EFFV (OP)
|
|
March 30, 2014, 01:21:34 AM Last edit: March 30, 2014, 02:25:33 AM by EFFV |
|
|
|
|
|
EFFV (OP)
|
|
March 30, 2014, 01:33:58 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
salsacz
|
|
March 30, 2014, 01:44:57 AM Last edit: March 30, 2014, 04:15:03 AM by salsacz |
|
or use existing Nxt crypto platform: one click to get to the Nxt testnet: http://nxtra.org/nxt-client/http://justpaste.it/nxt-introduction-4-journalists50.000 posts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.0and since it's not just about the pictures.. - Nxt's architecture is leaner and faster than Bitcoin's. The proof of stake mechanism is lightweight and block generation is 10 times faster. Nxt also doesn't support scripts/predicates, so transaction processing is easier as well.
- Everything built on top of Bitcoin must inherit Bitcoin's speed, its proof-of-work legacy of waste, and its transaction processing model. Nxt has none of these, so everything built in top of Nxt is lighter, cheaper, more energy efficient, and faster.
- Since anything being built on top of Bitcoin can also be built on top of Nxt, Nxt is the obvious choice.
|
|
|
|
|
btcpay86
|
|
March 30, 2014, 03:36:15 AM |
|
he is ok, i think
|
1. Jeunesse, Redefining YOUTH. 婕斯,重新定义年轻。| 该生病而不生病,该老化却很年轻,正是婕斯“沛泉菁华”的奥秘所在。 为了大家实现财务自由的梦想,敬请关注婕斯全球直销网站: http://haccp.jeunesseglobal.com2. 捐赠 Donations: BTC - 12QSDXfUq6B2ywer8xJeQYbiV7A7E8yB3H
|
|
|
jabo38
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1001
mining is so 2012-2013
|
|
March 30, 2014, 04:11:57 AM |
|
That looks amazing. It is clear that 2.0 is coming!!!
mining PoW is so 2012-2013
|
|
|
|
franky1
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4382
Merit: 4752
|
|
March 30, 2014, 04:28:07 AM |
|
just another altcoin advertisment... Yawn....... ....moving on
|
I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER. Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
|
|
|
waldox
|
|
March 30, 2014, 06:55:51 AM |
|
if a government expresses to kill and acquire the pos cyrptocurrency then they can kill it by people panic selling to the government, until the govt holds 51%
in a pos the rich keeps getting richer... its not really a fair way to distribute and acquire new users
if you have a lot of pos shares then you have less incentive to spend vs hoard thus mining more by hoarding
these are very strong weaknesses with pos compared to pow
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
March 30, 2014, 07:15:16 AM |
|
these are very strong weaknesses with pos compared to pow
Tell this to owners of Po W coins that were 51% attacked. R u able to recall a Po S coin that was 51% bought?
|
|
|
|
evanxxx
|
|
March 30, 2014, 07:25:15 AM |
|
if you have a lot of pos shares then you have less incentive to spend vs hoard thus mining more by hoarding
forging/mining income for PoS is only comparable to bank interest. how much incentive do you think bank interest gives people to hoard instead of spending?
|
|
|
|
kelsey
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1000
|
|
March 30, 2014, 07:54:37 AM |
|
these are very strong weaknesses with pos compared to pow
Tell this to owners of Po W coins that were 51% attacked. R u able to recall a Po S coin that was 51% bought? The misconception is that you actually need 51% of the coins in order to do a 51% attack on a POS
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
March 30, 2014, 07:55:47 AM |
|
The misconception is that you actually need 51% of the coins in order to do a 51% attack on a POS True. In Nxt u must buy 90% to attack it.
|
|
|
|
LeChatNoir
|
|
March 30, 2014, 08:06:06 AM |
|
I'm very interested in PoW VS PoS debate as i'm sure PoW will have to face a lot of hard issues in the future. From reddit http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1oi7su/criticisms_of_proofofstake/ccsd6rm: I think Andrew Miller put it best: "The trouble with Proof-of-stake is that there is nothing at stake."
Consider the basic function of proof-of-work and the blockchain: together, they let the network come to a consensus when there are two (or more) different, competing chains.
Miners must decide to dedicate their hashing power to just one chain-- they cannot "bet on" more than one. So their best strategy is to work on the chain that they think most other miners are working on, and that quickly drives the system to a consensus on a single, best chain.
The trouble with proof-of-stake is there is no natural incentive stopping a miner from assigning their stake to multiple, competing chains. If you try to create such a system, you "go meta" -- you started by trying to solve the transaction double-spend problem (which proof-of-work and the blockchain handle nicely), and end up trying to solve a proof-of-stake double-spend problem.How do NEM or NXT address this problem?
|
Coinpanion.io - Copy Successful Crypto Traders
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
March 30, 2014, 08:14:35 AM |
|
I'm very interested in PoW VS PoS debate as i'm sure PoW will have to face a lot of hard issues in the future. From reddit http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1oi7su/criticisms_of_proofofstake/ccsd6rm: I think Andrew Miller put it best: "The trouble with Proof-of-stake is that there is nothing at stake."
Consider the basic function of proof-of-work and the blockchain: together, they let the network come to a consensus when there are two (or more) different, competing chains.
Miners must decide to dedicate their hashing power to just one chain-- they cannot "bet on" more than one. So their best strategy is to work on the chain that they think most other miners are working on, and that quickly drives the system to a consensus on a single, best chain.
The trouble with proof-of-stake is there is no natural incentive stopping a miner from assigning their stake to multiple, competing chains. If you try to create such a system, you "go meta" -- you started by trying to solve the transaction double-spend problem (which proof-of-work and the blockchain handle nicely), and end up trying to solve a proof-of-stake double-spend problem.How do NEM or NXT address this problem?Nxt uses Transparent Forging to counteract malicious miners who mine multiple chains. As a result such weak point as ability to mine multiple chains becomes a strong one. Legit miners get chance to mine legit parallel chains and this leads to insane performance optimization.
|
|
|
|
zhuaihdd
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
|
|
March 30, 2014, 09:21:47 AM |
|
Hello! Are you ok?
I think he should be very good now
|
|
|
|
department
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
March 30, 2014, 09:26:52 AM Last edit: April 08, 2014, 02:51:13 PM by department |
|
I don't know much about Bitcoin though I read the whitepaper. I only used it to buy Nxt. Wink
Edit: Hardcoded well-known nodes lead to centralization. This is just another one of the cases where Nxt is more decentralizing than Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
LeChatNoir
|
|
March 30, 2014, 09:36:42 AM |
|
I'm very interested in PoW VS PoS debate as i'm sure PoW will have to face a lot of hard issues in the future. From reddit http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1oi7su/criticisms_of_proofofstake/ccsd6rm: I think Andrew Miller put it best: "The trouble with Proof-of-stake is that there is nothing at stake."
Consider the basic function of proof-of-work and the blockchain: together, they let the network come to a consensus when there are two (or more) different, competing chains.
Miners must decide to dedicate their hashing power to just one chain-- they cannot "bet on" more than one. So their best strategy is to work on the chain that they think most other miners are working on, and that quickly drives the system to a consensus on a single, best chain.
The trouble with proof-of-stake is there is no natural incentive stopping a miner from assigning their stake to multiple, competing chains. If you try to create such a system, you "go meta" -- you started by trying to solve the transaction double-spend problem (which proof-of-work and the blockchain handle nicely), and end up trying to solve a proof-of-stake double-spend problem.How do NEM or NXT address this problem?Nxt uses Transparent Forging to counteract malicious miners who mine multiple chains. As a result such weak point as ability to mine multiple chains becomes a strong one. Legit miners get chance to mine legit parallel chains and this leads to insane performance optimization. Interesting TY
|
Coinpanion.io - Copy Successful Crypto Traders
|
|
|
Ix
|
|
March 30, 2014, 02:44:20 PM Last edit: March 30, 2014, 03:15:05 PM by Ix |
|
Nxt uses Transparent Forging to counteract malicious miners who mine multiple chains. As a result such weak point as ability to mine multiple chains becomes a strong one. Legit miners get chance to mine legit parallel chains and this leads to insane performance optimization.
I don't really see how calling a bug a feature makes it a feature. In what way does transparent forging counteract malicious miners? And why does having multiple consensus chains lead to performance optimizations? (That seems quite counter-intuitive.) How is consensus eventually achieved?
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
March 30, 2014, 06:43:21 PM |
|
I don't really see how calling a bug a feature makes it a feature. In what way does transparent forging counteract malicious miners? And why does having multiple consensus chains lead to performance optimizations? (That seems quite counter-intuitive.) How is consensus eventually achieved?
Oh, troll much, such cute.
|
|
|
|
Ix
|
|
March 30, 2014, 06:56:51 PM |
|
Oh, troll much, such cute.
You completely evaded the question and promoted what should be a critical failure (allowing double spends and providing no real means of consensus) as some feature of the currency. I'd say you're the one trolling.
|
|
|
|
|