Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 550. (Read 1276933 times)

Issue:
XCP not returned from escrow after cancellation of Order

http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=17PgVzRSSSjc2aN8Lyp1x9QayKzPzY2pKj

a) I placed a sell order for 250 XCP order
b) the order was matched by the engine, but the buyer did not make any payment yet.
c) I cancelled the order
d) I did not receive back the XCP from escrow

The Balance should be: 1432-400-200-200=632
Instead it is 382 XCP and 250 from Escrow is missing.

I know there was similar issue not sure what the resolution for that was. (I am on the latest build).

Mine ran for about 12 to 24 hours (on a machine with SSD drive).

My is still running after 24 hours...
Is this normal  

I'm sure he has many backups.  The current method of transferring shares of Asicminer is to create a thread in the auction section, like this one: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/asicminer-shares-500-for-sale-439392

Then private message and/or email friedcat so he can change the addresses on the spreadsheet.

Many times people also use an escrow provider (such as John K.) to escrow the transfers.


This is a ridiculously inefficient, slow, manual process of transferring ownership of Asicminer shares.

If you're not familiar with Bitcoin securities, Asicminer is the most prominent of them all.

It makes an outrageous amount of sense for Asicminer to start using Counterparty.

The CEO of Asicminer, friedcat, currently keeps track of which bitcoin addresses own the 400,000 dividend-receiving shares with an excel spreadsheet.

He has to manually update this spreadsheet every time someone wants to transfer ownership of a share.

It usually takes days to transfer ownership of shares, 10 minutes would be a massive improvment.

Asicminer on Counterparty would be an epic combo.


Come join the discussion in the Asicminer thread and help bring Counterparty to friedcat's attention!

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4907871

Is there a way to transfer XCP from multiple addresses in a wallet to another address in just one single transaction?

Let's say I have 10 addresses containing XCP and I want to consolidate all of them in one single address. Do I have to create 10 send transactions or is there a way to do this with just a single transaction?

both will exist. BTC blockchain will bloat, but since people will use either MSC or XCP, not both for the same transaction, the bloat will be about the same as if there was only one. I am assuming the load on blockchain is similar for XCP and MSC, otherwise need to weigh market usage by respective sizes. either way BTC blockchain wont meltdown, too much money at stake to keep it alive!

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4940643 says that each mastercoin transaction sends "dust" to a fake address. However, my understanding is that something like 0.0001 BTC is sent to the mastercoin Exodus address. If they really wanted dust, why wasnt it set to 1 satoshi?

Also, I might be confused, but I am pretty sure JR has access to the Exodus address and it is not a "fake" address.

So, there is a built in extra transfer fee for every MSC transaction. XCP will always costs less than MSC, but XCP is also more reliable. The problem with software projects developed using architecture -> hire developers -> waterfall method -> slow and subtle bugs are usual. The reason is that the design is in one brain, but the code is written by somebody else. If the original design is done right, then eventually when the coders fully understand what the original designer meant in ALL cases, then it will be just fine.

I am reading the mastercoin thread. Do you get the feeling that the guys writing the mastercoin code to the mastercoin spec are 100% in sync with the mastercoin designer?

James

I think they are just like BTCT and BitFunder. Users will just go to the one they feel more comfortable.

But from technical point of view, won't the blockchain too bloated if two protocol run on top of it? Also why are you saying that XCP cost less, is it true?

For the moment XCP>MSC, but we all know that MSC will finally come up with a working product one day or another.

Depends on the utility of each. Once people realize XCP is more reliable and costs less, then 80/20 does not seem too unreasonable. It is not like there is a lot of usage of the mastercoin system yet, still trying to find out usage levels.

James

I think having a OTC market without counterparty risk is huge. But what do you think will happen once MSC work?

Is it conceivable the two exist one next to the other? Can we imagine one capture 80% of the market the other 20% and both still exist, or one has to die?

cityglut,

When you said mastercoin, was, well not really as cleanly defined, I didn't understand how nice you were being!

From what I can tell, the MSC project was started by some software architecture guy working parttime who doesnt write code and that the code is written by committee or some hired guys, who are not the guy that designed it?!

No wonder they are so late. I am going through their main thread and I am surprised they were able to raise so much money. I dont want to offend anyone that is mastercoin fan, but realistically XCP improves daily before our eyes. This really reminds me of the constant improvement with NXT. Regardless of what you feel about NXT distribution, there is no denying the continuous improvement. That I believe is the key to success.

All this 2 week beta period, etc. reminds me of waterfall project management. I think they did that in the 1970's?

I am not trying to create a flame war, just trying to fully understand what XCP's first hurdle is. They do have a much bigger warchest, so XCP will definitely need to counter with better tech.

Any ideas on test suite from hell?

James

+1. Well said. I do believe that XCP will have its place in time to come.

Good points, Vitalik & jimhsu. I agree with both of your points - here's something to add to the idea that valuable markets aren't 100% centered around HFT.

Everyone remembers Lehman Brothers for their spectacular collapse in 2008. Surprisingly, they are still in business today 5+ years after declaring bankruptcy, albeit in an odd fashion. Their derivatives and real estate contracts are so complicated that it's going to take until sometime in 2017 to unwind them all and reclaim funds for creditors.

There are tons of markets where the value of the contracts are significant enough that phone trading is still the primary way that business is done - tapping into that with blockchain based distributed systems would be a tremendous feat, imo.

Old but interesting article and still essentially valid through 2017: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-21/welcome-to-lehman-brothers-dot-were-open-for-business

Thank you!

Actually, I just pushed the hotfix to master.

I think you have a good point. However, I don't see HFT of cross (virtual) assets as a target utility for Counterparty.

One area which Counterparty targets areas where time scales of 10 minutes is magnitudes less than what is currently available in 'real life': issuance of shares, distribution of dividends and transfer of property. All of this is placed into the blockchain and provable.

I'd be interested to hear how Counterparty compares with traditional markets for betting (and spread betting).

A couple of people have asked on coinmarketcap's bitcointalk thread. Gliss (the moderator of the thread im guessing) hasn't replied.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=199685.1640

Can we get counterparty xcp added to coinmarketcap.com ?

Switch to develop or manually apply this fix to cancel.py:

https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,22.msg163.html#msg163

If not technically inclined, just wait it out a few days.