Switch to ArdorForum

why volume is low but usage is high?

NXT/BTC has low volatility -> low volume.

Quote from: v39453 on March 10, 2015, 08:52:28 pm

Quote

The cost of maintaining the Bitcoin network seems large, but it's actually pretty small compared to the cost of maintaining the Euro or USD.

That's only because Bitcoin is small compared to EUR or USD. If USD and EUR had an extra cost of billions of dollars, I'm sure steps would be taken to remove it.

The cost of the physical cash part of USD is estimated to be around $200 billion / year. That's how much would be saved if money was just electronic and physical cash was removed. Yet it hasn't been removed (although suggestions have been made that it should be).

Source: http://fletcher.tufts.edu/CostofCash/Papers

Removing physical cash would be difficult, but an individual consumer can easily switch between Bitcoin and NXT, and because NXT will be cheaper for that individual consumer, it seems like an easy choice.

But Bitcoin is meant to be used by the 7 billion humans, and if it would, the cost would be roughly the same than the one of today (cost ~= cost of PoW)

Mining costs are not constant. Bitcoin with 100 times the current market cap and the same mining costs would be 100 times easier to attack.

From the wiki: "Allowing accounts to only send coins to a specified account"

I wonder if the following use cases are possible. They depend on there being no way to override or cancel this "lock".

1. Microtransactions. I lock one of my accounts to a payment processor's account for a month. Every time I buy something, I sign and send a transaction directly to the payment processor without broadcasting it. This transaction is always the sum of all my purchases up to that point. The payment processor stores the last transaction I send, and broadcasts it at the end of the month, paying only one fee.

2. Cross chain transactions. I have accounts A and A' on different chains, my counterparty has accounts B and B'. I lock account A to B and my counterparty locks B' to A'. I sign a small transaction from A to B without broadcasting it  and send it to my counterparty, who signs a small transaction from B' to A' and sends it to me. This continues with small increments to the amounts until the whole sum is covered, at which point both parties broadcast the  last transaction they have received.

3. Contract for difference without counterparty risk (contracts are for USD, gold, Apple stock or anything else). I lock my account A to B, who provides a CFD service, and B locks his account B2 to my account A2. Wins/losses are settled between the parties once a minute by signing transactions without broadcasting them. One practical application would be to lock the USD value of my NXT holdings by short selling. Skycoin developer talks about something similar in "Continuous Settlement and Clearing" here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=380441.msg10605137#msg10605137
 

Quote from: jones on January 03, 2015, 10:11:44 pm

[Account control]gives the possiblility, if someone can only spend 20% of an accounts funds per block, then as long as the person confirming the tx does it within 5 blocks, they can't have a double spend.

Yes, I mentioned AC in a follow-up to my original post. I've been thinking about it a bit more since. Just to check I have this right:

Suppose I have two accounts, the first with a balance of 100 NXT and a 20%/block limit. I send 20 NXT to the merchant, and 20 NXT to my second account.

The attacker could also create more transactions to his own accounts. For example 1 transaction to the merchant, and 100 transactions to his own accounts. So I'm not so sure this will work.

did anyone tweet @garzick yet to let him know that nxt, for all intents and purposes, has beaten bitcoin to sidechains and went a big step further and removed the need for secondary chains? im sure he will be delighted to hear the news..

Sidechain is also a security "firewall" so I doubt he will be impressed.

I don't see a similarity between sidechains and MS, except maybe in the economics of NXT backed currencies.

Quote from: Fatih87SK on December 31, 2014, 03:17:41 pm

Is it possible to create group chats with NXT?

Is it hard to build this?

encrypted --> hard and would need a 3rd party encryption
unencrypted --> its a question of GUI only

A group could be an account to which everyone in the group has a password. Encrypted and unencrypted is equally easy, a question of doing the GUI.

I would like some testNXT please.

NXT-KQUJ-Q6TZ-QFLL-F3GTV
bc9d2c82857d05429ec980a639a7edcffc8e4ca079d180608cddd84932a1bc68

IMO, it's not a cold wallet. If I could bruteforce passphrase, passphrase written on paper could be also in Mars, but I can take NXT from that account. Doing this procedure means only that passphrase was not announced in any place.

You can't bruteforce the passphrase.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brute-force_attack#Theoretical_limits

So, "cold wallet" is only VERY STRONG PASSPHRASE

No it's not. It means that even if you have a virus or a keylogger, it can't send your passphrase over the Internet.

Most users will not have the time and motivation to monitor what is sold.

It's not just a question of motivation. There was a link somewhere (on this forum, don't remember) about the kind of filtering Youtube and others do. It's a job people are paid for, and it is also an extremely stressful job. Content filtering is not something that would be done for free. The content is too difficult to watch for people with a normal psyche.

The forgers can also refuse to include transactions in blocks.  I think this is a part of the protocol and will always be. So there is theoretically a way to stop transactions. But I would see no filtering as the only realistic option.