elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
Show Posts - jones
singapore
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Latest Nxt Client: Nxt 1.11.15

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - jones

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 53
1
Nxt General Discussion / Re: Price speculation
« on: January 07, 2016, 06:07:15 am »

The jnxt demonet is up to date with the current 1.7 chain of releases now.

http://jnxt.org:6876

Just click the start demo button and you are brought into an account with 200'000 NXT in it and blocks forged every 50 seconds or so.

I'm pretty happy looking at the early results of the new block retargeting algo, the block making average for a set was never more than 68 seconds, going to be nice to have this on the mainnet.
Awesome, thanks jones!

So, all 1.7 features are already available in your demo, right?

yep, everything included with 1.7 is in there.

Thanks jones. Did you know that your block counter plugin isn't compatible with newer versions of the UI? I mentioned it in the block counter thread a while ago, but I guess we won't really need it after the hard fork :-D

It'll be cool to see some large shuffling pools too, with over 20 participants. :-D

Good times ahead.

Oh, right, I need to repackage with a new version, will need to do that soon. The new better block times will help, but I still like seeing exact times for when the next block will happen.

2
Nxt General Discussion / Re: Price speculation
« on: January 05, 2016, 06:50:30 am »
The jnxt demonet is up to date with the current 1.7 chain of releases now.

http://jnxt.org:6876

Just click the start demo button and you are brought into an account with 200'000 NXT in it and blocks forged every 50 seconds or so.

I'm pretty happy looking at the early results of the new block retargeting algo, the block making average for a set was never more than 68 seconds, going to be nice to have this on the mainnet.

3
Official Nxt Releases / Re: NRS v1.7.4
« on: January 01, 2016, 05:12:35 pm »

4
Nxt General Discussion / Re: Price speculation
« on: December 26, 2015, 05:39:27 pm »
No one can explain NXT and POS.
I thinks NXT Core devs can,the key is whether they want to .

This is one that goes over the basics of proof of stake and what the nothing at stake attack is.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pzIl3vmEytY

I made it a few months ago and it seems to explain decently.

5
Nxt General Discussion / Re: Price speculation
« on: December 15, 2015, 03:30:19 pm »
@jones cold bid/ask is great - but can you add 'cancel' too at some point?  :)

Cancel is tough because you need to refer to the id, and it's asking a lot of a person to write the 20 number id

6
Nxt General Discussion / Re: Price speculation
« on: December 13, 2015, 08:21:09 am »
Due to popular demand, Vapor now supports Asset bid and ask operations.
The wallet offloads all necesarry asset data so you can search an asset by name, then it automatically formats the asset decimals as needed.

This allows people to trade on the AE in a completely offline way through an airgapped computer and broadcasting through nxtvault.



http://jnxt.org/vapor

7
Nxt General Discussion / Re: PHP library?
« on: December 11, 2015, 05:26:22 am »
http://Http://github.com/jonesnxt/nxtlib-php has some useful parts like token generation and node requests, if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

8
Nxt General Discussion / Re: Price speculation
« on: December 09, 2015, 06:28:53 am »
Its been a tough couple of months for me, but I'm hopefully back to being here a bit more. Sorry to everyone for my random leave of absence.

How are things going these days? will need to check out the newest dev progress.

I have still been working in the background with SuperNET, and recently have helped put pieces together for a superNET plugin, that will come together soon enough.

Jay has been rather stagnant, and sadly the asset price looks pretty bleak at the moment, but I still have some ideas on that front and instantDEX will still technically lead to revenue on that.

As for the other tools that I have made over time, I will be doing my best to update those to the current versions when I can find time, I hear variable fees will be a thing soon.

9
Nxt General Discussion / Re: Dominant forging exploit possible?
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:32:12 pm »
because the forging hash chain isnt dependent on the contents of a block. If it was, what you describe would work.

I thought the algorithm used the hash of the last block as part of its calculation?
my understanding is that there are two hash chains, one for the txid and another for the forging and they are independent

This is correct, payload signature is of the block and generation signature is of the forgers public key hashed wit the last blocks Gen signature

10
Jay Framework / Re: MS coin problem
« on: September 01, 2015, 01:15:57 am »
Hello.
I have a problem for buy or sell MS coin.I have a message that my passphrase is wrong.
With assets no problem.
thx for response.

Sorry, at this time Jay doesn't support MS currency transactions, it will be included in the next version, which is still currently in development.

11
Nxt Improvement Proposals / Re: Fixing the blocktimes
« on: August 30, 2015, 07:40:31 am »
Well, I think it's really time to solve this problem. What I propose, is to adopt a (strongly) modified version of the algorithm described here: https://nxtforum.org/proof-of-stake-algorithm/basetarget-adjustment-algorithm/. Namely:

1. Introduce the interval of values the BaseTarget may assume. Say, [90%; 3000%].

2. BaseTarget changes only at blocks that are multiple of 10.

3. Let T be the mean blocktime of last 10 blocks (in minutes). Then

 3.1 If T<0.9, set New_BaseTarget=Old_BaseTarget*0.93
 3.2 If T>1.1, set New_BaseTarget=Old_BaseTarget*1.1
 3.3 If 1<T<1.1, set New_BaseTarget=Old_BaseTarget*T
 3.4 If 0.9<T<1, New_BaseTarget=Old_BaseTarget*(1-0.7*(1-T))

Of course, if the New_BaseTarget tries to go out of the above interval, just set it to the limiting value.

The above values can be changed, of course, but I think it should be along these lines: we shouldn't allow the BaseTarget to change very quickly, while still allowing it to be adjusted. When doing the hard fork, set Initial_BaseTarget = 300%, say.

An algorithm like this should solve the problem of large blocktimes for good.  Also, it is more secure than the current one, exactly since the blocktime will become more "concentrated" (i.e., the variance will decrease) with it.

Sounds good to me, a change like this is overdue. but I still have a few remarks/questions.

1. with your statement 3.4, why do we multiply the (1-T) by 0.7, that seems like a rather arbitrary value, any particular reason for that number in particular, or are we just generally making the base target scale slower when lowering the base target.

2. So this new algorithm would be more secure for blockchain transactions, because more blocks are able to pile on top of the transactions in a much more time efficient manor, but should we be worrying at all about increased forking due to a higher block concentration.

12
Nxt General Discussion / Re: Nxt Vapor Wallet - Cold storage with style
« on: August 20, 2015, 08:09:55 am »
Just pushed a new version of vapor that adds the ability to easily make and print paper wallets for your nxt passphrases.

http://jnxt.org/vapor


Will also be looking into implementing a place AE order transaction type to this system, since I already have all of the asset data loaded into the file.

13
Yustas and mess are no longer active.

Kushti is no longer contributing to the core, but still around :)

Jones, are you still contributing to the core or active on your own projects? Please let us know. :)

I am no longer a main contributor to the core, but some of my own projects will have announcements soon.

14
OK, so, after a long conversation with CfB, I'm pretty sure that:

1. it would be OK to set the minimum basetarget to some reasonable value, say, 30-50% or so. That would indeed help a lot against bad blocks.   CfB's recommendation to set MINIMUM base target to 300% was a joke  :)

2. additionally, the modified algorithm described in https://nxtforum.org/proof-of-stake-algorithm/basetarget-adjustment-algorithm/ with some γ<1 (say, 0.5-0.7) would further improve the things;

3. additionally, we can also set the maximal basetarget, say, to 3000% (to avoid VERY fast blocks). This will spoil the average blocktime in the event when the active stake is less than 3% of the total stake, but if such a thing happens, Nxt would be considered dead anyway  :)

So, I would definitely vote for implementing the changes in this direction with the next hard fork.

I would agree to this.

15
There has been talk previously that we can just put a cap on the lower side of the base target percentage at 100%. This is a really easy change and doesn't effect the overall forging algo at all, but makes it so long blocks are much less probable.

It makes sense to do this also because it is not possible for more than 1'000'000'000 nxt tk be forging, which is what a base target below 100% is trying to say.

We could also implement mthcl's math for block retargeting, I remember he did some calculations in the past that made much more consistent times.

TF might be able to fix block times all the way, but it would be a huge help to get an intermediate fix.

16
API discussion / Re: local tx signing - short manual? (Python?)
« on: August 16, 2015, 05:48:43 am »
A while back I made nxtlib-php which has a native implementation of curve25519 as well as createToken and verify token
http://Https://github.com/jonesnxt/nxtlib-php

17
The compitition is over, and with it comes the prizes.

1st: AltSheets - 40'000 NXT with assetgraphs
2nd: Lyaffe - 20'000 NXT with Shapeshift Plugin
3rd: Shmoula - 10'000 NXT with Nawa Android App


The entries were scored on four categories, Completeness, Style, Use of API, and Usefulness, the four scores (0-10) below a name are those scores, and the one beside the name are the added up totals.

Final Scores for the hackathon:
TOENU - 19.33
5.17
3.92
5.09
5.15

SFDEV - 20.10
4.64
4.82
5.28
5.36

LYAFFE - 26.27
6.92
6.69
5.73
6.93

SHMOULA - 25.86
6.33
6.55
5.90
7.08

JONES - 21.84
6.00
5.14
4.92
5.78

ALTSHEETS - 27.11
5.85
7.38
7.50
6.38

Congratulations to all who entered and thanks to everyone who helped me make this a thing.
I will gather my thoughts and do a write up all my thoughts on the subject, and start thinking about if we want to do this again a few months from now.

18
Nxt General Discussion / Re: Is 12 words enough for a passphrase?
« on: August 15, 2015, 03:14:37 am »
Quote
Please write down or memorize these 12 words (their order and capitalization matters - always lowercase). This passphrase is needed in order to access your Nxt account.

There has been some talk about the danger of brain wallets in general. I've been wondering, if 12 random words, as generated by the nxt wallet is actually enough to be safe and secure?

What if in the future there is a botnet that tries attacking the nxt network to crack into people's wallet's ?

12 word passphrases are secure, I have personally audited the code and done the math and they are secure.

They use the javascript secure random number generator to product the necessary entropy, and selects words from a wordlist of 1626 different words, this gives us 1626^12 possible combinations and an entropy level of
Log (1626^12)/log (2) = 128 bits of entropy

This is an arbitrarily large number, with 38 decimal places, even with one trillion guesses a second, it would take until beyond the heat death of the universe to compute the entire keyspace.

I would not worry about the 12 word seed, the bigger issue is quantum computers breaking elliptic curve cryptography, but that won't be for another 15 or so years

19
Nxt General Discussion / [video] Explaining Nothing At Stake
« on: August 12, 2015, 10:37:25 am »
I tried to very briefly, (4 minutes), go over the basics of proof of stake blockchains and how the nothing at stake attack works, and what can be done about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzIl3vmEytY

Thank you to Kushti and the Consensus Research team for their work, this is based off of the reading of many of their papers.

I hope everything is covered in the correct way and I didn't misspeak, get anything wrong, or leave anything out, if you notice any errors, please notify me and I will make some edits.

20
I would like to extend the HD wallet idea with disposable addresses for one time payments and shuffled coins

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/price-speculation/msg191075/#msg191075

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 53
elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
assembly
assembly