Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information - page 292. (Read 2761645 times)

Updating software is something I think everyone has already adapted to (in fact most likely the majority of the software you are using "updates itself").

The value of NXT *can never be very high* as it is basically just *fuel* to run the engine. There seem to be a lot of people in this forum who just "don't get this" (perhaps because "greed" is blinding them to reality).

I think it would be a fair prediction that the price of NXT could be determined mathematically by the available supply along with the number of users and transactions.

Speculators should be looking to purchase Assets in order to "make big profits" and again the "fees" will be determined by the two main points I mentioned (if you make them too low then then network dies due to spamming and no incentive to forge and if you make them too high it dies due to competition with other such networks).

So - how low are the fees going to be?

It is a *competition* between Mastercoin, Bitshares, Ethereum and Nxt (you could call it a *race to the bottom*).

I don't really care what it's a percentage of, just as long as it isn't a hard number that is guaranteed to be disruptive in a fluctuating market and almost will guarantee the systems demise.  The fact that I have to even point out the obvious paradox here is really concerning to me. Either no one thinks Nxt could ever be worth more than a few cents or someone has a lot of confidence in the ability for this community to adapt on the fly very quickly to market forces. Also everyone will have to update software everytime this takes place.

It's called VISA (or Mastercard) and it makes *zero* sense to charge a % when it *costs* the exact same to send 1NXT or 1M NXT.

The fee is there to do two things:

1. Prevent spam
2. Reward forging

Thus the fee needs to have a "fixed minimum amount" in order to achieve point 1 and "be as high as the market will bear" to achieve point 2.

If we are going to consider taking the fees as a % of anything it should be of the entire supply of NXT rather than anything to do with a tx amount.

One (perhaps not) small quibble here regarding fees. By making the fees static ie:1000 Nxt for assets .01 Nxt for transactions, etc, aren't we setting ourselves up for a scaling problem where investors and users of Nxt and the AE will find themselves simultaneously rewarded and punished as the price fluctuates in value?

What if the value of Nxt went to $500 USD? That would be awesome right? Except then no one would be actually using Nxt because who is going to pay $500,000 USD to issue an asset? Who's going to be willing to buy a Soda worth $1.00 USD using Nxt when the transaction fee is five USD dollars?
This is a paradoxical situation.

I understand this can be changed later via coding, but then is Nxt really a decentralized platform? Will there be a Bitcoin Foundation like entity to make these decisions? Will making these sorts of decisions resemble the decision making process we see here in the Mega-Thread every day? What if the price skyrocketed one day based on news of some sort? Would the next news item follwoing any rise be about how Nxt crashed again because the suddenly rising value made it the market for Nxt grind to a halt?

Wouldn't it be better to head all these problems off at the pass and and base transaction fees on percentages rather than hard numbers?
For transactions that would be easy, simply make it a percentage, say 1%, of whatever the amount is. I can't imagine that being a difficult coding challenge at all.

For assets perhaps charge a higher percentage based on the number of assets being issued.

For instance Transaction Fee: 1% of amount being transferred. Asset fee: 5%  of number of assets being issued.

This way the person wanting creating a new asset and the person wanting to download cheap pornopics (As C-F-B so eloquently put it) won't be discouraged by the rising price of Nxt.

Anyone else see the scaling problem that I see with using hard numbers rather than percentages?
 

I agree with #2, would be great to sort assets by trading volume, price, etc..  We are decentralized, no one can moderate the exchange, however, we could have a reputation system and forum threads so people could do a little research before buying.

Ricky, when I first read your post I agreed with you - having people fight over who is eligible for a massive buy-in option would cause too many problems, and might derail things now. But then after a while I changed my mind. There will only be a small number of crypto currencies that survive long term, and I want NXT to be one of them. I want the guys with the Lance Armstrong sized will to be the best working on NXT. If there's a MASSIVE reward on offer to those people who push NXT to a market cap of 1 billion USD, then I would contribute to a stock option system. The arguing over who got what wouldn't start until after NXT was unambiguously successful, and by then most of us would be satisfied.

But the guys with the Lance Armstrong will to compete and succeed are the ones I want working on NXT right now. I'm not talking about 'cheating' or doing anything illegal or immoral etc. I'm talking about offering MASSIVE rewards to people who are single minded about making NXT a global phenomenon. Some of the best people might not have a large stake in NXT, and maybe they can't afford to buy in big now either. If there is a chance of MASSIVE rewards to those people through a fixed price buy-in down the track, then some of them will be motivated to stay working on NXT. Those people will have the hunger to succeed that NXT needs to compete with etherium & emunie & counterparty etc etc

Im sure i don't get everything right, but this following idea is worth thinking about, I think.

What if asset ID would be a kind of structure with one member being the asset name and the other member being the block height at which the asset was created. If two identical asset name are register on the same block, only the one with higher fee would be accepted for the current block. Next block would register the asset with the lower fee.

In the client, the block number at which the asset was created could be given in the asset description.

That would solve the problem of identification of multiple asset with the same name and the first come first serve problematic. First come first serve is nonsence in my opinion.

In fact why limiting Nxt with unique asset name when block height could be used to differentiate between them and showed which one was create first?

"Asset name" don't have to be unique as it is the case with "alias". Of course, alias have to be unique, but not "Asse namet". It would be limiting for Nxt to impose unique asset name. Think about it please.

"Asset name is already used" should not happen!

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.

Great first post Blocktree - any contribution with the 'grey fox' sucking back the beer gets a +1 from me!!

edit: please stick around, NXT needs more clowns

No matter who is emule,what he said is the fact:NXT IS BEING DEAD.

I don't think the understanding of the purpose of the Nxt committees is clear.

The committees administer funds.  They do not provide strategic direction for Nxt.  Anyone with a proposal that requires funding can put one forward, and the committee will assess it.  That is what the committees were elected to do.   They do not "run" anything, and do not own the direction of Nxt.  

There is nothing stopping anyone from doing any work outside of the elected committees.  The committees provide FUNDING for work that people want to do.  So: keep on trucking, y'all, and submit a proposal for funding when you think funding will help.

Anyone know if someone giving out assets would be able to change the number of assets?  Anyone know?

I'd like to issue assets and destroy them on the fly so that the block chain can record exactly how many assets have been issued.

I understand the cointroplois crew very well.
Dirty tactics was used by people who in the marketing committee to be elected (and the community didn't mind it, called it politics) and now NXT pay the consequences. We have a elected marketing committee but the price is the lowest it has been in 2 months. Last time me contacting BTER lead to them adding us which saved us, what will save us this time?
AE? It'll be after Mastercoin, Invictus, Counterparty.. so I doubt it'll be enough.


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

@Justabit:

No worries, mate, go have some fun in the sun. Thanks again for what u guys achieved, btw.
I may not have agreed with some aspects of your work (SoL....hmmmm   ) but on the whole Cointropolis did some good work.
Hows the Trek convention coming on?

I'll just 'volunteer' the next guy who opens his mouth about NXT mainstream acceptance to run the game payments idea.

1) I know BCNext at some point was coming up with a way that you could indeed give out dividends.
2) Great idea!  Should be currencies, stocks, assets, and I'm probably missing a couple. Not sure if that's being worked on.
3) Agreed, needs to be some kind of system for flagging assets as fraudulent and giving people a trust meter.

Good hearing from you EvilDave. CoinTropolis has moved on to other projects, however, I'm still doing a few things to help protect my investment on the side. The payment module mixed in with gaming is fantastic, that's the type of outreach that needs to happen for market penetration.

This sounds like project the marketing committee could run with fairly quickly.

Have fun, thanks for all your work so far. If you're lucky, u might come back to a very nice NXT surprise......

In the meantime, is Nifty_Nikel still keeping Cointropolis running ?
Because I have one very easy idea for NXT adoption/promotion:
Get NXT accepted, as a simple first gen currency, by major online games.
Payment module from Damelons guy is almost ready to go, and getting "NXT accepted here" on the log-in screens for WoW, EVE, WoT, etc.,  would be major publicity if nothing else. I've got no time to run with this, so maybe u guys (or anyone else) would like to pick it up and take it further.

Personnaly, here what I think about to register an asset in Nxt.
I like the idea to submit a proposal to register an asset. I think that to register an asset, a vote with nxt voting feature should be require. Proposal could be submitted on a forum page prior to the vote.
I think that this could avoid a total mess with registering many not usefull asset.

A 1000nxt currently is not very high. Im not sure that this will avoid spamming.

Can this idea may be brainstorm?

The problem is all this solutions require centralization.I would just do it with the coins, as it would be very important for all the community(i guess it could have like 90%+ agreement of the community).For the rest of things it should be first to come,first to take.I didnt thought much when i wrote my previous post,but the 1000 nxt fee avoids spam-taking all the asset names.

Regarding Asset Exchange:

1. Is there a way to give out dividends?
2. I am envisioning that there would be tons of people creating whatsoever assets, I believe a way to manage it is necessary.  Like categories? favorites?
3. I also think there should be a moderator who could flag assets that are fraudulent.