NEM Technical Reference (White paper) Released!!!!!!

jabo38

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1001

mining is so 2012-2013

Quote from: JohnnyBTCSeed on May 21, 2015, 09:52:29 AM

so kodtycoon, you're an nxt guy as well right? Can you explain the differences between nem and nxt. (am aware that it is diff code).

If poi is so great then why couldn't nxt just adopt it? What can nem do that nxt can't? (I don't buy the nem is fairer distribution argument, and am not trying to argue that atm)

CfB is a core dev at NXT, some think he is the one that actually came up with POS as it is in NXT, but if not he is definitely on record as leading NXT for the first 6 months.

Here are his words. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10688964 And interestingly enough, since NEM's white paper came out, he hasn't logged into any accounts but instead left a comment that he was getting back to work coding on JINN.

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on March 07, 2015, 06:02:59 AM

Quote from: jabo38 on March 06, 2015, 08:09:45 PM

I think CfB is a pretty amazing programmer, but probably not the best person for a review in this situation as he has already stated that if POI works he will copy it and put it in NXT.

This is correct, but priority changed a little, I'll put it into Jinn-related tech.

TaunSew

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 506

Quote from: JohnnyBTCSeed on May 21, 2015, 09:52:29 AM

so kodtycoon, you're an nxt guy as well right? Can you explain the differences between nem and nxt. (am aware that it is diff code).

If poi is so great then why couldn't nxt just adopt it? What can nem do that nxt can't? (I don't buy the nem is fairer distribution argument, and am not trying to argue that atm)

NEM and NXT both deaded, not even Chechen mountain tribe not trade their 3rd daughter for it...

Real difference is ascertained by quality of code. For many years I worked on gaming modifications, for 12 years now, and NEM code is among best in crypto... You know this especially when you write and look at scrypts, commands, et cetera - I was like NEM code so clean and easy to follow, just like professional studio! NXT code I read was dogs breakfast in comparsion.. (many ppl thought this so NXT capitalization decreased after open source..)

but NEM nobody buy it... they rather buy $hitcoins..

As developer / programmer I / you can appreciate the QA (quality control) but I still see nothing to wow me or anyone yet..

Jguar needs to get that fashion one / big foot stuff into NEM.

JohnnyBTCSeed

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

so kodtycoon, you're an nxt guy as well right? Can you explain the differences between nem and nxt. (am aware that it is diff code).

If poi is so great then why couldn't nxt just adopt it? What can nem do that nxt can't? (I don't buy the nem is fairer distribution argument, and am not trying to argue that atm)

I am the guy

full member

Activity: 237

Merit: 100

great questions and answers here. great job Kodty

Wheatclove

hero member

Activity: 606

Merit: 500

Since when do exchanges stake?

kelsey

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: kelsey on May 19, 2015, 10:54:23 AM

you can not seriously call an exploit where a non holder can hold coins stake them and increase network participation based on other holders coin a non issue. especially when on the most part people gave them the coins to sell rather then to use for their own gain.

Again (for the last time)... who decides whether their property will be held by an exchange or not?

Answer the above (honestly) and you'll see that there is no exploit here.

If anything... you should be stressing how important it is for people to hold their coins locally and harvest as much as possible. With NEM you don't even need to run a node for crying out loud.

Exchanges harvesting can only become an actual threat to the network if (and only if) XEM holders allow for unacceptable harvesting percentages in favor of one (1) exchange to occur.

Potential XEM holder stupidity... Yes. Exploit by the exchanges... No.

answer; people working in their own best interest and not that of the network.

even in this case thats not the point, it is an exploit, because genuine users who wish to support the network are unfairly disadvantage by those who are out for their own interest.

i mean the whole point in NEM twigging existing POS system was to make it fairer for genuine network participates over hoarders, and its twig now makes the exchanges (who aren't even genuine holders) now have a huge advantage over genuine network participants.

1 step forward 1 step back, nil gain over existing rich get richer POS.

kelsey

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: kelsey on May 19, 2015, 08:29:41 AM

just saying one particular exchange at this point in time isn't fully exploiting its potential position doesn't say at all that exchanges can't exploit this, and sooner or later they will.

