[ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 584.

ewibit

legendary

Activity: 2955

Merit: 1050

Quote from: irrawaddybtc on January 29, 2014, 11:26:19 AM

Im using the latest build from github on Ubuntu

me too latest build

Code:

./counterpartyd.py --rpc-password=xxxx server
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./counterpartyd.py", line 13, in
import appdirs
ImportError: No module named 'appdirs'

SyRenity

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 10:06:27 AM

The BTC will be used to buy the shares on the distributed exchange with the order command (in the CLI), and the dividends will (usually) be paid in XCP with the dividend function.

If you don't want to pay dividends, but rather only make good on something like an IOU, then there's no reason that you should do that in XCP over any other asset.

So the only inconvenience, is that investors will have to convert XCP back to BTC (if they want so)? Is there any way planned to pay dividends in BTC, or this will need to be handled separately?

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Quote from: ?? on ??

It does take quite a while for counterpartyd to sync even starting from block 278,000ish. This will eventually become a big problem I think, if not fixed.

A stop gap solution would be to offer a partially updated downloaded able counterparty db. However, with this approach there could be trust issues.

irrawaddybtc

newbie

Activity: 17

Merit: 0

Im using the latest build from github on Ubuntu and trying to send XCP but am getting the following python TypeError:

Code:

File "/home/xxxxxx/counterpartyd_build/dist/counterpartyd/lib/bitcoin.py", line 177, in serialise
secret_exponent, compressed = wif_to_tuple_of_secret_exponent_compressed(private_key_wif, is_test=testnet)
TypeError: wif_to_tuple_of_secret_exponent_compressed() got an unexpected keyword argument 'is_test'

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: lonsharim on January 29, 2014, 10:12:45 AM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 09:26:23 AM

The main disadvantage of the 'meta-coin' approach is that there can't be any SPV clients (someone needs to store the whole blockchain, as it were), but there are plenty of ways around that.

OK I don't understand the behind-the-scene details of SPV clients other than the fact that it does not do its own verification but connects to a trusted node. I feel like I am missing something here. Why couldn't a thin client do the same with XCP.

That's not SPV, and Counterparty may use a trusted node (or a consensus of multiple trusted nodes) just fine. See the Bitcoin wiki.

lonsharim

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 09:26:23 AM

The main disadvantage of the 'meta-coin' approach is that there can't be any SPV clients (someone needs to store the whole blockchain, as it were), but there are plenty of ways around that.

OK I don't understand the behind-the-scene details of SPV clients other than the fact that it does not do its own verification but connects to a trusted node. I feel like I am missing something here. Why couldn't a thin client do the same with XCP.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: SyRenity on January 29, 2014, 09:47:39 AM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 09:43:55 AM

The assets will be backed however the issuer likes.

For an IPO, one would create an asset, announce off-blockchain how it would be backed, and then sell a certain number of that asset at whatever price, for whatever asset.

For instance, if I want to make an IPO for MiningCompanyX, I could issue 10^5 of MININGX (divisible or indivisible), then sell perhaps 3*10^4 of those on the distributed exchange at a price of .1 BTC/MININGX and raise 3*10^3 BTC. The backing here might be the promise of future dividends.

And the BTC will be sent to asset address?
How they will be paid back later on in form of divs, as BTC or XCP?
(This the point that I don't quite get...)

The BTC will be used to buy the shares on the distributed exchange with the order command (in the CLI), and the dividends will (usually) be paid in XCP with the dividend function.

If you don't want to pay dividends, but rather only make good on something like an IOU, then there's no reason that you should do that in XCP over any other asset.

SyRenity

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 09:43:55 AM

The assets will be backed however the issuer likes.

For an IPO, one would create an asset, announce off-blockchain how it would be backed, and then sell a certain number of that asset at whatever price, for whatever asset.

For instance, if I want to make an IPO for MiningCompanyX, I could issue 10^5 of MININGX (divisible or indivisible), then sell perhaps 3*10^4 of those on the distributed exchange at a price of .1 BTC/MININGX and raise 3*10^3 BTC. The backing here might be the promise of future dividends.

And the BTC will be sent to asset address?
How they will be paid back later on in form of divs, as BTC or XCP?
(This the point that I don't quite get...)

