NEM Node Rewards (please give feedback)

General Discussion
#41

To be honest I don't understand what is it stands for:

> The high performance node must use the private key of the (delegated) remote account of the deposit account as the bootkey.

Could somebody explain? I definitely don't want to store the key there, but feel that I not understand something...


It's the priv-key of the remote account which can safely be stored on a vps since noone can access your funds through it. That's why you need to active delegated harvesting for that account. This results in the importance being transfered to the remote account while the funds are staying where they are.
#42



the truth is, we don't know for sure how the community will react.  this is the first time something like this has been done

It seems that Dash (former Darkcoin) have very similar approach.


They have a deposit for their masternodes. The only thing similar about that is the opt-in - the purpose is comletely different. They are using it to secure the network while in NEM it's - for now anyway - only to reward people who run nodes.


There are more differences too.  Dash's masternodes are a security risk according to some where as NEM's would only add security.  The nodes are funded by inflation, so where a person feels like they are getting richer, actually they aren't as 1/10 of the pie is still 1/10 of the pie, but worse, not all of the money for masternodes actually goes to the node managers, some of it goes to projects like paying developers money. 

I actually reviewed Dash a little bit.  The thing they have in common with NEM is that both pay for nodes, but where the money comes from, how it is divided, services rendered, how many nodes are needed are all quite different. 
#43




the truth is, we don't know for sure how the community will react.  this is the first time something like this has been done

It seems that Dash (former Darkcoin) have very similar approach.


They have a deposit for their masternodes. The only thing similar about that is the opt-in - the purpose is comletely different. They are using it to secure the network while in NEM it's - for now anyway - only to reward people who run nodes.


There are more differences too.  Dash's masternodes are a security risk according to some where as NEM's would only add security.  The nodes are funded by inflation, so where a person feels like they are getting richer, actually they aren't as 1/10 of the pie is still 1/10 of the pie, but worse, not all of the money for masternodes actually goes to the node managers, some of it goes to projects like paying developers money. 

I actually reviewed Dash a little bit.  The thing they have in common with NEM is that both pay for nodes, but where the money comes from, how it is divided, services rendered, how many nodes are needed are all quite different.


Is there any actual proof that Dashs masternode system isn't secure ? I've seen loads of talk about it but it seemed to be just people hating.

Let's not hijack the topic though :)
#44





the truth is, we don't know for sure how the community will react.  this is the first time something like this has been done

It seems that Dash (former Darkcoin) have very similar approach.


They have a deposit for their masternodes. The only thing similar about that is the opt-in - the purpose is comletely different. They are using it to secure the network while in NEM it's - for now anyway - only to reward people who run nodes.


There are more differences too.  Dash's masternodes are a security risk according to some where as NEM's would only add security.  The nodes are funded by inflation, so where a person feels like they are getting richer, actually they aren't as 1/10 of the pie is still 1/10 of the pie, but worse, not all of the money for masternodes actually goes to the node managers, some of it goes to projects like paying developers money. 

I actually reviewed Dash a little bit.  The thing they have in common with NEM is that both pay for nodes, but where the money comes from, how it is divided, services rendered, how many nodes are needed are all quite different.


Is there any actual proof that Dashs masternode system isn't secure ? I've seen loads of talk about it but it seemed to be just people hating.

Let's not hijack the topic though :)


I don't have any proof.  Could just be haters.

moving on....
#45

We thought that activating delegated harvesting and using that 'delegated private key' as the bootkey for the node (which you want to use to participate in the node reward program) is a good way to identify the node. Our measurement VPSes then just have to look up the original account for the known delegated account and check if the balance is above the needed 'deposit balance'.

The NCC gui can't activate delegated harvesting for multisig accounts till now, but this is just a missing feature. Technically that is no problem and I think this feature needs to be implemented before the node reward program starts, so this is no issue any more then.

#46

is there a guide on setting up a node for the non-techie?

I have my own server, but am not that comfortable with command lines and what not …

#47

is there a guide on setting up a node for the non-techie?

I have my own server, but am not that comfortable with command lines and what not ...


http://blog.nem.io/easy-configuration-guide-opening-port-7890/

If you have your own server your skill level is more than high enough. Setting up a full node basically amounts to step 1) open ports 7890, step 2) start NEM, 3) check nembex to make sure you can see your node name.
#48

node rewards are just for public nodes not for individual harversters (local or delagated) if i understand right ?

#49

node rewards are just for public nodes not for individual harversters (local or delagated) if i understand right ?


Any node that fullfilles the required performance parameters is eligible even if you don't let others harvest on your node.
#50

I had this idea, what do you think?

what about 3 million XEM deposit balance to opt-in to the program, but every additional node only needs 500k XEM (or 100k?) more and there is a maximum of 10 nodes to avoid that people run hundrets of nodes (centralization problem).

that way people can help us with more than 1 node easily but we still dont have centralization problems.
#51

Ok, I have a suggestion on how the XEM requirements and reward structure should be done…

Allow ANYONE to run a node, similar to how it is now, but based on the XEM held for the node (i.e. 3M as suggested by you guys) the reward structure changes. Those with 3M deposit per node earn max reward for the node, 2M-2.99M earn max reward less 25%, 1M-1.99M earn max reward less 50%, and 500k-999k earn max reward less 75%. Anyone with less than 500k XEM for a node earns 0 reward, but still has the ability to run a node. If there is x number of XEM required for a node, and that never changes, it doesn't make NEM MasterNodes any better or worse than all the other coins out there already running masternodes. This method can be hardcoded into NEM and would never need to be adjusted in the future releases.

To be clear, I coming at this not knowing anything about NEM until the wallets were actually released and NEM launched. I don't know anything about stakes or redemption, and even at the proposed reward structure for nodes outlined above I'm still about 370,000 XEM shy of earning any reward for a node. The intent here is to create something NEW without excluding the little guys. It needs to be better than all of the other altcoins out there.

EDIT: another thought here…I don't know how the masternodes work for the other altcoins or how the balance for each is recorded and held, but why not just make an additional line in the config.properties file to say masternode=true/false and keyformasternode=xxxxx, release an updated NIS with another key (masternode key), and within the network only allow the masternode key to be used at one time, on a single node. This allows users to keep their balances in their personal wallet. If they empty their wallet, then the masternode automatically detects that the wallet is below the required threshold required to run and stops broadcasting until it detects the the required XEM back in the local wallet.

2nd EDIT: if masternodekey is created then there is literally 0 risk for those running nodes. They don't have to deposit their XEM anywhere. They are safe and secure, parked at home in their local wallet.

Does that even make any sense??

#52

Ok, I have a suggestion on how the XEM requirements and reward structure should be done...

Allow ANYONE to run a node, similar to how it is now, but based on the XEM held for the node (i.e. 3M as suggested by you guys) the reward structure changes. Those with 3M deposit per node earn max reward for the node, 2M-2.99M earn max reward less 25%, 1M-1.99M earn max reward less 50%, and 500k-999k earn max reward less 75%. Anyone with less than 500k XEM for a node earns 0 reward, but still has the ability to run a node. If there is x number of XEM required for a node, and that never changes, it doesn't make NEM MasterNodes any better or worse than all the other coins out there already running masternodes. This method can be hardcoded into NEM and would never need to be adjusted in the future releases.

To be clear, I coming at this not knowing anything about NEM until the wallets were actually released and NEM launched. I don't know anything about stakes or redemption, and even at the proposed reward structure for nodes outlined above I'm still about 370,000 XEM shy of earning any reward for a node. The intent here is to create something NEW without excluding the little guys. It needs to be better than all of the other altcoins out there.

EDIT: another thought here...I don't know how the masternodes work for the other altcoins or how the balance for each is recorded and held, but why not just make an additional line in the config.properties file to say masternode=true/false and keyformasternode=xxxxx, release an updated NIS with another key (masternode key), and within the network only allow the masternode key to be used at one time, on a single node. This allows users to keep their balances in their personal wallet. If they empty their wallet, then the masternode automatically detects that the wallet is below the required threshold required to run and stops broadcasting until it detects the the required XEM back in the local wallet.

2nd EDIT: if masternodekey is created then there is literally 0 risk for those running nodes. They don't have to deposit their XEM anywhere. They are safe and secure, parked at home in their local wallet.

Does that even make any sense??


