NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[rdanneskjoldr]

Keep it simple ...  JL, please return the unique names.

Keep it simple for *scammers* is what you are actually saying - I think JL changed it because of this exact point.

An Asset is not a Twitter account - people are likely to end up buying fake shares (rather than reading a wrong tweet) - will you be refunding anyone who gets scammed?

True that twitter in not an Asset exchange.For that reason people will be even more cautious,as they are dealing with money.

[achimsmile]

There *will be a readable* name - the choice is one of two:

Microsoft (a fake but readable name)
or
Microsoft:12334
Microsoft:12345

Uh oh? What it this - seems I need to find out more.
Which method is "helping" the end user to get *scammed* and which is not?

- no.  You propose this choice:

Microsoft (a fake ? a true?)
Microsoft (a true? a fake?)
or
Microsoft:12334
Microsoft:12345

I think your decision (non-unique name) is helping the end user to get scammed.

Nope you are wrong, it will force user to make the right choice. No one want to get scam and sort by volume solve this issue easilly in the long run.

thankyou sebastien

Sorting by volume can easily be gamed with only minimal cost imo

[Jerical13]

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.

What if Aliases ownership expired after a length of time and went up for bid on expiration?

[abctc]

You propose this choice:
Microsoft (a fake ? a true?)
Microsoft (a true? a fake?)
or
Microsoft:12334
Microsoft:12345
I think your decision (non-unique name) is helping the end user to get scammed.

Nope you are wrong, it will force user to make the right choice (unique asset id anyway). No one want to get scam and sort by volume solve this issue easilly in the long run.

- sorry, how do you think the real Microsoft would promote their asset? They need to say: go and buy asset "Microsoft" with the bigest volume ?

[CIYAM]

True that twitter in not an Asset exchange.For that reason people will be even more cautious,as they are dealing with money.

And they will be "doubly" as cautious if they see "two names" instead of one.

[Sebastien256]

There *will be a readable* name - the choice is one of two:

Microsoft (a fake but readable name)
or
Microsoft:12334
Microsoft:12345

Uh oh? What it this - seems I need to find out more.
Which method is "helping" the end user to get *scammed* and which is not?

- no.  You propose this choice:

Microsoft (a fake ? a true?)
Microsoft (a true? a fake?)
or
Microsoft:12334
Microsoft:12345

I think your decision (non-unique name) is helping the end user to get scammed.

Nope you are wrong, it will force user to make the right choice. No one want to get scam and sort by volume solve this issue easilly in the long run.

thankyou sebastien

Sorting by volume can easily be gamed with only minimal cost imo

Note that there is still the unique asset id. See Volume as just a pre sorting of the really bad one!

[CIYAM]

They need to say: go and buy asset "Microsoft" with the bigest volume ?

They could simply create something on their (HTTPS) web page which "puts the mystical number" on to your clipboard (just like a Bitcoin address).

You then "paste" in that number and: "viola" the *right* Microsoft is now selected!

[Anon136]

You propose this choice:
Microsoft (a fake ? a true?)
Microsoft (a true? a fake?)
or
Microsoft:12334
Microsoft:12345
I think your decision (non-unique name) is helping the end user to get scammed.

Nope you are wrong, it will force user to make the right choice (unique asset id anyway). No one want to get scam and sort by volume solve this issue easilly in the long run.

- sorry, how do you think the real Microsoft would promote their asset? They need to say: go and buy asset "Microsoft" with the bigest volume ?
[/quote]

dude are you kidding. A - the stock market isnt for everyone, its for people who have SOME idea what they are doing. B - the client could sort by volume or fees payed on transfers automatically. Or what ciyam said. Or a million other things i could probably think of in rapid succession. The only way someone could suffer from such a lack of imagination is if their argument depended on it.

[abctc]

Sorting by volume can easily be gamed with only minimal cost imo

- agree, especially in the beginning of the trades.

[Sebastien256]

You propose this choice:
Microsoft (a fake ? a true?)
Microsoft (a true? a fake?)
or
Microsoft:12334
Microsoft:12345
I think your decision (non-unique name) is helping the end user to get scammed.

Nope you are wrong, it will force user to make the right choice (unique asset id anyway). No one want to get scam and sort by volume solve this issue easilly in the long run.

- sorry, how do you think the real Microsoft would promote their asset? They need to say: go and buy asset "Microsoft" with the bigest volume ?

promote with asset id,especially in the beggining. The only unique thing that need to be unique.

[CIYAM]

promote with asset id. The only unique thing that need to be unique.

So as I said (let's try it again) - have a link to your HTTPS website (so say https://microsoft.com/nxt).

On the page is the "asset id" which you can click on to put on the clipboard.

Now you go to the Asset Exchange and "paste" in that asset id - "viola" the asset named Microsoft shows up and you keep that one.

So you see - it doesn't matter *how many* Microsoft listings there are - and the user has been "forced to do the right thing" from the very start.

[abctc]

They need to say: go and buy asset "Microsoft" with the bigest volume ?

They could simply create something on their (HTTPS) web page which "puts the mystical number" on to your clipboard (just like a Bitcoin address).
You then "paste" in that number and: "viola" the *right* Microsoft is now selected!

- so we are returning to the:

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.

[CIYAM]

so we are returning to the:

What you are doing is now "trolling" to make this go in yet another circle.

That really isn't helpful at all.

[Sebastien256]

promote with asset id. The only unique thing that need to be unique.

So as I said (let's try it again) - have a link to your HTTPS website (so say https://microsoft.com/nxt).

On the page is the "asset id" which you can click on to put on the clipboard.

Now you go to the Asset Exchange and "paste" in that asset id - "viola" the asset named Microsoft shows up and you keep that one.

So you see - it doesn't matter *how many* Microsoft listings there are - and the user has been "forced to do the right thing" from the very start.

+10000 , thank you, I have difficuly expressing this. That is how it should work!
Case Solve!

[abctc]

promote with asset id,especially in the beggining. The only unique thing that need to be unique.

- so we are returning to the:

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.

[BrianNowhere]

On the asset name controversy, am I being dense? Wouldn't an asset from a given entity always be issued from a Unique Nxt address, therefore making it very easy to tell who is issuing that asset?

It seems like an easy matter to set up the AE to only show assets from Nxt Addresses you have indicated you trust and to only purchase assets from them and also to clearly be able to show who is issuing that asset.

If Microsoft owns Nxt address 3498343485498 then you should be able to make sure that any time you are buying MSFT that you
are only buying it from Nxt address 3498343485498

I'm not getting why this is such a controversy.

+1
Yes that is the point. There is no need to make the asset name or suffix unique. That will only encourage scammer.

It seems to me that it would be best to have the AE be empty the first time you go into it, with a button there that says "add trusted issuer"
where you could add a Nxt address and give it a name (you could name it whatever you want) and then ONLY after you did that would that issuers assets show up in the AE.  It would clean up the interface and get rid of looking at asset prices that you have no interest in. Elsewhere you could "browse or search all assets" if you wanted to see what's out there and consider adding them to your trust pool.

Then Microsoft (or whoever) could market themselves in Nxt by having one line blurb on their website that says "Add Microsoft to Nxt by trusting 723549872359875"

[CIYAM]

Then Microsoft (or whoever) could market themselves in Nxt by having one line blurb on their website that says "Add Microsoft to Nxt by trusting 723549872359875"

Exactly - also as I stated their website can make it very easy for you to put the "scary number" onto your clipboard.

[Anon136]

They need to say: go and buy asset "Microsoft" with the bigest volume ?

They could simply create something on their (HTTPS) web page which "puts the mystical number" on to your clipboard (just like a Bitcoin address).
You then "paste" in that number and: "viola" the *right* Microsoft is now selected!

- so we are returning to the:

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.

no because this will only need to be done during the bootstrapping phase of the asset. once it gets established people will just be able to search microsofit in their client and hit buy. this really is a much better solution than "unique-names" (a bad description since we have unique names with both proposals)

[Sebastien256]

promote with asset id,especially in the beggining. The only unique thing that need to be unique.

- so we are returning to the:

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.

this do not help to post this post below our answer in this thread.

[abctc]

so we are returning to the:

What you are doing is now "trolling" to make this go in yet another circle.

That really isn't helpful at all.

- no, non-unique names is a trolling thing, that make as go in yet another circle - as perfectly shown by wesleyh.  Bravo, wesleyh!