[ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 599.

BitThink

legendary

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

Quote from: prophetx on January 22, 2014, 07:27:07 AM

Quote from: BitThink on January 22, 2014, 06:33:43 AM

Quote from: prophetx on January 22, 2014, 01:16:10 AM

btw I just remembered that the Chinese give each other these red envelops with lucky money in the new year or leading up to the Chinese new year, and then they burn it I think... I'm not Chinese so I don't really know how it works.

I know it was not the original intent of this project to burn, but I thought how ironic that the burn would end around the Chinese new year.

No, Chinese will use the lucky money in the envelops. Chinese only burn fake money as an way to worship ancestors. These are two different things.

so the lucky money is real money then?

when do they burn the fake money?

Yes, the lucky money is real money.

The fake money is burnt on Qingming (around 5th April), 7th month in lunar calendar, and other days, mostly for ancestors worship.

Actually, burning real money is illegal in China, just like in most countries. But certainly nobody cares if you are not burning millions.

prophetx

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1010

he who has the gold makes the rules

Quote from: BitThink on January 22, 2014, 06:33:43 AM

Quote from: prophetx on January 22, 2014, 01:16:10 AM

btw I just remembered that the Chinese give each other these red envelops with lucky money in the new year or leading up to the Chinese new year, and then they burn it I think... I'm not Chinese so I don't really know how it works.

I know it was not the original intent of this project to burn, but I thought how ironic that the burn would end around the Chinese new year.

No, Chinese will use the lucky money in the envelops. Chinese only burn fake money as an way to worship ancestors. These are two different things.

so the lucky money is real money then?

when do they burn the fake money?

SyRenity

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: porqupine on January 22, 2014, 04:45:50 AM

Quote from: TheMightyX on January 22, 2014, 03:07:39 AM

Quote from: Bitye West on January 22, 2014, 02:47:48 AM

Would it be a good idea to try to keep this coin on the DL until after the burn period is over?

We can all keep it hush and try to keep the thread bumping and promoting at a minimum until the burn is over.

yes, except that there is already 1,400+ BTC burnt.
So.... cats out of the bag. This will not be another NXT moneymaking bonanza.

It seems there is more money to be made in scammy altcoins and promise-to-do-something protocols than the actual thing..-- Nevertheless in terms of a protocol/currency being adopted the later has much better chances (even if the devs do not get super rich from it).

While it won't bring quantum jump as NXT did (after all, Nxt is quite unique being both first PoS and having a very limited initial distribution), I still expect a very solid profit on this technology. It very depends how market adopts and runs with it bringing innovative features onwards.

Also motivating the devs with donations is a significant part of the success Wink

.

BitThink

legendary

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

Quote from: prophetx on January 22, 2014, 01:16:10 AM

btw I just remembered that the Chinese give each other these red envelops with lucky money in the new year or leading up to the Chinese new year, and then they burn it I think... I'm not Chinese so I don't really know how it works.

I know it was not the original intent of this project to burn, but I thought how ironic that the burn would end around the Chinese new year.

No, Chinese will use the lucky money in the envelops. Chinese only burn fake money as an way to worship ancestors. These are two different things.

TheMightyX

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Vires in Numeris

Quote from: halfcab123 on January 22, 2014, 05:12:31 AM

Quote from: porqupine on January 22, 2014, 04:45:50 AM

Quote from: TheMightyX on January 22, 2014, 03:07:39 AM

Quote from: Bitye West on January 22, 2014, 02:47:48 AM

Would it be a good idea to try to keep this coin on the DL until after the burn period is over?

We can all keep it hush and try to keep the thread bumping and promoting at a minimum until the burn is over.

yes, except that there is already 1,400+ BTC burnt.
So.... cats out of the bag. This will not be another NXT moneymaking bonanza.

It seems there is more money to be made in scammy altcoins and promise-to-do-something protocols than the actual thing..-- Nevertheless in terms of a protocol/currency being adopted the later has much better chances (even if the devs do not get super rich from it).
Regarding PoS and asset issuance: while it would be tenable to have a PoS multi-sig requirement for asset issuance, I'm not sure it would be altogether fair. Basically a big stake owner in XCP could still issue as many assets as he would like, and low stake owners would have to scramble,if only to enable the use of a certain feature inherent to the protocol. I think asset balance maintenance is significantly more solid - say .5 btc (200xcp) is not that much to maintain one's own asset for accounting purposes (even if its just for internal bets/accounts between a limited number of people), (and if someone has 50000 xcp sure let them make 100 assets it still won't enable them to monopolize available asset names, and it will commit their funds to non-liquidity, the later only being reasonable if they have a real use for these assets.

Are you suggesting 200 xcp = .5 btc ... Just wondering

I think that was just an arbitrary number.
Regardless, the final amount disbursed is always going to be an arbitrary number assuming adequate divisibility.

halfcab123

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CabTrader v2 | crypto-folio.com

Quote from: porqupine on January 22, 2014, 04:45:50 AM

Quote from: TheMightyX on January 22, 2014, 03:07:39 AM

Quote from: Bitye West on January 22, 2014, 02:47:48 AM

Would it be a good idea to try to keep this coin on the DL until after the burn period is over?

We can all keep it hush and try to keep the thread bumping and promoting at a minimum until the burn is over.

yes, except that there is already 1,400+ BTC burnt.
So.... cats out of the bag. This will not be another NXT moneymaking bonanza.

It seems there is more money to be made in scammy altcoins and promise-to-do-something protocols than the actual thing..-- Nevertheless in terms of a protocol/currency being adopted the later has much better chances (even if the devs do not get super rich from it).
Regarding PoS and asset issuance: while it would be tenable to have a PoS multi-sig requirement for asset issuance, I'm not sure it would be altogether fair. Basically a big stake owner in XCP could still issue as many assets as he would like, and low stake owners would have to scramble,if only to enable the use of a certain feature inherent to the protocol. I think asset balance maintenance is significantly more solid - say .5 btc (200xcp) is not that much to maintain one's own asset for accounting purposes (even if its just for internal bets/accounts between a limited number of people), (and if someone has 50000 xcp sure let them make 100 assets it still won't enable them to monopolize available asset names, and it will commit their funds to non-liquidity, the later only being reasonable if they have a real use for these assets.

Are you suggesting 200 xcp = .5 btc ... Just wondering

halfcab123

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CabTrader v2 | crypto-folio.com

Why so much doom and gloom around this coin

porqupine

full member

Activity: 214

Merit: 101

Quote from: TheMightyX on January 22, 2014, 03:07:39 AM

Quote from: Bitye West on January 22, 2014, 02:47:48 AM

Would it be a good idea to try to keep this coin on the DL until after the burn period is over?

We can all keep it hush and try to keep the thread bumping and promoting at a minimum until the burn is over.

yes, except that there is already 1,400+ BTC burnt.
So.... cats out of the bag. This will not be another NXT moneymaking bonanza.

It seems there is more money to be made in scammy altcoins and promise-to-do-something protocols than the actual thing..-- Nevertheless in terms of a protocol/currency being adopted the later has much better chances (even if the devs do not get super rich from it).
Regarding PoS and asset issuance: while it would be tenable to have a PoS multi-sig requirement for asset issuance, I'm not sure it would be altogether fair. Basically a big stake owner in XCP could still issue as many assets as he would like, and low stake owners would have to scramble,if only to enable the use of a certain feature inherent to the protocol. I think asset balance maintenance is significantly more solid - say .5 btc (200xcp) is not that much to maintain one's own asset for accounting purposes (even if its just for internal bets/accounts between a limited number of people), (and if someone has 50000 xcp sure let them make 100 assets it still won't enable them to monopolize available asset names, and it will commit their funds to non-liquidity, the later only being reasonable if they have a real use for these assets.

TheMightyX

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Vires in Numeris

Quote from: Bitye West on January 22, 2014, 02:47:48 AM

Would it be a good idea to try to keep this coin on the DL until after the burn period is over?

We can all keep it hush and try to keep the thread bumping and promoting at a minimum until the burn is over.

yes, except that there is already 1,400+ BTC burnt.
So.... cats out of the bag. This will not be another NXT moneymaking bonanza.

Bitye West

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Would it be a good idea to try to keep this coin on the DL until after the burn period is over?

We can all keep it hush and try to keep the thread bumping and promoting at a minimum until the burn is over.

lonsharim

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: maxmint on January 21, 2014, 05:57:59 AM

Quote from: lonsharim on January 21, 2014, 05:53:55 AM

Quote from: maxmint on January 21, 2014, 05:45:26 AM

Quote from: lonsharim on January 21, 2014, 05:38:03 AM

Is it enough confirmation to see the bitcoin has been received @ this address 1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr when done through blockchain.info?

No, that's not necessarily proof of burn. It would be best to check your address using counterpartyd or blockscan.com.
If you feel unsafe burning yourself you can use my escrow burn service:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GY1pNSLo8PUW8cSb9WJC8OdQOdrZ510pGEXTBIvq3i0

How long does it take to see XCP at the addressed used for burning?

I could test this process by burning 0.01 BTC and check.

blockscan.com is pretty quick, as soon as it catches up with the latest block you'll be able to see your balance. Should not take more than 15 minutes or so.

Thanks maxmint

I was able to burn from blockchain.info easily enough and also confirm the XCP received at my address through blockscan.com

At some point I will have to sort out my local bitcoin-qt wallet and import the private keys there so that I can use the counterparty wallet.

lonsharim

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: TheMightyX on January 22, 2014, 01:10:15 AM

Will the amount of coins minted by burning be a set amount and everyone gets a share proportional to their investment or will it be a set amount x investment?

No
Investment in XCP per BTC gives you between 1500 and 1000 XCP. How much you get depends on which block your burn transaction is a part of. Currently these transactions need to be between 278310 and 283810. Transactions part of the earlier blocks get closer to 1500 and transactions part of the last few blocks will likely fetch you 1000 XCP.

There is a simple algo a few pages behind that calculates the XCP you can potentially receive.

prophetx

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1010

he who has the gold makes the rules

btw I just remembered that the Chinese give each other these red envelops with lucky money in the new year or leading up to the Chinese new year, and then they burn it I think... I'm not Chinese so I don't really know how it works.

I know it was not the original intent of this project to burn, but I thought how ironic that the burn would end around the Chinese new year.

TheMightyX

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Vires in Numeris

Will the amount of coins minted by burning be a set amount and everyone gets a share proportional to their investment or will it be a set amount x investment?

BitThink

legendary

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

Quote from: JahPowerBit on January 21, 2014, 05:36:09 PM

what is the advantage of using XCP, compared with coloredcoin (http://coloredcoins.org/)?
In any case, it's probably possible to make a chromawallet fork for XCP (http://chromawallet.com/).

XCP is a completely new protocol based on the messages embedded in the block chain, so there're more features can be implemented compared with coloredcoin.

Nonetheless, which can be successful all depends on which arrives the market the first, which is more stable, and the marketing.

BitThink

legendary

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

Quote from: JahPowerBit on January 21, 2014, 03:01:39 PM

How can i generate an address like this: 1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr ?

Why 1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX is impossible?

Thks.

The last 6 characters is the checksum and has to be calculated based on the previous characters.

Chang Hum

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 502

Not sure if there's a way to do it, but would be good if ongoing fees could go into a dev pool.

jimhsu

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 264

Given these problems, and the fact that any fixed fee will ultimately not make sense, I still support some kind of proof of model (e.g. PoS) and local/global assets to ultimately fix this problem (as I described several pages back). It has a natural analogy with how marketing (in the real world) works -- anyone can come up with an idea/product, but to introduce it to the real world, there are costs involved. Even further, it (a PoS function) directly incentivizes holding XCP without introducing a balance requirement (a heavy handed way to do things) or restricting it per address (which = Sybil attack). Again, proof of stake doesn't have to lead to inflation of the underlying asset (one of the most common criticisms); in XCP's case, it can create new assets.

As an extension, I could even imagine XCP holders that don't want to create assets to pull their "proof of stake" power into some sort of pool to help promising/deserving projects that don't have a lot of XCP to launch.

cityglut

full member

Activity: 216

Merit: 100

Quote from: porqupine on January 21, 2014, 10:10:15 PM

Quote from: cityglut on January 21, 2014, 10:06:43 PM

Quote from: porqupine on January 21, 2014, 09:54:32 PM

What about linking XCP generated Assets to the original Issuer address by limiting an address to a single issued asset per address and requiring it to maintain a certain balance of XCP?

As Counterparty stands, only one address can issue each asset, and each address can issue only one asset. Why do you think an address which issues an asset should have to maintain a certain balance of XCP?

I think it could be a reasonably effective way to prevent one person from, issuing as mentioned, numerous Assets just by generating addresses just to sit on them. It's pretty trivial at the moment to write a scrip to issue all possible 3/4 letter assets, and I don't think that a tiny fee is a real deterrent.

I spoke imprecisely last time: there are in fact 256^8 asset names in all, but there only around 10,000 single common English words that could possibly be asset names. The problem, then, is rather different from how I initially described it.

porqupine

full member

Activity: 214

Merit: 101

Quote from: cityglut on January 21, 2014, 10:06:43 PM

Quote from: porqupine on January 21, 2014, 09:54:32 PM

What about linking XCP generated Assets to the original Issuer address by limiting an address to a single issued asset per address and requiring it to maintain a certain balance of XCP?

As Counterparty stands, only one address can issue each asset, and each address can issue only one asset. Why do you think an address which issues an asset should have to maintain a certain balance of XCP?

I think it could be a reasonably effective way to prevent one person from, issuing as mentioned, numerous Assets and sitting on them. It's pretty trivial at the moment to write a script to issue all possible 3/4 letter assets, and I don't think that a tiny fee is a real deterrent.

Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 599. (Read 1276933 times)