Questions on Nubit's Transaction Fees, Blockchain Bloat Protection & Open Transactions Compatiability

Sentinelrv 2014-09-22 23:43:29 UTC #1

I have several questions about how similar Nubits is to Peercoin.

Does NuBits use a transaction fee that is the same amount as Peercoin’s fee, 0.01? As explained here in the “Microtransaction & Off-Chain Networks” section, Sunny set this fee to protect Peercoin from the massive blockchain bloat currently being experienced by other cryptos.
If so, does the same fee apply to both NuBits and NuShares, or only one of the two?
As explained in my link above, off-chain networks like Open Transactions can be used to get around the fee, so that microtransactions are possible. OT would allow people to bypass the fee, so that they can use NuBits as a true transactional currency, while also keeping the blockchain small. Is Open Transactions compatible with NuBits and is implementation something that is planned for a future release?
If Peercoin uses OT, people will need to give up their share of the network temporarily while their peercoins are stored in an OT voting pool. With Nu though, it seems that you would be able to maintain control of your NuShares and protect the network through minting and voting while at the same time being able to transact with your NuBits. Is this true?

This seems like the perfect setup if true.

Ben 2014-09-22 23:57:53 UTC #2

Yes. There is a transaction fee of 0.01 NBT per 1kb of data sent in a transaction, the same as Peercoin. There is a 1.0 NSR per 1kb of data mandatory fee for transactions, as well. Note that these are mutually exclusive.

Nu is not currently OT-ready, but the development team has discussed including it on the feature roadmap.

I’m not quite sure how this would work, unless you mean that instead of using NSR as the OT “transational token” that you would use NBT instead?

Sentinelrv 2014-09-23 00:39:37 UTC #3

Yes. You could hold onto your NuShares, mint with them and vote. At the same time you could transact with your NuBits inside OT. With Peercoin you don’t have that choice since it’s only one unit you’re dealing with. You either hold onto it or not.

Of course, you could also trade your NuShares in OT as well. Maybe the OT voting pools could have some way of allowing you to still vote or mint, not sure.

masterOfDisaster 2014-09-23 16:35:20 UTC #4

As far as I understand this fee gets destroyed - just like tx fees at Peercoin.
Has it been considered to transfer those fees to an address that belongs to a custodian for example.
…or at any other address so they can be used for the benefit of NuBits?

I don’t see the drawbacks of such an approach.

Chronos 2014-09-23 17:04:59 UTC #5

Destroying the fees makes the remaining units more valuable by reducing total supply. This has the same effect as distributing fees equally among shareholders.

masterOfDisaster 2014-09-23 17:15:15 UTC #6

Ok, so basically it’s no difference whether or not the NuBits from the tx fees get destroyed and created again (in the future) or transferred to a custodian - right?
One might say that destroying the tx fees is (economically) beneficial for the NuBits system.

Yurizhai 2014-09-23 17:16:28 UTC #7

What is the implication of NuShares & the Peercoin blockchain/fee? Will each individual dividend payment be subject to the fee which is destroyed? Will dividends greatly increase the speed at which Peercoin’s blockchain expands?

teeneagle 2014-09-24 09:01:30 UTC #8

How is the 0.01 usd protect the chain from bloating ? considering bitcoin minimum fee is 0.04 usd already !

mhps 2014-09-24 09:22:56 UTC #9

I remember by playing with peershares that the fee is charged so if your dividends is less than 0.01 it won’t be sent.

Cybnate 2014-09-24 09:23:21 UTC #10

We will see more transactions and more fees destroyed (increasing the value for all PPC holders which will increase the size of the blockchain.

Cybnate 2014-09-24 09:25:03 UTC #11

It won’t protect indeed, but it will keep out the smallest spammy transactions at least.

teeneagle 2014-09-24 10:14:08 UTC #12

Great, does this mean the network can handle micropayments ? we dont need OT ?

cryptog 2014-09-25 08:24:18 UTC #13

If NuBits becomes widely accepted, millions of people will make millions of transactions a day…Won’t that bloat permanently the blockchain?

Ben 2014-09-25 12:13:36 UTC #14

The block chain would be larger than a less used crypto, yes. The expectation is that when the level of scale is acheived that this becomes a major concern, time will have been spent on technical considerations to adapt the protocol to minimize the effect. Companion technologies like the one being developed by the Open Transactions team, or a “mini-block chain” may be two of the ways that this could be done.

The Nu development team is very interested in the OT project. Microtransactions of NBT are something that I believe are going to be essential for the long-term success of NuBits, so if OT is the answer to making it useful, I think it’s well-worth continuing to research the integration of the project as it matures.

cryptog 2014-09-25 14:24:25 UTC #15

I see.
Since Nubit is pegged to the dollar, Nubit is intended to be a daily life currency.
I believe it is essential for Nubits to be able to handle a lot of transactions a day.
By the way, can you detail what a mini blockchain is?

Ben 2014-09-25 14:31:21 UTC #16

Sure, here’s the link to Bitfreak’s initial concept discussion on BitcoinTalk : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195275.0

A white paper, Purely P2P Crypto-Currency With Finite Mini-Blockchain, was developed after those discussions occurred, and then it was expanded into a full project wiki: http://cryptonite.info/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

Sentinelrv 2014-09-25 18:12:58 UTC #17

There is also Sunny’s sidechain project for Peercoin. That’s an unknown right now, but it’s possible that it may provide some use to help with this in addition to other features. We’ll just have to wait and see.

cryptog 2014-09-26 06:51:58 UTC #18

Tks. Interesting. The main idea being to trim the whole block chain…

cryptog 2014-09-26 06:53:53 UTC #19

Well if the purpose is to create a currency out of peercoin which is an asset, I think NuBits does the job unless SK wants to create another currency different from NuBits but it would sounds like doing the same thing twice imh…

masterOfDisaster 2014-09-26 07:31:47 UTC #20

The thing that is hard to achieve and has been achieved by NuBits very successful so far is the price stability - ok, it’ only a few days in the wild, but I find it impressive enough looking at the volumes of NuBits that have been traded!
Creating sidechains and pegging them to a block chain is one thing.
Making the value of that sidechain’s units stable is another thing…