|
520Bit
|
 |
February 04, 2014, 12:36:00 AM |
|
c:\counterpartyd_build>c:\python32\python.exe setup.py
2014-02-04 08:04:22,448|DEBUG: base path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: dist path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\dist'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: env path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\env'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: bin path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\bin'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,453|INFO: Installing Counterparty from source...
2014-02-04 08:04:23,124|INFO: Checking out/updating counterpartyd:master from gi
t...
2014-02-04 08:04:23,125|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: cd "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\
counterpartyd" && git pull origin master
From https://github.com/PhantomPhreak/counterpartyd
* branch master -> FETCH_HEAD
Already up-to-date.
2014-02-04 08:04:26,660|INFO: WINDOWS: Installing Required Packages...
2014-02-04 08:04:26,660|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: c:\python32\Scripts\easy_install
.exe virtualenv==1.10.1 pip==1.4.1
Searching for virtualenv==1.10.1
Best match: virtualenv 1.10.1
Processing virtualenv-1.10.1-py3.2.egg
virtualenv 1.10.1 is already the active version in easy-install.pth
Installing virtualenv-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv-3.2-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv-3.2.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Using c:\python32\lib\site-packages\virtualenv-1.10.1-py3.2.egg
Processing dependencies for virtualenv==1.10.1
Finished processing dependencies for virtualenv==1.10.1
Searching for pip==1.4.1
Best match: pip 1.4.1
Processing pip-1.4.1-py3.2.egg
pip 1.4.1 is already the active version in easy-install.pth
Installing pip-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip-3.2-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip-3.2.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Using c:\python32\lib\site-packages\pip-1.4.1-py3.2.egg
Processing dependencies for pip==1.4.1
Finished processing dependencies for pip==1.4.1
2014-02-04 08:04:29,095|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: c:\python32\Scripts\pip.exe inst
all appdirs==1.2.0
Requirement already satisfied (use --upgrade to upgrade): appdirs==1.2.0 in c:\p
ython32\lib\site-packages
Cleaning up...
2014-02-04 08:04:30,650|WARNING: Deleting existing virtualenv...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "setup.py", line 488, in <module>
main()
File "setup.py", line 479, in main
create_virtualenv(paths, with_counterwalletd)
File "setup.py", line 277, in create_virtualenv
create_venv(paths['env_path'], paths['pip_path'], paths['python_path'], path
s['virtualenv_args'], 'reqs.txt')
File "setup.py", line 264, in create_venv
_rmtree(env_path)
File "setup.py", line 67, in _rmtree
_rmtree(fullpath)
File "setup.py", line 65, in _rmtree
rmgeneric(fullpath, f)
File "setup.py", line 49, in rmgeneric
import win32api, win32con
ImportError: No module named win32api
c:\counterpartyd_build> What does the error mean - 'ImportError: No module named win32api'? How to fix it? |
|
|
|
|
xnova
Sr. Member
 Offline
Activity: 390
Merit: 254
Counterparty Developer
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:40:33 AM |
|
c:\counterpartyd_build>c:\python32\python.exe setup.py
2014-02-04 08:04:22,448|DEBUG: base path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: dist path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\dist'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: env path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\env'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: bin path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\bin'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,453|INFO: Installing Counterparty from source...
2014-02-04 08:04:23,124|INFO: Checking out/updating counterpartyd:master from gi
t...
2014-02-04 08:04:23,125|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: cd "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\
counterpartyd" && git pull origin master
From https://github.com/PhantomPhreak/counterpartyd
* branch master -> FETCH_HEAD
Already up-to-date.
2014-02-04 08:04:26,660|INFO: WINDOWS: Installing Required Packages...
2014-02-04 08:04:26,660|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: c:\python32\Scripts\easy_install
.exe virtualenv==1.10.1 pip==1.4.1
Searching for virtualenv==1.10.1
Best match: virtualenv 1.10.1
Processing virtualenv-1.10.1-py3.2.egg
virtualenv 1.10.1 is already the active version in easy-install.pth
Installing virtualenv-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv-3.2-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv-3.2.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Using c:\python32\lib\site-packages\virtualenv-1.10.1-py3.2.egg
Processing dependencies for virtualenv==1.10.1
Finished processing dependencies for virtualenv==1.10.1
Searching for pip==1.4.1
Best match: pip 1.4.1
Processing pip-1.4.1-py3.2.egg
pip 1.4.1 is already the active version in easy-install.pth
Installing pip-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip-3.2-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip-3.2.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Using c:\python32\lib\site-packages\pip-1.4.1-py3.2.egg
Processing dependencies for pip==1.4.1
Finished processing dependencies for pip==1.4.1
2014-02-04 08:04:29,095|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: c:\python32\Scripts\pip.exe inst
all appdirs==1.2.0
Requirement already satisfied (use --upgrade to upgrade): appdirs==1.2.0 in c:\p
ython32\lib\site-packages
Cleaning up...
2014-02-04 08:04:30,650|WARNING: Deleting existing virtualenv...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "setup.py", line 488, in <module>
main()
File "setup.py", line 479, in main
create_virtualenv(paths, with_counterwalletd)
File "setup.py", line 277, in create_virtualenv
create_venv(paths['env_path'], paths['pip_path'], paths['python_path'], path
s['virtualenv_args'], 'reqs.txt')
File "setup.py", line 264, in create_venv
_rmtree(env_path)
File "setup.py", line 67, in _rmtree
_rmtree(fullpath)
File "setup.py", line 65, in _rmtree
rmgeneric(fullpath, f)
File "setup.py", line 49, in rmgeneric
import win32api, win32con
ImportError: No module named win32api
c:\counterpartyd_build> What does the error mean - 'ImportError: No module named win32api'? How to fix it? Please see https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,22.msg79.html#msg79 |
|
|
|
PhantomPhreak (OP)
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 476
Merit: 300
Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:43:28 AM |
|
So what was the result of the Super Bowl bet between me and jimhsu? I can see on blockscan that I've been credited 1 XCP from winning the bet since I only received 1340 XCP from burning and my "total received" shows 1341 XCP: http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1QBPsB2ea61vWTNA9nGUhaHqPQB4SXF4fNHowever, my balance is still 1340. What is causing this discrepancy? What should your balance be? I found a bug in the bet expiration code, and now I'm getting 1399.41 XCP. EDIT: In addition to that problem, the bet isn't being settled, it seems. The reason that the bet wasn't settled is that the broadcast you made announcing the result was timestamped before the bet's deadline, which was a few hours ago. You just need to make another broadcast with the same values now (counterpartyd does the timestamping automatically). EDIT: The expiration bug should have only affected the develop branch. I am confused. I thought when the deadline arrives the value of the last feed broadcast before the deadline counts as the final value? jimhsu originally set that deadline for 5AM EST. Example scenario: block X: feed value = 0 (bet deadline passes in between block X and X+1) block X+1: feed value = 1 What is the value the bet would settle at? 0 or 1? Or are you talking about the deadline for open bet expiration? I believe jimhsu's bet expiration was set for 1000 blocks away. I set my expiration for only 10 blocks because I expected it to match immediately. Rather, it's the first broadcast with a timestamp after the deadline that settles bets. Hmm this seems to violate some real-world conventions for settling CFDs based on "last price". It also creates some problems. Under your system, for a simple sports bet such as my Super Bowl Bet, the feed operator would have to wait until max(all deadlines of bets on the Super Bowl feed) before publishing the result if he doesn't want to continue publishing the same result repeatedly to settle outstanding bets. Another problem is if the feed is shut off or the feed operator loses the feed's private key with bets outstanding. Under your system the money involved in those bets would be in limbo forever. I propose changing the protocol to settle bets based on the last broadcast with a timestamp before the deadline that settles bets. There are problems the other way, too, e.g. the feed operator would have to wait until max(deadlines) before publishing the results of a new bet on the same feed, but the real problem would be that bets would have to be settled based on block times, which I think should be considered generally unreliable, instead of deadlines, which allow for much finer-grained timing (e.g. broadcasting multiple times per block wouldn't get you in trouble). Right now, bet matches are expired two weeks after the deadline if the deciding broadcast has not been made by then. (Block times are reliable on this time scale.) |
|
|
|
|
PhantomPhreak (OP)
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 476
Merit: 300
Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:52:09 AM |
|
I think for orders to show up as matched in blockscan, the buyer first has to execute btcpay. Correct me if I'm wrong. Would be helpful to see matched, but unpaid orders though. I thought the point of having that Order Match table was so you could have the order-match-id handy as well as Time Left to execute a btcpay. So I've been chatting with the owner of those 2 matched orders and he apparently can't see the matched orders on his counterpartyd market either. Perhaps there is still a bug. Well they've expired. But if I ignore that, and the fact that the addresses aren't in my wallet, they show up, at least in the develop branch. |
|
|
|
|
jl777
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1134
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:07:22 AM |
|
I have started a Volunteer Info thread. https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,29.msg84.html#msg84It is up to us to make XCP all that it can be. I wanted there to be a place where everyone can go to and quickly see who is available. This way we can efficiently coordinate efforts to get things done as quickly as possible. I estimate there are over 1000 people here and regardless of your skill set, if you are willing to help, there will be stuff you can do to help XCP. James |
|
|
|
PhantomPhreak (OP)
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 476
Merit: 300
Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:07:31 AM |
|
So what was the result of the Super Bowl bet between me and jimhsu? I can see on blockscan that I've been credited 1 XCP from winning the bet since I only received 1340 XCP from burning and my "total received" shows 1341 XCP: http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1QBPsB2ea61vWTNA9nGUhaHqPQB4SXF4fNHowever, my balance is still 1340. What is causing this discrepancy? What should your balance be? I found a bug in the bet expiration code, and now I'm getting 1399.41 XCP. EDIT: In addition to that problem, the bet isn't being settled, it seems. The reason that the bet wasn't settled is that the broadcast you made announcing the result was timestamped before the bet's deadline, which was a few hours ago. You just need to make another broadcast with the same values now (counterpartyd does the timestamping automatically). EDIT: The expiration bug should have only affected the develop branch. I am confused. I thought when the deadline arrives the value of the last feed broadcast before the deadline counts as the final value? jimhsu originally set that deadline for 5AM EST. Example scenario: block X: feed value = 0 (bet deadline passes in between block X and X+1) block X+1: feed value = 1 What is the value the bet would settle at? 0 or 1? Or are you talking about the deadline for open bet expiration? I believe jimhsu's bet expiration was set for 1000 blocks away. I set my expiration for only 10 blocks because I expected it to match immediately. Rather, it's the first broadcast with a timestamp after the deadline that settles bets. Hmm this seems to violate some real-world conventions for settling CFDs based on "last price". It also creates some problems. Under your system, for a simple sports bet such as my Super Bowl Bet, the feed operator would have to wait until max(all deadlines of bets on the Super Bowl feed) before publishing the result if he doesn't want to continue publishing the same result repeatedly to settle outstanding bets. Another problem is if the feed is shut off or the feed operator loses the feed's private key with bets outstanding. Under your system the money involved in those bets would be in limbo forever. I propose changing the protocol to settle bets based on the last broadcast with a timestamp before the deadline that settles bets. There are problems the other way, too, e.g. the feed operator would have to wait until max(deadlines) before publishing the results of a new bet on the same feed, but the real problem would be that bets would have to be settled based on block times, which I think should be considered generally unreliable, instead of deadlines, which allow for much finer-grained timing (e.g. broadcasting multiple times per block wouldn't get you in trouble). Right now, bet matches are expired two weeks after the deadline if the deciding broadcast has not been made by then. (Block times are reliable on this time scale.) Oh ok good points. So what happens if max(deadlines) is longer than 2 weeks away? It sounds like broadcasting a stream of prices has different requirements from broadcasting a binary one-time bet on an event. Addresses that broadcast an event can be disposable so the feed operator doesn't have to worry about corrupting his feed by publishing a new bet. Perhaps broadcast should include a new flag to differentiate between the 2 types? Or at least an option to specify whether you want to use the "last-before-deadline" broadcast or the "first-after-deadline" broadcast. As it stands, all bets must have a minimum precision of two weeks. Of course, this duration could be trivially extended if the need arose. Somewhat different requirements, yes, but I don't think, at this stage at least, that such a change would bring benefits worth the added complexity. Let's see how people use the system, esp. once there's a GUI. |
|
|
|
|
halfcab123
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
CabTrader v2 | crypto-folio.com
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:09:09 AM |
|
15,890 XCP for sale. 1,589 BTC  |
DayTrade with less exposure to risk, by setting buy and sell spreads with CabTrader v2, buy now @ crypto-folio.com
|
|
|
jl777
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1134
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:20:00 AM |
|
I finally found some info about mastercoin: http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Category:FeaturesIt seems that they have data feeds, betting, dividends and escrow. Of course it is all just in specification form, and not sure what the current mastercoin software has. Does anybody have any experience with the actual mastercoin software? From a marketing point, it seems that almost feature for feature the only difference between XCP and mastercoin is that XCP has it working and almost debugged, while mastercoin is still trying to get a release out. If the technical overlap between XCP and mastercoin is the ~90% that it looks like to me, can somebody help with explaining the technical advantage of XCP over mastercoin? James |
|
|
|
jl777
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1134
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:26:35 AM |
|
I finally found some info about mastercoin: http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Category:FeaturesIt seems that they have data feeds, betting, dividends and escrow. Of course it is all just in specification form, and not sure what the current mastercoin software has. Does anybody have any experience with the actual mastercoin software? From a marketing point, it seems that almost feature for feature the only difference between XCP and mastercoin is that XCP has it working and almost debugged, while mastercoin is still trying to get a release out. If the technical overlap between XCP and mastercoin is the ~90% that it looks like to me, can somebody help with explaining the technical advantage of XCP over mastercoin? James Theres going to be a deluge of high quality software releases coming from the mastercoin front in the next 6 weeks or so. Any idea how it will compare to XCP? I am looking for a clear technical advantage XCP will have over mastercoin. Something they won't be able to duplicate for a long time James |
|
|
|
|
qtgwith
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:31:50 AM |
|
Sell 200 XCP for 4BTC @0.02
|
|
|
|
|
halfcab123
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
CabTrader v2 | crypto-folio.com
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:39:12 AM |
|
I finally found some info about mastercoin: http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Category:FeaturesIt seems that they have data feeds, betting, dividends and escrow. Of course it is all just in specification form, and not sure what the current mastercoin software has. Does anybody have any experience with the actual mastercoin software? From a marketing point, it seems that almost feature for feature the only difference between XCP and mastercoin is that XCP has it working and almost debugged, while mastercoin is still trying to get a release out. If the technical overlap between XCP and mastercoin is the ~90% that it looks like to me, can somebody help with explaining the technical advantage of XCP over mastercoin? James Theres going to be a deluge of high quality software releases coming from the mastercoin front in the next 6 weeks or so. Any idea how it will compare to XCP? I am looking for a clear technical advantage XCP will have over mastercoin. Something they won't be able to duplicate for a long time James BUMP @PhantomPhreak ? |
DayTrade with less exposure to risk, by setting buy and sell spreads with CabTrader v2, buy now @ crypto-folio.com
|
|
|
BitThink
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:41:20 AM |
|
One quick question:
Is there anyway to transfer some shares from A to B? I think this is quite important for existing stocks to import their shares.
|
|
|
|
|
Patel
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1320
Merit: 1007
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:42:28 AM |
|
One quick question:
Is there anyway to transfer some shares from A to B? I think this is quite important for existing stocks to import their shares.
Its the same command as send, but replace asset=XCP with asset=[name] quantity is however much you want to send |
|
|
|
|
BitThink
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:44:55 AM |
|
One quick question:
Is there anyway to transfer some shares from A to B? I think this is quite important for existing stocks to import their shares.
Its the same command as send, but replace asset=XCP with asset=[name] quantity is however much you want to send Thanks. Then it's cool and importing an existing asset is as simple as running a simple script. |
|
|
|
|
PhantomPhreak (OP)
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 476
Merit: 300
Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:51:28 AM |
|
I finally found some info about mastercoin: http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Category:FeaturesIt seems that they have data feeds, betting, dividends and escrow. Of course it is all just in specification form, and not sure what the current mastercoin software has. Does anybody have any experience with the actual mastercoin software? From a marketing point, it seems that almost feature for feature the only difference between XCP and mastercoin is that XCP has it working and almost debugged, while mastercoin is still trying to get a release out. If the technical overlap between XCP and mastercoin is the ~90% that it looks like to me, can somebody help with explaining the technical advantage of XCP over mastercoin? James Theres going to be a deluge of high quality software releases coming from the mastercoin front in the next 6 weeks or so. Any idea how it will compare to XCP? I am looking for a clear technical advantage XCP will have over mastercoin. Something they won't be able to duplicate for a long time James BUMP @PhantomPhreak ? I don't want to start a flame war, but this is a legitimate question. There are lots of medium-sized technical advantages of the Counterparty protocol, but the most important advantage, IMHO, is just that it is much simpler and more straightforward. For one, this means that there will never be any question of what constitutes a valid Counterparty transaction, whereas Mastercoin is still working on this problem, many months in. Then there's the issue of parsing of transactions, and the order in which they're considered, which they have hardly even touched on yet, and which constitute a much greater technical challenge. (Their early efforts implementing a distributed exchange, for instance, are very much overcomplex, too.) They will never be able to duplicate this, for backwards-compatibility, with anything less than a full shutdown of the network and a transfer of balances to a new protocol. |
|
|
|
|
jl777
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1134
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:56:19 AM |
|
For everyone who is actively testing the command line, I ask a favor.
Could you come up with the most common sequences of commands you find useful. If we had a list of (??) most useful sequences, we can make them push button easy in the GUI.
Most specifically the btcpay command seems like something that could (should) be part of a sequence for a trade that you don't want to cancel. It is my understanding that you have to manually do the btcpay to complete a transaction.
I am total newbie to the actual counterparty commandline, so please excuse me if I am asking totally silly questions.
Since mastercoin will have all the same tech features as XCP, we HAVE to come up with a layer on top of XCP (or at least macros) that creates awesomely new functionality. Imagine if there were dozens of push buttons in the GUI that each triggered lower level commands that each do useful things.
mastercoin is using a centralized development, so they will implement what the spec says to implement. Top down.
We are XCP team and decentralized. Anybody can propose new useful ways of using XCP and the best ideas become part of the GUI.
James
|
|
|
|
Patel
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1320
Merit: 1007
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:59:03 AM |
|
For everyone who is actively testing the command line, I ask a favor.
Could you come up with the most common sequences of commands you find useful. If we had a list of (??) most useful sequences, we can make them push button easy in the GUI.
James
Here are some useful commands
cd C:\counterpartyd_build
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py server
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py send --from=1xx --quantity=xx --asset=XCP --to=1xx
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py order --from=1xx --get-quantity=xx --get-asset=XCP --give-quantity=xx --give-asset=BTC --expiration=10 --fee_required=.001
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py btcpay --order-match-id=[enter tx hashes of both orders, combined]
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py cancel --offer-hash=[enter tx hash here]
|
|
|
|
|
jl777
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1134
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:59:52 AM |
|
I finally found some info about mastercoin: http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Category:FeaturesIt seems that they have data feeds, betting, dividends and escrow. Of course it is all just in specification form, and not sure what the current mastercoin software has. Does anybody have any experience with the actual mastercoin software? From a marketing point, it seems that almost feature for feature the only difference between XCP and mastercoin is that XCP has it working and almost debugged, while mastercoin is still trying to get a release out. If the technical overlap between XCP and mastercoin is the ~90% that it looks like to me, can somebody help with explaining the technical advantage of XCP over mastercoin? James Theres going to be a deluge of high quality software releases coming from the mastercoin front in the next 6 weeks or so. Any idea how it will compare to XCP? I am looking for a clear technical advantage XCP will have over mastercoin. Something they won't be able to duplicate for a long time James BUMP @PhantomPhreak ? I don't want to start a flame war, but this is a legitimate question. There are lots of medium-sized technical advantages of the Counterparty protocol, but the most important advantage, IMHO, is just that it is much simpler and more straightforward. For one, this means that there will never be any question of what constitutes a valid Counterparty transaction, whereas Mastercoin is still working on this problem, many months in. Then there's the issue of parsing of transactions, and the order in which they're considered, which they have hardly even touched on yet, and which constitute a much greater technical challenge. (Their early efforts implementing a distributed exchange, for instance, are very much overcomplex, too.) They will never be able to duplicate this, for backwards-compatibility, with anything less than a full shutdown of the network and a transfer of balances to a new protocol. So is it fair to say that with XCP you can rely on the escrow process? We dont need to mention that mastercoin has an escrow process that usually works, the key is that they wont be able to say that "mastercoin escrow is 100% reliable" if it isn't. At least it will blow up in their faces without us doing anything. All the while we are pushing XCP as having 100% reliable escrow of the bitcoins and XCP. James P.S. Does mastercoin actually currently have a real world network where people are trading real stuff? |
|
|
|
jl777
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1134
|
|
February 04, 2014, 02:00:50 AM |
|
For everyone who is actively testing the command line, I ask a favor.
Could you come up with the most common sequences of commands you find useful. If we had a list of (??) most useful sequences, we can make them push button easy in the GUI.
James
Here are some useful commands
cd C:\counterpartyd_build
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py server
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py send --from=1xx --quantity=xx --asset=XCP --to=1xx
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py order --from=1xx --get-quantity=xx --get-asset=XCP --give-quantity=xx --give-asset=BTC --expiration=10 --fee_required=.001
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py btcpay --order-match-id=[enter tx hashes of both orders, combined]
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py cancel --offer-hash=[enter tx hash here]
Yikes! Please explain why they are useful. To me (end user hat on) it looks like very scary technobabble. |
|
|
|
jl777
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1134
|
|
February 04, 2014, 02:03:35 AM |
|
I finally found some info about mastercoin: http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Category:FeaturesIt seems that they have data feeds, betting, dividends and escrow. Of course it is all just in specification form, and not sure what the current mastercoin software has. Does anybody have any experience with the actual mastercoin software? From a marketing point, it seems that almost feature for feature the only difference between XCP and mastercoin is that XCP has it working and almost debugged, while mastercoin is still trying to get a release out. If the technical overlap between XCP and mastercoin is the ~90% that it looks like to me, can somebody help with explaining the technical advantage of XCP over mastercoin? James Theres going to be a deluge of high quality software releases coming from the mastercoin front in the next 6 weeks or so. Any idea how it will compare to XCP? I am looking for a clear technical advantage XCP will have over mastercoin. Something they won't be able to duplicate for a long time James BUMP @PhantomPhreak ? I don't want to start a flame war, but this is a legitimate question. There are lots of medium-sized technical advantages of the Counterparty protocol, but the most important advantage, IMHO, is just that it is much simpler and more straightforward. For one, this means that there will never be any question of what constitutes a valid Counterparty transaction, whereas Mastercoin is still working on this problem, many months in. Then there's the issue of parsing of transactions, and the order in which they're considered, which they have hardly even touched on yet, and which constitute a much greater technical challenge. (Their early efforts implementing a distributed exchange, for instance, are very much overcomplex, too.) They will never be able to duplicate this, for backwards-compatibility, with anything less than a full shutdown of the network and a transfer of balances to a new protocol. Could you explain why anybody would care about the order transactions are parsed. I can guess, but I don't want to guess on the key tech that will be used to differentiate XCP from mastercoin |
|
|
|
|
