Topic: Transparent mining 2, or What part of Legacy should be left behind - page 7. (Read 15616 times)

Yes, "selfish" is probably a bit too strong; but, in fact, we agree in essence. It is quite normal for people to expect a reward for resources invested. And this reward should be immediately convertible to  food and shelter money for one's family, which (I mean, the family ) is the most important thing in the world. So it is natural that a forger expects some profit, and that's why the fees should stay, in one way or another.

I return my agreement with this Easy does it.

I also would like to add that terminology is important and would like to opt to keep the passiva/active forging terminology.

If "selfish" is used, prepare for a fight. Human nature and all that Also, "passives" are still providing something of value.

I completely agree!

Something, I would like to add: whatever ratio of passive/active forging we strive to, we should do the transition as smoothly as possible. Humans cannot bear change and especially not abrupt change.

So, what's your point?

Just because, we might be might workaround some security issues does not mean the forger can lean back forever.
Just to make that sure: There will always be a bug! Could somebody create a meme for that?

The real world/hardware etc. issue won't go away anyway.

This is an important point. Nxt is about transactions being done. It does nothing if no one doesn't dó anything. Any discussion about whether or not forging is profitable is moot until activity gets going.

What do you need to get activity? Services, and lots of them. This is one of the reasons I like incentivising service providers to forge.

That way the "passive" forgers (I like that term better than "selfish", because they too are providing a service to the network) will also get some of the dividend, but it will be less than the "active" forgers, who are actually making the network more attractive to use and also provide extra traffic and transactions.

As I said, in the proposed system, there still is a place for passive forging, but the gains will be much lower than for active forgers.

Tit for tat.

When Account Controls are implemented, I imagine you can simply lease a "puppet" account your forging power. So you could have a 10mil+ NXT account forging through an account with 1 NXT, so the only risk you take is is the 1 NXT.

It's a tradeoff. If your business relies on NXT being healthy, then you have a very good reason for forge. If you're simply a user with a small balance, but you aren't really affected by hiccups in the service, then obviously you wouldn't forge.

Tbh, I think the rewards justify forging, although it may seem not to be so. For example, if you hold Bitcoin, you are paying a ~10% inflation tax every year. Your stash is literally generating -10% BTC a year.

In NXT, your stash (according to jL7777) appreciates by 0.5% a year. This is a +10.5% difference vs. BTC per year.

interesting.

"Wall street complex financial instruments were actually designed by mathematicians and Nobel-tracked physicists, who used algorithms and computer models to reconstitute the unreliable loans in a way that was supposed to eliminate most of the risk.

But you can't model human behavior with math."

Okay, I do it:

The forger:
 - has to have a client
 - risks all his stake if the client is malicious
 - risks his hardware if the client is not secured against malicious attacks
 - has to pay the electricity bill
 - has to pay for the hardware/renewal of such
 - has to pay for a place that hardware can exist in
 - has to pay for the bandwidth he contributes to the network
 - has to implement security measures (attacks, heat etc.)

I think there is pretty much at stake, literally.


So, forgers should be paid for their expenses. But nothing more or just a little bit of it.


As I said, I see forger as an equivalent to bankers with a most important difference (both keep the system running):
- forgers do the least what is necessary to sustain the system - verifying transactions and doing all the hard computational work
- bankers generate the drive to keep the system running by generating money and debts (watch the videos of freigeist) and therefore creating the urge of the society to drive forward, work and repay debts

Bankers have the unfair advantage of creating and manipulating the ways the system works. They therefore make profit at the expense of others.

Forgers can't and therefore don't. BUT they have to be compensated. The (compensation - expenses) should be close to 0 but maybe bit more to create incentive for people to join and explore the possibilities of NXT.

I think selfish is a wrong term, I and a lot of people want to make money/business on a new revolutionary way: Cryptocurrency. What is selfish about that? Then every business is selffish, it is always about making money and provide food and shelter for your family. Reward the forgers and youw ill get a lot of forgers!

I tink all these are ideas are interesting and fascinating, but very hard to understand for Average Joe... And me.

Sorry bit off topic....if anyone has seen the new Robocop movie then you will see clearly why anonymous encrypted internet/calling/messaging/platforms will be a staple of the future.

(leaked today from our dear friend ED)

‘Gilgamesh’ and ‘Shenanigans’

Instead of accessing cellphone metadata through cell phone towers and internet service providers, the NSA uses a program called Gilgamesh. To be able to track the cellphones of potential targets a special device known as a ‘virtual base-tower transceiver’ has to be installed on the drone. The transceiver emits a signal that forces the target’s mobile to lock into the NSA’s system, allowing the target to be tracked to within 30 feet of their location.

As well as Gilgamesh, the NSA has developed a program known as ‘Shenanigans’ that acts like a giant cyber vacuum cleaner. A pod on an aircraft downloads massive amounts of information from any wireless networks, smart phones, computers, or other electronic devices that are within range.

The world needs the Nxt Ecosystem....

Same here. I,m running 3 24/7 nodes weeks ago. Motivation is not forging rewards, is Nxt and his concept.

Owning NXT is somewhat like owning shares in a virtual public company.  The shares were issued all at once, but they happen to be coins that are traded on crypto markets, which is nice because they are accessible to anyone.  They function as both shares and as the resource used in the network itself.

The forging fees are not attractive right now as an incentive for profit because there is no real activity yet.  To me, forging fees are more of a programmatic "dividend" that is built into the shares.  You are only paid this dividend if you show up to shareholder meetings (run a client with an unlocked account)(run a node).

Can you please explain what job a forger doing other that unlocking his client and leaving the software open?
But the network is not just these nodes! the network needs servers that is now working by donation! IMHO that is not fair!
Just my opinion!

I'm personally may open a client to forge, but why should I arrange several servers/ VPS around the world to Handle the network? Just because I'm a Nxt holder? Just because donations?

That is not enough for long term plan!

http://support.coinbase.com/customer/portal/emails/new

In regards to Part 2 of Transparent Mining.  I personally think it's essential that coins are built on top of Nxt.  Otherwise, we are no different than BTC or new POS clones. We can create a huge market all of which relies on Nxt as the infrastructure.  I would also go so far as to propose that any new Nxtcoin is required to send 10000Nxt to genesis at time of creation.  Thus we are reducing supply of Nxt while adding value since Nxt would be required for creation of Nxtcoin.  All Nxtcoins would start with the same value (10k Nxt) Would also be great because individuals can fund raise Nxt in order to create a new Nxtcoin.  Nxt would become immensely valuable with that model and eventually all Nxt could be replaced with Nxtcoins.  

+1

Thanks for the link! But I doubt that such a thing could really work - too many abuse possibilities...

Also, this
would mean that (almost) all scientists (and, certainly, all mathematicians) are doomed in such a system  

BCNext was talking about payments only - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nxt-instant-transactions-with-guaranteed-confirmation-316104

I really hate having to go through BTC first via coinbase, because I have to wait 4 days before I get my BTC and then transfer them into NXT. During that time, prices tend to move

Does coinbase have some kind of petition form? I'm surprised they still deal only in BTC.

Just read the "Proof-of-Learning" article, where "learning" is a bit of a misnomer, but this is already a way of getting a huge adoption. I disagree that even with the "idealistic" setup, it will be restricted. People will play with the "rules".
If you go by the "Proof-of-Learning" model, you could still get huge returns on just running memes. 

People will find ways to monetise with the least amount of work anyway.

But I get your point. I am just trying to not let go of mine