Topic: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread - page 77. (Read 1276786 times)

Good answers for the most part. thanks Matt. I might be lacking some info from not being around for a few months

1. why is 1 not accurate? "while there is still support and backing the founders are off to the next project" (which can be percived positive based on your answer in 4, but it is a fact)

and that while SYMB was developed with CP tech it might or might not be connected to the project in the future (possibly even in use cases that were classic CP ones). where is the inaccuracy?

2-3  I didnt expect them to do anything and certainly not work unfunded. it is not my business and I am happy for them. it is just a matter of perception. when you are off to a next project even with some ties to CP and even with continued involvement at some level- it is not the same as the 1st year. BUT again I respect and accept- and maybe would do the same in their shoes. I hope that you are right on 4 and then 2-3 is really irrelevant.

4. I accept...... no- i didnt want them to buy a bunch of XCP... I already did it myself a year  +ago-- not enough for everybody :-)

5. got it

Not really, no. I think smart contracts represent a bigger market and I don't think it's even close, if that's any help.

Was the decentralized exchange improved? I usted it and its really a needed thing but the one counter parte had was just too slow because of bitcoins blocks

1. Clearly stated not to be the case

2. The same people are still there, just with corporate funding, which should be considered a good thing. How long would Adam, Evan, and Robby been able to work for free, with no funding?

3. Different projects. I could just as easily point to everyone in Bitcoin being happy that core developers have paid positions and this was widely considered to be a very good thing. Counterparty is more closely aligned with Bitcoin than Ethereum because... They did not take money like Ethereum did. There was no crowdfund for Counterparty. Counterparty is also more mature than Ethereum and a simpler technology.

4. They are still actively developing Counterparty tech and are highlighting the tech by creating a viable business on it. I could not be happier for them and how they've chosen to promote Counterparty for me as an investor. What would you rather have them do? Certainly the development is fast enough and still ongoing so I guess, what, biz dev calls with randos instead of getting the biggest people on Wall Street to back the technology through a company? Maybe you wanted these extremely high net worth individuals to just buy a bunch of XCP? I don't think that's a realistic vision.

5. To use smart contracts on Counterparty you have to use XCP. But yeah, if they are not doing Counterparty transactions for some things, they will not be burning XCP. This makes sense, doesn't it? In order not use XCP for Counterparty transactions they would need to fork Counterparty and it's clear that that's not happening from the post.

There were 3 advantages to CP

1) the platform
2) the dedication and commitment of at least one of the founders even in the overstock days
3) active foundation and PR that is headed by the founders as the front - pushing the platform and pulling interest with their knowledge and good name in the community in general.

The platform is ofcourse still here- and it is good that it will be relied upon by the founders team in their new project when time is right.

However the message that emphasized that there is a clear separation between both entities (as well as synergy- I understand that) communicated what too me is the biggest concern: while there is still support and backing the founders are off to the next project, and that while SYMB was developed with CP tech it might or might not be connected to the project in the future (possibly even in use cases that were classic CP ones).

At the very early stage that CP is - I believe that this is still too early and so did many that sold in the past 24 hours (I havent yet). It is not only about tech. it is about people behind it and the horizon that their presence promises.

this is parallel for example to Ethereum developers announcing their next project while announcing that they will just support the old one. would cause a serious drop because it is 5 years too early.

now- dont get me wrong- no one owes anything to no one here. the CP vision and opportunity is the founders' and not the investors who just shared in with their own risk and thus - it is what it is. As a private investor I might buy into the SYMB corporate IPO on a centralized Nasdaq one day...but this horizon is a bit less attractive it seems without the full presence of 1-3 of the founding team pusing forward. and not just as a resource.

as far as XCP itself- the same concern- before- it was perceived (maybe wrongly) that since SYMB. is based on CP tech that XCP will be the fuel behind any future SYMB transaction. From the message it seems clear that this is not the case and thus a major real-world use case is out of play.  

Quoted for truth. What a great, sensible post.

Symbionts ledger agnosticism / private v public chain design was known quite long ago to any investor doing their own due diligence,  (certainly before the recent run up and subsequent crashes) if you understand the differing requirements of the demographics targeted its clear there would never be a one sized fits all approach.

Regardless, the situation is a hell of a more promising reality than vast majority of "investment oppurtunities" in the crypto space today. It seems quite simple. Where there is demand for a counterparty like structure, counterparty will be to tool for the job. There is no other such investment opportunity in the promising crytofinance space, and now you have a corporate entity supporting this open source project, works for red hat. Not to get started on corps open source contributions in general.

Market reaction seems to imply precious few had done background research as this news has been surprising..or were expecting some totally different news but im confused as to what.?

What's the difference between relying on Counterparty and Counterparty technology? Counterparty technology = Counterparty...

Besides that, Counterparty also relies on Symbiont as Symbiont actively funds Counterparty development. Seems like a pretty symbiotic relationship.

I'm really not sure what you guys were expecting. If you wanted more than what's in the announcement you should have sold a long time ago.

"Counterparty is a core part of the Symbiont “tech stack”, with entirely complementary technology to the other systems we are developing."

"nothing has changed with respect to our enthusiasm for the potential of Counterparty, and permissioned ledgers will augment Symbiont’s platform offerings, not compete with the many market uses for Counterparty."

"We will continue to support the Counterparty ecosystem by providing development resources, funding Ivana Zuber in her position as Executive Director of the Counterparty Foundation and handling incoming business development inquiries. "

"However, as we onboard more clients and partners, and develop more products, we will not be able to discuss if, why or how that client product uses or does not use Counterparty. (Determining use of Counterparty should be clear to anyone via a Counterparty block explorer.)"

"That's not what the post said at all. The technology that Symbiont has developed outside of Counterparty does not overlap or compete with Counterparty at all. They're different things for different uses, one being private network/private blockchain/permissioned access, and the other (Counterparty) being public blockchain, public ledger, open access."

"To reiterate, Counterparty is still being actively supported and developed (by symbiont staff members, nonetheless). You can see that just by looking at the github."

Now we know it very clear that Symbiont "supports" counterparty but not "relies" on counterparty any more. Symbiont relies on the counterparty technology instead. If Symbiont succeeds, it does not mean the success of counterparty, but only means there's a successful company backs up counterparty.

Seems oversold. But then again when it fell from .25 to .07 it seemed too much of a fall then. Who knows when it will finally find a stable floor that doesnt keep adjusting lower

Seems to be a dearth of mature market participants investing in projects with a long term purview.
All we ever see is occasional rises followed by sadly inevitable dumps often past the previous floor for no real logical reason - even if the news is groundbreaking andnoverwhelmingly positive. Guess people can profit at any levels trading waves or shorting

All of this news had been spelt out previously.
I cant understand nor explain rash dumping after that announcement unless english is not the native langauge seems like a gross misintepretation to me

I understand right like now XCP is in same place than every other similiar projects, anyone not really use it?   What we are waiting now? Smart contracts where everyone have look, wait and hype other projects? Some of that have even bitcoin core devs push it forward and keep peoples know it is what they want?

This time there is zero number of projects what don't waiting other projects smart contracts instead of have even testing XCP smart contracts in test net? So, so far I don't see really reason to worry before first side chains project are out and everyone start use their smart contracts. Or that is my hope I really don't understand so much about this all systems


Thanks for devs to keep community to know what you are doing so often.   Sometimes some word out can be nice from you also, we all can't read githupreposwhatevertootechinformation. I know there have also Counterparty Foundation updates but still it is nice if you write something sometimes

I would like to thank the Counterparty Foundation for the update. If you simply look at it from a Counterparty Protocol perspective - it was just a positive announcement that a serious company like Symbiont will use Counterparty as appropriate. Open-source projects can benefit hugely from the support and resources of a well established company in their domain.

The Counterparty Protocol remains as a maturing project that can be used by anyone to build additional functionality. If you are really concerned about the fiat denominated value of XCP you can build something to provide more utility to XCP.

Smart Contracts are coming.

It seems like people were so badly abused by shit coins that they are living in an alternate reality when looking at a real project.

I agree. It's a great time to shake weak hands though. With the recent BTC drop, a lot of people are on edge.

My guess would be months as they want to wait for a couple formal security audits.

What would be a typical use case for counterparty (xcp) and what would be a typical use case for a separate (private) counterparty technology based chain?
I mean a specific one... not an abstract description, if you would like to provide that. 

I am speechless. Thanks for the cheap XCP. Dump on what appears to be a perfectly nice community update. Again, speechless but I won't look a gift horse in the mouth.

Is there a rough timescale for when CP will implement Pythereum smart contracts?

I could make the time, I just don't have the will to do it. Best luck to you.

That's not news.  We did get some news this morning though.