I asked if I can use asset exchange to buy a commodity like pot, and someone said no. A bitcoin is a commodity.
By the way, this isn't trustless as I will have to trust bitstamp that they will send me real bitcoin if I buy their asset.
The person who said no is not correct. Anon136, as an example, is planning to use the AE to sell silver bullion. Exactly. This confusion started when someone said no ( think it was wesleh) The real discussion was high fees. I want to sell $5 pot the fees to issue asset should not be $40. By the way, I don't do drugs -- but lets stick to selling pot as an example |
|
|
|
Are you trolling?
You can't buy pot this way because you would buy the right to buy pot... and not pot directly. It is not a shop but an exchange.
Also you only buy an IOU. Like a share is....
Yes you need to trust bitstamp to redeem it, but the exchange of those tokens is trustless
I wasn't trolling  Why can't I buy pot by redeeming pot asset-- just like bitcoin would be redeemed by bitstamp? The seller issues a pot asset. I buy it (with some amount of nxt). Then I "redeem" it and the sellers mails me the pot (I have to send him my address but that's between me and the seller). |
|
|
|
You get dividends
So if the company makes profit, they pay some of the profit to their asset holders?. As nxt is decentralized anonymous with no govt involvement, there is no legal framework and checks and balances to insure the "company" isn't lying. I don't think it's going to do anything for nxt (short to long term --- nxt needs to be at least at bitcoin level in popularity before even a semi-legitimate business like a gambling company) would issue such asset. I won't buy it still. Lets move on. And let's say you want to trade BTC/NXT, who do you trust more, the blockchain + a gateway or a site like cryptsy? You will be able to trade BTC/NXT on the asset exchange. Also, luckily most people here see the extreme advantages of an asset exchange, the little number of people who doubt the concept don't matter. That's not dividend. I am getting a commodity in return (bitcoin) right away. This is different. please catch up what the word asset means. Thank you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AssetI asked if I can use asset exchange to buy a commodity like pot, and someone said no. A bitcoin is a commodity. By the way, this isn't trustless as I will have to trust bitstamp that they will send me real bitcoin if I buy their asset. |
|
|
|
You get dividends
So if the company makes profit, they pay some of the profit to their asset holders?. As nxt is decentralized anonymous with no govt involvement, there is no legal framework and checks and balances to insure the "company" isn't lying. I don't think it's going to do anything for nxt (short to long term --- nxt needs to be at least at bitcoin level in popularity before even a semi-legitimate business like a gambling company) would issue such asset. I won't buy it still. Lets move on. And let's say you want to trade BTC/NXT, who do you trust more, the blockchain + a gateway or a site like cryptsy? You will be able to trade BTC/NXT on the asset exchange. Also, luckily most people here see the extreme advantages of an asset exchange, the little number of people who doubt the concept don't matter. That's not dividend. I am getting a commodity in return (bitcoin) right away. This is different. |
|
|
|
You get dividends
So if the company makes profit, they pay some of the profit to their asset holders?. As nxt is decentralized anonymous with no govt involvement, there is no legal framework and checks and balances to insure the "company" isn't lying. I don't think it's going to do anything for nxt short to long term --- nxt needs to be at least at bitcoin level in popularity before even a semi-legitimate business like a gambling company would issue such asset. I won't buy it still. Lets move on. |
|
|
|
What do you mean? Lets say I want buy pot. ( i take the risk of getting scammed).
Give me a solution to use either asset or digital goods infrastructure to do so.
There is no solution so far... Ok, then I misunderstood "asset" exchange and I take everything back I said about it. You can have unique names all you want. It's crap and I doubt it's worth that much pages of discussion. It's not going to do anything for nxt. It basically will encourage ponzi schemes. I issue an "asset" and tell you to buy it and sell it to next person for higher price. The next person buys it and sells it to next person even higher. This is worth nothing unless I can trade it for something real. Too many pages of discussion on something that will never pickup (not in the next 2 or 3 years) congratulations on "not getting it". if all those pages of discussion weren't enough than only time will be able to sort this one out. some day you will "get it" you will just have to see the applications with your own eyes. (granted there will probably be 100 scams for every 1 legitimate use but thats neither here nor there, the 1% that are legit are going to change the world) I don't believe any "legitimate" company is going to issue a "virtual" asset anytime soon on nxt (if it al). It's really worth nothing if I can't trade it for something real. Why would I buy any asset next month when it's live on real blockchain? every gambling company in the world? the mobile application company nxt? a fiat gateway? a cryptocoin gateway? Ok, so I bought an asset issued on nxt blockchain by a gambling company. What cam I do with it? |
|
|
|
What do you mean? Lets say I want buy pot. ( i take the risk of getting scammed).
Give me a solution to use either asset or digital goods infrastructure to do so.
There is no solution so far... Ok, then I misunderstood "asset" exchange and I take everything back I said about it. You can have unique names all you want. It's crap and I doubt it's worth that much pages of discussion. It's not going to do anything for nxt. It basically will encourage ponzi schemes. I issue an "asset" and tell you to buy it and sell it to next person for higher price. The next person buys it and sells it to next person even higher. This is worth nothing unless I can trade it for something real. Too many pages of discussion on something that will never pickup (not in the next 2 or 3 years) congratulations on "not getting it". if all those pages of discussion weren't enough than only time will be able to sort this one out. some day you will "get it" you will just have to see the applications with your own eyes. (granted there will probably be 100 scams for every 1 legitimate use but thats neither here nor there, the 1% that are legit are going to change the world) I don't believe any "legitimate" company is going to issue a "virtual" asset anytime soon on nxt (if it al). It's really worth nothing if I can't trade it for something real. Why would I buy any asset next month when it's live on real blockchain? What exactly can I do with it? |
|
|
|
What do you mean? Lets say I want buy pot. ( i take the risk of getting scammed).
Give me a solution to use either asset or digital goods infrastructure to do so.
There is no solution so far... Ok, then I misunderstood "asset" exchange and I take everything back I said about it. You can have unique names all you want. It's crap and I doubt it's worth that much pages of discussion. It's not going to do anything for nxt. It basically will encourage ponzi schemes. I issue an "asset" and tell you to buy it and sell it to next person for higher price. The next person buys it and sells it to next person even higher. This is worth nothing unless I can trade it for something real. Every "asset" is just another "crapcopin" on nxt blockchain. Too many pages of discussion on something that will never pickup. Lets move on to a different topic. |
|
|
|
I really strongly think this is not right.
People are going to have to do research anyway before they buy and once they do it will be totally obvious which one is the legit one, it will be the one that they already own some of. alternatively inorder for them to feel safe buying with out doing research the asset will have to be well established. In this scenario the barrier to entry cost would actually be relatively insignificant compared to the costs associated with artificially generating that credibility through having huge amounts of fees payed to miners through the buying and selling of your asset.
im really quite certain that, considering the recent change to the conditions, the benefits gained from having a vibrant ecosystem of tokens would outweigh the cost of potential scammers, especially since people will need to take basic precautions against scammers anyway no matter what the issue fee.
This makes sense. Let's think how we'll come to a consensus. Dude, this is pretty simple. You were working on "digital good" ("porn store"). If one video (that costs $5 on clips4sale) costs $40, the seller needs to sell 8 of them to just make it even This is not going to work. Trust me. No one is opening a digital "good" store if it costs that much to add a new clip Asset exchange is not for digital goods. It is for parts of a company. In fact, cfb is working on a digital goods store as we speak. I thought it would use the same infrastructure. So it's totally new code that will become part of NRS? Yes. What about non-digital goods? Lets say I want to sell a USB drive that's worth $10? Neither is fit for your needs. (Due to trust issues etc) What do you mean? Lets say I want buy pot. ( i take the risk of getting scammed). Give me a solution to use either asset or digital goods infrastructure to do so. |
|
|
|
I really strongly think this is not right.
People are going to have to do research anyway before they buy and once they do it will be totally obvious which one is the legit one, it will be the one that they already own some of. alternatively inorder for them to feel safe buying with out doing research the asset will have to be well established. In this scenario the barrier to entry cost would actually be relatively insignificant compared to the costs associated with artificially generating that credibility through having huge amounts of fees payed to miners through the buying and selling of your asset.
im really quite certain that, considering the recent change to the conditions, the benefits gained from having a vibrant ecosystem of tokens would outweigh the cost of potential scammers, especially since people will need to take basic precautions against scammers anyway no matter what the issue fee.
This makes sense. Let's think how we'll come to a consensus. Dude, this is pretty simple. You were working on "digital good" ("porn store"). If one video (that costs $5 on clips4sale) costs $40, the seller needs to sell 8 of them to just make it even This is not going to work. Trust me. No one is opening a digital "good" store if it costs that much to add a new clip Asset exchange is not for digital goods. It is for parts of a company. In fact, cfb is working on a digital goods store as we speak. I thought it would use the same infrastructure. So it's totally new code that will become part of NRS? Yes. What about non-digital goods? Lets say I want to sell a USB drive that's worth $10? |
|
|
|
I really strongly think this is not right.
People are going to have to do research anyway before they buy and once they do it will be totally obvious which one is the legit one, it will be the one that they already own some of. alternatively inorder for them to feel safe buying with out doing research the asset will have to be well established. In this scenario the barrier to entry cost would actually be relatively insignificant compared to the costs associated with artificially generating that credibility through having huge amounts of fees payed to miners through the buying and selling of your asset.
im really quite certain that, considering the recent change to the conditions, the benefits gained from having a vibrant ecosystem of tokens would outweigh the cost of potential scammers, especially since people will need to take basic precautions against scammers anyway no matter what the issue fee.
This makes sense. Let's think how we'll come to a consensus. Dude, this is pretty simple. You were working on "digital good" ("porn store"). If one video (that costs $5 on clips4sale) costs $40, the seller needs to sell 8 of them to just make it even This is not going to work. Trust me. No one is opening a digital "good" store if it costs that much to add a new clip Asset exchange is not for digital goods. It is for parts of a company. In fact, cfb is working on a digital goods store as we speak. I thought it would use the same infrastructure. So that part is totally new code that will become part of NRS? |
|
|
|
I really strongly think this is not right.
People are going to have to do research anyway before they buy and once they do it will be totally obvious which one is the legit one, it will be the one that they already own some of. alternatively inorder for them to feel safe buying with out doing research the asset will have to be well established. In this scenario the barrier to entry cost would actually be relatively insignificant compared to the costs associated with artificially generating that credibility through having huge amounts of fees payed to miners through the buying and selling of your asset.
im really quite certain that, considering the recent change to the conditions, the benefits gained from having a vibrant ecosystem of tokens would outweigh the cost of potential scammers, especially since people will need to take basic precautions against scammers anyway no matter what the issue fee.
This makes sense. Let's think how we'll come to a consensus. Dude, this is pretty simple. You were working on "digital goods" ("porn store"). If one video (that costs $5 on clips4sale) costs $40 to issue as an asset, the seller needs to sell 8 copies to just make it even This is not going to work. No one is opening a digital "good" store if it costs that much. |
|
|
|
since we are doing non-unique names we may as well lower the price of issuing an asset down to the same price as any other transaction. (0.1nxt as it stand now i think right)
can anyone think of a good reason not to?
Yes, the logic behind 1000 nxt was to discourage scamers from squatting on names. If the names are not unique, the fees should be dropped. Besides, if I have something that is worth $5. 1000 nxt fees ($40) is 8 times higher than my asset value. |
|
|
|
Nxt is in dared need of a 100% trust forum. Im wondering how long it will take until we get one. I believe community fund should fund a forum to get thing structure a bit. It good to be decentralized, but not desorganized.
I'm setting one up now and if opticalcarrier agrees it can be the new forums.nxtcrypto.org: http://107.170.117.237Nice it look like bitcointalk! EDIT: @wesley, make sure there is two admins, to avoid the case that Nxt have with nxtcrypto at the moment. [/quote] Why just two? We can can have perhaps 6 admins (or moderators) that are well known |
|
|
|
Nxt is in dared need of a 100% trust forum. Im wondering how long it will take until we get one. I believe community fund should fund a forum to get thing structure a bit. It good to be decentralized, but not desorganized.
I'm setting one up now and if opticalcarrier agrees it can be the new forums.nxtcrypto.org: http://107.170.117.237Great job. Is nxt.org owner still asking for a million nxt? That should be the default URL (but definitely not for a million nxt). |
|
|
|
So frustrating that some of these other guys cant see what an elegant solution this is to an age old problem.
Indeed - also practically speaking the "list of Assets" will end up being huge (so you are not likely to be searching for an Asset by scrolling through a list). Yes, this is a good point. If the list of assets goes into hundreds of thousands, who will care about "names" anyway?. It will be impossible to display that many names in the client. If the user is shown only the assets whose issuer they added to the trust list, that will make the list clean and manageable. |
|
|
|
Hey ciyam, you see what happens when you push an idea / prototype? Discussion. Which results in new ideas. Good!
There is already a great invention for trust called GPG - maybe if we can help make *that* more user friendly we could integrate its usage *with* the Nxt platform. I think the idea of "personal" aliases (unique attributes belonging to a user) could be helpful for that (one of those could be GPG fingerprint). The trust list can't be encrypted as the server needs to know if someone is in your list. Otherwise how would the server reject an asset buy from non-trusted issuer? edit: sorry that part is probably wrong. Any opinion on that? How would "trust" work if the list is encrypted? |
|
|
|
Hey ciyam, you see what happens when you push an idea / prototype? Discussion. Which results in new ideas. Good!
There is already a great invention for trust called GPG - maybe if we can help make *that* more user friendly we could integrate its usage *with* the Nxt platform. I think the idea of "personal" aliases (unique attributes belonging to a user) could be helpful for that (one of those could be GPG fingerprint). The trust list can't be encrypted as the server needs to know if someone is in your list. Otherwise how would the server reject an asset buy from non-trusted issuer? edit: sorry that part is probably wrong. Nxt doesn't need GPG. There is already a public key that can be used to encrypt something (client side) and the private key will decrypt it. Or is that not possible? |
|
|
|
So if the first thing we do is prevent any business from being able to use their own name without extortion it is *hardly going to be appealing*.
what are they doing with domain names since internet is born ? Again - in many countries it is *illegal* to squat names (such as Australia) - the world isn't just the US. Something decentralized (and more anonymous without a central registrar) like nxt, it really doesn't matter as no legal actions can be initiated. However, there is a problem with life-time owning the domain, even after the account is lost (forgotten password, dead person) that domain name is gone forever. |
|
|
|
So if the first thing we do is prevent any business from being able to use their own name without extortion it is *hardly going to be appealing*.
what are they doing with domain names since internet is born ? The domain names expire though. You have to pay to keep it. in nxt case domain are life-time. Even after you are dead, no one can still use them |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
