Topic: [NXT] Decentralized Asset Exchange Discussion Thread - page 6. (Read 31346 times)

There was a bug in the code that was released a couple days ago. A new version just came out today that supposedly fixes it. You should download & install the latest version.

I don't have any Test Nxt, but keep asking around and someone will send you some.

[1] - Could somebody send me some text NxT for Wesley's web interface testnet use ? (When I try to use the 'send test NXT link, I receive an error: "amountNQT" not specified")

[2] - I'm trying to register an asset (using same interface) but get an error when I do so. Is there a guide for the asset registration somewhere that I can use to familiarise myself ?

Thanks !

yes i also would like to know this. does anyone have any news?

when will the asset exchange finally released?

"Weed" is more fungible than BTC so SWIM says

Nice - perhaps we also need something for specific clients (but of course that is up to the creators of those clients to create).

LOL. I mean let the user have the choice. Give the option to hide or not hide.

i don't think its possible not to offer that choice.

have a look

Some times people place bids and asks for psych. effects.

Would it be possible to offer a choice of hidden/not hidden.

so here is a serious issue that i want to get out there and get people thinking about and that is bid orders stored locally rather than on the blokchain. these orders would be present but invisible to anyone except the person placing them (in their client). what do you guys think would be the net effect of these? it seems like they would hold significant advantages to the users so would there be any point at all in publicly displaying your bids? wouldnt this be a sort of market failure where its in the individuals interest to hide his bids and asks but in the communities interest for them to be public? what would cause some people (preferably most people) to display their bids publicly?

I really like the look of the new forum and think it will make us much more effective in discussing and debating Nxt.

to that end, I submitted a new post there: http://107.170.117.237/index.php/topic,35.0.html

It has to do with the currency settlement debate, but I am raising new issues that haven't been addressed. Please feel free to comment, especially Ian.

Can anyone tell me the best place to report bugs for Wesley's client?

The two most obvious uses would be as equity shares in a company, or as "bearer tokens."

A "bearer token" means that anyone that sends that token back to the issuer will receive something for it.

For instance, Anon136 had the idea of issuing tokens that would correspond to a specific type of 1 oz. silver coin.

He would sell these tokens on the asset exchange for enough money to cover his cost + shipping to the United States + some profit for himself.

So if he has 500 silver coins in his vault, he can sell 500 tokens redeemable for a 1 oz silver coin, including shipping.

Now these tokens can be traded freely on the exchange and function as a sort of currency. If one day I decide that I would rather hold the coin in my hand than just own it digitally, I can send my token back to Anon and he will mail me the silver coin.

That is one example. There are novel ways of using these assets to raise capital to start a small business, as well.

If a new exchange creates Nxt assets, I buy some of them for 10.000 Nxt, what can I do with those assets then? What benefits can it bring to me?

It will have to be non-unique as JL has already agreed and made the changes that Asset naming is to be "non-unique".

Trying to "get around it" by saying it is a secondary name is allowing listings such as:

Software:Microsoft
Hardware:Microsoft

where Microsoft is a squatted alias (thus we are now allowing "multiple" scam listings rather than even just the one).

New version at http://nxtra.org/nxt-client/

Basically, I changed asset issuance;

See this screen below, you'll see there are a bunch of extra settings. The most important of which is the suffix.

Now that the asset exchange allows non-unique names you'll see duplicate listings. I don't like this. Now, in the future I will show as XYZ.001, XYZ.002 etc (it doesn't yet now for technical reasons), but even that is not a good solution. We need some kind of branding.

That's why I added a suffix field. This field should be set to an alias you control.

This allows you to brand your asset. For example, if you sell gold, instead of it being displayed like "gold.012" you can display as "gold.yourname".

The prefix (gold) is not unique, the suffix is (since it's an alias which is already unique).



There are a few other fields also like tags but I don't really use these now. I added this because CFB is also adding tagging capability to his digital goods store. However, he is doing it server side, I'm doing it client side. I don't like that. I would like for both api's (asset exchange and DGS) to have as much in common as possible). I'm only adding tagging here as a proof of concept at the moment.

Anyway, this is how an asset with a suffix looks like in the sidebar:



This too I would like to see integrated on the server side, as an extra field in the assets table. Why? Because right now I have to do double the requests; I have to first fetch the asset, if it has an alias assigned to it, fetch the alias and check to see if it belongs to the asset issuer (if not it is not displayed). So this is not as efficient, and since it's a field that can never change, it doesn't make sense not to integrate it in to the asset exchange table.

Of course, only if you guys (the community) like this feature.

Please let me know your feedback on this. I think it solves all the issues; we have a non-unique prefix and a brandable, unique suffix.

Thanks to pandaisftw and jl777 for the ideas.

Test this, and let me know if you find any bugs or have suggestions.

Donations appreciated at 8189784314684138350

if they could keep there quality consistent enough than it could work. the thing is that there probably wouldnt be a huge advantage for mr green of allowing people to trade greens dank tokens amongst themselves rather than just selling to them directly. though there could potentially be the advantage of giving him some really solid price signals to help in the running of his business. i may in fact have been wrong about this. it may infact be good for mr green if he produces a steady supply of reliable constant quality, not so good for some guy who gets meth or something from different sources all of the time with varying quality. good for producers themselves who can guarantee a constant quality and constant supply, bad for resellers who just resell what ever they can get their hands on.

Yes - we are going to have to consider a few things about how AT and AE will interact to help with the above and with other things to do with the creation of a DAC.

Maybe via AT.