Awesome. And that is not an unusual sample! Keep up the great work!

I think you need to set up a federated node -  https://github.com/CounterpartyXCP/counterpartyd_build/blob/master/docs/SettingUpAFederatedNode.rst

Relevant thread: "Can I create a Bitcoin address with pen and paper?" - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=816123.0

While I wouldn't say no to an update either, you need to think about what you are asking.

The Counterparty Protocol is in an extremely healthy state with a very exciting roadmap ahead. Patrick Byrne saying that he has a "loose alliance" with Counterparty doesn't change that at all. If you think about it, you can only have a loose alliance (if any) with a protocol. The organizational representation of Counterparty - The Counterparty Foundation is just a few weeks old.

Overstock did a talent acquire of some Counterparty Developers with the intention to construct a particular technology, Medici (cryptosecurity infrastructure). The Counterparty Protocol may or may not play a part in that infrastructure (though it could play a significant role with it's blockchain security and smart contracts, for example). It has probably become obvious to everyone involved that other additional technologies are required to make a composite solution for Medici to work in a flawless and familiar way - e.g. reputation systems, fiat pegged cryptocurrency, 3rd party secure asset storage, centralized asset exchange, new regulations, etc.

I would expect that the Counterparty Devs are not at liberty (under NDA for example) to discuss Medici anyway.

Disclaimer: I know nothing, this post is purely speculation on my behalf.

This same question was posted and answered recently -

"Moving forward, one of our priorities will be the development of a desktop wallet. The first version is expected to be released this month, with the application framework and basic features already developed. You can monitor the development progress on GitHub in our counterparty-gui repository. As always, we’ll keep you updated on all major milestones."

Source: The latest update (from yesterday) - http://counterparty.io/news/counterparty-community-update-jan-07/

Gavin Andresen has an interesting blogpost about repackaging (specific) transactions into a new alternative blockchain for some tests that he is carrying out - http://gavintech.blogspot.ie/2015/01/looking-before-scaling-up-leap.html. He is talking about it from a Bitcoin scalability perspective of course but I feel there is some benefit to looking at it from a Counterparty perspective. If it was deemed useful one could repackage all the Counterparty data into a dedicated Counterparty Blockchain. This would result in exclusive (no Bitcoin Blockchain) Counterparty Blockchain nodes.

Users could download Counterparty data from these exclusively Counterparty Nodes and even use SPV (Simple Payment Verification) with these nodes. If additional security was required of these exclusive nodes, Proof of Stake could be employed.

This way of looking at things considers The Counterparty Protocol not just as data embedded in the Bitcoin Blockchain, but as a raw unpackaged independent Blockchain embedded in the Bitcoin Blockchain. By packaging it correctly, native Blockchain features (like SPV for example) can be accessed by Counterparty users.

Is this idea viable or even good or am I missing something important (aside from the technical implementation!)?

Yes. Recent information about the team can be found here - http://counterparty.io/news/counterparty-community-update-dec-24/.

Ain't that the truth. Hopefully we can educate people enough to see the bigger picture.

Here is my reply in that thread -

Here is a very quick and arbitrarily abstract Venn diagram of the cryptocurrency ecosystem with an emphasis on the Bitcoin ecosystem and the fundamentally different fields of discussion and development that are currently operational and will be operational in the near future:



There already is an "Alternate Cryptocurrencies" sub-forum. There are very clear use cases for a dedicated "Bitcoin 2.0 Technology" sub-forum which can be further subdivided into "Sidechains" and "Metacoins".

Yes, it is Peer-to-Peer. Anyone can join in.


Source: http://www.coindesk.com/factom-white-paper-outlines-record-keeping-layer-bitcoin/

It doesn't matter if Viacoin is merge mined. This isn't about being better than a human being nor is it about setting a precedent - It is already quite obvious that this method of trusted timestamping is fundamentally sound and will be universally accepted just like digital signatures have been - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_signatures_and_law.

This is all about making a user-friendly (and enterprise-friendly) system. I already use Proof of Existence (and my own version of Proof of Process) daily in a Research and Development environment. When something like Factom is set up, it will be used by many.

In your terminology, yes, the data can be "big". As "big" as you want. From your example, I think you'd be interested in what Factom are doing - http://factom.org/.

What I mean by "dedicated off chain... notary service/network" is captured in this image:



Factom have their own network (specifically designed for this notary service provision). The "last mile" of their protocol is to store a hash of what happened on their network in the Bitcoin Blockchain (because Bitcoin has the best security).

Currently the Clearinghouse features amount to little more than the general Proof of Existence (http://www.proofofexistence.com/) concepts/features, but on a less secure Blockchain (Viacoin). People are using Proof of Existence (see the latest registrations and confirmations).

Maybe this is the bit that you are missing - if you want to prove that a document existed, you'd better use the MOST secure Blockchain possible. Right now that is Bitcoin. That is why people use Proof of Existence and they will use Factom but they don't use the corresponding XCH features.

EDIT: This is also why the XCH notary features would be better implemented in Counterparty, because the hashes are committed to the Bitcoin Blockchain.

Also, as an aside for anyone interested, Counterparty could notarize a checkpoint hash of it's own data/database to the Bitcoin Blockchain. This could be done with Smart Contracts, for example. This could allow (potentially by SPV) for downloading CP data from any channel (torrents, usenet, radio etc.) and checking to see is that data legit by ensuring that the hash of that data matches the checkpoint hash.

TL;DR Rapid downloading of and simple authentication and verification of all Counterparty Data (up to a recent checkpoint) using an SPV client is probably possible.

My apologies, when I said "data storage" I meant storage of the hashes. I didn't mean storage of the original data, which as you mentioned could be achieved in any way imaginable. So to summarize what I tried to say earlier:

Factom = Factom Network (to notarize every document individually and establish/notarize the custody chain(s)) + Bitcoin Network (to notarize aggregations/snapshots of what has happened in the Factom Network)

Clearinghouse = Bitcoin Network (to notarize every document individually and establish/notarize the custody chains)

TL;DR Factom has a dedicated off-chain (off-Bitcoin Blockchain) notary service/network, Clearinghouse doesn't (i.e. it just uses it's Viacoin Blockchain for everything).

It all comes down to questions of price/fee, security, Blockchain Bloat, trust in the given network, etc.

Just to expand it a bit - XCH has a "blockchain notary service" implemented and "custody chains" are in development now. Yes, this is all very close to what Factom is developing, however Factom outsources 99% of this work and data storage away from the Blockchain of choice (Viacoin, in this case) and on to their own network. You can probably roll your own in house Factom server/infrastructure too. XCH look like they will stuff everything into their Blockchain.

Depends on what you mean. They will likely just issue an asset called "FactoidPreSale" or something on the Counterparty Protocol. So yes, in that case you could be able to exchange XCP and BTC and many (all?) other Counterparty assets for it.

For example, does this mean that multi-sig can be set up without requiring that addresses involved first need to have made a transaction (expose public key) on the Blockchain? If so, this is great news!

Keep up the great work!

Yes, I mean the former. What is the ultimate origin of the Burnt Bitcoins? Thanks for the advice but I have not the time nor the skill to accomplish such a task. Hopefully someone else might be enticed to take it on.

Does anyone have the time or skills required to follow all the burnt BTC at the 1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr address back through the history of the blockchain to see when they were mined?

It would be nice to visualize the timespan over which the POW period of Counterparty occurred. Afterall, you can't have Proof of Burn without Proof of Work (in this case).