NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[Sebastien256]

So could some stakeholders put the biggest chunk of bounty in history of mankind out there for atomic cross chain transaction on nxt please? During this time (this will take a while?!) we should have the best community driven gateway possible, which james is currently building.

OK.
3M NXT (up to 5M for additional features) for atomic cross chain transactions.
Conditions:
a) working client for average user;
b) official approve of all three NXT Funding Committees;
c) fully working asset exchange;
d) working transparent forging in the part marked bold:

NB: The only penalty is inability to mine blocks within some period of time. They still can decide not to bother with mining, but their "hashing" power will be distributed to those who do protect the network.

Last two conditions are my conditions to stop holding investment in 50M NXT.

Can the amount of NXT for the bounty be transfer to the NXT Funding Committees? People can't start working on such a large project without be sure that the bounty actually exist.

Only after both c) and d) conditions.

Since there is now a GIANT bounty for cross chain support. I think we might as well get started on it!

Bounty is not completely 100% official as I understand. c) and d) conditions must be done first.

[1714910906]

1714910906

[1714910906]

1714910906

[1714910906]

1714910906

[TwinWinNerD]

Nice to see Cryptsy added Nxt.

This is their Nxt info page:


Here's something for Cryptsy:

yeah, had a chuckle *gg*

[wakasaki808]

Nice to see Cryptsy added Nxt.

This is their Nxt info page:


Here's something for Cryptsy:

yeah, had a chuckle *gg*

Lol

[jl777]

So could some stakeholders put the biggest chunk of bounty in history of mankind out there for atomic cross chain transaction on nxt please? During this time (this will take a while?!) we should have the best community driven gateway possible, which james is currently building.

OK.
3M NXT (up to 5M for additional features) for atomic cross chain transactions.
Conditions:
a) working client for average user;
b) official approve of all three NXT Funding Committees;
c) fully working asset exchange;
d) working transparent forging in the part marked bold:

NB: The only penalty is inability to mine blocks within some period of time. They still can decide not to bother with mining, but their "hashing" power will be distributed to those who do protect the network.

Last two conditions are my conditions to stop holding investment in 50M NXT.

Can the amount of NXT for the bounty be transfer to the NXT Funding Committees? People can't start working on such a large project without be sure that the bounty actually exist.

Only after both c) and d) conditions.

Since there is now a GIANT bounty for cross chain support. I think we might as well get started on it!

Bounty is not completely 100% official as I understand. c) and d) conditions must be done first.

Just a matter of time for a), b), c) and d)
The only issue is the exact mechanism of d), I am sure what Mr 47... wants is TF live and working, that is what we will have

James

Edit: Mr 47... please dont forget NXTcash completion bounty!

[Jerical13]

Good news everyone.
Video already done, you can download it from this topic:
https://nextcoin.org/index.php/topic,3981.msg37555.html#msg37555

Holy crap, that is *beautiful*!

Well done! 

Nice

[Jerical13]

What if the gateway were used as a marketing tool to the exchanges? This would put them in charge of managing the gateways, and put any risk involved on them, allow them a way of participating in the AE instead of competing with it, and give them incentive to trade NXT.

It would also decentralize the use of the gateway by making it a private enterprise.

+1...good idea.

Thanks. And by the way, what is the +1 thing about? I see it a lot, but I think I am missing the meaning.

[allwelder]

- build a great gateway á la james
- work hard on AT and atomic cross chain transactions

Without a doubt if we can achieve atomic cross-chain txs then we will have basically got rid of the business model for all exchanges that don't do fiat.

IMO "this is our job".

The future will not be centralised!

ANY detailed info about atomic cross chain transactions ?

Let us assuming AT supports the same secret sharing methods that bitcoin scripts do. That will allow the method previously described to work, IF the external blockchain is accessible.

Since AT is in a sandbox, this data is not directly accessible, so I think it will need to coordinate with some external process (gateways!) that will put the required info in AM that the AT can access. I also think this means AT will need to support writing of AM, which to my knowledge is not yet on the list of current AT features. I am sure CIYAM is working out the details. In order to support automatic cross chain transactions, a lot of pieces need to be in place.

Since there is now a GIANT bounty for cross chain support. I think we might as well get started on it!

Due to constraints by dogecoin network and impracticality of lots of independent gateways, I limited the multisig to 2 of 3. However, for data validation purposes there is no need to limit to 3, we can have a larger number of peers to validate the external blockchain. I doubt there is much utility in going to more than 1 per geographic area. The idea is to have each bitcoind on whatever the local fork is. Then as soon as any forking is detected, all withdrawals stop. The only time withdrawals get processed will be when all the gateway bitcoinds are in agreement.

The multisig gateway is the first step toward automatic cross chain. What I hope is that the community recognizes this and we can create a standard set of software to run on hallmarked nodes. If all the hallmarked nodes have bitcoind, dogecoind, altcoind installed now, then that is the first step. I know the multisig gateway sure could use such an infrastructure in place.

Then we can create a layer of software that cross validates all the crypto daemon's blockchains (at least the subset we care about) and provide AM interface for AT and NXT clients.
In addition to crypto blockchain services, we can easily add market price information for everything and provide AM services for price data. AT can then be written to implement options, bets, etc.

This is why I have been saying that we need NXT layer. The multisig gateway is just the first alpha version of the full NXT layer. So, I hope it is not to controversial to ask the hallmark server guys to get a set of bitcoind, litecoind, dogecoind, etc. installed. Then when I make a release of multigateway, you can easily fill in the wallet addresses for the three gateways and public keys. This determines the multisig address and change a few strings and constants for the coin, recompile and new multisig gateway.

As far as error handling goes, I have not figured out how to deal with the network disappearing for 2 days

Anybody that sent in DOGE, the deposit got swept into the multisig, but the unspent txout trigger is gone. I think I have to reconcile every transaction and use any discrepancies to further investigate a manual transaction. I will put in a NXT network down flag to prevent this in the future

James

seems I understand a little.
Thank you ,james.
I have sent some doge to your gateway,but seemshttp://nxtra.org/nxt-client/ is down,we can continue test after it works.

[Jerical13]

I think you can ensure that per gateway there is only one AE asset type for a RL Asset e.g. USD, I think this will avoid confusion, if you have a legit USD and a scammer can create US or USd or some variant people will get scammed.

We cannot force other people not to build a gateway on their own. We can build a nice community-drive gateway which could become very big and everyone uses it. But that's about it.

and be clear on the AE which gateway and asset is being traded through.

Absolutely.

Just a stupid question:
How to distinguish different issued assets with same asset name by different issuers on AE ?

I think that that is what the gateway does. It makes external assets appear as they are from the same set of assets, created at the same time, by the same account, no matter when or who creates them. A doge that comes through the gateway today will be seen the same as a doge that comes through tomorrow or a week or year from now. I don't know by what coding magic this is done but that is how James explained it to me in laymen terms.

[2Kool4Skewl]

I think you can ensure that per gateway there is only one AE asset type for a RL Asset e.g. USD, I think this will avoid confusion, if you have a legit USD and a scammer can create US or USd or some variant people will get scammed.

We cannot force other people not to build a gateway on their own. We can build a nice community-drive gateway which could become very big and everyone uses it. But that's about it.

and be clear on the AE which gateway and asset is being traded through.

Absolutely.

Just a stupid question:
How to distinguish different issued assets with same asset name by different issuers on AE ?

I think that that is what the gateway does. It makes external assets appear as they are from the same set of assets, created at the same time, by the same account, no matter when or who creates them. A doge that comes through the gateway today will be seen the same as a doge that comes through tomorrow or a week or year from now. I don't know by what coding magic this is done but that is how James explained it to me in laymen terms.

Only DOGE assets issued by the multi-sig gateways are redeemable through the DOGE multi-sig gateways.  Someone else can start a DOGE gateway and those DOGE assets are only issued and redeemed through them.

There can be multiple assets of the same type issued and redeemed by separate gateways.

[NxtMinnow]

In my travels through the Internet pursuant to researching Nxt, I encountered an academic named Emin Gun Sirer, associate Professor at Cornell University, who is very skeptical of ethereum.

Emin Gun Sirer and Ittay Eyal wrote "Majority is not Enough: Bitcoin Mining is Vulnerable" published in  arXiv, November 2013 and can be read here: http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.0243
Majority is not Enough: Bitcoin Mining is Vulnerable Authored by Ittay Eyal and Emin Gün Sirer is scheduled to appear in the Proceedings of Financial Cryptography in Barbados, March 3-7 2014.

Emin Gun Sirer posted the following scathing response yesterday to The Slasher Punitive Proof-of-Stake Algorithm Article written by Vitalik Buterin of ethereum at

http://blog.ethereum.org/2014/01/15/slasher-a-punitive-proof-of-stake-algorithm/

START QUOTE
"I tried to parse and follow your writeup, but it reads too much like a just-so story around an interesting topic, with little attention paid to a proper specification.

Could you please concretely specify what problem you’re trying to fix?

Could you then formally specify your proposed protocol for fixing it? Please be sure to avoid obvious pitfalls. For instance, if you say “X should be revealed at block K+2000,” you need to specify what happens when timing issues in the p2p network prevent the revelation from happening in block K+2000.

Normally, one also needs a proof that the proposed solution is necessary and sufficient to solve the problem, but if the specification is clear enough, this step is not necessary.

I very much like the goals behind the Ethereum effort, but much of the technical writing is neither clear nor rigorous, and currencies are a business where you have to be one or the other. "
END QUOTE

On another positive note for Nxt, the Karma paper written by Vivek Vishnumurthy, Sangeeth Chandrakumar and Emin Gun Sirer in June 2003 available at http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/karma/ describes the combination implementation of Nxt 91% Transparent Forging NIP and nodecoin 2.0.

It only took 11 years for the specifications of Karma to go from concept to reality!

[jl777]

I think you can ensure that per gateway there is only one AE asset type for a RL Asset e.g. USD, I think this will avoid confusion, if you have a legit USD and a scammer can create US or USd or some variant people will get scammed.

We cannot force other people not to build a gateway on their own. We can build a nice community-drive gateway which could become very big and everyone uses it. But that's about it.

and be clear on the AE which gateway and asset is being traded through.

Absolutely.

Just a stupid question:
How to distinguish different issued assets with same asset name by different issuers on AE ?

I think that that is what the gateway does. It makes external assets appear as they are from the same set of assets, created at the same time, by the same account, no matter when or who creates them. A doge that comes through the gateway today will be seen the same as a doge that comes through tomorrow or a week or year from now. I don't know by what coding magic this is done but that is how James explained it to me in laymen terms.

There can only be one asset named "DOGE" so different gateways would have "myDOGE" or "otherDOGE", etc.

This is the confusion I am worried about. There is no guarantee that the community will get the asset named "DOGE", it will go to the highest bidder the block AE goes live. I am hopeful that in community spirit the ones that obtain the pure names like "DOGE", "BTC", etc would sell all the assets to the community after issuing the full billion. In ripple, anybody can issue any asset, so it becomes a very dangerous thing for the unaware. With NXT, there can be only one, but there is no guarantee the community will get the pure names...

I am thinking of offering a bounty starting at 5000 NXT for the popular crypto names, with a sliding scale from BTC down to unpopularcoin. Hopefully, a quick 4000 NXT profit and community spirit will allow the community gateways to have the pure names.

My plan B) on this is to just add a random string to all the pure names and get the one that is available across the board. It would then look a bit funny with "djwBTC" "djwLTC" and "djwDOGE" being the community crypto assets, but this way we wont be held hostage by somebody that wants 1 million NXT for the BTC asset. It shouldnt be much work for the clients to special case the "djw" prefix, and it might actually help to have a common prefix so we can have a crypto assets page

James

[wakasaki808]

Nice to see Cryptsy added Nxt.

This is their Nxt info page:


Here's something for Cryptsy:

yeah, had a chuckle *gg*

Lol

Lmao. That's... interesting.

At least they got NXT name and code correct...haha..

Maybe someone should help them with the description and the new logo 

[2Kool4Skewl]

There can only be one asset named "DOGE" so different gateways would have "myDOGE" or "otherDOGE", etc.

This is the confusion I am worried about. There is no guarantee that the community will get the asset named "DOGE", it will go to the highest bidder the block AE goes live. I am hopeful that in community spirit the ones that obtain the pure names like "DOGE", "BTC", etc would sell all the assets to the community after issuing the full billion. In ripple, anybody can issue any asset, so it becomes a very dangerous thing for the unaware. With NXT, there can be only one, but there is no guarantee the community will get the pure names...

I am thinking of offering a bounty starting at 5000 NXT for the popular crypto names, with a sliding scale from BTC down to unpopularcoin. Hopefully, a quick 4000 NXT profit and community spirit will allow the community gateways to have the pure names.

My plan B) on this is to just add a random string to all the pure names and get the one that is available across the board. It would then look a bit funny with "djwBTC" "djwLTC" and "djwDOGE" being the community crypto assets, but this way we wont be held hostage by somebody that wants 1 million NXT for the BTC asset. It shouldnt be much work for the clients to special case the "djw" prefix, and it might actually help to have a common prefix so we can have a crypto assets page

James

Can asset names be transfered from one Nxt account to another?  I would imagine that we would want the community asset names owned by one account.  If multiple people register the community asset names, we want to make sure they can transfer them.

If the community cannot get the plain asset names BTC, DOGE, LTC, etc, I would recommend registering the names BTC.nxt, DOGE.nxt, LTC.nxt, etc.

[sashsh]

ANNOUNCEMENT

NMAC Share Placement is Closed

We are pleased to announce that due to very strong demand we are closing the 1st & 2nd Tier share placement from this moment.  The below investors in BOLD have already collectively pledged to purchase 57 million shares.  We are still awaiting the pledges of the UN-BOLD members, because of the strong demand we will push forward the placement process date to March 5th, 11:59 PM GMT.

Pls bare in mind that this is the deadline for mentioning how many shares you wish to purchase.  Payment will be settled at a later date which we will communicate to all concerned.

LIST

pandaisftw: Jan 8  
danniego - Jan 8
Kbk00 - Jan 8
abctc - Jan 9
cromaclear - Jan 9
neer.g - Jan 9
UtopianFuture - Jan 9
benowl - Jan 9
Hash - Jan 14
butterclown -  Jan 18
eXtatiC - Jan 21  
Shin - Jan 21
swartzfeger - Jan 22
Ezravdb - Jan 23
okaynow - Jan 29
LemonAndFries - Feb 8
Allwelder - Feb 14

After business plan published:

kodtycoon - Feb 25
smaragda - Feb 25
eB101 - Feb 25
Damelon - Feb 25
KyLins - Feb 25
rushi - Feb 25
shenjie - Feb 25
voldemort628 - Feb 26
redsn0w - Feb 26
pt2002 - Feb 27
stoneone - Feb 27
bezbezbez - Feb 27
xcn - Feb 27
sashsh -- Feb 27
Igmaca -- Feb 28
Chanc3r -- Feb 28
Vega -- Feb 28
Rickyjames -- Feb 28
Arafel71 -- Feb 28  
4iribasik -- Feb 28  
lingdu22 -- Mar 1
qbd1313 -- Mar 1
Leetrump -- Mar 1
Kisa -- Mar 1
Achim -- Mar 1
Crtcl -- Mar 1
Yanlap -- Mar 1
fgbnbb -- Mar 1
Perado -- Mar 1
Chinabreak123 -- Mar 1
xzhybbs -- Mar 1
Tercel -- Mar 1
Robinf -- Mar 1
fnjing21t -- Mar 1
Ziggy -- Mar 1
Miramare -- Mar 1
gmoneycoin --- Mar 1  
oldnbold -- Mar 1
Hala -- Mar 1
dimirfu -- Mar 1 --

[jl777]

On another positive note for Nxt, the Karma paper written by Vivek Vishnumurthy, Sangeeth Chandrakumar and Emin Gun Sirer in June 2003 available at http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/karma/ describes the combination implementation of Nxt 91% Transparent Forging NIP and nodecoin 2.0.

It only took 11 years for the specifications of Karma to go from concept to reality!

After quickly reading it, the process they describe seems somewhat familiar, but I cant say I fully understand it.

I tried to use common sense and utilize existing components (like bitcoind) as much as possible. I dont trust myself to accurately implement something I dont understand. Its hard enough to implement something I do understand! I dont think the multsig approach has to worry about the byzantine generals. Maybe a Ddos attack, which will stop all deposits and withdraws, but that is an inconvenience, not fatal. Is it possible for an attacker to totally take over the internet feed for all gateways at the same time and feed it false information about bitcoin transactions so that all the gateways end up on a false fork?

Requiring 100% identical states on three independent bitcoind is what I am relying on to give us an accurate balance for all the coin accounts. I am in the process of doing the same for the NXT side of things. Much work for dealing with the 1% cases...

James

[allwelder]

There can only be one asset named "DOGE" so different gateways would have "myDOGE" or "otherDOGE", etc.

This is the confusion I am worried about. There is no guarantee that the community will get the asset named "DOGE", it will go to the highest bidder the block AE goes live. I am hopeful that in community spirit the ones that obtain the pure names like "DOGE", "BTC", etc would sell all the assets to the community after issuing the full billion. In ripple, anybody can issue any asset, so it becomes a very dangerous thing for the unaware. With NXT, there can be only one, but there is no guarantee the community will get the pure names...

I am thinking of offering a bounty starting at 5000 NXT for the popular crypto names, with a sliding scale from BTC down to unpopularcoin. Hopefully, a quick 4000 NXT profit and community spirit will allow the community gateways to have the pure names.

My plan B) on this is to just add a random string to all the pure names and get the one that is available across the board. It would then look a bit funny with "djwBTC" "djwLTC" and "djwDOGE" being the community crypto assets, but this way we wont be held hostage by somebody that wants 1 million NXT for the BTC asset. It shouldnt be much work for the clients to special case the "djw" prefix, and it might actually help to have a common prefix so we can have a crypto assets page

James

Can asset names be transfered from one Nxt account to another?  I would imagine that we would want the community asset names owned by one account.  If multiple people register the community asset names, we want to make sure they can transfer them.

If the community cannot get the plain asset names BTC, DOGE, LTC, etc, I would recommend registering the names BTC.nxt, DOGE.nxt, LTC.nxt, etc.

may be we can use the full name, bitcoin...

[2Kool4Skewl]

may be we can use the full name, bitcoin...

Good idea.

[jl777]

There can only be one asset named "DOGE" so different gateways would have "myDOGE" or "otherDOGE", etc.

This is the confusion I am worried about. There is no guarantee that the community will get the asset named "DOGE", it will go to the highest bidder the block AE goes live. I am hopeful that in community spirit the ones that obtain the pure names like "DOGE", "BTC", etc would sell all the assets to the community after issuing the full billion. In ripple, anybody can issue any asset, so it becomes a very dangerous thing for the unaware. With NXT, there can be only one, but there is no guarantee the community will get the pure names...

I am thinking of offering a bounty starting at 5000 NXT for the popular crypto names, with a sliding scale from BTC down to unpopularcoin. Hopefully, a quick 4000 NXT profit and community spirit will allow the community gateways to have the pure names.

My plan B) on this is to just add a random string to all the pure names and get the one that is available across the board. It would then look a bit funny with "djwBTC" "djwLTC" and "djwDOGE" being the community crypto assets, but this way we wont be held hostage by somebody that wants 1 million NXT for the BTC asset. It shouldnt be much work for the clients to special case the "djw" prefix, and it might actually help to have a common prefix so we can have a crypto assets page

James

Can asset names be transfered from one Nxt account to another?  I would imagine that we would want the community asset names owned by one account.  If multiple people register the community asset names, we want to make sure they can transfer them.

If the community cannot get the plain asset names BTC, DOGE, LTC, etc, I would recommend registering the names BTC.nxt, DOGE.nxt, LTC.nxt, etc.

No punctuation. I think it is like aliases. Possible to transfer, but not yet. It wont matter that the assets are issued by different accounts. I have a #define for asset # and this is something that will need to be done for each supported coin. Also, I am monitoring the gateway addresses so for ease of use people could just use one of the gateway addresses to redeem

The authorized assets (total issue amount) would be transferred to the community acct with the understanding that it will never directly sell the assets. Each gateway would then get a reasonable amount each to deal with deposits. If we need to get more asset into circulation, the community acct would distribute more.

At any given time the difference between total issued and (quantity of assets held in trust and gateways) should match what is in the multisig acct. This will be publicly viewable and the gateway code will be requiring the balances to match within reason. Pending deposits show up as different amounts to the different bitcoinds due to the sometimes long block times.

James

[msin]

We should support this project if we are looking for another charity, they accept BTC, maybe Nxt?

https://www.outernet.is/

[jl777]

I dont know why I thought it wasnt possible to do cold storage for the multisig deposit acct.

On a typical day, less than 10% of overall deposits would be withdrawn, maybe much less. There is no need for a super complicated shifting of funds to and from many multisig accts. We just need to have a multisig cold wallet using 2 of 3 signers where the signers would be Anon136, rickyjames and klee. When the gateway multisig acct gets excess deposits, each server would authorize transfer to the cold multisig wallet. When a big withdrawal comes in, then 2 of the 3 cold wallet signers would need to approve.

All of the deposits and withdrawals and multisig acct info would be public, so all these funds transfers will be visible to all.

The incentive for two of the three gateway operators to collude is reduced dramatically. The trust required for gateways drops 90% and shifts to the cold wallet trio.

What do you think?

James