Topic: [neㄘcash, ᨇcash, net⚷eys, or viᖚes?] Name AnonyMint's vapor coin? - page 57. (Read 95279 times)

I own that name (or maybe it is only Prvt which someone pointed out could be pervert lol, but I think I registered both and I started an Android app iPrivy in 2014 but stopped coding it). I should offer to one of the anonymous coins, such as BBR.

Please vote.

I think Sync is going to grow on you all over time. The block chain should always be in sync and not only every 10 minutes such as in Bitcoin. The programmable block chain should always be in sync without needing every mining node to verify every script (that was the key scaling design flaws of Ethereum).

I think ion and sync are the strongest names so far, Clickz/vibe/zing all sounds very dated. The best I have to offer is Privy.

When looking at the definition I thought I nailed it



But unfortunately I forgot about this...



Others I wasnt too sure about but thought I would include them anyway

nutrino (Neutrinos)
tchyn / tak-ee-on (Tachyons)
Lumi (Superluminosity)
Indy (Independence? Might be boardline cheese)
01 (Would make for a nice logo, but not really enough)
Nero

Perhaps the abbreviation names are overused and sometimes hard to make out (which isn't exactly ideal for your company name) . Shame about Privy, sounds quite modern in a twitter/insta/snapchat kinda way.

Naming the coin Time might imply ephemeral money that expires, but time can be captured in a more positive name...

After letting it all sink in, I've decided to go a different direction on the naming.

I've been trying to capture in the name several concepts in descending order of importance:

1.	Group agreement and coherence, i.e. consensus which is the entire point.
2.	Community synergy, group or network effects as the backing of value and purpose.
3.	Instantaneous.
4.	Technophile technological appeal.
5.	Intangible value.
6.	Permission-less, autonomous control.
7.	Value that is not too abstract to appreciate. Preferably not alien to technophobes.
8.	Fungible value.
9.	Locomotion store-of-value.

And one trait I do not want in a name:

↯	Similar phonetic misspellings.

Each of the proposed name ideas captured some of those concepts, but no one name captured all of them. Here they are tabulated by score ranking with ↯ breaking ties and contributing a significant negative score.

sync	+1, 2, 3, +4 (8 for syncoin)	≈5
vibe	1, +2, +5, 7	≈8
clickz	+3, 5, 6, +7, 9, ↯	≈2
ion	3, +4, 5, +9	≈6 for i-on
zing	+3, +5, 8, +9, ↯	≈2, ≈7
virtual	4, 5	≈8
metarial	5, ↯	≈4, ≈8

+ means very strong and direct association to the concept.
≈ means a weak or indirect association to the concept.

In the table above, 'clickz' although strong in the most attributes, is entirely lacking the most important point of coherent consensus [1] and the association to group synergy [2] (i.e. the alternative "get along well" definition of 'click' and the indirect association of clicking to social interaction in cyberspace) is weak (i.e. not likely emphasized and recognized by most). Also although 'clicks' is a cybergood that is well appreciated, and is fungible in the sense that a click can be applied to a myriad of things, it is not a universal good and thus pigeon-holes the applicability. It is an efficient/expedient means of relating for example microtransactions but at the cost of losing generality. Also it conflates the goods with the unit, e.g. "1.23 clicks" doesn't mean you get 1.23 opportunities to click a mouse. Examples of generality lost are block chain features such as BlocSign, digital assets, virtual contracts, and goods & services that have nothing to do with clicking such as making a phone call or paying a toll booth. Also 'clickz' has no strong appeal to futurists and technophiles. We justify as the optimum way to convey microtransactions, but is it really? If you are in a videochat, then you ask the person to send you some 'clickz' before you give English lessons. Seems that 'clickz' is not really general enough to be money. Facepalm me.

Since it is very difficult to find one name that hits all the desired attributes, I thought it may be better to have a separate names for the consensus network and the fungible value. It seems to be that 'sync' is the ideal name for the consensus network with block chain scaling, high TX/s, and block chain 2.0 features. Although it was used before, that Sync project appears to be dead or dying (even the coin domain syncclub.net links to some page in chinese), their domains never had just 'sync' nor 'syncoin' nor 'synccoin', and their use was for a colored coin (not their own block chain) and backed assets, thus I don't think they can claim trademark over the use as a block chain and no centralized backing.

Thus I am adding a new proposed name:

sync

For the name of the fungible items, we can choose between:

ions
syncs
syncoins
vibes
virtuals

I am leaning towards individual choice to use either 'syncs' or 'syncoins' for the largest unit, and then we need to choose the smallest unit. My preference for the smallest unit is either 'vibes' or 'virtuals'. Although 'virtuals' is more abstract and generalized, I think 'vibes' will make more sense to more people in a social networking setting. For a purely technical audience, 'ions' is great but the project name 'sync' already satiates the technophile demographic, so shouldn't we select a smallest unit that caters to the masses? Also 'vibes' is sort of wave-like or ambiance which is apt for the minute, particle-like quality of the smallest unit. If you are in a videochat, then you ask the person to send you some 'vibes' or 'syncoins' before you give English lessons, because 'ions' doesn't seem to have any natural (innate) meaning in that context.

If the smallest unit is a millionth of the largest unit and 1 billion large units are created, then in the extreme scenario of widespread adoption if the market cap is $1 trillion with an exchange price of $1000, then each smallest unit is priced at a thousandth of a dollar (a tenth of a penny or cent). In the less extreme scenario that corresponds to some mass adoption if the market cap is $1 billion with an exchange price of $1, then each smallest unit is priced at a millionth of a dollar. Disclaimer: these are not projections nor expectations of future value, rather scenarios that if reached would have the stated relationships.

In both of those scenarios the user can decide whether to quote the price in the largest or smallest units. Large units would always be expressed with a floating point number (number will a decimal portion) unless they are whole number multiples, and smallest units would be expressed with whole numbers and with 'k' appended to the number if the quantity has only zeros for the last three digits. So for example, one could alternatively quote a price as "1.23 sync(oin)s" or "1230k vibes". A micropayment could be quoted for example "0.000123 sync(oin)s" or "123 vibes".

We could allow values to be expressed in tenths, hundreds, or thousands of the smallest unit, to add more range without burdening the normal price quotation usage with extra digits.

I am visualizing a logo for 'sync' where the right side of the 'n' and the left side of the 'c' are interlocking gears. Or especially if using allcaps, then the 'C' has clock hands drawn inside of it.

The logo for 'vibe' will be a background of wavy lines (e.g. in black) with the word 'vibe' etched out as same color as the background (e.g. in white).

The logo for 'ion' would be an orbiting ion for the 'o' and a lightning bolt come from left, bottom, behind, and through the 'n' to the upper, right. The 'i' could optionally have the same treatment as for 'clickZ'.

For 'clickZ' I thought of making the dot on the 'i' have the "clicked" lines as I showed in the prior post at the finger point . The 'Z' would have the fast blurring trails effect I showed for the Downloadfast logo but in the transposed direction.

For 'virtual' the letters would take the places of the nodes shown on the network .

If we don't use ion (ion.cash domain), I will offer to donate this smooth (appreciation for all his interaction and help in the past) if he wishes to use it instead of Aeon. Or to another serious coin. It is a good name especially for a technology (technophile) focused coin.

Edit: I don't feel particularly great in my conscience in discovering that the name I like a lot 'sync' (which has been in mind for the past few days) was used before in another crypto project. However, generally speaking a trademark only applies globally if their venture had global reach and/or has the financial power to enforce their trademark. But this name was used for a project that hasn't gained any significant adoption, thus has nearly 0 reach nearly a year after launch. And the former project was apparently not even a block chain and only a colored coin on the Bitcoin block chain with some hokey idea of selling domain assets to back the colored coins. It appears to be failed concept (backed colored coin assets on a decentralized Bitcoin block chain), very minuscule reach, and not even precisely in the same category. What a shame to waste on a hokey concept, a great name for a block chain synchronicity innovation. Also since it appears to me to be an unregulated investment security, then I believe it is illegal, void, and thus vacated.

Edit#2: I am leaning at the moment very emphatically towards project name Sync (block chain revolution) with social media microunit of 'vibes', probably regardless what the votes say, unless I have a change of thinking. I have to let these names sit with me for some time to be sure I have thought through potential pitfalls.

Clickz is the best from the provided options.
Throwing out other ideas to the community. In brackets possible meaning.
ClickBit (Click money), Talons (sounds cool), Time (universal unit of money), BitChrono (money time), TerraBit (earth money)

p.s. don't know why I associated Bit to Money :-)

Digitz? I like clickz too, it works well with social media.

My favorites are:

clickz
ion
metarial
vibe
virtual

The unit 'virtuals' or 'metarials' is an abstract or futurist name of the essence of what the owner possesses. Whereas, 'clicks' are more descriptive of a good or service a user would associate with the value of these units (and other definition means synergy). The term 'ions' perhaps connotes a unit of fuel for virtual activity. The unit 'vibes' is an abstract good or energy in social networking, so it a more felt form of a fuel for virtual interaction.

The shorter spelling 'clix' as well 'vibe' are competitive with 'ion' in brevity.

The logo for 'click' is likely a . The logo for 'virtual' would be something like or which is artwork I created in 2002. The logo for 'metarial' would signify recursion or self-referential composition/decomposition . Vibe logo might incorporate the concept of waves or resonance .

I am still considering 'ion' as well. Perhaps people can learn to think of it as the "electric charge" (fuel) they need to do actions in virtual reality. The logo would probably be a lighting bolt and/or positively charge ions floating in a cloud . If 'ion' wins out, I won't be upset. I just want to make sure all perspectives have been weighed by voters. Please read the thread before voting.

i·on·o·sphere
īˈänəˌsfi(ə)r/Submit
noun
the layer of the earth's atmosphere that contains a high concentration of ions and free electrons and is able to reflect radio waves. It lies above the mesosphere and extends from about 50 to 600 miles (80 to 1,000 km) above the earth's surface.

Remember even if we don't choose 'ion' as the name, we can use 'ions' as the smallest unit instead of satoshis.

---

Here are various logos in I designed from 1999 - 2002:

I am thinking we need to invent a word for interacting with computers, or the synergy we gain from leverage information technology. Clicking is one of the main actions we do in this more general process. As we move beyond clicking for interfacing with computers, seems we will need a more general term. Any suggestions?

copute
cyberact
cybergize
cybin
cyborgate
digitize
metarealize
quantification
transinate
transpute
virtualize

I had liked the name virtual, but no domains are available, yet virtuals and virtualcash are available in numerous tlds.

Any way from that I thought of another abstract name:

metarial or metareal

Material about material, i.e. the virtual data world. But it is not really catchy. Not many people would get it initially. Very brandable long-term.

An abstract name along that line of thinking would be:

meta

Things about things, block chains about block chains, programs about programs, or values about values which is I guess what money is. Seems too abstract though.

I forgot to say thank you to everyone that participated in this thread. I am grateful for the interaction which spawned the clickz name idea. And I do mean everyone that posted and voted in thread, excluding no one.



Thanks. I prefer clickz because it is more clearly associated with clicks, and avoiding the attrition of confusion is paramount. Although clix is shorter, the spelling might not be as memorable as click+z. Once you start butchering click, then many spellings arise such as clics, klix, klics, klicks, klickz, etc.. So I thought it was better to add z to non-butchered click, so it is click and instead of s then a z, but also I don't really mind if people say "pay me 5 clicks" instead of "pay me 5 clickz" because they are still using the same software and protocol. However, if they say the former and mean instead "pay me 5 clix", although they might be using the same software and protocol as "clix", the is also chance they are using "clics, klix, klics, klicks, klickz" protocol instead. In short or more quantitatively, I prefer the choice with the minimum Levenshtein distance from clicks.

However, I do want to guard against the confusion of copycoins, thus I have registered the following domains due to your feedback:

clickzit.net	($12)
clix.cash	($25)
clix.space	($2)

So we can give the users the option of using 'clickz', 'clix', or 'clickzits" for the largest units of the coin (ion is proposed as the smallest unit), and let the community preference take hold. This should hopefully demotivate copycoins from abusing our name. Also just in case the market prefers 'clix' (in case my logic above on the choice is overpowered by the collective market wisdom).

On 'zing', I like it for the sound, short spelling (although it could be misspelled 'xing'), and association with swiftness and energy, but I think in hindsight that it lacks the target market focus of clickz. And it looks like a rip-off from Microsoft's Bing search engine. I remain open-minded however. My perspective could be colored by my own subjectivity, so I allow time to widen my experience and eyes before becoming totally firm on clickz.


