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

[Anotheranonlol]

I have invested in Counterparty (quite a bit!). Here is the issue I have with Counterparty's investor relations policy:

If I don't know what your long term vision is, what your position is on various challenges blockchain technology faces (securing a public ledger in an effective and efficient way at scale (POW is not made to do that), counterparty free pegged assets) and what your perspective is on various technologies (proof of stake, proof of work, delegates proof of stake, market pegged assets)) then I don't know whether XCP is a good long term investment. I want to be a loyal long term investor but need some visionary basis regarding the technological challenges (besides the things you do very well: forming alliances, professional daily PR management).

This is not a request to get 10 visionary articles next week regarding your perspective where blockchain and decentralized exchange technology will go in the next 5 years but it is a polite request for the above in general!

with regard to market pegged assets- it's possible to create them. However If you are talking of "counterparty-risk free" pegged assets a la market-issued bitassets (collateralized BTS derivatives) we don't have such an equivalent here.

If an issuer was to create a USD representation on counterparty the idea would be every dollar-token distributed would be backed by an equivalent physical dollar (unlike BTS model) and distributed on an ad-hoc basis. The responsibilities of accurate/ethical issuance and redemption lie with the issuer. Of course then there is still risks in holding those assets-- like the issuer defaulting but that's not an avenue that the developers attempt to cover. they just build the protocol as a counterparty agent enabling risk free trading between parties whilst present inside the ecosystem. There are  methodologies which could be adopted to reduce the risk of relying on a single issuer however. 

Building on a seperate PoS/DPoS chain means CounterParty will no longer have native compatibility with bitcoin nor be able to market itself as benefiting from the existing miner work-force protecting the bitcoin network. While I agree POW is not the most efficient ( I think hyperledger (Practical Byzantine Fault tolerance) style consensus or skycoin's Obelisk beat it in that regard ) approach to securing the ledger, even with mining pools dominating the bulk of the pie PoW still proven effective at thwarting double-spends, tx reversals, blacklisting etc and has been comparatively well battle-tested as far as consensus mechanisms in this space go. POS and DPoS, just like PoW are not without pitfalls. I believe the devs are adopting an eyes-open approach and passively observing the evolving landscape.

my personal value proposition of counterparty factors the current design in.  bitcoin already has established network effects and counterparty is a drop in abstraction layer building on that foundation, (http://joel.mn/post/103546215249/the-blockchain-application-stack)  it turns bitcoin from what it is mostly now- a BTC transfer network to a general purpose value transfer network.  It can act as a distributed data-store where anyone can create an ineradicable record for a small fee, it offers an order-matching/settlement engine that allows users to trade without exposing their privkeys to a third party, smart contracting capabilities ( a big contributor to ethereum's $15MM fundraising venture),  p2p betting,  token controlled access (games/apps/member management/drm), fundraising & even altcoins with supplies denominated in counterparty assets and their own distribution schemes

[deliciousowl]

The smart contracts system in Counterparty will be 100% compatible with the Ethereum one. This means you can run vitalik's shellingcoin...  Also why would anyone have to be compensated? (Although smart contracts also make this possible.)

After all, nobody compensated the devs of XCP! Welcome to the world of open source... many people simply enjoy solving problems, and if they bought a lot of xcp they can benefit from improving the protocol. In fact, the core xcp team is exactly the same as any other investor. Theres no difference in incentive at all.

Also hundreds of thousands of people are currently in consensus that BTC is fine. From security experts to multinational enterprises. If something is proven to be better, then im sure the BTC devs will consider that. This isnt something the xcp devs have any control over, theyre focused on coding and improving xcp. The underlying system (Bitcoin) is up to miners, network consensus and the core dev team.

[qqqq]

Hello guys, why in the counterwallet i have to log out and log in again to see some changes in there ? It's about deposits, sends, history changes and etc.   

[xnova]

I have invested in Counterparty (quite a bit!). Here is the issue I have with Counterparty's investor relations policy:

If I don't know what your long term vision is, what your position is on various challenges blockchain technology faces (securing a public ledger in an effective and efficient way at scale (POW is not made to do that), counterparty free pegged assets) and what your perspective is on various technologies (proof of stake, proof of work, delegates proof of stake, market pegged assets)) then I don't know whether XCP is a good long term investment. I want to be a loyal long term investor but need some visionary basis regarding the technological challenges (besides the things you do very well: forming alliances, professional daily PR management).

This is not a request to get 10 visionary articles next week regarding your perspective where blockchain and decentralized exchange technology will go in the next 5 years but it is a polite request for the above in general!

I think this will all be answered shortly with some announcements we have planned and are drafting up now (which, admittedly, were delayed a bit due to logistics). Instead of proclamations and simple bloviation on the future of the technology, in Counterparty fashion, we're operationally positioning things so that the base technology achieves (hopefully) indefinite sustainability, while  capturing the opportunity for real use in specific, massive financial subsets (which, if any of the burners reading this recall, was the original vision behind counterparty in the first place, as an innovative platform for decentralized finance). We have been quiet as of late, but there are multiple audiences and factors in what we are doing, so the time has been spent getting our ducks in a row. Thanks for your patience.

-the Counterparty team

[delulo]

I have invested in Counterparty (quite a bit!). Here is the issue I have with Counterparty's investor relations policy:

If I don't know what your long term vision is, what your position is on various challenges blockchain technology faces (securing a public ledger in an effective and efficient way at scale (POW is not made to do that), counterparty free pegged assets) and what your perspective is on various technologies (proof of stake, proof of work, delegates proof of stake, market pegged assets)) then I don't know whether XCP is a good long term investment. I want to be a loyal long term investor but need some visionary basis regarding the technological challenges (besides the things you do very well: forming alliances, professional daily PR management).

This is not a request to get 10 visionary articles next week regarding your perspective where blockchain and decentralized exchange technology will go in the next 5 years but it is a polite request for the above in general!

with regard to market pegged assets- it's possible to create them. However If you are talking of "counterparty-risk free" pegged assets a la market-issued bitassets (collateralized BTS derivatives) we don't have such an equivalent here.

If an issuer was to create a USD representation on counterparty the idea would be every dollar-token distributed would be backed by an equivalent physical dollar (unlike BTS model) and distributed on an ad-hoc basis. The responsibilities of accurate/ethical issuance and redemption lie with the issuer. Of course then there is still risks in holding those assets-- like the issuer defaulting but that's not an avenue that the developers attempt to cover. they just build the protocol as a counterparty agent enabling risk free trading between parties whilst present inside the ecosystem. There are  methodologies which could be adopted to reduce the risk of relying on a single issuer however.

Building on a seperate PoS/DPoS chain means CounterParty will no longer have native compatibility with bitcoin nor be able to market itself as benefiting from the existing miner work-force protecting the bitcoin network. While I agree POW is not the most efficient ( I think hyperledger (Practical Byzantine Fault tolerance) style consensus or skycoin's Obelisk beat it in that regard ) approach to securing the ledger, even with mining pools dominating the bulk of the pie PoW still proven effective at thwarting double-spends, tx reversals, blacklisting etc and has been comparatively well battle-tested as far as consensus mechanisms in this space go. POS and DPoS, just like PoW are not without pitfalls. I believe the devs are adopting an eyes-open approach and passively observing the evolving landscape.

my personal value proposition of counterparty factors the current design in.  bitcoin already has established network effects and counterparty is a drop in abstraction layer building on that foundation, (http://joel.mn/post/103546215249/the-blockchain-application-stack)  it turns bitcoin from what it is mostly now- a BTC transfer network to a general purpose value transfer network.  It can act as a distributed data-store where anyone can create an ineradicable record for a small fee, it offers an order-matching/settlement engine that allows users to trade without exposing their privkeys to a third party, smart contracting capabilities ( a big contributor to ethereum's $15MM fundraising venture),  p2p betting,  token controlled access (games/apps/member management/drm), fundraising & even altcoins with supplies denominated in counterparty assets and their own distribution schemes

I don't disagree with anything you said and I was happy to read your post.

Maybe you can help me to understand the following:

There are  methodologies which could be adopted to reduce the risk of relying on a single issuer however.

it offers an order-matching/settlement engine that allows users to trade without exposing their privkeys to a third party

Here I guess you mean: Trading gateway IOUs, XCP or BTC without revealing the private keys of these assets?

p2p betting

Would this work by having an oracle that is provided by a user (the bet issuer for example) that decides the bet?

Token controlled drm is a potent idea I haven't considered!

altcoins with supplies denominated in counterparty assets

Do you mean here a user issued asset that represents stake in a future consensus system? If not, could you expand?  

[SkryptoDude]

I have invested in Counterparty (quite a bit!). Here is the issue I have with Counterparty's investor relations policy:

If I don't know what your long term vision is, what your position is on various challenges blockchain technology faces (securing a public ledger in an effective and efficient way at scale (POW is not made to do that), counterparty free pegged assets) and what your perspective is on various technologies (proof of stake, proof of work, delegates proof of stake, market pegged assets)) then I don't know whether XCP is a good long term investment. I want to be a loyal long term investor but need some visionary basis regarding the technological challenges (besides the things you do very well: forming alliances, professional daily PR management).

This is not a request to get 10 visionary articles next week regarding your perspective where blockchain and decentralized exchange technology will go in the next 5 years but it is a polite request for the above in general!

I think this will all be answered shortly with some announcements we have planned and are drafting up now (which, admittedly, were delayed a bit due to logistics). Instead of proclamations and simple bloviation on the future of the technology, in Counterparty fashion, we're operationally positioning things so that the base technology achieves (hopefully) indefinite sustainability, while  capturing the opportunity for real use in specific, massive financial subsets (which, if any of the burners reading this recall, was the original vision behind counterparty in the first place, as an innovative platform for decentralized finance). We have been quiet as of late, but there are multiple audiences and factors in what we are doing, so the time has been spent getting our ducks in a row. Thanks for your patience.

-the Counterparty team

Wolf

[Anotheranonlol]

Maybe you can help me to understand the following:

There are  methodologies which could be adopted to reduce the risk of relying on a single issuer however.

Take the model of a BTC (or any bitcoin based coin for that matter)-> Counterparty token vending machine. User sends 1 BTC to the vending address & they receive back 1 VIRTUALBTC, which enables them to trade more smoothly on the DEX. A week later they could send that VIRTUALBTC back to swap for BTC.

That's great because we know the process is automated and that the code to convert is open-source. All transaction flow is auditable on the blockchain, reserves are fully visible. The operator is likely to act in good faith since they can take a small cut of each trade. But even given that you don't 100% know what's happening behind the scenes on the server at any given time when you send BTC to that address.

You could instead run the vending machine on Codius. You can prove to the user that the code running on the codius host is the same code published for the world to see. You can adopt secure-multiparty computing ideas with the use of multi-sig or threshold sigs across multiple hosts. The private key would not have to be stored on a single server to reduce the risk of compromise.  You could also choose to plug into 'enterprise digital oracles" which are companies basically offering signing-as-a-service model and even factor independent third-party arbiters into the mix that step in upon a breach of the contract. The goal is proving validity - ensuring the code is faithfully executed as written. increasing trust distribution - reducing the risk of a single point of failure.

Then there's a whole lot of more esoteric stuff which would specifically help secure a host that the contract runs on, or the contract itself regardless of whether it's running on untrusted locations. Although many of these are not yet production viable, progress is being made and it's likely at some point in the future they will be.

Trusted computing & secure enclaves
https://www.nccgroup.com/en/blog/2015/01/intel-software-guard-extensions-sgx-a-researchers-primer/
http://research.microsoft.com/apps/pubs/default.aspx?id=223450

Homomorphic computing
http://tommd.github.io/

Zero knowledge proofs
http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2014/11/zero-knowledge-proofs-illustrated-primer.html

That works fine for digital assets like BTC/LTC/DOGE etc that are problematic to handle with the counterparty protocol. When we start introducing digital representations of real world things onto the network (like gold for instance) you're always going to be exposed to some level of risk. Bitassets never promises that 1 BItUSD is backed by a physical dollar insitu, nor that bitgold is backed by physical gold, the expectation for counterparty assets usually would be.

Imagine a user has a few hundred dollars in BTC. They have a feeling BTC is on it's way down for a bit and gold is on it's way up. They don't own any precious metals but also like the idea of owning some. They don't yet want to commit to physically storing it just yet. They also want the ability to move easily from btc to precious metals on the blockchain.

So they go ahead and buy 1/10 oz. Gold American Eagle from digitaltangibletrust. Current price is 0.5131 BTC. They send those 0.5131 BTC to DTT's wallet who immediately purchases the equivalent from their dealer. They then send it off to the vaults, issue publicly an Inventory Report showing that your Gold eagle is safely stored in the depository and issue you a token. Which is essentially a cryptographic representation of a bailment receipt on the blockchain.  The most obvious weakness here is that DTT would forge the inventory report but that's solved simply by independent confirmation with the depository. They themselves have auditors and intensive security measures so although we still have a human element which is always a weak link purchasers can have a high level of assurance that each token is really backed by physical holdings that they can take delivery of when the please-- that's perhaps more than they'd get from ETF's.

The vending machine & semi-trusted issuer approach makes a lot of sense for counterparty. For fiat we now have things like https://tlsnotary.org/ & https://bitsquare.io/ for cryptographically proving funds are sent., banking API's like finxera, plaid.io, Currencycloud, COREFX, fidorOS, Standard Treasury etc. aloThat side of fintech is on fire right now. There's got to be at least a dozen internet-only banking startups who have goals to open up their API completely.  Either someone builds an app along with a vending machine that would allow a user to send fiat straight from a bank to counterparty and vice versa or leverage an existing service which have already started tapping into those.
With that approach you end up with a programmable plug and play model for onramps and offramps and a lot more liquidity on the DEX (ergo the XCP token). .  

 I can't imagine it stagnating away at current levels forever when it's clear there's developments on the horizon and when it has an actual role beyond attempting to act as a currency.  As the saying goes liquidity begets liquidity - from that we can get a more accurate price discovery and I think that's one of the main reasons CounterParty has been down in the dumps despite having strong promise.

it offers an order-matching/settlement engine that allows users to trade without exposing their privkeys to a third party

Here I guess you mean: Trading gateway IOUs, XCP or BTC without revealing the private keys of these assets?

yes.

p2p betting

Would this work by having an oracle that is provided by a user (the bet issuer for example) that decides the bet?

Yes, usually There is rock-paper-scissor built right into counterwallet, and two examples here for sportsbetting: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=645313 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=767510.0

Here is an example however where a user can become their own oracle to make a bet on anything User bets

The bet issuer decides the outcome. Whilst it is possible for a bet owner to (mis)intentionally list an outcome incorrectly. The bet outcome is published via a counterparty broadcast feed, for the world to see. example here: http://blockscan.com/feedinfo?q=2344910 . They would quickly lose business by doing that. It's in their best interest to remain fair and impartial

There are two services below which collect could be used to spread the risk across multiple oracles or enable a secondary arbitration level. I think it may be possible to do it via multisig alone right now and no other service

https://www.realitykeys.com/
http://orisi.vanillaforums.com/discussion/4/mturk-and-distributed-oracles-two-tiered-arbitration

Token controlled drm is a potent idea I haven't considered!

cool   usually as soon as you say DRM people get turned off but there are interesting applications. you could register rights in a p2p setting with Counterparty. and IPFS - http://ipfs.io/ could solve the asset distribution and storage problem.

altcoins with supplies denominated in counterparty assets

Do you mean here a user issued asset that represents stake in a future consensus system? If not, could you expand?  

Yeah.  Instead of having them as reservations for a future stake you might even do away with a seperate chain and consensus system entirely. Instead issue counterparty tokens and come up with your own distribution mechanism. You might give them away on social media like stellar, or in the form of an Asset Based Puzzle- touched upon here in the appendix (https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/tcv)

[delulo]

Take the model of a BTC (or any bitcoin based coin for that matter)-> Counterparty token vending machine. User sends 1 BTC to the vending address & they receive back 1 VIRTUALBTC, which enables them to trade more smoothly on the DEX. A week later they could send that VIRTUALBTC back to swap for BTC.

That's great because we know the process is automated and that the code to convert is open-source. All transaction flow is auditable on the blockchain, reserves are fully visible. The operator is likely to act in good faith since they can take a small cut of each trade. But even given that you don't 100% know what's happening behind the scenes on the server at any given time when you send BTC to that address.

This is still the same trust model as with exchanges today. Only difference is that the conversion process from BTC to BitcoinIOU is open source. There are still private keys with someone that operates the server that runs the open source software.
...which is where (if I get your argument right) you introduce multi sig issuers:

The private key would not have to be stored on a single server to reduce the risk of compromise.

That actually is an advancement and maybe a solution. The problem I see (not saying that it will be ultimately limiting) is see such multi sig issuers actually arise. Exchanges today could be multi sig like such issuers.

Bitassets never promises that 1 BItUSD is backed by a physical dollar insitu, nor that bitgold is backed by physical gold, the expectation for counterparty assets usually would be.

Agreed. It is a trade of with physical assets "on a blockchain": Either you have the counterparty risk of a single issuer or you have the volatility risk since as you said Bitgold is not backed by gold but by 200-300% the value of BitGold in BTS (although BitAssets can take volatility up to a point not yet seen in Bitcoin or Bitshares; volatility here means change in price per time).  

I did not completely understand how those fintec startups you mentioned would change the counterparty risk / trust equation. I would understand that they can help make things much more easy/automated.

I don't like the idea of digital rights but haven't thought of that idea.

http://research.microsoft.com/apps/pubs/default.aspx?id=223450

If I get this right, this would still need an admin and just shield the software from the remote server environment.

Thanks for the exchange of ideas!

[baddw]

Pretty awesome, the Bitcoin Foundation is using SWARM (which in turn uses Counterparty) to hold an on-blockchain vote!

http://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/voting-on-the-blockchain-version-1-0/

If this doesn't cement Counterparty in place as an allowable use of the blockchain, then nothing will.

[mtbitcoin]

Pretty awesome, the Bitcoin Foundation is using SWARM (which in turn uses Counterparty) to hold an on-blockchain vote!

http://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/voting-on-the-blockchain-version-1-0/

If this doesn't cement Counterparty in place as an allowable use of the blockchain, then nothing will.

And now trackable in realtime via the CounterpartyBitcoin Blockchain ...  

https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A6911386445473330000 (Michael Perklin)
https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A13040890161784082000 (Oliver Janssens)
https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A2891598960410954000 (Jim Harper)
https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A8911401948086144000 (Bruce Fenton)

This further proves that Counterparty has real world use cases. And because everything is done via the Blockchain these transactions can be transparently tracked and monitored

[deliciousowl]

And now trackable in realtime via the Counterparty Blockchain ... 

https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A6911386445473330000 (Michael Perklin)
https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A13040890161784082000 (Oliver Janssens)
https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A2891598960410954000 (Jim Harper)
https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A8911401948086144000 (Bruce Fenton)

This further proves that Counterparty has real world use cases. And because everything is done via the Blockchain these transactions can be transparently tracked and monitored

Bitcoin Blockchain* 

[mtbitcoin]

And now trackable in realtime via the Counterparty Bitcoin Blockchain ...  

https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A6911386445473330000 (Michael Perklin)
https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A13040890161784082000 (Oliver Janssens)
https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A2891598960410954000 (Jim Harper)
https://www.blockscan.com/vote/A8911401948086144000 (Bruce Fenton)

This further proves that Counterparty has real world use cases. And because everything is done via the Blockchain these transactions can be transparently tracked and monitored

Bitcoin Blockchain*  

corrected ... Lol

[CIYAM]

Why do all the vote links say "rescinded"?

[baddw]

  I guess it didn't work for some reason, as they are going to another platform (off-blockchain) for the voting......

[GeminiSimba]

Instead of proclamations and simple bloviation on the future of the technology, in Counterparty fashion, we're operationally positioning things so that the base technology achieves (hopefully) indefinite sustainability...

This is exactly why I love you guys, this is why I pace myself with my collection of xcp and merely check in with your twitter page and this forum once a week or even once a month because I know that rather than talk about what you will do you guys always just DO things first and let the world talk about it. I can't wait to see what you all do next

[GeminiSimba]

Hello Counterparty Community, I recently had an epiphany (PICISI) about a crowdfunding cooperative involving 10 CC communities that could actually rival Kickstarter and Indiegogo ... well that truly idea died quickly when I realized that everyone loved the idea but only a hand full was willing to do the work.   Anyway, since PICISI impossible to do with only a few people, I'm hoping to do a massively scaled down version of PICISI so that we could get our feet wet in the crowdfunding space while building the brand, upgrading the site, and maturing relationships so that in 6 mos, when we reintroduce PICISI, it will be the site it was initially designed to be.  

At this point I want to raise funds to create the site, when I viewed this video: http://youtu.be/fr0sHxUQ-FQ?t=4m30s (from 4:30 to 5:52) it described how someone could raise funds using your resources.  I have some questions: how can we set the opening price?  how can we set a minimum value for the token?  can we have a private market where we only sell to those we select?  

The tokens will have actual value since they could be used to buy sponsorship opportunities at the site.

Are we able to reserve a token now for launch 6 months in the future?  Can we add more tokens (dilution) at a later date?  

Thanks for your help in this regard

Wow you asked the perfect question for an article which by coincidence just came out about 6 days ago with all the answers you need

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/crypto-for-change-how-to-create-your-first-token-and-distribute-it

[mtbitcoin]

Why do all the vote links say "rescinded"?

https://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/runoff-election-reboot/

[ninjaboon]

Hello Counterparty Community, I recently had an epiphany (PICISI) about a crowdfunding cooperative involving 10 CC communities that could actually rival Kickstarter and Indiegogo ... well that truly idea died quickly when I realized that everyone loved the idea but only a hand full was willing to do the work.   Anyway, since PICISI impossible to do with only a few people, I'm hoping to do a massively scaled down version of PICISI so that we could get our feet wet in the crowdfunding space while building the brand, upgrading the site, and maturing relationships so that in 6 mos, when we reintroduce PICISI, it will be the site it was initially designed to be.  

At this point I want to raise funds to create the site, when I viewed this video: http://youtu.be/fr0sHxUQ-FQ?t=4m30s (from 4:30 to 5:52) it described how someone could raise funds using your resources.  I have some questions: how can we set the opening price?  how can we set a minimum value for the token?  can we have a private market where we only sell to those we select?  

The tokens will have actual value since they could be used to buy sponsorship opportunities at the site.

Are we able to reserve a token now for launch 6 months in the future?  Can we add more tokens (dilution) at a later date?  

Thanks for your help in this regard

Wow you asked the perfect question for an article which by coincidence just came out about 6 days ago with all the answers you need

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/crypto-for-change-how-to-create-your-first-token-and-distribute-it

The share distributor looks like a cool tool. Will test it out later.

Step 5. Distributing your tokens.

Now you have these sweet new tokens, you need a way to distribute them. One way is to send out tokens individually using Counterwallet, of course. If you're doing a mass distribution, you can can access the share distributor courtesy of the developers at Let's Talk Bitcoin!This tool lets you upload a CSV sheet with Counterparty addresses and the amount of your token you wish to distribute to each address and then does the job for you.

Unfortunately, the share distributor does not work on Testnet, so you will have to send out your testnet coins to other people on Testnet in the traditional way.

To access the share distributor, visit the dashboard section of your LTB account and click the “Share Distributor” option on in the lefthand menu under LTBcoin.

[pankogulo]

New Update is live with the details about the upcoming election for Counterparty Foundation community seats http://counterparty.io/news/counterparty-update-feb-27/

[baddw]

Why do all the vote links say "rescinded"?

https://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/runoff-election-reboot/

Further info....

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/19401/developing-story-bitcoin-foundation-elections-shambles-candidates-call-restart/

In short, there wasn't any technical problem, but the way it was handled was clunky and required a lot of steps (not surprisingly since everybody voting would have had to register a BTC address from which they were voting), and apparently the guy who decided to go with the plan didn't consult with everybody first and some folks got a little pissy about some of the implementation details such as whose name was listed first in the voting.... ah, politics.  Furthermore, some people had valid concerns about the public's ability to see the results in real-time, which could discourage others from voting or otherwise affect the outcome.