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

[GeminiSimba]

This means that when Medici becomes a reality, it will be the first and only crypto currency stock market that the SEC will have officially approved.

What could be bigger than that?  Still, I'm very curious about the role the XCP coin will play in Medici, if any.  I'm also a bit concerned that we've been providing betting/gambling services.

I still think that the concept of what exactly Counterparty is still eludes even many of those who support it. But it's probably also because the concept of cryptographic currency is still such a huge learning curve to most. 10 months ago I didn't understand bitcoin at all, I do tech support for a graphics card manufacturer called XFX and had been hearing about bitcoin and litecoin constantly from customers who kept breaking our products while trying to mine with them so I got interested. But I have always had a kind of Libertarian mindset and open minded to disruptive theories etc... So I kind of pulled an Antonopoulos, disappeared from many of my friends and have really immersed myself not just in the community of digital currency, but have spent every day from the ground up absorbing traditional and alternative knowledge concepts about economics, computer science(of which I'm least adept at), and philosophy as these 3 categories of thought are what is necessary to have a proper grasp of the essentials of how crypto currency is actually changing the world.

It's a steep learning curve trying to really grasp what these new protocols like Counterparty and Ethereum are actually bringing to the table but once you start to see it and it becomes this clear picture I can assure you that you won't say that "we've been providing gambling services" because counterparty doesn't provide any service at all. It's an open source code which anyone can use. Trying to say we provide gambling services is like saying the internet provides recruiting services for ISIS or other terrorist organization thus perhaps we should shut down or criminalize the internet or facebook? Negative, we shut down the perpetrators of illegal or counter productive activity not the protocol itself because the protocol is innocent.

[1715560694]

1715560694

[1715560694]

1715560694

[1715560694]

1715560694

[ssmc2]

I bought some XCP on Polo and am wondering what the best way to store them off exchange is?

[Matt Y]

I bought some XCP on Polo and am wondering what the best way to store them off exchange is?

http://support.counterparty.io/support/solutions/articles/5000004858-cold-storage-of-counterparty-assets-btc-using-armory-

[ssmc2]

I bought some XCP on Polo and am wondering what the best way to store them off exchange is?

http://support.counterparty.io/support/solutions/articles/5000004858-cold-storage-of-counterparty-assets-btc-using-armory-

Thanks!

[bitcoinrocks]

It's a steep learning curve trying to really grasp what these new protocols like Counterparty and Ethereum are actually bringing to the table but once you start to see it and it becomes this clear picture I can assure you that you won't say that "we've been providing gambling services" because counterparty doesn't provide any service at all. It's an open source code which anyone can use. Trying to say we provide gambling services is like saying the internet provides recruiting services for ISIS or other terrorist organization thus perhaps we should shut down or criminalize the internet or facebook? Negative, we shut down the perpetrators of illegal or counter productive activity not the protocol itself because the protocol is innocent.

As you know, that is an extremely common point of view amongst cryptofolk.  It is, in my opinion, naive at best and detrimental at worst.  Crypto works but in order for it to work better, practical factors like regulation must be engaged.  Thinking big is great but in order to get there from here, we need boots on the ground doing the dirty work of connecting the dots.  Fortunately, people like Patrick Byrne seem to be doing exactly that.

[GeminiSimba]

It's a steep learning curve trying to really grasp what these new protocols like Counterparty and Ethereum are actually bringing to the table but once you start to see it and it becomes this clear picture I can assure you that you won't say that "we've been providing gambling services" because counterparty doesn't provide any service at all. It's an open source code which anyone can use. Trying to say we provide gambling services is like saying the internet provides recruiting services for ISIS or other terrorist organization thus perhaps we should shut down or criminalize the internet or facebook? Negative, we shut down the perpetrators of illegal or counter productive activity not the protocol itself because the protocol is innocent.

As you know, that is an extremely common point of view amongst cryptofolk.  It is, in my opinion, naive at best and detrimental at worst.  Crypto works but in order for it to work better, practical factors like regulation must be engaged.  Thinking big is great but in order to get there from here, we need boots on the ground doing the dirty work of connecting the dots.  Fortunately, people like Patrick Byrne seem to be doing exactly that.

