Topic: Was NXT the first IPO coin? + Interesting prediction of NXT from February 2013 (Read 1629 times)

I understand what you're saying. Thanks for the explanation. 

Yes, IPO/ICO are terms that have significant baggage and used to evoke an emotional response (negative in the case of crypto). Like bureaucrat and public servant, you could say they are the same but the public servant would probably object as bureaucrat has negative connotations  

If I understand you correctly, you are basically objecting to the term "ICO/IPO."

I'm not trying to be difficult. I'm new and don't really know much about NXT. I'm just trying to understand what you're saying.

P.s. You can download a bootstrap blockchain from peerexplorer.com if you can't copy your nxt_db folder across to the newest version.

Sorry to break this to you but if you're not running 1.4.x, you are on a fork. So any forging you might have been doing will disappear when you update.


I am not a Nxt dev   Not even one of the founding 73 (~103). I defer my opinion to someone who I think is year's ahead of the curve at the moment..



Bitshares merges resource testing (POS) with centralization (voting for 101 delegates). I am not convinced it is anything different from the system we have today. It introduces politics onto the blockchain (expect more arguing and FUD for votes) and couldn't it be said that today's world is effectively run by 101 powerful entities? Bitassets are derivatives contracts reliant on the bitshares network. In Nxt, I promote assets as risk^2 for this reason: if the network fails you are left with nothing (not necessarily true for Multigateway however). In Bitshares, they were promoted as the opposite. The network fails, you have nothing. If there is any fear of systemic failure, the bitassets market starts to break down. Why accept or buy something that is denominated in something that might not be here in a week/year? I don't like crypto's with inflation. While clunkier, a direct link between work done and payment in bounties seems a better system. So suffice to say I have never bought any BTS.


CfB is interested in this mixed approach, and with Vitalik publishing his thoughts on 'cryptoeconomic security' and BCNext above stating that maths alone isn't enough, I think we will see more discussion in this area and that it is a tenant of Economic Clustering (you pick the node you bootstrap from because you trust them and have a economic incentive to be on the same chain to be able to transact with them). You have more direct control of who you choose to trust by nominating them for your node, BTS requires you to accept the majority even if you voted for none. If you are going to introduce 'cryptoeconomic' rules using trust as a resource, I prefer Nxt's approach where you have 100% direct control of that element.

But I am not a dev   and I am trying to see through the fog into the future as much as anyone. I could be wrong in my interpretation.

Interesting insight into BCNext's creation of NXT. Thanks.

Looks like I need to update my NXT software too. I'm still running on 1.3-something.


Just out of curiosity, but as a NXT dev, what do you think of BitShares? I mean, obviously you probably see NXT as being the superior system but do you think BitShares has some interesting features as well?

I'm more of a NXT guy myself but I've always felt their market-pegged assets were quite interesting for example.

I could find a number of heated debates that pre-date Bitshares being capable of being a platform of sorts but lets not go down that road 

Sounds very BitShares-ish.

From the NXT wiki:


I guess what BCNext means here is that the value of a single NXT should reflect the value of the economy/network and the "coins" that we use in the traditional sense should be built on top using the monetary system.

Yes, he has a project in mind that requires 'special conditions for it's existence'. He hoped BTC would provide these but saw that Bitcoin had failed by becoming corrupt by people interested only in fiat so he developed Transparent Forging as a fix. You should never be able to become a millionaire forging Nxt otherwise, by the same comparison, Nxt would have failed. You forge in Nxt because you want Nxt to persist and grow and you want to see the emergence of an economy based on Nxt's toolkit.





Speaking of toolkit, businesses are being targeted..  

[plugitty-plug-plug] http://bitcoinprbuzz.com/bitcoin-alternative-nxt-announces-upcoming-release-of-nxt-version-1-5-the-complete-toolkit-for-business/ [/plugitty-plug-plug]

Some people have suggested that BCNext and Satoshi were actually the same person. If they are connected in some way then your scenario is probably more likely since Satoshi was an old school C++ programmer while BCNext was a Java programmer.


That's certainly an interesting way of looking at it, although it does reinforce the idea of an IPO as selling shares in a company in the same way IPOs do in the non-crypto world.


LOL. "Idolized" was probably too strong a word but it's clear from his posts that he definitely admired Satoshi:

This is the "Promote the currency or promote the platform" debate I say both but long term value will come from the platform, as you say, in the AE and other things that are built on top.

Nxt got through 2 of the planned 3 month 'IPO' period so, again, 'cut short' has usually been used in the past with no detail to imply that there was a sinister motive to prevent people getting involved   Those that did their own research could follow the thread we have been quoting can see anyone had the opportunity to join for around 2 months. Not sure about the Satoshi reference, he at least didn't idolized him overtly.


The second or third post in that thread was an edit of a "reserved" post when BCNext went underground after he said someone had contacted him about Nxt, even after he had been careful with his ID and computer IP. It could be true, it could be razamataz. But it isn't important. He liked symbolism and riddles, CfB has said there are hidden references to '1984' in the Nxt algo's as well as the genesis password being the opening line from the same book. 21 was chosen as that was the number of BTC that will ever be.

A POS Block-Chain System shouldn't be calling itself a 'COIN'. They're DACs.

If I may, I think this is the misconception.. And why some people get so upset and irritated by these 'COIN' launches..  (Steady..).

The 'UNIT' running on the POS chain is exactly what the chain says it is,.. a STAKE in the system.

POS Systems should rely on making money through the services they provide. NXT's asset exchange, or BitShares in general both provide a utility to their POS network. And that IS worth something.

NXT's IPO was exactly that. A sale of shares in a fledgling DAC. I don't think of NXT as coins. They're shares.

I had not seen anything like that before. But there hadn't been any pure POS coins until then. Definitely a first for me on both counts.

Congratulations most certainly in order.. 

Here's my personal favorite (emphasis mine):


Link: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3279654



Yeah, BCNext's intentions were definitely quite different from the IPO scams that were to come later. I did say in a previous post that most IPOs since NXT's have been motivated by greed. People saw the NXT IPO and realized that they had missed the boat and so they started looking for the next big thing. Scammers sensed that there was a new opportunity to rip off people hence the reason for the countless IPO scams in 2014.

Also, there were IPOs which turned out not to be scams such as those for Crypti, Qora, MaidSafe, Mastercoin, GEMZ, and Ethereum which not only resulted in the investors getting an actual product but also rewarded their investors with a handsome profit during their peaks. The term "IPO" is nearly synonymous with scams but not all IPOs are scams.

I still think that describing NXT's distribution as an IPO is the most accurate since I can't think of another term that would replace it in this sense. Nevertheless, BCNext's intent was probably closer to Counterparty's proof-of-burn model which sent coins to an unspendable address. Here's a quote by PhantomPhreak, one of the founders of Counterparty:


Even so, he did intend to use the funds from the IPO to promote the coin unlike Counterparty which brings it closer to traditional (non-scammy) IPOs:



But he obviously didn't consider that part to be very important:


And a few other interesting quotes by BCNext:


... Looks like he wouldn't have approved of NEM's distribution. Or perhaps he was unaware of anti-sockpuppet measures.


... And the prediction came true.


... Already mentioned in another quote above but it seems that he desperately wanted more stakeholders. I wonder why the distribution was cut short then? I understand that he idolized Satoshi but to cut the IPO short just to get a nice round 21 BTC seems a bit excessive.

Nice one.

it would be a cool story if someone linked BCNEXT to Satoshi somehow and they both are anonymous. Maybe they were best friends?

And.......does anyone want to guess how much BTC was raised by the NXT IPO/distribution allocation ?

"Was it a million BTC, Uncle Dave ?"
No, son, it was 21.
"Twenty-one ? You shitting me, Uncle ?"
It's the truth, kid, once upon a time crypto world wasn't full of greedy thieves, the Interwebs was free and CMC fitted on to one screen.
"Now I know you're lying, you old bastard"

As discussed above, IPO/ICO are terms used by scammers with the aim of maximizing donations before delivering nothing. Hence all the "never invest in IPOs" by those that got burned. BCNext plan was:


BCNext never called it an IPO/ICO and asked for donations to be made to a spendable BTC account so he could send the small amounts back if Nxt failed.




Nxt's 'IPO' had far and away the opposite of what most people in crypto today think of. That is the main reason Nxt is referred to as an IPO in my experience, to try and create the same association with the recent IPO scams. Very few know it was the first and less still do their own research.

Nxt was capped donations with low funds raised+delivery of ground breaking technology. Most IPOs are raise as much money as possible+deliver nothing.


Fun fact: There were over 100 users who expressed an interest and sent tiny amounts to the donation address to be part of the initial Nxt distribution. Only 73 bothered to claim their stakes (eventually, initially I think it was 71). Amusing when you see trolls (no one in here) talking about Nxt as though it was always a sure thing 

Same here, although I became interested in cryptos a few weeks later than you did. If it's any consolation, many of those who knew about NXT back then chose not to invest despite having the opportunity to do so and a few people even called it an outright scam and warned others not to invest (which I guess was terrible advice in hindsight):



Also, even if I did become involved in cryptos while the NXT IPO was still open, I doubt I would have been able to buy bitcoins, set up a wallet, navigate to the thread, and follow BCNext's instructions to send a signed message via Blockchain.info in such a short timeframe anyway.

I was just getting into crypto when nxt funding closed. How I wonder if I was one of the investors.