Quote from: NUD on August 19, 2014, 10:04:20 PM

Quote from: prdomain on August 19, 2014, 09:19:20 PM

What happen? bad news ?

No. We had to pay bittrex 35k NUD to cover the expenses of the last hardfork for them, this is exactly why we got ourselves the NUD. Doubt we could round up 35k at demand instantly.

On the long run, it may be cheaper to hire experienced developers who can handle wallet upgrading without creating losses for NUD businesses.

Quote from: NUD on August 19, 2014, 10:04:20 PM

Quote from: doldgigger on August 19, 2014, 02:34:34 PM

If you require users to download the blockchain instead of having the nodes distribute it, why bother with a blockchain and peer-to-peer at all? Wouldn't it be easier if you make your coin a mere wallet website where people can login and view their balance, transmit coins etc.? Then you can edit the balances as you wish, without creating synchronization issues. This would also cut your development costs as you would not have to bother with all that cryptocurrency stuff anymore (which seems to go wrong regularly, anyway).

The logic is still peer to peer and not centralized as you seem to suggest, it's like the bitcoin blockchain which is available via torrent.

One tiny difference: With Bitcoin, the torrent-distributed blockchain is the same as the one you get when letting the client download it from other peers. So, it is just a speedup. With NUD, the blockchain is rather small until now, so no real point in doing so if it was for mere speeding up the download. However, it turns out that the consensus-driven process that gets you a blockchain by running the wallet leads to a different blockchain than what is available for donload by HTTP. So, it seems like someone on nud.fi wants to override the consensus from the network by his own transactions.