Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 491. (Read 1276923 times)

hi,guys, when will the GUI version release ? what's the ETA?
thanks

not sure if it's currently possible but system should allow to have the odd number of feed broadcasters, and count the majority

Don't do it! The cake is a lie!

waiting for download and re-index but will try and pinch a slice if there's any left later  

to devs, or any expert user who know about Counterparty, I understand we cannot use SPV client, but is it possible to implement some 'lightweight' Server-Trusting Client, connecting to remote node(s)?

If anyone wants to help test asset/dividend, give the Counterparty CAKE a try here:
https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,118.0.html

It'd be nice if you can pass the cake around too.

In bets the feed has to be trusted. So there could be feed exploits where 2 people agree on a feed, where 1 is controlling the feed to benefit himself and thereby steals XCP (or any asset) in the trustless bet. So feed trust could be an issue I guess.

Hm, maybe I should change "Bob" to "Mark" so people are more aware of the risk involved...

My point was not to downplay the trust issue, but rather to say that *if* the trust issue can be gotten over, then asset based currency pegs have some features that CFD currency pegs lack, and avoid some of the dependencies as well.

There's something a tad ironic in this suggestion (given recent events).

Of course there has to be a reciprocal betting party, but in the feed case, the bet is trustless and only the broadcast is dependent, where as with BOB (hopefully not Mark) the BTC Exchange owner, there are two components to the trust. On one hand this could lead to larger and more long term commitments (since betting amounts are escrowed, a large capital would be idle during the bet, whereas in the later case both BOB and the buyer are free to utilize the respective assets exchanged freely). As for callable/non-callable assets, still the risk on the non-callable is only in so far as an issuer is solvent for sum total value of all the assets/obligations.

That's great! I recommend that whoever issued GLDAEA [em]provide his issuing address on the website[/em], which will give some identity verification, and I recommend that users not purchase GLDAEA until the issuer has done so.

I think the #1 pitfall that will always exist, is there's no way to cancel or fix a change.. or undo sending money to the wrong address and all this stuff.. All this will need be fixed, it has to be more humane, as of right now its SUPER secure, but its also cold (unfriendly,) and this will be a deterrent for mainstream in just about any blockchain implementation. There are ways around it I'm sure.. like multi-factor authentication for sending, or possibly having to send one transaction 2 or 3 times to ensure its accuracy. Thoughts @ 3am.

In order for people to actually buy BOBUSD, Bob will most likely have to be not just be some guy, but, for example, the owner of a well-known BTC centralized exchange.

*If* Bob is trustworthy, then BOBUSD can be passed from user-to-user like a bank note, and hence could act a money replacement.

There are also two contingencies with bets: 1. there has to be someone broadcasting the data you want to bet on; 2. there has to be someone willing to take the other side of your bet; the latter requires that they agree to your odds, your leverage and your deadline.

Moreover with the CFD "currency peg", you are pegged against USD (for example) for, so to speak, a short time: what if the price of XCP dips again after your bet is over? Assuming the issuer is trustworthy, with an asset issuance based currency peg, you can maintain your peg for longer.

Also, the degree to which you can cover your bet is proportional to your leverage, hence a more secure peg means greater risk. With asset issuance based currency pegs, the price you buy at is the price of your peg. Naturally, for the risk taken by the issuer, the latter will probably require a premium.

Asset issuance based currency pegs, will, in my opinion,  probably always be "callable" assets, as the risk is otherwise completely on the side of the issuer.

I don't understand how to tell if the reindex worked.. and I'm not sure if uhh.. I'm just stuck on this whole reindex thing.

I still can't figure out how to send and receive XCP. So frustrating

大神，请问怎么更新5.0到5.3啊。

Thanks this will be useful.

I have drawn one simple diagram of how counterparty protocol works.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5231652

any one can tell me how can I update my 5.0xcp  to5.3??THS

Anyone care to elaborate on the "rumor" that "counterparty" as a whole is further along than NxT, Mastercoin, Bitshares ? 

I don't see the reasoning behind an Asset Issuance based Currency Peg as opposed to a Feed Bet - The former requires trusting 'Bob' as the asset issuer, the later only a trusted feed.