NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[Framewood]

Yes this is ok for you and me who are tech heads but what about mainstream..... mum, dad, gran aren't going to do this.

Erm, it's not thát difficult to make a long and safe password and store it safely.  

Also, just like mum, dad and gran now ask their kids (or someone else they trust) to set up their equipment, if they want to get into NXT safely, they will have to ask for help.

There is always risk involved, but there are simple ways of getting better safety. However, if they cannot, then for now, NXT and other currency online is not for them.

Please don't think this way, my generation built computers and the internet, I stated before dos. If we thought this way you would not have what we have today. This is revolutionary, in 10, 20, 30 years time this could be what everyone is transacting with.

[1714207487]

1714207487

[1714207487]

1714207487

[1714207487]

1714207487

[1714207487]

1714207487

[Damelon]

Yes this is ok for you and me who are tech heads but what about mainstream..... mum, dad, gran aren't going to do this.

Erm, it's not thát difficult to make a long and safe password and store it safely.  

Also, just like mum, dad and gran now ask their kids (or someone else they trust) to set up their equipment, if they want to get into NXT safely, they will have to ask for help.

There is always risk involved, but there are simple ways of getting better safety. However, if they cannot, then for now, NXT and other currency online is not for them.

You'd be surprised how difficult it is, I've taught IT at university and secondary levels for over 10 years and daily I'm doing face plants.

I know, I have a mum who lifted her mouse to make the arrow go "up", too

But that's exactly what I mean: for the time being, they either get help or they don't get in. I'm sure with time tools will be developed. That's the good thing about a collaborative venture

Edit: just saw your last post. I want to make clear by nó means I want to exclude anyone! I am just saying that for now, for the mainstream that you were referring to, this is way over their head. In time, there should of course be tools to make the whole thing accessible for everyone. Otherwise this whole effort is basically a futile thing.

[canuck]

A compromise could be to logarithmically weight the votes based on NXT balance. So a larger NXT balance has more of a say but not linearly more.

A bit of a hassle, but couldn't a large stakeholder sidestep that (or any other method that isn't just a count of the votes) by distributing his/her coins amongst multiple accounts?

Yes.  NXT is a proof of stake currency and holders of more NXT should certainly have more of a say in how it's to change if it should.  The largest stakeholders have the most to risk after all and so, it's just plain rational that the market would seek the greatest amount of input from those market actors if the currency is to be democratized in this way.

Arguments that amount to "it's unfair" are emotional arguments, not economic ones...generally.  The arguments that are economic that favour weighted influence to favour smaller stakeholders are simply wishful thinking when you boil them down.

[smartwart]

LOL.  The NXT transaction fee distribution algorithm already weights participation in accordance with how much NXT is in the account of an individual, not the sheer number of nodes being contributed by computers operated by that individual - which is far more important to the health of the NXT network.  And you talk about ethical problems applying the exact same arrangement to member voting?

Just a wry observation, I see the merit (and pitfalls) of both approaches...

yes,
because the decision how much  you found you account  is individual.
you can decide for your self how much risk is ok for you.
your vote is always 100% of all votes.

voting concerns a group of individuals.
your vote should represent you opinion and is only a propotional part from the final result.
with the result all have to live.

[Alias]

In continuation of the announcement that we r looking for more Nxt core devs, there are features we r planning to implement till block 525960 (in alphabetical order):

- Alias System (done)
- Arbitrary Messages (partially)
- Asset Exchange (done)
- Distributed Computing (concept not ready)
- Distributed Storage
- Instant Transactions (requires peer review)
- Mixing Service (concept not ready)
- Multisignatures
- Service Providers
- Shrinking
- Smart Contracts (concept not ready)
- Transparent Mining (partially)
- Two-phase Payments
- Voting System
- some non-revealed features

I'd like to get ur opinions what features should be implemented in the 1st place.

Sorry for the stupid question, but where does colored coins fits in?

Pin

If I'm not mistaken, the Asset Exchange is the Colored Coins feature.

[TwinWinNerD]

So I just started the german version of the WIKI.

http://nxt-de.wikia.com/wiki/NXT_Deutsch_Wiki

For now i only made the frontpage, but i plan on completing the whole wiki in time!

Donations are welcome at: 16134099701168321966


Mit freundlichen Grüßen, (haha)
TwinWinNerD

[GCInc.]

Asset Exchange (done)

Any info / instructions on the usage of the asset exchange? Thanks

[pandaisftw]

Could I propose another simple but powerful feature? I already posted it in the dedicated NXT Features ¦ VOTE thread:

I would like to offer up another potentially simple to implement but extremely powerful feature:

16 Beneficiary Address : This feature allows you to define the account number/address to which your earned fees are sent. This would allow for a number of potential applications...

