Release and support Chinese NuBits immediately

mhps 2016-09-01 02:04:15 UTC #21

poloniex is going to delist BITUSD on Sept. 5. Daily volume is 0.x btc.

huafei 2016-09-01 02:45:54 UTC #22

yes , but still list bitCNY…

Financisto 2016-09-02 03:20:46 UTC #23

BitUSD is gonna get an epic fail apparently…

crypto_coiner 2016-09-14 10:50:08 UTC #24

Hi there – long time, no see
NuYuan is interesting in the times we are living right now –
I am interested in recruiting the developers –
@Phoenix Please PM me to discuss the terms of the fees

backpacker 2016-09-14 11:15:24 UTC #25

i tried to discuss this directly with @Phoenix, but he prefers that I do it here, I’m able to spend few hours per week on cpp code, implementing necessary changes to source code. easiest thing would be to have a separate blockchain completely, it would also be more suitable for people who are starting with new token, they won’t have to sync 2+gb of transactions that don’t concern them.

what do you think?

mhps 2016-09-14 11:51:53 UTC #26

it would certainly reduce the size of blockchain. but so would a pruned blockchain with reset coin-age.

If cn-nbt does not use nsr minting to run its network, you’d have to issue cn-nsr. if all cn-nsr are airdropped to nsr owners the issuing part may not be a lot of work. the community will still have to run twice as many minting clients.

A separate blockchain does contain the damage if the chinese government sabotages the blockchain.

Cybnate 2016-09-17 06:26:04 UTC #27

It is a difficult one as the above is teasing. My main concern is the security of the new chain, as you will have to mint on 2 chains. For a non-minting client like NuDroid it would be easier to just copy the App instead of integrating both currencies into own App. As they would likely have two different audiences it won’t be a problem. Maintenance is higher though as any generic changes needs to be applied twice.

Sentinelrv 2016-09-17 14:27:12 UTC #28

If you had separate blockchains for each currency instead of one, wouldn’t you be effectively splitting Nu into 4 separate businesses? While the shareholders would be the same in the beginning, ownership between them would grow apart over time. This means you would need to pass the same motion on 4 separate blockchains, which may not be possible due to differences of opinion between shareholders.

With 4 groups of NuShares supporting one currency each, Nu would inevitably fracture into separate businesses as voting for each currency would no longer be tied together through the ownership of a singular group of NuShares. NuShare value would now also be split 4 ways and you’d run into issues, for example with shareholders of EU-NBT or others not wanting to work together to help back the value of US-NBT if it got into trouble again.

You’d also need separate branding and logos such as US-NSR and EU-NSR as you could no longer keep calling them simply NSR if there were 4 different types.

Sabreiib 2016-09-19 01:11:33 UTC #29

@backpacker, I guess you need to show your coding skills to the shareholders, and in future you may demand reward after finishing some work.

backpacker 2016-09-19 06:09:47 UTC #30

I think this is the way out of current situation, to split into new businesses and new blockchains for each new product.

surely necessary infrastructure motions would pass on all chains albeit at different times.

irritant 2016-09-19 06:51:11 UTC #31

I would suggest using peerassets technology for this

Cybnate 2016-09-19 08:42:32 UTC #32

Not a bad idea, but not yet proven. Will require some serious development and testing before it can be implemented. I think it is too early for that and probably to expensive for Nu. I believe the other presented options are much easier to release into the wild with less effort in less time.