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

[xibeijan]

order --from=mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns --get-quantity=10 --get-asset=BTC
--give-quantity=20 --give-asset=XCP --expiration=10 --fee_provided=.001

Does real BTC actually get transferred from mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns's bitcoin wallet to my bitcoin wallet?

Can someone please answer this?  THX

[1714697243]

1714697243

[romerun]

maybe dev are secretly funded by bitcoin foundation to end those silly greedy mastercoin visacoin nxt bitshare etc

[xibeijan]

maybe dev are secretly funded by bitcoin foundation to end those silly greedy mastercoin visacoin nxt bitshare etc

poppycock

[PhantomPhreak]

I am running into issues too .. Could the documentation be incorrect?

The github docs state

•Buy BTC for XCP
order --from=mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns --get-quantity=10 --get-asset=BTC
--give-quantity=20 --give-asset=XCP --expiration=10 --fee_provided=.001


However when attempting to do a buy using the format above the following exception is thrown :

  File "C:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\counterpartyd.py", line 426, in <module>
    raise exceptions.FeeError('When buying BTC, do not specify a fee provided.')
lib.exceptions.FeeError: When buying BTC, do not specify a fee provided.

Yes: the README had fee_provided and fee_required reversed. Good catch.

Normally I prefer to a project where the developers have fair rewards to keep them working hard. In the description of this project, I cannot see any way the developers can be rewarded other than burning some BTC themselves. Therefore, I think there're three options:
1) they have burnt or will burn considerable amount of BTC so they will get quite a lot of XCP to enjoy the future appreciation. In this case, could the developers provide some evidence of burning to show their confidence in this project?

2) they reserved some part of XCP for themselves. This is fine as long as they make it public how much they reserved, but I haven't seen any claim in the original post.

3) they have no rewards at all. In this case, I am not so comfortable because I don't see why the developers will keep working on this project after their interest is gone. This project will become a completely community-driven project and will not survive long.

Could any developer of Counterparty help clarify on this? Thanks. 

Both xnova and I are burning some BTC. No XCP have been reserved for any person or organisation.

'tried to transfert XCP.
Problem before the expected problem:

Code:

user@home:~$ xcp send --from=send --from=myaddresswithXCP --quantity=1 --asset=XCP --to=safeBTCaddress
Confirm? (y/N) y
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/user/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/counterpartyd.py", line 426, in <module>
    json_print(bitcoin.transmit(unsigned_tx_hex))
  File "/home/user/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/lib/bitcoin.py", line 260, in transmit
    return rpc('sendrawtransaction', [signed_tx_hex])
  File "/home/user/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/lib/bitcoin.py", line 64, in rpc
    raise exceptions.BitcoindError('{}'.format(error))
lib.exceptions.BitcoindError: {'code': -22, 'message': 'TX rejected'}

Same error without the --from=send

I expected the command to work,
but then never see the XCP arrive in my safeaddress 'coz even Eligius doesn't process OP_RETURN before v0.9.
So I kind of willingly risked to lose 1XCP, but fail.
(curious: does anyone know an easy way to cancel a transmission that has never been confirmed? be BTC, XCP or whatever)

Did anyone succeed using the send command?
Must have someone who tried before Eligius stopped, or on testnet.
What do I do wrong?

edit: tried to add -paytxfee=0.0001 (error: unrecognized arguments)

Code improvement needed: 'doesn't show BTC balance ? ? ?

Code:

xcp address myXCPaddresswithBTC
Balances
+-------+------------+
| Asset |   Amount   |
+-------+------------+
|  BTC  |    ???     |      
|  XCP  | okvalue    |
+-------+------------+

Without Eligius, no one can send XCP on mainnet yet. You can on testnet, however.

Bitcoind isn't actually capable of showing the BTC balance of an arbitrary address, so, for the time being at least, neither is counterpartyd.

[panonym]

Bitcoind isn't actually capable of showing the BTC balance of an arbitrary address, so, for the time being at least, neither is counterpartyd.

oooh... You're right.

Code:

bitcoind getbalance pubkey

This always show zero
Cannot find a trick with auto-labelling? (lost the command to set label) then using:

Code:

bitcoind listaccounts mybeautifullabel

Should show the balance.
Such basic feature missing -__- After 5 years!

edit: Oh! counterparty wallet show BTC&XCP. No problem. Just address doesn't show BTC.

More important:
Does counterpartyd has a command to show the total number of XCP?
(or list all burning proof and show total XCP, neat way)

Another thing as you're around:
Can you differentiate burning transaction from the soft and from blockchain.info?
Doubt it.

I'm still wondering about this early adopter additional reward. 'seem I'm not the only one thinking about it.
What do you think about it?
You could create an awesome asset, the very first.
Ideally with long term dividend on a betting system, or whatever.

Burning is between block 278310 & 283810. That's 5500 block time.
Could split in 5:
up block 279410 = First 20% time get 50.0% of 1stAsset
up block 280510 = First 40% time get 25.0% of 1stAsset
up block 281610 = First 60% time get 12.5% of 1st Asset
up block 282710 = Last 40% time get nothing
up block 283810 = Last 20% time get nothing
And you keep 9.375% to give as such or resell(XBT) in 2~3 month for bounties for the development of the project.
Feel free to keep a part for yourself 2dev. I'm sure no investor will be against.

Other % possible.
50% - 20% - 10% - nothing - nothing - 20%dev&bounties.
66% - 33% - nothing - nothing - nothing.

I'd like to underline, in plus of the highest risk of burning in the first week;
Our money is blocked for a whole month.
As v0.9 is need for everything. Can't trade it back before, even in case of sudden money need.

[cityglut]

I will hire miners for this project

Pm me

Counterparty is built on top of the Bitcoin blockchain, and as such XCP cannot be mined.

[wizzardTim]

I finally made counterparty running on windows.

I see the number of blocks in the command line. What do i do now?

Kill the command and try the -burn flag? Or open another cmd.exe window while the command is running in the other?

[panonym]

raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
I hate bitcoind
Crappy for 5 years old. REALLY


edit: wizzardTim, you can try -force
I opted to wait the necessary 4~7h for counterpartyd to sync.

[xibeijan]

order --from=mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns --get-quantity=10 --get-asset=BTC
--give-quantity=20 --give-asset=XCP --expiration=10 --fee_provided=.001

Does real BTC actually get transferred from mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns's bitcoin wallet to my bitcoin wallet?

[sixteendigits]

Bitcoind isn't actually capable of showing the BTC balance of an arbitrary address, so, for the time being at least, neither is counterpartyd.

oooh... You're right.

Code:

bitcoind getbalance pubkey

This always show zero
Cannot find a trick with auto-labelling? (lost the command to set label) then using:

Code:

bitcoind listaccounts mybeautifullabel

Should show the balance.
Such basic feature missing -__- After 5 years!

edit: Oh! counterparty wallet show BTC&XCP. No problem. Just address doesn't show BTC.

More important:
Does counterpartyd has a command to show the total number of XCP?
(or list all burning proof and show total XCP, neat way)

Another thing as you're around:
Can you differentiate burning transaction from the soft and from blockchain.info?
Doubt it.

I'm still wondering about this early adopter additional reward. 'seem I'm not the only one thinking about it.
What do you think about it?
You could create an awesome asset, the very first.
Ideally with long term dividend on a betting system, or whatever.

Burning is between block 278310 & 283810. That's 5500 block time.
Could split in 5:
up block 279410 = First 20% time get 50.0% of 1stAsset
up block 280510 = First 40% time get 25.0% of 1stAsset
up block 281610 = First 60% time get 12.5% of 1st Asset
up block 282710 = Last 40% time get nothing
up block 283810 = Last 20% time get nothing
And you keep 9.375% to give as such or resell(XBT) in 2~3 month for bounties for the development of the project.
Feel free to keep a part for yourself 2dev. I'm sure no investor will be against.

Other % possible.
50% - 20% - 10% - nothing - nothing - 20%dev&bounties.
66% - 33% - nothing - nothing - nothing.

I'd like to underline, in plus of the highest risk of burning in the first week;
Our money is blocked for a whole month.
As v0.9 is need for everything. Can't trade it back before, even in case of sudden money need.

Yes, fantastic idea, let's take the only new "2nd gen crypto" that has some respectability to it and make it just a little bit scammy by altering the reward structure after the fact.  I have no problem with a dev keeping coins for himself for their hard work, but he laid down the reward system in the first post, changing it now is not kosher.  What in the fuck is wrong with you people?  We have a dev who seems passionate about creating something new, he isn't trying to take your BTC from your wallet, and has set up reward parameters that don't punish late adopters too harshly.  It is basically the fairest and most honest project I have seen in months.  So let's all try to put a stain on it because you need "muh early adopter bonus".  I remember the days where if someone launched an alt with front loaded block rewards, it was automatically labelled scam and looked at with derision.  Now it's just par for the course.  The dev said in his first post that this was alpha software and it was possible to lose your BTC if something breaks.  Everyone was warned, you can wait if you think it is too risky.

PhantomPhreak, don't listen to these greedy assholes.  They just want their early adopter bonus so they can shit the coins all over the order books as soon as it pumps.  Keep doing what you are doing, you have my respect.

[PhantomPhreak]

order --from=mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns --get-quantity=10 --get-asset=BTC
--give-quantity=20 --give-asset=XCP --expiration=10 --fee_provided=.001

Does real BTC actually get transferred from mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns's bitcoin wallet to my bitcoin wallet?

There was a mistake in the documentation. If you're buying BTC, then you need to require a fee.

Yes.

[wizzardTim]

raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
I hate bitcoind
Crappy for 5 years old. REALLY


edit: wizzardTim, you can try -force
I opted to wait the necessary 4~7h for counterpartyd to sync.

I didnt know it was synching now...what will it say when it syncs? Will it stop outputting block numbers?

So, can you please tell me the command to use in windows and the steps? E.g. Kill the command, then run -force, then -burn.

Thank you in advance for all this help

[xibeijan]

        "account" : "",
        "address" : "1Wh4bh",
        "category" : "send",
        "amount" : 0.00000000,
        "fee" : -0.00010000,
        "confirmations" : 36,
        "blockhash" : "0000000002d1ecf1442be4c47b2e3c4c6fff24f77d7162e29c972921b0fa35be",

seems like an short address.  Is that normal?

[panonym]

What in the fuck is wrong with you people?
[...] these greedy assholes.

What the fuck is wrong with you? Superiority complex?
Are you unable to have a civilized conversation without insulting people thinking differently?

Can't you grasp the concept behind the word additional?
Your pseudoargumentation is incoherent.
Adding potential reward doesn't "punish" anyone. It's a win - neutral situation.
Grow please.

edit: + I'm not begging for it. Fine without.
Simply proposed to open the talk with the dev.
A first quality managed asset could help to give a good image about the various possibilities XCP offer.
Other that the 50 crappy useless scammy asset we will see appearing after 3 month.

[prophetx]

ok maybe i am missing something here but how do we know that someone does not have the privkey for this address?

https://blockchain.info/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr

Also, why not just use an address that goes to the Red Cross or Shawns Outpost or whatever random charity.  Since you are just using this as way to limit coin generation why not at least have the BTC go toward something that benefits people, planet, something.

I know it is too late for that obviously.

Counterparty aims at maximizing trustlessness, i.e. not sending Bitcoins to any address for which someone has the prviate key; even though you have suggested donating to good causes, Bitcoins could only be sent to their addresses at the expense of trustlessness and decentralization.

EDIT: Regarding the unspendability of the Bitcoins in at CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr please see this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg4317890#msg4317890

yes one would have to be incredibly lucky to generate that address, however we all still have to trust that you do not own a quantum computer or that you did not come here from the future where you have the key to this address.

i do not see the causality between using a charity address at the expense of decentralization, as being fundamentally different than your current state.

this is using 1 address to gen coins  so whether that address belongs to God or the Devil, or no one it makes little difference since coin minting is centralized to that address during the genesis blocks.

i would love to see a real logical argument about why an address that is highly unlikely to be generated put out by a nontransparent group of people is better than a btc address that is publicly published by any well known NGO or nonprofit that puts out corporate responsibility reports and is transparent about who they are.  

essentially i think if someone does this again it would much better if the coins at least went to something productive, rather than accruing to the rest of btc holders (thanks btw since obviously even the developers of this coin will not see any of this btc.

otherwise looks like a good project.

[xibeijan]

Feeds
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
|            Feed Address            |         Timestamp         |       Text       |  Value   | Fee Multiplier |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| mt1N2qE4wHkjdDeumCtRg1NKwxXGMCAx5X | 2014-01-06T16:00:03+00:00 | CoinDesk BPI USD | 922.0817 |     0.0001     |
| mgYWm8Ug76czkAMSVNECJ31iEAGH5V9py1 | 2014-01-06T15:57:53+00:00 |      foobar      |   3.0    |       10       |
| n1TzSvnJRH4LUKA9j6qvCpiqc2yvxGKSmg | 2014-01-06T15:06:40+00:00 |      foobar      |  123.0   |      1E-7      |
| mq8srYuaPCrzk4mdKuz3168dxJQAQKv7Wo | 2014-01-05T02:06:34+00:00 |   Hello World    |   0.0    |      0.01      |
| mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns | 2014-01-02T01:41:46+00:00 |      foobar      |   2.0    |     0.001      |
| mz8qzVaH8RaVp2Rq6m8D2dTiSFirhFf4th | 2014-01-02T01:04:17+00:00 |     <Locked>     |   0.0    |      0.01      |
| n3EHaCAycMEv6DhMPbrQsEubFsgtUmoin1 | 2014-01-01T13:16:05+00:00 |       Test       |   0.0    |    0.000001    |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+

So feeds shows us all feeds being "broadcast", rather than just the ones we care about?

The feeds listed first are those that have been most recently broadcast.

Won't this pose a risk to spamming?  For only 0.144 BTC /day you could spam the Feed list every minute and keep your spam visible on top.

[xibeijan]

ok maybe i am missing something here but how do we know that someone does not have the privkey for this address?

https://blockchain.info/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr

Also, why not just use an address that goes to the Red Cross or Shawns Outpost or whatever random charity.  Since you are just using this as way to limit coin generation why not at least have the BTC go toward something that benefits people, planet, something.

I know it is too late for that obviously.

Counterparty aims at maximizing trustlessness, i.e. not sending Bitcoins to any address for which someone has the prviate key; even though you have suggested donating to good causes, Bitcoins could only be sent to their addresses at the expense of trustlessness and decentralization.

EDIT: Regarding the unspendability of the Bitcoins in at CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr please see this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg4317890#msg4317890

yes one would have to be incredibly lucky to generate that address, however we all still have to trust that you do not own a quantum computer or that you did not come here from the future where you have the key to this address.

i do not see the causality between using a charity address at the expense of decentralization, as being fundamentally different than your current state.

this is using 1 address to gen coins  so whether that address belongs to God or the Devil, or no one it makes little difference since coin minting is centralized to that address during the genesis blocks.

i would love to see a real logical argument about why an address that is highly unlikely to be generated put out by a nontransparent group of people is better than a btc address that is publicly published by any well known NGO or nonprofit that puts out corporate responsibility reports and is transparent about who they are.  

essentially i think if someone does this again it would much better if the coins at least went to something productive, rather than accruing to the rest of btc holders (thanks btw since obviously even the developers of this coin will not see any of this btc.

otherwise looks like a good project.

I think the point is that someone working at SaveTheChildren, who has access to the private key of the donation address account (or a hacker who stole it), could infinitely inflate the supply of XCP during the mining period.  In other words, they can take the received BTC and burn it, receive it back again and repeat. The devil could work for SaveTheChildren, you never know....

[cityglut]

ok maybe i am missing something here but how do we know that someone does not have the privkey for this address?

https://blockchain.info/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr

Also, why not just use an address that goes to the Red Cross or Shawns Outpost or whatever random charity.  Since you are just using this as way to limit coin generation why not at least have the BTC go toward something that benefits people, planet, something.

I know it is too late for that obviously.

Counterparty aims at maximizing trustlessness, i.e. not sending Bitcoins to any address for which someone has the prviate key; even though you have suggested donating to good causes, Bitcoins could only be sent to their addresses at the expense of trustlessness and decentralization.

EDIT: Regarding the unspendability of the Bitcoins in at CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr please see this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg4317890#msg4317890

i do not see the causality between using a charity address at the expense of decentralization, as being fundamentally different than your current state.

this is using 1 address to gen coins  so whether that address belongs to God or the Devil, or no one it makes little difference since coin minting is centralized to that address during the genesis blocks.

i would love to see a real logical argument about why an address that is highly unlikely to be generated put out by a nontransparent group of people is better than a btc address that is publicly published by any well known NGO or nonprofit that puts out corporate responsibility reports and is transparent about who they are.  

As I said, our goal is maximize decentralization and minimize trust, and it is simply the case that sending BTC to an address for which someone has the private key is less decentralized and requires more trust than sending BTC to an address for which no one has the private key. If you think this is an unworthy goal, that is one thing, but I am not sure what sort of 'logical argument' you are looking for.

[panonym]

i would love to see a real logical argument about why an address that is highly unlikely to be generated put out by a nontransparent group of people is better than a btc address that is publicly published by any well known NGO or nonprofit that puts out corporate responsibility reports and is transparent about who they are.  

Because human can trust more easily mathematics than other people.
How can you prove that the NGO is really the one having sole control of the private key?
It's rather unlikely that only one person in big NGO would have access to the key.
You have to trust they have no link with the dev.
You have to trust the NGO will not try to mix the coin and send them back to themself for greater gain.
You have to trsut they are competent.
& More than one person would gladly stole a million if they are sure they can help thousands with the money. No much care about crashing the project number 1864.

Yet now that XPO is out based on solid trustlessness:
Nothing prevent you to create a voting system on it's asset for pseudoburning XCP or something else to an NGO instead of a unspendable address.

[cityglut]

Feeds
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
|            Feed Address            |         Timestamp         |       Text       |  Value   | Fee Multiplier |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| mt1N2qE4wHkjdDeumCtRg1NKwxXGMCAx5X | 2014-01-06T16:00:03+00:00 | CoinDesk BPI USD | 922.0817 |     0.0001     |
| mgYWm8Ug76czkAMSVNECJ31iEAGH5V9py1 | 2014-01-06T15:57:53+00:00 |      foobar      |   3.0    |       10       |
| n1TzSvnJRH4LUKA9j6qvCpiqc2yvxGKSmg | 2014-01-06T15:06:40+00:00 |      foobar      |  123.0   |      1E-7      |
| mq8srYuaPCrzk4mdKuz3168dxJQAQKv7Wo | 2014-01-05T02:06:34+00:00 |   Hello World    |   0.0    |      0.01      |
| mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns | 2014-01-02T01:41:46+00:00 |      foobar      |   2.0    |     0.001      |
| mz8qzVaH8RaVp2Rq6m8D2dTiSFirhFf4th | 2014-01-02T01:04:17+00:00 |     <Locked>     |   0.0    |      0.01      |
| n3EHaCAycMEv6DhMPbrQsEubFsgtUmoin1 | 2014-01-01T13:16:05+00:00 |       Test       |   0.0    |    0.000001    |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+

So feeds shows us all feeds being "broadcast", rather than just the ones we care about?

The feeds listed first are those that have been most recently broadcast.

Won't this pose a risk to spamming?  For only 0.144 BTC /day you could spam the Feed list every minute and keep your spam visible on top.

As I wrote here, users will most likely determine which feeds they want to bet on with reference to a source outside of the blockchain. Spamming broacasts, then, will probably just cause this, which will happen naturally and of its own accord, to happen more quickly.