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 1.12.1 Upgrade before block 2870000 is mandatory!

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 51

Author Topic: Nxt 2.0 design  (Read 211007 times)

EvilDave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +341/-40
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1789
    • View Profile
    • NXT Foundation
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #660 on: February 20, 2016, 06:35:47 pm »

On a very quick note; can we actually disagree without being annoyingly bitchy to each other ?

This is supposed to be a brainstorming topic, so leave your egos at the door, and concentrate.

@jl777: how much difference would a halving of the NXT supply, with a matching creation of a half billion fNXT affect your asset crash scenario ?
Logged
Nulli Dei, nulli Reges, solum NXT
NXT Donations: NXT-BNZB-9V8M-XRPW-3S3WD
We will ride eternal, shiny and chrome!

Sebastien256

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +169/-24
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2823
  • ^LOOK UP^ = Nxt community!
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #661 on: February 20, 2016, 06:46:12 pm »

Ok, I think I see where we disagree. I don't think fNxt is a dilution of the current NXT as they do not serve the same purpose at all.

I will try to get a figure example. Take this pencil (make an analogy that this is the actual NXT in the Nxt platform):
https://www.google.ch/imgres?imgurl=http://www.completepromotionalproducts.com.au/persistent/catalogue_images/products/promo_pencil_natural_wood.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.completepromotionalproducts.com.au/shop/item/natural-wood-pencil-p71&h=500&w=1000&tbnid=SfFSKg2z05zE9M:&docid=sETlVHF0wDblUM&ei=NLLIVsXSLIa8OrXbt8gK&tbm=isch

split the eraser(fNxt) from the mine(post fork NXT). After you done so, you still can do the same thing, but the value of the system is split between the eraser(fNxt) and the mine(post fork NXT). You will have two market for each pieces, the eraser and the mines, instead of only one market for the pencils.

It is not like after fork there will be two time more pencils, that would be inflation and I would not agree with such a thing.

This is of course only a crude example. I hope you all get the idea.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2016, 07:09:46 pm by Sebastien256 »
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).

jl777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +718/-123
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6170
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #662 on: February 20, 2016, 06:48:33 pm »

Ok, I think I see where we disagree. I don't think fNxt is a dilution of the current NXT as they do not serve the same purpose at all.

I will try to get a figure example. Take this pencil (make an analogynthat this is the actual NXT in the Nxt platform):
https://www.google.ch/imgres?imgurl=http://www.completepromotionalproducts.com.au/persistent/catalogue_images/products/promo_pencil_natural_wood.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.completepromotionalproducts.com.au/shop/item/natural-wood-pencil-p71&h=500&w=1000&tbnid=SfFSKg2z05zE9M:&docid=sETlVHF0wDblUM&ei=NLLIVsXSLIa8OrXbt8gK&tbm=isch

split the eraser(fNxt) from the mine(post fork NXT). After you done so, you still can do the same thing, but the value of the system is split between the eraser(fNxt) and the mine(post for NXT). You will have two market for each pieces, the eraser and the mines.

It is not like after fork there will be two time more pencils, that would be inflation and I would not agree with such a thing.

This is of course only a crude example. I hope you all get the idea.
why do you object to inflation, but gladly accept deflation
Logged
There are over 1000 people in SuperNET slack! http://slackinvite.supernet.org/ automatically sends you an invite

I am just a simple C programmer

lurker10

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +168/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #663 on: February 20, 2016, 06:49:37 pm »

On a very quick note; can we actually disagree without being annoyingly bitchy to each other ?

This is supposed to be a brainstorming topic, so leave your egos at the door, and concentrate.

Sorry, Dave, my bad.
Logged
Run a node - win a prize! "Lucky node" project jar: NXT-8F28-EDVE-LPPX-HY4E7

Sebastien256

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +169/-24
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2823
  • ^LOOK UP^ = Nxt community!
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #664 on: February 20, 2016, 06:49:51 pm »

There is no deflation either, not sure where you get 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).

jl777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +718/-123
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6170
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #665 on: February 20, 2016, 07:16:28 pm »

On a very quick note; can we actually disagree without being annoyingly bitchy to each other ?

This is supposed to be a brainstorming topic, so leave your egos at the door, and concentrate.

@jl777: how much difference would a halving of the NXT supply, with a matching creation of a half billion fNXT affect your asset crash scenario ?
you have it backwards.
that makes it much worse. Now there is even less "water in the lake"

The number of fNXT doesnt matter so much, it can be just 10,000 of them. They are isolated, high friction and meant to just forge. They are the gold bars in the fort knox.

The closest model to what is being proposed that I know of (I am sure there are better ones) is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1873

It was caused by the US going to a gold standard. Which doesnt sound so bad, but prior to that it was both gold and silver that were basically the currency status. So we have two halves that are together before the 1873 and afterwards only the gold, with silver having to stand alone on its noncurrency uses.

so current NXT is modeled by pre 1873 (gold + silver) (fNXT + NXT)
after 1873 gold/fNXT and silver/NXT2.0

Silver price crashed, and anything denominated in silver suffered. Most of you probably dont remember things back in 1873, but it was pretty grim, only the great depression of the 1930's was worse.

Splitting a currency and demoting part of it to non-currency status will devalue that part. It is logical, I have math and historical support.

Now, does it matter if the effect is 1% or 10% or 50% or 90%? Is this a quantitative "if the pain isnt too much, then why not" sort of thing, or is this a qualititative "forcing a voiceless subset of the community by fiat declaration is something we just dont even think about doing" thing?

Now most people intuitively felt this will cause an asset selloff, but I am not so sure that is what will happen. But the feeling that people had that this will be bad for assets is very likely correct as I have shown. The only question is how bad will the effect be and that depends on "delta" which is not knowable.

Fear, Uncertainity, Doubt caused by this. Sorry to those who didnt realize the truth behind the likely event of this, I cannot help that the analysis comes out this way.

I just dont see any solution that decouples assets from all of NXT. NXT suffered during BTC's bear market, there is no debate for this. Assets suffered during NXT's bear market, there is no debate for this. Clearly the reference currency you are based on is very very significant and the instant devaluation by the delta factor cannot be papered over.

Since asset issuers have no direct power and NXT holders will follow their self interest and go to the 2.0 fork, there are really not many options for asset issuers that care about their investors. Even if the devaluation is temporary, unless it can be strictly quantified and planned for (highly unlikely) the risk that it could start a prolonged bear market/depression as in 1873 to 1880+, asset issuers would have to vote against this.

However as past issues have shown, only NXT holders have any power in NXT, so being disenfranchised the only power asset issuers have is mobility. asset issuer have no power within NXT, but the have all the power within their asset. I am very disappointed that the general tone has been that asset investors have somehow been disloyal since they actually sold their NXT to invest in the ecosystem. That somehow Mr 4788... is the ideal NXTer that we should all strive to become.

AE is the majority of NXT transactions. AE is what has allowed NXT to develop to where it is now and its ecosystem was growing gradually, but BC2 created an  extinction event and now fNXT. Time is running out for the NXT community to show that it is actually a community that values the AE ecosystem, or if the biggest priority is some mythical price pump

James
Logged
There are over 1000 people in SuperNET slack! http://slackinvite.supernet.org/ automatically sends you an invite

I am just a simple C programmer

jl777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +718/-123
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6170
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #666 on: February 20, 2016, 07:18:02 pm »

There is no deflation either, not sure where you get that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflation
please read the above and tell me why you think that even though NXT is becoming NXT*(1 - delta), while the prices stay the same that there is no deflation.

Are you claiming that 0.9 is the same as 1.0?

James
Logged
There are over 1000 people in SuperNET slack! http://slackinvite.supernet.org/ automatically sends you an invite

I am just a simple C programmer

lurker10

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +168/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #667 on: February 20, 2016, 07:22:05 pm »

that makes it much worse. Now there is even less "water in the lake"

James, what do you think of creating an additional billion of NXT at the hard fork to add more 'water to the lake' such that the system total supply is 2 billion NXT + 1 billion fNXT? Should this provide more liquidity to the asset market in your estimation?
Logged
Run a node - win a prize! "Lucky node" project jar: NXT-8F28-EDVE-LPPX-HY4E7

PondSea

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Karma: +12/-14
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 82
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #668 on: February 20, 2016, 07:32:01 pm »

I have assets worth millions of NXT.

When 2.0 happens, 1 billion fNXT will be created.

My assets go from being worth what they are now to being worth less due to the NXT holders getting 1:1 to offset the dilution of their currency. Asset holders will get nothing and will lose money. Regardless of the market reverberates or not, initially we will be losing money.

If the devs do not give a shit about hurting their main source of users and their main use case for this currency then there is nothing more to say on this thread.
Logged

PondSea

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Karma: +12/-14
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 82
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #669 on: February 20, 2016, 07:33:54 pm »

Lurker10 that will break the no more than 1 billion NXT.

We should not be changing the money supply it we are not better than fiat.

