Anyone knows the reason of NXT dropping so badly?
Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 404. (Read 2761638 times)
This good enough for y'all?
I'm not sure but isn't this better;
"You will receive 1 NXT Fee once all assets have been sold"
Again. I'm not sure.
Future tense: You will recieve xNxt when all assets are sold.
Future perfect tense: You will have recieved xNxt when all assets are sold.
Future perfect is for an action being completed in the future. I think you have it right but it does feel odd...
it makes the most sense to say "you will receive (x)NXT once all assets are sold"
i think there should be a ? for fee too.. stating "1nxt fee immediately is deducted from effective balance for all buy/sell orders"
just in case people think that it is taken after the sale/purchase is made..
when i first started trading i kept placing and canceling buy/sell orders.. on exchanges there is no fee to do that how ever there is on AE..
if people migrate to the AE and do the same they will end up wasting nxt for nothing and get frustrated when they realize they have thrown away 5,10,15 nxt for nothing.. its a stupid thing to have to include but i think it is needed for any newbies that start using the asset exchange. you need an idiot to make it idiot proof :L your welcome ha
I'm using the syntax suggested by another user:
"Once all assets have been sold, you will have recieved xNxt."
Also, about another question mark next to fee, I don't know about that.. What do others think? Can't clutter up the interface with question marks all over
At some point tutorial guide will be included in the nxt client, which will guide you through all screens and show you what everything does. That should be good enough, right? Fees are used for every action in the system anyway.
my 2 cents' worth:
As each asset is sold you will receive [ ] NXT making a total of [ ] NXT once all assets have been sold.
I've completed the 1st draft of my article about forging from a probabilistic point of view: http://www.docdroid.net/9yub/forging.pdf.html
Comments, suggestions, (and donations
) are welcome!
Please, discuss it here: https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=836 (or send me a PM). Unfortunately, I won't be able to follow this thread in the next few days.
Comments, suggestions, (and donations
) are welcome! Please, discuss it here: https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=836 (or send me a PM). Unfortunately, I won't be able to follow this thread in the next few days.
limit forging power 1/3 active balance.
this means you need to continuously monitor which is the total active balance everytime and limit forging power to 1/3 active balance maximun per account.
ok so you want to limit effectiveBalance to max value possible equal to 1/3 of balance. I dont understand your last sentence at all. What is the point of 1/3, why not 1/4?
Quote from: mthcl
Quote from: igmaca
limit forging power 1/3 active balance.
this means you need to continuously monitor which is the total active balance everytime and limit forging power to 1/3 active balance maximun per account.
this can be interesting as inlet will penalize large accounts for small.
this means you need to continuously monitor which is the total active balance everytime and limit forging power to 1/3 active balance maximun per account.
this can be interesting as inlet will penalize large accounts for small.
You mean 1/3 of total active balance (i.e., of all accounts together)? Yes, this may be a good idea (not with 1/3, which is kind of critical, but, say, 0.1). I only don't know if this is computationally costly...
I can read, but there is still something Im not getting from what you've recopied and pasted. How do you propose to limit "1/3 of total active balance (i.e., of all accounts together)" thats impossible to sum up, at least decentralized. Its just not possible for the network as a whole to know how much total NXt is forging. even if it did, who do you cut out to get to 1/3.
Where do the numbers 1/3 and .1 come from. I still dont understand the problem we are trying to solve here
I've completed the 1st draft of my article about forging from a probabilistic point of view: http://www.docdroid.net/9yub/forging.pdf.html
Comments, suggestions, (and donations) are welcome!
Please, discuss it here: https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=836 (or send me a PM). Unfortunately, I won't be able to follow this thread in the next few days.
Comments, suggestions, (and donations
) are welcome! Please, discuss it here: https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=836 (or send me a PM). Unfortunately, I won't be able to follow this thread in the next few days.
limit forging power 1/3 active balance.
this means you need to continuously monitor which is the total active balance everytime and limit forging power to 1/3 active balance maximun per account.
ok so you want to limit effectiveBalance to max value possible equal to 1/3 of balance. I dont understand your last sentence at all. What is the point of 1/3, why not 1/4?
Quote from: mthcl
Quote from: igmaca
limit forging power 1/3 active balance.
this means you need to continuously monitor which is the total active balance everytime and limit forging power to 1/3 active balance maximun per account.
this can be interesting as inlet will penalize large accounts for small.
this means you need to continuously monitor which is the total active balance everytime and limit forging power to 1/3 active balance maximun per account.
this can be interesting as inlet will penalize large accounts for small.
You mean 1/3 of total active balance (i.e., of all accounts together)? Yes, this may be a good idea (not with 1/3, which is kind of critical, but, say, 0.1). I only don't know if this is computationally costly...
Quote
It Should be Observed That this probability does not outstretch to 0 (asm! 1) if the bad guy has at Least 1 = 3 of allactivebalances inthe network in the case of U-algorithm (corresondingly, At Least 1 = 2 in the case of exp-algorithm). There should exist some methods for speci c network against protectingthe Such an attack in the CASE WHEN there is risk that (active) relative balance of the bad guy theabove Could Become larger than threshold
it may be a good idea to limit the forging power of accounts by some xed threshold, e.g., if an account has more than, say, 300K NXT,then it forges as if it had exactly 300K NXT. Of course, a rich guy cansplit his fortune between smaller accounts, but then all those accountswould forge roughly as one big account (without threshold) under Exp-algorithm. One can one use the computationally easier U-algorithmwithout having the drawbacks discussed in this section.
it may be a good idea to limit the forging power of accounts by some xed threshold, e.g., if an account has more than, say, 300K NXT,then it forges as if it had exactly 300K NXT. Of course, a rich guy cansplit his fortune between smaller accounts, but then all those accountswould forge roughly as one big account (without threshold) under Exp-algorithm. One can one use the computationally easier U-algorithmwithout having the drawbacks discussed in this section.
Yes... that is true... but from a mathematical point of view we cannot calculate an optimal forging limit... from what the author said...
so it must be a combination of things I suppose... and it looks like you might be on the right track.
i agree
Any suggestions about Parallel Chains? If not then I'll stick to BCNext's draft.
maximum parallel chains is ?all parallel chains use the same Nxt Wallet?
According to BCNext all chains r secured by the same stake.
Just to let you guys know that I will be "unwatching" the topic shortly.
It has certainly been an interesting ride but it has been made clear to me that "software engineering" is not wanted by those writing the software and therefore I feel that I have nothing more to contribute.
I wish you guys all the best.
hope come back asap,we will miss you. It has certainly been an interesting ride but it has been made clear to me that "software engineering" is not wanted by those writing the software and therefore I feel that I have nothing more to contribute.
I wish you guys all the best.
- Bigger discussion about must-have fields for nondigital goods
- marketing
- marketing
No time for discussion. I'll implement only digital goods, someone then could add extra functions. U can start the discussion though.
yes, better release things first ASAP
time is crucial for Nxt atm
we can improve them later
We can make NXT fun by integrating our NXT game or other games into the client of Wesleyh.
Or integrating something like Spotify in it where you can buy music with NXT. This way you make it very easy and fun for the consumer.
There are already wallets that have games on them like Flappycoin.
We can have poker or something.
Possible?
NXT + Poker + Music + NXTshop. I would use the client all day long.
Or integrating something like Spotify in it where you can buy music with NXT. This way you make it very easy and fun for the consumer.
There are already wallets that have games on them like Flappycoin.
We can have poker or something.
Possible?
NXT + Poker + Music + NXTshop. I would use the client all day long.
Although I would like to see a Store for all possible goods instead of only digital goods, I have to state that we need to focus.
And your approach would be not-focus
My idea was for 2015 :p
You're right aboit focussing. I was a little bit too entousiastic.
We can make NXT fun by integrating our NXT game or other games into the client of Wesleyh.
Or integrating something like Spotify in it where you can buy music with NXT. This way you make it very easy and fun for the consumer.
There are already wallets that have games on them like Flappycoin.
We can have poker or something.
Possible?
NXT + Poker + Music + NXTshop. I would use the client all day long.
Or integrating something like Spotify in it where you can buy music with NXT. This way you make it very easy and fun for the consumer.
There are already wallets that have games on them like Flappycoin.
We can have poker or something.
Possible?
NXT + Poker + Music + NXTshop. I would use the client all day long.
Although I would like to see a Store for all possible goods instead of only digital goods, I have to state that we need to focus.
And your approach would be not-focus
@ Native English people
Guys, I'm working on Digital Goods Store and need few words/phrases/terms for the following:
Guys, I'm working on Digital Goods Store and need few words/phrases/terms for the following:
Will be the store inside the wallet?
NXTMarketIt would be great to sell inside the wallet real goods and have there second hand store too.
Quote
We can make NXT fun by integrating our NXT game or other games into the client of Wesleyh.
Or integrating something like Spotify in it where you can buy music with NXT. This way you make it very easy and fun for the consumer.
There are already wallets that have games on them like Flappycoin.
We can have poker or something.
Possible?
NXT + Poker + Music + NXTshop. I would use the client all day long.
Or integrating something like Spotify in it where you can buy music with NXT. This way you make it very easy and fun for the consumer.
There are already wallets that have games on them like Flappycoin.
We can have poker or something.
Possible?
NXT + Poker + Music + NXTshop. I would use the client all day long.
It could limit the power of forging under two restrictions;
a) limit forging power to 0.1 total active balance maximun per account.
b) chance forging is about one day
a) limit forging power to 0.1 total active balance maximun per account.
b) chance forging is about one day
Good to see you putting effort into this... but the author of the paper said this...
Quote from: mthcl
From a purely mathematical point of view, there is no "optimal forging limit" - the less it is, the closer the thing is to the Exp-algorithm (I'm assuming that the rich guys are spitting to maximize profits). The question of the forging limit should be solved using other approaches...
https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=836#p4335
I have requested more details on the using other approaches.
Edit: I just realized that your post may be one of those other approaches!
and then what means this?
Quote
It Should be Observed That this probability does not out stretch to 0 (asm! 1) if the bad guy has at Least 1 = 3 of all active balances in the network in the case of U-algorithm (corresondingly, At Least 1 = 2 in the case of exp-algorithm). There should exist some speci fic methods for protecting network against Such an attack in the CASE WHEN there is risk that (active) relative balance of the bad guy Could Become larger than thre above threshold
it may be a good idea to limit the forging power of accounts by some fixed threshold, e.g., if an account has more than, say, 300K NXT,then it forges as if it had exactly 300K NXT. Of course, a rich guy can split his fortune between smaller accounts, but then all those accounts would forge roughly as one big account (without threshold) under Exp-algorithm. One can one use the computationally easier U-algorithm without having the drawbacks discussed in this section.
it may be a good idea to limit the forging power of accounts by some fixed threshold, e.g., if an account has more than, say, 300K NXT,then it forges as if it had exactly 300K NXT. Of course, a rich guy can split his fortune between smaller accounts, but then all those accounts would forge roughly as one big account (without threshold) under Exp-algorithm. One can one use the computationally easier U-algorithm without having the drawbacks discussed in this section.
wait. so ciyam got so butthurt that he not only leaves this thread but he locks the AT thread and wants people to come to his own forums board to discuss? wtf I dont understand how people let themselves get so butthurt over this
Guys it is better atm to not make any hasty judgements... @ Native English people
Guys, I'm working on Digital Goods Store and need few words/phrases/terms for the following:
- To place goods for sale
- Opposite to above (when u cancel selling this goods)
- A comment that is left by a customer when they r (not) satisfied with the quality of purchased goods
- A tag that is used to describe goods to make it easier to find them (like "game", "online", "mmorpg" for online game codes)
- A process of send goods to buyers (actually it's publishing encrypted text on the blockchain)
Guys, I'm working on Digital Goods Store and need few words/phrases/terms for the following:
- To place goods for sale
- Opposite to above (when u cancel selling this goods)
- A comment that is left by a customer when they r (not) satisfied with the quality of purchased goods
- A tag that is used to describe goods to make it easier to find them (like "game", "online", "mmorpg" for online game codes)
- A process of send goods to buyers (actually it's publishing encrypted text on the blockchain)
nice
Will be the store inside the wallet?
NXTMarketIt would be great to sell inside the wallet real goods and have there second hand store too.
CIYAM leaves? Bad bad news
Only this thread. He went back to his cave - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=463731.180
This good enough for y'all?
I'm not sure but isn't this better;
"You will receive 1 NXT Fee once all assets have been sold"
Again. I'm not sure.
Future tense: You will recieve xNxt when all assets are sold.
Future perfect tense: You will have recieved xNxt when all assets are sold.
Future perfect is for an action being completed in the future. I think you have it right but it does feel odd...
it makes the most sense to say "you will receive (x)NXT once all assets are sold"
This suggest you will receive nothing until all assets are sold.
I hear you about the idiot proofing but I have heard it takes two idiots to make it foolproof. We did great work here today Kodtycoon
...
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.
- Bigger discussion about must-have fields for nondigital goods
- marketing
- marketing
No time for discussion. I'll implement only digital goods, someone then could add extra functions. U can start the discussion though.
If you want to add more functions on Nxt, you can start to do it yourself with your own dev team as James has been doing. what you need is to have an idea, find programers who can implement you idea, apply for a fund from tech fund, a whale, or lots of minnows.
wait. so ciyam got so butthurt that he not only leaves this thread but he locks the AT thread and wants people to come to his own forums board to discuss? wtf I dont understand how people let themselves get so butthurt over this
This good enough for y'all?
I'm not sure but isn't this better;
"You will receive 1 NXT Fee once all assets have been sold"
Again. I'm not sure.
Future tense: You will recieve xNxt when all assets are sold.
Future perfect tense: You will have recieved xNxt when all assets are sold.
Future perfect is for an action being completed in the future. I think you have it right but it does feel odd...
it makes the most sense to say "you will receive (x)NXT once all assets are sold"
i think there should be a ? for fee too.. stating "1nxt fee immediately is deducted from effective balance for all buy/sell orders"
just in case people think that it is taken after the sale/purchase is made..
when i first started trading i kept placing and canceling buy/sell orders.. on exchanges there is no fee to do that how ever there is on AE..
if people migrate to the AE and do the same they will end up wasting nxt for nothing and get frustrated when they realize they have thrown away 5,10,15 nxt for nothing.. its a stupid thing to have to include but i think it is needed for any newbies that start using the asset exchange. you need an idiot to make it idiot proof :L your welcome ha
I'm using the syntax suggested by another user:
"Once all assets have been sold, you will have recieved xNxt."
Also, about another question mark next to fee, I don't know about that.. What do others think? Can't clutter up the interface with question marks all over
At some point tutorial guide will be included in the nxt client, which will guide you through all screens and show you what everything does. That should be good enough, right? Fees are used for every action in the system anyway.
Jump to: