NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[Eadeqa]

I have more than $7000 in NXT but received 1 NXT per week after several weeks!!! It's really frustrating and community should consider it!

So the only reason you want to   "forge" is because you want transactions fees but you don't care about securing the network where you have $7000 invested?

Weird.

I doubt everyone else thinks the same way.

I still suggest drop the transactions fees low.

That's the best solution

[charitybegin123]

believe it or not, most ppl run Nxt client for fee.

[Anon136]

People who are invested in Nxt will still run full NRS software just to protect the network.

People keep stating this like it's a fact. What if enough people don't do this? What is the minimum percentage of users who need to run nodes for everything to work? Most people are not rational actors, especially once NXT is operating on a grand scale.
It makes me nervous that no one who is in the know has ever answered this questions when I ask it. It just gets ignored and glossed over.

It's not a binary sort of thing we are talking about here. What we are talking about here is the more people are participating, or to be more specific, the more stake that is participating honestly, the more secure each confirmation is. We would need VERY few people forging and a lot of very bad people attacking for nxt to be entirely broken. What we are discussing here, what is the better more relevant question, is how to properly weigh the monetary cost of transactions against the security cost of less secure confirmations while additionally taking into consideration the cost of lost hard drive space resulting from blockchain spam resulting from low transaction fees and idea of the value of stress testing. its way more complex than "What is the minimum percentage of users who need to run nodes for everything to work?" and this is not at all the right question to be asking.

*edit* also like ciyam pointed out, running nodes should be differentiated from forging.

[Gaman]

Guys, I am still getting these weird errors running 0.7.6 nrs

[2014-02-24 05:52:38.960] DEBUG: Failed to accept block 10121 height 73855 received from vps4.nxtcrypto.org, blacklisting
[2014-02-24 05:52:41.242] DEBUG: Failed to accept block 10121 height 73855 received from vps1.nxtcrypto.org, blacklisting
[2014-02-24 05:52:46.085] DEBUG: Failed to accept block 10574 height 73856 received from 46.19.137.116, blacklisting
[2014-02-24 05:52:48.726] DEBUG: Failed to accept block 10574 height 73856 received from 46.19.137.116, blacklisting
[2014-02-24 05:52:50.820] DEBUG: Failed to accept block 10574 height 73856 received from vps8.nxtcrypto.org, blacklisting

[abctc]

.. Is it too late to name the concepts again?   
These names has been commented earlier, too. Eg. forgery has only negative meanings.

The simple mistake of confusing forgery and forging is being made here. Very different.

- how would you name "miner" in Nxt ? forger ?

[sepehr]

I have more than $7000 in NXT but received 1 NXT per week after several weeks!!! It's really frustrating and community should consider it!

So the only reason you want to   "forge" is because you want transactions fees but you don't care about securing the network where you have $7000 invested?

Weird.

I doubt everyone else thinks the same way.

My friend,

As Ciyam told running server is different with just forging!
I have 4 Servers with Valid IP that Securing the network. But I can forge on my Handset without Valid IP.
Why should one like me put 4 servers that cost at least monthly $10 each for NEX Network?

Please be realist and not Idealist! Economy have it's own rules!

[MarvellousMutant]

If you're asking a majority of users to run open nodes for little to no reward I can almost guarantee failure.

Not only is there no reward but under the currently proposed TF there is actually *zero* benefit (i.e. they are not helping to secure the network at all).

While they are not helping to secure the network, they are helping to ensure the functionality through providing bandwith. With their bandwidth, downloading the blockchain becomes faster for other clients. When bandwidth runs low, nobody can use Nxt as you would never see your confirmed transaction in the blockchain if you cannot keep up downloading with the blockchain's growth.

Edit: Its also more secure to have a lot of nodes providing bandwidth rather than a few very fast nodes. A few nodes can be tricked into providing false blockchains easier than a loarge number of independent nodes. So more nodes equal more security.

[Eadeqa]

As Ciyam told running server is different with just forging!
I have 4 Servers with Valid IP that Securing the network. But I can forge on my Handset without Valid IP.
Why should one like me put 4 servers that cost at least monthly $10 for NEX Network?

Why are you running 4 servers. According to Ciyam, only "forging" node secures the network.

Just run one on any old unused computer

[Anon136]

If you're asking a majority of users to run open nodes for little to no reward I can almost guarantee failure.

Not only is there no reward but under the currently proposed TF there is actually *zero* benefit (i.e. they are not helping to secure the network at all).

sorry to nitpick ciyam but just to be fair it does help to protect against ddos.

[BrianNowhere]

People who are invested in Nxt will still run full NRS software just to protect the network.

People keep stating this like it's a fact. What if enough people don't do this? What is the minimum percentage of users who need to run nodes for everything to work? Most people are not rational actors, especially once NXT is operating on a grand scale.
It makes me nervous that no one who is in the know has ever answered this questions when I ask it. It just gets ignored and glossed over.

It's not a binary sort of thing we are talking about here. What we are talking about here is the more people are participating, or to be more specific, the more stake that is participating honestly, the more secure each confirmation is. We would need VERY few people forging and a lot of very bad people attacking for nxt to be entirely broken. What we are discussing here, what is the better more relevant question, is how to properly weigh the monetary cost of transactions against the security cost of less secure confirmations while additionally taking into consideration the cost of lost hard drive space resulting from blockchain spam resulting from low transaction fees and idea of the value of stress testing. its way more complex than "What is the minimum percentage of users who need to run nodes for everything to work?" and this is not at all the right question to be asking.

*edit* also like ciyam pointed out, running nodes should be differentiated from forging.

Finally, I think I understand a little better now. The question has been nagging at me regarding how big of a problem it would be if most Nxt users didn't bother with forging, which is what I think MOST people would not do if Nxt became a big enough thing (UNLESS it was made EXTREMELY easy to do) . As long as enough honest, large stakeholders are doing it then I guess that should not be a problem.

I hate to ask this, but have you guys examined  or considered stealing some ideas from the way Ripple manages their system? Right now the "servers" are run by ripple Labs, but supposedly they will have users run them in the future. I wish I understood it better, but I know it has something to do with using a large enough and diverse enough pool of 'verifiers' that could not possibly collude with one another because people who don't know each other are incapable of coordinating in large numbers to do something dishonest, even if individually they are not trustworthy.

I wish I was more qualified to ask better questions, but all I know is that XRP is transmitted extremely quickly and there might be an idea or two to steal there. They seem to feel that a very very tiny transaction fee is enough to eliminate spamming.

[sepehr]

Hi Guys,

We can arrange for a company account!
We can have two type of accounts, Personal accounts and company accounts like any Bank.
Personal accounts can act just like normal currency accounts. One person have the total control over the account while he/she have it's credentials.
But Company accounts can include several personal accounts. each personal account is a member of board of company and can participate in decisions.
Company board members can decide how the payments from company account should be made.
They will vote for a logical order that showing how payments from company account should be made.

For example:

Payments from Company Account(CA) can be confirmed if "Personal Account A"(PS-A) confirm it.
Payments from CA can be confirmed if "PS-A and PS-B" confirm it.
Payments from CA can be confirmed if "PS-A or (PS-B and PS-C)" confirm it.

So in this case the system can:

1-Form a company in virtual world.
2-The company board can take decisions according to the voting system we implemented separately for a "logical order".
3-payments from company can be made according to combination of Personal entities defined in "logical order"
4-Members of board at anytime can change the "logical order" of company so they can change the CEO of company as they wish.
5-The company after forming can announce Assets in Asset exchange feature. so everyone can be a stake holder of an asset of company. And receive dividends.

It's just a new Idea aroused in my mind!

I think every one that implement this idea in his currency will have the future!

Is there any feedback for this Idea? We can call it Crypto Company.

[sepehr]

As Ciyam told running server is different with just forging!
I have 4 Servers with Valid IP that Securing the network. But I can forge on my Handset without Valid IP.
Why should one like me put 4 servers that cost at least monthly $10 for NEX Network?

Why are you running 4 servers. According to Ciyam, only "forging" node secures the network.

Just run one on any old unused computer

I'm running 4 servers now because hoping that NXT grow and want to help secure the network but I cannot deny that I assumed lot lot more reward than this!

[chanc3r]

Finally, I think I understand a little better now. The question has been nagging at me regarding how big of a problem it would be if most Nxt users didn't bother with forging, which is what I think MOST people would not do if Nxt became a big enough thing (UNLESS it was made EXTREMELY easy to do) . As long as enough honest, large stakeholders are doing it then I guess that should not be a problem.

I hate to ask this, but have you guys examined  or considered stealing some ideas from the way Ripple manages their system? Right now the "servers" are run by ripple Labs, but supposedly they will have users run them in the future. I wish I understood it better, but I know it has something to do with using a large enough and diverse enough pool of 'verifiers' that could not possibly collude with one another because people who don't know each other are incapable of coordinating in large numbers to do something dishonest, even if individually they are not trustworthy.

I wish I was more qualified to ask better questions, but all I know is that XRP is transmitted extremely quickly and there might be an idea or two to steal there. They seem to feel that a very very tiny transaction fee is enough to eliminate spamming.

As I posted a few pages back... its great NXT solves the problem of CPU for confirming transactions, but you still have the problem of network bandwidth and memory, now you can forge on your mobile but in future (when NXT is successful) unless you have the bandwidth you won't be able to keep up with the block download and it will fry your data plan and similarly you will chew through more of your home broadband plan.

There will be more transactions and more rewards BUT while CPU will be low the data bandwidth demands will go up - not for a long time maybe but it will happen.

I've forged about 13 blocks on my macbook since december, earned about 9 NXT but only 4 blocks had any fees because we have a lot of empty blocks right now.

The concept of a decentralised network that anyone can join is great but it needs to have some QoS membership criteria for the nodes so that people can rely on the node and every node has the minimum strength to deliver if it were the next forging node.

From what I have seen - so far no crypto has the potential to become a high performance network apart from this one (although I have not looked deep into Ripple)  but that means the network has to grow in the right way with the demands on it.

Ripple have done what they have done to ensure a QoS from the start (although I'm sure their are other reasons), as I understand it people other than Ripple can run servers but not many are right now.

[Eadeqa]

Finally, I think I understand a little better now. The question has been nagging at me regarding how big of a problem it would be if most Nxt users didn't bother with forging, which is what I think MOST people would not do if Nxt became a big enough thing (UNLESS it was made EXTREMELY easy to do) . As long as enough honest, large stakeholders are doing it then I guess that should not be a problem.

I hate to ask this, but have you guys examined  or considered stealing some ideas from the way Ripple manages their system? Right now the "servers" are run by ripple Labs, but supposedly they will have users run them in the future. I wish I understood it better, but I know it has something to do with using a large enough and diverse enough pool of 'verifiers' that could not possibly collude with one another because people who don't know each other are incapable of coordinating in large numbers to do something dishonest, even if individually they are not trustworthy.

I wish I was more qualified to ask better questions, but all I know is that XRP is transmitted extremely quickly and there might be an idea or two to steal there. They seem to feel that a very very tiny transaction fee is enough to eliminate spamming.

As I posted a few pages back... its great NXT solves the problem of CPU for confirming transactions, but you still have the problem of network bandwidth and memory, now you can forge on your mobile but in future (when NXT is successful) unless you have the bandwidth you won't be able to keep up with the block download and it will fry your data plan and similarly you will chew through more of your home broadband plan.

I don't think bandwidth will be a problem when clients can sign transactions locally and broadcast it to a public node.  Most users with less than 1000 Nxt will not have to download the entire blockchain. They will run a lightweight client. The network will only need a few hundred nodes that will maintain (upload/download)  the entire blockchain.

