Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 357. (Read 1276826 times)
March 25, 2014, 12:08:51 AM
It's pretty good. But Satoshi was actually in favor of further development.
March 24, 2014, 11:54:54 PM
Desperate times call for desperate measures. And with pain in my heart I've called upon the ultimate weapon: the Bayeux Tapestry Generator.
Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds
Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds
March 24, 2014, 11:09:35 PM
If ever any of the other chains goes onto a fork or does a blockchain rewind, any floating XCP that got sold would end up being able to be double spent.
Maybe this is a rare enough thing, then again, didnt DOGE just have one of these? The stability of XCP would end up being the stability of the weakest chain it ever floated on
James
Perhaps it would only be implemented on certain chains that are expected to be secure and stick around for the long run, rather than able to have XCP on every random BTC/LTC clone. There could be 3 maybe. BTC for security, doge or litecoin for transaction speed and then maybe something else which allows relatively large data storage or something, idk. But really though, anything could happen to anyone or any coin at any time (fork, attacks, price crash, whatever). BTC is just the hardened veteran
Yeah. You'd need every Counterparty client constantly talking to the servers for every single altcoin it was running on. And you'd have to implement a strict system for ordering blocks across chains. You'd also have to come up with a good system for sending funds across chains, because the addresses are not compatible and Counterparty right now stores the destination of transfers in its own output.
BTC is much more secure than any other coin, as far as I can tell. On multiple blockchains, Counterparty would only be as secure as the weakest of them.
But you could limit XCP-XCP transactions to whatever the underlying coin is. So while X_Asset1 might be trading on both DOGE and BTC, people with their XCP on DOGE could only trade with other XCP_DOGE holders while people with XCP_BTC would be limited to XCP_BTC. People who have their XCP solely on BTC will never see the DOGE/LTC/whatever markets.
And then whenever they wanted to swap for whatever reason, just do the REBORN process and wait for the XCP to be "transferred" from one blockchain to the other. All XCP are "natively" started in BTC, and it is likely that people will want to keep them in BTC for long-term storage. But for fast trades or whatever, they might transfer to a faster blockchain for that purpose. Not to mention, 1 DOGE for transaction fee will probably be a lot cheaper than whatever the BTC transfer fee happens to be at the time! And the DOGE miners are less likely to have custom tweaks, they will just be running the bog standard software.
I was ruminating over something like this myself over the past week or so. Turning XCP into a meta-crypto-currency that can theoretically live on *any* crypto-currency would be kind of an end-game. And I think it will actually be necessary, otherwise somebody is just going to copy the Counterparty code and fork it to run on top of LTC, DOGE and whatever else. I'd rather have 1 meta-XCP than a ton of XCP clones running around on every altcoin under the sun. (Theoretically, this should be fairly easy to implement in XCP since most of the crap altcoins have virtually no alterations and are pretty much straight copypastas of Bitcoin or Litecoin, with a few tweaks in the parameters. Of course, the chain-hopping itself would be difficult to implement, but once it's implemented for, say, Litecoin, it would be pretty straightforward to extend it to DOGE or Name_Altcoin_Here.)
This is more or less how I was thinking it could work as well. Kind of hope this catches on :p good stuff
On a side note and totally off topic... anybody able to give me some + rating on my profile to counteract the negative rating my account has so I can get rid of that red "trade with caution" warning? Annoying troll from another thread decided to give me negative feedback and label me scammer over literaly nothing. ugh >_>
March 24, 2014, 10:50:44 PM
If ever any of the other chains goes onto a fork or does a blockchain rewind, any floating XCP that got sold would end up being able to be double spent.
Maybe this is a rare enough thing, then again, didnt DOGE just have one of these? The stability of XCP would end up being the stability of the weakest chain it ever floated on
James
Perhaps it would only be implemented on certain chains that are expected to be secure and stick around for the long run, rather than able to have XCP on every random BTC/LTC clone. There could be 3 maybe. BTC for security, doge or litecoin for transaction speed and then maybe something else which allows relatively large data storage or something, idk. But really though, anything could happen to anyone or any coin at any time (fork, attacks, price crash, whatever). BTC is just the hardened veteran
Yeah. You'd need every Counterparty client constantly talking to the servers for every single altcoin it was running on. And you'd have to implement a strict system for ordering blocks across chains. You'd also have to come up with a good system for sending funds across chains, because the addresses are not compatible and Counterparty right now stores the destination of transfers in its own output.
BTC is much more secure than any other coin, as far as I can tell. On multiple blockchains, Counterparty would only be as secure as the weakest of them.
But you could limit XCP-XCP transactions to whatever the underlying coin is. So while X_Asset1 might be trading on both DOGE and BTC, people with their XCP on DOGE could only trade with other XCP_DOGE holders while people with XCP_BTC would be limited to XCP_BTC. People who have their XCP solely on BTC will never see the DOGE/LTC/whatever markets.
And then whenever they wanted to swap for whatever reason, just do the REBORN process and wait for the XCP to be "transferred" from one blockchain to the other. All XCP are "natively" started in BTC, and it is likely that people will want to keep them in BTC for long-term storage. But for fast trades or whatever, they might transfer to a faster blockchain for that purpose. Not to mention, 1 DOGE for transaction fee will probably be a lot cheaper than whatever the BTC transfer fee happens to be at the time! And the DOGE miners are less likely to have custom tweaks, they will just be running the bog standard software.
I was ruminating over something like this myself over the past week or so. Turning XCP into a meta-crypto-currency that can theoretically live on *any* crypto-currency would be kind of an end-game. And I think it will actually be necessary, otherwise somebody is just going to copy the Counterparty code and fork it to run on top of LTC, DOGE and whatever else. I'd rather have 1 meta-XCP than a ton of XCP clones running around on every altcoin under the sun. (Theoretically, this should be fairly easy to implement in XCP since most of the crap altcoins have virtually no alterations and are pretty much straight copypastas of Bitcoin or Litecoin, with a few tweaks in the parameters. Of course, the chain-hopping itself would be difficult to implement, but once it's implemented for, say, Litecoin, it would be pretty straightforward to extend it to DOGE or Name_Altcoin_Here.)
March 24, 2014, 09:51:59 PM
i suggest if one company Issue of shares，then Destroy 5XCP，but this destroy is not really,if compay is still work Normal，nobody can use this 5 xcp like destroy or if the Dividends is Enough then real destroy this 5 xcp. the amount of xcp is reduce when the more company issue they shares.and xcp Price raise.
but if compay who issue of the shares is run off or close ,then can Thaw this 5 xcp which hige price this time to Compensate Shareholder
but if compay who issue of the shares is run off or close ,then can Thaw this 5 xcp which hige price this time to Compensate Shareholder
This has no any relationship with decentralization. This is the work of centralization.
March 24, 2014, 09:30:27 PM
i suggest if one company Issue of shares，then Destroy 5XCP，but this destroy is not really,if compay is still work Normal，nobody can use this 5 xcp like destroy or if the Dividends is Enough then real destroy this 5 xcp. the amount of xcp is reduce when the more company issue they shares.and xcp Price raise.
but if compay who issue of the shares is run off or close ,then can Thaw this 5 xcp which hige price this time to Compensate Shareholder
but if compay who issue of the shares is run off or close ,then can Thaw this 5 xcp which hige price this time to Compensate Shareholder
March 24, 2014, 09:27:26 PM
Can somebody post some credible sources about the coiledcoin event? I currently mine via Eligius and would like to reconsider if this is being accurately portrayed.
More generally, I think pools should be a lot more aggressive about differentiating themselves politically, so small-time miners can 'vote' to support the kind of bitcoin we want. (Though I also understand Adam Back's point, that the miners aren't all that important in comparison to the 'political' clout of the people simply running a node, I still think there's some signal in supporting certain pools over others).
More generally, I think pools should be a lot more aggressive about differentiating themselves politically, so small-time miners can 'vote' to support the kind of bitcoin we want. (Though I also understand Adam Back's point, that the miners aren't all that important in comparison to the 'political' clout of the people simply running a node, I still think there's some signal in supporting certain pools over others).
The credible source is Luke-Jr himself: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.678006
Personally I find it disgusting how he keeps on saying I'm "slandering" him to bringing up coiledcoin yet refuses to answer to his actions. I've got no personal issue myself with the Coiledcoin attack - it's a decentralized "might is right" system - but he sure seems to find it inconvenient that his own actions prove so clearly my point that merge-mining is dangerous and embedded consensus systems are a much safer design.
March 24, 2014, 09:10:32 PM
If ever any of the other chains goes onto a fork or does a blockchain rewind, any floating XCP that got sold would end up being able to be double spent.
Maybe this is a rare enough thing, then again, didnt DOGE just have one of these? The stability of XCP would end up being the stability of the weakest chain it ever floated on
James
Perhaps it would only be implemented on certain chains that are expected to be secure and stick around for the long run, rather than able to have XCP on every random BTC/LTC clone. There could be 3 maybe. BTC for security, doge or litecoin for transaction speed and then maybe something else which allows relatively large data storage or something, idk. But really though, anything could happen to anyone or any coin at any time (fork, attacks, price crash, whatever). BTC is just the hardened veteran
Yeah. You'd need every Counterparty client constantly talking to the servers for every single altcoin it was running on. And you'd have to implement a strict system for ordering blocks across chains. You'd also have to come up with a good system for sending funds across chains, because the addresses are not compatible and Counterparty right now stores the destination of transfers in its own output.
BTC is much more secure than any other coin, as far as I can tell. On multiple blockchains, Counterparty would only be as secure as the weakest of them.
March 24, 2014, 08:20:23 PM
If ever any of the other chains goes onto a fork or does a blockchain rewind, any floating XCP that got sold would end up being able to be double spent.
Maybe this is a rare enough thing, then again, didnt DOGE just have one of these? The stability of XCP would end up being the stability of the weakest chain it ever floated on
James
Perhaps it would only be implemented on certain chains that are expected to be secure and stick around for the long run, rather than able to have XCP on every random BTC/LTC clone. There could be 3 maybe. BTC for security, doge or litecoin for transaction speed and then maybe something else which allows relatively large data storage or something, idk. But really though, anything could happen to anyone or any coin at any time (fork, attacks, price crash, whatever). BTC is just the hardened veteran
March 24, 2014, 08:07:17 PM
JahPowerBit, developer of BootleXCP and pyrpcwallet, will join Counterparty full-time.
https://www.counterparty.co/fulltime-developer-counterparty/
https://www.counterparty.co/fulltime-developer-counterparty/
to the mooon!
+1
Such an awesome surprise! So this means we can expect many more great things
Kudos, Jah! Best news in a while.
Thank you guys! I am eager to start full time.
March 24, 2014, 08:05:47 PM
DOGE recently had an intentional fork to fixed-reward blocks because multipools were snatching up the best random-reward blocks and leaving the poor ones for the DOGE miners.
regardless of the reason,wouldnt any floating XCP on a soon to be obsolete fork be a double spend risk? This is because when the fork is reconciled, any DOGE transactions automatically get back to what they should be, but how does the floating XCP get undone? March 24, 2014, 08:03:08 PM
DOGE recently had an intentional fork to fixed-reward blocks because multipools were snatching up the best random-reward blocks and leaving the poor ones for the DOGE miners.
March 24, 2014, 07:56:18 PM
Anyone have any thoughts on this? From the counterparty forums:
Anyone have any thoughts on why this may or may not work? Because it sounds like almost a perfect solution (I have no actual idea so take that with some salt). XCP would gain the advantages of all blockchains. Want to trade and perform actions at a higher frequency? just move your XCP to dogecoin or something. Want the security of the bitcoin blockchain for your assets? Just keep it on BTC.
If ever any of the other chains goes onto a fork or does a blockchain rewind, any floating XCP that got sold would end up being able to be double spent.Quote
For those think 10 minutes is slow, or Bitcoin devs don't like to modify OP_RETURN to 80 bytes. I have an idea to solve all these problems. That is to make XCP float on a lot of coins. See details below:
Add an "operation/transaction type" into XCP protocol called "BURN_TO_REBORN".
The "BURN_TO_REBORN" has a parameter named "targetRebornCoinName".
this method's code is like:
BURN_TO_REBORN(string targetRebornCoinName)
Then you can BURN your XCP by using this "BURN_TO_REBORN" on the Bitcoin blockchain.
Save the transaction ID of which the "BURN_TO_REBORN" Bitcoin transaction is in, it will be used later.
After 6 confirms, then you can claim/request to REBORN (with the Bitcoin transaction ID of "BURN_TO_REBORN" as a parameter) your XCP on Dogecoin or LiteCoin or other Altcoin blockchain.
The XCP daemon/program/heavy-client on Dogecoin or other Altcoin, will check if this REBORN request is valid( has a correct BURN_TO_REBORN in the Bitcoin blockchain ) and have a correct parameter.
If the REBORN(parameter) is correct and valid. Then your XCP is REBORN in Dogecoin. (or other altcoin you like)
You only can reborn your XCP on one Altcoin blockchain, which is specified in the parameter targetRebornCoinName of the BURN_TO_REBORN method.
Through this way, XCP can move / float on all coins.
The value of 1 XCP in all bitcoin and altcoins blockchains has the same value . Because they can move between altcoins freely.
There will be 2 kinds XCP users:
1. light-client user, just like the current XCP user.
2. heavy-client user, those will do the verify work to check all the BURN_TO_REBORN and REBORN messages between all the selected Altcoins' blockchains. Heavy-client users can earn/mine the XCP fees in all the BURN_TO_REBORN and REBORN messages.
Result:
1. This way, we can make XCP a super coin -- float on all coins.
2. And XCP will become the "media/middle-coin" to convert coins between all kinds of altcoins.
3. Solve the 10 minutes slow confirm problem. Because those like to make fast transactions can move their XCP coins into a fast blockchains/altcoins.
4. Solve the 80 bytes problem and other Bitcoin devs' noncooperation problem. If Bitcoin devs want to filter XCP, we can just move to other coins easily.
Source: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,195.0.htmlAdd an "operation/transaction type" into XCP protocol called "BURN_TO_REBORN".
The "BURN_TO_REBORN" has a parameter named "targetRebornCoinName".
this method's code is like:
BURN_TO_REBORN(string targetRebornCoinName)
Then you can BURN your XCP by using this "BURN_TO_REBORN" on the Bitcoin blockchain.
Save the transaction ID of which the "BURN_TO_REBORN" Bitcoin transaction is in, it will be used later.
After 6 confirms, then you can claim/request to REBORN (with the Bitcoin transaction ID of "BURN_TO_REBORN" as a parameter) your XCP on Dogecoin or LiteCoin or other Altcoin blockchain.
The XCP daemon/program/heavy-client on Dogecoin or other Altcoin, will check if this REBORN request is valid( has a correct BURN_TO_REBORN in the Bitcoin blockchain ) and have a correct parameter.
If the REBORN(parameter) is correct and valid. Then your XCP is REBORN in Dogecoin. (or other altcoin you like)
You only can reborn your XCP on one Altcoin blockchain, which is specified in the parameter targetRebornCoinName of the BURN_TO_REBORN method.
Through this way, XCP can move / float on all coins.
The value of 1 XCP in all bitcoin and altcoins blockchains has the same value . Because they can move between altcoins freely.
There will be 2 kinds XCP users:
1. light-client user, just like the current XCP user.
2. heavy-client user, those will do the verify work to check all the BURN_TO_REBORN and REBORN messages between all the selected Altcoins' blockchains. Heavy-client users can earn/mine the XCP fees in all the BURN_TO_REBORN and REBORN messages.
Result:
1. This way, we can make XCP a super coin -- float on all coins.
2. And XCP will become the "media/middle-coin" to convert coins between all kinds of altcoins.
3. Solve the 10 minutes slow confirm problem. Because those like to make fast transactions can move their XCP coins into a fast blockchains/altcoins.
4. Solve the 80 bytes problem and other Bitcoin devs' noncooperation problem. If Bitcoin devs want to filter XCP, we can just move to other coins easily.
Anyone have any thoughts on why this may or may not work? Because it sounds like almost a perfect solution (I have no actual idea so take that with some salt). XCP would gain the advantages of all blockchains. Want to trade and perform actions at a higher frequency? just move your XCP to dogecoin or something. Want the security of the bitcoin blockchain for your assets? Just keep it on BTC.
Maybe this is a rare enough thing, then again, didnt DOGE just have one of these? The stability of XCP would end up being the stability of the weakest chain it ever floated on
James
March 24, 2014, 07:51:33 PM
Anyone have any thoughts on this? From the counterparty forums:
Anyone have any thoughts on why this may or may not work? Because it sounds like almost a perfect solution (I have no actual idea so take that with some salt). XCP would gain the advantages of all blockchains. Want to trade and perform actions at a higher frequency? just move your XCP to dogecoin or something. Want the security of the bitcoin blockchain for your assets? Just keep it on BTC.
Quote
For those think 10 minutes is slow, or Bitcoin devs don't like to modify OP_RETURN to 80 bytes. I have an idea to solve all these problems. That is to make XCP float on a lot of coins. See details below:
Add an "operation/transaction type" into XCP protocol called "BURN_TO_REBORN".
The "BURN_TO_REBORN" has a parameter named "targetRebornCoinName".
this method's code is like:
BURN_TO_REBORN(string targetRebornCoinName)
Then you can BURN your XCP by using this "BURN_TO_REBORN" on the Bitcoin blockchain.
Save the transaction ID of which the "BURN_TO_REBORN" Bitcoin transaction is in, it will be used later.
After 6 confirms, then you can claim/request to REBORN (with the Bitcoin transaction ID of "BURN_TO_REBORN" as a parameter) your XCP on Dogecoin or LiteCoin or other Altcoin blockchain.
The XCP daemon/program/heavy-client on Dogecoin or other Altcoin, will check if this REBORN request is valid( has a correct BURN_TO_REBORN in the Bitcoin blockchain ) and have a correct parameter.
If the REBORN(parameter) is correct and valid. Then your XCP is REBORN in Dogecoin. (or other altcoin you like)
You only can reborn your XCP on one Altcoin blockchain, which is specified in the parameter targetRebornCoinName of the BURN_TO_REBORN method.
Through this way, XCP can move / float on all coins.
The value of 1 XCP in all bitcoin and altcoins blockchains has the same value . Because they can move between altcoins freely.
There will be 2 kinds XCP users:
1. light-client user, just like the current XCP user.
2. heavy-client user, those will do the verify work to check all the BURN_TO_REBORN and REBORN messages between all the selected Altcoins' blockchains. Heavy-client users can earn/mine the XCP fees in all the BURN_TO_REBORN and REBORN messages.
Result:
1. This way, we can make XCP a super coin -- float on all coins.
2. And XCP will become the "media/middle-coin" to convert coins between all kinds of altcoins.
3. Solve the 10 minutes slow confirm problem. Because those like to make fast transactions can move their XCP coins into a fast blockchains/altcoins.
4. Solve the 80 bytes problem and other Bitcoin devs' noncooperation problem. If Bitcoin devs want to filter XCP, we can just move to other coins easily.
Source: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,195.0.htmlAdd an "operation/transaction type" into XCP protocol called "BURN_TO_REBORN".
The "BURN_TO_REBORN" has a parameter named "targetRebornCoinName".
this method's code is like:
BURN_TO_REBORN(string targetRebornCoinName)
Then you can BURN your XCP by using this "BURN_TO_REBORN" on the Bitcoin blockchain.
Save the transaction ID of which the "BURN_TO_REBORN" Bitcoin transaction is in, it will be used later.
After 6 confirms, then you can claim/request to REBORN (with the Bitcoin transaction ID of "BURN_TO_REBORN" as a parameter) your XCP on Dogecoin or LiteCoin or other Altcoin blockchain.
The XCP daemon/program/heavy-client on Dogecoin or other Altcoin, will check if this REBORN request is valid( has a correct BURN_TO_REBORN in the Bitcoin blockchain ) and have a correct parameter.
If the REBORN(parameter) is correct and valid. Then your XCP is REBORN in Dogecoin. (or other altcoin you like)
You only can reborn your XCP on one Altcoin blockchain, which is specified in the parameter targetRebornCoinName of the BURN_TO_REBORN method.
Through this way, XCP can move / float on all coins.
The value of 1 XCP in all bitcoin and altcoins blockchains has the same value . Because they can move between altcoins freely.
There will be 2 kinds XCP users:
1. light-client user, just like the current XCP user.
2. heavy-client user, those will do the verify work to check all the BURN_TO_REBORN and REBORN messages between all the selected Altcoins' blockchains. Heavy-client users can earn/mine the XCP fees in all the BURN_TO_REBORN and REBORN messages.
Result:
1. This way, we can make XCP a super coin -- float on all coins.
2. And XCP will become the "media/middle-coin" to convert coins between all kinds of altcoins.
3. Solve the 10 minutes slow confirm problem. Because those like to make fast transactions can move their XCP coins into a fast blockchains/altcoins.
4. Solve the 80 bytes problem and other Bitcoin devs' noncooperation problem. If Bitcoin devs want to filter XCP, we can just move to other coins easily.
Anyone have any thoughts on why this may or may not work? Because it sounds like almost a perfect solution (I have no actual idea so take that with some salt). XCP would gain the advantages of all blockchains. Want to trade and perform actions at a higher frequency? just move your XCP to dogecoin or something. Want the security of the bitcoin blockchain for your assets? Just keep it on BTC.
March 24, 2014, 07:36:48 PM
I can't help but feel like we're wasting our time fighting over bitcoin, when it's not all that well suited to a DEX anyway, due to the long confirmation times. Didn't somebody just post that this has become excruciatingly clear with the advent of counterwallet?
Not all Counterwallet DEX transactions require short confirmation times, my good sir!
March 24, 2014, 07:22:07 PM
I can't help but feel like we're wasting our time fighting over bitcoin, when it's not all that well suited to a DEX anyway, due to the long confirmation times. Didn't somebody just post that this has become excruciatingly clear with the advent of counterwallet?
March 24, 2014, 07:19:49 PM
EDIT: I will also that ask that you and Luke-Jr discuss the Coiledcoin 51% attack accusations separately from this thread, if that's okay.
No, I believe the Coiledcoin attack should be a part of this discussion. I would never have known about it if it hadn't been brought up, so I investigated what happened. What Luke-jr did to Coiledcoin was similar to a bully on the beach coming along and kicking apart a sand castle some kids were in the middle of building, saying it was in the way of people walking on the beach as justification. He used computing resources which did not belong to him, but were entrusted to his care, to sabotage another project.
This discussion has shown some serious problems with Bitcoin, a high degree of consolidation of centralized control, which needs to be addressed. Proof of work mining was the main turn-off as a gross waste of resources and energy when I first learned about Bitcoin. It would be good if Counterparty and Mastercoin could migrate away from Bitcoin, preferably to a PoS or proof of contribution blockchain.
Can somebody post some credible sources about the coiledcoin event? I currently mine via Eligius and would like to reconsider if this is being accurately portrayed.
More generally, I think pools should be a lot more aggressive about differentiating themselves politically, so small-time miners can 'vote' to support the kind of bitcoin we want. (Though I also understand Adam Back's point, that the miners aren't all that important in comparison to the 'political' clout of the people simply running a node, I still think there's some signal in supporting certain pools over others).
March 24, 2014, 06:33:16 PM
@LED_LCD, @CityGlut @Community
Video Update: Things are going well!
Video Update: Things are going well!
It was great speaking to you halfcab123. All the best and let me know if there is anything I can help you with.
i second that, halfcab is a great guy:) not only that but this community has impressed me with the way it handled the recent situation, kudos!
March 24, 2014, 05:54:51 PM
So if I understand correctly the pyrpcwallet does not require a bitcoin blockchain sync ? Can someone please link me to this 
And I assume there's docs for it
Here is the link to pyrcwallet. And I assume there's docs for it https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,166.0.html
The instructions seem to be for Mac(brew). If anyone figures it out for Windows/Linux let me know.
EDIT: See instructions from Jahpowered bit (on the last page) for installing sqllite without brew.
March 24, 2014, 05:50:42 PM
So if I understand correctly the pyrpcwallet does not require a bitcoin blockchain sync ? Can someone please link me to this And I assume there's docs for it
And I assume there's docs for it Jump to: