i attempted to get the CP schema into a postman collection to share but was having a hell of a time converting it into the correct format. lmk if you find one.
stamps one here: https://www.postman.com/pepecola/bitcoin-stamps/collection/s41l9kv/stampchain-openapi-3-0
- 01 March 2025 (5 messages)
-
-
On the API
Dispenser block index is the last action of the dispenser?
Is there a call for the block the dispenser closes? I thought I found it but it’s returning null. -
Thanks, I’m going to filter by close and use the last block index. I think that’s correct.
-
speaking of the api. this is being annoying for block fetching just to be aware of.. might impact other verbose calls
https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/issues/3059 - 02 March 2025 (15 messages)
-
Lowest price verified XCP dispenser incoming
https://mempool.space/tx/9357f081a0060db913d7a972d5989f8eac2f96960267d4e28fd77440ff27f542
322 XCP @ 0.000088 BTC ea. -
Xcp adding to strategic reserve? -
Jacob Brown (@JakeBlockchain) on XJust received a leaked document detailing the allocation strategy for the Crypto Strategic Reserve. Bullish.
-
lol
-
What a slap in the face
-
ADA, XRP, ETH wtf is going on
-
Ada, xrp, and sol. Eth didnt get mentioned. -
Actually, a follow up post mentioned that BTC and Eth as well.
-
Fun sounds like they are just doing the hot stuff
When XCP STOCKPILE ?! -
This V2 api is insane. I can’t but think the amount of work and time it must of took.
-
It’s professional and never ending
-
I have GEMZCARD I would like to sell -
- 03 March 2025 (13 messages)
-
📢ORBital Market Survey REMINDER : Share Your Experience & Win! 🎉
You have until this Sunday to take our survey and try your luck! ✨
🔗https://forms.gle/e3GhPNVkL79vmhgq6
Try Your Luck!
🏆PRIZES🎀:
🐕 3 x MAGICSPELL: The Building of a Myth card from the Future of Forgotten Relics collection
💰 7 x 1'500 BitCrystals (BCY)
Your opinion matters!ORBital Market: User Experience SurveyHelp us improve the ORBital market by sharing your experience and be one of the lucky winners! The survey is now open and runs until Sunday, March 9. Once the survey is closed, we will randomly draw 10 winners among all the participants. PRIZES: - 3 x MAGICSPELL - 7 x 1’500 BCY The winners will be announced on our X, Telegram and Discord accounts. Do not forget to fill in your Counterparty compatible address to ensure you can receive your prize! Good luck!
-
🚀 Announcing BitcoinSDK!
Hello everyone,
We’re excited to introduce BitcoinSDK, a modular JavaScript/TypeScript SDK designed to simplify Bitcoin integration in dApps and services.
🔹 What BitcoinSDK Offers:
✅ Seamless Bitcoin Wallet Integration – Easily connect and manage multiple wallets with built-in visual components.
✅ Counterparty & Metaprotocol Support – Includes API calls to interact with Counterparty and other metaprotocols.
✅ Atomic Swaps via OpenBook – Enabling shared liquidity across dApps and markets using on-chain orderbooks.
BitcoinSDK is an ongoing project, and we’ll continue expanding its features. This SDK will be the foundation for future developments and upcoming products.
📦 Get it now: https://www.npmjs.com/package/bitcoinsdk
Feedback and contributions are welcome! Let’s build the future of Bitcoin dApps together. 🚀npm: bitcoinsdkBitcoin SDK to integrate Bitcoin wallets to your app and get access to The OpenBook Protocol in your project. Latest version: 0.1.6, last published: 2 minutes ago. Start using bitcoinsdk in your project by running `npm i bitcoinsdk`. There are no other projects in the npm registry using bitcoinsdk.
-
Do you have an available app to test this on?
-
🔥**Announcing Counterparty Core v10.10.1** 🔥
This release includes two major improvements to the Counterparty Core codebase: (1) faster and more reliable node shutdown, (2) ~50% faster initial node catchup. (Between v10.9.0 and this release we've gone from around 28 hrs to 11 hrs on a fast machine (!)) This release also includes a number of usability improvements to the API and CLI, as well as bugfixes.
Full release notes are on GitHub as always: https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/releases/tag/v10.10.1 -
None
-
Ahh dispensers allow one to stay in the CP ecosystem with Bitcoin without leaving vs atomic swaps
Wonder if it would be possible for dispensers to have an over subscription option
Where you could put in reserve X tokens it would still dispense if oversubscribed -
If dispenser has no incoming dispenses, it would close at 0 and release reserve from escrow to dispenser owner
Otherwise, it would use reserve if oversubscribed and then close -
there is an app on the repository built with the UI components so you can clone and test everything there or just import it on any of your apps
edited: BitcoinSDK soon will be implemented on firemints as is mostly the same code but will update to use the npm package
https://github.com/JavierCervilla/BITCOINSDKGitHub - JavierCervilla/BITCOINSDKContribute to JavierCervilla/BITCOINSDK development by creating an account on GitHub.
-
Yeah i did this on accident to find out -
It’s a solution for trusted sellers so they don’t have to deal with refunds and assurance for buyers.
-
anybody interested in the GEMZCARD We are offering?
- 04 March 2025 (14 messages)
-
Joined. -
None -
Hi there.
Who should I contact to find out if they are currently hiring developers for this project? -
You have to send your feet pictures to @carsonated. That works in most chats
-
If your back is hairy enough, I think others here can help you
-
I'd like to confirm that we need feet pics -
confirmation provided -
Same. Some API documentation is basically point and click for postman integration. There is a way with counterparty API but it requires a middle step and reliant on apiary docs we may not have. Thanks for the reference -
When 🌕
-
I, Zero G and Oli do them -
- 05 March 2025 (219 messages)
-
Amazing how few active counterparty addresses hold an XCP balance.......
