NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[Ebrelus]

1 vote 1 human is impossible because of all possibilities of cheating...

So:
Rule 1: There should be a census - minimal amount of Nxts owned on account to be able to vote.

Rule 2: Only enough experienced NXTers should be able to vote (because of possiblity of exploting Rule 1 and level of user maturity is important)

Precise numbers are up to you. I would say minimum of 100 NXTs and a month of owning it.

/edit
Rule 3: Quality of vote makes differece (like shares in stock company) - more NXTs more power of vote - not proportionally of course... maybe 1 vote for first 10 NXTs and 1 more for each next 1000 NXTs ?

3 rules should be enough. You can't make it perfect after all... nothing is perfect...

/endedit

This is logical that only owning certain amount of NXTs for a long enough time makes person a real member of community with bigger probability that he actually knows anything about it...

That's basicly how greek direct democracy worked too...

I would even say that there could be something like a 2 grade votings. Less important stuff decided in majority voting and these really important decissions made in smaller, elite, arystocracy-like type of voting with higher requirements.


Direct democracy works only when there is up to 100000 equal people deciding.
In all democracies there is elite which show nation a direction to mass less interested in politics.

All today democracies aren't direct and people doesn't really decide and they passivly agree that minority rules them... and in many cases there is no real aristocracy to show direction but only bunch of thieves trying to steal as much as possible before next election...

I would also put into voting a possibility of choosing 1 good person for a NXT King
Kingdom can be good or bad depends who is a King but demoracy is always stupid and ends badly
I will repeat it in future when NXt will face inevitable problem of populistic votings (if voting wil be without 2 requirements above)

[1714871422]

1714871422

[1714871422]

1714871422

[1714871422]

1714871422

[1714871422]

1714871422

[okaynow]

We can ask NSA for help.

Yes please!

[msin]

At the risk of sounding like an extremist, I want to have people like klee and CfB to have a LOT more weight than frictionlesscoin. does anybody disagree with this?

The problem here is wealth disparity is much larger than intellect disparity.

If I have $10 and Bill Gates has 50 billion, does this mean he's 5 billion times smarter than me?

So we need a "compressor" function and that can be gamed by splitting wealth into multiple accounts to get "optimal" voting power.

If you are voting on Microsoft topics?  Yes.

[NxtChg]

I'm suggesting keeping our voting system within the Nxt blockchain, where it belongs, so it can be implemented into a client in the future.  You are the one talking about developing a website to handle all of this, that is more complicated then opening a Nxt account and sending AM's to that account.  

What the cost of website development has to do with it? What matters is how easy and convenient it is for people.

Sending AM's into different accounts is a Rube Goldberg contraption. It's difficult to use, it's difficult to see the results. It loads the blockchain with something that can be done off-chain.

What's the advantage? Integration with the client? It can be integrated with the site too, especially since we're moving in the direction of thin clients anyway.

[lucky88888]

Why is not anyone creating localnxtcoin.com or localnxt.com?
Domain name is not even being squatted?

This can be our first worldwide nxt/fiat gateway.
Just like https://localbitcoins.com/
It should be easy to implement with automated escrow service. And an internal rating system.
If you can create an EXCHANGE, i'm pretty sure you can handle "localnxt".

Dev should set a nice bounty for this.
Agreed?

[Conurtrol]

Re: Voting...

Why are we still having this discussion?

Nxt is PoS, voting should be based upon stake: 1 NXT == 1 Vote.

It's the only fair way.

This seems obvious to me but maybe I'm missing something. Are small stakeholders afraid that large stakeholders will band together and vote to take away their money or something? Is something nefarious like that even possible? What mechanism is in place to enforce voting results?

[salsacz]

BCNext could be one of the member of the Satoshi.
BUT i bet he is probably Sunny King experimenting on his modified POS system.

My guess 20% Satoshi 70% Sunny Kind 10% Other AltCoin Dev.
He definitely has experience in cryptocurrency!

Sunny King lives in a different timezone than BCNext

[coolmist]

This sounds interesting, a method to vote by account, but removes the incentive to make a ton of new accounts? I'm not sure if I grasp the bottomline of this implementation, can you state in words how this will prevent someone from making a ton of accounts? Lastly, how can you calculate similarity? Can't someone can just put their coins through a mixer/exchange?

It won't prevent anyone from making a ton of new accounts, however when they use those accounts to vote for one option the accounts that appear to be participating in a organized manner will have their similarity increased,decreasing voting weight.

similarity starts as one for all accounts

Vote issue 1 is split by a 60% 40% vote

statistically a voter chosen at random will have a 60% chance of choosing the winning outcome, a person with multiple accounts has a higher probability initially.

Vote issue 2 is split by a 60% 40% vote

Vote issue 3 is split by a 60% 40% vote

BankA_x represents accounts that voted and won.

If BankA₁ contains [accounts a, b, c, d, x, y and z]

and BankA₂ contains [accounts b, c, y and z]

and BankA₃ contains [accounts a, b, y and z] and



b, y and z's similarity will be increased by .1/ (.216), .216 being the probability of that occurring naturally (.6^3). As the probability goes to zero the similarity is increased exponentially.

The mixer/exchange problem is circumvented by adding the timesVoted variable, the more times an account has cast a vote for an issue the more weight his vote will have exponentially.

So if you don't vote and try to game the system by varying votes between accounts you will be left in the dust by people consistently voting.

An account recently made will have 25% the voting power of a account that has voted once already.

[okaynow]

One idea from some here is that a person with more coins, cares more for the system, so he should have more voting power.
so they say 1 coin = 1 vote. People who disagree say that Richman can have 1 account with 1 mil coins, and 1000 accounts with 1000 coins, and his word will be the law of the land.

This is based on an assumption, that Richman will care more for the system than his personal profit, so therefore his word should be the law of the land.

Then there is the idea, that 1 account = 1 vote. People who disagree say that Richman can make 10000 accounts with n coins, and his word will be the law of the land.

In both ideas Richman has the advantage. That is because his vote weighs as much as his wallet.

The only way for him to lose the advantage is not to associate vote weight with ones money. We should not forget, Richman is here for profit.
The rest just want to beat him to it. Let's not pretend it is "right" or "ethical" for Richman to have more power on every aspect.

[msin]

I'm suggesting keeping our voting system within the Nxt blockchain, where it belongs, so it can be implemented into a client in the future.  You are the one talking about developing a website to handle all of this, that is more complicated then opening a Nxt account and sending AM's to that account.  

What the cost of website development has to do with it? What matters is how easy and convenient it is for people.

Sending AM's into different accounts is a Rube Goldberg contraption. It's difficult to use, it's difficult to see the results. It loads the blockchain with something that can be done off-chain.

What's the advantage? Integration with the client? It can be integrated with the site too, especially since we're moving in the direction of thin clients anyway.

I don't think we will ever come to an agreement.  How much do we need to vote on anyway?  Let's put this to rest and let the core developers tackle the "how to"

[lucky88888]

BCNext could be one of the member of the Satoshi.
BUT i bet he is probably Sunny King experimenting on his modified POS system.

My guess 20% Satoshi 70% Sunny Kind 10% Other AltCoin Dev.
He definitely has experience in cryptocurrency!

Sunny King lives in a different timezone than BCNext

How do you know if that is what he wanted you to think. My beliefs still stands, if it's true, maybe i will get a reward or something from him. hahaha
I Originally invested in Peercoin and was so into Sunny, as it was the only one standing out at the time, until i saw nxt and i moved all my assets over, made few losses on the way but gained much more.

[EvilDave]

Time to repeat myself:

My proposal: small group of guys organise, throw up a quick and dirty voting website as soon as possible, taking as much community feedback into account as possible.

We vote, see how it goes, then change/modify/tweak the voting system until the flood of complaints about it are reduced to a minimum.
Once the site is working to (almost) everyones satisfaction, transfer that functionality into the Nxt client(s)

I propose: utopianfuture, smartwart, coolmist (and anyone else who feels really strongly about it or has the tech skills to get a site up) form a working group and throw something up on the Webs to try out.

[ebereon]

I don't know if someone else read betwen the lines but...

Sorry for the spoiler. Before u continue this discussion u'd better to know that PoS is required only during bootstrapping phase of Nxt. I can't reveal details now, u have to wait for the 3rd part of the plan.

Not sure yet. If Nxt goes well, we won't need coingen. Coingen will be implemented as a part of Nxt protocol.

I really wonder how to participate in writing a NXT white paper amid such a clandestine environment..

Well, looks like I told too much... Think of such a hint: Why BCNext chose "Nxt" as the name of the project. This hint should make u busy until u get all 3 pieces of the puzzle.

hmmm...
NxtBitcoin?
NxtLitecoin?
One to fork them all?

In 2 weeks 1 million NXT will be worth 200-250 BTC. I would like to ask too, who will receive them?

What is the timeline for the 2nd and 3rd parts? Are we in the 1st part?

No idea when he will publish the next part. We have only 1st one currently.

So where can I find written descriptions of the five levels of TF to add to the white paper?

In the 2nd and 3rd parts of BCNext's plan.

Thats how it should be april at the v earliest. We are doin all clones a favour. In april they will be able to copy the finnished thing

In April noone will care about the clones.

will blocks still be generated every 60,000 ms after full TF implementation?

Yes, or we can choose any other value, thx to time warp effect.

so we can decrease the block forging gap to 10,000 ms or lower?

Yes. It doesn't matter what we change - number of transactions in a block or time between blocks.

NXT can handle all transactions from all ***coins that are out today together?


I think this will become really huge... think about Bitcoin on top of NXT

Sorry, I'm dreaming...

[coolmist]

Why is not anyone creating localnxtcoin.com or localnxt.com?
Domain name is not even being squatted?

This can be our first worldwide nxt/fiat gateway.
Just like https://localbitcoins.com/
It should be easy to implement with automated escrow service. And an internal rating system.
If you can create an EXCHANGE, i'm pretty sure you can handle "localnxt".

Dev should set a nice bounty for this.
Agreed?

Agree, that sounds like a phenomenal idea!

[cremstopper]

What does deadline mean when you send NXT? Best to just leave at 24hrs?

[Anon136]

Re: Voting...

Why are we still having this discussion?

Nxt is PoS, voting should be based upon stake: 1 NXT == 1 Vote.

It's the only fair way.

[msin]

NXT can handle all transactions from all ***coins that are out today together?


I think this will become really huge... think about Bitcoin on top of NXT

Sorry, I'm dreaming...

Yeah, I think you are close!

[EvilDave]

I don't know if someone else read betwen the lines but...

...lots of text....

NXT can handle all transactions from all ***coins that are out today together?


I think this will become really huge... think about Bitcoin on top of NXT

Sorry, I'm dreaming...

This reminds me of my last thought last night before I headed to bed:

We all know that the banhammer is coming down on Bitcoin (and other cryptos) very soon in China.

We also all know that NXT will soon have an integrated Asset Exchange, freeing us from needing to use 3rd party exchanges such as DGEX, BTER, etc, and that this feature will be very useful in the current Chinese environment. No exchanges, true peer-2-peer currency exchange.

The possibly crazy concept here is : will it be possible (or can it be implemented?) to exchange other cryptos such as Bitcoin thru the NXT asset exchange, or an add-on to the AE?

If NXT could become a backdoor into (or out of) China for all other cryptos, things could get very interesting.

[S3MKi]

I have good news for u dudes.They added Nxt!

[Anon136]

Re: Voting...

Why are we still having this discussion?

Nxt is PoS, voting should be based upon stake: 1 NXT == 1 Vote.

It's the only fair way.

This seems obvious to me but maybe I'm missing something. Are small stakeholders afraid that large stakeholders will band together and vote to take away their money or something? Is something nefarious like that even possible? What mechanism is in place to enforce voting results?

THe way i understand it is voting would just be a way of allowing the community to express its opinion. whether or not that opinion changes the way the network operates would be up to the developers. can someone confirm this?