Bitcoin Forum
May 22, 2018, 02:32:58 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.0  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
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 96 97 98 99 ... 166 »
  Print  
Author Topic: MasterCoin: New Protocol Layer Starting From “The Exodus Address”  (Read 446750 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.
zathras
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 18, 2013, 08:55:51 AM
 #961

Tachikoma, on mastercoin-explorer you have a total MSC of 563,162.36 - could you advise how you are reaching this result?  Are you including anything other than Exodus purchases?  

My code calculates the total purchased from the Exodus address to be 559,302.41, then when the 10% dev fund is added on I make the total MSC created during the 'minting' if you will to be 615,232.65.

Given that Mastercoins will never again be created (ie both the initial mastercoins and the delayed reward dev fund were 'minted' during August, a once off process) and thus the total number of MSC should forever stay fixed unless they start getting destroyed for some reason.  If my reasoning is accurate then we should be able to define 'THE' fixed number of MSC that exist, a number that should not change and put that fundamental to bed once and for all.

Edit: occurs to me reading the spec - "For every 10 MasterCoins sold, an additional “reward MasterCoin” will also be created which will be awarded to the Exodus Address slowly over the following years" -I would read this as implying the 'reward mastercoin' was created at the point in time the 10 mastercoins were sold, thus all 'reward mastercoins' have already been created, but are not spendable until they are awarded.   Is this interpretation in line with your intentions JR?

You can see the exact calculation on:
https://github.com/grazcoin/mastercoin-tools/blob/master/msc_bootstrap.py
the result of msc per exodus address on:
https://github.com/grazcoin/mastercoin-tools/blob/master/outputs/msc_per_address.csv
and the exact total sum is:
563162.35762218
Tachikoma has confirmed that out calculations agree.

It is possible to interpret that the 10% were already generated and they are not yet spendable.
Trying to keep the bitcoins interpretation i.e. ~21M BTC will be generated, but we still consider a bitcoin existence only after it got mined, I rather use the dual approach and interpret it in a way that every year new mastercoins are being born, and only then they exist.

If you insist on your view, than the calculation is:
563162.35762218 * 110% = 619478.593384398 -> 619478.59338440

There is absolutely no practical difference between those views.

Thanks for the feedback.  I have no strong views on the reward mastercoins either way, but ambiguity is bad so would be good to get locked away...

I'm going through my code looking for discrepancy - just ran through your list of differing values and mine seem to agree with yours:
Code:
Masterchest has: 107.00200066 ,Explorer has: 11000200066, Tools has: 10700200066 for 12LSJoCAqvVQyvW5qaKGp6ZKMaaZpUcCv3
Masterchest has: 6996.19940476, Explorer has: 574619940476, Tools has: 699619940476 for 12bDX26J84x545pzfSZouULeqjfBtAe9Lv
Masterchest has: 211.34827433, Explorer has: 21234827433, Tools has: 21134827433 for 13P8CSqRoboefrNsXKZieWYtZhJ4KcQHhH
Masterchest has: 36.08607308, Explorer has: 4058607308, Tools has: 3608607308 for 13qJCzNQUx7dFcixjq9Rab7wPgUCtYS48v
Masterchest has: 10.87679398, Explorer has: 2087679398, Tools has: 1087679398 for 13x2dka6tVhjsNNNomGJjUPi2iJQCb67bw
Masterchest has: 246.01309524, Explorer has: 24701309524, Tools has: 24601309524 for 158qYAqDu4GKeVHDiTYA2xAu5Ew4sEU2Ug
Masterchest has: 529.3432826, Explorer has: 39434328263, Tools has: 52934328263 for 15og4WXZPwkMnnsb3dj6HqgTUfcRLx4J9b
Masterchest has: 531.68692130, Explorer has: 53568692130, Tools has: 53168692130 for 16QkgycuGwFvwQ8oZ5cYHgVjDNSavcwovS
Masterchest has: 60.56807478, Explorer has: 7056807478, Tools has: 6056807478 for 17QqwZtZ221Dod33bY33SAZMXrSmi89rsP
Masterchest has: 101.73350529, Explorer has: 10273350529, Tools has: 10173350529 for 1AgZvwAoNDFGkQYEF193RAm3qxipWAEFAH
Masterchest has: 151.42266518, Explorer has: 15342266518, Tools has: 15142266518 for 1ApWmGDViVjTPqRKBhPydpBZ5DRjpuEEic
Masterchest has: 101.27878638, Explorer has: 10227878638, Tools has: 10127878638 for 1Bitcoin4yZjSSPoXUceJaiyQLABx7B2LL
Masterchest has: 5017.80257937, Explorer has: 501650257937, Tools has: 501780257937 for 1Eo6FGPytuYvuA3ZS6ToXqP8sScWWtKhWN
Masterchest has: 57.20500793, Explorer has: 2220500793, Tools has: 5720500793 for 1GaNupdUBzfVF2B3JUAY1rZwHoXJgjyzXj
Masterchest has: 101.03326720, Explorer has: 9933326720, Tools has: 10103326720 for 1K5Tofy7UTfcrpWBnXcJhHZzvLTksDdasQ
Masterchest has: 3003.15819775, Explorer has: 301315819775, Tools has: 300315819775 for 1K5ZEkQ8Pzwqedg2WHsKQd3xiAGnj7MeCD
Masterchest has: 317.76650397, Explorer has: 32276650397, Tools has: 31776650397 for 1Kk6eLpM3cpgC4NEzXLzjKvdndd8bPox6f
Masterchest has: 107.12380845, Explorer has: 10812380845, Tools has: 10712380845 for 1LjT88X7Zu8BdbqJw8vfRa83NJuzYL9kqm
Masterchest has: 104.76380622, Explorer has: 10526380622, Tools has: 10476380622 for 1donutMH4L7kdRqh4xvSvesfd3KFu3UNm

Could you please let me know the total count of transactions you are considering mastercoin purchases from the Exodus address?

Thanks Smiley

Smart Property & Distributed Exchange: Master Protocol for Bitcoin
1526999578
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1526999578

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1526999578
Reply with quote  #2

1526999578
Report to moderator
1526999578
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1526999578

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1526999578
Reply with quote  #2

1526999578
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1526999578
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1526999578

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1526999578
Reply with quote  #2

1526999578
Report to moderator
zathras
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 18, 2013, 09:20:59 AM
 #962

Using your CSV file of exodus purchases and running that against my implementation I come up with two addresses with discrepancies:
1Bqp4VEweM1S8FKGHWYviRRtSxv5tMAVih
1KDCt8VoY45ya3QnExwtZEdugAnRAncr1Z

The difference in amount is ~3859.95, which if added to 559302.41 comes out at the same total yourself and Tachikoma have (563162.36).

Bug somewhere in my code.  Hunting time.

EDIT: Both transactions have purchases in block 255365 & those values account for the discrepancies.  It's been agreed that purchases in that block will be included I believe.

Smart Property & Distributed Exchange: Master Protocol for Bitcoin
zathras
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 18, 2013, 09:46:00 AM
 #963

OK fixed, I was being a little strict with my block time verification.

Please to say my code is now calculating a total equal to the implementations from others Smiley



P.S. that screenie is simply dev code to help me build an implementation to interact with bitcoind's RPC server and loop through the transactions in each block to parse mastercoin data - the web front end etc is still progressing nicely and will be the UI once I get to the stage of opening it up.

Smart Property & Distributed Exchange: Master Protocol for Bitcoin
grazcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 284
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 18, 2013, 10:53:18 AM
 #964

OK fixed, I was being a little strict with my block time verification.

Please to say my code is now calculating a total equal to the implementations from others Smiley

Take care - I think you missed 2 dacoins, probably rounding 18 dacoins to 20.
With currency systems, accuracy is very important, and in our case it is 8 places after the decimal point.


zathras
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 18, 2013, 11:19:32 AM
 #965

OK fixed, I was being a little strict with my block time verification.

Please to say my code is now calculating a total equal to the implementations from others Smiley

Take care - I think you missed 2 dacoins, probably rounding 18 dacoins to 20.
With currency systems, accuracy is very important, and in our case it is 8 places after the decimal point.


Thanks. Yep 8 decimal places is what I'm working with - the actual figure is 563,162.35762208 which is != 563,162.35762218 so there is still a slight discrepancy I'll need to trace.

EDIT: Transactions are written to the database to 8 decimal digits but I'm using raw values from the bonus calcs in the total calculation which may explain the slight skew, will look into it further.

Smart Property & Distributed Exchange: Master Protocol for Bitcoin
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1002


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 18, 2013, 03:26:50 PM
 #966

One thing I haven't seen any discussion of (and I don't think I mentioned explicitly in the spec) is the continuous nature of the function describing the vesting of the 10% coins. That is, you can feed 0.5 years into that equation. Technically, a small number of them are spendable right now. To my knowledge, nobody currently recognizes those coins.

Also, I didn't explicitly say the date to start counting from - I think September 1st 2013 makes sense. By my calculations, ~0.05 years have passed since then, so (1 - 0.5^0.05) = ~3.4% of the 10% would currently be unlocked. I'll try to make these details clear in the next rev of the spec.

I have no plans to use those MasterCoins soon, so I don't care much about recognizing them now, but they will probably be used at some point as part of a compensation package for full-time employees - kind of like vesting stock options.

I love seeing the collaboration here. Is anybody working on using Tachikoma's new method of data storage yet? I assume he is, at least . . .

Tachikoma
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
September 18, 2013, 08:18:04 PM
 #967

I've been under the weather these past days and bound to bed. I have done some initial work and I will be releasing some source code as soon I've fought of this flu Smiley

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

Activity: 266
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 18, 2013, 09:15:31 PM
 #968

Sorry to hear you're unwell Tachikoma Sad

JR, as per my question above re reward Mastercoins; I think it would be prudent to clarify - please consider the following:
Sce1) Reward Mastercoins were created along with each 10 Mastercoin purchase at the same point in time (ie during August), but cannot be spent until they have been awarded to the Exodus address
Sce2) Reward Mastercoins are created at the point in time they are awarded to the Exodus address

I concur the total number of coins does not change in either case, but let's play semantics for a moment - consider how the layperson may interpret:
Sce1) Mastercoins have all been minted (created) and no more will ever be created (layperson may interpret as fixed/finite supply of coins)
Sce2) A small number of Mastercoins are created in an ongoing/continuing process (layperson may interpret as increasing supply of coins)

For those involved in Mastercoin, we can recognize that both provide the same total supply of coins of course.  This may be considered a non-issue and perhaps I'm overthinking it, but I thought whilst less technically relevant it could have a bearing on certain perceptions of Mastercoin.

Going back to the nuts and bolts, I'm including reward Mastercoins in my implementation starting @ 1377993600 for now.

EDIT: Missed your storage Q - no work done on Tachikoma's suggested storage approach as yet I'm still knee deep in my base wallet & explorer implementation.

Smart Property & Distributed Exchange: Master Protocol for Bitcoin
bybitcoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 18, 2013, 09:20:32 PM
 #969

I've been under the weather these past days and bound to bed. I have done some initial work and I will be releasing some source code as soon I've fought of this flu Smiley
Sorry to ask this, a long thread: are you coding in c++ or java or perhaps python? I am thinking about joining the force but am not sure yet Smiley
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1002


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 19, 2013, 12:11:13 AM
 #970

Sorry to hear you're unwell Tachikoma Sad

JR, as per my question above re reward Mastercoins; I think it would be prudent to clarify - please consider the following:
Sce1) Reward Mastercoins were created along with each 10 Mastercoin purchase at the same point in time (ie during August), but cannot be spent until they have been awarded to the Exodus address
Sce2) Reward Mastercoins are created at the point in time they are awarded to the Exodus address

I concur the total number of coins does not change in either case, but let's play semantics for a moment - consider how the layperson may interpret:
Sce1) Mastercoins have all been minted (created) and no more will ever be created (layperson may interpret as fixed/finite supply of coins)
Sce2) A small number of Mastercoins are created in an ongoing/continuing process (layperson may interpret as increasing supply of coins)

For those involved in Mastercoin, we can recognize that both provide the same total supply of coins of course.  This may be considered a non-issue and perhaps I'm overthinking it, but I thought whilst less technically relevant it could have a bearing on certain perceptions of Mastercoin.

Going back to the nuts and bolts, I'm including reward Mastercoins in my implementation starting @ 1377993600 for now.

EDIT: Missed your storage Q - no work done on Tachikoma's suggested storage approach as yet I'm still knee deep in my base wallet & explorer implementation.

It sounds mostly like a question of presentation. I'm fine with treating the coins as "created but not spendable" if that is a better message to the layperson.

Nice work so far (judging from the screenshots). I can't wait to see more! Smiley


zathras
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 19, 2013, 03:18:59 AM
 #971

It sounds mostly like a question of presentation. I'm fine with treating the coins as "created but not spendable" if that is a better message to the layperson.

Nice work so far (judging from the screenshots). I can't wait to see more! Smiley
Great stuff, thanks.  Completely agree it's an issue of presentation and I think now we're clear on this we can make the following explicit statements:

1) The total number of Mastercoins is 619478.593384398.
2) No new Mastercoins will ever be created.

By having those statements explicit (rather than with caveats such as (paraphrasing) "with the exception of new coins awarded to the dev fund" etc) we are simplifying the overview for new entrants I believe.

Thanks, I'm working through my milestones but I'm sure you know how it is with other commitments (job/family) etc - so far I've found it easier to sacrifice something else (sleep!).

Smiley


Smart Property & Distributed Exchange: Master Protocol for Bitcoin
grazcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 284
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 19, 2013, 08:10:40 AM
 #972

1) The total number of Mastercoins is 619478.593384398.

Again accuracy minor issue:
We have 8 digits after the decimal point, so the number is 619478.59338440

zathras
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 19, 2013, 08:15:24 AM
 #973

OK fixed, I was being a little strict with my block time verification.

Please to say my code is now calculating a total equal to the implementations from others Smiley

Take care - I think you missed 2 dacoins, probably rounding 18 dacoins to 20.
With currency systems, accuracy is very important, and in our case it is 8 places after the decimal point.

Thanks. Yep 8 decimal places is what I'm working with - the actual figure is 563,162.35762208 which is != 563,162.35762218 so there is still a slight discrepancy I'll need to trace.

EDIT: Transactions are written to the database to 8 decimal digits but I'm using raw values from the bonus calcs in the total calculation which may explain the slight skew, will look into it further.
Quick update on the above - when I query the database directly (select sum) I get the correct number of dacoins - 563,162.35762218.  The skew was introduced by my using an array which held my raw (>8 decimal places) instead of my processed (8 decimal place) values.

Smart Property & Distributed Exchange: Master Protocol for Bitcoin
zathras
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 19, 2013, 08:22:36 AM
 #974

1) The total number of Mastercoins is 619478.593384398.

Again accuracy minor issue:
We have 8 digits after the decimal point, so the number is 619478.59338440
That'll teach me for using 'calc' at work Tongue

This transaction has 4 outputs of 0.0006 - how did you consider destination vs change address?
https://blockchain.info/tx/2d69ad4c5ec9380b2da89c06ef9fd263755d70f9fe7fe0774fe8c8a2494938ee

EDIT: Answered my own question I think, loop through ambiguous address sequence numbers checking for first data packet sequence number-1.

Smart Property & Distributed Exchange: Master Protocol for Bitcoin
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1002


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 19, 2013, 03:28:55 PM
 #975

1) The total number of Mastercoins is 619478.593384398.

Again accuracy minor issue:
We have 8 digits after the decimal point, so the number is 619478.59338440
That'll teach me for using 'calc' at work Tongue

This transaction has 4 outputs of 0.0006 - how did you consider destination vs change address?
https://blockchain.info/tx/2d69ad4c5ec9380b2da89c06ef9fd263755d70f9fe7fe0774fe8c8a2494938ee

EDIT: Answered my own question I think, loop through ambiguous address sequence numbers checking for first data packet sequence number-1.


I think somebody created that on purpose just for testing Smiley

I'm a little worried about corner cases here. Let's see if I can define some rules for processing:

  • All protocol transactions should have the same output amount. If one output is different, that is the change address.
  • If all outputs are the same, then look at sequence numbers:
    • If there is a broken sequence (i.e. 3,4,8), then the odd-man-out is the change address (8 in this example)
    • If there is an ambiguous sequence (i.e. 3,4,4), then the transaction is invalid!
    • If there is a perfect sequence (i.e. 3,4,5), then the transaction is invalid!
      • The first version of this post had some additional rules for perfect sequences, due to the possibility of two data addresses, but then I realized that there will NEVER be two data addresses, because data addresses are only used by standard bitcoin clients for simple sends, which only have one data address. Advanced features will only run on MasterCoin clients, which can avoid ambiguity explicitly by making sure that either there is no change or that the change address has a different output than the other addresses.

I'll put those rules into the next rev of the spec.

If somebody wants to try their hand at getting some test cases like the above into the block chain, we can make sure that all clients handle them the same.

ripper234
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000


Ron Gross


View Profile WWW
September 19, 2013, 07:22:52 PM
 #976

Does this calculation include the amount of reward mastercoins?
I added an entry to the FAQ.

Please do not pm me, use ron@bitcoin.org.il instead
Mastercoin Executive Director
Co-founder of the Israeli Bitcoin Association
dacoinminster
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1002


Rational Exuberance


View Profile WWW
September 19, 2013, 08:57:04 PM
 #977

Does this calculation include the amount of reward mastercoins?
I added an entry to the FAQ.

Yup! (I updated the FAQ)

zathras
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 19, 2013, 09:25:51 PM
 #978

1) The total number of Mastercoins is 619478.593384398.

Again accuracy minor issue:
We have 8 digits after the decimal point, so the number is 619478.59338440
That'll teach me for using 'calc' at work Tongue

This transaction has 4 outputs of 0.0006 - how did you consider destination vs change address?
https://blockchain.info/tx/2d69ad4c5ec9380b2da89c06ef9fd263755d70f9fe7fe0774fe8c8a2494938ee

EDIT: Answered my own question I think, loop through ambiguous address sequence numbers checking for first data packet sequence number-1.


I think somebody created that on purpose just for testing Smiley

I'm a little worried about corner cases here. Let's see if I can define some rules for processing:

  • All protocol transactions should have the same output amount. If one output is different, that is the change address.
  • If all outputs are the same, then look at sequence numbers:
    • If there is a broken sequence (i.e. 3,4,8), then the odd-man-out is the change address (8 in this example)
    • If there is an ambiguous sequence (i.e. 3,4,4), then the transaction is invalid!
    • If there is a perfect sequence (i.e. 3,4,5), then the transaction is invalid!
      • The first version of this post had some additional rules for perfect sequences, due to the possibility of two data addresses, but then I realized that there will NEVER be two data addresses, because data addresses are only used by standard bitcoin clients for simple sends, which only have one data address. Advanced features will only run on MasterCoin clients, which can avoid ambiguity explicitly by making sure that either there is no change or that the change address has a different output than the other addresses.

I'll put those rules into the next rev of the spec.

If somebody wants to try their hand at getting some test cases like the above into the block chain, we can make sure that all clients handle them the same.

Quite a test, if I'm decoding correctly 250 Mastercoins were sent in that transaction!

Thanks for detailing some fringe cases, as you say I think it's a good idea to get it into the spec.  I was thinking that it's possible for the change address to have the same seq number as the reference or data address but it looks like you've cleared that up above as an invalid transaction Smiley

Smart Property & Distributed Exchange: Master Protocol for Bitcoin
ASICSRUS
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10


Expert Computer Geek


View Profile
September 20, 2013, 12:46:31 AM
 #979


I am VERY excited to announce that I now have a complete specification for building a protocol layer on top of bitcoin (like how HTTP runs on top of TCP/IP).

The coins of the new layer have
  • Additional security features to make your money much harder to steal
  • Built-in support for a distributed currency exchange
  • Built-in support for distributed betting (no need to trust a website to coordinate bets)
  • Built-in support for "smart property" which can be used to create and transfer property such as titles, deeds, or stock in a company
  • Capability to hold a stable user-defined value, such as an ounce of gold or U.S. Dollar, with no need to trust a person promising to back up that value

This is a significant improvement over anything we've had before, including colored coins. This protocol has been my life's work for over two years now, and you can finally get a piece of it today!

The name of the new protocol layer is “MasterCoin” (a name I invented and published long before the alt-coin of the same name), and it is 100% message-based, meaning that it encodes all its protocol data as hidden messages in the block chain which have special meanings, such as placing a bet, or transferring MasterCoins to another address.

Once you own MasterCoins, you have the building blocks for creating GoldCoin, USDCoin, EuroCoin, and any other real-world asset you can imagine! These child currencies will then be “meta stable” (holding their values as long as they remain sufficiently backed by MasterCoins held in escrow). Their target values are maintained by protocol actions which control the available supply.

Want more details?


About me:

MasterCoins are intended to be an investment opportunity on par with buying bitcoins when they first came out. However, as with bitcoins, there are a lot of risks too. Before you buy MasterCoins, please take a few minutes to read my summary of some of the ways this could go wrong and you could lose your money: https://sites.google.com/site/2ndbtcwpaper/MasterCoinRisks.pdf

Perhaps you have heard of the Genesis Block, from which the first bitcoins were created. MasterCoins have a similar starting point in the bitcoin block chain, called the “Exodus Address” (http://blockchain.info/address/1EXoDusjGwvnjZUyKkxZ4UHEf77z6A5S4P). MasterCoins were created by sending bitcoins to the Exodus Address during the month of August 2013. That fundraiser is now over, and anyone wishing to buy MasterCoins will have to purchase them from an early adopter.

Bitcoins raised in the fundraiser are being used to fund the development of software implementing the MasterCoin protocol. The fundraiser was structured like a kickstarter, but it is also an investment. If we're successful, the purchased MasterCoins could be worth a tremendous amount of money someday. Thanks to everyone who participated, helping us raise over half a million dollars worth of bitcoins.

Again, the fundraiser is over, and bitcoins sent to the Exodus Address do not create MasterCoins anymore. Until we get the bitcoin/MasterCoin distributed exchange set up, you can purchase MasterCoins (using a very manual process) here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=287145.0

Do not attempt to purchase or use MasterCoins with a web wallet such as MtGox or Coinbase (YOU COULD LOSE YOUR MONEY). You must use a wallet where you can control a sending address by sending all your funds to that address first, then creating a "message" by sending funds from that address in a special format. Web wallets such as BlockChain.info will work fine, since they give you complete control over the addresses in your wallet.

Many MasterCoin functions are now available online: http://mastercoin-explorer.com (Note site disclaimers! There may still be bugs!)

We now have our own subreddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/mastercoin

We are currently running a $25000 coding contest, ending October 15th 2013. ALL serious entries win a prize. Details here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=292628.0

Feel free to ask any questions here, although please keep a civil tongue and be aware that I will delete posts on this thread which are off-topic or impolite.

Thanks!





looking good i listened to the interview!!!!~=) very cool~blockchain dustmitecoin LOL

✰ If You Risk Nothing, You Risk Everything | PrimeDice.com | The New Way To Roll | *Thread*

<3<3:::LOVE^YOUR^NEIGHBOR!!!:::|+i|_33+(((PLEASE)))====>Donate if you like me!~> 157YEcD4WQ9UbhZ7NSC2FpuaYfxHe3JgF2
ripper234
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000


Ron Gross


View Profile WWW
September 20, 2013, 06:23:29 AM
 #980

I'm not following this thread all the time, so I missed a few discussions about whether Mastercoin should or shouldn't be an alt chain.
I just want to state that I agree with Willet 100% that it shouldn't be, and actually started another thread just about this topic:

(If you want me to see you response, try posting it on the other thread, I will be monitoring that one more frequently ... just copy-pasting here for the lazy)

There have been several well known bitcoiners that tried to convince J.R.Willet to move Mastercoin to an altchain, instead of using the bitcoin blockchain. Willet's opinion is that Mastercoin should stay on the blockchain, and I fully concur. Here is my reasoning:

It is easier to implement Mastercoin on the blockchain. The entire concept of mining "vanishes", or actually is satisfied by Bitcoin miners. This means the security of Mastercoin is on par with Bitcoin (up to potential bugs) ... there is no way to 51% attack it.

The same could be implemented using merged mining, but no matter how you look at it, merged mining is technically a more complicated solution, because it requires an entirely new blockchain one needs to reason about. You need to think about the hashrate of this separate blockchain and to encourage miners to merge-mine it, things that are just not needed when you directly encode things into the Bitcoin blockchain. As far as software development goes, I'm super lazy - I do not like to do something complicated if I can do something simple that serves the same purpose.

Now, it is true that this "burdens" the blockchain ... in the same way that Satoshi Dice does.
However, this burdening is something that Bitcoin users and developers will just have to live with. Nobody is the boss of Bitcoin, and any standard Bitcoin transaction (like Mastercoin transactions are) are legitimate transactions that Bitcoin simply has to learn to deal with. There is just no feasible way that I see that Bitcoin developers could ban such transactions (please enlighten me if I'm wrong).

Bitcoin is the future of finance, resistant to hacking, government censorship and regulation. Do you really want to base that future on asking other people to pretty please "not abuse it for you own purposes"? This is not the answer. Bitcoin has to be made scalable enough to meet its role as the one major, global, world currency.

Mastercoin developers have no intention of disrupting Bitcoin, and will gladly adapt to any friendly encoding that the brilliant minds of these forums will propose, as long as it doesn't harm Mastercoin (using non-standard transactions that are relayed more slowly is not an option at the moment). The Bitcoin blockchain must and will remain neutral, and if Willet hadn't come up with Mastercoin encoding, someone else would have created something similar sooner or later.

Please do not pm me, use ron@bitcoin.org.il instead
Mastercoin Executive Director
Co-founder of the Israeli Bitcoin Association
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 96 97 98 99 ... 166 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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!