NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[brooklynbtc]

It is decided: non-unique asset names

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/commits/122679083641070efc870df625b90b599c9d22c5

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

[1714760212]

1714760212

[1714760212]

1714760212

[1714760212]

1714760212

[1714760212]

1714760212

[1714760212]

1714760212

[1714760212]

1714760212

[Sebastien256]

It is decided: non-unique asset names

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/commits/122679083641070efc870df625b90b599c9d22c5

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.

[brooklynbtc]

It is decided: non-unique asset names

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/commits/122679083641070efc870df625b90b599c9d22c5

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

[jl777]

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

I hope its ok  

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

James

[Anon136]

It is decided: non-unique asset names

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/commits/122679083641070efc870df625b90b599c9d22c5

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.

[Anon136]

It is decided: non-unique asset names

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/commits/122679083641070efc870df625b90b599c9d22c5

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.

good point! a novel solution that idk how i overlooked.

[Sebastien256]

It is decided: non-unique asset names

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/commits/122679083641070efc870df625b90b599c9d22c5

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

This is not what I mean, of course, the editable field would have "no value" related to the asset other than a mean to provide additional information about the asset.
Only the permanent description provide the value of the asset.

[jl777]

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

Only numbers and letters are allowed in asset names currently,plus it is too long 10 char  limit

[Sebastien256]

Only numbers and letters are allowed in asset names currently,plus it is too long 10 char  limit

Clearly, asset require an additional editable field with longer than 10char!  If more than 10char cost space in blockchain,a solution would then make issue asset cost more than 1000nxt.  imo, I don't think asset should be cheap.

[allwelder]

i bought a lottery ticket, if i win big i will invest in nxt!
 

yea,good luck to you ,and then Nxt rocket...

[allwelder]

Do you guys think that 100 BTC buy wall on bter is fake? (Yes/No/Probably)

Define fake.

But it is real deal and finished.

[brooklynbtc]

Only numbers and letters are allowed in asset names currently,plus it is too long 10 char  limit

Clearly, asset require an additional editable field with longer than 10char!  If more than 10char cost space in blockchain, then make issue asset cost more than 1000nxt. 

I think we're getting this mixed up.

ASSET names can not be longer than 10 chars at the moment. The description is a much longer space.

I agree the asset needs an editable field, just can't be the name or description.

[Sebastien256]

Only numbers and letters are allowed in asset names currently,plus it is too long 10 char  limit

Clearly, asset require an additional editable field with longer than 10char!  If more than 10char cost space in blockchain, then make issue asset cost more than 1000nxt.  

I think we're getting this mixed up.

ASSET names can not be longer than 10 chars at the moment. The description is a much longer space.

I agree the asset needs an editable field, just can't be the name or description.

YEs, thing got mix a bit.  
I don't know all the detail of AE.

So,at the moment,  we are 3 that think that asset need an additional editable field . Maybe more will join and give his opinion on this subject. I think that would be a good addition before AE launch.

[Sebastien256]

Hey you know what would be important to be unique for asset!?!

I would make impossible for two assets to have the same name and description simultaneously. I mean name and description taken separatly can be non-unique but the full string asset.name+asset.description should be unique.  This would avoid the need to always check the asset id before buying and the side effect to remove some of the spam copycat.
What you think about that?

[jl777]

Hey you know what would be important to be unique for asset!?!

I would make impossible for two assets to have the same name and description simultaneously. I mean name and description taken separatly can be non-unique but the full string asset.name+asset.description should be unique.  This would avoid the need to always check the asset id before buying and the side effect to remove some of the spam copycat.
What you think about that?

too easy to workaround. The description can be quite long, any changed word would make it not be identical.

Many good ideas and suggestions!

James

[opticalcarrier]

how about increasing the number of digits used to identify assets?  This coupled with the now non-unique "name" (I like to use the work description now, since they arent unique) should allow us to reduce the fee charged with issuing an asset. 

I like the change to non-unique as it completely removes the idea of squatting

[CIYAM]

JL has already made the changes so that Asset name is no longer "unique" and I think we should stick with that.

The idea of perhaps making the Description (or another new field) "editable" seems like a reasonable one for consideration.

[Anon136]

JL has already made the changes so that Asset name is no longer "unique" and I think we should stick with that.

The idea of perhaps making the Description (or another new field) "editable" seems like a reasonable one for consideration.

important point to specify is that that field be stored locally not on the blockchain.

*edit* just to head of that argument before it even begins

[CIYAM]

important point to specify is that that field be stored locally not on the blockchain.

*edit* just to head of that argument before it even begins

Oh - in that case we are just talking about using localStorage or the like (so a client only thing).

Perhaps Wesley might add that in the same sort of way that he has implemented Contacts.

[Anon136]

important point to specify is that that field be stored locally not on the blockchain.

*edit* just to head of that argument before it even begins

Oh - in that case we are just talking about using localStorage or the like (so a client only thing).

Perhaps Wesley might add that in the same sort of way that he has implemented Contacts.

I mean there wouldn't be anything wrong with having the name editable and that change would be stored on the blockchain. but it would be nice to have a general "notes" field that was stored locally. that would make it a lot more difficult for scammers to trick people with almost no cost.