I think we should be thankfull to James
+100
Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 349. (Read 2761645 times)
What are your thoughts? The big guys earn of the fees of the small guys now, so it's more fair if they pay more for transactions?
I do not see why changing fees the way you described it would change that.
Offtopic: NRS has been working stable for more than one week. I'm missing days when we had all the blocks becoming orphaned. It was like playing Russian roulette, u never knew if there was at least one node that kept a copy of the blockchain...
I vote for fundamental research (what James is doing right now with nodecoin) but don't mix it up with our Nxt branding.
I agree, too. That is what I was trying to convey and what should be conveyed clearly by James as well when he promotes nodecode. Am I right?
nodecoin is a product of James. So, he is responsible for it.
NXT is a product of the community. Se, they are responsible for it.
James could have created a Bitcoin fork called Nodecoin, but the decided to use the Nxt infrastructure for it. He gets coins as they are distributed to others. so this is his business. He has to make sure, that they will be worth anything. Not a community issue.
I think we should be thankfull to James for building it ontop of Nxt, instead of copying Bitcoin.
That´s all.
Why the price is keeping going down?
don't worry, price drop was caused by those 2 stakeholders:http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=3000&acc=4483676211889446810
http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=2000&tra=12023091469145621022
but it was supported only by these:
http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=2000&tra=12169060789793651904
http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=2000&tra=18286075937885214016
http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=2000&tra=14279129699678101070
Everyone else is buying, a lot! Bter's account is much smaller than a week ago. There are massive buyings in last week, thanks to these stakeholders, massive adoption
< 10 000 NXT send = min. 1 NXT fee
10000-100000 NXT send = min. 10 NXT fee
100000-1000000 NXT send = min. 100 NXT fee
> 1000000 NXT send = min. 1000 NXT fee
In the future this could be, because we want to lower the fees:
< 10 000 NXT send = min. 0.01 NXT fee
10000-100000 NXT send = min. 0.1 NXT fee
100000-1000000 NXT send = min. 1 NXT fee
> 1000000 NXT send = min. 10 NXT fee
What are your thoughts? The big guys earn of the fees of the small guys now, so it's more fair if they pay more for transactions?
Hey James,
I really like the Idea of Nodecoins. Please don't let it die! If you need donations or something let me know, I can pitch some to you.
If someone doesn't like the idea of nodecoins, he can just refuse to use them. I see no way of how that layer can hurt us.
Thank you,
Paul!
I really like the Idea of Nodecoins. Please don't let it die! If you need donations or something let me know, I can pitch some to you.
If someone doesn't like the idea of nodecoins, he can just refuse to use them. I see no way of how that layer can hurt us.
Thank you,
Paul!
+1440
I vote for fundamental research (what James is doing right now with nodecoin) but don't mix it up with our Nxt branding.
I agree, too. That is what I was trying to convey and what should be conveyed clearly by James as well when he promotes nodecode. Am I right?
nodecoin is a product of James. So, he is responsible for it.
NXT is a product of the community. Se, they are responsible for it.
What are the current ideas of having coins on top of Nxt:
- Coins via Asset Exchange
- Coins as parallel blockchains
- Using AM (How? And is this idea dismissed?)
- ...?
- Coins via Asset Exchange
- Coins as parallel blockchains
- Using AM (How? And is this idea dismissed?)
- ...?
What about this coin-via-AM? And is there another method for a coin-on-top of Nxt?
Hey James,
I really like the Idea of Nodecoins. Please don't let it die! If you need donations or something let me know, I can pitch some to you.
If someone doesn't like the idea of nodecoins, he can just refuse to use them. I see no way of how that layer can hurt us.
Thank you,
Paul!
I really like the Idea of Nodecoins. Please don't let it die! If you need donations or something let me know, I can pitch some to you.
If someone doesn't like the idea of nodecoins, he can just refuse to use them. I see no way of how that layer can hurt us.
Thank you,
Paul!
Where nodecoin becomes part of the fabric of NXT is if we as a community decides to offer it as an official ongoing reward to run a computer and support our network.
Once we do this, once we cross over this line, we can no longer call ourselves a pure Proof of Stake cryptocurrency.
Once we do this, once we cross over this line, we can no longer call ourselves a pure Proof of Stake cryptocurrency.
And it is actually James´ decision as he created the asset. If it will be worth $0 nobody will care about it. If it will be worth something, Nxt will benefit from it.
I think we should let the market decide.
I think we should let the market decide.
I fully agree. It's the purpose of NXT to enable people to build services on top of it.
They do it on their own. It has nothing else to do with NXT except that NXT is one of their buliding blocks.
Period.
Please see above.
I vote for fundamental research (what James is doing right now with nodecoin) but don't mix it up with our Nxt branding. Not yet.
"They're PoW and use LOTS of power; we're PoS so we don't have to".
This still stands.
AE users don't run nodes by having their clients unlocked.
Rewarding (and compensating) Nxters who run nodes for securing the network, seems fair to me.
I also have nothing against the gamification element.
Yeeeeeah, it's fun to see Nodecoins being generated. But "gambling"? How? You don't play.
AE is far more dangerous in that aspect than a (green) reward system, called Nodecoin. NodePoints. Is that better?
I think there is a generational thing here and I am on the old end of the stick. I never spent any time playing a video game watching a point counter go up and up and up to happy little sounds, I wasted my time watching people go for huge piles of money on The Sopranos, The Shield and Breaking Bad. I want huge piles of money. I want 1 NXT = $1000. I don't see how giving out free coins makes that happen. Of course, I don't understand how Farmville or Candy Crush or Twitter makes money either. Oh wait, they don't.
NXT is an ecosystem and lots of things find their niche in a true ecosystem. Good luck, James.
Apropos gambling 
Hey guys!
Gamblex has added NXT to our exchange and our gambling site. It will be fully implemented, that means we will also sell shares that distribute a part of the NXT fee revenue to stakeholders.
Check out our thread and maybe Invest!
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5676745
"They're PoW and use LOTS of power; we're PoS so we don't have to".
This still stands.
AE users don't run nodes by having their clients unlocked.
Rewarding (and compensating) Nxters who run nodes for securing the network, seems fair to me.
I also have nothing against the gamification element.
Yeeeeeah, it's fun to see Nodecoins being generated. But "gambling"? How? You don't play.
It's like fearing that folks should get addicted to watching a spinning washing machine. Most people don't.
AE is far more dangerous in that aspect than a (green) reward system, called Nodecoin. NodePoints. Is that better?
And it is actually James´ decision as he created the asset. If it will be worth $0 nobody will care about it. If it will be worth something, Nxt will benefit from it.
I think we should let the market decide.
I think we should let the market decide.
I fully agree. It's the purpose of NXT to enable people to build services on top of it.
They do it on their own. It has nothing else to do with NXT except that NXT is their buliding block.
Period.
We had 5 months to deliver something, that makes Nxt unique. We had the benefit of being first. If we failed to take this advantage, then let it be. If something built ON TOP of Nxt can destroy it, than it is not the system that the world needs.
The forks of Bitcoin have nothing to do with Bitcoin itself, they are just copies/forks, but Bitcoin managed to stay alive and be the Nr1 cryptocurrency. Now we will have coins built ON TOP of Nxt, which has a stong correlation and connection to Nxt, unlike Bitcoin and his other alts. If this kills Nxt, then let it be.
- lick us at facebooks and twitters and retweet us
And it is actually James´ decision as he created the asset. If it will be worth $0 nobody will care about it. If it will be worth something, Nxt will benefit from it.
I think we should let the market decide.
I think we should let the market decide.
I fully agree. It's the purpose of NXT to enable people to build services on top of it.
They do it on their own. It has nothing else to do with NXT except that NXT is one of their buliding blocks.
Period.
[Some valid points.. ]
Nxt is still green as you can even run it on a RasPi running with solar power only. If you have a computer network, you will need electricity. Nodecoin is just a gift, that was created by one of the community members to give it to the people participating in the Nxt network. The amount of Nodecoin you get doesn´t depend on the forging rig you are using. I don´t think that makes Nxt "less green".
There's three possibilities and only three possibilities.
1. Nobody gets this gift for participating
2. Some people don't get this gift even though they did participate
3. Everybody gets the same gift
We as a community are doing something useless that is a waste of time if we do 3.
We as a community are doing something "unfair" if we do 2.
That's why I vote 1.
We reward only the people who are supporting the network.
It is already there, why don´t use it?
And it is actually James´ decision as he created the asset. If it will be worth $0 nobody will care about it. If it will be worth something, Nxt will benefit from it.
I think we should let the market decide.
- lick us at facebooks and twitters and retweet us
Once we do this, once we cross over this line, we can no longer call ourselves a pure Proof of Stake cryptocurrency.
It's the rationale that NXT has to give nodecoins away to help "secure the network" or "pay for the network" that I question.
these are questions for which it would be nice to have clear and concise answers:
1) why is the forging mechanism insufficient for protecting the nxt network?
currently there are not decentralization
2) what behavior does the nodecoin encourage? is it possible to encourage this behavior through a modification of the forging mechanism?
yes with share fee group. is very simple to implement only have to be desire to change the process of assignment of forging fees.
currently there are very few transactions and nxt prices are low and therefore the fees for forging (1 nxt) are unattractive
so I think that node coin could short term until the number of transactions does not increase a very good solution
3) who will pay for nodecoins once they are mined? why will they pay for nodecoins?
lease active nodes for several services. (I think I understand)
4) the answer to #3 above, should also help to answer this question: does the existence of nodecoins dilute the value of 1 nxt?
i propose to mantein forging fees with share fee group and using nxt coins
and i propose lease active nodes using node coin
in the future if the transactions goes up forging fees will be more interesting to ensure the network
1) why is the forging mechanism insufficient for protecting the nxt network?
currently there are not decentralization
...
the transaction fees are still too damn high, forging rewards are way to low & come too slow for all but the richest Nxters.
...
In my opinion, you're better off dishing out smaller rewards at a faster pace. People are like lab rats who feel rewarded when they get a pellet. It would be better to get .001 NXT every couple of days than 10 NXT after many months. It is simple psychology. Almost every successful software "invention" these days is successful because it's addicting. Twitter, facebook, Angry Birds, Flappy Birds, Candy Crush, Farmville. All very successful and all very addicting. Give the people their pellets and they will be addicted and they will forge.
the transaction fees are still too damn high, forging rewards are way to low & come too slow for all but the richest Nxters.
...
In my opinion, you're better off dishing out smaller rewards at a faster pace. People are like lab rats who feel rewarded when they get a pellet. It would be better to get .001 NXT every couple of days than 10 NXT after many months. It is simple psychology. Almost every successful software "invention" these days is successful because it's addicting. Twitter, facebook, Angry Birds, Flappy Birds, Candy Crush, Farmville. All very successful and all very addicting. Give the people their pellets and they will be addicted and they will forge.
2) what behavior does the nodecoin encourage? is it possible to encourage this behavior through a modification of the forging mechanism?
yes with share fee group. is very simple to implement only have to be desire to change the process of assignment of forging fees.
I don't get your idea, or I get it. I don't know.
Instead of leasing forge power, you commit with your account to share fees among others in the same "share fee group" if you forge a node. You still try to forge a block on your own, but you commit to share the incentive with others if you are successful (with special conditions like committing to run the node for some time, ...). Could this be done with AT and would that make sense?
Instead of leasing forge power, you commit with your account to share fees among others in the same "share fee group" if you forge a node. You still try to forge a block on your own, but you commit to share the incentive with others if you are successful (with special conditions like committing to run the node for some time, ...). Could this be done with AT and would that make sense?
I really like this idea because your node still has to be online to be part of the shared group.
It retains the decentralisation and number of nodes.
Forging is a bit like bingo/lottery anyway rather than mining and it smooths out the impact of penalty and people pool hopping if the pool was based on a single node...
So generally in stead of buying a single big ticket you are offering to share your ticket and any winnings with lots of others and vice versa
Penalties would only affect the nodes in the shared pool an would not take huge chunks of NXT out of the forging balance in one go by taking a whole pool out.
It retains the decentralisation and number of nodes.
Forging is a bit like bingo/lottery anyway rather than mining and it smooths out the impact of penalty and people pool hopping if the pool was based on a single node...
So generally in stead of buying a single big ticket you are offering to share your ticket and any winnings with lots of others and vice versa
Penalties would only affect the nodes in the shared pool an would not take huge chunks of NXT out of the forging balance in one go by taking a whole pool out.
currently there are very few transactions and nxt prices are low and therefore the fees for forging (1 nxt) are unattractive
so I think that node coin could short term until the number of transactions does not increase a very good solution
3) who will pay for nodecoins once they are mined? why will they pay for nodecoins?
lease active nodes for several services. (I think I understand)
4) the answer to #3 above, should also help to answer this question: does the existence of nodecoins dilute the value of 1 nxt?
i propose to mantein forging fees with share fee group and using nxt coins
and i propose lease active nodes using node coin
in the future if the transactions goes up forging fees will be more interesting to ensure the network
Jump to: