Quote from: marcelus on March 17, 2014, 08:35:23 PM

Quote from: bitexch on March 17, 2014, 07:43:26 PM

Quote from: Herp on March 17, 2014, 07:38:00 PM

Quote from: bitexch on March 17, 2014, 07:29:00 PM

Counterparty vs. Mastercoin: I am invested in both, and I think the space is big enough that we don't have to pick sides. But calling Counterparty a "copycat" isn't a good criticism, since Mastercoin is open-source (which is very important!) and it's not really about who came up with the ideas first, but who is implementing them more quickly and effectively.

I agree it's very good that Mastercoin has institutional investors, but it's not only about how much money you have backing the project, it's also how many features you have, and Counterparty objectively has more features right now. Actually, you don't want the money to get too far ahead of the project, or else there will be a more drastic reaction if the project fails to make good on what it promises.

Calling Counterparty a "copycat" is calling it as it is. They've copied Mastercoin down to smallest details and Mastercoin's idea of using BTC blockchain.

I agree that space is big enough to allow for more competitors to emerge and competition is healthy.

Please name these specific features Counterparty has right now.

With Counterparty you can create assets, make bets and contracts for difference, and you can trade all assets, not only XCP and BTC, on the distributed exchange. According to Mastercoin's timeline, they only expect to have user-created assets by the end of Q2, and I don't know when they plan to have bets and contracts for difference implemented.

Congratulations to Counterparty for implementing those features so quickly but there is no denying that they are a copycat. As you said, this space is open source so it's all about getting there first and doing it well but JR is right when he says they're a copycat.

Either way, I think the time has passed to remain anonymous in this game. It was very understandable for Satoshi to do so being the first, but the cat is out of the bag now and govs know there's little point on putting pressure on anyone or any group of persons in an open source environment. If they don't like what's happening they will resort to other measures. Those that remain anonymous such as the NXT and XRP people, will find it difficult to compete with teams that can network and attract VC money like JR has already done and what appears like a large scale. This space is real industry now. Institutional money is ready. Projects need real names, real faces, these institutions can reach out to. I think this is an important point.

Do you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about? Or are you just trying participate in something for the sake of increasing your post count?

RippleLabs is not anonymous and they have attracted funding.

Here's the team: https://www.ripplelabs.com/team/
Here's the VC money they have attracted: https://www.ripplelabs.com/investors/