[NXT] Decentralized Asset Exchange Discussion Thread

[loyer]

yeah where can i download the client?

[1714920955]

1714920955

[1714920955]

1714920955

[1714920955]

1714920955

[1714920955]

1714920955

[vanduric]

Hi, could I get some testNext for testnet : 9362966581067150294

thanks

[CIYAM]

This has probably already been discussed but I think we need to get rid of the "Asset Name" so we don't end up with a second lot of name squatting.

Wouldn't it be a better idea to just tie an Alias to the Asset Id same as we can tied an Alias to an Account Id?

[Come-from-Beyond]

This has probably already been discussed but I think we need to get rid of the "Asset Name" so we don't end up with a second lot of name squatting.

Wouldn't it be a better idea to just tie an Alias to the Asset Id same as we can tied an Alias to an Account Id?

Client software could just hide "name" field.

[CIYAM]

Client software could just hide "name" field.

As long as duplicate names are permitted then I would be fine with that.

[bitcoinpaul]

This has probably already been discussed but I think we need to get rid of the "Asset Name" so we don't end up with a second lot of name squatting.

Wouldn't it be a better idea to just tie an Alias to the Asset Id same as we can tied an Alias to an Account Id?

Client software could just hide "name" field.

It needs collaboration of all client devs for this. AE should be a cohesive experience across all clients.

[CIYAM]

It needs collaboration of all client devs for this. AE should be a cohesive experience across all clients.

Agreed - that's why I would want the Asset Name to be non-unique (it would *force* the clients to do something better as their users will complain about the duplicate Asset Names).

[bitcoinpaul]

Let's say by issuing an asset, this asset automatically gets a random string as the name (=identifier). What would be a good solution that people could recognize this asset as the xyz asset? Linking to aliases, which are already squatted and can easily be obtained (1NXT in comparison to 1000NXT when issuing an asset) sounds not good.

[foxfoxcoin]

this is an awesome project but i wonder if it can success

[bitcoinpaul]

We will see, foxfoxcoin. With altcoin-gateways to Nxt, it could be a game changer.

Did you try it out on the testnet?

[CIYAM]

What would be a good solution that people could recognize this asset as the xyz asset?

We already have aliases that *belong* to accounts don't we?

So we can put the name of the Asset into such an alias that belongs to the Asset issuer.

e.g. @Asset_Id = "ABC Asset"

The idea being that the Asset Name is no longer unique - you just choose which one you want to pay attention to according to the Issuer (so it doesn't matter if you get duplicate names as long as you know the issuers accounts of the ones you are interested in).

I would expect an Issuer would be making some sort of announcement where they can tell everyone the Issuer account id for their new Asset.

[bitcoinpaul]

Right now:
Asset Names -> Buyer pays attention to Asset Name, Description, Asset Issuer Account and some public opinions

Your idea:
Alias -> Buyer pays attention to Alias (belonging to Nxt account which issues the Asset), Description, Asset Issuer Account and some public opinions


I don't see a big difference. What don't I understand?

[CIYAM]

Right now:
Asset Names -> Buyer pays attention to Asset Name, Description, Asset Issuer Account and some public opinions

Your idea:
Alias -> Buyer pays attention to Alias (belonging to Nxt account which issues the Asset), Description, Asset Issuer Account and some public opinions

I don't see a big difference. What don't I understand?

The only real difference is whether or not an Alias Name has to be "unique" and whether users are going to get "tricked" or "confused" because they didn't check other things (or their client didn't show it the "right" way).

As I said provided that Asset Name doesn't need to be unique then I don't mind if it remains.

[bitcoinpaul]

But Aliases are unique and people look at it first.

I have a mental block, it seems.

edit: Ok, wait. I process it one more time. Maybe I get it

[CIYAM]

But Aliases are unique and people look at it first.

I was pretty sure we can have aliases that are "private to an account" (unless I am mistaken) so everyone can have an alias called @Asset_Id.

[bitcoinpaul]

What about unique identifiers (currently Asset Names, but you cannot choose it yourself) and a non-unique name (kind of a 'short description').

Now people search for the 'short-description' first but then look at the unique identifier and other stuff to reassure it is the right one.

No aliases involved.

edit: Yes, this would involve changing the code.

[bitcoinpaul]

But Aliases are unique and people look at it first.

I was pretty sure we can have aliases that are "private to an account" (unless I am mistaken) so everyone can have an alias called @Asset_Id.

What do you mean with "private to an account"?

[CIYAM]

What do you mean with "private to an account"?

Meaning every account can have an alias called say @email that is there email address (rather than a *global* Alias called @email).

12345@email = 12345@domain.com
88888@email = 88888@domain.com

Make sense?

[Come-from-Beyond]

As long as duplicate names are permitted then I would be fine with that.

I don't like the idea, coz this could be (and will be) used for phishing.

[CIYAM]

As long as duplicate names are permitted then I would be fine with that.

I don't like the idea, coz this could be (and will be) used for phishing.

In that case I would like the Asset Name *removed altogether* as otherwise I can bet someone will create an Asset called CIYAM and rip people off with it because of the name.

I'm not sure why you are in support of letting people do such squatting and scamming - it will never go down well "in the real business world".