NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[Sebastien256]

We will have created a O(N^2) trade path optimization problem and divided asset liquidity up to N times.

I understand very well the math, but I don't see why there is a problem with that. Please explain.

[1714128703]

1714128703

[1714128703]

1714128703

[Sebastien256]

Anon136,

The free market must be allowed to flourish on the blockchain. Why insist on settling trade in NXT for every transaction when every transaction already has a NXT cost to process? What if a consumer wants to use the Nxt AE, has NXT for transaction fees and wants to buy $10 million of oil from a reputable Nxt AE Issuer (vetted with history, positive transactions, other due diligence items).

In your scenario the buyer must buy $10 million worth of NXT (about 250 million NXT) or about 1/4 of the existing TOTAL supply of NXT.
This simple attempt to purchase 25% of the supply of the TOTAL STAKE of a cryptocurrency would drive the price of NXT far past reasonable and the order could not be filled at the preferred price (the price before $10 million of NXT buy orders hit the market, attempting to take control of 25% of the supply of a Proof of Stake Currency.)

Then the user of the NXT AE (now seller of NXT) would have to sell $10 million of NXT to buy $10 million of oil from the reputable Nxt AE Issuer.
Big money needs room to move. Nxt needs to provide that room to move. I believe my illustration showing why Nxt AE needs to allow trading between any pair is complete.

This argument doesnt make any sense. If one day 10 millions dollar transaction is routine, then nxt would value very much more in comparison to the transsaction. I believe, no one will ever buy 25% of the PoS power. That would be suicide.

[Sebastien256]

To be clear from this morning,

Nxt Asset Exchange will allow trading in any pair chosen by market participants, correct?

not at the start. Once AT will be enabled, someone can create such a pair with NXT in the background

honestly i think it would be best never to let that happen for a couple of reasons. it forces people to use nxt which inflates the value and strengthens the security of the network but also it forces the markets to be deeper and more liquid thus reducing volatility and generating more accurate and reliable price signals.

Well, I do not agree with you Anon, really some market need to not be tied to the value of Nxt. Just think of the USD link to the Oil industry. This is great example, and this is really problematic for the US right now. USA have a huge responsability concerning this matter. In the end, pegging everyting to Nxt will put too much pressure on the Nxt devs or the Nxt network. I think it is better to let the market choose what best currency a thing need to be denominated to. Most thing could be value in Nxt, but not everything. Better to let free will. In the end, Nxt is the platform 2.0 ecosystem. Denomintaing everything in Nxt will focus NXT to be to much of a 1.0 crypto. To much centralization toward Nxt is not good either.

I don't think Nxt need to be inflate, Nxt ecosystem value will come by its ability to solve real world problems.

Please detail more your opinion on this matter. I know you are talented to express your thinking.

@TwinWinNerD Hopefully, I hope only Nxt fee will be involve in the background.

Well you didnt disprove either of my arguments you only added a couple of new ones. I tend to agree with your arguments, i think they are right. However they are not sufficient to overcome mine. Its like if we were stranded on an island and a box of liquorish washed up on shore and i said you should eat some of them and you said yea i would except i don't like the taste. Yes that's a good valid and right argument for why not to eat something, but its insufficient to overcome the argument that if you dont eat them than you will probably die.

Well liquidity and reduce volitality will simply come with progressive adoption of the Nxt platform. We just have to think to all the project that come to the mind of everyone here, I know you are awared of them. Satoshi idea of Blockchain will transform the way we are trading as human. It is inevitable because it is the most efficient way so far that humanity have found to trade up to date.

There is no need in trying inflate Nxt value. Value and liquidity will come by itself if project build on top of it are of value. Anyway most thing can be denomitated in Nxt. But it is too much power centralized in one place to impose Nxt everywhere. However, I believe to impose Nxt fee everywhere is reasonable to ensure the stability of the blockchain.

[Ola]

This is SPARTAHHHHH!


Hodl

couldn't resist  

[paradigmflux]

Hey guys, http://hashrate.org has had a bit of a facelift.
Yesterday we paid out 0.008 BTC/MH/day equivilent in NXT - why mine anywhere else?

Great job on this, I'd really like to see a layman's guide on your page as well, for those that want to mine a little bit;

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.msg5820979#msg5820979

Check the new "Getting Started" section

This payout is scrypt I take it

Yes, we still haven't hit a SHA256 round.
As soon as we do, I am going to replacing the SHA256 port with a P2P port to ensure more consistant SHA payouts.

[Sebastien256]

We will have created a O(N^2) trade path optimization problem and divided asset liquidity up to N times.

I understand very well the math, but I don't see why there is a problem with that. Please explain.

The market participation of any single asset will be split between many market pairs.  This creates a shallower market depth per pair.  Less participants would lead to greater market volatility and higher spreads.

Frankly, the only value I see in a many-to-many system is for bots that perform arbitrage (ie: the programs that perform the path optimization)

Overall, I think free market will tend to O(N) trading pair for trading efficiency and improve liquidity, O(N^2) is worst case scenario. In reality I doubt that every trading pair will ever exist. So, this argument don't stand in my mind.

EDIT: ps. inflating NXt is related to Anon post, not your.

[Sebastien256]

There is no need in trying inflate Nxt value. Value and liquidity will come by itself if project build on top of it are of value. Anyway most thing can be denomitated in Nxt. But it is too much power centralized in one place to impose Nxt everywhere. However, I believe to impose Nxt fee everywhere is reasonable to ensure the stability of the blockchain.

My argument has nothing to do with inflating NXT value.  We would be introducing far more complexity in AE to benefit one esoteric example.

Simpler is better.

I think you don't see far enough the capacity of Nxt in the far future. Pegging Nxt to everything is a centralization. This would lead to to much power for Nxt, as with the USD. Overall, i think this is bad imo.

EDIT: You say that it is simpler to peg everything in Nxt. Why is so? What is the complexity to allow every trading pair?

[CIYAM]

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").

[Sebastien256]

I think you don't see far enough the capacity of Nxt in the far future. Pegging Nxt to everything is a centralization. Overall, i think this is bad imo.

I'm insulted.  Attacking my 'vision' borders on a personal attack.  I am very much excited about the capacity that Nxt future presents and believe my concerns have merit.  It is not fair to dismiss them out of hand and claim 'superiority in vision'.

I agree that we need to solve the problem you (and others) have presented.  However, I don't believe that inside AE is the right approach for the reasons I've listed above.

I would value an economist's take on the issue.

Sorry Jack, I did not mean to insult. I should have rephrase more correctly, but im not english native. It is difficult for me sometime.

My comment relative to "you don't see far ahead" was related to the overall centralization that pegging nxxt to every thing would lead to. I don't mean personnal attack. In fact I really enfoy this discussion and I value the opinion of other.

[IveBeenBit]

To be clear from this morning,

Nxt Asset Exchange will allow trading in any pair chosen by market participants, correct?

not at the start. Once AT will be enabled, someone can create such a pair with NXT in the background

I've been thinking about this. Will this mean that we have TWO entirely separate asset exchanges? One will be native to the Nxt core, and denominated only in NXT, and the other will be an entirely separate market operating on an optional DAC/AT? Sort of like a "Nxt plug in?"

I don't see this as being elegant, as it would be nice to have all trades available in one place from the start.

But I am barely able to wrap my head around all this and how it would work, so I'd be curious to hear what others thought.

[CIYAM]

There is some misunderstanding about AT and Asset trading.

There is no "magical" direct trading going on here - account A sends X Chips to the AT then account B sends Y Chops to the AT.

Remember an AT is "just like another account" so if you look at the Assets for the AT you would now see:

[AT]
Chips - X
Chops - Y

Now the AT simply decides to "transfer" the Chips and Chops Assets to the opposite parties that "sent them to it".

So there is no "direct" transfer and we haven't changed AE at all.

It is an "atomic" transfer because the AT will either do the swap or refund (so neither side can "cheat").

People can do such transfers "right now" except they have to trust each other or send to a 3rd party. So all we are doing by using an AE is *replacing* an escrow with a program.

[Sebastien256]

To be clear from this morning,

Nxt Asset Exchange will allow trading in any pair chosen by market participants, correct?

not at the start. Once AT will be enabled, someone can create such a pair with NXT in the background

I've been thinking about this. Will this mean that we have TWO entirely separate asset exchanges? One will be native to the Nxt core, and denominated only in NXT, and the other will be an entirely separate market operating on an optional DAC/AT? Sort of like a "Nxt plug in?"

I don't see this as being elegant, as it would be nice to have all trades available in one place from the start.

But I am barely able to wrap my head around all this and how it would work, so I'd be curious to hear what others thought.

This is exactly the same as allowing every pair. Every pair include every Nxt pair. No?

[IveBeenBit]

There is some misunderstanding about AT and Asset trading.

There is no "magical" direct trading going on here - account A sends X Chips to the AT then account B sends Y Chops to the AT.

Remember an AT is "just like another account" so if you look at the Assets for the AT you would now see:

[AT]
Chips - X
Chops - Y

Now the AT simply decides to "transfer" the Chips and Chops Assets to the opposite parties that "sent them to it".

So there is no "direct" transfer and we haven't changed AE at all.

It is an "atomic" transfer because the AT will either do the swap or refund (so neither side can "cheat").

People can do such transfers "right now" except they have to trust each other or send to a 3rd party. So all we are doing by using an AE is *replacing* an escrow with a program.

Wouldn't the AT-based marketplace have an orderbook, though? Of say,
USD / OIL
DOGE / OIL
BTC / GLD

Etc??? With a list of bids and asks that people can sift through to decide to accept, or to place their own?

This is what I meant about there being two entirely separate marketplaces.

[CIYAM]

Wouldn't the AT-based marketplace have an orderbook, though? Of say,
USD / OIL
DOGE / OIL
BTC / GLD

Etc??? With a list of bids and asks that people can sift through to decide to accept, or to place their own?

No - it isn't a "separate" market - an AT is just an "escrow" using the existing AE system.

As I said - "you can already do this" using the Asset Transfer feature - you just need an "escrow" in between (or have to trust each other).

If people are so concerned with this then what they should be asking for is the *removal* of the Asset Transfer feature.

[Anon136]

Anon136,

The free market must be allowed to flourish on the blockchain. Why insist on settling trade in NXT for every transaction when every transaction already has a NXT cost to process? What if a consumer wants to use the Nxt AE, has NXT for transaction fees and wants to buy $10 million of oil from a reputable Nxt AE Issuer (vetted with history, positive transactions, other due diligence items).

In your scenario the buyer must buy $10 million worth of NXT (about 250 million NXT) or about 1/4 of the existing TOTAL supply of NXT.
This simple attempt to purchase 25% of the supply of the TOTAL STAKE of a cryptocurrency would drive the price of NXT far past reasonable and the order could not be filled at the preferred price (the price before $10 million of NXT buy orders hit the market, attempting to take control of 25% of the supply of a Proof of Stake Currency.)

Then the user of the NXT AE (now seller of NXT) would have to sell $10 million of NXT to buy $10 million of oil from the reputable Nxt AE Issuer.
Big money needs room to move. Nxt needs to provide that room to move. I believe my illustration showing why Nxt AE needs to allow trading between any pair is complete.

Both "transactions" (in the colloquial sense) could be executed simultaneously in the same "transaction" (using it this time to refer to one record of information in a block not the more colloquial sense i used it in prior). In this way the nxt market wouldn't be moved.

now im starting to think about whether this is the sort of thing that could be stopped even if we wanted to. it may not be that sort of thing.

[NxtMinnow]

Certain AT programs could allow AE users to place options contracts like puts and calls based on trading pairs in the AE.

EDIT: other AT programs could provide annuity payments from blockchain based assets.

Wouldn't the AT-based marketplace have an orderbook, though? Of say,
USD / OIL
DOGE / OIL
BTC / GLD

Etc??? With a list of bids and asks that people can sift through to decide to accept, or to place their own?

No - it isn't a "separate" market - an AT is just an "escrow" using the existing AE system.

As I said - "you can already do this" using the Asset Transfer feature - you just need an "escrow" in between (or have to trust each other).

If people are so concerned with this then what they should be asking for is the *removal* of the Asset Transfer feature.

[CIYAM]

Certain AT programs could allow AE users to place options contracts like puts and calls based on trading pairs in the AE.

Sure I think options will be possible - the point is "you could do it now" (just requires a 3rd party) as we have a "transfer" mechanism (for those thinking that it is AT that is providing the functionality).

There are going to be also sorts of complicated trading ideas worked out via ATs (or offered by 3rd parties) down the track.

[IveBeenBit]

It's just that things get far more complicated without 'pegging to NXT'.  I hope I have highlighted some concerns, and hope that we can collectively come up with solutions.

In terms of vision, my personal belief is that NXT must be a lubricant to many other economic activities.  Should aim to be the cheapest and most effortless mechanism in support of everything else.  Transaction fees should be kept exceptionally low, and we should never concern ourselves with the value of 1 NXT.

Jack, your analysis of too many trading pairs is mathematically sound insofar as it's THEORETICALLY POSSIBLE that the scenario you describe would happen, but you ignore human behavior and examples of markets that exist in reality.

Let's pretend the USA released its control over the oil markets and oil could now be traded in something other than USD.

Do you really think the markets are going to be flooded with "too many oil markets?" Oil / Wheat, Oil / pork bellies, oil / silver, oil / gold, oil / USD, oil / Euro, oil / copper, oil / cement, oil / ethylene oxide, oil / cocaine, oil / soybeans, oil / yen, oil / iron, oil / corn, oil / orange juice, oil / lumber

Yes...they are all theoretically possible, and in effect, that's what you are so worried about. Hopefully you understand how silly it looks when you see it listed that way.

No, even if oil were not forced to be traded in USD (akin to you insisting that everything be priced in NXT), there would be maybe 3 major oil markets

OIL / USD
OIL / EUR
OIL / CNY
And maybe OIL / JPY (Yen)

These 4 markets would be patronized by whatever was most convenient for the participating traders. A trader in Europe would rather bargain in Euros than dollars.

All the other tiny markets (E.g. oil / orange juice) would be specialized to unique players and would constitute a tiny fraction of the trade that happened. The rest of the world could safely ignore them entirely.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY that there will be 5000 asset pairs reducing liquidity. Your Nxt client will filter out those asset pairs of small liquidity, and you'd never even see them. If you own an orange tree farm and want to trade orange juice for gold or oil, then you will have to go looking for that info. It would probably be easier, though, for you to sell your oranges for one of the "top tier" currencies, and use that currency to buy your oil.

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.

[Anon136]

Certain AT programs could allow AE users to place options contracts like puts and calls based on trading pairs in the AE.

Sure I think options will be possible - the point is "you could do it now" (just requires a 3rd party) as we have a "transfer" mechanism (for those thinking that it is AT that is providing the functionality).

There are going to be also sorts of complicated trading ideas worked out via ATs (or offered by 3rd parties) down the track.

Is AT just a feature of a truing complete scheme that you have in mind?

[Sebastien256]

It's just that things get far more complicated without 'pegging to NXT'.  I hope I have highlighted some concerns, and hope that we can collectively come up with solutions.

In terms of vision, my personal belief is that NXT must be a lubricant to many other economic activities.  Should aim to be the cheapest and most effortless mechanism in support of everything else.  Transaction fees should be kept exceptionally low, and we should never concern ourselves with the value of 1 NXT.

Jack, your analysis of too many trading pairs is mathematically sound insofar as it's THEORETICALLY POSSIBLE that the scenario you describe would happen, but you ignore human behavior and examples of markets that exist in reality.

Let's pretend the USA released its control over the oil markets and oil could now be traded in something other than USD.

Do you really think the markets are going to be flooded with "too many oil markets?" Oil / Wheat, Oil / pork bellies, oil / silver, oil / gold, oil / USD, oil / Euro, oil / copper, oil / cement, oil / ethylene oxide, oil / cocaine, oil / soybeans, oil / yen, oil / iron, oil / corn, oil / orange juice, oil / lumber

Yes...they are all theoretically possible, and in effect, that's what you are so worried about. Hopefully you understand how silly it looks when you see it listed that way.

No, even if oil were not forced to be traded in USD (akin to you insisting that everything be priced in NXT), there would be maybe 3 major oil markets

OIL / USD
OIL / EUR
OIL / CNY
And maybe OIL / JPY (Yen)

These 4 markets would be patronized by whatever was most convenient for the participating traders. A trader in Europe would rather bargain in Euros than dollars.

All the other tiny markets (E.g. oil / orange juice) would be specialized to unique players and would constitute a tiny fraction of the trade that happened. The rest of the world could safely ignore them entirely.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY that there will be 5000 asset pairs reducing liquidity. Your Nxt client will filter out those asset pairs of small liquidity, and you'd never even see them. If you own an orange tree farm and want to trade orange juice for gold or oil, then you will have to go looking for that info. It would probably be easier, though, for you to sell your oranges for one of the "top tier" currencies, and use that currency to buy your oil.

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.

+1 Could not say it better. I think that too.