| Nxt | Blockchain Platform | Proof of Stake | Official

[verdun2003]

but many more continue adding coins by forging massive amounts

no the total NXT in circulation does not increase.  The money supply is constant.

-bm

So those people with 40-50 million coins, they don't forge more?

they do forge BLOCKS and they get the TX FEES as payment for doing so.  So the NXTs only circulate from USERS to STAKEHOLDERS via transaction fees.

it's quite different than Bitcoin.

-bm

I understand that but, assuming they havent sold a single coin, a guy with 50 million would have considerably more than 50 million nby forging right now, right?

yes, but that is true for everyone only forging and not selling. What is your point?

My point is that if only 20 wallets control probably 80-90% or more of NXT, how does that situation makes a 51% attack "impossible" as claimed in the NXT documents?

Clearer: There's a huge distribution problem -extensible to forging- in this coin. Or I am totally wrong?

You are wrong.  There isn't a huge distribution problem.  Distribution is already way better than bitcoin's and continues to get better. 

I appreciate your confidence but, sorry, you don 't dispute any of my points. Again: 20 wallets got a total of 1 billion coins. Even after presumably massive dumping, still a bunch of those wallets and a few others, control 90% of the coins. How is that not a massive distribution problem? SWhatever the situation on BTc notwithstanding?

You sir must be a troll...  

Top 100 NXT account: http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=34

UH ho... Houston we have a serious problem. Questioning a very logical question, make me a "must be a troll".... very serious (and common) problem.

No "sir" I am just looking for clear answers, that cannot come from fan boys or scammers -one of which you surely are-. I AM aware of the holdings of those 100 wallets. Top 10 wallets still own almost 1/3 of the coins. It IS a HUGE problem by which future investors, like me, should run for the exits.

I wanted some common sensical explanations, obviously there's nothing but blind greed.

This is a legit question. If you look back in time (thank you archive.org, 19th april : https://web.archive.org/web/20140419201626/http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=34), you'll see that the coins pretty sticked to the top holders - distribution was even worse before as there were a few 50,000,000 wallets, now only 2 remaining. This problem is not new, and many ppl saw this as a threat. Time showed us that in the 6 months ++ period, that no big holder sold his coins abruptly.

Now, ask yourself this question: "what is my interest, by being a huge holder of NXT, to see the price decline?" None. The best way to see it decline is through the liquidation of the wallet of one of the... big holders. There is a huge difference between the amount of wealth you have based on the market price, and the total amount you can get by liquidating your position. You may have 6 million USD with 50million NXT at a market price of 0.0000716, but if you cash-out, you may have to put the market at 0.000001, or even less, depending on the order book bids - thus, ending up with way less than the expected 6 million USD.

In a nutshell, it is in the interest of those big holders to... keep the coins. Let alone all the projects that are blossoming all over the place.

Indeed it is. But people have personal projects, needs, etc. That's why, as you point out, they are getting out of their millions of dollars positions "orderly". This "orderliness", of course, holds the price down which, in  turns, hurts the minor investors that don't see their investment grow and also hurts the coin appreciation for it becomes "boring" and doesn't attract traders and new investors, all of which is perfectly legit and goes with the territory when a coin has the humongous distribution problem that this one has.

But the foreseeable big problem is not just the distribution itself, bad as it is. If just a few of these big holders get together -assuming they are not in it together already, what could possibly stop them for perpetrating a 51% attack and take ALL the rest of the coins? Remember, there's absolutely no accountability in crypto...

Actually, it is an assumption to say that they are putting the price down, as you can see per the evolution of the top wallets within the last month. Coins are not moving so much, therefore, top wallets are not putting too much selling pressure. There is a big factor we need to take into account, which is the whale activity in driving the price up/down.

I believe one of the best ways to remove the fear of those top holders is to look at BTC. Here's the distribution:
http://bitcoinrichlist.com/charts/percent-bitcoins-owned-by-richest
The top100 wallets owned around 30% of total BTC's for more than a year, they currently hold 20%. BTC had the same distribution problems that NXT currently has and we know where BTC is right now, I believe overtime, as distribution will take place, you'll see more users and less coins per top wallet. But as always, most of the coins will be owned by a few amount of holders - which is true for most of the assets today, would it be stock, bond, gold markets.

Regarding the attack part, if they would do so, the price would plummet as trust would be lost - which would not be in their best interest based on the millions they hold. From the nxt forums I've read you would need to achieve a 90%++ attack in order to control the forging, which would be quite a stretch.

[verdun2003]

UH ho... Houston we have a serious problem. Questioning a very logical question, make me a "must be a troll".... very serious (and common) problem.

No "sir" I am just looking for clear answers, that cannot come from fan boys or scammers -one of which you surely are-. I AM aware of the holdings of those 100 wallets. Top 10 wallets still own almost 1/3 of the coins. It IS a HUGE problem by which future investors, like me, should run for the exits.

I wanted some common sensical explanations, obviously there's nothing but blind greed.

Show me 10 stocks that don't have the top 10 investors hold >1/3

I could show you many. Just for your reference, since you profess total ignorance on the matter- I will remind you that Steve Jobs himself was ousted from Apple. And that wasn't an exceptional occurrence either.

But any similitude with stocks in a cryptocurrency, is pure coincidence and the poorest of excuses for stocks are HEAVILY REGULATED and cryptos are not at all, therefore anyone can perpetrate any kind of fraud here without any consequences, while in stocks, in the real world, he (they) will be taken to jail.

It is preposterous that the top 20 -or 50- wallets control 80-90% of the coins. Not just preposterous but both a distribution problem and a recipe for disaster.

But you really don't care about that, really, do you? You don't care about the future at all, you just want your holdings, whatever they are, to be worth more than you paid for and, when spiking, getting out, right? That's called daytrading or swing-trading. And it's quite ligitimate, so no problem at all with that.

There's a big problem though when you pretend to serve that stance with FUD or inventing similarities that don't exist

I care more about the future than you, and I have evaluated and informed myself, the contrary of what you did.

Do you know gametheory? Lets assume what you are saying is true ( it isn't in reality): that top 20 accounts have 50.01% of the funds. Now, to destroy or harm the network, they would have to work together. TWENTY people have to organize themselves to hurt the network. This on its own is ridiculously hard. But now comes the kicker: WHY THE FUCK WOULD THEY DO THAT? That is the question. Why? Maybe to burn their 15,000,000 USD investment? To through away then money they own? Sure why not... sounds perfectly reasonable..

There is a huge difference between a POW 51% attack and a 51% attack of POS. You would need to kill your own wealth.

Now **** off you troll fudster and get your facts straight.

Great point. Too bad the delivery didn't follow.

[nutildah]

If nobody can forge anything worth discussing unless you have at least a million NXT, the NXT promoters needs to stop pretending like EVERYONE can forge NXT with equal opportunity. Some millionaires are more equal than non-millionaires, I suppose. Also, you have to stop pretending that there are no motivations for the giant stakeholders to crash the market at any given, arbitrary moment. If you use your founding stake to drive down the price in a massive dump, you can still use your proceeds to buy up more cheap NXT. There's always a motive for disruption of the system if there's any feasible way to profit from it.

Bottom line: there needs to be more distribution, faster. If the founders/stakeholders just decide to sit on their piles forever, NXT isn't going to be very useful. I guess I'm looking for a price drop.

[barabbas]

UH ho... Houston we have a serious problem. Questioning a very logical question, make me a "must be a troll".... very serious (and common) problem.

No "sir" I am just looking for clear answers, that cannot come from fan boys or scammers -one of which you surely are-. I AM aware of the holdings of those 100 wallets. Top 10 wallets still own almost 1/3 of the coins. It IS a HUGE problem by which future investors, like me, should run for the exits.

I wanted some common sensical explanations, obviously there's nothing but blind greed.

Show me 10 stocks that don't have the top 10 investors hold >1/3

I could show you many. Just for your reference, since you profess total ignorance on the matter- I will remind you that Steve Jobs himself was ousted from Apple. And that wasn't an exceptional occurrence either.

But any similitude with stocks in a cryptocurrency, is pure coincidence and the poorest of excuses for stocks are HEAVILY REGULATED and cryptos are not at all, therefore anyone can perpetrate any kind of fraud here without any consequences, while in stocks, in the real world, he (they) will be taken to jail.

It is preposterous that the top 20 -or 50- wallets control 80-90% of the coins. Not just preposterous but both a distribution problem and a recipe for disaster.

But you really don't care about that, really, do you? You don't care about the future at all, you just want your holdings, whatever they are, to be worth more than you paid for and, when spiking, getting out, right? That's called daytrading or swing-trading. And it's quite ligitimate, so no problem at all with that.

There's a big problem though when you pretend to serve that stance with FUD or inventing similarities that don't exist

I care more about the future than you, and I have evaluated and informed myself, the contrary of what you did.

Do you know gametheory? Lets assume what you are saying is true ( it isn't in reality): that top 20 accounts have 50.01% of the funds. Now, to destroy or harm the network, they would have to work together. TWENTY people have to organize themselves to hurt the network. This on its own is ridiculously hard. But now comes the kicker: WHY THE FUCK WOULD THEY DO THAT? That is the question. Why? Maybe to burn their 15,000,000 USD investment? To through away then money they own? Sure why not... sounds perfectly reasonable..

There is a huge difference between a POW 51% attack and a 51% attack of POS. You would need to kill your own wealth.

Now **** off you troll fudster and get your facts straight.

Well, normally I would ignore such idiotic response with shouts and obscenity totally uncalled for, but since you insists... I actually hadn't see your "answer", so not selective at all.

First, I have been informing myself... and finding out my initial suspicions were not at all far from the reality.

Second, no I am NOT saying the top 20 wallets control more than 50.1%, they control almost 1/3. I am not just saying that, it is  FACT available to anyone.
That you consider an alliance of 20 "people" (it would be wallets, which not necessarily mean different "people controlling them, you get that, right?) "ridiculously hard" is simply quite funny... especially considering that those purported 20 people would be the club of multimillonaires that awarded themselves the totality of coins to begin with. More or slightly less, to be quite precise. You, of course, would find "ridiculously hard" to believe that there are organized "investors groups" ALREADY inside some coins, controlling every aspect of it. But, by their own admission, publicly, they exist.

Now you want to know why would they "do that" (I assume you are asking why they would perpetrate a 51% attack). The obvious answer is to get ALL your coins. Would a 51% attack necessarily, kill NEXT? I don't believe so. Just some owner would have ceased to exist. The coin and the platform, going nowhere. Less owners, in fact = more value. Why would they lose anything? Oh, you believe that by that people would run away from NEXT and it's value would be dumped to "0"? Why? Many more applications and uses are brought in every day, why would then NXT be valued less, just because some people, minimal people in investment, whatever their amount in numbers, claim to have been robbed? They would just say it was a massive hacking and that's it. The coin would trade higher a week after the attack.

Will they be happy with their millions and not perpetrate such an attack, that stands to reason, why not. By now they have millions of dollars in their pockets already, and still more millions growing in value here, so there's a common sensical opinion, that obviously you share, that why would they want to do anything else? Well, is history and human nature have taught us anything in thousands of years is that many people do quite irrational -or damaging- thing simply because they can. Especially if there;'s no accountability and riches to be gained.

After all, 6 million dollars is a lot... only when you don't have close to that. When you do, it isn't that much. And it goes real fast too.

[verdun2003]

If nobody can forge anything worth discussing unless you have at least a million NXT, the NXT promoters needs to stop pretending like EVERYONE can forge NXT with equal opportunity. Some millionaires are more equal than non-millionaires, I suppose. Also, you have to stop pretending that there are no motivations for the giant stakeholders to crash the market at any given, arbitrary moment. If you use your founding stake to drive down the price in a massive dump, you can still use your proceeds to buy up more cheap NXT. There's always a motive for disruption of the system if there's any feasible way to profit from it.

Bottom line: there needs to be more distribution, faster. If the founders/stakeholders just decide to sit on their piles forever, NXT isn't going to be very useful. I guess I'm looking for a price drop.

Problems you point to are exactly the ones that Bitcoin faced/faces. Who mines? Not the little guy anymore, huge data centers. Who owns? Very few investors again.

NXT is already useful with the distribution it currently has. Just look at the AE, already 10 companies did IPO's - this is just the beginning. So many exciting projects are coming, from leasing to the trading alt's platform for... free.

[barabbas]

but many more continue adding coins by forging massive amounts

no the total NXT in circulation does not increase.  The money supply is constant.

-bm

So those people with 40-50 million coins, they don't forge more?

they do forge BLOCKS and they get the TX FEES as payment for doing so.  So the NXTs only circulate from USERS to STAKEHOLDERS via transaction fees.

it's quite different than Bitcoin.

-bm

I understand that but, assuming they havent sold a single coin, a guy with 50 million would have considerably more than 50 million nby forging right now, right?

yes, but that is true for everyone only forging and not selling. What is your point?

My point is that if only 20 wallets control probably 80-90% or more of NXT, how does that situation makes a 51% attack "impossible" as claimed in the NXT documents?

Clearer: There's a huge distribution problem -extensible to forging- in this coin. Or I am totally wrong?

You are wrong.  There isn't a huge distribution problem.  Distribution is already way better than bitcoin's and continues to get better. 

I appreciate your confidence but, sorry, you don 't dispute any of my points. Again: 20 wallets got a total of 1 billion coins. Even after presumably massive dumping, still a bunch of those wallets and a few others, control 90% of the coins. How is that not a massive distribution problem? SWhatever the situation on BTc notwithstanding?

You sir must be a troll...  

Top 100 NXT account: http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=34

UH ho... Houston we have a serious problem. Questioning a very logical question, make me a "must be a troll".... very serious (and common) problem.

No "sir" I am just looking for clear answers, that cannot come from fan boys or scammers -one of which you surely are-. I AM aware of the holdings of those 100 wallets. Top 10 wallets still own almost 1/3 of the coins. It IS a HUGE problem by which future investors, like me, should run for the exits.

I wanted some common sensical explanations, obviously there's nothing but blind greed.

This is a legit question. If you look back in time (thank you archive.org, 19th april : https://web.archive.org/web/20140419201626/http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=34), you'll see that the coins pretty sticked to the top holders - distribution was even worse before as there were a few 50,000,000 wallets, now only 2 remaining. This problem is not new, and many ppl saw this as a threat. Time showed us that in the 6 months ++ period, that no big holder sold his coins abruptly.

Now, ask yourself this question: "what is my interest, by being a huge holder of NXT, to see the price decline?" None. The best way to see it decline is through the liquidation of the wallet of one of the... big holders. There is a huge difference between the amount of wealth you have based on the market price, and the total amount you can get by liquidating your position. You may have 6 million USD with 50million NXT at a market price of 0.0000716, but if you cash-out, you may have to put the market at 0.000001, or even less, depending on the order book bids - thus, ending up with way less than the expected 6 million USD.

In a nutshell, it is in the interest of those big holders to... keep the coins. Let alone all the projects that are blossoming all over the place.

Indeed it is. But people have personal projects, needs, etc. That's why, as you point out, they are getting out of their millions of dollars positions "orderly". This "orderliness", of course, holds the price down which, in  turns, hurts the minor investors that don't see their investment grow and also hurts the coin appreciation for it becomes "boring" and doesn't attract traders and new investors, all of which is perfectly legit and goes with the territory when a coin has the humongous distribution problem that this one has.

But the foreseeable big problem is not just the distribution itself, bad as it is. If just a few of these big holders get together -assuming they are not in it together already, what could possibly stop them for perpetrating a 51% attack and take ALL the rest of the coins? Remember, there's absolutely no accountability in crypto...

Actually, it is an assumption to say that they are putting the price down, as you can see per the evolution of the top wallets within the last month. Coins are not moving so much, therefore, top wallets are not putting too much selling pressure. There is a big factor we need to take into account, which is the whale activity in driving the price up/down.

I believe one of the best ways to remove the fear of those top holders is to look at BTC. Here's the distribution:
http://bitcoinrichlist.com/charts/percent-bitcoins-owned-by-richest
The top100 wallets owned around 30% of total BTC's for more than a year, they currently hold 20%. BTC had the same distribution problems that NXT currently has and we know where BTC is right now, I believe overtime, as distribution will take place, you'll see more users and less coins per top wallet. But as always, most of the coins will be owned by a few amount of holders - which is true for most of the assets today, would it be stock, bond, gold markets.

Regarding the attack part, if they would do so, the price would plummet as trust would be lost - which would not be in their best interest based on the millions they hold. From the nxt forums I've read you would need to achieve a 90%++ attack in order to control the forging, which would be quite a stretch.

I don 't think the BTC model of distribution is, number one, a mirror to follow and number two, anything even remotely similar to NXT which, by design, was IPO'ed to a few stakeholders ONLY.

BTC has been around for 5 years in which, either through mining or investment ANYONE could have accumulated millions. Thatg it did nothing really until a year ago or so, guaranteed proper distribution and no scam whatsoever. That is its great VALUE. No one can put any blame on the rewards of somebody that mined and bought through thick and thin. That's VISION as opposed to SCAM, clear?

And, still, once the above is quite clear ONLY, the distribution is way wider than that of NXT, currently and before.

[TwinWinNerD]

UH ho... Houston we have a serious problem. Questioning a very logical question, make me a "must be a troll".... very serious (and common) problem.

No "sir" I am just looking for clear answers, that cannot come from fan boys or scammers -one of which you surely are-. I AM aware of the holdings of those 100 wallets. Top 10 wallets still own almost 1/3 of the coins. It IS a HUGE problem by which future investors, like me, should run for the exits.

I wanted some common sensical explanations, obviously there's nothing but blind greed.

Show me 10 stocks that don't have the top 10 investors hold >1/3

I could show you many. Just for your reference, since you profess total ignorance on the matter- I will remind you that Steve Jobs himself was ousted from Apple. And that wasn't an exceptional occurrence either.

But any similitude with stocks in a cryptocurrency, is pure coincidence and the poorest of excuses for stocks are HEAVILY REGULATED and cryptos are not at all, therefore anyone can perpetrate any kind of fraud here without any consequences, while in stocks, in the real world, he (they) will be taken to jail.

It is preposterous that the top 20 -or 50- wallets control 80-90% of the coins. Not just preposterous but both a distribution problem and a recipe for disaster.

But you really don't care about that, really, do you? You don't care about the future at all, you just want your holdings, whatever they are, to be worth more than you paid for and, when spiking, getting out, right? That's called daytrading or swing-trading. And it's quite ligitimate, so no problem at all with that.

There's a big problem though when you pretend to serve that stance with FUD or inventing similarities that don't exist

I care more about the future than you, and I have evaluated and informed myself, the contrary of what you did.

Do you know gametheory? Lets assume what you are saying is true ( it isn't in reality): that top 20 accounts have 50.01% of the funds. Now, to destroy or harm the network, they would have to work together. TWENTY people have to organize themselves to hurt the network. This on its own is ridiculously hard. But now comes the kicker: WHY THE FUCK WOULD THEY DO THAT? That is the question. Why? Maybe to burn their 15,000,000 USD investment? To through away then money they own? Sure why not... sounds perfectly reasonable..

There is a huge difference between a POW 51% attack and a 51% attack of POS. You would need to kill your own wealth.

Now **** off you troll fudster and get your facts straight.

Well, normally I would ignore such idiotic response with shouts and obscenity totally uncalled for, but since you insists... I actually hadn't see your "answer", so not selective at all.

First, I have been informing myself... and finding out my initial suspicions were not at all far from the reality.

Second, no I am NOT saying the top 20 wallets control more than 50.1%, they control almost 1/3. I am not just saying that, it is  FACT available to anyone.
That you consider an alliance of 20 "people" (it would be wallets, which not necessarily mean different "people controlling them, you get that, right?) "ridiculously hard" is simply quite funny... especially considering that those purported 20 people would be the club of multimillonaires that awarded themselves the totality of coins to begin with. More or slightly less, to be quite precise. You, of course, would find "ridiculously hard" to believe that there are organized "investors groups" ALREADY inside some coins, controlling every aspect of it. But, by their own admission, publicly, they exist.

Now you want to know why would they "do that" (I assume you are asking why they would perpetrate a 51% attack). The obvious answer is to get ALL your coins. Would a 51% attack necessarily, kill NEXT? I don't believe so. Just some owner would have ceased to exist. The coin and the platform, going nowhere. Less owners, in fact = more value. Why would they lose anything? Oh, you believe that by that people would run away from NEXT and it's value would be dumped to "0"? Why? Many more applications and uses are brought in every day, why would then NXT be valued less, just because some people, minimal people in investment, whatever their amount in numbers, claim to have been robbed? They would just say it was a massive hacking and that's it. The coin would trade higher a week after the attack.

Will they be happy with their millions and not perpetrate such an attack, that stands to reason, why not. By now they have millions of dollars in their pockets already, and still more millions growing in value here, so there's a common sensical opinion, that obviously you share, that why would they want to do anything else? Well, is history and human nature have taught us anything in thousands of years is that many people do quite irrational -or damaging- thing simply because they can. Especially if there;'s no accountability and riches to be gained.

After all, 6 million dollars is a lot... only when you don't have close to that. When you do, it isn't that much. And it goes real fast too.

Ok, now I get it. You have no idea what 51% attack is. You think you can steal coins. Spend coins of someone?

Ridiculous

Also if a 51% does mallicious things for only some time, the community would rather fork the blockchain with new distribution without the stealers, than continuing suffering from "tyrans"

[barabbas]

UH ho... Houston we have a serious problem. Questioning a very logical question, make me a "must be a troll".... very serious (and common) problem.

No "sir" I am just looking for clear answers, that cannot come from fan boys or scammers -one of which you surely are-. I AM aware of the holdings of those 100 wallets. Top 10 wallets still own almost 1/3 of the coins. It IS a HUGE problem by which future investors, like me, should run for the exits.

I wanted some common sensical explanations, obviously there's nothing but blind greed.

Show me 10 stocks that don't have the top 10 investors hold >1/3

I could show you many. Just for your reference, since you profess total ignorance on the matter- I will remind you that Steve Jobs himself was ousted from Apple. And that wasn't an exceptional occurrence either.

But any similitude with stocks in a cryptocurrency, is pure coincidence and the poorest of excuses for stocks are HEAVILY REGULATED and cryptos are not at all, therefore anyone can perpetrate any kind of fraud here without any consequences, while in stocks, in the real world, he (they) will be taken to jail.

It is preposterous that the top 20 -or 50- wallets control 80-90% of the coins. Not just preposterous but both a distribution problem and a recipe for disaster.

But you really don't care about that, really, do you? You don't care about the future at all, you just want your holdings, whatever they are, to be worth more than you paid for and, when spiking, getting out, right? That's called daytrading or swing-trading. And it's quite ligitimate, so no problem at all with that.

There's a big problem though when you pretend to serve that stance with FUD or inventing similarities that don't exist

I care more about the future than you, and I have evaluated and informed myself, the contrary of what you did.

Do you know gametheory? Lets assume what you are saying is true ( it isn't in reality): that top 20 accounts have 50.01% of the funds. Now, to destroy or harm the network, they would have to work together. TWENTY people have to organize themselves to hurt the network. This on its own is ridiculously hard. But now comes the kicker: WHY THE FUCK WOULD THEY DO THAT? That is the question. Why? Maybe to burn their 15,000,000 USD investment? To through away then money they own? Sure why not... sounds perfectly reasonable..

There is a huge difference between a POW 51% attack and a 51% attack of POS. You would need to kill your own wealth.

Now **** off you troll fudster and get your facts straight.

Well, normally I would ignore such idiotic response with shouts and obscenity totally uncalled for, but since you insists... I actually hadn't see your "answer", so not selective at all.

First, I have been informing myself... and finding out my initial suspicions were not at all far from the reality.

Second, no I am NOT saying the top 20 wallets control more than 50.1%, they control almost 1/3. I am not just saying that, it is  FACT available to anyone.
That you consider an alliance of 20 "people" (it would be wallets, which not necessarily mean different "people controlling them, you get that, right?) "ridiculously hard" is simply quite funny... especially considering that those purported 20 people would be the club of multimillonaires that awarded themselves the totality of coins to begin with. More or slightly less, to be quite precise. You, of course, would find "ridiculously hard" to believe that there are organized "investors groups" ALREADY inside some coins, controlling every aspect of it. But, by their own admission, publicly, they exist.

Now you want to know why would they "do that" (I assume you are asking why they would perpetrate a 51% attack). The obvious answer is to get ALL your coins. Would a 51% attack necessarily, kill NEXT? I don't believe so. Just some owner would have ceased to exist. The coin and the platform, going nowhere. Less owners, in fact = more value. Why would they lose anything? Oh, you believe that by that people would run away from NEXT and it's value would be dumped to "0"? Why? Many more applications and uses are brought in every day, why would then NXT be valued less, just because some people, minimal people in investment, whatever their amount in numbers, claim to have been robbed? They would just say it was a massive hacking and that's it. The coin would trade higher a week after the attack.

Will they be happy with their millions and not perpetrate such an attack, that stands to reason, why not. By now they have millions of dollars in their pockets already, and still more millions growing in value here, so there's a common sensical opinion, that obviously you share, that why would they want to do anything else? Well, is history and human nature have taught us anything in thousands of years is that many people do quite irrational -or damaging- thing simply because they can. Especially if there;'s no accountability and riches to be gained.

After all, 6 million dollars is a lot... only when you don't have close to that. When you do, it isn't that much. And it goes real fast too.

Ok, now I get it. You have no idea what 51% attack is. You think you can steal coins. Spend coins of someone?

Ridiculous

Also if a 51% does mallicious things for only some time, the community would rather fork the blockchain with new distribution without the stealers, than continuing suffering from "tyrans"

Well, now that I am aware or your activity and projects in the AE, of course I wouldn't expect you to do anything but what you are doing here (i.e: Bullshitting). You have scams or your own going on, I understand...

[TwinWinNerD]

Well, now that I am aware or your activity and projects in the AE, of course I wouldn't expect you to do anything but what you are doing here (i.e: Bullshitting). You have scams or your own going on, I understand...

Yeah I am scamming all day long, I must be, as I disagree with your wrong "facts".

Go read up on false "facts" on 51% attacks. But for your convenice, I state them for you:

An attacker that controls more than 50% of the network's computing power can, for the time that he is in control, exclude and modify the ordering of transactions. This allows him to:

    Reverse transactions that he sends while he's in control
    Prevent some or all transactions from gaining any confirmations
    Prevent some or all other generators from getting any generations

The attacker can't:

    Reverse other people's transactions
    Prevent transactions from being sent at all (they'll show as 0/unconfirmed)
    Change the number of coins generated per block
    Create coins out of thin air
    Send coins that never belonged to him

[salsacz]

http://www.coinssource.com/now-live-nxts-decentralized-asset-exchange/

[jl7777]

Thanks for The pool suggestion guys.

What I'm wondering is, assume you have 1000 NXT and you solo -forge; what would be the average numbers of transactions you would get and how many NXT you would actually earn?
Rough numbers would do more then enough.

Thanks in advance :-)

Edit: Forging for a day, I mean.

in a day = 0
in a week = 0
in a year = 0
in 10 years = 1 Nxt

Ouch!

I'm a total pos newbie but I was expecting something like 0.1% annual interest or so.
This seems something totally different compared to pos coins

Jl777 calculated 0.38% per annum currently.

That is with a forging pool or big Holdings. The forged blocks with next pos are not proportional distributed. So a 1000 nxt forging will receive less than average

or a LOT more
solo forging will end up being either much worse or much better than the average case
For example, I somehow got 1000+ NXT in the early days with 500k acct cuz I got lucky and forged a fat block
my ROI was 0.2% per week for a while

[TwinWinNerD]

Thanks for The pool suggestion guys.

What I'm wondering is, assume you have 1000 NXT and you solo -forge; what would be the average numbers of transactions you would get and how many NXT you would actually earn?
Rough numbers would do more then enough.

Thanks in advance :-)

Edit: Forging for a day, I mean.

in a day = 0
in a week = 0
in a year = 0
in 10 years = 1 Nxt

Ouch!

I'm a total pos newbie but I was expecting something like 0.1% annual interest or so.
This seems something totally different compared to pos coins

Jl777 calculated 0.38% per annum currently.

That is with a forging pool or big Holdings. The forged blocks with next pos are not proportional distributed. So a 1000 nxt forging will receive less than average

or a LOT more
solo forging will end up being either much worse or much better than the average case
For example, I somehow got 1000+ NXT in the early days with 500k acct cuz I got lucky and forged a fat block
my ROI was 0.2% per week for a while

That is statistically irrelevant. on AVERAGE the smaller account will forge less NXT/NXT than the bigger accounts. CIYAM open proved it mathematically somewhere, can't find the link just now.

[okaynow]

what could possibly stop them for perpetrating a 51% attack

51% attack on nxt is not possible, but i guess you probably know that already from your extensive research on the subject.

edit - and please be so kind to point to exact security breach that you can drive your truck through, others asked for that
but you "dispersed from answering" , as you so elegantly put it...

[lyynx]

Wow, the FUD is thick in here today. This means we're doing something right.

Distribution is fine as it is and progressing. You don't like it, carry on. We are very experienced in handling trolls that are too lazy to read up on Nxt, assume everything and say anything to continue the argument.

Nxt will continue it's glorious march and write new history in the world of crypto. We Are Nxt!!!!!

[barabbas]

Wow, the FUD is thick in here today. This means we're doing something right.

Distribution is fine as it is and progressing. You don't like it, carry on. We are very experienced in handling trolls that are too lazy to read up on Nxt, assume everything and say anything to continue the argument.

Nxt will continue it's glorious march and write new history in the world of crypto. We Are Nxt!!!!!

Hey if you are happy, I'm (disappointed), but happy.

Very easy: in and out. Hopefully playing with the crooks...

[pandaisftw]

Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'.  Which is it?

It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....

This misinformation has gone on long enough:

1) There were over 70 initial stakeholders (you can confirm this in the genesis block). No, each one did not receive 50mil NXT. You need to do some fact checking before embarrassing yourself.

2) NXT distribution is a point only the uninformed or FUDsters bring up. It's already better than bitcoin's:

http://bitcoinrichlist.com/charts/bitcoin-distribution-by-address?atblock=300000

0.1% of Bitcoin address own 50% of all Bitcoins, roughly $3bil USD. You're comfortable with the top 0.1% holding ~50% of all coins (they could dump that $3bil it at any time, remember?). As for the mining power, remember just a few short months ago one of the pools almost reached 50% of the total Bitcoin hashrate? In fact, if there wasn't a huge outcry, and the pool implemented measures to kick miners off, they certainly would have passed it.

Here's a pretty old chart:

http://nxtcoin.blogspot.com/2014/01/nxt-distribution-infographics.html

And since then, distribution has only gotten better.


Also, to debase some of your arguments, anyone could have invested in the IPO (~2 months long) or bought NXT when it was less than a single cent. If you missed it... well that's no one's fault but your own. Otherwise, everyone would be calling Bitcoin a scam because they missed the boat on that too (I certainly missed Bitcoin when it was <$1 USD, that doesn't make it a scam). So no, the devs don't control any significant portion of the coins (the founder, BCNext had no share at all). Blows your mind, doesn't it?

Pandaisftw

[jl7777]

Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'.  Which is it?

It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....

Having a relatively small number of large accounts to add up to >50% actually helps NXT network security. It is much harder for an attacker to gain control over a few dozen highly motivated people (who each have a sizeable interest in keeping network secure) than over hundreds or thousands of people who wouldnt be so interested.

If you know the founders personally like i do, you will realize that they are ordinary guys and getting them to all agree on anything is near impossible. For them to agree to destroy NXT integrity by pulling off some sort of 51% attack is absurd.

Theoretically all sorts of horrible things can happen to anything, in reality, there are common sense things that limit such crazy scenarios. bitcoin is also based on this self-interest model. The more you have, the less likely you are to want to destroy it.

James

[barabbas]

Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'.  Which is it?

It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....

This misinformation has gone on long enough:

1) There were over 70 initial stakeholders (you can confirm this in the genesis block). No, each one did not receive 50mil NXT. You need to do some fact checking before embarrassing yourself.

2) NXT distribution is a point only the uninformed or FUDsters bring up. It's already better than bitcoin's:

http://bitcoinrichlist.com/charts/bitcoin-distribution-by-address?atblock=300000

0.1% of Bitcoin address own 50% of all Bitcoins, roughly $3bil USD. You're comfortable with the top 0.1% holding ~50% of all coins (they could dump that $3bil it at any time, remember?). As for the mining power, remember just a few short months ago one of the pools almost reached 50% of the total Bitcoin hashrate? In fact, if there wasn't a huge outcry, and the pool implemented measures to kick miners off, they certainly would have passed it.

Here's a pretty old chart:

http://nxtcoin.blogspot.com/2014/01/nxt-distribution-infographics.html

And since then, distribution has only gotten better.


Also, to debase some of your arguments, anyone could have invested in the IPO (~2 months long) or bought NXT when it was less than a single cent. If you missed it... well that's no one's fault but your own. Otherwise, everyone would be calling Bitcoin a scam because they missed the boat on that too (I certainly missed Bitcoin when it was <$1 USD, that doesn't make it a scam). So no, the devs don't control any significant portion of the coins (the founder, BCNext had no share at all). Blows your mind, doesn't it?

Pandaisftw

 Well thank you for being at least informative. So not just 20 (like I had read in a source usually well in formed) but 70. Hardly changes the equation in a significant manner: I'll conceived initial distribution no matter what which never professes to be wide no matter how you choose to look at it.

Yes there were opportunities to buy in at ridiculously low prices but we are talking days, few, no YEARS as the case of bitcoin is... which I answer above extensibly.

As for the example of hashrate that you make, it was GHASH.IO the pool in question and it never reached above 38%, so no real "danger" (although an attack can actually be perpetrated with 38%, just less likely to succeed, so miners saw the danger and acted accordingly... not that same pool is way under 30%).  I don't think a 51% is LIKELY on NEXT but it certainly is possible given the concentration of the forging power which is evident just taking a light look at the top holding wallets.

What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.

Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.

It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.

[barabbas]

Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'.  Which is it?

It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....

Having a relatively small number of large accounts to add up to >50% actually helps NXT network security. It is much harder for an attacker to gain control over a few dozen highly motivated people (who each have a sizeable interest in keeping network secure) than over hundreds or thousands of people who wouldnt be so interested.

If you know the founders personally like i do, you will realize that they are ordinary guys and getting them to all agree on anything is near impossible. For them to agree to destroy NXT integrity by pulling off some sort of 51% attack is absurd.

Theoretically all sorts of horrible things can happen to anything, in reality, there are common sense things that limit such crazy scenarios. bitcoin is also based on this self-interest model. The more you have, the less likely you are to want to destroy it.

James

But that dear James is wanting to assume that those top 20 holders will not be the perpetrators of the attack... which makes the whole point.

But of course, like Twin here, you are on to your own scams, so please do carry on...

[pandaisftw]

What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.

Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.

It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.

Yet you ignore that 0.1% of wallets own 50% of all Bitcoins in circulation? They could all "decide together" to dump all $3bil, too. But they wont. Big holders of NXT will not either. It's not baffling, you're suffering from cognitive dissonance.

And no, the top holders are not the devs.

Btw, it's known that Sataoshi holders over 1 Million Bitcoins, which is ~15% of Bitcoins in circulation, does this concern you as well?

Pandaisftw