Nexus - Pure SHA3 + CPU/GPU + nPoS + 15 Active Innovations + More to Come

[AliMan]

That was my assumption as well, but it's always good to verify rather than assume at least in my opinion

Thank You,
Viz.

Viz, you can see how long since this coin has been released. You also know how many chances we've had for mining, or buying low. Not sure how much it's worth it, just to put a few extra coins in the pocket.

[macorcina]

if community like this pos system, that fine. If someone have 10 mil coins for them this is perfect pos, for all others go ahead and babysitting wallets for peanuts

[pdogg147]

if community like this pos system, that fine. If someone have 10 mil coins for them this is perfect pos, for all others go ahead and babysitting wallets for peanuts

Hi macorcina,

As tokyopotato and Viz mentioned above we are proposing a solution to extend the length of time before trust keys expire.  So the concerns of the Community are being heard and addressed.  We appreciate Community feedback.  I understand and share your concern on the trust key expiration as I was away for a long weekend and was also concerned that my trust key would expire if my PC shutdown.  I was okay with a 3 day expiration but what Viz proposes regarding the expiration being a ratio based on the length of time you have had your trust key is very fair.  Also, the interest rewards are proportional, so whether you have a small number or larger number of coins you get the same interest rate.  I would like to point out that we care about holders small and large and understand that a small amount of coins may be quite an investment for some folks.  We also agree that more users on the network is better.  Please keep in mind that larger holders that are actively staking are supporting the network too and also helping the economy by keeping the coins off the market.  This also helps smaller holders on some level and for some of the larger holders it is also quite an investment.

Thanks,

pdogg147

[macorcina]

why you force expiration key,  for all coins ? If I understand, security is depend of running wallet (node) , doesn't matter if is in wallet 1 coin or 1 mil coin ?
this is right or wrong ?

[merc84]

The trust key expiration is to give incentive for people to run wallets to create pos blocks which adds additional security to the network. If the trust key did not expire someone could simply turn on their wallet for staking every so often and still get the benefit of full interest rates, this would not do much for security as the wallet would rarely be staking.

[macorcina]

The trust key expiration is to give incentive for people to run wallets to create pos blocks which adds additional security to the network. If the trust key did not expire someone could simply turn on their wallet for staking every so often and still get the benefit of full interest rates, this would not do much for security as the wallet would rarely be staking.

@The trust key expiration is to give incentive for people to run wallets to create pos blocks which adds additional security to the network.

That mean I am right ?
Security depend ONLY on number of running wallets.
If is in network 10000 running wallets with 1 coin this is much secure , compared to 10 running wallets with 1 mil coins. (or 10 running wallets with 1 coin) ?

[ I focus now ONLY on security.  forget about interest rates. And question is only about security. ]

[merc84]

The trust key expiration is to give incentive for people to run wallets to create pos blocks which adds additional security to the network. If the trust key did not expire someone could simply turn on their wallet for staking every so often and still get the benefit of full interest rates, this would not do much for security as the wallet would rarely be staking.

@The trust key expiration is to give incentive for people to run wallets to create pos blocks which adds additional security to the network.

That mean I am right ?
Security depend ONLY on number of running wallets.
If is in network 10000 running wallets with 1 coin this is much secure , compared to 10 running wallets with 1 mil coins. (or 10 running wallets with 1 coin) ?

[ I focus now ONLY on security.  forget about interest rates. And question is only about security. ]

I believe u need more than 1 coin in order to stake, security depends on the number of pos blocks created not strictly the number of wallets.

[macorcina]

The trust key expiration is to give incentive for people to run wallets to create pos blocks which adds additional security to the network. If the trust key did not expire someone could simply turn on their wallet for staking every so often and still get the benefit of full interest rates, this would not do much for security as the wallet would rarely be staking.

@The trust key expiration is to give incentive for people to run wallets to create pos blocks which adds additional security to the network.

That mean I am right ?
Security depend ONLY on number of running wallets.
If is in network 10000 running wallets with 1 coin this is much secure , compared to 10 running wallets with 1 mil coins. (or 10 running wallets with 1 coin) ?

[ I focus now ONLY on security.  forget about interest rates. And question is only about security. ]

I believe u need more than 1 coin in order to stake, security depends on the number of pos blocks created not strictly the number of wallets.

for example 1 coin,  not literally,
but I will rephrase :

the question is (in general) :
If is in network 300 running wallets with 5000 coin this is much secure (300x 5000=1.5mil) , compared to 10 running wallets with 0.15 mil coins. ?

Yes , or no ?

[merc84]

The trust key expiration is to give incentive for people to run wallets to create pos blocks which adds additional security to the network. If the trust key did not expire someone could simply turn on their wallet for staking every so often and still get the benefit of full interest rates, this would not do much for security as the wallet would rarely be staking.

@The trust key expiration is to give incentive for people to run wallets to create pos blocks which adds additional security to the network.

That mean I am right ?
Security depend ONLY on number of running wallets.
If is in network 10000 running wallets with 1 coin this is much secure , compared to 10 running wallets with 1 mil coins. (or 10 running wallets with 1 coin) ?

[ I focus now ONLY on security.  forget about interest rates. And question is only about security. ]

I believe u need more than 1 coin in order to stake, security depends on the number of pos blocks created not strictly the number of wallets.

for example 1 coin,  not literally,
but I will rephrase :

the question is (in general) :
If is in network 300 running wallets with 5000 coin this is much secure (300x 5000=1.5mil) , compared to 10 running wallets with 0.15 mil coins. ?

Yes , or no ?

Due to restriction on consecutive pos blocks i believe yes.

[macorcina]

If we agree about some minimum acceptable security, for 24 hour staking wallets,
for exemple :
x1 to x2 number of wallets is minimum acceptable security
x3 to x4 number of wallets is medium security
x5 to x6 number of wallets is good security
approximately what is this numbers x1 to x2, x3 to x4, x5 to x6...........
this is question for dev .

[tokyopotato]

Some of the additional innovations we are discussing as we develop a plan, are adding DNS capabilities to Nexus to improve upon Namecoin and fix the issue with name squatting, as well as integrate Nexus with MegaNet - Kim Dotcom's new decentralized internet framework dubbed "MegaNet", of which details are due to be released February 2016.

We are looking to expand Nexus in many directions over time, and right now we want to get in place the protocol specifics for trust keys, improve the miner software and wallets, get the digital recycler functioning on some level and then be able to move onto adding other features to the protocol.

One of Nexus main goals is to improve upon Bitcoin and give back to Bitcoin community.  We believe strongly in developing a cohesive relationship with Bitcoin developers over time, and to offer them our technology for improving the Bitcoin protocol.

I would advise those of you following this blockchain protocol that I am not interested in hyping the price of Niro whatsoever.  This project is purely non-speculative for me.  I do not dream to get rich off Niro, instead I will focus my time on refining our image and marketing strategy for developing a powerful protocol for the 21st century and beyond.  I hope this is a prosperous protocol and that all of you can share in the value that will gain over time.

We will dream big and accomplish big goals if we work together, and we are really just at the beginning of what Nexus will be.

Cheers.

[tokyopotato]

the question is (in general) :
If is in network 300 running wallets with 5000 coin this is much secure (300x 5000=1.5mil) , compared to 10 running wallets with 0.15 mil coins. ?

Yes , or no ?

Yes, this is technically more secure and a better outcome over time, but if we can attain 100 staking wallets (nodes) combined with our CPU and GPU mining channels this will be a very secure network.  However, we also want to perfect the protocol before we have so many nodes spread out that it is hard to ensure they are all updated to latest core releases.  So, there's no need to worry too much about having 300 staking wallets at this time.  My goal is to promote Nexus enough to have 100 wallets staking (full-nodes) by the end of the year.  

I hope we can all work together to promote Nexus to cryptocurrency community as much as possible after our next wallet release.  This will be a good time to get involved because we will have an updated stable wallet release for Linux, Windows, and Mac.  We will also have a new GPU miner.

[Videlicet]

And to add a note, I have been working on 51% attack proof technology which means once developed and perfected, it will eliminate any possible 51% attack for Nexus, Bitcoin, and any other currencies that choose to inherit this technology. The trust network will help secure the network yes, but the biggest point is to filter through the users that are just looking for a quick ROI, to find the nodes that wish to contribute to the betterment of the network. As the trust network grows in security it lays the foundation for many new features to be grown from its base.

Thank You,
Viz.

[macorcina]

Nice.
To finish my point about subject. Between 100 and 300 is the minimum number for running wallets , for good security.
My opinion is that everything less than minimum 14 day, for ordinary average user, is problem and annoying for expiration time.
Lot of users agree about 21 day for optimum.

Let's look on another way.

what is more secure :
100 wallets with 7 day expiration or 300 wallets with 21 day expiration ?
whether it is possible to determine a correlation formula , about this ?
or at least approximately correlation ?

[merc84]

I think the real point is for maximum security wallets need to be running 24/7 (when a wallet is not producing pos blocks it adds no security to the network) so it is really a trade off allowing greater than 1 day expiry for trust keys. I think the ideal balance has been stuck with the system proposed where by those who have been staking for longer get a longer expiry.

[tokyopotato]

I think the ideal balance has been stuck with the system proposed where by those who have been staking for longer get a longer expiry.

That seems to be a good reward mechanism, rewarding those who devote time.  Nexus is not based upon false time frequency, we are synchronizing with natural time frequency. Right now our ratio is 7/1 based upon 7 days per week, 28 days per month, 13 months per year. http://www.lawoftime.org/thirteenmoon.html

Nice.

