[BlockScan] Counterparty (XCP) Block Explorer - page 8.

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Quote from: 520Bit on February 05, 2014, 10:44:08 PM

Overview
Dividends
Updates
Contacts
  Asset_ID:    2632494122289
  Issuer:    1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp:    2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction:    2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash:    91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued:    [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000
  Divisible:    True
  Transfer:    False
  Remark:    Valid

The difference between counterpartyd_build and blockscan.com:

counterpartyd_build:

Asset Name: MPTSTOCK
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 200.0

blockscan.com:

Asset Info MPTSTOCKF
  Asset_ID:    2632494122289
  Issuer:    1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp:    2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction:    2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash:    91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued:    [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000

My question is , which one is correct? I have marked the difference in red.

I also posted this at: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.2440

The AssetID is a bit confusing. Previous builds did not include the CHECKSUM character and the AssetID was calculated based on this..

But when the CheckSum character was added to the later releases the MPTSTOCK-became->MPTSTOCKF. And this (MPTSTOCKF) is what its officially referred to in this counterparty client when doing a "asset" command. However, the ASSETID is still calculated based on "MPTSTOCK" and not "MPTSTOCKF

I understand that the code is still alpha and changes like these are to be expected for the betterment of the protocol. However, I don't really have a way to know what gets broken on blockscan whenever these changes take place...

I believe I have already corrected this issue and asset page on blockscan should match what you see in the counterparty client. If I have missed out anything please let me know

I am going to take a step back from the making changes at blockscan and most likely wait till the changes stabilize a bit before trying to fix stuff after this

cheers

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Quote from: gacrux on February 06, 2014, 07:44:01 AM

I've found another (major) difference between blockscan.com and counterpartyd:

http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1JUXwDjh21yLkUhKNdggenexZK8XpeXTRx

Initially blockscan.com was showing a successful trade and a balance of 29 XCP in the above account.

Now it shows that the initial order TIMED OUT, and a balance of 0 XCP :-(

However:

~$ counterpartyd address 1JUXwDjh21yLkUhKNdggenexZK8XpeXTRx
Balances
+-------+--------+
| Asset | Amount |
+-------+--------+
| BTC | ?? |
| XCP | 29.0 |
+-------+--------+

My local counterpartyd still believes I have 29 XCP.

(cross-posted at: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,2.0.html )

I am running the develop branch I am getting the following which matches with blockscan is showing

Balances
+-------+----------+
| Asset | Amount |
+-------+----------+
| BTC | 0.004257 |
+-------+----------+

gacrux

newbie

Activity: 22

Merit: 0

I've found another (major) difference between blockscan.com and counterpartyd:

http://blockscan.com/address.aspx?q=1JUXwDjh21yLkUhKNdggenexZK8XpeXTRx

Initially blockscan.com was showing a successful trade and a balance of 29 XCP in the above account.

Now it shows that the initial order TIMED OUT, and a balance of 0 XCP :-(

However:

~$ counterpartyd address 1JUXwDjh21yLkUhKNdggenexZK8XpeXTRx
Balances
+-------+--------+
| Asset | Amount |
+-------+--------+
| BTC | ?? |
| XCP | 29.0 |
+-------+--------+

My local counterpartyd still believes I have 29 XCP.

(cross-posted at: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,2.0.html )

romerun

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1001

Bitcoin is new, makes sense to hodl.

It looks quite confusing, order book should group orders with the same price in 1 line, then user may be able to click to see all orders at that price, the remain column is not necessary, just show the sum of available at each price on the top level, simply put making it looks like normal order book

jimhsu

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 264

I see that you've implemented the order book -- props for an absolutely essential feature.

Can you sort the Sell orders in ascending order though (cheapest sell on top)? Optionally also put last trade/volume info on top.

A chart would also be nice, but I don't think we have enough volume yet.

520Bit

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 252

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 06, 2014, 12:50:14 AM

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 06, 2014, 12:46:01 AM

Quote from: 520Bit on February 05, 2014, 10:44:08 PM

Using counterpartyd_build with command counterpartyd asset MPSTOCK, fetch the result:

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>counterpartyd asset MPTSTOCK

c:\counterpartyd_build>echo off
Asset Name: MPTSTOCK
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 200.0
Divisible: True
Issuer: 1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA

While I checkd the asset MPSTOCKF in counterpartyd_build, it shows:

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>echo off
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\counterpartyd.py", line 613, in
   total = util.devise(db, total, args.asset, 'output')
  File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\lib\util.py", line 318, in devise
   if not issuances: raise exceptions.AssetError('No such asset: {}'.format(asset))
lib.exceptions.AssetError: No such asset: [color=red]MPTSTOCKF[/color]

But when I check above information in blockscan.com, which shows:

Code:

Asset Info MPTSTOCKF

Disclaimer: Blockscan is not resposible for the accuracy of the content listed here.

Overview
Dividends
Updates
Contacts
  Asset_ID: 2632494122289
  Issuer: 1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp: 2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction: 2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash: 91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued: [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000
  Divisible: True
  Transfer: False
  Remark: Valid

The difference between counterpartyd_build and blockscan.com:

counterpartyd_build:

Asset Name: MPTSTOCK
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 200.0

blockscan.com:

Asset Info MPTSTOCKF
  Asset_ID:    2632494122289
  Issuer:    1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp:    2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction:    2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash:    91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued:    [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000

My question is , which one is correct? I have marked the difference in red.

I also posted this at: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.2440

Unless I'm missing something, counterpartyd is correct.

Actually, this is the correct:

Code:

$ counterpartyd.py asset MPTSTOCKF
Asset Name: MPTSTOCKF
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 100.0
Divisible: True

The first issuance missed the 5 XCP fee.

Why an error happened when I check the asset MPTSTOCKF?

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>counterpartyd asset MPTSTOCKF

c:\counterpartyd_build>echo off
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\counterpartyd.py", line 613, in
total = util.devise(db, total, args.asset, 'output')
File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\lib\util.py", line 318, in devise
if not issuances: raise exceptions.AssetError('No such asset: {}'.format(asset))
lib.exceptions.AssetError: No such asset: MPTSTOCKF

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: PhantomPhreak on February 06, 2014, 12:46:01 AM

Quote from: 520Bit on February 05, 2014, 10:44:08 PM

Using counterpartyd_build with command counterpartyd asset MPSTOCK, fetch the result:

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>counterpartyd asset MPTSTOCK

c:\counterpartyd_build>echo off
Asset Name: MPTSTOCK
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 200.0
Divisible: True
Issuer: 1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA

While I checkd the asset MPSTOCKF in counterpartyd_build, it shows:

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>echo off
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\counterpartyd.py", line 613, in
   total = util.devise(db, total, args.asset, 'output')
  File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\lib\util.py", line 318, in devise
   if not issuances: raise exceptions.AssetError('No such asset: {}'.format(asset))
lib.exceptions.AssetError: No such asset: [color=red]MPTSTOCKF[/color]

But when I check above information in blockscan.com, which shows:

Code:

Asset Info MPTSTOCKF

Disclaimer: Blockscan is not resposible for the accuracy of the content listed here.

Overview
Dividends
Updates
Contacts
  Asset_ID: 2632494122289
  Issuer: 1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp: 2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction: 2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash: 91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued: [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000
  Divisible: True
  Transfer: False
  Remark: Valid

The difference between counterpartyd_build and blockscan.com:

counterpartyd_build:

Asset Name: MPTSTOCK
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 200.0

blockscan.com:

Asset Info MPTSTOCKF
  Asset_ID:    2632494122289
  Issuer:    1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp:    2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction:    2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash:    91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued:    [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000

My question is , which one is correct? I have marked the difference in red.

I also posted this at: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.2440

Unless I'm missing something, counterpartyd is correct.

Actually, this is the correct:

Code:

$ counterpartyd.py asset MPTSTOCKF
Asset Name: MPTSTOCKF
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 100.0
Divisible: True

The first issuance missed the 5 XCP fee.

PhantomPhreak

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 300

Counterparty Chief Scientist and Co-Founder

Quote from: 520Bit on February 05, 2014, 10:44:08 PM

Using counterpartyd_build with command counterpartyd asset MPSTOCK, fetch the result:

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>counterpartyd asset MPTSTOCK

c:\counterpartyd_build>echo off
Asset Name: MPTSTOCK
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 200.0
Divisible: True
Issuer: 1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA

While I checkd the asset MPSTOCKF in counterpartyd_build, it shows:

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>echo off
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\counterpartyd.py", line 613, in
   total = util.devise(db, total, args.asset, 'output')
  File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\lib\util.py", line 318, in devise
   if not issuances: raise exceptions.AssetError('No such asset: {}'.format(asset))
lib.exceptions.AssetError: No such asset: [color=red]MPTSTOCKF[/color]

But when I check above information in blockscan.com, which shows:

Code:

Asset Info MPTSTOCKF

Disclaimer: Blockscan is not resposible for the accuracy of the content listed here.

Overview
Dividends
Updates
Contacts
  Asset_ID: 2632494122289
  Issuer: 1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp: 2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction: 2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash: 91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued: [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000
  Divisible: True
  Transfer: False
  Remark: Valid

The difference between counterpartyd_build and blockscan.com:

counterpartyd_build:

Asset Name: MPTSTOCK
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 200.0

blockscan.com:

Asset Info MPTSTOCKF
  Asset_ID:    2632494122289
  Issuer:    1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp:    2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction:    2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash:    91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued:    [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000

My question is , which one is correct? I have marked the difference in red.

I also posted this at: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.2440

Unless I'm missing something, counterpartyd is correct.

520Bit

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 252

Using counterpartyd_build with command counterpartyd asset MPSTOCK, fetch the result:

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>counterpartyd asset MPTSTOCK

c:\counterpartyd_build>echo off
Asset Name: MPTSTOCK
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 200.0
Divisible: True
Issuer: 1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA

While I checkd the asset MPSTOCKF in counterpartyd_build, it shows:

Code:

c:\counterpartyd_build>echo off
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\counterpartyd.py", line 613, in
   total = util.devise(db, total, args.asset, 'output')
  File "c:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\lib\util.py", line 318, in devise
   if not issuances: raise exceptions.AssetError('No such asset: {}'.format(asset))
lib.exceptions.AssetError: No such asset: [color=red]MPTSTOCKF[/color]

But when I check above information in blockscan.com, which shows:

Code:

Asset Info MPTSTOCKF

Disclaimer: Blockscan is not resposible for the accuracy of the content listed here.

Overview
Dividends
Updates
Contacts
  Asset_ID: 2632494122289
  Issuer: 1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp: 2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction: 2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash: 91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued: [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000
  Divisible: True
  Transfer: False
  Remark: Valid

The difference between counterpartyd_build and blockscan.com:

counterpartyd_build:

Asset Name: MPTSTOCK
Asset ID: 101249773934
Total Issued: 200.0

blockscan.com:

Asset Info MPTSTOCKF
  Asset_ID:    2632494122289
  Issuer:    1FCkCQCnEtHQ3j7NqdkAnkqQUvqfti4XoA
  Time Stamp:    2/1/2014 10:45:57 PM
  Transaction:    2843 recorded at Block #283652
  Tx Hash:    91aed459a4cb1bbd500e1ffea62e84a0c8988971d251d307f7485d6cd57d79a8
  Total Amount Issued:    [Issue No.1 at Block#283652] 10000000000

My question is , which one is correct? I have marked the difference in red.

I also posted this at: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.2440

kdrop22

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Great tool...

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Quote from: Alias on February 03, 2014, 05:41:06 AM

Hi there mtbitcoin.

First of all, Blockscan is great! It was a wonderful resource during the burn-in period and surely will continue to be of great use as the project develops further. One important utility during the price discovery phase of a cryptocurrency is data about the completed trades and the total market capitalisation. If you could have a URL of the last trade price in XCP/BTC on the decentralised exchange then that would be sufficient along with the total number of XCP (2,648,755.9218) to get Counterparty listed on coinmarketcap.com. You could obviously implement your own data visualization and analysis on Blockscan too.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Keep up the good work.

Regards,
Brian

Good suggestions!

I will look into those.. I was just thinking about what to replace the main page with now that the burn period is over

Alias

full member

Activity: 127

Merit: 100

Money be green

Hi there mtbitcoin.

First of all, Blockscan is great! It was a wonderful resource during the burn-in period and surely will continue to be of great use as the project develops further. One important utility during the price discovery phase of a cryptocurrency is data about the completed trades and the total market capitalisation. If you could have a URL of the last trade price in XCP/BTC on the decentralised exchange then that would be sufficient along with the total number of XCP (2,648,755.9218) to get Counterparty listed on coinmarketcap.com. You could obviously implement your own data visualization and analysis on Blockscan too.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Keep up the good work.

Regards,
Al

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Quote from: mtbitcoin on January 28, 2014, 02:48:23 PM

Quote from: Ratanol on January 28, 2014, 12:22:03 PM

FYI Web of Trust is reporting this site as Blockscan as having malware on it...

Hi

Are there any explanations or specific pages for the report. I am unable to see nor detect any of the reported malware on the site

cheers

I've taken another looks at this and I am pretty certain that this is false positive due to the .js code inserted by cloudflare (reverse proxy)

cheers

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Quote from: Ratanol on January 28, 2014, 12:22:03 PM

FYI Web of Trust is reporting this site as Blockscan as having malware on it...

Hi

Are there any explanations or specific pages for the report. I am unable to see nor detect any of the reported malware on the site

cheers

Ratanol

newbie

Activity: 40

Merit: 0

FYI Web of Trust is reporting this site as Blockscan as having malware on it...

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Thanks for the tip!

Looks like there was another bug with the blocks.py code. I've pulled the latest git and it looks like we are good to go again

maxmint

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

Quote from: mtbitcoin on January 18, 2014, 03:33:50 PM

Quote from: maxmint on January 18, 2014, 07:11:56 AM

Quote from: mtbitcoin on January 17, 2014, 11:43:43 PM

Thank you. If you have any additional comments or suggestions please feel free to post them here.

If you would like to donate please do so by donating directly to the XCP project developers via the donation address at 12J1YFvsWHDCU5HNAWNLNy1Q9nZo8Q4Xgs

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annxcp-counterparty-pioneering-peer-to-peer-finance-official-thread-395761

Already donated to the developers of course but would like to send you something as well – the site is awesome.
Some more suggestions:
- Make the search box accept asset names
- Show % of all XCP next to an address balance
- There's something wrong in the dividends view on the asset list, e.g. here: http://blockscan.com/assetInfo.aspx?q=VOID (columns seem to be mixed up)

Keep up the great work!

Those are actually good suggestions.. I have updated the site with your suggestions and fixed the dividend issue

My donation address is 1bLockjTFXuSENM8fGdfNUaWqiM4GPe7V

Great, thanks for implementing this – I sent a little tip.

Btw: it seems blockscan is stuck at block 281531 and doesn't show the recent transactions.

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Quote from: jimhsu on January 18, 2014, 04:02:26 PM

Hey, that's what "send" is for .... though you'd have to issue the maximum permissible amount and send that to actually transfer ownership.

Come to think of it though, can devs implement a way to transfer "issuance privileges" so that the above doesn't have to be done?

Out of curiosity how many assets did you "pre-book" ? Cheesy

I noticed a bunch of same addresses hitting the assets.

jimhsu

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 264

Quote from: mtbitcoin on January 18, 2014, 03:37:09 PM

Quote from: jimhsu on January 17, 2014, 11:47:23 PM

Wow, people have been busy with opportunistic asset name creation. Almost feels like the old Web 1.0 days of domain squatting...

Yea

But unlike domain names you have to transfer your private key over. And I doubt that anyone is going to trust someone to just hand over the private keys without keeping a copy. Lolz...

Well, lets see how this plays out.

Hey, that's what "send" is for .... though you'd have to issue the maximum permissible amount and send that to actually transfer ownership.

Come to think of it though, can devs implement a way to transfer "issuance privileges" so that the above doesn't have to be done?

mtbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000

Etherscan.io

Quote from: jimhsu on January 17, 2014, 11:47:23 PM

Wow, people have been busy with opportunistic asset name creation. Almost feels like the old Web 1.0 days of domain squatting...

Yea

But unlike domain names you have to transfer your private key over. And I doubt that anyone is going to trust someone to just hand over the private keys without keeping a copy. Lolz...

Well, lets see how this plays out.

Topic: [BlockScan] Counterparty (XCP) Block Explorer - page 8. (Read 31809 times)