Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 277. (Read 1276936 times)
May 16, 2014, 02:25:05 PM
I am also optimistic about this coin, good coin surely someone gossiping
May 16, 2014, 02:16:29 PM
Hey guys, is there a way to set up two factors of authentification to access Counterwallet?
Robby has this slated for future integration into Counterwallet. Not sure of the timeline.
For now I prefer to keep my XCP in my 2FA blockchain wallet because of this feature lacking.
May 16, 2014, 12:09:50 PM
Hey guys, is there a way to set up two factors of authentification to access Counterwallet?
Robby has this slated for future integration into Counterwallet. Not sure of the timeline.
May 16, 2014, 12:09:12 PM
Can someone compare Coinprism's implementation of colored coins through Open Access with Counterparty? Is there an advantage to using a proprietary currency, like XCP?
Also, what is Coinprism's revenue model? The wallet is free, so how are they making money?
Edit: Are there limits to the kinds of assets or transactions that colored coins can handle?
Also, what is Coinprism's revenue model? The wallet is free, so how are they making money?
Edit: Are there limits to the kinds of assets or transactions that colored coins can handle?
XCP can be escrowed. That is its main use case and provides the betting and contract for difference functionality.
XCP also makes using the DEx easier, but in my opinion, this is secondary to what XCP allows due to its ability to be escrowed.
May 16, 2014, 11:05:20 AM
Hey guys, is there a way to set up two factors of authentification to access Counterwallet?
May 16, 2014, 09:38:23 AM
Can someone compare Coinprism's implementation of colored coins through Open Access with Counterparty? Is there an advantage to using a proprietary currency, like XCP?
Also, what is Coinprism's revenue model? The wallet is free, so how are they making money?
Also, what is Coinprism's revenue model? The wallet is free, so how are they making money?
Not sure. But is the creation of new assets free?
May 16, 2014, 09:27:15 AM
Can someone compare Coinprism's implementation of colored coins through Open Access with Counterparty? Is there an advantage to using a proprietary currency, like XCP?
Also, what is Coinprism's revenue model? The wallet is free, so how are they making money?
Edit: Are there limits to the kinds of assets or transactions that colored coins can handle?
Also, what is Coinprism's revenue model? The wallet is free, so how are they making money?
Edit: Are there limits to the kinds of assets or transactions that colored coins can handle?
May 15, 2014, 10:09:43 PM
Everybody can get a 0.66% interest of XCP at bter platform: http://bter.com/myaccount/interest
Rate Of Interest Per Annum. This feature also support other coins.
The interest is down to 0.44% now.
May 15, 2014, 09:46:44 PM
That's right. Overspends are just ignored. Counterparty also doesn't pay much attention at all to block boundaries: it parses every transaction in a block one-at-a-time, in the order in which the transactions are listed within the block.
Does Counterparty wait for a certain number of confirmed blocks prior to updating the internal balances?
I would gather it would have to do this otherwise if it got a block that was eventually replaced by another then the ordering would be different.
It doesn't, no. Balances may indeed change on blockchain reorganisations, just like with Bitcoin.
I'm curious, how is that implemented? Can you give a sketch of how that is done?
The blockchain reorganisation detection algorithm? It's pretty straightforward: everytime counterpartyd sees a new block in Bitcoind, it checks to see whether its parent in the SQLite3 DB is its parent in Bitcoind, if it isn't, then it checks *that* block's parent, and so on; if it is, then counterpartyd deletes the recent, bad blocks from the DB and reparses every transaction from scratch, in order, which takes a couple of minutes.
ok... thought there was a more complex algorithm under the covers. Thanks.
May 15, 2014, 07:48:17 PM
That's right. Overspends are just ignored. Counterparty also doesn't pay much attention at all to block boundaries: it parses every transaction in a block one-at-a-time, in the order in which the transactions are listed within the block.
Does Counterparty wait for a certain number of confirmed blocks prior to updating the internal balances?
I would gather it would have to do this otherwise if it got a block that was eventually replaced by another then the ordering would be different.
It doesn't, no. Balances may indeed change on blockchain reorganisations, just like with Bitcoin.
I'm curious, how is that implemented? Can you give a sketch of how that is done?
The blockchain reorganisation detection algorithm? It's pretty straightforward: everytime counterpartyd sees a new block in Bitcoind, it checks to see whether its parent in the SQLite3 DB is its parent in Bitcoind, if it isn't, then it checks *that* block's parent, and so on; if it is, then counterpartyd deletes the recent, bad blocks from the DB and reparses every transaction from scratch, in order, which takes a couple of minutes.
May 15, 2014, 06:38:02 PM
That's right. Overspends are just ignored. Counterparty also doesn't pay much attention at all to block boundaries: it parses every transaction in a block one-at-a-time, in the order in which the transactions are listed within the block.
Does Counterparty wait for a certain number of confirmed blocks prior to updating the internal balances?
I would gather it would have to do this otherwise if it got a block that was eventually replaced by another then the ordering would be different.
It doesn't, no. Balances may indeed change on blockchain reorganisations, just like with Bitcoin.
I'm curious, how is that implemented? Can you give a sketch of how that is done?
May 15, 2014, 06:09:15 PM
That's right. Overspends are just ignored. Counterparty also doesn't pay much attention at all to block boundaries: it parses every transaction in a block one-at-a-time, in the order in which the transactions are listed within the block.
Does Counterparty wait for a certain number of confirmed blocks prior to updating the internal balances?
I would gather it would have to do this otherwise if it got a block that was eventually replaced by another then the ordering would be different.
It doesn't, no. Balances may indeed change on blockchain reorganisations, just like with Bitcoin.
May 15, 2014, 04:44:36 PM
That's right. Overspends are just ignored. Counterparty also doesn't pay much attention at all to block boundaries: it parses every transaction in a block one-at-a-time, in the order in which the transactions are listed within the block.
Does Counterparty wait for a certain number of confirmed blocks prior to updating the internal balances?
I would gather it would have to do this otherwise if it got a block that was eventually replaced by another then the ordering would be different.
May 15, 2014, 02:58:48 PM
I got a question that may have been explained prior.
How does counterparty prevent double spending of assets?
How does counterparty prevent double spending of assets?
I couldn't find a website link, which I'm also rather sure there was. Anyways Counterparty assets just like Bitcoins do not exist as a 'thing', it is a ledger starting from the burn address (or issuer address) keeping track of what is where by embedding the information into Bitcoin transactions, which Counterparty nodes (by parsing the Bitcoin blockchain) interpret according to the protocol rules.
Accordingly as with Bitcoin transactions debits to an address for amounts&/assets it does not have will not be accepted by Counterparty Nodes, and the Counterparty protocol does not use unconfirmed transactions - therefore the possibility of a double spend on Counterparty is the same as of a Bitcoin blockchain fork (the reason for using the Bitcoin blockchain - as opposed to side chains, or other coins etc.) One difference to note is in Bitcoin consensus is established by evaluating the transactions through a scripting language, where as Counterparty transactions are evaluated through an api.
With Bitcoin miners validate the script to ensure validity prior to inclusion in the blockchain.
With CounterParty invalid data can get itself into the blockchain. However, as I understand it correctly, invalid data cannot find itself into the working memory of the CounterParty nodes. Therefore, even though they are rejected, they are essentially ignored?
What happens though if an address overspends in the same block? How does CounterParty resolve which payment to make out of all the payments in the block?
That's right. Overspends are just ignored. Counterparty also doesn't pay much attention at all to block boundaries: it parses every transaction in a block one-at-a-time, in the order in which the transactions are listed within the block.
May 15, 2014, 02:41:10 PM
I got a question that may have been explained prior.
How does counterparty prevent double spending of assets?
How does counterparty prevent double spending of assets?
I couldn't find a website link, which I'm also rather sure there was. Anyways Counterparty assets just like Bitcoins do not exist as a 'thing', it is a ledger starting from the burn address (or issuer address) keeping track of what is where by embedding the information into Bitcoin transactions, which Counterparty nodes (by parsing the Bitcoin blockchain) interpret according to the protocol rules.
Accordingly as with Bitcoin transactions debits to an address for amounts&/assets it does not have will not be accepted by Counterparty Nodes, and the Counterparty protocol does not use unconfirmed transactions - therefore the possibility of a double spend on Counterparty is the same as of a Bitcoin blockchain fork (the reason for using the Bitcoin blockchain - as opposed to side chains, or other coins etc.) One difference to note is in Bitcoin consensus is established by evaluating the transactions through a scripting language, where as Counterparty transactions are evaluated through an api.
With Bitcoin miners validate the script to ensure validity prior to inclusion in the blockchain.
With CounterParty invalid data can get itself into the blockchain. However, as I understand it correctly, invalid data cannot find itself into the working memory of the CounterParty nodes. Therefore, even though they are rejected, they are essentially ignored?
What happens though if an address overspends in the same block? How does CounterParty resolve which payment to make out of all the payments in the block?
May 15, 2014, 02:19:09 PM
I got a question that may have been explained prior.
How does counterparty prevent double spending of assets?
How does counterparty prevent double spending of assets?
I couldn't find a website link, which I'm also rather sure there was. Anyways Counterparty assets just like Bitcoins do not exist as a 'thing', it is a ledger starting from the burn address (or issuer address) keeping track of what is where by embedding the information into Bitcoin transactions, which Counterparty nodes (by parsing the Bitcoin blockchain) interpret according to the protocol rules.
Accordingly as with Bitcoin transactions debits to an address for amounts&/assets it does not have will not be accepted by Counterparty Nodes, and the Counterparty protocol does not use unconfirmed transactions - therefore the possibility of a double spend on Counterparty is the same as of a Bitcoin blockchain fork (the reason for using the Bitcoin blockchain - as opposed to side chains, or other coins etc.) One difference to note is in Bitcoin consensus is established by evaluating the transactions through a scripting language, where as Counterparty transactions are evaluated through an api.
May 15, 2014, 11:34:16 AM
Everybody can get a 0.66% interest of XCP at bter platform: http://bter.com/myaccount/interest
Rate Of Interest Per Annum. This feature also support other coins.
May 15, 2014, 10:58:31 AM
Counterparty offers such a great incentive to Bitcoin by the use of its asset issuance, but I believe this technology is ahead of its time.
There is a huge benefit to Bitcoin because Counterparty allows companies to IPO at 0 cost. Basically, they can sell shares for Bitcoin, and get paid dividends in Bitcoin.
This creates a large demand in Bitcoin, but until the regulations are clear, no business will touch it because they don't want to get in trouble with the SEC.
What specifically would be legal issues for an IPO on Counterparty? There is a huge benefit to Bitcoin because Counterparty allows companies to IPO at 0 cost. Basically, they can sell shares for Bitcoin, and get paid dividends in Bitcoin.
This creates a large demand in Bitcoin, but until the regulations are clear, no business will touch it because they don't want to get in trouble with the SEC.
It depends exactly what you are selling.
If you are selling something that is equivalent to an investment then there is indeed a lot of legal issues in the U.S.
I believe counterparty circumvented the issue by having the proceeds of the investment go to nowhere (i.e. burned).
Safecoin circumvents the issue by selling tokens that are equivalent to storage space.
Ripple circumvents the issue by selling tokens that are equivalent to toll passes.
Bitcoin circumvents the issue because there is no IPO, you just have to mine shares on your own.
May 15, 2014, 10:29:25 AM
Everybody can get a 0.66% interest of XCP at bter platform: http://bter.com/myaccount/interest
May 15, 2014, 04:51:50 AM
Counterparty offers such a great incentive to Bitcoin by the use of its asset issuance, but I believe this technology is ahead of its time.
There is a huge benefit to Bitcoin because Counterparty allows companies to IPO at 0 cost. Basically, they can sell shares for Bitcoin, and get paid dividends in Bitcoin.
This creates a large demand in Bitcoin, but until the regulations are clear, no business will touch it because they don't want to get in trouble with the SEC.
What specifically would be legal issues for an IPO on Counterparty? There is a huge benefit to Bitcoin because Counterparty allows companies to IPO at 0 cost. Basically, they can sell shares for Bitcoin, and get paid dividends in Bitcoin.
This creates a large demand in Bitcoin, but until the regulations are clear, no business will touch it because they don't want to get in trouble with the SEC.
Jump to: