I understand, that you had some problems with some of the guys over in the Nxt thread, but looking at your recent posts here, it seems that you are now trying to talk Nxt down.

The counterparty webclient is very neat, indeed, as well as some Nxt clients are neat, too. Don´t be biased and please don´t denigrate the work of a lot of people, just because you´re angry.


just to make it clear:
I have a higher stake in XCP as in Nxt (proportionally), but I think that both approaches are very interesting and promising. I just don´t like if someone is spreading false/bad information over and over again, just because of rage or disappoitnment.

Sent some.Wait a while.

You don't need install anything before using the webwallet.

https://testnet.counterwallet.co

I can send you some test BTC and XCP.

Counterparty is based upon PoB - Proof of Burn concept. You can check the total XCP created during the burning period here: http://blockscan.com/burn.aspx

I am not emotionally involved in any coin actually. Personally I think ripple will succeed.

This thread is dedicated to discussion of Nxt features (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303898.0), don't confuse it with Bitcoin or other altcoins.


In Bitcoin a payment is made by transferring all coins from input to output addresses with difference between input and output paid as transaction fee.  If someone wants to send only part of the coins they must send the rest back to one of their own addresses.  An attempt to use the same input twice is a double-spending, only one of the transactions will be confirmed even if enough money is sent back.

Unlike Bitcoin and its forks, Nxt uses a single account instead of multiple addresses for each user.  It is possible to send multiple transactions from the same source address (called "account"), all these transactions will be confirmed if the account holds enough coins.  Someone still can attempt a double-spending by paying for something with low fee and then sending all their coins to other account with higher fee, making it impossible to confirm the first payment.

We can counteract a double-spending attack in Nxt by using special accounts.  A special account has certain limits that don't let to create transactions for more than (for example) 1/10th of the balance in total within a 24 hour timeframe.  The network will simply ignore transactions and blocks that violate this rule.

A merchant (or a vending machine) can accept payments from special accounts without waiting for confirmations.  The only thing should be done is checking that a received transaction doesn't violate the rule.

Does anybody see flaws or disadvantages in such design?

P.S.  Payment privacy in Nxt will be provided via mixing.

P.S.  Payment privacy in Nxt will be provided via mixing.

Just to be certain, I did not mean "yes" in my post "Does this sound stupid?"  >_<

Its a decent idea, but there is an issue in who controls the asset accounts.  Unless I'm missing something, the only way we can send from the "permanent account" is if the account is controlled by a trusted escrow.  It's doable, but makes it less decentralized.

What might be interesting is to implement escrow right into the asset exchange, so that anyone can have a rated escrow account as well.  For example:

1. Jon wants to sell "asset" for Sue for 100NXT but has little or no rating.
2. Jon push "sell", and sends the asset to a linked and highly rated escrow account
3. Sue pushes "buy", 100 NXT goes to the linked and highly rated escrows account
4. If both things arrived to account then this account sends the 100 NXT to Joe and asset to Sue.
5. Upon successful transaction, the escrow, Jon and Sue all +1 each other for a good trade, thus developing rep for Jon, Sue, and the escrow.

Just an idea, still hard to implement the real world commodity part of the escrow, and maybe that would complicate it too much, but just an idea.  Still, I think ratings of some sort could establish trust.  As far as commodities go though, I think a system to easily implement dividends may prove useful, but I wonder the legal implications of such a thing.  But a full peer-to-peer trading platform would be excellent.


Edit: pardon me, I've derailed the thread to suggestions ... back to asset exchange testing.