elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
Nxt 2.0 design singapore
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Latest Stable Nxt Client: Nxt 1.12.2

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 51

Author Topic: Nxt 2.0 design  (Read 233970 times)

Damelon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +792/-54
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2314
    • View Profile
    • Nxt Inside
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #300 on: February 12, 2016, 11:10:02 am »


Sorry for the following question if she ever has been:

Will all my assets become worthless with Nxt2.0?

Just like if you print a normal IOU on paper and then print a new version on plastic or even digital, it's not the MEDIUM that is important, but what it represents.

So your assets will be just as valuable, as long as the company/asset/commodity it represents is just as valuable.
Logged
Member of the Nxt Foundation | Donations: NXT-D6K7-MLY6-98FM-FLL5T
Join Nxt Slack! https://nxtchat.herokuapp.com/
Founder of Blockchain Workspace | Personal Site & Blog

Damelon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +792/-54
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2314
    • View Profile
    • Nxt Inside
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #301 on: February 12, 2016, 11:17:43 am »

My intention was to use the account property only for the initial distribution of fNXT. If you missed this one time event youll have to purchase fNXT on the open market. Allowing accounts to possibly claim their fNXT later is complex to implement and would mean that initially only small proportion of the fNXT stake will actually forge.

I am very against this.

A one time exchange is NOT how we should treat long time holders/investors.

If it's complex to code: tough! We cannot just push ALL responsibility to the users. That needs to be shared and one thing that is absolutely necessary is a grace period.

We can haggle over the length of the grace period (or even decide to extend it indefinitely) but NOT having one is a bad idea and I really see no way to defend it in any reasonable way.

You cannot use the "they should pay attention" routine, as that again just says "you are an idiot" and that is the last thing we should do to people who have supported Nxt up till now.

tl;dr: I think this is a very bad idea. ;)
Logged
Member of the Nxt Foundation | Donations: NXT-D6K7-MLY6-98FM-FLL5T
Join Nxt Slack! https://nxtchat.herokuapp.com/
Founder of Blockchain Workspace | Personal Site & Blog

lurker10

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +168/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #302 on: February 12, 2016, 11:21:40 am »

On this I'm not going to joke: no-one, even if their account has never shown any signs of life or usefulness (or even if they are a known thief, like TheSir  >:( ) should have any of their assets/NXT/rights to fNXT/whatever taken away.
It's simply not right. I can understand some peoples frustration at having major NXT holders doing apparently nothing to help out the cause....but, hey, it's their choice to make, and we have to respect that. 

With all due respect, the best tech of NXT lagging behind inferior technologies market caps owes in no small part to passive sleeping whales. Sure, we can respect their choices and keep lagging behind in the race.

Let's just go with the initial proposal of JL and give 1:1 to all holders and be done with it. This is the least evil solution out of all the others. Can the Nxt foundation please set up an 'official' poll on the 1:1 proposal?
Logged
Run a node - win a prize! "Lucky node" project jar: NXT-8F28-EDVE-LPPX-HY4E7

Cassius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +207/-18
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2459
  • Rather be a pirate than join the navy
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #303 on: February 12, 2016, 11:24:04 am »

My intention was to use the account property only for the initial distribution of fNXT. If you missed this one time event youll have to purchase fNXT on the open market. Allowing accounts to possibly claim their fNXT later is complex to implement and would mean that initially only small proportion of the fNXT stake will actually forge.

I am very against this.

A one time exchange is NOT how we should treat long time holders/investors.

If it's complex to code: tough! We cannot just push ALL responsibility to the users. That needs to be shared and one thing that is absolutely necessary is a grace period.

We can haggle over the length of the grace period (or even decide to extend it indefinitely) but NOT having one is a bad idea and I really see no way to defend it in any reasonable way.

You cannot use the "they should pay attention" routine, as that again just says "you are an idiot" and that is the last thing we should do to people who have supported Nxt up till now.

tl;dr: I think this is a very bad idea. ;)

I don't think this is what is meant. I think Riker means the 1:1 exchange will happen based on account balances at a given time. Everyone will own their fNXT at that point - they will be stored in accounts with the same private key as the matching 1:1 account.
Logged
I head up content for BitScan, crypto business hub.

martismartis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +73/-10
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1238
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #304 on: February 12, 2016, 11:31:30 am »

I have a straight question: is it possible to have all sidechain stuff without these fNXT and other NXT stuff?
Logged

Damelon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +792/-54
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2314
    • View Profile
    • Nxt Inside
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #305 on: February 12, 2016, 11:44:48 am »

My intention was to use the account property only for the initial distribution of fNXT. If you missed this one time event youll have to purchase fNXT on the open market. Allowing accounts to possibly claim their fNXT later is complex to implement and would mean that initially only small proportion of the fNXT stake will actually forge.

I am very against this.

A one time exchange is NOT how we should treat long time holders/investors.

If it's complex to code: tough! We cannot just push ALL responsibility to the users. That needs to be shared and one thing that is absolutely necessary is a grace period.

We can haggle over the length of the grace period (or even decide to extend it indefinitely) but NOT having one is a bad idea and I really see no way to defend it in any reasonable way.

You cannot use the "they should pay attention" routine, as that again just says "you are an idiot" and that is the last thing we should do to people who have supported Nxt up till now.

tl;dr: I think this is a very bad idea. ;)

I don't think this is what is meant. I think Riker means the 1:1 exchange will happen based on account balances at a given time. Everyone will own their fNXT at that point - they will be stored in accounts with the same private key as the matching 1:1 account.

Ah, if that is the case, never mind :)

The main point is nothing is taken and all ownership  respected.
Logged
Member of the Nxt Foundation | Donations: NXT-D6K7-MLY6-98FM-FLL5T
Join Nxt Slack! https://nxtchat.herokuapp.com/
Founder of Blockchain Workspace | Personal Site & Blog

Cassius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +207/-18
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2459
  • Rather be a pirate than join the navy
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #306 on: February 12, 2016, 12:04:16 pm »

The so-called 'split' of NXT into fNXT and NXT is proving most controversial. Is there no way of securing child chains on the current Nxt chain whilst enabling scalability?
Logged
I head up content for BitScan, crypto business hub.

LocoMB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +101/-37
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 751
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #307 on: February 12, 2016, 12:10:12 pm »

The so-called 'split' of NXT into fNXT and NXT is proving most controversial. Is there no way of securing child chains on the current Nxt chain whilst enabling scalability?

I believe so.

on the other hand- I seem to remember that it was BCNEXTs original vision that the NXT be used solely as a token to stabilize the network, not as a coin in itself, and all else should be run as an MS coin

so NXT should be fNXT, meaning there already ‚Äčis fNXT, and it is called 'NXT'
certainly a hardfork is needed to get to a 2.0 level thing but there is no technical reason at all to split NXT

But a very fundamental reason to not split Nxt, and that is called 'forced reallocation is a no-go'

But maybe I am simply not understanding it correctly, and it does not equate to 'forced reallocation'?

Logged
TOX
90E54E5B5213290EE616D425CADC473038CFABFA53C913271AA8559D1937DC4AF3A354A9E4E5

Jean-Luc

  • Core Dev
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +816/-81
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1610
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #308 on: February 12, 2016, 12:11:31 pm »

My intention was to use the account property only for the initial distribution of fNXT. If you missed this one time event youll have to purchase fNXT on the open market. Allowing accounts to possibly claim their fNXT later is complex to implement and would mean that initially only small proportion of the fNXT stake will actually forge.
One good reason to use such a property or some other way of confirming the account is still in use would be to prevent giving fNXT to accounts without public keys announced. Since those could be mined in the future, potentially by an attacker who would then get forging power in addition to the NXT. Many of those accounts have NXT because of user error, e.g. somebody sending to account 123 or similar, when sending to numeric account ids was still allowed in the client. Or somebody could have done that in order to burn NXT, instead of the normal way of sending them to genesis.
There is also the case of forgotten passwords, for accounts that do have public keys. It is not feasible for an attacker to get those (unless the password was weak, but then they would have been stolen already), so even if such accounts do get fNXT, they can never forge with it, but neither can a potential attacker.

Nothing in the 2.0 implementation depends on how exactly the fNXT was distributed, if we do use a keepAlive property the deadline for setting it would be just before the snapshot is taken. It is also too early to do polls about it, a lot may change in the Nxt ecosystem and user base until the time for that decision comes. At least wait until we have some proof of concept 2.0 implementation running on testnet, then we would still be at least 6 months away from putting it in production.

Logged
GPG key fingerprint: 263A 9EB0 29CF C77A 3D06  FD13 811D 6940 E1E4 240C
NXT-X4LF-9A4G-WN9Z-2R322

Jean-Luc

  • Core Dev
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +816/-81
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1610
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #309 on: February 12, 2016, 12:13:00 pm »

certainly a hardfork is needed to get to a 2.0 level thing but there is no technical reason at all to split NXT
Explain how pruning would work without splitting.
Logged
GPG key fingerprint: 263A 9EB0 29CF C77A 3D06  FD13 811D 6940 E1E4 240C
NXT-X4LF-9A4G-WN9Z-2R322

Jean-Luc

  • Core Dev
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +816/-81
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1610
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #310 on: February 12, 2016, 12:13:45 pm »

I have a straight question: is it possible to have all sidechain stuff without these fNXT and other NXT stuff?
No, it is not.
Logged
GPG key fingerprint: 263A 9EB0 29CF C77A 3D06  FD13 811D 6940 E1E4 240C
NXT-X4LF-9A4G-WN9Z-2R322

Marc De Mesel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +228/-83
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 643
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #311 on: February 12, 2016, 12:26:09 pm »

With all due respect, the best tech of NXT lagging behind inferior technologies market caps owes in no small part to passive sleeping whales. Sure, we can respect their choices and keep lagging behind in the race.

This is not true. Passive investors are giving value to nxt simply by being invested. It is those that sold their nxt that have lowered the value.


If we want nxt to be money and valued as money in the future, it means you can buy it, save it, forget about it, come back a few years later and sell it, without having lost voting or forging rights in the meantime.

Dilution or inflation of shares/coins or stripping them from rights, if they don't do this or that, is a sure way to lose the race to become a valuable currency.


Who is responsible for NXT lagging behind inferior technologies is a big discussion but it surely are not our investors, active or passive!

Jean-Luc

  • Core Dev
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +816/-81
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1610
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #312 on: February 12, 2016, 12:32:36 pm »

1) The transactions within a child chain are verified by nodes via the last snapshot (which they can create themselves, if they are up to date) of that chain and via the transaction history of that chain since the last snapshot, right?
Yes, transactions are verified based on the state of the childchain (e.g. account balances, assets ownership, open ask/bid orders, alias ownership and all that). This state is constructed starting from the last snapshot and applying all transactions that occurred after it (and are therefore not yet pruned).

For that reason, as "state" we must define anything that is needed in order to be able to verify and process a transaction. For example, asset dividend payments depend on the account asset balance at the dividend payment height which may be up to 1440 blocks behind current height. Therefore, the state must include asset balance history up to 1440 blocks back, to be able to execute such dividend payment.

Nothing depends on arbitrary messages, therefore they will not be part of the state. Even the permanent ones. But if your node is configured to follow a specific child chain without pruning it, it will have those messages. There will really be one or two more degrees of pruning than the one that we currently have which affects prunable data only.

Aliases are part of the state, because being able to reserve an alias, or change or sell an existing one, depends on whether it has already be taken and who owns it. So aliases cannot be pruned. (But the transactions that did the setting or changing the alias can and will be pruned, as you only need the last alias value, not all previous ones).

One more thing I realized, we don't really need per-child-chain snapshots. We just need snapshots taken of the full system state, as defined above. What would be child chain specific and configurable is how far back behind this state one can go for each childchain.
 
Quote
2) The child chain's snapshot and transaction history since the last snapshot are prunable data attachements in the main chain, right?
The transaction history will be contained in the prunable attachments of those ChildchainBlock transactions. Nodes that are set as archival for a specific child chain will not prune those, and other nodes who are interested in obtaining those will retrieve them similar to how prunable data can be retrieved from archival nodes now, verifying their hashes.

The snapshot will not be an attachment. Only its hash will be contained in the transaction that defines it. How exactly the snapshot gets downloaded by nodes who do not yet have it remains to be decided, it will be too big to download as a single piece of data from a single node, some torrent-like distributed download will need to be implemented.
Logged
GPG key fingerprint: 263A 9EB0 29CF C77A 3D06  FD13 811D 6940 E1E4 240C
NXT-X4LF-9A4G-WN9Z-2R322

allwelder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +196/-13
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1867
  • NxtChina.org
    • View Profile
    • NxtChina.org
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #313 on: February 12, 2016, 12:33:10 pm »

There is a practical problem with using the distribution of NSC to make any decision about the distribution of fNXT.
Account NXT-WKDG-E8R6-BUBL-BCNSC currently holds 99.97% of all the supply, this is a form of centralization. Surely we are not going to give fNXT based on the proportional stake in NSC including this account. But if we exclude this account how can we trust this account owner not to distribute these NSC coins to accounts under his control and not according to the hallmark nodes rule ?

I have another suggestion to reward those who care, regardless if they are forging or not. I mean if you paid 1M NXT to TNSSE but are not forging, aren't you helping NXT ?

The suggestion is that each account, in order to receive fNXT according to his proportional NXT stake would have to register a specific "Keep Alive" property on his account. By this the account owner proves that he poses the passphrase for this account and that the she cares enough about NXT in order to register this property.
The distribution code will iterate over all accounts, filter out those who did not register the property, then distribute fNXT proportionally based on the NXT stake of the accounts that did register the property.
I dont think this is a good solution.
This solution is just grab NXT from others who hold NXT but not active.

fNXT and NXT =1:1 is the best solution,whether these NXT holders are active or not IMO.
The fact they hold NXT has given value to Nxt.
Logged
NxtChina |Weibo |Twitter Donation welcomed:NXT-APL9-66GU-K8LY-B3JJJ

allwelder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +196/-13
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1867
  • NxtChina.org
    • View Profile
    • NxtChina.org
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #314 on: February 12, 2016, 12:34:50 pm »

The 'keep alive' variation could work well, so long as it never expired. So people would always have a chance to claim their fNXT.
- how this differ from simple 1:1 case? In both cases a sleeping whale can wake up and dump 50'000'000 fNXT.
Do not try to solve the problem of whale,this is nothing business with NXT2.0,RIGHT?
Logged
NxtChina |Weibo |Twitter Donation welcomed:NXT-APL9-66GU-K8LY-B3JJJ

SkyNxt

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Karma: +19/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #315 on: February 12, 2016, 12:38:48 pm »

How is NXT 2.0 different from mini blockchain cryptonite.info apart from NXT would have POS and child chains?
Logged

allwelder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +196/-13
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1867
  • NxtChina.org
    • View Profile
    • NxtChina.org
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #316 on: February 12, 2016, 12:46:02 pm »

My intention was to use the account property only for the initial distribution of fNXT. If you missed this one time event youll have to purchase fNXT on the open market. Allowing accounts to possibly claim their fNXT later is complex to implement and would mean that initially only small proportion of the fNXT stake will actually forge.
Many of those accounts have NXT because of user error, e.g. s
So how to prove this is error but not the real sending?

fNXT:NXT=1:1,PLEASE.Whether they are active or not,error or real sending.

From what talked,I feel NXT2.0 is much focus on solving the whales problem rather than tech.
Logged
NxtChina |Weibo |Twitter Donation welcomed:NXT-APL9-66GU-K8LY-B3JJJ

Damelon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +792/-54
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2314
    • View Profile
    • Nxt Inside
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #317 on: February 12, 2016, 12:46:22 pm »

The 'keep alive' variation could work well, so long as it never expired. So people would always have a chance to claim their fNXT.
- how this differ from simple 1:1 case? In both cases a sleeping whale can wake up and dump 50'000'000 fNXT.
Do not try to solve the problem of whale,this is nothing business with NXT2.0,RIGHT?

Correct. If the "whale problem" is a problem at all.
That probably depends on your outlook on life and philosophy, which is a different kettle of fish altogether :)
Logged
Member of the Nxt Foundation | Donations: NXT-D6K7-MLY6-98FM-FLL5T
Join Nxt Slack! https://nxtchat.herokuapp.com/
Founder of Blockchain Workspace | Personal Site & Blog

TheCoinWizard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +97/-55
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 614
  • Learn by questioning everything!
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #318 on: February 12, 2016, 12:48:30 pm »

I am glad that nxt is evolving but as a criticism I feel the need to share my concerns evolving it this way...

Some disadvantages I see in this design:

From the moment their are no more offers, offering fNXT for the childchain currency, it is no longer possible to forge and excecute transactions on the childchain.
The fee in the childchain would also be floating depending on the latest fNXT offer.

- To be able to still do pruning, we need a snapshot transaction, which takes a snapshot of the current child chain state only, without any history that led to this state.

Scaling by using snapshots causes all transaction history to be unsaved.
Even though nodes could still have that data, they have no incentive to share that date.
This would mean that I open my nxt account and I can't see my previous transactions, messages, trades, etc.
I think scaling would be more feacable by lowering the duplicity of all this data, not by deleting it all together, as that results in the loss of availability of all that data.


fNXT transactions will have higher fees compared to transactions on child chains, as they will need to be stored permanently.
That also means no phasing, no account control, no shuffling, etc.

No account control for the token that needs security the most, as it controls the security of all childchains?

The initial cost of creating a child chain should be very high, to protect against abuse.

Unfortunatly that will result into low usage as well.




I would beg to consider this alternative implementation of childchains or alternative nxt 2.0, undoing all previously mentioned disadvantages...
https://nxtforum.org/core-development-discussion/aternate-nxt-2-0-design/
Logged
Welcome to the After Nxt Calendar era...
Which started in the year 222 of the French Republic, Frost month, on the fifth day of the first week, better known as the 2456621th Julian day,
even better known as 24 November 2013 at 12:00:00 UTC.

lurker10

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +168/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #319 on: February 12, 2016, 01:05:22 pm »

If we want nxt to be money and valued as money in the future, it means you can buy it, save it, forget about it, come back a few years later and sell it, without having lost voting or forging rights in the meantime.

Dilution or inflation of shares/coins or stripping them from rights, if they don't do this or that, is a sure way to lose the race to become a valuable currency.

Various forms of money are valued for different properties. Crypto is a new form of money, better than others in special use cases. For instance, you can transfer your wealth across the border in your brain without asking anyone's permission, no other form of money can do that.

Unfortunately, crypto is not perfect, you can't use it without internet or electricity. This is a clear example of limitation.

The initial design can change, this is both a limitation and a powerful potential to open new horizons. You shouldn't treat it like other forms of money, it's different. Its potential to change design doesn't make it less valuable. What is important is consensus. If the consensus of forgers (PoS) is to change the initial design in a certain way, it will happen.

What you talk about is the store of value function. I don't think crypto is particularly good at this function, it hasn't been proven, not even the longest running example, Bitcoin. Crypto excels at other functions. Wishing for the ideal solution is futile, it's less unnerving to enjoy and embrace what it can do rather than wish for what it can't or is not known to. For store of value function gold is probably the best known to humanity. Crypto? Not so much.
Logged
Run a node - win a prize! "Lucky node" project jar: NXT-8F28-EDVE-LPPX-HY4E7
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 51
 

elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
assembly
assembly