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 1.11.15 | Latest Experimental Nxt Client: Nxt 1.12.0e

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 51

Author Topic: Nxt 2.0 design  (Read 207630 times)

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 #380 on: February 16, 2016, 11:10:26 am »

The possibility of asset sales to increase NXT balances ahead of fNXT creation is not so different to what happens when NXT is in an uptrend, or when a shiny new asset launches and people liquidate their existing holdings to fund its purchase.

For various reasons it seems best to make the allocation process flexible and as voluntary as possible. You don't want people suddenly dumping their fNXT because they never valued the idea in the first place and want to grab a quick profit. You do want the most motivated-to-forge people owning fNXT. So I think it's right there should be a cost to owning fNXT, because it represents the ability to profit from the long-term success of Nxt.

Edit: to clarify I think that cost should be met by burning NXT, rather than by a separate ICO.
Logged
I head up content for BitScan, crypto business hub.

Seccour

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +68/-15
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 380
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #381 on: February 16, 2016, 05:05:49 pm »

Edit: to clarify I think that cost should be met by burning NXT, rather than by a separate ICO.

So you will steal people right to forge ? NXT already have the "initial distribution problem" in his history ( a lot of people still think NXT is a scam because of this ), do you really want to add to this " how the forging right of NXTer was stolen by forcing them to burn their NXT if they want to forge " ? NXT / fNXT at a 1:1 ratio is the least worst idea since after the fork people will eventually rebuy assets ( that would be cheap ) so actually the risk for the AE isn't that high when we think about it. ( I'm still against this NXT 2.0 thing btw )
Logged
SecFund : 9125535795764729261 (Asset ID)

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 #382 on: February 16, 2016, 05:39:05 pm »

Edit: to clarify I think that cost should be met by burning NXT, rather than by a separate ICO.

So you will steal people right to forge ? NXT already have the "initial distribution problem" in his history ( a lot of people still think NXT is a scam because of this ), do you really want to add to this " how the forging right of NXTer was stolen by forcing them to burn their NXT if they want to forge " ? NXT / fNXT at a 1:1 ratio is the least worst idea since after the fork people will eventually rebuy assets ( that would be cheap ) so actually the risk for the AE isn't that high when we think about it. ( I'm still against this NXT 2.0 thing btw )

I'm not fully convinced of the benefit of going down the fNXT/NXT route. I can see why it would help scalability, but is doing it really worth the space saved? That's not really something I can answer. If it was down to me I'd stick with mainchain as the host and play it safe.
IF we go down that route, though, I'd be wary of 1:1 as it will inevitably lead to a dump of fNXT (and assets - though this may be mitigated somewhat by announcing plans far ahead), and questions about dilution. People don't forge for the profits right now, in any case.
Logged
I head up content for BitScan, crypto business hub.

Sebastien256

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +169/-24
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2823
  • ^LOOK UP^ = Nxt community!
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #383 on: February 16, 2016, 08:20:41 pm »

Would be great if in Nxt 2.0, there would actually some rewards or incensitive to run archieved node.

I say that, because every child blockchain seems to be pruned after 1440 blocks in the current 2.0 design.

Are there any plan on that?
Logged
Please drop your ideas concerning Nxt and/or NRS in this topic -> List of feature request for Nxt and/or NRS (with the full list in OP).

Windjc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +59/-17
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #384 on: February 17, 2016, 09:24:08 am »

So this thread began by saying that this was the best solution.

Can we know about the OTHER potential solutions that you don't think are as good?

Its easy for people to say "it doesn't matter if Asset values get destroyed." Except I have invested over $200k of money into assets.

Poor me? Maybe.

But updates that crush long term supporters and investors can't be good for the eco-system, can they?

I felt by investing in Assets I was investing in the development of the NXT eco system, instead of just investing and holding Nxt. Now, I could be severely punished for that.

I didn't really sign up for major overhauls like this one.

If it doesn't effect Assets then fine. But if it does, as it potentially can, and I lose $200k, I won't be coming back.

I love capitalism. I am willing to be a victim of it. That doesn't mean I will continue to be a part of a community that would disregard some people in such a way. There is "risk" and then there is stupidity. I invest in developers more than projects. Nxt felt like a project I could trust. Lose my trust, lose me. And probably other people like me.

« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 09:29:14 am by Windjc »
Logged

NxtSwe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +124/-9
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 657
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #385 on: February 17, 2016, 09:34:30 am »

So this thread began by saying that this was the best solution.

Can we know about the OTHER potential solutions that you don't think are as good?

Its easy for people to say "it doesn't matter if Asset values get destroyed." Except I have invested over $200k of money into assets.

Poor me? Maybe.

But updates that crush long term supporters and investors can't be good for the eco-system, can they?

I felt by investing in Assets I was investing in the development of the NXT eco system, instead of just investing and holding Nxt. Now, I could be severely punished for that.

I didn't really sign up for major overhauls like this one.

If it doesn't effect Assets then fine. But if it does, as it potentially can, and I lose $200k, I won't be coming back.

I love capitalism. I am willing to be a victim of it. That doesn't mean I will continue to be a part of a community that would disregard some people in such a way. There is "risk" and then there is stupidity. I invest in developers more than projects. Nxt felt like a project I could trust. Lose my trust, lose me. And probably other people like me.

Why would NXT 2.0 destroy assets?
Logged
Check out the NxtLib, the .NET Framework API for the Nxt platform.

Windjc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +59/-17
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #386 on: February 17, 2016, 09:38:16 am »

So this thread began by saying that this was the best solution.

Can we know about the OTHER potential solutions that you don't think are as good?

Its easy for people to say "it doesn't matter if Asset values get destroyed." Except I have invested over $200k of money into assets.

Poor me? Maybe.

But updates that crush long term supporters and investors can't be good for the eco-system, can they?

I felt by investing in Assets I was investing in the development of the NXT eco system, instead of just investing and holding Nxt. Now, I could be severely punished for that.

I didn't really sign up for major overhauls like this one.

If it doesn't effect Assets then fine. But if it does, as it potentially can, and I lose $200k, I won't be coming back.

I love capitalism. I am willing to be a victim of it. That doesn't mean I will continue to be a part of a community that would disregard some people in such a way. There is "risk" and then there is stupidity. I invest in developers more than projects. Nxt felt like a project I could trust. Lose my trust, lose me. And probably other people like me.

Why would NXT 2.0 destroy assets?

Potentially because people will dump assets to buy more Nxt to try and get more fNxt.  Also, fear that Nxt price might be diluted, Asset become less valuable and then are dumped as well.
Logged

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 #387 on: February 17, 2016, 09:40:19 am »

@NxtSwe The concern is that if there's a 1:1 distribution of fNXT for NXT then people will want to stock up on NXT before that happens, and will sell assets to get it.
This is a bit like what happens when a new asset is launched. Nxt is still fairly small and it's a bit of a zero sum game shuffling money around for the next big thing. What's different about this, though, is that it's not the 'free market': it's a change that comes from within the Nxt ecosystem, a fundamental change of the platform that affects a different stakeholders in different ways (a nuance I hadn't fully appreciated until @windjc and others articulated it).
Logged
I head up content for BitScan, crypto business hub.

Seccour

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +68/-15
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 380
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #388 on: February 17, 2016, 09:43:42 am »

So this thread began by saying that this was the best solution.

Can we know about the OTHER potential solutions that you don't think are as good?

Its easy for people to say "it doesn't matter if Asset values get destroyed." Except I have invested over $200k of money into assets.

Poor me? Maybe.

But updates that crush long term supporters and investors can't be good for the eco-system, can they?

I felt by investing in Assets I was investing in the development of the NXT eco system, instead of just investing and holding Nxt. Now, I could be severely punished for that.

I didn't really sign up for major overhauls like this one.

If it doesn't effect Assets then fine. But if it does, as it potentially can, and I lose $200k, I won't be coming back.

I love capitalism. I am willing to be a victim of it. That doesn't mean I will continue to be a part of a community that would disregard some people in such a way. There is "risk" and then there is stupidity. I invest in developers more than projects. Nxt felt like a project I could trust. Lose my trust, lose me. And probably other people like me.

Why would NXT 2.0 destroy assets?

Potentially because people will dump assets to buy more Nxt to try and get more fNxt.  Also, fear that Nxt price might be diluted, Asset become less valuable and then are dumped as well.

Even if asset are dumped, after the fork it will goes up again. Since the price of a lot of assets will be under their NAV because of the dump.
Logged
SecFund : 9125535795764729261 (Asset ID)

Windjc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +59/-17
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #389 on: February 17, 2016, 09:48:24 am »

@NxtSwe The concern is that if there's a 1:1 distribution of fNXT for NXT then people will want to stock up on NXT before that happens, and will sell assets to get it.
This is a bit like what happens when a new asset is launched. Nxt is still fairly small and it's a bit of a zero sum game shuffling money around for the next big thing. What's different about this, though, is that it's not the 'free market': it's a change that comes from within the Nxt ecosystem, a fundamental change of the platform that affects a different stakeholders in different ways (a nuance I hadn't fully appreciated until @windjc and others articulated it).

Correct. I certainly will not partake in a race to the bottom. In my opinion Nxt devs already showed some disregard to assets holders with the backwards compatibility issue (SuperNet and SuperNet Assets). This issue also forced some very useful services like secureae.com out of business.

If this goes through, its pretty obvious that Assets are not being taken into consideration. In my humble opinion.
Logged

lurker10

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +168/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #390 on: February 17, 2016, 10:49:49 am »

That's why burning may be a better option than 1:1.
There is no dilution in burning, some coins out of 1 billion supply will be 'colored' and get a special function of forging, while most other functions will be removed.

When you invest in NXT assets, a) you invest in centralized companies and b) you don't forge, you expect from these companies to give you more profits than if you simply held NXT coins or forged. That's not stupid or smart, that's your personal choice, you take more risk and expect more reward.

Ask yourself why you're holding the NXT assets that you're holding, and whether you believe in them enough to keep holding. Why would you and others dump assets to get yearly 1% returns from forging if the assets should, by your calculations, return much more? You have done calculations to invest in them, haven't you? If you don't believe the assets should return much more, are you deluding yourself right this very moment, and should you dump these assets while you still can and with no regard to the future NXT 2.0 overhaul? Do you expect others to bail you out because you miscalculated?

These are all tough questions. I had to dump some assets at a loss a few months ago because I saw them going nowhere. In the real world 90% or more of start-ups go bust. You can blame devs or whatever, but that's shifting responsibility onto others because you miscalculated. There is a chance you didn't miscalculate and the assets will succeed and you will get more rewards than others. Calculate the damn risks! Don't throw money into hyped ventures, it's a sure way to feel sorry afterwards and start blaming others.

Finally, suggest your plan to take assets into consideration in the NXT 2.0 roadmap, if you believe they are not, in all the plans that have been proposed.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 10:54:25 am by lurker10 »
Logged
Run a node - win a prize! "Lucky node" project jar: NXT-8F28-EDVE-LPPX-HY4E7

sadface

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +16/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 273
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #391 on: February 17, 2016, 11:27:07 am »

could you post the equation where a hard fork changing fundametals is factored in?

imo you're totally reaching now to make your point lurker.
Logged

Windjc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +59/-17
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #392 on: February 17, 2016, 11:27:31 am »

Why would you and others dump assets to get yearly 1% returns from forging if the assets should, by your calculations, return much more?

First or all, how the hell does someone calculate the risks of a change to the core structure of a coin? That's ridiculous when applied to "risks of investing in assets". Its just as likely that such a core change would increase the value of an asset. This premise to "calculate risk" based on an unexpected unpredictable change in the very core makeup of the coin itself falls flat on its face in my opinion.

Secondly, to the bolded part above, fNXT WILL be traded and have value. And you get some FREE for every NXT you own. If you do not understand the value to sell assets over and above a 1% forging value, then I don't even know where to start a discussion with you.
Logged

Windjc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +59/-17
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #393 on: February 17, 2016, 11:30:02 am »


Finally, suggest your plan to take assets into consideration in the NXT 2.0 roadmap, if you believe they are not, in all the plans that have been proposed.

Sure. Take a snapshot of Nxt owned today and do a 1:1. Or a week ago. Or a day before this proposal. Its not perfectly fair, but it protects everyone from being grossly negatively effected by this proposal in ways they cannot control.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 11:33:31 am by Windjc »
Logged

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 #394 on: February 17, 2016, 11:37:22 am »


Finally, suggest your plan to take assets into consideration in the NXT 2.0 roadmap, if you believe they are not, in all the plans that have been proposed.

Sure. Take a snapshot of Nxt owned today and do a 1:1. Or a week ago. Or a day before this proposal. Its not perfectly fair, but it protects everyone from being grossly negatively effected by this proposal in ways they cannot control.

This would surely have a similar effect - people dumping assets to pick up NXT for the snapshot?
Logged
I head up content for BitScan, crypto business hub.

Windjc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +59/-17
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #395 on: February 17, 2016, 11:40:56 am »


Finally, suggest your plan to take assets into consideration in the NXT 2.0 roadmap, if you believe they are not, in all the plans that have been proposed.

Sure. Take a snapshot of Nxt owned today and do a 1:1. Or a week ago. Or a day before this proposal. Its not perfectly fair, but it protects everyone from being grossly negatively effected by this proposal in ways they cannot control.

This would surely have a similar effect - people dumping assets to pick up NXT for the snapshot?

Thats why I said a point in the past. If the devs were smart they would have already done this - taken a snapshot. But certainly if we can roll back to a certain block in the past, we should have a snapshot of the day before this proposal?
Logged

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 #396 on: February 17, 2016, 11:44:03 am »


Finally, suggest your plan to take assets into consideration in the NXT 2.0 roadmap, if you believe they are not, in all the plans that have been proposed.

Sure. Take a snapshot of Nxt owned today and do a 1:1. Or a week ago. Or a day before this proposal. Its not perfectly fair, but it protects everyone from being grossly negatively effected by this proposal in ways they cannot control.

This would surely have a similar effect - people dumping assets to pick up NXT for the snapshot?

Thats why I said a point in the past.


Ah - thought you meant a day before the proposal [was implemented]. That's actually not so bad an idea :)
I'm still a little concerned about fNXT being dumped, which would have security implications.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 11:50:44 am by Cassius »
Logged
I head up content for BitScan, crypto business hub.

lurker10

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +168/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #397 on: February 17, 2016, 11:45:01 am »

Many assets are and overvalued right now and have always been overvalued in their history. Their prices will go down guaranteed if the price of NXT goes up. Why? Because the supply of NXT is only 1 billion, and that 1 billion is chasing a few billions of assets market caps. It's unrealistic and naive to expect the prices of assets to stay high unless you dilute and print more NXT coins in the same manner they do with fiat and stock market. Read this again, the prices of assets are guaranteed to go down with or without any NXT 2.0 changes, especially the assets that are vaporware which is a good part of them.
Logged
Run a node - win a prize! "Lucky node" project jar: NXT-8F28-EDVE-LPPX-HY4E7

Windjc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +59/-17
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #398 on: February 17, 2016, 11:47:08 am »

Many assets are and overvalued right now and have always been overvalued in their history. Their prices will go down guaranteed if the price of NXT goes up. Why? Because the supply of NXT is only 1 billion, and that 1 billion is chasing a few billions of assets market caps. It's unrealistic and naive to expect the prices of assets to stay high unless you dilute and print more NXT coins in the same manner they do with fiat and stock market. Read this again, the prices of assets are guaranteed to go down with or without any NXT 2.0 changes, especially the assets that are vaporware which is a good part of them.

No shit sherlock.

These points have zero to do with what I am discussing on this thread.
Logged

Windjc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +59/-17
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #399 on: February 17, 2016, 11:48:54 am »


Finally, suggest your plan to take assets into consideration in the NXT 2.0 roadmap, if you believe they are not, in all the plans that have been proposed.

Sure. Take a snapshot of Nxt owned today and do a 1:1. Or a week ago. Or a day before this proposal. Its not perfectly fair, but it protects everyone from being grossly negatively effected by this proposal in ways they cannot control.

This would surely have a similar effect - people dumping assets to pick up NXT for the snapshot?

Ah - thought you meant a day before the proposal [was implemented]. That's actually not so bad an idea :)
I'm still a little concerned about fNXT being dumped, which would have security implications.



Thanks. I think its the ONLY right idea if we were to keep fNXT.

As to your security concern, I would like to hear what the devs have to say about that.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 51
 

elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
assembly
assembly