Transparent mining 2, or What part of Legacy should be left behind - page 11.

landomata

legendary

Activity: 2184

Merit: 1000

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 07:17:56 AM

Quote from: landomata on February 10, 2014, 07:11:59 AM

Pegging INSIDE the NXT ASSET EXCHANGE would be Decentralized....as I said I need real time with the Asset Exchange to take my solution forward.

This makes no sense at all - in order to peg NxtUSD to say NxtAUD *inside* the Asset Exchange would mean that the actual USD/AUD exchange rate has to be ignored (as that by definition is *outside* the AE).

So by definition you can't peg those currencies to each other in any meaningful way - you might decide you are going to always exchange 1 NxtUSD for 1 NxtAUD and the opposite but even that won't work unless you have exactly the same amount of either.

My aim is a fix price scenario...I will continue thinking along this line once I have some actual experience with the Asset Exchange.

Lets discuss after a month.

bitcoinpaul

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 07:33:27 AM

Quote from: bitcoinpaul on February 10, 2014, 07:31:26 AM

So the only problem I have now is, that I don't see any news with his 2nd plan. Anyone, please?

Nothing really new.

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1009

Newbie

Quote from: bitcoinpaul on February 10, 2014, 07:31:26 AM

So the only problem I have now is, that I don't see any news with his 2nd plan. Anyone, please?

Nothing really new.

ChuckOne

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 06:49:48 AM

Quote from: landomata on February 10, 2014, 06:46:30 AM

FORGET IOU....I'm not even talking about IOU's.

You are - but let's look at what you say "next" (pun intended).

Quote from: landomata on February 10, 2014, 06:46:30 AM

Example: NXTMONEY is pegged at 1 USD....so everyone who has or wants to receive NXTMONEY knows that it is worth 1 USD, 1 YEN, 1 CNY for example locally in his country.

This is the problem - *how* is it *pegged*?

It can only be so if some individual or group is "guaranteeing" to accept it for 1 USD (or whatever) but if that person/group decides that they are not worth it (for whatever reason - maybe they don't have any USD left) then your *pegging* has just failed and in fact the coins are worth ZERO.

This is why they are not *actual* USDs (or whatever) - they are actually IOUs - this is EXACTLY how Ripple works.

That is what I was talking over and over again.

NXT has no control over offchain activities. It's humans that have. They decide whether they accept it or not. If not, *boff* value=0.

bitcoinpaul

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ChuckOne on February 10, 2014, 07:28:22 AM

Quote from: bitcoinpaul on February 10, 2014, 06:19:10 AM

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 05:51:14 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 05:45:52 AM

BCNext doesn't propose to change 1B limit, he is even against it coz this would break forging. His idea is similar to issuance of eDollars on Asset Exchange.

Oh - I thought the purpose of the Asset Exchange was always going to be for such things. At the end of the day I think that the AE just brings the Nxt functionality closer to Ripple (which may or may not be a good thing).

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 05:23:28 AM

NXTs r not coins, at least the creator of Nxt didn't want them to be coins.

I have a problem to understand where the difference is now

- CfB always said there should be coins on top of Nxt
- Now BCNext says there should be coins on top of Nxt and this should be the sole purpose of Nxt.

Since you need NXT for this coins, NXT will automatically gets evaluated (high) and BCNext idea of using NXT as coins cannot become real because NXT will get traded like gold coins, e.g. eDollars backed by NXT, dollars (long time ago) backed by gold. Wrong?

edit: Or is this a terminology problem, because 'gold coins' are no coins?

What's problem? Scarcity of a precious and in this case I mean really precious good is what make that precious good a perfect thing for a basis. Even better than gold because it cannot be created by mining or nuclear fusion.

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 06:54:25 AM

Quote from: bitcoinpaul on February 10, 2014, 06:19:10 AM

edit: Or is this a terminology problem, because 'gold coins' are no coins?

Hm, looks like this is a problem with my English. BCNext's idea is that NXTs shouldn't be used as mean of exchange.

So the only problem I have now is, that I don't see any news with his 2nd plan. Anyone, please?

ChuckOne

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82

Quote from: bitcoinpaul on February 10, 2014, 06:19:10 AM

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 05:51:14 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 05:45:52 AM

BCNext doesn't propose to change 1B limit, he is even against it coz this would break forging. His idea is similar to issuance of eDollars on Asset Exchange.

Oh - I thought the purpose of the Asset Exchange was always going to be for such things. At the end of the day I think that the AE just brings the Nxt functionality closer to Ripple (which may or may not be a good thing).

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 05:23:28 AM

NXTs r not coins, at least the creator of Nxt didn't want them to be coins.

I have a problem to understand where the difference is now

- CfB always said there should be coins on top of Nxt
- Now BCNext says there should be coins on top of Nxt and this should be the sole purpose of Nxt.

Since you need NXT for this coins, NXT will automatically gets evaluated (high) and BCNext idea of using NXT as coins cannot become real because NXT will get traded like gold coins, e.g. eDollars backed by NXT, dollars (long time ago) backed by gold. Wrong?

edit: Or is this a terminology problem, because 'gold coins' are no coins?

What's problem? Scarcity of a precious and in this case I mean really precious good is what make that precious good a perfect thing for a basis. Even better than gold because it cannot be created by mining or nuclear fusion.

ChuckOne

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 05:45:52 AM

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 05:31:46 AM

Changing the total supply from 1B to something else would be a lot more controversial than reducing the fees - effectively that amount was a "promise" made at the outset so if that promise were to be broken I would expect some investors (especially the 73 initial ones) would be unhappy about that (actually it would probably upset those who have invested at recent "market prices" much more than the 73 as they have already probably each taken large profits from their initial investment).

BCNext doesn't propose to change 1B limit, he is even against it coz this would break forging. His idea is similar to issuance of eDollars on Asset Exchange.

I don't want it either. Especially after reading that paper and thinking through TF thoroughly.

bitcoinpaul

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

The btc tx bug seems to be known since ages. It is more of a exchange bug I think.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: landomata on February 10, 2014, 07:11:59 AM

Pegging INSIDE the NXT ASSET EXCHANGE would be Decentralized....as I said I need real time with the Asset Exchange to take my solution forward.

This makes no sense at all - in order to peg NxtUSD to say NxtAUD *inside* the Asset Exchange would mean that the actual USD/AUD exchange rate has to be ignored (as that by definition is *outside* the AE).

So by definition you can't peg those currencies to each other in any meaningful way - you might decide you are going to always exchange 1 NxtUSD for 1 NxtAUD and the opposite but even that won't work unless you have exactly the same amount of either.

pinarello

full member

Activity: 266

Merit: 100

NXT is the future

Quote from: Pouncer on February 10, 2014, 06:52:21 AM

MtGox: Bitcoin Transaction Malleability bug

https://www.mtgox.com/press_release_20140210.html
BTC Crash!

"Note that this will also affect any other crypto-currency using the same transaction scheme as Bitcoin."
NXT not affected!!

marketing should jump on this and use it immediately

pandaisftw

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Quote from: 2Kool4Skewl on February 10, 2014, 07:06:47 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 06:59:46 AM

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 06:58:16 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 06:56:28 AM

Nxt could have a special kind of asset backed by fixed amount of NXT.

But if we aren't supposed to "trade NXT" then that wouldn't have any value then would it?

The point is that we are NOT supposed to do anything, it's up to the community how to develop Nxt further.

I think it is best for NXT to have multiple purposes.

1 - As a store of value because of it's scarcity.

2 - As an intermediate currency between IOUs issued on the asset exchange.

IMO, of all things, NXT - as the base unit - is like gold. It backs up everything in the system because everything can be traded for it, the supply is constant, and its value (within the NXT ecosystem) is guaranteed by the protocol. EDIT: Plus, it makes sense, people don't use gold as currency (anymore) but it still has huge store of value.

And holy shit, why is NXT still tied to BTC... maybe we should contact coinbase to do USD/NXT pair

landomata

legendary

Activity: 2184

Merit: 1000

Quote from: 2Kool4Skewl on February 10, 2014, 07:08:12 AM

+1

Any type of "pegging" is centralization. This is the antithesis of Nxt's ideology.

Pegging INSIDE the NXT ASSET EXCHANGE would be Decentralized....as I said I need real time with the Asset Exchange to take my solution forward.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: 2Kool4Skewl on February 10, 2014, 07:06:47 AM

I think it is best for NXT to have multiple purposes.

1 - As a store of value because of it's scarcity.

2 - As an intermediate currency between IOUs issued on the asset exchange.

I agree (and had always thought that was the intention).

The mistake that Ripple made was to make all the statements about Ripples just being "postage stamps" and having no real value and then suddenly hyping their value after launching and giving away "coins" (a small percentage). If they had been more honest about it in the first place people would not have been so turned off by it and so far I think Nxt has been far more honest (so no need to go and do the "reverse" of Ripple).

bitcoinpaul

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 06:59:46 AM

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 06:58:16 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 06:56:28 AM

Nxt could have a special kind of asset backed by fixed amount of NXT.

But if we aren't supposed to "trade NXT" then that wouldn't have any value then would it?

The point is that we are NOT supposed to do anything, it's up to the community how to develop Nxt further.

Let me rephrase his question:

Quote

If we don't "trade NXT" then that wouldn't have any value then would it?

2Kool4Skewl

sr. member

Activity: 644

Merit: 250

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 07:05:04 AM

Quote from: landomata on February 10, 2014, 07:01:07 AM

I have been working on a solution in my mind for a couple weeks now....I will explain it once Asset Exchange testing starts and we play around for some time....right now it's only in our minds....at least I had the luxury of speaking to a PhD who has been testing the Asset Exchange for some time now but there are still black spots in my thinking.

Best of luck with it - but my guess is you end up with something like "Bitshares" who think that just because you call something bitUSD then it will magically be "worth" 1 USD because of it being a "prediction market".

I don't think that holds water at all nor any kind of other "pegging" unless you are talking about the kind of "pegging" that governments do (like Hong Kong's pegging of the HKD to the USD) which is not at all what I think people interested in "decentralised" solutions are looking for.

+1

Any type of "pegging" is centralization. This is the antithesis of Nxt's ideology.

2Kool4Skewl

sr. member

Activity: 644

Merit: 250

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 06:59:46 AM

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 06:58:16 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 06:56:28 AM

Nxt could have a special kind of asset backed by fixed amount of NXT.

But if we aren't supposed to "trade NXT" then that wouldn't have any value then would it?

The point is that we are NOT supposed to do anything, it's up to the community how to develop Nxt further.

I think it is best for NXT to have multiple purposes.

1 - As a store of value because of its scarcity.

2 - As an intermediate currency between IOUs issued on the asset exchange.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: landomata on February 10, 2014, 07:01:07 AM

I have been working on a solution in my mind for a couple weeks now....I will explain it once Asset Exchange testing starts and we play around for some time....right now it's only in our minds....at least I had the luxury of speaking to a PhD who has been testing the Asset Exchange for some time now but there are still black spots in my thinking.

Best of luck with it - but my guess is you end up with something like "Bitshares" who think that just because you call something bitUSD then it will magically be "worth" 1 USD because of it being a "prediction market".

I don't think that holds water at all nor any kind of other "pegging" unless you are talking about the kind of "pegging" that governments do (like Hong Kong's pegging of the HKD to the USD) which is not at all what I think people interested in "decentralised" solutions are looking for.

landomata

legendary

Activity: 2184

Merit: 1000

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 06:49:48 AM

Quote from: landomata on February 10, 2014, 06:46:30 AM

FORGET IOU....I'm not even talking about IOU's.

You are - but let's look at what you say "next" (pun intended).

Quote from: landomata on February 10, 2014, 06:46:30 AM

Example: NXTMONEY is pegged at 1 USD....so everyone who has or wants to receive NXTMONEY knows that it is worth 1 USD, 1 YEN, 1 CNY for example locally in his country.

This is the problem - *how* is it *pegged*?

It can only be so if some individual or group is "guaranteeing" to accept it for 1 USD (or whatever) but if that person/group decides that they are not worth it (for whatever reason - maybe they don't have any USD left) then your *pegging* has just failed and in fact the coins are worth ZERO.

This is why they are not *actual* USDs (or whatever) - they are actually IOUs - this is EXACTLY how Ripple works.

I have been working on a solution in my mind for a couple weeks now....I will explain it once Asset Exchange testing starts and we play around for some time....right now it's only concepts in our minds....at least I had the luxury of speaking to a PhD who has been testing the Asset Exchange for some time now but there are still black spots in my thinking.

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1009

Newbie

Quote from: CIYAM on February 10, 2014, 06:58:16 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 06:56:28 AM

Nxt could have a special kind of asset backed by fixed amount of NXT.

But if we aren't supposed to "trade NXT" then that wouldn't have any value then would it?

The point is that we are NOT supposed to do anything, it's up to the community how to develop Nxt further.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on February 10, 2014, 06:56:28 AM

Nxt could have a special kind of asset backed by fixed amount of NXT.

But if we aren't supposed to "trade NXT" then that wouldn't have any value then would it?

Topic: Transparent mining 2, or What part of Legacy should be left behind - page 11. (Read 15616 times)