Bitcoin Forum
February 20, 2019, 08:41:47 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 ... 166 »
  Print  
Author Topic: MasterCoin: New Protocol Layer Starting From “The Exodus Address”  (Read 447580 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
Tachikoma
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
September 11, 2013, 08:20:04 AM
 #881

JR, I've made a booboo and sent an MSC transaction using the incorrect number of decimal places (0.0006 instead of 0.00006).

This is an invalid transaction per the spec, but before I resend using the correct 0.00006 values could you confirm that the transaction with 0.0006 will be considered invalid?

Please see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=287145.msg3126417#msg3126417

Thanks!
FYI Tachikoma this transaction should be invalid (0.0006 not 0.00006) but shows as a valid transaction on mastercoin-explorer.

J.R. did the same thing with some early payments and I always considered those payments to be fine. If you want to pay more to send a transactions that is up to you. I personally don't think those payments should be considered invalid since it's your money that you are sending. However I will await J.R.'s answer as always Smiley

Tachikoma, could you add a trim function to the address input field?  I've noticed if for example you paste an address with a trailing space it does not find the address.  Thanks Smiley

Edit: Also to say thanks for such a great service - mastercoin-explorer.com is clearly becoming the 'goto' place for Mastercoin transaction info.

This should be fixed now.

Electrum: the convenience of a web wallet, without the risks | Bytesized Seedboxes BTC/LTC supported
1550652107
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550652107

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550652107
Reply with quote  #2

1550652107
Report to moderator
Your Bitcoin transactions
The Ultimate Bitcoin mixer
made truly anonymous.
with an advanced technology.
Mix coins
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1550652107
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550652107

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550652107
Reply with quote  #2

1550652107
Report to moderator
1550652107
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550652107

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550652107
Reply with quote  #2

1550652107
Report to moderator
1550652107
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550652107

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550652107
Reply with quote  #2

1550652107
Report to moderator
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1022


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 11, 2013, 02:48:41 PM
 #882

Regarding using 0.0006 instead of 0.00006, that is a perfectly valid transaction. The only real constraint is that the amounts must all be the same in the transaction, and be above the dust threshold. The guys on the buyer/seller thread came to the same conclusion, and I confirmed it there too.

Requiring the amounts to all be the same is important, since it reduces the likelihood that the change address will get confused with the reference address or the data address and make an invalid transaction. Speaking of that situation, I don't know if current implementations do this, but if there is any ambiguity about which address is change, the transaction should be treated as invalid. Otherwise we risk making a different transaction than intended!

It might be interesting to try to set up some transactions which have change coming back in the amount of 0.00006 BTC, to see what happens Smiley

dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1022


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 11, 2013, 03:12:07 PM
Last edit: September 11, 2013, 03:23:34 PM by dacoinminster
 #883

But test mastercoins were released together with real mastercoins simultaneously. As far as I understand, you can do the same thing with test coins as with real coins. So, if there will be an exchange trading them in the future, they WILL be useful, and you can trade them back to bitcoins or whatever and buy something with it.
Still not different from testnet bitcoins.

There are so many other cryptocurrencies with hardly any innovation in them, but still they have some value, because you can exchange them with other currencies.
These alts have people advocating their use, which results in people speculating they have a chance to catch on (and they still capture only a small percentage of Bitcoin's market cap). For test coins you have no such thing.

Actually, what you're doing right here is a form of advocacy that testcoins should be used. Keep doing that and you might fulfill your prophecy.

I just wanted to mention this possibility, because ultimately, test coins might lower the value of real coins because of more supply. So it might be good to destroy them at some point, before it's too late. And of course let people know early enough about that action. I think this helps, because people can actually treat them as test coins and therefore also 'waste' them for testing purpuses.
Test mastercoins are effectively a clone of mastercoins. If you fear that mastercoins can lose their value due to the existence of a clone, and clones are trivial to create, why do you think mastercoins can have any value at all?

We already have existing test cases for all of this. For instance, bitcoin has testnet coins, which do have some value (while they are frequently given away, they CAN be bought and sold). And bitcoin has plenty of clones.

I don't see any reason things won't play out any differently for MasterCoin, although I actually expect we are more vulnerable to clones than bitcoin, since MasterCoin is just so darn easy to understand and implement and improve upon. You don't need to understand cryptography to improve on MasterCoin (I still have a lot to learn myself in fact). All you need is to be able to think of nifty things to do with messages. That's it. The distributed exchange described in our spec is ridiculously, stupidly simple. The distributed betting on data feeds are equally simple. It took me about 20 minutes and less than a page to describe how to create smart property for IPOs and titles/deeds in our most recent spec. That's one reason I'll be watching clones closely, looking for good ideas to steal Smiley

I've said this many times before: I just can't understand why someone hasn't done this already. It just seems too easy. (Although maybe it just seems that way to me since I have been thinking about it constantly for a couple of years now)

lebing
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1000

Enabling the maximal migration


View Profile
September 11, 2013, 03:37:11 PM
 #884


I've said this many times before: I just can't understand why someone hasn't done this already. It just seems too easy. (Although maybe it just seems that way to me since I have been thinking about it constantly for a couple of years now)

When you think about/ practice something for that long, it does seem easy, sometimes trivial even. Don't sell yourself short, this has the potential to be an amazing solution to many of the issues currently facing the cryptographic currency space. If it was that easy, someone else would have thought of it earlier.

Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
grazcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 284
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 11, 2013, 05:12:51 PM
 #885


Yup, biggest contributor gets the coins. I believe the latest rev of the spec now says this explicitly.

This is a convenience for the user, especially those that bought from twenty different addresses at once. I know it makes the parsing a bit trickier . . .

https://github.com/grazcoin/mastercoin-tools got updated.
Tachikoma: can you please verify that mastercoin per address of mastercoin-tools and mastercoin-explorer is identical?
https://raw.github.com/grazcoin/mastercoin-tools/master/outputs/msc_per_address.csv


Tachikoma
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
September 11, 2013, 06:20:50 PM
 #886


Yup, biggest contributor gets the coins. I believe the latest rev of the spec now says this explicitly.

This is a convenience for the user, especially those that bought from twenty different addresses at once. I know it makes the parsing a bit trickier . . .

https://github.com/grazcoin/mastercoin-tools got updated.
Tachikoma: can you please verify that mastercoin per address of mastercoin-tools and mastercoin-explorer is identical?
https://raw.github.com/grazcoin/mastercoin-tools/master/outputs/msc_per_address.csv



19 differences
 
Code:
Explorer has: 11000200066, Tools has: 10700200066 for 12LSJoCAqvVQyvW5qaKGp6ZKMaaZpUcCv3
Explorer has: 574619940476, Tools has: 699619940476 for 12bDX26J84x545pzfSZouULeqjfBtAe9Lv
Explorer has: 21234827433, Tools has: 21134827433 for 13P8CSqRoboefrNsXKZieWYtZhJ4KcQHhH
Explorer has: 4058607308, Tools has: 3608607308 for 13qJCzNQUx7dFcixjq9Rab7wPgUCtYS48v
Explorer has: 2087679398, Tools has: 1087679398 for 13x2dka6tVhjsNNNomGJjUPi2iJQCb67bw
Explorer has: 24701309524, Tools has: 24601309524 for 158qYAqDu4GKeVHDiTYA2xAu5Ew4sEU2Ug
Explorer has: 39434328263, Tools has: 52934328263 for 15og4WXZPwkMnnsb3dj6HqgTUfcRLx4J9b
Explorer has: 53568692130, Tools has: 53168692130 for 16QkgycuGwFvwQ8oZ5cYHgVjDNSavcwovS
Explorer has: 7056807478, Tools has: 6056807478 for 17QqwZtZ221Dod33bY33SAZMXrSmi89rsP
Explorer has: 10273350529, Tools has: 10173350529 for 1AgZvwAoNDFGkQYEF193RAm3qxipWAEFAH
Explorer has: 15342266518, Tools has: 15142266518 for 1ApWmGDViVjTPqRKBhPydpBZ5DRjpuEEic
Explorer has: 10227878638, Tools has: 10127878638 for 1Bitcoin4yZjSSPoXUceJaiyQLABx7B2LL
Explorer has: 501650257937, Tools has: 501780257937 for 1Eo6FGPytuYvuA3ZS6ToXqP8sScWWtKhWN
Explorer has: 2220500793, Tools has: 5720500793 for 1GaNupdUBzfVF2B3JUAY1rZwHoXJgjyzXj
Explorer has: 9933326720, Tools has: 10103326720 for 1K5Tofy7UTfcrpWBnXcJhHZzvLTksDdasQ
Explorer has: 301315819775, Tools has: 300315819775 for 1K5ZEkQ8Pzwqedg2WHsKQd3xiAGnj7MeCD
Explorer has: 32276650397, Tools has: 31776650397 for 1Kk6eLpM3cpgC4NEzXLzjKvdndd8bPox6f
Explorer has: 10812380845, Tools has: 10712380845 for 1LjT88X7Zu8BdbqJw8vfRa83NJuzYL9kqm
Explorer has: 10526380622, Tools has: 10476380622 for 1donutMH4L7kdRqh4xvSvesfd3KFu3UNm

Diving into the why right now Smiley

Edit: Are you counting incoming/outgoing payments towards the balance; or is this just exodus payments? If the latter that accounts for the difference Smiley

Electrum: the convenience of a web wallet, without the risks | Bytesized Seedboxes BTC/LTC supported
jadair10
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52
Merit: 0



View Profile
September 11, 2013, 08:31:55 PM
 #887

In the interest of full transparency, here is the updated expenditure list I sent to the board just now. Hopefully I can process refunds tomorrow.


Quote
We've decided to set the cutoff date for investments a couple blocks later in order to accommodate some people who sent before the deadline, but did not get included in a block until after the deadline. Consequently, the expenditure list has changed slightly. Here's the final list of transactions which I hope to execute soon, probably tomorrow:

    13.279 BTC in refunds to investors who missed the deadline (addresses and details here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AnnInaIJVqrtdGMteFNOWjBpWTNqd3BYbWUzdGVLMmc#gid=0)
    3 BTC bounty to bytemaster (1Nou27Zt2k3yTFHw6yePg3A1df2ohCTFFb per his PM to me) as a bounty for their work exposing a flaw in my spec. (details here: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mastercoin/EQgEHvKJBh4/4VeE3a02I3QJ)
    3 BTC to d'aniel as part of the same bounty. D'aniel requested that his prize go to forum member gmaxwell: 1GMaxweLLbo8mdXvnnC19Wt2wigiYUKgEB, request is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=284178.msg3041300#msg3041300)
    2 BTC to mich for the awesome logo (13x2dka6tVhjsNNNomGJjUPi2iJQCb67bw, verified by him)
    0.1 BTC to Ron to reimburse his purchase of MasterCoin.org (1HfXDX3ALapNebQC8stTdd5zK7kiCgvX9n)

Total expenditures: 21.379 BTC
Aside from the changes to the refund list, this is the same list of expenditures as before, so I don't expect comments - I'm just keeping you guys in the loop.

Thanks!

-J.R.

If you are expecting a refund, please check the spreadsheet linked above and make sure it looks correct. Thanks!

I think you are making the right decision to include those transactions which posted prior to the cut off but were not included in the block chain until after the deadline as those people acted in good faith, even though the spec says "as determined by bitcoin block chain records". It is hard to enforce an ambiguous cut off time.
jadair10
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52
Merit: 0



View Profile
September 11, 2013, 09:18:41 PM
 #888

I am the official forum user for http://www.BuyMastercoin.com.

We launched BuyMastercoin on Aug 31st in order to provide a safe and reliable place for people to exchange Mastercoins since after this date you could no longer buy Mastercoins through the exodus address.

Our current format is over the counter yet we plan to launch a real-time Mastercoin exchange soon. We will allow people to buy and sell Mastercoins using dollars, euros, litecoins, altcoins, ripples, bitcoins and more.

We want to help build the Mastercoin ecosystem, especially now that the client is not yet developed and has some time to go. We also look to provide valuable information to the Mastercoin community such as MSC/BTC price charts, and tools for Mastercoin derived markets.

Visit us at http://www.BuyMastercoin.com and subscribe for news updates and to sign up for our beta.

For up to date pricing information or to receive an exact price quote please email us through our contact form.

Thank you.

-BuyMastercoin.com Team

No thank you. I think your unsolicited self promotion is of benefit to this project, regardless of what the other forum members may say.  I too am an entrepreneur. I think we all are. In fact, this whole project is based on "hiding MasterCoin Protocol Data in the Block Chain" which other people disagree with doing.

Cheers.
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1022


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 11, 2013, 09:36:34 PM
 #889

No thank you. I think your unsolicited self promotion is of benefit to this project, regardless of what the other forum members may say.  I too am an entrepreneur. I think we all are. In fact, this whole project is based on "hiding MasterCoin Protocol Data in the Block Chain" which other people disagree with doing.

Cheers.

I was confused by this post, and read it like 10 times before I finally figured out that that I was reading the first sentence with the wrong emphasis.

"No thank you!" vs "No, thank you"

jadair10
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52
Merit: 0



View Profile
September 11, 2013, 09:55:49 PM
 #890

And to top it all off, I made an animated intro video using the new logo:
https://vimeo.com/73592269

Tips of any sort are greatly appreciated! My address: 13x2dka6tVhjsNNNomGJjUPi2iJQCb67bw
Depending on what you guys think, I can probably help out more with explanation videos/ branding.
Excellent work. Wow.

I'm on the fence with the "build it before we paint it" view.

I agree that there is absolutely no point to marketing unless Mastercoin is worth marketing for. But certain things like logos and explainer videos can be helpful as long as they are targeting the right people. Specifically- developers who can build great things around this project. Plus, they can be worked on simultaneously by those who aren't developers (designers, etc.) So I would say at this point, some marketing can be helpful and won't be taking away from the main goal.

I'm a graphic designer, so my MO is to jump in when I think I'll be helpful, and then get out of the way asap.

I think, the biggest issue with marketing is making sure

1. It doesn't get ahead of itself. It should be appropriate for whatever stage Mastercoin is at. It needs to take the backseat.

and

2. It's factual- There is good communication between the developers and anyone who wants to 'spread the word' so there are less headaches.

I agree with your point above about "explainer videos". In an earlier post I suggested some kahn academy style videos such as this one... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzDO44oZWtE.

And here is a great video on "how to make a khan academy video". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZJAhfaZnUA; not that I need to tell you how to make a video.
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1022


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 11, 2013, 10:26:40 PM
 #891

In the interest of full transparency, here is the updated expenditure list I sent to the board just now. Hopefully I can process refunds tomorrow.


Quote
We've decided to set the cutoff date for investments a couple blocks later in order to accommodate some people who sent before the deadline, but did not get included in a block until after the deadline. Consequently, the expenditure list has changed slightly. Here's the final list of transactions which I hope to execute soon, probably tomorrow:

    13.279 BTC in refunds to investors who missed the deadline (addresses and details here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AnnInaIJVqrtdGMteFNOWjBpWTNqd3BYbWUzdGVLMmc#gid=0)
    3 BTC bounty to bytemaster (1Nou27Zt2k3yTFHw6yePg3A1df2ohCTFFb per his PM to me) as a bounty for their work exposing a flaw in my spec. (details here: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mastercoin/EQgEHvKJBh4/4VeE3a02I3QJ)
    3 BTC to d'aniel as part of the same bounty. D'aniel requested that his prize go to forum member gmaxwell: 1GMaxweLLbo8mdXvnnC19Wt2wigiYUKgEB, request is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=284178.msg3041300#msg3041300)
    2 BTC to mich for the awesome logo (13x2dka6tVhjsNNNomGJjUPi2iJQCb67bw, verified by him)
    0.1 BTC to Ron to reimburse his purchase of MasterCoin.org (1HfXDX3ALapNebQC8stTdd5zK7kiCgvX9n)

Total expenditures: 21.379 BTC
Aside from the changes to the refund list, this is the same list of expenditures as before, so I don't expect comments - I'm just keeping you guys in the loop.

Thanks!

-J.R.

If you are expecting a refund, please check the spreadsheet linked above and make sure it looks correct. Thanks!

This transaction has now been broadcast. Considerable money left the Exodus Address, but most of it came back to the same offline wallet as change (14JnZjp1HXgVKy8CKo2VkiD4vQM69nQrFN)

TX can be viewed here: http://blockchain.info/tx/99160b37b3294eebc83bd8ff44849c813d2e9da986a25fb127b0c5915e799c0a

dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1022


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 12, 2013, 12:43:23 AM
 #892

Coding Contest LAUNCHED on this separate thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=292628.0

Here's the quote from the OP of that thread, although note that I'm not planning on updating this quote if I update the OP of that thread:


If you've been living under a rock, you may not know that we recently raised over half a million dollars to build a new protocol layer on top of bitcoin. The new layer is NOT an alt-chain currency - it's built right on top of bitcoin, and is called "MasterCoin" (not to be confused with the alt-chain currency of the same name). You can read all about it here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=265488.0

A few days ago, I pre-announced that we would be doing a major coding contest, with total prizes adding up to $25000 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=265488.msg3065262#msg3065262). The goals of the contest are to spur development on the MasterCoin protocol layer, and to hopefully find at least one person to be our first full-time hire.

This thread is devoted to that contest. Following are the official rules, subject to change if deemed necessary:

  • ALL serious entries will win a prize (although some prizes may be very small)
  • Prize money will be divvied up by myself, with input from the community and the board of the MasterCoin Foundation, based primarily on how useful and valuable your code is to the success of our protocol layer
  • In addition to the overall impact and value of your code, other important things will be taken under consideration:
    • How often you post updates in this thread or the main project thread. Ideally, you should post what you plan to do, and then post extremely frequent updates as you make progress.
    • Ease of use and testability. If you just dump some source code on me at the end of the contest with a bunch of grandiose claims, you may not get much. Ideally, you should be posting demos, screenshots, and/or set up a website demonstrating your code.
    • Collaboration. If you are helping other people working on MasterCoin projects, that will weigh favorably on how much you win. If you release your source code early and other people build on it, that will weigh even more favorably.
    • Breaking new ground, or being redundant. Doing something new is awesome, but you will NOT be penalized for implementing the same thing as someone else. We need redundancy for cross-checking. We have the following feature needs:
      • Better ways to store (and then retrieve) MasterCoin data. Gavin has told us there are multiple better ways, and there has been some discussion of how to do it on this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=284178.0
      • Reusable libraries for parsing MasterCoin transactions in the block chain, and for generating them
      • PC wallets for MasterCoin
      • Web wallets for MasterCoin
      • Implementing advanced features, as defined in the spec. (But please don't implement new features using the existing "data address" method of storing data in the block chain - we need to look for a better way to store our data first)
  • Only open-source projects will be considered for a prize. You must release your source code before the end of the contest to be eligible.
  • Getting the biggest prize in this contest does NOT guarantee you a job, but having some kind of entry in this contest will help your chances a lot.
  • Contest ends October 15th, 2013, with prizes paid out once the dust settles.
  • Prizes will total $25000 USD, payable in bitcoins according to the exchange rate at that time.
  • Contestants may elect to take some or all of their prize money in MasterCoins if desired. (We'll purchase them on the open market for you, using the bitcoins we would have paid you)

You should be aware that multiple projects eligible for entry into this contest are already started, and have made amazing progress. When I first contemplated a $25000 payout, it seemed like a huge sum, but given how many people are enthusiastically working on MasterCoin projects, you may be disappointed with the prize you get for your efforts. There is a lot of amazing work going forward extremely rapidly, as you can see on the project thread. By the end of the contest, I doubt that anybody's prize will be "fair" for the effort they put in. We'll have to just hope that it is a nice bonus for working on a fun project.

I'll update this post soon with a link to a job description of the full-time job we will be hoping to fill, hopefully we'll fill the position with someone who enters this contest.




 . . . and true to form, I'm now going offline for awhile. I'll try to catch up on any questions about the contest tomorrow.

dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1022


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 12, 2013, 06:11:42 PM
 #893

I added some sidebar links to our subreddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/mastercoin/

If I missed anything important, please let me know.

I can't offer a bounty for it, but if somebody wants to take a crack at a reddit-style logo for MasterCoin, that would be fun to have. Usually such a logo would have the reddit alien in it. Maybe the reddit alien getting irradiated by MasterCoin, since our logo looks kind of like the radiation symbol  Tongue

Maybe that's too unprofessional. I dunno . . .

grazcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 284
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 12, 2013, 10:24:30 PM
 #894

Now, breaking down the transaction data, we have:
81 = sequence number, which is one less than the same byte of the reference address, which is 0x82

In spec 1.1 you say:
"the data packet sequence numbers start at n+1 where n is the sequence number of the reference packet if it were treated as a data packet".

On your first ever transaction (quote above) I see that the data has sequence number (81) which is lower than the one of the reference (82).
How come?


dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1022


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 12, 2013, 10:53:38 PM
 #895

Now, breaking down the transaction data, we have:
81 = sequence number, which is one less than the same byte of the reference address, which is 0x82

In spec 1.1 you say:
"the data packet sequence numbers start at n+1 where n is the sequence number of the reference packet if it were treated as a data packet".

On your first ever transaction (quote above) I see that the data has sequence number (81) which is lower than the one of the reference (82).
How come?



Because the spec has an error which I need to fix in the next rev Smiley

Here's my explanation of how that happened which I gave to maraoz a couple days ago when he asked me the same thing:

Why does Mastercoin Advisor use a data sequence number lower than the recipient sequence number? Shouldn't it be the successor of the recipient sequence number, as the protocol specifies?

Code:
recipientSequenceNum = ord(recipientBytes[1])
dataSequenceNum = recipientSequenceNum - 1
if dataSequenceNum < 0:
dataSequenceNum = dataSequenceNum + 256

Quote
In order to distinguish data packets from the reference address, the data packet sequence numbers start
at n+1 where n is the sequence number of the reference packet if it were treated as a data packet. Any
additional data packets can continue to use up sequence numbers n+2, n+3, and so on until all sequence
numbers are used except for n-1.
As an example of how this works, let's imagine a MasterCoin transaction that has two data packets. If
the reference address happens to have a sequence number of 62, then the first data packet has a
sequence number of 63 and the second has a sequence number of 64. Note that sequence number 255
is followed by 0.


Aw crap. I meant to update the spec to change how the sequence numbers worked. Thanks for catching that.

When I was writing the code for MasterCoin Adviser, it occurred to me that it might be easier to parse MasterCoin transactions if the first data packet had the first sequence number, then additional data packets following, and then the reference packet last, with the last sequence number. But I never went back and updated the spec to reflect that change. I made that change because I thought it might help if we ever had transactions with data but no reference address.



moltenmich
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 130
Merit: 100



View Profile WWW
September 13, 2013, 01:29:41 AM
 #896

I added some sidebar links to our subreddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/mastercoin/

If I missed anything important, please let me know.

I can't offer a bounty for it, but if somebody wants to take a crack at a reddit-style logo for MasterCoin, that would be fun to have. Usually such a logo would have the reddit alien in it. Maybe the reddit alien getting irradiated by MasterCoin, since our logo looks kind of like the radiation symbol  Tongue

Maybe that's too unprofessional. I dunno . . .

  if anyone comes up with anything better, definitely replace it. but this can be a good placeholder for now

█ Professional Design & Multimedia █

michpalmer.com
Tachikoma
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
September 13, 2013, 08:54:32 AM
 #897

I have a proposal for alternative Mastercoin encoding ready and I wanted to discuss the feasibility of my solution. We are going to use a OP_CHECKMULTISIG script with three (or more) public keys to encode the data.

Because we will be using public keys to encapsulate the data we now have 64 bytes to encode data (65 minus one byte for the 04 marker). In order to not polute the blockchain we will always supply a publickey that the sender owns as first signature this way the output can always be redeemed. The other signatures we supply will be data-addresses; these transactions won't be able to be converted to addresses since they are not technically ECDSA x/y coordinates but they should be relayed and mined just fine.

I've created a test transaction on testnet3 (raw) to test this functionality.

miKnddGDQfU6rRYpLp2dhRyttnxH1WUo21 is the exodus that I use on Testnet. I'm sending the coins to myself (miDyBpL3TeeJRbtwdFUsw9mUWUEhN6FyXf) in this example so I send both the change amount and 0.00006 transaction to this address. I also use this address as the first signature for the multisg output so I can redeem this later. If you check the raw transaction you will see that there are two more keys supplied. If you decode these using the encoding standard from the whitepaper (but instead pad with zeros until you have 65 bytes) you will see that I'm doing two transaction for 1 test Mastercoin each.

In theory you could do multiple Mastercoin transactions in one multisig output but I would like to propose to keep it simple and only one transaction per output. If you want to send multiple Mastercoin transactions in one Bitcoin transaction you can create multiple multisig outputs.

Since all current ideas of the whitepaper fit within 126 bytes (2 signatures) and signatures are in fixed order we might not need to add sequences to all signatures but for now let's continue doing it.

I know there are a lot of users with more knowledge of Bitcoin lurking so please let me know if this approach would work within the rules set out by the reference implementation. I'm especially interested in if we can use 1 out of 5 multisig transactions. I tried to make one; and it relayed; but I'm not sure it's actually a valid transaction type.

Please let me know your thoughts so we can continue building cool things on top of Mastercoin Smiley

Electrum: the convenience of a web wallet, without the risks | Bytesized Seedboxes BTC/LTC supported
grazcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 284
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 13, 2013, 09:02:47 AM
 #898

basic mastercoin tx parser was added to https://github.com/grazcoin/mastercoin-tools

The parser goes on all 1EXoDus tx, and outputs:
tx_hash,from,to,amount,currency,tx_type
currently only simple send is supported

usage:
python msc_parse.py > outputs/tx_parse.csv

updated result can be fetched:
https://raw.github.com/grazcoin/mastercoin-tools/master/outputs/tx_parse.csv

Tachikoma: can you please verify that we have identical parsing?


Tachikoma
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
September 13, 2013, 09:06:07 AM
Last edit: September 13, 2013, 09:19:14 AM by Tachikoma
 #899

I've also had a question about "Purchasing a Currency Offered For Sale" that has been bothering me.

I put an offer out there to sell 100 coins for 5 BTC.

User A and User B both send me 5BTC wanting to buy those 100 coins. User B's transactions gets added above User A's transaction in the block so he receives the Mastercoins.

What happens to the 5BTC from user A that he send to the address?

Tachikoma: can you please verify that we have identical parsing?

Will do this ASAP.

Edit: They match 100% Smiley

Electrum: the convenience of a web wallet, without the risks | Bytesized Seedboxes BTC/LTC supported
grazcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 284
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 13, 2013, 09:44:14 AM
 #900

I have a proposal for alternative Mastercoin encoding ready and I wanted to discuss the feasibility of my solution. We are going to use a OP_CHECKMULTISIG script with three (or more) public keys to encode the data.

Because we will be using public keys to encapsulate the data we now have 64 bytes to encode data (65 minus one byte for the 04 marker). In order to not polute the blockchain we will always supply a publickey that the sender owns as first signature this way the output can always be redeemed. The other signatures we supply will be data-addresses; these transactions won't be able to be converted to addresses since they are not technically ECDSA x/y coordinates but they should be relayed and mined just fine.

I've created a test transaction on testnet3 (raw) to test this functionality.

miKnddGDQfU6rRYpLp2dhRyttnxH1WUo21 is the exodus that I use on Testnet. I'm sending the coins to myself (miDyBpL3TeeJRbtwdFUsw9mUWUEhN6FyXf) in this example so I send both the change amount and 0.00006 transaction to this address. I also use this address as the first signature for the multisg output so I can redeem this later. If you check the raw transaction you will see that there are two more keys supplied. If you decode these using the encoding standard from the whitepaper (but instead pad with zeros until you have 65 bytes) you will see that I'm doing two transaction for 1 test Mastercoin each.

In theory you could do multiple Mastercoin transactions in one multisig output but I would like to propose to keep it simple and only one transaction per output. If you want to send multiple Mastercoin transactions in one Bitcoin transaction you can create multiple multisig outputs.

Since all current ideas of the whitepaper fit within 126 bytes (2 signatures) and signatures are in fixed order we might not need to add sequences to all signatures but for now let's continue doing it.

I know there are a lot of users with more knowledge of Bitcoin lurking so please let me know if this approach would work within the rules set out by the reference implementation. I'm especially interested in if we can use 1 out of 5 multisig transactions. I tried to make one; and it relayed; but I'm not sure it's actually a valid transaction type.

Please let me know your thoughts so we can continue building cool things on top of Mastercoin Smiley

looks good Smiley
I would try to optimize the tx so it has only 2 outpus and not 4:
  • 0.00006000 as marker (exodus)
  • all the rest (with no separation between another 0.00006000 or change) to the multisig address, where the first multisig address belongs to the multisig sender and the embedded data (which comes from the other addresses) contains whatever we want, including the reference address, but not as a valid redeemer.

We have to keep in mind though, that fully spent transactions can be pruned (for keeping the blockchain smaller), and then we lose the mastercoin information.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 ... 166 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bitcointalk.org is not available or authorized for sale. Do not believe any fake listings.
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!