NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 278.

BrianNowhere

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: mikesbmw on March 18, 2014, 10:28:58 AM

Quote from: mcjavar on March 18, 2014, 09:30:19 AM

Quote from: wesleyh on March 18, 2014, 09:24:35 AM

Quote from: mcjavar on March 18, 2014, 09:12:15 AM

Allowing the issuance of assets with the same name will most probably hinder us to sell our assets on the Nxt AE as we don´t want to have anyone creating assets with the same name as ours. We will work hard to get our shit together and to convince the community that our shares are worth buying, but if anyone can come and issue assets with the same name, we will most probably not use Nxt as scamming would harm our reputation, too.

EDIT: I am talking about a real life project we would like to fund using Nxt.

if we have a verification system there should be no issue, right? (with non unique names)

Well, I thin kthat the average user will go after the name...
I see some discussions between friends:
"I bought ABC shares on Nxt"
"Really? Cool! I will also buy one when I get home."
"But take care as there are hundreds of shares with the same name..."

This IS confusing..isn´t it?
Anyway, looking forward to the decision of the wise counsel.

Is it?

On many places where stuff is exchanged there are multiple items with the same name, but issued by different users.
As long as it is distinguishable that both items are issued by different users, there is no problem.

Non-unique names should not be a problem as long as it clear they are from different users.

To use ripple as an example once again they have Bitstamp BTC, Peercover BTC etc. Don't see why that's an issue. It provides arbitrage opportunities and allows buyers to shop around for the best price on the exchange.

However, Ripple only charges an infinitesimal transaction fee (for spam prevention only, not rewarding "forgers", which allows these centralized exchanges to set their own fees. In Nxt, if any similar exchanges wanted to use Nxt in this way, traders would either have to pay both Nxt's fee and the Exchanges fee. Therefore Nxt has pretty much eliminated the motivation for centralized exchanges to use Nxt at all. Unlike XRP, NXt comes preloaded with lots of friction.

We're basically left with individuals selling "shares" in their companies. I'm starting to envision a future where the Nxt platform looks like bitcointalks' alternative currency section. Lots of noise, confusion and scam artists hawking digital penny stocks.

Eadeqa

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 500

Quote from: BrianNowhere on March 18, 2014, 09:46:22 AM

My concern is that any subsequent fee change based on future price increases will be necessarily decided on by this decentralized development team, or be arbitrarily decided upon by one person (Jean-Luc) I don't know which is worse.

Then if/when the price goes back down it will have to be changed again. Nxt will be unable to scale to rapid market fluctuations and volatility. It is not enough for me for CIYAM OPEN to say a sudden and rapid price spike is impossible. The "what if" in me says that if that would occur the market would suddenly grind to a halt because the fees would be "too damn high".

We have discussed this for months. We even had poll about this, and it was agreed that tx fee will be 0.1 for now. It can be changed in future, and there is nothing wrong with it, nor would it be a problem.

btc2nxt

full member

Activity: 236

Merit: 100

Quote from: ?? on ??

i think NXT AE should have unique names, just like domains on the internet
if someone buys up Microsoft, microsoft itself should pay a good sum to that first owner if they really want the name for example. this is what happens with domains now and works fine

Quote from: btc2nxt on March 05, 2014, 08:59:24 PM

about Asset name:
1. name must contain only digits and latin letters, so Chinese characters are invalid.
2. aaa = AAA
3. cannot use '-' in name , so A-A is invalid.
4. 3-10 characters, so AA is not valid.

btw quantity <=1,000,000,000

Eadeqa

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 500

Quote from: opticalcarrier on March 18, 2014, 09:45:45 AM

I realize that we still have some discussing to do on non/unique "names" for assets. I just laid out some very good reasons why I think we should change it to be non-unique: the squatting issue, and by doing so it allows us to reduce fees for assets which in the event price of NXT shoots up, this low price for issuing assets will be SORELY needed on the AE.

Yes, I agree. The names should not be unique. It only leads to confusion once all the good names are taken by trolls and squatters.

As for scams, the buyers will have to do some reasearch. The asset issuer will have to advertise his ID on his website and the buyer will add that account to their contact list. Or his "trust line" (like ripple). Once that is done, the buyer will be able to buy only the assets that he added to his contacts list, that will protect him from clicking the wrong asset.

btc2nxt

full member

Activity: 236

Merit: 100

Quote from: CIYAM on March 18, 2014, 12:57:08 AM

I don't have such powers although I did make quite a bit of money from a few well chosen stocks (such as Sun Microsystems back in the early 90's).

I am "no hippie" but I do *get* what Nxt actually *is*. It is *not* another "pump and dump copy coin" but instead a *platform*.

Right from the start Nxt was presented without the word "coin" and this among other things was *deliberate*.

+1

brooklynbtc

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

AKA jefdiesel

Quote from: achimsmile on March 18, 2014, 07:27:21 AM

Quote from: jl777 on March 18, 2014, 07:21:37 AM

We can automatically create an +/- poll on asset creation, cost is not an issue and display this right along side the asset name. The assets that are popular will get a lot of votes and unless it is a scam or has big problems, it should be above 50% +

+1

two probs.
a. voting by account or by shares? (pandoras ballot box)
b still can game this, either way, votes or shares

mikesbmw

sr. member

Activity: 338

Merit: 250

Quote from: mcjavar on March 18, 2014, 09:30:19 AM

Quote from: wesleyh on March 18, 2014, 09:24:35 AM

Quote from: mcjavar on March 18, 2014, 09:12:15 AM

Allowing the issuance of assets with the same name will most probably hinder us to sell our assets on the Nxt AE as we don´t want to have anyone creating assets with the same name as ours. We will work hard to get our shit together and to convince the community that our shares are worth buying, but if anyone can come and issue assets with the same name, we will most probably not use Nxt as scamming would harm our reputation, too.

EDIT: I am talking about a real life project we would like to fund using Nxt.

if we have a verification system there should be no issue, right? (with non unique names)

Well, I thin kthat the average user will go after the name...
I see some discussions between friends:
"I bought ABC shares on Nxt"
"Really? Cool! I will also buy one when I get home."
"But take care as there are hundreds of shares with the same name..."

This IS confusing..isn´t it?
Anyway, looking forward to the decision of the wise counsel.

Is it?

On many places where stuff is exchanged there are multiple items with the same name, but issued by different users.
As long as it is distinguishable that both items are issued by different users, there is no problem.

Non-unique names should not be a problem as long as it clear they are from different users.

EvilDave

hero member

Activity: 854

Merit: 1001

Quote from: swartzfeger on March 18, 2014, 10:14:26 AM

Quote from: w4llace on March 18, 2014, 04:58:12 AM

Quote from: swartzfeger on March 18, 2014, 01:54:11 AM

Quote from: Uniqueorn on March 17, 2014, 09:12:26 PM

I think I was the first guy to propose to use NXT as ingame currency, feel free to approach any of the big game devs. Got nothing to lose

[da whole game discussion]

Besides the ingame-purchase-thing:

https://www.humblebundle.com/#contribute is a very famous game-bundle.
You can choose the amount of money you are willing to pay on your own.
They already allow bitcoin, why not NXT?

Can please somebody with proper english-skills contact them?

Ahh, yes... totally forgot about those! Humble Bundles (and similar) would be a solid marketing target.

just saw this, on a quick recce round BTT:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=229278.80
http://www.coingas.com/

Maybe another sales opportunity for NXT.

I really would like someone to step up to the plate and make some real work out of promoting NXT as a payment system (not in-game, but subscription/purchase costs) for the gaming community. Theres plenty of people with big mouths, and no projects......
...or kids, which i have to pick up from school. Little sods. BRB in a few hours.

brooklynbtc

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

AKA jefdiesel

Quote from: wesleyh on March 18, 2014, 07:26:56 AM

Quote from: jl777 on March 18, 2014, 07:21:37 AM

[Solution for Asset Naming Issue]

First off, any changes in how Asset Names are handled in the core will delay release of AE. It also impacts all the code written against the current spec. So, any solution that doesnt require NXT core changes wins any ties.

...

James

Good post, I think we need something like "verified accounts" in Twitter. The asset issuer would need to give up his anonimity. This way we know who he is and he is less likely to scam. Verified account status can be taken away too.

I like the idea that if you want to issue an IPO you need to at be public. But who will verify?

Also, would Registered Companies be valid as a Verified entity?

Eadeqa

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 500

Quote from: CIYAM on March 18, 2014, 05:25:01 AM

Quote from: okaynow on March 18, 2014, 05:20:10 AM

Non-unique asset listings could create confusion, or worse they could be a scam haven, with multiple BLABLA issuers.

Let's clear that up for you.

In the current Nxt "distopian" future you will have these Assets:

Microsoft (scam)
M1crosoft (scam)
M1cr0soft (scam)
Microsoft_2014 (scam)
Microsoft_2015 (real - assuming they haven't destroyed Nxt out of anger about the 1st listing)

Can you see why unique names are a problem now?

May as well just make it this:

Microsoft 38234124
Microsoft 98289128
Microsoft 12349123
Microsoft 58345345
Microsoft 13912342

only 1 is legit anyway (so *buyer* needs to *do more research* rather than just getting ripped off).

Yes the buyer will have to do some research. The legitimate asset issuer will have to advertise their account number on their website, with PGP signed message. Once the buyer adds that to their contact list, they won't be able to buy scam version. The client can protect them.

swartzfeger

full member

Activity: 350

Merit: 100

Quote from: w4llace on March 18, 2014, 04:58:12 AM

Quote from: swartzfeger on March 18, 2014, 01:54:11 AM

Quote from: Uniqueorn on March 17, 2014, 09:12:26 PM

I think I was the first guy to propose to use NXT as ingame currency, feel free to approach any of the big game devs. Got nothing to lose

[da whole game discussion]

Besides the ingame-purchase-thing:

https://www.humblebundle.com/#contribute is a very famous game-bundle.
You can choose the amount of money you are willing to pay on your own.
They already allow bitcoin, why not NXT?

Can please somebody with proper english-skills contact them?

Ahh, yes... totally forgot about those! Humble Bundles (and similar) would be a solid marketing target.

brooklynbtc

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

AKA jefdiesel

Quote from: wesleyh on March 18, 2014, 04:32:29 AM

community input needed:

Unique names for assets? For example : BLABLA (only issued once)

Or non unique names for assets?

For example: BLABLA 12423434 and BLABLA 343434334 (you only choose BLABLA, the rest is the asset id - automatically generated)

(Perhaps, I'm not sure, the number can be shortened..)

If you have another idea, please specify.

All Asset registered Device and Company names will be non unique (you only choose BLABLA, the rest is the asset id - automatically generated)

The AE will contain ALL registered ASSETS by non unique name

The top 10 performing AE by demand, price, and action will be promoted to the NXT10 with the privilege of using their UNIQUE name, i.e. BLABLA

NXT10 (20, 50, 100, as growth demands) will an automated top list, of volume, performance, and dividends paid out. (?)
The NXT10 will be updated on a 90 day basis with underperforming assets dropping back to the AE and going to back to BLABLA 123421

Code:

OK> Brainstorm Below> No Clear thoughts.. discuss..

What about UNIQUE is place held, but confirmations needed. maybe IPO provided, and minimum transactions filed within X days for unique name to be "granted", sort of like a NASDAQ 100.

as we brainstorm this.. maybe make a top 10 now, and they can show as UNIQUE names, the rest show as codes only.

NewCo comes along, has to create their IPO and show actual interest from investors in a forum, website, or real life OUTSIDE of the AE, and once they reach a minimum volume, they will be listed as their UNIQUE name.

[s]If NewCo fails to reach velocity within 30 days, their AE assets will remain under their account number, but they will forfeit their name and with it their 1000NXT.[/s]

If NewCo drops out of the top 10, 100, etc, (since they are only squatting) the Asset Name will no longer show in the AE, just the number. If NewCo goes dormant, the assets will remain of course, but they will revert to the account number.

[/quote]

igmaca

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: opticalcarrier on March 18, 2014, 10:00:09 AM

Quote from: igmaca on March 18, 2014, 09:57:43 AM

Quote from: ChuckOne on March 18, 2014, 09:52:34 AM

It should not only tied to the size of the blockchain but also to the computational effort a node must perform to include this transaction.

EXACT

"Keep incentivized network"

interesting... what do you mean by computational effort? It seems I am missing an aspect of something here.

must be distributed the cost of maintaining stimulated the "green, secure and decentralized network"

for example

Nxt% Fee per current transactions
Alias Fee services (For example per bytes)
Nxt% Fee per AE transactions

and so on ....

How The network is worth to maintain?

How many minimum nodes are needed?
How much electricity does it cost?
How many minimum transactions contemplated

BrianNowhere

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: opticalcarrier on March 18, 2014, 09:49:18 AM

Quote from: BrianNowhere on March 18, 2014, 09:46:22 AM

My concern is that any subsequent fee change based on future price increases will be necessarily decided on by this decentralized development team, or be arbitrarily decided upon by one person (Jean-Luc) I don't know which is worse.

Then if/when the price goes back down it will have to be changed again. Nxt will be unable to scale to rapid market fluctuations and volatility. It is not enough for me for CIYAM OPEN to say a sudden and rapid price spike is impossible. The "what if" in me says that if that would occur the market would suddenly grind to a halt because the fees would be "too damn high".

this is what completely untie'ing all fees from any fiat representation, and setting it to a fee/transactionByteSize ratio will do for us

That is what Ripple does I believe, combined with setting the fee low enough (0.00001) that a sudden market increase would have to be ginormous to have a negative effect on trading. If XRP suddenly went to BTC's $620 USD the transaction fee would still be less than a penny (USD).

Is it likely to happen? No. But not likely is not good enough for programming.

Our sad paradox is that transaction fees are used to reward needed forgers yet could necessarily have to be set too high, potentially making the system unusable with a built in crash mechanism for any sudden value increase. it's a giant experiment in finding out where this threshold lies and waiting for the inevitable crash (or complete stagnation) that would occur.

Ripple 1
POW 1
POS O

bitcoinpaul

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: BrianNowhere on March 18, 2014, 09:34:36 AM

I guess decentralized development is great, until it's not. I have really been confused by this notion that because the idea is for a decentralized exchange that development should also be decentralized. Didn't BcNext hisself decide to code alone (centralization) in the beginning because of crap like we see here every day?

There's good stuff happening, but this decentralized everything idea is a bad one. Cancer is decentralized. The cure could never be.

+1

Tobo

hero member

Activity: 763

Merit: 500

Quote from: Pouncer on March 17, 2014, 10:12:54 PM

Allowing a first come first served method for asset name registration will result in squatting & non-meaningful/potentially misleading names. I suggest we use a system generated incrementing number starting from 101 as the unique asset ID. Asset Issuer can append any tag to the numerical ID.
eg:
115:BTC [ Asset description]
116:BTC [ Asset description]
117:ABC [ Asset description]

Asset ID 1-100 could be reserved for special assets.

+1. Great idea!

bitcoinpaul

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: El3k0n on March 18, 2014, 08:49:30 AM

The more I learn about NXT the more I believe we won't go to the moon, we'll directly buy the moon!

Best quote of the day.

opticalcarrier

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: igmaca on March 18, 2014, 09:57:43 AM

Quote from: ChuckOne on March 18, 2014, 09:52:34 AM

It should not only tied to the size of the blockchain but also to the computational effort a node must perform to include this transaction.

EXACT

"Keep incentivized network"

interesting... what do you mean by computational effort? It seems I am missing an aspect of something here.

igmaca

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: ChuckOne on March 18, 2014, 09:52:34 AM

It should not only tied to the size of the blockchain but also to the computational effort a node must perform to include this transaction.

EXACT

"Keep incentivized network"

wesleyh

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

Quote from: mcjavar on March 18, 2014, 09:30:19 AM

Quote from: wesleyh on March 18, 2014, 09:24:35 AM

Quote from: mcjavar on March 18, 2014, 09:12:15 AM

Allowing the issuance of assets with the same name will most probably hinder us to sell our assets on the Nxt AE as we don´t want to have anyone creating assets with the same name as ours. We will work hard to get our shit together and to convince the community that our shares are worth buying, but if anyone can come and issue assets with the same name, we will most probably not use Nxt as scamming would harm our reputation, too.

EDIT: I am talking about a real life project we would like to fund using Nxt.

if we have a verification system there should be no issue, right? (with non unique names)

Well, I thin kthat the average user will go after the name...
I see some discussions between friends:
"I bought ABC shares on Nxt"
"Really? Cool! I will also buy one when I get home."
"But take care as there are hundreds of shares with the same name..."

This IS confusing..isn´t it?
Anyway, looking forward to the decision of the wise counsel.

Link to asset 12345:

http://nxtra.org/nxt-client/#asset:9229925548955252583

Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 278. (Read 2761645 times)