Time has proven centralization of currency issuing power is inevitable whether it is fiat or bitcoin, the only different is the players.
Might as well change the protocol and switch it to PoS system.
Topic: $5000 per coin will never happen if PoW mining is allowed to continue - page 3. (Read 10118 times)
October 24, 2014, 10:15:42 AM
October 24, 2014, 10:10:51 AM
No idea, I usually use this one:
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_accounts
sort by account balance descending order with 100 records per page, and you'll see all you need to see.
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_accounts
sort by account balance descending order with 100 records per page, and you'll see all you need to see.
Well than you may want to do some research into which one is correct. I would more likely trust my source as it more closely matches the results of the IPO and comes from an older and more trusted site but of course you would probably pick the dataset that supported your delusions above critically looking at the facts, right?
On the contrary, it was a comment said with a cold mind, I can repeat it any time again if need be.
Well I'm waiting to hear how you can rationalize a few(Whether 7 or 80 doesn't change the point) large stake holders credentials being stolen is less probable than all networking devices stop working worldwide ?
October 24, 2014, 10:06:13 AM
1. How many mining pools' operators own 80% of Bitcoin hashrate? 3-5?
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution
142 NXT accounts own 77.81% of NXT.
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution
142 NXT accounts own 77.81% of NXT.
Why does this
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution
not match this :
http://charts.nxt.org/cDistribution.aspx
This is a huge discrepancy!
No idea, I usually use this one:
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_accounts
sort by account balance descending order with 100 records per page, and you'll see all you need to see. And you can compare the data there against your own client and your own downloaded blockchain if you don't trust that blockexplorer.
Additionally, can you at least admit that this comment was hysterically fallacious:
On the contrary, it was a comment said with a cold mind, I can repeat it any time again if need be.
October 24, 2014, 10:03:27 AM
1. How many mining pools' operators own 80% of Bitcoin hashrate? 3-5?
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution
142 NXT accounts own 77.81% of NXT.
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution
142 NXT accounts own 77.81% of NXT.
Why does this
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution
not match this :
http://charts.nxt.org/cDistribution.aspx
This is a huge discrepancy!
Additionally, can you at least admit that this comment was hysterically fallacious:
What I called a myth here is not so much the N@S itself, which theoretically does exist, but theories are just that, theories. This N@S theory for NXT is less probable than the theory of all governments switching off internet in unison to block crypto currencies, which can be thought of as a conspiracy theory, and it's still a good theory for some folks.
October 24, 2014, 10:01:39 AM
So you are suggesting that a few large stake holders credentials being stolen is less probable than all networking devices stop working worldwide ?
Explain to me how you could possibly rationalize this?
Explain to me how you could possibly rationalize this?
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution
142 NXT accounts own 77.81% of NXT.
Explain what you mean by 'a few'?
October 24, 2014, 09:59:20 AM
1. How many mining pools' operators own 80% of Bitcoin hashrate? 3-5?
2. How do you compromise those accounts exactly, accounts are not bound to IPs/identities (but Bitcoin mining pools are easily identified and can be tinkered with)?
If compromising was that easy, then you'd need to only compromise your friend's computer and then hack into Bill Gates' mailbox armed with just a Six degrees of separation theory.
2. How do you compromise those accounts exactly, accounts are not bound to IPs/identities (but Bitcoin mining pools are easily identified and can be tinkered with)?
If compromising was that easy, then you'd need to only compromise your friend's computer and then hack into Bill Gates' mailbox armed with just a Six degrees of separation theory.
You are deflecting as I have already admitted Bitcoin isn't perfect and has security concerns. It is far more likely that Nxt is compromised by a bug in past or future code due to its lack of developers and peer review than a NaS attack. Now care to back up this assertion:
What I called a myth here is not so much the N@S itself, which theoretically does exist, but theories are just that, theories. This N@S theory for NXT is less probable than the theory of all governments switching off internet in unison to block crypto currencies, which can be thought of as a conspiracy theory, and it's still a good theory for some folks.
What I called a myth there is the whole idea of someone attacking with ease after drinking their morning coffee and at no cost no less, that user apparently was quoting someone else's biased words, and that's double face palm
What I called a myth there is the whole idea of someone attacking with ease after drinking their morning coffee and at no cost no less, that user apparently was quoting someone else's biased words, and that's double face palm
So you are suggesting that a few large stake holders credentials being stolen is less probable than all networking devices stop working worldwide ?
Explain to me how you could possibly rationalize this?
October 24, 2014, 09:53:09 AM
This shows that between 7-15 individuals own over 80% of the stake. This means that all one would have to do is compromise a few of these accounts and that can be done by compromising 1-2 of them first and than using those credentials to compromise their friends and fellow developers.
1. How many mining pools' operators own 80% of Bitcoin hashrate? 3-5?
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_distribution
142 NXT accounts own 77.81% of NXT.
2. How do you compromise those accounts exactly, accounts are not bound to IPs/identities (but Bitcoin mining pools are easily identified and can be tinkered with)?
If compromising was that easy, then you'd need to only compromise your friend's computer and then hack into Bill Gates' mailbox armed with just a Six degrees of separation theory.
October 24, 2014, 09:44:48 AM
Quote
Yes, and that's still much more than you believe it is you can get access to.
Correct for today.Tomorrow the situation will change.
There will be no reasons for typical holder to be online 24/365
As in bitcoin there are no reasons to have a full-node on desktop PC
There is a choice to lease balance (without giving control of the coins) to pools (just like in Bitcoin) for those who don't want to forge (stake) on their own.
But actually the situation with solo forging might improve as distribution gets better, although this is not a guarantee. Likewise, your statement that it will get worse is not a guarantee either.
October 24, 2014, 09:43:10 AM
Quote
You will need 51% of actual balances with NXT in them to successfully do damage
You will need 51% of actual online balances with NXT in them to successfully do damage.
See the difference.
Yes, and that's still much more than you believe it is you can get access to.
Are you serious or just playing dumb?
http://charts.nxtcrypto.org/cDistribution.aspx
This shows that between 7-15 individuals own over 80% of the stake. This means that all one would have to do is compromise a few of these accounts and that can be done by compromising 1-2 of them first and than using those credentials to compromise their friends and fellow developers.
The reality is Nxt was attacked even before being launched by their own creators. The history will forever be tainted and thus is a huge PR problem that you will have to deal with that is not so easy to ignore.
October 24, 2014, 09:39:32 AM
Quote
Yes, and that's still much more than you believe it is you can get access to.
Correct for today.Tomorrow the situation will change.
There will be no reasons for typical holder to be online 24/365
As in bitcoin there are no reasons to have a full-node on desktop PC
October 24, 2014, 09:37:52 AM
NXT has been running in decentralized consensus for 11 months. That's a fact of life, deal with it.
No, it really hasn't.
October 24, 2014, 09:35:15 AM
Quote
You will need 51% of actual balances with NXT in them to successfully do damage
You will need 51% of actual online balances with NXT in them to successfully do damage.
See the difference.
Yes, and that's still much more than you believe it is you can get access to.
October 24, 2014, 09:33:50 AM
Quote
You will need 51% of actual balances with NXT in them to successfully do damage
You will need 51% of actual online balances with NXT in them to successfully do damage.
See the difference.
October 24, 2014, 09:27:51 AM
So you are suggesting that a couple large stake holders credentials being stolen is less probable than all networking devices stop working worldwide ?
Explain to me how you could possibly rationalize this?
Explain to me how you could possibly rationalize this?
A couple of large stake holders private keys stolen can't kill NXT. You will need 51% of actual balances with NXT in them to successfully do damage, just like in Bitcoin (or 90% after TF is implemented some time in 2015). If you purchase or somehow gain access to private keys with empty balances of 51% in the past, there is a protection against that in the algo, basically, you'll need to be building myriads of chains to build one with the highest cumulative difficulty to overcome the correct chain. Like I said, welcome to nxtforum.org, there is a lot of info there on this topic.
October 24, 2014, 09:22:52 AM
What I called a myth here is not so much the N@S itself, which theoretically does exist, but theories are just that, theories. This N@S theory for NXT is less probable than the theory of all governments switching off internet in unison to block crypto currencies, which can be thought of as a conspiracy theory, and it's still a good theory for some folks.
What I called a myth there is the whole idea of someone attacking with ease after drinking their morning coffee and at no cost no less, that user apparently was quoting someone else's biased words, and that's double face palm
What I called a myth there is the whole idea of someone attacking with ease after drinking their morning coffee and at no cost no less, that user apparently was quoting someone else's biased words, and that's double face palm
So you are suggesting that a few large stake holders credentials being stolen is less probable than all networking devices stop working worldwide ?
Explain to me how you could possibly rationalize this?
October 24, 2014, 09:18:15 AM
Thank you for finally admitting NaS is a theoretical flaw and not only a myth. The role of security analysts to find all theoretical security flaws and patch them before an attack occurs. To simply ignore the problem by calling it a myth because it hasn't been witnessed be executed before is just irresponsible.
What I called a myth here is not so much the N@S itself, which theoretically does exist, but theories are just that, theories. This N@S theory for NXT is less probable than the theory of all governments switching off internet in unison to block crypto currencies, which can be thought of as a conspiracy theory, and it's still a good theory for some folks.
What I called a myth there is the whole idea of someone attacking with ease after drinking their morning coffee and at no cost no less, that user apparently was quoting someone else's biased words, and that's double face palm
October 24, 2014, 09:12:27 AM
You're right that the source code of TF is not available yet. I meant the source code of the current version 1.3.1 is available for anyone's review.
The N@S security flaw you're referring to is only a theoretical flaw, orders of magnitude more theoretical than powerful entities coercing large Bitcoin mining pools to fulfill their agendas. In particular if you hope to get private keys to a few large balances in the past and forge a chain that others would have to accept, you will be in for a big surprise. If you need details on that protection, please visit nxtforum.org, this is bitcoin's forum after all.
The N@S security flaw you're referring to is only a theoretical flaw, orders of magnitude more theoretical than powerful entities coercing large Bitcoin mining pools to fulfill their agendas. In particular if you hope to get private keys to a few large balances in the past and forge a chain that others would have to accept, you will be in for a big surprise. If you need details on that protection, please visit nxtforum.org, this is bitcoin's forum after all.
Yes, bitcoin is vulnerable too, but because of the amount of developers working on the project and multiple stacks is far more secure than any alt right now.
Thank you for finally admitting NaS is a theoretical flaw and not only a myth. The role of security analysts to find all theoretical security flaws and patch them before an attack occurs. To simply ignore the problem by calling it a myth because it hasn't been witnessed in the wild before is just irresponsible.
October 24, 2014, 09:07:05 AM
I'm talking about the source code on the final adjustments of how transparent forging will function. The details on the whitepaper hasn't even been released let alone the source code for these changes.
So you agree that there are some security flaw within Nxt and NaS isn't a myth?
So you agree that there are some security flaw within Nxt and NaS isn't a myth?
You're right that the source code of TF is not available yet. I meant the source code of the current version 1.3.1 is available for anyone's review.
The N@S security flaw you're referring to is only a theoretical flaw, orders of magnitude more theoretical than powerful entities coercing large Bitcoin mining pools to fulfill their agendas. In particular if you hope to get private keys to a few large balances in the past and forge a chain that others would have to accept, you will be in for a big surprise. If you need details on that protection, please visit nxtforum.org, this is bitcoin's forum after all.
October 24, 2014, 08:59:33 AM
Lets say John have 100$ and he buys 0.3 bitcoin from miner and miner uses that 100$ to pay his debts and also buys new pair of jeans. So this is money "going out" of bitcoin ecosystem?
Yes. $85 gone out.
jeans came in.
block reward also came in.
Quote
And when John have 100$ and he buys 0.3 bitcoin from whale who bouht his 1K bitcoins 1$ each few years back, and this whale uses this 100$ on hookers, thats money "staying in" bitcoin ecosystem?
Yes.And this is ponzi.
October 24, 2014, 08:58:15 AM
Source code of NXT has been available since February or March, can't remember exactly.
Some bugs were found by researchers and fixed by developers since then, no fatal bugs though which may be a promise of a robust design. Bugs exist in any other software, that's normal. As long as they are not fatal design bugs, they are fixed and software only gets better. Bitcoin itself had a serious forking bug as late as beginning of 2013, does that make it insecure? The point is software has to be improved or it gets replaced by more advanced software.
Some bugs were found by researchers and fixed by developers since then, no fatal bugs though which may be a promise of a robust design. Bugs exist in any other software, that's normal. As long as they are not fatal design bugs, they are fixed and software only gets better. Bitcoin itself had a serious forking bug as late as beginning of 2013, does that make it insecure? The point is software has to be improved or it gets replaced by more advanced software.
I'm talking about the source code on the final adjustments of how transparent forging will function. The details on the whitepaper hasn't even been released let alone the source code for these changes.
So you agree that there are some security flaws within Nxt and NaS isn't a myth?
Jump to: