ChromaWallet (colored coins): issue and trade private currencies/stocks/bonds/..

[justusranvier]

So how does a Colored coin representing 1oz of gold actually transmit gold? Wouldn't this require the trust of 3 parties as with ripple?

Colored coin is like a voucher. Obviously, it doesn't transfer any physical item. When you receive a voucher, you can either send it to somebody else or try to redeem it.

Colored coins are not magic, it's just a way to do vouchers on top of Bitcoin blockchain.

Ripple and other similar project are doing no one any favours by muddying the waters and ignoring the distinction between a representation of value and the value itself.

[1714847244]

1714847244

[1714847244]

1714847244

[1714847244]

1714847244

[green king]

every single satoshi is still traceable to its generation block

is this true? are you sure?

that would be horrible.

[mcgravier]

How is the progress? Project seems to develop terribly slow, wich is sad since issuing and P2P exchange of shares is IMHO one of most important and promising features of blockchain technology.

Any ETA on fully usable software?

[NanoAkron]

every single satoshi is still traceable to its generation block

is this true? are you sure?

that would be horrible.

Why would it be horrible? That's precisely what the 'permanent, public ledger' of the blockchain entails.

[killerstorm]

How is the progress? Project seems to develop terribly slow,

Yes, it have failed to attract a strong team of open source developers. I kinda understand why: people prefer to work on ambitious, beautiful projects (e.g. Ethereum), or on ones which are easy to monetize (alt-coins, startups).

A good example is Vitalik Buterin: he started with colored coins, wrote some code and started the spec, but then switched to Ethereum.

I think there was only one person besides me who had a resolve to make "fully usable" colored coins software, and was able to allocate enough time... But that person died(?) about a year ago...

And I'm fairly good at building prototypes and developing concept, but I'm very reluctant to make final decisions and I hate taking responsibility. So this is unfortunate: I just couldn't finish it without a team.

So the only option to keep the project alive was to commercialize it. ChromaWallet is now being developed by a startup company called ChromaWay, see here: http://chromaway.com

It is still open source, but priorities are different.

So, about progress: we have been working on web/mobile wallet implemented in JS. It was started in July, now we have a complete wallet core and are integrating UI, I expect that it will be available in a week or two.

You can find source code here: https://github.com/chromaway

As for the desktop wallet, beta version was released in June. It has few warts, which could have been fixed by now, but finishing it wasn't my priority.

which is sad since issuing and P2P exchange of shares is IMHO one of most important and promising features of blockchain technology.

I'm no longer interested in 'shares'. I've been following Bitcoin capital markets since 2012, and I came to a conclusion that they aren't good. The problem isn't in a lack of a decentralized marketplace, but in the very nature of the companies listed on these markets. There is a lot of scams, and there is also a lot of people doing it in a half-assed way, which is a recipe for a failure. There are almost no companies which are honest and profitable.

There are also legal problems: selling shares without registering a public company is illegal in USA and many other countries.

So I'm not interested in helping this shady market, especially if there is a chance that regulators will go after those who help to facilitate transactions.

On the other hand, I cannot prevent people from issuing shares and bonds.

BTW, while we are at it, I believe there is a better way to do crowdfunding with Bitcoin. Well, there are several ways to do it, the most intriguing is a combination of assurance contracts (like in Lighthouse: https://github.com/vinumeris/lighthouse/blob/master/README.md) with colored-coin like stuff. But it is more technically complex, so we will do it after we do normal colored coins.

Any ETA on fully usable software?

It depends on what qualifies as a fully usable software...

[killerstorm]

I think NEOBEE disaster was the point where I realized that Bitcoin capital markets are bad. It looked like a serious company, the name of the CEO was known and he often appeared in public. That didn't help.

What's most striking, there was no transparency and no oversight: investors just gave Danny Brewster 7000 BTC, and he was free to use them in any way he wanted to. In the end he just said that all of them were spent.

Surely we can do better than that having an open ledger and programmable money.

Now imagine that instead of giving 7000 BTC to the CEO, investors would instead collect them into a fund which they control. Then the CEO guy would say they need 100 BTC per month to pay for software development, office and so on. And investors will pay out of this fund, ideally directly to developers and a landlord, so that CEO won't be able to steal that money.

It is still possible that the project will fail, perhaps after 5 months. But in that case 6500 BTC will remain intact and will go back to investors.

[barwizi]

How is the progress? Project seems to develop terribly slow,

Yes, it have failed to attract a strong team of open source developers. I kinda understand why: people prefer to work on ambitious, beautiful projects (e.g. Ethereum), or on ones which are easy to monetize (alt-coins, startups).

A good example is Vitalik Buterin: he started with colored coins, wrote some code and started the spec, but then switched to Ethereum.

I think there was only one person besides me who had a resolve to make "fully usable" colored coins software, and was able to allocate enough time... But that person died(?) about a year ago...

And I'm fairly good at building prototypes and developing concept, but I'm very reluctant to make final decisions and I hate taking responsibility. So this is unfortunate: I just couldn't finish it without a team.

So the only option to keep the project alive was to commercialize it. ChromaWallet is now being developed by a startup company called ChromaWay, see here: http://chromaway.com

It is still open source, but priorities are different.

So, about progress: we have been working on web/mobile wallet implemented in JS. It was started in July, now we have a complete wallet core and are integrating UI, I expect that it will be available in a week or two.

You can find source code here: https://github.com/chromaway

As for the desktop wallet, beta version was released in June. It has few warts, which could have been fixed by now, but finishing it wasn't my priority.

which is sad since issuing and P2P exchange of shares is IMHO one of most important and promising features of blockchain technology.

I'm no longer interested in 'shares'. I've been following Bitcoin capital markets since 2012, and I came to a conclusion that they aren't good. The problem isn't in a lack of a decentralized marketplace, but in the very nature of the companies listed on these markets. There is a lot of scams, and there is also a lot of people doing it in a half-assed way, which is a recipe for a failure. There are almost no companies which are honest and profitable.

There are also legal problems: selling shares without registering a public company is illegal in USA and many other countries.

So I'm not interested in helping this shady market, especially if there is a chance that regulators will go after those who help to facilitate transactions.

On the other hand, I cannot prevent people from issuing shares and bonds.

BTW, while we are at it, I believe there is a better way to do crowdfunding with Bitcoin. Well, there are several ways to do it, the most intriguing is a combination of assurance contracts (like in Lighthouse: https://github.com/vinumeris/lighthouse/blob/master/README.md) with colored-coin like stuff. But it is more technically complex, so we will do it after we do normal colored coins.

Any ETA on fully usable software?

It depends on what qualifies as a fully usable software...

Yes, it have failed to attract a strong team of open source developers. I kinda understand why: people prefer to work on ambitious, beautiful projects (e.g. Ethereum), or on ones which are easy to monetize (alt-coins, startups).

I keep telling you, if you want to see a hoard of devs, copy-paste or otherwise, lets have a c++ version. I guarantee half the altcoin forum will be on this in a matter of weeks. The incentive of money always drives the fastest development. Look at all the suggested improvements for bitcoin that made it to alts first (some that btc is only incorporating now). Eve the UI designs you see in alts have more functionality and features as well as creative looks.

[killerstorm]

I keep telling you, if you want to see a hoard of devs, copy-paste or otherwise, lets have a c++ version.

And I will tell you again, it was started as a C++ version two years ago:

https://github.com/killerstorm/bitcoin/tree/cbtc

I implemented it in about a week.

I guarantee half the altcoin forum will be on this in a matter of weeks.

I don't see how that helps. Very few changes made by alt-coiners get back to Bitcoin Core, as most of those changes are risky, silly or not well-thought-out.

Look at all the suggested improvements for bitcoin that made it to alts first (some that btc is only incorporating now).

Well, compare number of commits which Bitcoin Core devs add to Bitcoin Core: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master

To a number of commits which come from alt-coin devs to Bitcoin Core.

Eve the UI designs you see in alts have more functionality and features as well as creative looks.

UI designs are easy to make.

Well, anyway, we will soon have a web/mobile wallet which is easy to integrate with alt-coins... In fact, it can also work with multiple alt-coins in one wallet.

[barwizi]

I keep telling you, if you want to see a hoard of devs, copy-paste or otherwise, lets have a c++ version.

And I will tell you again, it was started as a C++ version two years ago:

https://github.com/killerstorm/bitcoin/tree/cbtc

I implemented it in about a week.

I guarantee half the altcoin forum will be on this in a matter of weeks.

I don't see how that helps. Very few changes made by alt-coiners get back to Bitcoin Core, as most of those changes are risky, silly or not well-thought-out.

Look at all the suggested improvements for bitcoin that made it to alts first (some that btc is only incorporating now).

Well, compare number of commits which Bitcoin Core devs add to Bitcoin Core: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master

To a number of commits which come from alt-coin devs to Bitcoin Core.

Eve the UI designs you see in alts have more functionality and features as well as creative looks.

UI designs are easy to make.

Well, anyway, we will soon have a web/mobile wallet which is easy to integrate with alt-coins... In fact, it can also work with multiple alt-coins in one wallet.

And I will tell you again, it was started as a C++ version two years ago:

https://github.com/killerstorm/bitcoin/tree/cbtc

Forgive the fly by

Well, compare number of commits which Bitcoin Core devs add to Bitcoin Core: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master

To a number of commits which come from alt-coin devs to Bitcoin Core.

TO BITCOIN, which lacks the "incentive" you so rightly mentioned.

I don't see how that helps. Very few changes made by alt-coiners get back to Bitcoin Core, as most of those changes are risky, silly or not well-thought-out.

true since most of it is garbage but some ideas are actually quite good.

UI designs are easy to make.

Wish i could say the same

Well, anyway, we will soon have a web/mobile wallet which is easy to integrate with alt-coins... In fact, it can also work with multiple alt-coins in one wallet.

I guess that will bring use to it, but i'm not sure about development.

[killerstorm]

New web/mobile wallet preview: http://killerstorm.xen.prgmr.com/alex/cw/demo-eng.html
(running on testnet, doesn't allow you to issue coins)

Compared to old WebcoinX, it has much saner code base. It is broken into 4 layers:

1. coloredcoinjs-lib: a colored coin library, handles 'coloring', constructs transactions
2. cc-wallet-core: wallet core, manages addresses and does the bulk of work
3. cc-wallet-engine: a high-level wrapper on top of wallet core, hides all low-level details and can be plugged directly into UI
4. UI

I believe that this architecture will simplify creation of custom colored coins applications.

Say, if you want to use colored coins as authentication tokens, you don't need a full-blown wallet user interface, but you want wallet backend which is able to construct transactions, do SPV verification and so on. You can take cc-wallet-engine and create some custom simplified UI on top of it, without bothering yourself with implementation details.

This is still a work in progress, but you can take a look here: https://github.com/chromaway

[subSTRATA]

every single satoshi is still traceable to its generation block

Bullshit. Send some coins from addresses A and B to address X and then send 1 Satoshi from address X to address Z. Did that 1 Satoshi originated from address A or address B?

[chrisrico]

every single satoshi is still traceable to its generation block

Bullshit. Send some coins from addresses A and B to address X and then send 1 Satoshi from address X to address Z. Did that 1 Satoshi originated from address A or address B?

Every bitcoin transaction has inputs and outputs. You can look at the transaction sending 1 satoshi to Z and see which inputs were used, and which previous transactions they were outputs from. You can trace this back to the mined coinbase transaction. The only time this gets fuzzy is if you have many inputs and outputs. For instance, if before sending to Z you merge the inputs by creating a transaction combining them into one output, and then use that output as an input to send 1 satoshi to Z.

[LitcoinCollector]

I'm intrigued by color coin, but I don't quite can get my head aroung it.

[subSTRATA]

every single satoshi is still traceable to its generation block

Bullshit. Send some coins from addresses A and B to address X and then send 1 Satoshi from address X to address Z. Did that 1 Satoshi originated from address A or address B?

Every bitcoin transaction has inputs and outputs. You can look at the transaction sending 1 satoshi to Z and see which inputs were used, and which previous transactions they were outputs from. You can trace this back to the mined coinbase transaction. The only time this gets fuzzy is if you have many inputs and outputs. For instance, if before sending to Z you merge the inputs by creating a transaction combining them into one output, and then use that output as an input to send 1 satoshi to Z.

Yes, forgot to add it to post. Merging of A and B are required.

[Sukrim]

You can come up with a finite deterministic set of rules to decide if that 1 Satoshi is considered A, B, both or none.

[subSTRATA]

You can come up with a finite deterministic set of rules to decide if that 1 Satoshi is considered A, B, both or none.

It makes no difference, there is no way you can be sure if 1 Satoshi originated from A or B hence "every single satoshi is still traceable to its generation block" is false.

[chrisrico]

It makes no difference, there is no way you can be sure if 1 Satoshi originated from A or B hence "every single satoshi is still traceable to its generation block" is false.

However, the original discussion was about anonymity. If a transaction combines two inputs, it can normally be assumed that the same individual controls both of the addresses associated.

[dexX7]

I stumbled upon this entry:

Code:

{
  "source_addresses": [
    "3Kfotk3zahcW2R94fdXWRtrR7b5Bn98Jy3"
  ],
  "contract_url": "http://chroma.io",
  "name_short": "CRYSTAL",
  "name": "Margo's Crystal Coin",
  "issuer": "Margaret Crable",
  "description": "This is a coin that Margaret Crable created. It earns the owner right to one fantasy drawing of a magic crystal.",
  "description_mime": "text/x-markdown; charset=UTF-8",
  "type": "CryptoToken",
  "divisibility": 1,
  "link_to_website": true,
  "icon_url": "http://chroma.io/chromacoin/coins/crystalcoin/crystalcoin.png",
  "image_url": "http://chroma.io/chromacoin/coins/crystalcoin/crystalcoin.png",
  "version": "1.0"
}

I assume there is no relation between http://chroma.io and ChromaWallet?

[killerstorm]

I assume there is no relation between http://chroma.io and ChromaWallet?

Yep, no relation.

BTW, http://chromaway.com/ is us. But aren't planning crowdsale or anything like that, just in case.

[dotcoin.info]

I assume there is no relation between http://chroma.io and ChromaWallet?

Yep, no relation.

BTW, http://chromaway.com/ is us. But aren't planning crowdsale or anything like that, just in case.

have to mark this thread.