It appears to me to the best. I will be surprised if better name is found for the mass adoption market of microtransactions and block chain scaling. Many investors think in terms of 'picocoin' or 'picopay' but users don't think of microtransaction as small money but rather about features they can access (the monetary exchange should be so small they don't have to think about it and approve each occurrence but instead just click and go), synergies they can obtain, quality upgrades to content, etc.. Degrading all those wonderful qualities by characterizing money as small is a "wtf r they thinking" moment for me. I think I have some marketing skills, but always so do a lot of you and collectively you have more wisdom than I do (so it is matter of instigating this interactive creative process) because there are no bad ideas (from crap ideas spawn winning ideas).

Btw, I am offering some unsolicited brainstorming for the name of Boolberry. I think they are not going to change the name and that may be the best decision. But any way, here are my ideas:

Blurberry
Mixberry
Peekabool
Entangle
Shuffle
Haystack
Entropy (irreversible)
Matrix
Mingle
Obfuscate
Mixalot
Fungible / Fungibit
Blur / Blurbit
Chrochet
Delink
Unchain

Edit: I didn't register clix.one nor clickz.one, which are both available. Seems we don't want the users to think they will only be able to click once or connote restriction of choices.

clickz is a good choice

what about clix?
I prefer zing over anything previously mentioned..

It was mostly general, directed at the entire market. If someone is targeting users of this forum then chances are the audience is altcoin investors/speculators. If another audience is to be pitched for a crowdsale (for example social media users, gamers, mobile users via an app, etc.), then it might not apply. Crypto Kingdom is an interesting middle ground. Despite being pitched on this forum, some people putting money into it are certainly gamers and highly interested in the gameplay elements. Others are very likely viewing it more as speculation. I don't know the proportions.


Wishing you the best on your effort.

I hope the use of the term 'your' is figurative and not literal. I am not, so it doesn't apply to me. I am embarking on an open source project for users, and I hope to get some user crowdfunded funding at some point (when there is a product ready, not now at vaporware). And I have no desire to continue to post in various threads for other altcoins nor promoting to investors. I want to go create actual software that works and does something real. I have been posting a bit in the other block chain scaling coin threads, just to understand their features and see if any technical collaboration is possible. But at some point if I don't go quiet, then you will know there isn't any software coming from me, because as you said up thread, programmers can't program and write in forums at the same time.



Oic. Great. I am thinking more of building platforms for developers than building specific instances and competing with the developers. To scale fast, build APIs and let others build out the specific cases of apps. I might want to build some of my own apps too, but that is tangential to what I think the rapid scaling strategy should be. Me building an app can be a form of activity applicable to designing/debugging/refining/demonstrating an API the app is built on.


I think it is a law of supply and demand. For as long as there is a supply of investors (the demand) eager to be duped or chase pumps, then there will be a demand for an altcoin forum. Perhaps if you have several strong racehorses in the altcoin sphere, the investors all pick a few and stop looking for 2 cent X11/DonaldDuckGravityWell copycoins. Perhaps for as long as Bitcoin fever is pulling in more new "I found God" new adopters, then perhaps it never ceases. Maybe there is a finite limit to the technophile-n00b-gambler demographic. Frankly I really have no idea, I don't think about things like that much. I am thinking about how to spread software to users, be funded, and who knows maybe win the lotto. I have always been interested to challenge myself to see how many users I can get to use my creations. I am trying to beat my 335,000 verified websites with Coolpage in 2001. Internet is 10x larger, so thus my minimum goal is 3+ million real users (not just one-transaction wonders who've since abandoned it). Who knows if I can achieve that (huge doubt at this point with only vaporware). Bitcoin isn't even that large now.

Some of us are totally uninterested in altcoin pumps. I agree that if you want to make money here short term, that's probably all there is. You can do an ICO and built applications somewhere outside, while ignoring what the speculative market does, sure, but 99% of your target market for the ICO is still probably going to be interested in altcoin pumps, so you are somewhat delusional if you don't recognize that's still the market you are in (i.e. that's still all there is).


I don't really know what getgems is doing but it seems to be based on a rich messaging app. Bitcrystals is trying to be backing for in-game assets for a mobile card game. Apparently the developer building the app is behind the most popular mobile game in Japan or something. There are probable some others I don't know what they are doing (we previously discussed how that might be the case for some of the China ones). So I do think there things going on besides this forum and reddit.


Probably what will happen is that a small number of survivors will each have their own communities and there won't be an altcoin community at all, hence no venue for scams. But that could be completely wrong, I'm just speculating.

Yeah, the dating thing is tough. You're stuck in a critical mass/chicken and the egg challenge.

Micro transactions are definitely going to be increasing in relevance as time goes on.

And I love Clickz. Can't believe it's not taken. It's a winner. And everyone knows what a click is. As long as you're not launching in 10 years, I think you're safe.

And no promise from me that goal will be achieved. But thanks for the comment. And heck why not try for the heck of it? Nothing ventured, nothing gained. I'd like to use such a currency myself. I am creating as much to be a user myself as other motivations I have.

In April, I created a dating site and then I couldn't monetize the "per message" sends. So I shut the site down because my model didn't work well with credit cards (need to gradually hook the users into paying by trialing with minimal outlay and I could afford the nor risk the $10,000+ to fund the site with free trialing to reach the necessary economy-of-scale to where the credit card model would work). Also I wanted a PPV model (guys paying the gals, or actually paying member paying non-paying member of any gender or sexual orientation juxtaposition) because it made more sense for what I was trying to do that was unique. But it wasn't going to work that these users weren't going to dump a $25 credit card funded funding to their balance on my site, for such a new and unknown site. Users have become much more adverse to paying for anything, since they can usually find something for free, so they need to see the quality is worth the payment and micropayments makes it possible to deliver much higher quality but users need to see this in action, you can't make it work in a credit card model. There are many other scenarios. This is a deep, deep untapped market in my opinion.

"Build it and they will come" doesn't work. If you really want to make it fly, the block chain protocol is not enough, have to also build out the ecosystem infrastructure and motivate the use cases, e.g. an easier way for sites to integrate micropayments, some social media apps that use micropayments, maybe a blogging app or site that does, etc.. For example, my dating site code is still sitting there, ready to relaunch (also some of that code can be re-deployable for other types of sites). But of course it requires many developers getting interested in an ecosystem to gain momentum. But leading the way can sometimes kickstart that there is a realization based on some initial success. Success tends to cascade from an initial small example or spark, e.g. the 10,000 BTC for a pizza was the defining moment where people realized you could actually use Bitcoin.

Sometimes I wonder if you are blind or if you just refuse to let any one have the last word when they've already refuted your point before you write it. I wrote the younger generation won't dominate "for another generation or so. A decade is more than enough time". See it above?

Tangentially, we both mean the very youngest, because the 20-somethings all are very familiar with the desktops, at least what I've seen in Asia (not just Philippines but also when I was in Hong Kong). It is only in the past few years that I saw people starting to use tablets as a primarily computer and their kids exposed to that. And even then most of them have a desktop in the home and you know kids are very curious. If they've seen a mouse, then they've used it. You can't have something in the house and the kids don't get demand "Daddy can I click the mouse". Tablet only homes are probably still not the majority.


Those are much more vertical market than clicking. Clicking is reasonably ubiquitous (and it includes swiping, pressing, and touching because they can all involve a microtransaction monetization model). Not as ubiquitous as the concept of fungible money, but you can't sell money to users who already have the money they trust and want. Really with Bitcoin we are selling money only to ideologues, scammers, internet gamblers, and others who have some reason to hate regular money. Bitcoin's ecosystem is diversifying into smart contracts and other features that more people might need (but not proven yet). Afaics with Monero you are not even selling money to anyone (or very few such as CryptoKingdom and kudos to rpietila on that), but rather predominately selling a vision of an open source marathon to (IMO naive) investors (who IMO seem to not be able to calculate probabilities very astutely...I could expound on that but prefer not to end up in a long back and forth on that since it is pretty much off topic here). You could argue the probabilities are also risky on any altcoin and then I would go into relative market cap and relative time on the market without significant market adoption, etc.. Any way no need to go there, the point is nobody has really cracked the marketing adoption yet which is also what you seem to be saying too.


I wasn't referring to Bitcoin. I was specifically referring to altcoin pumps. I don't know if any of them get any play outside of BTT and Reddit. I am interested to know of their other marketing avenues.

I don't know where the altcoin community could graduate to that wouldn't have "trolling, scams, and other noise", lol.

Sure, you can hop from coin to coin and make that blanket statement, and you will be wise more than 99% of the time.

I'm not so sure that we have seen a coin launched that will move on to see mass adoption.

The masses have spoken. We don't care.

Please, for the love of God, no more new coins!

Good thing he had that helmet on...

Actually, it was a joke.

But looking back on my post, perhaps I should have added: