.

You don't NEED SIDECHAINS in Ethereum so that counterparty press release appears to be complete bollocks.

BURST and QORA both have turing complete at's, capable of doing ANYTHING which eth can do.

You really need to go and dyor....

Please help me out here, but I am under the impression last i checked (it has been some time) that both Qora and Burst have set up Ciyam's AT found here. http://ciyam.org/at/  I have also talked to Ciyam about this at the time I talked to him and he said the only thing that had really been made use of was a couple of cross chain transactions, of which were actually a bit of a complicated dance, yet still it was accomplished and was the first time in crypto (first times aren't often all that polished, so that is understandable).  But that is a far cry from completely turing complete "ANYTHING".  In fact if you look at CIYAM's documentation that I linked above he has actually only made 5 transaction types.  Those being atomic cross chain transfers, auction, crowd funding, dormant funds transfer, and lottery.  

Can anybody please send a link to more information about how Qora/Burst have gone to these 5 to anything?

It would also be nice to read more about the specific examples of turing complete transactions on these platforms if somebody has a link for those.

CIYAM's at's take a different approach to ethereum's. Ethereum went the route of a virtual machine, and CIYAM the route of virtual cpu....or maybe the other way round. Not 100% sure right now.

Here(http://ciyam.org/at/at.html) you can see

Automated Transactions Specification
------------------------------------

In brief an Automated Transaction is a "Turing complete" set of byte code instructions which will be executed
by a byte code interpreter built into its host. An AT supporting host platform automatically supports various
applications ranging from games of chance to automated crowdfunding and ensuring that "long term savings" are
not lost forever.

His AT's obviously meet his specifications ;P

[Jean-Luc]

The development of HZ consists of plagiarizing the work of the Nxt developers, even including the changelogs and readme files that I write.

well.... they changed the color of the wallet too. 

I gave them and future cloners a notice: https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/notice-to-nxt-clone-creators

[jabo38]

The development of HZ consists of plagiarizing the work of the Nxt developers, even including the changelogs and readme files that I write.

well.... they changed the color of the wallet too. 

I gave them and future cloners a notice: https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/notice-to-nxt-clone-creators

I own a lot of coins, NHZ included.  Maybe time to slim up my portfolio. 

[Sentinelrv]

Why did you remove Nu from this chart as it is a 2.0 technology? Did you see the answer I posted in response to your thread on Reddit? I will include it again below. Nu is one of the most unique networks in crypto and its voting mechanisms would have prevented the mess we see in Bitcoin right now. Further, we believe that stable currencies are the future of crypto and Nu is one of the leaders in this new and innovative market. We have now kept a stable peg for almost a year and are constantly working to improve our service.

Whereas most crypto supporters believe mass adoption will eventually stabilize price, the creators and supporters of Nu believe they have it backwards, that price stability will encourage mass adoption.
 
Nu is comparable to a central bank, however it's the world's first decentralized bank. The network is split into 2 units, NuBits and NuShares. NuBits are pegged to the dollar. NuShares are free floating in price and represent equity in the network. NuShareholders control the supply and demand of NuBits through various decentralized voting mechanisms.
 
NuBot: We have a trading bot called NuBot which is designed to place buy and sell walls directly above and below $1. This bot keeps the peg as tight as possible.
 
Custodial Grants: If demand is rising and there are not enough NuBits already in circulation, shareholders will vote for a specific amount of NuBits to be created. Those NuBits will then be placed as a sell wall directly above $1 to prevent the price from rising too much.
 
Parking: If demand is in a slump, then shareholders can vote to increase parking interest rates. Doing so will encourage people to withdraw NuBits from exchanges to park them for a certain length of time in order to receive interest. This creates temporary synthetic demand to prevent the price from dropping below $1.
 
Variable Transaction Fees: With the release of v2.0, shareholders now have the ability to vote on the transaction fee. The fee acts as a natural way to destroy NuBits and permanently decrease the supply. Raising the fee rate will destroy NuBits at a faster pace, but could discourage transactions as well. It's up to shareholders to find an appropriate fee rate.
 
NuBits Burning: If parking interest rates have been raised for a while, but aren't having the intended effect, then this is an indicator to shareholders that the supply of NuBits needs to be permanently decreased. As a last line of defense for the peg, shareholders will vote to dilute themselves by creating more NuShares and selling them to raise funds. These funds will then be used to buy back NuBits and burn them to reduce the supply. When demand finally picks back up again, shareholders will do the opposite, vote to create more NuBits, sell them on the market and use the proceeds to buy back NuShares and burn them.
 
Liquidity Pools: Nu operates under a zero reserve model to eliminate counterparty risk. To accomplish this, we've created two types of liquidity pools. The first type requires a little bit of trust. Shareholders appoint a pool operator and provide them with a monthly grant of NuBits. Regular people deposit their own money with the pool operator. The operator then runs NuBot on an exchange to place buy and sell walls. The operator then provides depositors with interest from the NuBits grant as compensation for the risk of providing liquidity.
 
The second type uses software we built called the trustless liquidity pool. Once again someone is appointed to be a pool operator and they are provided with a monthly grant of NuBits. Rather than depositing funds with the pool operator though, people deposit money to the exchange they plan to provide liquidity for. They then install a client, which places buy and sell walls using their deposited funds. The client sends this trading data to a server under the control of the pool operator. This server verifies whether the liquidity is being provided and how much. After verifying, the server then distributes interest to everyone as compensation for providing liquidity. It's important to note that using this trustless method, liquidity providers maintain full control of their funds at all times.
 
Business Model: NuShareholders provide the service of a price stable crypto. This service costs shareholders as you can see from the monthly fees we pay out to provide for decentralized liquidity. The job of shareholders is to continuously increase demand and adoption for NuBits. As demand increases, new NuBits are created and sold. The proceeds are then either distributed to shareholders in the form of Peercoin or NuShares are bought back and burned. The transaction fee is also one way that users of the network pay for the service we provide them. The transaction fee slowly decreases the supply over time, which then allows us to create and sell more NuBits again for profit. In the future, NuShareholders will also decide to add more pegged currencies, such as the Euro or Yuan to target different markets.
 
If you would like an even more detailed account, I wrote an entire history for Nu, which takes new people through our entire evolution since we launched...
 
https://docs.nubits.com/history/

Please tell me if there is anything else you need to know.

[jwinterm]

Sorry I didn't get a chance to update table yesterday, I should have some time to work on it a bit tonight.

I'm thinking I should separate automated transactions and Turing complete scripting into two categories. I've had some people tell me that as far as they know, only Ethereum really offers Turing complete scripting, and the automated transactions/scripting is (I guess) a subset of that.

If anyone has any links, suggestions, etc., regarding this distinction I would greatly appreciate it.

[jwinterm]

I removed Nu because as far as I could tell it's only purpose was to provide a market-pegged asset. I tend to think of the 2.0 platforms as offering asset/share issuance and exchange, automated/scripted txs for decentralized applications, and other features along these lines. I'll read a bit more about it and maybe add back (maybe with Syscoin) tonight.

[Nagalim]

I think you'll find B&C exchange (block shares) fit the bill very nicely.  As far as Nu (which B&C is forked from) the ability to vote on motions and control a cryptocurrency's supply using block chain consensus is certainly in line with decentralized share and asset issuance.

[Nxtblg]

The development of HZ consists of plagiarizing the work of the Nxt developers, even including the changelogs and readme files that I write.

well.... they changed the color of the wallet too. 

I gave them and future cloners a notice: https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/notice-to-nxt-clone-creators

Thanks for the notice. In case you missed his response, MaWo responded favourably and said that he had merely forgotten. I've known him for quite a few months, and know that he's very different from john_connor: he's a "straight-up guy" who eschews hype.

[fartbags]

Winner = Ethereum clones.

[jwinterm]

Soooo, uh, is crypti closed source?

https://github.com/crypti?tab=repositories

Probably going to take it off list if there is no available source.

[jwinterm]

Table updated again. Changed a bunch of stuff to ? or Pending (needs link). Trying to be a bit more skeptical rather than just giving everything green check marks.

Still leaning towards leaving NuBits/NuShares and derivatives off. If it's only function is to maintain a market-peg, I don't think that really qualifies as a platform for decentralized trade and asset exchange. I guess I should be more specific about the requirements in the OP.

Thinking about removing Crypti if it's closed source.

Planning to add Syscoin, just haven't had a chance yet. If there's any other cryptos/coins/platforms/etc that you think should be considered, please let me know

[Sebastien256]

I'm thinking I should separate automated transactions and Turing complete scripting into two categories. I've had some people tell me that as far as they know, only Ethereum really offers Turing complete scripting, and the automated transactions/scripting is (I guess) a subset of that.

As far as I understand, AT is a turing complete scripting as well as the Ethereum one.

[Sebastien256]

I'm not sure if this is what is needed for the "market pegged asset" coinoUSD on the Nxt AE.
Here is a link:
https://coinomat.com/coinousd.php

What is CoinoUSD?
CoinoUSD is an asset tied to US dollar, 1 CoinoUSD = 1 dollar. CoinoUSD brings USD to NXT trading directly to NXT blockchain, without using exchanges. We maintain a gateway which allows to buy CoinoUSD asset for USD denominated payment systems. When you buy CoinoUSD asset is it transferred to you, and can be traded or sold back to us. It can even be withdrawn to your bank card!

[Irontiga]

I'm thinking I should separate automated transactions and Turing complete scripting into two categories. I've had some people tell me that as far as they know, only Ethereum really offers Turing complete scripting, and the automated transactions/scripting is (I guess) a subset of that.

As far as I understand, AT is a turing complete scripting as well as the Ethereum one.

AT = Smart contract (almost).

The only difference is the name and the approach. CIYAM named his AT's, no big deal. The Ciyam at's are just as good, if not better than ethereum's ones. See http://smartcontr.actor as well for an at generator (none of them are tested however, so use at own risk).

[jwinterm]

I'm not sure if this is what is needed for the "market pegged asset" coinoUSD on the Nxt AE.
Here is a link:
https://coinomat.com/coinousd.php

What is CoinoUSD?
CoinoUSD is an asset tied to US dollar, 1 CoinoUSD = 1 dollar. CoinoUSD brings USD to NXT trading directly to NXT blockchain, without using exchanges. We maintain a gateway which allows to buy CoinoUSD asset for USD denominated payment systems. When you buy CoinoUSD asset is it transferred to you, and can be traded or sold back to us. It can even be withdrawn to your bank card!

Seems totally centralized (unlike bitshares approach). I guess I'll add it back with caveat about centralized and link to coino site.

[Sebastien256]

I'm not sure if this is what is needed for the "market pegged asset" coinoUSD on the Nxt AE.
Here is a link:
https://coinomat.com/coinousd.php

What is CoinoUSD?
CoinoUSD is an asset tied to US dollar, 1 CoinoUSD = 1 dollar. CoinoUSD brings USD to NXT trading directly to NXT blockchain, without using exchanges. We maintain a gateway which allows to buy CoinoUSD asset for USD denominated payment systems. When you buy CoinoUSD asset is it transferred to you, and can be traded or sold back to us. It can even be withdrawn to your bank card!

Seems totally centralized (unlike bitshares approach). I guess I'll add it back with caveat about centralized and link to coino site.

Yes, it is centralized and manage by coinomat.

[crowetic]

Not sure if you're interested in this aspect of things, but BURST has a new Windows GUI wallet/plotter/miner

video with download links can be found here...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FHvD3b30ks


Feel free to delete this post if you're not interested in this type of development for the coins.

[Sebastien256]

I would suggest to add the date of the last modification to the chart. This could be usefull.

[jwinterm]

I would suggest to add the date of the last modification to the chart. This could be usefull.

Good point. I'll try to update this evening and add "last modified:xxxx-xx-xx" at the end.

[Passion_ltc]

Soooo, uh, is crypti closed source?

https://github.com/crypti?tab=repositories

Probably going to take it off list if there is no available source.

No reason to take it off the list. Sources for v0.1.9 will be released shortly. The later sources are coming step-by-step. Crypti is more like a startup, we are developing it with a team in the background. Not with an open source collective.

[tyz]

Great summary!

Qora's founder is not anonymous anymore.
He revelead its identity some months ago.
His name is Jelle Bourdeaud'hui, a Belgium programmer.

[Passion_ltc]

Great summary!

Qora's founder is not anonymous anymore.
He revelead its identity some months ago.
His name is Jelle Bourdeaud'hui, a Belgium programmer.

Is qora's source open? Can you give me the link?

[Skerberus]

Great summary!

Qora's founder is not anonymous anymore.
He revelead its identity some months ago.
His name is Jelle Bourdeaud'hui, a Belgium programmer.

Is qora's source open? Can you give me the link?

Complete open source, yes! Code can be found here https://github.com/Qoracoin/Qora

[r0ach]

Qora's founder is not anonymous anymore.
He revelead its identity some months ago.
His name is Jelle Bourdeaud'hui, a Belgium programmer.

If no one can pronounce his name, does it still qualify as not anonymous?

[Irontiga]

If no one can pronounce his name, does it still qualify as not anonymous?

If his name were related to the topic, would the topic be called the "2.0 throwdown thread"?

Qora is a great coin AT's before ETH.

Burst DOES have turing complete AT's, if you would actually read http://ciyam.org/at. I don't know who is saying the at's aren't turing complete....whoever is saying that needs to go and rtfm

But I'll make it easy for you all:

Automated Transactions (AT) is a technology created by CIYAM Developers which provides "Turing complete smart contracts" for any blockchain that implements it.

Burst implemented it, and so did Qora, however Burst was first to do so.

[Passion_ltc]

If no one can pronounce his name, does it still qualify as not anonymous?

If his name were related to the topic, would the topic be called the "2.0 throwdown thread"?

Qora is a great coin AT's before ETH.

Burst DOES have turing complete AT's, if you would actually read http://ciyam.org/at. I don't know who is saying the at's aren't turing complete....whoever is saying that needs to go and rtfm

But I'll make it easy for you all:

Automated Transactions (AT) is a technology created by CIYAM Developers which provides "Turing complete smart contracts" for any blockchain that implements it.

Burst implemented it, and so did Qora, however Burst was first to do so.

Is there a cross chain decentralized exchange available for Burst/Qora?

[tyz]

Not yet, as far as I know. But it is to be planned for the upcoming releases. I'll ask a Qora developer.

If no one can pronounce his name, does it still qualify as not anonymous?

If his name were related to the topic, would the topic be called the "2.0 throwdown thread"?

Qora is a great coin AT's before ETH.

Burst DOES have turing complete AT's, if you would actually read http://ciyam.org/at. I don't know who is saying the at's aren't turing complete....whoever is saying that needs to go and rtfm

But I'll make it easy for you all:

Automated Transactions (AT) is a technology created by CIYAM Developers which provides "Turing complete smart contracts" for any blockchain that implements it.

Burst implemented it, and so did Qora, however Burst was first to do so.

Is there a cross chain decentralized exchange available for Burst/Qora?

[jwinterm]

Thanks for info and suggestions

Table updated with Syscoin, CoinoUSD, Qora founder, and I also added some links at the bottom of the table (and date of last update).

I'm still thinking about removing Crypti since it's closed source. I don't think any of the technology can really be verified if the source isn't available. I will try and see what the timeframe is for them to release source code.

Lemme know if you have any other info, suggestions, suggested reading, cat pictures, links, corrections, etc.

[Sebastien256]

@jwinterm,

From the table update you just made, I think you miss one of my post. 

Thanks you for compiling the data.

That is great work jwinterm!

There are couple of centralized "apps or platforms" using the Nxt blockchain (which write on it, i.e. they are not read-only apps). Maybe put the "Centralized apps utilizing blockchain" at the end of the chart and with another color instead of a green label. Indeed, those are not core features of the blockhain. I would also do the same concerning the decentralized apps since these are done third party.

I made some digging and here a few important one:

Drachmaeconnect
http://www.drachmaeconnect.com/
It use the unique Monetary System core feature of Nxt.

Secure Asset Exchange
http://www.secureae.com/
It allows to invest in Nxt asset with bitcoin in a very very simple manner.

Lyth, the Nxt MMO
http://lythmmo.com/
It plan to use the Nxt platform for it economy.

Nxtty
http://nxtty.com/
It use the nxttycoin of the NXT AE as well as account creation and p2p encryption of Nxt.

Freebieservers.
http://freebieservers.com/
In particular, it use the blockchain to manage account and some transactions on the Nxt network.

If I find something else. I will let you know. Keep up the good work!

Edit:
This one is another decentralized apps runing on top of Nxt:
Helix

http://finhive.com/fh_helix.html
"Helix itself is written as an decentralized app, means it can run signed sourcecode or even code fraqments directly from the NXT blockchain during runtime."

[Sebastien256]

Nxt also has alias tech, so it is not unique to syscoin.

http://nxt.org/about/alias-system/


I think other blockchain 2.0 has this ability to, I'm just not sure which one.

[vincentvincent]

Nxt also has alias tech, so it is not unique to syscoin.

http://nxt.org/about/alias-system/


I think other blockchain 2.0 has this ability to, I'm just not sure which one.

also qora has aliasing

[gjhiggins]

if you would actually read http://ciyam.org/at. I don't know who is saying the at's aren't turing complete....whoever is saying that needs to go and rtfm

Unfortunately, the only description that either DDG (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Turing+site%3Aciyam.org) or I can find in the CIYAM docs is gibberish:

http://ciyam.org/at/at.html Automated Transactions Specification

In brief an Automated Transaction is a "Turing complete" set of byte code instructions which will be executed by a byte code interpreter built into its host.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_completeness Turing completeness

In colloquial usage, the terms "Turing complete" or "Turing equivalent" are used to mean that any real-world general-purpose computer or computer language can approximately simulate the computational aspects of any other real-world general-purpose computer or computer language.

Most programming languages, conventional and unconventional, are Turing-complete. This includes:
All general-purpose languages in wide use.
...
Turing completeness is an abstract statement of ability, rather than a prescription of specific language features used to implement that ability. The features used to achieve Turing completeness can be quite different; Fortran systems would use loop constructs or possibly even goto statements to achieve repetition; Haskell and Prolog, lacking looping almost entirely, would use recursion.

CIYAM's "specification" document is wrong as well as imprecise, ATs in themselves are not Turing complete and scarequotes won't make it so. The document, if it aspires to meet the requirements of a specification, should contain the precise details of the features ensuring Turing completeness of the programming language in which the ATs are expressed.

I can understand why people might want to distinguish sharply between ATs and a Turing complete scripting language.


Cheers

Graham

[jwinterm]

...

CIYAM's "specification" document is wrong as well as imprecise, ATs in themselves are not Turing complete and scarequotes won't make it so. The document, if it aspires to meet the requirements of a specification, should contain the precise details of the features ensuring Turing completeness of the programming language in which the ATs are expressed.

I can understand why people might want to distinguish sharply between ATs and a Turing complete scripting language.


Cheers

Graham

This is my sentiment as well. I'm probably going to split AT and Turing complete into two different rows on the next iteration.

I'll add a row for aliasing as well, and remove that from the unique features for Syscoin.

Also, sorry Sebastien256, missed that one. I'll add those NXT services next go-around as well.

[jabo38]

Great work on this table.  It is really coming together well.   I can see this thread becoming a major focus point in the future. 

[JBC]

Overstock used to maintain a wikia on the 2.0 projects.  Overstock discontinued maintaining their wikia and later launched their own ledger called tØ.  

tØ is a blockchain ledger but not a cryptocurrency nor a solutions platform for the public.  It is not a "2.0" and not a "1.0" project but something entirely else: "blockchain securities ledger" best describes it.

tØ was designed to do one thing: securities listings.   tØ already has 10 stocks listed on it but it is not accessible to the public.  I don't think Overstock will ever make tØ public for download.  As far as I can tell tØ is closed source and that means most companies would never use it.  Would you list your company's equity on something that could have backdoors and other vulnerabilities?  There's no reason to when the future will probably have an open source securities ledger.

[jwinterm]

Overstock used to maintain a wikia on the 2.0 projects.  Overstock discontinued maintaining their wikia and later launched their own ledger called tØ.  

tØ is a blockchain ledger but not a cryptocurrency nor a solutions platform for the public.  It is not a "2.0" and not a "1.0" project but something entirely else: "blockchain securities ledger" best describes it.

tØ was designed to do one thing: securities listings.   tØ already has 10 stocks listed on it but it is not accessible to the public.  I don't think Overstock will ever make tØ public for download.  As far as I can tell tØ is closed source and that means most companies would never use it.  Would you list your company's equity on something that could have backdoors and other vulnerabilities?  There's no reason to when the future will probably have an open source securities ledger.

Interesting, JBC. I'd heard about this t0 project, but didn't realize that it was already live...

Edit: I just went to their site, http://t0.com/ , and it looks like every other bootstrap crypto site I've ever seen

[CIYAM]

CIYAM's "specification" document is wrong as well as imprecise, ATs in themselves are not Turing complete and scarequotes won't make it so.

Please point out exactly (technically) what is wrong as well as imprecise as just saying that something is *wrong as well as imprecise* doesn't make it so.

The AT machine code supports jumping, subroutines, stacks, conditional logic and memory and this is enough to be able to run "any program" in the sense that you could write a C++ compiler with the AT "virtual CPU" as its platform (I assume you are not going to deny that C++ is "Turing complete") and in fact that is one of the potential projects being considered (although we do not have millions of dollars in funding to pay for such work at this stage).

If you haven't read so please check this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_instruction_set_computer and you'll learn that it is so "easy to be Turing complete" that even a "single op code" machine can be so. Basically Bitcoin's Script was intentionally built to not be "Turing complete" as it is actually harder to do that (is has several special checks to make sure it can't accidentally end up looping and numerous op codes were actually removed due to their potential to cause trouble).

There is no "special magic sauce" required in order to be "Turing complete" but just the ability to have conditional logic, variables and loops (all of which AT has).

If you think that a mathematical proof of being "Turing complete" is needed then please show me where Ethereum have provided this and I'll get a math guy to write an equivalent document for AT.

When you read the specs of any CPU it doesn't come with a mathematical proof about being "Turing complete" but instead looks just like the specification that was created for AT (i.e. documenting the instruction set and other key features such as word size, etc.).

So how on earth can we ever create "Turing complete" programs if we are using compilers and interpreters that are running on "Turing incomplete" CPUs?

[gjhiggins]

CIYAM's "specification" document is wrong as well as imprecise, ATs in themselves are not Turing complete and scarequotes won't make it so.

Please point out exactly (technically) what is wrong as well as imprecise as just saying that something is *wrong as well as imprecise* doesn't make it so.

I did, in the post, quoting specifically.

Cheers

Graham

[CIYAM]

Well - if you are referring to a "programming language" you should understand that AT is a "virtual CPU". So it is not a high-level language but is a "machine code" (and it should be noted that Ethereum is also not a high-level language but is a VM which is an approach that I think was far less elegant).

So - if you accept that things like RISC chips are "Turing complete" then it should be obvious that AT is (I even gave you the link to a "single instruction virtual CPU" that is "Turing complete" to show just how simple it is to achieve this).

If you don't accept that CPUs (and thus "virtual CPUs") are "Turing complete" then clearly we have nothing further to discuss.

[jwinterm]

Well - if you are referring to a "programming language" you should understand that AT is a "virtual CPU". So it is not a high-level language but is a "machine code" (and it should be noted that Ethereum is also not a high-level language but is a VM which is an approach that I think was far less elegant).

So - if you accept that things like RISC chips are "Turing complete" then it should be obvious that AT is (I even gave you the link to a "single instruction virtual CPU" that is "Turing complete" to show just how simple it is to achieve this).

If you don't accept that CPUs (and thus "virtual CPUs") are "Turing complete" then clearly we have nothing further to discuss.

OK, you convinced me - I'll leave Automated Transactions and Turing complete lumped together for now. What is the method to prevent an infinite loop being run in Burst or Qora's Turing complete scripting/instruction set? Just the transaction fee on each "instruction"? Is there a fee market on Burst and Qora a la Ethereum, or a hard-coded fee for each instruction/script/transaction?

[vbcs]

Each op code (instruction) consumes a fee, so an infinite loop will need "infinite" amount, but even so there is a hardcoded max number of steps (op codes) each AT program could run on each block.

[tyz]

Could you add smart contracts to the list, too? Would be nice to know what POS coin has it implemented already.

[CIYAM]

Could you add smart contracts to the list, too? Would be nice to know what POS coin has it implemented already.

The term "smart contract" I believe was first coined by Nick Szabo and although I'm not sure if he intended that to mean a general computer language anything that does provide a Turing complete language by definition supports smart contracts.

Think of it this way - AT and Ethereum are both low-level languages that support the use of higher level languages which make it possible to create smart contracts (the smart contract being the program).

A platform that provided a set of smart contracts but didn't provide a programming language to be able to extend them or add new ones really wouldn't be so useful.

[rockethead]

NEM

Average  block time 60s
Recommended confirmation time - 6 blocks
Market peg - Pending completion of Asset Creation
Multisig - Both in wallet and off wallet
Centralised Apps using Blockchain - Pending Asset Creation

Unique features:
Multisignatory can be created as a small footprint thumbdrive signatory with fastboot, real time - off wallet
Do not need a node to run a wallet. Wallet is fastboot and need not sync.
Special purpose small footprint "sub-functions" of wallet can be built without the need to have a node server.
Tiered architecture solution.
Centralised apps can be easily built, i.e., based on block chain technology - open system - e.g., a voting system.
It is a platform solution.

[Irontiga]

NEM

Average  block time 60s
Recommended confirmation time - 6 blocks
Market peg - Pending completion of Asset Creation
Multisig - Both in wallet and off wallet
Centralised Apps using Blockchain - Pending Asset Creation

Unique features:
Multisignatory can be created as a small footprint thumbdrive signatory with fastboot, real time - off wallet
Do not need a node to run a wallet. Wallet is fastboot and need not sync.
Special purpose small footprint "sub-functions" of wallet can be built without the need to have a node server.
Tiered architecture solution.
Centralised apps can be easily built, i.e., based on block chain technology - open system - e.g., a voting system.
It is a platform solution.

Wait a moment, what does it have that burst/nxt/eth don't have?

[Skerberus]

Additions for Qora
Decentralized Apps: built-in social network and decentralized web! What kind of link is needed here? As stated before you can also browse it without a wallet see http://qora.co.in:9090/index/main.html

[patmast3r]

Sorry if this has already been asked but what would stop any plattform from having "centralized app utilizing blockchains" ?
Shouldn't this just be green for all of them ?
Or is this to merely point out the existence of such services ? Even if so...they all have block explorers, faucets or whatever

[jabo38]

Sorry if this has already been asked but what would stop any plattform from having "centralized app utilizing blockchains" ?
Shouldn't this just be green for all of them ?
Or is this to merely point out the existence of such services ? Even if so...they all have block explorers, faucets or whatever

I kind of thought the same.  Anybody that has a faucet has a faucet or tip bot or block explorer basically has a centralized service. 

[jabo38]

Well - if you are referring to a "programming language" you should understand that AT is a "virtual CPU". So it is not a high-level language but is a "machine code" (and it should be noted that Ethereum is also not a high-level language but is a VM which is an approach that I think was far less elegant).

So - if you accept that things like RISC chips are "Turing complete" then it should be obvious that AT is (I even gave you the link to a "single instruction virtual CPU" that is "Turing complete" to show just how simple it is to achieve this).

If you don't accept that CPUs (and thus "virtual CPUs") are "Turing complete" then clearly we have nothing further to discuss.

OK, you convinced me - I'll leave Automated Transactions and Turing complete lumped together for now. What is the method to prevent an infinite loop being run in Burst or Qora's Turing complete scripting/instruction set? Just the transaction fee on each "instruction"? Is there a fee market on Burst and Qora a la Ethereum, or a hard-coded fee for each instruction/script/transaction?

Yes, thanks for coming by CIYAM and clearing that up.  I was asking about this earlier in the thread and was also a bit confused myself. 

[jwinterm]

Sorry if this has already been asked but what would stop any plattform from having "centralized app utilizing blockchains" ?
Shouldn't this just be green for all of them ?
Or is this to merely point out the existence of such services ? Even if so...they all have block explorers, faucets or whatever

I kind of thought the same.  Anybody that has a faucet has a faucet or tip bot or block explorer basically has a centralized service. 

I was kind of trying to reserve it for applications that are a bit more unique than explorers or tipbots and such, like the MMO or maybe a prediction market or big gambling site or something...

[Skerberus]

I forgot to mention that qora has a built in decentralized block explorer too...agran made this available also to people that have no wallet you can see it here http://qora.co.in:9090/index/blockexplorer.html

[jabo38]

Sorry if this has already been asked but what would stop any plattform from having "centralized app utilizing blockchains" ?
Shouldn't this just be green for all of them ?
Or is this to merely point out the existence of such services ? Even if so...they all have block explorers, faucets or whatever

I kind of thought the same.  Anybody that has a faucet has a faucet or tip bot or block explorer basically has a centralized service. 

I was kind of trying to reserve it for applications that are a bit more unique than explorers or tipbots and such, like the MMO or maybe a prediction market or big gambling site or something...

So would the distinction maybe be a for profit centralized service with a real business model, not just something that is kind of supported by the community?

[Arkh]

Hi,

I didn't see any mentions to supernet for NXT, I think it's the bigger project going on over there so I thought I'll notify you.

You'll find more details here : http://www.supernet.org/index.php as it's a pretty big project.

Also ATOMIC transaction are planned to be implemented in supernet core : https://nxtforum.org/nxtventures/atomic-11694807213441909013-in-supernet-core-single-blockchain-for-all

Thanks for this very informative table

[Passion_ltc]

jwinterm, just sent you a PM with all details about Crypti.


Please differentiate between Dapp and Plugins. Dapps have their own consensus, blockchain (side or main), presentation layer, contract layer.. While plugins only utilize different APIs and are always just stored on your local PC, instead of many different nodes.

[rockethead]

NEM

Average  block time 60s
Recommended confirmation time - 6 blocks
Market peg - Pending completion of Asset Creation
Multisig - Both in wallet and off wallet
Centralised Apps using Blockchain - Pending Asset Creation

Unique features:
Multisignatory can be created as a small footprint thumbdrive signatory with fastboot, real time - off wallet
Do not need a node to run a wallet. Wallet is fastboot and need not sync.
Special purpose small footprint "sub-functions" of wallet can be built without the need to have a node server.
Tiered architecture solution.
Centralised apps can be easily built, i.e., based on block chain technology - open system - e.g., a voting system.
It is a platform solution.

Wait a moment, what does it have that burst/nxt/eth don't have?

Different architecture. We don't run brain wallet for a start.

[I am the guy]

NXT did it first but NEM is doing it right. 

[tyz]

I think this is more a religious question. Both do it in a different way and this is good for development of crypto currency tech 

NXT did it first but NEM is doing it right. 

[delulo]

With Bitshares there is Bitshares as it is atm (which you describe well in your table) and Bitshares 2.0 which should come out in a few month. The information below regards Bitshares 2.0. Note that 2.0 is already written and tested atm.

Bitshares, multisig: https://bitshares.org/technology/dynamic-account-permissions/
(kind of advanced multisig)

Bitshares, privacy: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=17687.30

Centralized apps utilizing blockchain: DACX.com, datasecuritynode.com.

Block time will be 1 sec and allows 100k tx/sec, https://bitshares.org/technology/industrial-performance-and-scalability/

Avrg and target block time is always equal in DPOS (1.0 and 2.0).

Development team, among others: https://angel.co/cryptonomex

Question: Any links to Qora/Bursts' turing complete scripting capabilities?

[Vrontis]

Question: Any links to Qora/Bursts' turing complete scripting capabilities?

http://ciyam.org/at/

[delulo]

Question: Any links to Qora/Bursts' turing complete scripting capabilities?

http://ciyam.org/at/

Thanks for the link!
I am not really informed on ciyam.
Could you explain how it it different to the Ethreum virtual machine and Codius? (I have a rough idea what the difference between the last two are)

[Passion_ltc]

jwinterm, would be great if you can update the table with the info I sent you recently. Thanks!

Btw, if you want I can send you some XCR so you can test out our system.

[jwinterm]

jwinterm, would be great if you can update the table with the info I sent you recently. Thanks!

Btw, if you want I can send you some XCR so you can test out our system.

Done. I updated a bunch of (need links) to actual links, especially for Bitshares and Crypti. Also added a bunch of apps for NXT and a few for Bitshares. Please let me know if I screwed anything up or threw your favorite coin under the bus 

[Sebastien256]

Hi jwinterm,

Nice table so far.  
I like it.

Here are some more things on Nxt.

You can add in centralized apps:
http://melodius.me/
It an itunes type website that used the Nxt decentralized marketplace.

Nxt has also a built-in wallet decentralized Monetary system:
http://nxt.org/about/monetary-system/

The last one is, afaik, an unique feature of Nxt.

Thank you.

[MemoryShock]

Where's Maid?

I think it deserves to be in this conversation...

[jwinterm]

Where's Maid?

I think it deserves to be in this conversation...

It's not released, afaik. I am leaning towards removing both Syscoin (most advanced features not released) and Crypti (closed-source), as well. I'm skeptical MAID will ever see the light of day, honestly. Hasn't it been under development since like 2006?

[jwinterm]

Hi jwinterm,

Nice table so far.  
I like it.

Here are some more things on Nxt.

You can add in centralized apps:
http://melodius.me/
It an itunes type website that used the Nxt decentralized marketplace.

Nxt has also a built-in wallet decentralized Monetary system:
http://nxt.org/about/monetary-system/

The last one is, afaik, an unique feature of Nxt.

Thank you.

Will try to update and add melodius soon, Sebastien256. What's the difference between NXT monetary system and assets in other platforms? Not sure I see distinction...

[cryptonit]

great job keep up the good work

[box0214]

Hi jwinterm,

Nice table so far.  
I like it.

Here are some more things on Nxt.

You can add in centralized apps:
http://melodius.me/
It an itunes type website that used the Nxt decentralized marketplace.

Nxt has also a built-in wallet decentralized Monetary system:
http://nxt.org/about/monetary-system/

The last one is, afaik, an unique feature of Nxt.

Thank you.

Will try to update and add melodius soon, Sebastien256. What's the difference between NXT monetary system and assets in other platforms? Not sure I see distinction...

if you dive deeper into MS, there are certain things you cannot do vs assets. some just off the top of my head are:

Monetary System:
- Create Minable coins based off of (sha256/scrypt/keccka) as a way for distribution. (think sidechains)
- Crowdfunding
- Prevent the ability to exchange a coin with others except the owner

-- One scenario that can be played out is that one of the MScoins could potentially be worth more than nxt coins. Which will therefore solve the "initial distribution" people keep complaining about. If one of the mscoins were to be a main coin, and leave nxt coin as a "transaction" toll fee payment only. it can leave out  all the speculators that doesn't provide any improvement into the system and a potentially evolve the community into using this new coin instead of nxt. just an idea for now.



You can use my account to test out nxt features on testnet.
go here: http://goo.gl/sS96ue -- use the pass 321 -- if its empty i'll refill it.

Also this version i'm developing on is mobile responsive ready. so you can use it on your phone. i dont believe any other Core wallet is accessible using a smartphone with this many features. its still being worked on so its not 100% functional on every tab yet.

[Sebastien256]

Will try to update and add melodius soon, Sebastien256. What's the difference between NXT monetary system and assets in other platforms? Not sure I see distinction...

Hi jwinterm,

take a look at the section "highly customizable":
http://nxt.org/about/monetary-system/

These are things you can't do with Nxt asset (except the "Exchangeable" features). For example, you can create a POW MS coins inside the Nxt ecosystem with only a few mouse clicks.

In the long term future, more functions will be given to the MS, such as the ability to use MS currency to buy and sell assets instead of only with NXT, such as it is the case for now.

[runpaint]

Excellent topic, this is a great resource for the community. 

I also think we should add more feedback along the lines of "does it work?"

Some of these platforms could conceivably be used by your grandmother, while some of them are frustrating user experiences that aren't exactly ready for prime time.

[box0214]

Hi jwinterm,

Nice table so far.  
I like it.

Here are some more things on Nxt.

You can add in centralized apps:
http://melodius.me/
It an itunes type website that used the Nxt decentralized marketplace.

Nxt has also a built-in wallet decentralized Monetary system:
http://nxt.org/about/monetary-system/

The last one is, afaik, an unique feature of Nxt.

Thank you.

Will try to update and add melodius soon, Sebastien256. What's the difference between NXT monetary system and assets in other platforms? Not sure I see distinction...

if you dive deeper into MS, there are certain things you cannot do vs assets. some just off the top of my head are:

Monetary System:
- Create Minable coins based off of (sha256/scrypt/keccka) as a way for distribution. (think sidechains)
- Crowdfunding
- Prevent the ability to exchange a coin with others except the owner

-- One scenario that can be played out is that one of the MScoins could potentially be worth more than nxt coins. Which will therefore solve the "initial distribution" people keep complaining about. If one of the mscoins were to be a main coin, and leave nxt coin as a "transaction" toll fee payment only. it can leave out  all the speculators that doesn't provide any improvement into the system and a potentially evolve the community into using this new coin instead of nxt. just an idea for now.



You can use my account to test out nxt features on testnet.
go here: http://goo.gl/sS96ue -- use the pass 321 -- if its empty i'll refill it.

Also this version i'm developing on is mobile responsive ready. so you can use it on your phone. i dont believe any other Core wallet is accessible using a smartphone with this many features. its still being worked on so its not 100% functional on every tab yet.

you should also add a new column for "mobile responsive ready?"... thats a major factor if you can access the core wallet on the phone or not.

[thezman007]

First of all, THANK YOU for this thread! It's awesome! I am going through all of these things (which just lead me farther down the rabbit hole LOL) and have seen a few changes since your latest update of Sep 1st. I don't own any XCR, as least not yet if I buy any, but it is apparently only closed source for about a quarter and THEN is released on GitHub. To call it completely closed source is not quite accurate. I was turned off by it at first as we all know that open source is really the only way to go, but can see where they are coming from to try and keep their "edge" from clones. I also agree with possibly dropping Burst as I can't see any real movement since what, April?

Just my .02

[jwinterm]

First of all, THANK YOU for this thread! It's awesome! I am going through all of these things (which just lead me farther down the rabbit hole LOL) and have seen a few changes since your latest update of Sep 1st. I don't own any XCR, as least not yet if I buy any, but it is apparently only closed source for about a quarter and THEN is released on GitHub. To call it completely closed source is not quite accurate. I was turned off by it at first as we all know that open source is really the only way to go, but can see where they are coming from to try and keep their "edge" from clones. I also agree with possibly dropping Burst as I can't see any real movement since what, April?

Just my .02

Thanks, it's been a busy few weeks between work (end of fiscal year) and kids (school starting), but I'll try and do a bit of an overhaul this weekend.

[BitcoinNational]

@J
agree cool thread "jw's throwdown000" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1153740.new#new
fire up the old TALK wallet an PM me a tipping address //edit// no? okay i guess but still like this thread
Crypto-2.0 :: {data}  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1206569.msg12666580#msg12666580

[jabo38]

Some people might be looking at this thread to see which projects to work on. 

NEM has some really amazing development going on with the core code with four talented main devs working on it daily.  

But NEM does need a really good UI and/or UX guy to work on the wallet.  

NEM also has very easy to use JSON API's with a lot of features to support different kinds of transactions types (NEM is a blockchain platform, not a coin), for third party devs to build apps on.  

If you are looking for a blockchain to work on, please send me a message.  

And here is the Github https://github.com/NewEconomyMovement

And here is some API documentation http://bob.nem.ninja/docs/ and https://www.krakenlabs.org/NCC/

[jwinterm]

Small update.

Removed the average block time as that was totally empty/question marks. I was thinking it would be cool to add a row for number of active nodes, but after looking into it for ten or fifteen minutes, that would have been all question marks too. I thought about adding number of wallets/accounts, but that seems a poor measure, as someone can programatically create thousands in a few minutes (for instance see wallets created on 10 Sept here: http://burstcoin.biz/ ).

Also, added some unique features for NEM and NXT.

BN, sorry, but deleted my TALK wallet many moons ago. You did give me an idea though, maybe if I can ever pick just one 2.0 system, then I'll create a BTCtalk asset to distribute

[Sebastien256]

As a new feature, the Shapeshift exchange is now integrated into the Nxt wallet.
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-6-1e/

[crypti PR]

Crypti is now Open Source!

[sidhujag]

Im a dev for syscoin.. we also do certs and aliases ontop of offers (marketplace)...

can you update?

[sebastien1234]

Yes, Jag Sidhu is correct (he should also be added to the development team for Syscoin), also the 18% premine was 15% ICO(mostly stolen from Moolah), 2% dev fund 1% bounties.

[jwinterm]

OK, will update syscoin and crypti in next few days.

[Sebastien256]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1213839.0

Coinoutlet use Nxt messaging in their backend.
This should be added as a centralized application.

TY

[crypti PR]

OK, will update syscoin and crypti in next few days.

Just a friendly reminder to note that Crypti is open source since a few weeks.

[jwinterm]

OK, will update syscoin and crypti in next few days.

Just a friendly reminder to note that Crypti is open source since a few weeks.

I know, I know, need to update. Have you guys gotten any good entries to DAPP contest yet?

[jwinterm]

OK, small update - Crypti is opensourced, Syscoin has beta marketplace, Nxt has some bitcoin atm using them as sidechain, and I updated my coins I own section.

[crypti PR]

OK, will update syscoin and crypti in next few days.

Just a friendly reminder to note that Crypti is open source since a few weeks.

I know, I know, need to update. Have you guys gotten any good entries to DAPP contest yet?

Don't worry. It was just a friendly reminder. Thank you for updating it.


We have about 5 developers asking us questions. We are ramping up the marketing on Node.js and JavaScript websites in the coming days. Right now we mostly advertised it on cryptocurrency sites.

[50cent_rapper]

Right now we mostly advertised it on cryptocurrency sites.

That is waste of time. 

[crypti PR]

Right now we mostly advertised it on cryptocurrency sites.

That is waste of time. 

 

[BitcoinNational]

Where's Maid?

I think it deserves to be in this conversation...

It's not released, afaik. I am leaning towards removing both Syscoin (most advanced features not released) and Crypti (closed-source), as well. I'm skeptical MAID will ever see the light of day, honestly. Hasn't it been under development since like 2006?

SYS ... i don't get it ... what is it? what does it do?  show me don't tell me it's been along time dan-0
MAID  ... same ... what is it?  I get some large cap 'asset' that trades like wildfire but why?  And if Omni/Master are shutting down their exchange well that just doesn't bode well in the greater picture.
CRYPTI ... some asset created called 'Sia' seems popular ... so at least they've created an asset within that platform ... but why has the wallet on cryptsy been locked for about 15 months?

point is ... enough talking ... get to creating a working exchange/platform with assets of real value trading on it.

CP is the only one doing the walk AFIK.  NXT is a step behind, and it serves their interests to put some pressure on SYS.

The rest in mostly vapors in the ethere-sphere ... dan-0!

[crypti PR]

Where's Maid?

I think it deserves to be in this conversation...

It's not released, afaik. I am leaning towards removing both Syscoin (most advanced features not released) and Crypti (closed-source), as well. I'm skeptical MAID will ever see the light of day, honestly. Hasn't it been under development since like 2006?

CRYPTI ... some asset created called 'Sia' seems popular ... so at least they've created an asset within that platform ... but why has the wallet on cryptsy been locked for about 15 months?

What are you talking about? Crypyti is a crypto-currency and decentralized application platform. Sia is integrated into the user interface, to make it possible to use it as a storage method for decentralized applications.

You can develop any JavaScript decentralized application you want, each gets its own sidechain with its own consensus. We give the developers the necessary tools and make this whole process very easy.

Check out our testnet at http://testnet.crypti.me/ , if you click on Dapp Store you see that we have 2 example dapps in there already. 


And yes, Cryptsy isn't working. It's not our fault, it's the fault of Cryptsy. We are contacting them since months with no answers. They are going down, as you can read everywhere on the internet. Cryptsy is the next MtGox.

[BitcoinNational]

"And yes, Cryptsy isn't working. It's not our fault, it's the fault of Cryptsy. We are contacting them since months with no answers. They are going down, as you can read everywhere on the internet. Cryptsy is the next MtGox."

well ... pot calling kettle black ... we will see in time ... you guys have the means to raise a ruckus if that was the case for real ... but because of that minor detail ... i advise all a great deal of caution.  Still I give you credit where credit is due ... you have a platform and an actual market traded asset.

[crypti PR]

"And yes, Cryptsy isn't working. It's not our fault, it's the fault of Cryptsy. We are contacting them since months with no answers. They are going down, as you can read everywhere on the internet. Cryptsy is the next MtGox."

well ... pot calling kettle black ... we will see in time ... you guys have the means to raise a ruckus if that was the case for real ... but because of that minor detail ... i advise all a great deal of caution.  Still I give you credit where credit is due ... you have a platform and an actual market traded asset.

Then please say me how we can "raise a ruckus".

We wrote many tweets to BigVern and the CryptsyWallet dude, several PMs to BitJohn here on BTT, dozens of support tickets, asked on reddit, Cryptsy long-time-users asked trollbox moderators and got in contact with several individuals via email.. All for nothing.

[BitcoinNational]

If you want to be Crypto 2.0 then making NOISE is part of the .biz
Can't do that then don't ask me to take you seriously.

NXT
XMR
Digibyte
etc ... can cause a commotion ... free advice ... make sure Crypti media ... blogs in detail a full and complete report ... and make sure it gets published and SEO ranked for "Crypti vs. Cryptsy" ... you need a record to back up your claims ... so again .. show not tell.

[crypti PR]

If you want to be Crypto 2.0 then making NOISE is part of the .biz
Can't do that then don't ask me to take you seriously.

NXT
XMR
Digibyte
etc ... can cause a commotion ... free advice ... make sure Crypti media ... blogs in detail a full and complete report ... and make sure it gets published and SEO ranked for "Crypti vs. Cryptsy" ... you need a record to back up your claims ... so again .. show not tell.

I'm a long time member of Nxt, but if it would be able to create a big ruckus, then it wouldn't be at $6.xM marketcap. Down from over $70M.

[TPTB_need_war]

With all the hype surrounding Ethereum launch, I'd like to start putting together a comparison table of all the 2.0 platforms/coins/tokens/thingamajigs. The ones I have in mind are Bitshares, Burst, Nem, Nxt, Qora, Counterparty (Dogeparty/Clearinghouse), and Ethereum. I'm interested in mapping out their similarities and differences, particularly what each is capable and incapable of doing, but also other differences such as validation scheme (PoW or PoS), initial distribution, etc.

With that being said, here is the table:



Link to html version of table: http://myrcraft.com/2p0platformtable.html

I am going to be adding my comments about each of these coins in this post. Please check back on this post from time-to-time as I will be updating it as I complete my research gathering process. I will correct any incorrect information as I learn or it is pointed out to me. The statements below are what I think to be true based on the level of reading I've done to this point.

BitShares 2.0

• Any engineer should know the antithesis of reliability is lack of fault-tolerance, i.e. depending on only 1 node for each block validation. Variability in the network hiccups, DoS-resistance, hardware, and other aspects of witnesses will mean that some can't keep up with the 3s block time every time or they drop transactions and transactions need to propagated to further witnesses and blocks. So either will have unreliability on the real-time promise, and/or this will push approval voting for witnesses that are centralized by those who have the resources to defend their nodes and maintain uptime and performance loads. These issues don't matter as much with longer block times and/or lower expectation of tps, but if you are seriously expecting 1000s of tps in 3s block times sequenced (funneled) into a queue of witnesses then issues will amplify exponentially not just linearly.
• As far as I know, the 3s block time with 1000 tps will be vulnerable to DoS attacks in terms of incoming transactions, because it is known a priori which witness will be producing each block. All PoS shares system suffer this issue, but less of an issue until you start to go for very fast block times, very high tps rates, and very small transacted values for microtransactions with real-time dependency on performance. In PoW the winning witness is unknown a priori and is randomized. Thus if ever Bitshares becomes a serious competitor to a properly designed high tps system, you can probably expect DDoS attacks on Bitshares causing it to become unreliable and suffer outages that belie any claim of real-time performance. I am sure many users have noticed significant delays and downtime of the Bitcointalk.org site due to DoS attacks. The system could be (re-)designed so each witness delegates transaction verification to a large distributed group of transaction verification servers (e.g. perhaps the other witnesses) and only accepts connections from those servers blacklisting any that DoS, but this means the same transaction can be sent to all the servers thus exponentially increasing network bandwidth requirements and the cost that must be charged to fees. Complex coordination algorithms might be attempted but complexity is increasing, so normally resilience suffers and corner cases proliferate. As the transacted value of the valid microtransaction decreases, the DoS cost per transaction increases proportionally. Viewing this as an analogy, it is well known that in multithreaded systems that contention (coordination) load can starve actual throughput and even to the point of gridlock. This appears to me to be fundamental issue that can't be fixed within the design of round-robin rotation through preassigned order of witnesses. Typically all solutions to coordination and even in Bitcoin's case lead to increased centralization and I am sure Bitshares will find this to be true. They've already centralized by adopting reputation and voting schemes in order to get a deterministic node for each block in order to eliminate network coordination load that plagues PoW system but they just pushed the problem onto DoS and they will need to centralize more to address this fundamental issue.
• PoS systems are inherently more centralized because reputation and voting are power vacuum paradigms, meaning that power amasses more power and those who don't play the game theory for power lose power. Democracy is always corrupt for this reason. Thus these systems are the antithesis of the reason we are hear for crypto which is to have trustless protocols without power vacuums that can't be gamed by those who aggregate power. Now I am aware that PoW has analogous failure modes in that coordination load is driving centralization and the 25 - 51% attack exists, but just because that is so it doesn't mean PoS is a solution. And I maybe someone actually has a solution. We will have to wait for that solution to appear and make a choice between lesser evils in the meantime.
• DPOS claims[1] that by having the stakeholders in the system vote, that the controlling group which is the corporation comprising the developers is not in control. Well publicly listed entities allow shareholders to vote, and that doesn't absolve the classification of investment securities. Ostensibly Bitshares is trying to not run afoul of the criminal and civil liability that results from unregistered investment securities, but my interpretation of the law[2] is they may be still acting as a controlling group since investors depend on them to add value to the investment and the future performance of the investment (again I am not making any declaration that they are or are not, I am raising awareness on this issue for potential investors and participants).
  
  

  [1]

  https://bitshares.org/technology/delegated-proof-of-stake-consensus/ This design was chosen to ensure that delegates technically have no direct power and that all changes to the network parameters are ultimately approved by the stakeholders. This is done to protect the delegates against regulations that may apply to managers or administrators of cryptocurrencies. Under DPOS, we can truly say that the administrative authority rests in the hands of the users, rather than either the delegates or witnesses.

  [2]

  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12739508#msg12739508 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12722193#msg12722193

• The new anonymity features in Bitshares are incomplete and not at the level[1] of Cryptonote combined with hiding values which was independently invented by both myself and separately Monero's Shen-Noether.
  
  

  [1]	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12711191#msg12711191 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12711400#msg12711400

• This thread has been created to try to provide a no-hype summary of critical information you might just want to know about.
  
  At launch, the big gold-rush excitement will be about signing up new users since those who do will receive up to 80% of the lifetime fees generated by every user they sign up.  (So you can get a share of the blockchain's profits without owning any of the BitShares yourself.)
  

  
  Is this a decentralized coin or a gymcountry club membership?
  
  Sounds like a top-down corporation to me.
  
  

  
  

  Oh it is sort of like Amway but anyone can buy direct, no MLM pyramid.
  
  Ah okay I thought I was a crypto-currency. Now I understand you guys are into [small niche] marketing schemes instead. Good luck.
  

[jwinterm]

...

Link to html version of table: http://myrcraft.com/2p0platformtable.html

I am going to be adding my comments about each of these coins in this post. Please check back on this post from time-to-time as I will be updating it as I complete my research gathering process. I will correct any incorrect information as I learn or it is pointed out to me. The statements below are what I think to be true based on the level of reading I've done to this point.

BitShares 2.0

• ...These issues don't matter as much with longer block times and/or lower expectation of tps, but if you are seriously expecting 1000s of tps in 3s block times sequenced (funneled) into a queue of witnesses then issues will amplify exponentially not just linearly.
• As far as I know, the 3s block time with 1000 tps will be vulnerable to DoS attacks in terms of incoming transactions, because it is known a priori which witness will be producing each block. All PoS shares system suffer this issue, but less of an issue until you start to go for very fast block times, very high tps rates, and very small transacted values for microtransactions with real-time dependency on performance. ...
  Now I am aware that PoW has analogous failure modes in that coordination load is driving centralization and the 25 - 51% attack exists, but just because that is so it doesn't mean PoS is a solution. And I maybe someone actually has a solution. We will have to wait for that solution to appear and make a choice between lesser evils in the meantime.
• DPOS claims[1] that by having the stakeholders in the system vote, that the controlling group which is the corporation comprising the developers is not in control. Well publicly listed entities allow shareholders to vote, and that doesn't absolve the classification of investment securities. Ostensibly Bitshares is trying to not run afoul of the criminal and civil liability that results from unregistered investment securities, but my interpretation of the law[2] is they may be still acting as a controlling group since investors depend on them to add value to the investment and the future performance of the investment (again I am not making any declaration that they are or are not, I am raising awareness on this issue for potential investors and participants).
  
  ...

I will try to update it once a week or two, I appreciate your (and everyone else's) input on the matter.

I generally agree with most of your points. I'm not a big fan of PoS, especially this delegated variety where users of the system are expected to constantly monitor the block signers, and especially the latest updates with all the membership and referral bullshit. They do apparently have very high fees now (20 BTS I think but couldn't confirm this), so that may help mitigate DoS.

I've updated the BTS column of the table to question a little bit their tps, fees, reflect that they've made 2.0 transition, stealth and confidential transfers, and their multisig.

[TPTB_need_war]

Everything I have written about Bitshares 2.0 needs to be subject to discussion. I will just add that in terms of putting a caveat on your table, the high TPS rate claimed is what the CPU can do (per an interview I listened to of Daniel on Letstalkbitcoin). To get a real world test must stress this network with real DoS attacks to claim with confidence what the real throughput will be. They funnel the network into one node every 3s. It will be required to have many nodes involved to solve this scaling problem and if they all must to talk to each other to propagate every transaction, then may have network communication scaling issues at that high TPS. If they instead make the propagation of transaction data hierarchical then may have DoS issues. This is not an easy thing to solve and must stress it under all these conditions to start to see the issues holistically.

I do believe they can get higher TPS than Bitcoin can do currently but they have issues to work out or detail how they already worked them out. And they need to explain more details and have more testnet modeling revealed. If they were claiming 100 TPS with 10s blocks, I might be more prone to accept that they've actually modeled all the major issues. But that 3000s in 3s looks like hype and lack of actual real world modeling. I haven't actually gone digging in the Bitshares forum threads looking for more information. Perhaps someone else can enlighten me with more details.

[rdnkjdi]

Ahhh - I'm very interested to see where this thread goes.

There is some guy claiming VISA level transactions by using "partions" with nodes. 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1191535.0

It seems like this is a project that's been in the pipeline for years with the dev trying to do a presale at one point?  Has anyone looked into it much that feels like doing a good tl;dr

[EvilDave]

Here's me giving BTS grief on the TPS issue:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.msg12620412#msg12620412

Some useful information contained there....looks to me like BTS are throwing security and stability out the window to get close to the 100,000 TPS they've been hyping, though it turns out that the 100,000 TPS figure is based on running a lab benchmark, and will only be achievable in the real world on next-genreration hardware and infrastructure.

@rdnkjdi: Yeps, that's Emunie, which has been in development for a very, very long time.

[Bassica]

Thanks for starting and contributing to this thread guys. Interesting read, I have lots to study.

[TPTB_need_war]

Here's me giving BTS grief on the TPS issue:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.msg12620412#msg12620412

Some useful information contained there....looks to me like BTS are throwing security and stability out the window to get close to the 100,000 TPS they've been hyping, though it turns out that the 100,000 TPS figure is based on running a lab benchmark, and will only be achievable in the real world on next-genreration hardware and infrastructure.

Reading through the comments on the linked page, and given I felt 100 TPS would be more believable and I never even was aware that Bitshares admitted 100 TPS, I urge the OP to edit his chart and put 100 TPS (TX/s) for Bitshares. Also I believe that 100 TPS is not a figure in the wild with DDoS attacks. I suspect the actual figure "not in a controlled environment" will be even lower than 100 TX/s.

Also by the way Stan Larimar writes about the 100,000 TX/s goal, it sounds like their figures come from assuming that all the witness nodes are being run by the corporation with a consistent level of hardware.

I don't trust any of this. Pushing everything through one node has issues.

Also I don't think any of this addressed block chain scaling. This is about TX/s only.

[monsterer]

Also by the way Stan Larimar writes about the 100,000 TX/s goal, it sounds like their figures come from assuming that all the witness nodes are being run by the corporation with a consistent level of hardware.

That number was just transaction verifications per second, as in blockchain sync. They very carefully omitted the definition of what they were actually describing.

[sidhujag]

Where's Maid?

I think it deserves to be in this conversation...

It's not released, afaik. I am leaning towards removing both Syscoin (most advanced features not released) and Crypti (closed-source), as well. I'm skeptical MAID will ever see the light of day, honestly. Hasn't it been under development since like 2006?

SYS ... i don't get it ... what is it? what does it do?  show me don't tell me it's been along time dan-0
MAID  ... same ... what is it?  I get some large cap 'asset' that trades like wildfire but why?  And if Omni/Master are shutting down their exchange well that just doesn't bode well in the greater picture.
CRYPTI ... some asset created called 'Sia' seems popular ... so at least they've created an asset within that platform ... but why has the wallet on cryptsy been locked for about 15 months?

point is ... enough talking ... get to creating a working exchange/platform with assets of real value trading on it.

CP is the only one doing the walk AFIK.  NXT is a step behind, and it serves their interests to put some pressure on SYS.

The rest in mostly vapors in the ethere-sphere ... dan-0!

Check out the shade release of syscoin.. You get a builtin decentralized exchange into the wallet.

[sidhujag]

With all the hype surrounding Ethereum launch, I'd like to start putting together a comparison table of all the 2.0 platforms/coins/tokens/thingamajigs. The ones I have in mind are Bitshares, Burst, Nem, Nxt, Qora, Counterparty (Dogeparty/Clearinghouse), and Ethereum. I'm interested in mapping out their similarities and differences, particularly what each is capable and incapable of doing, but also other differences such as validation scheme (PoW or PoS), initial distribution, etc.

With that being said, here is the table:



Link to html version of table: http://myrcraft.com/2p0platformtable.html

I am going to be adding my comments about each of these coins in this post. Please check back on this post from time-to-time as I will be updating it as I complete my research gathering process. I will correct any incorrect information as I learn or it is pointed out to me. The statements below are what I think to be true based on the level of reading I've done to this point.

BitShares 2.0

• Any engineer should know the antithesis of reliability is lack of fault-tolerance, i.e. depending on only 1 node for each block validation. Variability in the network hiccups, DoS-resistance, hardware, and other aspects of witnesses will mean that some can't keep up with the 3s block time every time or they drop transactions and transactions need to propagated to further witnesses and blocks. So either will have unreliability on the real-time promise, and/or this will push approval voting for witnesses that are centralized by those who have the resources to defend their nodes and maintain uptime and performance loads. These issues don't matter as much with longer block times and/or lower expectation of tps, but if you are seriously expecting 1000s of tps in 3s block times sequenced (funneled) into a queue of witnesses then issues will amplify exponentially not just linearly.
• As far as I know, the 3s block time with 1000 tps will be vulnerable to DoS attacks in terms of incoming transactions, because it is known a priori which witness will be producing each block. All PoS shares system suffer this issue, but less of an issue until you start to go for very fast block times, very high tps rates, and very small transacted values for microtransactions with real-time dependency on performance. In PoW the winning witness is unknown a priori and is randomized. Thus if ever Bitshares becomes a serious competitor to a properly designed high tps system, you can probably expect DDoS attacks on Bitshares causing it to become unreliable and suffer outages that belie any claim of real-time performance. I am sure many users have noticed significant delays and downtime of the Bitcointalk.org site due to DoS attacks. The system could be (re-)designed so each witness delegates transaction verification to a large distributed group of transaction verification servers (e.g. perhaps the other witnesses) and only accepts connections from those servers blacklisting any that DoS, but this means the same transaction can be sent to all the servers thus exponentially increasing network bandwidth requirements and the cost that must be charged to fees. Complex coordination algorithms might be attempted but complexity is increasing, so normally resilience suffers and corner cases proliferate. As the transacted value of the valid microtransaction decreases, the DoS cost per transaction increases proportionally. Viewing this as an analogy, it is well known that in multithreaded systems that contention (coordination) load can starve actual throughput and even to the point of gridlock. This appears to me to be fundamental issue that can't be fixed within the design of round-robin rotation through preassigned order of witnesses. Typically all solutions to coordination and even in Bitcoin's case lead to increased centralization and I am sure Bitshares will find this to be true. They've already centralized by adopting reputation and voting schemes in order to get a deterministic node for each block in order to eliminate network coordination load that plagues PoW system but they just pushed the problem onto DoS and they will need to centralize more to address this fundamental issue.
• PoS systems are inherently more centralized because reputation and voting are power vacuum paradigms, meaning that power amasses more power and those who don't play the game theory for power lose power. Democracy is always corrupt for this reason. Thus these systems are the antithesis of the reason we are hear for crypto which is to have trustless protocols without power vacuums that can't be gamed by those who aggregate power. Now I am aware that PoW has analogous failure modes in that coordination load is driving centralization and the 25 - 51% attack exists, but just because that is so it doesn't mean PoS is a solution. And I maybe someone actually has a solution. We will have to wait for that solution to appear and make a choice between lesser evils in the meantime.
• DPOS claims[1] that by having the stakeholders in the system vote, that the controlling group which is the corporation comprising the developers is not in control. Well publicly listed entities allow shareholders to vote, and that doesn't absolve the classification of investment securities. Ostensibly Bitshares is trying to not run afoul of the criminal and civil liability that results from unregistered investment securities, but my interpretation of the law[2] is they may be still acting as a controlling group since investors depend on them to add value to the investment and the future performance of the investment (again I am not making any declaration that they are or are not, I am raising awareness on this issue for potential investors and participants).
  
  

  [1]

  https://bitshares.org/technology/delegated-proof-of-stake-consensus/ This design was chosen to ensure that delegates technically have no direct power and that all changes to the network parameters are ultimately approved by the stakeholders. This is done to protect the delegates against regulations that may apply to managers or administrators of cryptocurrencies. Under DPOS, we can truly say that the administrative authority rests in the hands of the users, rather than either the delegates or witnesses.

  [2]

  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12739508#msg12739508 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12722193#msg12722193

• The new anonymity features in Bitshares are incomplete and not at the level[1] of Cryptonote combined with hiding values which was independently invented by both myself and separately Monero's Shen-Noether.
  
  

  [1]	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12711191#msg12711191 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12711400#msg12711400

• This thread has been created to try to provide a no-hype summary of critical information you might just want to know about.
  
  At launch, the big gold-rush excitement will be about signing up new users since those who do will receive up to 80% of the lifetime fees generated by every user they sign up.  (So you can get a share of the blockchain's profits without owning any of the BitShares yourself.)
  

  
  Is this a decentralized coin or a gymcountry club membership?
  
  Sounds like a top-down corporation to me.
  
  

  
  

  Oh it is sort of like Amway but anyone can buy direct, no MLM pyramid.
  
  Ah okay I thought I was a crypto-currency. Now I understand you guys are into [small niche] marketing schemes instead. Good luck.
  

In a controlled environment its already demonstrated 100k tps.. The bottleneck is the network capabilities rather than the core code which is what it demonstrates. Once network capabilities scale up naturally, then 100k comes possible as demand sees fit.

Your assumption which led to a dozen more about which witness is next to sign a block is incorrect, thus your derived assumptions also incorrect. Thus you really have no claim ablut bitshares and the tps without fully understanding the concepts behind the tests and feature itself.

[MikeCoin]

That article seems to be big on press releases and very light on detail. I think the network effect of Ethereum and the Ethereum DAPP ecosystem will render BTC and current Altcoins redundant.

You don't NEED SIDECHAINS in Ethereum so that counterparty press release appears to be complete bollocks.

BURST and QORA both have turing complete at's, capable of doing ANYTHING which eth can do.

You really need to go and dyor....

No they don't why are you lying?

Go away, you're the only one lying. Not gonna talk to you anymore. JWinterm, we need a moderated thread.

If you're not lying give me one shred of evidence. No actually you'll probably cook up one of your fake meaningless infographics

Yes i thought it was moderated

[TPTB_need_war]

In a controlled environment its already demonstrated 100k tps.. The bottleneck is the network capabilities rather than the core code which is what it demonstrates. Once network capabilities scale up naturally, then 100k comes possible as demand sees fit.

You are obscuring that what you just wrote effectively means, "this is how many TX/s a fast server CPU can process and we eliminated any sense of a real network from the test".

Once network capabilities scale up naturally, then 100k comes possible as demand sees fit.

This is like saying once we redesign our coin (or monopolize the DPOS witnesses with our own corporate funded super hardware because DPOS is really just a way to obscure that we are paying dividends to ourselves, analogous to how masternodes in Dash was ostensibly a way obscuring that those huge interest fees were going to those who owned the most coins), it will get faster. Let's rather talk about what a coin can do now, today, in the real world of decentralized witnesses of varying capabilities.

Obscuring instamines, and other means (cheap pre-sales of ProtoShares that were converted to Bitshares?) of having control over large percent of the coins and then setting up a paradigm where coins can be parked to earn dividends. Hmmm. How dumb are we. Hey more power to them if investors are gullible enough to buy it. But it all starts to fit together in terms of analyzing why they would even think they could have a uniform capability across all witnesses.

Your assumption which led to a dozen more about which witness is next to sign a block is incorrect, thus your derived assumptions also incorrect. Thus you really have no claim ablut bitshares and the tps without fully understanding the concepts behind the tests and feature itself.

If you would be kind enough, you are welcome to cite a reference document. I was working from the official description of DPOS at the official website. As I wrote, I will edit my post for corrections if any one provides information. You have not yet provided any information. So far I read only your (perhaps incorrect) spin on the matter.

[sidhujag]

In a controlled environment its already demonstrated 100k tps.. The bottleneck is the network capabilities rather than the core code which is what it demonstrates. Once network capabilities scale up naturally, then 100k comes possible as demand sees fit.

You are obscuring that what you just wrote effectively means, "this is how many TX/s a fast server CPU can process and we eliminated any sense of a real network from the test".

Once network capabilities scale up naturally, then 100k comes possible as demand sees fit.

This is like saying once we redesign our coin (or monopolize the DPOS witnesses with our own corporate funded super hardware because DPOS is really just a way to obscure that we are paying dividends to ourselves, analogous to how masternodes in Dash was ostensibly a way obscuring that those huge interest fees were going to those who owned the most coins), it will get faster. Let's rather talk about what a coin can do now, today, in the real world of decentralized witnesses of varying capabilities.

Obscuring instamines, and other means (cheap pre-sales of ProtoShares that were converted to Bitshares?) of having control over large percent of the coins and then setting up a paradigm where coins can be parked to earn dividends. Hmmm. How dumb are we. Hey more power to them if investors are gullible enough to buy it. But it all starts to fit together in terms of analyzing why they would even think they could have a uniform capability across all witnesses.

Your assumption which led to a dozen more about which witness is next to sign a block is incorrect, thus your derived assumptions also incorrect. Thus you really have no claim ablut bitshares and the tps without fully understanding the concepts behind the tests and feature itself.

If you would be kind enough, you are welcome to cite a reference document. I was working from the official description of DPOS at the official website. As I wrote, I will edit my post for corrections if any one provides information. You have not yet provided any information. So far I read only your (perhaps incorrect) spin on the matter.

Why not read the code?

Again the bottleneck is in the consensus code which was been optimized so that it is possible to do more than 100k tps, a bitcoin controlled environment cant do this because of the bottleneck outside of network constraints. By leveraging LMAX technology and applying it to blockchains they were able to increase efficiency in validating and signing blocks. Propogation is always an issue.. Which is where scaling up network parameters helps and is totally feasible which multiple markets are betting on and will benefit. Because there is no mining it is possible off the bat, and now optimized to create more tps. Dpos allows them to maximize decentralization while remaining anonymous and even so with bitshares following regulatory rules gives less incentive from a regulation attack than bitcoin.

With fiberoptic internet would bitcoin be able to do 100k tps? No.

Lmax does 100k in 1ms latency http://www.infoq.com/presentations/LMAX

On the use of lmax in bts https://bitshares.org/technology/industrial-performance-and-scalability/

Increasing network params will only help bitcoin by helping with the regulation attack but not scale up in tps as efficiently. Today btc is restricted to 7tps at 1mb so its orders of magnitudes off and id argue that dpos is still more decentralized than using LN to increase tps and use bitcoin as a settlement platform.

[jwinterm]

OK, bumped BTS down to 100 tx/s and left caveat. If someone has link to better info I'll be glad to check it out.

[TPTB_need_war]

In a controlled environment its already demonstrated 100k tps.. The bottleneck is the network capabilities rather than the core code which is what it demonstrates. Once network capabilities scale up naturally, then 100k comes possible as demand sees fit.

You are obscuring that what you just wrote effectively means, "this is how many TX/s a fast server CPU can process and we eliminated any sense of a real network from the test".

Once network capabilities scale up naturally, then 100k comes possible as demand sees fit.

This is like saying once we redesign our coin (or monopolize the DPOS witnesses with our own corporate funded super hardware because DPOS is really just a way to obscure that we are paying dividends to ourselves, analogous to how masternodes in Dash was ostensibly a way obscuring that those huge interest fees were going to those who owned the most coins), it will get faster. Let's rather talk about what a coin can do now, today, in the real world of decentralized witnesses of varying capabilities.

Obscuring instamines, and other means (cheap pre-sales of ProtoShares that were converted to Bitshares?) of having control over large percent of the coins and then setting up a paradigm where coins can be parked to earn dividends. Hmmm. How dumb are we. Hey more power to them if investors are gullible enough to buy it. But it all starts to fit together in terms of analyzing why they would even think they could have a uniform capability across all witnesses.

Your assumption which led to a dozen more about which witness is next to sign a block is incorrect, thus your derived assumptions also incorrect. Thus you really have no claim ablut bitshares and the tps without fully understanding the concepts behind the tests and feature itself.

If you would be kind enough, you are welcome to cite a reference document. I was working from the official description of DPOS at the official website. As I wrote, I will edit my post for corrections if any one provides information. You have not yet provided any information. So far I read only your (perhaps incorrect) spin on the matter.

Why not read the code?

Again the bottleneck is in the consensus code which was been optimized so that it is possible to do more than 100k tps, a bitcoin controlled environment cant do this because of the bottleneck outside of network constraints. By leveraging LMAX technology and applying it to blockchains they were able to increase efficiency in validating and signing blocks. Propogation is always an issue.. Which is where scaling up network parameters helps and is totally feasible which multiple markets are betting on and will benefit. Because there is no mining it is possible off the bat, and now optimized to create more tps. Dpos allows them to maximize decentralization while remaining anonymous and even so with bitshares following regulatory rules gives less incentive from a regulation attack than bitcoin.

With fiberoptic internet would bitcoin be able to do 100k tps? No.

Lmax does 100k in 1ms latency http://www.infoq.com/presentations/LMAX

On the use of lmax in bts https://bitshares.org/technology/industrial-performance-and-scalability/

Increasing network params will only help bitcoin by helping with the regulation attack but not scale up in tps as efficiently. Today btc is restricted to 7tps at 1mb so its orders of magnitudes off and id argue that dpos is still more decentralized than using LN to increase tps and use bitcoin as a settlement platform.

As I wrote from the start of this, Bitshares 2.0 has optimized the witness code so the CPU can scale to 100,000 TX/s, but not only are they apparently requiring on the order of LMAX's 1ms network latency to achieve it, but I haven't read where they've modeled DoS service attacks on the transaction propagation network at such high TX/s. Real-time systems are not only about average throughput but also about CIS (guaranteed reliability and continuous throughput). If you are sending your real-time payment through and the next 10 witnesses that are queued in the chosen order are DoS attacked so they are unable to receive the transactions, then they can't complete their function. That is a fundamental problem that arises from using PoS as the mining method if you claim such high TX/s across variable hardware and network capabilities of nodes (those PoS claiming more conservative TX/s and block times are thus less likely to bump into these issues external to the speed of updating the ledger in the client code). They can adopt counter measures, but it is going to impact the the maximum TX/s rates to the downside, perhaps significantly.

I am not even confident they can maintain 100 TX/s on a real-world network today composed of a myriad of witnesses capabilities under a DDoS attack. Someone needs to do some modeling.

[sidhujag]

In a controlled environment its already demonstrated 100k tps.. The bottleneck is the network capabilities rather than the core code which is what it demonstrates. Once network capabilities scale up naturally, then 100k comes possible as demand sees fit.

You are obscuring that what you just wrote effectively means, "this is how many TX/s a fast server CPU can process and we eliminated any sense of a real network from the test".

Once network capabilities scale up naturally, then 100k comes possible as demand sees fit.

This is like saying once we redesign our coin (or monopolize the DPOS witnesses with our own corporate funded super hardware because DPOS is really just a way to obscure that we are paying dividends to ourselves, analogous to how masternodes in Dash was ostensibly a way obscuring that those huge interest fees were going to those who owned the most coins), it will get faster. Let's rather talk about what a coin can do now, today, in the real world of decentralized witnesses of varying capabilities.

Obscuring instamines, and other means (cheap pre-sales of ProtoShares that were converted to Bitshares?) of having control over large percent of the coins and then setting up a paradigm where coins can be parked to earn dividends. Hmmm. How dumb are we. Hey more power to them if investors are gullible enough to buy it. But it all starts to fit together in terms of analyzing why they would even think they could have a uniform capability across all witnesses.

Your assumption which led to a dozen more about which witness is next to sign a block is incorrect, thus your derived assumptions also incorrect. Thus you really have no claim ablut bitshares and the tps without fully understanding the concepts behind the tests and feature itself.

If you would be kind enough, you are welcome to cite a reference document. I was working from the official description of DPOS at the official website. As I wrote, I will edit my post for corrections if any one provides information. You have not yet provided any information. So far I read only your (perhaps incorrect) spin on the matter.

Why not read the code?

Again the bottleneck is in the consensus code which was been optimized so that it is possible to do more than 100k tps, a bitcoin controlled environment cant do this because of the bottleneck outside of network constraints. By leveraging LMAX technology and applying it to blockchains they were able to increase efficiency in validating and signing blocks. Propogation is always an issue.. Which is where scaling up network parameters helps and is totally feasible which multiple markets are betting on and will benefit. Because there is no mining it is possible off the bat, and now optimized to create more tps. Dpos allows them to maximize decentralization while remaining anonymous and even so with bitshares following regulatory rules gives less incentive from a regulation attack than bitcoin.

With fiberoptic internet would bitcoin be able to do 100k tps? No.

Lmax does 100k in 1ms latency http://www.infoq.com/presentations/LMAX

On the use of lmax in bts https://bitshares.org/technology/industrial-performance-and-scalability/

Increasing network params will only help bitcoin by helping with the regulation attack but not scale up in tps as efficiently. Today btc is restricted to 7tps at 1mb so its orders of magnitudes off and id argue that dpos is still more decentralized than using LN to increase tps and use bitcoin as a settlement platform.

As I wrote from the start of this, Bitshares 2.0 has optimized the witness code so the CPU can scale to 100,000 TX/s, but not only are they apparently requiring on the order of LMAX's 1ms network latency to achieve it, but I haven't read where they've modeled DoS service attacks on the transaction propagation network at such high TX/s. Real-time systems are not only about average throughput but also about CIS (guaranteed reliability and continuous throughput). If you are sending your real-time payment through and the next 10 witnesses that are queued in the chosen order are DoS attacked so they are unable to receive the transactions, then they can't complete their function. That is a fundamental problem that arises from using PoS as the mining method if you claim such high TX/s across variable hardware and network capabilities of nodes (those PoS claiming more conservative TX/s and block times are thus less likely to bump into these issues external to the speed of updating the ledger in the client code). They can adopt counter measures, but it is going to impact the the maximum TX/s rates to the downside, perhaps significantly.

I am not even confident they can maintain 100 TX/s on a real-world network today composed of a myriad of witnesses capabilities under a DDoS attack. Someone needs to do some modeling.

LMAX is able to push 6M TPS but its not on a blockchain. Thus it is not apparently requiring that kind of latency at all. "BitShares is able to process 100,000 transactions per second without any significant effort devoted to optimization" that means with optimization they can pull alot more and deal with DDOS or whatenot.

"The real bottleneck is not the memory requirements, but the bandwidth requirements. At 1 million transactions per second and 256 bytes per transaction, the network would require 256 megabytes per second (1 Gbit/sec). This kind of bandwidth is not widely available to the average desktop; however, this level of bandwidth is a fraction of the 100 Gbit/s that Internet 2 furnishes to more than 210 U.S. educational institutions, 70 corporations, and 45 non-profit and government agencies."


"The NASDAQ claims that orders are acknowledged in 1 ms and then executed in just 1 ms. This claim has the built in assumption that the machines doing the trading are on fiber optic connections to the exchange and located within 50 miles. This is due to the fact that light can only travel 186 miles in a millisecond in space and half of that speed on a fiber optic cable. The time it takes for an order to travel 50 miles and back is a full millisecond even if the NASDAQ had no overhead of its own.

If a user in China were to do trading on the NASDAQ then they would expect that order acknowledgement would be at least 0.3 seconds.

If BitShares were configured with 1 second block intervals, then on average orders are acknowledged and/or executed within 0.5 seconds. In other words, the performance of BitShares is on par with a centralized exchange processing orders submitted from around the world. This is the best that can be achieved with a decentralized exchange because it puts everyone on equal footing regardless of their geographical location. In theory, traders could locate their machines within 50 miles of the elected block producers and trade with millisecond confirmations. Unfortunately, block producers are randomly selected from locations all around the world which means that at least some of the time a trader would have higher latency."

"We setup a test blockchain where we created 200,000 accounts and then made 2 transfers and 1 asset issuance to each account. This is involved a total of 1 million operations. After creating the blockchain we timed how long it took to “reindex” or “replay” without signature verification. On a two year old 3.4 Ghz Intel i5 CPU this could be performed at over 180,000 operations per second. On newer hardware single threaded performance is 25% faster.

Based upon these numbers we have concluded that claiming 100,000 transactions per second is well within the capability of the software."

"When measuring performance we make the assumption that the network is capable of streaming all of the transaction data and that disks are capable of recording this stream. We make the assumption that signature verification has been done in parallel using as many computers as necessary to minimize the latency. A single core of a 2.6 Ghz i7 is able to validate 10,000 signatures per second. Todays high-end servers with 36 cores (72 with hyper-threading) could easily validate 100,000 transactions per second. All of these steps have been designed to be embarrassingly parallel and to be independent of blockchain state."


Read https://bitshares.org/blog/2015/06/08/measuring-performance/

[TPTB_need_war]

sidhujag, you are not disproving their the measurements are all assuming the network has scaled to the throughput of the CPU and they never mention DoS attacks at all.

[TPTB_need_war]

The proposed Lightning Networks for Bitcoin is not on the table in the OP. I finally dug into some research on this today and I reasonably shocked to find out what a mess LN could end up being it if is enabled by some block chain changes.

• I haven't found any mention of what happens with chain reorganization but I am assuming it could create an irrevocable mess. Strategies could probably steal coins:
  
  

  Reorg that removes all the payment transactions and refunds everything to himself. The payment transactions will have timeout, but the refunds can be made up to 40 days later. Lets say you can buy something of value with microtransactions that can be aggregated and exchanged back to crypto coin, such as game tokens.

  
  

  This seems like a massive 51% attack. You could do the same with confirmed on-chain transactions then.
  

  
  Not in my design. I have 51% attack immunity to double-spends in my design. Comparing designs for microtransactions.

• Extra block chain load (and not even in the context of DoS attacks).
  
  

  To make this work they will need hubs with reputation that establish all the intermediate channels. So then you as a user open only one channel to pay and get paid with. That can work and eliminate the DoS problem and also the latency problem.
  
  But there is another way to DoS it which is to create more and more Bitcoin addresses so the block chain gets flooded with new channels. There is no way to stop a DoS attack against a resource which has no cost of creation. Well I guess you force the recipient to have a payment channel open so the cost is the minimum bond of a payment channel. But if they make that value too high you limit participation (as you said onramp cost). And you can't stop users from closing a payment channel (by sending the refund or the first spend TX) and immediately creating another Bitcoin channel with a new address. Well I guess you have the Bitcoin block chain TX fee to contend with.

• Kills anonymity. No ring sigs nor value hiding is possible in this structure. Trusted corporations must run the servers for this to work against DoS and latency issues. This is a tracking system.
• Requires big spikes in block chain headroom. Due to many people closing their channels at the same time. And if a server gets hacked.
  
  

  At the end of the video they admit payment channels are likely to make block chain scaling worse because there will be proliferation of competing payment channel networks with different features thus users will open multiple channels on the block chain.
  
  This appears very, very messy and too many risks. I would endeavor to make sure payment channel networks can not function if I created a coin.
  
  On-chain type end-to-end anonymity should be seamless and available for microtransactions when you want it.
  
  They can make this LN stuff work sort of with lots of bandaids and duck tape. And then...kaboom.

  
  

  Appears Lightening Networks is going to require orders-of-magnitude more block chain space than my block chain scaling design. Also the increased latency (unless corporate spying servers with reputation dominate) and on ramp delay (wait for block confirmation to open a channel). Also I bet LN will end up having effectively more than one signature to the block chain to settle up (when DoS attacked by unfriendly nodes). DoS attacks are going be nearly impossible to deal with given any sort of anonymity mixing such as CoinShuffle.
  
  I calculate the bandwidth cost per TX on my design will be in neighborhood of $0.000001 per TX. I haven't computed CPU costs yet. Bitshares is claiming 100,000 TPS on commodity hardware in one thread, so looks like amortized hardware costs will be extremely low also.

[sidhujag]

sidhujag, you are not disproving their the measurements are all assuming the network has scaled to the throughput of the CPU and they never mention DoS attacks at all.

Right it was a controlled environment like I said earlier and that their tests showed more than 100k on standard hw and much more on better hardware and much much more on optimized source code, I just said that there would be some leeway for DDOS although a full DDOS attack on delegates would cause standby delegates to get called upon, im sure a lag indicator(which im sure is already enforced at some time limit) can be used if delegates are not responding within a certain time causing blocks to be delegated to another witness. It would be short lived because other witnesses (standby) can be used and list of witnesses can be increased dynamically to withstand an attack over an extended period of time.

Remember that the next witness is random and cannot be predicted by attackers. So if they keep trying to attack witnesses, new ones can easily replace them from the standby pool or new ones voted in during a long attack. I'm pretty sure ComeFromBeyond already tried this attack on bitshares 1.0 and left without a proper response from him, although he was eager to learn and try to find attack vectors. When he realized that DDOS attack is really the only attack to the network for him he tried it (many people were complaining about delegate lags at the time but the important note is that the system resolved itself feasibly). Infact I think he said he would attack the testnet to see if its a viable attack without hurting mainnet but I personally believe his intentions were to try to break it (from a competitors angle for NXT) and he didn't really comment on his results,  leaving the thread https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,13921.0.html

[TPTB_need_war]

sidhujag, you are not disproving their the measurements are all assuming the network has scaled to the throughput of the CPU and they never mention DoS attacks at all.

Right it was a controlled environment like I said earlier and that their tests showed more than 100k on standard hw and much more on better hardware and much much more on optimized source code, I just said that there would be some leeway for DDOS although a full DDOS attack on delegates would cause standby delegates to get called upon, im sure a lag indicator(which im sure is already enforced at some time limit) can be used if delegates are not responding within a certain time causing blocks to be delegated to another witness. It would be short lived because other witnesses (standby) can be used and list of witnesses can be increased dynamically to withstand an attack over an extended period of time.

I'd prefer some official technical document detailing the DDoS algorithm and real world tests or modeling results.

Hiccups every 10s with intermittent DDoS might not be squelched and many other possible scenarios. We can't piecemeal this, we need actually engineering level inspection and test data.

[sidhujag]

sidhujag, you are not disproving their the measurements are all assuming the network has scaled to the throughput of the CPU and they never mention DoS attacks at all.

Right it was a controlled environment like I said earlier and that their tests showed more than 100k on standard hw and much more on better hardware and much much more on optimized source code, I just said that there would be some leeway for DDOS although a full DDOS attack on delegates would cause standby delegates to get called upon, im sure a lag indicator(which im sure is already enforced at some time limit) can be used if delegates are not responding within a certain time causing blocks to be delegated to another witness. It would be short lived because other witnesses (standby) can be used and list of witnesses can be increased dynamically to withstand an attack over an extended period of time.

I'd prefer some official technical document detailing the DDoS algorithm and real world tests or modeling results.

Hiccups every 10s with intermittent DDoS might not be squelched and many other possible scenarios. We can't piecemeal this, we need actually engineering level inspection and test data.

That is a good suggestion and I believe the best way to get them to share this information or perhaps conduct these tests (which I'm sure they already have) is to post on their forum over at bitsharestalk.org. Create an account and post a thread im sure Daniel Larimer reads it daily.

It would be good to reflect back here on the results of those tests or responses from the core devs.

If you have a hunger for information it is a good place to look for a solution in a time sensitive manor.

[Peachy]

Here's me giving BTS grief on the TPS issue:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.msg12620412#msg12620412

Some useful information contained there....looks to me like BTS are throwing security and stability out the window to get close to the 100,000 TPS they've been hyping, though it turns out that the 100,000 TPS figure is based on running a lab benchmark, and will only be achievable in the real world on next-genreration hardware and infrastructure.

@rdnkjdi: Yeps, that's Emunie, which has been in development for a very, very long time.

Relevant:
https://twitter.com/eMunie_Currency

eMunie achieved a load of 200-300 tx/s for over an hour tonight. No true crypto has gone so fast for so long!

"The future is NOW"  ...and that's with only 1 partition! 

Multiply that times 1024 partitions and you can see it's easily 256,000 txn/s with commodity (of the shelf) hardware.

[jwinterm]

No Lightning Network, no eMunie, no MAID, or anything else that is practically a foregone conclusion or most likely vaporware - it has to be released publicly (no alpha/beta/testnet/bullshit youtube videos) to be considered here.

[sidhujag]

Here's me giving BTS grief on the TPS issue:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.msg12620412#msg12620412

Some useful information contained there....looks to me like BTS are throwing security and stability out the window to get close to the 100,000 TPS they've been hyping, though it turns out that the 100,000 TPS figure is based on running a lab benchmark, and will only be achievable in the real world on next-genreration hardware and infrastructure.

@rdnkjdi: Yeps, that's Emunie, which has been in development for a very, very long time.

Relevant:
https://twitter.com/eMunie_Currency

eMunie achieved a load of 200-300 tx/s for over an hour tonight. No true crypto has gone so fast for so long!

"The future is NOW"  ...and that's with only 1 partition! 

Multiply that times 1024 partitions and you can see it's easily 256,000 txn/s with commodity (of the shelf) hardware.

That doesmt mean anything.. I want a third party to test it with open source code

[r0ach]

no eMunie

[BitcoinNational]

"No Lightning Network, no eMunie, no MAID, or anything else that is practically a foregone conclusion or most likely vaporware"

Heard of eMunie ... for like 2 years ... where does it trade?
Everyone has heard of MAID ... where's this platform it hyped so well?
Lightning Network ... is that an actual thing?

" -it has to be released publicly (no alpha/beta/testnet/bullshit youtube videos) to be considered here- "

Agree.  The 2.0 has reached the point of either you already have to have product in the field, or get out.
That means at least a working platform with real users.  And we are very near the point that that platform also needs to contain assets of value, not just fluff that no one wants.

[smooth]

no MAID

MAID trades, right? I'm not familiar with it through, is that just some placeholder token with no features?

[jwinterm]

no MAID

...just some placeholder token with no features?

Exactly.

[BitcoinNational]

一生万物，万物归一
未来的个人数字银行系统
Tai Yi
One for All, All for One
Personal Bank System of the Future

http://www.taiyilabs.com/
http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/trmb/

=================
got a verdict on the YB?

[TPTB_need_war]

一生万物，万物归一
未来的个人数字银行系统
Tai Yi
One for All, All for One
Personal Bank System of the Future

http://www.taiyilabs.com/
http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/trmb/

=================
got a verdict on the YB?

Can anyone translate?

Here come the Chinese, which are good at copying everything. Plagiarism, no problem it is legal in China.

So far they've been able to make Chinese versions of everything we have in the West (e.g. replacement for Amazon.com, social networks, Google, etc) that cater to their markets which are large enough that they haven't had to worry about external adoption. But I think crypto-currency might be different. Crypto-currency straddles borders so they need our comprehension and adoption also.

[sidhujag]

一生万物，万物归一
未来的个人数字银行系统
Tai Yi
One for All, All for One
Personal Bank System of the Future

http://www.taiyilabs.com/
http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/trmb/

=================
got a verdict on the YB?

Can anyone translate?

Here come the Chinese, which are good at copying everything. Plagiarism, no problem it is legal in China.

So far they've been able to make Chinese versions of everything we have in the West (e.g. replacement for Amazon.com, social networks, Google, etc) that cater to their markets which are large enough that they haven't had to worry about external adoption. But I think crypto-currency might be different. Crypto-currency straddles borders so they need our comprehension and adoption also.

Doesn't matter its totally geared for the Chinese, whitepaper is chinese only and from documentation/explorer looks like its a clone of Nxt or something

[Peachy]

Can anyone translate?

Here come the Chinese, which are good at copying everything. Plagiarism, no problem it is legal in China.

So far they've been able to make Chinese versions of everything we have in the West (e.g. replacement for Amazon.com, social networks, Google, etc) that cater to their markets which are large enough that they haven't had to worry about external adoption. But I think crypto-currency might be different. Crypto-currency straddles borders so they need our comprehension and adoption also.

Doesn't that speak to the idea of maybe being closed-source for a while to gain market share?  As long as it's peer-reviewed under a hardened NDA it should be more than sufficient.  That way the originator can achieve growth before the inevitable clone onslaught and thus will not be able to succeed unless they prove a demonstrable improvement over the original.

Just a thought...

[sidhujag]

Can anyone translate?

Here come the Chinese, which are good at copying everything. Plagiarism, no problem it is legal in China.

So far they've been able to make Chinese versions of everything we have in the West (e.g. replacement for Amazon.com, social networks, Google, etc) that cater to their markets which are large enough that they haven't had to worry about external adoption. But I think crypto-currency might be different. Crypto-currency straddles borders so they need our comprehension and adoption also.

Doesn't that speak to the idea of maybe being closed-source for a while to gain market share?  As long as it's peer-reviewed under a hardened NDA it should be more than sufficient.  That way the originator can achieve growth before the inevitable clone onslaught and thus will not be able to succeed unless they prove a demonstrable improvement over the original.

Just a thought...

That requires trust. Its the very thing we are trying to remove.

You have been given an elevator speech and fell for it, now you are trying to convince yourself and others its ok to be corruptible and nothing in this world has to change.. Its fine the way it is! The fed is printing asymptotically ideal money.

[EastKing]

If you want to be Crypto 2.0 then making NOISE is part of the .biz
Can't do that then don't ask me to take you seriously.

NXT
XMR
Digibyte
etc ... can cause a commotion ... free advice ... make sure Crypti media ... blogs in detail a full and complete report ... and make sure it gets published and SEO ranked for "Crypti vs. Cryptsy" ... you need a record to back up your claims ... so again .. show not tell.

I'm a long time member of Nxt, but if it would be able to create a big ruckus, then it wouldn't be at $6.xM marketcap. Down from over $70M.

I think Monero is a good coin, not sure if it fits into 2.0.

[BitcoinNational]

Walter Sobchak: So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...

[Sebastien256]

Nxt now has the "Data Cloud" feature on mainnet (with NRS 1.7.3e).

This feature allows to upload lightweight data files directly to the blockchain. The files are also very easy to upload, download and search. As an example, this feature is perfect to put torrent files onto the blockchain.
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

[jabo38]

NEM has a centralized app being built on it called DragonFly that can now be mentioned in that sections of the chart.  It is a remittance app using NEM on the back end for international transfers. 

http://www.dragonflyfintech.com/#welcome

Here is a news article that announces a partnership with DragonFly and a major Japanese Bank.  http://allcoinsnews.com/2015/12/17/dragonfly-inks-deal-with-nomura-sbi-sumishin-net-bank-offering-nem-blockchain-based-solution/

[sidhujag]

Nxt now has the "Data Cloud" feature on mainnet (with NRS 1.7.3e).

This feature allows to upload lightweight data files directly to the blockchain. The files are also very easy to upload, download and search. As an example, this feature is perfect to put torrent files onto the blockchain.
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

So you just store magnet links to torrent data which is served up like a p2p bittorrent network? How is that different than what these other projects are doing but they also include ability to sell storage space?

In the end you may have a case where you need some information that you dont have stored and its not on the cloud anymore all you have is a magnet link with no peers. Is this correct?

[Sebastien256]

Nxt now has the "Data Cloud" feature on mainnet (with NRS 1.7.3e).

This feature allows to upload lightweight data files directly to the blockchain. The files are also very easy to upload, download and search. As an example, this feature is perfect to put torrent files onto the blockchain.
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

So you just store magnet links to torrent data which is served up like a p2p bittorrent network? How is that different than what these other projects are doing but they also include ability to sell storage space?

In the end you may have a case where you need some information that you dont have stored and its not on the cloud anymore all you have is a magnet link with no peers. Is this correct?

As far as I understand, it can be used with magnet link where DHT network is used. If there is no peer, of course the file cannot be retrieve. Im not expert in torrent, I was just giving an example. In fact, I'm not sure to understand your question.

The Data Cloud feature allow you to upload any small file on the blockchain (not just torrent). Here is a screen shot since an image worth a thoushand words:


Note also that this is the first version of the GUI.

For more information, I suggest you try the client (1.7.3e) or ask question directly on the forum in this topic:
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

[sidhujag]

Nxt now has the "Data Cloud" feature on mainnet (with NRS 1.7.3e).

This feature allows to upload lightweight data files directly to the blockchain. The files are also very easy to upload, download and search. As an example, this feature is perfect to put torrent files onto the blockchain.
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

So you just store magnet links to torrent data which is served up like a p2p bittorrent network? How is that different than what these other projects are doing but they also include ability to sell storage space?

In the end you may have a case where you need some information that you dont have stored and its not on the cloud anymore all you have is a magnet link with no peers. Is this correct?

As far as I understand, it can be used with magnet link where DHT network is used. If there is no peer, of course the file cannot be retrieve. Im not expert in torrent, I was just giving an example. In fact, I'm not sure to understand your question.

The Data Cloud feature allow you to upload any small file on the blockchain (not just torrent). Here is a screen shot since an image worth a thoushand words:


Note also that this is the first version of the GUI.

For more information, I suggest you try the client (1.7.3e) or ask question directly on the forum in this topic:
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

Yea i see where they are going., its a neat idea for sure to solve the bandwidth requirement issue although bitcoins ibd is pretty good at that with pruning to limit storage costs.. What im doing with syscoin is storing on chain for my services (only a few kb) which i could have done this way but decided that a deterministic data retrieval was more important than saving bandwidth, not to mention easier to understand and less moving parts.. While seperating concerns between the problem of bandwidth and using that data.. Id say bitcoin devs will come up with ways tto solve the issue which i can leverage instead of complicating the setup with workarounds like dht.

[Sebastien256]

There is the possibiliy of pruning data too in Nxt. There is two type of node, archive and normal node. So Nxt Cloud should not used too much space on normal node since after a while (90 days if transaction not renew) only the hash of the transaction is keep on the normal blockchain, but the data is still available on the archive chain.

[sidhujag]

There is the possibiliy of pruning data too in Nxt. There is two type of node, archive and normal node. So Nxt Cloud should not used too much space on normal node since after a while (90 days if transaction not renew) only the hash of the transaction is keep on the normal blockchain, but the data is still available on the archive chain.

But your distributing data via dht so its not deterministic, depends on seeds. If it was stored on archive nodes then it would make more sense

[box0211]

link to test out the nxt file storage feature? what is the max file size and fee cost?

[Sebastien256]

There is the possibiliy of pruning data too in Nxt. There is two type of node, archive and normal node. So Nxt Cloud should not used too much space on normal node since after a while (90 days if transaction not renew) only the hash of the transaction is keep on the normal blockchain, but the data is still available on the archive chain.

But your distributing data via dht so its not deterministic, depends on seeds. If it was stored on archive nodes then it would make more sense

dht is for torrent or magnet file, nothing to do with nxt peers as far as I know(I could be wrong, you seems a technical guy). Archive node store the magnet link after 90 days before that all node store it on the blockhain.

 

[Sebastien256]

link to test out the nxt file storage feature? what is the max file size and fee cost?

At the moment you need to install 1.7.3 mainnet or use the tesnet.
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

There is no demo link yet for this feature.

Im not 100% sure, but I think it is 1 NXT (not sure, but probably more) for 42Kb (maximum size) of prunable data (90 days on normal node and indefinitly on archive node), or 1 NXT for each 32bytes of permanent data on normal node (maximum size 160 bytes).

So this feature is for lightweight data files.

I think you can get the info on this link:
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-0e/

otherwise please feel free to ask for info directly in this topic
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

[box0214]

link to test out the nxt file storage feature? what is the max file size and fee cost?

At the moment you need to install 1.7.3 mainnet or use the tesnet.
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

There is no demo link yet for this feature.

Im not 100% sure, but I think it is 1 NXT (not sure, but probably more) for 42Kb (maximum size) of prunable data (90 days on normal node and indefinitly on archive node), or 1 NXT for each 32bytes of permanent data on normal node (maximum size 160 bytes).

So this feature is for lightweight data files.

I think you can get the info on this link:
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-0e/

otherwise please feel free to ask for info directly in this topic
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

thanks will have to test out this file hosting thing.

[Abiky]

Nxt now has the "Data Cloud" feature on mainnet (with NRS 1.7.3e).

This feature allows to upload lightweight data files directly to the blockchain. The files are also very easy to upload, download and search. As an example, this feature is perfect to put torrent files onto the blockchain.
https://nxtforum.org/nrs-releases/nrs-v1-7-3e/

This is a very useful feature of the NXT platform. NXT sure has some good developments going on, but sometimes I wonder why price is so cheap when compared to other crypto 2.0 I think that the best crypto 2.0 out there are none other than Ripple, Ethereum and NXT. If big companies get to invest into of these crypto currencies, then we might be able to see a positive trend in probable Bitcoin replacements. All of them have great and better technologies than Bitcoin, but still Bitcoin remains at the top being the pioneer of the Blockchain technology. 

I have invested a lot into those mentioned cryptos by the way, hoping to gain profits once they rise both in price and demand. 

[entertheabyss]

2.0 is so 2000s prepare for crypto 3.0!!!!!