Bandwidth will not be a problem




 

[chanc3r]

Finally, I think I understand a little better now. The question has been nagging at me regarding how big of a problem it would be if most Nxt users didn't bother with forging, which is what I think MOST people would not do if Nxt became a big enough thing (UNLESS it was made EXTREMELY easy to do) . As long as enough honest, large stakeholders are doing it then I guess that should not be a problem.

I hate to ask this, but have you guys examined  or considered stealing some ideas from the way Ripple manages their system? Right now the "servers" are run by ripple Labs, but supposedly they will have users run them in the future. I wish I understood it better, but I know it has something to do with using a large enough and diverse enough pool of 'verifiers' that could not possibly collude with one another because people who don't know each other are incapable of coordinating in large numbers to do something dishonest, even if individually they are not trustworthy.

I wish I was more qualified to ask better questions, but all I know is that XRP is transmitted extremely quickly and there might be an idea or two to steal there. They seem to feel that a very very tiny transaction fee is enough to eliminate spamming.

As I posted a few pages back... its great NXT solves the problem of CPU for confirming transactions, but you still have the problem of network bandwidth and memory, now you can forge on your mobile but in future (when NXT is successful) unless you have the bandwidth you won't be able to keep up with the block download and it will fry your data plan and similarly you will chew through more of your home broadband plan.

I don't think bandwidth will be a problem when clients can sign transactions locally and broadcast it to a public node.  Most users with less than 1000 Nxt will not have to download the entire blockchain. They will run a lightweight client. The network will only need a few hundred nodes that will maintain (upload/download)  the entire blockchain.

Bandwidth will not be a problem

This is not about signing - I understand that - clients can sign without any blocks as long as they can reach a public node - this is about Forging and the minimum requirements for a node to reliably forge if it is selected as the next forging node by TF - bandwidth is likely more relevant here.

But if forging and signing are the same thing (I didnt understand them to be) then happy days...

[Come-from-Beyond]

In ~8 hours I'm planning to reload the testnet, balances will be reset.

[pandaisftw]

IMO, forging is fine. In the future, there will be supernodes (service providers) that are basically be high-bandwidth pools people can lend their stake to. This won't be a problem of centralization, because NXT is resistant even against 90% attacks. So unless 1 single pool gets that much forging power, we will be fine. These high-bandwidth pools can support 1000+ TPS easily.

[abctc]

IMO, forging is fine. In the future, there will be supernodes (service providers) that are basically be high-bandwidth pools people can lend their stake to. This won't be a problem of centralization, because NXT is resistant even against 90% attacks. So unless 1 single pool gets that much forging power, we will be fine. These high-bandwidth pools can support 1000+ TPS easily.

- agree.

[chanc3r]

IMO, forging is fine. In the future, there will be supernodes (service providers) that are basically be high-bandwidth pools people can lend their stake to. This won't be a problem of centralization, because NXT is resistant even against 90% attacks. So unless 1 single pool gets that much forging power, we will be fine. These high-bandwidth pools can support 1000+ TPS easily.

Panda - stating this is fine... we need the building blocks in place enable these to happen if this is the way it will be, I'm not sure I entirely agree with the 'super node', the issue with over centralisation is not attack but reliability of the network particularly if you are promising instant or near realtime transactions.

So the way in which the network grows is important rewarding both the node providers and the stakeholders (and even someone with 1 NXT is a stakeholder)

[CIYAM]

sorry to nitpick ciyam but just to be fair it does help to protect against ddos.

Granted it does do that (so yes - saying *zero* benefit was going too far).

My main concern is that simple economics will likely lead to a small number of "super nodes" because I think *most* stakeholders will lease their forging rights to pools (why wouldn't you want to get money for doing absolutely nothing?).

So the problem is that if those pools are suddenly shut down (due to court order lets say) then the transaction confirmation rate is going to slow down *dramatically*.

It would look rather bad if our amazing 1000+ TPS network suddenly ended up struggling to handle much more than 10 TPS because it was actually now only being run on a few hundred Raspberry Pis!