The gameplay looks solid and possibly addictive, and the cards seem to be tradable as well. I think trading intensive games definitely attract the right mindset for XCP. +1


Sadly, it will more likely be something like this:
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/pensioners-lose-savings-in-government-cash-grab-20140609-39t7p.html
http://rt.com/usa/199883-irs-structuring-civil-asset-forfeiture/

So if you are paid to be advertised to, what will stop someone from creating hundreds of dummy accounts to harvest ad revenue? A registration fee in gems? 

Ah, nice. I'm rather certain that regular community updates will clear up some of the mystery (suspense?) surrounding XCP. Doesn't hurt for getting indexed properly on Google either.

Also, this isn't related to the update, but I just noticed it on the forums:

"Spells of Genesis first commercial game using Counterparty"
https://forums.counterparty.io/discussion/774/spells-of-genesis-first-commercial-game-using-counterparty#latest

I really hope you guys will be using strong encryption for the messaging itself  .

I also fully support the idea of an invite system instead of a traditional presale, as other users have pointed out here. That will clearly be a benefit to GEMS.

And because it uses the Bitcoin blockchain and is fully open-source, it is essentially anti-fragile. Compared to traditional finance, it has close to no operating costs whatsoever. In terms of being a technology, it fits the criteria of both Buffet's investing style, and Nassim Taleb's concept of anti-fragility. Bitcoin and XCP are a valuable and finite substrate for black swan events to occur. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory

You can see a validation of this in the all-time charts of Counterparty. After the burn event, there is a huge spike in value which slowly falls and becomes a very long period of calm. Then Overstock caused another sudden and unpredictable increment. It's not going to stop attracting such patterns, since the protocol continues to function regardless of pretty much any circumstance.

At least that's my reasoning for investing. 

Who is personally profiting exactly? Apart from the government... Anyway, your statement is ridiculous and hyperbolic. Of course the devs are going to try and be compliant, are you mad? They are compliant because they don't want to break the law and go to jail.

Counterparty and Bitcoin are both open-source and have exactly the same philosophy. So if you want to ignore government regulation at your own peril, then go ahead. You can run your own counterpartyd or counterwallet and nobody can restrict anything whatsoever, since the blockchain is immune to manipulation by any central authority. But don't expect everyone else to follow suit, especially not those with a public identity.


Even though Warren Buffet hates Bitcoin, his work has helped me realize why Counterparty will succeed. You can see that it has a strong competitive advantage:

• No fundraiser (avoids legal difficulties, ensures a fair distribution of coins, and gives the developers incentive)
• Slightly deflationary
• First mover advantage
• Uses the Bitcoin blockchain, which has formidable network and security.

Yes, a few other features are disabled through geo-ip restrictions as well.

There is no information yet. Consider that in the end the regulations cannot affect the technology itself. And as long as the Bitcoin network exists, Counterparty will keep working. It's a minor setback but not a huge problem. Anyone seriously investing in this technology should have been able to see this coming.

In the end, places exist outside of the U.S, and there are many uses for tokens which do not fall under any regulation anywhere. I think to see what is occurring as an end of the world scenario shows a lack of resolve or ulterior motives.

weak hands that cannot hodl

Based on what I know, tokens are not being used in a way that would qualify for the SEC to intervene. GEMS is fine.

Although I think GEMS can only reach its true potential if its Android as well. 90% of people that I know in Europe have an Android phone rather than iOS.

I think it's obvious really, but why try to convince people?

That's a ridiculous claim. Medici is definitely using XCP and Counterparty. And as PhantomPhreak stated, sidechains are much less secure. It makes no sense to sacrifice liquidity or security in either scenario.

I think that's a bit hyperbolic. A few people might get serious difficulties, but many others use tokens in a way that does not infringe on any regulation or laws.

Also, Counterparty as a fully open-source platform will not be affected, because the Bitcoin network will still be online. All money in the world can be used for good or evil, so I don't think it's fair to blame the tools we use for this phenomenon. Money in the world can go to charities or cartels, but its the people who decide.

And if you've been following recent news, Counterparty is creating a foundation and cooperating with Overstock to create a platform with full regulatory compliance.

Aw, why not SWARM 

Do you mean his tweet? That was a joke 

From "I'm Gavin Andresen, Chief Scientist at the Bitcoin Foundation. Ask me anything!" at http://reddit.com/r/Bitcoin

[–]GrounBEEFtaxi 31 points 1 day ago
Gavin, what is your take on the counterparty/overstock cryptosecurities project. I truly believe this might be the grand project that truly challenges wall street. Thoughts?

[–]gavinandresen 31 points 1 day ago
Really really interesting.
A lot will depend on how the SEC (or similar regulatory agencies overseas) reacts, I think.

---

[–]maraoz 30 points 1 day ago
Hey Gavin, great respect for your amazing work. What are your thoughts on non-financial transactions or uses of the bitcoin blockchain? (e.g counterparty, colored coins, proof of existence, etc.)

[–]gavinandresen 61 points 1 day ago
I'm excited about the possibilities. I think a lot of projects unnecessarily mix up the various services the blockchain provides, and try to make it do things it is not good at doing (like storing data). I think the best projects understand that they don't need to invent a new currency. They don't need to use the blockchain as their long-term data storage solution. And they don't need to use the p2p network as their communication mechanism.

They should use the blockchain as the world's most secure distributed ledger.

---

[–]socium 7 points 1 day ago

What would you say about storing digests in OP_RETURN (as long as they don't exceed the 40bytes max size) ?

[–]gavinandresen 14 points 1 day ago

That is what OP_RETURN is for, go for it!

Ah my mistake, I must have accidentally left that out. Updated.

Sorry, it just seems ludicrous at this point because its literally a non-argument. AFAIK XCP transactions are prune-able, pay transaction fees, and ultimately contribute to the liquidity of Bitcoin. Not only that, but trading on the DEx pays the miners a default of 1% of BTC sell orders. I absolutely fail to see how that is damage.

Besides, it's self regulating. If nobody uses it, there is no added data. If everyone uses it, the value must exceed its very limited footprint. The burned BTC that were converted are now worth 1500% as XCP.

1% of BTC Sell orders towards network incentive and a 10+ fold increase in exchange value can't pay for a few bytes, really?

IIRC, they changed their attitudes positively towards Counterparty recently. Those kinds of comments now only come from competing projects.

You could run the counterpartyd command line client which communicates with Bitcoin Core, or (a bit tricky) run a counterwallet locally.