Show Posts - CIYAM  
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Latest Stable Nxt Client: Nxt 1.12.2

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.

Topics - CIYAM

Pages: [1]
Nxt General Discussion / So where does AT go from now?
« on: July 02, 2014, 05:10:46 pm »
As some of you might know JL has announced his skepticism about AT (please check the AT topic for his posts) and major unit holders of NxtAT are therefore "reasonably concerned".

We have to make a choice to either make AT available to Nxt or to a *clone* (or to create our own clone) - none of which are choices we'd really like to make.

So without any *threat* of where AT might go (no decision has been made) I'd like to hear what the Nxt community wants to see happen with this project.


Asset Id: 16365311175761675972
Account: NXT-RZ9H-H2XD-WTR3-B4WN2 (10399799417421692143)


This Asset was created by vbecas with a total of 1B units. 20% of this has been transferred to btc2nxt, 10% has been transferred to CIYAM and 20% will be expected to be retained by vbecas so that between the 3 of us we will retain 50% of this Asset (allowing us as a united group to retain control when future issues might be put to a vote).

What is this Asset for?

As the title mentions it is really for two purposes. The first is to expedite the completion of the Nxt AT project. Progress has been steady but slow as you can see here: http://ciyam.org/open/?cmd=view&data=20140220164742097000&ident=M100V137&chksum=065ecf7d so by raising capital vbecas and btc2nxt will be able to work closer to "full time" to complete it.

The second (and perhaps more interesting) purpose is that it represents a "partnership" between the 3 of us that will provide for AT "consulting" when AT has been completed. A percentage of the consulting fee (100% where tasks can be fully automated) will be retained for distribution to unit holders of the NxtAT Asset.

So if you'd like to help to get Nxt AT up and running and potentially enjoy a portion of the profits as this very interesting new technology comes into more widespread usage then you might be interested in purchasing some Asset units.

Please note that there can be no *guarantees* offered about future dividends although we will be trying very hard to make this a success for all investors.

Note that the offer has been divided up into 0.01 NXT (already gone), 0.02 NXT, 0.03 NXT and 0.04 NXT batches each of 100M units (around 100M were reserved for others that had offered to invest prior to this announcement) so that earlier investors will be able to buy cheaper.

Meta Nxtforum / Automatically add to My Bookmarks when you post?
« on: April 17, 2014, 11:39:44 am »
Can we have a setting so that any topic that you post in gets "automatically added to my bookmarks" please.

If we had that it would work much more like the Watchlist in Bitcointalk.


This project should be closely looked into to see if it can help with the ideas of "atomic cross-chain transfers" (as it apparently uses nLockTime) as well as for multi-sig stuff using P2SH.

Perhaps those interested in such things should consider contacting the dev and see if he would be interested to help "make history".

I have created a topic about this on CIYAM Open that I'd invite you to read: http://ciyam.org/open/?cmd=view&data=20140228122618458000&ident=M100V120&chksum=56fab279 (it's not a wall of text so don't worry about that).

Being a bit older than most here I was witness to the Phil Zimmerman "campaign" (when the NSA wanted to basically "put him away") and the early days of the "struggle against central authority".

How have we "progressed since then"? Basically we have *gone backwards* with everyone "freely giving away all of their personal information to *social networks* which we pretty much now *know* that the NSA have *back doors* into).

So why my concern with "unique aliases" you ask? Surely they are "convenient"?

The *convenience* is *exactly* where the *real problem lies*. I can create an alias called Microsoft and those that "don't bother to check" can be easily scammed.

But - what if I *verify* Microsoft *is for real*?

How did you *do that*?

You would of had to visit a secure website from Microsoft and got at least an "account" number (if not a signature) to do so.

If you are going to be bothered to even do that then "you don't need a *global* name called Microsoft" (you could simply create a "label" in exactly the same way you create a "name" for someone's phone number or email address).

I want people to *learn* that they need to "verify identities" and I think the first start is to *take away* the *convenience of unique names*.

This is not a simple thing perhaps for people to get used to - but then again we all got used to "adding a name to a phone number" on our mobile phones (so it doesn't seem to be *something unreasonable to ask for*).

Whilst thinking about the problem of "randomness" and "predictability" the idea of using "hash chains" suddenly popped into my head.

For those not familiar a what a "hash chain" is here is a simple illustration (with a chain length of 3 hashes):
nonce = "test"
MD5( nonce ) = 098f6bcd4621d373cade4e832627b4f6
MD5( MD5( nonce ) ) = fb469d7ef430b0baf0cab6c436e70375
and MD5( MD5( MD5( nonce ) ) ) = 25ab3b38f7afc116f18fa9821e44d561

So the Hallmarked node (am suggesting only Hallmarked nodes as they already have to "register" so this could be easily added to that procedure) would in this case register the hash: 25ab3b38f7afc116f18fa9821e44d561.

Of course no-one (except the Hallmark node) can guess fb469d7ef430b0baf0cab6c436e70375 will come next (unless a very poor nonce was chosen which is the case in this simple example of course) so we now have a very decent "source" of random information.

Even better when this registered node next forges then need to put fb469d7ef430b0baf0cab6c436e70375 into the block and this can be verified *trivially* by every node in the network (by checking it hashes to 25ab3b38f7afc116f18fa9821e44d561) so even though the registered node knows the next hash in their hash chain they certainly can't *change* it (can only skip their turn).

Now consider that we will have multiple such Hallmarked nodes forging (and most likely forging the majority of blocks) then I think we have an excellent source of entropy by including these hashes along with the forging hash.

Note that this will not require much in the way of coding and very little extra work for "standard nodes" (they just need to keep the "last" such hash for each Hallmarked node stored somewhere then verify the next hash and "update" their entry).

Meta Nxtforum / Banner is *too big*
« on: March 23, 2014, 05:51:19 pm »
The new banner that has just appeared is really "too big" - can we shrink it down by at least 50% please?

Pages: [1]