Just realized a 100% pure coin Nxt and also consideration of PoS for Bitshare by invictus company. Any comments?
Nxt:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303898.0
Stick with Peercoin, unless you have extra to gamble. These new coins that are coming out where they have pre-mined billions of coins and then the few who control them all hope to pump them a few cents and explode the market cap and suck people in. All you need to do to have a “fake” large market cap is create a few billion coins and multiply that by a few cents, and you instantly get a multi-million market cap. It is like the Ripple money system. They make 200 billion coins and then get people trading them for like 2 cents… But the demand is not really there.
I did not want to open up a new thread for this, so I hope this one will be ok for my question:
Apparently Nxt and Tx were/are not being successful with introducing PoS into the market (for good reasons, one just has to look at the Nxt trading side and forums to understand why…). Since the BTC mining pool GHash.io is still gaining market share, a lot of bitcoin users are worrying about a upcoming/potential 51% attack at the network (source: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1uk690/ghashio_just_mined_6_in_a_row_again_no_big_deal/ ). Now my question is:
Is there a chance for BTC to retroactively implement PoS to their network? What are the technical difficulties? How realistic is the implementation of PoS in general?
Thanks in advance and kind regards
Hey Test0r,
I remember asking the same question myself on the peercoin subreddit. Here’s a link http://www.reddit.com/r/peercoin/comments/1szdu5/bitcoins_efficiency_vs_peercoins_efficiency/ to that post. I hope this helps in answering your question.
Cheers.
So as far as I understand it is principally all about the danger of implementing a huge modification into the software, which changes what btc is and what it’s meant to be dramatically. So dramatically that there most probably won’t be a consesus about this act, ever. Right? And I guess the technical difficulty of this implementation alone can also not be neglected.
Ok, got this one. Thanks for your reply/help. 
i had to sell my nxt at a huge loss. the exchanges are god awful and sketchy as fuck. it took me 5 days the first time around to get my coins from the main exchange to the wallet. the owner of the exchange charges insane fees now. there is no local wallet for the software so if someone finds your password out they can steal all your money.
essentially i like the ideas of nxt. maybe it could be big in the future… maybe it will totally flop. if you are going to invest in it now precede with INCREDIBLE CAUTION and be fully prepared to loose every dime you invest. all the coins are owned by a select few… while i understand that btc/ppc are the same way… if someone dumps 5k btc, while it will make a dent in the market, everyone will want to buy and it will recover quickly. If a large shareholder of nxt decides to cash out, which can happen at any time… the value could massively plummet.
tl;dr – > had bad experiences with nxt. if you invest in it dont put in more than you can afford to loose.
[quote=“Test0r, post:3, topic:996”]I did not want to open up a new thread for this, so I hope this one will be ok for my question:
Apparently Nxt and Tx were/are not being successful with introducing PoS into the market (for good reasons, one just has to look at the Nxt trading side and forums to understand why…). Since the BTC mining pool GHash.io is still gaining market share, a lot of bitcoin users are worrying about a upcoming/potential 51% attack at the network (source: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1uk690/ghashio_just_mined_6_in_a_row_again_no_big_deal/ ). Now my question is:
Is there a chance for BTC to retroactively implement PoS to their network? What are the technical difficulties? How realistic is the implementation of PoS in general?
Thanks in advance and kind regards[/quote]
BTC Devs likely have the skill to port to POS, but in doing so, they will more or less concede that PeerCoin is the original, better model. PeerCoin would jump on any such news.
it does look more and more that for BTC mining is an issue.
PeerCoin just does not have that whole mining tax which is not insignificant drag and perhaps security issue
as a store of wealth PeerCoin is by far the better option to BTC, inmho. BTC seems to fall between store of wealth and coffee payment system. Emunie may take the latter and PeerCoin the Former.
I agree with SK that BTC would have a hard time reaching consensus of migrating to POS. This would further leave the who mining community well, beached.
Current POS needs to have new coins minted forever. That might require BTC to abundon the 21million limit, which many BTC comunity members will fiercely oppose. One alternative way would be abolishing the year-2140 end point of coin generation, and making POS reward decreasing over time in a way that the total number of BTC would take forever to reach to 21million. Other possibility can be using transaction fee to fund POS reward. Anyway huge political will from the community (or the conclave?) is needed to make such change.
Not necessarily: BTC could use the “nxt” model, with PoS minters earning only transaction fees. But I think increasing the coin supply like in PPC is a superior concept, as a only-transaction-fee model could lead into prohibitively high fees to achieve an acceptable security level.