[ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 640.

xibeijan

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1001

Quote from: cryptrol on January 06, 2014, 12:22:44 PM

Quote from: panonym on January 06, 2014, 11:56:38 AM

Quote from: bitcoinrocks on January 06, 2014, 11:31:18 AM

Once the initial buy-in period is over, how will the price be determined? Will a decentralized exchange be online then?

On testnet it is online and working.
On mainnet the code is the same and work if miner process OP_RETURN.
Good chance are all miner will process it with the upload to bitcoind v0.9.
This day it will be online and usable.

TBH I have yet to see any authorized voice not speaking bad about this, so I wouldnt be so sure to see this finally implemented on .9 . I like this project and how it has been launched, but all this project and the BTC spent (burnt) depends on the implementation of a feature that may or may not appear on 0.9 and it is uncertain even when. I would like to have a more clear roadmap for this nice project.

Good point. I am now feeling very nervous. Sad

xibeijan

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1001

Quote from: porqupine on January 06, 2014, 11:32:33 AM

.144 BTC a day would be quite high. Especially if BTC goes up another couple thousand, and supposing that you aren't receiving anything back in fees.

Ah, but you're forgetting that this is based on the min BTC TX fee. If BTC goes up, then the min TX fee is adjusted down. Thus, 0.XXX BTC day should be a reasonable, relatively constant amount hovering around $144 or $0.09 USD per feed post. Perhaps, I've got it wrong though?

wizzardTim

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1000

Reality is stranger than fiction

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on January 06, 2014, 12:20:41 PM

Quote from: wizzardTim on January 06, 2014, 11:52:46 AM

Ok, I burned 0.01BTC. Transaction id: 089318e80783a93e15e4bdc7be922cc303a85f5045b942ffe05eb249c27ffaea

Now when I enter:

python run.py address 15prRGqRvQckN7dQjqA18H1uy4e1ruiBrh

I see that I have 14.41 XCP balance but after that I get a:

UnicodeEncodeError: 'charmap' codec cant encode character '\u2026'

Should I worry?

@devs: now I should wait for an hour to pass before I burn the whole BTC? Because I remember reading somewhere that there is only one valid transaction per address per hour.

You shouldn't worry, and you don't need to wait.

Thank you, sir.

xibeijan

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1001

Quote from: cityglut on January 06, 2014, 11:27:57 AM

Quote from: xibeijan on January 06, 2014, 11:09:19 AM

Quote

Feeds
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| Feed Address | Timestamp | Text | Value | Fee Multiplier |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| mt1N2qE4wHkjdDeumCtRg1NKwxXGMCAx5X | 2014-01-06T16:00:03+00:00 | CoinDesk BPI USD | 922.0817 | 0.0001 |
| mgYWm8Ug76czkAMSVNECJ31iEAGH5V9py1 | 2014-01-06T15:57:53+00:00 | foobar | 3.0 | 10 |
| n1TzSvnJRH4LUKA9j6qvCpiqc2yvxGKSmg | 2014-01-06T15:06:40+00:00 | foobar | 123.0 | 1E-7 |
| mq8srYuaPCrzk4mdKuz3168dxJQAQKv7Wo | 2014-01-05T02:06:34+00:00 | Hello World | 0.0 | 0.01 |
| mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns | 2014-01-02T01:41:46+00:00 | foobar | 2.0 | 0.001 |
| mz8qzVaH8RaVp2Rq6m8D2dTiSFirhFf4th | 2014-01-02T01:04:17+00:00 | | 0.0 | 0.01 |
| n3EHaCAycMEv6DhMPbrQsEubFsgtUmoin1 | 2014-01-01T13:16:05+00:00 | Test | 0.0 | 0.000001 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+

So feeds shows us all feeds being "broadcast", rather than just the ones we care about?

The feeds listed first are those that have been most recently broadcast.

Won't this pose a risk to spamming? For only 0.144 BTC /day you could spam the Feed list every minute and keep your spam visible on top.

As I wrote here, users will most likely determine which feeds they want to bet on with reference to a source outside of the blockchain. Spamming broacasts, then, will probably just cause this, which will happen naturally and of its own accord, to happen more quickly.

My question is not about trust (I understood your earlier post). It's about whether the information being displayed is useful.

What I'm asking is that if this "Feed info window" has information (including spam) changing randomly every 10 minutes, then how useful is it to display it?

Feeds of interest will be selected from another source (e.g. a website or forum post), so perhaps it would be better use to show only the feeds a user is interested in (user configurable). I don't know if that's possible, but just a suggestion.

Another solution could be to give feeds a feedback rating (as part of the system), then the "Feed window" could be sorted from highest to lowest feedback rating. Feeds could obtain feedback by decentralised voting.

cryptrol

hero member

Activity: 637

Merit: 500

Quote from: panonym on January 06, 2014, 11:56:38 AM

Quote from: bitcoinrocks on January 06, 2014, 11:31:18 AM

Once the initial buy-in period is over, how will the price be determined? Will a decentralized exchange be online then?

On testnet it is online and working.
On mainnet the code is the same and work if miner process OP_RETURN.
Good chance are all miner will process it with the upload to bitcoind v0.9.
This day it will be online and usable.

TBH I have yet to see any authorized voice not speaking bad about this, so I wouldnt be so sure to see this finally implemented on .9 . I like this project and how it has been launched, but all this project and the BTC spent (burnt) depends on the implementation of a feature that may or may not appear on 0.9 and it is uncertain even when. I would like to have a more clear roadmap for this nice project.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: wizzardTim on January 06, 2014, 11:52:46 AM

Ok, I burned 0.01BTC. Transaction id: 089318e80783a93e15e4bdc7be922cc303a85f5045b942ffe05eb249c27ffaea

Now when I enter:

python run.py address 15prRGqRvQckN7dQjqA18H1uy4e1ruiBrh

I see that I have 14.41 XCP balance but after that I get a:

UnicodeEncodeError: 'charmap' codec cant encode character '\u2026'

Should I worry?

@devs: now I should wait for an hour to pass before I burn the whole BTC? Because I remember reading somewhere that there is only one valid transaction per address per hour.

You shouldn't worry, and you don't need to wait.

panonym

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Help and Love one another ♥

Quote from: bitcoinrocks on January 06, 2014, 11:31:18 AM

Once the initial buy-in period is over, how will the price be determined? Will a decentralized exchange be online then?

On testnet it is online and working.
On mainnet the code is the same and work if miner process OP_RETURN.
Good chance are all miner will process it with the upload to bitcoind v0.9.
This day it will be online and usable.

wizzardTim

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1000

Reality is stranger than fiction

Ok, I burned 0.01BTC. Transaction id: 089318e80783a93e15e4bdc7be922cc303a85f5045b942ffe05eb249c27ffaea

Now when I enter:

python run.py address 15prRGqRvQckN7dQjqA18H1uy4e1ruiBrh

I see that I have 14.41 XCP balance but after that I get a:

UnicodeEncodeError: 'charmap' codec cant encode character '\u2026'

Should I worry?

@devs: now I should wait for an hour to pass before I burn the whole BTC? Because I remember reading somewhere that there is only one valid transaction per address per hour.

porqupine

full member

Activity: 214

Merit: 101

.144 BTC a day would be quite high. Especially if BTC goes up another couple thousand, and supposing that you aren't receiving anything back in fees.

bitcoinrocks

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

Once the initial buy-in period is over, how will the price be determined? Will a decentralized exchange be online then?

cityglut

full member

Activity: 216

Merit: 100

Quote from: xibeijan on January 06, 2014, 11:09:19 AM

Quote

Feeds
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| Feed Address | Timestamp | Text | Value | Fee Multiplier |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| mt1N2qE4wHkjdDeumCtRg1NKwxXGMCAx5X | 2014-01-06T16:00:03+00:00 | CoinDesk BPI USD | 922.0817 | 0.0001 |
| mgYWm8Ug76czkAMSVNECJ31iEAGH5V9py1 | 2014-01-06T15:57:53+00:00 | foobar | 3.0 | 10 |
| n1TzSvnJRH4LUKA9j6qvCpiqc2yvxGKSmg | 2014-01-06T15:06:40+00:00 | foobar | 123.0 | 1E-7 |
| mq8srYuaPCrzk4mdKuz3168dxJQAQKv7Wo | 2014-01-05T02:06:34+00:00 | Hello World | 0.0 | 0.01 |
| mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns | 2014-01-02T01:41:46+00:00 | foobar | 2.0 | 0.001 |
| mz8qzVaH8RaVp2Rq6m8D2dTiSFirhFf4th | 2014-01-02T01:04:17+00:00 | | 0.0 | 0.01 |
| n3EHaCAycMEv6DhMPbrQsEubFsgtUmoin1 | 2014-01-01T13:16:05+00:00 | Test | 0.0 | 0.000001 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+

So feeds shows us all feeds being "broadcast", rather than just the ones we care about?

The feeds listed first are those that have been most recently broadcast.

Won't this pose a risk to spamming? For only 0.144 BTC /day you could spam the Feed list every minute and keep your spam visible on top.

As I wrote here, users will most likely determine which feeds they want to bet on with reference to a source outside of the blockchain. Spamming broacasts, then, will probably just cause this, which will happen naturally and of its own accord, to happen more quickly.

panonym

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Help and Love one another ♥

Quote from: prophetx on January 06, 2014, 11:07:58 AM

i would love to see a real logical argument about why an address that is highly unlikely to be generated put out by a nontransparent group of people is better than a btc address that is publicly published by any well known NGO or nonprofit that puts out corporate responsibility reports and is transparent about who they are.

Because human can trust more easily mathematics than other people.
How can you prove that the NGO is really the one having sole control of the private key?
It's rather unlikely that only one person in big NGO would have access to the key.
You have to trust they have no link with the dev.
You have to trust the NGO will not try to mix the coin and send them back to themself for greater gain.
You have to trsut they are competent.
& More than one person would gladly stole a million if they are sure they can help thousands with the money. No much care about crashing the project number 1864.

Yet now that XPO is out based on solid trustlessness:
Nothing prevent you to create a voting system on it's asset for pseudoburning XCP or something else to an NGO instead of a unspendable address.

cityglut

full member

Activity: 216

Merit: 100

Quote from: prophetx on January 06, 2014, 11:07:58 AM

Quote from: cityglut on January 06, 2014, 12:37:12 AM

Quote from: prophetx on January 06, 2014, 12:28:52 AM

ok maybe i am missing something here but how do we know that someone does not have the privkey for this address?

https://blockchain.info/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr

Also, why not just use an address that goes to the Red Cross or Shawns Outpost or whatever random charity. Since you are just using this as way to limit coin generation why not at least have the BTC go toward something that benefits people, planet, something.

I know it is too late for that obviously.

Counterparty aims at maximizing trustlessness, i.e. not sending Bitcoins to any address for which someone has the prviate key; even though you have suggested donating to good causes, Bitcoins could only be sent to their addresses at the expense of trustlessness and decentralization.

EDIT: Regarding the unspendability of the Bitcoins in at CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr please see this post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4317890

i do not see the causality between using a charity address at the expense of decentralization, as being fundamentally different than your current state.

this is using 1 address to gen coins so whether that address belongs to God or the Devil, or no one it makes little difference since coin minting is centralized to that address during the genesis blocks.

i would love to see a real logical argument about why an address that is highly unlikely to be generated put out by a nontransparent group of people is better than a btc address that is publicly published by any well known NGO or nonprofit that puts out corporate responsibility reports and is transparent about who they are.

As I said, our goal is maximize decentralization and minimize trust, and it is simply the case that sending BTC to an address for which someone has the private key is less decentralized and requires more trust than sending BTC to an address for which no one has the private key. If you think this is an unworthy goal, that is one thing, but I am not sure what sort of 'logical argument' you are looking for.

xibeijan

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1001

Quote from: prophetx on January 06, 2014, 11:07:58 AM

Quote from: cityglut on January 06, 2014, 12:37:12 AM

Quote from: prophetx on January 06, 2014, 12:28:52 AM

ok maybe i am missing something here but how do we know that someone does not have the privkey for this address?

https://blockchain.info/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr

Also, why not just use an address that goes to the Red Cross or Shawns Outpost or whatever random charity. Since you are just using this as way to limit coin generation why not at least have the BTC go toward something that benefits people, planet, something.

I know it is too late for that obviously.

Counterparty aims at maximizing trustlessness, i.e. not sending Bitcoins to any address for which someone has the prviate key; even though you have suggested donating to good causes, Bitcoins could only be sent to their addresses at the expense of trustlessness and decentralization.

EDIT: Regarding the unspendability of the Bitcoins in at CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr please see this post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4317890

yes one would have to be incredibly lucky to generate that address, however we all still have to trust that you do not own a quantum computer or that you did not come here from the future where you have the key to this address.

i do not see the causality between using a charity address at the expense of decentralization, as being fundamentally different than your current state.

this is using 1 address to gen coins so whether that address belongs to God or the Devil, or no one it makes little difference since coin minting is centralized to that address during the genesis blocks.

i would love to see a real logical argument about why an address that is highly unlikely to be generated put out by a nontransparent group of people is better than a btc address that is publicly published by any well known NGO or nonprofit that puts out corporate responsibility reports and is transparent about who they are.

essentially i think if someone does this again it would much better if the coins at least went to something productive, rather than accruing to the rest of btc holders (thanks btw Wink

since obviously even the developers of this coin will not see any of this btc.

otherwise looks like a good project.

I think the point is that someone working at SaveTheChildren, who has access to the private key of the donation address account (or a hacker who stole it), could infinitely inflate the supply of XCP during the mining period. In other words, they can take the received BTC and burn it, receive it back again and repeat. The devil could work for SaveTheChildren, you never know....

xibeijan

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1001

Quote

Feeds
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| Feed Address | Timestamp | Text | Value | Fee Multiplier |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+
| mt1N2qE4wHkjdDeumCtRg1NKwxXGMCAx5X | 2014-01-06T16:00:03+00:00 | CoinDesk BPI USD | 922.0817 | 0.0001 |
| mgYWm8Ug76czkAMSVNECJ31iEAGH5V9py1 | 2014-01-06T15:57:53+00:00 | foobar | 3.0 | 10 |
| n1TzSvnJRH4LUKA9j6qvCpiqc2yvxGKSmg | 2014-01-06T15:06:40+00:00 | foobar | 123.0 | 1E-7 |
| mq8srYuaPCrzk4mdKuz3168dxJQAQKv7Wo | 2014-01-05T02:06:34+00:00 | Hello World | 0.0 | 0.01 |
| mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns | 2014-01-02T01:41:46+00:00 | foobar | 2.0 | 0.001 |
| mz8qzVaH8RaVp2Rq6m8D2dTiSFirhFf4th | 2014-01-02T01:04:17+00:00 | | 0.0 | 0.01 |
| n3EHaCAycMEv6DhMPbrQsEubFsgtUmoin1 | 2014-01-01T13:16:05+00:00 | Test | 0.0 | 0.000001 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------+------------------+----------+----------------+

So feeds shows us all feeds being "broadcast", rather than just the ones we care about?

The feeds listed first are those that have been most recently broadcast.

Won't this pose a risk to spamming? For only 0.144 BTC /day you could spam the Feed list every minute and keep your spam visible on top.

prophetx

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1010

he who has the gold makes the rules

Quote from: cityglut on January 06, 2014, 12:37:12 AM

Quote from: prophetx on January 06, 2014, 12:28:52 AM

ok maybe i am missing something here but how do we know that someone does not have the privkey for this address?

https://blockchain.info/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr

Also, why not just use an address that goes to the Red Cross or Shawns Outpost or whatever random charity. Since you are just using this as way to limit coin generation why not at least have the BTC go toward something that benefits people, planet, something.

I know it is too late for that obviously.

Counterparty aims at maximizing trustlessness, i.e. not sending Bitcoins to any address for which someone has the prviate key; even though you have suggested donating to good causes, Bitcoins could only be sent to their addresses at the expense of trustlessness and decentralization.

EDIT: Regarding the unspendability of the Bitcoins in at CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr please see this post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4317890

yes one would have to be incredibly lucky to generate that address, however we all still have to trust that you do not own a quantum computer or that you did not come here from the future where you have the key to this address.

i do not see the causality between using a charity address at the expense of decentralization, as being fundamentally different than your current state.

this is using 1 address to gen coins so whether that address belongs to God or the Devil, or no one it makes little difference since coin minting is centralized to that address during the genesis blocks.

i would love to see a real logical argument about why an address that is highly unlikely to be generated put out by a nontransparent group of people is better than a btc address that is publicly published by any well known NGO or nonprofit that puts out corporate responsibility reports and is transparent about who they are.

essentially i think if someone does this again it would much better if the coins at least went to something productive, rather than accruing to the rest of btc holders (thanks btw Wink

since obviously even the developers of this coin will not see any of this btc.

otherwise looks like a good project.

panonym

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Help and Love one another ♥

Quote from: sixteendigits on January 06, 2014, 10:01:12 AM

What in the fuck is wrong with you people?
[...] these greedy assholes.

What the fuck is wrong with you? Superiority complex?
Are you unable to have a civilized conversation without insulting people thinking differently?

Can't you grasp the concept behind the word additional?
Your pseudoargumentation is incoherent.
Adding potential reward doesn't "punish" anyone. It's a win - neutral situation.
Grow please.

edit: + I'm not begging for it. Fine without.
Simply proposed to open the talk with the dev.
A first quality managed asset could help to give a good image about the various possibilities XCP offer.
Other that the 50 crappy useless scammy asset we will see appearing after 3 month.

xibeijan

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1001

Quote

"account" : "",
"address" : "1Wh4bh",
"category" : "send",
"amount" : 0.00000000,
"fee" : -0.00010000,
"confirmations" : 36,
"blockhash" : "0000000002d1ecf1442be4c47b2e3c4c6fff24f77d7162e29c972921b0fa35be",

seems like an short address. Is that normal?

wizzardTim

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1000

Reality is stranger than fiction

Quote from: panonym on January 06, 2014, 09:50:34 AM

raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
I hate bitcoind
Crappy for 5 years old. REALLY

edit: wizzardTim, you can try -force
I opted to wait the necessary 4~7h for counterpartyd to sync.

I didnt know it was synching now...what will it say when it syncs? Will it stop outputting block numbers?

So, can you please tell me the command to use in windows and the steps? E.g. Kill the command, then run -force, then -burn.

Thank you in advance for all this help

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: xibeijan on January 06, 2014, 10:00:45 AM

Quote

order --from=mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns --get-quantity=10 --get-asset=BTC
--give-quantity=20 --give-asset=XCP --expiration=10 --fee_provided=.001

Does real BTC actually get transferred from mtQheFaSfWELRB2MyMBaiWjdDm6ux9Ezns's bitcoin wallet to my bitcoin wallet?

There was a mistake in the documentation. If you're buying BTC, then you need to require a fee.

Yes.

Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 640. (Read 1276796 times)