Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 431. (Read 2761642 times)

They can be but they shouldn't have to be is the point that is being made here.

Understand that the whole reason to say have a China chain is because they won't be able to work with the main chain at decent speeds because of the GCF (so of course they wouldn't want their chain being dependent upon the stake holders in the main chain).

In regards to the main chain being fast - that is what TF is all about and that is the very point of "the plan". It makes less sense to me for the main chain to be the slower one.

BTW - these same conversations just keep going in pointless circles every day.

Personally I think we just "stick with the plan" and get on with it (otherwise you guys will still be debating in 2015 about what to do by which time Nxt will be irrelevant).

All of the parallel blockchains can be backed by NXT directly, according to cfb.

BTC and LTC is not a fair comparison. Mining power used to secure BTC cannot be used to secure LTC, for example. In NXT, anyone can support X number of chains simultaneously. It also makes more sense if you think of parallel chains on a more global scale. RMB is not useless because USD is the dominant currency accepted by most vendors, it has its uses within it's sphere of influence. The same with parallel chains - these chains will not likely be straight up clones of NXT (although that is allowed), but they may be tied to a certain market or geographical location.

EDIT: The question also remains as to why we need a single 1000 TPS chain. If I'm going to China, it's really not much trouble to spend 1 NXT to convert any amount of NXTUSA to NXTChina. Why does everyone have to process transactions they are completely unconcerned about (besides profitability, which I mentioned in a previous post) and suffer all the disadvantages (high-bandwidth, bloat, etc.) Let the market forces decide, and all the chains will be secured just as much as they need to be.

oh sure. i agree there. choice is always a good thing. let the market decide. im just imagining a future where we have thousands of DAC's, each one needing its own dedicated chain, it would be nice if security could be a function of the value of all chains combined rather than relying on the security provided by their own chain in isolation.

One of the reasons for wanting parallel chains is to address the "initial distribution problem" that has lead to clones.

So although it could be something a parallel chain could do I would not at all want that to be mandatory (in fact the parallel chain should be able to use PoW rather than PoS if it likes).

what do you think of the idea of having parallel chains that draw security from the price of NXT on the main chain. so for example the hits can be derived from the main chain but the targets would be derived from hashing a value that is deterministically derived from the geneses block of the alt chain. that way it is the ownership of nxt that entitles you to author blocks on the alt chain rather than the alt chain currency while the reward for authoring blocks could be alt chain currency while at the same time insuring that its almost always a different person who gets to author the block on the main chain and the block on the alt chain.

the disadvantage is that you would have to run clients for the main chain and the alt chain at the same time inorder to author blocks on the alt chain. the advantage would come from the fact that the security of nxt is a function of the cost of buying up a significant portion of the total stake. By having the right to author all blocks on all alt chains be attained by owning stake on the main chain value resulting from legitimate utility provided by alt chains strengthens security of all chains rather than only strengthening the security to its own chain.

No - there seems to be quite a bit of confusion about parallel chains - they are not "connected together" beyond perhaps "checkpoint" AMs being sent to the master chain.

Think of it like Bitcoin and Litecoin - so people talking about "spreading the load" across chains are actually saying that you would go to buy something with 1 BTC and say 100 LTC - personally I don't think any vendor is going to want to bother with that so such ideas are not helpful.

@ChuckOne - TF will be implemented in the main chain so you needn't care if another chain decides not to use TF as you don't need to buy any of those coins (it doesn't matter what you *think* about how someone should create a coin they are going to create one anyway if that's what they want to do).

So,these parallel block chains of Nxt can be called Nxt Blocktree?

TestNxt,as you aked.

Nodecoin update

I didnt see anything really magical in XPT, I think I will just do my own networking code.

I think I finally solved the problem with nodecoin having to trust what the node reports as far as forging status goes. Not much can be done about Evil Bob disabling the forging enable call and reporting that he is forging, but it seems that there is no point for him to do that. So with that caveat in mind, here is my planned allocation of nodecoins.

