NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[grandpa_seth]

All this talk about forging and running nodes and this and that and unfair and that.....

And here I am running some nodes just to strengthen the network.

I do it because if the network is successful, then we'll all be succesful. Although if I could forge more it would be a plus.

+1, good work, fellow dave.

I am thinking about setting up a public VPS node to offer a(nother) node for my users of my NXT client.

Which hoster should I use, what are the server specs. I would need to run it smoothly and is there still the danger of hitting hoster bandwith limits with the recent version of NRS?

Thanks!
Marcus

I'm running a non-hallmarked VPS 24/7 on Amazon EC2, monthly costs were $1.38 for January, and are $0.34 for Feb. Costs fuck all, basically.
Looks like hosting costs are dropping as Jean-Luc works his magic. If version 0.8 also has such low overhead, I'll fire up a few more EC2 instances at the begining of March.

I think that forging should stay as it is...big holders get bigger rewards. It's PoS, live with it.
However: we need to encourage a healthy NXT network, now and in the future, and forging income alone doesn't seem to be enough right now to motivate people. We need some way to make contributing to the network at least slightly profitable for everyone, not just guys with enough to forge.

When Nxt goes to 1 dollar soon. Even small holders will forge if for no other reason than to secure the health of the network to get to 10 dollars.

We just need a client that makes it so that there is no cost to forging. Then even if your chances are small there will still even then be no reason not to participate. All other things being equal a 0.001% chance to win 1000 dollars is better than a 0.000% chance of winning 1000 dollars even though 0.001% is a pretty slim chance.

+1440

[xyzzyx]

You know how I know BCNext is not a native English speaker?  A native English speaker never would have used the word "forge" positively in connection with currency.

I dont believe bcnext came up with that term

You've piqued my interest.  Do you know where it was first used in connection with Nxt?

[Eadeqa]

I don't see any logical reason to change forging. We spent so much efforts explaining that Nxt is not about forging and the income from it. We are also contemplating lowering down the fees and making forging income insignificant. So all this stuff about big stakeholders' forging will become irrelevant.

That's a good point. We should lower the fees to 0.1 then eventually lower it to 0.01. The point of forging should not be to make money, but to protect the network -- especially if you are invested in Nxt, it's an incentive  to protect it.

[naurisdede]

Thank you dear Mr. Stackeholder, what a generous move!!  

[QBTC]

Green Nxt: exotic video, new version:
http://youtu.be/cP4KFH6Iz0g

feel free to share

Error: "This video is not available in your country." (United States)

[mthcl]

Thanks 7017504655955743955!

+1

[chanc3r]

We just need a client that makes it so that there is no cost to forging. Then even if your chances are small there will still even then be no reason not to participate. All other things being equal a 0.001% chance to win 1000 dollars is better than a 0.000% chance of winning 1000 dollars even though 0.001% is a pretty slim chance.

Nxt is going to go to those kinds of prices because it is useful, this means transaction confirmations are quick and reliable.

No crypto has made it big in retail yet and BTC and most of its derivatives with multi minute and unpredictable transaction confirmation is a dead duck for this.

The explanation of how Transparent Forging can be evolved to instant transactions is brilliant if it can be achieved but pointless if the node receiving those transactions cannot or does not process them reliably.

I too want everyone to benefit equally from their stake and see the benefit returned in forging benefits but we also need to encourage a strong network - not just in the number of nodes and their decentralisation but also that each node can meet a minimum specification in terms of the need of the network for overall processing speed.

Right now you can run NXT on a TV stick, RasPI or whatever and forge, in the future, if NXT is successful I am not sure these will meet the minimum requirements for the network to deliver a consistent performance and the network should be built to depreciate weak nodes or it will fail.

The ability for the community to join together to create a strong node is important which is why I think we need forging pools of some description to address both issues - the forging reward and the network reliability.

If in the end even if we can run a node on a solar powered device with a big network pipe - why have 10,000,000 of these with 100 NXT why not have 1000 of these with 1,000,000 NXT but the stakeholders still get their forging benefits - surely this is even better for the environment.

[MadCow]

Thank you dear Mr. Stackeholder, what a generous move!!  

This is so cool!

[igmaca]

I...STILL...DON'T....GET....IT.

Unlike Bitcoin, unlike DOGE, unlike all the other crap coins that are out there that I ran away from to get here, NXT IS A ZERO SUM GAME.  There are no new coins being created.  A coin that goes in one NXT forger's pocket has to come out of another NXTer's pocket, either from a NXT transaction fee payer's pocketor from another NXT forger's pocket.  HAS TO.

So for ANY scheme is concocted that pools NXT to forge,  IF that scheme claims a pool member will get some LARGER proportion of forged coins than they would get from a true 100% Proof of Stake system that NXT runs by now, THEN BY DEFINITION some other pool member is getting a SMALLER proportion than they would by acting alone.   So explain to me who is getting shafted under this new scheme?

Not that your explanation matters, because with falling transaction fees, I doubt anybody can profitably support amortizing the purchase cost of a forging node and its electricity costs under ANY scheme, including the one NXT is operating under right now.

You wanna mine free coins and get rich, go see DOGE.  You wanna try to experiment and create a more sustainable system that faces bigger challenges than it seems at first glance, stick around for this fun roller coaster ride called NXT.

ok i just trying to help

I'm not saying you can't help and I want you to stick around and try to help.  I'm just saying that I am a numbers guy and I would appreciate seeing the full picture of who gets more rewards and who gets less under any idea you propose.

Thanks,

my idea is to just give in to the pools forging fees rights. Not forging power. Not funds

forging power and funds stay in bob account

forging fees rights stay in pool if bob wants.

if bob forge and forging fees rights are in the pool bob must split forging fees with other people in the pool proportionally with amount of funds in this moment.

I think for that direction is the right solution.

The number of pools and the size of them I reach an optimum value beyond which no interest be bigger.

with this solution the network will always be extremely decentralized and every body have the same opportunities to forge.

you just have to adjust the transaction fee for the annual return to forge all year continuously is equivalent to the cost of maintaining the node. if for example it is estimated that with 10000 nodes is enough then we must assess how much maintaining 10000 nodes for a year and evaluate the number of transactions in the year and adjust the fees.

[mthcl]

You know how I know BCNext is not a native English speaker?  A native English speaker never would have used the word "forge" positively in connection with currency.

+1000.  This is a real problem for anybody learning about NXT for the first time.  There is a valid and legitimate use in English for "forger" as being "one who heats and works metal", like a blacksmith.  But the FAR MORE COMMON use of "forger" in English is "one who creates fake documents, particularly financial ones".

The same problem in Portuguese, by the way.

[chanc3r]

You know how I know BCNext is not a native English speaker?  A native English speaker never would have used the word "forge" positively in connection with currency.

+1000.  This is a real problem for anybody learning about NXT for the first time.  There is a valid and legitimate use in English for "forger" as being "one who heats and works metal", like a blacksmith.  But the FAR MORE COMMON use of "forger" in English is "one who creates fake documents, particularly financial ones".

Or he has a very good understanding of english and knows the double-entendre very well.

[marcus03]

I'm running a non-hallmarked VPS 24/7 on Amazon EC2, monthly costs were $1.38 for January, and are $0.34 for Feb. Costs fuck all, basically.
Looks like hosting costs are dropping as Jean-Luc works his magic. If version 0.8 also has such low overhead, I'll fire up a few more EC2 instances at the begining of March.

Could you specify the product you are using? Linux m3.medium ?

[zorke]

Thank you dear Mr. Stackeholder, what a generous move!!  

This is so cool!

I think we would all appreciate if more big stakeholders did what 7017504655955743955 has done today, especially top 50 accounts which are all from 5 million to 50 million NXT.

To them to spread 100,000 like 7017504655955743955 did would be nothing but this would show even more greatness of this community and this project.

In the end, doing something like this would just raise the worth of NXT in a long run and paradoxically their main stash would be worth much more than this little part that they have possibly disbursed to this hard working community.

Just something to think about.

Once again BRAVO for 7017504655955743955!!

[salsacz]

7017504655955743955 you rock man! thanks so much!

*edit* also 2037401990853753795 who ever you are also thank you so much. you also are awesome!

*edit2* google search reveals 2037401990853753795 is salsacz. thanks buddy. what was that for specifically?

tai zen interview. its in gdoc

[Damelon]

Thank you 7017504655955743955

[xyzzyx]

You know how I know BCNext is not a native English speaker?  A native English speaker never would have used the word "forge" positively in connection with currency.

+1000.  This is a real problem for anybody learning about NXT for the first time.  There is a valid and legitimate use in English for "forger" as being "one who heats and works metal", like a blacksmith.  But the FAR MORE COMMON use of "forger" in English is "one who creates fake documents, particularly financial ones".

Or he has a very good understanding of english and knows the double-entendre very well.

Perhaps.  If so it seems counterproductive to the idea of spreading NXT far-and-wide, though.

[Anon136]

7017504655955743955 you rock man! thanks so much!

*edit* also 2037401990853753795 who ever you are also thank you so much. you also are awesome!

*edit2* google search reveals 2037401990853753795 is salsacz. thanks buddy. what was that for specifically?

tai zen interview. its in gdoc

ah well idk anything about this doc but thanks a lot!

[EvilDave]

I'm running a non-hallmarked VPS 24/7 on Amazon EC2, monthly costs were $1.38 for January, and are $0.34 for Feb. Costs fuck all, basically.
Looks like hosting costs are dropping as Jean-Luc works his magic. If version 0.8 also has such low overhead, I'll fire up a few more EC2 instances at the begining of March.

Could you specify the product you are using? Linux m3.medium ?

Good question, set it up a while ago.
There is a set-up guide for these EC2 instances floating around somewhere. I'll search fro it in a bit....
Basically, I chose the cheapest Win options: 512mB EC2 instance, running Win Server 2008.

[verymuchso]

JeanLuc

Couple of points.. (hope your not getting sick of me).

Could you possibly move all static initialization code in nxt.Nxt to nxt.Nxt.Init.init method. You probably planned that already, it could be my decompiler f%$'ing stuff up but it shows now that init method is empty (private static void nxt.Nxt.Init.init() {})  and that all code that should go there is in the static class initializer beneath it (again, that's what my decompiler thinks).

Because of the code in the static initializers it's impossible to register event listener before we kick off the init process, the event listeners are there off course to display init progress.

Also. You read in both "nxt-default.properties" and "nxt.properties" in the static class initializer in nxt.Nxt. The runtime exceptions thrown when those files are missing (our case) cannot be caught. I believe this code belongs in nxt.Nxt.Init.init to. But the exceptions thrown on missing property files remain a problem. I really like how you can pass a Properties object to Nxt.init. Maybe you can read the property files in nxt.Nxt.Init.init() and then in nxt.Nxt.Init.init(Properties properties) do the rest, that way we can simply call nxt.Nxt.Init.init(Properties properties).

I'm stuck at the moment and the only way out I see is to delete Nxt.class and create my own fork of Nxt.java (sucks really because of the decompiler mangling all the names). Where are you on your refactorings? Any chance you can release a version more geared towards java client developers?

If that's not the case if you could give me a copy of only Nxt.java I can at least share my changes with you.

As always thanks!

You cant register a listener with BlockchainProcessorImpl to listen for BLOCK_SCANNED events because to register the listener there need to be a new BlockchainProcessorImpl that in it's constructor calls BlockchainProcessorImpl.scan (which is the method that is firing the BLOCK_SCANNED events).

[lyynx]

You know how I know BCNext is not a native English speaker?  A native English speaker never would have used the word "forge" positively in connection with currency.

I dont believe bcnext came up with that term

You've piqued my interest.  Do you know where it was first used in connection with Nxt?

If i am not mistaken, I can say for sure it was after December 3rd, 2013 and I believe the suggestion occured on Nextcoin.org  , still looking for it.

I only think this because i suggested the use of the term "refining" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.msg3808862#msg3808862 on that date and not too long after that, i believe we adopted "forging"