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: SyRenity on January 29, 2014, 09:24:19 AM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 09:17:58 AM

Why would you send BTC in particular to the issuing address? One may use any asset to buy any other, and one may use the distributed exchange for IPOs.

With XCP, one tiny dividend transaction can pay all of the dividends simultaneously. With BTC, you need one output per address. Of course, there's nothing stopping someone from paying BTC dividends, but there's no reason to put that feature in the Counterparty protocol (it wouldn't be a Counterparty transaction).

Ok, I see where you coming now from.

Can you explain a bit how the distributed exchange will work with the IPO's? People will still need to buy XCP, or they could send it any other asset? Also, how these assets will be backed?

The assets will be backed however the issuer likes.

For an IPO, one would create an asset, announce off-blockchain how it would be backed, and then sell a certain number of that asset at whatever price, for whatever asset.

For instance, if I want to make an IPO for MiningCompanyX, I could issue 10^5 of MININGX (divisible or indivisible), then sell perhaps 3*10^4 of those on the distributed exchange at a price of .1 BTC/MININGX and raise 3*10^3 BTC. The backing here might be the promise of future dividends.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: halfcab123 on January 29, 2014, 09:00:49 AM

Once I figure out how to send and receive XCP I'll send you guys a pretty sizeable donation in XCP

Thanks!

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: lonsharim on January 29, 2014, 09:18:12 AM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 06:38:09 AM

Quote from: Alias on January 29, 2014, 06:29:40 AM

How flexible is the Counterparty Protocol in terms of it being run atop other alt-coins instead of just Bitcoin?

Has anyone got any opinions about which alt-coin might be the optimal base for Counterparty?

Most alt-coins are nearly identical to Bitcoin, and Counterparty will run fine on any one that is. It would need a little tweaking for something like Namecoin or Peercoin, but not much, I think.

By which you mean support for OP_RETURN feature of Bitcoin? I think I read something on that before, i.e. that it is used to store data on the XCP transaction taking place.

I was reading an article on one of the bitcoin magzine websites and they mention that apart from the obvious external dependency (i.e. btc blockchain) the other problem is that it could be sluggish or time consuming searching the block chain for specific transactions that have stored XCP data. Is this a concern for you at this stage.

As far as I know, most alt-coins support multi-sig, which does suffice.

It's not a problem, as all of the transactions only need to be found once, in order, and then they are stored in their own (much smaller) database. And we have ten minutes between blocks, so there's plenty of time to parse new transactions as they appear on the network. The main disadvantage of the 'meta-coin' approach is that there can't be any SPV clients (someone needs to store the whole blockchain, as it were), but there are plenty of ways around that.

SyRenity

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 09:17:58 AM

Why would you send BTC in particular to the issuing address? One may use any asset to buy any other, and one may use the distributed exchange for IPOs.

With XCP, one tiny dividend transaction can pay all of the dividends simultaneously. With BTC, you need one output per address. Of course, there's nothing stopping someone from paying BTC dividends, but there's no reason to put that feature in the Counterparty protocol (it wouldn't be a Counterparty transaction).

Ok, I see where you coming now from.

Can you explain a bit how the distributed exchange will work with the IPO's? People will still need to buy XCP, or they could send it any other asset? Also, how these assets will be backed?

lonsharim

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 06:38:09 AM

Quote from: Alias on January 29, 2014, 06:29:40 AM

How flexible is the Counterparty Protocol in terms of it being run atop other alt-coins instead of just Bitcoin?

Has anyone got any opinions about which alt-coin might be the optimal base for Counterparty?

Most alt-coins are nearly identical to Bitcoin, and Counterparty will run fine on any one that is. It would need a little tweaking for something like Namecoin or Peercoin, but not much, I think.

By which you mean support for OP_RETURN feature of Bitcoin? I think I read something on that before, i.e. that it is used to store data on the XCP transaction taking place.

I was reading an article on one of the bitcoin magzine websites and they mention that apart from the obvious external dependency (i.e. btc blockchain) the other problem is that it could be sluggish or time consuming searching the block chain for specific transactions that have stored XCP data. Is this a concern for you at this stage.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: SyRenity on January 29, 2014, 09:13:33 AM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 09:11:08 AM

Quote from: SyRenity on January 29, 2014, 08:31:02 AM

A question about dividends, is it possible to do them via BTC?

Or the only planned options for the moment is using XCP?

XCP can do the job much better than BTC, so dividends (and bets) will be XCP-only for the foreseeable future.

So the assets investors, sending BTC to asset address, will actually get XCP back (and will need to exchange them back to BTC, if needed)? A bit backwards approach, to be honest.

Why would you send BTC in particular to the issuing address? One may use any asset to buy any other, and one may use the distributed exchange for IPOs.

With XCP, one tiny dividend transaction can pay all of the dividends simultaneously. With BTC, you need one output per address. Of course, there's nothing stopping someone from paying BTC dividends, but there's no reason to put that feature in the Counterparty protocol (it wouldn't be a Counterparty transaction).

SyRenity

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 09:11:08 AM

Quote from: SyRenity on January 29, 2014, 08:31:02 AM

A question about dividends, is it possible to do them via BTC?

Or the only planned options for the moment is using XCP?

XCP can do the job much better than BTC, so dividends (and bets) will be XCP-only for the foreseeable future.

So the assets investors, sending BTC to asset address, will actually get XCP back (and will need to exchange them back to BTC, if needed)? A bit backwards approach, to be honest.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: SyRenity on January 29, 2014, 08:31:02 AM

A question about dividends, is it possible to do them via BTC?

Or the only planned options for the moment is using XCP?

XCP can do the job much better than BTC, so dividends (and bets) will be XCP-only for the foreseeable future.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: Alias on January 29, 2014, 08:23:09 AM

Quote from: led_lcd on January 29, 2014, 07:35:58 AM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 29, 2014, 06:38:09 AM

Quote from: Alias on January 29, 2014, 06:29:40 AM

How flexible is the Counterparty Protocol in terms of it being run atop other alt-coins instead of just Bitcoin?

Has anyone got any opinions about which alt-coin might be the optimal base for Counterparty?

Most alt-coins are nearly identical to Bitcoin, and Counterparty will run fine on any one that is. It would need a little tweaking for something like Namecoin or Peercoin, but not much, I think.

This is the reason I support Counterparty and will continue to do so.

What the team is doing is a great service to Bitcoin and the crypto currency community. The way they operate in my opinion is akin to the spirit in which Bitcoin is built.

Instead of acting like a commercial enterprise trying to hide away their secret code or release the code late (with bugs no less), the Counterparty team released working source code on launch. It was made available to everyone.

I get the exact same vibe from these guys. No extraneous BS, just hard working and responsive dudes.

Thanks for the reply about running an instance of Counterparty on different alt-coins. The tweaking for Peercoin would be interesting if you automatically (for example) burned the users generated stake and turned it into XCP. That would encourage people to secure the base layer of Peercoin by buying it and performing Proof of Stake mining and generating the more useful XCP. (XC(P)PC) for the win!

Another related question...

Could you implement one instance of Counterparty which runs across a number of different alt-coins at the same time. Presumably you would need some supernodes (i.e. simply nodes that are nodes for all the alts that you are running across). This way the Counterparty Protocol would become the first interoperable cryptocurrency utility. This would have some interesting implications for Counterparty's decentralised exchange, with regard to direct automated transactions of cryptocurrencies that aren't just BTC and XCP.

I'm looking forward to your response.

Cross-blockchain synchronisation will probably be rather awkward (as if Bitcoin block times were not already long enough"), and given the fact that most alt-coins are so similar, attempting to figure it out is not too high of a priority right now.

halfcab123

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CabTrader v2 | crypto-folio.com

Once I figure out how to send and receive XCP I'll send you guys a pretty sizeable donation in XCP

SyRenity

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

A question about dividends, is it possible to do them via BTC?

Or the only planned options for the moment is using XCP?

SyRenity

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: Alias on January 29, 2014, 08:11:02 AM

Quote from: SyRenity on January 29, 2014, 07:52:52 AM

If I burned XCP on separate address (but same wallet) on blockchain info, is there any way to export only this address private key?

Or the only way for me is to export the whole wallet then import into Bitcoin-QT?

Thanks.

There is. If I recall from memory, you simply click on import/export and look for the unencrypted/plaintext export option and copy and past the private key corresponding to your public key/address.

Thanks, will check.

Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 584. (Read 1276936 times)