I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).
Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.
The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.
The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.
Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).
Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.
Thanks for the kind words! The Counterparty team makes no promises regarding returns-on -investment. Our goal. moreover, was not to make investors rich overnight, but rather to create a working and relatively full-featured client, and to that extent returns-on-investment were secondary. At the same time, however, I believe that the situation you describe does not preclude XCP significantly increasing in value. Specifically, unless a Counterparty fork offers some real technical improvement, I think that XCP-2, etc. will be minted only when Counterparty has proved itself a financial success. And even if a Counterparty fork does offer technical advantage, the importance of being the first Counterparty must not be forgotten. In my opinion, certain alt-coins offer definite advantages over Bitcoin (e.g. faster block-time), and yet Bitcoin has still increased in value and the alt-coin market has, in my opinion, at least for now, proven itself to be by-and-large a bubble. Nothing suggests to me that the situation wouldn't be same if alt-Counterpartys were to appear. |
|
|
|
Feeds
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| Feed Address | Timestamp | Text | Value | Fee Multiplier |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| mt1N2qE4wHkjdDeumCtRg1NKwxXGMCAx5X | 2014-01-06T16:00:03+00:00 | CoinDesk BPI USD | 922.0817 | 0.0001 |
| mgYWm8Ug76czkAMSVNECJ31iEAGH5V9py1 | 2014-01-06T15:57:53+00:00 | foobar | 3.0 | 10 |
| n1TzSvnJRH4LUKA9j6qvCpiqc2yvxGKSmg | 2014-01-06T15:06:40+00:00 | foobar | 123.0 | 1E-7 |
| mq8srYuaPCrzk4mdKuz3168dxJQAQKv7Wo | 2014-01-05T02:06:34+00:00 | Hello World | 0.0 | 0.01 |
| mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns | 2014-01-02T01:41:46+00:00 | foobar | 2.0 | 0.001 |
| mz8qzVaH8RaVp2Rq6m8D2dTiSFirhFf4th | 2014-01-02T01:04:17+00:00 | <Locked> | 0.0 | 0.01 |
| n3EHaCAycMEv6DhMPbrQsEubFsgtUmoin1 | 2014-01-01T13:16:05+00:00 | Test | 0.0 | 0.000001 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
So feeds shows us all feeds being "broadcast", rather than just the ones we care about? The feeds listed first are those that have been most recently broadcast. Won't this pose a risk to spamming? For only 0.144 BTC /day you could spam the Feed list every minute and keep your spam visible on top. , users will most likely determine which feeds they want to bet on with reference to a source outside of the blockchain. Spamming broacasts, then, will probably just cause this, which will happen naturally and of its own accord, to happen more quickly. |
|
|
|
ok maybe i am missing something here but how do we know that someone does not have the privkey for this address? https://blockchain.info/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVrAlso, why not just use an address that goes to the Red Cross or Shawns Outpost or whatever random charity. Since you are just using this as way to limit coin generation why not at least have the BTC go toward something that benefits people, planet, something. I know it is too late for that obviously. Counterparty aims at maximizing trustlessness, i.e. not sending Bitcoins to any address for which someone has the prviate key; even though you have suggested donating to good causes, Bitcoins could only be sent to their addresses at the expense of trustlessness and decentralization. EDIT: Regarding the unspendability of the Bitcoins in at CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr please see this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg4317890#msg4317890i do not see the causality between using a charity address at the expense of decentralization, as being fundamentally different than your current state. this is using 1 address to gen coins so whether that address belongs to God or the Devil, or no one it makes little difference since coin minting is centralized to that address during the genesis blocks. i would love to see a real logical argument about why an address that is highly unlikely to be generated put out by a nontransparent group of people is better than a btc address that is publicly published by any well known NGO or nonprofit that puts out corporate responsibility reports and is transparent about who they are. As I said, our goal is maximize decentralization and minimize trust, and it is simply the case that sending BTC to an address for which someone has the private key is less decentralized and requires more trust than sending BTC to an address for which no one has the private key. If you think this is an unworthy goal, that is one thing, but I am not sure what sort of 'logical argument' you are looking for. |
|
|
|
I will hire miners for this project
Pm me
Counterparty is built on top of the Bitcoin blockchain, and as such XCP cannot be mined. |
|
|
|
ok maybe i am missing something here but how do we know that someone does not have the privkey for this address? https://blockchain.info/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVrAlso, why not just use an address that goes to the Red Cross or Shawns Outpost or whatever random charity. Since you are just using this as way to limit coin generation why not at least have the BTC go toward something that benefits people, planet, something. I know it is too late for that obviously. Counterparty aims at maximizing trustlessness, i.e. not sending Bitcoins to any address for which someone has the prviate key; even though you have suggested donating to good causes, Bitcoins could only be sent to their addresses at the expense of trustlessness and decentralization. EDIT: Regarding the unspendability of the Bitcoins in at CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr please see this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg4317890#msg4317890 |
|
|
|
So every transaction of XCP or asset will have a 0.0001 BTC fee.
0.001 BTC fee is ONLY for burning through counterpartyd.
Then why using your soft to burn if it cost me 9x less using blockchain.info ?
Much more easy, cheaper, almost unfair.
Where did you see that it cost .001 BTC to burn through counterpartyd? The fee for all XCP transactions is the same. |
|
|
|
Let's say I want to put out a broadcast with a fee of .01 (or 1% of the bets made on the broadcast) - it would look like this:
python3 counterpartyd.py --rpc-password=PASSWORD broadcast --from=ADDRESS --text=TEXT --fee-multiplier=.01
The text of a broadcast is a string. If you want to publish a value later on, then the syntax is:
python3 counterpartyd.py --rpc-password=PASSWORD broadcast --from=ADDRESS --text=TEXT --fee-multiplier=.01 --value=VALUE
Does that help?
I don't understand why there are two commands nor what they do. For the first command, is the fee of 0.01 something I have to pay? For the second command, do I need to pay for each update I make? If so, do I pay in BTC or XCP? Finally, where is this information stored? In the bitcoin block chain OR does counterpart have its own block chain? Thanks. Anyone? The first command is what people are betting on, and the second command, which includes the 'value' function publishes the actual outcome of the bet, and hence determines which user won the bet. |
|
|
|
feed-issuers have the added incentive of developing a reputation: the more often they maintain their feeds to the satisfaction of those who are betting, the more trusted they will become, and hence the more often betters will bet on feeds issued by them.
This betting system seem to rely on trust... That's a problem to me. We can bet anything, but the feed output is under control of a single one. Nothing stop him to feed the opposite of the true result of the bet. Do I miss something? 'Trust' is a misleading word. Consider the situation from a feed-operator's point of view: For the most part, the actual data that a feed operator is publishing will be extremely easy to find outside of Counterparty, and consequently, whether a feed-operator has tampered with the data will be readily verifiable. Users will then stop betting on feeds published by such a feed-operator. Betting in Counterparty doesn't depend on feed-operators being honest, it depends on them being rational. Now one could argue that a feed operator can create arbitrarily many addresses, and consequently can continue publishing faulty under new identities. In my opinion, however, this is not a real concern, given how I see Counterparty developing. Namely: one will discover feed-operators outside of the blockchain (either through forum threads or external websites, or whatever), see which public addresses they says are theirs, and bet accordingly. This further increases the utility of reputation within Counterparty, and hence reduces the risk of being scammed. |
|
|
|
Let's say I want to put out a broadcast with a fee of .01 (or 1% of the bets made on the broadcast) - it would look like this:
python3 counterpartyd.py --rpc-password=PASSWORD broadcast --from=ADDRESS --text=TEXT --fee-multiplier=.01
The text of a broadcast is a string. If you want to publish a value later on, then the syntax is:
python3 counterpartyd.py --rpc-password=PASSWORD broadcast --from=ADDRESS --text=TEXT --fee-multiplier=.01 --value=VALUE
Does that help?
I don't understand why there are two commands nor what they do. For the first command, is the fee of 0.01 something I have to pay? For the second command, do I need to pay for each update I make? If so, do I pay in BTC or XCP? Finally, where is this information stored? In the bitcoin block chain OR does counterpart have its own block chain? Thanks. No, the fee is something those who are betting on your feed have to pay. The fee is basically meant to incentivize the issuer of the feed to maintain the integrity of the feed (both updating it regularly and not tampering with it). In my opinion, feed-issuers have the added incentive of developing a reputation: the more often they maintain their feeds to the satisfaction of those who are betting, the more trusted they will become, and hence the more often betters will bet on feeds issued by them. You have to pay the standard Bitcoin fee for making a transaction each time you update your feed, yes. The information is stored in the Blockchain. Counterparty does not have its own blockchain; Counterparty transactions are made on the Bitcoin blockchain. |
|
|
|
May I ask how you work?
doc? testing? hosting?
I have been an active tester, especially in the time leading up to Counterparty's release. I also try to reach out to the community on behalf of the Counterparty team. |
|
|
|
Cityglut, do we have hidden devs by any chance? dark core member?
Just curious.
I thought PhantomPhreak & xnova were the only dev, but some message lead to confusion.
There are no hidden devs. I work with the xnova and PhantomPhreak but am not a dev, myself. EDIT: I know your donation was directed at the devs, but they are quite busy with the project, and I did not want you to think your donation went unnoticed, so I took the liberty of thanking you on their behalf. |
|
|
|
I just send you 14$ dev  To encourage your work. Maybe not much, but still a little amount for me. 10x the first donation \o/ If 100 people do the same you're good  Thanks very much for the donation. Don't worry about the size of the donation, we really appreciate the support. |
|
|
|
+1 I was all on board with this when I started the lengthy process of getting ready to burn 1 BTC but after detailed research and thought, I came to the same conclusion. Why not wait 20-25 days until things are easy, stable, and much more "evaluated" by the community and still get 1000 XCP at that point? If I may, I do think the intent was to release a working protocol and to encourage people to use it -and Not to create something where someone who was watching the forums more intently, or was tipped off as an insider for example, could get in to merely multiply their money at the expense of others. I am aware that most people browsing alt-currency forums may very well be people looking to "make money out of thin air" if you will, on account of being early investors in something (having missed the early investment into bitcoin per say), without much caring as to what something does, or whether it offers any kind of potential benefit to others, or mankind at large. While this approach may in fact make a select number of people rich, nevertheless I think it is ultimately detrimental to the acceptance and development of digital monetization and finance in the broader sense. The financial component of a project is a critical component to its success. How much XCP you allocate for developers and early adopters will impact how much free time (and will) these individuals have for contributing to the project. People do not _only_ labor for things because they are cool or neato, though that is a large component of success in this realm. Ideally you want a lot of stake holders, with a decent stake size, who will support the project and help drive it forward. If these individuals are drowned out by huge late-comer investments from "dumb-money" (e.g., VCs and other large-scale late comers) then your community is essentially squashed because their stakes tend towards zero. Thus, from a project success perspective, it seems quite important to incentivise/reward the founders, developers and early adopters over late comers. To be fair, I see what you're trying to do by levelling the playing field over time, so that no one screams premine. It's a nice idea and it could work, who knows. However, I do not think it is a necessary risk to take with such a great project. It is abundantly clear, based on the content of the code I have reviewed, the functionality already available and the description of your project, that your project does indeed have something behind it and is no a premise scam. What I can't understand is how you'll build a vibrant community if some large VCs or institutional investors come along on day 28 and inflate the currency supply 10x. If the burn period were longer, then I would agree with you. However, since the burn period is only a month, the distinction between "late-comers" and "new-comers" is pretty slight. Also, even though Counterparty is nearly feature-complete, we still run the risk of alienating later investors by rewarding early investors disproportionately. Indeed, I would say that the the more successful the project is in the long run, the more likely it is that people will accuse us of having premined in the future - even though XCP cannot be mined, at all. The situation you depict regarding VCs and institutional investors is perhaps a concern, though I think not a great one. Usually institutional investors and VCs have to do long, strenuous research on a project before deciding whether to invest in it. Moreover, VCs and institutional investors tend to have much more modest investment goals than those involved in Bitcoin, so even if a few of them invest during the burn period, others will not be deterred from investing after the burn period, and early investors' XCP will still increase in value. |
|
|
|
Counterparty Announcement
... We are looking for community contributions of testing, bug reports, patches, and companion software (e.g. built around counterpartyd). We are also asking for donations of BTC and XCP to 12J1YFvsWHDCU5HNAWNLNy1Q9nZo8Q4Xgs, which funds will be used to issue bounties for the development of the project. Sorry to see you've not received any contributions yet. Your project looks great. Keep up the great work. I will be watching it closely. I'd like to see an example or tutorial on how to setup a feed on the test net, just so I can play around with it and contribute some bug fixes. Let's say I want to put out a broadcast with a fee of .01 (or 1% of the bets made on the broadcast) - it would look like this: python3 counterpartyd.py --rpc-password=PASSWORD broadcast --from=ADDRESS --text=TEXT --fee-multiplier=.01 The text of a broadcast is a string. If you want to publish a value later on, then the syntax is: python3 counterpartyd.py --rpc-password=PASSWORD broadcast --from=ADDRESS --text=TEXT --fee-multiplier=.01 --value=VALUE Does that help? |
|
|
|
Question: what if you forget which bitcoin address you used? I don't see a command equivalent to listtransactions or getinfo in bitcoind. counterpartyd --rpc-password=rpcpw1234 address 1CrmTo7Rtk6keeBHbN93B3tAMCm31sG5Tc In general Bitcoind/-qt takes care of wallet management. Right now, in Counterparty, every log is the same, and Counterparty doesn't keep track of which transactions you make - but we are working to change that. |
|
|
|
Only Mastercoin funding is centralized, protocol itself isn't centralized.
This isn't the place to discuss Mastercoin, but it may be worth pointing out an important difference here between Mastercoin's protocol and Counterparty's: every Mastercoin transaction has to have a small output to the Exodus Address (to which at least J.R. holds the private key). Counterparty has no such limitation. EDIT: typo Q1. I know you said this isn't the place to discuss MSC, but is the above true? Do you mean every future MSC transaction, (even once it's up & running) will have a small output to the Exodus address? That sucks. Yes, it is true. Q2. As much as I like your POB decentralisation and I really do. Maintaining & further developing something like this will require serious funding? No? We can't expect you guys to do all the work when you're getting the same risk/reward incentive as us. Even Protoshares are now issuing Angel shares as they need more direct funding. (Or maybe they're just scamming, we'll have to see if they actually release their delayed Keyhotee soon.)
While we do appreciate donations, it may be worth pointing out that Bitcoin's development was not predicated on outside funding, and Counterparty is: 1) much simpler and smaller project than Bitcoin, and 2) relatively full-featured. Most open-source projects are community-driven, with software developers contributing not primarily for the financial incentives, but because they really believe in the project they are developing (Gavin Andresen, for example, worked on Bitcoin a long time before being hired full-time). I will certainly be investing in Counterparty, but this is because I think it is a great project with lots of potential, not because there is a lot of money in alt-coins at the moment. |
|
|
|
I must be too far away from serious dev talk, but could someone explain all this in lay man's terms?
Counterparty transactions are made on the Bitcoin blockchain. Right now, all you can do with Bitcoins is send them from one address to another, and so Counterparty adds increased functonality to Bitcoin. Specifically, the Counterparty protocol provides a distributed exchange and, by running counterpartyd, users can 1) broadcast information, 2) make bets on broadcasts 3) create assets and 4) send assets to other addresses. Counterparty uses proof-of-burn to initialize balances: by sending BTC to an unspendable address, users earn XCP. The burn period is roughly a month, and there is an early entrance reward, which starts at 50% and decreases linearly over the month. If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask, and also check out the reference implementation and the protocol specification. |
|
|
|
@Developers - Can I send BTC to you and burn them for me?
I want to get in ASAP and it is a bit unfair for me as a mac user - I trust that when you will have a working client you will send the XCP back to me!
klee, I PMed you. |
|
|
|
Interesting project.
Are you able to tell us why did you decided to make these new accounts to announce this?
We have all been very active on bitcointalk, but we created new accounts primarily for two reasons: First, the code is open-source, and we want dicussion to be about the project, as opposed to our past activity within Bitcoin. Also, some of the functions we provide are innovations, and as such their legal status is not yet clear. We imagine that similar considerations prompted Satoshi to remain anonymous, and we felt that he made the right decision, so we decided to follow his example. |
|
|
|
The Counterparty protocol has not yet been finalized! You may lose your money if it changes!
[/center]
This looks like an interesting project. Has the timeframe of the burn period been decided? Does this warning mean that we shouldn't burn real BTC yet? The burn period goes from block 278310 to block 283810, or roughly a month. You can burn real BTC, but there are risks associated with doing so, which is why there is a 50% reward that is linearly decreasing over the course of the burn period. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
