NEM (XEM) Official Thread - 100% New Code - Easy To Use APIs

[Defender_Of_The_Ancients]

I would rather vote for NEM funds to be spent on new internal researches then looking for dev teams around the world to apply and develop new NEM technologies. Similar to what ETC is doing now. Any external requests for funds is a red red red flag!

Consider all the failing insecure Ethereum dapps that just sucked money from crowd funding. NEM dev funds should never get trapped in any sort of crowd funding for projects or Dapps that operates on NEM unless the project/research is a core NEM piece that initially been developed internally by the NEM dev team. Only then we can vote.

A third party request for funds should not even open the door for any sort of voting! I would rather vote and debate such principal first.

That's a very valid point. Always good to read smart posts

I start to read about XEM project and I see there's a massive community behind. I'm trying to find a project and enter it long-term, XEM is one of the things I start to track.

[1714177872]

1714177872

[LemonAndFriesOne]

I would rather vote for NEM funds to be spent on new internal researches then looking for dev teams around the world to apply and develop new NEM technologies. Similar to what ETC is doing now. Any external requests for funds is a red red red flag!

Consider all the failing insecure Ethereum dapps that just sucked money from crowd funding. NEM dev funds should never get trapped in any sort of crowd funding for projects or Dapps that operates on NEM unless the project/research is a core NEM piece that initially been developed internally by the NEM dev team. Only then we can vote.

A third party request for funds should not even open the door for any sort of voting! I would rather vote and debate such principal first.

Everytime something like this comes up, I have not seen one developer in the thread asking for a vote or setting up a system for the initial investors to vote on.

We can discuss this all day long, but if we can't actually physically vote then all these are just words and we will be ignored.

Can anyone point me to where the voting is happening? Because I have yet to see it all these years.

[NEMergizer]

I would rather vote for NEM funds to be spent on new internal researches then looking for dev teams around the world to apply and develop new NEM technologies. Similar to what ETC is doing now. Any external requests for funds is a red red red flag!

Consider all the failing insecure Ethereum dapps that just sucked money from crowd funding. NEM dev funds should never get trapped in any sort of crowd funding for projects or Dapps that operates on NEM unless the project/research is a core NEM piece that initially been developed internally by the NEM dev team. Only then we can vote.

A third party request for funds should not even open the door for any sort of voting! I would rather vote and debate such principal first.

Everytime something like this comes up, I have not seen one developer in the thread asking for a vote or setting up a system for the initial investors to vote on.

We can discuss this all day long, but if we can't actually physically vote then all these are just words and we will be ignored.

Can anyone point me to where the voting is happening? Because I have yet to see it all these years.

I followed the NEM forum links and couldn't find any voting there. Can't wait to vote with a BIG NO.

[enhu]

If its for the development, I would actually allow the funds to be used, we might not wait for years for NEM to moon its demand. If you are to keep your NEMs anyway, you'd be patient to see price go up again. It started with less than a cent too.

[fudster]

I would rather vote for NEM funds to be spent on new internal researches then looking for dev teams around the world to apply and develop new NEM technologies. Similar to what ETC is doing now. Any external requests for funds is a red red red flag!

Consider all the failing insecure Ethereum dapps that just sucked money from crowd funding. NEM dev funds should never get trapped in any sort of crowd funding for projects or Dapps that operates on NEM unless the project/research is a core NEM piece that initially been developed internally by the NEM dev team. Only then we can vote.

A third party request for funds should not even open the door for any sort of voting! I would rather vote and debate such principal first.

That's a very valid point. Always good to read smart posts

I start to read about XEM project and I see there's a massive community behind. I'm trying to find a project and enter it long-term, XEM is one of the things I start to track.

Agree. WAVES platform has developed and supported token projects within their platforms which is a smart move for them. Its going to be a smart decision for all NEM holders too. Don't wait for ARKs to be developed or you'll end up with copied ideas. Use the funds for new projects.

[Pamadar]

If its for the development, I would actually allow the funds to be used, we might not wait for years for NEM to moon its demand. If you are to keep your NEMs anyway, you'd be patient to see price go up again. It started with less than a cent too.

yes indeed it took only a year and the price went up to this level so what would be the possibility of price increase again after another year, i'm okay if funds needed to be use for more development as we are here to support we already believed and for sure it will make more huge rise up after new development will be offered.

[NEMergizer]

The proposed NEM authenticator from Atraura Organization seems mainly focused on EASE OF USE. I do not see any new proposed feature other than utilizing multi-sig "which is one of NEM's core features". They will utilize multi-sig in a manner that would make it very easy and simple for users to use it practically for authentication and authorization purposes.

NEM dev team already developed the hard part long time ago "multi-sig". Back then NEM dev team didn't spend $3,000,000+ to develop such impressive core NEM feature.

Atraura Organization is asking for too much funds "$3+ Million" just to utilize NEM technology. It is not smart to waste NEM funds on NEM Dapps. We should vote on the principal that NEM should never fund third party projects unless:

- The research/design been fully developed and approved internally
or
- The added NEM feature been initially requested by the NEM community such as what happened with the hardware wallet request.

[LemonAndFriesOne]

I would rather vote for NEM funds to be spent on new internal researches then looking for dev teams around the world to apply and develop new NEM technologies. Similar to what ETC is doing now. Any external requests for funds is a red red red flag!

Consider all the failing insecure Ethereum dapps that just sucked money from crowd funding. NEM dev funds should never get trapped in any sort of crowd funding for projects or Dapps that operates on NEM unless the project/research is a core NEM piece that initially been developed internally by the NEM dev team. Only then we can vote.

A third party request for funds should not even open the door for any sort of voting! I would rather vote and debate such principal first.

Everytime something like this comes up, I have not seen one developer in the thread asking for a vote or setting up a system for the initial investors to vote on.

We can discuss this all day long, but if we can't actually physically vote then all these are just words and we will be ignored.

Can anyone point me to where the voting is happening? Because I have yet to see it all these years.

I followed the NEM forum links and couldn't find any voting there. Can't wait to vote with a BIG NO.

I would also like to vote and have some proper articles/opinions from both sides to make a decision.

The first issue anyone should have right now is to demand a voting system if NEM is truly a currency for the community.

[jyrvalor]

Here's my 2 nem about the latest community fund proposal.

First thing people need to understand is that the community fund and the development fund are not the same thing.

Community fund was created to fund projects outside of the main nem development.

15 million might sound like much but given that there is currently almost 300 million in the community fund this project would only require about 5% of the fund.


Now about the proposal itself:

Having a development framework would make development on the nem chain even easier.

The guys at Atraura have experience developing for nem so they are not just some random company asking for nems so i think there is a good chance they will finish the project.

Having more projects running on the nem blockchain is the best possible advertisement. (Usually theres an uptick in price on any crypto when new projects are finished)
Not to mention this project would not only help Atraura but every developer that wants to develop for the nem chain.

Last thing i want to say is that the milestones in their request sound very reasonable - for the first ones they only need 1,5 million each.

[Red_Sanford]

If you look at Dash and their model of the masternodes voting on what to fund each month you can learn how to increase use and utility. Dash has a YouTube channel describing everything about development and   progress etc. Their aggressive advertising has helped them brand their coin. They have paid outside companies to incorporate dash in their websites. Enabling fiat to dash.

Nem is a great platform but it could use some good advertising and videos explaining the utility. This should be done quickly because new platforms are evolving quickly. Dan Larimer has a new project called EOS that seems very similar to Nem.  

[jyrvalor]

The proposed NEM authenticator from Atraura Organization seems mainly focused on EASE OF USE. I do not see any new proposed feature other than utilizing multi-sig "which is one of NEM's core features". They will utilize multi-sig in a manner that would make it very easy and simple for users to use it practically for authentication and authorization purposes.

NEM dev team already developed the hard part long time ago "multi-sig". Back then NEM dev team didn't spend $3,000,000+ to develop such impressive core NEM feature.

Atraura Organization is asking for too much funds "$3+ Million" just to utilize NEM technology. It is not smart to waste NEM funds on NEM Dapps. We should vote on the principal that NEM should never fund third party projects unless:

- The research/design been fully developed and approved internally
or
- The added NEM feature been initially requested by the NEM community such as what happened with the hardware wallet request.

The way i understood that post was that the authenticator would only be the first milestone so it would only cost 1,5 million nem.

[NEMergizer]

Here's my 2 nem about the latest community fund proposal.

First thing people need to understand is that the community fund and the development fund are not the same thing.

Community fund was created to fund projects outside of the main nem development.

15 million might sound like much but given that there is currently almost 300 million in the community fund this project would only require about 5% of the fund.


Now about the proposal itself:

Having a development framework would make development on the nem chain even easier.

The guys at Atraura have experience developing for nem so they are not just some random company asking for nems so i think there is a good chance they will finish the project.

Having more projects running on the nem blockchain is the best possible advertisement. (Usually theres an uptick in price on any crypto when new projects are finished)
Not to mention this project would not only help Atraura but every developer that wants to develop for the nem chain.

Last thing i want to say is that the milestones in their request sound very reasonable - for the first ones they only need 1,5 million each.

Thanks for clarifying the difference between NEM community funds and NEM Dev funds. From a perspective of spending NEM community funds we should support Atraura. However, still 5% of the NEM community funds is too much to spend on a single project/proposal. Such funds should remains available for years and projects to come. $3,000,000 is too much to spend on the proposed solution. The project can be fully developed with a fraction of the requested funds.

[Skelaton4]

I would argue that this is a critical time in the history of NEM. Many cryptos are racing to become the chosen Blockchain/coin, innovation at this juncture will help drive adoption. If no one adopts NEM it doesn't matter if we have 1 trillion in the DEV fund if no one is using it. I say go for it.

[fudster]

I would argue that this is a critical time in the history of NEM. Many cryptos are racing to become the chosen Blockchain/coin, innovation at this juncture will help drive adoption. If no one adopts NEM it doesn't matter if we have 1 trillion in the DEV fund if no one is using it. I say go for it.

This!

NEM should have something to offer for the users, if it don't these funds will soon be gone with all the massive adoption these days, the projects created for every ICO is aiming for adoption and NEM already have the easy of use. But who would use it when there is nothing inside this chain?

Give away that 15M for the development. Maybe do an ICO which allow investors to only deposit NEM for the crowdfund.

[jkoil]

With all respect to Albert and Atraura Organization, I am totally and completely against funding any third party organization using NEM funds. NEM funds should only get spent to expand the NEM dev team internally "NOT EXTERNALLY". Any third party organization can create their own crowd funding away from NEM dev funds.

Totally agree with this! Only internal use!

That's ridiculous. There aren't very many of them and they're busy people and not exactly the most reactive or accessible bunch. There's a mountain of money waiting to be used to improve NEM. If an outsider can do it then it should be allocated. Ideas come from everywhere.

I have no clue or opinion about this project, but for instance the upcoming Trezor integration comes from an outside programmer. He did a deal and is being paid by developer funds as far as I know. It's a vast benefit to everyone that wouldn't otherwise have happened.

And this project isn't asking for all the funds upfront anyway.

I would argue that this is a critical time in the history of NEM. Many cryptos are racing to become the chosen Blockchain/coin, innovation at this juncture will help drive adoption. If no one adopts NEM it doesn't matter if we have 1 trillion in the DEV fund if no one is using it. I say go for it.

There were few good points ...

Basically, I would not reject new devs, because they are coming "outside" of NEM.
But the another issues are
a) the possible benefits to NEM
b) the costs


To evaluate the possible benefits, there are needed good examples of the use cases, etc. 5 days is quite short time to study and understand them well enough.

To evaluate the costs there are 2 ways:
how much coding work (men months) the project requires  or/and
how much NEM community values the possible benefits.

[NEMergizer]

With all respect to Albert and Atraura Organization, I am totally and completely against funding any third party organization using NEM funds. NEM funds should only get spent to expand the NEM dev team internally "NOT EXTERNALLY". Any third party organization can create their own crowd funding away from NEM dev funds.

Totally agree with this! Only internal use!

That's ridiculous. There aren't very many of them and they're busy people and not exactly the most reactive or accessible bunch. There's a mountain of money waiting to be used to improve NEM. If an outsider can do it then it should be allocated. Ideas come from everywhere.

I have no clue or opinion about this project, but for instance the upcoming Trezor integration comes from an outside programmer. He did a deal and is being paid by developer funds as far as I know. It's a vast benefit to everyone that wouldn't otherwise have happened.

And this project isn't asking for all the funds upfront anyway.

I would argue that this is a critical time in the history of NEM. Many cryptos are racing to become the chosen Blockchain/coin, innovation at this juncture will help drive adoption. If no one adopts NEM it doesn't matter if we have 1 trillion in the DEV fund if no one is using it. I say go for it.

There were few good points ...

Basically, I would not reject new devs, because they are coming "outside" of NEM.
But the another issues are
a) the possible benefits to NEM
b) the costs


To evaluate the possible benefits, there are needed good examples of the use cases, etc. 5 days is quite short time to study and understand them well enough.

To evaluate the costs there are 2 ways:
how much coding work (men months) the project requires  or/and
how much NEM community values the possible benefits.

Totally agreed on all your points

[Scharfenberger]

With all respect to Albert and Atraura Organization, I am totally and completely against funding any third party organization using NEM funds. NEM funds should only get spent to expand the NEM dev team internally "NOT EXTERNALLY". Any third party organization can create their own crowd funding away from NEM dev funds.

Totally agree with this! Only internal use!

That's ridiculous. There aren't very many of them and they're busy people and not exactly the most reactive or accessible bunch. There's a mountain of money waiting to be used to improve NEM. If an outsider can do it then it should be allocated. Ideas come from everywhere.

I have no clue or opinion about this project, but for instance the upcoming Trezor integration comes from an outside programmer. He did a deal and is being paid by developer funds as far as I know. It's a vast benefit to everyone that wouldn't otherwise have happened.

And this project isn't asking for all the funds upfront anyway.

I would argue that this is a critical time in the history of NEM. Many cryptos are racing to become the chosen Blockchain/coin, innovation at this juncture will help drive adoption. If no one adopts NEM it doesn't matter if we have 1 trillion in the DEV fund if no one is using it. I say go for it.

There were few good points ...

Basically, I would not reject new devs, because they are coming "outside" of NEM.
But the another issues are
a) the possible benefits to NEM
b) the costs


To evaluate the possible benefits, there are needed good examples of the use cases, etc. 5 days is quite short time to study and understand them well enough.

To evaluate the costs there are 2 ways:
how much coding work (men months) the project requires  or/and
how much NEM community values the possible benefits.

Totally agreed on all your points

Agreed!!
All the major points should be set in stone by a waterproof contract as we're not talking about a giveaway of 50USD.

[Scharfenberger]

Another thought:

I'd like to suggest a capping for every project. Other projects that have been successfully funded by NEM community had a total of around 5 million XEM each (if I'm not mistaken).

Hence, what's about a limit per project of 5 million XEM.
(and under certain circumstances, the inventors can apply for more XEM, if they have reasonable arguments. However, this should just be a exception and not the rule).

[Skelaton4]

One thing to consider is that we are all assuming that NEM is going to INCREASE in value, however, that is not a given. This organization is taking some risk that the NEM they gain from this work will not plummet and they will have received much less money than expected. Nothing is a given in this market. Just a thought.

[Scharfenberger]

One thing to consider is that we are all assuming that NEM is going to INCREASE in value, however, that is not a given. This organization is taking some risk that the NEM they gain from this work will not plummet and they will have received much less money than expected. Nothing is a given in this market. Just a thought.

Since the NEM devs never disappointed us, I highly doubt that NEM's value will decrease in the near future but rather we could face the fact that a funding worth of 5 million XEM could be soon equal to 5 million USD!