Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 1336. (Read 2761645 times)

I read the following link in a previous post:

http://wiki.nxtcrypto.org/wiki/Account_Control

This would be a really brilliant feature!

It means almost theft-safe accounts, provided that you can set a control as not reversible

I would do this way:

1) I create a "safe" account A and a "spending" account B
2) I set that account A can only send Nxt to account B and only a limited daily amount

If someone stole my passphrase for account A he could do nothing, if he stole account B he could steal my Nxt but the damage would be limited. If I found that account B is compromised I can create account C and lock account B in the same way as A  

I wonder if such feature could be implemented in bitcoin? Probably it requires some great change in the protocol

I bought NXT again from these BTCs.

ha hobos. NXT in boxcars now

Hey Salsacz,

 Can you help me find graphic designers for this project? I've removed the design estimated costs from the proposal

 https://nextcoin.org/index.php/topic,3441.0.html

 Does anyone know who designed http://www.nxtcrypto.org/ ?

 It would make sense to link the cards to that site, and match the "look and feel"

 We could link Wesley's modified redemption faucet right into the site with a /redeem/ URL on the cards

 I think this is a great idea and I am not asking for money to do it, only looking to raise funds and help to make it happen

 Thanks!

I edited it now

This too can be gamed.  Assume a person can uniquely be identified with colored coins.  What is to stop a significant stakeholder attaching colored coins to hobos for some pocket change to gain additional votes.   The only solution that cannot be gamed is 1 NXT = 1 vote?  This is also consistent with POS.

I hate u.....

This "wild west" approach is inefficient. We should strive to do better.

Here are a couple different appeals, not all of them congruent.

Appeal to potential investor greed:
The tone of the appeal needs to more more forward looking than backward looking, more focused on the possibilities to be enjoyed by investing now, rather than justifying BCNext's decisions. This appeal targets speculators.
"If you believe that NXT offers the possibility of significant value appreciation, then it might make sense for you buy a stake."
People who buy shares of Bekrshire Hathaway do so because they believe that its value will increase from this point forward more than other things they might invest in. But I don't think they spend a lot of time condemning Warren Buffet or any of the early adopters for having made enormous gains already.  

Appeal to development integrity:
This appeal targets long-term investors.
BCNext closed the funding period because he accumulated exactly the amount of startup funding that was necessary for the project. Taking on more funding would have, in his view, corrupted [this might not be the best word] the development process. The goal was always, and continues to be, developing the best cyptographic architecture. It is common these days for corporations to reward stockholders at the expense of sound product development principles. BCNext is old fashioned in that he always places the integrity of the product above the financial rewards of his investors. But, as we all know, if the product is excellent, the money will find it.

Do any of these appeals help us think about the audience we might be writing to, and the way we want to position the NXT product/process?

Holy crap, it's a Miami Summary!

thanks you are now listed in the gdoc (in my signature and to the right)

+1

That's a bit arrogant, but Ok, everybody is entitled to his own opinion.

I bet many smart people thought that decentralized money wasn't possible.

Will somebody promote Nxt here ---> https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/altcoin-devs-read-this-looking-for-altcoin-as-an-alternative-payment-leaserig-433319

About the voting system:

I have an idea. What if the user gets the choice if he is in or out. I don't care if the logo becomes black or white. But if there are important code changes proposed. The nxt user should decide if he accepts the code change or not.

So the user decides if he wants to be part of the new code, the old code, or maybe an alternative proposal. The community will be split with users on different branches and they will continue separately. The fittest/best branches will survive. So people will 'vote' for the proposal with in the back of their minds 'what is best for the network'.

Don't know if this has actually to do with the voting system, but what do you think?

I still stand by my prediction that we will never reach consensus on how to reach consensus.

James

Right, but all people in NXT are stakeholders. It's not like we're making up laws for what people can and cannot do in their lives. VS is used to solve consensus as well as what direction NXT should take.

If he does, he is no longer a large account holder. It would be  twice as expensive for a large account holder to do it more than once.