Re: Transparent mining 2, or What part of Legacy should be left behind
BCNext doesn't propose to change 1B limit, he is even against it coz this would break forging. His idea is similar to issuance of eDollars on Asset Exchange.
Oh - I thought the purpose of the Asset Exchange was always going to be for such things. At the end of the day I think that the AE just brings the Nxt functionality closer to Ripple (which may or may not be a good thing).
This was my thought too.
My same sentiment...
also
please do not try to increase the support to remove mining fees, at least not just yet...Mining makes more people run more nodes, no matter their intent...it secures the network unless you already have Advanced DDoS Protection: Project Kharon implemented and ready to be activated
do not remove mining
do not increase nxt supply....asset exchange token will peg a stable value from people who can verifiably back tokens with real fiat
transaction cancellation is just ridiculous...I hope bcnext is ok
Nxt could have a special kind of asset backed by fixed amount of NXT.
But if we aren't supposed to "trade NXT" then that wouldn't have any value then would it?
The point is that we are NOT supposed to do anything, it's up to the community how to develop Nxt further.
I think every everyone in the community wants nxt to be able to be traded MYSELF INCLUDED whats going on with bcnext?
?? why even suggest this? or is this another one of his social experiments to make sure he is not seen as Messiah and ensure the functionality of the community is decentralized??? if not i think something serious is going on with him!!!!