NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[jl777]

 What you could do is create a sub-asset on the network that is created by miners as a secondary, inflationary token which the network will then honor in some kind of way (like to pay fees, instead of using NXT) - So the miners mine an alternative token that can be used to pay network fees, which makes it valuable without diluting NXTs value.

Could you explain how you see that as not diluting Nxt's value? What exactly is Nxt's value proposition if it's not even used to pay network fees?

Also, not sure if you've been attentive to this thread for the past few dozen pages, but you might want to man the barracks.

Having the miners mining for nodecoins instead of not being part of NXT in any way at all does not hurt NXT.
We will get people who have nodecoins. What will they do with them? Probably sell them for NXT.

sell nodecoins and buy NXT

Unlike arbitrage trading of OIL/GOLD which has a neutral effect on NXT, whenever you sell something to buy NXT, that creates upward pressure on NXT. At worst, they sell right away and we get back to neutral.

However, some miners just might HODL.

James

P.S. How often am I wrong? How often is emule right?

You're assuming they will sell for nxt. Why would they do this? If nodecoins are used for network fees instead of nxt you have given nxt's value proposition to nodecoin. There will be positive pressure for nodecoin as it then becomes the base asset by utility. At that point, what is Nxt's value proposition?


Also, I don't think there's any danger of elmo's opinion being seen as anything near credible. No need to juxtapose.

I never proposed nodecoins be used to pay for NXT networks fees! Not sure why people get that idea.
The only thing I proposed was nodecoins be used to pay for some of my own personal server costs in running the multigateway and pool servers. Since I am issuing the nodecoins and incurring actual real world costs for the servers, I didnt think it would be out of line

James

[1714835274]

1714835274

[1714835274]

1714835274

[Touque]

 What you could do is create a sub-asset on the network that is created by miners as a secondary, inflationary token which the network will then honor in some kind of way (like to pay fees, instead of using NXT) - So the miners mine an alternative token that can be used to pay network fees, which makes it valuable without diluting NXTs value.

Could you explain how you see that as not diluting Nxt's value? What exactly is Nxt's value proposition if it's not even used to pay network fees?

Also, not sure if you've been attentive to this thread for the past few dozen pages, but you might want to man the barracks.

Having the miners mining for nodecoins instead of not being part of NXT in any way at all does not hurt NXT.
We will get people who have nodecoins. What will they do with them? Probably sell them for NXT.

sell nodecoins and buy NXT

Unlike arbitrage trading of OIL/GOLD which has a neutral effect on NXT, whenever you sell something to buy NXT, that creates upward pressure on NXT. At worst, they sell right away and we get back to neutral.

However, some miners just might HODL.

James

P.S. How often am I wrong? How often is emule right?

I wonder what is the sub-asset you can create which is something NXT can not do by itself.

[opticalcarrier]

Im waiting to hear from JLP/CfB on whether or not client signing transactions need to use SSL to communicate with VPSs.  Given that tor is eventually  compromised if some extremely harsh and strict security methods arent followed, Im interested in hearing on whether or not I should just disable SSL on all my VPSs or not.

Transactions will be visible to anyone anyway. U need SSL only for privacy.

Please expound.  Really we only need a decision made on whether or not there is benefit if infrastructure committe will pay for my VPSs' SSL certs, or if I should just disable SSL on them.  The committe's response was "no we dont want to pay for SSL just use tor."  well I have previously laid out reasons that NXT has only partial tor support (DNS is still leaked out), plus, like I mentioned, tor is eventually compromised unless very harsh, nearly impossible security methods are taken

Apparently the certs that I am using, that is signed by a private CA, still causes some client-side software to fail, apparently they cannot just ignore the cert warning for some reason.

[BitcoinForumator]

Emule - what kind of a positive thing did you do here? You just bitch and moan. Contribute something and then be vocal.

[EvilDave]

is NXT a scam plan, like Labcoin?

Yes.
Pleae send me all of your BTC at the address below.
(or u could read some of the thread, and figure it out for yourself)

[wesleyh]

Im waiting to hear from JLP/CfB on whether or not client signing transactions need to use SSL to communicate with VPSs.  Given that tor is eventually  compromised if some extremely harsh and strict security methods arent followed, Im interested in hearing on whether or not I should just disable SSL on all my VPSs or not.

Transactions will be visible to anyone anyway. U need SSL only for privacy.

Please expound.  Really we only need a decision made on whether or not there is benefit if infrastructure committe will pay for my VPSs' SSL certs, or if I should just disable SSL on them.

Apparently the certs that I am using, that is signed by a private CA, still causes some client-side software to fail, apparently they cannot just ignore the cert warning for some reason.

Cannot ignore it because requests are made via ajax, which is invisible to end user, and thus shows no dialog to accept the cert. Unless you have a real, non-self signed cert.

[jl777]

@james, you are a big nxt player for sure.

You could start using the new forum, many people have move there and start using it, you could follow the momentum at:

www.nxtforum.org

idiots he is killing nxt with his delutional mind and fantasy

Thanks mulie for your endorsement!

As fun as this has been, gotta go back to my delusions.

James

[jl777]

@CfB
how do I get transaction GUID? Does it fit in 64bits?

[EvilDave]

Nxt will feature two pages in the book called Cryptocurrency "The Alt-ernative" the Beginner's Reference

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=483187.new#new


Please donate to the below Nxt wallet address in order to help fund this project:

14081530087791934508

It will have 2 pages similar to this:

deleted.....

If you spot any spelling or grammar errors, these are easily sorted.  I do have a full time job as well as trying to get this project completed too.

Sorry, mate , I have absolutely zero faith in your book project. If it turns out that u ever get pages out, I might buy in, but asking for donations for a couple of pages in an unpublished book is simply an update of the classic business listing scam.

[Damelon]

Here's a reminder: Don't forget your target audience, the average crypto investor.

This is an assumption.

One that I don't share, by the way.

[Touque]

 What you could do is create a sub-asset on the network that is created by miners as a secondary, inflationary token which the network will then honor in some kind of way (like to pay fees, instead of using NXT) - So the miners mine an alternative token that can be used to pay network fees, which makes it valuable without diluting NXTs value.

Could you explain how you see that as not diluting Nxt's value? What exactly is Nxt's value proposition if it's not even used to pay network fees?

Also, not sure if you've been attentive to this thread for the past few dozen pages, but you might want to man the barracks.

Having the miners mining for nodecoins instead of not being part of NXT in any way at all does not hurt NXT.
We will get people who have nodecoins. What will they do with them? Probably sell them for NXT.

sell nodecoins and buy NXT

Unlike arbitrage trading of OIL/GOLD which has a neutral effect on NXT, whenever you sell something to buy NXT, that creates upward pressure on NXT. At worst, they sell right away and we get back to neutral.

However, some miners just might HODL.

James

P.S. How often am I wrong? How often is emule right?

You're assuming they will sell for nxt. Why would they do this? If nodecoins are used for network fees instead of nxt you have given nxt's value proposition to nodecoin. There will be positive pressure for nodecoin as it then becomes the base asset by utility. At that point, what is Nxt's value proposition?


Also, I don't think there's any danger of elmo's opinion being seen as anything near credible. No need to juxtapose.

I never proposed nodecoins be used to pay for NXT networks fees! Not sure why people get that idea.
The only thing I proposed was nodecoins be used to pay for some of my own personal server costs in running the multigateway and pool servers. Since I am issuing the nodecoins and incurring actual real world costs for the servers, I didnt think it would be out of line

James

If you want to subsidize and compensate the people who run the servers and service, why don't subsidize with NXT or charge NXT for using your service? Who will pay for it? Will you use the NXT community fund to subsidize the service in the beginning?

[redsn0w]

Goodmorning people  , how are you ?

good night.

 

[EvilDave]

Let's just employ Adam B Levine as our spokesperson. He's as good as it gets.  

I'd rather have him continue to speak from a person's building a project on top of Nxt perspective and/or from a Nxt investor's perspective.

If his project is successful and/or his investment is profitable...  you got yourself a lifetime spokesperson!!!    

I'd have to let you make me your spokesman, and as mentioned in other places I'm not picking sides.  I think there is huge potential in all the metalayers and I want to help all of you succeed as much as possible.  The future is big and roomy, lots of room for multiple projects and communities to work on these ideas in parallel and since the whole thing is open source it is merely quaint competition rather than antipathy driven.

Regardless, you can buy air-time on my program (as NXT did two months ago, and I think Kris has been doing great work with it) if you want to keep NXT in mind for people tuning into LTB or the other shows on our network.

