I'm dumping Nxt and here's why you should too

[Come-from-Beyond]

I know your joking because no one can be this fucking stupid

He was not joking. He sold his NXT right before the rise and now feels that all the others cooperated to scam him.

[1713997051]

1713997051

[1713997051]

1713997051

[Damelon]

I just noticed the dilution. I am very disappointed. NXT has no future but as a SCAM coin because of this. It is gicing more trouble than what it is trying to fix.

I know your joking because no one can be this fucking stupid

Look at the post date 

[inBitweTrust]

Why the hell do we need this old thread in here ? The ongoing fight between NxT and other groups are a joke... Possible Bitshares think people are stupid in here

Yes, here is an interesting article from Daniel Larimer:

http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/13/Decentralization-of-Nxt-vs-BitShares/

Bitcoin also has its own set of problems with decentralization with the centralization of mining and full nodes dropping off.

[inBitweTrust]

Why the hell do we need this old thread in here ? The ongoing fight between NxT and other groups are a joke... Possible Bitshares think people are stupid in here

Yes, here is an interesting article from Daniel Larimer:

http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/13/Decentralization-of-Nxt-vs-BitShares/

Bitcoin also has its own set of problems with decentralization with the centralization of mining and full nodes dropping off.

Hmm, I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve. What do you think about this article and why do you post it in a dead thread?

This thread isn't dead, I resuscitated it as a point in reflection that the OP made the right decision from an investment perspective as evidenced by the facts.

I am suggesting that many top crypto currencies including Bitcoin have problems with lack of decentralization. On topic - The fact that 60% of all blocks within NxT are produced by only 15 accounts is troubling.

[achimsmile]

I'm inclined to think that since you reopened this thread, are posting this (very subjective) article, and always stress the possible weaknesses of Nxt or PoS in general, even if they are very unprobable, that you want to scare users away from Nxt, even if it means promoting another (D)PoS system.

[inBitweTrust]

I'm inclined to think that since you reopened this thread, are posting this (very subjective) article, and always stress the possible weaknesses of Nxt or PoS in general, even if they are very unprobable, that you want to scare users away from Nxt, even if it means promoting another (D)PoS system.

Why assume anything when I have been open and honest with my intentions from the get go.

Lets re-iterate:

1)    I am biased towards Bitcoin and would suggest everyone stay away from all other alts at the moment
2)    Of all the variations of PoS , I prefer TaPoS with weak subjectivity and would think that it is a good thing if a TaPoS layer is added to Bitcoin
3)    I prefer Nxt PoS algo over Bitshares DPoS , although Bitshares does have some advantages as expressed in the article and vice versa.
4)    I resurrected this thread precisely because I think it is good to review the historical facts and to indeed warn users that NxT isn't a recommended investment
5)    I don't think NxT is a scam coin or pump and dump alt despite the questionable ICO, but the fact that between 4-14 users have as much as 50% stake is problematic and will hurt NxT in the future.

There is no hidden agenda. I will openly admit and discuss my intentions.

[Daedelus]

In response to that (very sloppy) article:

Today I saw http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/13/Decentralization-of-Nxt-vs-BitShares/ and became interested by the title enough to spend some time on reading. The article is related to http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/07/The-Most-Decentralized-Proof-of-Stake-System/ and the both analyze the same phenomenon (decentralization), so I will treat them as a single article.

I'd like to comment some things mentioned in the articles.

Today the numbers are in for Nxt with data from their very own block explorer. These numbers show that 60% of all blocks are produced by just 15 people.

I believe "people" means "accounts", we don't know how many people behind these accounts. There can be only 4 of them, or 400 (yes, one of the accounts can be controlled by a company which has its own hierarchy).

...I found enough block producers that were above 1% and less than 2% that I can safely conclude that after 720 blocks less than 101 unique block signers have confirmed the block.

I see a reference to the 101 delegates. I'd like to point that 101 is not a big number, someone could successfully control 10 such delegates or 20 delegates could collude. I can safely bet that the 101 delegates distribution follows Pareto's Principle that states that "80 delegates are controlled by 20 entities" (numbers may vary). The point of "101 is not a big number" is that order of magnitude of this number (let's write it as 99 + 2) is roughly the same as deviation caused by external factors. When a measured value has the same order of magnitude as errors of measurement scientists trash such measurements. The comparison of number of forgers and number of delegates in a 720-block window doesn't make sense to me because of this very reason.

What is even more interesting is the overall speed of the network. The Nxt blockchain aims for 1 minute blocks, but on average gets only one block every two minutes. You can see this on their blocks-per-day chart.

It's a long story why we have 2-minute blocks now, it doesn't influence distribution of forgers among forged blocks though and should be discarded.

Our delegates are far more reliable with near 100% participation compared to Nxt forgers at about 50% participation.

A number would be much better. One could argue that it's not "far more" but rather "a little bit more".

For Nxt to have a block confirmed by 101 unique individuals would require 7 hours best case.

This is an incorrect statement. Block generation and block confirmation are different things. All nodes confirm every single block indirectly by agreeing to propagate it over the network. All merchants confirm every single block indirectly by accepting money sent to them recently. All users confirm every single block indirectly by including the reference to a block generated 20 minutes back in their transactions.

If BitShares were to lose 50% of its delegates all at once due to a government crackdown the remaining 50 delegates would still be producing a more secure, decentralized, and distributed ledger with greater decentralization per minute than every other blockchain on the market.

I see a violation of CAP theorem there (if BitShares are decentralized). How do you know that a blockchain generated by remaining 50 delegates is legit while a blockchain generated by other 50 delegates is not?

For the sake of this article, I am going to define decentralization as the total number of unique individuals participating in the validation process such that no one individual is responsible for a disproportionate amount of blocks.

You have the right to define decentralization in such the way, but practical usefulness of this definition is quite low. It assumes that all individuals are equal in their power and their intentions to save the current state of things. One person who is able to protect blockchain against a reorg is more valuable than 100 others who are unable to do it.

If you want to have a million users participate in the consensus process then you will require a million computers all connected to the internet and consuming bandwidth.

No, we will not. Imagine that one of the nodes is a computer controlled by 1000 people (a company). In Nxt users without computers take part in the consensus too, via Economic Clustering (though it's almost not used now).

Each additional validator provides less and less value to the network despite costing the network the same.

It's true only for a system with a bad architecture. O(N) should be replaced by O(log N). I'm almost sure that Bitcoin, BitShares and Nxt networks are all follow O(log N) because nodes send packets to a fixed number of peers.

To cover operating expenses a crypto currency network must charge transaction fees.

Why? If usage of a cryptocurrency network generates extra profit itself then fees can be as small as it's enough for fighting spam. Hashcash could be used to remove fees completely.

These early proof of stake systems claim that they have greater decentralization than BitShares.

These systems can claim nothing. Only some of their users can.


I skipped the rest of the article because there are already so much disagreements that the rest of the math from the article is worthless.


PS: It would be great to see comments on comments...

Read through the rest of that thread and you will find these blogs are written by a developer who hasn't implemented solutions to issues that have already been understood and solved (Byantine Generals problem). Right now, Come-from-Beyond's modelling sshows the bloggers crypto is vulnerable to attack from just 22 nodes (he voluntarily admits he doesn't know the theory behind cryptos, another referred to theory as 'ivory tower' development). Bitcoin only needs a handful of pool operators to collude.


While all crypto is bootstrapping, I think it would be wise not to throw stones when we all live in glass houses.

[Come-from-Beyond]

4)    I resurrected this thread precisely because I think it is good to review the historical facts and to indeed warn users that NxT isn't a recommended investment

The logic of this statements seems to be a little bit flawed. If I claim that Bitcoin is a bad investment and you claim the opposite then one of us will be right in 6 months. This doesn't mean that one of us is an expert and our opinion is worth anything. Do you see the point?

If you imply that Nxt will repeat the same trend then it's not backed by anything. More probably that 1 BTC will plummet that much that Nxt will be completely unpegged and will start climbing up on its own.

Your turn.

[inBitweTrust]

While all crypto is bootstrapping, I think it would be wise not to throw stones when we all live in glass houses.

The stones are and will be continued to be thrown at my own house. I am quite vocal about Bitcoins security problems, regardless of it remaining the most secure coin.

When judging the security of a coin there are many other aspects to consider such as the amount of peer review, the amount of nodes,
the amount of implementations and stacks, the amount of researchers auditing, the amount of developers, the total market cap which
 incentivizes would be attackers from exploiting the currency, ect....

That response to the article has an apologist tone and while we don't know, and cannot possibly know there are 4-14 users controlling 50% of NxT stake there is good evidence to suggest this.

The logic of this statements seems to be a little bit flawed. If I claim that Bitcoin is a bad investment and you claim the opposite then one of us will be right in 6 months. This doesn't mean that one of us is an expert and our opinion is worth anything. Do you see the point?

If you imply that Nxt will repeat the same trend then it's not backed by anything. More probably that 1 BTC will plummet that much that Nxt will be completely unpegged and will start climbing up on its own.

Your turn.

I will go further than that and suggest past market performance does not necessarily indicate future returns. For all we know NxT could topple all other coins in a month , extremely unlikely but hypothetically possible.

[autodiv]

I am a holder and buyer of NXT simply because of the speed of development by the core team.

At least these individuals are serious about releasing new features in a timely fashion and that is what keeps serious competitors ahead of their not as serious foes.

Look at the decentralized asset exchange and monetary system features and how much they can help the ecosystem grow because of the amount of economic activity (true value) they can spawn. A lot of very important economic activity will surround the NXT cryptocurrency ecosystem because of the foundation they have laid and are laying.

Just my 2 cents! Does anyone use cents anymore?

[achimsmile]

review the historical facts opinions and to indeed warn users that NxT isn't a recommended investment

Review historical opinions after half a year?

very altruistic. To each his own motives.

Your strategy is to take the wind out of somebodys sails by weakening your own stance.
i.e.: I don't have a hidden agenda and it's not a scam per se, but ico was skewed, stake distribution is centralized, etc. etc.

All your points are subjective. Is an ipo skewed when it's been open for 1.5 months? What is a "good" distrbution?

Having no hidden agenda doesn't mean having no agenda.

[Come-from-Beyond]

I am quite vocal about Bitcoins security problems, regardless of it remaining the most secure coin.

You are talking about an abstract Bitcoin in spherical vacuum. Real Bitcoin is very insecure, so much BTC is already stolen. I would say that not less will be stolen in the future, but... I'm not sure that Bitcoin will survive the next dump.

[inBitweTrust]

Your strategy is to take the wind out of somebodys sails by weakening your own stance.

Having no hidden agenda doesn't mean having no agenda.

Weakening my own stance? With all the scams, thefts, and cloud mining ponzi's the Bitcoin ecosystem needs no help from me. I prefer we honestly discuss the facts so we can allow coins to stand on their own merits or not.

Yes, I indeed have an agenda... one that is spelled out clearly.

I am quite vocal about Bitcoins security problems, regardless of it remaining the most secure coin.

You are talking about an abstract Bitcoin in spherical vacuum. Real Bitcoin is very insecure, so much BTC is already stolen. I would say that not less will be stolen in the future, but... I'm not sure that Bitcoin will survive the next dump.

Here is what I am suggesting:

Bitcoin is very unstable and insecure. All other crypto-currencies are more so. I recommend and encourage developers to test other alts on the open market if there is some real development and ingenuity behind them(NxT classifies as thus), but this still hasn't met the bar of confidence that would make me suggest for the average user to invest in it yet or any other alt for that matter. My recommendations may change in the future depending upon the evolution of the currencies and it is possible in 5 years that I may be recommending NxT over Bitcoin. I am inclined to believe that NxT will continue its downward trend of losing marketshare in the crpto currency ecosystem however, but am open to changes.

[Come-from-Beyond]

I am inclined to believe that NxT will continue its downward trend of losing marketshare in the crpto currency ecosystem however, but am open to changes.

How do you measure marketshare? Don't say that you visit http://coinmarketcap.com, Paycoin at #4 is enough to prove that marketshare can't be measured this way.

PS: Nxt is low in CoinMarketCap rating simply because the site doesn't pull data from Asset Exchange and the like. Once everyone start using solely NXT its market cap will become 0, because no trades will be happening on centralized fiat exchanges.

[inBitweTrust]

I am inclined to believe that NxT will continue its downward trend of losing marketshare in the crpto currency ecosystem however, but am open to changes.

How do you measure marketshare? Don't say that you visit http://coinmarketcap.com, Paycoin at #4 is enough to prove that marketshare can't be measured this way.

Unfortunately, for the cryptocurrency eco-system that PoS scam coin does deserve a high market share as they have a large and loyal following and high liquidity. I would suggest their standing is artificially elevated above others due to manipulation in the monetary supply, but the same could be said about NxT where a few whales control most of the supply and the liquidity is pathetic.

Your point is still valid, as there are other indications to test market share like:
Merchant adoption, user adoption(very difficult to measure accurately), Venture capital investments, development involvement.

Google trends wont be accurate at all because NxT is mainly affiliated with WWE in searches.

One could use Alexa ranking though:

bitcoin.org  Global rank 13,074
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/bitcoin.org

bitcointalk.org  Global rank 4,405
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/bitcointalk.org

http://nxt.org  Global rank 451,998
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/nxt.org

nxtforum.org Global rank 197,055
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/nxtforum.org

paycoin.com   Global rank 138,714
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/paycoin.com

hashtalk.org    Global rank  28,827
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/hashtalk.org


Thus much to our chagrin paycoin has stolen marketshare/mindshare from NxT as the evidence has provided.

[Zer0Sum]

I am inclined to believe that NxT will continue its downward trend of losing marketshare in the crpto currency ecosystem however, but am open to changes.

How do you measure marketshare? Don't say that you visit http://coinmarketcap.com, Paycoin at #4 is enough to prove that marketshare can't be measured this way.

PS: Nxt is low in CoinMarketCap rating simply because the site doesn't pull data from Asset Exchange and the like. Once everyone start using solely NXT its market cap will become 0, because no trades will be happening on centralized fiat exchanges.

Coinmarketcap needs to be called out as a joke. And ignored.
They conflate phony assets bubbles created by colluding traders with "capital" (Bitshares, NuBits).

As for NXT... why are NXT Devs gratuitously trashing their "tokens" every chance they get?
Your point makes no sense anyway... unless the 10-15 people that control NXT actually want to seal it off from the world.

SuperNET is clearly doing the opposite.

Dude, your "financial system" is going nowhere without a strong, liquid central currency...
Right now all you have is a constellation of Asset Bubbles with zero revenue = untenable situation.

"Best tech" means nothing... NXT is one major shock away from becoming an also-ran.

[Daedelus]

As for NXT... why are NXT Devs gratuitously trashing their "tokens" every chance they get?

Read CfB's comments in context with the logic.

i) CMC doesn't include trading on the three decentralised exchange platforms Nxt has: Asset Exchange, Marketplace and Monetary System (and multigateway too, thinking of it. Though it isn't a core feature of Nxt).

ii) "Once everyone start using solely NXT its market cap will become 0, because no trades will be happening on centralized fiat exchanges" and centralized fiat exchanges are the only thing CMC reports.


The more Nxt moves to decentralised exchanges, the closer it will get to 0 on CMC as they only report centralised exchange stats. The decentralised stats are on the blockchain, but they just don't bother.

[inBitweTrust]

Read CfB's comments in context with the logic.

i) CMC doesn't include trading on the three decentralised exchange platforms Nxt has: Asset Exchange, Marketplace and Monetary System (and multigateway too, thinking of it. Though it isn't a core feature of Nxt).

ii) "Once everyone start using solely NXT its market cap will become 0, because no trades will be happening on centralized fiat exchanges" and centralized fiat exchanges are the only thing CMC reports.


The more Nxt moves to decentralised exchanges, the closer it will get to 0 on CMC as they only report centralised exchange stats. The decentralised stats are on the blockchain, but they just don't bother.

You are completely avoiding the fact that their are many ways to gather metrics as to NxT's falling marketshare within the crypto ecosystem as I have just shown. Even brand new coins like Stellar and Paycoin are ousting NxT when studying metrics other than market cap.

Additionally , CMC should refelct a somewhat accurate market cap as all other internal exchanges because of arbitrage. CfB statement only is applicable with regards to liquidity.

[jones_]

Read CfB's comments in context with the logic.

i) CMC doesn't include trading on the three decentralised exchange platforms Nxt has: Asset Exchange, Marketplace and Monetary System (and multigateway too, thinking of it. Though it isn't a core feature of Nxt).

ii) "Once everyone start using solely NXT its market cap will become 0, because no trades will be happening on centralized fiat exchanges" and centralized fiat exchanges are the only thing CMC reports.


The more Nxt moves to decentralised exchanges, the closer it will get to 0 on CMC as they only report centralised exchange stats. The decentralised stats are on the blockchain, but they just don't bother.

You are completely avoiding the fact that their are many ways to gather metrics as to NxT's falling marketshare within the crypto ecosystem as I have just shown. Even brand new coins like Stellar and Paycoin are ousting NxT when studying metrics other than market cap.

nxt is a crypto in constant development and doing research into the best systems, so I would venture to guess that statistics related to unpaid people helping out the platform, and developer, research and project development would slide in nxts way.

anything relating to VC money will be weighted against nxt as that's not the route we've taken

[inBitweTrust]

nxt is a crypto in constant development and doing research into the best systems, so I would venture to guess that statistics related to unpaid people helping out the platform, and developer, research and project development would slide in nxts way.

anything relating to VC money will be weighted against nxt as that's not the route we've taken

You understand that VC money pays for professional developers right? You understand that NxT has a fraction of devs compared to those working directly for bitcoin core or on bitcoin projects, right? You understand that Bitcoin also has the most unpaid development as well and Nxt has a fraction of what Bitcoin has, right?

Or are you under the impression that NxT actually has more development?