- 28 October 2024 (556 messages)
-
-
More and more suspicious
-
-
tic tok -
Red almost looks like xcp symbol
-
-
If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
Though to be clear. Anything I post is my personal opinion unless specifically saying its the opinion of the fund. -
Im a varied user of many protocols. My opinions are all over the place.
-
Who is selling 50mil MINTS for 750 XCP? -
now lost from ZeroHedge... https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2017/07/17/blockchain%20ecosystem.jpg
love that date 20170717 :) -
When you pushed forks forward in the past, I don’t recall you adding replay protection ever even when there was contention. -
Counterparty is Bitcoin.
We are currently continuing the use of v9.59 as it is evident that v9.60 upgrade was made despite unresolved objections. Consensus of the project was broken with this fork.
Developers in this room agree to constructively discuss implementations, improvements and the testing thereof. All participants should each represent what they believe to be ethically and technically responsible actions.
Our intention is to build a superior foundation to foster the longevity of Counterparty we all want. This room is also for people who want to build on top of this as well as those who want to support such endeavors. -
He's only been purged from TG for two weeks and Counterparty has already forked!?!?
RarePepeTrader (RPN/RPT) would like to ask how many Rare Pepes there are on each fork now?
Will a Counterparty 2.0 10.4 utx0 RAREPEPE end up being worth more or less than a Counterparty Classic 9.6 RAREPEPE?
Which XCP will DexTrade and Zaif support?
When will impoverished Rare Pepe Traders from the global south be able to afford MPMAs again?
Will pepe.wtf be getting updated to show the different holdings across addresses for Counterparty Classic and Counterparty 2.0 fork?
If a dispenser dispenses in a forest, is there anybody there to pick up the rares? -
Well from 9.59 to 9.60 the issuance message was changed in a non-backward compatible way. A nasty mess.
Then the message was changed again from 9.60 to 9.61, to “clean up” the mess a bit, but still not fully. The 9.59 issuance format is not detected.
All these done without the due CIP process -
Reminder that this happened prior to STAMPS and that drama
-
-
This will all make for an interesting case study one day.
-
Yes we know u are a shitcoiner and u don’t belong here
-
Yup, and I backed off the fork because in that instance I was the fork, not exactly comparing apples n apples. This situation is a bit different, as I am not the fork, the new software is, historically the new release with changes adds the replay protection.
And at that time, I backed off the fork in the interest of the community. -
This is a different fork that did move forward, not the stamp fee one
-
-
You could do it again, and everyone would thank you for backing off the 9.6 fork -
What’s your address Jake? How many xcp do you hold? How many xcp assets do you personally have???
-
Guys we need to put our shit toghether !
Findinng consensus is not easy, but counterparty is to small to fork.
We need to put in place some clear governance structure for the protocol. -
I suggested a while ago to have a concil with different counterparty stakeholders
-
Mentionned to different people around counterparty but I think now it's the time
-
I know I promissed jDog & Adam I will work on it but happen to be a bit more complicated than I expected
-
Another funny post, as Adam completely abolished the community driven CIP process under his reign🤷🏻♂️😜
Easier to push forward contentious changes when you don’t engage much with the community and limit conversations to github….. can write up what you want in your own lil quiet corner, if no one notices and objects, you can move forward saying “well it’s all done in the open in github”
Hell, even when ppl do object, the objections are ignored if your viewpoint is not in line with what Adam wants.
This is not how things are done in a community based project…. Tho Adam wouldn’t know that, as he came back and immediately started making changes to code and discarding processes used for years, like the forums and “counterparty improvement proposals” (CIPs).
How do u think it would be received by the Bitcoin community if some dev came in, threw out all the BIPs, and started making changes with limited engagement? 🤷🏻♂️ -
You literally did the exact same thing 2 years ago with this update: https://www.counterparty.io/news/counterparty-lib-9-60-0/Counterparty-lib 9.60.0 released! - Counterparty News
Counterparty - Unlock the Full Potential of Bitcoin
-
Well clearly every software update is a “fork”, and I only push changes that the general community agreed with… if there were changes that were super contentious pushed forward, it would’ve caused us much more uproar than just Duncan… who has historically disagreed with every change that has been made to counterparty since he rage quit his job as a community director.
Duncan used to work as a community director writing newsletters for counterparty every month, yet another person I was paying to help better counterparty…. However, people complained about him a bunch when he started kicking people from the counterparty chat left and right, as a result, I removed his administrative power, so he could no longer kick anybody. This greatly upset him, and he stopped communicating with me and stopped doing the job he was being paid for.
There are some similarities here in that Adam also rage quit the chat, refuses to engage, and in that case, I also only removed his administrative power after he tried to kick me from the channel over asking questions about his VC funding n not being transparent.
As I said, if whatever changes this Duncan post refers to were super controversial, it would not have been pushed forward. I always listened to the other community members, including Joe Looney and Shawn Leary, etc before pushing out any release that had any changes that could’ve been considered contentious…. Anytime they disagreed with the decision the change was not pushed.
This also included me backing off pushing changes that included a fee on numeric assets 2 years ago, which at that time had 90 to 95% consensus…. Joe advised me that he felt we should kick the can down the road and wait a bit longer before putting a fee on numerics, and so that is what I did. -
A functional foundation governance council, was something RPT attempted to float December 30th 2017…
Didn’t get much buy in back then.
“guys, this is fundamentally about ensuring there's an open transparent governance framework, providing clear procedures for debate, with a mechanism for all voices to be heard, some kind of democratic decision making process with verifiable documentation of outcomes?”
…
“My natural assumption is a functional foundation (either with its current bylaws or with proposed amendments) is an essential requirement for effective project and community governance.
However, if there is a desire on the part of enough interested parties to re-examine fundamental assumptions in order to achieve consensus to move forward, is there a benefit in doing that?
I'm not trying to blow things up here by the way, I'm merely seeking to establish a common place for everyone to stand in shared understanding, in order to move forward.
As it seems to me that is what is missing right now.
If I've got this wrong, happy to be corrected :)” -
Nobody much wants to engage with the boring but necessary work of governance when things are going along fine and then as soon as things are not fine and there’s a crisis, mechanisms for resolving the crisis are absent because the work hasn’t been done
-
I am not the fork…. Also, the reverse is true, Adam and team could add back the dispenser origin functionality, and the community would be grateful.
I’ve humbled myself for the community many many times and done what is best for them always.
I have not seen that behavior from Adam, no transparency on his motivations until he is absolutely forced into a corner.
I think Adam forgot that this is a community driven project , and even though he originally wrote the software, he chose to walk away from it for 9 years, and in that time it has grown far beyond being under his, or any one persons control.
I said yesterday compromises can still be made, but that the window for compromises is rapidly closing. The dispenser origin functionality could be added back to counterparty, but that would require Adam and team to humble themselves and admit they made a mistake…. And I have seen nothing from them that indicates they have any viewpoint other than. “ counterparty 2.0 features are the only features that matter.”
I’m sorry you feel that I am the fork even though I am not the new version of the software , and I’m sorry you feel that I should be the one once again to make sacrifices and back off of my beliefs rather than the returning devs admitting that they made some changes that perhaps were not in the best interest of the community, before they had suitable replacements fully working and proven. -
I agree I've talked a lot with jdog over the time and even if sometimes he had hard rants and strong opininion. He always kept the community in mind and at the forfront. And we could have a sane discussion debate even when the opinion were different. I think this is how to keep a healthy and productive environement
-
There are always different opinion and different point of views. We cannot always agree. Some people different ways to express them. We need a way to be inclusive in opinions and listen to everyone sometime we have to take decision that doesn't benefit everyone but the motives need to be clearly explained and some kind of voting should be in place. I we cannot manage the plurality of opinions and a consensus mechanism counterparty doesn't deserve to exist as a decentralized protocol.
-
looking at counterparty.io website right now make me really disapointed
-
I really shows how imature we are
-
this is an ego fight instead of building something for the users
-
Remember xcp cash fork speculation made this run to $100/xcp -
Julian was gonna fork xcp on btc cash
-
I do not care who the fork is but do care that the space will be splintered. Why would someone ever use both chains? I cannot think of a valid case. I would say that everyone wants atomic swaps as that is key to make CP have a future. Why would an artist or collector want to use 9.x and 10.x. Honest question. Do not care who or what or why just the effect that this will have on the space. -
I think some users havent realized yet they got assets from dispensers in a fork, but will they be happy to have those assets in a fork that wont use new and future updates? -
What happens to all assets currently In dispensers? -
You just don’t understand what it is you’re actually doing by promoting a minority fork
-
I don’t know how else I can explain the destructiveness of that action
-
Fork has happened (2.0) and possibly now dupes with ninja not updating, very distructive behaviour with the new fork
-
Of the minority fork
-
It has been well established that 9.6 is the minority fork now
-
OK, if you like to call a predecessor a fork lol, and blame 9.6 for the dupes be my guest
-
A fork takes two to tango
-
No blame on the actual fork in your eyes
-
Now there's possibly dupes in curculation
-
I wanted the updates to happen and was aware of the dupe possibility
-
Nifty pulled together a nice estimate here.
-
So your opinion only matters, not the truth or facts, I think if people were asked the new fork/update would create a 596 club, the majority view would be against, call me old fashioned but I think most cp users are not scammers
-
please teach me, what's "dupes"? -
But thanks for been honest
-
I have personally spent countless hours tracking down dispensers for noobs that were rugged as have many others.
-
There are 298 rarepepe's, now there could be 596
-
Nifty has done an amazing job with the trusted dispenser list he publishes
-
But it’s absurd that we’ve had to do such work
-
Cool, but ur OK with a duplicate market
-
cheers
-
As long as changes are made that you agree with
-
If you are 'ok with possible dupes" then not much else to say
-
I’m wondering if there might be some looking to duplicate their XCP holdings though…
-
I’m not okay with duplicates being maintained, hence why I’m in here arguing for the old code to be abandoned
-
So your OK with the upgrade that created the dupe issue, and blame stamp ninja or anyone else for not updating, got you view point, thanks
-
Yeah, it was worked on for close to a year and discussed at great lengths. The ninja team was aware of the dupe possibility
-
Exactly, so the majority view would be different if transparent
-
The update includes things that have been discussed for years prior to the founders returning
-
No sense even trying to talk to Doge-Style -
Same song and dance for years
-
agree -
Politicians include things people want/discussed for years, then they still fuck you
-
Yes, user safety, sorry if that's not your priority
-
And my view may not align with yours, you can always go watch TV or something and not read my comments lol
-
So we have 3000 RarePepe's now?
-
Do you have any cards worthwhile? I’ll trade you my 9.6 for your 2.0’s
-
But of course you won’t do that because you don’t believe anything you say
-
I made it clear I'm not doing any tx until sorted, you mocked me then later took that stance, you are so fake
-
Now u wanna trade dupes
-
I will not trade anything if it's possible dupe
-
See exactly
I took the stance so I wouldn’t interact with the fake shit chain, not 2.0 -
After mocking me for that position
-
Only way you get attention is by doing this
-
Mayby different reason but
-
Hahaha, yh great attention from you, I really need your attention
-
Thanks, you fell for it
-
My life is complete coz big guy xcer noticed me
-
You fag
-
Buy yeah, I have many cards from nearly every project on counterparty, would rather see them burn than have dupes
-
I have alot in dispensers also, so I'm curious... ..
-
About this
-
You’ll be over to 2.0 as soon as your 9.6 is worth $0.
Guaranteed -
I hope whatever version maintains long loved features and user safety, and hopefully new features that doesn't compromise
-
Regardless of asset value
-
I’m not moving anything on CP until there’s clear direction here -
The only question in the air is freewallet 9.6 or 10.6
That’s the only risk, just need to move wallets I guess -
FreeWallet classic will be 9.6… FreeWallet will be counterparty 2.0, same as it is now👍🏻
Heading out the door to yoga, then back to work…. Hope you enjoy your day😊 -
Yep users should halt all activity until current devs pull there head from asses
-
How many dupes has been created coz of new fork and ninja,?
-
Think the damage may have already been done?
-
I’m halting promotion of assets and use of the network with my business and services until all is cleared up.
For the sake of eliminating user confusion and potentially having to answer questions, I cannot right now. I had a few emails and DM’s and had to point them to some screen caps I made from in here.
I’m a fan and supporter of CP / XCP and hope everything can come to a conclusion. Wishing for the best.
Honestly, looks to me like there is a lot of love and support, hopefully a consensus can be made. -
Not sure what needs to be cleared up. Devs are not going back to 9.6
-
I do hope that people consider not going forward with FWC on 9.6. I think that it is not going to help anyone at all but mostly people using it as I cannot see it being the promoted or having a long life. I still cannot think of a reason for anyone to use both and if this is going to be a vote by node version, 10.x is going to win on a longer enought time frame (perhaps even short). TIme spend to stand up a 9.6 FWC could be spent on some many other things that could help and not splinter. I understand than the idea is that the community wants this but that is not really the truth and voices just on TG are not the full community.
-
I 100% understand both side and as I have said I can see jdog view points, truly I can. If someone can explain why you would ever want to versions running and maintained and have users use both I'm listening. I cannot think of one of them. Yes this time of building and rollout suck but it will get better over time. Not supporting the "fork 2.0" is only going to cause confusion and problems
-
We now have fair mints and atomic swaps which not only can replace rugspencers making the space safer for everyone, but these upgrades gives Counterparty a real shot at greatness. Or we can just fumble the next bull-run like we did in 2021. Counterparty was perfectly positioned from a narrative perspective OWNING the historical meme, but instead "Crypto Punks are first NFTs" and worth hundreds of thousands a piece. That could have been SoG. That could have been Rare Pepe. But a decade of stagnation resulted in a complete fumble. Why anyone would want to repeat the mistake of the past is beyond me. Counterparty 2.0 is the only viable path forward unless you're fine with Counterparty languishing in obscurity and slowly falling apart with ancient tooling and a dwindling user base. -
Exactly. People wanting to go back to 9.6 acting like Counterparty was exploding in growth lol
-
What happens to dispensers, will it be a case of emblem vault, costing users fortunes to retrieve assets?
Updates and new features are great if they do not create issues for what we are using and create dupes -
As I mentioned before devs could very easily add back to origin functionality…. But again they, like you Xcer, only see their viewpoint as the correct viewpoint and will not compromise at all.
You can try to paint this anyway you want, but the reality is the core dev’s broke functionality that the counterparty community still relies on and wants restored, until it is proven that better methods are available and working consistently.
The fact that the core devs refused to compromise in anyway, even in the face of a very damaging fork, which was caused by their updates, demonstrates to me and others what I have been saying for a long time…. Which is that they believe counterparty is theirs to control as they see fit, and are not willing to listen to any views that disagree with theirs.
It is an unfortunate situation , but we are now going on three weeks of for divergence, and 1+ weeks of waiting for any kind of compromise with absolutely no discussions from the core devs that indicate they’re willing to make any compromises.
Counterparty is no longer a decentralized, community driven project. 🤷🏻♂️
Heading into my yoga class now , then back to work on the necessary updates.
I hope everyone has a great day 👍🏻 -
Dispensers are not trustless. Atomic swaps are better.
-
-
They also haven’t gone away. You can still use them and they actually are safer now because you can’t accidentally trigger them. So open one up on your main address. No issues. One txn required.
-
i just typed a whole thing and deleted it because nobody asked me
felt good..
would recommend -
please give us your point
-
nah.. this aint my diary
also it changes nothing
I do have a question tho... so ill ask that -
Tried the new wallet, it is useless for what i do. For its flaws the only wallet browser combo that i CAN use is FW/xchain or thanks to Dan FW with xcp(.)io
*i will add the caveat of "currently", its not that i cant change, but nothing else works for me RIGHT NOW
Can somebody unironically explain how or why somebody like me would use atomic swabs or whatever the thing is that is supposed to be better?
also i send a multitude of assets in different directions... the main benefit of FW and why i would always show it off to people is that i can do in 1 transaction what would take me 40 through Metamask. If that is going away or made more expensive, i'd like to know what is the trade off? Like what do i get for my higher property taxes? New uniforms for the high school teams... better sidewalks?
for background i am an artist that makes pictures, and videos with sound -
Yeah, without going into detail, i would much rather ask here
i would like to know what the opinion is (generally) on the upside -
im aware
-
“Can somebody unironically explain how or why somebody like me would use atomic swabs or whatever the thing is that is supposed to be better?”
Dispensers work great between a small group of trusted friends who aren’t going to rug each other and who you can contact when something goes wrong.
What we’ve increasingly seen over the last couple years as Counterparty has modestly grown beyond the original tribe is a tremendous amount of lost funds. This repels people. They never want to come back after getting rugged. It’s just bad all around (not even getting into some of the technical debt the former implementation caused with non-source addresses).
Trustless Atomic swaps are what people in the broader “crypto” community have come to expect as table stakes. That’s why they’re shocked when a dispenser rugs them. “How could this happen? It doesn’t happen when I buy an NFT on OpenSea!”
So Counterparty either needs to grow up and embrace “trustless” methods of transacting or it’s going to be perceived as a rug factory that you need to stay away from. -
better question... taking all of the above at face value.
Fine... can i do everything a dispenser does with an atomic swap?
Can i put a multitude of assets into one thing and have like a bundle sale? -
do i lose functionality?
-
Good question. I'm not sure about a bundle sale. That would definitely be a cool feature. Presently you can still do a "bundle sale" using dispensers as you always have.
-
Ok... so lets just (again face value) say that atomic swaps are not really a benefit to me, but people like em and im not losing anything.
Multi-Sends are either going away or being made more expensive... whats the trade off for peopel like me?
Couple that with the fact that NONE of these wallets support what i do (except for FW), and only 1.5 of the browsers.
There is a push from the core devs to their things... lets just say they are right and we all should... what i am getting at is this is a move away from "people like me". So i can either find a new medium or find a new blockchain.
im looking for reasons to NOT feel this way -
Multisend is something else, and tbh, the technical rationale for the change is above my pay grade (I'm not a coder). Just explaining dispenser tradeoffs... if you're happy with the tradeoffs, you can still use them instead of atomic swaps
-
would be no big deal if but seemingly it was all just phased out before the new tools are ready and well tested which in the end caused problems that were predicted months ago and now everyone is scared to use anything
-
i get that too... would be lying if i said i didn't think about it A LOT, but im choosing to ignore that part since it wont be forever.
temporary discomfort for long term gain or whatever
im focused on the long term gain
what do i have to gain? -
Multisends were more expensive before because they'd constantly fail between the 1st and 2nd required txn and you'd have to redo the whole thing. This was a HUGE issue.
-
yea I dunno the technical stuff
-
Non-source address has been phased out as that was a huge exploit. We saw several examples of people opening dispensers on exchange accounts causing a MASSIVE flood of dispenses on unwitting accounts. Given the rhetoric about all the "spam" that Stamps caused, I find this particularly amusing.
-
again... im not looking at or thinking about any of that
whats the benefit for people like me? -
if there isnt one thats fine... but i wish people would just say that
-
I guess it's in the docs to read, might want to look there, cant find the specific link right now.
-
When the tooling is more mature (the tools are barely a week old) you'll be able to offer items for sale trustlessly to, hopefully, a larger liquidity pool. Marketplaces can also be set-up where it can be free to list and a fee isn't incurred until a sale actually happens.
-
I understand a lot of people were "comfortable" with the Rube Goldberg system they grew accustomed to over many years (myself included). But having to use a desktop application in 2024 is bonkers. Freewallet mobile has not been viable for many years and even lacks support for many of the upgrades Jdog himself introduced. For Counterparty to be competitive in 2024 it needs: adequate mobile support; Chrome extension support and modern tooling, not tooling stuck in 2017. It sort of works for us "OGs" cuz we're masochists lol
-
"Hey... small artists and creators who are used to doing things THIS certain way. We are changing things, and while most of it will affect you, it probably wont benefit you. And we are building it for people we value more than you to secure the future of the thing you probably wont be a part of."
That is what im getting from all of this... im not gonna go learn to read "dev" and pour through githubs searching for spiritual clarity. Im not gonna fight anything, ill just step off...
again, im looking for plainly worded benefits or reasons to NOT feel this way -
Dispensers still work. You don't have to pour through Githubs. The failures we've seen are a result of a few entities not upgrading properly (using old APIs). A few dispenser exploits were closed, but they largely still work exactly the same. In fact, they work better as you can now safely open them on your main address rather than having to fund a separate address. Atomic swaps will be waiting for you when you're ready.
-
Dispensers are one part of the issue... if there is an even steven alternative fine.
But there is a CLEAR push to the core devs products (wallets and browser) which currently are of no use to me. If that is the direction the wind is blowing (and it is) are you advising a "wait and see" approach?
If this neighborhood is being gentrified i dont wait till the bulldozer is at my door to put my stuff in boxes -
i dont personally feel that would be productive at this time...
-
What is it you can't do today that you could do a month ago?
-
Not my question.
As ive stated... i see things changing, im asking how those changes benefit people like me
if the answer is THEY DONT thats fine
it sounds like thats the answer -
open a dispenser on a new address in a single tx... do an MPMA send for cheap... do an MPMA sends with multiple memos... trigger a dispenser with just BTC... for starters
-
There was no protocol change here. They just disabled it in the API. There's nothing stopping anyone from using an out-of-date Bitcoin Core and constructing P2SH MPMA. This is a software limitation not a protocol change.
-
semantics bro. ppl can't do MPMA sends for cheap. Wrap it up however you want.
-
why would you want to trigger a dispenser with just BTC? What is the actual usecase there? The recipient can't even see the token in their vanila wallet
-
Anyway, continuing to go in circles over this drama is pointless. i'm made it clear many times that compromises could be made if the core devs restored origin functionality so ppl could use dispensers as they have in the past on new/empty addresses using just 1 tx instead of 3.... but, its clear that isn't going to happen, or even being discussed by the current core devs... so its clear they dont really care about the outrage here and upset ppl... so...
-
Here's the benefit: you have devs working on the protocol breathing new life into it. Software that isn't maintained is not viable.
-
-
lots of beta energy from og's trying to peer pressure J. J Dog has the correct stance and new devs with their shitcoin VC's need to get their shit together
-
I'd rather not divert from the original question.
things are changing... change can be fine
is there a benefit for small audio/visual creators and if so WHAT ARE those benefits
i dont want to have a dev argument because im not a dev, im an end user -
by the way some simple search for the Bitcoin Frontier Fund they appear to be hiding under a Bitcoin Maxi appeal but they have shitcoins and degens all over there page with a token launchpad & accelerator... lol not hard to see who these clowns are
-
The fact that people could trigger dispensers accidently was a huge issue. I've stupidly done that myself. You forget you've got one open... you send some Bitcoin to the address from an exchange and poof! Now the exchange owns your dispensed token. Good luck getting it back. There is no rational usecase for triggering a dispenser from a vanilla wallet
-
ok.. so safety issue for other people... got it
i get why most people shouldnt drive drunk... im good it... but cool... make it a law -
Would it be a benefit to you if Counterparty assets were supported on Magic Eden? We're trying to get there and a lot of these upgrades like atomic swaps are pretty much requirements
-
that is one issue.. no direct tangible to me, but it makes the world a better place and all that. will i lose funtionality
-
Lost 8 of my own fakes like that 😭
-
so is that what this is?
because up until now NO BODY is phrasing it that way.
"hey... we are trying to get in M.E. stuff got to change, the inconvenience will be worth it"
that would actually sound better than the last few days -
bull is coming with or without eden I swear all you think about is your bags
-
integrity of the network is more important than your bags
-
From outside looking in this is just crazy sounding. you're on a road you come up on a new left turn off of that road. from above it looks like a fork but all of us understand truly it's just a turn off the main road. Somebody takes the turn and then immediately hit a whole bunch of bumps bandits and random fukery. Then turns around and says it's the roads fault..
Also seems like those that are most for the fork seem to have been perfectly poised to start fairminting and atomic swapping🤔
Now can see peeps trying to trade mints for mints n selling them for insane amounts of XCP...
What sorcery is this? -
fuking betas all over here lol
-
bull will come and go if we don't have adequate means of selling our bags
-
many of us are barely selling much
-
currently the entire network is on hold
-
this is fine
-
-
mostly i am asking people who do (or at least understand) what i do
if there are are upsides that perhaps im not smart enough to realize, im asking here for a specific reason
if anyone has something helpful i'd appreciate it -
besides you dealing with people that have been through fire n hell and back so we aint leaving
-
Counterparty doesn't exist in a vacuum. There is a wide-world of crypto out there. You gotta keep up or you're dead.
-
weve been dead for 10 years now yet we are still here lol
-
thanks to JDog I might add
-
Atomic swaps will make it much easier for create market places and make buying selling assets safer and easier for other people that are in this space
-
ive sold my art on 8 different blockchains... i asked a very specific question
-
Yeah. It's something that should definitely stay in the past
-
I think its been answered several times: the old stuff still works; the new stuff works better. Use what you want.
-
Not really the forum. But I plan to “airdrop” some art to holders. Talking with some artists.
-
-
Few....
All the others are Shitcoins n art lacking facts... -
Wider distribution. Whales got a bunch of the fair mint supply and I wanted to dilute them
-
Just curious. You guys are throwing the word shitcoin around a lot.
Do you not think your shitcoiners as well?
Genuine question. -
This is the funny part. To a true Maxi, we are all dirty shitcoiners
-
you lack the understanding of thermodynamics
-
Anything that isn't a monetary transaction on the blockchain
-
Yeah. That’s why I’m curious. lol
-
Did my best... dunno... I told people not to mint it... plan to burn some more tho...
-
you guys still dont understand proof of burn and it shows
-
not surprised
-
You will be able to do MPMA sends more reliably. I’ve spent quite a bit of btc on failed sends, and I’d bet you have too if you use it often.
You can bundle UTXOs, so the atomic swap upgrade helps you there.
The fairminting has a lot of parameters to play with, which is another big upside. -
lol. I can see finding consensus may be hard here if the delusions run that deep.
No one cares of proof-of-burn after the initial XCP supply phase.
We’re all shitcoiners to the holy group -
you dont understand proof of burn
-
but then again you are a shitcoiner
-
and out of your element
-
Will classic have a proof of bern a la dogeparty?
-
Tell me why proof of burn is relevant in 2024
-
Provenance
-
If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry
-
Provenance Of what? That tokens wernt printed out of thin air and track to some nominal BTC price a decade ago?
-
it hasn't... but if you think it has i will infer from that the subtext
i should step off
i'll hang around for other answers, but thank you -
You might do well to suggest to your "Unspendable Labs" investment partners to consider that PERHAPS they made a mistake in forcing some changes on the community before alternatives were ready, and that the long-term damage done by multiple ledgers existing far outweighs the cost of admitting a mistake and adding some functionality back.... Or not. Just dont say you weren't warned. Been trying to find a compromise and middleground for over a week, but just about to push this thing out the door, after which point, no going back 🤷️️️️️️ I didn't create the ledger fork, your business partners did.
-
CEXes have a healthy bag of XCP and tokens
-
Will you admit that opening dispensers on an empty address is a mistake that caused undo spam and forced a change on users by limiting the number of dispenses per dispenser?
-
There are real use cases to have more dispenses from a dispenser than what it had to be limited to.
-
this is a dumb argument. dispensers will automatically get less and less used if the atomic swaps are done properly. there was no reason to lash out and remove them. easy path forward let them stay and get phased out naturally
-
Do you remember OXBT?
-
nope. Opening dispensers on a new/empty address was an improvement the community wanted to make dispeners easier to manage, as they could fund and open dispeners on brand new empty addresses in a single tx... same for closing dispeners and returning funds to origin address.... YES, there was an issue where the "EMPTY" address being defined as just no XCP history allowed for 2 dispensers to be open on "exchange" wallets, and that problem was rectified by re-defining "EMPTY" to mean no BTC or XCP history.
-
Yes I do remember it, and that is why we put a 1000 dispense limit on dispensers, to close the dispensers that would have dispensed for many years
-
I don’t want to step on toes as a new entrant to the chat but dispensers need to die.
Can understand getting use to a new behavior takes time but don’t die on that sword. They are terrible UX. -
let them die naturally
-
we still use them
-
So im asking... whats the benefit?
