ParmaBTC
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1002
|
|
December 09, 2013, 12:08:12 AM |
|
Hmm, couldn't say without a white paper/ source code. I would assume its similar to pruning, but "shrinking" could be interpreted as a type of compression.
Actually it's supposed to be such a way: 1. Take all non-zero balances. 2. Generate a new genesis block. 3. Start a new blockchain. 4. Put old blockchain to somewhere for those who wish to check that new genesis block is legit. I think that will be the chance to recover lost accounts. will be that possible?
|
|
|
|
MyZhre
|
|
December 09, 2013, 03:37:12 AM |
|
Looks like the balance zero problem still exist, I'm running 0.3.16
|
NXT: 13997163105778396158
|
|
|
Jcsarokin
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
December 09, 2013, 03:55:51 AM |
|
Looks like the balance zero problem still exist, I'm running 0.3.16
Same here - saw zero balance, freaked out for a second :p
|
|
|
|
leonts87
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 40
Merit: 0
|
|
December 09, 2013, 06:34:01 AM |
|
Looks like the balance zero problem still exist, I'm running 0.3.16
Same here - saw zero balance, freaked out for a second :p +1 just blockchain save my nerve http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=1
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
December 09, 2013, 06:39:19 AM |
|
I think that will be the chance to recover lost accounts. will be that possible?
No, there is no way to make sure it's a lost account. What if someone uses it for cold storage?
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
December 09, 2013, 06:41:07 AM |
|
Looks like the balance zero problem still exist, I'm running 0.3.16
Yes, while we r waiting for more guys setting hallmarks, I'll fix this issue.
|
|
|
|
laowai80
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
December 09, 2013, 07:05:28 AM |
|
To prevent permanent loss of nxt units to the network as a whole, some type of reclamation process could be programmed in?
This is overcomplicating things too much. Users must learn to securely deal with their money, irresposible actions must have a price to pay. The system as a whole doesn't care if someone loses money, same is true for bitcoin, same should be true for NXT.
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
December 09, 2013, 07:06:25 AM |
|
Well, guys... I'm going to create a new thread about transparent/predictable mining. Right now I'm reading the 1st part of BCNext's plan that he decided to reveal. It's about a solution of Selfish mining problem. Also he states that this solves 51% attack problem (adversary must own 90%+ coins to successfully attack the network). We agreed that I won't copy-paste the text (to avoid text style analysis) but rather write it by myself in other words, so it will take some time. BCNext was waiting in hope that price becomes more affordable for newcomers but we all have some deadlines set, so... Check this thread time to time, I'll post the link here. It's unknown how BCNext's paper will change the price, don't invest money you can't afford to lose.
|
|
|
|
|
laowai80
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
December 09, 2013, 07:30:10 AM |
|
Yes the system as a whole cares, as we cannot create more units losing them is irreperably damaging to the health and robustness of the network. So what if bitcoin doesn't do it. Bitcoin doesn't do a lot of things. That's why nxt and other cryptos exist. Bitcoin has many flaws, oversights and much needed features. What do you propose is done if Nxt takes off and in 100 years 25% of all units are lost due to varying "irresponsible" (a trait of humanity) factors? Unless it's 100% idiot proof (arguably impossible) there is a technical curve that allows these type of "bugs/flaws" to exist. There need to be automatic failsafes to deal with them. That's practically the definition of robustness.
Bitcoin doesn't do it for natural reasons, NXT shouldn't do it for the same reasons. If you observe things around you, you understand that once some material object with a finite supply (all material objects have a finite supply, no matter how high that number could be) is lost or we better say 'destroyed' in this case (because if there is no way to reconstruct the pass phrase, it can be considered effectively destroyed, not just lost), it's gone for ever. Currencies must abide by the laws of nature, these laws have proven to work thousands of years, and they shouldn't be broken artificially and arbitrarily. Doesn't matter that it's a virtual currency, it still must be treated as a material object with a finite supply. Once the supply is known, users and developers define their further actions with that supply in mind. Once you start tweaking the supply somehow, this would be a very bad sign, it'd be similar to what authorities do to the fiat currencies, that's why I will never invest in any crypto that doesn't put a definite limit to its supply or provides for some sort of tweaking that supply in the future, no matter how good its other features could be. What you're proposing is tweaking the money supply, even though it's the slightest one, it's still bad.
|
|
|
|
superresistant
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1131
|
|
December 09, 2013, 07:50:52 AM |
|
What version should I use ? 0.3.16 or 0.3.15 ?
I can't connect from both versions anyway. No active peers for some reasons. It was working well before I updated.
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
December 09, 2013, 07:52:17 AM |
|
What version should I use ? 0.3.16 or 0.3.15 ?
I can't connect from both versions anyway. No active peers for some reasons. It was working well before I updated.
0.3.16. Check console for errors.
|
|
|
|
laowai80
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
December 09, 2013, 07:56:29 AM |
|
You don't actually provide logic for the argument in your first paragraph. Just defer to "the law of nature". Okay... Are you referring to the law of conservation of energy or something? See my paragraph below.
