Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 267. (Read 2761645 times)

URL can be editable, off chain information and the likes. but Asset is your Business Plan and IPO in one.

No one would buy Apple Stock if all of a sudden it could become worth 1 free song download from iTunes

OK then, you are right, but would it be possible to add an editable field other than description to an asset. That would be usefull i think.

You really better be checking more than just the ID before you invest. Caveat Emptor as they say

Sry James, but i have used you in this thread. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5774788

I hope its ok  

OK then, would it be possible to add an editable field other than description to an asset. That would be usefull i think.

Adjusting the description is adjusting the whole Asset.

Original Asset is what the investors purchase, sell, and value.

IF you can adjust, why not adjust delete the description and make it worthless. If you sold all your shares, now the ASSET owns zero anything.

Who is going to buy that?

its a good solution imo just remember to check the id before you click purchase.

Good news. Only asset ID was needed to be unique anyway. People can put nxt alias in asset description to point to asset owner site or something. That would help differentiate between asset.

Hey by the way, now that non-unique asset names is decided,

Would it be possible to allow to edit asset description if asset owner feel like he needs that?
Let discuss this.

Good news. Only asset ID was needed to be unique anyway. People can put nxt alias in asset description to point to asset owner site or something. That would help differentiate between asset.

Hey by the way,

Would it be possible to allow to edit asset description if asset owner feel like he needs that?
Let discuss this.

It is decided: non-unique asset names

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/commits/122679083641070efc870df625b90b599c9d22c5

It is decided: non-unique asset names

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/commits/122679083641070efc870df625b90b599c9d22c5

it could still collide if someone else registered Anon136.silver10z

2 million Nxt buyer back on bter.

Nope, think bigger, it's something that everyone uses (and is forced to use by some extent), but doesn't really like using due to one factor. NXT removes the factor.

0.01 Nxt would still be a high fee for messaging though... I would recommend a fee of about 0.0001 Nxt per message, if the only thing being sent is a message, the catch is you can only pay that low of a fee if the message is automatically deleted from the blockchain.

I think the messages need to be perceived as being really cheap as we are competing against WhatsApp that offers messaging for 99 cents per year.  The average teen sends 3,339 txts per month!! (http://mashable.com/2010/10/14/nielsen-texting-stats/) This would be about 40,000 txts per year.  Assuming he/she uses WhatsApp, that costs $0.99 per year, that works out to be $0.000025/txt   Assuming Nxt will soon reach 10 cents that would be a fee of 0.00025 Nxt to compete with them on price alone, we also offer encryption but I'd say we really should try to compete when it comes to price as well. Because if we do it right, I do feel like this could be a killer app because we could probably even compete well with them price-wise.  The money made off of this could then compensate for even lower transaction fees and the forgers could be profitable.

And I worked through all the math but just deleted it to avoid clutter, I believe that we could even afford to charge lower than this assuming we delete messages once the app on the other end receives it, after all most text messages will be stored by the local apps on both sides and the blockchain/decentralized storage can be temporary.. only a few seconds in most cases.  Forgers supporting the text messaging would have to be paid for their extra bandwidth though.


Regard facebook built on top of Nxt.. actually I see some sense to that, we can afford to charge people a very low fee per post, that varies based on how long they want to store it, store it using the decentralized storage, the people in charge of make money off of that and use that money to advertise itself and grow a business.  Why would people use it?  Same advantage Dispora has, Diaspora is indeed very similar but I see it being hard to advertise itself, build it into Nxt and I know I would sign up for a Nxtbook account!

it could still collide if someone else registered Anon136.silver10z

Just saw a really good idea on XCP forum:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5773807

It is about asset naming and it is very simple and I think quite effective.
Basically once you own an Asset Name, then you can create a subasset for a much lower fee. this essentially allows branding of the root name and then people will know that anything that starts with that is from the same issuer

So Anon gets his Anon136 asset name. Now he can issue:

Anon136.silver1oz
Anon136.silvershot
Anon136.silveretc

It still has a squatting issue with it, but now the squatters have to squat on the names of the issuers, not the target asset. This is far riskier as if a specific name is taken, there are always others that can be used. Unlike "BTC", which is unique.

If we are going to change the NXTcore for asset names, this one might be worth doing.


James

Just saw a really good idea on XCP forum:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5773807

It is about asset naming and it is very simple and I think quite effective.
Basically once you own an Asset Name, then you can create a subasset for a much lower fee. this essentially allows branding of the root name and then people will know that anything that starts with that is from the same issuer

So Anon gets his Anon136 asset name. Now he can issue:

Anon136.silver1oz
Anon136.silvershot
Anon136.silveretc

It still has a squatting issue with it, but now the squatters have to squat on the names of the issuers, not the target asset. This is far riskier as if a specific name is taken, there are always others that can be used. Unlike "BTC", which is unique.

If we are going to change the NXTcore for asset names, this one might be worth doing.


James

Just saw a really good idea on XCP forum:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5773807

It is about asset naming and it is very simple and I think quite effective.
Basically once you own an Asset Name, then you can create a subasset for a much lower fee. this essentially allows branding of the root name and then people will know that anything that starts with that is from the same issuer

So Anon gets his Anon136 asset name. Now he can issue:

Anon136.silver1oz
Anon136.silvershot
Anon136.silveretc

It still has a squatting issue with it, but now the squatters have to squat on the names of the issuers, not the target asset. This is far riskier as if a specific name is taken, there are always others that can be used. Unlike "BTC", which is unique.

If we are going to change the NXTcore for asset names, this one might be worth doing.


James