You'd better convert your nxt to another alt (Eth, Maid, Factom, Decred?)
Topic: Jean-Luc destroying NXT or saving it with NXT 2.0? - page 2. (Read 2946 times)
NXT has nothin to lose. Go for it.
i think 2.0 is cool, but it comes at great cost. i think nxt won't be the same after. the nxt sidechain could die, or only survive at grace of the fnxt holders. i already see a 1.x branch fork and a community split coming up. a lot of past effort will end up wasted and the platform activity might slow down or come to a halt until after the 2.0 fork.
i just got to come to terms and shake off that some people i have come to like and appreciate might get burned.
from an investor perspective its awesome.
i just got to come to terms and shake off that some people i have come to like and appreciate might get burned.
from an investor perspective its awesome.
If we need a new chain separate from NXT, the new chain should be dependent upon NXT tokens.
It makes no sense for something as established and successful as NXT to become completely dependent upon a brand-new altcoin.
So I think it makes perfect sense for fNXT to be created with ~1 billion tokens that are locked and can never move unless NXT is locked to release them.
If coins can move both ways between the two chains, then NXT holders get to decide how much fNXT is released.
Since 1 fNXT would always be tradeable for 1 NXT within the NXT client, the price of each would remain the same, and the overall effective supply of NXT/fNXT would remain under a billion.
It makes no sense for something as established and successful as NXT to become completely dependent upon a brand-new altcoin.
So I think it makes perfect sense for fNXT to be created with ~1 billion tokens that are locked and can never move unless NXT is locked to release them.
If coins can move both ways between the two chains, then NXT holders get to decide how much fNXT is released.
Since 1 fNXT would always be tradeable for 1 NXT within the NXT client, the price of each would remain the same, and the overall effective supply of NXT/fNXT would remain under a billion.
I do believe that some can think up better scalability solutions, possibly avoiding a split. Jean Luc does make mistakes, for example at the time forcing every new account to not only share their nxt address, but also their 'public key', before they can receive/do their first transaction, making it less userfriendly as bitcoin. Luckily he cancelled that later on but this did cost us in adoption.
But thinking up a better design is not sufficient, you have to implement it and get it marketed as well. In crypto you cannot decide what the devs need to do, they are not employees, even though you may hold many shares/coins. You can only decide whether to continue to follow their lead and vision, or to go your own path, and for the latter you need a lot more than just a better design.
But thinking up a better design is not sufficient, you have to implement it and get it marketed as well. In crypto you cannot decide what the devs need to do, they are not employees, even though you may hold many shares/coins. You can only decide whether to continue to follow their lead and vision, or to go your own path, and for the latter you need a lot more than just a better design.
Quote
How about implementing a solution where you guys/gals don't get to pocket all them fnxt while screwing the AE?
Pocket? Nxt, the coin, is stripped from it's forging power, my Nxt if I may say, for which I payed dearly! So ofcourse I get the coin where my forging power is going to 1 on 1.
Screwing AE? That is based on false assumptions I think. The first one being that Nxt will go down in value as the value will go to fNxt.
Bitcoins do not have any validation power, which you only have with mining gear, yet people value it highly for just the currency aspect. Same is true for Nxt, the currency.
Sure Nxt will lose value with the split, say 50% to fNxt, but the value of cryptos depends mostly on people seeing a future in it, speculation, and I think nxt 2.0 offers exactly that, a promising future, easily doubling it's value.
But some disagree, and think nxt 2.0 is the inverse: no future.
So lots of controversy in the Nxt community. Lead dev Jean Luc proposed Nxt 2.0 which involves splitting nxt into 2 currencies, fNxt and nxt. fnxt becomes motherchain stripped of everything except validating transactions (token for forging/staking), and nxt becomes childchain with all the features (token for paying/currency, aliases, multisig, market place, asset exchange, etc).
This allows to easily fork nxt and create your own crypto, taking whatever features you want from nxt but also having the decentralised network fnxt validate your transactions and secure your crypto. Your crypto (be it currency or app) will also automatically stay up to date with new code. Another change in nxt 2.0 is that only the crypto creator needs to buy (f)nxt to pay for the transactions but the users can now pay the fees with their own currency allowing you to completely hide nxt and fnxt to your end user.
Since likely fnxt will be distributed to all nxt holders in 1:1 allocation, some asset investors and asset issuers think this will crash the assets in nxt value as everybody wants nxt in anticipation of the fnxt distribution and/or nxt will lose a lot of value as the forging power goes to fnxt also damaging the value of the assets. Others fear people will now wait to launch their planned assets & apps build on top of nxt until nxt 2.0 is launched.
Core dev Riker calculated splitting nxt into mother- and childchain will allow nxt to scale to 200 Transactions Per Minute while keeping the blockchain at 540 MB instead of 43 GB. Many agree scalability is important but some believe it can be achieved in less intrusive and better ways. Often heard criticism is that nxt is a platform yet Jean Luc makes too many changes and has not respected backwards compatibility and user friendliness enough chasing away users and developers. Instead the core devs should focus less on code cleanness and efficiency and more on retaining and building out existing users & features.
What do you think? Would Nxt 2.0 be the kiss of death, or the breakthrough Nxt has been waiting for?
This allows to easily fork nxt and create your own crypto, taking whatever features you want from nxt but also having the decentralised network fnxt validate your transactions and secure your crypto. Your crypto (be it currency or app) will also automatically stay up to date with new code. Another change in nxt 2.0 is that only the crypto creator needs to buy (f)nxt to pay for the transactions but the users can now pay the fees with their own currency allowing you to completely hide nxt and fnxt to your end user.
Since likely fnxt will be distributed to all nxt holders in 1:1 allocation, some asset investors and asset issuers think this will crash the assets in nxt value as everybody wants nxt in anticipation of the fnxt distribution and/or nxt will lose a lot of value as the forging power goes to fnxt also damaging the value of the assets. Others fear people will now wait to launch their planned assets & apps build on top of nxt until nxt 2.0 is launched.
Core dev Riker calculated splitting nxt into mother- and childchain will allow nxt to scale to 200 Transactions Per Minute while keeping the blockchain at 540 MB instead of 43 GB. Many agree scalability is important but some believe it can be achieved in less intrusive and better ways. Often heard criticism is that nxt is a platform yet Jean Luc makes too many changes and has not respected backwards compatibility and user friendliness enough chasing away users and developers. Instead the core devs should focus less on code cleanness and efficiency and more on retaining and building out existing users & features.
What do you think? Would Nxt 2.0 be the kiss of death, or the breakthrough Nxt has been waiting for?
Jump to: