Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 209. (Read 2761645 times)

There is already account ID that is unique. Let users do the research and force them to add the legitimate asset issuer to their trust list.  Then display only those assets to the user. What's wrong with this scheme? Can anyone explain? This will reduce (if not outright kill)  scam.

Unique name is really bad idea. If I issue "bitcoin" as an asset, then I am the only owner of that name for ever, even if I don't have any bitcoins.  No one is able to use that  name again. I am forever squatting on it. That sounds really bad.  


 

I've posted this before....


The dip - some FUD but more importantly NXT stakeholders improving distribution by selling....

The rise - My personal view I think NXT is breaking through in technology and innovation while others are just talking about it.... The first two of these are evident in this thread, the 3rd one, driving use, is harder but I'm sure as some of the innovations which are very close are delivered then we will see this happen.

EDIT: I think its this community that helps drive our independence from the bitcoin world...

i do not know what to attribute the price swing to but i just wanted to point out that i also have noticed the striking independence from bitcoins price. not just in this swing but in general always nxt has been like that. to me its EXTREMELY long term bullish, no other altcoin behaves this way that i am aware of. for better or worse nxt is its own animal entirely.

I have no problem with hierarchical names *provided that no part is unique*.

As stated the reason for preventing unique Asset names is to "help stop people from being easily scammed".

We do already have a "unique id" for each Asset - it's just that Wesley "doesn't like to show numbers".

So the issue is a "safety/security design measure" being overridden by a UI "display preference" (a bit like removing the seat belts from the car because "they look ugly").

I like the hierarchical names that were proposed for XCP a few days back.  If that's not going to happen for Nxt, I think asset names should be generated by the client using a hash.  The description would then contain a "name" as well as a description.  If someone is looking for your asset, the hash would be a unique tag that you could provide to verify the correct one.  This is similar to how offical NRS releases have a SHA hash associated with them.

I'm hashing SHA-256 on nxtp00l.org.. but interest seems to be dropping so I may move my miner..
Are you guys running both this and hashrate? I'm confused about that.
Also what do you have in this space on hashrate?  - site only shows the scrypt stats which is why I haven't used it.

I can see this becoming another big circle - and while we are at it with circles again I will point out that Wesley's "suffix" for an Asset name *will support scammers*.

There was a very good reason why JL *removed* unique Asset names - to use these "suffixes" which are tied to "aliases" would *undo* the very point of the change.

Right at the moment there are *two* CIYAM Assets in testnet.

According to this "suffix" idea one could use the alias say CIYAM to show you the "real one".

*except*

I don't own the alias CIYAM in testnet - so actually it would be showing you the "fake one".

I've been thinking about limiting trading pairs to only nxt crosses and whether that's possible and i think it is. The only thing is that if people in the other camp were super stubborn than we could potentially get a fork and get 2 separate nxt's one with and one without alt crosses. I would say that there are definitely very good reasons to want to limit crosses to nxt but if people really felt so strongly about it as to force a fork than i would back down, it isn't THAT big of a deal. The world would keep spinning even if people traded other crosses.

*edit* just remember that if we are competing with other people and they have crosses all over the place with everything trading against everything else and we are committed to crossing everything against nxt, our markets would be THE go to place for prices and any orders that are even reasonably large. Large orders would just move the other thinner markets too much in the process for it for anyone big to play there. *edit2* unless they bought a little bit of everything and executed trades on every cross at the same time, but who wants to deal with that.

+ Very well said (the whole post).  Trades can be denominated in any currency. BUT, if there is any attempt to force traders to use a particular currency/token, then it must be NXT and nothing else. In other words, free for all, or only NXT. I hope it will be implemented this way, provided there are no serious technical issues.

A decentralized, flexible trading platform with low fees, multisig gateways, plus special high end features using AT will make Nxt AE a class of its own!

 

Nxt is on the way to moon...

heck hashrate.org has paid out nearly 5000 NXT in the last couple of days in return for miners contributing scrypt hashrate!!!

+1

Even though NXT is "GREEN" doesn't mean we should just forget about the many mining rigs that are available that won't go away any time soon. I've used my mining rig prior to the NXT multipools to mine BTC then convert to NXT. This cuts down on one step The NXT mining pools do nothing but help NXT go up with all the alt-clones go down because of how they work.

The way I view it might as well use mining rigs for as long as can if it's available. Cater towards the many instead of the few.

yes,great enormous works

Let's say you bought one in the olden days, you can still make money using it but realize that Nxt is the one going up in the long term.

Plus, you mine their coins, dump them on their market and buy Nxt... Nxt goes up, other coin goes down

Keep in mind this is also one reason that big companies aren't going to start accepting Bitcoin soon, Amazon does 4.9 billion dollars in sales, now people would have to start buying Bitcoin's, Amazon would accept them, and use Bitpay to dump them back onto the market.. maybe there would be an equilibrium but I actually think that the price would start going down.. 9 times out of 10 people aren't going to buy Nxt just to use them to purchase an item at Amazon but if you buy something at Amazon, they'll dump Nxt onto the market.  So unless people refill their wallets for everything spend, the price will actually start going down.

Us Nxt as a platform to facilitate transactions in a currency better suited to grow or keep a more stable value, and the price stays fairly even.  I actually have an idea in mind for a perfect currency to run on top of Nxt that would be more stable and more trusted by both sides to retain it's value.

Nxt still maintains it's value and it's valuable because you buy Nxt to run services that require the forgers be fed.  Anytime a transaction goes through, you have to at least own enough Nxt to feed the forgers, so you have to own Nxt, say everyone buy $50 worth, enough to send a NxtTxt, you could still hold onto Nxt and at time of purchase convert it to the currency running on top of Nxt to be held by the party on the other end, you need to pay in Nxt anytime you use a Nxt smart contract.  

And you do still make sure that Nxt can be used for purchases.

allwelder: smoking is bad, but poeple still smoke

I just mean there is no mining in Nxt.
So why and how use these hash power of specialized rig for Nxt mining? principle?

so they decided to accept Nxt, but a problem is - how can I hide this from my gf?
http://toronto.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-jewellery-watches-Crypto-Jeweler-Buy-diamonds-gold-and-silver-with-Bitcoin-W0QQAdIdZ576680963

empties are worth 10¢