Topic: | Nxt | Blockchain Platform | Proof of Stake | Official - page 526. (Read 941260 times)
It is 4 in the morning here and the wife cant sleep -_-! but will leave you guys with some good reads:
Q:
I've read that bitcoins are infinitely divisible:
Are bitcoins truly infinitely divisible or merely practically?
A link to the relevant source code would be more than welcome.
A: (last one)
If there is a need for them, additional decimal places can be added with concensus of the network. This is why some refer to "infinite" divisibility, because we can select the level that we need as time goes on.
The current level selected in the code (by Satoshi) is 8 decimal places (1 satoshi = 0.00000001 BTC) hence the nickname for the smallest unit currently possible for bitcoin today.
As a thought exercise, if a consensus of the network (miners, but also clients and server applications for compatibility reasons) decides to update to a version of the protocol that includes 16 decimal places inspired by your post, we could end up with a new base unit (1 satoshi = 100,000,000 gracchi) as well as nanobitcoins (nBTC), picobitcoins (pBTC), and even femtobitcoins (fBTC, 10 gracchi)
I have trouble imagining the need for such a thing, unless destroying bitcoin becomes a prevalent method of use. If it is needed the potential is there and will never dilute your held bitcoins, which actually makes it a problem some would love to see the need to solve.
shareimprove this answer
Source: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/19661/how-is-bitcoin-infinitely-divisible
Quote
Q:
I've read that bitcoins are infinitely divisible:
Quote
Bitcoins can be divided up and trade into as small of pieces as one wants
How is this possible programmatically? The only thing that comes to mind are floating points which are inaccurate.Are bitcoins truly infinitely divisible or merely practically?
A link to the relevant source code would be more than welcome.
A: (last one)
If there is a need for them, additional decimal places can be added with concensus of the network. This is why some refer to "infinite" divisibility, because we can select the level that we need as time goes on.
The current level selected in the code (by Satoshi) is 8 decimal places (1 satoshi = 0.00000001 BTC) hence the nickname for the smallest unit currently possible for bitcoin today.
As a thought exercise, if a consensus of the network (miners, but also clients and server applications for compatibility reasons) decides to update to a version of the protocol that includes 16 decimal places inspired by your post, we could end up with a new base unit (1 satoshi = 100,000,000 gracchi) as well as nanobitcoins (nBTC), picobitcoins (pBTC), and even femtobitcoins (fBTC, 10 gracchi)
I have trouble imagining the need for such a thing, unless destroying bitcoin becomes a prevalent method of use. If it is needed the potential is there and will never dilute your held bitcoins, which actually makes it a problem some would love to see the need to solve.
shareimprove this answer
- @ Gracchus In theory, every cryptocurrency modeled after bitcoin could be retrofitted for more (or less) decimal places. Some altcoins have made changes to these parameters already, but so far I have not seen anyone who has tried to alter one after issuance. @Murch, that is an example of one of many technical details that would need to be solved. Check bitcointalk for more detailed discussions, there are several threads along this topic IIRC (with actual core developers commenting.) – CoinEnablers Jan 4 at 15:03
Source: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/19661/how-is-bitcoin-infinitely-divisible
The transaction fee won't change immediately. So it will be 1NXT before the change and 100000000 NQT (or 1 NXT) just after the changed.
Yes not immediately but this change allows it to happen, which is a good thing.
I agree. It will probably increase the number of transactions too.
I didn't notice, may be I'm wrong, it's easy to check. Send any amount of NXT to e.g. your own slightly changed (1 digit is enough) address. If such transaction is accepted - there are still no checksums in addresses.
How are we supposed to fund new accounts? Do we need a new transaction type?
Also guys I just thought of this.
What if you want to increase nxt to 10 billion? what would you do with the existing holders? hmmm how about you make their balance (balance*10)?
So? how is this different from this idea by enabling more decimal places?
If the above scenario makes you rethink about my arguements. Please share with us your thoughts and input.
What if you want to increase nxt to 10 billion? what would you do with the existing holders? hmmm how about you make their balance (balance*10)?
So? how is this different from this idea by enabling more decimal places?
If the above scenario makes you rethink about my arguements. Please share with us your thoughts and input.
You have missed out a negative sign. We are adding 10^-8 (i.e. decimal places) not 10^8 (dilution of supply). The ideas are opposites, that is how they are different.
If a loaf of bread costs 5Nxt before the change, it will cost 500000000NQT after the change. Or 5 Nxt as 500000000 * 10^-8 = 5 NXT
Who are you working for!? Blackcoin? Ripple?
Good to see NXT is highly divisible now. One of two basic features NXT was lacking is finally implemented. Well done! The other very basic feature, which is a must - checksummed address, hopefully it will soon be implemented too.
Is it not implemented already?
Also guys I just thought of this.
What if you want to increase nxt to 10 billion? what would you do with the existing holders? hmmm how about you make their balance (balance*10)?
So? how is this different from this idea by enabling more decimal places?
If the above scenario makes you rethink about my arguements. Please share with us your thoughts and input.
What if you want to increase nxt to 10 billion? what would you do with the existing holders? hmmm how about you make their balance (balance*10)?
So? how is this different from this idea by enabling more decimal places?
If the above scenario makes you rethink about my arguements. Please share with us your thoughts and input.
No, the above scenario doesn't make me rethink anything. If everyone's account is increase by 10 then we will have 10 times more nxt, and one nxt will be equal to 1/10 current price, at the current demand/supply marketplace. Nothing has changed. The same applied to fractions. Nothing has changed.
We need more users, less fees, higher demand. Introducing NQT is the right thing.
Also guys I just thought of this.
What if you want to increase nxt to 10 billion? what would you do with the existing holders? hmmm how about you make their balance (balance*10)?
So? how is this different from this idea by enabling more decimal places?
If the above scenario makes you rethink about my arguements. Please share with us your thoughts and input.
What if you want to increase nxt to 10 billion? what would you do with the existing holders? hmmm how about you make their balance (balance*10)?
So? how is this different from this idea by enabling more decimal places?
If the above scenario makes you rethink about my arguements. Please share with us your thoughts and input.
other factors aside:
value -> 1 oldNXT = 10 newNXT
everybody has same wealth as before -> if you possessed 1k of 1billion you now possess 10k of 10billion
@Iophie
Just that I get that: your problem is that NXTs are dividable soon?
Just that I get that: your problem is that NXTs are dividable soon?
wow, lophie, do you want to buy back after you sold everything? 
The transaction fee won't change immediately. So it will be 1NXT before the change and 100000000 NQT (or 1 NXT) just after the changed.
Yes not immediately but this change allows it to happen, which is a good thing.
Also guys I just thought of this.
What if you want to increase nxt to 10 billion? what would you do with the existing holders? hmmm how about you make their balance (balance*10)?
So? how is this different from this idea by enabling more decimal places?
If the above scenario makes you rethink about my arguements. Please share with us your thoughts and input.
What if you want to increase nxt to 10 billion? what would you do with the existing holders? hmmm how about you make their balance (balance*10)?
So? how is this different from this idea by enabling more decimal places?
If the above scenario makes you rethink about my arguements. Please share with us your thoughts and input.
Good to see NXT is highly divisible now. One of two basic features NXT was lacking is finally implemented. Well done! The other very basic feature, which is a must - checksummed address, hopefully it will soon be implemented too.
Is it not implemented already?
But there is the fee problem. One transaction of asset or one decentralize message can't cost 0.01 NXT fee. If NXT take the same value of Bitcoin now, it's 0.01 $. It's too much and the value of 1 NXT can go higher (as BTC).
We want to build on the top of Nxt and we must divide the NXT for that.
We want to build on the top of Nxt and we must divide the NXT for that.
I don't see the logic in these arguments
Just to be clear, everyone knows we're going from 1000000000 to 1000000000.00000000NXT
And not 1000000000 to 100000000000000000 NXT, right? < this one is dilution
The transaction fee won't change immediately. So it will be 1NXT before the change and 100000000 NQT (or 1 NXT) just after the changed.
Am I missing something?
Just to be clear, everyone knows we're going from 1000000000 to 1000000000.00000000NXT
And not 1000000000 to 100000000000000000 NXT, right? < this one is dilution
The transaction fee won't change immediately. So it will be 1NXT before the change and 100000000 NQT (or 1 NXT) just after the changed.
Am I missing something?
Perfectly correct.
Good to see NXT is highly divisible now. One of two basic features NXT was lacking is finally implemented. Well done! The other very basic feature, which is a must - checksummed addresses, hopefully it will soon be implemented too.
I don't see the logic in these arguments
Just to be clear, everyone knows we're going from 1000000000 to 1000000000.00000000NXT
And not 1000000000 to 100000000000000000 NXT, right? < this one is dilution
The transaction fee won't change immediately. So it will be 1NXT before the change and 100000000 NQT (or 1 NXT) just after the changed.
Am I missing something?
Just to be clear, everyone knows we're going from 1000000000 to 1000000000.00000000NXT
And not 1000000000 to 100000000000000000 NXT, right? < this one is dilution
The transaction fee won't change immediately. So it will be 1NXT before the change and 100000000 NQT (or 1 NXT) just after the changed.
Am I missing something?
NXT will always be in my heart.
It's like saying that if you have $100 bill, and you convert it to 100000 cents , you just diluted your money.
There is no logic to to that claim as $100 = 100000 cents
There is no logic to to that claim as $100 = 100000 cents
okay, now assume there is only a fixed amount of dollars that no one can make more, ever. Imagine the distrbution to 70 people from the start. Then "after a while" take every dollars and cut it to 100000 part where each part also works in this currency system. Add to that that this dollar system is open source where the services it provides can be copied and adopted in a new system which can be launched at any moment.
Now the goal is to keep users on THIS CHAIN not THIS TECHNOLOGY, make it work.
Interesting argument... Hmmm. There is some truth to this.
I see your problem, because it indirectly decreases the trading value for one whole NXT. Because now people have the option to trade a fraction of 1 NXT i.o. 1 whole NXT.
How would you try to work around the following scenario: 1NXT = $10. I want to buy something which is worth $1. How would you do this?
1. things would get crazy expensive to buy with NXT or 2. you need to allow decimal places.
you add one as you needed it, market it for a long while, wait for the fork to start and hope to god the main chain would die.
Jump to: