4 ms·

Nano: What Bitcoin Was Supposed to Be

20 points by awaxman11 6y ago

Scandiravian 6y ago
I'm cautiously optimistic after reading a bit about nano, but have a few questions and concerns after browsing the page for a bit. If anyone can give some answers to my questions I'll be very grateful - My understanding is, that the initial distribution of Nano was the only time new coins will be generated. Is that correct? - I can't find any information on protection mechanisms against voting monopolies. If a few representatives accumulate enough Nano, they could simply start voting against transactions that removes money from their voters. It makes me concerned that the "freedom" will only exist as long as the wealth equality is high. Have I missed something here?
- onelastjob 6y ago
  Yes, the initial distribution was the only time Nano could be minted. Additional Nano will never be minted. Nano uses something called ORV (open representative voting). If you hold Nano, you can delegate the voting weight of your Nanos to any representative you want at any time. Representatives that get a certain amount of voting weight delegated to them become Principal Reps. If bad actors have 51% of voting weight delegated to them, they could block transactions from happening. But if this happened, Nano holders would just delegate their voting weight to different reps. If the bad actors actually owned 51% of the Nano supply, then they could block transactions indefinitely, but this would crash the value of the coin and since they would be holding 51% of the Nano supply they would lose money by doing this.
bionhoward 6y ago
Privacy, conspicuously absent...
- onelastjob 6y ago
  Privacy in Nano is something the Nano team is interested in, but I'm not sure how close they are to implementing it.
  - snypher 6y ago
    Seems like it should be a design rule, not an added extra.
    - onelastjob 6y ago
      There are only a few privacy coins (Monero, ZCash) at this time. I'm not sure why people in this thread are acting like privacy is a standard feature in cryptocurrency at this time. Also, privacy coins were just delisted from Bittrex, so it's not clear what the regulatory future will be for privacy coins.
stuckindider 6y ago
What does this offer that the thousands of other shitcoins don't offer?
- onelastjob 6y ago
  feeless, under 1 second transactions.
ur-whale 6y ago
A crypto that has no anonymity in 2021 when multiple technical solutions to the problem exist ... pass.
- onelastjob 6y ago
  The lack of privacy doesn't seem to bother you in regards to Bitcoin.
  - ur-whale 6y ago
    It most certainly does bother me, and while there are various ongoing efforts to at least mitigate the problem (e.g. coinjoin), I don't know if Bitoin is actually "fixable" in that regard save a major hard fork. But Bitcoin was designed in '09 and paved the way, that buys it some slack in my book: you can't expect it to be perfect on first iteration. Bitcoin also has also some other properties that have been amply demonstrated thus far, such as resistance to attackers and forgery, and for which it is rather easy to convince oneself that the chain is solid just by reading the white paper. As for nano, I'm honestly skeptical. I read the various white papers on the site and haven't found anything yet that looks like a justification that the "block lattice" data structure is in any way resistant to attacks.
    - onelastjob 6y ago
      Do you cut Windows 98 slack and still use it because it was designed in the 90s, or do you use a modern OS? Cutting technology slack because it was the first iteration doesn't make sense to me. I think Nano is more secure than Bitcoin considering that the majority hashrate of BTC is controlled by mining pools in China. If the Chinese government decides to coerce the owners of those mining pools to perform a block reorg tomorrow, it will happen. Nano does not have the sort of incentives that create centralization. In fact, Nano voting power is getting more decentralized over time, which is the opposite of what has happened with Bitcoin. When you consider that Nano txs take under 1 second, are feeless, are scalable, and require no POW mining, it's obviously superior to Bitcoin. All that Bitcoin supporters have left is vague "security concerns" about Nano. But if Nano is not secure, wouldn't it have been compromised by now considering there is an economic incentive to do so and considering that the mainnet has been running since 2014 or 2015?
gatgeagent 6y ago
No private-by-default transactions are an instant pass.

20 points by awaxman11 6y ago

I'm cautiously optimistic after reading a bit about nano, but have a few questions and concerns after browsing the page for a bit. If anyone can give some answers to my questions I'll be very grateful - My understanding is, that the initial distribution of Nano was the only time new coins will be generated. Is that correct? - I can't find any information on protection mechanisms against voting monopolies. If a few representatives accumulate enough Nano, they could simply start voting against transactions that removes money from their voters. It makes me concerned that the "freedom" will only exist as long as the wealth equality is high. Have I missed something here?

onelastjob 6y ago
Yes, the initial distribution was the only time Nano could be minted. Additional Nano will never be minted. Nano uses something called ORV (open representative voting). If you hold Nano, you can delegate the voting weight of your Nanos to any representative you want at any time. Representatives that get a certain amount of voting weight delegated to them become Principal Reps. If bad actors have 51% of voting weight delegated to them, they could block transactions from happening. But if this happened, Nano holders would just delegate their voting weight to different reps. If the bad actors actually owned 51% of the Nano supply, then they could block transactions indefinitely, but this would crash the value of the coin and since they would be holding 51% of the Nano supply they would lose money by doing this.

bionhoward 6y ago

Privacy, conspicuously absent...

onelastjob 6y ago
Privacy in Nano is something the Nano team is interested in, but I'm not sure how close they are to implementing it.
- snypher 6y ago
  Seems like it should be a design rule, not an added extra.
  - onelastjob 6y ago
    There are only a few privacy coins (Monero, ZCash) at this time. I'm not sure why people in this thread are acting like privacy is a standard feature in cryptocurrency at this time. Also, privacy coins were just delisted from Bittrex, so it's not clear what the regulatory future will be for privacy coins.

stuckindider 6y ago

What does this offer that the thousands of other shitcoins don't offer?

onelastjob 6y ago
feeless, under 1 second transactions.

ur-whale 6y ago

A crypto that has no anonymity in 2021 when multiple technical solutions to the problem exist ... pass.

onelastjob 6y ago
The lack of privacy doesn't seem to bother you in regards to Bitcoin.
- ur-whale 6y ago
  It most certainly does bother me, and while there are various ongoing efforts to at least mitigate the problem (e.g. coinjoin), I don't know if Bitoin is actually "fixable" in that regard save a major hard fork. But Bitcoin was designed in '09 and paved the way, that buys it some slack in my book: you can't expect it to be perfect on first iteration. Bitcoin also has also some other properties that have been amply demonstrated thus far, such as resistance to attackers and forgery, and for which it is rather easy to convince oneself that the chain is solid just by reading the white paper. As for nano, I'm honestly skeptical. I read the various white papers on the site and haven't found anything yet that looks like a justification that the "block lattice" data structure is in any way resistant to attacks.
  - onelastjob 6y ago
    Do you cut Windows 98 slack and still use it because it was designed in the 90s, or do you use a modern OS? Cutting technology slack because it was the first iteration doesn't make sense to me. I think Nano is more secure than Bitcoin considering that the majority hashrate of BTC is controlled by mining pools in China. If the Chinese government decides to coerce the owners of those mining pools to perform a block reorg tomorrow, it will happen. Nano does not have the sort of incentives that create centralization. In fact, Nano voting power is getting more decentralized over time, which is the opposite of what has happened with Bitcoin. When you consider that Nano txs take under 1 second, are feeless, are scalable, and require no POW mining, it's obviously superior to Bitcoin. All that Bitcoin supporters have left is vague "security concerns" about Nano. But if Nano is not secure, wouldn't it have been compromised by now considering there is an economic incentive to do so and considering that the mainnet has been running since 2014 or 2015?

gatgeagent 6y ago

No private-by-default transactions are an instant pass.