- 18 May 2024 (152 messages)
-
super weird the people in this group wont help people with the only open source wallet that actually works -
some people so cornfused
-
maybe because mobile wallet wasnt updated for a decade, no? -
its a wallet that doesnt even support segwit
-
i use it on mobile, but can i recommend it to someone it's questionable
-
it at least works lol
-
it works fine with legacy addies , thats true! :)
-
the only CP wallet i use on the go :)
-
freewallet.io works on pc, mac etc all dl's on github
-
opened order for 4000 XCP on dex : https://xchain.io/tx/70bb4fcb9f6b7489d8dde3dab360dacc87559e576aed4ab5a0f6a6dfe6c33f7a
-
good opportunity to acquire bulk xcp
-
cheap price compared to the size, listed at the price to move fast.
-
don't sleep on it.
-
-
50% off, very generous Stack -
how many confirmations required for btc-pay to be broadcasted after the order match? i can see people are buying but no btc pay to be broadcasted so i wanted to know if there were any changes in to the way of how orders work
-
ok so basically it should be broadcasted after 1st confirmation, right?
-
maybe the buyers closed the wallets too early. no idea honestly. for those who are buying. set btc pay on auto mode and keep wallets open until its completed. thanks
-
running into an issue with setting up multiple dispensers on a single (new) address with Counterparty API.... anybody got answers?
https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/issues/1800setting up multiple dispensers on an address (only 1/8 was successful) · Issue #1800 · CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-corerunning into something I haven't seen before with setting up dispensers.... I am in the process of setting up my new fake rare subassets (11 total) and main asset to dispense all tokens in a si...
-
are multiple dispensers on a single address not supported anymore? - is that also the case when Source address and Dispenser address are the same?
-
Bitcoin_To_The_Oblivion (A C C E L E R A T E 🚀) (@BTCtoOblivion) on XLet's deep dive into one more method of spamming the #bitcoin network. IT'S CALLED OP_RETURN METHOD.
-
are multiple dispensers on a single address not supported anymore? - is that also the case when Source address and Dispenser address are the same?
-
if i send my assets to the address the dispenser is on. and create more dispensers on that address.. will that be allowed protocol wise?
-
i can try... i know i did it recently with a couple assets a couple weeks ago
-
i shared all the details in the issue
-
no i prefer github and here
-
will try sending all the assets to that address and creating them from the Source addy
-
im betting that will work, but will have to test it
-
and if so its just a misunderstanding from my side on how creating dispensers work (on new addresses and ones that differ from the source)
-
In which order were your transactions confirmed ? could it be no2 was first and hat's why it opened up dispenser OK and then all other fail de to address havinga counterparty tx history
so yeah move all assets to addres you wish to dispense from then open as that won't trigger the empty address check as you openingon the holding address so of course it has history -
the terminology in FW is "Source" and "Dispenser"
-
check the github
-
i post the error in trying it after as well
-
you should try out FW one of these days mate!
-
I not searching 4000 tx ina block to see what confirmed first sorry dude
-
what order you posted transactions may not be the order they confirmed unless they all cpfps
-
just trying to help with the logic side of things
-
xchain wont show tx index no for the failed opens I suspect no2 confirmed first
-
i explained this all in the github post in detail.... i will try opening it from the Source address instead.. most likely just me not understanding this process
-
as you say move assets to the dispenser address then open multipes
-
process used to be dif tho
-
yeah before empty address checks were added I bet it was
-
I read the git hub .. used jpjas tx decoder to learn more about the failed txs
-
it shows the addresse you trying to open on n I then looked them up m see open dispenser
-
the github includes lot of txid but no addresses
-
7/8 of them show as 404 on xcp dot dev ..... and yes the github shows the addy:
-
so findout what order your txs confirmed
-
all I see on gitub is links to txds
if you look up the address you tried to use to open a dispenser on in failed tx8 you see it has a dispenser
https://xchain.io/address/bc1qv4mgsvt44ft6nuyyghduvz449mtqj52e6ayumv -
yes.... the 1 successful one out of the 8 i tried
-
I has to decode tx fail 8 with jpja tool to get that address
-
I didn't decode tx2 that worked as xchain shows it
-
ill try the other method in a moment and most likely will explain it was my fault for trying it the old way we did it
-
I think if you move all assets to the dispenser address then do it you will have joy
-
still be interested to know whattx confirmed first maybe I look it up tomorrow to confirm my diagnosis
-
for some reason it was only the second one (as explained in the github)
-
you need to load the block from mempool.space ..scrolllscroll scroll to load all txs then search txid
-
i can't do on mobile device as infinite scroll on mempool needs desktop version
-
yeah so counterparty only process that one tx as valid as the other 7 then try to open on a address that has a xcp tx history so fail as invalid
-
will update the user manual and warn users
-
-
I been reading the bitcointalk forum Ann thread .. the real olden days
-
users chating about the fees while burning whole coins .. back then if you sent a whole coin it was free no tx fee was needed 😂
-
talk about a scroller my god that one goes deep
-
so many 0.0001's wasted
-
miners loved ppl not knowing that whole coins were 1st class citizens
-
i didnt know this!
-
every day we learn
-
I think it was 2016 it stopped being a thing .. maybe 2017
-
lol would love to see the bitcoin github discussion of this
-
must have been insane
-
discussion must be out there somewhere
-
2014 Counterparty users didn't all know about utxos n the bitcoin clients were clunky shall we say
-
most still dont know about utxos ima be honest
-
ordinals changed that a lil i think tho
-
I see the topic being spoken about more on reddit
I gonna ingest more 2014 Ann thread as goldmine of info, Pete Todd chimes in.. its got some top name contributors and is great history lesson -
til that even the counterparty burn was using op return in the very very early versions
-
love the vision too -
I saw you reply, and I can think of another reason to Lock description .. artist issues token .. then ownership is then sold, should a person be able to update a token they now own but didn't create ? be nice if the artist or creator was able to Lock to prevent subsequent owners from updating ... this is not about possession but ownership
-
agree entirely, you post it in github yet?
-
not yet will do tho
-
youll get my upvote for sure
-
there is a og rare with 0 issuance that gets traded .. so ownerships are traded
-
absolutely, POWH is a great example of this
-
Trade asset ownerships via DeX or with Dispensers · CounterpartyXCP/Forum · Discussion #116
Currently there is no way using the Dex or using Dispensers to trade asset ownerships. It would be nice if you could put ownership of an asset up for sale. I know Emblem Vaults can be used for this...
-
talked about for years and posted Sept 18, 2023
-
sweeps are a good way to trade ownerships as you get any supply held plus the ownership
-
but require OTC
-
and xcp
-
and we love trustless trading on the DEx now dont we
-
trading Token Ownerships with PSBT and Atomic Swaps would also be lovely
-
op return sweeps in psbts ?
-
Hmmm yes that’s a thing that could happen. -
now that sounds scary
-
sweeps should be sweeps... you wouldnt want to sweep the whole address when you can simply just do the Token Asset Ownership... many addresses hold many many Token Ownerships
-
you can make a new address and send a ownership to it manually then trade from that
-
sounds annoying for the user if there was a way to do it without sweeps
-
it's easy to abstract away from user . just click n wallet takes care of it
-
but not a BAD idea... just for use only with Token Ownership seems not the right angle for it
-
now if i wanted to sell my entire addy... yes makes sense
-
but i assume should be an entirely diff thing than selling Token Ownerships individually
-
it's 1 tx to sweep supply and holdings .. 2 to do them manually
-
it's just a idea I don't know if op return sweeps in psbts is feasible .. is why I put a ? maybe the psbt scientists will
-
would be a good discussion topic though
-
you should write it up!
-
-
we are discussing Token Asset Ownership ... which is the address that holds the power to change description, issue more tokens etc for a specific token.... not a "person who just holds an asset"
-
we are specifically referencing this github discussion: https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/Forum/discussions/135Lock description · CounterpartyXCP/Forum · Discussion #135
This space is to discuss implementation of a lock description operation to ensure inmutability of assets
-
Look up POWH auction in @WTHAuctionHouse
Zero tokens exist
Asset ownership was auctioned and changed hands. -
OK, I'll check out those docs before asking more questions.
Thank you. -
Ok, did a quick review of the github.
It sounds like, "the original creator retains the ability to change the description of an NFT even after ownership of the asset has been sold/transferred to another person/entity."
From a common sense perspective, that's really weird.
Think about the implications. You could sell someone an asset, and then change the description to contain rude/offensive language, or perhaps even go whole hog and include statements that would be considered "hate crime" in some countries (=Jail time).
This should not be possible, IMHO.
Once you sell/transfer it, it is no longer yours and you should not be able to alter it in any way.
If I build and sell you a house, would you be ok with me coming by to draw on the walls of the house whenever I want? -
.... this doesnt happen when selling an asset... only the Token Issuance Ownership.... which is owned by the person who made the asset (even if they dont have any of the assets left)
-
in which you would be in favor of YES we SHOULD be able to lock description
-
because then if you sold the Token Asset Ownership, the new owner could NOT change the art or description
-
but they (the new owner) COULD issue subassets
-
and because of things like this, this is a very real thing and has been asked for by users, collectors and artists for a long time
-
which would be a main point for a person looking to purchase a Tokens's Token Issuance Ownership like POWH
-
1. So again, wait, the "asset" and "token issuance ownership" are separate and can be sold/transferred/owned separately?
2. " you would be in favor of YES we SHOULD be able to lock description" = based on my limited understanding, absolutely YES, and when description is not locked, the power to do so should be tied to the asset itself, not separate. -
-
also any peeps and devs feel free to ignore this issue... figured it out and made the appropriate updates to the FW user manual
-
the power is defined in the protocol to rest with address that holds the Token Issuance Ownership
-
Man I did a quick search and now I'm confused about another issue (not sure if it is the same or related to the original issue.
How does one buy/sell an asset with zero issuance?
Doesn't an issuance of zero mean that it does not exist?
https://t.me/wthauctionhouse/151666
Sorry if these questions sound dumb —- I had never heard of any of this.RarePepeTrader (Pepe class of 2016) in 🐸🖼 🏦 WTH Auction House 🏦🖼🐸we had POWH asset ownership sell for $8000 recently... the rarest Pepe, with zero token supply
-
-
you can only do it using this method... and in the event of RPN and his auction.... RPN was the escrow for the trade
-
yes!
-
token issuance ownership isnt technically a token
-
its simply the rights of an address to do token related things (change description, issue more tokens if unlocked, issue subassets etc etc)
-
Lock Description + Trading Token Issuance Ownership = a great path forward
imo -
It's going to take me a while to process this, but it seems like it would have profound implications for the value of a token.
-
-
Duncan had a useful suggestion of how to allow appending or updating of descriptions, and block explorers could show the original description on original issuance, plus each change/new description added would be time stamped... I will try to find his write-up, or get it from him and post it
his argument is that asset owners should always be allowed to repair or update assets
mistakes do get made, or legal definitions can change, so updates ought to be possible in an append-only fashion... not a replacement, or permanent lock... -
if you can find it thatd be dope to look into, would love you and anyone else to chime in on these discussions on github too
Lock Description discussion:
https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/Forum/discussions/135
Token Issuance Ownership trading discussion:
https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/Forum/discussions/116Lock description · CounterpartyXCP/Forum · Discussion #135This space is to discuss implementation of a lock description operation to ensure inmutability of assets
-
depends .. cip33 olga stamps have their ownerships burned but you can make olga stamps with ownerships in tact if you want to
-
-
you can make divisible olga stamps too if you go off road
- 19 May 2024 (154 messages)
-
I did a unlocked olga stamp
-
retained ownership
-
be careful if you play with this stuff in electrum I found it does funny things and you have to use increasing value dust outputs to keep them in the correct order
if you manually script the transaction you can use equal value dust at 330 sats -
Call me a nervous nelly, but I can imagine some bad things happening under current conditions.
Imagine, if you will:
1. I buy a rare 1/1 NFT for $100,000, thinking I have made a good long term investment. But unfortunately, the purchase did not include the "token issuance ownership."
2. The person still holding "token issuance ownership," in a fit of drunken rage or whatever, decides to change the description and fill it with pornographic language, racial hate speech, etc.
3. The NFT would be nearly impossible to resell and probably has lost most of its value (=my investment is gone).
4. Depending on the country where I live, the language in the description may be illegal and place me at some legal risk just for owning it.
I'm guessing this has not happened *yet*, but just one wild and crazy incident and it might attract some attention (the BAD kind). -
yes this is discussed in the github... and the argument for that is that the original art and issuance will always be immutible (collectors can verify the original art).... which is WHY an artist would LOVE to introduce Lock Description
-
if the owner ship description was locked or burned that prevents that
-
But currently this is not possible?
-
give the artist the choice to burn or lock .. its part of the art
-
lots of nfts have has ownerships burnt already
-
When looking at an NFT:
https://xchain.io/asset/BOOGERPEPE
Where can I verify that the ownership has been burnt? -
-
xchain
-
Owner / Issuer1JDogZS6tQcSxwfxhv6XKKjcyicYA4Feev
-
not burnt
-
but you cant verify a burn address (to the best of my knowledge?)
-
you need to inspect tx issuance tx to know if olga stamp was burned
-
so you couldnt actually verify if the owner addy IS a burn address
-
without Lock Description enable
-
if olga stamp tx has op return as position 2
-
that's a burn
-
Sorry to be thick, but where does it indicate it was burned? Do I have to look through all of the issuers "burns"?
-
it shows the owner ad its not burnt ownership
-
nope - to verify a "description burn" you would have to verify that the owners address IS a burn address
-
great example of that is this:
-
-
yes inspect isuance tx ..look for op return placement
-
Just guessing, but pretty sure many people buying/selling NFTs have no clue bout this.
-
how do you verify 1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE is a burn addy?
-
most people buying and selling have no clue about alot of things....
-
of course they don't ..this is advanced stuff
-
This seems like a particularly meaningful issue to be unaware of:
https://t.me/Counterparty_XCP/237319Munehisa Honma in Official Counterparty ChatCall me a nervous nelly, but I can imagine some bad things happening under current conditions. Imagine, if you will: 1. I buy a rare 1/1 NFT for $100,000, thinking I have made a good long term investment. But unfortunately, the purchase did not include the "token issuance ownership." 2. The person still holding "token issuance ownership," in a fit of drunken rage or whatever, decides to change the description and fill it with pornographic language, racial hate speech, etc. 3. The NFT would be nearly impossible to resell and probably has lost most of its value (=my investment is gone). 4. Depending on the country where I live, the language in the description may be illegal and place me at some legal risk just for owning it. I'm guessing this has not happened *yet*, but just one wild and crazy incident and it might attract some attention (the BAD kind).
-
I doubt some of the devs know divisible unlocked olga stamps
-
with ownership retention
-
when i onboarded a few artists to make XCP art the FIRST thing they always ask after locking the token issuance is.... wait.... they let me change the description still???
-
-
which is why you should explain your thoughts in the github.... the only place devs take opinions seriously (been this way a lonnnng time)
-
-
What if 1BurnPepexxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxAK33R was a clever vanity address cash honeypot?
(Tinfoil hat) -
-
Understood. This seems worth mentioning.
-
no that would mean the counterparty burn was spendable too
-
IKIK, just having a little fun
-
While you guys are here —-
quick question.
Assets with zero supply/issuance keep showing up in my wallet.
What is this all about?
https://xchain.io/asset/BITGETTOKEN -
there are 'verified' burn addresses, because burn address derive an address with an invalid private key
i mention it here: https://davestaxcp.gitbook.io/freewallet.io-user-manual/common-questions-using-freewallet-faq/how-do-you-create-a-burn-address-for-use-on-counterparty -
-
xchain hiding scam coin?
-
that is what it looks like
-
there is a online burn address generator be nice to link
-
mmm but how do you verify the address generator?
-
https://xchain.io/asset/BACONXCP
Total supply: 0
If there is no supply, how is there a "token" in my wallet? -
Who keeps sending these things:
https://xchain.io/asset/BLOCKMOOD -
you don't need to .. you just need the checksum for your UberKeWlbUrnaddress
-
probly a scammer
-
you wallet prolly has supply .. xchain is hiding data
-
i think jdog only hid the numeric tokens with 0 issuance... named tokens and subassets with 0 still show
-
ah this would make sense
-
what does xcp.dev show for those assets? (be careful with whatever description they put on them... assuming thats why its hidden)
-
-
locked supply: false
current supply: 100000000.00000000 -
there are dispenser if you want more 😂
-
so the answer is xchain is blocking it (probably because that address tried using scam description links or something)
-
So the proper response on my end would be to burn those tokens/assets?
-
either that or send them back
-
whatever is cheaper
-
no .. ignore them burning them costs you money
-
Prolly gonna burn, feels weird seeing them when I open my wallet
-
destroy is option if you going to pay to get rid
-
mess with the supply
-
This is how xcp.dev does it, shows all issuances’ descriptions instead of only the latest. -
a counterparty op return tx paired with and ord style envelop could afford as much space as needed to do all sorts of cool stuff
-
-
any one know this dispenser owner?
-
im retarded and sent .00139 instead of .0013999 for 10 xcp.
-
what wil happen?
-
can i sent the leftover .00000099 and be good??
-
Would it automatically return if it's below the threshold amount? -
I got 2 XCP maybe someone wants it? -
For $20
-
will it just send me 9 xcp and eat the change?
-
fuggg
-
Arv you can buy my 2 XCP if you are need
-
looks like this dispenser might belong to https://t.me/Alth0tas - i would dm himAlth0tas
Checking dms + groups more regularly now but still away > usual 🫡
-
https://gobittest.appspot.com/ProofOfBurn
Nice online burn address generator webpage no need for to run a python appTP's Go Bitcoin TestsBitcoin Go Unit Tester
-
Correct
-
It didn't send me the 9
-
Why would it not send the 9?
-
Now have dispenser owner saying dispenser wont send me the 9 and only way to get my xcp is to send btc for 10 more xcp then he will refund the btc for the first purchase??
-
why cant i just get the 9 xcp and eat the mistake for the leftover??
-
fug
-
only the dispenser owner can solved it
-
I don’t see the tx in that address for the amount you said you sent
-
.00139
-
I ran out of batteries laptop fuggen with it....
I sent the .00139
Instead of .0013999
Never got any xcp yet.
"Owner" reached out and at first just Said send the difference/he'd send the 10xcp and I sent my last$10 worth of corn to him.. then he wanted me to send another .001399 all over again to different address saying he would refund the original .00139 + my sats...
Whenever I get battery charged and get chance to get Internet again I'll check..
Corn was gone from my FW last I checked -
-
Who know could be in the up and up but I'm broke so...
-
i dont think that is the owner of the dispenser....
-
you would have to contact Alth0tas and double check he is the creator of that dispenser
-
Totally agree
-
Possible scammer but who knows
-
Will let you know when I get in civilization again
-
You can probably buy my 2 XCP
-
For $20
-
any idea why i can't withdraw from dextrade -
So with powh ownership, could owner reset the supply? -
No -
No, the entire supply must be owned (whatever was made in the beginning) and token must be unlocked...which rare pepes are not
-
Oah was supply send to burn address or destroyed
-
And none of the supply can ever change hands I think too.... Might be wrong on that though
-
I thought if you held all supply you could
-
I remember some sort of talk... It's probably somewhere in the GitHub... Where the token couldn't have been distributed either
-
Would have to double check that
-
Ahh yh powh has 250 supply sent to burn address
-
No getting them back lol
-
I thought It was 100 % supply possession was required
Wonder if it may be possible to reset a token whose supply been destroyed ? rather than burned as it effects supply -
If destroyed to zero then holder of zero owns all supply
-
exactly
-
But there was a supply and it was "distributed"
-
and then if it all supply re acquired?
-
You can Mint a token with zero supply also, I guess you could lock it at zero
-
we can try n find out for science
-
yeah you can lock a 0 supply
-
the chain shows the txid 68e7... as suspected ... confirmed first .. all the other txs are descendants
-
I just picked your new fake rare from dispenser and got an insane number of subassets coming with it 🤝 -
-
i noticed that! means a ton man - thank you!
-
Thank you for all those dope cards 🥂
-
i think ima make a sticker pack soon with some of my little characters ... i think its time
-
thank you for grabbing one!
-
thank you for working all the time during the event
-
like an absolute madman
-
-
New card added on 17art collection https://xchain.io/tx/dbaea0ddf77d8041ccc26703a2009b9cf5970c8da1556f734cc61e58c2e892a9
-
Nifty
-
Can you buy my 2 XCP for $15?
-
Thank you for plain talk nifty
-
When is the dip? i need to buy -
The main point of purchasing POWH's token issuance is to own the Rarest Rare Pepe -
Granted, I have updated its description and issued subassets for fun
-
but I risk tainting it by doing so
-
You bring up good points, and I believe the norm for selling 1/1s on Counterparty should be 0 tokens and trading the asset ownership, ideally with the description locked too so the new owner cannot alter it. However, it would still be an option of leave it unlocked for various reasons.
-
On another note, I discovered that Counterparty operates the trains in Portugal
-
Comboios de Portugal
-
Personally, I think all this does is create market confusion. I've never been a fan of being able to reassign "issuance" as it breaks the entire supply narrative. Is the NFT ownership "the supply" or "the issuance"? I can imagine a lot of buyers will feel regret that they *only got the supply*. Not to mention, this is quite a foreign concept within the NFT space.
With Stamps, we did our best to discourage this practice which was helped in no small part to the cost of transferring issuance: it requires replicating the Description field where the Base64 string is stored. Effectively, its like minting a whole new Stamp.
A lot of things in Counterparty are vestiges of its original use-case which don't map so easily onto "Art NFTs" so I would be careful about using some of these things just because they exist. Obviously, artists can do what they want and that's cool - experimentation is good - but market confusion can be an impediment to further adoption. -
"I believe the norm for selling 1/1s on Counterparty should be 0 tokens and trading the asset ownership"
This just feels like shoehorning a solution onto a protocol that was never designed for art NFTs (as it predated them). Not my cup of tea. -
It's akin to buying the original painting versus a print
-
Nice. Is this from the airport? Looking for best method of getting from airport to the venue.
-
Yup... I agree. But If I bought a Nakamoto card, I might be disappointed that I "bought a print". It sort of devalues the supply.
-
I noticed it on one of the lines, but its nationwide. There is a line that goes close to the park. I saw you can reserve one of those drivers that holds a name card for $40.
-
Do I need to get some euros or can I just use my credit card to get on the subway?
-
I'm not 100% certain, but everywhere else I've been able to buy a subway card using a US credit card
-
Seems pretty straightforward. Might take the subway. I hear the cab drivers like to drive you around and take the scenic route
-
That route is trying to make the Counterparty logo
- 20 May 2024 (68 messages)
-
CP was designed as a financial platform so it makes sense?
Such as transferring issuance ownership if acquired, etc… -
I like that issuance is transferable personally, I think it makes zero sense you can’t lock the description though.
If i’m the owner of the asset, I should be able to do whatever I want. -
How anyone could be against locking the description is beyond me.
-
0.00075 BTC per 0.00005 SUPPLY DIVISIBLE
RAREPEPESS.ORDINALGLOBETROTTER
SUPPLY 1 -
Bitcoin Stamps locks the description simply by ignoring updates.
-
The token is the art
-
hence why "stamps' are trash lol
-
Olga stamps generally burn the ownership too by placing the op_return in vout :1 which transfers token ownership to the unusable data carrying address in vout:0
-
i recommend that historical buyer to cancel his buy orders if he is not willing to pay for them.
This shit blocks other people from buying.
all those address'es that open up orders and never pay for them will be rated accordingly.
red feedbacks or canceled orders - those are two options that they have. -
because basically i can put 1 bitcoin to work and block everyone from using dex for whole my lifetime.
-
yeah because it is nonsense to have an open order to buy on the empty addy. this is open gates for exploits
-
1. i can load my addy with 1 btc
2. open order to buy x2 price
3. disable btc auto pay
4. send btc out of wallet.
5. repeat on the other wallet -
i can do this with every asset and not only xcp
-
i can literally block everyone from using counterparty
-
my 1 btc would kill billions worth of network
-
bullshit? bullshit
-
thats money on the line
-
so of course there are feelings
-
someone is trying to outplay
-
im here to talk about this.
-
it is not my issue
-
the protocol is built in the wrong way
-
if the addy has no bitcoin
-
it has to have no orders
-
simple as that.
-
May I interrupt?
-
Someone put a dispenser and any hour its already close and instead of someone dispense it or what so ever it's gone and took it others also change it to XCP?
-
i know that nowadays matched orders expire after 21 blocks
-
btw, even btc pay broadcasted orders can go expire
-
which is very wrong.
-
if you would broadcast btc pay and fees would surge and stay above for 21 block
-
i would get to keep your btc
-
and you would get ZERO
-
broadcasted payments should never ever expire even if it takes 10 years
-
if someone in a rush to receive btc, they can spend the input with higher fee.
-
i am opening dispenser. safu to buy from it. will update with the link
-
-
if anyone want xcp, thats is my dispenser. hit me up if any questions
-
Will someone tell me what is the valid reason of this
-
feel free to hit my dispenser. you will receive what you buy :)
-
-
thats where your assets are
-
it is so called
-
hack
-
welcome to crypto
-
New dispenser and price for rareqtrump https://xchain.io/tx/9caa6dcdc9e2fcf391ed5867fc247dc3c2ddf1554f8013942f91678888393214 ... Today sending the two las wwgowwa to the two last buyers
-
Hi friends. I have issued a couple of tokens that have not been confirmed, i think because there is seemingly no XCP fee paid.
Does anyone know what might have happened?
Can i reissue the token? Is it a problem with my wallet?
Thanks -
The txn itself is unconfirmed. Nothing to do with CP: https://xchain.io/tx/d4be59c9614e12bb2a101ab19b27afbd5d04581c6a8e68e640fe1a9115d4bd6f
-
Bitcoin Transaction: d4be59c9614e12bb2a101ab19b27afbd5d04581c6a8e68e640fe1a9115d4bd6f
Explore the full Bitcoin ecosystem with The Mempool Open Source Project®. See the real-time status of your transactions, get network info, and more.
-
Haha ok thanks
-
That’s embarrassing
-
I guess I have a problem on my computer
-
Thanks for sending me that I can now see the tx
-
Sorry to bother everyone
- 21 May 2024 (179 messages)
-
Srsly? Coming from stamp man. 😂 -
-
is it just me who noticed that this crappy wallet changes number when ever it want to?
-
this is so annoying
-
i have seen people broadcasting dex orders to sell good assets for 0.00001 pepecash
-
i can bet thats not the price they set to. but thats just a wallet that do what ever it want
-
this shit has to be shut down and hidden from people
-
as it ALWAYS makes people do errors
-
my washing machine is more reliable than this wallet
-
-
"change word bitcoin to counterparty"
-
Fuckin Putin...kek what a turd -
haha thats not putin 😅😅😅
-
but yeah fuck putin!!
-
-
I know who he is. He claimed "fuckin putin" made bitcoin and its going to zero
-
Yay for that turd
-
I hope he burns in hell for his scamming
-
Pretty sure fraud is the 9th circle
-
ahhhh what a hell lol
-
-
Why are you putting the fee in before the BTC amount send?
The wallet shows it’s calculating the optimal tx fee after you enter the amount you want to send…. -
Obviously entering the amount you want to send triggers the optimal fee calculation…
-
why not lol?
-
its me who decide what to do,no?
-
wtf
-
who gave permission for that?
-
i want to send max. i enter what i want to pay for fee and hit max
-
thats it
-
your way i would need calculator
-
Entering the amount in freewallet clearly triggers the tx fee calculation
-
dont tell me all is ok
-
dont even try to convince me please
-
triggers lol
-
Yes triggers correct
-
good that they dont trigger to sweep any btc amount they want
-
lol
-
who gave permission for that?
-
who gave permission to change my number?
-
who asked it to recalculate?
-
i as user want to be in control
-
not the stupid wallet
-
today because of FW error i sent 1.5k$ to scammers dispener
-
Ok, you want to send with a 3X fee, fine..
Enter it after it does the calculation -
just because that crap changed dispenser order
-
Changed dispenser order, explain?
-
one microsecond beforre my click
-
i sorted dispensers by price
-
on my click it moved order by one
-
i sent to wrong addy
-
show me a single person that havent made error using FW
-
at least one
-
today OGs contacted me to help to connect to the server lol
-
even OGs cant use this network or dont know how so what do we expect from newcomers
-
cp api blocks HUMAN interactions
-
"rate limited"
-
-
what a disaster
-
-
if someone else has troubles
-
thats my settings
-
another thing to mention. lets say i have 1000 dispensers. if i would want to find 1 particular addy with an assets by going 1 by 1, i would get rate limited after few clicks.
after that happens i am not warned i was rate limited but instead all my address'es would be shown as empty even if they are not.
i know this wallet is shit so thats why i dont pay much attention, but take new comer and he would think he was hacked -
what is exact reason to block human interactions?
-
too much traffic to handle? too much to handle 10 people using it?
-
decade old network and nobody noticed this?
-
priority has to be a wallet that we could trust. all other things are not that important. after new devs joined CP i thought these nonsenses will be fixed in a day, but more likely it will take another 8 years.
-
but thats the only wallet we have
-
because 8 years we relied on a private wallet
-
ran by a single person
-
same dude that was collecting donations right?
-
later to cry he cant handle the traffic?
-
-
donations went to ass
-
thats what i think
-
my server at home has much greater power than CP
-
btw it cost me about 3 euros a month to run my server
-
15€ a year.
-
i could handle ALL the traffic that CP has
-
EASY. without blocking humans
-
lol
-
i knew someone will say this
-
when you criticise the protocol or wallet instead of fixing it someone offering to make my own coin
-
or make my own nodes
-
or what ever
-
im good. thanks
-
i expect new comers
-
i think what will happen to them
-
without new people we are slowly going to zero.
-
thats not my job
-
i am not CP dev
-
you as a team
-
cant fix simple things? all of you?
-
its like too much to do?
-
oh really
-
what was your motives to come back?
-
sit and watch sinking ship?
-
you call this work?
-
This looks to me like normal behavior…. When the transaction details change, the Wallet makes a request to the counterpart API to generate the transaction….. hence the transaction size changes the fee changes
There’s a reason the fee is all the way at the bottom of the screen …. It’s the last thing you’re supposed to enter and change…. Every action is confirmed with the user.
Pretty easy to sit back and use other peoples tools and bitch ….
If you’re able to write some amazing explore and wallet, which will blow away , I encourage you to do so..
No one is forcing you to use FreeWallet…. If you don’t like the wallet then how about you STFU and use something else?
Or just continue to talk about how great you are and how you could solve all these problems with a blink of your eye and then do nothing🤷🏻♂️
Those who can , do…. Those who can’t spend all their time talking.🤷🏻♂️ -
its not important
-
as i said we need wallet we can trust
-
wallet that gets audited
-
wallet that doesnt mislead people
-
after that. make as many commits as you want
-
until that happen you are doing not important things
-
meanwhile people are getting rekt
-
i set the fee, i clearly did that. i havent asked wallet to recalculate it. wallet has to turst my actions and take my actions as granted
-
Ur mom said it was ok😂🤷🏻♂️
-
fuck you
-
idiot
-
"mom"
-
ill mom your ass
-
you prick
-
this community is full of shit.
-
degenerates are like 99% of it.
-
-
ok ill leave it here.
make your commits that are worthless and watch people getting rekt every single day -
so what you are saying is that its very reliable
-
i havent lost anything
-
i got the xcp. but thing is
-
scammer ended with my btc
-
Cool you stand in front of the wallet and talk to it and tell it what you want it to do see how well that works out for you.🤷🏻♂️
“wallet, send all my bitcoin to my mom’s Coinbase address, this Bitcoin stuff is too hard!”
Then just sit and wait for the wallet to do what you ask 😂😜
Official Counterparty Chat
Public archive of Telegram messages.
- 01 May 2024 (41)
- 02 May 2024 (11)
- 03 May 2024 (12)
- 04 May 2024 (1)
- 05 May 2024 (32)
- 06 May 2024 (26)
- 07 May 2024 (141)
- 08 May 2024 (55)
- 09 May 2024 (4)
- 10 May 2024 (559)
- 11 May 2024 (314)
- 12 May 2024 (138)
- 13 May 2024 (307)
- 14 May 2024 (237)
- 15 May 2024 (74)
- 16 May 2024 (34)
- 17 May 2024 (9)
- 18 May 2024 (152)
- 19 May 2024 (154)
- 20 May 2024 (68)
- 21 May 2024 (179)
- 22 May 2024 (9)
- 23 May 2024 (25)
- 24 May 2024 (16)
- 25 May 2024 (18)
- 26 May 2024 (12)
- 27 May 2024 (7)
- 28 May 2024 (42)
- 29 May 2024 (19)
- 30 May 2024 (19)
- 31 May 2024 (59)