[ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 557.

Patel

legendary

Activity: 1320

Merit: 1007

Quote from: BitThink on February 03, 2014, 08:41:20 PM

One quick question:

Is there anyway to transfer some shares from A to B? I think this is quite important for existing stocks to import their shares.

Its the same command as send, but replace asset=XCP with asset=[name] quantity is however much you want to send

BitThink

legendary

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

One quick question:

Is there anyway to transfer some shares from A to B? I think this is quite important for existing stocks to import their shares.

halfcab123

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CabTrader v2 | crypto-folio.com

Quote from: jl777 on February 03, 2014, 08:26:35 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: jl777 on February 03, 2014, 08:20:00 PM

I finally found some info about mastercoin:
http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Category:Features

It seems that they have data feeds, betting, dividends and escrow. Of course it is all just in specification form, and not sure what the current mastercoin software has.

Does anybody have any experience with the actual mastercoin software?

From a marketing point, it seems that almost feature for feature the only difference between XCP and mastercoin is that XCP has it working and almost debugged, while mastercoin is still trying to get a release out.

If the technical overlap between XCP and mastercoin is the ~90% that it looks like to me, can somebody help with explaining the technical advantage of XCP over mastercoin?

James

Theres going to be a deluge of high quality software releases coming from the mastercoin front in the next 6 weeks or so.

Any idea how it will compare to XCP? I am looking for a clear technical advantage XCP will have over mastercoin. Something they won't be able to duplicate for a long time

James

BUMP @PhantomPhreak ?

qtgwith

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

Sell 200 XCP for 4BTC @0.02

jl777

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1134

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: jl777 on February 03, 2014, 08:20:00 PM

I finally found some info about mastercoin:
http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Category:Features

It seems that they have data feeds, betting, dividends and escrow. Of course it is all just in specification form, and not sure what the current mastercoin software has.

Does anybody have any experience with the actual mastercoin software?

From a marketing point, it seems that almost feature for feature the only difference between XCP and mastercoin is that XCP has it working and almost debugged, while mastercoin is still trying to get a release out.

If the technical overlap between XCP and mastercoin is the ~90% that it looks like to me, can somebody help with explaining the technical advantage of XCP over mastercoin?

James

Theres going to be a deluge of high quality software releases coming from the mastercoin front in the next 6 weeks or so.

Any idea how it will compare to XCP? I am looking for a clear technical advantage XCP will have over mastercoin. Something they won't be able to duplicate for a long time

James

jl777

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1134

I finally found some info about mastercoin:
http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Category:Features

It seems that they have data feeds, betting, dividends and escrow. Of course it is all just in specification form, and not sure what the current mastercoin software has.

Does anybody have any experience with the actual mastercoin software?

From a marketing point, it seems that almost feature for feature the only difference between XCP and mastercoin is that XCP has it working and almost debugged, while mastercoin is still trying to get a release out.

If the technical overlap between XCP and mastercoin is the ~90% that it looks like to me, can somebody help with explaining the technical advantage of XCP over mastercoin?

James

halfcab123

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CabTrader v2 | crypto-folio.com

15,890 XCP for sale. 1,589 BTC Roll Eyes

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 03, 2014, 07:43:28 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 03, 2014, 06:39:38 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 03, 2014, 03:58:45 PM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 03, 2014, 03:47:32 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

So what was the result of the Super Bowl bet between me and jimhsu?

I can see on blockscan that I've been credited 1 XCP from winning the bet since I only received 1340 XCP from burning and my "total received" shows 1341 XCP:
http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1QBPsB2ea61vWTNA9nGUhaHqPQB4SXF4fN

However, my balance is still 1340. What is causing this discrepancy?

What should your balance be? I found a bug in the bet expiration code, and now I'm getting 1399.41 XCP.

EDIT: In addition to that problem, the bet isn't being settled, it seems.

The reason that the bet wasn't settled is that the broadcast you made announcing the result was timestamped before the bet's deadline, which was a few hours ago. You just need to make another broadcast with the same values now (counterpartyd does the timestamping automatically).

EDIT: The expiration bug should have only affected the develop branch.

I am confused. I thought when the deadline arrives the value of the last feed broadcast before the deadline counts as the final value?

jimhsu originally set that deadline for 5AM EST.

Example scenario:

block X: feed value = 0
(bet deadline passes in between block X and X+1)
block X+1: feed value = 1

What is the value the bet would settle at? 0 or 1?

Or are you talking about the deadline for open bet expiration? I believe jimhsu's bet expiration was set for 1000 blocks away. I set my expiration for only 10 blocks because I expected it to match immediately.

Rather, it's the first broadcast with a timestamp after the deadline that settles bets.

Hmm this seems to violate some real-world conventions for settling CFDs based on "last price".

It also creates some problems.

Under your system, for a simple sports bet such as my Super Bowl Bet, the feed operator would have to wait until max(all deadlines of bets on the Super Bowl feed) before publishing the result if he doesn't want to continue publishing the same result repeatedly to settle outstanding bets.

Another problem is if the feed is shut off or the feed operator loses the feed's private key with bets outstanding. Under your system the money involved in those bets would be in limbo forever.

I propose changing the protocol to settle bets based on the last broadcast with a timestamp before the deadline that settles bets.

There are problems the other way, too, e.g. the feed operator would have to wait until max(deadlines) before publishing the results of a new bet on the same feed, but the real problem would be that bets would have to be settled based on block times, which I think should be considered generally unreliable, instead of deadlines, which allow for much finer-grained timing (e.g. broadcasting multiple times per block wouldn't get you in trouble).

Right now, bet matches are expired two weeks after the deadline if the deciding broadcast has not been made by then. (Block times are reliable on this time scale.)

Oh ok good points.

So what happens if max(deadlines) is longer than 2 weeks away?

It sounds like broadcasting a stream of prices has different requirements from broadcasting a binary one-time bet on an event. Addresses that broadcast an event can be disposable so the feed operator doesn't have to worry about corrupting his feed by publishing a new bet.

Perhaps broadcast should include a new flag to differentiate between the 2 types? Or at least an option to specify whether you want to use the "last-before-deadline" broadcast or the "first-after-deadline" broadcast.

As it stands, all bets must have a minimum precision of two weeks. Of course, this duration could be trivially extended if the need arose.

Somewhat different requirements, yes, but I don't think, at this stage at least, that such a change would bring benefits worth the added complexity. Let's see how people use the system, esp. once there's a GUI.

jl777

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1134

I have started a Volunteer Info thread.

https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,29.msg84.html#msg84

It is up to us to make XCP all that it can be. I wanted there to be a place where everyone can go to and quickly see who is available. This way we can efficiently coordinate efforts to get things done as quickly as possible.

I estimate there are over 1000 people here and regardless of your skill set, if you are willing to help, there will be stuff you can do to help XCP.

James

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: jimhsu on February 03, 2014, 06:53:37 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

POSSIBLE BUG:

Two orders were matched from this address and have yet to be paid with btcpay:
http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1G2i1WENdALacdWAwCQLf4Sn56PrWBVkYR

However no matched orders show up on counterpartyd market

I am on master branch, updated a couple hours ago.

I think for orders to show up as matched in blockscan, the buyer first has to execute btcpay. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Would be helpful to see matched, but unpaid orders though.

I thought the point of having that Order Match table was so you could have the order-match-id handy as well as Time Left to execute a btcpay.

So I've been chatting with the owner of those 2 matched orders and he apparently can't see the matched orders on his counterpartyd market either.

Perhaps there is still a bug.

Well they've expired. But if I ignore that, and the fact that the addresses aren't in my wallet, they show up, at least in the develop branch.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 03, 2014, 06:39:38 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 03, 2014, 03:58:45 PM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 03, 2014, 03:47:32 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

So what was the result of the Super Bowl bet between me and jimhsu?

I can see on blockscan that I've been credited 1 XCP from winning the bet since I only received 1340 XCP from burning and my "total received" shows 1341 XCP:
http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1QBPsB2ea61vWTNA9nGUhaHqPQB4SXF4fN

However, my balance is still 1340. What is causing this discrepancy?

What should your balance be? I found a bug in the bet expiration code, and now I'm getting 1399.41 XCP.

EDIT: In addition to that problem, the bet isn't being settled, it seems.

The reason that the bet wasn't settled is that the broadcast you made announcing the result was timestamped before the bet's deadline, which was a few hours ago. You just need to make another broadcast with the same values now (counterpartyd does the timestamping automatically).

EDIT: The expiration bug should have only affected the develop branch.

I am confused. I thought when the deadline arrives the value of the last feed broadcast before the deadline counts as the final value?

jimhsu originally set that deadline for 5AM EST.

Example scenario:

block X: feed value = 0
(bet deadline passes in between block X and X+1)
block X+1: feed value = 1

What is the value the bet would settle at? 0 or 1?

Or are you talking about the deadline for open bet expiration? I believe jimhsu's bet expiration was set for 1000 blocks away. I set my expiration for only 10 blocks because I expected it to match immediately.

Rather, it's the first broadcast with a timestamp after the deadline that settles bets.

Hmm this seems to violate some real-world conventions for settling CFDs based on "last price".

It also creates some problems.

Under your system, for a simple sports bet such as my Super Bowl Bet, the feed operator would have to wait until max(all deadlines of bets on the Super Bowl feed) before publishing the result if he doesn't want to continue publishing the same result repeatedly to settle outstanding bets.

Another problem is if the feed is shut off or the feed operator loses the feed's private key with bets outstanding. Under your system the money involved in those bets would be in limbo forever.

I propose changing the protocol to settle bets based on the last broadcast with a timestamp before the deadline that settles bets.

There are problems the other way, too, e.g. the feed operator would have to wait until max(deadlines) before publishing the results of a new bet on the same feed, but the real problem would be that bets would have to be settled based on block times, which I think should be considered generally unreliable, instead of deadlines, which allow for much finer-grained timing (e.g. broadcasting multiple times per block wouldn't get you in trouble).

Right now, bet matches are expired two weeks after the deadline if the deciding broadcast has not been made by then. (Block times are reliable on this time scale.)

xnova

sr. member

Activity: 390

Merit: 254

Counterparty Developer

Quote from: 520Bit on February 03, 2014, 07:36:00 PM

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>c:\python32\python.exe setup.py
2014-02-04 08:04:22,448|DEBUG: base path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: dist path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\dist'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: env path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\env'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: bin path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\bin'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,453|INFO: Installing Counterparty from source...
2014-02-04 08:04:23,124|INFO: Checking out/updating counterpartyd:master from gi
t...
2014-02-04 08:04:23,125|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: cd "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\
counterpartyd" && git pull origin master
From https://github.com/PhantomPhreak/counterpartyd
* branch master -> FETCH_HEAD
Already up-to-date.
2014-02-04 08:04:26,660|INFO: WINDOWS: Installing Required Packages...
2014-02-04 08:04:26,660|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: c:\python32\Scripts\easy_install
.exe virtualenv==1.10.1 pip==1.4.1
Searching for virtualenv==1.10.1
Best match: virtualenv 1.10.1
Processing virtualenv-1.10.1-py3.2.egg
virtualenv 1.10.1 is already the active version in easy-install.pth
Installing virtualenv-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv-3.2-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv-3.2.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts

Using c:\python32\lib\site-packages\virtualenv-1.10.1-py3.2.egg
Processing dependencies for virtualenv==1.10.1
Finished processing dependencies for virtualenv==1.10.1
Searching for pip==1.4.1
Best match: pip 1.4.1
Processing pip-1.4.1-py3.2.egg
pip 1.4.1 is already the active version in easy-install.pth
Installing pip-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip-3.2-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip-3.2.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts

Using c:\python32\lib\site-packages\pip-1.4.1-py3.2.egg
Processing dependencies for pip==1.4.1
Finished processing dependencies for pip==1.4.1
2014-02-04 08:04:29,095|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: c:\python32\Scripts\pip.exe inst
all appdirs==1.2.0
Requirement already satisfied (use --upgrade to upgrade): appdirs==1.2.0 in c:\p
ython32\lib\site-packages
Cleaning up...
2014-02-04 08:04:30,650|WARNING: Deleting existing virtualenv...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "setup.py", line 488, in
main()
File "setup.py", line 479, in main
create_virtualenv(paths, with_counterwalletd)
File "setup.py", line 277, in create_virtualenv
create_venv(paths['env_path'], paths['pip_path'], paths['python_path'], path
s['virtualenv_args'], 'reqs.txt')
File "setup.py", line 264, in create_venv
_rmtree(env_path)
File "setup.py", line 67, in _rmtree
_rmtree(fullpath)
File "setup.py", line 65, in _rmtree
rmgeneric(fullpath, f)
File "setup.py", line 49, in rmgeneric
import win32api, win32con
ImportError: No module named win32api

c:\counterpartyd_build>

What does the error mean - 'ImportError: No module named win32api'? How to fix it?

Please see https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,22.msg79.html#msg79

520Bit

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 252

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>c:\python32\python.exe setup.py
2014-02-04 08:04:22,448|DEBUG: base path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: dist path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\dist'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: env path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\env'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,451|DEBUG: bin path: 'c:\counterpartyd_build\bin'
2014-02-04 08:04:22,453|INFO: Installing Counterparty from source...
2014-02-04 08:04:23,124|INFO: Checking out/updating counterpartyd:master from gi
t...
2014-02-04 08:04:23,125|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: cd "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\
counterpartyd" && git pull origin master
From https://github.com/PhantomPhreak/counterpartyd
* branch master -> FETCH_HEAD
Already up-to-date.
2014-02-04 08:04:26,660|INFO: WINDOWS: Installing Required Packages...
2014-02-04 08:04:26,660|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: c:\python32\Scripts\easy_install
.exe virtualenv==1.10.1 pip==1.4.1
Searching for virtualenv==1.10.1
Best match: virtualenv 1.10.1
Processing virtualenv-1.10.1-py3.2.egg
virtualenv 1.10.1 is already the active version in easy-install.pth
Installing virtualenv-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv-3.2-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing virtualenv-3.2.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts

Using c:\python32\lib\site-packages\virtualenv-1.10.1-py3.2.egg
Processing dependencies for virtualenv==1.10.1
Finished processing dependencies for virtualenv==1.10.1
Searching for pip==1.4.1
Best match: pip 1.4.1
Processing pip-1.4.1-py3.2.egg
pip 1.4.1 is already the active version in easy-install.pth
Installing pip-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip-3.2-script.py script to c:\python32\Scripts
Installing pip-3.2.exe script to c:\python32\Scripts

Using c:\python32\lib\site-packages\pip-1.4.1-py3.2.egg
Processing dependencies for pip==1.4.1
Finished processing dependencies for pip==1.4.1
2014-02-04 08:04:29,095|DEBUG: RUNNING COMMAND: c:\python32\Scripts\pip.exe inst
all appdirs==1.2.0
Requirement already satisfied (use --upgrade to upgrade): appdirs==1.2.0 in c:\p
ython32\lib\site-packages
Cleaning up...
2014-02-04 08:04:30,650|WARNING: Deleting existing virtualenv...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "setup.py", line 488, in
main()
File "setup.py", line 479, in main
create_virtualenv(paths, with_counterwalletd)
File "setup.py", line 277, in create_virtualenv
create_venv(paths['env_path'], paths['pip_path'], paths['python_path'], path
s['virtualenv_args'], 'reqs.txt')
File "setup.py", line 264, in create_venv
_rmtree(env_path)
File "setup.py", line 67, in _rmtree
_rmtree(fullpath)
File "setup.py", line 65, in _rmtree
rmgeneric(fullpath, f)
File "setup.py", line 49, in rmgeneric
import win32api, win32con
ImportError: No module named win32api

c:\counterpartyd_build>

What does the error mean - 'ImportError: No module named win32api'? How to fix it?

jimhsu

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 264

Quote from: ?? on ??

POSSIBLE BUG:

Two orders were matched from this address and have yet to be paid with btcpay:
http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1G2i1WENdALacdWAwCQLf4Sn56PrWBVkYR

However no matched orders show up on counterpartyd market

I am on master branch, updated a couple hours ago.

