Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 276. (Read 2761645 times)
Do you guys think that 100 BTC buy wall on bter is fake? (Yes/No/Probably)
community input needed:
Unique names for assets? For example : BLABLA (only issued once)
Or non unique names for assets?
For example: BLABLA 12423434 and BLABLA 343434334 (you only choose BLABLA, the rest is the asset id - automatically generated)
(Perhaps, I'm not sure, the number can be shortened..)
If you have another idea, please specify.
Unique names for assets? For example : BLABLA (only issued once)
Or non unique names for assets?
For example: BLABLA 12423434 and BLABLA 343434334 (you only choose BLABLA, the rest is the asset id - automatically generated)
(Perhaps, I'm not sure, the number can be shortened..)
If you have another idea, please specify.
I still vote for unique names.
Other solutions are not adequate IMHO.
I dont understand a bit how these correlate to any defined computational effort. How are some transactions more computationally intense than others? Also, consider that AM are periodically purged, so perhaps their fee structure should be a little different somehow? (smaller, larger, not sure)
It is just effort to be done by a node. That effort is related to how efficient the implementation is. Each machine instruction of that node requires electricity. So, storing the blockchain, broadcasting the blockchain, creating new blocks etc. etc. everything of it requires electricity. Nothing is for free.
That is the node provider needs to be reimbursed adequately by the amount of effort he has put in to build up and maintaining his node.
One could consider the fees and the expenditures of a node provider as an implicit market. That is: expensive nodes require higher fees. People want lower fees, so only the nodes that can afford these low fees will process the incoming transactions. As node providers want to people to send their transactions to their nodes, they will workaround until they can provide such cheap nodes. On the other hand, if no node provides such low fees, people's transactions will not be distributed or included in a block, so people are willing to raise the fees.
Supply and demand will drive the fee negotiation in the long term.
FTR, I am 100% against charging fees based on amount of NXT being transferred.
Agreed.
I just dont get it. Consider 2 people with the same identical hardware cost are block forging nodes, but one has balance of 10million and other has 1 million. So one forges 10x as many blocks as other. Are you saying that the smaller one should charge higher fees? This doesnt seem feasable as it will directly conflict with our desire of instant transactions. And I still dont see how different transactions have different computations - Wont any transaction will require full knowledge of the blockchain?
You have me completely lost. Can you provide an example model, modified with your computational model? Like if I suggested a model of a transaction of 128bytes to have a fee of .1 NXT, then if an asset creation took 256 bytes, then its fee should be .2 NXT (yes, I know AE issue probably isnt 256bytes, and its fee is currently 1000 NXT, but work with me here for an example)
It should not only tied to the size of the blockchain but also to the computational effort a node must perform to include this transaction.
EXACT
"Keep incentivized network"
interesting... what do you mean by computational effort? It seems I am missing an aspect of something here.
must be distributed the cost of maintaining stimulated the "green, secure and decentralized network"
for example
Nxt% Fee per current transactions
Alias Fee services (For example per bytes)
Nxt% Fee per AE transactions
and so on ....
How The network is worth to maintain?
How many minimum nodes are needed?
How much electricity does it cost?
How many minimum transactions contemplated
Well explained.
I dont understand a bit how these correlate to any defined computational effort. How are some transactions more computationally intense than others? Also, consider that AM are periodically purged, so perhaps their fee structure should be a little different somehow? (smaller, larger, not sure)
FTR, I am 100% against charging fees based on amount of NXT being transferred.
Yes of course some services like AM it can indexed per bytes but other
can be indexed per amount transacted
all AE like Cryptsy, BTC, Bitstamp use % amount transacted
We're going to reinvent the wheel?
why not?
what this clear that will be a lot more economical to maintain than BTC network or clones
[Solution for Asset Naming Issue]
First off, any changes in how Asset Names are handled in the core will delay release of AE. It also impacts all the code written against the current spec. So, any solution that doesnt require NXT core changes wins any ties.
...
James
First off, any changes in how Asset Names are handled in the core will delay release of AE. It also impacts all the code written against the current spec. So, any solution that doesnt require NXT core changes wins any ties.
...
James
Good post, I think we need something like "verified accounts" in Twitter. The asset issuer would need to give up his anonimity. This way we know who he is and he is less likely to scam. Verified account status can be taken away too.
Very good well reasoned post james...We need to take this proposal or something similar very seriously
@wesleyh I think a verified "linkedin" Account will provide more credibility and accountability than twitter. Anybody can create a twitter account and post a bunch of tweets whereas on linkedin, your network actually kind of proves who you are and people who have worked with you in the past, because the process of connecting with other profiles requires the context of your familiarity with them and email contact. Also maybe it should be that that, verified asset issuers public information is encrypted and stored, not visible to the public unless the issuer is involved in some kind of foul play.
As for Unique names or non unique names for assets? again James is right on the money: there is no need to change Nxt core. Unique names similar to the dns model would be sufficient. What could be more valuable is the ability to destroy or sell these asset names to other accounts. What happens when company 'B' whats to sell its establishment to company 'A'? this should not be impossible to do.
Thanks for the personal insult El3k0n.
Nxt Funds have NXT. If NXT is worth 1/32 of what it is worth today, then Nxt Funds have 1/32 of the actual dollars or Euros or gold or whatever to pay real devs, server costs, etc.
Only idiots care about market cap. It's a meaningless number.
Nxt Funds have NXT. If NXT is worth 1/32 of what it is worth today, then Nxt Funds have 1/32 of the actual dollars or Euros or gold or whatever to pay real devs, server costs, etc.
msin, I agree with you on every point you made except the part where you said you wouldn't mind if the Nxt market cap went to $1 mil.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Only idiots care about market cap. It's a meaningless number.
Yes, of course, I agree with spending power. But we need to focus less on the MarketCap of Nxt at this time and more focus on advanced features, including CFB's MMORPG!
community input needed:
Unique names for assets? For example : BLABLA (only issued once)
Or non unique names for assets?
For example: BLABLA 12423434 and BLABLA 343434334 (you only choose BLABLA, the rest is the asset id - automatically generated)
(Perhaps, I'm not sure, the number can be shortened..)
If you have another idea, please specify.
Unique names for assets? For example : BLABLA (only issued once)
Or non unique names for assets?
For example: BLABLA 12423434 and BLABLA 343434334 (you only choose BLABLA, the rest is the asset id - automatically generated)
(Perhaps, I'm not sure, the number can be shortened..)
If you have another idea, please specify.
I like what James proposed, no need to change Nxt core. When account creates first asset, client can create poll for the account and attach poolId end of every asset description that is created by that account. And client can get feedbacks from pollId to measure trust for that accountID and present it to user on AE window.
Also, you can restrict users from buying assets that are in not the users trust list. That will force the users to do research and verify that they are adding a legitimate issuer to the trust list. This will cut down most of the fake/scam issuers.
It attracts new speculators/buyers who buy things that they think is growing.
I think it will also improve NXT's attractiveness and publicity. That is basically a good thing.
Thanks for the personal insult El3k0n.
Nxt Funds have NXT. If NXT is worth 1/32 of what it is worth today, then Nxt Funds have 1/32 of the actual dollars or Euros or gold or whatever to pay real devs, server costs, etc.
Only idiots care about market cap. It's a meaningless number.
Nxt Funds have NXT. If NXT is worth 1/32 of what it is worth today, then Nxt Funds have 1/32 of the actual dollars or Euros or gold or whatever to pay real devs, server costs, etc.
msin, I agree with you on every point you made except the part where you said you wouldn't mind if the Nxt market cap went to $1 mil.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Only idiots care about market cap. It's a meaningless number.
Sorry, I didn't want to say you're an idiot. I meant that only idiots care about market cap when making an investment. No serious trader/investor would base his decision on the market cap, because it doesn't mean anything.
But everyone HAS to admit that .1 is high, at least for long term. Consider BTC now and how extremely low fees are. This is because BTC is still in mining phase now; consider what BTC will look like is 2140 when no more coins are generated and miners are then paid only in fees. Hell, consider what will happen to mining soon when block subsidy is halved again - drastic ROI change. Does anyone know when this happens again?
BTC is POW coin and will still require computation/electricity once the mining phase is over. It costs me absolutely nothing to run Nxt software on my computer, as my system is already running regardless if I run nxt node or not, and my bandwidth is unlimited.
ok, good, we're getting somewhere...
So are you saying that as subsidy declines, we should expect BTC's fee per transaction to rise? Its obvious that right now, NXT fees are fairly high when compared to BTC's fees. .1 fee right now equates to around $0.003/transaction, a good start. But if we want to beat BTC, we'll have to do better.
msin, I agree with you on every point you made except the part where you said you wouldn't mind if the Nxt market cap went to $1 mil.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Only idiots care about market cap. It's a meaningless number.
It attracts new speculators/buyers who buy things that they think is growing.
Thanks for the personal insult El3k0n.
Nxt Funds have NXT. If NXT is worth 1/32 of what it is worth today, then Nxt Funds have 1/32 of the actual dollars or Euros or gold or whatever to pay real devs, server costs, etc.
Only idiots care about market cap. It's a meaningless number.
Nxt Funds have NXT. If NXT is worth 1/32 of what it is worth today, then Nxt Funds have 1/32 of the actual dollars or Euros or gold or whatever to pay real devs, server costs, etc.
msin, I agree with you on every point you made except the part where you said you wouldn't mind if the Nxt market cap went to $1 mil.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Only idiots care about market cap. It's a meaningless number.
msin, I agree with you on every point you made except the part where you said you wouldn't mind if the Nxt market cap went to $1 mil.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Yes, my point was that I'm holding onto my Nxt until I can spend it on something I want (a house, a boat, an island). I have never sold 1 Nxt, only bought. I never will sell Nxt, I will only buy things with Nxt. If you want the price to increase, focus on developing DAC, NxtCash, AT, Parallel Blockchains, CCT. We can't market what we don't have. Build new features and they will come. I can email Marc Andreessen and tell him to buy Nxt but he won't buy Nxt because he thinks the market price will go up, he will buy Nxt because he thinks 10Mil people will be using it.
I dont understand a bit how these correlate to any defined computational effort. How are some transactions more computationally intense than others? Also, consider that AM are periodically purged, so perhaps their fee structure should be a little different somehow? (smaller, larger, not sure)
It is just effort to be done by a node. That effort is related to how efficient the implementation is. Each machine instruction of that node requires electricity. So, storing the blockchain, broadcasting the blockchain, creating new blocks etc. etc. everything of it requires electricity. Nothing is for free.
That is the node provider needs to be reimbursed adequately by the amount of effort he has put in to build up and maintaining his node.
One could consider the fees and the expenditures of a node provider as an implicit market. That is: expensive nodes require higher fees. People want lower fees, so only the nodes that can afford these low fees will process the incoming transactions. As node providers want to people to send their transactions to their nodes, they will workaround until they can provide such cheap nodes. On the other hand, if no node provides such low fees, people's transactions will not be distributed or included in a block, so people are willing to raise the fees.
Supply and demand will drive the fee negotiation in the long term.
FTR, I am 100% against charging fees based on amount of NXT being transferred.
Agreed.
It's funny the other day I was on my dedicated Nxt node forging computer (I often forget it's even on), it's a Gigabyte Brix that sits in the corner of my desk. I decided to sync my Bitcoin wallet on the same machine. When I opened bitcoin-qt I thought my Brix was going to explode. CPU 100%, Fan running full blast, everything completely slow. I quickly shutdown bitcoin-qt and let the machine relax running Nxt. I then sent out some Nxt donations which went out instantly and sat back and drank a beer, wondering why BTC is so popular.
Aaahh.. bedtime-stories 
community input needed:
Unique names for assets? For example : BLABLA (only issued once)
Or non unique names for assets?
For example: BLABLA 12423434 and BLABLA 343434334 (you only choose BLABLA, the rest is the asset id - automatically generated)
(Perhaps, I'm not sure, the number can be shortened..)
If you have another idea, please specify.
Unique names for assets? For example : BLABLA (only issued once)
Or non unique names for assets?
For example: BLABLA 12423434 and BLABLA 343434334 (you only choose BLABLA, the rest is the asset id - automatically generated)
(Perhaps, I'm not sure, the number can be shortened..)
If you have another idea, please specify.
I like what James proposed, no need to change Nxt core. When account creates first asset, client can create poll for the account and attach poolId end of every asset description that is created by that account. And client can get feedbacks from pollId to measure trust for that accountID and present it to user on AE window.
msin, I agree with you on every point you made except the part where you said you wouldn't mind if the Nxt market cap went to $1 mil.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Only idiots care about market cap. It's a meaningless number.
But everyone HAS to admit that .1 is high, at least for long term. Consider BTC now and how extremely low fees are. This is because BTC is still in mining phase now; consider what BTC will look like is 2140 when no more coins are generated and miners are then paid only in fees. Hell, consider what will happen to mining soon when block subsidy is halved again - drastic ROI change. Does anyone know when this happens again?
BTC is POW coin and will still require computation/electricity once the mining phase is over. It costs me absolutely nothing to run Nxt software on my computer, as my system is already running regardless if I run nxt node or not, and my bandwidth is unlimited.
It's funny the other day I was on my dedicated Nxt node forging computer (I often forget it's even on), it's a Gigabyte Brix that sits in the corner of my desk. I decided to sync my Bitcoin wallet on the same machine. When I opened bitcoin-qt I thought my Brix was going to explode. CPU 100%, Fan running full blast, everything completely slow. I quickly shutdown bitcoin-qt and let the machine relax running Nxt. I then sent out some Nxt donations which went out instantly and sat back and drank a beer, wondering why BTC is so popular.
msin, I agree with you on every point you made except the part where you said you wouldn't mind if the Nxt market cap went to $1 mil.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
Nxt whales have already taken $18 million of market cap out of Nxt from 50 million to 32 million today. Nxt needs new investors and needs the market cap to grow NOW. Nxt needs that market cap (price of NXT) to grow in order to attract new investors.
NXT Whales. Stop Dumping and give Nxt time to release AE. Thanks. You've taken your profit. Now invest in the future of Nxt.
>>> Official sales thread and more pictures<<<
Price per item: 800 NXT / 0.05 BTC
Available items: 20
Worldwide shipping from Germany.
Price per item: 800 NXT / 0.05 BTC
Available items: 20
Worldwide shipping from Germany.
Jump to: