Bitcoin Forum
July 17, 2019, 01:29:15 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 2234 2235 2236 2237 2238 2239 2240 2241 2242 2243 2244 2245 2246 2247 2248 2249 2250 2251 2252 2253 2254 2255 2256 2257 2258 2259 2260 2261 2262 2263 2264 2265 2266 2267 2268 2269 2270 2271 2272 2273 2274 2275 2276 2277 2278 2279 2280 2281 2282 2283 [2284] 2285 2286 2287 2288 2289 2290 2291 2292 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2301 2302 2303 2304 2305 2306 2307 2308 2309 2310 2311 2312 2313 2314 2315 2316 2317 2318 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2325 2326 2327 2328 2329 2330 2331 2332 2333 2334 ... 2567 »
  Print  
Author Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information  (Read 2754315 times)
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
March 18, 2014, 01:46:22 PM
 #45661

someone mentioned before "what happens if the assets sold on the AE become worth more then the market cap of NXT?"

would i be right in saying that the marketcap of nxt will always be higher then the marketcap of the assets sold on AE? seeing as you need nxt to buy shares on the AE? thus meaning if there is ever a company that sells shares on the AE that grows to the size of google.. the nxt marketcap will also rise to above the market cap of that company+the rest? so say NMAC rises in value and all the shares are worth 40billion.... the nxt marketcap would be atleast 40billion? am i right in saying that?

To me it feels like you are saying the market cap of DHL should be equal to the value of the parcels it shifts...

In this case Nxt is the medium in which the assets are traded, but NXT may not be used to buy/sell those assets, if it is - great but I assume what we are saying is you can buy one asset e.g. Silver with another asset e.g. BTC

Will they be completely decoupled, I am guessing not but I don't have a good enough knowledge of economics to guess what the relationship will be.

well maybe im wrong but from what i know you wont be able to buy shares in one company with shares in another.. or silver or what ever other asset! the reason i think that it will be the case that the value of nxt will rise with the value of companies is akin to the petrodollar!

you need dollars to purchase oil hence propping up the value of the dollar!(allot)... if a company is growing fast and people want to buy into that company they must first nxt and therefore propping up the value of nxt the same as the petrodollar only for companies instead of oil... correct me if im wrong but thats just the way i see it going!

 i also think it would be a bad idea to make it possible to buy shares/assets with any other assets! i think nxt should stay as the base currency... look what would happen to the dollar if it became the petroeuro!
Certainly there is an effect, but not directly linear.
However since all assets are priced in NXT, if somebody wanted to use AE to sell things that are worth more than all of NXT, they couldnt. Therefore they wont.

This is why we need to be able to trade things denominated in other assets.

Do the math please. Do you want to ensure that there will never be any more assets in AE than the market cap of NXT?

Currently, what would happen if somebody deposited 100 million worth of BTC and had that much in  BTC assets? People wouldnt pay a premium for it, but there isnt enough NXT to be able to represent all of that BTC. Certainly the price of NXT will "stretch" as best as it could, but not linearly. Some proportion.

Now imagine somebody issued 100 billion USD worth of Petro assets in NXT. of course they wouldnt, unless there was 100 billion USD worth of other assets. This wont make NXT worth 100 billion, but if it gets even 1% due to the "stretching"...

Do the math, properly and you will see that we need to allow trading assets against other assets, otherwise NXT AE will be limiting the amount of assets being issued in the first place.

 James

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
1563326955
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563326955

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563326955
Reply with quote  #2

1563326955
Report to moderator
1563326955
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563326955

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563326955
Reply with quote  #2

1563326955
Report to moderator
1563326955
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563326955

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563326955
Reply with quote  #2

1563326955
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
March 18, 2014, 01:48:45 PM
 #45662

Simple:

Free market will not allow big arbitrage possibilities, thus making Nxt market cap >= cumulated assets values.

tl;td moon.

edit: Believe me. I studied. Kiss
You studied at wrong place Smiley

This equation is true only if we restrict to trading using NXT,but that has a counterproductive limiting aspect as I have explained. I am not an economist, but I do have common sense

Better to have 1% the value of uncapped asset values, than 100% of asset values limited to NXT market cap.

James

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
El3k0n
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 109
Merit: 10


USA TRUMP USA TRUMP USA TRUMP


View Profile
March 18, 2014, 01:49:30 PM
 #45663

someone mentioned before "what happens if the assets sold on the AE become worth more then the market cap of NXT?"

would i be right in saying that the marketcap of nxt will always be higher then the marketcap of the assets sold on AE? seeing as you need nxt to buy shares on the AE? thus meaning if there is ever a company that sells shares on the AE that grows to the size of google.. the nxt marketcap will also rise to above the market cap of that company+the rest? so say NMAC rises in value and all the shares are worth 40billion.... the nxt marketcap would be atleast 40billion? am i right in saying that?
Incorrect.
The value of NXT will be a function of the value of all the assets. The more the assets are worth the more NXT will be worth, however we do not know what the mapping function will be. It will most likely be some sort of monotonically increasing function.

James

the bold line is essentially what i meant!

edit: the more i learn about NXT the more i believe in it regardless of the current value or negative opinions of others!

The more I learn about NXT the more I believe we won't go to the moon, we'll directly buy the moon!
igmaca
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 18, 2014, 01:50:02 PM
 #45664

someone mentioned before "what happens if the assets sold on the AE become worth more then the market cap of NXT?"

would i be right in saying that the marketcap of nxt will always be higher then the marketcap of the assets sold on AE? seeing as you need nxt to buy shares on the AE? thus meaning if there is ever a company that sells shares on the AE that grows to the size of google.. the nxt marketcap will also rise to above the market cap of that company+the rest? so say NMAC rises in value and all the shares are worth 40billion.... the nxt marketcap would be atleast 40billion? am i right in saying that?

To me it feels like you are saying the market cap of DHL should be equal to the value of the parcels it shifts...

In this case Nxt is the medium in which the assets are traded, but NXT may not be used to buy/sell those assets, if it is - great but I assume what we are saying is you can buy one asset e.g. Silver with another asset e.g. BTC

Will they be completely decoupled, I am guessing not but I don't have a good enough knowledge of economics to guess what the relationship will be.

well maybe im wrong but from what i know you wont be able to buy shares in one company with shares in another.. or silver or what ever other asset! the reason i think that it will be the case that the value of nxt will rise with the value of companies is akin to the petrodollar!

you need dollars to purchase oil hence propping up the value of the dollar!(allot)... if a company is growing fast and people want to buy into that company they must first nxt and therefore propping up the value of nxt the same as the petrodollar only for companies instead of oil... correct me if im wrong but thats just the way i see it going!

 i also think it would be a bad idea to make it possible to buy shares/assets with any other assets! i think nxt should stay as the base currency... look what would happen to the dollar if it became the petroeuro!

I think the key is that the fees to ensure NXT network only Nxt coins must be used.

martismartis
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1005


View Profile
March 18, 2014, 01:50:34 PM
 #45665

Good afternoon people. Could somebody explain to me the following:

Somebody (j777) issues asset "BTC" in AE. Gateways is working, technically it is possible to sell and buy BTC in AE.

But I also have real BTC and want to sell them for NXT in AE. As it is already "BTC" issued in AE not by me and I'm not an owner of this asset, how my real BTC will appear in AE and I can trade them? Will I need to issue "BTC1"? This question is also for some other "universal" assets.

Did I miss something or do I need to go for beauty sleep for a while? Smiley
You can deposit your real BTC with any NXT gateway using whatever method they have. For multigateway, once you get a deposit address, you just send your real BTC to that bitcoin address and it will appear in AE with the corresponding amount of multigateway BTC.

Alternatively, you could create a BTC asset and list it and convince people that you really do have the BTC and you really will redeem it when they want and then sell it on the AE.

The 1000 NXT fee will discourage the second approach as issuing and maintaining any real asset is a lot of work and should not be undertaken lightly. If it only cost a few NXT, then some people will try to issue their own assets and it will become quite a mess.

Look at the work Anon136 is putting in for his silver asset. There are entire companies that are being created to become an asset!

James

Ok, Thank you for explanation. But what about other "universal" assets, which is not related with cryptos and gateways? For example, I want to trade "salt" in AE. I issue asset "salt" with quantity of 1000. Sometime all 1000 of "salt" is sold, and I want to add "more" salt to AE. It will be "Salt1"? What if my competitor also has the same "salt" and wants to trade it in AE?

While debate about asset naming started, could somebody answer and/or explain my thoughts?
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
March 18, 2014, 01:51:17 PM
 #45666

someone mentioned before "what happens if the assets sold on the AE become worth more then the market cap of NXT?"

would i be right in saying that the marketcap of nxt will always be higher then the marketcap of the assets sold on AE? seeing as you need nxt to buy shares on the AE? thus meaning if there is ever a company that sells shares on the AE that grows to the size of google.. the nxt marketcap will also rise to above the market cap of that company+the rest? so say NMAC rises in value and all the shares are worth 40billion.... the nxt marketcap would be atleast 40billion? am i right in saying that?
Incorrect.
The value of NXT will be a function of the value of all the assets. The more the assets are worth the more NXT will be worth, however we do not know what the mapping function will be. It will most likely be some sort of monotonically increasing function.

James

the bold line is essentially what i meant!

edit: the more i learn about NXT the more i believe in it regardless of the current value or negative opinions of others!

The more I learn about NXT the more I believe we won't go to the moon, we'll directly buy the moon!

Around 1000 NXT per acre!

http://www.lunarregistry.com/land/index.shtml

James

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 18, 2014, 01:52:25 PM
 #45667

Simple:

Free market will not allow big arbitrage possibilities, thus making Nxt market cap >= cumulated assets values.

tl;td moon.

edit: Believe me. I studied. Kiss
You studied at wrong place Smiley

This equation is true only if we restrict to trading using NXT,but that has a counterproductive limiting aspect as I have explained. I am not an economist, but I do have common sense

Better to have 1% the value of uncapped asset values, than 100% of asset values limited to NXT market cap.

James

No way, I studied truthology at Christian Tech.
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
March 18, 2014, 01:58:53 PM
 #45668

Good afternoon people. Could somebody explain to me the following:

Somebody (j777) issues asset "BTC" in AE. Gateways is working, technically it is possible to sell and buy BTC in AE.

But I also have real BTC and want to sell them for NXT in AE. As it is already "BTC" issued in AE not by me and I'm not an owner of this asset, how my real BTC will appear in AE and I can trade them? Will I need to issue "BTC1"? This question is also for some other "universal" assets.

Did I miss something or do I need to go for beauty sleep for a while? Smiley
You can deposit your real BTC with any NXT gateway using whatever method they have. For multigateway, once you get a deposit address, you just send your real BTC to that bitcoin address and it will appear in AE with the corresponding amount of multigateway BTC.

Alternatively, you could create a BTC asset and list it and convince people that you really do have the BTC and you really will redeem it when they want and then sell it on the AE.

The 1000 NXT fee will discourage the second approach as issuing and maintaining any real asset is a lot of work and should not be undertaken lightly. If it only cost a few NXT, then some people will try to issue their own assets and it will become quite a mess.

Look at the work Anon136 is putting in for his silver asset. There are entire companies that are being created to become an asset!

James

Ok, Thank you for explanation. But what about other "universal" assets, which is not related with cryptos and gateways? For example, I want to trade "salt" in AE. I issue asset "salt" with quantity of 1000. Sometime all 1000 of "salt" is sold, and I want to add "more" salt to AE. It will be "Salt1"? What if my competitor also has the same "salt" and wants to trade it in AE?

While debate about asset naming started, could somebody answer and/or explain my thoughts?
You should have issued enough assets to cover all the salt you thought you would ever use and put the issued but uncollateralized assets in holding. Maybe I need to create an asset holding service to allow people to do incremental issuing of assets. That would make it much easier to do this without being accused of fractional reserving

It seems that decisions are being made behind closed doors against my advice on the Asset Naming and we are about to get identical names implemented, even though we can never go back from that. We could always do the reverse, but it seems that I am too busy coding now that I am out of the loop on the key decisions.

So, your Salt will appear as Salt 72857 and competitors salt will be Salt 94893 and that will magically instill an urge into every salt purchaser to conduct a due diligence research into which Salt is better and why the price is difference, etc. No chance of it confusing the user at all, we all know how much people like to investigate things thoroughly before they purchase $2 worth of salt

James

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
opticalcarrier
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100



View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:04:46 PM
 #45669

If POS isn't profitable and owning Nxt is not profitable and only owning assets are profitable, no one will be around to develop the asset owning system into the future.

The future is not something we can easily predict - but if you have a choice of two platforms:

1. Fee of 1%
2. Fee of 0.01 USD

which are users going to "flock to"?

In the end it is only the "users" that matter - not peoples wishes and desires to "get rich".


*sigh*  ill say it again.  I've had just a few people back me up, but no one yet to say why its a bad idea, if it truly is...

I view the fee as a blockchain spam deterrent, any possible ROI is secondary IMHO.  We don't have any major activity on the blockchain at the moment.  All is relatively quiet, but that will change as services are added and merchants begin to use NXT for payment.  After only a few short months of very little activity the full blockchain is already over 50 megs on disk.

I think the fee should only be changed if the price of NXT goes up significantly.  My 0.25 NXT minimum fee vote was based on the thought of 1 NXT going to the stable range of $0.15 to ~$0.30 cents US in the next six months.

I still say trying to tie the fee to some FIAT is the wrong direction.  Ill say it again - a transactions's fee should be tied to its byte size on the blockchain.  So lets say a NXT transfer is 128bytes, and its fee is .1NXT, so then an AM or alias transaction of size 256bytes should then cost .2NXT, and other transaction types follow the same method of fee determination.  We would determine a "base" transaction that is the smallest possible transaction, and set the .1 NXT fee to it.  (or .01 or .05 or whatever the community decides) and then scale every other transaction's fee to be based on its size compared to the base one.
But no one likes my idea.  Embarrassed

This proposal will require a bit more code; but for the moment I think a straight .1 NXT for all works, as it will encourage more use for now.
bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:08:53 PM
 #45670

I like your idea and CfB wrote about it, too.

Let's discuss!
opticalcarrier
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100



View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:11:15 PM
 #45671

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.

mmmhh, send it to the genesis account? Clients should look up which assets the genesis account owns and subtract the amount from the asset amount available on Nxt.

I think itd be a good idea for the system to be able to completely purge an asset from the blockchain if all of its qty is sent to genesis block.  then someone should be able to reissue the same name/ID.  OF course this will require a good bit of code, so mayby its not that urgent right now, Id prefer to see ability to split NXT down to 8 decimal places first, reduced fees, and also leased effectiveBalance and account control first.
mcjavar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:12:15 PM
 #45672

Good afternoon people. Could somebody explain to me the following:

Somebody (j777) issues asset "BTC" in AE. Gateways is working, technically it is possible to sell and buy BTC in AE.

But I also have real BTC and want to sell them for NXT in AE. As it is already "BTC" issued in AE not by me and I'm not an owner of this asset, how my real BTC will appear in AE and I can trade them? Will I need to issue "BTC1"? This question is also for some other "universal" assets.

Did I miss something or do I need to go for beauty sleep for a while? Smiley
You can deposit your real BTC with any NXT gateway using whatever method they have. For multigateway, once you get a deposit address, you just send your real BTC to that bitcoin address and it will appear in AE with the corresponding amount of multigateway BTC.

Alternatively, you could create a BTC asset and list it and convince people that you really do have the BTC and you really will redeem it when they want and then sell it on the AE.

The 1000 NXT fee will discourage the second approach as issuing and maintaining any real asset is a lot of work and should not be undertaken lightly. If it only cost a few NXT, then some people will try to issue their own assets and it will become quite a mess.

Look at the work Anon136 is putting in for his silver asset. There are entire companies that are being created to become an asset!

James

Ok, Thank you for explanation. But what about other "universal" assets, which is not related with cryptos and gateways? For example, I want to trade "salt" in AE. I issue asset "salt" with quantity of 1000. Sometime all 1000 of "salt" is sold, and I want to add "more" salt to AE. It will be "Salt1"? What if my competitor also has the same "salt" and wants to trade it in AE?

While debate about asset naming started, could somebody answer and/or explain my thoughts?
You should have issued enough assets to cover all the salt you thought you would ever use and put the issued but uncollateralized assets in holding. Maybe I need to create an asset holding service to allow people to do incremental issuing of assets. That would make it much easier to do this without being accused of fractional reserving

It seems that decisions are being made behind closed doors against my advice on the Asset Naming and we are about to get identical names implemented, even though we can never go back from that. We could always do the reverse, but it seems that I am too busy coding now that I am out of the loop on the key decisions.

So, your Salt will appear as Salt 72857 and competitors salt will be Salt 94893 and that will magically instill an urge into every salt purchaser to conduct a due diligence research into which Salt is better and why the price is difference, etc. No chance of it confusing the user at all, we all know how much people like to investigate things thoroughly before they purchase $2 worth of salt

James

Allowing the issuance of assets with the same name will most probably hinder us to sell our assets on the Nxt AE as we don´t want to have anyone creating assets with the same name as ours. We will work hard to get our shit together and to convince the community that our shares are worth buying, but if anyone can come and issue assets with the same name, we will most probably not use Nxt as scamming would harm our reputation, too.


EDIT: I am talking about a real life project we would like to fund using Nxt.
martismartis
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1005


View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:14:29 PM
 #45673

Good afternoon people. Could somebody explain to me the following:

Somebody (j777) issues asset "BTC" in AE. Gateways is working, technically it is possible to sell and buy BTC in AE.

But I also have real BTC and want to sell them for NXT in AE. As it is already "BTC" issued in AE not by me and I'm not an owner of this asset, how my real BTC will appear in AE and I can trade them? Will I need to issue "BTC1"? This question is also for some other "universal" assets.

Did I miss something or do I need to go for beauty sleep for a while? Smiley
You can deposit your real BTC with any NXT gateway using whatever method they have. For multigateway, once you get a deposit address, you just send your real BTC to that bitcoin address and it will appear in AE with the corresponding amount of multigateway BTC.

Alternatively, you could create a BTC asset and list it and convince people that you really do have the BTC and you really will redeem it when they want and then sell it on the AE.

The 1000 NXT fee will discourage the second approach as issuing and maintaining any real asset is a lot of work and should not be undertaken lightly. If it only cost a few NXT, then some people will try to issue their own assets and it will become quite a mess.

Look at the work Anon136 is putting in for his silver asset. There are entire companies that are being created to become an asset!

James

Ok, Thank you for explanation. But what about other "universal" assets, which is not related with cryptos and gateways? For example, I want to trade "salt" in AE. I issue asset "salt" with quantity of 1000. Sometime all 1000 of "salt" is sold, and I want to add "more" salt to AE. It will be "Salt1"? What if my competitor also has the same "salt" and wants to trade it in AE?

While debate about asset naming started, could somebody answer and/or explain my thoughts?
You should have issued enough assets to cover all the salt you thought you would ever use and put the issued but uncollateralized assets in holding. Maybe I need to create an asset holding service to allow people to do incremental issuing of assets. That would make it much easier to do this without being accused of fractional reserving

It seems that decisions are being made behind closed doors against my advice on the Asset Naming and we are about to get identical names implemented, even though we can never go back from that. We could always do the reverse, but it seems that I am too busy coding now that I am out of the loop on the key decisions.

So, your Salt will appear as Salt 72857 and competitors salt will be Salt 94893 and that will magically instill an urge into every salt purchaser to conduct a due diligence research into which Salt is better and why the price is difference, etc. No chance of it confusing the user at all, we all know how much people like to investigate things thoroughly before they purchase $2 worth of salt

James

Bold part could be a solution. But what about possibility for asset issuer to increase (not decrease) own asset quantity later? Could it somehow harm the whole concept of AE?
chanc3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 250



View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:17:06 PM
 #45674



I still say trying to tie the fee to some FIAT is the wrong direction.  Ill say it again - a transactions's fee should be tied to its byte size on the blockchain.  So lets say a NXT transfer is 128bytes, and its fee is .1NXT, so then an AM or alias transaction of size 256bytes should then cost .2NXT, and other transaction types follow the same method of fee determination.  We would determine a "base" transaction that is the smallest possible transaction, and set the .1 NXT fee to it.  (or .01 or .05 or whatever the community decides) and then scale every other transaction's fee to be based on its size compared to the base one.
But no one likes my idea.  Embarrassed

This proposal will require a bit more code; but for the moment I think a straight .1 NXT for all works, as it will encourage more use for now.

+1

First time I have seen this - must have missed it in the hopsepipe first time round - I think this has some merit...
After all NXT is PoS so the growth/demand and resources is all in the chain....


         ▄▄▄
        █████
        █████
         ▀▀▀
     ▄█
███████▄    ▄█████▄   ███████▄   ███   ███  ███        ▄█████▄   ███   ███   ▄█████▄
    ███ █████████  █████████  █████████  ███   ███  ███       █████████  ███   ███  █████████
    ███ ███  ▀███  ███   ███  ███  ▀███  ███   ███  ███       ███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███
    ███ ███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███  ███       ███   ███  ███   ███  ███▄
    ███ ███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███  ███       ███   ███  ███   ███   ███▄
    ███ ███  ▄███  ███   ███  ███  ▄███  ███   ███  ███       ███   ███  ███   ███    ▀███▄
    ███ █████████  ███   ███  █████████  ███   ███  ███       ███   ███  ███   ███      ▀███
    ███ ███████▀   ███   ███  ███████▀   ███   ███  ███       ███   ███  ███   ███       ▀███
        ███        ███   ███  ███        ███   ███  ███       ███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███
        ███        █████████  ███        █████████  ████████  █████████  █████████  █████████
        ███         ▀█████▀   ███         ▀█████▀   ████████   ▀█████▀    ▀█████▀    ▀█████▀
                                                                       WORLD
   

               ▄████▄▄   ▄
  █▄          ██████████▀▄
  ███        ███████████▀
  ▐████▄     ██████████▌
  ▄▄██████▄▄▄▄█████████▌
  ▀████████████████████
    ▀█████████████████
    ▄▄███████████████
     ▀█████████████▀
      ▄▄█████████▀
  ▀▀██████████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀


                   ▄▄████
              ▄▄████████▌
         ▄▄█████████▀███
    ▄▄██████████▀▀ ▄███▌
▄████████████▀▀  ▄█████
▀▀▀███████▀   ▄███████▌
      ██    ▄█████████
       █  ▄██████████▌
       █  ███████████
       █ ██▀ ▀██████▌
       ██▀     ▀████
                 ▀█▌


         ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
      ▄█▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██▄
     █▀ █  ▄   ▄  █ ▀█
    █ ▀█   █   █   █▀ █
   █▀ █ ▀▀█▀▀▀▀▀█▀▀ █ ▀█
   █▄█▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█▄█
   █▀█▀▀▀▀█▀▀▀▀▀█▀▀▀▀█▀█
   █▄ █ ▄▀█▀▀▀▀▀█▀▀▄█ ▄█
    █ ▄█   █   █   █▄ █
     █▄ █  ▀   ▀  █ ▄█
      ▀█▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄█▀
         ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

              █
            █████
          █████████
        █████████████
      █████████████████
    █████████████████████
  █████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
  █████████████████████████
    █████████████████████
      █████████████████
        █████████████
          █████████
            ████
             
RECEIVE    ⇩ ⇩
          9% DISCOUNT         
⇨  BUY NOW 
bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:17:41 PM
 #45675


Non-unique Asset names combined with Asset ID (which already exists) as the displayed name. The more I read about it the more I like it. Nxt code change would just be to allow same asset names. The rest is client side dev.

edit: Use the Asset ID and change it to HEX for slightly more convenience, maybe.

It's not the most beautiful solution, but it is straight forward and easy. Where is the problem?
bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:20:21 PM
 #45676

Fee should depend on data size coz it solves a technical problem (spam prevention)
BrianNowhere
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
March 18, 2014, 02:20:50 PM
 #45677

Simple:

Free market will not allow big arbitrage possibilities, thus making Nxt market cap >= cumulated assets values.

tl;td moon.

edit: Believe me. I studied.  Kiss Grin

So can the price of Nxt skyrocket one day, or not? For those who think that is possible based on the above, is it of no concern that the fees for transacting and assets will be based on a fixed number rather than a percentage that can self adjust based on current value?

If Nxt ever matched the value of current BTC (which can't happen according to CIYAM OPEN and others here) and the transaction fee is the proposed .01 Nxt  then the cost to make a transaction in Nxt would be $6.20 USD It would cost $6.20 to PLACE a buy or sell order on the AE exchange. It would cost $620,000 to issue an asset at the proposed 1000 Nxt fee for issuance.

Even if Nxt only reached LTC heights we're looking at $0.23 or so for transaction fees, which basically makes the idea microtransactions a non-starter.

Supposedly the 1000 Nxt rate is temporary, which is the same thing they said about tollbooths in my state about 40 years ago.


NXT: 4957831430947123625
bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:23:10 PM
 #45678

We are in the middle of discussing fees.

And if we don't discuss it and NXT raises in value, it is obvious that the devs will lower it more.

I don't get your post Huh
wesleyh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:24:35 PM
 #45679



Allowing the issuance of assets with the same name will most probably hinder us to sell our assets on the Nxt AE as we don´t want to have anyone creating assets with the same name as ours. We will work hard to get our shit together and to convince the community that our shares are worth buying, but if anyone can come and issue assets with the same name, we will most probably not use Nxt as scamming would harm our reputation, too.


EDIT: I am talking about a real life project we would like to fund using Nxt.


if we have a verification system there should be no issue, right? (with non unique names)
Damelon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001



View Profile
March 18, 2014, 02:27:34 PM
 #45680

Simple:

Free market will not allow big arbitrage possibilities, thus making Nxt market cap >= cumulated assets values.

tl;td moon.

edit: Believe me. I studied.  Kiss Grin

So can the price of Nxt skyrocket one day, or not? For those who think that is possible based on the above, is it of no concern that the fees for transacting and assets will be based on a fixed number rather than a percentage that can self adjust based on current value?

If Nxt ever matched the value of current BTC (which can't happen according to CIYAM OPEN and others here) and the transaction fee is the proposed .01 Nxt  then the cost to make a transaction in Nxt would be $6.20 USD It would cost $6.20 to PLACE a buy or sell order on the AE exchange. It would cost $620,000 to issue an asset at the proposed 1000 Nxt fee for issuance.

Even if Nxt only reached LTC heights we're looking at $0.23 or so for transaction fees, which basically makes the idea microtransactions a non-starter.

Supposedly the 1000 Nxt rate is temporary, which is the same thing they said about tollbooths in my state about 40 years ago.

Who has ever said the fees can't change to match the situation?

Because that is what this is predicated on.

Member of the Nxt Foundation | Donations: NXT-D6K7-MLY6-98FM-FLL5T
Join Nxt Slack! https://nxtchat.herokuapp.com/
Founder of Blockchain Workspace | Personal Site & Blog
Pages: « 1 ... 2234 2235 2236 2237 2238 2239 2240 2241 2242 2243 2244 2245 2246 2247 2248 2249 2250 2251 2252 2253 2254 2255 2256 2257 2258 2259 2260 2261 2262 2263 2264 2265 2266 2267 2268 2269 2270 2271 2272 2273 2274 2275 2276 2277 2278 2279 2280 2281 2282 2283 [2284] 2285 2286 2287 2288 2289 2290 2291 2292 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2301 2302 2303 2304 2305 2306 2307 2308 2309 2310 2311 2312 2313 2314 2315 2316 2317 2318 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2325 2326 2327 2328 2329 2330 2331 2332 2333 2334 ... 2567 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!