To call my point of view naive is a bit much, in essence you simply disagree and that is fine, you can disagree without badmouthing the opposition. I tend to agree more with the philosophical viewpoint of Andreas which is that due to the fact that as far as western nations are concerned, purchasing ability is not exactly super enhanced by switching from say a credit card transaction to bitcoin transaction (relatively speaking). Thus, the true wide adoption waiting for crypto currency technology will most likely come from the various developing nations who do "NEED" something like bitcoin because in comparison their local currency or economic system is just trash.

You mention having boots on the ground doing the dirty work and I agree completely, but it's not about engaging regulation, it's going to be about Down-Teching the bitcoin technology itself. As in making it SOOO easy and simple to use and understand crypto currencies that even some guy in a remote part of the world can simply use a Nokia cell phone and basically become the bank of his village...  This is the sort of thing Andreas Antonopoulos talks about and I have to agree that making this technology simpler will increase real adoption WAYYY quicker than trying to get in bed with regulators.

[bitcoinrocks]

I tend to agree more with the philosophical viewpoint of Andreas which is that due to the fact that as far as western nations are concerned, purchasing ability is not exactly super enhanced by switching from say a credit card transaction to bitcoin transaction (relatively speaking). Thus, the true wide adoption waiting for crypto currency technology will most likely come from the various developing nations who do "NEED" something like bitcoin because in comparison their local currency or economic system is just trash.

If we're talking about crypto-as-a-currency (not to be confused with crypto), then I agree.

You mention having boots on the ground doing the dirty work and I agree completely, but it's not about engaging regulation, it's going to be about Down-Teching the bitcoin technology itself. As in making it SOOO easy and simple to use and understand crypto currencies that even some guy in a remote part of the world can simply use a Nokia cell phone and basically become the bank of his village...  This is the sort of thing Andreas Antonopoulos talks about and I have to agree that making this technology simpler will increase real adoption WAYYY quicker than trying to get in bed with regulators.

Why not both?  Crypto has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

[Anotheranonlol]

This means that when Medici becomes a reality, it will be the first and only crypto currency stock market that the SEC will have officially approved.

What could be bigger than that?  Still, I'm very curious about the role the XCP coin will play in Medici, if any.  I'm also a bit concerned that we've been providing betting/gambling services.

I think CounterWallet is compliant as far as gambling goes (abides by some relevant national/regional anti-gambling laws by enforcing geo-ip restrictions)

[bitcoinrocks]

I think CounterWallet is compliant as far as gambling goes (abides by some relevant national/regional anti-gambling laws by enforcing geo-ip restrictions)

Can anyone confirm this?  If so, I'd consider it more great news as we wade into regulation.

[Matt Y]

I think CounterWallet is compliant as far as gambling goes (abides by some relevant national/regional anti-gambling laws by enforcing geo-ip restrictions)

Can anyone confirm this?  If so, I'd consider it more great news as we wade into regulation.

Confirmed.

[deliciousowl]

I think CounterWallet is compliant as far as gambling goes (abides by some relevant national/regional anti-gambling laws by enforcing geo-ip restrictions)

Can anyone confirm this?  If so, I'd consider it more great news as we wade into regulation.

Yes, a few other features are disabled through geo-ip restrictions as well.

[bitcoinrocks]

The foresight exhibited by this team is astonishing.

[xnova]

The foresight exhibited by this team is astonishing.

Thank you. And regarding the recent rumors of possible SEC enforcement action against numerous entities in the space (presumably based around unauthorized security offerings), the following link is rather apropos:

http://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/newsletter/0014/materials/investmentch2.pdf

It’s rather short and well cited. In particular, “Investment Contracts and Instruments Commonly Known as Securities” on page 5 is good. I am not a lawyer and thus will not interpret this document here. However, it appears to be a good resource for anyone interested in the definition of a security, and how such a definition may apply to the various offerings in this space.

[Fernandez]

Confused about the whole SEC business. Still holding my burned coins but wondering whether I made a mistake of not cashing in.

I love the technology and the developers, but these regulations may be a huge problem

There is no information yet. Consider that in the end the regulations cannot affect the technology itself. And as long as the Bitcoin network exists, Counterparty will keep working. It's a minor setback but not a huge problem. Anyone seriously investing in this technology should have been able to see this coming.

In the end, places exist outside of the U.S, and there are many uses for tokens which do not fall under any regulation anywhere. I think to see what is occurring as an end of the world scenario shows a lack of resolve or ulterior motives.

I am still very much backing Counterparty. Having said I am thinking of selling a small amount to recover my initial cost. In that way even if it doesn't become as good as we all believe, I will still not be at a loss.

Don't worry, its a tiny amount, it won't move the market.

[iCEBREAKER]

I think CounterWallet is compliant as far as gambling goes (abides by some relevant national/regional anti-gambling laws by enforcing geo-ip restrictions)

Can anyone confirm this?  If so, I'd consider it more great news as we wade into regulation.

Yes, a few other features are disabled through geo-ip restrictions as well.

Mmmm....yummy jackboots!  I love licking delicious black polish off shiny authoritarian footwear.

Compliance with arbitrary coercion in exchange for personal profit is exactly what Satoshi intended to facilitate when he invented blockchain technology!

[bassclef]

I am still very much backing Counterparty. Having said I am thinking of selling a small amount to recover my initial cost. In that way even if it doesn't become as good as we all believe, I will still not be at a loss.

Don't worry, its a tiny amount, it won't move the market.

No worries. It's a free market 

That said I'm encouraged with the growth during the past few months. A positive sign at least from a speculation point of view.

[Matt Y]

http://venturebeat.com/2014/11/02/the-2-biggest-emerging-opportunities-in-cryptocurrency/

These early talks led to an exciting session at the Stanford seminar, one where Paypal founder Max Levchin, Counterparty’s Robby Dermody, and Blockstream’s Austin and Adam all engaged in a class wide discussion. This was easily a highlight of the quarter as reviewed by pundit Tim Swanson.

[deliciousowl]

Mmmm....yummy jackboots!  I love licking delicious black polish off shiny authoritarian footwear.

Compliance with arbitrary coercion in exchange for personal profit is exactly what Satoshi intended to facilitate when he invented blockchain technology!

Who is personally profiting exactly? Apart from the government... Anyway, your statement is ridiculous and hyperbolic. Of course the devs are going to try and be compliant, are you mad? They are compliant because they don't want to break the law and go to jail.

Counterparty and Bitcoin are both open-source and have exactly the same philosophy. So if you want to ignore government regulation at your own peril, then go ahead. You can run your own counterpartyd or counterwallet and nobody can restrict anything whatsoever, since the blockchain is immune to manipulation by any central authority. But don't expect everyone else to follow suit, especially not those with a public identity.

That said I'm encouraged with the growth during the past few months. A positive sign at least from a speculation point of view.

Even though Warren Buffet hates Bitcoin, his work has helped me realize why Counterparty will succeed. You can see that it has a strong competitive advantage:

• No fundraiser (avoids legal difficulties, ensures a fair distribution of coins, and gives the developers incentive)
• Slightly deflationary
• First mover advantage
• Uses the Bitcoin blockchain, which has formidable network and security.

[nakaone]

regarding regulatory framework:

besides xcp and bitcoin, what is issued on the counterparty protocol are IOUs - counterparty manages to minimize the clearinghouse risk, but you still need to trust the issuer of the IOU - this cries out for a mechanism to minimize the risk.

regulating the issuer is a useful step. when the direction of counterparty was not that clear back in march, someone proposed a decentralized rating agency to manage the risk explained above. I think if the regulation gets somewhat useful this project will be valueable in a way we cannot even imagine at this point of time.

[deliciousowl]

Even though Warren Buffet hates Bitcoin, his work has helped me realize why Counterparty will succeed. You can see that it has a strong competitive advantage:

• No fundraiser (avoids legal difficulties, ensures a fair distribution of coins, and gives the developers incentive)
• Slightly deflationary
• First mover advantage
• Uses the Bitcoin blockchain, which has formidable network and security.

Damn it! I hate you are right!

And because it uses the Bitcoin blockchain and is fully open-source, it is essentially anti-fragile. Compared to traditional finance, it has close to no operating costs whatsoever. In terms of being a technology, it fits the criteria of both Buffet's investing style, and Nassim Taleb's concept of anti-fragility. Bitcoin and XCP are a valuable and finite substrate for black swan events to occur. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory

You can see a validation of this in the all-time charts of Counterparty. After the burn event, there is a huge spike in value which slowly falls and becomes a very long period of calm. Then Overstock caused another sudden and unpredictable increment. It's not going to stop attracting such patterns, since the protocol continues to function regardless of pretty much any circumstance.

At least that's my reasoning for investing.