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

[btc4ever]

I just updated from git and am still getting this error on Ubuntu 12.10.

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "./counterpartyd.py", line 22, in <module>
    from lib import (config, api, util, exceptions, bitcoin, blocks)
  File "/home/counterpartycoin/counterpartyd/lib/api.py", line 7, in <module>
    from werkzeug.wrappers import Request, Response
  File "/usr/local/lib/python3.2/dist-packages/werkzeug/__init__.py", line 154, in <module>
    __import__('werkzeug.exceptions')
  File "/usr/local/lib/python3.2/dist-packages/werkzeug/exceptions.py", line 111
    return u'<p>%s</p>' % escape(self.description)

[BitThink]

2FA needs a central server, so I don't know how it can be implemented in a decentralized system.

humm... does it necessary does?
I thought it was just the result of a function on a private key in relation to a referential clock.
Sure the time ref is centralized. But if that only that it can be solved.
Now maybe the verification need a central server. Haven't thought about that.
Unperfect 2FA technology if that's the case.
'thought it worked with multisignature reconnaissance or something similar.
My understanding is vague, I admit.
But with a net of trust amongst master node, 'well doesn't seem completely impossible.
I cannot solve the tech aspect, that much is certain.

Thing is: current security is not enough.
Doesn't seem to be.
Security is not my strong suit.
But if there is a real risk that someone connect to my computer and stole my unencrypted wallet.dat (let's say), then the risk of him having a keylogger, a live watch on my screen, or something taking screenshort regularly:the risk is pretty much the same.
If the guy have the skill for the first, what prevent the second?
He just have to wait until he see either a privkey or your wallet password.

That's why I'm uncomfortable about not being able to move my XCP.
Sole place my coin are safe to me is in privkey outside wallet who never touched an internet connection.
I entered my wallet password in a terminal with a space upfront.
But it happened many time while 'computer is online.
Has to be to use the soft.

I'm not at peace with that.
I have no clue if my computer is secure enough.
Fresh GNU/Linux is better than old XP for sure, but I don't know much more about security.

I think the best method to ensure safety is to use an always-offline computer to sign the transaction, like the Armony offline wallet. I'm currently trying to find a more convenient way on it.

[BitThink]

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

[klee]

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

Totally agree here.

I am already hooked by this project - one man can love many women

[reader31]

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

once a lot of services get built around the project then it would hard to replicate that support structure isn't it? I would think it would be hard for any copy cat to replicate the counterparty support community after counterparty has a good head start.

[xnova]

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

once a lot of services get built around the project then it would hard to replicate that support structure isn't it? I would think it would be hard for any copy cat to replicate the counterparty support community after counterparty has a good head start.

That, and the fact that any project that blatantly forked the Counterparty code without adding a drastic amount of value-add would be seen as a Counterparty clone right off the bat.

[BitThink]

I've put a couterpart explorer online:
http://www.counterparty-explorer.com/


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=404562.msg4380341#msg4380341

Welcome to try it. Please correct me if my validation criteria is different with the official one.

[jimhsu]

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

once a lot of services get built around the project then it would hard to replicate that support structure isn't it? I would think it would be hard for any copy cat to replicate the counterparty support community after counterparty has a good head start.

That, and the fact that any project that blatantly forked the Counterparty code without adding a drastic amount of value-add would be seen as a Counterparty clone right off the bat.

The fact that bitcoins are DESTROYED (instead of going to some developer's wallet) will at least hinder adoption of clones by altcoin writers. Why go through the trouble of that when it's so much easier to make a few hundred grand off of a "2nd generation coin" clone?

[jimhsu]

I've put a couterpart explorer online:
http://www.counterparty-explorer.com/


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=404562.msg4380341#msg4380341

Welcome trying it. Please correct me if my validation criteria is different with the official one.

Your BTC and XCP values seem to be a multiple of 6 higher than expected. After all each address can't have more than 1 BTC / 1500 XCP.

Also I see a lot of unfortunate people that messed up the burn. This is why you do a test burn, people.

Particularly it's the multiple inputs part that seems to be a problem. The tutorial should emphasize that multiple inputs are NOT accepted.

[cityglut]

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

Thanks for the kind words!

The Counterparty team makes no promises regarding returns-on -investment. Our goal. moreover, was not to make investors rich overnight, but rather to create a working and relatively full-featured client, and to that extent returns-on-investment were secondary. At the same time, however, I believe that the situation you describe does not preclude XCP significantly increasing in value. Specifically, unless a Counterparty fork offers some real technical improvement, I think that XCP-2, etc. will be minted only when Counterparty has proved itself a financial success. And even if a Counterparty fork does offer technical advantage, the importance of being the first Counterparty must not be forgotten. In my opinion, certain alt-coins offer definite advantages over Bitcoin (e.g. faster block-time), and yet Bitcoin has still increased in value and the alt-coin market has, in my opinion, at least for now, proven itself to be by-and-large a bubble. Nothing suggests to me that the situation wouldn't be same if alt-Counterpartys were to appear.

[BitThink]

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

once a lot of services get built around the project then it would hard to replicate that support structure isn't it? I would think it would be hard for any copy cat to replicate the counterparty support community after counterparty has a good head start.

Yes, it becomes difficult to be copied if there're many asset issued on XCP, but before that people are free to copy and compete with the asset issuers.

[BitThink]

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

Thanks for the kind words!

The Counterparty team makes no promises regarding returns-on -investment. Our goal. moreover, was not to make investors rich overnight, but rather to create a working and relatively full-featured client, and to that extent returns-on-investment were secondary. At the same time, however, I believe that the situation you describe does not preclude XCP significantly increasing in value. Specifically, unless a Counterparty fork offers some real technical improvement, I think that XCP-2, etc. will be minted only when Counterparty has proved itself a financial success. And even if a Counterparty fork does offer technical advantage, the importance of being the first Counterparty must not be forgotten. In my opinion, certain alt-coins offer definite advantages over Bitcoin (e.g. faster block-time), and yet Bitcoin has still increased in value and the alt-coin market has, in my opinion, at least for now, proven itself to be by-and-large a bubble. Nothing suggests to me that the situation wouldn't be same if alt-Counterpartys were to appear.

There're years between bitcoin and its copicats, so bitcoin has enough time to grow. XCP, however, may have only months to be mature enough to secure the first arriver advantage. Nonetheless, I agree with you that there're still considerable upsite for XCP, because people will copy it and will to burn for the copicat only after XCP is successful and the price is high enough.

I'm just saying that the price will not increase as much as Nxt (>1000x) and all investors had better to keep this in mind IMHO.

[led_lcd]

Also I see a lot of unfortunate people that messed up the burn. This is why you do a test burn, people.

Particularly it's the multiple inputs part that seems to be a problem. The tutorial should emphasize that multiple inputs are NOT accepted.

I've posted a reply to the thread to correct the logic about the outputs. It will be interesting to see how many invalid burns remain after that.

[BitThink]

Your BTC and XCP values seem to be a multiple of 6 higher than expected. After all each address can't have more than 1 BTC / 1500 XCP.

Fixed.

Also I see a lot of unfortunate people that messed up the burn. This is why you do a test burn, people.

Particularly it's the multiple inputs part that seems to be a problem. The tutorial should emphasize that multiple inputs are NOT accepted.

I'm not sure multiple inputs are not accepted yet. It requires the confirmation of the developers. The developers could relax the condition so that those BTCs are not wasted.

I've relaxed the condition to only invalidate those with multiple input addresses. If there're multiple inputs with same address, it is treated as valid now. Now almost all transactions are valid now except there's one address burnt slightly over 1 BTC.

[mtbitcoin]

Anyone who was having "codemap"/unicode display issues, please pull the newest counterpartyd from git and let us know if you're still experiencing issues.

We had several unicode characters in the code that were causing the Windows terminal (which cannot properly display unicode from what my research told me) to choke. This has been fixed:

https://github.com/PhantomPhreak/counterpartyd/commit/e7497296b6c1409b3108bca3818dc1b89a452007


LeoC: Also, you are running an older version of counterparty if you are using the installer. I have just pushed up a new version of the installer based off of the latest commit to https://github.com/xnova/counterpartyd_binaries

Try reinstalling using that installer (or just use the source for now as we are regulary making changes to counterpartyd)

I am still running into the issues after updating to the latest git


--
  File "C:\counterpartyd_build\env\lib\encodings\cp437.py", line 19, in encode
    return codecs.charmap_encode(input,self.errors,encoding_map)[0]
UnicodeEncodeError: 'charmap' codec can't encode character '\u2026' in position 259: character maps to <u
ndefined>

[porqupine]

Looks like the code was updated to allow multiple inputs up 1, and to burn at least 1 on an overburn.

[PhantomPhreak]

Looks like the code was updated to allow multiple inputs up 1, and to burn at least 1 on an overburn.

The rule has always been that all of the inputs sources have to be identical, and their number doesn't matter.

The overburn rule is new, however, yes.

[xibeijan]

Another bug report

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "./counterpartyd.py", line 465, in <module>
    deadline = round(datetime.timestamp(dateutil.parser.parse(args.deadline)))
AttributeError: type object 'datetime.datetime' has no attribute 'timestamp'

Hmm. What version of datetime do you have?

python3-dateutil_2.0+dfsg1-1_all.deb (debian7)

[xibeijan]

New dep on python-werkzeug?

Which version should we use?

[xnova]

New dep on python-werkzeug?

Which version should we use?

The build system was updated yesterday or the night before to deal with these dependencies. If you're using the build system, just rerun setup.py (as if you're redoing that part in Building from Source).

If you just want to see the version of the dependency we're using, check out: https://github.com/xnova/counterpartyd_build/blob/master/dist/reqs.txt

EDIT: I have also updated the docs to mention that rerunning setup.py is possible:
http://counterpartyd-build.readthedocs.org/en/latest/BuildingFromSource.html#updating-to-the-newest-source