Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 210. (Read 2761645 times)

Into 5th!  Looking forward to unseating Peercoin at 4.

I have 1 empty bottle of wine will trade for 2 aspirins.

I have wine, will trade .5cl for 100g hard cheese

are we forking? or is mynxt.info off the chain?

I got 3 emails from mynxt.info tonight saying I had forged blocks.. that can be right. two with payments and they don't show in the explorer..

My 149 average dropped to 108, but that's what you get for rising prices.  

AT is basically an Nxt account that is a "computer program" (which was created with a "Turing complete" instruction set).

I say *basically* because it most likely won't have "all the same abilities" as any "normal" account (and can't use the *real* Nxt API as it is "sandboxed" to using the Nxt AT API).

I think Ethereum's focus on "contracts" is somewhat limited which is why I created the "lottery" use case.

Another:www.nxt123.org

+1 Could not say it better. I think that too.

Is AT just a feature of a truing complete scheme that you have in mind?

Jack, your analysis of too many trading pairs is mathematically sound insofar as it's THEORETICALLY POSSIBLE that the scenario you describe would happen, but you ignore human behavior and examples of markets that exist in reality.

Let's pretend the USA released its control over the oil markets and oil could now be traded in something other than USD.

Do you really think the markets are going to be flooded with "too many oil markets?" Oil / Wheat, Oil / pork bellies, oil / silver, oil / gold, oil / USD, oil / Euro, oil / copper, oil / cement, oil / ethylene oxide, oil / cocaine, oil / soybeans, oil / yen, oil / iron, oil / corn, oil / orange juice, oil / lumber

Yes...they are all theoretically possible, and in effect, that's what you are so worried about. Hopefully you understand how silly it looks when you see it listed that way.

No, even if oil were not forced to be traded in USD (akin to you insisting that everything be priced in NXT), there would be maybe 3 major oil markets

OIL / USD
OIL / EUR
OIL / CNY
And maybe OIL / JPY (Yen)

These 4 markets would be patronized by whatever was most convenient for the participating traders. A trader in Europe would rather bargain in Euros than dollars.

All the other tiny markets (E.g. oil / orange juice) would be specialized to unique players and would constitute a tiny fraction of the trade that happened. The rest of the world could safely ignore them entirely.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY that there will be 5000 asset pairs reducing liquidity. Your Nxt client will filter out those asset pairs of small liquidity, and you'd never even see them. If you own an orange tree farm and want to trade orange juice for gold or oil, then you will have to go looking for that info. It would probably be easier, though, for you to sell your oranges for one of the "top tier" currencies, and use that currency to buy your oil.

Let the market work.

Let people do business however THEY see fit.

Do not try to force people to use YOUR favored currency. That is behavior suited for governments.

NXT will succeed, IF we empower people to do business in THEIR preferred way.

Sure I think options will be possible - the point is "you could do it now" (just requires a 3rd party) as we have a "transfer" mechanism (for those thinking that it is AT that is providing the functionality).

There are going to be also sorts of complicated trading ideas worked out via ATs (or offered by 3rd parties) down the track.

Certain AT programs could allow AE users to place options contracts like puts and calls based on trading pairs in the AE.

EDIT: other AT programs could provide annuity payments from blockchain based assets.

Both "transactions" (in the colloquial sense) could be executed simultaneously in the same "transaction" (using it this time to refer to one record of information in a block not the more colloquial sense i used it in prior). In this way the nxt market wouldn't be moved.

now im starting to think about whether this is the sort of thing that could be stopped even if we wanted to. it may not be that sort of thing.

No - it isn't a "separate" market - an AT is just an "escrow" using the existing AE system.

As I said - "you can already do this" using the Asset Transfer feature - you just need an "escrow" in between (or have to trust each other).

If people are so concerned with this then what they should be asking for is the *removal* of the Asset Transfer feature.

Wouldn't the AT-based marketplace have an orderbook, though? Of say,
USD / OIL
DOGE / OIL
BTC / GLD

Etc??? With a list of bids and asks that people can sift through to decide to accept, or to place their own?

This is what I meant about there being two entirely separate marketplaces.

This is exactly the same as allowing every pair. Every pair include every Nxt pair. No?

There is some misunderstanding about AT and Asset trading.

There is no "magical" direct trading going on here - account A sends X Chips to the AT then account B sends Y Chops to the AT.

Remember an AT is "just like another account" so if you look at the Assets for the AT you would now see:

[AT]
Chips - X
Chops - Y

Now the AT simply decides to "transfer" the Chips and Chops Assets to the opposite parties that "sent them to it".

So there is no "direct" transfer and we haven't changed AE at all.

It is an "atomic" transfer because the AT will either do the swap or refund (so neither side can "cheat").

People can do such transfers "right now" except they have to trust each other or send to a 3rd party. So all we are doing by using an AE is *replacing* an escrow with a program.

I've been thinking about this. Will this mean that we have TWO entirely separate asset exchanges? One will be native to the Nxt core, and denominated only in NXT, and the other will be an entirely separate market operating on an optional DAC/AT? Sort of like a "Nxt plug in?"

I don't see this as being elegant, as it would be nice to have all trades available in one place from the start.

But I am barely able to wrap my head around all this and how it would work, so I'd be curious to hear what others thought.

Sorry Jack, I did not mean to insult. I should have rephrase more correctly, but im not english native. It is difficult for me sometime.

My comment relative to "you don't see far ahead" was related to the overall centralization that pegging nxxt to every thing would lead to. I don't mean personnal attack. In fact I really enfoy this discussion and I value the opinion of other.

Guys in regards to Asset for Asset trading understand 2 important things:

1. Fees in NXT are required.
2. Further fees in NXT are required to create and execute an AT.

Also the idea of adding an alias to an Asset IMO is a *bad* one - you've just let the squatters/scammers back in who now look like they are more legit (because naive people are going to believe that Software.Microsoft really is Microsoft as that's how you've described it to them by calling it "branding").

Just "because you don't like non-unique names" is really not a good reason to *support* scammers (which is how it will be perceived when people work out "they were tricked").