Is the "dividend" command already working? I'm trying to pay dividends to an asset I just created ("MAXM"), but the total amount is 0: ./counterpartyd.py dividend --from=1B9S7nhAsQeGnU6DWqaMF1G2jamLSFNJkV --quantity-per-share=1 --share-asset=MAXM
Total amount to be distributed in dividends: 0.0 Am I missing something here? There seems to be an error where only assets set to divisible can have dividends distributed. |
|
|
|
|
The transaction looks right, but the TEST/XCP value from the log looks wrong, again.
Also on blockscan:
- "Price" should include the pair (e.g. XCP/TEST) instead of just "XCP"
- For BTC/XCP, buy and sell prices look right; the "price" column is still wrong (you could derive/verify the price column by dividing the buy by the sell price...) - more confusingly only some of the prices look wrong.
(I hope this "intensive" testing is useful, BTW).
|
|
|
|
|
Oddly I see that my order for selling 5 TEST (that I put in later, at a slightly lower price) matched first on blockscan. Do we have a fork, or will this be resolved somehow?
EDIT: need to rebuild database. Check back later.
|
|
|
|
EDIT: I fixed the bug and pushed to GitHub.
Great, market view is working again. Now shouldn't the system match these 2 orders? | Give Quantity | Give Asset | Get Quantity | Get Asset | Price | Price Assets | Fee | Time Left | Tx Hash |
| 25 | TEST | 0.1 | XCP | 0.0040 | XCP/TEST | 0.0001 | 9866 | a751987c...90d05a76 |
| 0.004 | XCP | 1 | TEST | 250.0000 | TEST/XCP | 0.0001 | 2 | 5d46f970...518978cc | Hmm. I'll look into that... I put up some more TEST orders of varying sizes, if you want to try matching them. I created a matching order (0.04 XCP <-> 10 TEST), let's see how this works out. EDIT: it did work, I now have 1 TEST in my wallet. Awesome! Hm, I should have received 10 TEST, will wait a couple of blocks to see what happens. Only part of your order matched due to rounding errors (?) I'm putting up more orders to better assess this. |
|
|
|
EDIT: I fixed the bug and pushed to GitHub.
Great, market view is working again. Now shouldn't the system match these 2 orders? | Give Quantity | Give Asset | Get Quantity | Get Asset | Price | Price Assets | Fee | Time Left | Tx Hash |
| 25 | TEST | 0.1 | XCP | 0.0040 | XCP/TEST | 0.0001 | 9866 | a751987c...90d05a76 |
| 0.004 | XCP | 1 | TEST | 250.0000 | TEST/XCP | 0.0001 | 2 | 5d46f970...518978cc | Hmm. I'll look into that... I put up some more TEST orders of varying sizes, if you want to try matching them. |
|
|
|
The drawback is that they will have no enough money to hire more developers and provide bounties. The advantage is that the community is more willing to contribute to this project as long as they get some XCP. It's like open-source community project vs. private company project.
That my point exactly, where from these XCP's are going to be paid off? If the developers are not allocating some development fund (and apparently they not), the only source for these XCP would be the community, which may actually prefer hoarding the coins, rather then donating them for the cause. Any thoughts from developers about this potential issue? The developers already burned at least 4 BTC, if not much more (20-40 is probably around the right ballpark). |
|
|
|
|
Yes a lot of work needs to be done to make this more, well, usable. That's the price of early adoption.
|
|
|
|
|
Are the devs broadcasting CoinDesk API prices? That's interesting, if a bit pricey for a broadcast service. How to use this to place a bet though?
Broadcast: 'CoinDesk BPI USD' = 856.5558 from 1Pcpxw6wJwXABhjCspe3CNf3gqSeh6eien
at 2014-01-13T20:10:27-06:00 with a fee multiplier of 0.0010 (b844b81e...7580d4
f5)
Broadcast: 'CoinDesk BPI USD' = 855.2317 from 1CeQHd59TFKWQzsWYDXc9NDX2ooMSRpiqi
at 2014-01-13T21:10:45-06:00 with a fee multiplier of 0.0010 (e0ab9cad...af90bc
6b)
|
|
|
|
Haha yeah like I said I hope I just lack imagination :-)
My bitcoin-qt finally synced \o/
Time to start betting on exotic crypto-financial derivatives!
I'll try and answer part of your question. Assuming that crypto currencies do establish themselves with some utility and adoption in the marketplace, then the next battleground will be for derivatives of crypto currencies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_(finance)Derivatives can be used in a variety of ways and the market is enormous: 1) Hedge against negative movements of an asset they hold. 2) Speculative trading - cf London Whale, where speculative trading was disguised as hedging. 3) Creation of complex instruments that are sold to other parties to a) hedge against difficult to calculate risks, b) make bets on the price movement of a set of assets. To give a concrete example of a present day problem, a US retailer who accepts bitcoin has a risk exposure to the volatility of USD/BTC. They could choose to purchase a derivative to ensure they could sell their bitcoin at a later date at a fixed USD price (protect against the price of BTC crashing). Similarly, the US retailer could use derivatives to protect against the price of bitcoin rising. Example: A customer purchases a television for 1 BTC. The retailer uses a payment processor such as bitpay to immediately convert the BTC to USD. In the future, the customer returns the television and wants a refund in BTC. The retailer could purchase a BTC derivative to give them the right to purchase BTC at a fixed price in the future. Some reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-exchange_option #1. Currency risk in fact is the number one thing hampering global adoption of cryptocurrencies, as alluded through numerous times in the US senate bitcoin hearings, the PBOC statements, other statements by the US government, even more statements from other foreign governments, and most of all merchants. (Again it goes back to trust, though -- who will run the derivatives exchange?) The derivatives market in the US is worth approximately ... $600,000,000,000,000. That's right, 600 trillion. That was back in 2007-2008. Estimates for the global market in 2012 are in the quadrillions. Both hugely scary, and a huge opportunity for cryptocurrencies (if they combined can capture even 1% of that market...) |
|
|
|
Based on the several recent IPO "incidents" on these forums, will you consider a trusted escrow to hold your funds, releasing them for certain project milestones? I'm sure several are willing to volunteer their services (I won't, because I'm not trusted enough). We took this a step further and came up with some innovations in the trust model we think that the community will like. I won't spoil it yet  Excellent, looking forward to it. Trust is something in seriously short supply, especially currently. |
|
|
|
|
Based on the several recent IPO "incidents" on these forums, will you consider a trusted escrow to hold your funds, releasing them for certain project milestones? I'm sure several are willing to volunteer their services (I won't, because I'm not trusted enough).
|
|
|
|
Any chance the BTC mining collective would simply block XCP (and MSC) transactions altogether, making the whole protocol useless?
High chance. What would be their motivation to block these transactions? The more transactions are in the block, the more data miner must submit to network. Due to network propagation, if some other miner mines block with much less transactions in almost the same moment his block will most likely propagate much faster and thus orphan block first miner mined, one with many transactions. In other words, increased number of transactions will never be cheered by miners. Some might do it simply because they can and that is perfectly fine. Then again that is weighed by the reward of generating 0.0001 additional BTC in revenue (that is why transactions have fees, anyways). Depending on the price of bitcoin in the future, that could be quite significant. Transaction fees already make up something like 1% of block revenue, and this number will only go up. https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees-usd?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=Plus, XCP and MSC transactions generate a LOT of fees (relatively). Study blockchain.info to see why. |
|
|
|
|
OK, I see your problem. (You don't want to run bitcoind locally, and don't trust a server). In this case, we'll have to wait for a online wallet implementation, or upgrade your computer/memory to be able to run bitcoind. So far I don't know of a way to sign transactions offline, though it should be possible.
|
|
|
|
About dedicated server
Well, obviously; I assume that the counterpartyd instance running on your VPS/dedicated doesn't have your actual wallet on there. That would be on your own computer. Hum... On my computer in order to run counterpartyd, I must have a bitcoind running in the backgroud. And for it to run, it need a wallet. Therefore yes, my wallet would need to be on this dedicated server. I don't see how it can work otherwise. (on the meantime, someone uploading the XCP database would resolve my main problem.) ('guess +4h isn't that much after days and days... 'afraid a new DB will be needed if soft is changed on v0.9 out) It could be a wallet ... not your personal wallet with lots of BTC, but just a randomly generated bitcoin wallet. |
|
|
|
Here we are \o/ 1'000'000 XCP createdIn other news, 16GB dedicated servers can be had for not much more than $20/month these days (albeit a very special deal on lowendbox). (Yes, a real dedicated, KVM and power management and all).
Isn't there a huge trust issue with dedicated server? I mean, I will have to have my encrypted wallet there, and enter the password many times... Any solution that guarantee exclusive access & 100% security on that matter? Well, obviously; I assume that the counterpartyd instance running on your VPS/dedicated doesn't have your actual wallet on there. That would be on your own computer. Well, created and matched my own order. Hope it goes through and gives some useful data points to implement actual transaction viewing on blockscan.com. |
|
|
|
The transaction seemed to go through, but I am stuck with Status: 0/unconfirmed without any broadcasts for about 20 minutes so far. Bitcoin-qt is well connected (10 active connections). How long does it take typically?
It did actually go through, though not for 30 minutes.
Also, more error reports:
1. rpc-user and rpc-password should be prefixed with "bitcoind-" in the autogenerated config from the installer. Or at least make that part of it clear.
2. I still get the u2026 unicode errors in windows when doing "counterpartyd market".
Open Orders
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "counterpartyd.py", line 608, in <module>
market(args.give_asset, args.get_asset)
File "counterpartyd.py", line 41, in market
print(str(table.get_string(sortby='Price')))
File "c:\Python33\lib\encodings\cp437.py", line 19, in encode
return codecs.charmap_encode(input,self.errors,encoding_map)[0]
UnicodeEncodeError: 'charmap' codec can't encode character '\u2026' in position
483: character maps to <undefined>
This worked before (albeit being blank), so obviously some of the new transactions that have come up in the last day are causing this error.
Thanks for these bug reports! Installer has been updated (new windows binary is available), and this unicode bug should have been fixed. Thanks. Confirmed fixed. Great job w/ the updates. All that's left is a blockchain.info style wallet ... take your time with that though. Update: the "get quantity" values for XCP/BTC transactions looks a bit weird though. Almost as if the values have been shifted by 1E-8. However my TEST/XCP order looks correct. Issue w/ divisibility? NB: the issue seems to be with "get quantity" and "price", but "give quantity" column looks correct. |
|
|
|
If people want to provide their addresses, I want to test transactions by sending them some TEST (lol). Until my bitcoins run out from all the fees ... lol.
BTC/XCP tips appreciated.
If you want to send some test coins, you are most welcomed  1L5dKm5ftLfiMBjq3yZDJMgr365J5SHkUC Here you go, have some TEST :p C:\Program Files\counterpartyd>counterpartyd address 1L5dKm5ftLfiMBjq3yZDJMgr365J5SHkUC Balances +-------+--------+ | Asset | Amount | +-------+--------+ | BTC |  | | TEST | 50 | +-------+--------+ Did everyone see this announcement?
Are there questions about what was launched on yesterday?
Yep, will appreciate that in layman terms. Yes. it means that Counterparty no longer needs to wait on Bitcoin 0.9. You can now do the following and mainnet with the XCP you received after you burned your BTC. It is possible to start using Counterparty protocol features as they were outlined at the launch on January 2nd. The following features are implemented and (mostly) working: - Send: XCP or user-created assets using mainnet, right this very moment.
- User-Created Assets: Issue user‐defined currencies/assets and pay dividends on them. You may now issue user-defined currencies/assets on Counterparty using mainnet.
- Distributed Exchange: Trade XCP, BTC or any asset with any other. Although there's no GUI as yet, you may now trade assets, on mainnet, using Counterparty.
- Betting, Financial Derivatives: Make bets, or construct contracts for difference, on the numerical value of a feed. You may now construct, make bets or do the same with contracts on the numerical value of a feed.
NOTE: There is no need to wait for Eligius or for Bitcoin v 0.9. if you wish to start building your applications and using them on mainnet, you can do so.I can confirm that pretty much everything (sending, receiving, orders, issuance) is working. (I've been busy as you can see on blockscan.com). |
|
|
|
|
If people want to provide their addresses, I want to test transactions by sending them some TEST (lol). Until my bitcoins run out from all the fees ... lol.
BTC/XCP tips appreciated.
|
|
|
|
The transaction seemed to go through, but I am stuck with Status: 0/unconfirmed without any broadcasts for about 20 minutes so far. Bitcoin-qt is well connected (10 active connections). How long does it take typically?
It did actually go through, though not for 30 minutes.
Also, more error reports:
1. rpc-user and rpc-password should be prefixed with "bitcoind-" in the autogenerated config from the installer. Or at least make that part of it clear.
2. I still get the u2026 unicode errors in windows when doing "counterpartyd market".
Open Orders
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "counterpartyd.py", line 608, in <module>
market(args.give_asset, args.get_asset)
File "counterpartyd.py", line 41, in market
print(str(table.get_string(sortby='Price')))
File "c:\Python33\lib\encodings\cp437.py", line 19, in encode
return codecs.charmap_encode(input,self.errors,encoding_map)[0]
UnicodeEncodeError: 'charmap' codec can't encode character '\u2026' in position
483: character maps to <undefined>
This worked before (albeit being blank), so obviously some of the new transactions that have come up in the last day are causing this error.
Yes, running into the same issues. Even the order are not working and throwing errors. However I suspect this is only for the Windows builds because if you observe the transactions log there are buy/sell orders being placed Here is another one for "order" File "C:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\lib\bitcoin.py", line 170, in serialise from pycoin.ecdsa import generator_secp256k1, public_pair_for_secret_exponent ImportError: No module named 'pycoin' Try the most recent update that phantom pushed. So far, I've tried orders (both XCP > BTC and BTC > XCP) and issuance and they both seem to work. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
