[ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread

[jrmg]

MSC tx is considered as spam. I am wondering if XCP have the same issue?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=441465.msg8695650#msg8695650

I think Counterparty and Mastercoin should sit down together and talk about some sort of future together. It's two different developments of the same technology and both are going to face the same problem in the future: the hardcore bitcoin folks. I don't put it past the core devs, or pool owners to eventually block bitcoin 2.0 technologies. It would only make sense to start talking now about some sort of permanent fix. Perhaps a bitcoin 2.0 merge mined chain (or why not use Namecoin anyway?). It would even perhaps give a chance to build a sidechain that was faster, so we aren't waiting for several blocks to confirm for something to update on our bitcoin2.0 wallets.

What is actually bitcoin core team plan, make slowly transferred crypto money without any other features? For me this way sounds only way to kill bitcoin in long run. Or they have some special reason hate 2.0 coins over their own blockchain, some other than small spam what sure help bitcoin also. Lets speak more this and drop price so we can buy again back with lower price

[1715375816]

1715375816

[1715375816]

1715375816

[1715375816]

1715375816

[deliciousowl]

It's now possible to search broadcasts by text!!! Thanks mtbitcoin!: http://blockscan.com/search.aspx?mod=broadcast

[crazy_rabbit]

MSC tx is considered as spam. I am wondering if XCP have the same issue?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=441465.msg8695650#msg8695650

I think Counterparty and Mastercoin should sit down together and talk about some sort of future together. It's two different developments of the same technology and both are going to face the same problem in the future: the hardcore bitcoin folks. I don't put it past the core devs, or pool owners to eventually block bitcoin 2.0 technologies. It would only make sense to start talking now about some sort of permanent fix. Perhaps a bitcoin 2.0 merge mined chain (or why not use Namecoin anyway?). It would even perhaps give a chance to build a sidechain that was faster, so we aren't waiting for several blocks to confirm for something to update on our bitcoin2.0 wallets.

What is actually bitcoin core team plan, make slowly transferred crypto money without any other features? For me this way sounds only way to kill bitcoin in long run. Or they have some special reason hate 2.0 coins over their own blockchain, some other than small spam what sure help bitcoin also. Lets speak more this and drop price so we can buy again back with lower price

It's a mess really. :-/

[SaveForrest]

MSC tx is considered as spam. I am wondering if XCP have the same issue?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=441465.msg8695650#msg8695650

I think Counterparty and Mastercoin should sit down together and talk about some sort of future together. It's two different developments of the same technology and both are going to face the same problem in the future: the hardcore bitcoin folks. I don't put it past the core devs, or pool owners to eventually block bitcoin 2.0 technologies. It would only make sense to start talking now about some sort of permanent fix. Perhaps a bitcoin 2.0 merge mined chain (or why not use Namecoin anyway?). It would even perhaps give a chance to build a sidechain that was faster, so we aren't waiting for several blocks to confirm for something to update on our bitcoin2.0 wallets.

I agree, some bitcoiners are against counterparty http://www.coindesk.com/new-forms-spam-bloat-bitcoins-block-chain/

[baddw]

MSC tx is considered as spam. I am wondering if XCP have the same issue?

Yes, XCP is blocked explicitly.

How does it work then if it's blocked?

Because Eligius only mines ~5% of Bitcoin blocks.

And no, BitSharesX is not a scam.  I have followed the development of it for a long time.  It is new code, not Bitcoin-based, and the delegate-based block creation process is probably the best implementation of a non-PoW system currently available (aside from "piggyback" coins like XCP).  Daniel Larimer is a very smart guy, and he and the rest of the team developed BTSX in a fishtank, with frequent public testing, comments, and feedback.  He was/is very active in the BTS forums and responded directly to a large number of suggestions, and implemented them if they were worthy.  He communicated when he was switching tracks (he kind of painted himself into a corner with his originally intended way of implementing PoS, and came up with the delegate system as a substitute).

Perhaps it is too bad that the BTSX team raised so much money, but no, all "pre-mined" coins are not inherently a scam.  If we set the bar of "fair distribution of un-mineable coins" at "100% fair" for Counterparty, then BitShares would get at least 75%.  Their system was convoluted, but it was open, transparent, well-communicated and without any post-facto rule-changes.

Is BTSX "better" or "worse" than XCP?  Impossible to answer.  They both are very good in different ways.  XCP lives and dies by its reliance on the Bitcoin blockchain.  It is both a huge strength (maximum security, relative ease of implementation) and a huge weakness (slow blocktimes, complete lack of control over blockchain).  BTSX has its own blockchain which is not hugely wasteful of electricity or any other real-world resource.  It is super fast and responsive.  Whether it is as secure as BTC will have to be shown over time.

[devphp]

How does it work then if it's blocked?

Because Eligius only mines ~5% of Bitcoin blocks.

Do you mean Eligius removes all pending transactions of Counterparty when it mines its blocks and those txs have to wait for another miner to include them?

[IamNotSure]

How does it work then if it's blocked?

Because Eligius only mines ~5% of Bitcoin blocks.

Do you mean Eligius removes all pending transactions of Counterparty when it mines its blocks and those txs have to wait for another miner to include them?

That's the way I understand it. Hopefully, all other pool owners are not as retarded as Luke jr

[prosperous]

Luke must be lucky to be able to deny money like that! He is definitely a prime buying candidate for our Counterparty asset.

[dexX7]

It's two different developments of the same technology and both are going to face the same problem in the future: the hardcore bitcoin folks.

Actually I was surpised and it turned out Eligius seems to be the only hostile pool which is much better than I expected.

There was a bit of heated discussion with Luke-Jr and wizkid057, but I wouldn't call Luke unreasonable. xnova weighted in as well:

https://github.com/mastercoin-MSC/spec/issues/248

[crazy_rabbit]

https://github.com/mastercoin-MSC/spec/issues/248

This is a great read. Even explains why we don't see any OP_RETURNS in use by XCP today. The code has a comment about BTCGuild but this explains further.

This is pretty good, thanks for posting.

This really exposes a much more important issue about where the Bitcoin 2.0 crowd stands versus the Bitcoin crowd. There seems to be an unreasonable amount of ill will towards people building on top of the blockchain, regardless of if they are paying their fee's or not. Not to mention that if bitcoin is going to work it's going to need to scale to an enormous volume anyway- so it's not like the problem won't need to be solved at some point.

[weex]

This really exposes a much more important issue about where the Bitcoin 2.0 crowd stands versus the Bitcoin crowd. There seems to be an unreasonable amount of ill will towards people building on top of the blockchain, regardless of if they are paying their fee's or not. Not to mention that if bitcoin is going to work it's going to need to scale to an enormous volume anyway- so it's not like the problem won't need to be solved at some point.

Despite what one holds as their ideal model for Bitcoin, the economics are what matter. I thank Peter Todd for highlighting this just as he did in earlier discussions about OP_RETURN. My understanding of reading those previous discussions is that people will continue to use this hacky multi-sig storage method because it's cheaper, until it isn't.

That games were played with OP_RETURN size does not build confidence in Bitcoin's development and perhaps the uncertainty it shows can explain why OP_RETURN isn't more widely implemented.

Keeping the protocol data agnostic and instead focusing on the economic incentives is clearly the way to practical block chain size and maximum utility. We're just now starting to get to what level of fees will be supported by markets in blockchain-based storage, XCP, MC, and payments and only those economics will tell us what makes sense to put in the Blockchain.

[Matt Y]

As alternatives to Bitcoin start to get traction with feature sets that Bitcoin does not have, the perception of Counterparty by Bitcoiners who are currently not in favor of the extra data in transactions will shift as XCP is increasingly seen as a way to keep people on Bitcoin for contracts for difference, other financial products, crowdfunding, and so on.

This is probably even more true if Bitcoin transactions and network growth continue to stagnate as Counterparty and the businesses it enables start to provide real value. That value will be hard to ignore in the face of increased competition via Ethereum, NXT, and other projects that come along.

[weex]

There's a story on hacker news now about Koinify (http://koinify.com) which will use Counterparty for crowdfunding. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8286261

[profitofthegods]

There's a story on hacker news now about Koinify (http://koinify.com) which will use Counterparty for crowdfunding. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8286261

Looks interesting, I wonder if they already have any projects lined up and if so when we'll get more info.

[BldSwtTrs]

Anyone here follow BitSharesX? It seems like a scam or at the very least a beta project that makes a lot of unsubstantiated claims. How does counterparty plan to continue differentiating itself from such obvious scams, and is there a contingency plan for when the SEC or other govt. entity does a crackdown that doesn't differentiate between legitimate projects like counterparty that are done with little hype and plenty of real development vs. altcoins like bitsharesX that smell really bad?

Some of the articles on here discuss the problems with bitshares http://prestonbyrne.com/back-of-the-envelope/

Serious replies appreciated!

I follow BitsharesX, it's not a scam, it's a visionary idea and very respectable people are implementing it. You should follow it too.

2.0 projects supporters shouldn't view other project as competitor and downplay them, there is room for every body in the world of tomorrow.

[Matt Y]

http://cointelegraph.com/news/112471/counterparty-adds-armory-offline-wallet-support

[Frozenlock]

Just so you all know, #xcp is a thing... 

IRC is a much better tool for open source projects than Skype.
You can have chat logs, you can choose between multiple clients, and you can join without being invited.

[weex]

And while we're on the subject of XCP community infrastructure, and I know it's nice to just have one thread to read, but there is also http://forum.counterparty.co and http://reddit.com/r/counterparty_xcp.

Most of what's posted to the forum is when people have issues with Counterwallet. Can't really make any generalizations about the reddit but it is a good platform to visit when a big story about Counterparty hits (of which I am confident there will be many).

I find some references on the forum to some sort of swarm meta-community project but it seems to have died months ago.

[deliciousowl]

Just so you all know, #xcp is a thing...  

IRC is a much better tool for open source projects than Skype.
You can have chat logs, you can choose between multiple clients, and you can join without being invited.

Is this on irc.freenode.net? It seems the most activity is concentrated on Skype for whatever reason. Maybe it would be interesting to bridge them via a bot.

DiceBitco.in Accused of Cheating Players - #Bitcoin #casino #scam http://cointelegraph.com/news/112470/dicebitcoin-accused-of-cheating-players

Looks like the reasons to prefer decentralized betting / gaming with built-in escrow are piling up. Sad that many will have to learn the hard way...

[weex]

Yes, on irc.freenode.net. I've not seen any skype-to-irc bots so that would be interesting to see.