NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[redsn0w]

Someone wants a bit of TestNxt  ??

[msin]

Just talked to bittrex, they have only 86 signups from nxt at the moment..

You should all go and sign up.

Go to https://bittrex.com/Account/Register and use SUPPORT_NXT as the invite code. This gets you past the invite code queue. Place some trades, enabled 2FA, or try any of our other features to help us stress the site before the final launch. If you find a bug, we're handing out bug bounties as well. Having a great exchange helps us but also helps the NXT community.

Done. Testing trading some DOGE until they add NXT.  

Received this from Bittrex, please don't bother signing up any more until we have clarification they can add Nxt.

"Sigh, we just hit a huge technical hurdle that is going to delay this;  I'm not sure we have an easy way around this without doing a lot of core engine restructuring which is super scary.  

I will keep you updated "

I've asked them for more specifics.

[igmaca]

I don't get your idea, or I get it. I don't know.

Instead of leasing forge power, you commit with your account to share fees among others in the same "share fee group" if you forge a node. You still try to forge a block on your own, but you commit to share the incentive with others if you are successful (with special conditions like committing to run the node for some time, ...). Could this be done with AT and would that make sense?

there really isnt much point in this mechanism.  what you are describing is basically a rube goldberg contraption that produces the exact result of current NXT account/network forging

not exactly see you in maths

leasing forging power of a account to another account to create pools

1.000.000.000 Nxt Coin
100.000 Nxt Coin per pool

John account  90.000 Nxt 0 Node participate in forging
Mary account  9.900 Nxt 0 Node participate in forging
Bob account  100 Nxt 0 Node participate in forging

Total pool 100.000 Nxt 1 Node paticipate in forging
Total 1 Node participate in forging

Chance to forge 0,0001
rate forging 1440 blocs per day
52,6 Blocs per year
aprox 1 Bloc per week

1.000.000.000 Nxt Coin
100.000 Nxt Coin per pool
10.000 Node participate in forging

share fee group

1.000.000.000 Nxt Coin
100.000 Nxt Coin per pool (share fee group)

John account  90.000 Nxt 1 Node participate in forging
Mary account  9.900 Nxt 1 Node participate in forging
Bob account  100 Nxt 1 Node participate in forging

Total pool (share fee group) 100.000 Nxt
Total Nodes 3 Node participate in forging

Chance to forge 0,0001
rate forging 1440 blocs per day
52,6 Blocs per year
aprox 1 Bloc per week

1.000.000.000 Nxt Coin
100.000 Nxt Coin per pool (share fee group)
30.000 Nodes participate in forging. if there are only three accounts linked per pool (share fee group)

I am wrong?

I suppose 30,000 nodes are sufficient to ensure the network

Now imagine if I am correct with 1,000,000 Nxt coins pools (share fee group)

1.000.000.000 Nxt Coin
1.000.000 Nxt Coin per pool (share fee group)

10 accounts  90.000 Nxt 10 Node participate in forging
10 accounts  9.900 Nxt 10 Node participate in forging
10 accounts  100 Nxt 10 Node participate in forging

Total pool (share fee group) 1.000.000 Nxt
Total 30 Nodes participate in forging

Chance to forge 0,001
rate forging 1440 blocs per day
526 Blocs per year
aprox 1,44 Blocs per day. 100 Nxt account is forging every day. receives fees in proportion to their funds every day!!!

1.000.000.000 Nxt Coin
1.000.000 Nxt Coin per pool (share fee group)
30.000 Nodes participate in forging. if there are only 30 accounts linked per pool (share fee group)

this means;

Extremely decentralized network (in the exemple 30.000 Nodes) Small accounts motivated to participate in forging (In the exemple 100 Nxt account is forging every day)
You just have to solve for the fees to be sufficiently attractive.

An interesting idea is to pay for other things like leased computing power
Other interesting idea is to pay for other things like leased memory storage capacity

[brooklynbtc]

Greed could be the fatal flaw, if that 50M accounts persist to hoard we are all doomed, simply because that accounts don’t need a higher price to sell, they get rich anyway, no matter what the price is.

I wish we could shot them accounts down coz they only make us look bad and people who own them are from the greediest people ever seen, they hurt nxt and will destroy it.

How rich do you want to be 1M, 10M, 50M, it’s just disgusting when you think of it.

Honestly: I couldn’t care less if NXT was worth 0, just for the fun them accounts have also 0.

Who knows, maybe a good clone will outlive NXT and them 50M accounts if they don’t start spreading the wealth.

Let's send some arbitrary messages to those accounts asking them to help out!

We already did. I think they dont even know how it works and they don't even give a damn how it works to.

Well...treat them like lostNxts (blackNxt, deadNxt or whatever they are called now).
Maybe the owner of the account already died. Or is on coma and doen´t care about it. I am pretty sure that they´d already sold some of them if they were alive

My fear is that some are second or third accounts and the whales dont even have the time to sell + there is not enough volume on the market to sell.

They can start PMing people from here who are active and faithful to NXT and offer them bulk quantities in discount prices!

If I had 100M nxt I would probably do this for at least 20-30M nxt.

And no one needs to know it (to affect the market).

Well that would be very nice. I'm a small fish, but wouldnt mind a "stock option price"

[bitcoinpaul]

tion to keep this ball rolling.  We should ask the Cryptsy folks to document what was required to get NXT plugged into their system. Then we should turn right around to allwelder or some of the other Chinese NXT members and see that this info from Cryptsy gets communicated to BTX38.com in China.  We need to be on both of these exchanges as soon as possible.  It is the only way we are going to get exposure to a new pool of capital to buy NXT and get our exchange volume back up.  

Good idea. Give them some bounty for it.

[bitcoinpaul]

I have increased the number of accounts and changed some other things to head towards a better idea but basically it should be possible to "scale down" the numbers without greatly affecting the results at all (of course scaling down to just 2 or 3 accounts is not a good idea).

I believe in another thread (flaw thread) we came to the conclusion that it is important to have many accounts for modeling. 10 could be too few.

[bitcoinpaul]

I don't get your idea, or I get it. I don't know.

Instead of leasing forge power, you commit with your account to share fees among others in the same "share fee group" if you forge a node. You still try to forge a block on your own, but you commit to share the incentive with others if you are successful (with special conditions like committing to run the node for some time, ...). Could this be done with AT and would that make sense?

there really isnt much point in this mechanism.  what you are describing is basically a rube goldberg contraption that produces the exact result of current NXT account/network forging

The idea is that all forgers repeatedly get small incentives for trying to forge. It is a pure psychological reason.

In the end, the fee distribution is the same.

[brooklynbtc]

Just talked to bittrex, they have only 86 signups from nxt at the moment..

You should all go and sign up.

Go to https://bittrex.com/Account/Register and use SUPPORT_NXT as the invite code. This gets you past the invite code queue. Place some trades, enabled 2FA, or try any of our other features to help us stress the site before the final launch. If you find a bug, we're handing out bug bounties as well. Having a great exchange helps us but also helps the NXT community.

Done. Testing trading some DOGE until they add NXT.  

Received this from Bittrex, please don't bother signing up any more until we have clarification they can add Nxt.

"Sigh, we just hit a huge technical hurdle that is going to delay this;  I'm not sure we have an easy way around this without doing a lot of core engine restructuring which is super scary.  

I will keep you updated "

I've asked them for more specifics.

These exchange kids are just desperate for new users. trying to add more coins to add more users to skim off their %
They are not in it for the community, and have no idea how to do anything but add a scrypt coin. They are just as bad as all the new coins.

The exchanges are important for the price, but NXT is still worth so much more than the reflected price on BTER. All the scam coins and pump and dumps are hoping to get on the exchanges to sell out. We need to be patient.

[redsn0w]

Now the value of 1 Nxt is : 0.00009180 BTC .. mhhhh  

[CIYAM]

I believe in another thread (flaw thread) we came to the conclusion that it is important to have many accounts for modeling. 10 could be too few.

It could be - so at the moment I am focusing on some more "worst-case scenarios".

Once I am happy with the stats we are getting from those simulations then I will move to what are perhaps "more realistic scenarios".

[martismartis]

Still testing 0.8.1e. Noticed some small bug. I run public node on Android TV stick and private forgoing node at home laptop. I'm connected to my public node with other PC. So, sometimes I notice, that in public node there stays unconfirmed transactions, which does not exists in private forging node. After refresh of public node, everything ok, unconfirmed transactions list became the same.

[casx]

i work on a bigger project for the english an german community.. if someone can support it with a donation... please pm me..
i will show u on what iam working


casx

[igmaca]

I don't get your idea, or I get it. I don't know.

Instead of leasing forge power, you commit with your account to share fees among others in the same "share fee group" if you forge a node. You still try to forge a block on your own, but you commit to share the incentive with others if you are successful (with special conditions like committing to run the node for some time, ...). Could this be done with AT and would that make sense?

there really isnt much point in this mechanism.  what you are describing is basically a rube goldberg contraption that produces the exact result of current NXT account/network forging

The idea is that all forgers repeatedly get small incentives for trying to forge. It is a pure psychological reason.

In the end, the fee distribution is the same.

exact!

But it is very important to keep alive the interest of forging every day because we want two things;

every day we must keep network secure
every day we must keep maximum decentralized network

[redsn0w]

I don't get your idea, or I get it. I don't know.

Instead of leasing forge power, you commit with your account to share fees among others in the same "share fee group" if you forge a node. You still try to forge a block on your own, but you commit to share the incentive with others if you are successful (with special conditions like committing to run the node for some time, ...). Could this be done with AT and would that make sense?

there really isnt much point in this mechanism.  what you are describing is basically a rube goldberg contraption that produces the exact result of current NXT account/network forging

The idea is that all forgers repeatedly get small incentives for trying to forge. It is a pure psychological reason.

In the end, the fee distribution is the same.

exact!

But it is very important to keep alive the interest of forging every day because we want two things;

every day we must keep network secure
every day we must keep maximum decentralized network

That's why WE need to start spreading the Nxt even in cities, in schools and in every place.

[EmoneyRu]

I run public node on Android TV stick

Expect some posts like

Why my node on Panasonic microwave oven forges so little blocks? Should I upgrade it to Zanussi?

 

[starik69]

Very strange. On 0.8.xe versions after several hours my node always forks. That was not the case on 0.7.x. I usually forged >1 block a day but on 0.8 i got nothing  
Downgrading.

mine doesnt fork, but every few hours my 0.8.1e forging NRS node just hangs on a block and stops receiving new blocks.  I upgraded to 0.8.2e, same thing.

May be it is one case. The forks i was getting were forged mostly with my account with very high target in blocks. So the reason may be the same - loosing connection with the network.

[msin]

Version 0.3.4 of Nxs is how up on GitHub

All API / UI server requests are now done through POST (with a config option for GET for backwards compatibility with Nxt versions prior to 0.8 ).

Nxs now has a sidebar for navigation (similar to the nxtra.org NXT Wallet's) because the advanced Nxt features such as Messages, Aliases, Asset Exchange, etc. won't fit into the navigation bar at the top. Aliases have now been implemented and can be registered and updated on the Aliases page. If you choose "Nxt Account" as your type, the Nxt account number URI will automatically be wrapped with "acct:" and "@nxt" so the full URI is something like "acct:0000000000000000@nxt". This is an attempt to help push a standard for Nxt account number alias URIs in solidarity with wesley's NXT Wallet app. In the future, these account numbers will be able to be entered as the recipient in a transaction as well.

Also, aliases now show up in their registering and updating transactions on the Transactions page.

Along with the new side bar, the pages interface has been completely revamped to show only one page at a time instead of the old navigation system where you could toggle widgets on and off and display multiple widgets at a time. The initial version with toggling widgets made too much of an attempt to emulate Nxt's default NRS GUI instead of rethinking the interface altogether.

Rate of requests for new data is now adjustable in "assets/js/config.js" allowing Nxs to potentially run more smoothly on older computers. Repo available here along with installation instructions and the full change log can be found here. New screenshots can be found here.

]

Anyone tried this?  Looks awesome, great work Regulus.

[mthcl]

Here is the source code to my simulator:

Code:

#ifndef USE_LOG
         weights[ i ] = ( rand( ) % 1000 ) * balances[ i ];
#else
         weights[ i ] = ( rand( ) % 1000 ) * log( ( double )balances[ i ] );
#endif
         total_weight += weights[ i ];
      }
...
      for( size_t i = 0; i < balances.size( ); i++ )
      {
         double adjusted_weight = weights[ i ] * 1000 / total_weight;

         if( adjusted_weight > best_target )
         {
            winner = i;
            best_target = adjusted_weight;
         }
      }

That's not how the nxt forging algorithm works.
You are looking for the maximum of random number * balance to get the winner where you really should calculate the minimum of random number / balance and let the minimum win.

Yes, BloodyRookie is right (according to my today's conversation with CfB).

[mthcl]

That's not how the nxt forging algorithm works.
You are looking for the maximum of random number * balance to get the winner where you really should calculate the minimum of random number / balance and let the minimum win.

I think that how you choose the winner is irrelevant - it is only the probabilities that matter here.

I think the rule of choosing the winner is relevant - it affects the probability distributions...

Also, could you run your simulations (with the correction of BloodyRookie) in the situation when the rich guy has around 0.35 of all NXT and there are around 10 poor guys with equal stakes? Some quick computations that I've just did indicate that the ROI for the rich guy would be maximal in this case...

[mthcl]

People have been wondering about some of the figures that my simulator has come up with so far - but there is actually a much worse picture here than I have so far shown as my simulator has been using "log(balance)" rather than just "balance" as the "stake multiplier".

So get ready for something that approaches more closely how Nxt actually works as it does not use log(balance):

blocks = 1440
a: 10
b: 10
c: 10
d: 10
e: 10
f: 50
wins( a ) = 48
wins( b ) = 50
wins( c ) = 50
wins( d ) = 41
wins( e ) = 52
wins( f ) = 1199
best_streak( a ) = 2
best_streak( b ) = 2
best_streak( c ) = 2
best_streak( d ) = 2
best_streak( e ) = 2
best_streak( f ) = 49
best_combined_streak = 3

In particular pay attention to the figure for "f" in regards to both "wins" and its "best streak".

this I don't understand at all - what exactly was your algorithm for calculating weights?