-
Perhaps the use case needs to be strengthened.........
-
Yep. Right now XCP is simultaneously a barrier to entry into the ecosystem and economically ~useless. This is easily fixable by simply updating the stupid XCP fee calculation from a fixed value (my fault... 11 years ago) to a dynamic fee calculation that starts off at zero and kicks in only at higher volumes. There's an outstanding proposal for this (a number of the comments on which unfortunately don't actually refer to the proposal) https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/issues/2893 We do this with attach now and it works great. IMO we should roll it out to other TX types.
-
(if you support the above proposal, please 👍/ comment on the GitHub issue!)
-
I'm trying to figure out which leading cryptocurrency protocols include dynamic or variable fees depending on network usage/demand.
Just based on a quick chatgpt inquiry, it appears that almost all (if not all?) of the leading cryptocurrencies have either dynamic fees, or rules for variation in fees that kick in under certain conditions. -
From ChatGPT:
As of October 2023, the top 10 cryptocurrencies by market capitalization include a mix of fixed fee and dynamic fee structures. Here’s a general overview of how these protocols handle transaction fees with their native tokens:
Bitcoin (BTC) - Dynamic Fees: Bitcoin uses a dynamic fee model where transaction fees fluctuate based on network demand and congestion.
Ethereum (ETH) - Dynamic Fees: Ethereum transitioned to a dynamic fee structure with the introduction of EIP-1559, which includes a base fee that changes according to network demand.
Tether (USDT) - Fixed Fees: Tether's transaction fees are generally considered fixed, especially on specific networks like Ethereum, though they can vary based on the underlying blockchain used.
BNB (Binance Coin) - Dynamic Fees: BNB used for Binance Smart Chain transactions typically has dynamic fees that adjust based on network activity.
XRP (XRP) - Fixed Fees: XRP transactions have a very low and relatively fixed fee structure, which is designed to keep transactions cheap and efficient.
USD Coin (USDC) - Fixed Fees: Similar to Tether, USDC usually has fixed fees on its primary networks, although fees can apply depending on the network used.
Cardano (ADA) - Fixed Fees: Cardano has a fixed fee structure for transactions, which is designed to be stable and predictable.
Solana (SOL) - Dynamic Fees: Solana employs a dynamic fee model where fees can fluctuate based on network congestion and usage.
Dogecoin (DOGE) - Fixed Fees: Dogecoin generally has a fixed fee structure, making transactions inexpensive and predictable.
TRON (TRX) - Dynamic Fees: TRON's fee structure can be considered dynamic, where fees are determined based on network conditions and resource allocation. -
Even the protocols where chatGPT claims the fees are fixed, are noted as having "stable" and "predictable" fees, from which one would assume the fees have some variation ("stable" and "predictable" are not equivalent with "fixed").
-
There's literally zero downside.
-
But if people don't support these kinds of obvious protocol improvements (or if they only support them on TG where their support can't be tracked), it won't happen 🤷♀️
-
Where are all those stamp peoples???
-
Did you spend the time to read the proposal ? Stamps remain unaffected, sorry -
briefly but until I know devs actually give a shit about what the community wants I see no reason to waste my time
-
Maintaining this "Nowhere in the proposal is it suggested that fees should be added to transactions that do not already have them. I think that would be a bad idea in general." But transfers and dividends were also mentioned in the discussion.
The commands where the benefit would be sweeps, named asset registering, since "binding assets to utxo" has already been applied. -
I mean named assets needing a new model makes sense, currently a fixed amount would be a barrier when XCP is at a higher valuation
-
Boooom
https://horizon.market/explorer/assets/LFGLUTNICK?marketsTab=swaps
Supply: 135
Holders: 13 -
-
I think increasing the value of the xcp token benefits the xcp ecosystem because economics is a part of absolutely every facet of life.
Why do/would any dev work on counterparty. Who cares about its viability for use? What if the current dev team goes dark tomorrow? Why on earth are Adam and co here? Why did Jdog accumulate 1% of xcp while he was developing?
I’m fully ready to see the light and understand why my thought process is wrong. -
Our activity footprint is super small
Price will increase with new user growth/activity
100% right, a higher XCP price benefits everyone -
With this model
Current users may not be minting named assets because they don’t want to spend XCP
But if XCP fees were null in low periods of activity, activity may actually pick up to take advantage of the fee less environment -
and it's not just about not spending XCP. right now it's still very hard to acquire *any* XCP
-
it's a barrier to entry into the ecosystem
-
Interesting, I never thought I would agree with this but here we are
It gamifies it a little bit too -
People will be more attentive to take advantage of the fee less state
-
If they feel like I feel about atomic swaps, I can totally understand
-
This attach detach uxto is like alien tech to me
-
yeah it's all still very new!
-
A fee less state with the ability to buy/sell asset issuances at a protocol level may be cool
-
There’s some arbitrage in there if you take advantage of the fee less state
-
I like it. We need activity more than we need the burning of XCP
The burning of XCP occurs when the activity level increases -
yes it should make transaction volume much more stable
-
Activity is a much bigger factor to price than burning
-
Idk if you’re affiliated with Jdog but this is my point
-
Can devs pump my bag??
-
Stamps people taking over protocol changes...
-
shocker
-
Not a fan in pegging or token gating
-
there are already free numerics no one is token gating
-
dynamic pricing on everything else is fine except asset issuance
-
I would probably even support a halving schedule similar to bitcoin for costs of asset issuance so like every 4 years gets cut in half
-
because I value asset issuance like the block rewards
-
as a finite supply it will get harder and more expensive over time to issue
-
So killing user base and activity??
-
no one is killing anything free numeric stamp boi
-
As if there isn't already a barrier in place.
-
see this is why this chat is a clown show your points dont make any sense
-
you guys have done a great job of that already
-
are you going to retro actively give us all back our xcp for assets weve issued in the past
-
this is the problem
-
Says the guy who promoted a Grift then started ban hammering users along side with a hostile dev
-
Smart guy.
-
essentially rugpulling the users who have paid the fees for anti spam
-
the only grifters are the stampers
-
Indeed. Rhetoric doesn't help the conversation, IMHO. Let's keep the name-calling out
Are there other arguments against variable fee?
I don't think users will expect reimbursement. -
you dont understand proof of burn
-
you are changing the thermodynamics of the protocol
-
this is engineering 101 not my feels
-
Too bad only GitHub conversations matter :/
-
But the block subsidy of bitcoin decreasing over time is genius
-
As user base increases things should decrease to allow more users and decrease the potential of centralization
-
thank you adding my comments
-
so a asset issuance halving then
-
I'm not paid to be community manager. If I was, you bet I'd do that for you
-
One could say current costs has halved *named asset issuance
-
This guy's really gotta go
-
I like this also
-
Sure but then going to basically zero asset issuance fee is a complete mockery of this project
-
Strawmaning a viable argument is gross... @teysol
-
Just to reiterate, there would be no XCP fee unless activity was dead
So if we have a thriving active community, there will be an XCP fee -
It’s like a kickstart
-
This is dumb and ignores the burn
-
Halving schedule would be acceptable
-
What burn? BTC burn for XCP?
-
Increasing the sat price
-
So double fee instead of halve? lol
-
If there’s no planes in the sky the fuel is free
-
It was negative at one point
-
So far I will rearrange your comment, with a negative connotation that has nothing to do with what you said, for no reason.
-
Basically what devs are arguing
-
So Bitcoin is basically free to use when no one is using it
-
To gmoney, burning of the XCP is the burning of energy to create the asset and I like that also
-
On a personal level, I’m not crazy I’ve burned 1,000’s of XCP to create my assets
But again, free named issuance only occurs if the network is dead
In that case, a dead network doesn’t help anyone -
you are ignoring physics. bitcoin subsidy trend toward zero of fixed supply
asset issuance (burn) of fixed supply trend towards zero -
Ironic to be so against STAMPs, but insist on the mechanic of "forever stamps" where the rate never changes
-
you cant destroy energy dead network or not
-
dynamic fees doesn't mean fees will go down; it doesn't mean that fees will go up either... the point is for it to be dynamic. there would still be a burning of XCP (against a limited supply), the question is what the _rate_ of that decrease should be, and keeping it fixed practically guarantees that the fee won't serve its economic function properly
-
introduce a halving schedule like bitcoin
-
you made this protocol like Bitcoin Adam right? stay consistent
-
the reason that Bitcoin block rewards half again and again over time is precisely to transition fees from fixed values to _dynamic_ transaction fees
-
in the long term, Bitcoin rewards to miners will be fully dynamically determined by network conditions
-
since they'll be entirely based on the dynamic fees that bitcoin already has
-
block rewards are a set rate of scarcity to 21M
-
yes in 2140 lol
-
you don't need decreasing block rewards to make Bitcoin have 21m coins
-
you are conflating fees with the foundation of this protocol...
Burned bitcoin = xcp = named asset -
the proposal doesn't change that
-
it just changes the ratio
-
the only thing that makes xcp special is limited supply and vanity names with proof of work attached
-
and indeed, the ratio at which burned BTC was converted into XCP *also* changed during the burn period
-
no one is talking about removing the XCP fee from named asset issuances
-
but it is a rugpull to those currently with named assets... chasing pumps over principles is not why we are here
-
a fixed halving schedule for named assets makes the most sense
-
I don't see how the proposal changes the value of any previously issued named assets
-
the value of XCP fluctuates as it is (as does the value of gold, BTC, CAD etc.)
-
Another valid concern is that now a user knows exactly how many xcp to acquire to create one or a few tokens
If someone, on a budget, goes to the effort to get the correct dynamicly estimated amount, then it changes, for worse, they will not enjoy the headache. Not very great onboarding there -
I dont even see why we need this since we have free numerics? seems like this isnt even an issue really
-
Joined. -
free numerics specifically allows anyone to create tokens on counterparty
-
are the stamps people all of a sudden going to use named assets if it gets cheaper? doubt it
-
1. Fees don't jump instantly. The algorithm enforces that they move gradually. (This can be tweaked ofc.)
2. You could say the same thing about BTC. And we shouldn't assume users only want to issue *one* named asset forever. -
Oh sorry, user. You missed out on the race, where more money = better than
-
👹
Playing devil's advocate....
Let's rule out all possible concerns -
I can't speak for anyone else but for my part I don't think the issue is particularly pressing. I think it's generally worth discussing the economics of the system—which are never simple—and figuring out what the right structure is.
I do think that every hard-coded fee is *stupid* (again, my fault). It's an unnecessary barrier to entry for users who want to issue named assets (which ofc are quite different from numeric ones!) The economic value of the fee has changed drastically over the past 11 years, and it'll continue to change, so it doesn't make sense IMO to leave it as a fixed value a priori, as long as the dynamics of the whole ecosystem don't change (which this proposal in particular should not do AFAICT). -
We all always knew the fee had to become dynamic at some point
-
We've seen in other communities where a flood of users clogged the transaction rates for everyone involved in Bitcoin because they get fomo and racing for some kind of stupid meme coin token.
In this theoretical situation, there is a race to register tokens with DODO in the name because the collection just launched with theme of a bird instead of a frog or a crocodile or an ape. So yes there's a name Rush that day to register any kind of DODO
the casual new user who sees the challenge and wants to do everything they can to secure their own idea in the form of a registration will lose out to someone who is already experienced and prepared ahead of time. so in this instance a person who is new is not succeeding -
I think the dynamic fee doesnt take into account the fixed supply XCP... I dont think it should go higher than .5 based on activity if anything over time should be lower
-
I wasn’t arguing that in an autistic *akshuallly* manner, I was simply sharing something that rhymes.
-
In this theoretical situation a known max issuance fee value could help the user prepare and succeed... Or be onboarded through publishing success
-
At the end of that day, we had ten years to pay a premium for virgin land. Now we can sell the remaining parcels at a market rate to make sure we don’t have deserted lots between beautiful homes, making the property values in line with their historic creations in comparison to the new builds
-
Ten years plus
-
If someone gets a good parcel for cheap, cool
-
Yeah imagine those abandoned lots never being able to be touched forever because the land never returns to the state.
I see a valid argument in the expiration of unused, undistributed, unlocked registrations in wallets that haven't had any debts for 10 years. These are a lost cause and should be recycled back into the community. -
Because ideally we want people using the protocol to its fullest extent and not just to do drive by name squatting as has been historically the case especially close to launch as far as I can tell
-
Oh Jesues Duncan, no one here will agree with that
-
Too bad cuz it makes sense
-
That’s a bridge too far for even me
-
But the convo is priceless to get the pulse
-
Get outta here with expiring assets, that’s so dumb. Just go to namecoin.
-
Because the people are emotionally attached to waste? I don't understand
-
There is a validity in what I say whether or not you want to personally entertain it at the moment publicly
-
permissionless is permissionless expiration of asset names is dumb af lol
-
Your emotional baggage is way more than mine. It's unfortunate that we can't have valid conversations about technical merit in order to strengthen the whole community and the protocol itself instead we want to get mired in personal attachments to nonsense. I don't get it but you do you
-
honestly I dont think we are going to get any major momentum until a big player comes in
-
A name-calling is psychological projection and you have succeeded at that. I don't want to entertain the concept with you any longer as you are not willing to have an authentic conversation
-
Scarcity conversion via time is like letting satoshis coins be remined because he didn’t move them
-
your bitcoin expires if you dont use it in 10 years lol
-
I beat you gmoney
-
sametime
-
lol
-
See, everyone can agree at least sometimes
-
You all have been institutionalized beyond reproach. That gang mentality is creating a problematic and not very inviting atmosphere year after year
-
Okay so 20 years
-
They should go unexpired for 10,000 years?
-
Cool, moderator calling everyone dumb
-
That's your word
-
This is EXACTLY what I’m talking about. Please tell me why XCP is bad and also explain why we still even have it. My impression was that it earmarks the health of the ecosystem within which we operate. To me it seems like a unifying object. Otherwise the protocol would be a vast array of projects trying to dev for their specific use case. To me XCP seems like a value to attract development to the protocol. But it seems I’m wrong. I’m glad Adam and co are here, though I don’t know why they’re here or what vision they can carry out since there’s no economic incentive or apparent need for an economic incentive. I like the progress that we’ve had. I have no intention of getting rich off XCP. I hold thousands of XCP and I haven’t been excited about counterparty for years. It is merely a lottery ticket. I check telegram periodically to see the community floundering around and arguing with itself about nothing as it’s done for years. A stagnant echo chamber, devoid of relevance.
-
I'm willing to have a conversation but you want to shut me down so I'm not sure what kind of trump card you want to pull with some kind of false rhetoric about appeal to anti-authority
-
so satoshis coins will be available to everyone soon 😂
-
these arent comments made by a serious person
-
So my grandmas Morgan silver dollars she gave me shouldn’t be worth a dollar now because they expired?
-
Yes you are the king of false equivalencies
-
Let’s reset the room. Quick, do we all agree we enjoy counterparty and the things that hang off the sides of it, and have for years?
-
Maybe they are just like domain names with expiration dates on using them. Sounds familiar
-
I am disappointed with all of you being unwilling to see the very valid point that my conversation is attempting to carry. instead we want to get all defensive and compared to other projects with false equivalencies instead of understanding that having abandoned dilapidated lots next to a mansion make the whole neighborhood look like shit
-
Perhaps it might make sense for, when there is low network activity, for the tx fee to be a tiny amount such as "0.1 XCP" instead of "zero XCP/free."
That way, regardless of network activity, an extremely small amount of XCP is required, just to maintain its symbolic importance as the token of the counterparty protocol.
The barrier to entry is not so much the cost involved with the XCP fee, but the difficulty involved with buying and selling XCP.
It would be ideal to be able to issue standing orders to both buy and sell XCP for BTC or other high liquidity coin as an offramp, but if this is difficult, then even just a simple one or two click "buy/sell" swap mechanism that enables easy entry and exit from XCP would enhance accessibility of XCP and counterparty. -
-
There are millions of available lots, no reason to go take other peoples lots from them
It’s entirely anti Bitcoin -
It's been explained to me time and time again that counterparty is not bitcoin. Maybe you could check out the history of the chats in order to get on the same page or you know up to speed
-
a fundamental flaw in understanding property rights
-
Someone going to come in soon and send it
-
The amont of words are nearly endless. If someone needs a lost name they can just modify it and make it great
-
Thanks for your tldr. So much input from you I am unbelievably glad that you are here to comment whenever you do
-
next Duncan will introduce a yearly bitcoin tax on your assets
-
It's unfortunate that you want to miss characterize me and being some kind of d** that you typically associate with
-
Literally no one would agree with what Duncan is saying so it’s not even worth discussing 😆
-
Then why are you getting so worked up. Why not ignore me if it's so off the wall?
-
Because it’s such a bad idea, I can’t even believe you would mention it
-
The last thing I'm going to say about this whole issue is that you all are unable to have an authentic conversation, on just about any topic that is outside of your very simplistic worldview
-
Klaus Schwab would love it.......
-
Literally no one in this entire community would likely agree with you lolll
-
Or maybe people are not interested in spending the time to make the effort put forth to communicate with people who are stone walls
-
Admin gets you
-
Feel like Duncan’s favorite dish is jambalaya
-
Only 3,670,344,486,987,776 possible combinations according to Grok!
Not enough! -
And if someone wants a named asset that has already been claimed/issued, they can put up a buy order for it.
-
You can’t sell assets at the protocol level
-
Yet?
-
coindaddy
-
-
"If you don't use your asset within 10 years, the asset will be seized without compensation."
Another issue is the definition of what it means to "use" an asset.
In many situations, ownership of the asset is a use case.
People gather/collect guitars, cars, gold bars, domain names, patents, branded watches, etc. The item may just be sitting in storage (whether physical or digital), but the owner derives enjoyment (or other perceived benefit) simply from ownership. -
Will
-
Here’s my will, sorry, the token expired
-
This seems quite odd.
According to these stats, only 12% (nearly 1/10) of active counterparty addresses hold *any* XCP (The Counterparty protocol native currency).
I wonder what percentage of active BTC addresses hold BTC and what percentage of active ETH addresses hold ETH.
One should generally need some of the native coin/token to use the protocol. -
great to have the leader of the protocol say this
-
-
Ownership Trading · Issue #2969 · CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-coreDEX would be hard I think. Atomic swaps much easier, but still not trivial. (You'd have to implement attach/detach for ownership.)
-
Give me a couple weeks, I got you
-
It’s only useless because there are no buyers standing by ready to purchase
-
There was a pepecash whale yesterday
-
Who’s buying PEPECASH 👀
-
Looks like @droplistoor turned on his bot again, which posts late 😅 -
Listening to this made me feel stupid for owning historical counterparty assets but also weirdly proud but also really, really stupid -
Why would you feel stupid? ^^ -
I'm not sure
-
Maybe I'm not flexing enough
- 06 March 2025 (156 messages)
-
Because they don't sell and nobody that has the capital to buy them even knows they exist
Ordinals and ETH were the first NFTs bro get on the bandwagon
(Sarcasm!) -
Maybe because so many people have moved on to the next things and yet I'm still here because I didn't want to move on
-
neither did I. Counterparty offers so much more than other protocols imo
Would be nice to add more though imo other than focusing on changing fees
But hey I'm just a pepe -
Pepe is everywhere though. He didn't start on XCP and he moved on with the rest of them
-
What stats did he share?
-
So I guess my answer would be active users
-
But we all know that
-
Vector, this functionality linked above is more needed than changing the fees
What I personally think we need is places like Magic Eden to be able to easily add xcp tokens and show the entire crypto community we (XCP assets) work just as well as ordinals, ethereum assets or runes
Because simply having them show as "equal" or have them included at all for big centralized NFT marketplaces will invite new users like no other
I don't think y'all really understand how ignored and shit on XCP assets are in the main spaces simply because all the other influencers say "punks were first" and "the first Bitcoin NFTs are ordinals"
Add on top of the fact that people literally don't know how or where to buy spells of Genesis or pepes or even xcp for that matter....
Adjusting the fee structure is so back seat to all of those things. I could ramble more but I'm just so tired of even putting my 2 sats in for anything these days -
How much do you really care about counterparty?
-
-
-
Warms my heart. 1/1 token and 1/1 physical. Carsonated the real MVP
-
I was surprised to see a number of signatures on this piece, I presume from the conference?
-
I'm saying the fact nobody knows about Counterparty (new users post 2018....) is because there is no marketing.
The XCP twitter is just all the hot fixes and new updates. *Fixed fixed fixed fixed
No official community spaces, no official events at Bitcoin conferences, no events at art events (NFT NYC, art Basel etc)
Counterparty literally relies on artists like Tatiana, Scrilla etc to throw events because of their love for the community and network.
The biggest thing you could do for marketing, interest and what the community has asked for (FOR YEARS) is to get native counterparty functionality (or just the historic NFT collections) on magic Eden.
I get the whole "XCP doesn't need to be on CEX"
... I get it. It's what makes on chain and protocol level functionality like the DEX so cool ....
But where did I hear about Counterparty? Bittrex and Poloniex.
If XCP assets aren't on the big NFT marketplaces, then they might as well not exist in the public sphere at all (from a new user/normie perspective)
Furthermore I noticed some people saying we "need a big player to get into xcp" - we HAVE big players. MANY of them. They just moved on because they can't make $ minting with xcp. Simple as that.
If the Counterparty twitter (social media) doesn't consistently engage with the community, explore live spaces for updates and have open discussion with the legends of xcp (Dan Anderson, JPJA, Adam Levine, Koji, Joe Looney etc)... Then nobody will be interested that hasn't heard about Counterparty already.
