Author

Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 444. (Read 2761644 times)

hero member
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
I don't want to rely on others in such a way. What's the downside of TF?

It was designed to favour a smaller number of very high powered machines - so it is much more centralised.


With TF there will naturally emerge some centralization (pools?) but it is secure, without TF we have to be careful to get no centralization (pools?) otherwise it is not secure?
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
I don't want to rely on others in such a way. What's the downside of TF?

It was designed to favour a smaller number of very high powered machines - so it is much more centralised.

Also when it comes down to it PoS *forces* you to rely upon the stake holders - of course there is no reason why a parallel chain couldn't be PoW/PoH instead.
hero member
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
I thought with TF we also have some security measurement against certain attack attempts.

Basically if you have enough "honest" stakeholders and/or evenly enough spread stakes then you don't need anything else (so things like "maximum forging power" and whether you can "allocate forging" would come into this).


I don't want to rely on others in such a way. What's the downside of TF?
sr. member
Activity: 421
Merit: 250
HEAT Ledger
Sure, but I think it's all unnecessary.  Why not just call SecureRandom 12 times to pick 12 random numbers (range  0 to 1625 ). You can use that to choose 12 random words from array. That will be pretty simple and no security/implementation complications.  The words would be chosen randomly and entropy would be 128-bit.

Thats how I did it already. Your approach intrigues me because I don't know how to do that, I dont like that  Angry

Microsoft patent actually describes  how to represent any number as words (1626)
https://www.google.com/patents/US5892470

Quote
In this example, the number is 3,481,269,321. The table of words contains 1626 words, which are indexed from 0 to 1625. To encode this number, the ME system divides the number by the radix, 1626, ... encoding "DRUM ART BUS," which has indices 1316, 1186, and 69, respectively, represents the number that is the result of 1316 * 1626.sup.2 +1186 * 1626.sup.1 +69 * 1626.sup.0.

Cool thanks for looking that up. I share your view that the SecureRandom approach is simpler.
For anyone wondering here seems to be a java implementation https://code.google.com/p/bitcoinj/source/browse/core/src/main/java/com/google/bitcoin/crypto/MnemonicCode.java
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
I thought with TF we also have some security measurement against certain attack attempts.

Basically if you have enough "honest" stakeholders and/or evenly enough spread stakes then you don't need anything else (so things like "maximum forging power" and whether you can "allocate forging" would also come into this).

The "penalty" system in TF provides extra safety but understand that it is only needed because of the fact that TF is intended to favour a low number of very powerful forgers.
legendary
Activity: 1778
Merit: 1043
#Free market
I Found a bug  in the client 0.8.8 (test)

Code:
{
    "balance": 100097400,
    "effectiveBalance": -100,
    "unconfirmedBalance": 100097400
}

Why the effective balance is :


 "effectiveBalance": -100,

Not a bug, effectiveBalance can be negative.

I'm reading this :

Code:
{
    "balance": 98597300,
    "effectiveBalance": -1500200,
    "unconfirmedBalance": 98597300
}

This is my Test account : 4940924250576724047 , why can the balance  be negative?



423539966622014338
please.
cheers Smiley


Sent 15 k TestNxt , enjoy it Wink .

legendary
Activity: 2184
Merit: 1000
Basically TF is useful for handling very large TPM rates and not much else.


I thought with TF we also have some security measurement against certain attack attempts.

I also thought the same.
hero member
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
Basically TF is useful for handling very large TPM rates and not much else.


I thought with TF we also have some security measurement against certain attack attempts.
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
1. What about the idea that the main chain only stores snapshots of every parallel chain?

That could be where this might lead to down the track but I very much doubt that it would be accepted by the community at this stage.

2. The parallel chains can choose to have TF or not?

Yes - I think they would be able to choose that (as internet *within* China is very fast so no need for NXTChina to not be able to do TF).

3. What are the characteristics of those parallel chains that they don't need / want TF? Or other way around: What are the characteristics of TF so that some parallel chains don't want to use it?

Basically TF is useful for handling very large TPM rates and not much else.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 500
Ok, here's the current NXT distribution as of today.



As you can see, it's pretty horrible. The whales rule almost 85% of the whole coin, and I guess most of them are the initial investors.

Excluding the ~85% of the total NXT the whales have, here's the distribution of the remaining 15%:


Pretty horrible against what? "Fainess"? NEM? We'll see when NEM hits 10k-20k, 100k+ accs. And "fairness" simplycan't be reached, even if u'll magically distribute wealth (in any coin, if so) proportionally to everyone living now. Next seconds: some thousand "poor" people'll be born; next minute: millions'll spend there shares for nothing an so on.

Nothing horrible, IMO. Even nothing bad. It's capitalism.
member
Activity: 86
Merit: 10
I Found a bug  in the client 0.8.8 (test)

Code:
{
    "balance": 100097400,
    "effectiveBalance": -100,
    "unconfirmedBalance": 100097400
}

Why the effective balance is :


 "effectiveBalance": -100,

Not a bug, effectiveBalance can be negative.

what does negative effectiveBalance mean?

Are you guys building a support for virtual debt?  Smiley

hero member
Activity: 490
Merit: 504
What is the benefit for the clones to be built on top of Nxt? Instead of standalone?
Clones on top of the Nxt would have a one-click installer, so the school-nerd could create a new currency for his class and he could sell shares for his time spent od doing homeworks for others. Or for Casino tokens. Or for Amazon points. Or for Nigeria national currency. Or for Hotels, Festivals, online games...

+ for Nxt is that clones on top of the Nxt would still be using Nxt somehow as payments
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
Microsoft patent actually describes  how to represent any number as words (1626)

How fucking ridiculous that they would try and patent something as obvious as that.

It's a bit like IBM's RLE patent (run-length encoding) and one of the reasons why I went open source on a project that otherwise I probably could have made millions from.
legendary
Activity: 2184
Merit: 1000
Can't we have specific clients for each chain like we have now with Wesley's webclient for testnet.

That could be a good idea - perhaps if we added a few extra APIs that control things like fees then it would make it very simple to "add a blockchain" to a client.


It would be a lot easier to market specific "clients" for specific "functions"....the inner working of the chains themselves don't have to be communicated to the average joe.





 
hero member
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
If we go this route, we can have our global nxt chain with TF. What would be the current implementation of it?

Indeed I would be strongly advocating that the main chain does TF *with the didn't forge penalty* as planned by BCNext. The goal of the main chain would be to offer a serious competitor to Ripple (and maybe even VISA).

For the case of NXG (assuming that is its name and assuming there is enough support to do this) I would guess there would be no TF at all.


1. What about the idea that the main chain only stores snapshots of every parallel chain?
2. The parallel chains can choose to have TF or not?
3. What are the characteristics of those parallel chains that they don't need / want TF? Or other way around: What are the characteristics of TF so that some parallel chains don't want to use it?
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 500
The entire point of the crypto movement is to code it so you don't come to the crossroads where you need to rely on a person or group of people making a good or bad decision. Figure out the best method to prevent these situations and put it in the core of the protocol. The math and code rules all.
Code don't just appear. So u're constantly relaying on code writers. Plus: on code reviewers and on code installers (1st and 2nd jobs can be done by yourslef, but it's not an option for vas majority of people; 3rd job - system can be crashed without your participation or even with your active counterreacting).

I don't see anything bad in relying on hubs or on gateways. Bad hub? Cancel leasing. Bad gateway? Don't use it, pick another.
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
What is the benefit for the clones to be built on top of Nxt? Instead of standalone?

The benefit for "clones" is not needing to hire devs and that we could also make the creation of a "new coin" a very simple procedure.

The benefit for Nxt is to not have a divided community - each group could have their own NXG and the Nxt community as a whole will be stronger.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 500
Sure, but I think it's all unnecessary.  Why not just call SecureRandom 12 times to pick 12 random numbers (range  0 to 1625 ). You can use that to choose 12 random words from array. That will be pretty simple and no security/implementation complications.  The words would be chosen randomly and entropy would be 128-bit.

Thats how I did it already. Your approach intrigues me because I don't know how to do that, I dont like that  Angry

Microsoft patent actually describes  how to represent any number as words (1626)

https://www.google.com/patents/US5892470

Quote
In this example, the number is 3,481,269,321. The table of words contains 1626 words, which are indexed from 0 to 1625. To encode this number, the ME system divides the number by the radix, 1626, which yields an integer quotient of 2,141,002 and a remainder of 69 (line 102). The ME system then uses the remainder as an index into the table and retrieves the indexed word, which is "BUS." The system sets the mnemonic encoding to that indexed word. The ME system then divides the integer quotient by the radix, 1626, which yields a new integer quotient of 1316 and a remainder of 1186 (line 103). The ME system then uses the remainder 1186 as an index into the table and retrieves the indexed word, which is "ART." The ME system then adds the word as the left-most word of the mnemonic encoding, which is now "ART BUS." The ME system then divides the integer quotient by the radix 1626, which yields a new integer quotient of 0 and a remainder of 1316 (line 104). The ME system uses the remainder 1316 as an index into the table and retrieves the indexed word, which is "DRUM." The ME system then adds the word "DRUM" as the left-most word of the mnemonic encoding, which is now "DRUM ART BUS." Since the integer quotient is zero, the encoding is complete. To decode the mnemonic encoding of "DRUM ART BUS," the ME system initializes the number that is represented by the mnemonic encoding to zero (line 105). The ME system then removes the left-most word from the encoding, which is "DRUM." The ME system then determines the index for that word in the table. Since the index of that word is 1316, the ME system sets the resultant number to the value 1316 (line 106). The ME system then again removes the left-most word of the current encoding, which is "ART." The ME system then determines the index for that word in the table, which is 1186. The ME system then sets the value of the resultant number to 2,141,002, which is the sum of the index (1186) and of the resultant number (1316) times the radix (1626) (line 107). The ME system then removes the left-most word from the encoding, which is "BUS." The ME system then determines the index of that word in the table, which is 69 (line 108). The ME system then sets the resultant number to 3,481,269,321, which is the sum of the index (69) and of the resultant number (2,141,002) times the radix (1626). Since the encoding is now empty, the current value of the resultant number represents the number for the mnemonic encoding. Each word in the mnemonic encoding corresponds to a radix position in the numbering system. For example, the mnemonic encoding "DRUM ART BUS," which has indices 1316, 1186, and 69, respectively, represents the number that is the result of 1316 * 1626.sup.2 +1186 * 1626.sup.1 +69 * 1626.sup.0.
sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
What else?

It would allow for TF in a country that is blocking or slowing down access to the main chain (also allowing for "local/community currencies" that might appeal to some).

Also it would mean that there is less incentive to clone Nxt (particularly if the motivation for doing that is because of the "initial distribution").


What is the benefit for the clones to be built on top of Nxt? Instead of standalone?
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
If we go this route, we can have our global nxt chain with TF. What would be the current implementation of it?

Indeed I would be strongly advocating that the main chain does TF *with the didn't forge penalty* as planned by BCNext. The goal of the main chain would be to offer a serious competitor to Ripple (and maybe even VISA).

For the case of NXG (assuming that is its name and assuming there is enough support to do this) I would guess there would be no TF at all.
Jump to: