Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 720. (Read 2761650 times)

Can somebody tell me what is the total amount of NXT coins? Its almost reached right, I thauhgt it was 1 billion?

I posted this on forums.nxtcrypto.org but was told to mention it here:


Also, aren't core Nxt developers using forums.nxtcrypto.org or nextcoin.org at this point? It seems to me that entire forums dedicated to Nxt should make it much easier to organize conversations than a single thread on bitcointalk.org.

What I can do is make Nxt.shutdown() public and not add any shutdown hooks myself, when started using init(), only when started using main(). Then whoever calls init() has the responsibility to add a shutdown hook or call shutdown().

I don't know how your restart works, but unless the jvm is really shutdown and started again, init() is unlikely to work as expected after a shutdown(), because of all the static initializers and final variables I rely on.

I will list it on Nxt websites www.nxt123.info after your completing it.

Specifically, we would like a critique of the sha256 and curve25519 implementations used for block signing and other transaction processing.  Source is available at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4287127 and while there have been newer released versions which have not had source released, the signing algorithms that we need expert audit of have not changed.  And it is possible for a java decompiler to decompile the latest version a http://download.nxtcrypto.org/ if you so desire to do so.

Unfortunately there is no official white paper however there is very very early draft available at:
http://wiki.nxtcrypto.org/wiki/Whitepaper:Nxt#NXT:_a_peer-to-peer_digital_economy_system

But unfortunately, as I said, it is an extremely early version with no math/proofs in it. In detail, our lead developer has stated: "We need security review of Crypto and Curve25519 classes. Also Transaction.sign/verify and Block.sign/verify should be checked. And I would like to hear opinion if NRS algo could be vulnerable to attacks described in http://eprint.iacr.org/2007/357.pdf"

Thank you for the 1K NXT 7017504655955743955, whoever you are! Much appreciated!

5172 accounts?I think he can only create 2586 Acc with 5172 NXT coz of transaction fee.

Then I will just have to figure out another way to distribute them once they are printed.  Perhaps I can arrange for (cute female?) handout personnel at the doors when they open.  Certainly we need printed handout materials for the four conferences we are going to have reps at over the next six weeks.  My request for funding stands.  

Is that descriptive enough?  I need a decent write up (w/ links) so I can send to her something that won't lead to more questions.  I can have you two email directly if that is easier.

Yes, I am going to HODL some NXT so I can FOGRE till the day I IDE!  If I had more BTC today, I would YUB, YUB, YUB!

In other news, I have contacted all the exchanges listed in the 2/22 SWARM and encouraged all of them to add NXT.

NXT distribution continues to widen; this weekends mystery NXT giveaway is reminiscent of the Million Plus NXT giveaway in the first 25 pages of this thread. 

Happy 3 Month Birthday NXT!

LOL. I'm gonna HODL some Nxt and then use it to FOGRE.

if you do this, organizator will collect them all in 5 minutes. It is not allowed to use conf areas for non paid ads

If you have an address that other peers can connect to, you can't really prevent that from being shared. Even if your peers don't share it with each other, you don't control which peers you connect to. So when you connect to one peer, after a while you request from it all other peers that it knows about. Then, you start connecting to them one by one - and all of them get to know your address directly from you. So it doesn't make sense to announce a public address, yet to set sharing to false. It will still get known, only a bit slower.

In fact, in 0.8.1, I added a feature so that setting nxt.myAddress is optional and only strictly needed if you use a non-default port. If you don't set nxt.myAddress, but nxt.shareMyAddress is still true (the default), when you connect to a peer he will see the address your request is coming from, and at a later time try to connect to this address at the default port (unless you have set nxt.myAddress to something else, in which case it will try to connect to your announced address). If it succeeds, it will treat your peer as if nxt.myAddress has been set to the address your connection was seen as coming from. And also share this address with others so they can also connect to you. This way you don't need to worry about what is the external IP of your router, and especially if it ever changes for those with dynamic IPs. If you don't want this to happen, set nxt.shareMyAddress to false. In this case, the peer networking server will not be started at all as nobody will be attempting to connect to you. You can of course still make outgoing requests and receive responses to them.

Ofc, I here disagree with BCNext, if he stays on "mining" today. There's objective difference between entities: mining, PoS-mining and forging.

How about FOGRE to avoid any confusion...

BCNext used "mining" as I recall.

Meh, I wanna something too: 16589087577979217010  

What and risk that transaction thing-a-ma-jig...

No i'm keeping my bitcoin under the mattress from now on