I think for orders to show up as matched in blockscan, the buyer first has to execute btcpay. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Would be helpful to see matched, but unpaid orders though.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 03, 2014, 03:58:45 PM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 03, 2014, 03:47:32 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

So what was the result of the Super Bowl bet between me and jimhsu?

I can see on blockscan that I've been credited 1 XCP from winning the bet since I only received 1340 XCP from burning and my "total received" shows 1341 XCP:
http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1QBPsB2ea61vWTNA9nGUhaHqPQB4SXF4fN

However, my balance is still 1340. What is causing this discrepancy?

What should your balance be? I found a bug in the bet expiration code, and now I'm getting 1399.41 XCP.

EDIT: In addition to that problem, the bet isn't being settled, it seems.

The reason that the bet wasn't settled is that the broadcast you made announcing the result was timestamped before the bet's deadline, which was a few hours ago. You just need to make another broadcast with the same values now (counterpartyd does the timestamping automatically).

EDIT: The expiration bug should have only affected the develop branch.

I am confused. I thought when the deadline arrives the value of the last feed broadcast before the deadline counts as the final value?

jimhsu originally set that deadline for 5AM EST.

Example scenario:

block X: feed value = 0
(bet deadline passes in between block X and X+1)
block X+1: feed value = 1

What is the value the bet would settle at? 0 or 1?

Or are you talking about the deadline for open bet expiration? I believe jimhsu's bet expiration was set for 1000 blocks away. I set my expiration for only 10 blocks because I expected it to match immediately.

Rather, it's the first broadcast with a timestamp after the deadline that settles bets.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: ?? on ??

POSSIBLE BUG:

Two orders were matched from this address and have yet to be paid with btcpay:
http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1G2i1WENdALacdWAwCQLf4Sn56PrWBVkYR

However no matched orders show up on counterpartyd market

I am on master branch, updated a couple hours ago.

That table in the 'market' view only shows matched orders awaiting payment from you. I'll change the title to make this clear. Thanks for the report, though!

halfcab123

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CabTrader v2 | crypto-folio.com

Quote from: ddink7 on February 03, 2014, 06:12:00 PM

Quote from: physalis on February 03, 2014, 05:48:27 PM

Quote

0.01 BTC for 1.0 XCP

OK, so we're now expected to pay 10-15x of what people burned BTC for 2 days ago.... sure.

If somebody wants to do a decent, non-scammy trade, I'll offer 0.0015 btc/xpc.

I don't think anybody expects you to do anything. You either buy or you don't. Up to you.

Buyers need to realize that the burn period is over. Sorry. No one is going to sell for that cheap, you're crazy. We know where this thing is going and if we're going to check out now, its because buyers are going to pay us for what it "will" be worth. That's just how it goes.

ddink7

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1000

Quote from: physalis on February 03, 2014, 05:48:27 PM

Quote

0.01 BTC for 1.0 XCP

OK, so we're now expected to pay 10-15x of what people burned BTC for 2 days ago.... sure.

If somebody wants to do a decent, non-scammy trade, I'll offer 0.0015 btc/xpc.

I don't think anybody expects you to do anything. You either buy or you don't. Up to you.

relm9

hero member

Activity: 840

Merit: 1000

I think the publicity was quite good - it was actually mentioned on Coindesk.com in an article alongside Mastercoin like a week ago, most projects here don't get anywhere near that kind of exposure early on. I was expecting the amount of BTC burned to be way higher.

rotalumis

newbie

Activity: 26

Merit: 0

Quote from: ddink7 on February 03, 2014, 05:07:46 PM

I'm not sure how it could have been advertised more? This thread has 108 pages and 38,400 page views. Short of taking out a paid advertisement somewhere, what can you do?

I haven't been too active here lately, but if that reddit post had been made 24 hours earlier, I'd have burned a BTC or two. The original announcement post on reddit 28 days ago got just 14 upvotes and must have been buried in the flurry of altcoin posts, which is why no one saw it.

Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 557. (Read 1276933 times)