Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 355. (Read 1276826 times)

Hey I need some advice from the experts regarding the XCP pricing...

Is a good time to buy now, or will price drop any further? Wait some more weeks and hope price goes down?
Ive read a new wallet is coming soon. But I suppose thats already priced in. Nevertheless that looks like good news. Is there any further improvements in short term coming?

If that's true, I'll be moving my miners off Eligius and recommend same to every other miner I know. Care to back quoted claim with some data?

CoiledCoin now closed. Have a nice day.

I don't particularly have any incentive to respond to the scammers that I foiled, given the significant cost (in time) to do so. Nor do I have any financial loss or care particularly if people want to stop mining on Eligius because they were in on the scam (or any other reason). I will clarify that Eligius miners were not adversely impacted by this, and that the CLC mining involved only adding data that I hashed myself to my own transactions; and I was careful to ensure that nobody lost any confirmed CLC. If any Eligius miner wishes to inquire further, I will take the time to answer specific to-the-point questions which are signmessage'd with an active (ie, has mined in the past week) Eligius payout address that has earned at least 2000 TBC (5.36870912 BTC) over all time.

Eligius is a Bitcoin mining pool and I am, as always, committed to doing my best to contribute to and protect the Bitcoin ecosystem. Pyramid schemes built upon forks of the Bitcoin software ultimately discredit and harm Bitcoin's reputation. I hope CoiledCoin will be the last of such scams now that it is clear there are people (not just myself) willing to stand up to them. Namecoin alone demonstrates a legitimate, innovative use of Bitcoin technology, and while I don't personally agree with their ideals/goals, I see it as a good thing for Bitcoin and worth cooperating with.

cablepair, regarding Devcoin, I don't see any reason to treat it as different from any other scamcoin. I will at least discuss it with you on IRC before doing anything other than mining it with the almost-unmodified (zero txn fee, zero post-maturity delay) Devcoin client.

P.S. While the opposition seem to be very venemous and vocal, I have gotten a lot more positive support from a head-count perspective.

If you got the Windows build of boottle, You can skip installing the Daemon from scratch by just holding down SHIFT while clicking on the icon.  Then you can type counterpartyd -h to see the available commands

+1

Yes, the emergence of cryptocurrencies and payment networks that are
built on top of existing blockchains, and on other protocols for
distributed-consensus, is a major trend in information technology. The
benefits both for the 'metacoins' and the underlying networks is huge:
Counterparty can leave the trusted-timestamping, proof-of-publication,
peer discovery, and anti-DOS measures entirely in a transport layer;
Bitcoin can be very conservative with the kinds of functionality that it
directly supports, while still rapidly acquiring the new features that
it needs to stay relevant and useful.

It's in Bitcoin's best interest that its developers do what they can to
encourage the building of interesting and useful technologies on top of
Bitcoin. However, the blockchain is robust structure, and passivity on
their part is unlikely ever to become a real problem as a direct result
of such innovation.

+1

Is it really the core developers’ job to make it possible for others to build extra services on top of the block chain? It had better, if it wants to stay relevant, says ‘PhantomPhreak’, a core developer for Counterparty.

Yes, the emergence of cryptocurrencies and payment networks that are
built on top of existing blockchains, and on other protocols for
distributed-consensus, is a major trend in information technology. The
benefits both for the 'metacoins' and the underlying networks is huge:
Counterparty can leave the trusted-timestamping, proof-of-publication,
peer discovery, and anti-DOS measures entirely in a transport layer;
Bitcoin can be very conservative with the kinds of functionality that it
directly supports, while still rapidly acquiring the new features that
it needs to stay relevant and useful.

It's in Bitcoin's best interest that its developers do what they can to
encourage the building of interesting and useful technologies on top of
Bitcoin. However, the blockchain is robust structure, and passivity on
their part is unlikely ever to become a real problem as a direct result
of such innovation.

If that's true, I'll be moving my miners off Eligius and recommend same to every other miner I know. Care to back quoted claim with some data?

shocking really, I expected better.

A command line in a window, behave yourself.

There is something I don't understand about the mechanics of the current problem with OP_RETURN. I am planning to issue an asset on top of XCP and want to make sure I get this straight, so I'll appreciate a clarification.

Currently, XCP already works with the current Bitcoin implementation. It's able to process feeds, allows decentralized trading, asset issuance and dividend payment, and so on.
With the next version, this OP_RETURN feature is being added, but with less storage space than anticipated, throwing a wrench in XCP development plans.

So my question is:
Will XCP still function as it does now (asset trading, dividend distribution, etc)?
What are the features that are incompatible with this new change?

Thanks in advance.

One of the primary arguments against POS - that one doesn't need to spend/invest in order to earn money through fees - is also an argument against saving to earn interest.

Certainly there will be people who hoard in order to earn fees, but no entrepreneur will be satisfied with such low returns. They will spend/invest their money to develop useful products and services for the prospect of significantly greater returns than through collecting tolls. And other users will want to buy those products or services, since the product or service is worth more to them than the little income they earn from the POS transaction fees.

There will always be hoarders, as I say, but the hoarders provide ballast and stability to the currency. Most savers will use the currency because it only has value when it is spent to create or consume real-world products and services.

Some of the comments on reddit..

 He used computing resources which did not belong to him, but were entrusted to his care, to sabotage another project.

[–]bassjoe 1 point 48 minutes ago
The blockchain belongs to the whole network, not just those that want to use it to store their proprietary information which is useless to the majority of the network's users.

[–]physalisx -1 points 1 hour ago*
As far as I'm concerned, counterparty can suck it. There is no reason why they should be allowed to abuse the blockchain by filling it with their data. The blockchain is not a general purpose storage space, period. They'll have to find another way. Wanting to build decentralized services is great. But there's no justification for putting it all on Bitcoin's shoulders.


[–]scotty321 1 point 1 hour ago
This is why we can't have nice things.

[–]super3
The blockchain is a data structure. Why do people get to state what it may or many not be used for?
[–]nullc 3 points 19 minutes ago
Your home is a steel and timber structure, why do people get to state what it may or may not be used for? I for one am looking forward to putting my radioactive waste in your living room. Don't like it? Too bad: I paid fees to your neighbor, fair and square.
[–]slimmtl 8 points 2 hours ago
My miners arent your free cloud storage.