Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 37 results by erik__
Re: [ANN] Bancor | Protocol for Smart-tokens, solving the liquidity problem
This is my first time even using Ethereum. It didn't make a good impression. I was getting errors and gave up thinking it didn't work. The Ether funds disappeared from my account when I first sent and then reappeared a short time later when the errors were happening and then when I checked later in the day they had disappeared again. So presumably I have Bancor tokens now.
Is whatever that caused the problem in Ethereum during the ICO fixable in Ethereum or will this happen every time there is a spike in traffic or DDOS attempt? Are any of these platforms able this kind of thing efficiently?
Is whatever that caused the problem in Ethereum during the ICO fixable in Ethereum or will this happen every time there is a spike in traffic or DDOS attempt? Are any of these platforms able this kind of thing efficiently?
Re: [ANN] Bancor | Protocol for Smart-tokens, solving the liquidity problem
I'm new to Etherium and using the Mist wallet. I'd like to participate in this Bancor ICO, but I don't think this wallet has a way to set the Gas Limit which Bancor says is required to be 200,000. The Mist wallet doesn't seem to display Gas anywhere let alone give me a way to set it. I'm sure the command line does, but I'm not comfortable enough to use that. Should I just ignore that requirement and hope for the best?
http://87.230.14.1/nxt/nxt.cgi?action=3000&acc=2584657662098653454
24 Million NXT?
In one account. Holy crap.
24 Million NXT?
In one account. Holy crap.yea 2.4% is too much of the stake. that person needs to sell for the sake of the security of the network.
Looking at their history they have done a lot of selling and probably would sell more if the price went back above a dime.
What we do need is as many clients as possible forging. This will secure the network, and more importantly improve the bandwidth of the network.
Using pools is the wrong direction. I do not think its a good idea to make the effective_balance leaseable. This will only lead to centralization and only a few clients beeing online the whole day.
Instead, lets try to built a system were the top X forgers of each block get equally paid out. This should be doable without pools:
As transparent forging allows us to determine the next forger, it would also allow us to determine the top X forgers for each block.
Have the fee split among them accoring to their 'contribution'.
Example:
Through Transparent forging, the network knows, that
Account A will forge the Block in 30 Seconds
Account B could forge in 50 Seconds
Account C could forge in 55 Seconds
The fee of this Block is 100 Nxt.
So A will get 46.5 Nxt, B will get 28 Nxt and C will get 25.5 NXT (rounded).
This could be extended to X accounts where X is the number of accounts forging for at least Y blocks in a row. For example, set Y to 5 to have the blocks rewarded forging for at least five blocks.
Using pools is the wrong direction. I do not think its a good idea to make the effective_balance leaseable. This will only lead to centralization and only a few clients beeing online the whole day.
Instead, lets try to built a system were the top X forgers of each block get equally paid out. This should be doable without pools:
As transparent forging allows us to determine the next forger, it would also allow us to determine the top X forgers for each block.
Have the fee split among them accoring to their 'contribution'.
Example:
Through Transparent forging, the network knows, that
Account A will forge the Block in 30 Seconds
Account B could forge in 50 Seconds
Account C could forge in 55 Seconds
The fee of this Block is 100 Nxt.
So A will get 46.5 Nxt, B will get 28 Nxt and C will get 25.5 NXT (rounded).
This could be extended to X accounts where X is the number of accounts forging for at least Y blocks in a row. For example, set Y to 5 to have the blocks rewarded forging for at least five blocks.
I don't really like the idea of Nxt pools either. A simpler option may be to give a higher forging chance multiplier simply for being a unique node. I know the pools can split their stake as much as they want, but they have to pay fees to do so, and for many people it's too much of an administrative hassle to bother.
Hope your gateway helps us achieve 1 NXT >= 1oz. .999 Fine Silver!
That would be awesome!
I vote off brand as well.
I vote 1oz rounds.
I am a bit concerned that there has been very little feedback on my recent proposals, blockchain FIFO and NXT plugin architecture.
I've been reading your posts with interest and trying to digest them. Much of it sounds good, but is mostly over my head so it's hard to give good feedback. My biggest concern is security right now especially after the recent scare. New features often bring new security holes, so I'd rather not be in too much of a rush to beat the competition for every little thing. Nxt already has a strong niche (zero inflation, proof-of-stake) and just needs steady, but not rushed, development to bring in the new features which may or may not be embraced by the market.
Has Dr. Evil been hired to continue to looking for exploits and weaknesses and consult? I saw a couple posts requesting this, but it should be a priority. He's proven himself by brute forcing something like 3% of Nxt accounts (including genesis) and discovering an x-spend attack. If we have community funds available then I think we should try to keep him on board as long as we can.
I have a couple of thoughts to share before I go to work for the night.
First:
as someone who BELIEVES CfB when he says nobody should trust anybody, I believe that asking us all to "trust" a mandatory update to 0.5.12, followed by a miserable admission of error and a mandatory update to v0.6.0 a few hours later all without an explanation of the issue is a violation. I have stopped my server and will not restart it until the nature of the "critical bug", and its fix, are disclosed.
First:
as someone who BELIEVES CfB when he says nobody should trust anybody, I believe that asking us all to "trust" a mandatory update to 0.5.12, followed by a miserable admission of error and a mandatory update to v0.6.0 a few hours later all without an explanation of the issue is a violation. I have stopped my server and will not restart it until the nature of the "critical bug", and its fix, are disclosed.
To a certain extent if the lead developer issues a release and says it's critical we have no choice but to trust him. But, outside developers can and should perform their own independent audits of new releases to see if something suspicious is done and raise the alarm if need be.
My interpretation is that any NXT holder is damaged by anybody that steals NXT property. So theoretically, anybody owning NXT at the time of infringement would have standing to sue. Is that wrong?
James
James
And when a stakeholder is actually doing those things? Copying, cloning etc? isn't that the case with all those clones?
So I guess you have to be a Nxt stakeholder to clone Nxt. Looks like the NEM folks (apparently Nxt insiders) are busy collecting donations in Nxt and BTC for their Nxt clone:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=440185.0
Let the clone wars begin!
What was that again about the 'trap' in the code that'll render clones dead in 24 hours?
Anyone can clone Nxt, but CFB can kill it. NEM is founded by Utopian, he's a Nxt supporter, but the only insiders would be CFB and JL.
Using restrictive licenses would be very bad for Nxt. I would sell my stake today and forget about this project if I thought that was seriously the plan. We already don't have a usable open-sourced copy of Nxt, but my understanding is that we will within a few months. Short delays in open sourcing new features is going far enough and it is debatable whether or not Nxt benefits from this.
NXT - 100% proof of stake, pretty new coin, price has been dipping lately, not a bitcoin fork. Anonymous Russian devs, and many other volunteer devs. A lot of its competitors feel like VC backed wannabes by comparison.
BTC - The king of cryptos is probably the safest bet, but may not rise as quickly as a successful altcoin
PPC - Peercoin Proof-Of-Stake/Proof-Of-Work hybrid coin. Innovative altcoin. Price has seen a nice steady rise.
DOGE - Risky. It seems like an old overdone joke, but the masses sometimes love old overdone jokes and good viral marketing may be the only think an altcoin needs to separate itself from the pack and succeed.
BTC - The king of cryptos is probably the safest bet, but may not rise as quickly as a successful altcoin
PPC - Peercoin Proof-Of-Stake/Proof-Of-Work hybrid coin. Innovative altcoin. Price has seen a nice steady rise.
DOGE - Risky. It seems like an old overdone joke, but the masses sometimes love old overdone jokes and good viral marketing may be the only think an altcoin needs to separate itself from the pack and succeed.
Any lawyer here?
I'd like to get comments on the following:
Nxt forgers don't "print" money, so they can't be sued as money emitters. Only BCNext can be.
Once Nxt users r able to lease forging power they can lease it to registered entities and be protected, coz noone can sue them for being money processors.
Looks legit or not?
I'd like to get comments on the following:
Nxt forgers don't "print" money, so they can't be sued as money emitters. Only BCNext can be.
Once Nxt users r able to lease forging power they can lease it to registered entities and be protected, coz noone can sue them for being money processors.
Looks legit or not?
I'm not a lawyer.
I think the legal matters are really only for those who convert Nxt to fiat and perhaps fiat to Nxt and perhaps for people like BCNext and CFB for causing headaches for the authorities. Transaction fees earned as Nxt wouldn't seem to be a legal concern.
But, really everyone is still waiting on clarity from the various government regulators which they probably won't give until they are convinced that they can control virtual currencies somehow.
I have multiple voting methods coded for community testing (per utopianfuture's proposal) I just need a way to send and receive API calls in PHP. The below example returns NULL... Suggestions?
Code:
function get_web_page( $url )
{
...
$ch = curl_init($url);
...
}
$result = get_web_page('http://node6.mynxt.info:7874/nxt?requestType=getBalance&account=10006970057300228034');
var_dump($result);
?>
{
...
$ch = curl_init($url);
...
}
$result = get_web_page('http://node6.mynxt.info:7874/nxt?requestType=getBalance&account=10006970057300228034');
var_dump($result);
?>
Maybe try:
function get_web_page($url)
{
return file_get_contents($url);
}
Does anyone know how I can call an account balance in PHP?
I need something like...
$TokenResponse = json_decode(file_get_contents("http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=decodeToken&website=" . $rand . "&token=" . $token"));
$balance = json_decode(file_get_contents("http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=getBalance&account=". $TokenResponse[account]"));
I need something like...
Code:
$TokenResponse = json_decode(file_get_contents("http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=decodeToken&website=" . $rand . "&token=" . $token"));
$balance = json_decode(file_get_contents("http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=getBalance&account=". $TokenResponse[account]"));
pass account ID not token.
Code:
http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=getBalance&account=6669070404060812420
remember results are "multiplied by 100"
also, you'll probably be interested more in guaranted balance:
Code:
http://localhost:7874/nxt?requestType=getGuaranteedBalance&account=6669070404060812420&numberOfConfirmations=10
Right I understand the API, I was just giving an example -- what I meant was connections are refused when I send json requests, and curl is returning "NULL".
Echo the url and enter it into the browser. Is the connection still refused? Can you use a public node? This seems to work for reading the balance:
http://node10.nxtbase.com:7874/nxt?requestType=getGuaranteedBalance&account=6669070404060812420&numberOfConfirmations=10
Please stop discussing global warming and any related political issues here.
If people like you managed to accept that it is a matter of science and not a matter of politics, SURE.
All the more reason this world needs a technocracy more than anything. Too many idiots in power.
Also: no we are going to discuss this as it is also a part of our marketing strategy.
Just saying that something is "green" and "environmentally friendly" is just empty buzzwords without consequences.
The fact is that global warming is currently making millions of people refugees, it is a very pressing matter.
And the other truth is, if Bitcoin becomes the currency of the future it will contribute HUGELY to this. That is a GREAT selling point for NXT compared to just saying "it's green, but hey it doesn't really matter because there is a magical ecosystem on earth that isn't affected regardless of what happens
"You're being condescending to a large part of the Nxt community, which is unhelpful in any discussion. My opinion is that GW should be left out of Nxt marketing. Discussing the fact that Nxt is energy efficient should be promoted though.
Important Funding request
Unofficial PR Committee agrees with the decision to have a paid 1 minute sponsor spot at the Let's talk... (one favourite Bitcoin show).
There will be also 4 new shows, but I wouldn't like to spend too much NXT. If we wanted to be in all 5 shows for 6 months, it would cost 1.3 mega NXT.
I am for: 1 minute long ad (=sponsor spot) at one show for 3 months for 270k NXT. Or: 500k NXT for 6 months.
(maybe we could add one more show..)
I will be exchanging NXT probably after Vircurex boom, if there will be any. So price in NXT could be lower.
