They key advantage I see for DAG tangle form of consensus versus a block chain, my ClickzSync design, and Lightning Networks, is that appending your transaction into the DAG tangle is autonomous and permission-less (notwithstanding you probably want to see as much of the breadth of the tree as possible thus need a reasonably powerful server and internet connection, or delegate to one)! That is a very profound distinction!

This means that any user can append their transaction to the consensus network and can't be censored per se. Now their transaction might not get included in any other branches of the tree if there is 100% censorship of that transaction, but this isn't very likely. It isn't a 51% all-or-nothing control as in Bitcoin and the conceptual reason is because a DAG tangle has multiple branches of consensus! And even if the probability of double-spend is high on a transaction that has been censored by a large % of the network (not included in their branches), the transaction still has a record in the DAG tangle and so the recipient can still accept the funds if they so choose to take that risk. In other words, the consensus network can multifurcate to route around censorship.

Having said this, the most optimum design for block scaling is not DAG tangles alone, but integrated with my ClickzSync design. And then also supporting the necessary opcodes so LN can also run on the system (because LN has the least overhead but has some drawbacks that an Iota+ClickzSync design would offer alternatives to). In other words, these 3 designs all address a slightly different aspect of the consensus scaling network optimization. The Iota design is going to need some tweaking any way, because I see some issues.

Thus I will open private discussions with the Iota team (apparently mthcl and Come-from-Beyond only?) now to see if they are interested in collaborating.

We are at a momentous point where (if I am not mistaken on the myriad of technical details) Iota+ClickzSync could radically overhaul crypto consensus network scaling, security, and TX/s. I hope they are interested to attempt it along with me if the parameters work for both of us.

I have some optimism because Come-from-Beyond is apparently programming to the Java Virtual Machine as I am as well. We seemed to have (very limited) amicable and agreeable forum discussion in the recent month or so.

Perspective. I hope he enjoyed the life. Carpe diem. Reach out.

Thank you. I was very groggy when I got too quickly enamored with zing, vibe, and love. Artists have their moments of inspiration and utter fail. Facepalm me.

Btw, please no promotion yet. I need to code. No promotion of vaporware. I just wanted to get the name issue settled so I know what the heck I am calling this code I am working on. Thanks for the enthusiasm. I will apply that boost to my coding resolve.

After much thought, I realized I was trying to make it too abstract (see also the minified quoted thoughts below). Users do not relate to these abstract concepts. For them they use the internet and want access to the goods and services thereof and they don't even think that much about using money on the internet because to a large extent access is free (advertising business model). In terms of monetization of the internet, the closest conceptual good I can think of which means something to users and is also related to access, social actions and merits, is this new name I will propose:

clickz

I registered:

clickz.cash	($25)
clickz.click	($9)
clickz.space	($2)
clickz.site	($4)

I have not been able to think of a more direct to the point name which can capture payment, access, virtual quantification, network computing related, social, instantaneous, fungible unit, and some conceptualization of an autonomous, peer-to-peer interaction, decentralized, end-to-end principled.

If you ask any person what clicks are, they know immediately. It means something to everyone. It may sound odd to store clicks, but in effect that is what you want is to be able to click and not be denied access. It captures solidly the difference between the utility and limitations of physical money and virtual decentralized, permission-less money (clicking is an autonomous activity that can communicate around the globe in milliseconds). And as a seller or social figure on the internet, you want more clicks to your profile or site.

Click has another meaning as well which also fits appropriately for the above use case. As for the relationship to block chain 2.0 scaling and programmable block chain, the following definition of clicks seems apropos which relates to synergy, clarity/coherence, and being mutually in sync.

informal
become suddenly clear or understandable.
"finally it clicked what all the fuss had been about"

quickly become friendly or intimate.
"we just clicked, and I found myself falling in love"

become successful or popular.
"I don't think this issue has clicked with the voters"

Note I do realize 'clickz' is not as technophile as 'ion', and even though you might think 'ion' is more brandable just consider the other coin names 'quark' and 'quantum'. I think the meaning is most important. The name 'ion' implies some electric charge which is stored and can be zapped, but only for those engineers who have any clue what an ion is. Most people think of ion probably as salt, lion, or just blank non-understanding. Also I am not really getting any meaning from ion that applies to block chain 2.0 other than the connotation of rapid transfer (discharge). The name 'clickz' will ring a bell in everyone's mind. Even though there will be different ideas of the applicability, I doubt anyone will have blank non-understanding. The average person will think this has something to do with clicking, either internet related or as in becoming more in sync. The investor or even technophile will understand this has something to do with internet traffic, hive action, and synergy. The block chain 2.0 proponent will likely see some veracity to the explanation of meaning relating to keeping the contracts in sync or clicking together.

I am nearly certain that Clickz has more direct meaning to your average person than Bitcoin, for those who have heard of neither. And I think Clickz is much less likely to feared as related to fraud and theft. Clicking is a benign, non-threatening activity. Clickz is much more friendly than Bitcoin. Just look at the coming into sync definition as well as the reality that clicking is a friendly social activity. Bitcoin is associated with scams, drugs, Silk Road, stolen coins, failed centralized exchanges, etc.. Of course eventually Clickz could be so associated if we don't do a better engineering job of creating the paradigms to be more sure that events are a much smaller proportion of the use cases. And the way to do that is to make microtransactions very popular. (Block chain scaling and faster TX/s also makes decentralized exchanges more realistic and I believe there may be other technical ways to strongly motivate users to not let centralized servers hold their private keys)

On the 'swipe' idea, there is already 'touch' coin (which appears to have died). On the exchange of energy concept, there is already a 'synergy' coin. There is already a 'global' coin.

I am not against 'ion', just trying to exhaust my search for a superior name before relenting.

Reflecting more on the essence of what I was attempting capture with 'zing' and 'love' is some universal concept of value that transcends monetary capital (and with zing also capturing the concept of fast). With 'zing' (or 'zeal'), 'love', and 'vibe', I potentially captured another form of value that may be more popular but I didn't capture the general essence of value. I thought of 'power', 'deed', 'merit', and 'good' but again these are not the essence of value.

The essence of value is what ever any one thinks it is, i.e. the essence of value is that it is not fungible! In theory we could have underlying general fungible, tagless/unnamed 'unit' and then it could be displayed to user with the moniker alias that represented which ever category of value the user is interested in, but that belies the fact that value is not fungible. So then what is a fungible unit if it is the antithesis of value? A fungible unit is—as Andreas explained in his recent video presentation—communication of information about relative values. Money is not a good, but rather an informational junction where society communicates dynamically about values. So this is why I suggested the name 'datum'.

My other attempt at naming the essence of this fungible unit of money other than calling it the abstract concept 'money', 'fungibles', or 'unit', I have thought of this information as being the driver or basis of relative values, thus names such as 'base', 'basis', 'pith', catalyst', 'motivation', and 'fuel' come to mind.

The essence of the block chain is not its representation (in digital, mathematical, or electronic form) but the key distinguishing trait is that (in theory) it is universal, consistent, and not relative to any place, entity, or influence. The exchange value is not absolute, so I am referring the record of information being absolute. In this context, afaics absolute is a sufficient substitution for allodial title.

Does anyone like the name 'absolute'?

Wouldn't this name have strong appeal amongst those who want unassailable, incorruptible, permissionless commerce, contracts, and system protocols?

However, that name doesn't say much about microtransactions, scalable block chain, nor even say anything particularly enticing to the masses.

Thanks for the offer of mycash. It isn't inappropriate, just not sure if it can brand and stand away from all the other ___cash and ___coin. Let's think about.

Okay if Zing is moving too far towards cartoons (and it is close to Microsoft's Bing search engine), and swipes is moving too specific to one action and not all the general cases of storing information from the virtual world on a block chain, yet we also need to say something that normal people can draw some meaning from and serious investors won't be turned off, then how about:

datum

Not really sure if I like it. Had thought of it many times since 2014.

But then we lose the fast meaning, but I am not so sure that is necessary. People expect money to be fast. I don't think we need to really say that.

I am (on the longer-term view) going for any informational value from the virtual world that benefits from being recorded on a block chain and thus needs block chain scaling and fast, real-time transactions.

Micro exchanges of monetary or social value is one of those.

For the more general case, I seem to prefer zing, val, ion, or netoken. For the social networking case, love or vibe seems to be more apt, but perhaps it is wiser to stick with a name that is more general.

Seems to me Zing really works the best overall. It has some appeal in the social interaction case, it has some appeal generally given the meaning of fast, and it also means energy which is hitech leaning.

Val seems too boring. For programmers.

Ion seems good also, almost as good as Zing but lacks the impact in the social networking case because it has really no meaning for most females and non-technophiles.

Netoken seems very bland and conservative, but safe (maybe too safe and can't get any separation in the market and enthusiasm).

You are pigeon-holing it. People are going to be exchanging micropayments on all sorts of activity that do not involved an NFC interaction with a mobile phone. You will confuse users and cause them to think this is a bastardized Apple Pay and they will prefer the corporate NFC not some bizarro decentralized wannabe crap (from their mindset).

Many more users have heard of Viber, Likes, love, and swiping than they will care or hear about NFC any time soon. You are replacing a generalized, currently popular association with a very narrow and future looking one that will be dominated by corporate behemoths.

And why are you pigeon-holing this only to payments. This is about ecosystems and all sorts of social paradigms of interaction that come from fungibility of expressions of interest.

You are missing the point. The BIG point.

You all are not putting yourselves in the mind of the user and that is why you have 0 adoption amongst mainstream users.

Do you think any normal person has a clue or cares what NFC means. Non-technophiles (n00bs, especially females) don't care about the tech, they only care about what they get that they want and need.

Regular people don't want something named ions. They wouldn't have any use for them. Whereas, offer them some swipes, likes, vibes, zings, or loves. That they want.

If you are going to tell people this is money, then they will want dollars and pesos, not your funky money.

If you want them to use your funky money, you have to name it something they want which is applicable to the context in which they will be interacting with your funky money.

Avoid all the complicated explanations that make my gf's eyes roll back in her head and just make it simple for them to understand.

It has been a trending phrase for me since the 1980s when I named WordUp, later Art-O-matic, later CoolPage. All were successful, but the last one the most so.

Dab means a very small amount of something. Who wants that? You are not communicating what anybody wants.

Zing? Yeah I want some of that. Vibe? Yeah I need more of that in this forum. Love? Hell yeah I want more of that. Dab? Sorry don't need any of that.

Try naming a social networking site Dabr instead of the very popular Viber and see how that works out. Actually I worked on Dabbler, which was a paint program, but in that context it is at least somewhat desireable (but I didn't pick the name and I didn't approve of it and it failed).

Another random bug like the instamine and this one never gets fixed.

I would have to study the code before I could determine whether it can be gamed. I will not take your nor Evan's word for it.

Sorry I just have a hard time buying into these sort of denials. Why wouldn't you users demand full investigation and disclosure. Why not hire an independent programmer to go do the research. I think because you don't really want to know.

And so it is not my place to tell you otherwise. Carry on. And I won't reply if you don't reply

https://www.dashpay.io/masternodes2/

I think we need to realize that microtransactions will end up being just credits of appreciation that are traded around. Users won't be counting these in terms of exchange value but rather in terms of the powers it enables.

Step away from your mindset as an investor and think about the person who is actually using sub-penny transactions. Are they thinking about the $0.00001? Hell no. Get a clue!

When you play a game, you earn credits to enable new powers and buy extra capabilities. Microtransactions are like that but on a more general setting of virtual life from social networking to even virtual jobs. So you want to order some customized shoes over the internet, you can just as well think of this as a capability enabled by the social value you attained with all your efforts in the virtual space (and that can even include work such as programming, designing something, recruiting, promoting, etc..)

The investors will want an exchange value to existing monetary markets fine. But the users are not primarily thinking about these tiny payments of fractions of a penny as money. They already have money for large purchases, every day needs, etc.. The transition (unification) from their virtual values (Likes) to what they use to pay for every day needs will happen seamlessly over the next decade as if they didn't even realize the unification was occurring.

To make new markets, we need to think of markets that are not already addressed by users' existing concepts of what money does and is. We should not struggle with making them rethink what money is and instead grab the lower hanging fruit of adjusting what money is to what they are already doing! And give it a name.

Instead of waiting for Facebook to record all the Likes in the universe (which is impossible), our block chain becomes a recording of Likes in a more fungible sense (and we can also have 2.0 assets for non-fungible vertical market units suck as Likes and these can then have an exchange value to Loves).

Think out-of-the box.

I think I've solved the naming issue!

I added three new name choices to the poll and I really, really like it:

zing
vibe
love

I think zing it is perfect. I also offer the vibe and love choices.

zing
ziNG
informal
noun
: energy, enthusiasm, or liveliness.
"he was expected to add some zing to the lackluster team"

verb
: move swiftly.
"he could send an arrow zinging through the air"

Please sling me 5 zings for that.


I started with 'love' because I was thinking what people really are sending on the internet is information about relative appreciation. Then I got to 'vibe' but it is more of a feeling. What I really wanted to capture is that money is a form of stored energy and also to capture the giving of love, vibes, and likes in social networking. So many crypto names have tried to capture crypto money as a concept of small bits of information (e.g. quark, bitcoin, quantum), but that is just how it is represented and doesn't capture what it really is.

I think I nailed it folks.

People want to store and communicate their value and energy.

The name also implies fast which is what we want for microtransactions. And the meanings for both the noun and the verb are perfectly matched to the meanings I am desiring to capture.

And I think everyone gets some meaning from that word, either fast thing or a storage of positive energy and enthusiasm.

This is in line with the shift in the Knowledge Age away from money has a monetary capital into a dynamic metric of social energy and enthusiasm. The capital that internet ventures value most are the social hive vibes, and not monetary capital. Monetary capital is dying with the death of large fixed capital investments for factories and physical economies-of-scale. The new economies-of-scale are in social energy.

Let's enter the Knowledge Age!

Edit: on further thought, maybe love or vibe are more unique and brandable, e.g. bing, fling, sling, etc. Certainly no one will make another coin that sounds like Love. It is the essence of value and why were are here on earth. I sort of like it more than zing. Love is more fundamental and will shock many people. Please pay me 5 loves. Filipinos will be all over that. A company would be hesistant to use the name Love, because it can't be trademarked. But for coin which no one owns, we don't want trademarks. Rather we just want spontaneous ubiquitous adoption. What could be more ubiquitous than love (perhaps the only thing more ubiquitous than money is love). And turning money into love. That is what the Knowledge Age is really about. It is about ending the concept of storing up monetary capital to take control over people, and instead positivity and appreciation of diversity and creativity.

(to all the jealous haters, I am an artist so just be prepared for shocking inspirations we can work together if you don't require control and subjugation powers...it is your choice...I will travel my path regardless)

Apologies. I am amicable with Fuseleer. I put that there as a placeholder and I have had two tabs open on my browser (for past 3 days) for eMunie threads that I am intending to read so I can make a more factual statement about eMunie (state what I know and don't know). I put that placeholder there for the meantime to indicate that it is vaporware same as mine, thus the intended meaning is that I can get back to the analysis of it later.

Sorry if I rubbed you the wrong way with that. I will soon edit that as soon as I get a chance. I am very overloaded with tasks as you might imagine. Cheers. If I do decide to delete any of your posts, it is only to keep the thread less cluttered. I will make sure you main point is quoted in the thread. I won't be deleting posts but rarely. At the moment, I am trying to cool down the noise a bit. Chill bro. You never know perhaps Fuseleer and I might enjoin our efforts if ever we discovered our designs were very similar (note: he hasn't offered that and he even told me he has too much invested in his own effort to change direction now). I am targeting the Java Virtual Machine (not Java language) same as he is.

Notice I placed eMunie 3rd in my list above Bitshares and Dash. That means I think it might be the most serious contender after LN and Iota, but what I meant to imply is I don't have enough information about it yet (but I do have two threads to review).

The precise term for what people want is:

allodial
in allodium

But is a word that people can't spell a good name for a product. There are many considerations that go into a name.

Yes I agree. I am dropping any consideration to use Cybit. There are other names. No need to incur that risk.

I posted an update on my research about Iota.

Research is very important, so time isn't wasted coding something (or in a way) that you would not have coded had you done your research.

Feel free to post a quoted example of where I have not done that today.

The remainder of your trolling has been deleted from the thread. Feel free to go post it else where and make a big drama (queen).

P.S. there is no such thing as diplomacy with trolls. How can there be? I try to address their complaints honestly and rationally. They dial up the FUD and drama. Everyone can see the games you are playing. You are trying to fill up my thread with noise.

I sought out and bought the CoolPage.com domain for $500 from a third party ($1500 or so inflation-adjusted). That name has remained consistent for 16 years and even my primary email address is still on that domain. The former registrant was able to buy a more appropriate domain for his programming business site, and pocked the difference as well as being able to tell everyone he was the prior owner of that domain I made slightly (0.3% internet reach) popular at the turn of the century (long since forgotten after the Friendsters, Myspaces, Facebooks, Vibers).

I know a great name when I see one and I don't vacillate. I am also an artist who demands perfection and maximum creativity in what I do. This is precisely why your culture is suffocating for me and I can't work with your culture. I am an artist.

Because the prior poll asks only about Ion. And this poll asks about other choices compared to Ion. I retained the prior poll because it contains information. There is no way to have two polls on one thread. I was forced to create a new thread unless I wanted to delete the prior thread. I don't believe in vandalizing that which is not my property (the reader's votes).


Boolberry, Decrits, eMunie, Unobtanium, Iota, Ethereum, Counterparty, Nxt, Quark, Quantum, Cinni, Monocle, Aiden, Aeon, Nibble, Etoken, Coino, Particle, Heisenberg, Ekrona, Darsek, ...