Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 252. (Read 2761645 times)

I don't know if that will fix the issues i mentioned in the article. I'm not even sure what makes one transaction have more bandwidth than another unless you are talking about large amounts of text or whatnot.  I don't even want to get into this too much here because I'll probably be accused of throwing FUD. I'll be happy to field any questions on reddit though.

Ive not noticed anyone say they were sick of your posts.  I read your writing and I 100% agree with it being ridiculous to try to adjust fees in client as NXT fluctuates in its value per fiat, which is why I've been saying we should determine how to untie fees from fiat.

NxtBook
Actually not true about nxtbook, you will be able to store that much info eventually using Nxt's decentralized storage, basic idea is you pay people for storage space and then you store your data across multiple harddrives, so that if any one of them goes down, others are holding onto it and if someone goes down, you copy it to another machine from one of the ones still there.  So the idea is that you only need to store it on 3 or 4 machines at a time and you'd paid to keep it online.  The more you are willing to pay per byte, the more machines and therefore security we can offer.

Similiar to multi-sigs you wouldn't have to store the entire data on every machine, just enough so that 2 out of 5 machines could reconstruct it or whatever.

If people hook up 2 or 3 TB drives and allow Nxt to use them for the decentralized storage system and get paid for them, they could make money off of the process and we'd end up with a lot of available storage space.

This could be used to host such images and will eventually be implemented.  It would also allow us to provide an email service and store encrypted emails in a distributed manner, so google can't read your emails for example.  I think that decentralized storage should be a big priority once asset and decentralized exchanges are finished.  Especially because once we have decentralized storage working, then we can create the distributed computing option, and Nxt will become a supercomputer running across multiple forging machines.

Since many here are sick of my posts, I've posted an "article" on http://reddit.com/r/nxt that addresses some of my concers about the Nxt ecosystem, mainly regarding fees, entitled "Nxt is the Bitcoin of the Future: Both in Good and Bad Ways".

http://www.reddit.com/r/NXT/comments/20u7ts/nxt_is_bitcoin_of_the_future_in_both_good_and_bad/

Just letting you folks know in case anyone wants to exercise their fee speech or present a rebuttal.

Hm, how would your client know that "fakecoin" or "fakeNXT" are currencies?

make much sense what you say,
very good article.

Do You think about this proposal?

My 2 cents on HFT: it's becoming very obvious that trading bots are being used to HFT the fuck out of some exchanges. Cryptsy trading is now becoming almost impossible for manual traders in popular markets. I spent 15 frustrating  minutes trying to place a buy order for LTC->NXT last night, got topped by 50 satoshis on every buy order I placed wihtin less than a second of placing the order. In the end, i just hodled the LTC, which made me cry a little this morning.

I started off not liking the idea of a fee on the AE for just placing an order, but HFT is taking predatory capitalism to new heights (or lows, depending on your point of view) and fees may well exclude these traders from the NXT AE, which is a good thing IMHO

Hi Brian. Thanks for posting your concerns in detail. I found it easier to digest than trying to follow the back-and-forth nature of discussion here.

I agree that the fee thing needs to be sorted out with an eye towards future price appreciation. Unfortunately, I don't think there is a simple solution. Charging fees based on bandwidth usage or size of transaction seemed like an elegant solution when I first heard about it. However, as nxt intends to compete with a variety of financial systems, each with complicated fee structures of their own, I'm concerned that some great nxt services will be "priced out" of the market, while other services will be unnecessarily cheap.

When thinking of nxt as bitcoin in the future, I think the analogy breaks down when talking about fees. Specifically, the future of bitcoin assumes much lower price volatility. Therefore, denominating fees in bitcoin instead of fiat isn't a big deal. For us, we expect high volatility for the near term. Denominating fees in terms of fiat (or gold or any other asset with lower volatility) might make sense in the near term.

With regards to charging fees for placing an order in the asset exchange, I think that there is room for the nxt AE to improve upon the way markets currently work. If you follow nanexllc on twitter (his work has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, amongst other publications), you will learn that high frequency trading firms have been abusing the stock markets in the United States. They take profit, and justify this profit by claiming to increase liquidity and lower the bid-ask spread. However, in reality, the displayed liquidity (order book) can rarely be accessed by real trades, and orders often disappear before a counterparty can fill them. I know that setting walls is a strategy for day trading. However, for a wall to be effective, it has to be large. This implies that the fee would be tiny in comparison to the size of the wall.

Additionally, Nanex's recent studies show that the bid-ask spread has not tightened over the life of the current regulation (Reg NMS). Based on these issues in current stock markets, I am suspicious of HFT terrorizing our infant network, and I think that charging fees for placing an order prevents both spam and these predatory trading practices. We aren't designing the AE for the profit of algorithmic day traders.

Since many here are sick of my posts, I've posted an "article" on http://reddit.com/r/nxt that addresses some of my concers about the Nxt ecosystem, mainly regarding fees, entitled "Nxt is the Bitcoin of the Future: Both in Good and Bad Ways".

http://www.reddit.com/r/NXT/comments/20u7ts/nxt_is_bitcoin_of_the_future_in_both_good_and_bad/

Just letting you folks know in case anyone wants to exercise their fee speech or present a rebuttal.

I am not sure I understand what you mean by tagging. To me It would seem be more practical to implement if there were a set of "check the one that applies" categories that would actively limit the types of listings that could be used. Flexibility could be achieved by having a comprehensive set of categories to choose from, that could be added to if needed; and by allowing more detailed descriptions of the asset in the description field during the assets registration.

Hey guys, just a heads up, to any of you trading at Cryptostocks:

AlcurEX, a listing for an exchange traded there, has posted a list of coins to be voted by the shareholders and NXT is on the list.
If any of you are holding any AlcurEX shares, please vote for NXT.

Thank you
-Fo-

Thanks for your incisive negative feedback!

So it is your conclusion that since it is impossible to make sure it is perfectly accurate that there is absolutely no value in detecting potentially active forks?

What if the fork is caused by upgrading? What if Evil Bob isnt around? What if we could detect things are a bit unstable? There is no value in this?