u sure is rc2 and not rc1??

To be honest, I’m driving right now and I could be mistaken… I thought there was an RC two that was released, but I might be confused since there’s been about six releases in the past week and a half….. all I know is I appreciate you letting me know that you’re having issues on the current release, so I can avoid updating to it until the issues are resolved👍🏻

is rc1

You’re right

maybe is just my node the one having issues, is someone on 10.5.0 and is working good?

okey now rc1 is throwing the same error...

going to trigger a reparse on 10.5.0 and see

Congratulations

Massive accomplishment

took some time to figure out @herpenstein @hodlencoinfield lol

they are wizzards

Legendary.

I have 2 questions?

1. The utxo binding and psbt are independent to each other right?

2. @hodlencoinfield @XJA77 the first psbt contained the asset source address input, how much it wanted for it in the output and the classic send opreturn. Then the second psbt must just have enough in the input for funding the first part’s output, and then just be sure the recipient output (and source input) are in the correct position for all to work?

Yes utxo binding happens first in a separate tx, the first psbt is just the utxo with asset as input and an output with the seller address and the sell amount (10000 sats in this case), its an unbalanced tx that I signed with sighash single/anyonecanpay, @XJA77 then completed it by adding an input that covered the value in my output as well as three outputs: dust to hold the asset, fees, and change

So the psbt is not a classic send, but that should also work?

No you need to attach to a utxo first, a traditional send wouldn’t work because you cant guarantee the asset would still be in the address when completing the psbt

You could get front run and lose your btc

You’re the goat. This is the way.

Hmm… so it is not that it couldn’t work, but that there are still some risks involved

What wallet did you sign with? I decoded the tx but never signed. I was skeptical about which API, network and wallet status.

What tooling do you use to compose your tx’s in development? Cli?

Electrum

Non-counterparty aware wallet too.

Yeah I signed it (but didn’t broadcast) to see if I could get it to work with unisat and bitcoinjs-lib

There’s no api endpoint magic for trading the assets once they are in the utxo, you have to build the psbt yourself.

It would be no better than a dispenser, in fact it would be even cheaper to front run

I need that bitcoinjs-lib sauce if you don’t mind sending me code snippet

It’s not production ready, but I can drop some « functional » v5.2.0 functions for you to play with when I get home

Im still in the Stone Age, so if your using v7 you will need to refactor a few things

Mine is not ready for prod neither but when i have a minute i could try to put the building code in a single repo and share it, but i cant promise when could be

Not sure why it would be cheaper (the first psbt might be already paying some of the fee?)

But anyway I get it. Seems like anything could be psbt, but you need to know what you are doing.

And the guarantees of utxo binding are also understood.

Cost of doing business?

yes, psbt works with anything

the atomc swap is what you need the utxo support for

as with a counterparty message bitcoin cannot detect a double spend

@hodlencoinfield is RPW open source yet?

Yep address based account has the benefits of simplicity (of development and user experience), but lacks guarantees because all can be front run. Utxo is less user friendly, more bitcoin native “harder” for developers, but has transactional guarantees. Tradeoffs everywhere.

I welcome the more btc native approach.

I’m halfway there, because maybe it was not the best move for the “OG Counterparty”. Maybe it was better to leave CP simple…

Then there is the corporate takeover by a power-seeking returning founder… which fully demotivated individual community contributors (like me). Not something I’m attracted to, having to accept EVERYTHING that is forced upon.

I remember mentioning it in this chat (when the founders were here) a while back and that is exactly what happened lol

Just a gist with some functions is all I want, save me some time seeing an example that’s functional

The reason I ask is it would be helpful to see your implementation of PSBT‘s and atomic swaps when you add them… much like it was helpful to take some of the signing code from counter Wallet for FreeWallet… and I believe you said in the past that FreeWallet being open source helped you with some of your code….

Hopefully this question was taken in the spirit it was meant👍🏻

Your code n JP Jansen’s code n counterwallet code is a bit easier to follow than the horizon code 🤷🏻‍♂️

No, needs a refactor first, I’m hopeful it’ll get there just not a high priority for me at the moment

Oh yeah once I get that working I’ll make a gist and share it

thanks for getting back to me👍🏻 I look forward to it👍🏻

One solution other builders have started to implement is platform or wallet private mempools.

Just 1 way to explore. But it is becoming a frequent tool coming to ordinals platforms where they are trying to secure psbt marketplaces

But yes security factor...

No mention of who is behind Bitcoin Frontier Fund on their website as far as I can see.

Btcfrontier.fund

Trevor

He runs and supports the entire Bitcoin development space, stacks, ordinals, Casey,

Trevor Owen's check on X. They run crypto spaces multiple times a week

Well not him specifically but participates

I believe he donated to Freewallet.io in the early days of the stamps days

Yeah I’ve met Trevor a couple times, he’s very supportive of all things Bitcoin assets including counterparty

He does have an early Stamps collections too

Was involved pretty early

Yes. I I belive it's in good hands. I've listened into 2 years of spaces and his discussions

Like I mean in good faith

He's always been critical of other vcs

Which he gave away for $1 just to onboard and teach users about CounterParty and freewallet.io

And all the funds he earned he sent them to dev

I just don't want to get involved in the arguing over funding...

Because I know both have received or may be receiving funds from said source or someone associated with that source

Degens don’t care

There's a stamp asset attached to a utxo currently waiting for a buyer

you have the psbt handy?

There is a need for a place to exchange these psbts

Stamp has now officially been attached to a UTXO. First Stamp ever.

Not first..second stamp attached

https://www.xcp.io/tx/af34319920de5554c1f95f1102318529a760551af9daf51cc2bf3226dded4c93

Oy vey... so much vitrol now that I can't even report valid issues in counterparty to github and make devs aware of the issue in the dev channel without getting told i'm playing games 🤷️️️️️️ FYI... you can't do MPMA sends with separate memos now.

https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/issues/2568

By following along with the CPv2 release, you are now playing on Spendable Labs court. Is a different game now. And they are not even hiding intentions any longer

Jdog is just unable to keep up technically with the pace of the core dev team, so he pretends it’s all based on principles. None of it is that important because he will probably be irrelevant in 6 months when Freewallet can’t support the pace of development of new features on Counterparty, and people look for other solutions that can. This process is already starting, that is why everyone is complaining that Freewallet is having issues.

Yup I’m aware of their lame gaslighting attempts…. And that I’m apparently a toxic dev who’s daddy didn’t love them enough🤷🏻‍♂️ I do my best to not take it personally n let karma take care of them…. Working so far…. This dev who can’t keep up is finding all sorts of issues n regressions in their code…. 5 hotfixes/releases in a week speaks for itself…. Lack of testing n preparing 🤷🏻‍♂️

I’ve heard people talk like that before usually they are not the victor’s kind of a na na na h thing haha

What would happen if you didn’t give them any advise haha

Juan may welcome some pull requests. Just sayin.

Ironic though, thinking back to why this channel exists in the first place…

Very ironic… n u all thought shit was centralized under me😜

Hell, Juan and I almost besties now…. The enemy of my enemy is my friend type of thing.🤣😜🤷🏻‍♂️

No enemies man, try love

It’s all about love in the end

I figured you guys might take that wrong…. Was simply using that well-known quote as a way to demonstrate that Juan and I are closer now because we have shared views.

Adam is not the enemy , just a developer with different views than I on software development, testing, and what community means🤷🏻‍♂️

As I said , I try not to take his views personally, and will let karma in the universe figure it out.

Adam has generally refrained from personal attacks except a few times… Vector however is a whole different story🤷🏻‍♂️ karma👍🏻

I laughed my asa of as someone referred to them as the devs from “spendable” labs
lol
Not unspendable haha 😂

FYI... Users are no longer able to send MPMA sends with multiple memos. I brought this issue up in the CP dev channel, and was immediately told I was playing games, and my issue was closed a few minutes later. Even tho MPMA sends were able to have a custom memo for every send in the past, apparently that is no longer the case going forward... sorry if some feel this is "trolling"... I'm simply explaining why users will no longer be able to send memos in MPMA sends... because it is broken / limited on the protocol level by the current devs.

https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/issues/2568

womp womp womp... no more ability to send multiple memos in MPMA sends... someone is triggered I guess? Once again, the CP users lose functionality and "better more sane stuff is coming".... FML

Your attempts to get me to just roll my shit back to 9.61.3 and roll with that instead are becoming more and more tempting as they dig their heels in and I continue to get a glimpse of what future bug reports and development will look like

@hodlencoinfield What are your thoughts on this issue? You fine with Adam just breaking MPMA memos and basically saying "tough shit, better stuff is coming"?

