Topic: Transparent mining 2, or What part of Legacy should be left behind - page 4. (Read 15635 times)
February 11, 2014, 02:26:46 PM
cool plan. waiting for April
February 11, 2014, 02:16:35 PM
Yes, timing is essential in Nxt. Luckily it's not a big problem to have the time synced.
Agreed - but it would be better if we didn't need to rely upon NNTP servers to do this (perhaps some future tech will make them obsolete?).
February 11, 2014, 01:58:09 PM
Not sure, if I understand why this should be my favorite choice.
Coz if someone is double-spending against u then they likely r trying to lower ur balance.
February 11, 2014, 01:51:48 PM
But then, what's the legitimate branch of the chain?
U should stick to a branch where ur balance is the highest, it's a part of the advanced consensus (coz "the longest chain wins" is not enough when accounts r penalized for skipping their turn to forge a block).
Ah, I remember you told me that.
Not sure, if I understand why this should be my favorite choice.
February 11, 2014, 12:21:48 PM
The life is full of trade-offs, I'm not sure that Nxt could work properly without time syncing.
I *know* it wouldn't (told you - I have created my own equivalent in pseudo-code and it also needs timing to work).
I *research* things when I am interested in them.
February 11, 2014, 12:19:43 PM
Agreed - but it would be better if we didn't need to rely upon NNTP servers to do this (perhaps some future tech will make them obsolete?).
The life is full of trade-offs, I'm not sure that Nxt could work properly without time syncing.
February 11, 2014, 12:18:04 PM
But then, what's the legitimate branch of the chain?
U should stick to a branch where ur balance is the highest, it's a part of the advanced consensus (coz "the longest chain wins" is not enough when accounts r penalized for skipping their turn to forge a block).
February 11, 2014, 12:17:52 PM
Yes, timing is essential in Nxt. Luckily it's not a big problem to have the time synced.
Agreed - but it would be better if we didn't need to rely upon NNTP servers to do this (perhaps some future tech will make them obsolete?).
February 11, 2014, 12:15:41 PM
But this information could come delayed. When does a node say: stop I do not accept this block from this account anymore?
This is why *timing* is an *essential* part of Nxt (your clock needs to be set very accurately).
Bitcoin doesn't have a reliance upon NNTP (which is why the timestamps can vary quite a bit) but Nxt *does* (this is also a very fair *criticism* of Nxt IMO).
Yes, timing is essential in Nxt. Luckily it's not a big problem to have the time synced.
February 11, 2014, 11:50:18 AM
But then, what's the legitimate branch of the chain?
That is determined by what in Bitcoin terms would be "the most work".
In Nxt terms if the hash was best for 1111 but 2222 also was close then whoever ended up choosing 2222 would be on a fork until they changed to 1111 (assuming they didn't see 1111 straight away).
This is a typical "fork" problem - and is solved once the nodes in the network "see" the best chain (they have approx. 1 day to do so from what I gather).
February 11, 2014, 11:36:45 AM
But this information could come delayed. When does a node say: stop I do not accept this block from this account anymore?
This is why *timing* is an *essential* part of Nxt (your clock needs to be set very accurately).
Bitcoin doesn't have a reliance upon NNTP (which is why the timestamps can vary quite a bit) but Nxt *does*.
Okay, I see.
But then, what's the legitimate branch of the chain?
February 11, 2014, 11:35:16 AM
But this information could come delayed. When does a node say: stop I do not accept this block from this account anymore?
This is why *timing* is an *essential* part of Nxt (your clock needs to be set very accurately).
Bitcoin doesn't have a reliance upon NNTP (which is why the timestamps can vary quite a bit) but Nxt *does* (this is also a very fair *criticism* of Nxt IMO).
February 11, 2014, 11:33:20 AM
I still don't see how the network determines that a node has not forged?
It sees that someone else forged the next block.
Okay - so "forget about *who is online*" and just look at "who *should* forge the next node based upon the hash value".
If we know that account 1111 was *supposed* to *forge* but didn't then we penalise node 1111 for not doing so (regardless of whether they were *online* or not).
February 11, 2014, 11:32:48 AM
I still don't see how the network determines that a node has not forged?
It sees that someone else forged the next block.
How? Nodes separately determine whether an account forged or not. But this information could come delayed. When does a node say: stop I do not accept this block from this account anymore?
February 11, 2014, 11:19:12 AM
I still don't see how the network determines that a node has not forged?
It sees that someone else forged the next block.
February 11, 2014, 11:16:02 AM
...each tx's broadcaster'll scan network and calculate 100%-s of block success by working nodes in next 15 secs...
Hmm... if your ping times are anything like they are in China (often 300+ms) then even in 15 secs you certainly won't be able to determine all active nodes so I do question this idea.
Can you give me some "concrete" examples of just how many nodes this can possibly scale to?
For example - you will never work out all connections if you have connections to 1M+ nodes (and will be consuming vast amounts of memory even trying to) - so has BCNext purposely limited the total network size to something quite paltry like a few thousand nodes?
BCNext limited nothing. We don't need to "ping" nodes.
This relates to my post here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5034359
I still don't see how the network determines that a node has not forged?
Maybe, you can look through my other notes as well and provide some feedback. Thanks in advance.
February 11, 2014, 11:11:50 AM
There is no "profit" in forging because merely forging adds no value.
Completely disagree! Only secure system'll be popular and for that forging'd be popular activity too, here works network effect: more independent forgers with their own goals, more secure system is for everybody else. So it adds value in security aspect of payment system and whole ecosystem.[/quote]
Securing a system adds value to the system.
Namely: security.
February 11, 2014, 10:54:53 AM
But isn't this the natural way for things to happen? I mean it's not like following somebody's plans. It will happen naturally, big businesses will be built on top of Nxt and they will take care of it and supprot it with forging, while fees will be lowered and there won't be people who forge "for the sake of forging". Coins will be issued backed by Nxt and will play the role of means of exchnage, but Nxt will still be something like a reserve currency. I thought this evolution was inevitable. Is this what BCnext meant or i didn't understand it?
Seems u r right.
here is a workable scenario:
1. bter,dgex,btc-e, issue asset like :BTC, LTC, Dogecoin etc. backed by Nxt
if issue 1BTC(token) , 20000 nxt have been locked.
2. someone want to sell nxt for btc etc, place bit order, if match the ask order, then btc(token) is transfered to receiver account.
3. more and more can place ask order with btc, etc.
1. because bter,dgex,btc-e are reputable, so you can trust them
you can deposit your btc,ltc for btc token.
or can withdrawl them.
February 11, 2014, 10:37:16 AM
February 11, 2014, 09:28:56 AM
Fee'd not be lower than it needed for Nxt to compete with other payment systems. And every sender'd know why he's paying fees: to provide speed and security.
In the world of centralized money (with inflation and not very healthy IDoL), something about 5% per month'll give a financial freedom with not so huge capital, in new world we'll have to calculate X% we'll be ready to provide to forgers for their job, and that number'll depend on thousand of factors, not only on minfee.
In the world of centralized money (with inflation and not very healthy IDoL), something about 5% per month'll give a financial freedom with not so huge capital, in new world we'll have to calculate X% we'll be ready to provide to forgers for their job, and that number'll depend on thousand of factors, not only on minfee.
Jump to: