Bitcoin Forum
July 21, 2019, 06:24:39 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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 2335 2336 2337 2338 2339 2340 2341 2342 2343 2344 2345 2346 2347 ... 2567 »
  Print  
Author Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information  (Read 2755394 times)
xyzzyx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 250


I don't really come from outer space.


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 01:49:58 AM
 #45921

Nope, I have mostly completed the messenger and friend functions, they both piggyback onto the block-chain in a really lightweight manner.

So you have to pay 1 nxt to send a message or friend somebody?

By design messages are not sent on the blockchain as AM's to avoid bloating (in the implementation I'm designing).

Cool.  I was just about to send you a link to the paper Deployment of a Large-scale Peer-to-Peer Social Network by M Yang, et al. but it appears you've already got that aspect covered.  Wink

"An awful lot of code is being written ... in languages that aren't very good by people who don't know what they're doing." -- Barbara Liskov
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
mczarnek
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 527
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 01:55:34 AM
 #45922

Nope, I have mostly completed the messenger and friend functions, they both piggyback onto the block-chain in a really lightweight manner.

So you have to pay 1 nxt to send a message or friend somebody?

Yep. But, one could bundle several messages into one AM. Wink

and the fees are planning on dropping to .01

right? i keep reading this.

Correct. Smiley

Nxt Facebook

That's what I'm working on  Smiley!

I keep thinking "Diaspora".
What makes your project different?

Fees dropping to 0.01 - that will be very interesting.

0.01 Nxt would still be a high fee for messaging though... I would recommend a fee of about 0.0001 Nxt per message, if the only thing being sent is a message, the catch is you can only pay that low of a fee if the message is automatically deleted from the blockchain.

I think the messages need to be perceived as being really cheap as we are competing against WhatsApp that offers messaging for 99 cents per year.  The average teen sends 3,339 txts per month!! (http://mashable.com/2010/10/14/nielsen-texting-stats/) This would be about 40,000 txts per year.  Assuming he/she uses WhatsApp, that costs $0.99 per year, that works out to be $0.000025/txt   Assuming Nxt will soon reach 10 cents that would be a fee of 0.00025 Nxt to compete with them on price alone, we also offer encryption but I'd say we really should try to compete when it comes to price as well. Because if we do it right, I do feel like this could be a killer app because we could probably even compete well with them price-wise.  The money made off of this could then compensate for even lower transaction fees and the forgers could be profitable.

And I worked through all the math but just deleted it to avoid clutter, I believe that we could even afford to charge lower than this assuming we delete messages once the app on the other end receives it, after all most text messages will be stored by the local apps on both sides and the blockchain/decentralized storage can be temporary.. only a few seconds in most cases.  Forgers supporting the text messaging would have to be paid for their extra bandwidth though.


Regard facebook built on top of Nxt.. actually I see some sense to that, we can afford to charge people a very low fee per post, that varies based on how long they want to store it, store it using the decentralized storage, the people in charge of make money off of that and use that money to advertise itself and grow a business.  Why would people use it?  Same advantage Dispora has, Diaspora is indeed very similar but I see it being hard to advertise itself, build it into Nxt and I know I would sign up for a Nxtbook account!

BitSend ◢◤Clients | Source
www.bitsend.info
█▄
█████▄
████████▄
███████████▄
██████████████
███████████▀
████████▀
█████▀
█▀












Segwit | Core 0.14 | Masternodes
XEVAN | DK3 | Electrum soon
Bitcore - BTX/BTC -Project












BSD -USDT | Bittrex | C.Gather | S.Exchange
Cryptopia | NovaExchange | Livecoin
Litebit.eu | Faucet | Bitsend Airdrop













████
 ████
  ████
   ████
    ████
     ████
      ████
       ████
        ████
       ████
      ████
     ████
    ████
   ████
  ████
 ████
████

████
 ████
  ████
   ████
    ████
     ████
      ████
       ████
        ████
       ████
      ████
     ████
    ████
   ████
  ████
 ████
████
Sebastien256
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 715
Merit: 500



View Profile
March 19, 2014, 01:55:39 AM
 #45923

Just saw a really good idea on XCP forum:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg5773807#msg5773807

It is about asset naming and it is very simple and I think quite effective.
Basically once you own an Asset Name, then you can create a subasset for a much lower fee. this essentially allows branding of the root name and then people will know that anything that starts with that is from the same issuer

So Anon gets his Anon136 asset name. Now he can issue:

Anon136.silver1oz
Anon136.silvershot
Anon136.silveretc

It still has a squatting issue with it, but now the squatters have to squat on the names of the issuers, not the target asset. This is far riskier as if a specific name is taken, there are always others that can be used. Unlike "BTC", which is unique.

If we are going to change the NXTcore for asset names, this one might be worth doing.


James


This look like a good addition +1

Nxt official forum at: https://nxtforum.org/
bidji29
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 01:57:58 AM
 #45924

Just saw a really good idea on XCP forum:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg5773807#msg5773807

It is about asset naming and it is very simple and I think quite effective.
Basically once you own an Asset Name, then you can create a subasset for a much lower fee. this essentially allows branding of the root name and then people will know that anything that starts with that is from the same issuer

So Anon gets his Anon136 asset name. Now he can issue:

Anon136.silver1oz
Anon136.silvershot
Anon136.silveretc

It still has a squatting issue with it, but now the squatters have to squat on the names of the issuers, not the target asset. This is far riskier as if a specific name is taken, there are always others that can be used. Unlike "BTC", which is unique.

If we are going to change the NXTcore for asset names, this one might be worth doing.


James


To avoid squatting, the best solution is to have a very high fee to create an AssetName.
Another problem (that Nodecoin revealed) is the fact people can receive assets without asking for them. It can be very problematic if it's abused. Poeple could create ton of asset then send them to all active account, indefinitely.  You don't want ton of asset in your account you don't asked for. Real Spam.
That's why i think an AssetName should go for 10'000 NXT at the launch. It could be modified based on NXT price, but it shouldn't be cheap.



This subasset solution seems great, but with cheap SubAsset, people can spam for only the cost of one Asset. Maybe add the possibility to vote on Asset, and the very bad one are ignored, with all their SubAsset



http://www.freebieservers.com/  100% FREE GAME SERVERS
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:12:33 AM
 #45925

Just saw a really good idea on XCP forum:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg5773807#msg5773807

It is about asset naming and it is very simple and I think quite effective.
Basically once you own an Asset Name, then you can create a subasset for a much lower fee. this essentially allows branding of the root name and then people will know that anything that starts with that is from the same issuer

So Anon gets his Anon136 asset name. Now he can issue:

Anon136.silver1oz
Anon136.silvershot
Anon136.silveretc

It still has a squatting issue with it, but now the squatters have to squat on the names of the issuers, not the target asset. This is far riskier as if a specific name is taken, there are always others that can be used. Unlike "BTC", which is unique.

If we are going to change the NXTcore for asset names, this one might be worth doing.


James


it could still collide if someone else registered Anon136.silver10z

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
brooklynbtc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250

AKA jefdiesel


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:16:57 AM
 #45926

Just saw a really good idea on XCP forum:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg5773807#msg5773807

It is about asset naming and it is very simple and I think quite effective.
Basically once you own an Asset Name, then you can create a subasset for a much lower fee. this essentially allows branding of the root name and then people will know that anything that starts with that is from the same issuer

So Anon gets his Anon136 asset name. Now he can issue:

Anon136.silver1oz
Anon136.silvershot
Anon136.silveretc

It still has a squatting issue with it, but now the squatters have to squat on the names of the issuers, not the target asset. This is far riskier as if a specific name is taken, there are always others that can be used. Unlike "BTC", which is unique.

If we are going to change the NXTcore for asset names, this one might be worth doing.


James


it could still collide if someone else registered Anon136.silver10z

It looks to me like the Anon136.prefix can only be registered by the original user.
Anon136.btc
Anon136.google etc

SN
S   U   P   E   R    N   E   T
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   
Uniting cryptocurrencies, Rewarding talent, Sharing benefits..

Blockchain Technology.

Eadeqa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:17:41 AM
 #45927

2 million Nxt buyer back on bter.



NXT-GZYP-FMRT-FQ9K-3YQGS
https://nxtforum.org
fusecavator
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 117
Merit: 10


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:18:10 AM
 #45928

0.01 Nxt would still be a high fee for messaging though... I would recommend a fee of about 0.0001 Nxt per message, if the only thing being sent is a message, the catch is you can only pay that low of a fee if the message is automatically deleted from the blockchain.

I think the messages need to be perceived as being really cheap as we are competing against WhatsApp that offers messaging for 99 cents per year.  The average teen sends 3,339 txts per month!! (http://mashable.com/2010/10/14/nielsen-texting-stats/) This would be about 40,000 txts per year.  Assuming he/she uses WhatsApp, that costs $0.99 per year, that works out to be $0.000025/txt   Assuming Nxt will soon reach 10 cents that would be a fee of 0.00025 Nxt to compete with them on price alone, we also offer encryption but I'd say we really should try to compete when it comes to price as well. Because if we do it right, I do feel like this could be a killer app because we could probably even compete well with them price-wise.  The money made off of this could then compensate for even lower transaction fees and the forgers could be profitable.

And I worked through all the math but just deleted it to avoid clutter, I believe that we could even afford to charge lower than this assuming we delete messages once the app on the other end receives it, after all most text messages will be stored by the local apps on both sides and the blockchain/decentralized storage can be temporary.. only a few seconds in most cases.  Forgers supporting the text messaging would have to be paid for their extra bandwidth though.


Regard facebook built on top of Nxt.. actually I see some sense to that, we can afford to charge people a very low fee per post, that varies based on how long they want to store it, store it using the decentralized storage, the people in charge of make money off of that and use that money to advertise itself and grow a business.  Why would people use it?  Same advantage Dispora has, Diaspora is indeed very similar but I see it being hard to advertise itself, build it into Nxt and I know I would sign up for a Nxtbook account!

Price isn't everything. I don't know anything about "WhatsApp", however as a long-time irc user, that $0.99/yr sounds rather steep for something I havn't been paying at all for for many years, so they must have some other draw considering they aren't competitive price-wise. I would consider endpoint-endpoint encryption a must, and that would be one of your draws imo.

The problem with full-blown nxtbook though is that people don't want to just post text, they post pictures, videos, etc, and you just can't store all that in the blockchain, even on a temporary basis.
msin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:18:45 AM
 #45929

Shot in the dark, is it decentralized sports betting via asset exchange?

Nope, think bigger, it's something that everyone uses (and is forced to use by some extent), but doesn't really like using due to one factor. NXT removes the factor.

A Nxt Public Toilet?
NxtMinnow
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84
Merit: 10


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:20:06 AM
 #45930

You mean the one at 4000 satoshi?

2 million Nxt buyer back on bter.



xyzzyx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 250


I don't really come from outer space.


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:20:51 AM
Last edit: March 19, 2014, 02:48:33 AM by xyzzyx
 #45931

it could still collide if someone else registered Anon136.silver10z

If I understood the post correctly, that would actually be two assets arranged in a hierarchy.  The first asset, the expensive to issue one, is the root asset.  In this case that asset is called "Anon136".  There is then another asset, a less expensive to issue one, that is a child of the root asset.  In this case it's "silver10z".  A child asset can only be issued by the creator of the root asset, if I'm understanding correctly.

Think website names.

When someone purchases Anon136.silver10z, he is specifying the one asset "silver10z" which is the child of asset "Anon136".

Edit: the more I think about this, the more I like it.  Esp. if the cost to issue child assets decreases the farther away the child asset is from the root asset.  This would use market forces to encourage issuers to impose order on their asset listings.

"An awful lot of code is being written ... in languages that aren't very good by people who don't know what they're doing." -- Barbara Liskov
btc2nxt
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 236
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:25:43 AM
 #45932


Nxt is a platform

non-unique asset names  are for decentralised platform.

but  there are half situation needing centralised platform.

Can we make a compromise.

i got a idea: if asset name contains "coin" , can be non-unique

Sebastien256
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 715
Merit: 500



View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:31:08 AM
 #45933


Good news. Only asset ID was needed to be unique anyway. People can put nxt alias in asset description to point to asset owner site or something. That would help differentiate between asset.

Hey by the way, now that non-unique asset names is decided,

Would it be possible to allow to edit asset description if asset owner feel like he needs that?
Let discuss this.

Nxt official forum at: https://nxtforum.org/
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:36:25 AM
 #45934


Good news. Only asset ID was needed to be unique anyway. People can put nxt alias in asset description to point to asset owner site or something. That would help differentiate between asset.

Hey by the way,

Would it be possible to allow to edit asset description if asset owner feel like he needs that?
Let discuss this.

its a good solution imo just remember to check the id before you click purchase.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
brooklynbtc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250

AKA jefdiesel


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:44:13 AM
 #45935


Good news. Only asset ID was needed to be unique anyway. People can put nxt alias in asset description to point to asset owner site or something. That would help differentiate between asset.

Hey by the way, now that non-unique asset names is decided,

Would it be possible to allow to edit asset description if asset owner feel like he needs that?
Let discuss this.

Adjusting the description is adjusting the whole Asset.

Original Asset is what the investors purchase, sell, and value.

IF you can adjust, why not adjust delete the description and make it worthless. If (as issuer) you sold all your shares, now the ASSET owns zero anything.

Who is going to buy that?

SN
S   U   P   E   R    N   E   T
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   
Uniting cryptocurrencies, Rewarding talent, Sharing benefits..

Blockchain Technology.

brooklynbtc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250

AKA jefdiesel


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:45:22 AM
 #45936


Good news. Only asset ID was needed to be unique anyway. People can put nxt alias in asset description to point to asset owner site or something. That would help differentiate between asset.

Hey by the way,

Would it be possible to allow to edit asset description if asset owner feel like he needs that?
Let discuss this.

its a good solution imo just remember to check the id before you click purchase.

You really better be checking more than just the ID before you invest. Caveat Emptor as they say

SN
S   U   P   E   R    N   E   T
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   
Uniting cryptocurrencies, Rewarding talent, Sharing benefits..

Blockchain Technology.

Sebastien256
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 715
Merit: 500



View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:45:42 AM
 #45937


Good news. Only asset ID was needed to be unique anyway. People can put nxt alias in asset description to point to asset owner site or something. That would help differentiate between asset.

Hey by the way, now that non-unique asset names is decided,

Would it be possible to allow to edit asset description if asset owner feel like he needs that?
Let discuss this.

Adjusting the description is adjusting the whole Asset.

Original Asset is what the investors purchase, sell, and value.

IF you can adjust, why not adjust delete the description and make it worthless. If you sold all your shares, now the ASSET owns zero anything.

Who is going to buy that?

OK then, you are right, but would it be possible to add an editable field other than description to an asset. That would be usefull i think.

Nxt official forum at: https://nxtforum.org/
brooklynbtc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250

AKA jefdiesel


View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:48:00 AM
 #45938


Good news. Only asset ID was needed to be unique anyway. People can put nxt alias in asset description to point to asset owner site or something. That would help differentiate between asset.

Hey by the way, now that non-unique asset names is decided,

Would it be possible to allow to edit asset description if asset owner feel like he needs that?
Let discuss this.

Adjusting the description is adjusting the whole Asset.

Original Asset is what the investors purchase, sell, and value.

IF you can adjust, why not adjust delete the description and make it worthless. If you sold all your shares, now the ASSET owns zero anything.

Who is going to buy that?

OK then, would it be possible to add an editable field other than description to an asset. That would be usefull i think.

URL can be editable, off chain information and the likes. but Asset is your Business Plan and IPO in one.

No one would buy Apple Stock if all of a sudden it could become worth 1 free song download from iTunes

SN
S   U   P   E   R    N   E   T
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   
Uniting cryptocurrencies, Rewarding talent, Sharing benefits..

Blockchain Technology.

jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
March 19, 2014, 02:49:30 AM
 #45939

Sry James, but i have used you in this thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=521252.msg5774788#msg5774788

I hope its ok  Cheesy


Of course not a problem. It is good to get anti-FUD out there

James

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
March 19, 2014, 02:50:37 AM
 #45940


Good news. Only asset ID was needed to be unique anyway. People can put nxt alias in asset description to point to asset owner site or something. That would help differentiate between asset.

Hey by the way,

Would it be possible to allow to edit asset description if asset owner feel like he needs that?
Let discuss this.

its a good solution imo just remember to check the id before you click purchase.

You really better be checking more than just the ID before you invest. Caveat Emptor as they say

why more than the id? id is not the same thing as name.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Pages: « 1 ... 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 2335 2336 2337 2338 2339 2340 2341 2342 2343 2344 2345 2346 2347 ... 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!