Topic: [ANN] SuperNET NXT asset 12071612744977229797, SUPERNET KMD assetchain in summer - page 188. (Read 736772 times)

Do you have a link to Atomic thread?

Because only 10% of it has been released and likely most of those who have it are hodlers, it's probably not a good idea to buy now. Should probably wait until CryptoAxe/James release more of the asset to find it's true market value.

I know nothing about Atomic, and how useful or valuable it is, I'm only basing this on the current distribution of the coin, which would tend to give it an inflated price. (I don't intend this as a knock against Atomic at all.)

But who knows? Maybe the information released tomorrow will make the price skyrocket, and perhaps James/CryptoAxe hold on to their percentages until the technology matches expectations.

Good question ... I would like to know as well since I have several hundred tokens and plan to hold UNITY long term. How will dividends/revenues be paid to UNITY holders?

Thanks James, I bought bitmark when you mentioned here and I am making big money.

Long Live James!

not until more is known and not until the price is available at a reasonable rate. The NXTventure dividend receivers are not wanting to sell any Atomic at low prices.

Atomic is early stage risky investment, so only invest what is easy to lose for a chance it is becoming big gain in the future and only after you are comfortable with the tech.

I am not doing any tradings and I am advising peoples to wait until more details are available. I take no responsibility for any tradings and I am not doing any Atomic selling myself.

James

Hi guys,

would you recommend to invest in atomic coin and why?

Long Live James!

Apologies if this has been answered already, but I haven't really parsed the entire thread yet:
How exactly will dividends/revenues be paid to UNITY holders?

Cheers,
~ Myagui

I think anybody with any large order for TOKEN would be following the opening of trading and when it is delayed for days due to their bid still there, it will be removed.

I can just imagine the peer pressure to find the laggard with the forgotten bid on the AE if the delay for trading is too long

James

P.S. After it is clear than anybody paying attention will know that TOKEN will be invalidated has had time to cancel their bids, then we can do the dividend of SuperNET asset and start the trading. We will have the voting during this time anyway

I am not familiar with what exactly the darkcoin masternodes do. Is the source code for it available yet? From my understanding I doubt they are very similar at all as the SuperNET nodes are not going to be doing any coinjoin

XC relay nodes sounds like it might be a little closer, but I cannot find the source code to make any technical comparison. Plus a bit too busy for any in-depth analysis

Given the lack of transparency I can only guess, but I would say somewhat similar to the relay nodes and not very similar to the masternodes.

James

Originally Atomic was proposed to me as a coin, but the nature of it made the "coinness" not the most efficient technical implementation and a more on-demand format was better. So we agreed to make it into a DAC, at least the ultimate form of it. The initial versions would probably be not quite 100% DAC

devs want to develop stuff, but the money it is nice, and coins were popular way to make the money
we got 500 coins!
maybe there is only room for half a dozen major coins and a 100 minor coins to mirror the real world fiat clumpiness of currencies. No way to know for sure, but the highlander mentality of "there can only be one" winning currency isnt even true in the centralized fiat world, so how could that possibly be true for decentralized crypto?

With SuperNET, it is making a showcase for the most valuable tech that the devs can make. The good devs they are not caring for the marketing so much and this is handled by others, so by disintermediating the non-tech part of coins the SuperNET is allowing for the good devs to monetize their codings with a preexisting large base of users, as opposed to the whole bootstrapping a community, nodes, userbase, etc.

There have been some good coins that didnt manage to bootstrap a critical mass of users and they slowly faded away. With SuperNET this will not be the case.

Imagine a world without google.

How did people manage to find the good websites before google? Mostly the highly marketed websites were getting the traffic and it had little to do with how good the site was. This was before the days of all the social media though, so the example is probably a bit extreme. Still the point is still valid. SuperNET will allow a large user base to find out about and try new tech and if it is popular then it achieves a very quick success. The tech can be separated from the coin.

James

BTER isn't a problem, I don't think. The problem is that they can't be removed by a third party on AE (though in other circumstances, that's a really useful feature ). I would have suggested just filling them and taking the hit if it was a small number, but perhaps this had already occurred to some people. There's an order for 100,000 TOKEN at 0.001 NXT. Wouldn't mind getting 100,000 UNITY for 100 NXT myself...
Hmm. Easy on BTER, hard on AE.

Out of interests sake, are SuperNET nodes similiar to the DarkCOIN or XC relay nodes?

Don't count on everyone voluntarily removing their buy orders. They need to be removed by you or bter.

2014-09-16-14:00:02-GMT SOLD 251298.20436917 TOKEN
 GOT 1054.4414311 BTC, 11907222.29457071 NXT, 20763.02816764 BTCD, 653425.17163942 CNY
NXT AE 27'495'489.74985353 for 220179 TOKEN

only the directory info is broadcast and only within each coin network.

Now when a new node appears, it will need to have its info sent to N nodes, but this propagates using the standard bitcoin message protocol.

As far as overall network bandwidth load, a new node appearing adds a minimum N/2 kilobytes of bandwidth as the pubaddr info packet is about half a kilobyte. Assuming 8 to 1 redundancy to fully propagate (I am expecting a lot smaller number) this is an average load of 4 kilobytes per node per new user joining the network, since the total bandwidth is spread across the N users.

So, how much load is this?

Let us assuming that 10,000 users are exiting and rejoining everyday. Pretty extreme case as I personally keep the wallets running nonstop to stay in sync. Since I am being super conservative on the 8:1 and 100% users, let us ignore population concentrations during certain GMT times and see what the average load is for the entire day:

10000 * 4KB (32 kbits) / 86400 = 3.7 kilobits per second

This is no big disaster as even if it is 10 times more, 37 kilobits/sec is not great, but still not anything close to a problem.

Also, this is assuming 100% of the user's of the participating coin networks are actively using SuperNET. Since it is an option the actual number will be less than 100%.

Once the directory info is broadcast, then the privacyServers are making direct UDP routes between any two SuperNET nodes.

Please explain to me a specific method of attacking using Sybil. Each SuperNET API request is signed by the sending account and if it is not from the expected acct, it would be ignored. Unsolicited requests would be associated with the sybil'ed acct which by definition would have no history, so I am looking forward to how a smart guy like you is able to make a sybil attack.

It is possible for a specific privacyServer to be flooded, but in this case the user can switch to a different privacyServer. If hostile forces are starting to attack the SuperNET, then there will be a new market for privacyServer vendors offering hardened privacyServers for SuperNET users to use. If these attackers are just hypothetical, then people can run with the localhost privacyServer. Maybe I will just make it so that the users are randomly selecting from the list of all available privacyServers for each request. Actually this is a good way to increase the anon factor by delinking comms between a node and its privacyServer.

Thank you for your criticisms! They might not be so accurate, but they are making me think to improve the SuperNET. I look forward to the detailed explanation of the method for a sybil attack.

James

Not sure whether everyone will remove Token orders... bound to be someone who gets burned. Maybe that's just the price to pay. Either way it goes, there may be people who try to game the system by taking advantage of others, or your good nature.
Is there a way to do it through BTER - send Tokens there and get them auto-converted and sent back immediately? Centralisation, of course, might put people off that one.

Looking forward to hearing more about Atomic (as I think everyone is). I think SuperNET will thoroughly blur the distinctions between coin and asset/service now: what is the purpose of creating a new coin with a distinctive feature, when you can probably achieve the same through a linked service?

Exactly.

This is how Atomic was born

James

good point
I think maybe I should wait until all buy orders for TOKEN are removed before distributing the SuperNET (UNITY) asset

In a decentralized system of privacyServer nodes using UDP where is the DDoS attack vector? The directory info is broadcast via the various coin networks. Unlike TCP where you can lock up a socket for a while, with UDP there are no connections to tie up, so you have to saturate the entire channel. If the attacker has resources to DdoS all the nodes of SuperNET and simply saturate everybody's connection, I see no solution to this. Then again what is the cost of this and what is gained?

So, if somebody will be saturating 100,000 nodes with 100,000 x 1 mbit/sec = 100 terabits/sec of flood traffic, expect SuperNET to have some slow response time for a while. If the attacker has 1 petabit/sec of bandwidth, then the SuperNET will be taken offline for the duration, then again so will all the coin networks and a big chunk of the Internet itself.

If anybody can make some hypothetical attack vectors based on the actual SuperNET design, I would appreciate this. For the initial version, I am just thinking that getting a "busy" signal is acceptable in the event that the other node is not reachable for whatever reason. I dont expect the SuperNET to be subjected to the petabit/sec flood in its first months.

James

TY