Why don't we use NBT as B&C exchange transaction fee?

The fee collected is nubits revenue, the Nu’s biggest problem is the lack of sufficient income.

1 Like


Transaction fees (the sole use for BlockCredits) must be paid using an asset native to B&C Exchange. NuBits live on a different blockchain.

That being said, it wouldn’t be surprising if the B&C UI eventually used a service like ShapeShift to provide instantaneous shifting between a native asset (like NuBits) and BlockCredits. If that feature was added users would “feel” like they are paying transaction fees in their native asset, while shareholders would get the simplicity afforded by BlockCredit accounting.

B&C exxhange is on another blockchain than nushare/nubits, the reason is avoid bloating?

In future the BKS holders and nsr holders may become two different groups people and BKS holders may show little intestest on nubits pegging. The split of our community is dangerous.

We desperately need the side chain, but sunny king has been silent for that topic for a long time.

Could some alternate version of NuBot be run, pointed at B&C to basically peg BKC to NBT?

They are different DAOs, of course they would have different holders and interests. This should not be a surprise. B&C is a complementary business to Nu, not an integrated component.

Perhaps one day BKC holders vote for delist NBT and Nushare, it’s not very possible but theoretically.

Any news on side chain developement?

Why concern yourself with an eventuality that may never show up? If B&C is built and at some point in the distant future one or more of the Nu tokens are on the chopping block, I doubt it will be a sudden decision without a sound reason.

Re: side chains

We’re not working on side chains, and there’s no indication that Sunny King is, either, other than a few random comments many months ago. I hope I’m proven wrong but I have a feeling that SK has moved on to other things under another assumed name.

Obviously they are harder to implement than the theoretical discussions suggests that it is.

Sunny has been working to get Peercoin ready for Emeth’s Peerapps with the v0.5 release.

And entire cryptocurrency ecosystems have risen and fallen in the time that SK has been working on “getting it ready”.

1 Like

Yeah, I hear you.

According to new fundraising scheme, at first 50% BKC is on the hands of those who have no NSR at all, the process ability of B&C is limited to 10 transactions per second, or it may be improved to more but the transaction is scarce resource and as a BKC holder without NSR, he/she may think about which cryptoasset should remain and which should be delisted.

NBT liquid providers will be big traders as long as they offer enough transaction fee.

Sabreiib is a serious speculators,he have been drop all nsr(more than 12000k), a very bad reputation in Chinese communities

I welcome speculators. They provide much needed liquidity. They must always buy before they can dump.

1 Like

I should have told you I dropped 20 millioms NSR, since you believe any words about my private information. Does it make me an even worse man?LOL

In your chinese “so called” community, a QQ group where some of them (including a leader) hate to listen any criticizing. I dislike your atmosphere very much because of your despotism, you’ve remind me <1984> where “Big Brother lead the information censorship”. You(Chinese QQ group) are a group of people from a despotism society with despotism style , so I understand and leave you.

For me, from the very begining, I asked David(the former marketing ) why Nu is not a ponzi sheme, and till now, my opinion is still that “Nu is lack of enough revenue”. I know some people dislike criticize in PPC forum or Nubits forums, but at least those administrators have basic sense of democracy and freedom.

As serious investors, we must love self-criticism and criticism, responsible for our hard earned money.


Agree, I’ve bought much more NSR before I sell.

Nu is not a ponzi scheme because it combines the value of an asset backed currency with the business mechanisms of a US bank. It’s true, investors provide liquidity; however, even $1 of interest translates into NSR being burned and brings up the question of how much NSR/NBT? This question gives the asset backed currency meaning and value. Once there is interest, that monetary interest can be transformed into infrastructure for Nu which allows a further spread of interest and deepening the economic net, though all the time retaining the strong connection to NSR and using its market for leverage on the peg.

Creation of paper bills beyond the actual means to back them 1:1 has long been accepted as transcending the ponzi scheme since the death of the gold standard. NBT are backed by NSR, they’re actually more transparently reinforced than USD.

Also, try not to be mean please

Both partial and 100% reserve are OK, as long as we find enough income. If we wanna simulate governments(partial reserve), we need to find our “tax”.Governments can’t live on just printing paper money.

  1. NBT transaction fee
  2. cryptomessage (by emeth) fee
  3. B&C exchange transaction fee

Could we turn B&C income into Nubits revenue?

Banks are not governments, think pre-great depression and you see what I’m saying. We are better than banks because we actually have a method for bailing out rather than cry to the government to bail us out with taxes. Though, you could argue that the American people are as much of an asset backing USD as NSR shareholders are backing NBT.

That said, I’m very happy with trying to find more creative fees we can charge as revenue streams. :smile:

Why would BKS shareholders burn NBT instead of distributing themselves BTC?

To make sure the BKS holders always share same interest with NSR holders, imagine that the BTC/Doge transaction on B&C exchange is very popular and all the process/transaction ability( 10 per second) is occupied by BTC/Doge pair for a long time, what will BKS holders do? BTC/Doge or BTC/NBT to be delisted(at least temporary)? We always say the disagreement between BTC holders and miners, now we face the same problem: two distinct blockchain, especially some potential investors have shown they are only interested in BKS not Nushare.

We may hard code in the protocol that a certian portion of B&C transaction fee(as NBT) is automatically burned.