For the second paragraph. Nobody is tweaking the money supply. Its reclamation. The supply remains static and in its original state. No units are created, however they can be considered destroyed if they are cryptographically lost to the ages and this implies a decay of the network. Especially with the use of few/no decimal places. (Not that I think adding divisible units is the solution). Nature does this. Things decay and it reclaims the units of matter and redistributes them. Sounding familiar?
Ya, sure Bitcoin is perfecty. Its not a flaw its a feature. I suppose bitcoins lack of blockchain cleaning/pruning/shrinking is a feature also.
You see, when you start putting failsafes in a system, where people could use a healthy amount of resposibility to achieve the same results, you start breeding irresponsibility. We need more educated users who know how to securely deal with money not irresponsible users who rely on failsafes. Once you start breeding irresposibility it breeds on itself, users begin demanding more failsafes, in the end the system crashes under its own weight, due to too many obligations. If you want failsafes, maybe you should just put your money in the bank. Oh wait, I forgot, they are now implementing the bail-in mechanisms in the banking system, banks aren't safe either I am not sure about decimal places, I think it was said, they are disabled for now while the software is in testing mode, but will be enabled in the future. This is a question for developers as to how many decimal places NXT can have. I understand your logic about decaying and reborn things in nature. The thing is, although currencies should abide by natural laws, they also should take into account human psychology and actions. Humans define if a certain currency is successful or not, humans value things more if these things are rare, and that is only achievable with a limited supply. Besides, you just can't know whether someone is just not using their funds or lost a pass phrase to them. That arguement alone beats all the rest. It's someone's money, doesn't matter they they don't touch it for a long time, it's nobody's business. If you want someone poke their nose into your money and do funny things to them, you have a wide choice of fiat currencies for that purpose. I never said bitcoin is perfect, blockchain size is its limitation. But what bitcoin did get right is the strictly defined money supply, and that made sure it became successful. If Satoshi had just said, miners will mine, difficulty will rise, and how many coins will be mined - it's up to the demand, bitcoin wouldn't have been successful.
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
December 09, 2013, 08:00:27 AM |
|
0.3.16 - Everything runs fine... but sometimes after exit I get java.lang.NullPointerException when trying to reconnect.
How can I get rid of that without having to download the blockchain from scratch?
Rename *.bak files to *.nxt
|
|
|
|
laowai80
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
December 09, 2013, 08:13:48 AM |
|
I was wondering if maybe there could be a simple script set up to upload the fresh nxtfiles.zip every hour, so that new users or old users with corrupt *.nxt files could quickly bootstrap to the recent blocks.
|
|
|
|
ImmortAlex
|
|
December 09, 2013, 08:23:37 AM |
|
I was wondering if maybe there could be a simple script set up to upload the fresh nxtfiles.zip every hour, so that new users or old users with corrupt *.nxt files could quickly bootstrap to the recent blocks.
It's better to build network with fast nodes.
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
December 09, 2013, 08:31:50 AM |
|
I was wondering if maybe there could be a simple script set up to upload the fresh nxtfiles.zip every hour, so that new users or old users with corrupt *.nxt files could quickly bootstrap to the recent blocks.
This will lead to centralization.
|
|
|
|
laowai80
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
December 09, 2013, 08:58:23 AM |
|
This will lead to centralization.
I meant this would be temporary until the system is more or less stable, but in the future why not have this bootstrapping archive on the official website as well for new users, it'd be convenient.
|
|
|
|
laowai80
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
December 09, 2013, 09:29:46 AM |
|
This is hilarious considering the conversation we just had. I wasn't going to engage you again because it was clearly pointless, but I just had to take the jab. You're all over the place.
I don't see any connection between the conversation we just had and an ability to download a recent blockchain from an official website. For example, Litecoin has recently introduced the blockchain bootstrapping download link, it takes forever to wait to download it if you do it from genesis block. Until at least the sources of NXT have been releaved to the public, it'd be appropriate to have this centralized blockchain too, because right now it's all about trust in the central developers anyway, at this point it's all centralized in their hands anyway. Once the sources are opened in January, it'll be a different game. After all, I don't suggest the blockchain download link is forced on anyone, it's completely voluntary how to download the blockchain. The nxtfiles.zip archive link already exists, I merely suggested that it's uploaded into that site more often than it is now (hourly would do). So just quit trolling please, that's not professor-like approach, ok?
|
|
|
|
Pouncer
|
|
December 09, 2013, 09:58:33 AM |
|
I followed the instructions to the letter, but just cannot manage to verify the correct account number. I copy and paste the passphrase to unlock the account, and immediately paste it into the hallmark link, but never managed to obtain the correct account number when decoding. Tried it in the local machine and VPS, same result. No idea what I did wrong... PS: Guys, don't forget about the hallmark! Only a few peers added it.
After doing decode, I get {"valid":true,"weight":1000,"host":"192.161.175.142","account":"XXXXXXXX","date":"2013-12-08"} but "XXXXXXXXX" is not the same as the account number corresponding to the secret phrase. Is this OK No, u entered incorrect passphrase when were marking the host.
|
|
|
|
|