Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 471. (Read 2761645 times)

Unfortunately this also is flawed due to topology (it can't be checked).

+2

Well, it is Proof of Stake.

More nodes without stake/hallmarks = more protection against DDOS attacks, but not necessarily more security.

Internet no, a huuuuge asshole yes.

I have been told by others here that this is the case. Think about it.  If small holders don't need to be forging, why even ask them to? Don't even make forging a selling point and just let the whales forge and protect their own network. I'm pretty sure that won't work, therefore it is a big problem that no one is taking seriously. edit: except CIYAM He has been putting a lot of thought into this and I REALLY appreciate him. and J77 (I think that's his nick) who is working on NODECOIN.

I had an, albeit flawed, idea the other day about dividing the block reward 50/50 between the block forger and the other nodes online.  For example, let's say the block reward was 25 NXT.  The forging node would receive 12.5 NXT and all the other nodes on the network would split the other 12.5 NXT.  If there were one thousand nodes online, then they would each get 0.0125 NXT.

This was flawed because of the network topology issue of knowing which nodes are online.  The only work around I can think of is to keep a master list that is broadcast to every node which lists all the nodes seen online in the last 24 hours.  Then these nodes would be rewarded.

The thing is: people wont see it as selling out. If Ethereum provides the best way for them to use Cryptos they have zero reason to think that Ethereum is any less "activist" than NXT. NXT's top 60 accounts still have like 65% of all NXT and they paid 30-50-100 dollars for it.
It's not a healthy distribution at all because it means all the power is centralized.
You can make the argument (as I have in marketing situations) that Bitcoin's distribution is just as bad, but that's not really a great defense as Bitcoin was the first crypto, the first prototype. We came 5 years later and couldn't even get that right.
NEM will have a lot more incentive for newcomers.

You can't say that a lot of big holders are giving out bounties, they simply aren't.


If you have read JustaBits post you would know what I am referring to. A certain individual tried to discredit him and Nifty and ended up getting a lot of votes from it.
Another person went on a smearcampaign right before teh voting started.

Great DEMO of wesleyh his client !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAhnpfkM0Z4

donation for video welcome: NXT: 12088507821025750338

donations for wesleyh: NXT:  8189784314684138350


TRY IT OUT and test AE!

That depends on who forges and how much NXT they own.

Some people might sell out for money, but not everyone does.  I believe the true believers in liberty and freedom back their words with action.

I think the distribution of NXT is fine now.  I remember a lot of large stakeholders selling NXT for next to nothing in the beginning.  I see other stakeholders funding development.  I disagree that NEM will be "fairer".

I didn't think "dirty" tactics were used in the campaign.  What are you referring to?

Why? That doesn't even make sense.

It can be resolved by integrating wesleyh client  with NRS and distributing it as simple executable application.

Or just use Marcus3 client that works without local copy of NRS

 

I will write the Dutch wiki to help.

I don't quite know how to get my point across on this issue without continually being accused of complaining about not getting rewarded personally.  

Bitcoin does not need a majority of holders to mine. Their network is secure as long as a small percentage of people engage in mining. They don't even have to be holding Bitcoin, they can dump it to  FIAT as soon as they get it. You can't tell people not to compare forging with mining and then turn around and do it yourself.

NXT as far as I understand it needs a larger percentage of it's userbase to be forging than bitcoin does or the network will be insecure.

If this is the case, then you are going to have to incentivize these holders or the wide majority of them will simply not forge (again, I'm not referring to myself, stay focused here) . They'll log in and out when they want to use it, if they decide to use NXT at all. These "little people" are going to be exposing their machine to a possible DDOS attack, have to run their computer 24/7 (Most people shut them off at night) and be giving up processing power they don't need to (someone who uses their computer for video editing wants to eliminate every unneeded MB CPU power)

I understand that there's nodecoin being created on top of the network, which I am hopeful will be enough to motivate the needed constituency to forge. My worry there is that 99% of potential NXT users might not bother with the AE or want to go to all that trouble. It sounds kinda like something just for the nerds to do & I want NXT to be for everyone, not just nerds and nerdtrepreneurs. ( and I use the term nerd endearingly, not as a pejorative)

So once again I am not bringing up this issue because I am dissatisfied with my return. I am thinking about the bigger picture in the future when everyday normal people will be using NXT. If the entire networks' survival depends on a certain percentage of these people to be forging then this FACT has to be taken into account when figuring out how to motivate just enough of them, preferably more than that, to contribute. It is a mathematical issue, not a financial one. The devs need to face the fact that 99% of people will follow the path of least resistance. If 99% of NXT users not forging is OK for the network to work then I am cool with it. If not then I think this issue needs to be taken a lot more seriously because the very survival of NXT just might depend on it.

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.

I agree that we already have the Alias system so there is no reason for an Asset to *have a name* at all (just a unique number should suffice - perhaps even issuing account # plus date).

Usability is KING!

A visitor of Nextcoin.org tells about his experience and why Nxt is difficult to use for newbees. I totally agree with him, usability is more important than futuristic features. How can we solve this problem?

https://nextcoin.org/index.php/topic,4339.new.html

Whatever.

Wikipedia is the greatest thing since slice bread -- and no that's isn't sarcasm. I really mean it.

 

I wish that was the case, but sadly in the real world it isn't ;\
If they provide the best service and tech, then average people (99,9% of the population) wont care one bit of the history involved.
And Ethereum got a lot of activists in it too so it's not like they are 100% synthetic and clinical.


NXT has too much drama, too skewed distribution of NXT, a lot of activists have already abandoned ship and more are doing so soon.
How did the marketing committee get selected? At least 2 of them used dirty tactics to get in the position they are now.

We barely got developers even and soon we lose CfB. This isn't something new, this is something people have known for months now and yet nothing changes. We keep drifting and drifting.
A lot of people learn of NXT, become involved, do great work, get zero pay, get disheartened and leave. Look at how many important people left to NEM. And *finally* NEM is auditing their IPO, so suddenly it'll be 10 times fairer than NXT in terms of distribution.
I have defended NXTs distribution 100 times, but it's clear that the vast majority of big holders are idle for a reason and that reason isn't strategic. (like Pouncer deluded himself to think)

Asset Exchange Enhancement Proposal

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1FsyumJLmQ9ckLNkHlmW1oPRGOoK3oAg_pVjFz3s0fNw/edit?usp=sharing

With even more feedback, some have suggested that perhaps relying on an external website is not good (although it *should* be secure, perhaps someone can find a way to abuse this?)

With this in mind, I added slides 5-7 to show how this could be done without external URLs, only using Aliases. NXT already provides all the tools needed for this to work, clients just have to be able to interpret it. If people think this is a good idea, hopefully we can have a discussion going on the standard formatting.

IMO, this is important because it removes the ability of squatters to hold important asset names at ransom from the community.

Pandaisftw