NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 1764.

notsoshifty

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: mcjavar on January 08, 2014, 12:03:37 PM

And in the end, we will have a big pool with all Nxts in it

On the subject of large pools forging...

Assuming all one billion nxt contributes to forging, an account (or pool) that has 17million balance will forge a block on average once per hour, i.e fairly regularly. Any business that needs to execute lots of transactions each day (e.g. an online wallet service / exchange / alias registrar service / poker game) could lump all its transactions from the last ~1hour into that one block and get them executed without fee. Or rather, it gets its own fee; but same result.

So, big players with big wallets and big transaction volumes will end up not paying any fees, whereas the small fish will have to pay fees. Is this a likely scenario, and if so is it a problem?

bitcoinpaul

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: kunibopl on January 08, 2014, 10:48:15 AM

I'd like to modify this concept a bit in a universal way.
I'd like to lock a portion of my account (up to the whole account)
I want let's say invent a turtlecoin with value xx_NXT, grant a specific account (other or mine) the right to pull this turtlecoin if he sends a password and define a timeframe during this has to be done. after the timelimit the turtlecoin becomes NXT again.
During the timeframe the turtlecoin is locked for me.

this way the NXT-client could print a QR-Code with the generated password, I go to the petshop and the owner can pull the turtlecoin with it.
-> I get the turtle and both are happy Grin

this is of course only one application for this feature. of course turtlecoin can be replaced by amout xx NXT.

another idea: it wouldn't be hard to implement an escrow this way.

I wanna sell a turtle. buyer sends me pass for turtlecoin, which I only can pull after turtle reached buyer succesfully.
if he doesn't confirm turtle reached him alive, the turtlecoin becomes invalid for me and him also and goes as NXT to a predefined social fund.
the buyer can trick me, pretending the turtle was dead, but he won't do this very often, because the network stores unsuccesful trades.

Poor turtle. Nice idea. Like a voucher (or paper money! mindblowing). It could also work as a guarantee. The coins are blocked for you, reachable for the other party which could grab them if a special condition is met maybe, but you can still forge with them.

edit: And they are called nxt coins (finally Grin

). Backed by NXTs.

bitcoinpaul

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on January 08, 2014, 09:36:36 AM

Brainstorming

I'd like to introduce a concept of a new feature called Account Control. This feature will allow to do different things with ur accounts. For example, u will be able to set a lock on an account to prohibit any outgoing transactions until a special condition met (e.g. an incoming transaction from a predefined account).

Love it. Conditions could be: incoming transaction from another account, only at specific times, second password(?). Or it wouldn't be locked only for specific amounts or receiver addresses.

We should keep in mind that the functions need to be simple. Of course with genius coding behind, but the end user must understand the features in a second.

Quote

Another example is Pooled Forging, when an account leases its forging power to another account.

I have a question first: When Alice's account forges a block, is Alice able to forge the next block(s) also or is there some locking going on (i read about it somewhere)? Without locking for the next x blocks, we could get some centralization (like big forging 'banks', getting bigger and bigger).

edit: ok, slow writing. this was mentioned three posts above mine.

EmoneyRu

hero member

Activity: 600

Merit: 500

Nxt-kit developer

Quote from: mcjavar on January 08, 2014, 12:03:37 PM

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:59:50 AM

don't see any problem there.
Maybe it would make sense to replace unlimited by an defined number to avoid "Monopo(o)ls".
(don't know how to do in open source SW)

Big pools could become bigger and bigger due to more frequently forging.
This allure (more accounts => more frequently forging) + self gaining...

And in the end, we will have a big pool with all Nxts in it

As I said ...

laowai80

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:59:50 AM

don't see any problem there.
Maybe it would make sense to replace unlimited by an defined number to avoid "Monopo(o)ls".
(don't know how to do in open source SW)

Big pools could become bigger and bigger due to more frequently forging.
This allure (more accounts => more frequently forging) + self gaining...

Node owners must be allowed to configure it to any number, 'unlimited' or '0' or '42' by default, I don't care. It'll be a nice parameter to have, that's all.

The way it's set up now is 'unlimited', because there is no configurable restriction at all.

mcjavar

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:59:50 AM

Quote from: laowai80 on January 08, 2014, 11:45:20 AM

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:38:21 AM

yeah, its a question how it becomes implemented.
I also think in general, every user should decide how to handle it.

getState shows "numberOfUsers":2

When user unlocks their account on the node, check against how many users are already forging on that node, check if AllowedForgingUsers is set to 'unlimited', allow to unlock, if the number is less than AllowedForgingUsers in web.xml - allow to unlock, and if it's equal to that parameter, display 'Node forging capacity is full' or something like that. Or do you see any other difficulties in implementing this? Please explain.

don't see any problem there.
Maybe it would make sense to replace unlimited by an defined number to avoid "Monopo(o)ls".
(don't know how to do in open source SW)

Big pools could become bigger and bigger due to more frequently forging.
This allure (more accounts => more frequently forging) + self gaining...

And in the end, we will have a big pool with all Nxts in it

smartwart

full member

Activity: 171

Merit: 100

Quote from: laowai80 on January 08, 2014, 11:45:20 AM

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:38:21 AM

yeah, its a question how it becomes implemented.
I also think in general, every user should decide how to handle it.

getState shows "numberOfUsers":2

When user unlocks their account on the node, check against how many users are already forging on that node, check if AllowedForgingUsers is set to 'unlimited', allow to unlock, if the number is less than AllowedForgingUsers in web.xml - allow to unlock, and if it's equal to that parameter, display 'Node forging capacity is full' or something like that. Or do you see any other difficulties in implementing this? Please explain.

don't see any problem there.
Maybe it would make sense to replace unlimited by an defined number to avoid "Monopo(o)ls".
(don't know how to do in open source SW)

Big pools could become bigger and bigger due to more frequently forging.
This allure (more accounts => more frequently forging) + self gaining...

bitcoinpaul

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on January 08, 2014, 11:26:36 AM

Quote from: NxtChg on January 08, 2014, 11:25:49 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on January 08, 2014, 11:18:08 AM

Who will decide if an alias is malicious enough?

Who decides at Google?

Google is centralized.

classic

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1010

Newbie

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:47:01 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on January 08, 2014, 11:40:05 AM

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:38:21 AM

@CfB: will the account connection be saved in blockchain?

I didn't get the idea.

My intention was, if the information of all account connections would be able available in blockchain,
its possible to define the global distribution of the forged pool-fee.

(I'm not sure if it is the best way to define it globally but its an aspect...)

Possible.

utopianfuture

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 268

Internet of Value

Quote from: landomata on January 08, 2014, 11:28:58 AM

Quote from: landomata on January 08, 2014, 04:31:15 AM

ANNOUNCEMENT: NXT MOBILE APPLICATIONS COMPANY ORGANIZATION

I will be posting this topic in the nextcoin.org & nxtcrypto.org forums so we will can better organize & develop this idea.

Summary:

The NXT MOBILE APPLICATIONS COMPANY will be coordinating the development, deployment & marketing of the NXT flagship mobile apps (Android & iPhone/iPad).

The Nxt Mobile Applications Company will be a decentralized, cellular organization. Its shares will be listed on the Nxt Asset Exchange.

P.S. Further details will be follow in both the forums mentioned above.

EDIT:

Pls register you name in any of the forums and PLS me mention which Group you would like to work under.

https://nextcoin.org/index.php/topic,2634.msg26093.html#msg26093

or

https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=467

Brief Organizational Concept/structure:

Node spaces are limited so the Nxt Mobile Applications Company will chose the most dedicated & technical competent candidates to fill the various node slots.

Further details/developments will be communicated you on an ongoing basis.

You would be golden as long as my girl can send her encrypted naked picture to me Grin

smartwart

full member

Activity: 171

Merit: 100

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on January 08, 2014, 11:40:05 AM

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:38:21 AM

@CfB: will the account connection be saved in blockchain?

I didn't get the idea.

My intention was, if the information of all account connections would be able available in blockchain,
its possible to define the global distribution of the forged pool-fee.

(I'm not sure if it is the best way to define it globally but its an aspect...)

BitcoinForumator

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1000

What is the divisibility of NXTs? How many decimals after .?

laowai80

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:38:21 AM

yeah, its a question how it becomes implemented.
I also think in general, every user should decide how to handle it.

getState shows "numberOfUsers":2

When user unlocks their account on the node, check against how many users are already forging on that node, check if AllowedForgingUsers is set to 'unlimited', allow to unlock, if the number is less than AllowedForgingUsers in web.xml - allow to unlock, and if it's equal to that parameter, display 'Node forging capacity is full' or something like that. Or do you see any other difficulties in implementing this? Please explain.

ImmortAlex

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 501

Quote from: NxtChg on January 08, 2014, 11:40:45 AM

Quote from: ImmortAlex on January 08, 2014, 11:36:49 AM

How can you block alias which is just a part of transaction in blockchain?
It's a feature of client software (again) - to protect user from internet danger. Like child/parent control in AV software, white/black lists and so on. You can setup service and sell it to Nxt'ers, but it's not a part of decentralized Nxt network.

You can add rank to each alias on the blockchain, which clients can use.

If reliable voting can be implemented.

Hmmm... Yes, voting can help.

NxtChg

hero member

Activity: 840

Merit: 1002

Simcoin Developer

Quote from: ImmortAlex on January 08, 2014, 11:36:49 AM

How can you block alias which is just a part of transaction in blockchain?
It's a feature of client software (again) - to protect user from internet danger. Like child/parent control in AV software, white/black lists and so on. You can setup service and sell it to Nxt'ers, but it's not a part of decentralized Nxt network.

You can add rank to each alias on the blockchain, which clients can use.

If reliable voting can be implemented.

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1010

Newbie

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:38:21 AM

@CfB: will the account connection be saved in blockchain?

I didn't get the idea.

smartwart

full member

Activity: 171

Merit: 100

Quote from: laowai80 on January 08, 2014, 11:29:07 AM

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 11:23:56 AM

Quote from: laowai80 on January 08, 2014, 11:04:07 AM

Quote from: smartwart on January 08, 2014, 10:54:15 AM

Transparent Forging will lead the user to jump directly to the nxt node which will forge nxt block.
This also leads to "self-fulfilling prophecy".

What would be the purpose of this jump? It's not the node that forges, it's the particular unlocked account that forges. The node is just a platform to forge.

There will be internal account<=>connection and external account<=>connection.
+Internal is e.g. connect forging power of your own VPS Nodes to earn NxT for paying them.
+External is you and me and other people will connect there forging power.

External Connection:

From my understanding, all particular unlocked accounts will "point" to one Node to accumulate the forging power.
This Node would split the forged NxT based on contract parameters(amount, time, penalty...).

Now, if we would know the next Node will forge an Block we could point our account of this Node for participation.
This assumes the participation is higher than possible contractual penalties for leaving directly after the Block was forged and the interest was payed.

If that is how it works, great!
Why not let the node owner decides how many accounts are allowed to forge on his node?
This is easy to implement, is not against freedom, shows respect for property (node is the owner's property and he should decide how many people are allowed to unlock on his property), good for decentralization (motivates others to set up their own nodes). I assume that's enough reasons to code in this additional parameter to the config file. Don't see any single reason why freedom of choice must be limited here.

yeah, its a question how it becomes implemented.
I also think in general, every user should decide how to handle it.

------------
@CfB: will the account connection be saved in blockchain?

ImmortAlex

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 501

Quote from: NxtChg on January 08, 2014, 11:31:58 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on January 08, 2014, 11:26:36 AM

Google is centralized.

Well, there has to be a solution. Would voting system help? Several users will vote an alias down...

Actually, maybe a full-blown alias rating? For scammers, who don't trade honestly and stuff like that?

Something like a democratic Google Page Rank

How can you block alias which is just a part of transaction in blockchain?
It's a feature of client software (again) - to protect user from internet danger. Like child/parent control in AV software, white/black lists and so on. You can setup service and sell it to Nxt'ers, but it's not a part of decentralized Nxt network.

NxtChg

hero member

Activity: 840

Merit: 1002

Simcoin Developer

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on January 08, 2014, 11:26:36 AM

Google is centralized.

Well, there has to be a solution. Would voting system help? Several users will vote an alias down...

Actually, maybe a full-blown alias rating? For scammers, who don't trade honestly and stuff like that?

Something like a democratic Google Page Rank

ImmortAlex

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 501

Quote from: aan on January 08, 2014, 11:22:40 AM

I'd like to see spending limits. For example so that I could only spend a maximum of 100 NXT/day from an account. Trying to steal this account would be less profitable.

Btw, there can be arbitraty time limits, not only daily. There's no difference in processing any time ranges at software.

Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 1764. (Read 2761645 times)