Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 637. (Read 1276928 times)

Also I see a lot of unfortunate people that messed up the burn. This is why you do a test burn, people.

Particularly it's the multiple inputs part that seems to be a problem. The tutorial should emphasize that multiple inputs are NOT accepted.

Thanks for the kind words!

The Counterparty team makes no promises regarding returns-on -investment. Our goal. moreover, was not to make investors rich overnight, but rather to create a working and relatively full-featured client, and to that extent returns-on-investment were secondary. At the same time, however, I believe that the situation you describe does not preclude XCP significantly increasing in value. Specifically, unless a Counterparty fork offers some real technical improvement, I think that XCP-2, etc. will be minted only when Counterparty has proved itself a financial success. And even if a Counterparty fork does offer technical advantage, the importance of being the first Counterparty must not be forgotten. In my opinion, certain alt-coins offer definite advantages over Bitcoin (e.g. faster block-time), and yet Bitcoin has still increased in value and the alt-coin market has, in my opinion, at least for now, proven itself to be by-and-large a bubble. Nothing suggests to me that the situation wouldn't be same if alt-Counterpartys were to appear.

once a lot of services get built around the project then it would hard to replicate that support structure isn't it? I would think it would be hard for any copy cat to replicate the counterparty support community after counterparty has a good head start.

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

I've put a couterpart explorer online:
http://www.counterparty-explorer.com/


https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4380341

Welcome trying it. Please correct me if my validation criteria is different with the official one.

That, and the fact that any project that blatantly forked the Counterparty code without adding a drastic amount of value-add would be seen as a Counterparty clone right off the bat.

once a lot of services get built around the project then it would hard to replicate that support structure isn't it? I would think it would be hard for any copy cat to replicate the counterparty support community after counterparty has a good head start.

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

I think XCP is a very promising project and I think I will do something on it (maybe an counterparty explorer soon).

Nonetheless, I don't think this project is able to give you huge return (more than 10x) like Nxt, so please be warned if you want to be rich over-night.

The reason is simple. Since this is an open-source project, so anyone could replicate it without any cost. They just need to create a new un-spendable address and then there's another XCP-2, XCP-3. Once people find the price of XCP is too high, they can freely goes to XCP-2 and XCP-3.

The smart or sneaky part of Nxt is that they postpone opening their source until the price is already more than 1000x. For master-coin, they have no code at all even at current stage.

Therefore, XCP in my opinion is the most honourable project and it's the project really want to create a decentralized market rather than a be-rich-soon game (the only other one similar is colored-coin).

Any thinking about this is welcome, especially from the developers.

humm... does it necessary does?
I thought it was just the result of a function on a private key in relation to a referential clock.
Sure the time ref is centralized. But if that only that it can be solved.
Now maybe the verification need a central server. Haven't thought about that.
Unperfect 2FA technology if that's the case.
'thought it worked with multisignature reconnaissance or something similar.
My understanding is vague, I admit.
But with a net of trust amongst master node, 'well doesn't seem completely impossible.
I cannot solve the tech aspect, that much is certain.

Thing is: current security is not enough.
Doesn't seem to be.
Security is not my strong suit.
But if there is a real risk that someone connect to my computer and stole my unencrypted wallet.dat (let's say), then the risk of him having a keylogger, a live watch on my screen, or something taking screenshort regularly:the risk is pretty much the same.
If the guy have the skill for the first, what prevent the second?
He just have to wait until he see either a privkey or your wallet password.

That's why I'm uncomfortable about not being able to move my XCP.
Sole place my coin are safe to me is in privkey outside wallet who never touched an internet connection.
I entered my wallet password in a terminal with a space upfront.
But it happened many time while 'computer is online.
Has to be to use the soft.

I'm not at peace with that.
I have no clue if my computer is secure enough.
Fresh GNU/Linux is better than old XP for sure, but I don't know much more about security.

Yes.
BTC privkey or wallet.dat containing it is what give you access to your XCP.

Yes of course. For example you are able to use this at any time to check your ballance, or someone elseBut if you wish to burn, and certainly send, you need to unlock your BTC wallet before.
Like that to unlock for 120sec:
Don't forget the space, otherwise history of your pwd in clear is kept.

It would be awesome if the dev are able one day to add 2FA-GA for XCP transaction.
That would make this project top 1 on security level.

Noticed: 80 BTC burned is less than 24h. Reached 230 in 5 days.
We probably gonna break the 1000 BTC / 1'000'000$.

Another bug report

Very interesting project. You mentioned the possibility of using the Counterparty Protocol with other cryptocurrency blockchains. If this happens, will XCP created by burning BTC be directly useable on other blockchains besides the Bitcoin blockchain, or will it always be married to Bitcoin?

Also, I love the idea of a 100% PoB system with a blockchain supported entirely by PoB. The PoB white paper that I read a while ago proposed such a system, if I remember correctly. Any thought of developing XCP into such a complete self-supporting system? It seems to me that with recent advances in PoS and now PoB, the only thing PoW has going for it is that it happens to be the method that Bitcoin (unfortunately) uses.

I think the protocol in https://github.com/PhantomPhreak/Counterparty needs to be updated (still saying burning to miner fee there). Especially, it's helpful to explicitly finalized what's the requirement of burning. Then third-party block explorer could be done to help people to show their XCP balance.

For example, It is said "Burn messages have precisely the string ‘ProofOfBurn’ stored in the OP_RETURN output." there, but as you have already clarified that OP_RETURN is not necessary in burning, and I believe all coins burnt in blockchain.info wallet has no OP_RETURN.

You should create a dedicated forum to keep your project communication organized.
It would increase the quality of this community-in-creation.

Dev, are you open to the creation of a think tank?
Are you open to discussion?

Due to adverse reaction about any change proposal in the wealth transfert to XCP & it's early adopter reward:
I'd like to propose the creation of a new project, on top of yours.

That would be a totally unique kind of asset.
As it is very special: it would require your help, cooperation and openness to discussion.

I call it MSH.
Mixing Share Holding.

This meta-asset would give a divident of the XCP mixing service usage.

The project and it's long term implications are quite vast and complex.

I'm happy to develop more if there is questions and interest.
Let's create a think tank.


Here is some more details about my MSH project:

It's trustless.
You send your XCP to a special address with a special command.
x% of XCP is taken, and shared amongst mixingshareholder.

- Got 1000 XCP, I want them to be splitted in two pseudoentity. I pay 2x%.
- Wanna it splitted in 3? in 4? You pay 3x% fee or 4x% fee.
- All the money you want in one clean address = 1x%.
- Cut in two and two again later? 2x% of 1000XCP, then 2x% of 2~500 XCP.


Example with x = 1:

Cut in two:
2x% of 1000 XCP = 20 XCP.
In 2-2 (cut in 2 and then again in 2, 50% proportion):
20+10 = 30 XCP.
Cut directly in 3?
1000 => 3x% = 30XCP fee.

You can specify with the new-to-be counterpartyd command the origin, the amount and the number of pubkey/which one you want it splitted in.

The 0.10$ BTC transfert fee doesn't disturb me at all.
The value & fee-concept I mean.
The fact it's so tightly linked with the bitcoin unity annoy me more.
But that will be a talk for another time.
It's long term implications.

I'm convince since months already that proof of burn is THE way to go for trustless wealth transfert and distribution.

If we're lucky: there might be a possibility to burn XCP without relying on Eligius pool?

That POB-way:
"MSH-project XCP burning" would be well cleanly separated from your "XCP-project BTC burning".

Nobody can anymore say I'm trying to change the early adopter reward of XCP.
That is a completely new project proposal.
With clearly defined minimal effort requirement from the start.
You HAVE to use the software.
No overeasy way, real reward.

I wish it to be maid with a more drastically decreasing reward over time.
Details can be publicly discussed.

This took me quite some time.
Everyone, please express yourself about it.
Have a nice day.

(Just that you know: I will have less available time during the next 36h)


PS: obviously (I hope) this idea is not a project in competition with XCP-project.
On contrary, it gives it more weight and extent the possibilities of the XCP-project. Increasing it's quality and appeal.
I work for communities.
That's called enlightened self-interest.
Human nature being selfish, we need trustlessness technologies.
& quality thinker's communication.