|
davidpbrown
|
 |
March 13, 2014, 10:19:36 AM |
|
Ok...
Mastercoin, Colored Coins, Counterparty.
What's the overall protocol strengths and weakness comparisons at this point in time ? Let's hear it! The good the bad and the ugly.
Well some of them have forums that they use for multithreaded discussions; Counterparty seems to prefer putting everything in one place. |
฿://12vxXHdmurFP3tpPk7bt6YrM3XPiftA82s
|
|
|
|
lonsharim
|
|
March 13, 2014, 12:12:29 PM |
|
Ok...
Mastercoin, Colored Coins, Counterparty.
What's the overall protocol strengths and weakness comparisons at this point in time ? Let's hear it! The good the bad and the ugly.
Well some of them have forums that they use for multithreaded discussions; Counterparty seems to prefer putting everything in one place. Err..not really. Counterparty has its own forum here https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php. |
|
|
|
|
|
valarmg
|
|
March 13, 2014, 01:05:09 PM |
|
If you are not here as a trader than 0.005 or 0.02 does not matter at this point. if we truely believe that this can become a platform for financial products and betting using XCP as a base currency than we should be thinking hundreds of millions and than billions in market cap value. 0.1btc is 172M cap. 0.5 is 860M (recently aurora). Aim there and then you realize that you should hold on and contribute here.
In one of the posts in NXT I believe, one fellow shared that he bought 1200 BTCs for $1 at the time. He sold them all for $10. Felt he made a great deal at the time.
The thing is, though, that as bitcoin grows, then the market cap of counterparty can grow without the XCP/BTC rate improving. So, say you think the market cap of XPC should be closer to 200M in dollar terms, and will get there in 2 years time, that could happen simply by the BTC/dollar rate improving. (Imagine a world where bitcoin has taken over fiat currencies and is worth hundreds of trillions, XCP would also have to be worth trillions to have an XCP/BTC rate of 0.1) I haven't fully got up to speed, but is it possible for counterparty to be hugely successful, but still have a small XCP rate? Are XCPs truly needed, or can many asset classes be traded on the bitcoin network via the counterparty protocol but without requiring XCPs? As I understand it, 5 XCPs are required to create the asset, but are they needed after that? (Those 5XCPs are paid to the developers, right, for the improvement of the protocol? What happens when the system becomes stable and developers aren't really needed, where do those XCPs go then?) If the value of XCP goes up to say 0.1btc, and btc goes to 10K dollars, then creating a counterparty asset would cost 5Kdollars, which might be a problem for the continued adoption of counterpart. However, as I understand it, that 5 XCP fee can be reduced. Is it that fee which creates the demand for XCP, and if so, will it be manipulated to keep the asset creation cost down? Would that manipulation also change demand for XCP, and thus affect the BTC/XPC rate substantially. Sorry if these are dumb questions, just trying to understand the XPC economy. |
|
|
|
|
|
davidpbrown
|
|
March 13, 2014, 01:24:16 PM |
|
Well some of them have forums that they use for multithreaded discussions; Counterparty seems to prefer putting everything in one place.
Err..not really. Counterparty has its own forum here https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php. It has a forum but here we are.. I'd rather everyone did use that forum. |
฿://12vxXHdmurFP3tpPk7bt6YrM3XPiftA82s
|
|
|
vishi_tup
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
March 13, 2014, 01:33:15 PM |
|
If you are not here as a trader than 0.005 or 0.02 does not matter at this point. if we truely believe that this can become a platform for financial products and betting using XCP as a base currency than we should be thinking hundreds of millions and than billions in market cap value. 0.1btc is 172M cap. 0.5 is 860M (recently aurora). Aim there and then you realize that you should hold on and contribute here.
In one of the posts in NXT I believe, one fellow shared that he bought 1200 BTCs for $1 at the time. He sold them all for $10. Felt he made a great deal at the time.
The thing is, though, that as bitcoin grows, then the market cap of counterparty can grow without the XCP/BTC rate improving. So, say you think the market cap of XPC should be closer to 200M in dollar terms, and will get there in 2 years time, that could happen simply by the BTC/dollar rate improving. (Imagine a world where bitcoin has taken over fiat currencies and is worth hundreds of trillions, XCP would also have to be worth trillions to have an XCP/BTC rate of 0.1) I haven't fully got up to speed, but is it possible for counterparty to be hugely successful, but still have a small XCP rate? Are XCPs truly needed, or can many asset classes be traded on the bitcoin network via the counterparty protocol but without requiring XCPs? As I understand it, 5 XCPs are required to create the asset, but are they needed after that? (Those 5XCPs are paid to the developers, right, for the improvement of the protocol? What happens when the system becomes stable and developers aren't really needed, where do those XCPs go then?) If the value of XCP goes up to say 0.1btc, and btc goes to 10K dollars, then creating a counterparty asset would cost 5Kdollars, which might be a problem for the continued adoption of counterpart. However, as I understand it, that 5 XCP fee can be reduced. Is it that fee which creates the demand for XCP, and if so, will it be manipulated to keep the asset creation cost down? Would that manipulation also change demand for XCP, and thus affect the BTC/XPC rate substantially. Sorry if these are dumb questions, just trying to understand the XPC economy. The 5 XCPs while creating an asset get destroyed or 'burnt'. They don't go to Developers. |
|
|
|
|
romerun
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1001
Bitcoin is new, makes sense to hodl.
|
|
March 13, 2014, 01:45:26 PM |
|
Ok...
Mastercoin, Colored Coins, Counterparty.
What's the overall protocol strengths and weakness comparisons at this point in time ? Let's hear it! The good the bad and the ugly.
My current impression is, greed-wised, msc, xcp, bts, ether are rent seekers, cc is not. msc, xcp can do things more sophisticate, whether they are needed or not, than cc. Ether can do more things than msc, xcp, but it will be running on a new chain, which I doubt if it could gain traction, it's like javascript running on IPX protocol, where msc,xcp are html run on TCP/IP, history says the crowd give no poo to alt TCP, even ipv6 is still tiny minority. Bts is same situation as ether, but their devs so far are the weakest of all. The main differences of msc and xcp are xcp is available, msc is not, and msc runs by organization while xcp runs by comunnity, msc likes to wait things to be perfect before release, xcp releases them as soon they are good enough, and let users test them out. btw, I forgot to mention peershare which aims for practicality than rich features promise, but they will be running side by side with peercoin chain, there're also nxt, enumie but not sure if they are focus to do bitcoin 2.0(I don't even like this word btw) protocols other than to compete with bitcoin |
|
|
|
|
PhantomPhreak (OP)
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 476
Merit: 300
Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder
|
|
March 13, 2014, 02:49:35 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
vishi_tup
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
March 13, 2014, 03:01:57 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
520Bit
|
|
March 13, 2014, 03:05:47 PM |
|
Can you double check the link? Page not found. |
|
|
|
|
|
lonsharim
|
|
March 13, 2014, 03:36:59 PM |
|
I haven't fully got up to speed, but is it possible for counterparty to be hugely successful, but still have a small XCP rate? Are XCPs truly needed, or can many asset classes be traded on the bitcoin network via the counterparty protocol but without requiring XCPs?
The protocol sits on top of the bitcoin blockchain, As I understand XCP transaction details are embedded inside the bitcoin transaction, piggyback style. What this means is that you need XCP to purchase any user defined asset at least at the protocol level. As this system matures I am guessing more sophisticated clients will come out that might do what you say. It is however not possible with the protocol itself. If the value of XCP goes up to say 0.1btc, and btc goes to 10K dollars, then creating a counterparty asset would cost 5Kdollars, which might be a problem for the continued adoption of counterpart. However, as I understand it, that 5 XCP fee can be reduced. Is it that fee which creates the demand for XCP, and if so, will it be manipulated to keep the asset creation cost down? Would that manipulation also change demand for XCP, and thus affect the BTC/XPC rate substantially.
If the value of XCP goes up, you can expect the cost of issuance to go down proportionally. 5 XCP is set only as a deterrence so that only people serious about issuing assets will do so. |
|
|
|
|
xnova
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 390
Merit: 254
Counterparty Developer
|
|
March 13, 2014, 04:30:24 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
nakaone
|
|
March 13, 2014, 04:43:47 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bellebite2014
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
March 13, 2014, 04:54:25 PM |
|
Can you double check the link? Page not found. They all look bad ... Current one is still the best option. |
|
|
|
|
Bellebite2014
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
March 13, 2014, 04:58:31 PM |
|
Excellent job! It looks really promising, can't wait  |
|
|
|
|
|
edok
|
|
March 13, 2014, 05:08:37 PM |
|
This looks awesome, great work. |
|
|
|
|
IamNotSure
|
|
March 13, 2014, 05:11:38 PM |
|
About the logo (/x/post from the counterparty forum / logo post)
I think it was initially designed by Jimshu and I have redone it in illustrator if someone want to take a look too (PM me for the file)
If there is an interest, I can do some rework on the current one on Saturday, with the same philosophy, makes some variations, and post the results.
BTW: counterwallet lastest images are looking awesome !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
valarmg
|
|
March 13, 2014, 05:16:35 PM |
|
The 5 XCPs while creating an asset get destroyed or 'burnt'. They don't go to Developers.
Ok, thanks, that makes sense. Thought I read somewhere that the XCPs went towards project development bounties. So bitcoin get burnt to create XCPs, then XCPs get burnt to create asset classes. Makes sense. If the value of XCP goes up, you can expect the cost of issuance to go down proportionally. 5 XCP is set only as a deterrence so that only people serious about issuing assets will do so.
Thanks. If asset creation is the main usage of XCP then seems that this cost would be very important to the XCP value which would be a strange basis for the XCP economy. But I'm reading more, and it seems that XCP will be used for other things like betting as well. |
|
|
|
|
BitcoinTangibleTrust
Member
Offline
Activity: 111
Merit: 10
Digitizing Valuable Hard Assets with Crypto
|
|
March 13, 2014, 05:19:34 PM |
|
Can you explain in which way the Private keys correspond to the ownership of the physical gold stored? Is the gold only redeemable by private key and in no way by your request without being provided that key on behalf of an owner to make the redemption?
Great question and I will add this question and answer to the FAQ, as well. We have one custodian partner with whom this is currently working and for which we are still testing, but our approach is as follows: Step 1: Customer who purchase gold through our platform will supply us a bitcoin address to send their Counterparty Goldcoin. We will assume that they are the owner of the address and they have the private key for that public address. Step 2: We track the public address of each Goldcoin we issue on Counterparty and update our custody database which we share with our custody partner. Step 3: We have provided our custody partner a digital signing application that requires the owner of the public address to digitally sign our redemption verification message with their private key. Only successful signature will allow for the release of the gold and they still need to provide contact information at redemption, as well. Given that we don't have the private key, we cannot sign for the gold ourselves. What do you think? Does this sound reasonable? |
|
|
|
|
porqupine
|
|
March 13, 2014, 06:04:38 PM |
|
Can you explain in which way the Private keys correspond to the ownership of the physical gold stored? Is the gold only redeemable by private key and in no way by your request without being provided that key on behalf of an owner to make the redemption?
Great question and I will add this question and answer to the FAQ, as well. We have one custodian partner with whom this is currently working and for which we are still testing, but our approach is as follows: Step 1: Customer who purchase gold through our platform will supply us a bitcoin address to send their Counterparty Goldcoin. We will assume that they are the owner of the address and they have the private key for that public address. Step 2: We track the public address of each Goldcoin we issue on Counterparty and update our custody database which we share with our custody partner. Step 3: We have provided our custody partner a digital signing application that requires the owner of the public address to digitally sign our redemption verification message with their private key. Only successful signature will allow for the release of the gold and they still need to provide contact information at redemption, as well. Given that we don't have the private key, we cannot sign for the gold ourselves. What do you think? Does this sound reasonable? It sounds promising. How is this going to work if someone sells their Goldcoin on the DEX to another person? It will now be associated with a new Pub/Priv key. Will the application in question use an active Node to verify the Blockchain? |
|
|
|
|
|
deliciousowl
|
|
March 13, 2014, 06:28:14 PM |
|
Asset fees should not be burned because then we are diminishing the total supply. Since there is no mining, or additionally BTC burning going on, why don't we change the protocol to distribute asset fees among all holders of XCP?
|
|
|
|
|
