Transparent mining 2, or What part of Legacy should be left behind

[landomata]

Sorry bit off topic....if anyone has seen the new Robocop movie then you will see clearly why anonymous encrypted internet/calling/messaging/platforms will be a staple of the future.

(leaked today from our dear friend ED)

‘Gilgamesh’ and ‘Shenanigans’

Instead of accessing cellphone metadata through cell phone towers and internet service providers, the NSA uses a program called Gilgamesh. To be able to track the cellphones of potential targets a special device known as a ‘virtual base-tower transceiver’ has to be installed on the drone. The transceiver emits a signal that forces the target’s mobile to lock into the NSA’s system, allowing the target to be tracked to within 30 feet of their location.

As well as Gilgamesh, the NSA has developed a program known as ‘Shenanigans’ that acts like a giant cyber vacuum cleaner. A pod on an aircraft downloads massive amounts of information from any wireless networks, smart phones, computers, or other electronic devices that are within range.

The world needs the Nxt Ecosystem....

[farl4web]

Mining reward is another obsolete part. True reward for supporting Nxt network comes from services that use Nxt. Someone owns a currency exchange and mine blocks to keep his business running. Another one owns a shop and mine blocks to keep his business running. The 3rd person owns a software company that develops programs for Nxt-based services and mine blocks to keep his business running. Selfish miners (those who mine only to earn fees) should be "removed" from the system, they r not interested in success of Nxt and only want to cash-out. If a clone appears such the people will likely jump to another ship, they add very little value to Nxt. All this doesn't mean that we should get rid of fees completely, we still need them as a countermeasure against spamming.

I like the idea, but then, I always liked the idea of "something for something".

+1

Like it or not, most people are selfish. These words from BCNext mostly apply to some ideal world, not ours. IMHO.

I think selfish is a wrong term, I and a lot of people want to make money/business on a new revolutionary way: Cryptocurrency. What is selfish about that? Then every business is selffish, it is always about making money and provide food and shelter for your family. Reward the forgers and youw ill get a lot of forgers!

I tink all these are ideas are interesting and fascinating, but very hard to understand for Average Joe... And me.

[ChuckOne]

But it is not fair!

What r u talking about? Nxt offers the most fair way.

It's more fair if we pay the transaction fees directly to server operators.

Do u think there'll be better security if forgers'll get nothing for their job? I don't think so. There'd be forgers competition for fees and best possible decision to secure network (protected public node with wide bandwidth and skilled operator cost some resourses).

Remember, forging - way to secure system. Only then, may be, business itself.

Exactly. Leave forging the way it is. Competition is good.

Can you please explain what job a forger doing other that unlocking his client and leaving the software open?
But the network is not just these nodes! the network needs servers that is now working by donation! IMHO that is not fair!
Just my opinion!

I'm personally may open a client to forge, but why should I arrange several servers/ VPS around the world to Handle the network? Just because I'm a Nxt holder? Just because donations?

That is not enough for long term plan!

Okay, I do it:

The forger:
 - has to have a client
 - risks all his stake if the client is malicious
 - risks his hardware if the client is not secured against malicious attacks
 - has to pay the electricity bill
 - has to pay for the hardware/renewal of such
 - has to pay for a place that hardware can exist in
 - has to pay for the bandwidth he contributes to the network
 - has to implement security measures (attacks, heat etc.)

I think there is pretty much at stake, literally.


So, forgers should be paid for their expenses. But nothing more or just a little bit of it.


As I said, I see forger as an equivalent to bankers with a most important difference (both keep the system running):
- forgers do the least what is necessary to sustain the system - verifying transactions and doing all the hard computational work
- bankers generate the drive to keep the system running by generating money and debts (watch the videos of freigeist) and therefore creating the urge of the society to drive forward, work and repay debts

Bankers have the unfair advantage of creating and manipulating the ways the system works. They therefore make profit at the expense of others.

Forgers can't and therefore don't. BUT they have to be compensated. The (compensation - expenses) should be close to 0 but maybe bit more to create incentive for people to join and explore the possibilities of NXT.

[mek300]

"Wall street complex financial instruments were actually designed by mathematicians and Nobel-tracked physicists, who used algorithms and computer models to reconstitute the unreliable loans in a way that was supposed to eliminate most of the risk.

But you can't model human behavior with math."

[bitcoinpaul]

Owning NXT is somewhat like owning shares in a virtual public company.  The shares were issued all at once, but they happen to be coins that are traded on crypto markets, which is nice because they are accessible to anyone.  They just happen to function as both shares and as the resource used in the network itself.

The forging fees are not attractive right now as an incentive for profit because there is no real activity yet.  To me, forging fees are more of a programmatic "dividend" that is built into the shares.  You are only paid this dividend if you show up to shareholder meetings (run a node).

interesting.

[pandaisftw]

But it is not fair!

What r u talking about? Nxt offers the most fair way.

It's more fair if we pay the transaction fees directly to server operators.

Do u think there'll be better security if forgers'll get nothing for their job? I don't think so. There'd be forgers competition for fees and best possible decision to secure network (protected public node with wide bandwidth and skilled operator cost some resourses).

Remember, forging - way to secure system. Only then, may be, business itself.

Exactly. Leave forging the way it is. Competition is good.

Can you please explain what job a forger doing other that unlocking his client and leaving the software open?
But the network is not just these nodes! the network needs servers that is now working by donation! IMHO that is not fair!
Just my opinion!

I'm personally may open a client to forge, but why should I arrange several servers/ VPS around the world to Handle the network? Just because I'm a Nxt holder? Just because donations?

That is not enough for long term plan!

Okay, I do it:

The forger:
 - has to have a client
 - risks all his stake if the client is malicious
 - risks his hardware if the client is not secured against malicious attacks
 - has to pay the electricity bill
 - has to pay for the hardware/renewal of such
 - has to pay for a place that hardware can exist in
 - has to pay for the bandwidth he contributes to the network
 - has to implement security measures (attacks, heat etc.)

I think there is pretty much at stake, literally.


So, forgers should be paid for their expenses. But nothing more or just a little bit of it.


As I said, I see forger as an equivalent to bankers with a most important difference (both keep the system running):
- forgers do the least what is necessary to sustain the system - verifying transactions and doing all the hard computational work
- bankers generate the drive to keep the system running by generating money and debts (watch the videos of freigeist) and therefore creating the urge of the society to drive forward, work and repay debts

Bankers have the unfair advantage of creating and manipulating the ways the system works. They therefore make profit at the expense of others.

Forgers can't and therefore don't. BUT they have to be compensated. The (compensation - expenses) should be close to 0 but maybe bit more to create incentive for people to join and explore the possibilities of NXT.

When Account Controls are implemented, I imagine you can simply lease a "puppet" account your forging power. So you could have a 10mil+ NXT account forging through an account with 1 NXT, so the only risk you take is is the 1 NXT.

It's a tradeoff. If your business relies on NXT being healthy, then you have a very good reason for forge. If you're simply a user with a small balance, but you aren't really affected by hiccups in the service, then obviously you wouldn't forge.

Tbh, I think the rewards justify forging, although it may seem not to be so. For example, if you hold Bitcoin, you are paying a ~10% inflation tax every year. Your stash is literally generating -10% BTC a year.

In NXT, your stash (according to jL7777) appreciates by 0.5% a year. This is a +10.5% difference vs. BTC per year.

[Damelon]

Owning NXT is somewhat like owning shares in a virtual public company.  The shares were issued all at once, but they happen to be coins that are traded on crypto markets, which is nice because they are accessible to anyone.  They just happen to function as both shares and as the resource used in the network itself.

The forging fees are not attractive right now as an incentive for profit because there is no real activity yet.  To me, forging fees are more of a programmatic "dividend" that is built into the shares.  You are only paid this dividend if you show up to shareholder meetings (run a node).

This is an important point. Nxt is about transactions being done. It does nothing if no one doesn't dó anything. Any discussion about whether or not forging is profitable is moot until activity gets going.

What do you need to get activity? Services, and lots of them. This is one of the reasons I like incentivising service providers to forge.

That way the "passive" forgers (I like that term better than "selfish", because they too are providing a service to the network) will also get some of the dividend, but it will be less than the "active" forgers, who are actually making the network more attractive to use and also provide extra traffic and transactions.

As I said, in the proposed system, there still is a place for passive forging, but the gains will be much lower than for active forgers.

Tit for tat.

[ChuckOne]

Okay, I do it:

The forger:
 - has to have a client
 - risks all his stake if the client is malicious
 - risks his hardware if the client is not secured against malicious attacks
 - has to pay the electricity bill
 - has to pay for the hardware/renewal of such
 - has to pay for a place that hardware can exist in
 - has to pay for the bandwidth he contributes to the network
 - has to implement security measures (attacks, heat etc.)

I think there is pretty much at stake, literally.


So, forgers should be paid for their expenses. But nothing more or just a little bit of it.


As I said, I see forger as an equivalent to bankers with a most important difference (both keep the system running):
- forgers do the least what is necessary to sustain the system - verifying transactions and doing all the hard computational work
- bankers generate the drive to keep the system running by generating money and debts (watch the videos of freigeist) and therefore creating the urge of the society to drive forward, work and repay debts

Bankers have the unfair advantage of creating and manipulating the ways the system works. They therefore make profit at the expense of others.

Forgers can't and therefore don't. BUT they have to be compensated. The (compensation - expenses) should be close to 0 but maybe bit more to create incentive for people to join and explore the possibilities of NXT.

When Account Controls are implemented, I imagine you can simply lease a "puppet" account your forging power. So you could have a 10mil+ NXT account forging through an account with 1 NXT, so the only risk you take is is the 1 NXT.

It's a tradeoff. If your business relies on NXT being healthy, then you have a very good reason for forge. If you're simply a user with a small balance, but you aren't really affected by hiccups in the service, then obviously you wouldn't forge.

Tbh, I think the rewards justify forging, although it may seem not to be so. For example, if you hold Bitcoin, you are paying a ~10% inflation tax every year. Your stash is literally generating -10% BTC a year.

In NXT, your stash (according to jL7777) appreciates by 0.5% a year. This is a +10.5% difference vs. BTC per year.

So, what's your point?

Just because, we might be might workaround some security issues does not mean the forger can lean back forever.
Just to make that sure: There will always be a bug! Could somebody create a meme for that?

The real world/hardware etc. issue won't go away anyway.

[ChuckOne]

Owning NXT is somewhat like owning shares in a virtual public company.  The shares were issued all at once, but they happen to be coins that are traded on crypto markets, which is nice because they are accessible to anyone.  They just happen to function as both shares and as the resource used in the network itself.

The forging fees are not attractive right now as an incentive for profit because there is no real activity yet.  To me, forging fees are more of a programmatic "dividend" that is built into the shares.  You are only paid this dividend if you show up to shareholder meetings (run a node).

This is an important point. Nxt is about transactions being done. It does nothing if no one doesn't dó anything. Any discussion about whether or not forging is profitable is moot until activity gets going.

What do you need to get activity? Services, and lots of them. This is one of the reasons I like incentivising service providers to forge.

That way the "passive" forgers (I like that term better than "selfish", because they too are providing a service to the network) will also get some of the dividend, but it will be less than the "active" forgers, who are actually making the network more attractive to use and also provide extra traffic and transactions.

As I said, in the proposed system, there still is a place for passive forging, but the gains will be much lower than for active forgers.

Tit for tat.

I completely agree!

Something, I would like to add: whatever ratio of passive/active forging we strive to, we should do the transition as smoothly as possible. Humans cannot bear change and especially not abrupt change.

[Damelon]

Owning NXT is somewhat like owning shares in a virtual public company.  The shares were issued all at once, but they happen to be coins that are traded on crypto markets, which is nice because they are accessible to anyone.  They just happen to function as both shares and as the resource used in the network itself.

The forging fees are not attractive right now as an incentive for profit because there is no real activity yet.  To me, forging fees are more of a programmatic "dividend" that is built into the shares.  You are only paid this dividend if you show up to shareholder meetings (run a node).

This is an important point. Nxt is about transactions being done. It does nothing if no one doesn't dó anything. Any discussion about whether or not forging is profitable is moot until activity gets going.

What do you need to get activity? Services, and lots of them. This is one of the reasons I like incentivising service providers to forge.

That way the "passive" forgers (I like that term better than "selfish", because they too are providing a service to the network) will also get some of the dividend, but it will be less than the "active" forgers, who are actually making the network more attractive to use and also provide extra traffic and transactions.

As I said, in the proposed system, there still is a place for passive forging, but the gains will be much lower than for active forgers.

Tit for tat.

I completely agree!

Something, I would like to add: whatever ratio of passive/active forging we strive to, we should do the transition as smoothly as possible. Humans cannot bear change and especially not abrupt change.

I return my agreement with this Easy does it.

I also would like to add that terminology is important and would like to opt to keep the passiva/active forging terminology.

If "selfish" is used, prepare for a fight. Human nature and all that Also, "passives" are still providing something of value.

[mthcl]

Like it or not, most people are selfish. These words from BCNext mostly apply to some ideal world, not ours. IMHO.

I think selfish is a wrong term, I and a lot of people want to make money/business on a new revolutionary way: Cryptocurrency. What is selfish about that? Then every business is selffish, it is always about making money and provide food and shelter for your family. Reward the forgers and youw ill get a lot of forgers!

I tink all these are ideas are interesting and fascinating, but very hard to understand for Average Joe... And me.

Yes, "selfish" is probably a bit too strong; but, in fact, we agree in essence. It is quite normal for people to expect a reward for resources invested. And this reward should be immediately convertible to  food and shelter money for one's family, which (I mean, the family ) is the most important thing in the world. So it is natural that a forger expects some profit, and that's why the fees should stay, in one way or another.

[pandaisftw]

Okay, I do it:

The forger:
 - has to have a client
 - risks all his stake if the client is malicious
 - risks his hardware if the client is not secured against malicious attacks
 - has to pay the electricity bill
 - has to pay for the hardware/renewal of such
 - has to pay for a place that hardware can exist in
 - has to pay for the bandwidth he contributes to the network
 - has to implement security measures (attacks, heat etc.)

I think there is pretty much at stake, literally.


So, forgers should be paid for their expenses. But nothing more or just a little bit of it.


As I said, I see forger as an equivalent to bankers with a most important difference (both keep the system running):
- forgers do the least what is necessary to sustain the system - verifying transactions and doing all the hard computational work
- bankers generate the drive to keep the system running by generating money and debts (watch the videos of freigeist) and therefore creating the urge of the society to drive forward, work and repay debts

Bankers have the unfair advantage of creating and manipulating the ways the system works. They therefore make profit at the expense of others.

Forgers can't and therefore don't. BUT they have to be compensated. The (compensation - expenses) should be close to 0 but maybe bit more to create incentive for people to join and explore the possibilities of NXT.

When Account Controls are implemented, I imagine you can simply lease a "puppet" account your forging power. So you could have a 10mil+ NXT account forging through an account with 1 NXT, so the only risk you take is is the 1 NXT.

It's a tradeoff. If your business relies on NXT being healthy, then you have a very good reason for forge. If you're simply a user with a small balance, but you aren't really affected by hiccups in the service, then obviously you wouldn't forge.

Tbh, I think the rewards justify forging, although it may seem not to be so. For example, if you hold Bitcoin, you are paying a ~10% inflation tax every year. Your stash is literally generating -10% BTC a year.

In NXT, your stash (according to jL7777) appreciates by 0.5% a year. This is a +10.5% difference vs. BTC per year.

So, what's your point?

Just because, we might be might workaround some security issues does not mean the forger can lean back forever.
Just to make that sure: There will always be a bug! Could somebody create a meme for that?

The real world/hardware etc. issue won't go away anyway.

Hm, what bug are you talking about?

The costs of forging are already taken into consideration when you decide to forge or not. If you depend on the NXT network being very robust, the incentive to forge (supporting the network) vs. not forging (making the network more vulnerable to attack, and making you lose potential profits), then there is a clear economical advantage to forge. There is no true "selfless" forging (maybe rarely), forging aligns the desire of a stable platform with network security, as it should be. This is different from selfish mining, where the only reason to mine is for the block reward, and no one really cares about actually supporting the network.

Both are economically driven, thus forging is not a charity service.

[ChuckOne]

Let me summarize:

We want:
 - passive forging (that what we do right now)
 - active forging (passive forging + additional service on top of NXT)
 - supporting the family
 - slow change

[opticalcarrier]

ok you're gonna have to explain what the differences are between active/passive forging.  I do not get how you are making the distinction

[brooklynbtc]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=455861

Yes - I guess something along the lines of using AE to trade precious metals might be a better application (although not being a PM trader it doesn't appeal to me personally).

why precious metals? why not coffee beans? or oil?

[Zahlen]

Removing the randomness from the time to next block will allow us to use the block number as a clock that is synchronized to realworld time. I can see a lot of potential with this!

I think it's impossible to remove randomness completely e.g. the miner of the next block may unexpectedly drop out of the network (as Anon136 mentioned in the interview), or botch the block generation. It'll take time for the network to agree on the next miner in line (on the order of seconds? milliseconds? Should decrease as networking tech and infrastructure improves. EDIT: But increase as the # of forgers increases). So the block number could work as a rough timer if you don't need high precision (e.g. for timestamping creative works), but otherwise I think you'd be better off relying on clocks worldwide, which already have a long history of consensus on time.

In fact, I'm guessing (only guessing, since the great puzzle of TF hasn't been solved) that Nxt will still depend on computer clocks for timing. So might as well go straight to the source for time info.

Whatever the case may be, TF should avoid 15+ min time to next block situations. CfB already hinted at this, the high variance from willy-nilly needle in a haystack random hashing, and using base target to compensate, eventually leads to potentially catastrophic situations like multiple quick blocks followed by an insanely long one.

Q3) In general, am I on the right track with NXTlayers, NXTplugins, crosschain transactions, automated gateways, NXTcash, blockchain FIFO, etc?

I dunno if this is the 'right' track (for BCNext, or everyone else), but I'm definitely interested in all this. The current model of forking to experiment with new coin properties and features is very inefficient.

[btc2nxt]

But isn't this the natural way for things to happen? I mean it's not like following somebody's plans. It will happen naturally, big businesses will be built on top of Nxt and they will take care of it and supprot it with forging, while fees will be lowered and there won't be people who forge "for the sake of forging". Coins will be issued backed by Nxt and will play the role of means of exchnage, but Nxt will still be something like a reserve currency. I thought this evolution was inevitable. Is this what BCnext meant or i didn't understand it?

Seems u r right.

After the test of Asset Exchange
here is a workable scenario:
1. bter,dgex,btc-e, issue asset like :BTC, LTC, Dogecoin etc. backed by Nxt
    if issue 1BTC(token) , 20000 nxt have been locked.
2. someone want to sell nxt for btc etc, place bit order, if match the ask order, then btc(token) is transfered to receiver account.
3. more and more can place ask order with btc, etc.

1. because bter,dgex,btc-e are reputable, so you can trust them
  you can deposit your btc,ltc for btc token.
  or can withdrawl them.

[pandaisftw]

Removing the randomness from the time to next block will allow us to use the block number as a clock that is synchronized to realworld time. I can see a lot of potential with this!

I think it's impossible to remove randomness completely e.g. the miner of the next block may unexpectedly drop out of the network (as Anon136 mentioned in the interview), or botch the block generation. It'll take time for the network to agree on the next miner in line (on the order of seconds? milliseconds? Should decrease as networking tech and infrastructure improves. EDIT: But increase as the # of forgers increases). So the block number could work as a rough timer if you don't need high precision (e.g. for timestamping creative works), but otherwise I think you'd be better off relying on clocks worldwide, which already have a long history of consensus on time.

In fact, I'm guessing (only guessing, since the great puzzle of TF hasn't been solved) that Nxt will still depend on computer clocks for timing. So might as well go straight to the source for time info.

Whatever the case may be, TF should avoid 15+ min time to next block situations. CfB already hinted at this, the high variance from willy-nilly needle in a haystack random hashing, and using base target to compensate, eventually leads to potentially catastrophic situations like multiple quick blocks followed by an insanely long one.

Q3) In general, am I on the right track with NXTlayers, NXTplugins, crosschain transactions, automated gateways, NXTcash, blockchain FIFO, etc?

I dunno if this is the 'right' track (for BCNext, or everyone else), but I'm definitely interested in all this. The current model of forking to experiment with new coin properties and features is very inefficient.

I'm pretty sure that when TF is fully activated, blocks will be 1 minute apart, no matter what. C-f-b mentioned every block would have a "group" of forgers (I believe it was 3) eligible to forge the next block. So they would all have to drop out at the same time to simply delay a single block (unlikely). This also has the side effect of being unable to guess who will truly release the next block within the group, thus make it hard to game your own transactions.

[joefox]

Can you please explain what job a forger doing other that unlocking his client and leaving the software open?

Okay, I do it:

The forger:
 - has to have a client
 - risks all his stake if the client is malicious
 - risks his hardware if the client is not secured against malicious attacks
 - has to pay the electricity bill
 - has to pay for the hardware/renewal of such
 - has to pay for a place that hardware can exist in
 - has to pay for the bandwidth he contributes to the network
 - has to implement security measures (attacks, heat etc.)

I think there is pretty much at stake, literally.

I disagree.  Literally.  

Point by point:

 - has to have a client
     - this costs nothing

 - risks all his stake if the client is malicious
     - this can be prevented with some forethought... which costs nothing

 - risks his hardware if the client is not secured against malicious attacks
     - risks his hardware?  This is quite far-fetched and highly unlikely.  It reminds me of the StuxNet virus, which made Iranian uranium-enrichment centrifuges spin until they burned themselves out.  But I know of very few "malicious attacks" that can fry my home PC.

- has to pay the electricity bill
     - this is a sunk cost.  The forger already has an electricity bill, and as has been stated countless times, the cost of electricity for running a Nxt node is very low.

- has to pay for the hardware/renewal of such
     - this is generally also a sunk cost, since people can forge on existing hardware... except for folks who have bought a Raspberry Pi: they're out $50.  Anyone who has spent $5000 on a spiffy Nxt forging rig should be a little embarrassed.

- has to pay for a place that hardware can exist in
     - This is also a sunk cost.  You already have a place to exist in, which you generally share with your hardware.  And your hardware isn't that big.

- has to pay for the bandwidth he contributes to the network
     - This is also a sunk cost, since you already pay for bandwidth. And you can still forge if you don't advertise your node address, which minimizes bandwidth usage.

- has to implement security measures (attacks, heat etc.)
     - "heat security"?  I don't even know what that means.  As for other security: most people already have an edge firewall protecting their local network.  People who don't use any form of security for their home setup are far more exposed already, for their existing hardware (PCs, etc.).  So we're at "sunk cost" again.

Add it all up, and you don't have much to stand on with your attempt to quantify risk/investment.

But consider the alternative.  To run a BUSINESS built on top of Nxt (or to improve/contribute to Nxt itself), you need to make a significant investment of money, time, intelligence, and sweat, depending on what kind of business/advancement you want to build.  Ask nexern how much he's earning.  Or passion_ltc.  Or wesleyh. Or salsacz, or pinarello, or rickyjames, jl777, neer.g, pouncer, klee, Damelon, Zahlen, allwelder, bitcoinpaul, or a whole community of people who have done far more than running a free client on a spare computer and hoping to turn a profit.  Compensate them first.

There is no "profit" in forging because merely forging adds no value.  This is BCnext's point – but I'll grant that even I don't accept the point completely unless we assume a "future state" where there are enough services built on top of Nxt to support the ecosystem without the use of forging-only setups.

Bottom line, though: raw forgers have no real expenses.  If they do, either they're minimal or they're Doing It Wrong.  I know the Internet is a wild place and Bitcoin/Doge/Maxcoin has put dollar signs in lots of peoples' eyes... but you don't earn the right to get compensated for doing nothing.  Some people get lucky (just like lottery players do, or people who manage to sell an old phone with Flappy Bird on it on eBay for $60,000), but that's just not the norm.  Sorry to disappoint you... but hey, Santa Claus isn't real, either.

As I said, I see forger as an equivalent to bankers with a most important difference (both keep the system running):
- forgers do the least what is necessary to sustain the system - verifying transactions and doing all the hard computational work
- bankers generate the drive to keep the system running by generating money and debts (watch the videos of freigeist) and therefore creating the urge of the society to drive forward, work and repay debts

Verifying transactions is not hard computational work.  Curve25519 was chosen because of its computational simplicity.

The "bankers" you refer to here are people who issue coins on TOP of Nxt.  Those folks can do fractional reserve and money issuing and interest and contracts and whatever else they want, and they should earn something for their work, if it's useful to the community.  You can profit off those people's efforts later.  It's just not what the base layer – Nxt – is for.

Bankers have the unfair advantage of creating and manipulating the ways the system works. Forgers can't and therefore don't. BUT they have to be compensated.

For what?  We already know they don't have to invest anything of real value.  

The TRUTH is that people WILL find a way to make profit off Nxt one way or another.  Regardless of whether or not BCNext's plan is respected, Nxt's value WILL vary against other currencies and people will profit from that (and as an aside: let's be honest, here. BCNext has let the animal out of its cage and HAS no control any more, so whether or not we follow the plan is up to us).  In general, though, people who feel entitled to... something... from Nxt have to work a little harder for it.

I said the other day and I'll say it again: Nxt is ultimately a low-level protocol.  Like the pipes that run under the streets, it serves as a necessary foundation for everything built above it.  What can be built is limitless, but in order for that limitlessness to exist, the foundation has to be simple.

[nxtsky]

Selfish miners (those who mine only to earn fees) should be "removed" from the system, they r not interested in success of Nxt and only want to cash-out.

"Selfish"? It like a communist's word. Selfish is the nature of human being. It's not a bad thing.