For now, we should point out that proof-of-stake mining has inherent problems, which, to my knowledge, neither BCNext nor anyone else in the Nxt community has addressed. In particular, the well-known "nothing at stake" attack, by which miners can mine on multiple blockchains at no cost to themselves; this is in contrast to proof-of-work, where the resources one uses to mine are depleted in the process of mining. "Transparent forging" doesn't solve this problem, and, in any case, transparent forging has not even been implemented yet.
This is what a Nxt dev had to say about the "nothing-at-stake" problem:
If you have a computer that can forge a very large number of accounts in parallel without using any CPU and can also fund these large number of accounts without costing any NXT, then sure nothing is at stake
In my experience though you need to fund each separate acct with NXT (wait long enough) and then even a small amount of CPU time, multiplied by millions of accounts, well that seems to take some CPU power after all.
So, if you ignore the millions in NXT fees to create the accounts and the CPU power needed to forge on those millions of accounts, then you can try to monkey around with grabbing all the forging fees.
economically it doesnt make sense as there is NXT at stake. I think the premise of "nothing at stake" is that it rhymes with "proof of stake" so it has to make sense. It seems the assumption is that they can buy an arbitrary amount of NXT for free, so maybe much closer to genesis this would have been an issue, but now it is nonsensical.
That has nothing to do with mining on multiple chains at once.
Your last statement show a complete lack of understanding of the NXT forging algorithm and its because of you and the like's of peter todd not taking the time to research before commenting, that people who are not technically adept run regurgitating untrue statements at these meetups...Nxt POS algo is much different than any other POS or even Peercoins algorithm...
I have been following counterparty's development since the first burn and up until now I have admired the efforts of the devs..I have looked into the details of Nxt and counterparty, and I must say that even though they are competing projects, the devs here should take more responsibility when talking about technical details of competing projects...
if you want to make valid criticisms and quit misleading your audience, at least you can start by reviewing some of the discussions by the core developers here:
https://nxtforum.org/general/how-does-nxt-fix-the-nothing-at-stake-problem/ your nothing at stake argument is moot, know the facts before your use your authority to mislead others
Edit: and for your info I am a major burner....
At the 56:50 mark:
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/ltb94-privacy-and-the-arts/ complete FUD and untruths...and thousands of people repeat the same thing confidently like parrots...Nxt is significantly different than peercoin POS, any other proof of stake and the fundamental the code base which is written in java. Nxt is has decentralized as you can get from marketing, development and all other initiatives. Shame on Adam for passive action in letting that smear fly by...You devs have to realize your power and take better responsibility!