Topic: Mintcoin or NXT coin?? - page 2. (Read 3989 times)

In nxt development thread that has been discussed.They are aware the fee is currently super high.They were discussing between reducing it to .1 nxt or .01 nxt.I guess it will soon be reduced to .1,and in the future,when required if it gains value,reduced to .01 and further.

Jesus 1%?  Who would hold this shit?

Nxt is not a clone




_{and the decentralised asset exchange is about to be launched}

In my opinion Doge,Mintcoin,PPC,BC,HBN,BCX and much more coins was better distributed than NXT OK eg. Mint it has 4,5% effective premine but NXT have 100%...
I don't know how that 100% was exactly distributed but i have rad that few investors took few bilns of NXT for 5 Btc.
Mayby they were even connected to devs, i don't know i never can be sure.
POW mining distribution is more transparent we have multipools, we have big farms they aim is ONLY convert BTC...
those miner are putting cheap coins on market and all can catch them.
Coins are getting hot more people are joying the party press is make even bigger attention look at DOGE all could join
and don't try even compare NXT to Doge distribution Doge is flawless in that matter.

If i compare Mintcoin and NXT in long therm i don't know for fairier distribution my vote goes to Mint.
If NXT main owners can hire 10 fulltime developers they can make unique features for sure but in long
run it looks like paying IT company for printing and maintaining digital money.

I will ask again what about that 1nxt transaction fee this is principal for nxt.
I some poor people want buy bread for 1$ and 1nxt cost 1$ he will pay 2$ in same time while can pay with BTC and it will cost much less 1.0001$
this is most interesting to me. How next will deal with that ? It looks like it can't handle real life currency principals.
No one want give me answer so far about that.

mining started off and was originally envisioned with people using home computers to support the network, but an arms race ensued and now it takes large investments in computers that are searching semi-pointlessly to solve problems that don't really mean much.  that is a lot of wasted, energy, computer power, and electricity.  mining had a real necessity in the early days but now is a system grown out of control via greed.  coins are meant exactly to combat this kind of thing.  with an IPO or mining a party needs an initial investment to get in, but with an IPO person doesn't need a minimum 10,000 dollars as an initial investment, they can put in 100 or 5 or 5000.  which sounds better to a new person wanting to test the waters? cryptocurrencies only live on right now out of speculation, but at some point for them to live, they will need to live on because they are actually being used by real people daily.  NXT was a far more fair distribution in reality than bitcoin or probably most any other serious coin.  it also has a more environmentally sane way of maintaining the network, which goes back to the original intentions. 

What makes NEM fairly distributed? Just asking for info

Fast development sure but they have high intrest rate from 1NXT fees so they can afford to full time development.
Other coin consists mostly form volunteers like BTC so is hard to compare both sides.
But as i said what with that fees 1-nxt per each cut - nxt operating range.
Now 1 nxt price 0,5$ .
Transaction fee 0.5% of value is reasonable that is why Bitcoin is better over paypal,westernunion in sending money or  buying, selling items eg. prepaid cards.
In short for me that mean i need buy goods over 100$ to make it sense, in other cases i would like use some other coin with lower fees.
For companies 1Nxt fee every time is like throwing away money in world where everywhere they cut costs so real companies will avoid it.
The higher price NXT is the more useless that coin start to be in real life when it have 1nxt transaction fee.
Are nxt devs planing lower transaction fees or sth else to deal with that ?

IMO nxt version with stable 1% inflation annual but little fees is much more superior than 1nxt constant fee.
That transacion fee fee is bottle next for it .

If you have to ask the question, I would advise you not to invest in either lol

None of them... Both have falling potential. Not being traded for bagrain prices = possible loss.

go with mintcoin .... you wont get anything forging NXT unless you hold millions.
It's also very buggy, just go read their thread if you dare:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nxt-descendant-of-bitcoin-updated-information-345619

Mintcoin will get you 20% first year.

Neither, but if you have to pick one go for Mintcoin.

Diversify and invest in both. Mintcoin market cap is a lot cheaper so has more room for future gains.

Just be sure to avoid the cheap clones eg NEM or Darkcoin etc.

Software development in NXT is very fast - faster than Bitcoin or any other altcoin out there. That's about the only reason I'm hooked into it.

Mint coin is good too. But already a few weeks old, that's why I think it's a good idea to wait and buy Nem when it's a few days old. But I like Mint coin.

I would go with either two. I mean, with all these alt coins, I think it's best to stick with the top coins. Consider Nem coin when it comes out in a couple of months, it's starting out with 3,000 active stake holders, vs NXT 73. So it's subject to less manipulation, and the amount of people who have a stake means it's going to be pretty popular right off the bat. And buying at the beginning will give you the best returns, if my logic of it becoming big is correct. So look into that coin.

Edit: I have a Nemcoin stake, so take that into consideration.

I would invest in mint coin.

Unfortunately, when you ask a question like this you're really just asking people to steer you into buying the coin they want you to buy. You really need to research the different coins yourself. There is a lot of inaccurate information in this thread already.

I don't get the argument that Mintcoin has more fair distribution than Nxt, as both require something to invest in the IPO. Nxt required BTC to get into the IPO. Mintcoin requires GPUs or scrypt ASICs to get into the IPO (to get a reasonable stake in the IPO at least.)

Both BTC and GPUs/Scrypt ASICs cost money. If anything Mintcoin is unfairly spread more so to GPU/Scrypt ASIC farm owners than to the rest of the community. Not everyone mines and has large mining farms... this still creates what someone could call an "unfair" distribution. Sure, with Nxt you had to pay BTC to be in the IPO, but still with Mintcoin you need to buy mining hardware or already have it. I don't see a big difference there...

IMO, most people claim Nxt is "unfair" because they didn't have the foresight to invest in the IPO and are somewhat envious that they missed the boat. For the record, I am one of those people... can't believe I missed out on Nxt.  

But, I would not consider Nxt unfair... everyone had a chance to invest in it. It's akin to how some people call Bitcoin unfair due to early adopters getting rich...

PS: My answer to your question is NXT > Mintcoin. They got a nice head start and are leaps and bounds ahead of mintcoin as far as developing features on top of the base PoS algorithm. Although the method for distribution is different, Mintcoin looks like a copy cat of Nxt if you ignore that factor.

check out Blackcoin.(0 premine)
Different approach to mining POS random 1% stakes occurs.

Mint is interesting only 4,5% premined compare to NXT and 100% premine.
They could start like others with POW on beginning for better distribution but they failed and few control mariolity at allmost 0 cost.
I wonder how much in rality it goes to Devs 30% of new coins(from 1nxt transactions) maybe more?
High price of NXT can kill that curency for trading transaction will rise to heaven if price of NXT will skyrocekt and unfourtunatly that will kill it.
This coin can be killed by it success.
Eg. 1 next costs 1$ do you want pay 1$ for transfer when something cost 20$ eg T-shirt ?
In long run success of NXT can cause it big fail it will be to expensive to use as regular currency
 

colored coins? wouldn't this destroy the fundamental element of crypto currency (anonymity)?