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

[ik_do]

BTW, if anyone has some XCP here to sell I am willing to buy XCP for 50 BTC at the price of 0.0052 BTC/XCP. Escrow is welcome.

I would btw immediately join a foundation for 50$  I would even consider taking more, so that not every average joe can enter but the large investors and early adopters. Not sure if this is a good idea though.

But that goes against the idea of producing tools for the entire world; everyone's opinion should be important, not just those with deep pockets.

Yeah, but with an entry fee of just 50$ a sybill attack might be possible.
Someone with deep pockets could just join the foundation with 100 identities (at a price of just 5000$) and manipulate the political decision processes easily. Or do I oversee something?

Exactly, a $50 fee isn't even a real deterrent for someone who has deep pockets. So why would you attach such an arbitrary amount to membership?

There may be some better way out there to verify that humans are humans, but I haven't heard of it.

[1715555016]

1715555016

[1715555016]

1715555016

[1715555016]

1715555016

[1715555016]

1715555016

[1715555016]

1715555016

[1715555016]

1715555016

[delulo]

It seems to me that Counterparty has a lot going for it but will it always be considered "slow" compared to other 2.0 tech since it's based on Bitcoin which takes a long time to confirm transactions?

The developers chose Bitcoin because they think it's the most secure blockchain (this is debatable). I agree with you that Bitcoin's slowness is a major drawback for Counterparty and that it is hindering its adoption. However, it's possible for Counterparty to move to another blockchain. If enough people complain about it then they might do it.

The reason I still haven't sold anything is that they could port it to any other blockchain anytime and Counterparty has the least legal baggage which is an asset. The Counterparty team has all it needs to come out as a big player in the industry. I just wish that they would think a little bit more visionary since Bitcoin / Proof of work and running a meta protocol on a (Bitcoin) network that is secured/powered by inflation is economically flawed.

Bitcoin has the most secure and time-tested blockchain. To new businesses, Bitcoin is the only crypto worth using. It is the reason Medici is using Counterparty. One can argue the virtue of other cryptos, but they are all theoretical unless they see actual adoption and move beyond their initial development phase. XCP would not be close to where it is today without Bitcoin. It's a good thing that XCP doesn't use it's own blockchain as I've seen dozens of cryptos fizzle away, and when they do, their mining network follows.

I agree that for now Bitcoin is the best option for marketing counterparty. Also agree about the "time tested" factor which is another reason to be on the Bitcoin blockchain. So no doubt that for now Bitcoin is the best option.

I doubt that the Bitcoin blockchain it is the safest option given (delegated) proof of stake (DPOS) alternatives like BitShares. DPOS is more decentralized and cheaper than POW (Bitcoin's funding of security through dilution /issuance of new coins is a real cost; simple calculation: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg6852307#msg6852307). Whether it is more "safe" depends on your definition of "safe" and security is hard to measure anyway (different attack vectors). To me it is obvious that Bitcoin in it's current form (POW) can not serve the purpose of a global ledger at scale. I guess that the Counterparty team is thinking about alternatives but it would be nice to see that they do.

An Overstock representative here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkiyRV99eEI (dont find the exact spot atm) also said that a crypto asset that has the value of a fiat currency is needed to facilitate buying of company shares. Who would want to buy a completely volatile asset in order to buy company stock with it? That volatility is a risk for a non trader. BitShares has solved this too with BitAssets / market pegged assets (http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2014/12/18/What-are-BitShares-Market-Pegged-Assets/).

I am not saying Bitshares is the solution. What I want to say is that I as an investor would be more confident if I saw a publicly visible long term vision to those problems (Bitcoin's POW and volatility risk) by the Counterparty team. I do believe though the Counterparty team is capable of meeting the market's needs.

You peg a Counterparty asset to the fiat of your choice so that you have a digital token with a constant value. The process is...

1. Some company makes a Counterparty asset that is always redeemable for $1 per unit. They sell those tokens on their super reputable bank site for $1.00 per unit (or more to build in profit model).
2. Users who want to buy stuff, like a stock on Medici, would buy those crypto dollars with regular fiat, skip all the volatility of Bitcoin, and have digital dollars in the cloud, so to speak.
3. Users could trade away the digital dollars to other people, sell them back to the institution they were created by, or simply buy things with them. They would always be redeemable for $1.00 unless whoever issued it went broke.

This just puts fiat on the blockchain, kind of.

Yes, exactly.  A "BitAsset" such as "BitUSD" could just as easily be created in Counterparty as in BitShares (and I am a BitShares owner/supporter).  These can easily be sold and pegged by reputable third parties acting as banks in order to transfer fiat to CounterpartyUSD without having to use Bitcoin or XCP tokens as intermediaries.

I guess the main difference is that BitUSD in BitShares can be created out of thin air, so to speak, by anybody willing to put up $1 worth of BitShares as collateral.  A CounterpartyUSD would require an asset issuer.

@ Matt you described very well how fiat could be brought into Counterparty respectively on the Bitcoin blockchain. The mechanism you described is simple and will work as long as the issuer is honest and/or does not loose funds. There is the imminent danger of fractional reserve banking hanging over such a system.

BitAssets like BitUSD in Bitshares have no such centralized counterparty and so there is no default risk like with the model Matt described. This http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2014/12/18/What-are-BitShares-Market-Pegged-Assets/ does a much better job at describing how it works than I ever could.

@baddw Bitassets are fundamentally different from the issuer backed crypto-fiat tokens described by Matt! It would take a tone of coding work to bring something like BitAssets to Counterparty.
And to create 1 BitUSD 3x (not 1x) the value in BTS has to be put up as collateral. The blockchain / code ensures that there is not fractional reserve banking.

I don't want to advertise Bitshares though (just responding to incorrectnesses). What I want is to see the Counterparty team recognizing such fundamental long term challenges (volatility and counterparty risk issue; proof of work) and present solutions!

[deliciousowl]

What I want is to see the Counterparty team recognizing such fundamental long term challenges (volatility and counterparty risk issue; proof of work) and present solution!

Smart contracts make it possible to implement pegged assets and other interesting solutions.

[delulo]

What I want is to see the Counterparty team recognizing such fundamental long term challenges (volatility and counterparty risk issue; proof of work) and present solution!

Smart contracts make it possible to implement pegged assets and other interesting solutions.

It was mentioned by some Bitshares dev that such an implementation would suffer from... I forgot what the argument was. I therefore asked here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=14120.0

[coinomat]

What I want is to see the Counterparty team recognizing such fundamental long term challenges (volatility and counterparty risk issue; proof of work) and present solution!

Smart contracts make it possible to implement pegged assets and other interesting solutions.

How smart contracts have working in testnet? Are there any problem or that will working just like devs have plan?

[Jpja]

Ethereum Slot Machine DApp : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ORk_lGwaSE

Cool stuff! Illustrates the potential of smart contracts.

[nakaone]

I think it is undebatable that the bitcoin blockchain is at this point of time the most secure as well as the most tested platform - all other aspects, well there is only one, and that is confirmation time, are debated in lenghts, when the project was in an earlier stage. vitalik buterin put it quite simple: blockchains are not usable for high frequency trading - for that you need centralized exchanges. for all the rest it does not matter if confirmation time is 20 sec, 1min, 10 min or an hour.

the discussion about bitshares and especially dpos is interesting and I'm not really against this mechanism, but you have to understand, from a very simple and logical point, that these systems are not as (close to) trustless as a POW is. we will see what comes in the future

[delulo]

I think it is undebatable that the bitcoin blockchain is at this point of time the most secure as well as the most tested platform - all other aspects, well there is only one, and that is confirmation time, are debated in lenghts, when the project was in an earlier stage. vitalik buterin put it quite simple: blockchains are not usable for high frequency trading - for that you need centralized exchanges. for all the rest it does not matter if confirmation time is 20 sec, 1min, 10 min or an hour.

the discussion about bitshares and especially dpos is interesting and I'm not really against this mechanism, but you have to understand, from a very simple and logical point, that these systems are not as (close to) trustless as a POW is. we will see what comes in the future

how do you define "trustless"? 

[Radoncointeam]

Can someone please help with this error on logging in after asset creation:

Code:

failoverAPI: Call failed (failed over across all servers). Method: get_normalized_balances; Last error: JSON-RPC Error:

Type: Invalid params

Code: -32602

Message: UNSPECIFIED

Thanks everyone.

[SkryptoDude]

http://www.coindesk.com/lead-developers-leave-overstocks-medici-project/

Dermody and Wagner confirmed the shift, indicating that they have since launched a new business to be announced soon. Both continue to work on their bitcoin-based asset transfer protocol Counterparty.

Does anybody know anything about the "new business"? Does it have anything to do with Counterparty? Or, is it something Darmody and Wagner are doing outside of Counterparty? I haven't seen this discussed and was hoping somebody could shed some light on this.

Thanks!

[jnada]

it may sounds like a word from out of blue - but just would like say that XCP developers and a way how this coin has been distributed is enough credible for me.
Wish the dev team all the best.

[ninjaboon]

http://www.coindesk.com/lead-developers-leave-overstocks-medici-project/

Dermody and Wagner confirmed the shift, indicating that they have since launched a new business to be announced soon. Both continue to work on their bitcoin-based asset transfer protocol Counterparty.

Does anybody know anything about the "new business"? Does it have anything to do with Counterparty? Or, is it something Darmody and Wagner are doing outside of Counterparty? I haven't seen this discussed and was hoping somebody could shed some light on this.

Thanks!

That type of information is usually under a NDA cover and no one will spill the beans.

[pankogulo]

request: make the cost for joining the foundation a little cheaper; $50 USD is pretty excessive in my opinion.

I understand the price is an incentive for keeping the process fair and trying to weed out those who would attempt to have 300 accounts, but setting the bar at $50 is a bit ridiculous considering it is a huge amount in many third world countries. And if counterparty's true aim is "to power the decentralization of finance and support the creation of superior, frictionless, decentralized financial tools" then allowing a far larger pool of members

Even as someone who lives in a first world country, I am hesitant to spend $50 on an annual membership. Perhaps making a lottery for those who cannot afford the $50 would be a good way to foster larger community involvement in the foundation.

Another issue is that the bitcoinfoundation itself only charges $25 USD for an annual membership.

The price for the annual membership is currently set to $30 (during the duration of the campaign you can use the coupon code CTGIVEAWAY, if you complete the giveaway at http://cointelegraph.com/giveaway you will also get $10 worth of XCP and $20 worth of store coupon, so you pay $30 and get $30 XCP and Counterparty items in return (plus all the other benefits the annual membership offers)). After the campaign ends we will consider lowering the fee if the majority of the community shares these concerns.

[ik_do]

request: make the cost for joining the foundation a little cheaper; $50 USD is pretty excessive in my opinion.

I understand the price is an incentive for keeping the process fair and trying to weed out those who would attempt to have 300 accounts, but setting the bar at $50 is a bit ridiculous considering it is a huge amount in many third world countries. And if counterparty's true aim is "to power the decentralization of finance and support the creation of superior, frictionless, decentralized financial tools" then allowing a far larger pool of members

Even as someone who lives in a first world country, I am hesitant to spend $50 on an annual membership. Perhaps making a lottery for those who cannot afford the $50 would be a good way to foster larger community involvement in the foundation.

Another issue is that the bitcoinfoundation itself only charges $25 USD for an annual membership.

The price for the annual membership is currently set to $30 (during the duration of the campaign you can use the coupon code CTGIVEAWAY, if you complete the giveaway at http://cointelegraph.com/giveaway you will also get $10 worth of XCP and $20 worth of store coupon, so you pay $30 and get $30 XCP and Counterparty items in return (plus all the other benefits the annual membership offers)). After the campaign ends we will consider lowering the fee if the majority of the community shares these concerns.

Another question I had regarding membership is what measures are taken to prevent interference of votes via autonomous means; I wrote briefly about this on another website ( https://www.backed.io/posts/post/37 )?

[pankogulo]

Another question I had regarding membership is what measures are taken to prevent interference of votes via autonomous means; I wrote briefly about this on another website ( https://www.backed.io/posts/post/37 )?

Here's the voting procedure for the Community Director that will take place on April 2nd.

• Every community member may self nominate, or be nominated by another member. Each candidate must hold at least 50 XCP, which they will prove by signing a specific message (chosen by the Executive Director) with their private key.
  
• At the start of the two week voting period the Executive Director will generate a Bitcoin address for each candidate, issue a specific vote token of 10 million units, divisible, and locked and issue a dividend to XCP holders with this vote token as the dividend asset. (Meaning that all XCP addresses will receive some quantity vote token in proportion to their XCP balance.)
• During this two week voting period owners of addresses with a vote token balance may send vote tokens to one or more of the addresses corresponding to the candidate(s) they wish to vote for.
• Immediately after the two week voting period the Executive Director will tally and report on the results of the voting. The candidate address with the highest vote token balance will be announced as the winner of the election, and will receive the Community Director position for the term of 1 year from the date of the end of the voting period.

[profitofthegods]

Another question I had regarding membership is what measures are taken to prevent interference of votes via autonomous means; I wrote briefly about this on another website ( https://www.backed.io/posts/post/37 )?

Here's the voting procedure for the Community Director that will take place on April 2nd.

• Every community member may self nominate, or be nominated by another member. Each candidate must hold at least 50 XCP, which they will prove by signing a specific message (chosen by the Executive Director) with their private key.
  
• At the start of the two week voting period the Executive Director will generate a Bitcoin address for each candidate, issue a specific vote token of 10 million units, divisible, and locked and issue a dividend to XCP holders with this vote token as the dividend asset. (Meaning that all XCP addresses will receive some quantity vote token in proportion to their XCP balance.)
• During this two week voting period owners of addresses with a vote token balance may send vote tokens to one or more of the addresses corresponding to the candidate(s) they wish to vote for.
• Immediately after the two week voting period the Executive Director will tally and report on the results of the voting. The candidate address with the highest vote token balance will be announced as the winner of the election, and will receive the Community Director position for the term of 1 year from the date of the end of the voting period.

Oooh exciting.

I wonder if someone will try to buy votes.

[ik_do]

Another question I had regarding membership is what measures are taken to prevent interference of votes via autonomous means; I wrote briefly about this on another website ( https://www.backed.io/posts/post/37 )?

Here's the voting procedure for the Community Director that will take place on April 2nd.

• Every community member may self nominate, or be nominated by another member. Each candidate must hold at least 50 XCP, which they will prove by signing a specific message (chosen by the Executive Director) with their private key.
  
• At the start of the two week voting period the Executive Director will generate a Bitcoin address for each candidate, issue a specific vote token of 10 million units, divisible, and locked and issue a dividend to XCP holders with this vote token as the dividend asset. (Meaning that all XCP addresses will receive some quantity vote token in proportion to their XCP balance.)
• During this two week voting period owners of addresses with a vote token balance may send vote tokens to one or more of the addresses corresponding to the candidate(s) they wish to vote for.
• Immediately after the two week voting period the Executive Director will tally and report on the results of the voting. The candidate address with the highest vote token balance will be announced as the winner of the election, and will receive the Community Director position for the term of 1 year from the date of the end of the voting period.

Oooh exciting.

I wonder if someone will try to buy votes.

That is what my real question is and it is a problem that probably affects both counterparty foundation and the bitcoin foundation.
What is to stop someone with deep pockets and a programmer influencing the entire election?

[profitofthegods]

That is what my real question is and it is a problem that probably affects both counterparty foundation and the bitcoin foundation.
What is to stop someone with deep pockets and a programmer influencing the entire election?

I'm not sure how much damage a rogue community director can do, so its probably not a critical problem - if someone wants to buy votes then I say we let them.

Not sure how voting is going to work for other board members, but I think its a Foundation membership rather than XCP holder thing for that - or perhaps both, which would probably work out best imo.

[pankogulo]

That is what my real question is and it is a problem that probably affects both counterparty foundation and the bitcoin foundation.
What is to stop someone with deep pockets and a programmer influencing the entire election?

I'm not sure how much damage a rogue community director can do, so its probably not a critical problem - if someone wants to buy votes then I say we let them.

Not sure how voting is going to work for other board members, but I think its a Foundation membership rather than XCP holder thing for that - or perhaps both, which would probably work out best imo.

Yes, Industry Directors are chosen by Industry members (businesses that support the foundation by paying for one of the Industry tier), while the Founding Directors (Robby and Adam) remain the same and ensure that the board as a whole keeps working in the best interest of Counterparty and its ecosystem.

[Bralex]

Can someone please tell me why i cannot release my xcp from the the market in wallet?

It will not let me cancel my order even after a week?

This is crazy i have btc in there also just my xcp says in escrow