If you guys keep going with this "comment on the GitHub" and then maybe post one or two issues or milestones to the TG and expect that users will actually care to engage I hate to break it to you, that process sucks.
But yeah that's my 2 sats. Marketing, user requested features (like trading Token Issuance Ownership) and broader historical NFT awareness outweighs changing fee structures. -
Signatures? There's only my signature. The one I printed for Tatiana's "The Counterparty" event was damaged. So I printed a new one........ It wasn't cheap.
-
To anyone printing canvas, get it stretched near the event it will show lol. And don't ship USPS. Learned a few lessons there!
-
Ahhh, I thought these were signed from the names shown
-
-
Naw that's me filling in mistakes (Adam let me know I had early Lead Developers wrong)
Which is why it's version 1.0 :)
I just stitched together that timeline before I made the changes, so thought Id manually change them for you -
I have plans for new printed version soon. But I have like 45 things in the GitHub docket to add (and amend)... And I have a cool idea to include more artists in a newer version of the timeline.
What you have is very rare. The rarest it can possibly be. And it's the first one 💜 -
This really isn’t the developers responsibility?
-
Every lead maintainer is a leader. Maybe Adam should be on Hell Money too!
-
This is more our responsibility?
-
Ser. Is that a Milky Way made of legos? How can your tiny little hard plastic hands even accomplish such feats? -
I do have some faint memory that once the 'rescue us from broken codebase' work was done we were going to see more appearance/convo exposure from Adam but maybe im crossing wires
-
it sure is, let me tell you how long it took with fingers that dont bend. a long time
-
IMO podcasts help, all exposure helps, but we need killer products built on top
-
Products that attract new users, they come here for the product, not the folklore
-
Historical NFTs, some of the most important NFTs to ever exist is such an incredible anchor
The next phase is new products the masses want to use -
lol you mean a marketplace i gotta buy little tokens (or do a subscription service) to trade atomic swaps?
why did horizon not just do % fees like every other marketplace does? -
id prefer to use Magic Eden
-
no hate on firemints or horizon or fairmints - i just want a better chance my token will be bought if i listed it ya kno
-
and what are the reasons why they wouldnt?
-
and?
-
name a few more reasons why they wouldnt
-
hypothetical, you run Magic Edens team of adding new tokens, what would you look for?
-
im asking you
-
im asking everyone here
-
what would you look for? what would you require?
-
Ease of integration
-
that's what "fixes fixes fixes" is for
-
They have the CP node booting in 11 hours. I think that’s why they are fixing
-
that's what removing useless fees in a coin that no one can purchase is for
-
December 2024 was the lowest volume on xcp ever.
-
that's not just Counterparty...
-
Also the fork…
-
for my part I'm planning for the long term
-
Counterparty's been around for 11 years and it's not going anywhere
-
I haven’t touched my wallet in a long time because the fork threw all kinds of uncertainty in everything I was use to doing
-
-
also not by a long shot
-
but yes the harm that the FUD around a completely fake "fork" does shouldn't be underestimated. I am shocked that people aren't screaming bloody murder about that nonsense that's at the top of tokenscan
-
ah i must have had the wrong data then, was getting my info from here:
https://www.xcp.io/transactions -
we love tokenscan
its been there for us when _others_ werent -
Tokenscan is a for-profit service, and one that centralized all of the development energy for the whole ecosystem for half a decade, contributing ~nothing upstream
-
I understand the brand loyalty but if you're wondering what's keeping users off of Counterparty *today* it might have something to do with Tokenscan's completely dishonest "warning to users"
-
That said, I'm very sympathetic to your concerns about lack of Counterparty "marketing" as it were.
-
who here had to pay tokenscan (previously xchain) to use it?
-
-
the fork had nothing to do with it more the devs weird postioning with the stamp people and the uncertainity of cutting off our existing tooling through rushed code changes
-
then do something about it
-
-
Who here donated significant quantities of money for blackbox tokens or whatever they were called for "protocol development" that never happened? ✋
-
-
but calling it for profit is so disingenuous
-
ok Vector, my whole point here is I am saying (PERSONALLY) that marketing is more important than changing fees for minting a named asset
-
-
ya go ask Leonidas I heard he loves xcp
-
-
Seems as if Adam is trying to kill the use case for XCP like stamps had originally planned
-
the lead dev calling it useless? lol
-
ive said my bit, but i got a sense of humor so ima meme myself
-
-
under current activity levels what would the new fee be to mint a named asset
-
i tried to ask this in the github too - at what point of activity would they be the highest fee?
2021 levels? - for the record 2021 levels is ROOKIE numbers - xcp could be WAY more used and we all know it -
Useless fees in it has no economic impact since so little is being burned
-
20 sales in the past 30 days for atomic swaps... again catering to a nonexistent market while shitting on the current users. its like numeric sub-assets lol
-
can you not answer the question of what the new xcp fee would be under these new rules with current activity?
-
what about inverse to bitcoin sat/vB?
when it's at 1 sat the fee is .5 XCP and when its 100 sat its .005 XCP or something? -
(arbitrary numbers)
-
wow i love this
-
sat/vb is the MAIN reason i do or do NOT do a tx
-
overall the issuance cost kinda stays flat
-
now this is interesting
-
if we are tied to bitcoin, we have a model or context to conceptualize upon and the data is already being used
-
That’s a cool idea but I think the entire idea of having no fee is to increase activity in times of low usage to enable new participants to enter seamlessly
-
ima take a wild guess, because no one knows about or cares about xcp - lowering fees aint gonna increase usage
-
Let's bring up "the forkooor"
-
maybe it could even be like the 2016 blocks to difficulty retargeting so its only adjusting on a longer timeframe so people can contemplate
-
Might be right, buying a single XCP from a dispenser is easy and low risk
-
but you gotta download muh wallet that isnt easily findable on the app stores
-
What do you mean
-
why not work on a mobile wallet first
-
its like the biggest no brainer
-
and how you actually onboard
-
counterwallet on mobile would be fun
-
for the record, ive wanted FW to update mobile since nam
-
maybe mobile only, no need to push through app stores as its basically a shortcut on the homescreen
-
since ww2 actually
-
u were born in the 90's bro
-
i fought alongside patriots in Iran-Contra
-
-
-
Freewallet is the only reason I have a computer
-
if it helps yall in anyway when onboarding an old friend recently and i heard he just wants to use a phone I recommended Horizon
-
"let the record show..."
-
truly is the greatest wallet ever made
-
Joined. -
It's really nice to see all of the active debate and discussion.
Some of it is heated, but that's ok —- it's a sign that people are passionate about the project.
We're still in the game!!!! -
About the same price as a BigMac w fries? Most should be able to afford it.
-
it depends on the parameters of the proposed protocol change, and they can be ~anything!
-
I totally hear you. Right now I don't personally have the bandwidth to go knocking on doors to get the word out, but I'm happy to go on any podcast/twitter space/whatever to talk!
-
fwiw the proposed protocol change for dynamic fees is bucketed in for protocol change *after* the upcoming one (to fix address support—which is strict necessity for CEX support as far as I'm concerned). I think it's a conversation we should be having over the course of multiple months. nothing at all urgent (!)
-
again I'm still thinking very much long-term. (esp. so since we're in a real bear market for NFTs atm. just look at runes volumes lol). obviously I want Counterparty tx volumes and the price of XCP to moon tomorrow _as much as anyone_. but that's why we should be having these conversations around fixing the fee structure, mobile wallet support, CEX support, etc. now.
-
that's why latest release included weeks of dev work on making sure the node software _shuts down properly_... because if that doesn't work, it's one more reason that real exchanges can't support Counterparty
-
looks like not much trading activity is happening with RUSTBITS:
https://tokenscan.io/asset/RUSTBITS
but 1st step would be to use an updated and recommended Counterparty wallet as shown on the website:
https://www.counterparty.io/#wallets
- You could sell using a Dispenser to exchange RUSTBITS for Bitcoin
- Or sell using the Counterparty DEX to sell RUSTBITS for XCP -
if youre using Freewallet (Desktop Version 2.0.3)
you can read through the user manual:
https://davestaxcp.gitbook.io/freewallet.io-user-manual/freewallet-functions/setting-up-a-dispenser
or ask in the Freewallet chat:
https://t.me/freewallet_io
—-
if youre using Horizon feel free to check out their TG chat:
https://t.me/HorizonXCP -
There is no exchange, you have to find a real human to buy it
-
see your point...
youd have to compare this:
https://www.xcp.io/transactions
with this:
https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC,all,fee
- 2021 for example nft culture and explosive prices drove xcp tx's up, but it was "worth it" to send with large sat/vb txs at the time
- Compared to 2017-2018 when nobody cared about tokens and the fees were considered "insanely" high at the time
- and how could we forget the last halving for ordinals/runes? ... with not too much correlation for xcp txs and fees
could be researched further, just a birds eye view of that discussion of "sat/vb fees vs # of xcp txs"Counterparty Transactions - XCP.ioExplore all Counterparty transactions and blockchain activities.
-
Let me summarize the last +100 messages with this quip from earlier. We all are here for counterparty, but can we please stop villainizing the mind set of wanting the xcp token to increase in value?
-
Can devs pump my bag??
-
It would be nice to have a buy order book as well
🙏 -
Currently having fun making a little Counterparty transaction viewer for nerds - basically a front-end for some v2 API calls, with a few bells and whistles (still experimental)
-
Is it possible to construct a transaction that would be a DEx buy order and bind it to a UTXO in the same transaction?
-
100% of ordinals are UTXO based vs. <0.01% of Counterparty’s tokens. There need to be mechanisms that ease the transition.
-
Looking for whole Rare Pepe 🐸 wallets for sale. DM me if interested. -
- 07 March 2025 (38 messages)
-
XCP has two important functions imo, dex liquidity and fork detection (XCP can only exist on the “real” ledger after all) -
Also I want a refund for all named assets I registered at 5 xcp before the cost was reduced to 0.5
-
So the strategic bitcoin reserve was a rugpull?
-
Lol it’s so funny how no one on the internet actually reads anything
-
Wasn't there an expectation for new BTC purchases?
-
Nah they said 17. I won again
-
The Secretaries of Treasury and Commerce are authorized to develop budget-neutral strategies for acquiring additional bitcoin,
-
Anyone have the full text of the executive order?
-
Summary (?) from Sacks:
https://x.com/davidsacks47/status/1897802280738734236
"Just a few minutes ago, President Trump signed an Executive Order to establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve."
"The Reserve will be capitalized with Bitcoin owned by the federal government that was forfeited as part of criminal or civil asset forfeiture proceedings. This means it will not cost taxpayers a dime."
"IN ADDITION, the Executive Order establishes a U.S. Digital Asset Stockpile, consisting of digital assets other than bitcoin forfeited in criminal or civil proceedings.
The government will not acquire additional assets for the Stockpile beyond those obtained through forfeiture proceedings. "David Sacks (@davidsacks47) on XJust a few minutes ago, President Trump signed an Executive Order to establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. The Reserve will be capitalized with Bitcoin owned by the federal government that was forfeited as part of criminal or civil asset forfeiture proceedings. This means it
-
Going to lead to a COPS like television program where we go and seize people and their Bitcoin -
-
Exactly
-
Seizable crypto will be seized !?
-
Well, this part is not bad:
"The Secretaries of Treasury and Commerce are authorized to develop budget-neutral strategies for acquiring additional bitcoin, provided that those strategies have no incremental costs on American taxpayers. " -
Stockpile is shitcoins
-
SBR is not stockpile
-
Srcxx will be it , no doubt
-
China is ahead in that front
-
Govt seized your stamps?
-
https://x.com/DavidZell_/status/1897806312714780724
"Two clear ways to do this:
1) Executive Authority: Using the net-position of the Exchange Stabilization Fund, per @btcpolicyorg’s recommendation in our November analysis. The fund has a net position of ~39B, so substantial acquisition could begin right away.
2) An Act of Congress: Revaluing gold, per @SenLummis
BITCOIN Act. If passed, the law would have the USFG acquire 200k per year for 5 years in an entirely budget-neutral manner." -
We call it ‘co-locating’ for now
-
Mexico will pay for our bitcoin
-
Maybe they can seize some BTC/crypto from three-letter agency controlled cartels
-
Catching up here - so rare pepes might expire ?
-
Jk
-
I kid I kid
-
Only if you don't use them....
-
How do I use them !?
-
Ok gotta go
-
Exactly.....
-
Teddy Bitcoins (@TeddyBitcoins) on X
Budget neutral ways to acquire bitcoin: - $39b of exchange stabilization fund - $160B from selling SDRs - $800B from gold certificate revaluation =$1T “budget neutral” bitcoin buys BITCOIN TO $1,000,000 “The Secretaries of Treasury and Commerce are authorized to develop
-
Joined. -
Kindly check your inbox..
-
Yes, it looks like the US holds about $150B in SDRs:
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/206/ESF-January-2025-FS-Trunc-Notes.pdf
Is there a liquid market where they could just sell those?
Who would buy them? -
Yea it undisputedly provides dex liquidity. I don’t have any experience with dev work or coding so I may be wrong, but I would think XCP serves as a common link between developers and entices them to make things that benefit other users and projects on the platform, not just their own specific projects and users. I think an example of this is stamps. I view XCP as a unifying force among developers and users of the platform. Maybe my view is wrong. Maybe it’s simply a tool for providing dex liquidity and to assign other use cases to it becomes problematic
-
Also I don’t know enough about stamps so maybe that’s not a good example
-
Establishment of the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and United States Digital Asset Stockpile
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
-
I consider XCP the reserve currency of the protocol
Basically what Mysterious said, Dex liquidity - 08 March 2025 (14 messages)
-
Joined. -
What's up y'all! I'm interested in digital collectable card games. Is anyone doing anything like that here?
-
I met @krostue recently and he turned me on to the group.
-
Thought we had a projects page, but I'm not seeing it
https://www.counterparty.io/ -
The old site had one,
@ffmad am I missing it, or does it have to be made yet? -
Here is a list from two years ago
-
17Art
Badger Capsule
Barnyard Club
Bassmint
Bitcorn
BigGANs
BitGirls
DABC
Dank Rares
Fake Commons
Fake Munchkins
Fake Rares
FauxSOG
Force of Will
Hodlpet
KaleidoscopeXCP
Mafia Wars
Memorychain
New Liberty Standard
Oasis Mining
Pepe pizza project
the PEPE Project
Pepemon
Phunchkins
Rare Shadilay
Rarelands
RarePepe
Retro XCP
scannable NFTs
Spamgelo
Spells of Genesis
Skulls and Bones
the Wojak Way -
Joined. -
These are all card games?
-
I misunderstood. If collecting is the game, then they all fit the bill
-
I'm thinking something like magic the gathering or pokemon
-
Not sure if they are still active
hodlpet.io -
When we were talking I couldn't think of the name "Spells of Genesis" but I mentioned that EverDreamSoft created a game before they started tokenizing the game cards with counterparty. And they were, by some accounts, the first to do so
- 09 March 2025 (7 messages)
-
I’ve got a handful of these cards if anyone is looking for any -
@ffmad or @davesta are either of you the go to for counterparty.io, forgive me if I got that wrong. Maybe Adam?
There is a malicious link under the ‘What does a Counterparty transaction look like?’ Section of this page https://docs.counterparty.io/docs/basics/what-is-counterparty/ -
-
5,300 unconfirmed TXs in the mempool
That’s incredible -
What size utxo do you like?
- 11 March 2025 (9 messages)
-
Such a great event!
-
(Is Twitter still down??)
-
It's back.
-
thanks for the YouTube link!
I was just searching for it there recently -
None -
Joined. - 12 March 2025 (4 messages)
-
Joined. -
Hello, one question, is there an updated list of public nodes somewhere?
and also, @teysol is there any reason for not having ipv6 support on https://api.counterparty.io:4000/v2 or could be possible to be added the AAA DNS record to this domain? -
I don't know if there's a public list
-
I haven't tested IPv6 support. I've filed an issue for that: https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/issues/3084IPv6 Support · Issue #3084 · CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core
and for the Public API
- 13 March 2025 (5 messages)
-
Joined. -
When did you move to the UK @davesta 😂
-
is this a fake one as well I assume?
-
i was thinking my messafe would shock you lol - 14 March 2025 (15 messages)
-
Where did you find this? Is this a sock of mine?