Maybe just try and fix it and submit a PR, sounds like it’s just an API problem, probably something easy

lol, they remove functionality, and its my job to submit code to fix their mistake. No thx.... will just use the v1 API as suggested and keep supporting multiple memos in MPMA sends... and they can explain to users in the future why their MPMAs are different 🤷️️️️️️

Appreciate you taking the time to respond 👍️️️️️️

FYI... found yet another issue in counterparty-core 10.5... with generating dispense transactions... hopefully this one is a little bit harder for Adam to ignore.. tho I wouldn't put it past him at this point... so tired of the nonsense and gaslighting saying I'm unable to keep up, when in reality, its them who dont test their shit properly to find issues before release🤷️️️️️️

https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/issues/2571

Heading to bed.. catch up with you guys in the AM

https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/issues/2568#issuecomment-2435173391

FYI... Core devs telling me I am mistaken and Counterparty never had support for multiple memos... and me pointing to 25+ transactions with multiple memos, and providing a link to view the multiple-memo sends in their own explorer.

Really sucks I gotta waste my time proving things which I know to be true... the gaslighting is real.. lol... Now yoga time. 🙂

Lol… and Adam‘s official response is that it’s my fault for not finding these issues months ago, much easier to blame me than to admit that counterparty indeed lost functionality, and they refuse to fix it🤷🏻‍♂️

I’m just about done with this bullshit … I’m still running a 9.61.3 public API…. Wouldn’t be that difficult to roll out a FreeWallet classic and point it to the API to allow users to choose the version of counterparty they wanna run.

As much as I hate the idea of a fork and I’ve done a lot to try to avoid that, the attitude of the current core, developers, losing functionality, gaslighting, developers who point out the functionality loss, and straight up lying about what functionality counterparty has had in the past is making it very clear to me that this potential conflict of interest is no longer potential.

Adam and UL are only concerned with pushing new features that they can add support to their wallet for, while breaking backwards compatibility…. They care nothing for the current community or the history of counterparty being a community driven project.

The software is not the ledger. Has there been damage to or forking of the ledger? How far diverged? Reconcilable? Too late?

The locomotive of a train derails long before the caboose

A caboose can also be disconnected and maintain momentum for a while

Ideally anyone can run whatever node software they want, as long as tx’s are valid in the end and explorers all agree

Figure out which side of the train you’re on before comitting

Chain split will be determined by who best works and who best agrees

Yes, the ledger has forked, despite my FreeWallet and token scan only showing data for the official 10 X version of counterparty.

xcp.dev still runs on 9.61.3, the ninja wallet has not updated to 10.xx version, and we have many cases where dispenses have been triggered on 9.61.3 and not on 10.X ledger.

Independent of my only supporting the 10.X version of counterparty on tokenscan and FreeWallet, the ledgers have forked and diverged for over a week, functionality has been lost or gained between the different versions, and users continue to be confused about what is going on.

I tend to agree with you and feel like the best path moving forward at this point is to support showing both versions of the ledger on tokenscan, releasing a version of FreeWallet, which continues to work with 9.61.3, and allowing the community to choose whichever ledger they want to do transactions on.

To be very clear, this was never my plan, I have done everything within my power to support the 10.4 update in my public APIs, explorer, and Wallet…. However, the ledger has forked, and has diverge for far longer than the fork that happened for a couple of days at the beginning of the year.

As always, my interest is in doing what is best for the community, and at this point, I feel the best course of action is to support both versions and let the community decide what version they want to run🤷🏻‍♂️

Tbh ninja forked the stamps indexing a while ago and are out of consensus all over the place. I question if they will be a viable marketplace on 9.6 for much longer as users are getting rugged. I wouldn’t use that as a reason to support sales on 9.6 anyway, but you have plenty of other reasons.

Just the sheer volume of fairmints I think will keep a large population off 9.6 anyway. Just for consideration on the efforts required to do both. As I certainly have no intention to debate the issues at hand

Definitely want to let the users decide what ledger they want to run on, vs forcing them to one or the other. Appreciate your feedback @reinamora_137 👍️️️️️️

Maybe embracing the whole "Counterparty Classic" and "Counterparty 2.0" is best... allows for a clear way to determine what version a user is on vs tracking specific version numbers... and the core devs n community seem to be calling the new updates "Counterparty 2.0" anyway... Perhaps they would update the prefix to "CPRTY2" to avoid collisions between the ledgers.

it's also possible many users aren't informed enough to decide, but that may be contentious perspective lol. is it expected dispensers will take up a large percentage of sales after atomic swap marketplaces is kind of the question? also any user chosing 9.6 may be unable to purchase on such a marketplace afaict? I'm not 100% on how those transfers are handled on 9.6 though? curious to know ( perhaps it's very few if any people know ALL the caveats on such a decision).

yeah that's a reasonable distinction. sounds like a shitstorm determining who would change the prefix however.

well one version hasn't changed (9.61.3), and one version (10.xx) is releasing new software that has forked things... so, logic dictates that the "new" version change their prefix... but I doubt that will happen 🤷️️️️️️

I have no interest in maintaining a classic version or running a competing "counterparty" ledger... i'm focused on xchain platform... but, ledger has forked n it is what it is now, so time wil tell how this all plays out.

yeah therin lies the other problem of maintaining it lol. know that all to well with SRC-20 indexing now.

Not that I couldn't maintain it, just dont really want to... but pretty easy to make some tweaks to my repos to allow ppl to spin up a "counterparty classic" node if they wanted (since core broken fednode with their counterparty-core repo rename) 🤷️️️️️️

ahh the classic fednode. i always liked it and thought it was a cool design. but certainly don't miss it using the typical docker commands.

Bring it “back” to CP2, using all new no-XCP required advances like numeric subassets 😆

The return to CP2 becomes the mythical:

GLYPHS

shorter CP2 prefix also means slightly smaller/cheaper txs for the "Counterparty 2.0" users 👍️️️️️️

changing the ticker for XCP would be interesting lol

A lot of the work has already been done in github.com/CNTRPRTY

Maybe with some motivation I could give it some love again ☺️

What better way to proove this is the "decentralized" version than 2 former CP devs who butted heads in the past and disagree on most issues (except the value of community and decentralization)... lol 😛

JPJ (I think, but the cip repo got nuked) had a wonderful cip about a shorter prefix. Smaller more efficient tx’s. May allow for more data to be stored. Not a new idea; just new motivation. I never forgot that CIP.

XCP: should probably be the prefix but day late, sat short?

fyi... I kept a copy of the CIP repo before it got nuked in my account.. feel free to review/reference 🙂

https://github.com/jdogresorg/cips

Do any of you wizards have any wisdom to share about programming with bitcoinjs-lib vs python-bitcoinlib? Pros cons pitfalls traps?

love the versatility of bitcoinjs-lib

you can se it in client and in server with just one learning

Big brain chat happening ‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️

awww... I wanna do stickers n gifs too...but admins have limited my permissions... prolly cuz I was hurting Vectors feelings with too many gifs... feel so left out not being able to post my "ninja skills" gif 😜️️️️️️

Hiiiya

Shortening the prefix from 8 to 3 bytes will reduce a typical tx cost by ~ 3%.

Not much in itself but combined with compression, bundling and more efficient encoding I believe we can save 50-80%.

Wow 🤯

*** Announcing Counterparty Core v10.6.0 ***

This release includes a protocol change to fix a regression for the case when there have been multiple dispensers opened at a single address. The bug prevents users from triggering dispensers at addresses where there have previously been closed dispensers (rather than simply re-opened dispensers).

This release is a protocol change from mainnet block 868,200 (in about one week).

It also includes a backwards-incompatible change in the API: /v2/addresses/<address>/balances/<asset> and /v2/assets/<asset>/balances/<address> now return a list that may include balances attached to UTXOs of <address>.

This release includes a bugfix for chained UTXO movements within the same block. This bugfix requires an automatic reparse starting from block 867,000. Given the current slowdowns in catching up with the API database, we recommend using counterparty-server bootstrap before restarting your server, but of course you can reparse from scratch to verify. The slowness in reparsing is currently being addressed.

*NOTE*: All wallets should use the compose_dispense() call to trigger dispenses rather than the legacy create_send(). Due to the above bug, using create_send() can make it possible for users to send BTC to an address where the dispenser will fail. All node hosts should migrate to compose_dispense() ASAP.

Full Release Notes on GitHub: https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterparty-core/releases/tag/v10.6.0

Public API Servers at api.counterparty.io are being updated as we speak.

Also glad that "They" identified issues that required a hotfix release.. issue with dispense txs not being created if a dispenser was already closed on an address in the past... and an issue with "auto-convert BTC send to dispense tx"... (yep, I reported those)... Also reported that they lost the ability to do multiple memos in MPMA sends... but was told I should have found those bugs for them months ago... and had my comments marked as abuse. Can't make this stuff up... too hilarious 😛

Gonna enjoy sitting back and watching how things go without me finding bugs for them.

turns out the data reparse issue was due to my local instance not properly updating to 10.6 even tho I followed the update instructions... the bootstrap database does have version 10.6 in it (strange it still triggers a rollback/reparse)... but nontheless... fixed the issue by blowing away my counterparty-core repo and cloning it again.

I’m struggling in finding the appropriate message…

Because what i really want to say is just way too harsh, and i need to think longer term.

So, for now, i will just take some time away from this chat. Will mute notifications.

Doing this before any other decision in relation to this chat. But definitely this chat is NOT for Counterparty 2.0. xcpdev will stay in v9.

Obviously feel free to talk about whatever, but that must be clear based on me being the owner and the history (and name) of the chat.

Sorry man.. I'll do my best to not talk about counterparty 2.0 here... been using this place as a mostly safe space to vent without going off in counterparty dev chat (already got one account muted for being "toxic")... But your right, will do my best to keep topics general and not cp-20 specific 🙂

I'm from China

🚀 Exciting news! We now have the MVP of the first Counterparty platform that allows you to buy and sell through atomic swaps 🔥 — eliminating the risks of dispensers, scammers, or front-running. ⚡️

Any feedback from the community would be greatly appreciated as we continue to improve and build out the platform. 🙌

👉 Check it out: https://firemints.xyz/

Wallet connect ? Isn’t lit up seems it wants me to make a new wallet ?

Only these wallets ? Odd

Which wallet do you want to use sir?

Will integrate horizon when possible

None of those available here haha who knows why ?
FreeWallet
Horizon
Or rare pepe

Free wallet is not easy to integrate and. The workflow is really bad

Xchain

Hopefully horizon will be available soon

Rarepepes is not an extension right?

bad in what way? How did you try to integrate?

https://freewallet.io/uri-schemes.html

Urischemas is not easy to do...

Psbt not. Supported for signing

How can I get the connected wallets?

ahh got ya... yeah... PSBT is not supported, as it is something that has just been added to CP

counterparty:?action=sign&message=test&icon=https%3A%2F%2Fxchain.io%2Ficon%2FCOINDADDY.png&callback=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.authparty.io%2Fapi%2Fv1%2Fauthorize_login%3Fprovider%3D005f15c462fe3eb536c4bec5fef42c%26modal_id%3DbemghXSwNXxhqzd

That's what I mean with hard workflow

pass a message to sign, icon to display, and callback URL... it opens wallet, prompts user to sign, and then passes the signed message in the workflow

So what you have there is basically a website with mint info right ? I can get current mint info off other places but I like your delivery it’s a lot more how do I say sort of flashy for consumers

Could work yes but requires many work to just integrate it, will add it to the todo list

pretty simple

https://i.gyazo.com/67d83c3d562cef8c2819fa6613fb9c8d.png

You can use atomic swaps

Sounds hopeful !! Let’s get FreeWallet hookup happening!!

click link... wallet opens and prompts user if they want to sign

https://i.gyazo.com/96063ee0b284d02761f4a7c037e3228b.png

First an only platform actually supporting them

they click yes, website gets callback and can allow login... its been working for many years, but few take the time to actually ask about uri support 🤷️️️️️️

Will add to the todo list and ask you if I have issues

I need to know more about these atomic swaps no has given me a real answer as to what they are and why aren’t they just incorporated on everything if there so great ??

You would be hitting a lot I man a lot of users if you had a FreeWallet link up !!

guys... remember, this is a CNTRPRTY chat... prolly shouldnt be discussing "Counterparty 2.0" functionality here as Juan has requested... up to you, just a friendly reminder

They are incorporate in everything counterparty has been the last one to adopt it but allows to use the capabilities of Bitcoin to trade atomic so in the same tx BTC and XCP assets goes to the wallets

Sorry gents
I do very much love xcpdev I’m on it constantly.
And want to find out about what someone said about sending a broadcast from there !?

Well maybe yes will add to my to-do list

Love the look of that site

I need to add all the asset images

I think jpjansen did an archive

https://jpjanssen.com/counterparty-image-archives/

its a bit bigger now tho

Lol yes

Could be possible to get a copy of it sir?

Tried it what am I doing wrong ?😑

Didn’t do anything that I can see yet ?

Torrent. Probably no one seeding it. I am traveling, not able to seed. If you ping me in a week, I will share it with you.

Can you speak Chinese?

Below the submit button there are 2 textareas: response and request.

Above the response it says “check lib_response”. Notice it had an error:

But xcp.dev is down at the moment, a new bug in v9 emerged. Will try to get it fixed later today

xcp.dev is back up!

Xcp dev I love you I wish I could use you some how ? Other than just monitoring
Counterparty nuances

Still my absolute go to for info if I’m digging into an asset or a wallet
Your my study guide and I always feel crappy I can’t transact on there ? I wish you linked somehow to FreeWallet !
Jdog says the ability to dis that is available quite easily? I know nothing but sounds like it’s right there

Much appreciated @codythecampbell

The goal of xcpdev has always been to educate about how Counterparty works. And it has been quite useful for much of the current cp+stamps developers

And is not that I was an expert, quite the opposite. I was just learning in the open for the benefit of everyone following along

Well you are learning like a ninja !! Love it !

Learning about L2s

https://www.bitcoinlayers.org/layers/liquid

Thanks 🙏🏼