This isn't about masternodes. Anyone can run nodes even without a single XEM.
You say yourself that you heavent read up on nem or the propsed reward structure. I'm wondering how it makes sense to propose an improvement for something if you don't know much about it  ???
#53

masternodes are kind of centralized and ponzi, it works fine for get rich quick alts but it's not good for a serious crypto like nem  :slight_smile:

Hell even dpos seems to be masternodes with a different name  :slight_smile:

Anyway don't know why we're talking about that since it has nothing to do with how nem works.

As for rewards even with something as low as 500K 9 billions/ 500 000 = 18 000 nodes max, less given actual amount of nem on the market. I don't think there is a way to prevent people from running multiple nodes if they want to.

Now how long does the reward program is supposed to last ?

#54

Allow ANYONE to run a node, similar to how it is now, but based on the XEM held for the node (i.e. 3M as suggested by you guys) the reward structure changes. Those with 3M deposit per node earn max reward for the node, 2M-2.99M earn max reward less 25%, 1M-1.99M earn max reward less 50%, and 500k-999k earn max reward less 75%. Anyone with less than 500k XEM for a node earns 0 reward, but still has the ability to run a node. If there is x number of XEM required for a node, and that never changes, it doesn't make NEM MasterNodes any better or worse than all the other coins out there already running masternodes. This method can be hardcoded into NEM and would never need to be adjusted in the future releases.

(Adjustments are needed anyway, because when XEM price changes a lot, we can't leave it like this. That is for sure. But that is no problem.)
The idea to scale that a bit is not bad, but it would make the system a bit more complicated of course. Question is, if it's worth it. I'm not sure, have to think more about it / would like to hear some opinions about this.


[...] why not just make an additional line in the config.properties file to say masternode=true/false and keyformasternode=xxxxx, release an updated NIS with another key (masternode key), and within the network only allow the masternode key to be used at one time, on a single node. This allows users to keep their balances in their personal wallet. If they empty their wallet, then the masternode automatically detects that the wallet is below the required threshold required to run and stops broadcasting until it detects the the required XEM back in the local wallet.

What happens if people use an existing "masternode key" for their node?
Another problem: Soon NIS will be open source, so people could just manipulate the software so it keeps running even if the balance is below the threshold.


if masternodekey is created then there is literally 0 risk for those running nodes. They don't have to deposit their XEM anywhere. They are safe and secure, parked at home in their local wallet.

With our current proposal people don't have to deposit their XEM "anywhere". They keep it in their own accounts of course, zero trust is needed for that "deposit account". Nobody has the private key of that deposit account but the user himself.



As for rewards even with something as low as 500K 9 billions/ 500 000 = 18 000 nodes max, less given actual amount of nem on the market. I don't think there is a way to prevent people from running multiple nodes if they want to.

We don't want to prevent people from running multiple nodes if they want to. We want to prevent people from running multiple nodes and GET REWARDS for that ;)
If people try to increase their power over NEM, they have to pay for it (buy a lot of coins, pay for running a lot of nodes). Otherwise centralization will be an issue.


Now how long does the reward program is supposed to last ?

Forever... We want to convert it step by step into a self sustaining program. Reread the proposal ;)
#55


Allow ANYONE to run a node, similar to how it is now, but based on the XEM held for the node (i.e. 3M as suggested by you guys) the reward structure changes. Those with 3M deposit per node earn max reward for the node, 2M-2.99M earn max reward less 25%, 1M-1.99M earn max reward less 50%, and 500k-999k earn max reward less 75%. Anyone with less than 500k XEM for a node earns 0 reward, but still has the ability to run a node. If there is x number of XEM required for a node, and that never changes, it doesn't make NEM MasterNodes any better or worse than all the other coins out there already running masternodes. This method can be hardcoded into NEM and would never need to be adjusted in the future releases.

(Adjustments are needed anyway, because when XEM price changes a lot, we can't leave it like this. That is for sure. But that is no problem.)
The idea to scale that a bit is not bad, but it would make the system a bit more complicated of course. Question is, if it's worth it. I'm not sure, have to think more about it / would like to hear some opinions about this.


[...] why not just make an additional line in the config.properties file to say masternode=true/false and keyformasternode=xxxxx, release an updated NIS with another key (masternode key), and within the network only allow the masternode key to be used at one time, on a single node. This allows users to keep their balances in their personal wallet. If they empty their wallet, then the masternode automatically detects that the wallet is below the required threshold required to run and stops broadcasting until it detects the the required XEM back in the local wallet.

What happens if people use an existing "masternode key" for their node?
Another problem: Soon NIS will be open source, so people could just manipulate the software so it keeps running even if the balance is below the threshold.


if masternodekey is created then there is literally 0 risk for those running nodes. They don't have to deposit their XEM anywhere. They are safe and secure, parked at home in their local wallet.

With our current proposal people don't have to deposit their XEM "anywhere". They keep it in their own accounts of course, zero trust is needed for that "deposit account". Nobody has the private key of that deposit account but the user himself.



As for rewards even with something as low as 500K 9 billions/ 500 000 = 18 000 nodes max, less given actual amount of nem on the market. I don't think there is a way to prevent people from running multiple nodes if they want to.

We don't want to prevent people from running multiple nodes if they want to. We want to prevent people from running multiple nodes and GET REWARDS for that ;)
If people try to increase their power over NEM, they have to pay for it (buy a lot of coins, pay for running a lot of nodes). Otherwise centralization will be an issue.


Now how long does the reward program is supposed to last ?

Forever... We want to convert it step by step into a self sustaining program. Reread the proposal ;)


The intent of masternodekey is that it's only usable on a single node. If another node is booted up with the same key as another it will not allow that node to run, or it'll allow it to run, but won't receive any reward.
#56


Ok, I have a suggestion on how the XEM requirements and reward structure should be done...

Allow ANYONE to run a node, similar to how it is now, but based on the XEM held for the node (i.e. 3M as suggested by you guys) the reward structure changes. Those with 3M deposit per node earn max reward for the node, 2M-2.99M earn max reward less 25%, 1M-1.99M earn max reward less 50%, and 500k-999k earn max reward less 75%. Anyone with less than 500k XEM for a node earns 0 reward, but still has the ability to run a node. If there is x number of XEM required for a node, and that never changes, it doesn't make NEM MasterNodes any better or worse than all the other coins out there already running masternodes. This method can be hardcoded into NEM and would never need to be adjusted in the future releases.

To be clear, I coming at this not knowing anything about NEM until the wallets were actually released and NEM launched. I don't know anything about stakes or redemption, and even at the proposed reward structure for nodes outlined above I'm still about 370,000 XEM shy of earning any reward for a node. The intent here is to create something NEW without excluding the little guys. It needs to be better than all of the other altcoins out there.

EDIT: another thought here...I don't know how the masternodes work for the other altcoins or how the balance for each is recorded and held, but why not just make an additional line in the config.properties file to say masternode=true/false and keyformasternode=xxxxx, release an updated NIS with another key (masternode key), and within the network only allow the masternode key to be used at one time, on a single node. This allows users to keep their balances in their personal wallet. If they empty their wallet, then the masternode automatically detects that the wallet is below the required threshold required to run and stops broadcasting until it detects the the required XEM back in the local wallet.

2nd EDIT: if masternodekey is created then there is literally 0 risk for those running nodes. They don't have to deposit their XEM anywhere. They are safe and secure, parked at home in their local wallet.

Does that even make any sense??


This isn't about masternodes. Anyone can run nodes even without a single XEM.
You say yourself that you heavent read up on nem or the propsed reward structure. I'm wondering how it makes sense to propose an improvement for something if you don't know much about it  ???



It was his first post and he was just thinking out loud.  They were interesting thoughts too.  ;)
#57


Ok, I have a suggestion on how the XEM requirements and reward structure should be done...

Allow ANYONE to run a node, similar to how it is now, but based on the XEM held for the node (i.e. 3M as suggested by you guys) the reward structure changes. Those with 3M deposit per node earn max reward for the node, 2M-2.99M earn max reward less 25%, 1M-1.99M earn max reward less 50%, and 500k-999k earn max reward less 75%. Anyone with less than 500k XEM for a node earns 0 reward, but still has the ability to run a node. If there is x number of XEM required for a node, and that never changes, it doesn't make NEM MasterNodes any better or worse than all the other coins out there already running masternodes. This method can be hardcoded into NEM and would never need to be adjusted in the future releases.

To be clear, I coming at this not knowing anything about NEM until the wallets were actually released and NEM launched. I don't know anything about stakes or redemption, and even at the proposed reward structure for nodes outlined above I'm still about 370,000 XEM shy of earning any reward for a node. The intent here is to create something NEW without excluding the little guys. It needs to be better than all of the other altcoins out there.

EDIT: another thought here...I don't know how the masternodes work for the other altcoins or how the balance for each is recorded and held, but why not just make an additional line in the config.properties file to say masternode=true/false and keyformasternode=xxxxx, release an updated NIS with another key (masternode key), and within the network only allow the masternode key to be used at one time, on a single node. This allows users to keep their balances in their personal wallet. If they empty their wallet, then the masternode automatically detects that the wallet is below the required threshold required to run and stops broadcasting until it detects the the required XEM back in the local wallet.

2nd EDIT: if masternodekey is created then there is literally 0 risk for those running nodes. They don't have to deposit their XEM anywhere. They are safe and secure, parked at home in their local wallet.

Does that even make any sense??


This isn't about masternodes. Anyone can run nodes even without a single XEM.
You say yourself that you heavent read up on nem or the propsed reward structure. I'm wondering how it makes sense to propose an improvement for something if you don't know much about it  ???


Does it really matter that I'm not as "seasoned" as you in regards to NEM information? The intent here is only to help. If you don't want my help or community support I'll gladly take it elsewhere. I've been around crypto long enough and involved in enough projects to come up with a few good ideas (in my opinion...).  I'm on freenode IRC regularly. Feel free to join so we can discuss.
#58

Just join telegram to discuss things. That is where 100+ people are.

#59



Ok, I have a suggestion on how the XEM requirements and reward structure should be done...

Allow ANYONE to run a node, similar to how it is now, but based on the XEM held for the node (i.e. 3M as suggested by you guys) the reward structure changes. Those with 3M deposit per node earn max reward for the node, 2M-2.99M earn max reward less 25%, 1M-1.99M earn max reward less 50%, and 500k-999k earn max reward less 75%. Anyone with less than 500k XEM for a node earns 0 reward, but still has the ability to run a node. If there is x number of XEM required for a node, and that never changes, it doesn't make NEM MasterNodes any better or worse than all the other coins out there already running masternodes. This method can be hardcoded into NEM and would never need to be adjusted in the future releases.

To be clear, I coming at this not knowing anything about NEM until the wallets were actually released and NEM launched. I don't know anything about stakes or redemption, and even at the proposed reward structure for nodes outlined above I'm still about 370,000 XEM shy of earning any reward for a node. The intent here is to create something NEW without excluding the little guys. It needs to be better than all of the other altcoins out there.

EDIT: another thought here...I don't know how the masternodes work for the other altcoins or how the balance for each is recorded and held, but why not just make an additional line in the config.properties file to say masternode=true/false and keyformasternode=xxxxx, release an updated NIS with another key (masternode key), and within the network only allow the masternode key to be used at one time, on a single node. This allows users to keep their balances in their personal wallet. If they empty their wallet, then the masternode automatically detects that the wallet is below the required threshold required to run and stops broadcasting until it detects the the required XEM back in the local wallet.

2nd EDIT: if masternodekey is created then there is literally 0 risk for those running nodes. They don't have to deposit their XEM anywhere. They are safe and secure, parked at home in their local wallet.

Does that even make any sense??


This isn't about masternodes. Anyone can run nodes even without a single XEM.
You say yourself that you heavent read up on nem or the propsed reward structure. I'm wondering how it makes sense to propose an improvement for something if you don't know much about it  ???


Does it really matter that I'm not as "seasoned" as you in regards to NEM information? The intent here is only to help. If you don't want my help or community support I'll gladly take it elsewhere. I've been around crypto long enough and involved in enough projects to come up with a few good ideas (in my opinion...).  I'm on freenode IRC regularly. Feel free to join so we can discuss.


You could help more if you actually read up on the topic no ? I mean you wouldn't have written the better part of your post if you had read up. Is it really that rude of me to point that out ?
My intention wasn't to make anyone feel unwelcome.
#60

I would need to have an average upload speed of 200kB (Kilobyte) = 1600kb (1.6 Mbit), right? Why so high? Is there a special reason?


How are ping times measured? Will there be several nodes distributed over the globe and the best result is kept?  How do you care about latency because of physical node distance?