Counterparty over Peercoin?

I suspect we need some voting on what name it may get, but maybe we should focus first on whether we would do this or not in the first place.

I think it is a good value, but we will face competition e.g. possibly even from NuBits as mentioned earlier :omg: It is not a project what we would do just as another project, it will be one of the pillars for the Peercoin blockchain to built upon and therefore we need a lot of a consensus in my opinion. I’m not seeing an overly enthusiastic community yet, but maybe there is a silent majority out there?

And when we think it is something to persue we need to find a business model (bounty model, shares model, transactional or combination) to attract 1 or 2 developers who like to take up the challenge.

I’m enthusiastic about a Counterparty implementation for Peercoin, but I’m silent as well (not much time these days…).
In difference to a side chain implementation that could achieve the same without storing data in Peercoin’s blockchain there is some block chain bloating with a Counterparty-like implementation.
But as this brings value to Peercoin I’m willing to take that. This is another aspect of treating Peercoin as a backbone, an underlying asset.
I share Jordan’s assessment that such an implementation would not interfere very much with the target group of Peershares due to size and complexity of the implementation.

It will sooner or later become obvious how costly maintaining Bitcoin’s block chain is. The next halving of Bitcoin’s PoW reward is coming.
…and then another… and another.
If the BTC price doesn’t go South far enough or the amount of tx fees doesn’t rise significantly, the sustainability problems will become obvious even for hardcore Bitcoin believers.
Belief can’t defy economy.
Bitcoin can’t be kept alive by sheer altruism - can it?
It would be great to have a Counterparty implementation that relies on a sustainable block chain to shift business from BTC’s Counterparty implementation to PPC’s Counterparty implementation.
It would be necessary to have such a thing, because it would be a mess for those who run a business that is based on quick sand without the chance to move it to solid ground :wink:
Finding a proper name is a different topic.
I only wanted to state why I’m for such a solution and why I think the world needs it.
If Counterparty for Bitcoin is successful, we need one, the world needs one for Peercoin as well!

It’s better to find some need for it to guide the development effort.

I’ve seen no mention of making Peercoin and Peerparty a harmonous duality like I outlined towards the start of the thread:

If there is one idea that people take away from this thread it should be this:-

Instead of burning any old Peercoins to generate “Peercoin XCP” initially, users should only be able to burn freshly minted PPC (no previous transactions) to get PXCP. And this burn period should be open ended, starting at a particular block and never ending.

[1] This would incentivize securing the Peercoin network to get the reward of not just PPC but potentially PXCP.
[2] This would raise the value of Peercoin as a commodity.
[3] This would create a duality or symbiotic relationship between “Peercoin Counterparty” and it’s host “Peercoin”.

Also, Peercoin Checkpoints could be embedded in the Blockchain using Peerparty.

[quote=“Alias, post:48, topic:3079”]I’ve seen no mention of making Peercoin and Peerparty a harmonous duality like I outlined towards the start of the thread:

If there is one idea that people take away from this thread it should be this:-

Instead of burning any old Peercoins to generate “Peercoin XCP” initially, users should only be able to burn freshly minted PPC (no previous transactions) to get PXCP. And this burn period should be open ended, starting at a particular block and never ending.

[1] This would incentivize securing the Peercoin network to get the reward of not just PPC but potentially PXCP.
[2] This would raise the value of Peercoin as a commodity.
[3] This would create a duality or symbiotic relationship between “Peercoin Counterparty” and it’s host “Peercoin”.

[/quote]

I think it is an interesting idea. Since there are an almost constant stream of peercoin created by POS so there will be very high inflation in the first few years of “peercoin xcp” – more than 100% p.a. in the first year, 50-100% in the second, only drop to 10% in the 10th year. I don’t really know all the implications but this feels a big prpoblem.

Also, Peercoin Checkpoints could be embedded in the Blockchain using Peerparty.

What do you mean?

I had exactly the same idea just some days ago when everybody was talking about XCP and its ethereum-like scripts, but have not posted so much in this forum these weeks as I’m pretty busy.

So I would support this and I think it can be a great way to implement all the nice “2.0” features like coloured coins etc. to PPC. Although I think it’s good to considerate the alternatives too (OT and sidechains) and decide without having to hurry.

I like the name “PeerExchange” (or alternative “PeerXchange”) a bit, as it’s very easy to get its meaning, even for non-english-speaking folks like me :wink:

Counterparty co-founder here. We’re generally supportive of Counterparty forks on other blockchains (and it would be neat to see one on a POS blockchain).

Especially if you are able to secure dev talent to move Peerparty/Counterpeer forward, it could be a good thing. For example, BTCDrac from Viacoin (another Counterparty fork) is able to both enhance his fork, as well as help out on the mainline Counterparty codebase. Something like that benefits everyone, and any help that a Peercoin fork could offer to improving the mainline Counterparty (especially in a way that is not peercoin-specific) is great.

[quote=“xnova, post:51, topic:3079”]Counterparty co-founder here. We’re generally supportive of Counterparty forks on other blockchains (and it would be neat to see one on a POS blockchain).

Especially if you are able to secure dev talent to move Peerparty/Counterpeer forward, it could be a good thing. For example, BTCDrac from Viacoin (another Counterparty fork) is able to both enhance his fork, as well as help out on the mainline Counterparty codebase. Something like that benefits everyone, and any help that a Peercoin fork could offer to improving the mainline Counterparty (especially in a way that is not peercoin-specific) is great.[/quote]

nice to have you in the forum. I have a question for the counterparty devs:
if it is needed, is it posible for the existing counterparty with all their assets to be ported to PPC (or other PoS coin, or other coin in general)
transparently for the end-user?
I mean coiding-wise, or counterparty is doomed if BTC’s blockchain dies for some reason?

[quote=“seki, post:52, topic:3079”]I have a question for the counterparty devs:
if it is needed, is it posible for the existing counterparty with all their assets to be ported to PPC (or other PoS coin, or other coin in general)
transparently for the end-user?[/quote]

I have the same question, too.

Looks like Adam Krellenstein, chief scientist of the Counterparty foundation, is playing with btcd: https://github.com/conformal/btcd/issues/186

If they have a counterparty implementation based on btcd, it will be easy to port it to peercoin using ppcd, that’s some good news.

any progress on this? i would love to help out but my coding skills are rudimentary at best :frowning:

[quote=“mably, post:54, topic:3079”]Looks like Adam Krellenstein, chief scientist of the Counterparty foundation, is playing with btcd: https://github.com/conformal/btcd/issues/186

If they have a counterparty implementation based on btcd, it will be easy to port it to peercoin using ppcd, that’s some good news.[/quote]

Definitely confirmed here: https://github.com/conformal/btcd/issues/190

[quote=“mably, post:56, topic:3079”][quote=“mably, post:54, topic:3079”]Looks like Adam Krellenstein, chief scientist of the Counterparty foundation, is playing with btcd: https://github.com/conformal/btcd/issues/186

If they have a counterparty implementation based on btcd, it will be easy to port it to peercoin using ppcd, that’s some good news.[/quote]

Definitely confirmed here: https://github.com/conformal/btcd/issues/190[/quote]
And someone has taken up the $1,500 bounty to actually start working on it! On watch 8)

[quote=“mably, post:56, topic:3079”][quote=“mably, post:54, topic:3079”]Looks like Adam Krellenstein, chief scientist of the Counterparty foundation, is playing with btcd: https://github.com/conformal/btcd/issues/186

If they have a counterparty implementation based on btcd, it will be easy to port it to peercoin using ppcd, that’s some good news.[/quote]

Definitely confirmed here: https://github.com/conformal/btcd/issues/190[/quote]

Pardon my ignorance, but does this mean if 186 is solved, peercoin will automatically have counterparty for those nodes that run 186-enabled ppcd ?

Searching around I haven’t found any definite statement that the API of ppcd is fully compatible with that of btcd.

I guess they can be considered mostly compatible, but compatibility may be reduced in further versions, especially after the implementation of cold-minting, which may introduce some subtle issues in handling the API. It shouldn’t be difficult for people familiar with both ppcd and btcd to perform the porting, but it won’t happenly “automatically”, i.e. the amount of work is still non-trivial.

I’m not a counterparty expert, but I know that ppcd will be almost 100% compatible with btcd APIs.

We have only added a few peercoin specific APIs and had to modify a few (only one a the moment) to be compatible with peercoin specificities, that’s all.

BTW the ppcd project needs stronger support from the community if we want to be production ready one day.

If you are a Go developper or willing to learn a new exciting programming language, feel free to chime in.

Donations are welcomed too, working at night or during holidays isn’t always the best solution.

just wondering if counterparty can use 2 or more blockchains at the same time
in order to balance the load, if this has any meaning :slight_smile:

The underlying idea here is one I sympathize with immensely. My biggest beef with counterparty is that it solves an abstract problem, not a practical problem. Have you ever tried to use it to do something meaningful? It is not easy.

I have some thoughts about something akin to Counterparty over Peercoin, but solving a less generalized and more specific problem, taking better advantage of some of Peercoin’s unique properties.

The biggest question everything hinges on for me though is mentioned in the below quotes:

What is the state of OP_RETURN on Peercoin?

I agree with the bitcoin devs here:
http://www.coindesk.com/developers-battle-bitcoin-block-chain/

40 bytes should be sufficient - this encourages storing just keys on the blockchain and the bulk of data off of it, which I think is necessary long-term (unless SK does something awesome with his sidechains, which would render this point moot).

It’s planned to be allowed in the next protocol upgrade, with the same constraints as in bitcoin.

It’s planned to be allowed in the next protocol upgrade, with the same constraints as in bitcoin.[/quote]

You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.