Bitcoin Forum
December 12, 2019, 09:46:39 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 [1856] 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 ... 2565 »
  Print  
Author Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information  (Read 2756319 times)
pinarello
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 100


NXT is the future


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 04:59:58 PM
 #37101

Why dont we update the NXT network?
I am only waiting for client developers to say they fully support the 0.8 branch, and to have the user friendly installer packages ready, before announcing it stable. I don't think it is unstable at all.

We have to move to the 0.8 branch before I can start working on incompatible features such as adding transaction type for fractional Nxt amounts.


guys lets update to 0.8 branche pls... thank you

and lets test some 0.8 clients.

1576187199
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576187199

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576187199
Reply with quote  #2

1576187199
Report to moderator
1576187199
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576187199

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576187199
Reply with quote  #2

1576187199
Report to moderator
1576187199
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576187199

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576187199
Reply with quote  #2

1576187199
Report to moderator
Even in the event that an attacker gains more than 50% of the network's computational power, only transactions sent by the attacker could be reversed or double-spent. The network would not be destroyed.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Jean-Luc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
February 24, 2014, 05:01:12 PM
 #37102

Can I call init() and shutdown()  from a linux command line? If so, how is the syntax?
No, these are java method calls only.

Quote
OK, the fix will be in the next release.

lead Nxt developer, gpg key id: 0x811D6940E1E4240C
Nxt blockchain platform | Ardor blockchain platform | Ignis ICO
mthcl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 376
Merit: 300


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:01:45 PM
 #37103

Can you define (in simple terms) the math model and the question about it that you need answered?  I'm a mathematician (Probability/Stochastic processes), but understand little how cryptocurrencies actually work, I have to confess that I understand almost nothing of the tech talk over here...

I will try my best (math is not my strength - logic is).

Basically the way that TF works is that there is a crypto hash for each block which was calculated from the previous' block hash and the "forgers" account.

This hash then determines who's account is the "best" to forge the next block so in a perfect situation if we consider that the max. "weight" of a block is 100 then you would see a blockchain like this:

A(100) B(100) C(100) D(100)

but things aren't perfect as some people won't forge (or pass on their forging right) so the network allows other "less perfect" blocks to be announced and each node will accept the best one that they see to try and keep building on the chain.

A(80) B(90) C(50)

The problem of "forking" is because each node can't see everything in the network (due to latency) so you could also end up with:

A(80) B(95) C(10)

with these "forks" ending up becoming "ignored" because a longer "better" chain has been noticed by the node.

So the problem we are dealing with is that B(95) could "hide" their block and then announce it *after* B(90) which would at least for 1 block make it a "better chain".

But as others will build upon what they see then it won't necessarily *matter* that B(95) was better than B(90) because C(50) is better than C(10) and so B's attempt to "create a fork" will fail.

If though someone has the ability to produce a better B, C, D, E, etc. then they could replace a large number of blocks. This is known in Bitcoin as the >50% attack.

We need to work out the probabilities of all this including how "penalising" a node for "not forging" changes this.

OK, let's try to make the notations more clear. Who are A,B,C,D? Blocks, right (not nodes)? Shall we write "A(80) B'(95) C'(10)" in your example then?

Maybe, define it this way:

- assume for now that we have a static picture (no transactions between accounts), and there are accounts (nodes) 1,...,N with balances M_1,...,M_N on them;

- the time is discrete, and at each moment k each (active) node j calculates its current weight W_k as a (randomized?) function of M_j and B^j_{k-1} (the previous block in the blockchain that the node j thinks to be "official")

- the network then chooses j_0 such that W_{j_0}>W_i for all i not equal to j_0, and lets the node j_0 forge the block B_k; then L_k=W_{j_0} is the weight of this block.

Now, what I don't really understand, is how a node really determines, which branch is "official"? By looking who has the majority among its neighbors in the network?
EvilDave
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1000



View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:04:39 PM
 #37104

is anyone here experienced with cad? does anyone know anyone who is experienced and talented with cad?

Off the top of my head, try gvans who produced the amazing NXT monolith.

Nulli Dei, nulli Reges, solum NXT
Love your money: www.nxt.org  www.ardorplatform.org
www.nxter.org  www.nxtfoundation.org
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:05:54 PM
 #37105

is anyone here experienced with cad? does anyone know anyone who is experienced and talented with cad?

Off the top of my head, try gvans who produced the amazing NXT monolith.

thanks evildave. you dont seem as evil as your name implies.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Regulus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18
Merit: 0



View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:10:59 PM
 #37106

Why dont we update the NXT network?
I am only waiting for client developers to say they fully support the 0.8 branch, and to have the user friendly installer packages ready, before announcing it stable. I don't think it is unstable at all.

We have to move to the 0.8 branch before I can start working on incompatible features such as adding transaction type for fractional Nxt amounts.


I have tested Nxs with 0.8.0e yesterday and did not run into any problems but have not yet pushed a new version to its repo. I will be testing more today with 0.8.1e and switching GET to POST before pushing a new version, but it should be up tonight or tomorrow.
wesleyh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:13:12 PM
 #37107

jeanluc; do you mean we have to start like this if we want a custom properties file:

java -Dnxt-default.properties=conf/nxt-default.properties -Xmx1024M -cp nxt.jar:lib/*:conf nxt.Nxt



(because that ain't working)
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:15:39 PM
 #37108

I do not understand. You create only 1 block per year. What exactly do you expect? 1000 NXTs for that?

I recently pondered about the discussion of inequality. I think it only stems from a perceived stagnation of the value associated with the amount of NXT a person has.

Let A be amount of NXTs and t1 and t2 two different timestamps. Humans cannot clearly see why A@t1 and A@t2 is a different value (in terms of goods one could buy with them). They just see A. They'd rather have a higher amount in their account (like interest in bank accounts).

One should teach people that NXT is deflationary (will they understand?). The increase in value is achieved indirectly and not by changing digits of the account balance.

No , but i expect at least 10-20 Nxt .. i'm helping the community and when i forge one block and the reward is 0 Nxt... i'm so angry  Grin

Cheesy Maybe, you could ask the committee for funding you. Wink Cheesy

This relates to the issue: nodes vs. blocks.

It seems to me that the system (reward for creating blocks == sum of fees) is quite perfect.

I dunno how to tackle rewards for running nodes without having PoW.
Jean-Luc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
February 24, 2014, 05:16:59 PM
 #37109

jeanluc; do you mean we have to start like this if we want a custom properties file:
java -Dnxt-default.properties=conf/nxt-default.properties -Xmx1024M -cp nxt.jar:lib/*:conf nxt.Nxt
No, I hope this should not be necessary. If both nxt-default.properties and nxt.properties are in the classpath, it will read both files, and the values in nxt.properties will override the defaults in nxt-default.properties. It is ok if nxt.properties is missing completely.

The system property should only be needed if for some reason you cannot have nxt-default.properties in the classpath, or the classloader doesn't find it, or you have some complicated setup with multiple classloaders. It is a hack.

lead Nxt developer, gpg key id: 0x811D6940E1E4240C
Nxt blockchain platform | Ardor blockchain platform | Ignis ICO
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:17:57 PM
 #37110

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.

I disagree. Many nodes are important to support the network. It the 'decentralized' part. Few supernodes can easily be shutdown.
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:20:36 PM
 #37111

I see no problem here. If a part of the stake becomes seized then the network will start forging with another part.

The question is "forging with what"?

If let's say 100 powerful machines are shut down by an authority and the majority of stake holders are "rich old men" who aren't that technically savvy then you are now running a network of maybe a few thousand desktop computers (or even less powerful devices) that are run by hobbyists and that is not going to do 1000+ TPS.

I am not saying the network would *die* but that it would be *seriously damaged* in terms of the TPS it could process and that in itself could cause *panic*.


1000 tps processing requires mid-level hosting hardware. Still see no problem.

After discussing this issue with CIYAM Open I got that we indeed have a problem here. If users will just lease their power and forget then one day Nxt network may die.

Sorry for my previous mistake, my English is not good enough to get some ideas clearly.

Smiley
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:23:43 PM
 #37112

I think we can possibly solve this by making it more profitable to be a service provider than forging and the reward should be equal for different service providers instead of being biased to those with powerful machines and massive resource, thus everyone has the incentive to be a service provider and the service would be provided in a distributed way.

Even split does not work.
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1009

Newbie


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:23:57 PM
 #37113

I'm updating the testnet...
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 24, 2014, 05:24:09 PM
 #37114

OK, let's try to make the notations more clear. Who are A,B,C,D? Blocks, right (not nodes)? Shall we write "A(80) B'(95) C'(10)" in your example then?

Yes they are blocks not nodes.


Maybe, define it this way:

- assume for now that we have a static picture (no transactions between accounts), and there are accounts (nodes) 1,...,N with balances M_1,...,M_N on them;

- the time is discrete, and at each moment k each (active) node j calculates its current weight W_k as a (randomized?) function of M_j and B^j_{k-1} (the previous block in the blockchain that the node j thinks to be "official")

- the network then chooses j_0 such that W_{j_0}>W_i for all i not equal to j_0, and lets the node j_0 forge the block B_k; then L_k=W_{j_0} is the weight of this block.

Now, what I don't really understand, is how a node really determines, which branch is "official"? By looking who has the majority among its neighbors in the network?

Now you lose me with the math (as I said that is not my field) - but let's try and move forwards.

There is "no official" branch.

Each node makes it's own decision about its current chain according to what it sees. So one node can end up on a "fork" and if it goes too far down that fork it may never be able to get back onto the "main chain".

So the "main chain" is the "best chain" in terms of the "weight" of every block in it.

With CIYAM anyone can create 100% generated C++ web applications in literally minutes.

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
EvilDave
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1000



View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:24:17 PM
 #37115

Below u'll find a short description of the Nxt communication system. This is the 2nd plan of our decentralization. 1st one you can find here.


hours and hours of communication

Did you ever send a copy of the signed form to Steven?

Did you fill it and sent it to Steven?

So, no, I did not send the form in to Steven.  I did not know I was supposed to.

  Cheesy

Wonder if I can get the above exchange printed on a t-shirt: We're so de-centralised that.....

Still, looks like it will work out in the end:

rickyjames: print the form, fill the form, scan the form, send it to Stephen Smiley Nifty was also in a phone contact with Paul, so lets wait for his news too
Done.  I am in email contact with Nifty too.



And back to the forging/running nodes issue:

I'm not technical. So you can ignore me if I say something stupid.

Isn't it possible to build something on top of NXT that can be more profitable for the forgers around us to keep the network safe?

I thought James was experimenting with such a coin earlier.

jl777 (and others) came up with the idea of rewarding people who run nodes with a colored "nodecoin", issued based on node running time.
This sidesteps the issue of forging income only going to the big fish, by also rewarding little fish who choose to run a node to help maintain the NXT network.

I know that we need to move away from the mining mindset as much as possible for NXT, but we also need to encourage network growth.
As a NXT node costs almost nothing to run (in terms of computing resources) compared to mining,  we could maybe in this way also persuade miners to run NXT nodes on their mining rigs in addition to their current mining activities.....everyone wins.

And to J-L, Pin, CfB and anyone else with an opinion...should we move to 8.0/8.1 now?

And I'm going to repeat my request for someone to step up and carry out a comprehensive audit of the NXT network:

Can someone step up and carry out a (semi-) comprehensive audit of the NXT network ?
What do we have up and running right now?

Nulli Dei, nulli Reges, solum NXT
Love your money: www.nxt.org  www.ardorplatform.org
www.nxter.org  www.nxtfoundation.org
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:24:54 PM
Last edit: February 24, 2014, 05:56:52 PM by ChuckOne
 #37116

In 0.8.1, I am adding the ability to use POST instead of GET for all API and UI methods, and optionally enforce use of POST for the methods that submit the user secret phrase. This is to prevent caching of the secret phrase in browser memory cache, and to prevent mistakes due to submitting the same request twice, as browsers are supposed to warn users when doing this with POST requests.

This wasn't possible before because everything shared the same port and POST was reserved for peer networking only. Now that the UI and API requests have their own servlets, there is no problem in making them accept both GET and POST. I am adding a nxt.properties parameter whether to enforce the use of POST for the methods that require it, or just accept both GET and POST.

I have already changed the NRS UI and the tools - admin.html, alias.html, message.html, to use only POST. Client developers preparing for the 0.8 branch should consider using POST where appropriate too.


Great. +1 for slow adaption of RESTful principles.
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:25:55 PM
 #37117

Another issue that I think needs to be carefully considered is the "penalty" for not forging.

I don't see it as being necessary in that any advantage of "not forging" would require significant amount of collusion IMO to be of financial benefit (maybe someone with some math skills can work on this).

And where I see it as being problematic is that our little hobbyists are quite likely to just switch off their forger for a day if they get penalized. It may even piss them off enough to "give up forging" once again potentially hurting our network.

So in summary I think that we "don't need it" and IMO we would be better off without it.


Penalty is necessary.
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:28:02 PM
 #37118

But if you forge a block now, are you able to forge the next blocks also?

yes of course

Ok. To understand it better: are we talking about penalizing or not penalizing nodes who don't forge when they should do it?

We do not want to penalize nodes but accounts.

Nodes != accounts.
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 24, 2014, 05:29:01 PM
 #37119

Penalty is necessary.

That is not useful - please provide reasoning for your statement.

With CIYAM anyone can create 100% generated C++ web applications in literally minutes.

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
February 24, 2014, 05:29:28 PM
 #37120

Could you elaborate on "we need penalty"
Pages: « 1 ... 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 [1856] 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 ... 2565 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!