(i) Decentralized Forge Bank (every member of the bank performs their own forging, the transaction fees get sent to a central authority that divides the spoils which then redistributes them accordingly/proportionally)
(ii) Running your own Savings account 24/7 which sends the transaction fees to your checking account.
(iii) Donating all your transaction fees to a charity, bounty etc.

This seems like a good idea. This could solve the problem of trusted forging. Not sure how possible it would be to implement though, because whoever is running the pool needs a way to figure out how much each person is contributing. Since you aren't constantly sending hashes to the pool, how would they know you are actually contributing instead of saying "I'm just unlucky, I never get blocks but let's share profits!"? ... I suppose the devs could create an API request so the pool owner can constantly ping to see if an account is actively forging as well as checking if it's transaction fees are pointed at the pool.

[Framewood]

Yes this is ok for you and me who are tech heads but what about mainstream..... mum, dad, gran aren't going to do this.

Erm, it's not thát difficult to make a long and safe password and store it safely.  

Also, just like mum, dad and gran now ask their kids (or someone else they trust) to set up their equipment, if they want to get into NXT safely, they will have to ask for help.

There is always risk involved, but there are simple ways of getting better safety. However, if they cannot, then for now, NXT and other currency online is not for them.

You'd be surprised how difficult it is, I've taught IT at university and secondary levels for over 10 years and daily I'm doing face plants.

I know, I have a mum who lifted her mouse to make the arrow go "up", too

But that's exactly what I mean: for the time being, they either get help or they don't get in. I'm sure with time tools will be developed. That's the good thing about a collaborative venture

Edit: just saw your last post. I want to make clear by nó means I want to exclude anyone! I am just saying that for now, for the mainstream that you were referring to, this is way over their head. In time, there should of course be tools to make the whole thing accessible for everyone. Otherwise this whole effort is basically a futile thing.

 

[smartwart]

Perhaps weight votes in accordance with how much NXT is in the account.

this approach could bring us in another ethical problem ;-)
(I got your point to make it expensive to gain the vote-power via multiple accounts)

LOL.  The NXT transaction fee distribution algorithm already weights participation in accordance with how much NXT is in the account of an individual, not the sheer number of nodes being contributed by computers operated by that individual - which is far more important to the health of the NXT network.  And you talk about ethical problems applying the exact same arrangement to member voting?

Just a wry observation, I see the merit (and pitfalls) of both approaches...

Voting System is based on number of coins, more coins = more voices. This is applied to global voting. Local voting (among asset shareholders) takes into account number of shares.
U can issue a "fake" asset and give exactly 1 share to 1 person who proves their identity by providing scanned copy of a passport (similar to KYC). Then u can do voting among "verified" accounts on whatever u want.

thx!

[S3MKi]

Not bad dgex http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=3000&acc=6635869272840226493

[EvilDave]

Are we on page 500 yet?


**oops...just a little premature...***

[klee]

500?

Nope!

[Ola]

500??? 


good discussion:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG_E47oQpT0

[mr_random]

A compromise could be to logarithmically weight the votes based on NXT balance. So a larger NXT balance has more of a say but not linearly more.

A bit of a hassle, but couldn't a large stakeholder sidestep that (or any other method that isn't just a count of the votes) by distributing his/her coins amongst multiple accounts?

Yes.  NXT is a proof of stake currency and holders of more NXT should certainly have more of a say in how it's to change if it should.  The largest stakeholders have the most to risk after all and so, it's just plain rational that the market would seek the greatest amount of input from those market actors if the currency is to be democratized in this way.

Arguments that amount to "it's unfair" are emotional arguments, not economic ones...generally.  The arguments that are economic that favour weighted influence to favour smaller stakeholders are simply wishful thinking when you boil them down.

I agree actually. Stupid people won't though.

We could always vote about how to handle the voting mechanism   But seriously, I'm fine with votes having more weight linearly in accordance with account balance

[ZeroTheGreat]

I'm little surprised why "Transparent Forging" wasn't built-in. Code wasn't ready?

Transparent Mining is an advanced feature and won't be included into released source code. It's the most powerful feature of Nxt atm.

I see, agree — that's smart strategy.

[ZeroTheGreat]

I'd like to get ur opinions what features should be implemented in the 1st place.

I'm voting for TM/F, I wanna forge MOAR in long term

[Patel]

in b4 500 

[sparta_cuss]

I got yer 500. Right here.\

Dang!

[ZeroTheGreat]

If you've had an alias nabbed: it's always possible for a bot to listen to the network for new alias request messages, and quickly submit a new one for the same alias and +1 fee, on the basis that if it's requested by one person it might be valuable one day, and so worth a (probably 2nxt) punt. Doubt anyone would bother now though.

Transparent Mining solves this problem. Transactions will be encrypted and only miners of next blocks will be able to decrypt them.

Slogan: Transparent Foring — We Can See Future!

(No mining in Nxt!   )