Bitcoin Forum
April 17, 2021, 11:59:07 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 2090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095 2096 2097 2098 2099 2100 2101 2102 2103 2104 2105 2106 2107 2108 2109 2110 2111 2112 2113 [2114] 2115 2116 2117 2118 2119 2120 2121 2122 2123 2124 2125 2126 2127 2128 2129 2130 2131 2132 2133 2134 2135 2136 2137 2138 2139 2140 2141 2142 2143 2144 2145 2146 2147 2148 2149 2150 2151 2152 2153 2154 2155 2156 2157 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162 2163 2164 ... 2560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information  (Read 2760180 times)
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1004


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2014, 12:34:53 PM
 #42261

Microsoft patent actually describes  how to represent any number as words (1626)

How fucking ridiculous that they would try and patent something as obvious as that.

It's a bit like IBM's RLE patent (run-length encoding) and one of the reasons why I went open source on a project that otherwise I probably could have made millions from.

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

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
1618703947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1618703947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1618703947
Reply with quote  #2

1618703947
Report to moderator
1618703947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1618703947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1618703947
Reply with quote  #2

1618703947
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1618703947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1618703947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1618703947
Reply with quote  #2

1618703947
Report to moderator
1618703947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1618703947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1618703947
Reply with quote  #2

1618703947
Report to moderator
1618703947
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1618703947

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1618703947
Reply with quote  #2

1618703947
Report to moderator
salsacz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 501


View Profile
March 09, 2014, 12:36:19 PM
 #42262

What is the benefit for the clones to be built on top of Nxt? Instead of standalone?
Clones on top of the Nxt would have a one-click installer, so the school-nerd could create a new currency for his class and he could sell shares for his time spent od doing homeworks for others. Or for Casino tokens. Or for Amazon points. Or for Nigeria national currency. Or for Hotels, Festivals, online games...

+ for Nxt is that clones on top of the Nxt would still be using Nxt somehow as payments

Nxt tips: NXT-R67P-6BZ2-XWAK-8RHZR | Nxt forum | Nxt Academy | Donate for Nxt at the Universities // BTCD: RVMLrnxYYy7uy8YZo9FcGfXbk1ZMnNifdg
mjrmac
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 86
Merit: 10


View Profile
March 09, 2014, 12:38:12 PM
 #42263

I Found a bug  in the client 0.8.8 (test)

Code:
{
    "balance": 100097400,
    "effectiveBalance": -100,
    "unconfirmedBalance": 100097400
}

Why the effective balance is :


 "effectiveBalance": -100,

Not a bug, effectiveBalance can be negative.

what does negative effectiveBalance mean?

Are you guys building a support for virtual debt?  Smiley

ZeroTheGreat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 09, 2014, 12:39:00 PM
 #42264

Ok, here's the current NXT distribution as of today.



As you can see, it's pretty horrible. The whales rule almost 85% of the whole coin, and I guess most of them are the initial investors.

Excluding the ~85% of the total NXT the whales have, here's the distribution of the remaining 15%:


Pretty horrible against what? "Fainess"? NEM? We'll see when NEM hits 10k-20k, 100k+ accs. And "fairness" simplycan't be reached, even if u'll magically distribute wealth (in any coin, if so) proportionally to everyone living now. Next seconds: some thousand "poor" people'll be born; next minute: millions'll spend there shares for nothing an so on.

Nothing horrible, IMO. Even nothing bad. It's capitalism.
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1004


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2014, 12:39:31 PM
 #42265

1. What about the idea that the main chain only stores snapshots of every parallel chain?

That could be where this might lead to down the track but I very much doubt that it would be accepted by the community at this stage.

2. The parallel chains can choose to have TF or not?

Yes - I think they would be able to choose that (as internet *within* China is very fast so no need for NXTChina to not be able to do TF).

3. What are the characteristics of those parallel chains that they don't need / want TF? Or other way around: What are the characteristics of TF so that some parallel chains don't want to use it?

Basically TF is useful for handling very large TPM rates and not much else.

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
March 09, 2014, 12:42:11 PM
 #42266

Basically TF is useful for handling very large TPM rates and not much else.


I thought with TF we also have some security measurement against certain attack attempts.
landomata
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1000


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2014, 12:43:14 PM
 #42267

Basically TF is useful for handling very large TPM rates and not much else.


I thought with TF we also have some security measurement against certain attack attempts.

I also thought the same.

redsn0w
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1042


#Free market


View Profile
March 09, 2014, 12:44:23 PM
 #42268

I Found a bug  in the client 0.8.8 (test)

Code:
{
    "balance": 100097400,
    "effectiveBalance": -100,
    "unconfirmedBalance": 100097400
}

Why the effective balance is :


 "effectiveBalance": -100,

Not a bug, effectiveBalance can be negative.

I'm reading this :

Code:
{
    "balance": 98597300,
    "effectiveBalance": -1500200,
    "unconfirmedBalance": 98597300
}

This is my Test account : 4940924250576724047 , why can the balance  be negative?



423539966622014338
please.
cheers Smiley


Sent 15 k TestNxt , enjoy it Wink .

CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1004


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2014, 12:49:16 PM
 #42269

I thought with TF we also have some security measurement against certain attack attempts.

Basically if you have enough "honest" stakeholders and/or evenly enough spread stakes then you don't need anything else (so things like "maximum forging power" and whether you can "allocate forging" would also come into this).

The "penalty" system in TF provides extra safety but understand that it is only needed because of the fact that TF is intended to favour a low number of very powerful forgers.

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

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
verymuchso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 250


HEAT Ledger


View Profile
March 09, 2014, 12:49:49 PM
 #42270

Sure, but I think it's all unnecessary.  Why not just call SecureRandom 12 times to pick 12 random numbers (range  0 to 1625 ). You can use that to choose 12 random words from array. That will be pretty simple and no security/implementation complications.  The words would be chosen randomly and entropy would be 128-bit.

Thats how I did it already. Your approach intrigues me because I don't know how to do that, I dont like that  Angry

Microsoft patent actually describes  how to represent any number as words (1626)
https://www.google.com/patents/US5892470

Quote
In this example, the number is 3,481,269,321. The table of words contains 1626 words, which are indexed from 0 to 1625. To encode this number, the ME system divides the number by the radix, 1626, ... encoding "DRUM ART BUS," which has indices 1316, 1186, and 69, respectively, represents the number that is the result of 1316 * 1626.sup.2 +1186 * 1626.sup.1 +69 * 1626.sup.0.

Cool thanks for looking that up. I share your view that the SecureRandom approach is simpler.
For anyone wondering here seems to be a java implementation https://code.google.com/p/bitcoinj/source/browse/core/src/main/java/com/google/bitcoin/crypto/MnemonicCode.java

bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 09, 2014, 12:50:49 PM
 #42271

I thought with TF we also have some security measurement against certain attack attempts.

Basically if you have enough "honest" stakeholders and/or evenly enough spread stakes then you don't need anything else (so things like "maximum forging power" and whether you can "allocate forging" would come into this).


I don't want to rely on others in such a way. What's the downside of TF?
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1004


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2014, 12:53:03 PM
 #42272

I don't want to rely on others in such a way. What's the downside of TF?

It was designed to favour a smaller number of very high powered machines - so it is much more centralised.

Also when it comes down to it PoS *forces* you to rely upon the stake holders - of course there is no reason why a parallel chain couldn't be PoW/PoH instead.

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
March 09, 2014, 12:56:27 PM
 #42273

I don't want to rely on others in such a way. What's the downside of TF?

It was designed to favour a smaller number of very high powered machines - so it is much more centralised.


With TF there will naturally emerge some centralization (pools?) but it is secure, without TF we have to be careful to get no centralization (pools?) otherwise it is not secure?
mcjavar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 09, 2014, 12:57:21 PM
 #42274

Ok, here's the current NXT distribution as of today.



As you can see, it's pretty horrible. The whales rule almost 85% of the whole coin, and I guess most of them are the initial investors.

Excluding the ~85% of the total NXT the whales have, here's the distribution of the remaining 15%:


Pretty horrible against what? "Fainess"? NEM? We'll see when NEM hits 10k-20k, 100k+ accs. And "fairness" simplycan't be reached, even if u'll magically distribute wealth (in any coin, if so) proportionally to everyone living now. Next seconds: some thousand "poor" people'll be born; next minute: millions'll spend there shares for nothing an so on.

Nothing horrible, IMO. Even nothing bad. It's capitalism.

I think NEM will be successfull because of the large number of account holder. Nxt has around 200 people in the core community. If 10% is doing something for Nxt, that´s 20 people. If NEM has the tenfold of investors, they have more people to build things around NEM...

That´s why we would need the price of Nxt to go up, because that would draw in more investors. The stable price in this phase of Nxt is not a benefit.
salsacz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 501


View Profile
March 09, 2014, 12:57:24 PM
 #42275

All: Please watch this video about the future of Nxt and comment it (here), thank you very much!

http://youtu.be/RtTWUwRL9mQ


Nxt Decentralized Internet video - alfa version:
http://youtu.be/RtTWUwRL9mQ

(created between 20 Feb-8 March)

I would be very grateful for any comments and suggestions. It still needs some time, but it already can be commented

Based on the paper:
http://justpaste.it/decentralized-internet
(created between 12-18 Feb)

And good night, its almost 6 AM here Cheesy

There is no evidence Nxt is ever going to implement zerocoin. It's incompatible  with 1000 TF

Zerocoin has a number of serious limitations:
- It uses cutting-edge cryptography which may turn out to be insecure, and which is understood by relatively few people (compared to ECDSA, for example).
- It produces large (20kbyte) signatures that would bloat the blockchain (or create risk if stuffed in external storage).
- It requires a trusted party to initiate its accumulator. If that party cheats, they can steal coin. (Perhaps fixable with more cutting-edge crypto.)
- Validation is very slow (can process about 2tx per second on a fast CPU), which is a major barrier to deployment in Bitcoin as each full node must validate every transaction.
- The large transactions and slow validation also means costly transactions, which will reduce the anonymity set size and potentially make ZC usage unavailable to random members of the public who are merely casually concerned about their privacy.
- Uses an accumulator which grows forever and has no pruning. In practice this means we'd need to switch accumulators periodically to reduce the working set size, reducing the anonymity set size. And potentially creating big UTXO bloat problems if the horizon on an accumulator isn't set in advance.

parallel blockchains would make it possible

The video is big to find parts that should be deleted. But - it should be inspirational and be used as an invitation. If there is a guy who could create a Zerocoin for us, he could find us thanks to that video, thank's to its geek/mainstream aims. There are functions and apps and there are invitations for devs to come here, join us and help us build those features + apps. Then it invites all geeks + freedom fighters. So the video can be divided into 2 groups aswell

Nxt tips: NXT-R67P-6BZ2-XWAK-8RHZR | Nxt forum | Nxt Academy | Donate for Nxt at the Universities // BTCD: RVMLrnxYYy7uy8YZo9FcGfXbk1ZMnNifdg
landomata
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1000


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2014, 12:57:45 PM
 #42276

I don't want to rely on others in such a way. What's the downside of TF?

It was designed to favour a smaller number of very high powered machines - so it is much more centralised.

Also when it comes down to it PoS *forces* you to rely upon the stake holders - of course there is no reason why a parallel chain couldn't be PoW/PoH instead.


Can't we plug NODECOIN into this setup?

CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1004


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2014, 12:58:05 PM
 #42277

With TF there will naturally emerge some centralization (pools?) but it is secure, without TF we have to be careful to get no centralization (pools?) otherwise it is not secure?

I would think that for a non TF chain you would not want to allow accounts to "allocate their forging power" to help with this potential issue.

We might also want to have a max. forging power "limit" available.

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
March 09, 2014, 12:58:55 PM
 #42278

I think NEM will be successfull because of the large number of account holder. Nxt has around 200 people in the core community. If 10% is doing something for Nxt, that´s 20 people. If NEM has the tenfold of investors, they have more people to build things around NEM...

Don't forget the Beyoncé, I mean, Ringelmann effect.
EvilDave
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1001



View Profile
March 09, 2014, 12:59:11 PM
 #42279



Unique is being blunt as fuck here, but he does have a point. More big stakeholders opening their wallets would be good, even if only to show that they do give a fuck. But we've down this road before without much results, we can't force people to fund NXT even if it is in their own best interest to do so. So lets put selfish stakeholders on the list of things to ignore, for the moment.



I thought a group of big stakeholders started a fund managed by rickyjames for jl777 to use on all his projects. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think some of those donations were quite large. I think klee and pouncer (and others?) have funded other projects too (one involving CIYAM?).

Who & what need funding right now who aren't getting it, or aren't just about to get it from the three committees?

From my reading of this thread it sounds like we're still in the planning stage, and we already have funds for the three committees, plus the extra private funds for jl777 etc on the side.

Instead of criticizing the big stakeholders, why not focus on getting agreement on the final plan/direction for NXT, then organise that into a set of projects with a shopping list, then ask for stakeholder donations when they know who and what they're paying for.

I think many fat cats will contribute when the time comes, and I base that on past evidence. There's too much bad blood at the moment IMO, and we don't have a clear road map with a leadership group. Save the stakeholder bashing for if & when the leadership group's pleas for donations for specific projects are being ignored. Try and stay positive on the main task - the NXT roadmap!

+1

I'm with u here, some stakeholders, (Klee and Pouncer spring to mind immediately, 747..... and others) have done a lot for NXT.
Others have done nothing so far, but may well step in later if needed (like the mysterious 747....)

It looks like we have enough funding for the short term, and I totally agree that we need to prioritise spending those funds on useful projects to get NXT further down the road to world domination  Grin.
Lets concentrate on the positive, get some useful work done, and not be distracted by something that is not that much of an issue.
I vote that we put stakeholder bitching on the ignore list for now.


Next couple of steps for the committees:

Pick a spokesperson. Guess who is the spokesthing for Infrastructure?...... Roll Eyes
Organise and publish an 'application for funds' process.
Define which committee is responsible for certain NXT components: for example, are clients Infrastructure or TechDev ?


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

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 09, 2014, 01:00:16 PM
 #42280

With TF there will naturally emerge some centralization (pools?) but it is secure, without TF we have to be careful to get no centralization (pools?) otherwise it is not secure?

I would think that for a non TF chain you would not want to allow accounts to "allocate their forging power" to help with this potential issue.

We might also want to have a max. forging power "limit" available.


How do you want to prevent people creating pools?

It seems to me that the comprehension problem I have right now is why would anybody want a PoS coin not to be secured by TF.
Pages: « 1 ... 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 2090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095 2096 2097 2098 2099 2100 2101 2102 2103 2104 2105 2106 2107 2108 2109 2110 2111 2112 2113 [2114] 2115 2116 2117 2118 2119 2120 2121 2122 2123 2124 2125 2126 2127 2128 2129 2130 2131 2132 2133 2134 2135 2136 2137 2138 2139 2140 2141 2142 2143 2144 2145 2146 2147 2148 2149 2150 2151 2152 2153 2154 2155 2156 2157 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162 2163 2164 ... 2560 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!