Topic: [ANN] [XCH] ★ ClearingHouse - Freedom by Blockchain ★ - page 17. (Read 119133 times)

Curious if anyone can comment on perceived weaknesses of counterparty and clearinghouse etc which are raised in this other thread posting. The poster brings up issues of weakened security for contracts when running a protocol on top of bitcoin, and that the proprietary blockchain solutions are superior.


I guess I don't understand how clearinghouse makes use of SPV, if it is required for clearinghouse to work or just makes the clients run faster. Does anybody know some source material to help gain a better technical understanding of clearinghouse? Any good posts providing a good counter-argument to Vitalik's opinion on the matter of SPV?

TIA

Edit: found some discussion on counterparty forums. Guess I had it backwards, Vitalik's argument is that clearinghouse et. al. do not inherit SPV so have to scan back to the beginning of the blockchain to verify transactions as valid, making the process slow and unscalable. 
https://forums.counterparty.io/discussion/214/vitalik-s-debate

If a viacoin transaction remains unconfirmed, then it hasnt happened. For future, please get support by PM/IRC. Need screenshots. In any case, it will just be a display issue, because unless it is confirmed on the blockchain, nothing has happened.

Drak,

I got a problem. I issued 100 tokens http://xch.blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=Vwzp25TDA387BxaJBeFyyG6yBo2VCy4ai3 with no problems. But I don't know why with Firefox, Clearwallet accidentally issued additional 100 tokens. I didn't refresh the browser, all I did was click on the exchange tab and then went back to balance tab. Anyway, the block explorer reported it as a double-spent attempt. http://explorer.viacoin.org/tx/4bd7ca8862e96820582697ab72d62f7627656081de6268b390ec03eaefd73196

Now, I intentionally issued 100 more tokens. This time after some hours, the transaction is still unconfirmed http://explorer.viacoin.org/tx/29724707af22db794f73c5d39a8f5920032868382f634e2507b720d230f11223 .

I was wondering if there's something not functioning with issuing additional tokens or asset management. I'm worried that I could not transfer asset ownership as I promised someone to transfer it to them.

I checked Counterparty assets. It seems that with Storj coin, it works. http://blockscan.com/assetInfo.aspx?q=SJCX#issuance

yup i got my 200's dumped on

it is b/c it is only a few months old

after about 6-9 months we shall known whether the money that was given to the project is allocated well and yielding fruit.

however it is noteworthy to point out that certainly there always seems to be a first mover premium in the space, and that XCP never went lower then the $ value of the coins burned (from what i recall)

Yes WE do, but it seems no one else gets it. I swear XCH is stupidly undervalued it's painful for me to watch my 8 btc investment shrink to 3.5. (risk is part of crypto i know but still wtf XCH is awesome

Do you have any idea how long it will take counterparty to get it stable and put it on the main net so you can merge it?

wow, we will have the same thing but on a lightspeed blockchain without political bariers, with custody chains and treechains in the future! Do you guys realize this!!!

Yep someone sold a big coin stash...

XCH volume is almost 1,500,000 today on Bter. Much higher than usual

https://bter.com/trade/xch_btc

We do keep up today with upstream changes from counterparty, so when this is stable we'll merge it. Gotta take my hats off to them, that was a pretty epic move

Counterparty recreated ethereum smart contracts, are plans in the works for clearing house to do so as well?

Look...free market is one thing but XCH needs some love, marketing, sex, SOMETHING!

what is the point of tied here

Yep, that's right.

Welcome Adam!

Thank you for dropping by and clarifying this. The point I'm trying to make is that XCP is a token in it's own right (as well as acting as a fuel currency for antispam), and specifically that there is no intrinsic link (since the burn completed) between BTC and XCP price. If people trade BTC and XCP the price will be affected of course, but that is a function of trade and not an intrinsic link - it would happen between any trade pairs.

A big source of confusion for readers has been that XCP is a token in it's own right (as is any asset/token created), but BTC is required since counterparty transactions are written in normal bitcoin transactions which must be confirmed in the blockchain. As such, BTC is required to pay the miners fee and meet the minimum relay requirements as required by bitcoin nodes.

When any counterparty asset/token when traded with BTC the protocol cannot make the exchange automatically and requires manual settlement after orders have been matched (using the BTCPay protocol). This is because counterparty tokens are not understood by the bitcoin protocol so there is no way for enforce settlement, unlike a pure counterparty token trade which can be matched and settled automatically within the counterparty protocol.

I should also clarify that while bitcoin miner fees are antispam measures, they also serve in the long term as incentive for miners once block subsidies reduce to 0. But without requiring a fee, it would be possible to spam transactions back and forth at no cost as a denial of service attack.

This is incorrect. XCP is used for much more in Counterparty than just anti-SPAM fees; in particular it's the only token usable for advanced features such as binary options and derivatives. It also represents stake in the protocol and speeds up DEx trades.

There is in fact no link between BTC and XCP except that the initial process of initializing XCP may have set the initial price expectations. To all intents and purposes XCP and BTC are independent tokens. BTC just happens to be the fuel and XCP is an antispam fuel token to prevent asset creation spam. BTC fees primarily defend the bitcoin network from spam transactions since it costs, attacks are not free. Same for XCP, it's there as a technical requirement to solve asset and dividend spamming by introducing a cost.

depends on the definition of "tied"

Question: Is XCP and BTC tied together?