NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[ChuckOne]

NXT - 3D graphics: Update #02

I'm not sure about the date on the coin. It is right 2013 or when was official release?

• png transparency bug fixed
  
• Nxt coin shadow v02

All 3d renderings will be here:
forums.nxtcrypto.org
nextcoin.org

Holy crap!! That's huuuge. I like it.

(even when nxt shall not be coins)

[1714745076]

1714745076

[1714745076]

1714745076

[marek3ball]

If you make more in different colors it coul be a nice promotion for colored coins concept

Good idea .

[ChuckOne]

The more NXT someone has, the more right he has to decide. It's natural. Someone with 50% ownership on a company has a 50% right to decide something..

It's so easy. So why do you fighting over this so much?

I agree too, but this is only under the assumption that large stakeholders will always do things in the best interest of the currency's growth and health. However, I am sure at some point there could be large NXT stakeholders that would vote for something just not acceptable by a majority of the community and it would be interesting to see how that would play out in the actual decision making process.

Well, they are the majority. So let it be.

They're not the majority. That's the point here.

They are. If you have 50$ and the other guy 1$ then you have the majority of wealth. So you are should be allowed to say more.

Fortunately, our democratic systems do not work this way (not yet, I fear).

You should be allowed to say more if you spend more of you wealth:
Say, if you spend 1/10 of your wealth it's more than if somebody spend 1/10000 of theirs. It appears it's not so important to them.

We are not a democratic state. We are an ecosystem based on money. Not on people.

It always come back to people. Not the ecosystem is transferring money. It's people doing so.

An ecosystem which is uncomfortable to people because they feel it is unfair aren't willing to accept it.

[Secondleo]

NXT - 3D graphics: Update #02

I'm not sure about the date on the coin. It is right 2013 or when was official release?

• png transparency bug fixed
  
• Nxt coin shadow v02

All 3d renderings will be here:
forums.nxtcrypto.org
nextcoin.org

Nice, yes. But the round coin thing really bothers me. Have you thought about a rectangular design? It would have infinitely more recognition value than just another round thing.
It would be harder to make it obvious that it is money though.

[nexern]

I could try to invent some graphics for other parts of Nxt too. I know it is not just a coin but I thought it is the biggest part of it, was I wrong?

I believe that coder-masters will show other great features of Nxt.

wow marek3ball, most realistic looking rendered coin i have seen so far.
even if nxt is no coin per definition, this looks great. whish i could have a
platinum version my pocket ;-)

hm... btw, while ltc = silver / btc = gold -> nxt = platinum  
(ok, if we follow this analogy, which we don't of course ;-)

[gimre]

Once you find valid reason major stakeholders
are delaying those blocks let us know.

It is already known because its in the code

Hey fuck it, whatever, go stupid and invest big time into coin that can be stalled for 20+ minutes on will, awesome deal!

R U mad bro? It cannot be stalled*.

Also have you seen the code? have you tried compiling it? NO!
If you did, you'd knew published code DOES NOT work with rest of nodes on the network...

* - ok as someone said already it "sort-of" can, but with risk, that someone else will generate block instead

[pandaisftw]

The more NXT someone has, the more right he has to decide. It's natural. Someone with 50% ownership on a company has a 50% right to decide something..

It's so easy. So why do you fighting over this so much?

I agree too, but this is only under the assumption that large stakeholders will always do things in the best interest of the currency's growth and health. However, I am sure at some point there could be large NXT stakeholders that would vote for something just not acceptable by a majority of the community and it would be interesting to see how that would play out in the actual decision making process.

Well, they are the majority. So let it be.

They're not the majority. That's the point here.

They are. If you have 50$ and the other guy 1$ then you have the majority of wealth. So you are should be allowed to say more.

Fortunately, our democratic systems do not work this way (not yet, I fear).

You should be allowed to say more if you spend more of you wealth:
Say, if you spend 1/10 of your wealth it's more than if somebody spend 1/10000 of theirs. It appears it's not so important to them.

NXT is an economic ecosystem, not a state. In PoS 1 NXT is equivalent to 1 person (like SSN, birth certificate, or whatever) because this is the only way to truly account for the validity of each NXT, so 1 NXT = 1 Vote. All other methods will be gamed by the rich to make the poor poorer. For example, using 1 account = 1 Vote, a large stakeholder can create 10k accounts easily, while a small stakeholder will go broke doing it. No matter what you do, the rich can always afford more accounts than the poor can. Thus voting on an account basis is unrealistic.

I think a good analogy would be (within the NXT ecosystem), 1 NXT = 1 Person, Account Owner = Representative. So if you own 10k NXT, you are their representative and represent their "views", but you cannot speak for all the NXTs under other representatives.

[pandaisftw]

Once you find valid reason major stakeholders
are delaying those blocks let us know.

It is already known because its in the code

Hey fuck it, whatever, go stupid and invest big time into coin that can be stalled for 20+ minutes on will, awesome deal!

I am not CfB, but thank you for your competent opinion.

Well people like you will obviously need to hear an opinions of an angry moob waiting in line at some shopping mall to
realise something is not right and should be fixed.

Bye, no more time to waste here.

Lmao, buddy, there is something called statistics. If you didn't notice, there is something called a target. When the target % gets too low, there is a chance that the hit value will be very large. Thus, yes, there will be some blocks that may be 10+ minutes, but these are outliers. Also, major stakeholders generate most of the blocks anyways, are you going to ignore all the blocks that were generated on time and just cherry pick out the ones that weren't?

Maybe you should go bring your issues up with Bitcoin... sometimes they have 30-45 minute blocks. Are the miners stalling? Maybe, but probably not - it's just random variance.

[ChuckOne]

The more NXT someone has, the more right he has to decide. It's natural. Someone with 50% ownership on a company has a 50% right to decide something..

It's so easy. So why do you fighting over this so much?

I agree too, but this is only under the assumption that large stakeholders will always do things in the best interest of the currency's growth and health. However, I am sure at some point there could be large NXT stakeholders that would vote for something just not acceptable by a majority of the community and it would be interesting to see how that would play out in the actual decision making process.

Well, they are the majority. So let it be.

They're not the majority. That's the point here.

They are. If you have 50$ and the other guy 1$ then you have the majority of wealth. So you are should be allowed to say more.

Fortunately, our democratic systems do not work this way (not yet, I fear).

You should be allowed to say more if you spend more of you wealth:
Say, if you spend 1/10 of your wealth it's more than if somebody spend 1/10000 of theirs. It appears it's not so important to them.

NXT is an economic ecosystem, not a state. In PoS 1 NXT is equivalent to 1 person (like SSN, birth certificate, or whatever) because this is the only way to truly account for the validity of each NXT, so 1 NXT = 1 Vote. All other methods will be gamed by the rich to make the poor poorer. For example, using 1 account = 1 Vote, a large stakeholder can create 10k accounts easily, while a small stakeholder will go broke doing it. No matter what you do, the rich can always afford more accounts than the poor can. Thus voting on an account basis is unrealistic.

I think a good analogy would be (within the NXT ecosystem), 1 NXT = 1 Person, Account Owner = Representative. So if you own 10k NXT, you are their representative and represent their "views", but you cannot speak for all the NXTs under other representatives.

I can understand your point of view. But do not make the Nxt ecosystem for Nxt. We do it for the people. And when people don't like it because it does not seem fair they won't support it.

There are more different methods as only these two (1 Vote = 1 Nxt and 1 vote = 1 account) and variants of them.

The problem with these two is, there is nothing at stake. You can vote whatever and whenever you want.

If you have to pay for each vote and the amount of what you pay directly influences the voting power, you really think of voting when and what and how much is it worth to me.

So, something is at stake now. I cannot simply pay 10.000.000 to simply outvote everyone else. Because, in the next voting session would won't have any coins left.

Can you produce any valid argument against fee-based voting? I would really like to hear them as I want Nxt to thrive because people love it.

[jkoil]

The more NXT someone has, the more right he has to decide. It's natural. Someone with 50% ownership on a company has a 50% right to decide something..

It's so easy. So why do you fighting over this so much?

I agree too, but this is only under the assumption that large stakeholders will always do things in the best interest of the currency's growth and health. However, I am sure at some point there could be large NXT stakeholders that would vote for something just not acceptable by a majority of the community and it would be interesting to see how that would play out in the actual decision making process.

Well, they are the majority. So let it be.

They're not the majority. That's the point here.

They are. If you have 50$ and the other guy 1$ then you have the majority of wealth. So you are should be allowed to say more.

Fortunately, our democratic systems do not work this way (not yet, I fear).

You should be allowed to say more if you spend more of you wealth:
Say, if you spend 1/10 of your wealth it's more than if somebody spend 1/10000 of theirs. It appears it's not so important to them.

NXT is an economic ecosystem, not a state. In PoS 1 NXT is equivalent to 1 person (like SSN, birth certificate, or whatever) because this is the only way to truly account for the validity of each NXT, so 1 NXT = 1 Vote. All other methods will be gamed by the rich to make the poor poorer. For example, using 1 account = 1 Vote, a large stakeholder can create 10k accounts easily, while a small stakeholder will go broke doing it. No matter what you do, the rich can always afford more accounts than the poor can. Thus voting on an account basis is unrealistic.

I think a good analogy would be (within the NXT ecosystem), 1 NXT = 1 Person, Account Owner = Representative. So if you own 10k NXT, you are their representative and represent their "views", but you cannot speak for all the NXTs under other representatives.

another analogy from public owned companies: each stock has one vote.
The richmen win ... but ...

Edit:
though in companies' meetings they decide on companies business, and so the one who owns more should have more votes.
But if NXT system voting is used to something not-so-economic matters, then it is not so clear...

[Anon136]

The more NXT someone has, the more right he has to decide. It's natural. Someone with 50% ownership on a company has a 50% right to decide something..

It's so easy. So why do you fighting over this so much?

I agree too, but this is only under the assumption that large stakeholders will always do things in the best interest of the currency's growth and health. However, I am sure at some point there could be large NXT stakeholders that would vote for something just not acceptable by a majority of the community and it would be interesting to see how that would play out in the actual decision making process.

Well, they are the majority. So let it be.

They're not the majority. That's the point here.

They are. If you have 50$ and the other guy 1$ then you have the majority of wealth. So you are should be allowed to say more.

Fortunately, our democratic systems do not work this way (not yet, I fear).

You should be allowed to say more if you spend more of you wealth:
Say, if you spend 1/10 of your wealth it's more than if somebody spend 1/10000 of theirs. It appears it's not so important to them.

NXT is an economic ecosystem, not a state. In PoS 1 NXT is equivalent to 1 person (like SSN, birth certificate, or whatever) because this is the only way to truly account for the validity of each NXT, so 1 NXT = 1 Vote. All other methods will be gamed by the rich to make the poor poorer. For example, using 1 account = 1 Vote, a large stakeholder can create 10k accounts easily, while a small stakeholder will go broke doing it. No matter what you do, the rich can always afford more accounts than the poor can. Thus voting on an account basis is unrealistic.

I think a good analogy would be (within the NXT ecosystem), 1 NXT = 1 Person, Account Owner = Representative. So if you own 10k NXT, you are their representative and represent their "views", but you cannot speak for all the NXTs under other representatives.

A larger holders vote should have weight proportional to their stake, but they should also pay a proportional fee to their total stake. That could be a significant cost, preventing impulsive, foolish or uneducated voting. It is the stake holders responsibility to vote in a responsible and educated manner. It is those who are pushing the changes (or dissenters) to make sure they are educated on what is being changed and why it is important/needs to be done. I can't see how anything else matters or why all these complicated, gameable voting systems are even being brought up.

not saying you are wrong but i just wanted to point out that a large stake holder already has a strong incentive not to make a bad decision. if he does it will lower the value of his stake.

[ChuckOne]

The more NXT someone has, the more right he has to decide. It's natural. Someone with 50% ownership on a company has a 50% right to decide something..

It's so easy. So why do you fighting over this so much?

I agree too, but this is only under the assumption that large stakeholders will always do things in the best interest of the currency's growth and health. However, I am sure at some point there could be large NXT stakeholders that would vote for something just not acceptable by a majority of the community and it would be interesting to see how that would play out in the actual decision making process.

Well, they are the majority. So let it be.

They're not the majority. That's the point here.

They are. If you have 50$ and the other guy 1$ then you have the majority of wealth. So you are should be allowed to say more.

Fortunately, our democratic systems do not work this way (not yet, I fear).

You should be allowed to say more if you spend more of you wealth:
Say, if you spend 1/10 of your wealth it's more than if somebody spend 1/10000 of theirs. It appears it's not so important to them.

NXT is an economic ecosystem, not a state. In PoS 1 NXT is equivalent to 1 person (like SSN, birth certificate, or whatever) because this is the only way to truly account for the validity of each NXT, so 1 NXT = 1 Vote. All other methods will be gamed by the rich to make the poor poorer. For example, using 1 account = 1 Vote, a large stakeholder can create 10k accounts easily, while a small stakeholder will go broke doing it. No matter what you do, the rich can always afford more accounts than the poor can. Thus voting on an account basis is unrealistic.

I think a good analogy would be (within the NXT ecosystem), 1 NXT = 1 Person, Account Owner = Representative. So if you own 10k NXT, you are their representative and represent their "views", but you cannot speak for all the NXTs under other representatives.

A larger holders vote should have weight proportional to their stake, but they should also pay a proportional fee to their total stake. That could be a significant cost, preventing impulsive, foolish or uneducated voting. It is the stake holders responsibility to vote in a responsible and educated manner. It is those who are pushing the changes (or dissenters) to make sure they are educated on what is being changed and why it is important/needs to be done. I can't see how anything else matters or why all these complicated, gameable voting systems are even being brought up.

Totally agree. Fees adjusted to voting power are absolutely necessary.

[coolmist]

Does anyone know how I can call an account balance in PHP?

I need something like...

Code:

$TokenResponse = json_decode(file_get_contents("http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=decodeToken&website=" . $rand . "&token=" . $token"));

$balance = json_decode(file_get_contents("http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=getBalance&account=". $TokenResponse[account]"));

[Kattywampus]

Update 13: Bitcoin Conference Miami

This one is a big deal; we had a great meeting with Eric from ZipZap. JustaBit has talked with Zipzap quite a bit in the past for Peercoin, providing what they needed to make an informed decision about adding it to their platform. Today, Eric, myself, JustaBit and eB101 talked about how to move Nxt forward with Zipzap. Fantastic information, Eric is a straight shooter which I appreciate.  JustaBit is willing to help facilitate this the same way he did with Peercoin. Once we're added to Vircurex and/or Cryptsy, we'll provide liquidity information to help push this forward.

Update 13b

It hasn't been made public yet, but JustaBit will be leaving the Peer community at the end of the month on great terms to work on a company we've been developing called CoinTropolis. He'll have much more bandwidth available for Nxt. If you're not familiar with ZipZap, you might want to start reading up now. Zipzap will allow us to get coins into the hands of Joe User for cash. This is the big leagues in crypto.


It was great to have eB101 with us during the meetings, I know he'll do a great job helping coordinate the International Nxt community.

[okaynow]

NXT - 3D graphics: Update #02

I'm not sure about the date on the coin. It is right 2013 or when was official release?

• png transparency bug fixed
  
• Nxt coin shadow v02

All 3d renderings will be here:
forums.nxtcrypto.org
nextcoin.org

Great job there!

[xyzzyx]

Which account numbers go to which exchanges? 

10715382765594435905 - Bter
3283108578452123518 - NxtChg(?)
2269220637361284198 - Peercover
2125131997005584278 - Peercover
6635869272840226493 - Dgex

Not positive about the second one.

[gimre]

Does anyone know how I can call an account balance in PHP?

I need something like...

Code:

$TokenResponse = json_decode(file_get_contents("http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=decodeToken&website=" . $rand . "&token=" . $token"));

$balance = json_decode(file_get_contents("http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=getBalance&account=". $TokenResponse[account]"));

pass account ID not token.

Code:

http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=getBalance&account=6669070404060812420

remember results are "multiplied by 100"

also, you'll probably be interested more in guaranted balance:

Code:

http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=getGuaranteedBalance&account=6669070404060812420&numberOfConfirmations=10

[S3MKi]

Kattywampus, thank u for fresh news!

[gs02xzz]

Update 13: Bitcoin Conference Miami

This one is a big deal; we had a great meeting with Eric from ZipZap. JustaBit has talked with Zipzap quite a bit in the past for Peercoin, providing what they needed to make an informed decision about adding it to their platform. Today, Eric, myself, JustaBit and eB101 talked about how to move Nxt forward with Zipzap. Fantastic information, Eric is a straight shooter which I appreciate.  JustaBit is willing to help facilitate this the same way he did with Peercoin. Once we're added to Vircurex and/or Cryptsy, we'll provide liquidity information to help push this forward.

Update 13b

It hasn't been made public yet, but JustaBit will be leaving the Peer community at the end of the month on great terms to work on a company we've been developing called CoinTropolis. He'll have much more bandwidth available for Nxt. If you're not familiar with ZipZap, you might want to start reading up now. Zipzap will allow us to get coins into the hands of Joe User for cash. This is the big leagues in crypto.


It was great to have eB101 with us during the meetings, I know he'll do a great job helping coordinate the International Nxt community.

+1.

[tman10]

Update 13: Bitcoin Conference Miami

This one is a big deal; we had a great meeting with Eric from ZipZap. JustaBit has talked with Zipzap quite a bit in the past for Peercoin, providing what they needed to make an informed decision about adding it to their platform. Today, Eric, myself, JustaBit and eB101 talked about how to move Nxt forward with Zipzap. Fantastic information, Eric is a straight shooter which I appreciate.  JustaBit is willing to help facilitate this the same way he did with Peercoin. Once we're added to Vircurex and/or Cryptsy, we'll provide liquidity information to help push this forward.

Update 13b

It hasn't been made public yet, but JustaBit will be leaving the Peer community at the end of the month on great terms to work on a company we've been developing called CoinTropolis. He'll have much more bandwidth available for Nxt. If you're not familiar with ZipZap, you might want to start reading up now. Zipzap will allow us to get coins into the hands of Joe User for cash. This is the big leagues in crypto.


It was great to have eB101 with us during the meetings, I know he'll do a great job helping coordinate the International Nxt community.

Great Job in Miami!!!