We want to reinforce good node behavior, so that is what I am going to use as the "mining" shares.
All nodes will report in the 20 active peers they are connected to and how much data was uploaded/downloaded since last block. This will also give us some useful info about network topology for infrastructure committee.

If a node is blacklisted or doesnt share their address, no credit. So for each block all the nodes report in the results of their peers along with their NXTacct and IP address and payout threshold, the pool server then sums up the contribution for each NXT acct as reported by peers. The blockreward then gets allocated on a prorata basis using satoshi fractions.

The server will return a packet with a listing of earned nodecoins, total nodecoins, etc. The fact that there will be NXT transactions costs to send the nodecoins is an issue. Unless there is a market for nodecoins, I think the miner will have to send in some NXT to pay for the transaction costs, then again if tx costs go to .01 it wont be a big deal and even some small donations will pay for these costs.

People can indirectly support the NXT network by bidding for nodecoins. This way you get some nodecoins and help the network at the same time. Nodecoins are earned by uploading and downloading data to peers. This seems like a pretty good metric. From what I saw in the NXT core, it selects the 20 active peers somewhat randomly, so I dont think Evil Bob can create is own set of nodes that peer each other and spam a lot of traffic, not sure.

The following are the steps left for nodecoin:
1) client: create server request packet and send to server
2) server: process client packets and allocate nodecoins, track cumulative, return packet
3) server: implement method for transferring earned nodecoins and dealing with tx fees
4) both: audit nodecoin inventory and mining output to verify conformance with Create NXTcoins parameters
5) admin: make a tool to generate a "Create NXTcoins" AM

James

It's still a big endorsement. It's still a big loss. IMO.

really good procedure of vote .
And thank you rickyjames, for the specific statistic and organization of vote.

tester have any question ,please go to Asset Exchange Test thread
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=507444.new#new

i will do these in testnet, but not test yet.

i got a packet with true transaction but false order, in placing bid using marcus03.crypto signing it, later will flood these wrong packet to testnet.

i will flood valid order to testnet throught peers, but peers are slowly then local NRS.

Stefan Molyneux speaking at the recent conference. http://youtu.be/BhL1Y1lg35w

I thought that 28:30 and 33:45 had some good points that this community could apply to Nxt. I would recommend watching the whole speech.

I saw NXT's potential and bought all of them when it was 1300 Satoshi. I had a little more than this previously. So no I didn't exactly spend 20%, but it was worth 20% when I lost it.

We are already doing this!

NxtMac currently says:
"If opening a new account, please note:
A simple passphrase will certainly result in your NXT being stolen! Do not use any phrase that appears in any printed or online material, no matter how long or obscure. A secure passphrase will be at least 35 characters long and consist of random letters, numbers, and special characters, or a meaningless combination of 10 random words."

The problem is that people dont necessarily read or understand or follow the warnings that are already there.
We probably need to make it hard for people to not create a good password.

The following generates a decent password:
openssl rand -base64 50

I am sorry for your loss. Your spending 20% of your money on Nxt was a big endorsement to Nxt. You must have thought that Nxt have some potentials in the future. It could have some good marketing effects for Nxt. I hope Nxt and some big whales will give you a Marketing bounty for that.

Sorry for your troubles, man.

Part of the problem is that the NRS client is close to the low-level network functions of Nxt.  NRS is the reference implementation -- it is meant to be a temporary interface to the Nxt functions until the community comes up with alternative higher-level clients.  When this happens (soon, it appears), NRS will be discarded.

Edit: and there are already several alternative clients available for Nxt.  I shouldn't leave that info out.

Life has to go on, right?

I died for about 1 minute but I think that was about it. 

Hello,

I REALLY appreciate you even posting here. I don't know if I would have taken the time for that, had I taken such a loss. Over 400,000 Nxt is a big number!

To me that shows real commitment and character, and I want to thank you for that.

There is still much to be done and we all hope and work that this will be done soon. It is a real pity that people like you have to go through this...