-
thats how we have done them and still do them
-
I answered
-
^
-
So, not gonna talk to your business partners about adding back origin functionality in the short-term until better solutions are available and proven as stable.... got it 👍️️️️️️ I appreciate your response.
-
-
talk about degenerate DNA
-
They are watching everything as far as I can tell.
We don’t tell founders we work with what to do. It’s their company to run. -
Finding balance in a community project is mad difficult tho
-
To be clear, I don't hate the new direction that CP is going, and see atomic swaps and some of the new features like fair minting as having value (hell, I added fairminting to CP over a year ago via BTNS)... but, my objection is to ignoring the community and depreciating features before viable alternatives are available and working solid
-
That’s a fair stance
-
thats why they rushed out mints and tokens and broke evrything else specifically for your token accelrator program.. ya nothing to see here
-
They are not part of that. But you’re welcome to keep assuming many things. Won’t stop you
-
its on your site bro
-
We have a token accelerator. We have many offerings
-
Each deal is unique
-
nope they are not, they have left this channel and are not participating in any discussions in their own channel that discuss any viewpoint other than moving forward with their own vision for CP.... again, I appreciate your respectful response. I wish we were not where we are, but its been a long road to get here, and the core devs hard stance that their new features and viewpoints are the only ones that matter have resulted in the ledger fork, and community outrage and confusion.
-
Community driven projects are hard... consensus is hard... but can't just force things cuz you want them, gotta take a broader view and depreciate things slowly as better alternatives appear
-
Are you retarded? (We are too, so don't worry)
XCP is transmuted BTC.
Chess not checkers.
Name one other coin that is transmuted BTC? -
AFK for a bit...
-
-
Yeah. I understand the POV.
From my view. You guys needs to agree where you want to go asap (and ideally from a cleaner slate so less baggage gets picked up)
The current debate is around messaging/how to discuss ideas.
And around old features people are used to vs new features the new wave of CPers will use.
This to me is where discussing dispensers is hitting a weird block.
If 10k people joined CP right now, dispensers would not go well for them.
You guys are tight knit enough to handle most edge cases yourselves. -
-
But I digress. Back to work.
-
-
if 10k people joined they wouldnt use dispenser cause they would be using atomic swaps but our communitys would still be using them
-
Using them because?
-
because thats all we know. I will move to swaps when there is a wallet capable of handling that non web based
-
who knows how long that will take
-
I think at this point, the the core devs and community are not going to see eye to eye, and no compromises are going to be made by core devs.... so best for them to just make a simple 1-line tweak to "Counterparty 2.0" to change the transaction prefix, which adds replay protection, and ensures that any transactions on "Counterparty Classic" and "FreeWallet Classic" do not effect their ledger. I doubt they will do that, but just pointing out that there IS a very simple way to stop all this drama and segment the new counterparty version/fork off from the "classic" version.
-
What is replay protection? I’ve heard this phrase a few times
-
why wouldnt they do that
-
counterparty-core/counterparty-core/counterpartycore/server.py at 2521b0b111d45803f3e3bb7e4a3f0261c5333ccd · CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core
Counterparty Protocol Reference Implementation. Contribute to CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core development by creating an account on GitHub.
-
it is basically changing a single word in the codebase, so that all transactions generated by "Counterparty 2.0" are no longer seen as valid by the "old" versions of counterparty like Counterparty classic.... WIth this change, the 2 versions of counterparty become separate from one another, and transactions done on one version do not effect the other... It is a very simple change, and historically the change is done by the "new" version of software, aka the fork version.... but, the core devs have also not entertained this change
-
Simply bringing it up, so you, as an investor, are aware that the "Counterparty 2.0" version could continue on without having the "old" versions of counterparty effect their ledger going forward....1 simple word change, 1 line of code, problems go away and the different versions are entirely separate
-
Make this happen!
-
>> historically the change is done by the "new" version of software
No, historically this is done by the minority fork. It's sort of a game of chicken to see who blinks first. -
Sounds like new devs overplayed their hand
-
Replay protection is implemented by the "loser" because they effectively cede the name to the winner.
-
BCASH as example
-
Regardless of what has historically be done, or who you feel should implement the replay protection, I am simply pointing out that this is a very simple 1-line change that could solve these problems and segment the "Counterparty 2.0" version off from the "Counterparty Classic" version.... Classic has not made any changes, the new version of counterparty 2.0 has made a ton of changes, so what is one more?
-
Yes, its a simple change that either fork could implement.
-
Hmm. Need to think on that but gotta step away for abit. mikes answer sounds right.
The canonical current state of the ledger is determined by the current winner in the market. Adding code like that solidifies a fork outside of social consensus -
In this example, Bitcoin existed, Bitcoin cash forked off (was the new software), and implemented the replay protection.... so again, historically, the new software version, or the "fork" has implemented the replay protection
-
No worries, I dont expect the core devs to implement this change which could solve this problem, but instead continue to allow drama... it just demonstrates they dont really care about the community or the damage they have done.... Enjoy your time away from the keyboard... getting outside and touching grass is very important 🙂 Hope you have a good day 👍️️️️️️
-
THE DRAMA CONTINUES TO EXIST BY KEEPING THE MINORITY FORK ALIVE 😂😂😂
-
WTFork.....
This is frogs holding the line.
We are not going anywhere.
New devs need too "cede" ...
You fuks launched without adequate testing....
We all read about it for weeks you retards being warned that this would happen...
Then you went n did it anyway...
PEPECEDE -
Don't do it jdog...
-
Hold the line
-
-
-
Just fuggen sayn.....
-
semantics... majority vs minority is a matter of perspective and beliefs.... so since we dont agree on what is majority vs minority... next best thing is to look at what has historically happened in software dev and forks, and that is for the "new" version of software (the fork) to implement the replay protection... as happened in the "Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash"... and in the "Ethereum vs Ethereum Classic" forks.... Ethereum implemented the replay protection.... same exact case here.... but, it doesn't fit your narrative, so you wanna keep trying to move the goalposts "majority vs minority", etc.
-
The VC guy making poop emojis is the owner of the forked xcp chat and nobody knows who he is or what his bags are
-
Jake u own any xcp???
-
-
Come clean bruv
-
I have 5 currently
-
of course you would bro... you love shitting in the sinks of counterparty rather than the toilets 😂️️️️️️
-
Just getting started. Didn’t want to get rugged so going slow
-
They doing the hitler salute? lol... seig heil... ROFLMAO
-
Counterparty be like
-
-
U rugging yourself
-
🐸🪖✍️
S E C R E T A R V I K S -
All trolling aside.. (clever n needed as it is)
CP is the future. I truly know that only good will come out all this. 🐸🪖💚
I'll fugg off...for a while...
Luv u frogs..
Kek -
I got tired of scrolling, but I just want to point out everyone singing the praises of dispensers as the killer app of xcp, do you recall the days of (were you here?) when we only had the dex and had to complete transactions within something like 10 blocks?
The dispensers were to fix a shortcoming, and they became the commonplace but people could still dex. now we are moving to a situation where dispensers have issues so a newer better solution is coming out but like the dex, people will still use dispensers. Not a big deal.
Everyone was complaining about tooling and wallets and we are on the precipice of being to be drop in on many popular wallets and the benefit to the network will be more access for participants in the tooling they are accustomed to.
I don't see how this is a bad thing. Just because we always did it that way is not a valid excuse for us to keep our clubhouse door very small. -
FAIRDOG 🔥🔥
-
🚨The Firemints team has detected an issue with legacy wallets when processing buy orders, and we're currently investigating it. For now, please avoid using legacy wallets for buying or selling, as they prevent orders from completing. Additionally, using Segwit wallets (bc1q) will help you save on fees for your Bitcoin transactions.
-
funny i just asked this, this morning in a dm... why not the DEX cause i always thought that was cool. Could that be a solution fo the security problem of dispensers?
Either way, I can still use dispensers and i get that... but can you help elaborate for me (or someone like me) what would be some of the benefits of atomic swaps... people seem excited and i'd like to know how i can benefit from it
I get safu and all.. thats fine... is there anything else... do i lose any functionality... can i just adopt this new safer way and continue on business as usual..
i know people like fighting and arguing but im really asking -
9.6 is clearly in the minority. It's not a matter of perspective and beliefs
I'd argue against replay protection, because it effectively duplicates everything immediately. As it is now, there are a few actions needed to create a duplicate. Very few have been affected, and they were likely able to be made whole again. I'm not sure what duplicates have been made yet, but it would be the same process of chasing down dispenser owners that we have grown accustomed to. -
You can list and delist at no cost
-
ok... now THAT is a fucking benefit... i like that... solid... anything else?
-
You can trade it p2p against an Ordinal
-
can i do the bundle thing were i put a few assets in a dispenser and its triggered by one sale and they get 2 or 3... is there an atomic swap version of that?
-
im redacted.. possible to say that slower and dumber?
-
Ok... we are getting somewhere... this i can use... is there a downside that i trade for that?
-
Maybe not today, but you will be able to bundle up utxos for sure. It might be possible to bundle up a bunch of assets into a single utxo even, but I'm not sure and sort of doubt it.
-
ok... so i dont do that TOO often and i can wait. Also i can still use dispensers for when i need to do a bundle or multi thing. So this sounds good.
not to be greedy but is there any other benefits? -
Im assuming (in my smooth brain)... it would be service fees because its free because its an offchain transaction and somebody has to fiddle the hootinnanny to make sure its working.
So i'd have to compare the fee of closing and opening vs the servicing of my atomization
i dig it...
this is way better than arguing -
You can trustlessly trade Counterparty assets for Ordinals or Runes
-
like the DEX or i can just operate in the same system?
-
this is where im thinking for bundled dispensers but I also didn't want to comment a confirm without seeing, but we see people buy blocks of uxtos via current ordinal/rune marketplaces, so buying a block of assets in one tx for a pool of uxtos should be possible
-
Not on the DEX, since that's just for Counterparty assets. This will require you attaching the asset to a utxo to create the trades.
-
you would use a different system, I dont think the dex functionality will hold uxtos, but ptoentially it could (there are other tools/services though) but no need to make the dex do it in a specific xcp wallet
-
Biggest advantage with dispensers is you can sell assets multiple times to multiple different buyers for BTC with a single tx and no expiration
-
This sounds good... im gonna have to brush up on my ordinals knowledge base but i learn new shit all the time, no biggie
-
on first read i thought i understood that, but i read it twice and now i dont... what does this mean?
-
So if I send something now using freewallet. It will be sent on the old version not the counterparty 2.0 right? -
It'd be sent the same on both versions
-
Freewallet is running the up to date version
-
Hum thought there was a fork
-
You can sell your asset or song to 1,000X different wallets by setting up a single dispenser.
DEX works similar but orders expire.
Atomic swap, 1 tx fee for each sale -
Both versions would recognize the send. The older version does not recognize mints or utxo attachments. The new version doesn't recognize dispenses without the prefix. That is where some tokens have forked.
-
Dispensers did not include the prefix, which is what allowed them to be triggered from any bitcoin wallet. Now they require the CNTRPRTY prefix, just like every other action within Counterparty.
-
Wait... is that a seller paid tx fee? or am i misunderstanding?
-
It could be structured that the buyer pays the fee. Depends on the tooling/marketplace
-
No, the seller using a dispenser only pays a single fee to setup the dispenser and the number of buys from the dispenser has no additional cost to the seller
-
Whereas, if you sold 5 assets via atomic swap, you would pay 5 tx fees
-
On advice from counsel I am hereby making my day better
-
I would pay the tx fee???... ok 2 follow up quetions
1. Are you sure... because that sounds odd
2. What happens if someone goes to buy something and i dont have any more monies? Does it deny the sale? -
You need to pay the tx fee to bind the asset to the uxto
-
So before you sell it or offer for it for sale, you need to bind it to the uxto first for atomic swaps
-
so i pay the fee when i make them.. oh... ok... different.
the fee is already PAID by the time someone can buy it... right? -
Yes
-
So i imagine there will be some sleek UI/UX that does this for me and i just pay what it costs right? Because when you say i have to "bind" stuff and all the whosits, i think The Craft and frankly im all out of potions.
So at that point its just cost vs liquidity... does it cost more this way, and is there more liquidity on the other side of atomic swaps... but both are available
is that about accurate? -
I’d say so.
I think there will be more buyers willing to buy this way -
Would you prefer to buy from a store that guarantees delivery, vs you may lose your money
-
It’s the entire explanation thing that’s a real pain in the ass when recommending buying
But don’t do this or that blah blah blah -
im more concerned with understanding it.. i cant make a decision on things i dont understand, its easier to just leave them alone
this is helping
thank you -
Thanks for asking all the questions, Kane.
You're helping more than just yourself! 🙏 -
that is one of the reasons i insist on asking here Sam...
-
i looked at firemints and while its nice, i dont have a use for it currently
i will keep an open eye for more benefits from the changes, its just easier to do when things are calm -
If Counterparty is new to you (or you're just interested in history like I am), this is the most comprehensive XCP token/protocol timeline so far and includes data from 2014 to 2024.
https://x.com/davesta_xcp/status/1850991902176510432davesta.xcp (@davesta_xcp) on XIf @CounterpartyXCP is new to you, this is the most comprehensive XCP token/protocol timeline so far and includes data from 2014 to 2024. More information and details below 👇🧵 https://t.co/yAb7TwCc4a #nft #hnft #nfttimeline
-
Just to understand, other than the obvious hiccups in the roll out of the new updates to counterparty which looks like are getting fixed and remedied daily, the main reason to keep the pre update FreeWallet active simultaneously to the new update, is the 1 tx dispensers?
If that’s the case, it seems like a solution that would satisfy the majority of the community could easily be reached. -
if Adam was truly a bitcoin'er he would know if Satoshi came back he couldn't FORCE things onto the protocol like some stakeholder god king. good thing this exercise will show the resilience of consensus & integrity of the community. if anything Adam should be more satoshi like
-
Communities are always led from above -
This is the first fair comment from the fork side -
we have all stopped using it
-
Yeah that's the best part. JDOG is running their upgrade but theyre pitching a fit, banning, making multiple new counterparty chat rooms, and blaming Jdog. Its the dumbest thing I've seen in this community. The people doing it have usernames I've never seen. It would be easy for them to bite the bullet and crawl back in here. Is there an example of the original protocol adding replay?
-
no this is the original counterparty
-
-
Yes, there is presidence for this, including when Ethereum Classic was born, and some users refused to accept the DAO rollback fork (the new version of Ethereum). Ethereum added replay protection, not Ethereum Classic... and in that instance, even Vitalik was honest and called his new version of Ethereum the "Hard Fork".
Same exact situation here, users refusing to run new version forced on them by developers. However in our case, the counterparty core devs are refusing to add replay protection to separate the ledger actions.
Even Ethereum knows how to hardfork properly... apparently the co-founders/core devs of Counterparty 2.0 do not 🤷️️️️️️
https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/20/hard-fork-completed
https://medium.com/@timonrapp/how-to-deal-with-the-ethereum-replay-attack-3fd44074a6d8#.ocsfgea7l -
-
looks like checkmate kek
-
🎉 Announcing Counterparty Core v10.6.1 🎉
This is a minor quality-of-life release that addresses a few bugs in the v2 API, especially for MPMA, and fills out API support for the management of assets attached to UTXOs. (This upgrade is not a protocol change and no automatic reparse is necessary.)
GitHub Release Notes: https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/releases/tag/v10.6.1 -
Yup.. I reported that issue as well, then was gaslight and told that I was mistaken and counterparty never had the ability to do multiple memos... even after pointing to transactions on their own explorer that indicated I was correct and they had lost functionality and were mistaken... I was told I should have found those issues for them months ago and my feedback marked as abuse... and the issue closed... only after even more community outrage, did Adam decide that he would add support back 🤷️️️️️️ https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/issues/2568MPMA Send unable to send multiple memos · Issue #2568 · CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core
Traditionally, MPMA Sends have allowed for a optional per-line memo, which can be either hex or not on a per-send basis. According to the new /v2/ API docs, and the response from the /address/<a...
-
"minor quality-of-life release".... sounds much better than "oops, we fucked up and lost some functionality which we should have never lost" 🤷️️️️️️
-
That's how I read it
-
-
Counterparty space tomorrow. Everyone is welcome onstage to chat and share what’s happening ✅https://x.com/EmblemVault/status/1851030760565981287Emblem Vault (@EmblemVault) on X🚨𝐓𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐨𝐰 Major Counterparty Updates w @agkrellenstein • $XCP 2.0 • Fairmints • Atomic Swaps • & much more! See you in the AM 🫡 https://t.co/H2S4Z2PkVU
-
Releases in the last 3 weeks :
counterparty-core 10.4.3
counterparty-core 10.4.4
counterparty-core 10.4.5
counterparty-core 10.4.6
counterparty-core 10.4.7
counterparty-core 10.4.8
counterparty-core 10.5
counterparty-core 10.6
counterparty-core 10.6.1
This is what not properly testing your software before release looks like. Which is strange, because I thought we all heard that they had built an automated test system to make sure releases were stable... I wonder what they are testing in their automated tests 🤷️️️️️️😂️️️️️️ -
Of course, gotta go on and do some spin, pivot to make fork caused by their software issues appear as all my fault... Not interested in engaging, I already know what they will say and it is a waste of my time to try and defend myself against false accusations. My chat history here, and github issues speak for themselves. 👍️️️️️️
-
You are welcome onstage, of course.
-
Mickey Mouse writing code for them? 🤣
-
Appreciate the offer, but I respectfully decline. 👍️️️️️️
- 29 October 2024 (950 messages)
-
OpenStamp now supports the minting and trading features for XCP (FairMinter Token)🚀.
Please note:
Due to the recent launch of the Counterparty UTXO binding feature on the mainnet, certain stability considerations may still exist. To ensure the safety of users’ assets, our trading market will temporarily use the same trading model as SRC20.
We are reviewing the relevant Counterparty source code to ensure the UTXO model operates as expected. We will provide UTXO model trading as soon as possible. Please stay tuned👀
More details: https://docs.openstamp.io/product-design/xcp-fairminter -
aren't there a battery of unit tests to provide this assurance? -
100% code coverage riiight?
-
-
kent beck is wondering 👀
-
guess Adam is glad that I pointed out a couple weeks ago that his UTXO selection model needed to be updated to protect users from accidentally generating txs via the CP API which would spend UTXOs with assets attached to them 😜️️️️️️ ... especially now since someone is reviewing that utxo selection model (note, it was just fixed/included in the new release put out today) 🤷️️️️️️
-
By Default, Don't Spend UTXOs with Assets Attached to Them · Issue #2375 · CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core
Sine nodes are using Counterparty Core to do UTXO selection for composing new transactions, we should do what we can to avoid accidentally spending UTXOs with assets attached to them. We can requir...
-
-
In Atomic Swaps, if a detachment transaction does not require including the UTXO to which the asset is attached, a seller could withdraw assets from the UTXO model by paying a high fee rate before the trading transaction is confirmed, causing the buyer to not receive the assets.
-
I don't know exactly what this says but it is funny
-
-
Allowing attaching of assets to spent utxos... hrm.. wonder what the thought process was there?!?
-
-
so new xcp fork is last shakeout before pepe moon trip?
-
-
Or this clown show is completely value destructive for everyone. 🤷♂️
-
u should ask the fork why they are doing that
-
what the fork
-
meanwhile we cozy in deep hodl mode... tik tok
-
-
patience is a virtue
-
I'm not the guy. It's probably fine. Define "safe" lol. You definitely won't die.
-
Did you open a dex order to sell them for xcp or open a dispenser for btc?
-
I'll assume you listed them for XCP and using version 0.9.37 of Freewallet (because some older versions will not display MINTS due to the fairminting). Click on the exchange tab, then enter either XCP/MINTS or MINTS/XCP into the search bar. If you scroll down to the bottom of the market page, there is a My Open Orders section, where any orders you have are listed and there is a button to click to cancel, which will require a btc tx.
-
The MINTS are escrowed, so they do not appear in your wallet while in an open order.
-
There have been a number of protocol breaking forks that you have blindly gone along with in the past. The 9.6x versions had a couple alone, not to mention the ever existing bugs that persist. Yet you pretend like it's the immaculate conception of crypto.
-
Check your address in a mempool to see if it's still pending then
-
Looks like JDog might have switched back to the old code without alerting anyone on the explorer site or within the wallet
-
Horizon Explorer
Horizon Explorer by Unspendable Labs
-
Here is your order
-
Freewallet relies on tokenscan, and it doesn't appear on there either
-
If you want to cancel your order, you can use the unspenable labs wallet with your freewallet seed phrase
-
yes, wallet . unspendablelabs . com
-
It’s a dig at stack for not wanting to refund 1 XCP buys if those small buys didn’t dispense
-
Centralisation in all colors ...
-
The more I am studying the 2.0 web* only tools the more I see priority of profits from fairmints team and etc , more than giving to ppl real comfortable options for working with CP .
Just saying . Hope the new team that do not care what old users saying will make money they needed so bad asap and will start creating REAL comfortable interface/front . Cos all those web designs - really shitty asf. My eyes are bleeding. -
How to Fair Mint on Counterparty - Don't Miss the Next 1000x BTC EcosystemHow to Fair Mint on Counterparty - Don't Miss the Next 1000x BTC Ecosystem https://firemints.xyz/ https://fairmints.io/ Fair Minting lets users create tokens in a decentralized way. One person starts the minting, and others can join in to create tokens for themselves. It works like the old Counterparty system, where users would burn BTC and get tokens in return. Join my Telegram: https://t.me/prestitocrypto Follow my Twitter: https://twitter.com/CryptoPrestito Join my Telegram Announcements: https://t.me/prestitocryptoann Prestito Crypto Covered the latest Crypto Alpha and Projects #counterparty #crypto #bitcoin #cryptocurrency #cryptonews #cryptoproject #cryptotrading #fairmint 00:00-02:30 - What is FairMinting 02:30-03:10 - Wallet 03:10-05:58 - How to Mint Tokens 05:58-09:18 - How to Trade 09:18-10:26 - Summary and Outro
-
Everyone likes the tools. Some people really hate the way they've been implemented. That's the hang up
-
Who’s the fairmints team, etc? What profits, it’s an open protocol?
-
-
Make sure to shake the fork up before you ask it ... You'll get better entropy that way...
-
They are building, as they said, to make it more comfortable for ppl to use the new tools ... and offering a few raw WEB-only tools with awful front and 2-3$ fees for every transaction through web tool... just saying
-
I’d like to speak with the Fairmints CEO, please.
-
Same team as src-20, same usual suspects, those that mint first when tech is harder to use, same teams that promote the inner circle tokens, same team that you have to ask permission to add image to a shit coin??
-
Even though he did refund then
-
100%
-
LOL… fairmints doesn’t have a team and to the extent that individuals are using the feature I see very little overlap with SRC20 users actually. But keep up with the conspiracy theories lol
-
They don’t have a monopoly. They are just first to market
-
I left a ? Mr I don't do src-20 wen u actually do lol
-
English?
-
I am also has feel from even 2015 that vibe that we have some "dark community" inside all community
-
The YouTube video said feel safe, it's from same team as src-20
-
It’s an open protocol for degen casino games. What are you expecting exactly?
-
it is still normal for decentralisation , but sad anyway
-
No that’s just some guy with a podcast.
-
I am expecting that same dark people will not be devs for example
-
or communicate well with them
-
just sayin
-
btw , is there any FAIR guide for people wanting to create first token using fairmints but never know how? and why to do so , ppl need to use new for them WEB* wallet only with realy strange eye-bleeding interface?
-
Here’s the thing people forget: you want friction. You want tooling to be hard. That’s your edge. If everything was easy there would be no asymmetry. It’s exactly like when Ordinals started and you had to actually run a node and command line tools. That’s when the money is made. If you wait until the tooling is EASY, then you’re the exit liquidity.
-
again , who can know that before letting using realy fair to use all tools? only those who friends with devs ? cool , cool...
-
Welcome to the world, my friend. The only people who knew about Bitcoin when it launched were subscribed to some obscure cryptography mailing list.
-
now I am starting getting more about social levels of our community... SAD PEPE
-
Fairmints/Atomic swaps have been on the roadmap for MONTHS. If you've been following Counterparty at all (Twitter/Github/here) you would know that these things were in the pipeline.
-
this is not answer for straight fair question .
just lost trust somewhere here... nevermind -
BTW, what is PEPEFAIR token?)
-
And no one knew about the actual tooling until they launched (myself included). Fairmints, Firemints... no one knew about these services until they were released.
-
I actually thought it might be many months after the block height activation for atomic swaps to become usable in end-user services. To my surprise, the popped-up overnight.
-
this is just words , good words , but how real - dunno. I am watching from side almost 10 years already...
-
and where I can use them ? where I can create pair for atomicswap for example?
-
I'm not sure what you think you're owed. The devs upgraded the protocol with a month-long activation planned. Then some independant developers decided to build services making use of these new features. I wasn't aware. I don't even think the Counterparty core devs were aware before those services launched.
-
someone know here from all community the purpose of those tokens ?
-
I don't know if you can create a pair. What I see as available is what Firemints currently offers: bind, unbind, offer for sale, buy.
-
is that means that those independent devs just have plan from start but only small company of ppl knew that ?
-
12 word seed?
-
Yes... decentralized and permissionless. They are not obligated to put out a press release.
-
Doesn't have this capability yet
-
interesting , if that means that everyone can make hard fork?
-
well sure, but that's not even what is happening here.
-
why I see popularity of this token but nobody telling the purpose?
-
the fact that anyone can create a hard fork is testiment to the protocol's decentraliztion. There is no top-down authority.
-
so offering new but raw tools already can be a problem , yeah
-
Which token? If you're referring to one of the fair mints, there is no "purpose" or utility if that is what you're asking. They are casino chips, just like every other meme token in crypto.
-
Can't stop people from doing stuff they want to do
-
cool , cool
-
I see some interest in your answers. hope it will cost all this
-
but thanks
-
Here is an example: I created Bitcoin Stamps and SRC-20 as meta protocols on top of Counterparty. Some people did not like this. They had to pound sand. We did what the protocol allowed us to do.
-
did you also took from users of whole network the choice of what wallet using by making all that? if no- it is not same for me, sry
-
Use whatever wallet you want. I like to use wallets that are in consensus and won't lose me money
-
interesting warning , I see your choice
-
btw, I've done a lot of dumb shit in Counterparty that has lost me money. That's on me. This is what decentralized finance looks like. No one can fix your mistakes.
-
this is not the same
-
with this
-
Which grifters make alot of money on, users been exit liquidity, while also claim that dispensers are so ruggy, when in reality not much funds have been lost in comparison
-
I'm sorry maybe there's a bit of a language barrier, but I'm having difficulty understanding your grievance.
-
There's a difference: when you walk into a casino, you're agreeing to certain implicit rules like the house always wins. A dispenser rugging you is entirely different.
-
There's a difference is the casino owner pretends he has nothing to do with any gambling business publicly for months :)
Official Counterparty Chat
Public archive of Telegram messages.
- 01 Oct 2024 (59)
- 02 Oct 2024 (44)
- 03 Oct 2024 (110)
- 04 Oct 2024 (32)
- 05 Oct 2024 (5)
- 06 Oct 2024 (30)
- 07 Oct 2024 (6)
- 08 Oct 2024 (22)
- 09 Oct 2024 (11)
- 10 Oct 2024 (40)
- 11 Oct 2024 (24)
- 12 Oct 2024 (28)
- 13 Oct 2024 (24)
- 14 Oct 2024 (58)
- 15 Oct 2024 (23)
- 16 Oct 2024 (28)
- 17 Oct 2024 (174)
- 18 Oct 2024 (450)
- 19 Oct 2024 (451)
- 20 Oct 2024 (129)
- 21 Oct 2024 (203)
- 22 Oct 2024 (626)
- 23 Oct 2024 (68)
- 24 Oct 2024 (54)
- 25 Oct 2024 (18)
- 26 Oct 2024 (44)
- 27 Oct 2024 (564)
- 28 Oct 2024 (556)
- 29 Oct 2024 (950)
- 30 Oct 2024 (793)
- 31 Oct 2024 (518)