Why are you referring to this non-issue as an exploit when the decision to transfer (and/or store) their property to the exchanges is made solely by the XEM holders themselves? Undecided

well it is an issue, as non dumping types who support the network are disadvantaged.

often those sending to the exchanges aren't usually caring about the best interest of the network.

also with any crypto points of centralisation such as exchanges aren't in the balance of things a positive thing for currencies attempting to be truly p2p (though i can understand the benefits for the crypto community in its infancy).

you can not seriously call an exploit where a non holder can hold coins stake them and increase network participation based on other holders coin a non issue. especially when on the most part people gave them the coins to sell rather then to use for their own gain.

no exchange should be staking coins, thats a given in the crypto community, its bad for any POS coin.

tbh there is no point in the whole NEM equation if you want to pick and chose what is fair network participation, it defeats the main point of having a hard coded mathematical equation as the backbone of trust in a network.

(i must give NEM credit though you did solve a password software exploit, present in similar systems that I won't go into here, that's a pleasant surprise i have to admit, and shows there was some competence in atleast one of the devs).

kelsey

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: kelsey on May 18, 2015, 09:26:22 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: kelsey on May 18, 2015, 09:33:56 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Troonetpt on May 18, 2015, 12:23:25 AM

I don't see anything new in the NEM coins, it's just a copy altcoins, just ignore it.

the logic of posting this in the very thread that proves your post invalid is astounding.. astoundingly bad! Cheesy

yet ironically you responded to this rather then a genuine question i posed Undecided

i didnt see your comment.

Quote from: kelsey on May 17, 2015, 09:09:22 PM

so POS encourages hoarding, and those who have the most get the most.

to get around this NEM powers to be have created a equation so network activity adjusts the amount a user can earn (awards an importance score) so its not just a simple larger hoarder with the biggest holding wins.

yes? no?

yes thats how it is supposed to work.. so effectively someone who is active in the network that does transactions on a regular basis ends up with a higher importance, and thus reward, than someone who simply hoards their coins. its not just rewards that gets better distributed either. a users importance is the users level of control over the network, so those who use the network the most will inherently have a higher level of control the network than someone with an equal amount of coins that doesnt ever transact.

so a huge advantage to the exchanges.

we can interact and boast out importance but all along the way getting fees for doing so, (and with my tests i'm easily paying more fees then getting mined).

exchanges well they use the users coins to stake, get plenty of artificial network participation, yet their uses pay their fees, so exchanges have the edge and in any such system any player who has an edge has potential to own the system.

exchanges WIN WIN, users some WIN LOSE others LOSE LOSE .

this guy has 80m: http://nembex.nem.ninja/#/search/NA5PXB3KOIEQR3XLS6QHPNXZZ5LMLCJTGZJMBKTQ

this is poloniex's wallet with 104m: http://nembex.nem.ninja/#/search/NBZMQO7ZPBYNBDUR7F75MAKA2S3DHDCIFG775N3D

polo(who has 104m) importance: 71%oo

guy with 80m XEM's importance: 84%oo -> >20% less coins. nearly 20% higher importance.

in a proof of stake system, poloniex would have the higher stake and thus control and reward in the network. in proof of importance, that is not the case.

User: WIN
Exchange: LOSE

WIN for Proof of importance.

one piece anecdotal evidence is next to ZERO proof against the exploit possible by exchanges.

just saying one particular exchange at this point in time isn't fully exploiting its potential position doesn't say at all that exchanges can't exploit this, and sooner or later they will.

(and even in this case pol has any outstanding level of importance considering its its users coins its using to obtain such a level.)

spartacusrex

hero member

Activity: 718

Merit: 545

Thanks kodtycoon. Always answering our POS queries.. Tongue

That's a big paper.. lot of work.. took a while to skim it, let alone digest it. A feat like that always deserves .. congratulations!

Here is the EigenTrust++ pdf , which I thought explained a few bits clearer.

http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~lingliu/papers/2012/XinxinFan-EigenTrust++.pdf

1) So with PoI a lower stake can have more importance, how does this affect the 51% attack ? How much stake and importance can you 'theoretically' get away with to have 51% power ?

2) If all the participants in the PoI scheme behaved similarly, this would mean a straight POS system ?

3) NEM's architecture vs NEUCoin's vs NXT ? (These seem the big POS boys) . I was just wondering whether we will ever get a 'definitive' POS algo that works better than all the rest.. ?

kelsey

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: kelsey on May 18, 2015, 09:33:56 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Troonetpt on May 18, 2015, 12:23:25 AM

I don't see anything new in the NEM coins, it's just a copy altcoins, just ignore it.

the logic of posting this in the very thread that proves your post invalid is astounding.. astoundingly bad! Cheesy

yet ironically you responded to this rather then a genuine question i posed Undecided

i didnt see your comment.

Quote from: kelsey on May 17, 2015, 09:09:22 PM

so POS encourages hoarding, and those who have the most get the most.

to get around this NEM powers to be have created a equation so network activity adjusts the amount a user can earn (awards an importance score) so its not just a simple larger hoarder with the biggest holding wins.

yes? no?

yes thats how it is supposed to work.. so effectively someone who is active in the network that does transactions on a regular basis ends up with a higher importance, and thus reward, than someone who simply hoards their coins. its not just rewards that gets better distributed either. a users importance is the users level of control over the network, so those who use the network the most will inherently have a higher level of control the network than someone with an equal amount of coins that doesnt ever transact.

so a huge advantage to the exchanges.

we can interact and boast out importance but all along the way getting fees for doing so, (and with my tests i'm easily paying more fees then getting mined).

exchanges well they use the users coins to stake, get plenty of artificial network participation, yet their uses pay their fees, so exchanges have the edge and in any such system any player who has an edge has potential to own the system.

exchanges WIN WIN, users some WIN LOSE others LOSE LOSE .

JohnnyBTCSeed

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: JohnnyBTCSeed on May 18, 2015, 02:32:55 PM

Can you please explain vested vs unvested concept? Thanks

Quote

Whenever an account receives XEM, the new XEM are added to the account’s unvested balance. When an account sends XEM, XEMs are taken from both the vested and the unvested balance, to retain the vested to unvested ratio. Additionally, every 1440 blocks, 1/10 of the unvested balance is moved to the vested part. - SEC 2.1

I read that page and didnt understand those terms hence the question

JohnnyBTCSeed

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

Can you please explain vested vs unvested concept? Thanks

americanpegasus

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: americanpegasus on May 18, 2015, 01:47:26 PM

Wait... "when everyone got their coins in the genesis"... is NEM a premine?

if you mean there is no mining in nem by "premine" then yes.

there were >1500 users in nems genesis most of which are unique users and most of which only got 1/2 stakes, and the proof is in the current distribution. 3/4 rounds of stake holder analysis removed pretty much all sock masters, resulting in brilliant distribution.

ps: http://cointelegraph.com/news/114289/nem-technical-reference-introduces-reputation-enhanced-proof-of-importance

So coins were sold prior to launch.

I see.

I think we both know that a coin that had pre-sales can never be one of the final and long term cryptos of the world, but I do wish you the best of luck with your NEM, and may you successfully convince other users to buy in.

It's obvious a lot of work went into it, despite the crippling economic flaws it incorporates.

Long live NEM.

americanpegasus

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

Wait... "when everyone got their coins in the genesis"... is NEM a premine?

JohnnyBTCSeed

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: kelsey on May 18, 2015, 09:33:56 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Troonetpt on May 18, 2015, 12:23:25 AM

I don't see anything new in the NEM coins, it's just a copy altcoins, just ignore it.

the logic of posting this in the very thread that proves your post invalid is astounding.. astoundingly bad! Cheesy

yet ironically you responded to this rather then a genuine question i posed Undecided

i didnt see your comment.

Quote from: kelsey on May 17, 2015, 09:09:22 PM

so POS encourages hoarding, and those who have the most get the most.

to get around this NEM powers to be have created a equation so network activity adjusts the amount a user can earn (awards an importance score) so its not just a simple larger hoarder with the biggest holding wins.

yes? no?

yes thats how it is supposed to work.. so effectively someone who is active in the network that does transactions on a regular basis ends up with a higher importance, and thus reward, than someone who simply hoards their coins. its not just rewards that gets better distributed either. a users importance is the users level of control over the network, so those who use the network the most will inherently have a higher level of control the network than someone with an equal amount of coins that doesnt ever transact.

So is it fair to say that not all holders are created equal then? In fact some holders are more important then others and should be given preferential treatment?

americanpegasus

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

What's to stop someone from simply owning many NEM addresses and passing coins around within those addresses to fake importance?

If that's possible, what's stopping someone from automating this process?

kelsey

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Troonetpt on May 18, 2015, 12:23:25 AM

I don't see anything new in the NEM coins, it's just a copy altcoins, just ignore it.

the logic of posting this in the very thread that proves your post invalid is astounding.. astoundingly bad! Cheesy

yet ironically you responded to this rather then a genuine question i posed Undecided

Troonetpt

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

I don't see anything new in the NEM coins, it's just a copy altcoins, just ignore it.

Topic: NEM Technical Reference (White paper) Released!!!!!! (Read 2606 times)