Catapult (v2) Update + Community Feedback

Announcements
#41

catapult launch dont have to be slowed down because of this
u can start without working bridge and manual move the first coins via burn on nis chain

only downside this coins will never be able move back
but still to claim 1 XEM burned on nis is 1 XEM created on catapult is doable this way in manual mode without full setup supernode powered bridge protocol stack in operation

the main concern people have is tax relevant events and value invested in each single xem they own dont move 1:1 towards catapult

a 2 chain 1 coin approach would solve that both because there is only once coin with same value and it doesnt matter if u buy an xem on a exchange who still only interact with nis and accept deposits on a pure nis node or if u buy a xem on an exchange who only interact with a catapult node. if its clear that in both chain together is the hard limit of 9 million coins and they can free move between chain then its clear 1 xem is 1 xem and there is no fear of catapult needed to devalue ur hard earned XEM u own. also there would be no timewindows that u can miss for swap/conversion/migration because in fact no migration is needed we can use services on both chains and i expect that wallets after some brain invested will soon be able show ur value on both chains and in background move xem between chains as needed so in fact its visible as one solution

see it as a mini sharding with 2 shards

and once we have this technology nothing stop us from launch more shards and we have a additional scaling layer.

add chains as needed maybe even chains specialized for different purpose but bridge connect them and make sure all chains powerd by the same XEM currency

this i would call added value for XEM owners

3 Likes
#42

some ideas from EOS is very cool

EOS will have 2 chain
and also give to EOS holders free EOS from these split
that is what I talk must NEM DO

SIMPLE AND EASY that is big

#43
#45

a chainspit into two chains with 2 coins is a hostile thing where 2 different opinions there for future of coin

only one will redeem to be the real thing other one falls into nonfactor pretty fast

this is a path that leave losers behind that people who did bet on wrong chain

NEM goal should be a solution without losers

noone supporting this project since years deserve to be on the loser side of a chain split

update:

people who ask how a chainsplit create losers and choosing side

it works like this people sell the coins on the chain they dont belive in and buy coins of the chain they belive in

this means a chainsplit with 2 chainz create destruction of one chain and everyone who not dump fast enough is fucked and the quick dumper on the right side can increase their share on the winning chain

do we really want such a “highlander” szenario? where one chain value have to be canabilized by the other one?

only a szenario that dont create new coins with new cointracker is a good one

if its with one chain or 2 chains is not that important
important is that it is with one currency
which is possible as i explained multiple times already

yes we will have people voting for 2 chain 2 coins
each community have vultures ours too
this are people who think they can play the trade pump dump game better then others
no way we should have this mindset influence our decisions
any path that accept leaving a trail of losers behind is a bad path

4 Likes
#46

I agree, there ought to be one chain to rule them all. It’s short-sighted childish supposition to think that more coins equate to more value, value is derived from scarcity, not abundance. Also look at how NXT-Ardor played out, people didn’t know which token to buy anymore, at the end of the day neither of the tokens really took off. It’s clear that are only 9 billion xem and there will only ever be 9 billion xem, no copy-cats, dillution and silly games. 9 Billion is the limit for this hopefully in the future important industry giant network of blockchain solutions worldwide.

2 Likes
#47

SJM211 +
GodTanu +

our discussion here is meaningless without understanding the problems that the migration team faced.

1 Like
#48

btw as i remember 9 billion coins was chosen because it was a Java limit.
So maybe it’s a chance to increase amount of coins? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

#49

exactly this is the perfect project to watch when u want to learn how to NOT do it!

as the first big real altcoin first big platform with assets
they managed to become invisible and split into 3 nonfactor coins
keeping alive a old codebase no new project would use
and a new codebase thats splits into 2 chains (coins) parent and childchain that both also didnt get tracktion

this is exact what we should avoid

i trust in foundation ability and reserve fund managers to understand how important it is to have value linked to XEM and nothing else

all other things are doable because what u can think u can code
and im sure we have people who can think clever things
just give them the time to code it

any catapult release pre may 2020 is in time

just we should not release after BTC halfing but upfront
u can expect the BTC halfing to be the spike of BTC dominance and value then flood in altcoins and XEM must be in interesting shape at that moment

5 Likes
#50

yes but EOS is much bigger now from NEM and split at 10 days at 2 chains
and give free money to holders
if anyone here does not want free money
is ok
i want free money

like BITCOIN do with hard fork like ETHEREUM do with hard fork
like EOS WILL do at 10 days
so thats my opinion
if not give some trick to invest at your coin why someone to invest at you
look what ceo of binance had do to support BNB coin and you will understand how important is what i tell
time had change and you not give something you will not go anywhere

also catapult roadmap is q3/q4 2019
so may 2020 is not option
because may 2020 will bring summer 2020 and then will bring end of 2020 and start of 2021
is not option
ROADMAP FROM NEM FOUNDATION TELL CATAPULT OUT
AT Q3 END OR EARLY Q4 OF YEAR 2019!!!

#51

do u belive in free money?

everything have a price
even free things

as explained above the free coins and the profit by sell them and dump one of the two chains into a 90% or more value loss compared to the winning chain
is in fact not free because u steal the value of that people which come to late and see 90% of their coin value on losing chain disappear in a few days and even winning chqain is losing value but way less

u might say but hey the got coins on other chain too

thats right but while all that vultures who destroyed one of the chain then increase their share on other chain that ones who didnt dump didnt increase their share on winning chain

so in the end they nice guy lose value comared to the vulture mindset guy

a chainsplit into two looks value wise like this

CoinA CoinB
50 50
after a day
CoinA CoinB
45 20
after a week
CoinA CoinB
40 4

so that one who didnt dump and shift value to wining chain lost over 10% of his value
that vultures who dumped one chain and buy more of wining chain managed a value gain
even if the price per coin on wining chain did decrease

1 Like
#52

I agree with GodTanu.

Firstly, we should know the optional solutions and problems which are faced by Migration Steering Committee.
Otherwise, who can give feedbacks?
NEM Community need transparency.Thanks.

3 Likes
#53

i think we can give plenty of feedback already now
without knowing their directions its even more valuable
because its likely we bring up alternatives they didnt even consider

where i agree is that its like 6 months to late
they should have done this very early to have more possible paths to choose from
and not stuck in a three that come into their minds

we have many long term blockchainers here and a brainstorming together with us is a valuable resource they should utilze more often and early enough in development cycle

2 Likes
#54

I want to know the “problem”,
not your opinion.

2 Likes
#55

He is saying a good point. But keep in mind that this is not the same problem as replacing an internal system of a company. Keep in mind that there may be many people who die economically in the real world. It is also related to the trust of the NEM blockchain so far.

2 Likes
#56

Surely we just need to aggregate a number of different potential scenarios - with their related pros and cons, and hold an indicative community vote.

Allow everyone to indicate their top three options - and whichever three options come out on top, put those to the committee to run feasibility testing.

They can then make a more detailed proposal for each option which we can again vote on.

1 Like
#57

im more interested in solutions
i dont need to know their problem to give feedback for solutions
because we know the setting already (migration NIS to Catapult with a for now incombatible node software)
its not needed to know where in the labirinth they stuck to show them possible tactics how to solve a labirinth

1 Like
#58

Useful link thks. This was my working assumption and I think holds for many locations that have actually tried to understand what is going on with the token economy.

1 Like
#59

Lol that’d be an awfully silly thing to do. Developers XEM stash, NEM Foundation funding and the NEM community fund ought to be cherished.

Up untill now NEM has been waiting in the shadows for a long time, its fundamentals being thought out and consolidating, NEM reorganizing below the radar. Whereas Ethereum went mainstream right from the start they are now confronted with its limitations, a house ought to be built on solid fundamentals, Currently NEM is valued less than 1/40th of Ethereum, will be the greatest comeback and surprise in blockchain history if NEM fulfills its promises and gains mainstream adoption while other platforms continue to struggle with scalability issues, lack of adequate features etc.

In short, credibility and trust cannot be bought, but can be forfeited easily, I hope NEM organisation realises that and will do their best to accomodate their community. It’s a common journey into the unknown. It’s time to reignite the passion of greatness and aspirations as we march towards a new future for NEM. :slight_smile:

3 Likes
#61

I believe NEM!

1 Like
#62

I think, despite our recent year and a half of being neglected, most of us still do. The community does (or what is left of it) otherwise we wouldn’t still be here and NEM wouldn’t still be popular in Japan, I think President Tinsman does otherwise she wouldn’t put her heart and soul into this thing, I believe the developers do because they keep coding like there ain’t no tomorrow, I believe all the different NEM organisation departments do, because they have got professionalism written all over them. All pieces of the puzzle are being put in place perfectly, now let’s hope the execution will be as great as the preparation:).

2 Likes