Topic: MasterCoin: New Protocol Layer Starting From “The Exodus Address” - page 131. (Read 448462 times)

Nope.  Doesn't work.  It picked up two of my three transactions - but missed the last one. 

Cool! Thanks.  I'm guessing then you are now able to provide the total number of MasterCoins purchased.  Curious to know..how many?

I've been working on some proof of concept code for Mastercoin since there is not much around yet. I decided to put my work to some practical purpose and made a quick page that uses the Mastercoin libraries to run through the blockchain and count how much coins were bought by a specific address.

A huge disclaimer: This is not the official code and things are often guestimated. For instance the whitepaper does not mention which time to use as basis for the extra coins for early adopters. I've opted in to use the time your transaction got added to a block but the reference spec might change this, although I'm not sure how.

You can check how many Mastercoins you bought here.

Full transparency; IPs for visits site are currently logged by the webserver software. If you don't want your ip in combination with your bitcoin address logged don't use it.

Call it what you like - i guess i have a problem with the box on the left in this picture.



I just think the solution needs to be something other than big dumb buckets of money programmed to blindly buy and sell at predictable points.  To me this is the achilles heal of the entire project (besides the UTXO issue, which i suspect will be resolved in time) and i'd rather see it sidelined whilst alternative models for trade are considered.


A couple of reasons below why I don't think the "escrow" solution is viable (some of these are variations of points orig posted by others).

1. Price variance. Instruments designed to offer exposure to the price movement of an underlying asset (e.g. "Goldcoin") can never offer true 1:1 exposure, since the differences in market environment conditions between the underlying and the tracker instrument will always create different risk profiles, and therefore different valuations once risk is priced in.  Buying a "Goldcoin" with mastercoins for example introduces several layers of risk on top of buying "Gold", such as the risk bitcoin itself may implode, that the mastercoin protocol may be discovered to have technical vulnerabilities or may be ruled illegal.  As a result of these continually fluctuating conditions, price correlation with underlying assets will vary as risk premiums are priced locally.  An "escrow" which steps in to prop up a market which has dipped due to a change in environmental conditions is distorting the market, not correcting it.  As a result the fund would continue to push prices up beyond "fair value" toward it's programmed target, with sellers happy to continue selling as the fund perpetually depletes itself.

2. Depletion. Once any escrow becomes depleted, the underlying value of the instrument backed by the fund is reduced (the total potential value which could be injected into the market is reduced, and if nothing else the risk that the escrow will become fully depleted has increased).  Not only does this create a a vicious circle with increased risk causing reduced valuations and feeding into scenario 1 above, but at this point, anyone duplicating the instrument feed can offer the chance for investors to jump ship and enter a new version of the same instrument (one with a new and healthy escrow). This in turn amplifies the downward pressure, and escrow-depletion of the original instrument.

3. Manipulation. A trader aware of the escrow logic could conceivably game it for profit. Let's say a trader is bullish and holds the highest open bid on the market, now say there happens to be a thin volume on the sell side and a buy of 5 MSC would push the asset price up 300 basis points and beyond the escrow trigger threshold. Knowledge that doing this would trigger the escrow to sell into the bidwall might be worth far more than the 5 MSC outlay (and if he's really savvy he'll have also reduced his bid to a sliver above the next highest offer). In this way people will be looking for opportunities to trigger escrow events to their advantage when certain market conditions exist.

At last count, he spent .37 BTC spamming blockchain.info at .01 BTC a pop, plus about $10 USD on the domain, so he has some expenses to recoup. .02 BTC is quite a dip from 1 BTC, seems like it would have been better to try some intermediate points.

I'm impressed he got a nice looking site up that quickly. It's obviously not an official Mastercoin Foundation site, and spamming blockchain.info with messages to promote the site was pretty obnoxious, so I'd be surprised if it is Mich's, though his artwork he posted here is on it.

The rate was 99 Mastercoins per Bitcoin yesterday, be nice if they do sell at 1:1 now - quite an ROI for a 24 hour investment!

Overall, other than the spamming, I wouldn't call it cheating - it's just an offer to resell. Curious how the Mastercoin transfer works, since the wiki mentions it isn't completely safe at this point.

Not wanting to be pedantic, but let's stop naming these currency issuers "escrows", shall we? They're not escrows. They're much closer to the concept of currency boards than that of an escrow.

repeat: Is this website yours？or the cheaters？

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO5sxLapAts

But seriously, this may catch up big though. I wish all the best.

When will the client software be built?

I dont understand. Someone please explain how the 'formulaec escrow funds will fail?'

Not trying to be a troll, just new to all this.

Explain it to me like im a kid

please

Congratulations to dacoinminster bought a few mastercoins and will like to be involved with the mastercoin foundation to provide may services in branding marketing and other media related services to bring exposure to mastercoin.

The problem with postponement is that the "escrows" are likely the most technically demanding component of the protocol.
I doubt they can be grafted on later unless the initial protocol is specifically designed to support them.

The escrows are also my largest point of concern.

Any model which enables forward predictability such as "if i make trade X, the escrow will make trade Y" enables manipulation, and will ultimately fail.

To be honest I would prefer to see escrows and any reliant capabilities officially excluded from the spec and discussed for possible future inclusion via the foundation if viable models can be identified.

I agree completely.

Implication: number 1 priority should be redesign of the formulaic escrow funds. Getting these to work (in theory) should be the #1 white paper priority. Developing and even designing everything else should wait.

bump.

So.. What now?

Whats gonna happen? :p

Also note, you will only see the mastercoins if you look at the transaction on the 1Exodus transactions page.  Currently, the greasemonkey script does not allow you to see them when viewing the transaction in your wallet.

Use firefox - install greasemonkey - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/greasemonkey/
Then install the script - http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/175196
Then find your transaction in blockchain.info.

Nice work on the wiki!  I swear I checked there just an hour ago and it was blank.  Appreciate your contributions with pushing things forward Ripper!