NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[swartzfeger]

This is called innovation. Its like baseball, if you get one third of them right, you are allstar. I am just not smart enough to know which ideas are going to be the hit, so it is safer to do them all

Just don't dip below the Mendoza line!

[jl777]

Zero knowledge proof to binding?

I'm outta my depth here...

Like I said, guys smarter than me need to figure out all the details. All I know is that it is possible. Hell, I saw linux written in javascript boot up in my browser today.

If that is possible, then all this other stuff has to be possible too.

Just have to ask the right guy the right questions until the answer goes from "impossible" to "really difficult"

I am trying to define a set of features that builds on top of the current NXT core,with minimal changes to the core itself that we can develop different pieces in parallel and that will create a way for further addons to be developed with minimal effort. Once we can have several reference implementations of useful addons for each of the different layers, then more and more people will be able to quickly develop solutions that previously were impossible.

NXT already has decentralized distributed storage. Add decentralized distributed Turing scripts combine it with a large set of NXT hub services, then the total possible solutions grows exponentially, even the work required only grows linearly.

We have the funds to finance this development in parallel with the already existing development in the core. Why should we wait to start building the addon stuff?

Anybody want to wait before we start adding new capabilities to NXT? Notice I am not expecting jean-luc to do any of this, so his schedule will only be affected minimally.

Do we need to run a poll to see if I should stop pushing for NXTlayers?

James

[Jean-Luc]

I wrote most of the db code yesterday and today, and I am running it for the first time now. Let's see how many stack traces I find in the log tomorrow morning. Hope to have it ready for release by the end of the week.

Update: No errors in the logs on my two machines. I even forged a few blocks with 0.7.0. Tried loading the blockchain from scratch with -Xmx256M, didn't go out of memory, but feels slower because the database doesn't get enough cache in this case (db cache is set to 50% of the available memory).

Get State:
{ "lastBlock": "6196662565553489403", "numberOfAliases": 56879, "lastBlockchainFeeder": "184.166.159.100", "numberOfBlocks": 58509, "numberOfPeers": 776, "totalMemory": 238551040, "numberOfUnlockedAccounts": 0, "freeMemory": 46919888, "maxMemory": 238551040, "numberOfTransactions": 115865, "numberOfUsers": 0, "version": "0.7.0", "numberOfOrders": 0, "totalEffectiveBalance": 98535822400, "time": 6293793, "availableProcessors": 4, "numberOfAssets": 0, "cumulativeDifficulty": "1812805398112686", "numberOfAccounts": 21966 }

I also updated the javadoc at https://nxt.airdns.org:7875/doc/ to the latest 0.7.0.

[bitcoinpaul]

The whole idea has security implications that we haven't even considered yet. This will turn out to be real bad for Nxt if malicious nodes  are able to steal money.  

There are many other things in the pipeline:

- Distributed Storage - In progress
- Multi-signatures - In progress
- Blockchain Shrinking - In progress
- Two-phase Payments - In progress
     Software supported escrow transactions
- Voting System - In progress
- Reputation System - Will be implemented after Voting System
     Account trust rating system.  Check if sellers on the distributed exchange have a good history, if stock issuers pay dividends and if gateways honor their asset redemptions.
- Decentralized Mixing Service - Concept not ready - Cryptographers please contact core dev team members
- Distributed Computing - Concept not ready
- Smart Contracts - Concept not ready

Why not work on these?

It appears cfb has very short attention spam. Last week it was zerocoin, and now it's built in VM.

I hope he doesn't follow through this and  focuses on finishing things already listed. Maybe more trusted developers should be added to the team. Looking at his posting history, I will vote for "CIYAM Open".

+1

+1

I think I mentioned this hundreds of pages ago, but why do we assume transactions and DACs have to be on the same blockchain? The beauty of multiple chains is that people can choose which chains to point their devices at. Smartphone users would be happy to point their smart phones at the main chain only, while those with powerful desktops can point their machine at both the main chain and the DAC chain. Both chains can be run at 1 minute between blocks, to maintain consistency. Also, I wonder if coins can be transferred between chains? If not, I'm 99% sure the AE can take care of that.

If it works with multiple chains, we should go for it. Otherwise, maybe focus on stuff what made Nxt so great in the first place: transparent forging  / 1000TPS. Right?

[Zahlen]

Zero knowledge proof to binding?

I'm outta my depth here...

Oh this was what NxtChg (and some others?) was talking about (SNARK "voodoo math"). Outta my depth too 

[landomata]

It it works with multiple chains, we should go for it. Otherwise, maybe focus on stuff what made Nxt so great in the first place: transparent forging  / 1000TPS. Right?

I don;t think TF implementation is being affected in any way....these new proposals are parallel developments.

[jl777]

I am assuming no objections to naming klee, neer.g, bybitcoin and pouncer as treasurers for the committees that will decide on how to spend the unclaimed NXT.

For those that missed it, a couple of days ago I made a proposal on the Process that should be used to deal with the 9 million unclaimed NXT. As usual somebody came up with a better idea, but that is OK, my role is to toss out a decent idea and I expect the community to make it better.

so here is Pouncer's proposal:

********

This is my simplified suggestion.

Select 3 founders to be treasurers for the unclaimed funds.
One to hold marketing, tech & infra respectively.
Treasurers will not sit in any committee

Make this selection simple & fast by putting up 3 names and waiting for no objection (1-2 days) period. Any objections should be followed by a good reason. I suggest jl777 propose the 3 names.

Once this is settled, we can do the nomination/election process for the 3 committees.

What this will solve:
1. Unlikely for founders to "run away" with the trusted funds.
2. They will be in for the long haul
3. They voluntarily give up their right to decide on the usage of funds. Founders will not be seen as monopolising the decision making process, thereby pleasing the opponents of 1NXT = 1Vote to a certain extend.
4. Gives more opportunities to other stakeholders to participate in building up Nxt.
********

I naturally chose the four most active founders who were instrumental in getting NXT to where it is now.

Did have some disagreements, but in the end all objections to my selections were retracted.

It has been about two days, but just in case anybody missed it I wanted to make sure that nobody has any good objections to any of: klee, bybitcoin, neer.g or pouncer from holding the unclaimed NXT in escrow until directed by the respective committees to disburse the funds.

The three committees are in the process of being selected here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=445209.60

James

[bitcoinpaul]

It it works with multiple chains, we should go for it. Otherwise, maybe focus on stuff what made Nxt so great in the first place: transparent forging  / 1000TPS. Right?

I don;t think TF implementation is being affected in any way....these new proposals are parallel developments.

1000TPS?

[swartzfeger]

Zero knowledge proof to binding?

I'm outta my depth here...

Oh this was what NxtChg (and some others?) was talking about (SNARK "voodoo math"). Outta my depth too 

Yes! That's exactly what I thought looking at it.

I didn't realize that's what NxtChg was referring to when he was discussing SNARK (I really wasn't following the cross-chain talk until now).

[jl777]

Zero knowledge proof to binding?

I'm outta my depth here...

Oh this was what NxtChg (and some others?) was talking about (SNARK "voodoo math"). Outta my depth too 

Actually this article is about using zeroknowlege proofs to do contingent payments. Put an escrow process in the middle and combine two contingent payments and you get trustless exchange!

When I was working on the zerocoin plan, I noticed that implementing zerocoin into NXT had a LOT of overlap with getting trustless crypto exchange working. With just a little more work, we can get 10 times the value.

This is why I am funding 100000 NXT for crosschain solution

James

[bitcoinpaul]

I am assuming no objections to naming klee, neer.g, bybitcoin and pouncer as treasurers for the committees that will decide on how to spend the unclaimed NXT.

So, what are the next steps? Do they get the NXT now?

[Eadeqa]

These would be NXT hubs running open source service modules. It wont be for everyone, but I would trust NXT hubs to work properly (after they have been tested) with minimal issues as compared to some places.

What if there is a glitch in the hub and the payment aren't received?

And what if the node doesn't send the request to it's service module?  There needs to be cryptographic proof that the node performed that action.

This isn't a trustless system.  

No one should trust such a system.

 "What good is complaining to bter?"

I can move to a different  gateway if it's not good.

[jl777]

It it works with multiple chains, we should go for it. Otherwise, maybe focus on stuff what made Nxt so great in the first place: transparent forging  / 1000TPS. Right?

I don;t think TF implementation is being affected in any way....these new proposals are parallel developments.

1000TPS?

We are able to push forward with NXTlayers. As soon as CfB tells us which instruction set he will implement, we can get all layers defined. Even before that we can get all layers other than the one right on top of the lowest layer defined and once defined we can start implementing.

50000 NXT to get all the layers defined.
400000 NXT to implement all the layers

James

[jl777]

I am assuming no objections to naming klee, neer.g, bybitcoin and pouncer as treasurers for the committees that will decide on how to spend the unclaimed NXT.

So, what are the next steps? Do they get the NXT now?

Lets wait for a bit more to make sure no complaints. Then we need to hear from the treasurer nominees which ones will accept. Pouncer is the alternate

James

[xyzzyx]

Is there a thread that is more in-depth than the following one when it comes to asset exchange API?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=406839.0

[landomata]

I can move to a different  gateway if it's not good.

Each HUB (Service provider) is a Gateway...they will all run separate servers....decentralized.

[swartzfeger]

We are able to push forward with NXTlayers. As soon as CfB tells us which instruction set he will implement, we can get all layers defined. Even before that we can get all layers other than the one right on top of the lowest layer defined and once defined we can start implementing.

I thought CfB was requesting an instruction set from us? Or am I completely misreading this?

Guys, if u offer an instruction set, please, provide a simple program. The task of this program is to pay dividends to accounts owning a particular asset at block N.

[jl777]

These would be NXT hubs running open source service modules. It wont be for everyone, but I would trust NXT hubs to work properly (after they have been tested) with minimal issues as compared to some places.

What if there is a glitch in the hub and the payment aren't received?

And if the node doesn't send the request to it's service module?

This isn't a trustless system.  

No one should trust such a system.

 "What good is complaining to bter?"

I can move to a different  gateway if it's not good.

At worst you can stop using this setup if its not good, so I dont see how it is any worse.

In order to be reliable it would need to verify the external blockchain to make sure payment was made. proper error handling is certainly expected. Not impossible to do by any means. Source code review will allow people to verify the error cases that are handled or not handled. THIS is what provides a lot more trust than blindly relying on centralized exchange.

The code that the node is running is also open source. It would be tested and so the only way I can think of that the node doesnt send the request to the service is if the server crashes. Thats a good catch! So we clearly need to have a mechanism to make sure that important tasks are denoted as such and the NXT hub servers will need to verify that all services that were supposed to have been done were done exactly once. I think this is similiar to the double spend problem, tricky but not impossible.

Maybe Evil Bob will do horrible things? So yes we need super smart guys to make sure Evil Bob cant do really horrible things. I personally would trust that a peer reviewed open source solution that takes into account the Evil Bobs of the world will be more trustworthy that trusting some random employee at some random company. But, hey that's me. Maybe I am becoming a cryptoanarchist?

James

[Mario123]

Quick question about coin mixing for anonymity (too early for my brain):

1. You send NXT to coin mixer (special account, hardcoded in source code)
2. The NXT will get forwarded, in random fractions, throughout the following 1440 blocks to the receiver
3. NXT Amount varies maybe 5%

Does this make sense? Is this even possible?

[jl777]

We are able to push forward with NXTlayers. As soon as CfB tells us which instruction set he will implement, we can get all layers defined. Even before that we can get all layers other than the one right on top of the lowest layer defined and once defined we can start implementing.

I thought CfB was requesting an instruction set from us? Or am I completely misreading this?

Guys, if u offer an instruction set, please, provide a simple program. The task of this program is to pay dividends to accounts owning a particular asset at block N.

I wonder if I should write a C program and send him the subleq output.
Is anybody working on this?