NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[Eadeqa]

So if the first thing we do is prevent any business from being able to use their own name without extortion it is *hardly going to be appealing*.

what are they doing with domain names since internet is born ?

Again - in many countries it is *illegal* to squat names (such as Australia) - the world isn't just the US.

Something decentralized (and more anonymous without a central registrar) like nxt, it really doesn't matter as no legal actions can be initiated.

However, there is a problem with life-time owning the domain, even after the account is lost (forgotten password, dead person) that domain name is gone forever.

[lophie]

So if the first thing we do is prevent any business from being able to use their own name without extortion it is *hardly going to be appealing*.

what are they doing with domain names since internet is born ?

Again - in many countries it is *illegal* to squat names (such as Australia) - the world isn't just the US.

Something decentralized (and more anonymous without a central registrar) like nxt, it really doesn't matter as no legal actions can be initiated.

However, there is a problem with life-time owning the domain, even after the account is lost (forgotten password, dead person) that domain name is gone forever.

Why dont we do it namecoin style? If we implement a decenteralized auction as well this can be so cool.

[Mario123]

Also I want to redirect NXTarea.com to http://mynxt.org/, Mario is that okay for you?

Ok Welcome back (soon)!

[Mario123]

We need guys in the marketing of Nxt who are native english speakers. I really appreciate the work of salsacz, but in some of his writinigs he uses phrases that can be misinterpreted or that are simply not appropriate.
We also need speakers for Nxt. Speakers with technical background who are able to represent Nxt in videos, interviews, people like rickyjames and Anon. But more of them, and also ones who are ready to travel to conferences.

I am in talks with the Vienna Bitcoin Conference guys, they already offered me to talk about Nxt, which is great, but I won´t be able to tell them more about it, than how cool it´s features are, because I have no clue about the cryptographical, mathematical or coding aspects. So here, for example, I would need someone to get with me on the stage and take over where it is getting more techy.

I can do all of this.  On top of my career as a professional actor (and the implied comfort with media work that comes with such employment), I have an engineering degree.  I understand Nxt quite well, and have been here since the first week of December.  I'm not a computer scientist or a cryptographer, but I know enough to represent Nxt very well.

I've decided NOT to head to Bitcoin Expo in Toronto due to its Bitcoin-centric content.  But I'm happy to speak to anyone about Nxt.  

This is cool! +1 Joefox! And I think we are in desperate need of a pool where we (and journalists, conference organizers) can choose from for different occasions (interviews, podium discussions, conference attending, speaker positions). I would like to collect names and some infos from the community for this. If anybody has any name suggestions or ideas, please PM me or reply here.

Mario

[Jerical13]

[Math Lesson]

I want to explain some things that are very clear to me, but it seems that almost everybody else has come to the opposite conclusion. So, either my math is wrong, or nobody else has done the math.

The question is do we want everything in AE to be traded via NXT.

joefox is only partially correct that if the market wants this we cant stop a layer that hides the AssetA <-> NXT <-> AssetB transaction. If the market really wants this, there will be AssetA <-> AssetB direct trading. I already know how to do this.

Before you start slamming out a reply, please bear with me. I have a clarifying example.

Q1. Do you want USD assets to exist within NXT AE?

If you answered no, they you can skip reading the rest of this post and start flaming away. If you think having USD assets in AE might actually benefit NXT, here is

Q2. How much USD assets do you want deposited into NXT AE?
a) $100,000 USD
b) $1 million USD
c) $1 billion USD

If you answered a) or b), stop reading and start flaming away. If you answered c)

Q3. If all AE trades are denominated in NXT, then how do you propose actually dealing with $1 billion USD deposit.

If you can post a coherent answer to Q3 other than "NXT will be worth $10 billion and it will easily absorb $1 billion" then I might change my mind. I am not an economist, just a simple C programmer. When I write a program to deal with $1 billion of assets, but only have $30 to $50 million of NXT total and much, much, much less in active circulation, my conclusion is that if we limit AE trading to being just NXT, we will be lucky to have $1 million USD of assets deposited.

Q4. Are you still 100% sure that you want to restrict all AE trading to be in NXT?

James

Would I be correct in assuming the USD's would be introduced to the NXT network via your gateway?

I think that only NXT should be allowed for tender on NXT AE and for fees and for any other feature that are implemented on the NXT blockchain (market place, etc).

I have made this suggestion before, but I don't know if it is possible: Create a wallet /client that would facilitate holding, spending and receiving external assets, and assets created on the AE, and any coin created on top of the NXT network. In other words, a client that would work for USD's that were introduced through the gateway. This would allow for the use of USD's  in purchasing goods and services on the NXT blockchain, with fees still paid in NXT. In this model, the AE would still have NXT as the base currency though, and NXT would still be the base currency for the network and there would be a common demand for NXT in at least  as much as were needed to pay fees and make purchases on the AE, as well as any other demand that could be leveraged or that would come into existence organically.

The demand for NXT would increase as confidence in it increased. If NXT were backing a broad range of external assets, internal assets, and coins created to function within the NXT network,  it would seemingly achieve this confidence by default. This leveraged demand would only be complimented by what is in my opinion, NXT's being a better form of currency than fiat and other cryptos.

[CIYAM]

Why dont we do it namecoin style? If we implement a decenteralized auction as well this can be so cool.

Because .bit is *a failure due to the squatting*.

Perhaps some might think it is "cool" to have a .bit domain that no-one uses but I don't think that any "major corporation" in the world has one nor probably ever will.

[Eadeqa]

Hey ciyam, you see what happens when you push an idea / prototype? Discussion. Which results in new ideas. Good!

There is already a great invention for trust called GPG - maybe if we can help make *that* more user friendly we could integrate its usage *with* the Nxt platform.

I think the idea of "personal" aliases (unique attributes belonging to a user) could be helpful for that (one of those could be GPG fingerprint).

The trust list can't be encrypted as the server needs to know if someone is in your list. Otherwise how would the server reject an asset buy from non-trusted issuer? edit: sorry that part is probably wrong.

Nxt doesn't need GPG. There is already a public key that can be used to encrypt something (client side) and the private key will decrypt it. Or is that not possible?

[BrianNowhere]

So if the first thing we do is prevent any business from being able to use their own name without extortion it is *hardly going to be appealing*.

what are they doing with domain names since internet is born ?

Here is the US you can litigate for the rights to your trademarked name. If you squat a name someone has IP rights to they will just take it away from you and give it to whoever should rightfully own that name. With decentralized systems like namecoin (.bit) there's no authority to do this.  

I have squatted some nxt aliases just in case they become transferable. If so I would sell them for a small profit. Ideologically though, I think squatters are bad for these kinds of systems. namecoin (.bit)  is never going to take off because of it and good nxt aliases are already pretty much all taken before it's even gotten off the ground.

[Eadeqa]

Hey ciyam, you see what happens when you push an idea / prototype? Discussion. Which results in new ideas. Good!

There is already a great invention for trust called GPG - maybe if we can help make *that* more user friendly we could integrate its usage *with* the Nxt platform.

I think the idea of "personal" aliases (unique attributes belonging to a user) could be helpful for that (one of those could be GPG fingerprint).

The trust list can't be encrypted as the server needs to know if someone is in your list. Otherwise how would the server reject an asset buy from non-trusted issuer? edit: sorry that part is probably wrong.

Any  opinion on that?

How would "trust" work if the list is encrypted?

[bitcoinpaul]

Keep the discussion about asset names running.

About the trading between different Assets (I had to think about it for some time, so some things were already pointed out I believe):

- With AT, it is possible to trade between different Assets without using NXT. But the first step is that someone *wants* to trade exactly these two pairs. So we won't have AE cluttered with corn/oil and seasalt/schmoggleboggles pairs (O(n^2)) as long as there is no one who wants to trade it. Like the cigarette analogy in prisons. NXT provides fungibility, and Nxt provides free markets.
- Afaik, with AT, we cannot prevent these trading pairs to popup. We should foster it instead (see next point)
- Nxt is about the free market. Business people want to be free and not restricted on how to do their businesses. Nxt should embrace these free markets to attract business people and the (free market minded) crypto community in general

That's my understanding right now.

[wesleyh]

Thank you for reminding him. Instead of letting this discussion play out.

Because this all just an effort to "try and undo" his decision.

Nope, I simply want the community to see it, and try it, before deciding on it. As there is no way back.

Again, if the people here do not want this I can simply remove it again. It's a prototype, which I assume you are familiar with.

Wesleyh how about allowing the user to assign a "contact name" to an issuers NXt address?

I can only compare Ripple again, where you provide a "trust line" to a Ripple Address and their Assett.
The way that works is first you set up a trust line for reN4oyRpY7nEKiSLxE6nxdXWc3veYi1QC to sell you BTC.
Actually now that I think of it there's usually a separate address for each Assett, but nevertheless.

Then, when you go in the trading section and look for BTC you will see reN4oyRpY7nEKiSLxE6nxdXWc3veYi1QC as one of the isssuers you trust.

To make this neater you can "create a contact" and name reN4oyRpY7nEKiSLxE6nxdXWc3veYi1QC to whatever you want, say Bob's Bitcoins.

Now when you go into the trading section and look for BTC you'll see "Bob's Bitcoins" as one of the issuers you trust an you can buy Bitcoins from them.

Is there anyway to identify assets being issued according to the Nxt address they are tied to? Can assets be tied to nxt addresses?

I already have (client side) contacts in my web client. Check it out. An asset will show up as issued by "Bob" if you have set that person up as a contact.

[CIYAM]

How would "trust" work if the list is encrypted?

There would be no reason to encrypt your trust list unless you wanted to keep it outside of Nxt (in which case just use GPG).

GPG also gives you "levels" of trust which is another thing to consider (e.g. "someone I've met in person" would have a higher trust level than someone I'd only met via forum or chat).

[wesleyh]

Anyone know any non-testnet nodes with API available and ajax CORS enabled? (except nxtcrypto.org)

[igysa]

What is the best CPU miner for AMD 64-bit ? hashrate.org CPU pool mining..

[Jerical13]

The question is do we want everything in AE to be traded via NXT.
If the market really wants this, there will be AssetA <-> AssetB direct trading.

I see no reason to force NXT as intermediate store when trading AssetA to AssetB.  NXT will be used to pay transaction (bid/ask) fees.

Furthermore, we should not let any fears of devaluing NXT prevent many kinds of uses of the NXT blockchain.  NXT will always be needed to create an entry into the public ledger as a transaction fee, and should gain in value as more uses are created.  (And IMHO, fees should be kept exceptionally low to encourage widespread adoption and use -- money flows to efficiency).

Q1. Do you want USD assets to exist within NXT AE?
c) $1 billion USD
Q3. If all AE trades are denominated in NXT, then how do you propose actually dealing with $1 billion USD deposit.

The asset issuer either has the reputation and means to satisfy withdrawals to real USD via gateway(s), or it doesn't.  Once it doesn't, then those assets become worthless and trade for pennies on the dollar -- Simply issuing 1 Billion 'USD' assets does not make it worth $1 Billion.

I am assuming the asset issuer merits trust, eg. large international bank. Let us assume there is an automated gateway so you can always safely redeem your USD assets. [ok nothing is "safe", this is a thought experiment to evaluate denominating things in AE in USD]

Do you see the problem, actually impossibility of anybody depositing $1 billion into NXT AE if all AE transactions are denominated in NXT? Maybe there is a way to break transactions up into itty bitty pieces and use up all of the NXT available in the liquid form, but not only will that create extreme volatility for the hypothetical large USD transaction, why would anybody with a $1 billion USD even attempt such insanity. So not impossible, but highly improbable

Usually people who control $1 Billion+ dont do stupid things. Putting in 30 times the market cap into a trading platform that limits trading to whatever NXT is available from the market cap (5%?) would qualify as idiotic. Anybody that does that will instantly be fired, or no longer be a billionaire.

This is why we MUST allow denominating AE trades in any other asset. USD, BTC, EUR, JPY, GLD, WTI, BCO, etc.

Does anybody really think that allowing trades to be denominated in USD (or BTC or ...) will do anything other than help NXT? It wont affect USD to any noticeable degree.

James

P.S. If we end up helping BTC by .01% is that really such a bad thing? After all, how BTC goes, all crypto goes at least for the near future. Once we have billions of dollars of trading in NXT AE, then BTC wont matter much anyway.

I think denominating AE trades to external currencies is a bad idea. If NXT were the only accepted tender for AE transactions, it WOULD create a scarcity of NXT currency, but this scarcity would by inherent laws of supply and demand, only valuate the NXT currency. The "Free Market" would dictate trading, and either the amount of external assets being traded on the AE would gradually increase with as the value and capacity of NXT allowed, or the demand for NXT would drive the value and capacity to facilitate trading assets.  In my opinion the NXT network should be valued in NXT and only NXT. We could allow other forms of currency or assets use of the blockchain for purchase of goods and services and charge a transaction fee in NXT, but I think all NXT network features should be exclusive to NXT currency. We should be patient and let NXT currency be the base currency of the NXT free market.

[CIYAM]

I think denominating AE trades to external currencies is a bad idea.

The AT approach I described would do no such thing (it would be effectively *outside* of AE).

The feature that makes this possible is the Asset Transfer one (you can play with it on testnet).

So right now you do "do a swap" with someone *but* you'd need to trust them to uphold "their end of the agreement". The difference with using AT to do this is you can "take out the trust" (in fact the AT acts as an "escrow").

Remember also that ATs are not going to be *cheap* (and their fuel is NXT) so the more that they are used then the more NXT will be worth.

[lucky88888]

i do not know what to attribute the price swing to but i just wanted to point out that i also have noticed the striking independence from bitcoins price. not just in this swing but in general always nxt has been like that. to me its EXTREMELY long term bullish, no other altcoin behaves this way that i am aware of. for better or worse nxt is its own animal entirely.

+1

so true! and i like it! 

[pandaisftw]

Again, the suffix is not intended for uses to take a glance at and instantly trust the issuer. It is there so *humans* can remember which issuer is which (instead of 12312314141 vs. 1231514241), even if they are scams. All of these other systems - verification (basically ripple trustlines), service providers, self-added, etc. - can be done on top of this.

Asset names were made non-unique because that didn't make sense, it's completely possible for two different companies to release "swimming trunks". However, now the focus is shifted on the to issuer, which matches how reality works, and is not a "back-door" to unique asset names. It is not possible for two people to claim to be the CEO of Microsoft at the same time. You would buy Windows 8 from Microsoft, not Evil Bob. Same thing with AE - if Microsoft's true name on the AE is Microsoft123, then people will buy from Microsoft123 and not the scam Microsoft. Once the user verifies Microsoft123 is the real one, he can simply add Microsoft123 to his trust list, and never have to worry about buying from scam Microsoft ever again.

Realize the current system (account #'s) is just as prone to scamming, if not more. You can have two issuers, 12312314141 and 1231514241, both with the descriptions "BTC from Bitstamp"... that's confusing, and the user would have to look up which one was real anyways.

And then what about new companies who start with NXT? They can make their name as they want, without being squatted. This is the same situation with the internet - what do you do when you start a new company? You register your site before you announce anything publicly. In fact, it would be crazy not to. So it seems that we want to limit *all* future potential companies that start with NXT so present companies can't be squatted? (Which they can get around anyways, if aliases transfers is implemented. Or, they can just use a "verified" alternate name) Granted, that's where the money is, but the internet can be squatted, and that's not stopping them from using it. IMO, most companies have no problem having a "sub-name" for a certain market. This can apply to the AE as well.

So if the first thing we do is prevent any business from being able to use their own name without extortion it is *hardly going to be appealing*.

what are they doing with domain names since internet is born ?

Again - in many countries it is *illegal* to squat names (such as Australia) - the world isn't just the US.

Something decentralized (and more anonymous without a central registrar) like nxt, it really doesn't matter as no legal actions can be initiated.

However, there is a problem with life-time owning the domain, even after the account is lost (forgotten password, dead person) that domain name is gone forever.

I actually thought about this the other day (because it was related to NXTopia). Expiring Aliases could be very useful, for things like Proof of Ownership (PoO) that become invalidated after a certain time period (rent). The owner of the alias can refresh the duration at anytime before the alias expires, to prevent someone from snatching the alias away right when it expires. This is actually why I asked c-f-b a while back if parallel chains could define their own parameters (but it seems not to be the case). EDIT: Although, AT could probably do something like this anyways.

Pandaisftw

[CIYAM]

The whole broken idea of DNS names was something from the 1980's.

It is now getting closer to 2020 and we *need to do things differently* and in a *decentralised manner* rather than just "it was good enough back then".

The aliases is basically .bit and look how well that went.

If a user gets *confused* by duplicate names *then that is good* as they are unlikely to just "click one at random" and "buy shares".

[BrianNowhere]

I already have (client side) contacts in my web client. Check it out. An asset will show up as issued by "Bob" if you have set that person up as a contact.

Ok I went into the assett exchange and clicked on "assett issuer" which gave me the issuers public address. I then went in a created a new contact with that address and named it "BOOB SELLER".

What I think might solve a lot of the problems you are referring to is if now when I went back into the Asset Exchange and looked at BOOBS
that any assets being issues by "BOOB SELLER" would be readily apparent in that window. I'd know "BOOB SELLER" was a trusted vendor of boobs and would choose his assets. Would also be nice to be able to filter the BOOBS sell order so only "BOOB SELLER" showed up there so I know that if I buy BOOBS I am only buying them from that seller..