Logged

lurker10

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +168/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #670 on: February 20, 2016, 07:38:36 pm »

Explain where I am wrong.

Current situation:
total supply of NXT is 1 billion, market cap $10 million (I round up for convenience).
forging coins = 40%, they don't add to liquidity of the asset exchange, they are locked up in forging accounts and not used for trading.
Coins that chase assets are 600 million of the supply, valued at $6 million.

Suppose we burn NXT for fNXT.
We get:
400 million fNXT owned by dedicated forgers valued at $4 million (if you disagree, explain why more NXT will be burned).
600 million NXT valued at $6 million chasing assets.

Where is the drastic effect on asset prices when you have 600 million NXT valued at $6 million going after assets both in NXT 1.x and NXT 2.0 systems?
Logged
Run a node - win a prize! "Lucky node" project jar: NXT-8F28-EDVE-LPPX-HY4E7

jl777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +718/-123
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6170
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #671 on: February 20, 2016, 07:42:34 pm »

that makes it much worse. Now there is even less "water in the lake"

James, what do you think of creating an additional billion of NXT at the hard fork to add more 'water to the lake' such that the system total supply is 2 billion NXT + 1 billion fNXT? Should this provide more liquidity to the asset market in your estimation?
I thought about that, it would solve the hardfork event, but not the long term devaluation of the reference currency. It would definitely reprice the assets so the good ones and bad ones alike will get a much more accurate pricing relative to each other.

The fact that doubling the coin supply isnt enough to fix this should give an idea of the magnitude of this change.

Another idea that i think evildave had which was promising was allowing NXT <-> fNXT at anytime, but since it has been declared that it will cost 100 fNXT per transfer, it is not practical. Even if it was 1NXT, the cost of that might be a barrier.

For people who have half or more of their value in NXT, they would be ok, but this requires everyone to be arbitraging against an unknowable delta factor against everyone else. So most would wait and see what the actual market price of fNXT will be, but if it is not on exchanges, what is its value?

Keeping the total at 1 billion, has liquidity problems at the hardfork and long term problems of the non-currency as the reference. And the after effect of declassifying NXT as money as was done to silver in 1873 is a very long term effect

Since it was decided that we cannot accept 1GB/year of blockchain bloat, nor can some special cases be maintained, we end up with a very clean software design that instead of rewarding the AE ecosystem investors and participants, just tells them "you should never have sold your NXT" But we worked very hard to get people to build this ecosystem, its not like they did it against the wishes of NXT. But it is everyone's responsibility that they trusted NXT to not devalue the reference currency that assets were based on. There was never any promise to do that and even if there was it would be unenforceable. Allocating handouts/bailouts or whatnot is no solution.

Really the question is do we break the implicit promise to the AE ecosystem or not. The fact that I am seeing so much resistance to NXT not throwing the AE under the bus makes me very sad. The reality is that after BC2 as I warned development of third party devs is slowed down and the ones not making money even decided to not bother to revise the "trivial" changes needed. I warned that not living up to the BC expectation and promise would hurt NXT. I was right, since I know about developers.

If the implicit AE promise is broken and now we have devs who cant rely on BC and AE that cant rely on even fundamental things like the reference currency not being totally changed, then the hopes of signing up lots of childchains hinges on them not doing their research into the past. I am speaking the brutal truth here as a lot of cheerleading has been done on this issue that goes totally against the reality of business. You cannot ignore the interests of millions of dollars invested without severe consequences. And since the only power asset issuers have is to move, that is what will happen. I am not making any ultimatums, or threats or FUD. Just explaining the logic and reality.

fNXT means not many assets left, but maybe that is exactly the plan?

James
Logged
There are over 1000 people in SuperNET slack! http://slackinvite.supernet.org/ automatically sends you an invite

I am just a simple C programmer

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 #672 on: February 20, 2016, 07:46:37 pm »

Can someone explain just how a free fNXT <> NXT conversion would work? Suppose fees are 0, not 100 or even 1.
How do you convert? If you want to change 1000 NXT for fNXT, that means someone has to be willing to do the reverse. Why would they, or what if there's just a supply imbalance?
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 #673 on: February 20, 2016, 07:46:48 pm »

Keeping the total at 1 billion, has liquidity problems at the hardfork and long term problems of the non-currency as the reference.

I could see how keeping the total at 1 billion has liquidity problems for NXT as a currency in terms of the inflationary Keynesian economic model that requires inflating supply to grow the economy, but this is not related to the hard fork NXT 2.0 proposed design.

Can you comment on my post above on 600 million NXT chasing assets regardless?
Logged
Run a node - win a prize! "Lucky node" project jar: NXT-8F28-EDVE-LPPX-HY4E7

Sebastien256

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +169/-24
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2823
  • ^LOOK UP^ = Nxt community!
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #674 on: February 20, 2016, 07:52:52 pm »

There is no deflation either, not sure where you get that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflation
please read the above and tell me why you think that even though NXT is becoming NXT*(1 - delta), while the prices stay the same that there is no deflation.

Are you claiming that 0.9 is the same as 1.0?

James

I was thinking that way,
Current NXT total valuation = fNXT total valuation + Post fork NXT total valuation  = Post fork total Nxt platform valuation.
All are positive number. I did not see inflation or deflation in the number of token that are use to represent the valutation of the Nxt platform. It is only a token that is split in 2 different functions.

But from the way you are looking, the price of NXT post fork is always relative to something. I will assume here that you talk that about  asset/NXT price. I do not think that these price will stay the same, they will change for sure.

However, in the majority of the case, I think this of no importance at all unless the value creation of the asset is NXT based, which very few assets are, I only got neodice in mind. When I invested in assets, some asset create value from btc (mining operation), most other derived their value from fiat operations. So whatever the price of NXT post fork is not of big importance, as long as the asset still get me more btc or fiat. (Note that I use all these btc or fiat to buy NXT tho :) )

Of course, I would like the fork to have little influence as possible on the asset price relative to the post fork NXT. But this is something I'm ready to live with. I don't think the price will change dramatically as forging is not very valuable anyway.

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).

Sebastien256

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +169/-24
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2823
  • ^LOOK UP^ = Nxt community!
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #675 on: February 20, 2016, 08:03:11 pm »

Can someone explain just how a free fNXT <> NXT conversion would work? Suppose fees are 0, not 100 or even 1.
How do you convert? If you want to change 1000 NXT for fNXT, that means someone has to be willing to do the reverse. Why would they, or what if there's just a supply imbalance?

Fees must be high because these are not prunable transaction. That is the idea.
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).

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 #676 on: February 20, 2016, 08:08:50 pm »

Can someone explain just how a free fNXT <> NXT conversion would work? Suppose fees are 0, not 100 or even 1.
How do you convert? If you want to change 1000 NXT for fNXT, that means someone has to be willing to do the reverse. Why would they, or what if there's just a supply imbalance?

Fees must be high because these are not prunable transaction. That is the idea.

Ok, forget the whole fees thing. That's a distraction here. How can something be freely exchangeable 1:1? That doesn't make sense. If no one wants to swap their fNXT for 1 NXT, the price will go up.
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 #677 on: February 20, 2016, 08:13:17 pm »

Can someone explain just how a free fNXT <> NXT conversion would work? Suppose fees are 0, not 100 or even 1.
How do you convert? If you want to change 1000 NXT for fNXT, that means someone has to be willing to do the reverse. Why would they, or what if there's just a supply imbalance?

Fees must be high because these are not prunable transaction. That is the idea.

Ok, forget the whole fees thing. That's a distraction here. How can something be freely exchangeable 1:1? That doesn't make sense. If no one wants to swap their fNXT for 1 NXT, the price will go up.

I do not understand what you are talking about, or you are right, it do not make sense :). I assume fNXT and NXT will be trade with a simiarly interface as current AE GUI.
If no one sell fNXT for a given NXT price, the price will go up either on the Nxt platform or externally off exchange.

It can't be 1:1 exchange as the token do not share the same functionnality, let remember the eraser and mines analogy. These will be 2 different markets.
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).

jl777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +718/-123
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6170
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #678 on: February 20, 2016, 08:14:44 pm »

Explain where I am wrong.

Current situation:
total supply of NXT is 1 billion, market cap $10 million (I round up for convenience).
forging coins = 40%, they don't add to liquidity of the asset exchange, they are locked up in forging accounts and not used for trading.
Coins that chase assets are 600 million of the supply, valued at $6 million.

Suppose we burn NXT for fNXT.
We get:
400 million fNXT owned by dedicated forgers valued at $4 million (if you disagree, explain why more NXT will be burned).
600 million NXT valued at $6 million chasing assets.

Where is the drastic effect on asset prices when you have 600 million NXT valued at $6 million going after assets both in NXT 1.x and NXT 2.0 systems?
Now we are getting the feedback I expected. I told my analysis had a detail to be clarified and it is close to what you wrote. The effect of the delta can be adjusted by the velocity of the asset trading. I dont have any recent stats on how much NXT is tied up in bids for assets, but certainly it isnt 100% of the assetcap.

And your method would roughly balance the value according to market forces and over time, it might not be so bad. Except for the first days where there will be massive market movements, which most assets should recover from in time. However, since the NXT holders are the ones that have the option to burn for fNXT, then it becomes possible that they make decisions without any consideration to the asset holders. So the PoS protection is missing for asset holders in NXT.  Which means the community has to create social protections to prevent force wealth transfers. Or just let whatever happens at the decison of the big NXT holders who dont care about assets and lose all the assets, we lost some devs, some website, maybe its ok to lose assets and asset investors. [All this applies to MS also, but there are much less capital there, still it is a principled issue]

So it could be possible to end up with 80% fNXT and 20% NXT, which would be a problem big enough to affect the external markets. Or maybe it is 20/80 the other way, in which case we end up with no network security.

And still the silver deflation effect is not solved, though its negative effect is lessened a bit.

Exactly when was it decided that NXT itself MUST be prunable? That "decision" is what is causing all of these problems. And it is made not by any represented group, not even the NXT holders. After BC2, I realized I will have to wait a while for the API to stabilize before resuming coding for NXT other than the mininum amount necessary. Most people thought I was just being on an ego trip, but the fNXT is the same type of thing to asset holders and now they can relate to why I got so upset with BC2. The reality is that if breaking changes to API is spun into "progress" and anybody against it is lazy or against progress, we will lose developers and websites. I am still waiting for a firm believable commitment to API backward compatibility. If NXT want more developers, BC is needed.

If NXT wants to retain more than a handful of hobby assets, assets must continue to trade against the full NXT currency. It is not about technical details, it is about money.

NXT is currently 100% centralized, there is not even a commitment to honor the voting result of the NXT holders and certainly no rights for the AE community. Now since NXT is even seriously discussing doing this, with pruning NXT a fait accompli, it is already seeing a significant negative reaction and I am not sure it can be fully fixed. But the longer things go without a total cancellation of the fNXT splitting, the more assets NXT will lose and at some point if it is clear that fNXT is going to happen I will be forced to move all my assets, including SuperNET elsewhere, probably to a hybrid BTC/BTCD setup so you can get the speed of 1 minute blocks BTCD has and the security of BTC for archival/cold storage.

I apologize for the prognosis, but unfortunately I have no power to change this and little influence. This is my final attempt to save NXT as the BC2 combined two separate incidents back to back where I was totally ignored and made perfectly clear to me that I dont matter and I wasnt welcome. I really get negatively affected by these type of things and my work suffers, so I cannot spend a lot of time. I saved up my analysis and posted here.

I simply cannot be part of a community that is not a community, but rather a cult which unthinkingly adopts any change mandated by the leader, regardless of the feedback or effects on others. And dont get me started on this pretending to listen to the community. My estimate was that if I did not do these hard truths posts, that 99.9% chance for fNXT and the end of NXT as we know it. Maybe it is still 99% chance, but I had to make one last try.

I will respond to math based analysis, but I dont have time for posts that ignore that when you subtract from something, it becomes smaller. You know, that math thing.

James

P.S. For asset holders who are afraid tl:dr dont be afraid, if forced to there will be a migration path, there are plenty of blockchain AE solutions available already and over the next year I see no problem for transitioning, even if I have to write one from scratch. coloredcoins.org among others.
Logged
There are over 1000 people in SuperNET slack! http://slackinvite.supernet.org/ automatically sends you an invite

I am just a simple C programmer

jl777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +718/-123
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6170
    • View Profile
Re: Nxt 2.0 design
« Reply #679 on: February 20, 2016, 08:24:18 pm »

Can someone explain just how a free fNXT <> NXT conversion would work? Suppose fees are 0, not 100 or even 1.
How do you convert? If you want to change 1000 NXT for fNXT, that means someone has to be willing to do the reverse. Why would they, or what if there's just a supply imbalance?

Fees must be high because these are not prunable transaction. That is the idea.
So a 100x fee increase is just fine? Already prices were increased by fiat declaration 10x for permanent storage and we were forced to spend almost 2 months to reduce MGW to below 160 bytes, since the arbitrary limit was set to 160 and MGW was using about 180 bytes.

Now it turns out all that work was meaningless as NXT is to become prunable.

BTC 0.12 about to release implements pruning. So having the pruning feature is not very powerful. To damage AE for the sake of pruning is nonsensical.

to increase prices 100x is unwise.

James
Logged
There are over 1000 people in SuperNET slack! http://slackinvite.supernet.org/ automatically sends you an invite

I am just a simple C programmer
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 51
 

elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
assembly
assembly