To finish my point about subject. Between 100 and 300 is the minimum number for running wallets , for good security.
My opinion is that everything less than minimum 14 day, for ordinary average user, is problem and annoying for expiration time.
Lot of users agree about 21 day for optimum.

Let's look on another way.

what is more secure :
100 wallets with 7 day expiration or 300 wallets with 21 day expiration ?
whether it is possible to determine a correlation formula , about this ?
or at least approximately correlation ?

I'm not sure we can draw a correlation formula since every user has their parameters for running a node (time, electricity, devices).  In other words, it is the quality of nodes not necessarily the quantity.  And it is hard to measure quality since it is subjective to each individual's resources.   This is why we reward trust keys and trust weight to nodes that are online more, because they are better quality.

If those 100 wallets or 300 wallets were always online, the 7 or 21 day expiration would be irrelevant.  It is a mechanism to reward those nodes that remain online and to penalize those nodes which do not remain online for long periods of time.

We want nodes online all the time staking, not network hoppers.  We need to basically make sure the system rewards full-node operators vs. network hoppers and that the system cannot be gamed. That's our goal for this, because the nodes will be a central part of the protocol that we build on top of.  This trust network is VERY important for future feature sets and in order to have a strong trust network we must reward those people the most.

In addition, we will be adding trust keys for miners as well, so that miners will be rewarded trust keys and gain trust weight as well, to reward them for not miner hopping from one coin to another.  

These trust keys will be important parts of the network going forward... first we must get the base protocol level of this done and then we can discuss why these trust keys are so important for the future of protocol.

[macorcina]

My idea going in this way.
First to cancel reward based on inflation formula. This reward potential make big problem, because interest rate is for all coins. This is primarily reason why developer must keep interest rate low. to prevent flooding with coins over time.

Second : generally for security we need for exemple 100 to 300 wallets 24 hour running.
Base reward for running wallets, not reward for possessions of coins.
Or make some balance between this two things.
Make something like " floating reward "

reward with be distributed for staking wallets. If number of staking wallets drop from 300 to 200 then this floating reward distribution between in this 200 wallets.
Closed loop.
this is roughly . Please dont' stick with numbers.
Mixing concept between master node, and POS

this concept is possible to achieve with existing system.
For example with genesis block. Every 6 or 12 or 24 hour, new genesis block, based on numbers of running wallets.
Time and security factor reward, no reward for number of coins

[merc84]

My idea going in this way.
First to cancel reward based on inflation formula. This reward potential make big problem, because interest rate is for all coins. This is primarily reason why developer must keep interest rate low. to prevent flooding with coins over time.

Second : generally for security we need for exemple 100 to 300 wallets 24 hour running.
Base reward for running wallets, not reward for possessions of coins.
Or make some balance between this two things.
Make something like " floating reward "

reward with be distributed for staking wallets. If number of staking wallets drop from 300 to 200 then this floating reward distribution between in this 200 wallets.
Closed loop.
this is roughly . Please dont' stick with numbers.
Mixing concept between master node, and POS

this concept is possible to achieve with existing system.
For example with genesis block. Every 6 or 12 or 24 hour, new genesis block, based on numbers of running wallets.
Time and security factor reward, no reward for number of coins

There is no point in creating a system like this unless u want large holders to split their holdings across multiple wallets and earn more coins than they otherwise would be able too when staking large amounts in a single wallet. The existing system already strikes a balance between large and small holders by restricting the number of consecutive pos blocks a single wallet is allowed to create.

[macorcina]

@The existing system already strikes a balance between large and small holders by restricting the number of consecutive pos blocks a single wallet is allowed to create.

If you implement more aggressive curve for this sistem ( restricting the number of consecutive pos blocks a single wallet), then in result you will reach breakpoint to stimulate the corresponding number of 24hour runing wallets.

Major problem of pos, compared to mining is that POS is more reward for rich, and small or nothing for small, this is reason why all pos coins suffer, insufficiently willing people to run wallets

[merc84]

@The existing system already strikes a balance between large and small holders by restricting the number of consecutive pos blocks a single wallet is allowed to create.

If you implement more aggressive curve for this sistem ( restricting the number of consecutive pos blocks a single wallet), then in result you will reach breakpoint to stimulate the corresponding number of 24hour runing wallets.

Major problem of pos, compared to mining is that POS is more reward for rich, and small or nothing for small, this is reason why all pos coins suffer, insufficiently willing people to run wallets

Viz already discussed increasing the restriction on consecutive blocks just a few days ago. However it does not seem unfair those who invest more get greater returns thats just how life works. What i mean to say is your reward is proportional to ur investment how is that a "major problem"? I also fail to see how pos reward is somehow different from mining reward as the "rich" can easily afford more/better mining hardware anyway.