But you can't buy me  You can only demonstrate that you'll looking for ideas that solve problems instead of ideas that reinforce an arbitrary leaders ego.   I think NXT has a damn good chance of that simply because ya'll don't have leaders.



I'd highly recommend as many NXTers as possible read the book "The Spider and the Starfish: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations" - You guys have an "apache" or "na'taan" model of leadership, you just don't know it so it doesn't work too well.

NXT is like the beast with a thousand arms and no head.  Difficult to organize, but with many resources at its disposal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dzK-0wB-CA

You are absolutely right. Can you come to our own new forum http://107.170.117.237
to visit or set up your own thread? I think members will have more serious conversation over there. Thanks.

Just to repeat myself.....no gods, no kings, just NXT

[marcus03]

Im waiting to hear from JLP/CfB on whether or not client signing transactions need to use SSL to communicate with VPSs.  Given that tor is eventually  compromised if some extremely harsh and strict security methods arent followed, Im interested in hearing on whether or not I should just disable SSL on all my VPSs or not.

Transactions will be visible to anyone anyway. U need SSL only for privacy.

-v please!

How is my privacy protected when I connect to a SSL NRS node in contrast to a non-SSL node. Which data is protected and why does it need protection?

[Come-from-Beyond]

Please expound.  Really we only need a decision made on whether or not there is benefit if infrastructure committe will pay for my VPSs' SSL certs, or if I should just disable SSL on them.  The committe's response was "no we dont want to pay for SSL just use tor."  well I have previously laid out reasons that NXT has only partial tor support (DNS is still leaked out), plus, like I mentioned, tor is eventually compromised unless very harsh, nearly impossible security methods are taken

Apparently the certs that I am using, that is signed by a private CA, still causes some client-side software to fail, apparently they cannot just ignore the cert warning for some reason.

In the end we'll have clients that prepare and sign transactions completely locally and send them via UDP.

[jl777]

If you want to subsidize and compensate the people who run the servers and service, why don't subsidize with NXT or charge NXT for using your service? Who will pay for it? Will you use the NXT community fund to subsidize the service in the beginning?

I dont have that much NXT myself to be able to afford any significant NXT subsidy.

I could charge NXT, but the whole issue has been that small stakeholders cant forge any meaningful amount of NXT, while everyone can mine enough nodecoins for the fees for my servers. I figured it was better to make multigateway services affordable for everyone.

I seem to have been fired from managing the NXTcash project and as trustee of NXTcommunityfund, but not sure. Nobody seems to tell me the important stuff.

I was planning on continuing to pay for my servers as long as I could afford to. Making it selfsufficient by charging fees would create stability, which seems like a good tradeoff.

James

[Come-from-Beyond]

@CfB
how do I get transaction GUID? Does it fit in 64bits?

getTransaction should return hash aka GUID. It's 256-bit long though.

[opticalcarrier]

Please expound.  Really we only need a decision made on whether or not there is benefit if infrastructure committe will pay for my VPSs' SSL certs, or if I should just disable SSL on them.  The committe's response was "no we dont want to pay for SSL just use tor."  well I have previously laid out reasons that NXT has only partial tor support (DNS is still leaked out), plus, like I mentioned, tor is eventually compromised unless very harsh, nearly impossible security methods are taken

Apparently the certs that I am using, that is signed by a private CA, still causes some client-side software to fail, apparently they cannot just ignore the cert warning for some reason.

In the end we'll have clients that prepare and sign transactions completely locally and send them via UDP

good info, ill go ahead and disable SSL on them then. (it would still be good to get SSL on wiki and on whatever forums DNS name they come up with for http://107.170.117.237 forums site.  If the community decided the new forums to be on nxtcrypto.org then a wildcard would be the way to go anyways, otherwise 2 different certs are needed.

Unless the wiki and forums operator are willing to purchase it out of their own pocket.

[EvilDave]

@jl777
if you need cash for servers, come knock on InfComs door.....

@Opticalcarrier;
I'm quite happy for u to submit a request for funding for SSL on forum and wiki servers.

[intmain()]

In the end we'll have clients that prepare and sign transactions completely locally and send them via UDP.

UDP? Why would udp be used over tcp?? Multicast applications?