Isn't this type of thing aimed at for-profit businesses and not so much for open source software that has no revenue model?
I think we'll look back in a bit and scold ourselves for panicking. Still holding for everything I'm worth.
Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 173. (Read 1276936 times)
October 28, 2014, 10:02:04 AM
October 28, 2014, 09:14:21 AM
The ppl selling need to think before they act. Counterparty is going down and not than things like NXT or Bitshares just because Counterparty happened to get mentioned in this article, but over the long term its the best positioned for regulatory compliance. Look at something like NXT and half the assets are scams and most of the other half are tiny one man operations which could never afford to do things the 'right way', but Counterparty seems to be mostly larger projects and has this Medici thing being built.
Well said. Interestingly enough, if these "authorities" were to go after some of the "Bitcoin 2.0" platforms themselves, Counterparty would surely come out unscathed having not raised any external funding (Proof-of-Burn was a very foresightful and innovative move).
October 28, 2014, 09:14:01 AM
Quote
The ppl selling need to think before they act.
Maybe the people selling got a letter from the SEC
October 28, 2014, 08:41:55 AM
The ppl selling need to think before they act. Counterparty is going down and not than things like NXT or Bitshares just because Counterparty happened to get mentioned in this article, but over the long term its the best positioned for regulatory compliance. Look at something like NXT and half the assets are scams and most of the other half are tiny one man operations which could never afford to do things the 'right way', but Counterparty seems to be mostly larger projects and has this Medici thing being built.
October 28, 2014, 06:32:37 AM
I guess this is the beginning of Peter Byrne vs the SEC. Let's hope they can work it out.
October 28, 2014, 06:23:31 AM
If XCP facilitates sale of illegal securites, it's like a crack house full of crack dealers. Gonna have a bad time...
And if you've been following recent news, Counterparty is creating a foundation and cooperating with Overstock to create a platform with full regulatory compliance.
I think this is quite crucial - whoever thinks he can live his liberterian dream within this business is completely delusional. Especially this 2.0 platfors almost scream for a regulatory framework. what I want to know is how it is handled practically.
October 28, 2014, 06:13:53 AM
If XCP facilitates sale of illegal securites, it's like a crack house full of crack dealers. Gonna have a bad time...
I think that's a bit hyperbolic. A few people might get serious difficulties, but many others use tokens in a way that does not infringe on any regulation or laws.
Also, Counterparty as a fully open-source platform will not be affected, because the Bitcoin network will still be online. All money in the world can be used for good or evil, so I don't think it's fair to blame the tools we use for this phenomenon. Money in the world can go to charities or cartels, but its the people who decide.
And if you've been following recent news, Counterparty is creating a foundation and cooperating with Overstock to create a platform with full regulatory compliance.
October 28, 2014, 05:47:47 AM
any comments by the counterparty team regarding this strange SEC stuff?
Do you mean the FinCEN announcement:
http://www.coindesk.com/fincen-rules-bitcoin-payment-processors-exchanges-money-transmitters/
Or something else?
I think poster was referring to this:
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/sec-sends-inquiry-letters-hundreds-bitcoin-companies-unregistered-securities/
October 28, 2014, 05:40:39 AM
SEC
https://de.scribd.com/doc/244670525/Letter-LA-Office
Companies that issued "assets" on counterparty could be affected but not counterparty itself as a platform.
https://de.scribd.com/doc/244670525/Letter-LA-Office
Companies that issued "assets" on counterparty could be affected but not counterparty itself as a platform.
If XCP facilitates sale of illegal securites, it's like a crack house full of crack dealers. Gonna have a bad time...
October 28, 2014, 04:57:28 AM
SEC
https://de.scribd.com/doc/244670525/Letter-LA-Office
Companies that issued "assets" on counterparty could be affected but not counterparty itself as a platform.
https://de.scribd.com/doc/244670525/Letter-LA-Office
Companies that issued "assets" on counterparty could be affected but not counterparty itself as a platform.
October 28, 2014, 04:53:44 AM
any comments by the counterparty team regarding this strange SEC stuff?
Do you mean the FinCEN announcement:
http://www.coindesk.com/fincen-rules-bitcoin-payment-processors-exchanges-money-transmitters/
Or something else?
exactly - to be fair I see by organisational structure as well as industry connection counterparty as the most serious 2.0 platform at this point of time. So it is more or less a question how this will be handled.
October 28, 2014, 04:48:32 AM
any comments by the counterparty team regarding this strange SEC stuff?
Do you mean the FinCEN announcement:
http://www.coindesk.com/fincen-rules-bitcoin-payment-processors-exchanges-money-transmitters/
Or something else?
October 28, 2014, 04:46:50 AM
any comments by the counterparty team regarding this strange SEC stuff?
Coin price seems to be tanking.
October 28, 2014, 04:34:14 AM
any comments by the counterparty team regarding this strange SEC stuff?
October 27, 2014, 04:43:20 PM
Clearinghouse is not on Bitcoin. You're either on Bitcoin or you're not and Clearinghouse is not. It could be made to work with Bitcoin because Clearinghouse is a clone of Counterparty, but then, Counterparty is already on Bitcoin. If being on Bitcoin were not such a huge advantage the Counterparty developers could move it to another chain in a day or so. They won't because there is absolutely no reason to be on another chain, but it is possible. Any flexibility and security feature that Clearinghouse has, it has because the Counterparty developers wrote the code and open sourced it on GitHub so that other people could use it as well.
There are plenty of reasons to be on another chain. Faster blocks, friendly relations with chain devs, quicker/better implementation of new features/bugfixes/etc.
Your absolute denial of them makes your position less reasonable and thus weaker, not stronger.
As for the forced choice between "either on Bitcoin or you're not"...treechains are coming!
http://bitcointlv.com/en/Agenda/Day-2-October-20
Yes, this is what I'm learning. I will say for certain, I know that a big social gaming co might be the first to make this jump to clearinghouse. From what I'm told, they simply weren't happy with counterparty for whatever reason. Though they haven't ruled out counterparty, they seem to be more intrigued with clearinghouse. I have no idea when this will happen, but I'm told the first move will be merging a type of betting game on the platform as an experiment. I was also told that they are even exploring offering company shares through the platform as well. Meanwhile, I'm still just sitting here trying to figure it all out.
Is there any way of proving this whatsoever?
Check your messages, that should provide all the proof you need.
October 27, 2014, 04:26:33 PM
Hey what do you all think about this Bitcongress platform that is being developed? Apparently it's been created using counterparty so it's very relevant to us here as well and looks like they want to decentralize the ability to vote for legislation and laws and such. I think this is just amazing and definitely a huge step in the right direction for upgrading how we deal with the government.
http://bitcongress.org/
http://bitcongress.org/
October 27, 2014, 01:08:52 AM
The bashing of viacoin makes zero sense because:
Fact 4. Viacoin implements BTC core devs' suggestion that Counterparty get its own blockchain and stop parasitizing theirs.
Simply read the core dev comments about blockchain spam, and for that matter the dogecoin devs comments about blockchain spam as well.
Fact 4. Viacoin implements BTC core devs' suggestion that Counterparty get its own blockchain and stop parasitizing theirs.
Simply read the core dev comments about blockchain spam, and for that matter the dogecoin devs comments about blockchain spam as well.
IIRC, they changed their attitudes positively towards Counterparty recently. Those kinds of comments now only come from competing projects.
They had to with Bitcoin tanking and Overstock putting Counterparty on the map. I won't be surprised if they implement the 80kB OP_RETURN soon.
80kB? LOL, that would be pretty big. We don't want to store PNG images or XML documents in the blockchain, just a little financial data.
80 kB was supposed to be introduced last time, but they reduced it to 40 kB at the end. That is what caused such a friction here.
PhantomPhreak has said 80 kB is ideal for Counterparty, and that 40 kB is too low.
Take the "k" off of "kb" and you're good to go I think.
ha ha, now I see the issue.
Though a few years on we will have mBs of OP_RETURN and would laugh at those who laughed at those who suggested kB.
October 26, 2014, 06:40:12 PM
The bashing of viacoin makes zero sense because:
Fact 4. Viacoin implements BTC core devs' suggestion that Counterparty get its own blockchain and stop parasitizing theirs.
Simply read the core dev comments about blockchain spam, and for that matter the dogecoin devs comments about blockchain spam as well.
Fact 4. Viacoin implements BTC core devs' suggestion that Counterparty get its own blockchain and stop parasitizing theirs.
Simply read the core dev comments about blockchain spam, and for that matter the dogecoin devs comments about blockchain spam as well.
IIRC, they changed their attitudes positively towards Counterparty recently. Those kinds of comments now only come from competing projects.
They had to with Bitcoin tanking and Overstock putting Counterparty on the map. I won't be surprised if they implement the 80kB OP_RETURN soon.
80kB? LOL, that would be pretty big. We don't want to store PNG images or XML documents in the blockchain, just a little financial data.
80 kB was supposed to be introduced last time, but they reduced it to 40 kB at the end. That is what caused such a friction here.
PhantomPhreak has said 80 kB is ideal for Counterparty, and that 40 kB is too low.
Take the "k" off of "kb" and you're good to go I think.
There isn't any ideal amount for Counterparty, which now has full support for multiple encoding methods. The only advantage of using OP_RETURN is that you don't have to recover the dust amounts later with http://redeem.bitwatch.co/, which we're going to do automatically later anyway.
October 26, 2014, 03:43:25 PM
Yes it was bytes not kilobytes. Think 40 or 80 letters, rather than 40 or 80 pages of text.
October 26, 2014, 12:47:05 AM
The bashing of viacoin makes zero sense because:
Fact 4. Viacoin implements BTC core devs' suggestion that Counterparty get its own blockchain and stop parasitizing theirs.
Simply read the core dev comments about blockchain spam, and for that matter the dogecoin devs comments about blockchain spam as well.
Fact 4. Viacoin implements BTC core devs' suggestion that Counterparty get its own blockchain and stop parasitizing theirs.
Simply read the core dev comments about blockchain spam, and for that matter the dogecoin devs comments about blockchain spam as well.
IIRC, they changed their attitudes positively towards Counterparty recently. Those kinds of comments now only come from competing projects.
They had to with Bitcoin tanking and Overstock putting Counterparty on the map. I won't be surprised if they implement the 80kB OP_RETURN soon.
80kB? LOL, that would be pretty big. We don't want to store PNG images or XML documents in the blockchain, just a little financial data.
80 kB was supposed to be introduced last time, but they reduced it to 40 kB at the end. That is what caused such a friction here.
PhantomPhreak has said 80 kB is ideal for Counterparty, and that 40 kB is too low.
Take the "k" off of "kb" and you're good to go I think.
Jump to: