I was just looking at the Ethereum thread, and was wondering: couldn't NXT technically implement what Ethereum is trying to do in a parallel blockchain that allows turing-complete code to execute? IMO Ethereum is interesting, but isn't particularly innovative (not in the way transparent forging is).

A few advantages I see if this is possible within the NXT ecosystem:
1) NXT is already established. No need for massive development of the network, and thus no need for an expensive, over-complicated IPO to get it off the ground.
2) These scripts can interact with other aspects of the NXT ecosystem, which is admittedly much larger in scope than Ethereum will ever be. For example, you can send 0.00001 NXT to "Asset Merchant Rating" script, and you can rate a merchant you had a pleasant/negative experience with, and the program will keep track of it on the parallel blockchain without the bloat that may come if we used AM for this purpose.
3) Take advantage of all the idling CPU power in most nodes. Since NXT client itself does not require much resources to run, perhaps this will give all the miners from PoW-world something to focus on.
4) Provide an increase fees for people willing to participate in the parallel blockchain. People with RPi's can just stick to basic forging, while those running nodes on powerful PC's can additionally use their CPU power to run these programs.
5) NXT has already set the precedent for decentralized development (something I'm rather proud of, and I have to hand it to BCNext, that was a very smart decision), so people making a decentralized effort to create decentralized programs fits the theme rather well.

What's left is to figure out how to integrate a PoW system within a PoS system. But since c-f-b is already working on that, I assume it can be done.

Hey, it's been quiet for some time in here... Let's bring the voting discussion back!

So do we have any practical ideas of reliable voting at all?

The whitepaper is very vague about it, no technical details about how this magical democracy will happen.

This is my take... https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/345619.msg4735849#msg4735849   

Nice. Let me guess: You need some NXT for this? SCNR...

Please focus on energy conservation (which should be dictated by common logic) WITHOUT building the argument around Global Warming.

ahh Voting!
one of my favorite discussions ;-)

Currently read many good aspects here!
I think we need to consider most of them in beta Client.
More and more it becomes clear there is not THE ONE way for VS.
But there are different poll-categories, e.g "assets polls" is different category as "best button-color polls".

The poll initiator should be able to choose boundary conditions depending on poll-topic.
The poll boundary conditions need to be transparent during run time.
To be more constructive lets try to collect some "Voting Models":

general options:

- min. permitted Account Deposit

- min. permitted Account age (Blocks)

- poll duration (Blocks)

- Voting Fee


Voting Models:

+ 1 NXT        ==   1 Vote  { vote = Func(accountBalance) }

+ 1 NXT        ==   x Vote  { x = Func(accountBalance) =  polynom * accountBalance}

+ 1 Account  ==  1 Vote   { vote = Func(accountBalance) =  0.5 * accountBalance}

+ 1 Account  ==  1 Vote   { Jcsarokrin Biometric Authenification: http://juliansarokin.com/100-years-the-future-of-government/}

+ coolmist:  {votingweight = ( 1 similarity ) ^ (4/3) * (accountbalance)^(1/3) * (accountage)^2 (timesvoted)^(3/2)}


no claim to completeness!


We need to discuss selection options too:
[true]    [false]    [abstention]
I think [abstention] provides an important information too.
E.g. a high count of [abstention] tells the poll creator "interesting question buddy, but not this way!!!" ...

It makes sense to collect all ideas to keep the overview.
Please extent the "general options" and "voting models" and "selection options" ideas!!!

Please focus on energy conservation (which should be dictated by common logic) WITHOUT building the argument around Global Warming.

Our friend moved on: http://forum.ethereum.org/index.php?p=/discussion/63/nex#latest

Apparently, we buy NXT as we buy stock from a company. So  1 NXT==  1 Vote is more reasonable. 1 Account  ==  1 Vote is nonsense because account can be created freely and rich people always can split his account into lots of small accounts. 1 NXT ==   x Vote is also impractical. we can't decide which NXT  has more weight. yes, give rich people more power is not democracy, but is the way a real company run.

Totally agreed. You don't want to get in a bitch fight with pro and against.
The proveable thing here is that costs are lower.