Can we get a balance where the federation of the gateways ensures the integrity of the transaction without becoming liable for the asset?

What I tried to get across in my reply to James a few pages back (which you kindly responded to) was the transaction is a contracts between the buyer and the seller and gateways cooperate to enforce the escrow / atomicity of the transaction and asset being transferred for which the gateways get a fee.

Firstly for this to work each maybe you need gateway relationship to be verified bi-laterally, i.e. a gateway to gateway trust relationship is pre-established, I am not sure this exists in the Ripple model which is why I think there is a problem - is this what you mean by federation.

Each buyer and seller legitimise the asset with each gateway involved e.g. deposit asset in escrow or reserve somehow.
The buyer sends the transaction request to the sellers gateway to buy the asset (with the relevant buy/sell asset ids from each gateway)
The sellers gateway initiates a transaction on the block chain which is seen by buyers gateway and this is validated by forging as legitimate (e.g. 10 confirms?)
The buyers gateway then confirms the transaction by re-submitting again to be validated by forging to confirm the buyer honours the contract.
The two gateways can then release the escrow asset to the buyer and seller respectively.
The transaction ledger could be the NXT blockchain, once the transaction is validated by forging the seller gateway releases the asset to the buyer and the buyer gateway releases the asset to the seller.
The buyer/seller gateways would get their fees from the buyer/seller respectively
There is a NXT fee for each of the transactions involved.

What  I am trying to achieve is the gateways are acting to ensure the safe transfer of an asset between two parties but maybe this is too hard complicated?
For widespread adoption there needed to be trust in the integrity of the transaction and that should be down to whether Anon, Bob or Sally tokens have a different trust level.
Without some level of transaction legitimacy validated by NXT itself I fear we would have a massive dispute resolution problem with scam buyers as much of a problem as scam sellers.

True... but people need to be able to trust in the network because the individuals are by nature, remote and anonymous...
Btw if you are trading DOGE it should be "Caveat Canem"

If I read this right - 'No escrow' or atomic completion?
so buyer beware....

James,

on gateways I am a little confused as to how you want them to work.
So If I want to buy LTC with BTC via gateways.

I deposit BTC with a BTC gateway under my NXT account ID
Someone has deposited LTC with an LTC gateway under their NXT account ID
They have also posted an exchange offer for an LTC/BTC exchange.

I submit a request to buy the LTC at the offered rate.

The BTC gateway creates a transaction to move the required BTC held under my NTX account ID to the NXT account ID of the LTC seller
The LTC gateway creates a transaction to move the required LTC held under the seller NXT Account ID to my NXT account ID.
The gateways would exchange the transaction IDs which would contain the buyer/seller NXT account IDs
Only when both transactions were confirmed the exchanges would release the LTC and BTC held under the NXT account IDs on those gateways.

This would require some trust/verification between the gateways?
Would the transactions appear against the NXT accounts?
Assume fee's would be in NXT or would they be in BTC/LTC?
Who's keys sign the transactions?

I've probably got this wrong but I'm trying to figure out how between the gateways you would create a contract that could ensure completion on both sides.

Does that mean its now considered a hard currency? 

http://www.information-age.com/technology/security/123457039/hackers-stole--45m-from-middle-eastern-banks-in-cyber-heist

Remember this last year - the ATM network wasn't at fault - a Bank didnt keep its servers safe...
FIAT systems get hacked too if people don't follow precautions.

Lol I don't buy BTC there I sell it for precisely that reason
My point is its an opportunity to nudge the FIAT exchanges about NXT

Both the main UK FIAT exchanges (Bitbargain, Bittylicious) have suspended bit coin trading 
I have helpfully suggested they add NXT
Anyone else in the UK who trades on these should drop them a note 

I can't tell you exactly but what I can tell you one solution is somewhere less than one cent per transaction.
Lots of the small ones are more expensive than this - depends on how well you invest.

Sorry - one thing I forgot...

If you assume several billion people on the planet will continue to use text phones for the forceable future (years) then these e-moneyplatforms will stay. This does to stop the spread of crypto the processing of FIAT and E-money is expensive so I can see an evolution where these platforms swap their e-money wallets for crypto wallets and become a kind of equivalent to block chain.info for people with only text phones to access/store a digital currency from a text phone. There will probably be a period where these platforms will provide both types of wallet and it will be interesting to see where this goes.

If we start pruning someone needs to keep a full copy I guess so some kind of motivation would be needed to maintain this as a service to the network with associated bandwidth etc.

Phone clients should not need a block chain at all (unless someone really wants to burn battery and data bundles forging) when we have proper clients and should just access a public node with a full copy for any block chain needs.

Just checked back for the previous post and this FIFO idea makes sense to me anyway. The high volume transaction systems I am talking about achieve this by DB partitioning - i.e. they keep the transactions they care about or are live in one partition and shove all the others elsewhere - this helps keep the processing speed high.

These systems can be viewed as centralised because typically multiple processing nodes are localised to a single database(block chain?) but in practice the transaction processors are all async and running in parallel sharing the DB(block chain) copy, the NXT equivalent is all transaction processors or forgers need a copy of the DB or block chain - its been highlighted in a number of posts this is not scaleable and needs fixing so FIFO or something like it to move block chain history off the transaction processors (forgers) will help.

1000TPS will not even touch the sides in a few years, if NXT manages to get it right.

In the adoption of e-currency in emerging markets are light years ahead of western markets. I know its not crypto but the average citizen in the emerging market cares about the outcome not the technology and in this model crucially the bank or telco offering the service helps the person get the money back if it goes astray - when your income is $10 / day then you are very careful where you put your money.

There have until recently been just 2 african countries where this has taken off but from 2012 this phenomenon has been spreading to other countries where telco's or banks basically take away the FIAT and provide electronic tokens that can be used by dumb text phones, to move money electronically and instantly via and e-wallet and yes these phones will be around a long time. no PCs no smart phones - these countries are still toxic to these technologies.

The recent GSMA report I've seen shows at least 10 countries where adoption of this way of paying is following a hyperbolic or hockey stick trajectory. In one of these countries the transaction platform can perform around between 300-400tps and resides in Europe not Africa.

Over a day in one of the major African markets demand can go from 0tps to 500tps, this is with only around 15m active customers and the market is less than 30% penetrated in terms of retail transactions and this is only one country. Average transaction time is <10s with full confirmation (yes this includes shipping everything from Africa to Germany and back) and for small transactions the cost is ZERO.

This kind of stuff is now being trialled in India, and there the transaction volumes will be way higher than 1000tps if you break into the for retail space, but for retail unlike general P2P you need instant transactions - VISA fakes it (authorise and then clear later), the e-money platforms do it all realtime and currently the crypto currencies do not address the problem of the retailer. Although some posts from I think cfb about how to implement instant transactions is the first I've seen of a crypto solution to this problem and i would hang onto it even if its implemented later.

So I would plan for far higher than 1000tps, solve the accompanying block chain problem and make sure you can do instant transactions, unless you just want to nibble around the crumbs that VISA / Mastercard will drop - both of whom have bough e-money platform companies...

Reply from Bittylicious - I am keeping on at them and trading on their site...
They may even let me offload my QRK for GBP in which case I can buy more NXT

From Marc@Bittylicious

Well I can sell BTC and other stuff for FIAT on Bittylicious but this is their comment on NXT;

"We don't do NXT yet as it requires some back end changes."

I will do some other trades and keep asking.

Submitted my seller application now, status is under review, stated I want to sell NXT - lets see what they say.

350 NXT sent
TX ID: 13519370157753466625

Well they don't currently offer NXT so lets see what they say about putting it on and take it from there....
I'm sure they ask for that volume but I cant see every seller they have achieving it when they are low on volume on some of the coins they offer like WDC and FTC

My KYC/registration with Bittylicious is pretty much complete, I can see they have about 4 Alt's on there already.
I don't know if anyone else has contacted them - I've emailed them to see if they will let me sell NXT.

You just need to have a stern word with your bank manager
I don't get those problems anymore..
Having more than one account for different purposes is also useful....
People forget the same bank will let you have multiple current accounts if you ask nicely.
and you do a lot of business with them..