I am asking the community if we can spare some unclaimed coins for this advertisement. Also if we have any private stakeholders who would like to sponsor this. And ofcourse if you agree with this all.
I don't want to write everything publicly, so who wants details, I will send him them.
Ad = an interview with a NXT developer or evangelist who can speak about NXT in a compelling way
NxtMarketing account:
2037401990853753795
(current spending of marketing acc: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgAGADgnQcrtdHRrV3V3Z1lzOXVEMWtqdElUaEtqV1E#gid=15 )
Marketing thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=412243.0
Thank you for your attention. I am personally against paid ads, but this time it is little different.
Unofficial PR Committee agrees with the decision to have a paid 1 minute sponsor spot at the Let's talk... (one favourite Bitcoin show).
There will be also 4 new shows, but I wouldn't like to spend too much NXT. If we wanted to be in all 5 shows for 6 months, it would cost 1.3 mega NXT.
I am for: 1 minute long ad (=sponsor spot) at one show for 3 months for 270k NXT. Or: 500k NXT for 6 months.
(maybe we could add one more show..)
I will be exchanging NXT probably after Vircurex boom, if there will be any. So price in NXT could be lower.
I am asking the community if we can spare some unclaimed coins for this advertisement. Also if we have any private stakeholders who would like to sponsor this. And ofcourse if you agree with this all.
I don't want to write everything publicly, so who wants details, I will send him them.
Ad = an interview with a NXT developer or evangelist who can speak about NXT in a compelling way
NxtMarketing account:
2037401990853753795
(current spending of marketing acc: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgAGADgnQcrtdHRrV3V3Z1lzOXVEMWtqdElUaEtqV1E#gid=15 )
Marketing thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=412243.0
Thank you for your attention. I am personally against paid ads, but this time it is little different.
paid add, bad idea, waste of money.
I don't really see the sense in running ads now let alone locking in medium to long term contracts at current Nxt prices. At least wait until we're on a few more exchanges as there's a reasonable chance Nxt will increase in price based on that alone and then our advertising Nxt will go farther.
Honestly though a full explanation and include the info graphic someone made here is all you need, I wouldn't give him a crappy client we are using at the moment or he might see it as not user friendly for the masses to invest or promote.
Our infographics are embarrassingly biased. I wouldn't trust the credibility or judgement of anyone sending them to me.
Don't offer Mark Cuban free Nxt, but do offer to answer any questions for him and offer technical assistance if he'd like to purchase some.
Also I think these points should be added to the draft (if true):
Also I think these points should be added to the draft (if true):
Guys,
Don't worry - the big difference I have seen between Nxt and the others is that:
i) It *doesn't* have VC capital backing.
ii) It *doesn't* have "slick sales guys*.
iii) It *does* have smart devs and an increasing following.
iv) It *is* delivering its promises (more or less) on time.
There will always be "the next* conference - stick to what you're doing well - people are watching this space with interest.
Don't worry - the big difference I have seen between Nxt and the others is that:
i) It *doesn't* have VC capital backing.
ii) It *doesn't* have "slick sales guys*.
iii) It *does* have smart devs and an increasing following.
iv) It *is* delivering its promises (more or less) on time.
There will always be "the next* conference - stick to what you're doing well - people are watching this space with interest.
Guys,
Don't worry - the big difference I have seen between Nxt and the others is that:
i) It *doesn't* have VC capital backing.
ii) It *doesn't* have "slick sales guys*.
iii) It *does* have smart devs and an increasing following.
iv) It *is* delivering its promises (more or less) on time.
There will always be "the next* conference - stick to what you're doing well - people are watching this space with interest.
Don't worry - the big difference I have seen between Nxt and the others is that:
i) It *doesn't* have VC capital backing.
ii) It *doesn't* have "slick sales guys*.
iii) It *does* have smart devs and an increasing following.
iv) It *is* delivering its promises (more or less) on time.
There will always be "the next* conference - stick to what you're doing well - people are watching this space with interest.
Pretty much this. I'd rather have the devs concentrating on the software than being concerned about giving interviews.