Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 475. (Read 1276928 times)

@devs: is something malfunctioning?

xnova said earlier they are all working together to sort things out. I'm sure we'll here from Busoni as soon as possible.

Any word for Poloniex whether they will continue to trade BTC/XCP?

Looking forward to more people participating in project of XCP  XCP will be better

The command-line interface takes a fraction (.01 = 1%), and the protocol uses a fixed quantity of BTC.

This "we shit" refers to "we" as in "the Counterparty community." Or did you think you were the only one who mattered?

What's this we shit?

First of all, that already could happen. It doesn't undermine anything regarding the protocol past the point that the protocol is ALPHA and changes / reestablishing the burn amount is part of CHANGING THE PROTOCOL TO MAKE IT BETTER.

Pretty simple. So no, it doesn't "create" any more or less possibility of unlimited inflation than there already is. Stating "the burn is final" is as rigid a rule as saying "we will only burn in alpha when doublespend vulnerabilities are found to have been implemented" or as stating "haha we'll burn whenever we feel like it."



It creates minor inflation up front in response to a critical bug that was only revealed by people having enough invested in it to make it worthwhile to abuse.

Congrats. Hope the grey hat hacker gets enough bounty to make giving up more coin worthwhile. Laff.

How about just consider the plunder the bounty? Oh that would be too obvious, eh

What a coincidence, your post is the most retarded thing I have read today! It clearly isn't a bailout, it is more aligned with FDIC when after a bank gets robbed the accounts are replenished.

Bottomline is that without it being that worthy of a target the vulnerability would likely remain so until that lucrative. You're also setting a pattern (I've read a lot of negative precedent setting issues in this thread) that it's fine to just wait until something catastrophic occurs and fuck you to the people who were required to invest / interact collectively to squeak out the issue.


Finally, it is rather convenient that this "benevolent hacker" proved their issue in such an amazingly robust manner. why not benevolently doublespend the minimum amount?

The unbelievable aspect - and why many doubted the initial reports - were 100% due to the scope and scale of the issue and how non-publicized it was. You're going to not directly contact the public / the devs to reveal the issue? But someone running an exchange when their involvement is rather tangential? LOL.

The idea that most people don't give a shit and shouldn't be "punished" for equality due to early adopters building the interest to the point that it is a worthy target deserves the slowest clap from the smallest animated gif

Who cares because everything's working as intended, and disclaimer text means tough shit, right?

Congrats Devs for all your outstanding work

Hi everybody!

I bought 402 XCP two days ago on poloniex... for 4BTC... Do you think I will see them again? 

Check the fee required, for the sell order.

We are not saying it is a genuine security issue to bitcoind itself. However, it is a less-than-ideal design consideration with a specific aspect of the protocol that has possible security implications for Counterparty and other Bitcoin-based metacoins. We will soon have a full release out that addresses any potential or theoretical attack vectors that this design choice may expose. Due to the nature of the problem, that's all I can say at the moment regarding this issue.

Have the bitcoin devs been notified of the security issue in bitcoind?

A quick update: We are currently working through things with busoni and the anonymous hacker regarding the security incident. We have essentially extended a reward as well as a security developer-type position to this individual contingent upon us fully settling this issue and the funds being fully returned.

Phantom is currently implementing even more strict transaction validity checking rules as we speak (to among other things, guard against a specific potential security issue in bitcoind "quirk" in bitcoind itself that the hacker has identified). We are also working on an intermediate transaction database (to lessen the need to do a full rebuild off of bitcoind for all but the most major updates). That all being said, there will most likely be another update out shortly that requires a rebuild, but we hope that this will be the last for awhile.

We have also created two donation addresses:

Bug bounty program: 14Tf35AovvRVURzd623q5i9kry2EW8WzyL
General donations: 19U6MmLLumsqxXSBMB5FgYXbezgXYC6Gpe

We will be announcing the terms of a bug bounty program later today. If you are interested in helping pay for bounties for bugs found, please donate BTC or XCP to the bounty address above.

General donations (to be used with the project at the Counterparty team's discretion) can be sent to the General donations address.

Again, thank you all for your patience on this matter as we drive it to resolution.

Sell in bulk in the buy/sell thread

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--445740

You'll find a buyer in no time

PS: alternatively you can PM me the price and quantity you want to sell and I'll see if I'm intrested

Any plans to add XCP to any other centralised exchange than poloniex. What is the status with DGEX? I want to liquidate my holdings

Burning again undermines the entire protocol, because it creates the possibility of unlimited inflation. We could just reinitiate a burn whenever people feel like it.

No it doesn't. Burning again doesn't defeat the purpose of burning, it just reestablishes value.







Yeah, it is an alpha and written in red in the first post. One of the things that would happen is you might lose value in your holdings. So why are you complaining about it happening to you when it is an easy fix that would prove the quality of the community? You said yourself, it is OK to lose them due to a bug in the alpha.


 

Trust me if
Forget about HFT. Its all about latency arbitrage. If I have the fastest quotes feeds and the fastest access to exchanges, then there are specific techniques that enable trading with nearly 100% profitability. Goldman Sacks and JPMorgan, are on a streak of hundreds of days in a row with no losses in their "prop program trading book".

In this case, its much worse, because you can decide to take the trade or give it to the original trader, depending on what happened after the trade. So you can rewrite history, it doesn't matter how frequent the trades are.

Also, if this DEX get big and there is a huge trade during a bitcoin "flash crash", I can guarantee that some group of miners/traders will front run and create a fork.

DEX can only work if you only allow trading on confirmed blocks. So basically orders can only be matched against orders that have 6 confirmations, and then you need to wait another 6 confirmations to "clear" the trade.

One idea (off the top of my head)  is to have a 6 confirmation pause between "trading sessions", no trading allowed during the pause.

exactly. what is happening on the DEX and POLONIEX?