NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[CIYAM]

Since James is on break from the forums, can I ask someone to give me a summary of the coin that shall not be named? I was away from the forums when the controversy surfaced. What sparked it, and what were the major arguments from both sides?

There are summaries posted regularly on a separate website (just go back a few pages and you should be able to find where that is).

I think we are best not to "keep bringing back up each issue" every week or we just go round and round in circles (getting nowhere except "frustrated").

[landomata]

Let the market work.

Let people do business however THEY see fit.

Do not try to force people to use YOUR favored currency. That is behavior suited for governments.

NXT will succeed, IF we empower people to do business in THEIR preferred way.

+ Very well said (the whole post).  Trades can be denominated in any currency. BUT, if there is any attempt to force traders to use a particular currency/token, then it must be NXT and nothing else. In other words, free for all, or only NXT. I hope it will be implemented this way, provided there are no serious technical issues.

A decentralized, flexible trading platform with low fees, multisig gateways, plus special high end features using AT will make Nxt AE a class of its own!

This would be enormous....we must get the first mover advantage.

[evanxxx]

have we finished discussing the "Nxt only" thing on Nxt AE? (Sorry, I cannot follow every post right now)

I think it has been made very clear by some of the previous posts that we should not do the "Nxt only" thing
1. It would limit the max order subject to the market capitalization of Nxt
2. It would lead to a clone of Nxt without the "Nxt only" limitation. Think you are a trader, which one would you choose? I think a lot of people would go to the platform without any limitation.

We should make Nxt as free as possible, the freedom will gain Nxt a much more value in a long run. the limitation will harm Nxt. We should NEVER force our user to do something.

[IveBeenBit]

Since James is on break from the forums, can I ask someone to give me a summary of the coin that shall not be named? I was away from the forums when the controversy surfaced. What sparked it, and what were the major arguments from both sides?

There are summaries posted regularly on a separate website (just go back a few pages and you should be able to find where that is).

I think we are best not to "keep bringing back up each issue" every week or we just go round and round in circles (getting nowhere except "frustrated").

Fair enough, but I've read the last 15 pages or more. Can you at least clue me in to some search terms that I can use to narrow it down? 

[CryptKeeper]

Since James is on break from the forums, can I ask someone to give me a summary of the coin that shall not be named? I was away from the forums when the controversy surfaced. What sparked it, and what were the major arguments from both sides?

There are summaries posted regularly on a separate website (just go back a few pages and you should be able to find where that is).

I think we are best not to "keep bringing back up each issue" every week or we just go round and round in circles (getting nowhere except "frustrated").

Fair enough, but I've read the last 15 pages or more. Can you at least clue me in to some search terms that I can use to narrow it down? 

http://nxter.org/category/nxt-2/news/

[pandaisftw]

Guys in regards to Asset for Asset trading understand 2 important things:

1. Fees in NXT are required.
2. Further fees in NXT are required to create and execute an AT.

Also the idea of adding an alias to an Asset IMO is a *bad* one - you've just let the squatters/scammers back in who now look like they are more legit (because naive people are going to believe that Software.Microsoft really is Microsoft as that's how you've described it to them by calling it "branding").

Just "because you don't like non-unique names" is really not a good reason to *support* scammers (which is how it will be perceived when people work out "they were tricked").

The idea behind a unique "suffix" is to make it easier for the user to identify the *same* issuer, not for the user to blindly trust "Microsoft". I imagine if one day Microsoft ends up using NXT AE, they will find their alias squatted, so they'll simply make a new alias "MicrosoftAE" ie. something else. Then on their main website they will announce that is their NXT AE "brand". This is also why I proposed the <AliasToken> - the client would send a auth token request to the URL provided by the issuer, in this case: www.microsoft.com. Then it will display to the user: "This token is verified by the issuer for the site: www.microsoft.com. If the URL is incorrect, the user can see the wrong URL. The chance of being scammed then becomes the same as a user buying from a phony website.

On-top of all this, like Wesleyh mentioned, there could be a rating service provider, which clients could interface with and receive a "trust index" to increase users trust in assets. If this happens, yes, I agree that the unique "branding" in the AE can be removed and let these service providers provide the client the correct names for issuer accounts. There is a trade-off however, this list becomes more centralized (better if we had multiple service providers confirming this information) but that's the price you pay for trust. (There is no trust in decentralization) However, these service providers will have very little incentive to scam their customers, since they would then lose their entire client-base on both sides, so it is not so bad.

Another option is to let users have a list of trusted issuers. However, they would still have to confirm manually, this may potentially turn off some newer users.

My ideal scenarios, in order:

1) If service providers are available (and a valid option), use this method. Otherwise
2) If there are no service providers providing "trust lists", then use "branding". However, if this is an issue, then
3) Make users manually name each asset issuer, that way the user is *forced* to research each issuer. Trade off is that this list is stored locally unless the user sets up a cloud account and keeps it synced.

(If you noticed, this is basically in the order of easiest to hardest for users)

IMO, chance of users getting scammed by fake "Microsoft" would be the same chance as me saying I'm Barrack Obama and you believing it. You would only believe me after I provided the correct information and you confirmed it personally.

Hey, new version at http://nxtra.org/nxt-client/
...

Great!

Hey, new version at http://nxtra.org/nxt-client/

[...]

Great work.

One word about more code in common: run for it. I think JL is open for that.

About the non-uniqueness of assets. Well, nice idea of having a branding via an alias, but I still do not like it. It is just a feeling.

Maybe, somebody could give me a good feeling of non-unique asset names.

As others have mentioned, the "original" asset name may not be the "real" asset, so the original name has no real meaning. Also, it solves the issue of different issuers selling the same product. Because their alias is unique, no one can fake their brand.

Pandaisftw

The problem with the alias thing is that it's a hack, I show this as a proof of concept and hope that we can get another field added to the asset exchange table format. (unique suffix). That's the only purpose that the alias serves, and could just as well be integrated in the asset table itself.

Same for tagging, which should follow a similar approach to the DGS.

I tried to provide a way without modifying the core. If the core is changed, then yes, we won't need aliases or tags in the description.

Pandaistw

[Fatih87SK]

Since James is on break from the forums, can I ask someone to give me a summary of the coin that shall not be named? I was away from the forums when the controversy surfaced. What sparked it, and what were the major arguments from both sides?

There are summaries posted regularly on a separate website (just go back a few pages and you should be able to find where that is).

I think we are best not to "keep bringing back up each issue" every week or we just go round and round in circles (getting nowhere except "frustrated").

Fair enough, but I've read the last 15 pages or more. Can you at least clue me in to some search terms that I can use to narrow it down? 

I've sended you a PM.

[2gen]

Speaking pure as trader here: I don’t have tried the software and don’t even bother as a trader.
I have observed and tried to trade NXT, but I was soon dumped out by whales.
There is no way NXT is going to succeed as coin in the trader community and if you like it or not that is where the value will be measured and eventually its success.
I cannot understand how people can be so stupid and Saw off the Branch they are sitting on. Without the dumping and little buy support nxt would be on the radars and would trade around 1$, whales and fools decided other ways.
Whales and dumpers don’t give nxt a single chance to breath and survive. Price will NEVER rice above 0.00008 again.
This was a short but very disappointing experience as a trader.
So goodbye and good luck

[Come-from-Beyond]

Speaking pure as trader here: I don’t have tried the software and don’t even bother as a trader.
I have observed and tried to trade NXT, but I was soon dumped out by whales.
There is no way NXT is going to succeed as coin in the trader community and if you like it or not that is where the value will be measured and eventually its success.
I cannot understand how people can be so stupid and Saw off the Branch they are sitting on. Without the dumping and little buy support nxt would be on the radars and would trade around 1$, whales and fools decided other ways.
Whales and dumpers don’t give nxt a single chance to breath and survive. Price will NEVER rice above 0.00008 again.
This was a short but very disappointing experience as a trader.
So goodbye and good luck

Emule, did u forget ur main account password?

[achimsmile]

Speaking pure as trader here: I don’t have tried the software and don’t even bother as a trader.
I have observed and tried to trade NXT, but I was soon dumped out by whales.
There is no way NXT is going to succeed as coin in the trader community and if you like it or not that is where the value will be measured and eventually its success.
I cannot understand how people can be so stupid and Saw off the Branch they are sitting on. Without the dumping and little buy support nxt would be on the radars and would trade around 1$, whales and fools decided other ways.
Whales and dumpers don’t give nxt a single chance to breath and survive. Price will NEVER rice above 0.00008 again.
This was a short but very disappointing experience as a trader.
So goodbye and good luck

Yeah the rise from 0.000042 to 0.000079 was really disappointing.

My Nxt gained almost 100% price value. This makes me as a trader sad  

[zorke]

Speaking pure as trader here: I don’t have tried the software and don’t even bother as a trader.
I have observed and tried to trade NXT, but I was soon dumped out by whales.
There is no way NXT is going to succeed as coin in the trader community and if you like it or not that is where the value will be measured and eventually its success.
I cannot understand how people can be so stupid and Saw off the Branch they are sitting on. Without the dumping and little buy support nxt would be on the radars and would trade around 1$, whales and fools decided other ways.
Whales and dumpers don’t give nxt a single chance to breath and survive. Price will NEVER rice above 0.00008 again.
This was a short but very disappointing experience as a trader.
So goodbye and good luck

What you missed is that this is not a pump and dump coin. For a quick buck (or quick loss) you need to go and trade AUR, MAX, SPA and others, like you have been doing so far, I am sure.

NXT is a real and honest try to change the money world. We don't need pump and dump people like you around us.

Good luck with you further trading of anything other than NXT.

[btc2nxt]

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.

points(asset) on nxt platform

Many bbs websites have their points system. Almost of these points are worthless, members only use them to download resources or ask for help. If we build a uique worldwide member points system on nxt(assetname= points), these worthless points would have a price. Because the points have value, many members would like to earn more, like answering question, uploading things.

Not only in the internet, we can use points in daily life, e.g.  after settling a hotel bill or restaraunt bill, you get 10 points. Maybe you use these points to pay the bill too.

But with no-unique asset name, every company can issue a asset of points, so we could not set up a worldwide points system. Members will have different asset of different company or website. Although these points have value just like altcoin, i think these value would be very very small.

--------
about :www.points.com

Starting in 2000, Points.com has worked towards the goal of making it easier to be a member of multiple rewards programs.   Since then, we've grown into a community with millions of members and have introduced unique ways to manage and move miles and points that have changed the way people use, manage, and value the loyalty programs in their wallet.   We make it easier to earn, move, give or redeem your points, miles and rewards from many of the world's leading programs.

about mypoints.com

Since when does shopping pay you back? MyPoints members earn Points every time they shop from our network of top retailers. Join MyPoints to receive personalized deals every day, and reward yourself with gift cards, cash back or travel miles
--------

[CIYAM]

The idea behind a unique "suffix" is to make it easier for the user to identify the *same* issuer, not for the user to blindly trust "Microsoft".

Once again - this is just not going to work - in the distopian world that this would be creating every single "well known name" is a *scam* and "every unknown name" is something you will have to then look up in order to work out if it is not a scam.

Understand that by *simply not having unique names* the motivation *to scam* has been greatly reduced.

If I see someone creating an Asset called CIYAM - then I create an Asset called CIYAM. Basically if the users get "scared off" all that has happened is that *both* issuers have thrown away 1K NXT (but at least confused Joe didn't bother buying shares in either).

There is simply no "good way to get unique names" (and in fact I think the "aliases" should have been non-unique also as now they are basically "useless tokens" a bit like all those "first bits" addresses that were obtained for 1 satoshi each years ago).

In many countries they have IP *rights* to names so the more Nxt tries to favour this "squatting" and "scamming" the more likely it is going to be *targeted* by authorities.

Other ways of trying to work out trust will be implemented down the track - but if you *allow unique* now then you won't be able to "take it away from the squatters later" (they'll fight you tooth and nail about it).

[wesleyh]

The idea behind a unique "suffix" is to make it easier for the user to identify the *same* issuer, not for the user to blindly trust "Microsoft".

Once again - this is just not going to work - in the distopian world that this would be creating every single "well known name" is a *scam* and "every unknown name" is something you will have to then look up in order to work out if it is not a scam.

Understand that by *simply not having unique names* the motivation *to scam* has been greatly reduced.

If I see someone creating an Asset called CIYAM - then I create an Asset called CIYAM. Basically if the users get "scared off" all that has happened is that *both* issuers have thrown away 1K NXT (but at least confused Joe didn't bother buying shares in either).

There is simply no "good way to get unique names" (and in fact I think the "aliases" should have been non-unique also as now they are basically "useless tokens").

In many countries they have IP *rights* to names so the more Nxt tries to favour this "squatting" and "scamming" the more likely it is going to be *targeted* by authorities.

Other ways of trying to work out trust will be implemented down the track - but if you *allow unique* now then you won't be able to "take it away from the squatters later" (they'll fight you tooth and nail about it).

Service providers will rate all assets traded, if someone uses ciyam.ciyam and it is verified that this is in fact not you, and he uses this asset without good reason other than to scam, the service provider can in fact "blacklist" the asset (and the alias), solving the issue.

[CIYAM]

Service providers will rate all assets traded, if someone uses ciyam.ciyam and it is verified that this is in fact not you, and he sues this asset without good reason other than to scam, the service provider can in fact "blacklist" the asset (and the alias), solving the issue.

This isn't in existence (such service providers) and "blacklists" are *never a good way to go*.

Please stop trying to push for this "unique name" and let other methods be developed as we progress.

Note that if every 2nd generation platform does the same thing (allow unique names) then you'll never be able to trust "the same name" on any 2 platforms (so all such *brands* have become *useless*).

[CIYAM]

Do you mean I should forget about selling these for 1M NXT some day?!?!?    

Yup - it isn't going to be "possible" to fight that battle - is it (which is why we shouldn't do it again with Assets or tie Assets to those).

[wesleyh]

Service providers will rate all assets traded, if someone uses ciyam.ciyam and it is verified that this is in fact not you, and he sues this asset without good reason other than to scam, the service provider can in fact "blacklist" the asset (and the alias), solving the issue.

This isn't in existence (such service providers) and "blacklists" are *never a good way to go*.

Please stop trying to push for this "unique name" and let other methods be developed as we progress.

Note that if every 2nd generation platform does the same thing (allow unique names) then you'll never be able to trust "the same name" on any 2 platforms (so all such *brands* have become *useless*).

I'm not pushing, I'm showing a proposal. Btw, you can't stop clients from doing this (though if the people do not want this feature, I will remove it). I want more discussion on this topic since we didn't have a lot when non-unique names were decided. People need to be able to brand their assets.

Also, users can decide whether or not to use a service provider. Yes, service providers don't exist today, since asset exchange isn't yet launched..

Why are blacklists never a way to go? You'd rather let the known, proven scammer stay in the asset exchange?

[alxx77]

Please some test NXT on acct 6200446314635151074  

***

Concerning asset naming, it is clear that most important thing will be rating of the issuer... exactly same as it is on Ebay... everybody can name its asset TabletPC but you MUST check seller's rating before buying anything, or you could end up in a problem...

And there is no way around that...

[wesleyh]

Please some test NXT on acct 6200446314635151074  

***

Concerning asset naming, it is clear that most important thing will be rating of the issuer... exactly same as it is on Ebay... everybody can name its asset TabletPC but you MUST check seller's rating before buying anything, or you could end up in a problem...

And there is no way around that...

Rating can be gamed.

[ChuckOne]

There is simply no "good way to get unique names" (and in fact I think the "aliases" should have been non-unique also as now they are basically "useless tokens" a bit like all those "first bits" addresses that were obtained for 1 satoshi each years ago).

Well, there is more to consider. Humans and machines need to uniquely identify an asset.

For machines, a cryptic number is okay. They simply do not care.
For humans, that numbers are not. They need readable and catchy names.

Regarding squatting, we should also rise the price for aliases. Another thing, I would like to see is trading aliases. So, the price will handle that "useless tokens" and eventually make them useful again.