NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[ImmortAlex]

why dont adjust fees in a predictably, dynamically and automatically way?? i mean, drecrease fees in relation with number of blocks in the block chain or something that makes fees go down as people use nxt more....as people use nxt more, price should rise, so, it would also be related to prices...

We can't correlate fee with any prices. Blockchain doesn't know anything about real world.
We can correlate min fee with block numbers. But I doubt someone can give us any good formula.

So I personally prefer lowering fee from time to time on user's demand. It will be fight between users and forgers. Forgers always want higher fees, users always want lower ones. So we'll have long voting threads, blockchain forks (if someone release software with lower fees) and so on Democracy, as you like it

Another way is to set very low fee right now, but doesn't increase transactions limit in block (255 for now). So in future users will fight for place in block, setting higher fees.
But very low fee in present time can hurt forgers.

[ChuckOne]

Fee: 1.0
Until we really have high price for 1 NXT.
Until we really have big number of transactions per block.
Until we really start to scream: "WTF, I buy one gram of blow cheap cheneese smartphone and need to pay 5% of it's price as fee!"

Exactly, my thoughts. Would also like a % of transaction's amount to be spent as fee with min 1NXT.

Reducing Nxt fee lowers incentive to forge with large Nxt account, while at the same time encouraging use of Nxt features. I like it.

Why not waiting for a month or two? Why the hurry?

[ImmortAlex]

How's the weather in St. Petersburg these days?

Why do you think he is from St.Petersburg?

Why do you think he's not?

He is from Minsk, Belarus.

[abctc]

why dont adjust fees in a predictably, dynamically and automatically way?? i mean, drecrease fees in relation with number of blocks in the block chain or something that makes fees go down as people use nxt more....as people use nxt more, price should rise, so, it would also be related to prices...

- no need, because in the future the senders will compete for a place in the next block for the place for theirs transactions (like in the bitcoin even today).

[opticalcarrier]

I would be ok with moving to 0.1, but only full nxt numbers should be able to be sent.

So you cannot send for example 0.5 nxt to someone. The minimum you can send is 1nxt. will this be the case?

If you have 105.45 nxt, you can send 105nxt, the 0.45 can only be spent on fees.

im curious, what is your rationale behind this structure?
and I am perfectly fine with 0.1, but if CfB *really* believes the price will jump we may as well move to .01.  That would be what I call 'conviction'.  But .001 would be asking for trouble at this point, IMO

given that it looks like the system as designed supports only 2 decimal places.  A decompile shows getBalance methods using some integer casting operations being divided by 100L.  So how much extra work would it be to implement .001 versus .01?

[ChuckOne]

why dont adjust fees in a predictably, dynamically and automatically way?? i mean, drecrease fees in relation with number of blocks in the block chain or something that makes fees go down as people use nxt more....as people use nxt more, price should rise, so, it would also be related to prices...

We can't correlate fee with any prices. Blockchain doesn't know anything about real world.
We can correlate min fee with block numbers. But I doubt someone can give us any good formula.

So I personally prefer lowering fee from time to time on user's demand. It will be fight between users and forgers. Forgers always want higher fees, users always want lower ones. So we'll have long voting threads, blockchain forks (if someone release software with lower fees) and so on Democracy, as you like it

If forgers don't agree, they don't let their software sign those transactions. It is as simple as that. It is irrelevant if a client allows lower fees if the majority of the forgers don't.

Another way is to set very low fee right now, but doesn't increase transactions limit in block (255 for now). So in future users will fight for place in block, setting higher fees.
But very low fee in present time can hurt forgers.

I agree. Let's do it slowly.

[Come-from-Beyond]

We only get the result from the forger. That's a result of having a turing-complete language. You cannot prove what the script is going to calculate.

This statement is wrong.

[MarvellousMutant]

I altered my mind. I think 0.1 NxT fee is good for now. Everything else can be decided by voting.

[ImmortAlex]

Fixed a critical bug. Everybody should upgrade immediately.

So my paranoia wake up.

What is the bug?! Do I need to decompile pair of sources and do diff and than do analyse just before upgrade?
Do you try to hide something from evil hackers? I think they are first who do analysis on decompiled sources...

[msin]

Fee: 1.0
Until we really have high price for 1 NXT.
Until we really have big number of transactions per block.
Until we really start to scream: "WTF, I buy one gram of blow cheap cheneese smartphone and need to pay 5% of it's price as fee!"

Exactly, my thoughts. Would also like a % of transaction's amount to be spent as fee with min 1NXT.

Reducing Nxt fee lowers incentive to forge with large Nxt account, while at the same time encouraging use of Nxt features. I like it.

Why not waiting for a month or two? Why the hurry?

Cause we need more people using Nxt, not forging for profit.

[ChuckOne]

We only get the result from the forger. That's a result of having a turing-complete language. You cannot prove what the script is going to calculate.

This statement is wrong.

Ah, really? What do we have instead?

[Come-from-Beyond]

Fixed a critical bug. Everybody should upgrade immediately.

So my paranoia wake up.

What is the bug?! Do I need to decompile pair of sources and do diff and than do analyse just before upgrade?
Do you try to hide something from evil hackers? I think they are first who do analysis on decompiled sources...

Don't waste ur time, it will be fully disclosed anyway.

[Come-from-Beyond]

We only get the result from the forger. That's a result of having a turing-complete language. You cannot prove what the script is going to calculate.

This statement is wrong.

Ah, really? What do we have instead?

Every node will run the script by itself.

[ImmortAlex]

given that it looks like the system as designed supports only 2 decimal places.  A decompile shows getBalance methods using some integer casting operations being divided by 100L.

Yes. And AFAIR situation was even worse at least in 0.4.7: transactions and fees was integer numbers, and account balance too, but 100 times higher.

[ImmortAlex]

Fee: 1.0
Until we really have high price for 1 NXT.
Until we really have big number of transactions per block.
Until we really start to scream: "WTF, I buy one gram of blow cheap cheneese smartphone and need to pay 5% of it's price as fee!"

Exactly, my thoughts. Would also like a % of transaction's amount to be spent as fee with min 1NXT.

Reducing Nxt fee lowers incentive to forge with large Nxt account, while at the same time encouraging use of Nxt features. I like it.

Why not waiting for a month or two? Why the hurry?

Cause we need more people using Nxt, not forging for profit.

Do you think that 1 NXT fee is something that really stops people now?! C'mon, it's just few cents!

[ImmortAlex]

Fixed a critical bug. Everybody should upgrade immediately.

So my paranoia wake up.

What is the bug?! Do I need to decompile pair of sources and do diff and than do analyse just before upgrade?
Do you try to hide something from evil hackers? I think they are first who do analysis on decompiled sources...

Don't waste ur time, it will be fully disclosed anyway.

I go to sleep, but my paranoia is not.

[BitcoinForumator]

Fee: 1.0
Until we really have high price for 1 NXT.
Until we really have big number of transactions per block.
Until we really start to scream: "WTF, I buy one gram of blow cheap cheneese smartphone and need to pay 5% of it's price as fee!"

Exactly, my thoughts. Would also like a % of transaction's amount to be spent as fee with min 1NXT.

Reducing Nxt fee lowers incentive to forge with large Nxt account, while at the same time encouraging use of Nxt features. I like it.

Why not waiting for a month or two? Why the hurry?

Cause we need more people using Nxt, not forging for profit.

Do you think that 1 NXT fee is something that really stops people now?! C'mon, it's just few cents!

It isn't in $ valuation. But in NXT terms it "seems" a lot.

[msin]

Fee: 1.0
Until we really have high price for 1 NXT.
Until we really have big number of transactions per block.
Until we really start to scream: "WTF, I buy one gram of blow cheap cheneese smartphone and need to pay 5% of it's price as fee!"

Exactly, my thoughts. Would also like a % of transaction's amount to be spent as fee with min 1NXT.

Reducing Nxt fee lowers incentive to forge with large Nxt account, while at the same time encouraging use of Nxt features. I like it.

Why not waiting for a month or two? Why the hurry?

Cause we need more people using Nxt, not forging for profit.

Do you think that 1 NXT fee is something that really stops people now?! C'mon, it's just few cents!

For someone who can only afford 1000 Nxt, yes.

[EmoneyRu]

Cause we need more people using Nxt, not forging for profit.

Forging works only for stakeholders. Why should we care about them?

Idea: don't use Nxt for chat because in April there will be a fork with infinite coins. CXT, MXT, whatsnxt, facenxt, nxtwitter.

[ChuckOne]

Cause we need more people using Nxt, not forging for profit.

I agree.

But, come on, NXT is two months old. Don't push it too hard.

I think the concept should convince people to come and to stay not the fees. If they stay, good. If they don't because of the fees, they will leave at the slightest problem. Let's accumulate those people first and then let people in that are just here for 'yet-another-altcoin' profit.

Don't you thing we have still some time?