Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 69. (Read 1276786 times)

From a token/asset view point there are some differences. In Counterparty, the tokens are "Global" meaning that anyone can view the tokens transaction, balances, credits/debits easily as it is encoded on a protocol level. In Ethereum (at the moment), the tokens are part of a "smart contract", they are not "global" in sense. Token/Asset names in Counterparty are unique, where else duplicate token names can be used in Ethereum if they are part of a different contract.

I don't particularly think one is better than the other. Each has its own use cases

You have more information than all of us. What IRC?

Yes, exactly. The dimensionality of factors that can screw up accounts and liquidity entirely either through malice or accident is exponentially higher than with BTC.

Your blockchain will not undergo an unprecedented change from POW to POS in 12 - 18 months. Who knows what that will mean for businesses on Ethereum, of which there probably won't be many.

No, apart from the fact that your money or assets are encoded on the only chain with real consensus and a workable solution to the Byzantine General's problem, there is no benefit. I guess if you don't care about network stability or who overwrites your coins and assets, you are free to use Ethereum.

(And Counterparty smart contracts will let you read BTC blocks, BTC transactions, BTC balances, and engage in nlocktime and other BTC scripting)


The way I see it: Once you establish rapport, giving tangible metrics of certain inefficiencies (in applicable fields) resolved by using Counterparty instead may be a stepping stone once a private solution is implemented. However, only calculated graphs, simulations and a 3rd party assessment will be convincing. I do hope these solutions are by definition modular and interconnectable as stated before.

Can anyone tell me why someone would want their smart contracts running on Counterparty instead of Ethereum?  Is there any advantage besides the security of the Bitcoin blockchain vs the security of the Ethereum blockchain?

Sure. Along the lines of what we stated earlier, Symbiont has multiple toolkits under its belt. Counterparty is one, and the private network technology we're developing is another. If we have a use-case where the client wishes us to build on a public network-based system, then Counterparty is likely a good choice there. For the other scenarios, our other technology is the better choice. The two technology product suites don't compete with each other, instead they allow us to have coverage for whatever the requirement is.

As to whether Counterparty will become used for a specific project, I can't say, simply because I don't know. It really just depends on what engagements materialize, and the requirements of each one.

In either case, Symbiont will continue to keep the regular community updates happening, as well as to keep the core Counterparty network chugging along, with improvements to functionality and stability as our resources allow. And lately it hasn't been just us who are adding in functionality, we've had a few code commits from other parties in the ecosystem as well...

What we have now is totally suitable for other parties to build on, and we'd be happy to field any questions by parties interested in the technology and platform.  Hope that helps.

With the advent of new and new platforms which promise the world such as Fluid and Treeleg, the definition of what a sidechain is has become completely ambiguous and subjective.

This is why I propose that Counterparty is now an embedded consensus sidechain. Please refer to is as such. This makes Counterparty the only functional sidechain in the world.

I expect a price bump of at least 10%+ as a result.

Hi Xnova,

I know there was a blog post about Sym. and CP's relation. But I'll appreciate it if you can relate specifically to the following:

1. Do products and functions currently being built for Symb. have, or will have anything to do with the CP platform? i.e. will they be using any XCPs for transactions for example? or are these completely 100% separate (aside from the technological base which is obviously somewhat similar?

In other words, are there real-life SYMB products that you expect that will be using counterparty at all?

OR

2. CP's growth is really now up to the community and the devs are just there to improve and further stabilize the platform, but you dont expect to create real-life financial products directly on CP, i.e. requiring XCP.

Thanks
 

We'll be looking further into this in the next few weeks. The underlying server changes should help with stability here (i.e. the software is designed to automatically update balances, but something is happening to disrupt that).

Exactly, or for any purpose for that matter. We performed this work due to issues we were seeing, as well as reports from some of the business and groups that have built real-world projects on top of Counterparty (Shapeshift, Tokenly, etc).

I'm going to be an enthusiastic optimist and realize that this is 'unsexy' work is exactly what needs to be done if you want XCP in production for business clients. 

Balances updated in real time, but you can try to switch between balances and "exchange" tab or any other if your balance not updated long time. Log in/logout is most ridiculous variant to update one page. 

There are a number of projects that use Counterparty already.

Any real world application.

What do you mean by "project"?

Thanks for posting.  Any information regarding incorporating Counterparty into a project?

I was a guest on Robert's Counterparty radio show where I covered the current technical progress we're making on the core Counterparty software: https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/xcp-weekly-update-18-robby-dermody-and-jop-hartog

To that end, we released 9.51.4 a few weeks back: https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-lib/releases/tag/v9.51.4
It has major performance updates.

Just today, we pushed the "undolog" changes to the "develop" branch (https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-lib/commits/develop), which will make reorg processing almost instantaneous (where before, it could take 15-45 minutes in some cases). This is another major improvement for the core counterparty software, and should be released to "master" within a few weeks, pending some additional testing.

We also made some significant improvements to counterblock, on the "fixes1" branch (https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterblock/commits/fixes1). Those are undergoing testing and will be pushed to master once ready. Counterblock is used by Counterwallet.

And, we are testing counterparty-server against bitcoind 0.11.1, which has been looking good.

Most of this is the unsexy behind-the-scenes work, but they are major strides in helping Counterparty to be a stable and solid option for building a service on, or using in general. For example, Counterwallet stability is much improved over what it was (still not 100% of the way there, but moving in that direction), and the "undolog" updates are very useful for several industry players, like Tokenly.

We have some initial conversations going to possibly identify more long term help that could work on other services, Counterwallet enhancements, etc. This is all very preliminary at this point however, but worth bringing up.

It would be nice to have some announcements or information on any of this though. Panic selling perpetuates too quickly in silence.

Don't worry guys. The work on XCP is going on behind the scene.

Watch Counterparty Github updates here:
https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP