Bitcoin Forum

Alternate cryptocurrencies => Altcoin Discussion => Topic started by: MalMen on February 20, 2015, 03:49:15 PM



Title: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: MalMen on February 20, 2015, 03:49:15 PM
Well, after reading this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=939072.0 and see the amount of offtopic related with DKR vs XMR i think its for the best open one more thread for discusting this :)
I posted this topic as selfmoderated one so i can prevent trolls, but i will try to not interfer on the posts

Whats the poins i think

- What is the best tech
  - Masternodes vs Ringsignatures
  - X11 vs cryptonight
  - Bitcoin clone vs Bytecoin Clone
  - Blockchain sizes
- Dev team
- strengths and weakeness in each one
- witch one is the fairest distributed
- target audience of each one is the same to you ?
- What you think the current value represent ?
- Where can you use your each coin in real life ?
(more discussion topics soon)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: r0ach on February 20, 2015, 04:03:30 PM
Not to sound negative, but a locked topic on this issue created by a new account is going nowhere since both these coins have insane positive and negative shilling going for both sides and everyone is just going to see you as a shill for one coin or the other that is trying to sway discussion by invoking moderation powers.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: UnicornFarts on February 20, 2015, 04:05:50 PM
Let me sum this up for you.  

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin.  It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

Monero cons

Original authors are scam artists so other devs have taken it over (for XMR)
Low market cap
Mostly held up by bitcoin whales who have no experience in altcoins
Not enough money to fund development (devs are using their own money).  Probably will run out at some point and project will die.
Kinda fubar'd emission

Dark cons

Massive premine
Alternated emission curve to jack price up (make early guys rich on shoulders of late guys after the fact).  Use of node required funding to prop price up.
Spaghetti code
Hypeish name that attracts the wrong crowd
Project will die as soon as devs don't have more coins to unload on a market they create by releasing features.  Even if that isn't the case, changing emission curve as dramatically as it was PLUS the massive instamine will kill it longterm.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: pippo on February 20, 2015, 04:12:56 PM
Take a look of Blockchain size.
Daily Blockchain sync is too big by Monero.
Darkcoin is not the best Name for a Coin.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Polycoin on February 20, 2015, 04:18:22 PM
i side wit darkcoin. i want to sell my instamined coins on u BITCHEZ, BUY MY INSTAMINED COINS!


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: r0ach on February 20, 2015, 04:27:14 PM
Without getting into bloat issues of Monero, or Darkcoin instamine, a PoW coin, if actually able to achieve anonymous transactions, is in a difficult position.  Governments would regulate against it, and PoW mining data centers are large attack vectors to be legislated against or just taken over.  Yea, they would be located in many countries, but governments seem to cooperate a lot on things like drugs, so they might cooperate on issues like this too.  I guess you could say Bitcoin sort of faces this issue as well, but they haven't made any big moves against it yet.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GreekBitcoin on February 20, 2015, 06:53:40 PM
Without getting into bloat issues of Monero, or Darkcoin instamine, a PoW coin, if actually able to achieve anonymous transactions, is in a difficult position.  Governments would regulate against it, and PoW mining data centers are large attack vectors to be legislated against or just taken over.  Yea, they would be located in many countries, but governments seem to cooperate a lot on things like drugs, so they might cooperate on issues like this too.  I guess you could say Bitcoin sort of faces this issue as well, but they haven't made any big moves against it yet.

On the other hand, and without getting into why PoS is making the big holders even bigger, PoS coins are not secure since Governments can achieve to hold 51% of coins by using some gag orders on the exchanges without anyone ever realizing.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Kienbui on February 20, 2015, 06:54:52 PM
I found this

There are speculations about CryptoNote being developed under the guidance of NSA. Following facts are mentioned as indicating a possible connections between NSA and CryptoNote development team:[76]

-Keccak hash has been chosen as a proof-of-work function in CryptoNote several months before it has been announced as SHA-3 hash function competition winner.

- NSA report about electronic cash outlines the necessity of using blind signatures in order to achieve anonymity.

- Using non-deterministic random in CryptoNote signatures might be a backdoor intentionally left by NSA in reference implementation.

- Being ASIC-resistant, CryptoNote-based currencies can be easily manipulated by NSA possessing big computational resources.


Source: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryptoNote#Blockchain_bloat_and_ring_signature_size


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GreekBitcoin on February 20, 2015, 07:08:20 PM
I found this

There are speculations about CryptoNote being developed under the guidance of NSA. Following facts are mentioned as indicating a possible connections between NSA and CryptoNote development team:[76]

-Keccak hash has been chosen as a proof-of-work function in CryptoNote several months before it has been announced as SHA-3 hash function competition winner.

- NSA report about electronic cash outlines the necessity of using blind signatures in order to achieve anonymity.

- Using non-deterministic random in CryptoNote signatures might be a backdoor intentionally left by NSA in reference implementation.

- Being ASIC-resistant, CryptoNote-based currencies can be easily manipulated by NSA possessing big computational resources.


Source: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryptoNote#Blockchain_bloat_and_ring_signature_size

The source for this is http://www.cryptobang.com/ which was never a serious crypto news site neither seems to be online now. Therefore much credibility so wow.

But, if that is the case, then this is seriously the coin you need to invest! If you believe that it is backed by NSA then a few millions of investment must be under way...


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: solid12345 on February 21, 2015, 01:33:14 AM
Shadowcash deserves to be put in this discussion as well IMO it's the closest to Zerocoin/Zerocash-like implementation.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: billotronic on February 21, 2015, 03:20:27 AM
Let me sum this up for you.  

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin.  It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

Monero cons

Original authors are scam artists so other devs have taken it over (for XMR)
Low market cap
Mostly held up by bitcoin whales who have no experience in altcoins
Not enough money to fund development (devs are using their own money).  Probably will run out at some point and project will die.
Kinda fubar'd emission

Dark cons

Massive premine
Alternated emission curve to jack price up (make early guys rich on shoulders of late guys after the fact).  Use of node required funding to prop price up.
Spaghetti code
Hypeish name that attracts the wrong crowd
Project will die as soon as devs don't have more coins to unload on a market they create by releasing features.  Even if that isn't the case, changing emission curve as dramatically as it was PLUS the massive instamine will kill it longterm.

This I think is a very accurate description of the cons. I think the underlying theme is they are both bullshit and better can be done.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: nachoig on February 21, 2015, 04:21:15 AM
Excuse me, but do we really need another thread about this? There are already 2 threads just to discuss about privacy-focused coins.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=568166.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=898563.0

Outside those, if you do a seach, you'll find a lot of threads with the same dicussion about Darkcoin x Monero with the same allegations.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on February 21, 2015, 10:15:06 AM

Biggest load of B.S. I've ever read.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stealth923 on February 21, 2015, 11:15:11 AM

+1 rubbish


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: PoS on February 21, 2015, 11:50:42 AM
Let me sum this up for you.  

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin.  It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

Monero cons

Original authors are scam artists so other devs have taken it over (for XMR)
Low market cap
Mostly held up by bitcoin whales who have no experience in altcoins
Not enough money to fund development (devs are using their own money).  Probably will run out at some point and project will die.
Kinda fubar'd emission

Dark cons

Massive premine
Alternated emission curve to jack price up (make early guys rich on shoulders of late guys after the fact).  Use of node required funding to prop price up.
Spaghetti code
Hypeish name that attracts the wrong crowd
Project will die as soon as devs don't have more coins to unload on a market they create by releasing features.  Even if that isn't the case, changing emission curve as dramatically as it was PLUS the massive instamine will kill it longterm.
Darkcoin dev cant run out of coins as he has unlimited coins coming out his arse with free masternode payments which he got with his instamine. It is a coin where the rich get richer by the minute.
Guys have hundreds of notes running. If you have 100 masternotes you get another on for free much faster than when you have just one or two. Obviously to buy you stand no chance at all.
lets say you have 100 masternotes and get paid 10 coins a day in a 100 days you have another masternote running, now you get paid from 101, now it takes less time to have another note running than last time. Time reduces with every additional masternote. If you operate one or two you too will have a free masternote in a couple of years. Try keeping up buying, lol.
The instamine scam with this coin is way worse than with a traditional scam where dev has limited dumping ability.
Time will tell when the last sucker is found.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on February 21, 2015, 01:31:57 PM

Obviously to buy you stand no chance at all.

[1] - stop with the instamined crap. It wasn't and everyone's bored with that year-old stale fud

[2] - stop crying that you can't afford a masternode and trying to turning it into a design issue

You pays your money you takes your choice. You buy more miners you get more coins. You buy more nodes you get more return. It's called a market.

Any coin holder with 1000 coins (2 ten-thousands of the supply) can set up a node anytime, anywhere. They don't need to wait 100 days they can do it right now. So what if I purchase enough for 50 and set them all up on the same virtual server ? - the fact that I can freely do that is the whole point (otherwise known as de-centralisation).


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: KingCaper on February 21, 2015, 05:32:15 PM
Excuse me, but do we really need another thread about this? There are already 2 threads just to discuss about privacy-focused coins.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=568166.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=898563.0

Outside those, if you do a seach, you'll find a lot of threads with the same dicussion about Darkcoin x Monero with the same allegations.

Judging from the OP's posting history the whole thread might be intended to advertise Monero.

Nonetheless, Monero kick's Darkcoin's ass, as does Shadowcoin (their dev is a fucking beast).
The Dark hype machine is relentless, but it'll fall eventually to one of those two.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Este Nuno on February 21, 2015, 05:45:00 PM

[1] - stop with the instamined crap. It wasn't and everyone's bored with that year-old stale fud


I could have sworn I saw some pretty good evidence that there was in fact a large instamine. I remember seeing graphs and such. The number 2 million seems to ring a bell, but I'm not sure.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on February 21, 2015, 10:19:54 PM

I could have sworn....

Whatever it was, the market gave it a nice price  ;)



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BCwinning on February 21, 2015, 10:25:39 PM

Dark cons

Massive premine
Alternated emission curve to jack price up (make early guys rich on shoulders of late guys after the fact).  Use of node required funding to prop price up.
Spaghetti code
Hypeish name that attracts the wrong crowd
Project will die as soon as devs don't have more coins to unload on a market they create by releasing features.  Even if that isn't the case, changing emission curve as dramatically as it was PLUS the massive instamine will kill it longterm.
this pretty much to the tee. Plus the whole masternode nonsense.
After seeing the massive premine
and how they implemented the masternodes I haven't looked back.
too many xmr shills to even bother looking at it.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on February 21, 2015, 10:56:49 PM

http://i.imgur.com/QtU5g2M.png


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: NemesisT on February 22, 2015, 02:32:51 AM
Monero already won, you can all stop pretending an instamined scam even matter at this point.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stealth923 on February 22, 2015, 03:02:05 AM
Monero already won, you can all stop pretending an instamined scam even matter at this point.

I guess you have never seen coinmarket cap....Monero #20....Darkcoin #5....

Darkcoin has 7x the value and 7x the volume.

Monero doesnt even have an official wallet GUI.....and zero adoption - have fun!



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: rustynailer on February 22, 2015, 03:02:56 AM
Why even compare those two coins when Shadow (sdc) beats them all in privacy, distribution and usability.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: PoS on February 22, 2015, 08:44:08 AM

[1] - stop with the instamined crap. It wasn't and everyone's bored with that year-old stale fud


I could have sworn I saw some pretty good evidence that there was in fact a large instamine. I remember seeing graphs and such. The number 2 million seems to ring a bell, but I'm not sure.
Unlike conventional instamines where devs stash diminishes over time in this scam the dev stash gets bigger with his masternode payments every passing day, together with early whales making it totally centralized.
It is a dead coin walking, the only good thing no execution date is set.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on February 22, 2015, 10:25:33 AM

Lets see:

http://i.imgur.com/GWqP0lU.png

Meanwhile......

http://i.imgur.com/ROQT4aP.png

http://i.imgur.com/pWaQV8Z.png

http://i.imgur.com/sWPg1kX.png

http://i.imgur.com/BPrvOhX.png


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Kienbui on February 22, 2015, 01:58:56 PM
Monero already won, you can all stop pretending an instamined scam even matter at this point.

With great benefit to creator, Darkcoin can keep its creator continue to innovate. By the other hand Monero creators can easily drop Monero to follow their other dreams. They don't have enought benefit to stick with it.

With master nodes, Darkcoin can attract more talent tech gurus come and bring more value.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: nakaone on February 22, 2015, 02:09:56 PM
when you really break it down and assume they are both not pnd shitcoins the winner will be the one who offers the best way to reach privacy, because this is the niche they are aiming for.

now you can start to think about which groups like privacy and start making assumptions about whether the utility of privacy is elastic or non-elastic.

after that you probably have the winner - or you conclude that this coin is not invented at all at this point of time.





Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: illodin on February 22, 2015, 02:15:04 PM
when you really break it down and assume they are both not pnd shitcoins the winner will be the one who offers the best way to reach privacy, because this is the niche they are aiming for.

now you can start to think about which groups like privacy and start making assumptions about whether the utility of privacy is elastic or non-elastic.

after that you probably have the winner - or you conclude that this coin is not invented at all at this point of time.

Privacy is not the only niche DRK excels at. Real-time transaction confirmations is another feature that might be essential for some, and useful for everyone, and all of its applications are not yet discovered. Masternodes offer an investing opportunity for those who are not into mining, and the features and applications that could be built on top of the masternode network open up a lot of new possibilities.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Este Nuno on February 22, 2015, 04:05:55 PM
One thing that I've noticed is that the instamine seems to actually have turned out to be a good thing for DRK(in the short term at least) as it clearly gives Evan Duffield a massive incentive to continue to develop and foster growth. Also it enables funding to further the project and it seems that DRK has been pretty consistent with development. Personally I completely dismissed DRK at some point last year and I'm surprised to see that it's continued to do fairly well. But it makes sense because the incentives are aligned with continued development. Long term though single individuals holding so much supply can be dangerous. Even Bitcoin has this same issue though with Satoshi.

Contrast this to XMR where developer funding is a big problem. The XMR devs have put a very large amount of their own money in to paying for research and code reviews and such. And from what I've read the entire team holds less than 80k XMR between them(7 people?). This has been used as a selling point by some people in the XMR community as evidence of a fair distribution, which it seems to be. But fair in the short term doesn't necessarily equate to a situation where those who have the ability to produce the most value actually have the resources to do so. So we get to see the trade offs here between two currencies with similar goals.

edit: that 80k XMR number is probably way out date and doesn't consider the likelyhood that they've all bought more since the price has come down quite a bit.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: nakaone on February 22, 2015, 05:24:43 PM
when you really break it down and assume they are both not pnd shitcoins the winner will be the one who offers the best way to reach privacy, because this is the niche they are aiming for.

now you can start to think about which groups like privacy and start making assumptions about whether the utility of privacy is elastic or non-elastic.

after that you probably have the winner - or you conclude that this coin is not invented at all at this point of time.

Privacy is not the only niche DRK excels at. Real-time transaction confirmations is another feature that might be essential for some, and useful for everyone, and all of its applications are not yet discovered. Masternodes offer an investing opportunity for those who are not into mining, and the features and applications that could be built on top of the masternode network open up a lot of new possibilities.


exactly - drk is in my opinion the most innovative bitcoin fork which exists (and probably the best).

additionally it has some interesting incentive structures

nevertheless it is a fork of bitcoin and the basic architecture of bitcoin is a transparent blockchain.

I believe in two things at least mid-term. a) no coin will replace bitcoin b) there are small niches which can be filled, the biggest of the small niches is privacy.

XMR is by core private - privacy has a non-elastic utility, therefore at this point of time there is no real competitor to xmr for this niche. money is an institution and economic network effects matter in cryptocurrency, therefore the likelyhood of xmr (in case it can solve its technical merits) for being the dominant private ledger is a this point quite high.

last year there was this altcoin observer started bie rpietela and the first 50 pages are worth reading for every person being interested in cryptoeconomics, especially the posts by PeterR are nuggets



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BCwinning on February 22, 2015, 08:02:35 PM
One thing that I've noticed is that the instamine seems to actually have turned out to be a good thing for DRK(in the short term at least) as it clearly gives Evan Duffield a massive incentive to continue to develop and foster growth. Also it enables funding to further the project and it seems that DRK has been pretty consistent with development. Personally I completely dismissed DRK at some point last year and I'm surprised to see that it's continued to do fairly well. But it makes sense because the incentives are aligned with continued development. Long term though single individuals holding so much supply can be dangerous. Even Bitcoin has this same issue though with Satoshi.

Contrast this to XMR where developer funding is a big problem. The XMR devs have put a very large amount of their own money in to paying for research and code reviews and such. And from what I've read the entire team holds less than 80k XMR between them(7 people?). This has been used as a selling point by some people in the XMR community as evidence of a fair distribution, which it seems to be. But fair in the short term doesn't necessarily equate to a situation where those who have the ability to produce the most value actually have the resources to do so. So we get to see the trade offs here between two currencies with similar goals.

edit: that 80k XMR number is probably way out date and doesn't consider the likelyhood that they've all bought more since the price has come down quite a bit.
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: ArticMine on February 23, 2015, 06:44:22 AM
One thing that I've noticed is that the instamine seems to actually have turned out to be a good thing for DRK(in the short term at least) as it clearly gives Evan Duffield a massive incentive to continue to develop and foster growth. Also it enables funding to further the project and it seems that DRK has been pretty consistent with development. Personally I completely dismissed DRK at some point last year and I'm surprised to see that it's continued to do fairly well. But it makes sense because the incentives are aligned with continued development. Long term though single individuals holding so much supply can be dangerous. Even Bitcoin has this same issue though with Satoshi.

Contrast this to XMR where developer funding is a big problem. The XMR devs have put a very large amount of their own money in to paying for research and code reviews and such. And from what I've read the entire team holds less than 80k XMR between them(7 people?). This has been used as a selling point by some people in the XMR community as evidence of a fair distribution, which it seems to be. But fair in the short term doesn't necessarily equate to a situation where those who have the ability to produce the most value actually have the resources to do so. So we get to see the trade offs here between two currencies with similar goals.

edit: that 80k XMR number is probably way out date and doesn't consider the likelyhood that they've all bought more since the price has come down quite a bit.
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

I will take quality FLOSS funded by donations such a GNU/Linux over propriety software and its related scams and malware any day. Just try searching Bing news  ;) for "Lenovo" http://www.bing.com/news/search?q=lenovo&FORM=HDRSC6 (http://www.bing.com/news/search?q=lenovo&FORM=HDRSC6)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BitcoinEXpress on February 23, 2015, 07:35:33 AM

Monero cons

Original authors are scam artists so other devs have taken it over (for XMR)



Who were the original authors and who are the devs today?


~BCX~


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: pandher on February 23, 2015, 12:23:35 PM

Who were the original authors and who are the devs today?


~BCX~

https://getmonero.org/knowledge-base/people


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Este Nuno on February 23, 2015, 12:39:35 PM
One thing that I've noticed is that the instamine seems to actually have turned out to be a good thing for DRK(in the short term at least) as it clearly gives Evan Duffield a massive incentive to continue to develop and foster growth. Also it enables funding to further the project and it seems that DRK has been pretty consistent with development. Personally I completely dismissed DRK at some point last year and I'm surprised to see that it's continued to do fairly well. But it makes sense because the incentives are aligned with continued development. Long term though single individuals holding so much supply can be dangerous. Even Bitcoin has this same issue though with Satoshi.

Contrast this to XMR where developer funding is a big problem. The XMR devs have put a very large amount of their own money in to paying for research and code reviews and such. And from what I've read the entire team holds less than 80k XMR between them(7 people?). This has been used as a selling point by some people in the XMR community as evidence of a fair distribution, which it seems to be. But fair in the short term doesn't necessarily equate to a situation where those who have the ability to produce the most value actually have the resources to do so. So we get to see the trade offs here between two currencies with similar goals.

edit: that 80k XMR number is probably way out date and doesn't consider the likelyhood that they've all bought more since the price has come down quite a bit.
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

"handouts" from performing skilled labour? That's a first.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on February 23, 2015, 01:01:21 PM
One thing that I've noticed is that the instamine seems to actually have turned out to be a good thing for DRK(in the short term at least) as it clearly gives Evan Duffield a massive incentive to continue to develop and foster growth. Also it enables funding to further the project and it seems that DRK has been pretty consistent with development. Personally I completely dismissed DRK at some point last year and I'm surprised to see that it's continued to do fairly well. But it makes sense because the incentives are aligned with continued development. Long term though single individuals holding so much supply can be dangerous. Even Bitcoin has this same issue though with Satoshi.

Contrast this to XMR where developer funding is a big problem. The XMR devs have put a very large amount of their own money in to paying for research and code reviews and such. And from what I've read the entire team holds less than 80k XMR between them(7 people?). This has been used as a selling point by some people in the XMR community as evidence of a fair distribution, which it seems to be. But fair in the short term doesn't necessarily equate to a situation where those who have the ability to produce the most value actually have the resources to do so. So we get to see the trade offs here between two currencies with similar goals.

edit: that 80k XMR number is probably way out date and doesn't consider the likelyhood that they've all bought more since the price has come down quite a bit.
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

"handouts" from performing skilled labour? That's a first.

Instamine talk is just too tiring.  Coins were distributed.  Many went to a dev who is no longer part of the team and sold up in the early days.  The rest were sold on open market.  I personally believe that Evan's DRK coins were mostly purchased.  I base this theory on the fact that Evan has been known to reach out to known whales to purchase large amounts of DRK for himself and family members.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: celestio on February 23, 2015, 09:00:04 PM
One thing that I've noticed is that the instamine seems to actually have turned out to be a good thing for DRK(in the short term at least) as it clearly gives Evan Duffield a massive incentive to continue to develop and foster growth. Also it enables funding to further the project and it seems that DRK has been pretty consistent with development. Personally I completely dismissed DRK at some point last year and I'm surprised to see that it's continued to do fairly well. But it makes sense because the incentives are aligned with continued development. Long term though single individuals holding so much supply can be dangerous. Even Bitcoin has this same issue though with Satoshi.

Contrast this to XMR where developer funding is a big problem. The XMR devs have put a very large amount of their own money in to paying for research and code reviews and such. And from what I've read the entire team holds less than 80k XMR between them(7 people?). This has been used as a selling point by some people in the XMR community as evidence of a fair distribution, which it seems to be. But fair in the short term doesn't necessarily equate to a situation where those who have the ability to produce the most value actually have the resources to do so. So we get to see the trade offs here between two currencies with similar goals.

edit: that 80k XMR number is probably way out date and doesn't consider the likelyhood that they've all bought more since the price has come down quite a bit.
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

"handouts" from performing skilled labour? That's a first.

Instamine talk is just too tiring.  Coins were distributed.  Many went to a dev who is no longer part of the team and sold up in the early days.  The rest were sold on open market.  I personally believe that Evan's DRK coins were mostly purchased.  I base this theory on the fact that Evan has been known to reach out to known whales to purchase large amounts of DRK for himself and family members.

No, they were not purchased. The majority of the coins that were instamined went to Evan and his partner, InternetApe, at the time. (I'm sure InternetApe mined much more than the 120,000 dark he said he did) Ever wondered why Evan could of donated full hour days to Darkcoin? Because of the instamined coins he gained.


Was there some instamine? "I" wouldnt call it instamine where the developers got all the coins as in a premine, but there was a good amount that was mines in the first 24-48 hours. I my self as one of the developers I mines ~120k DRK. and realized this could be a problem in the futures and gave away around 50k to get people interested.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: celestio on February 23, 2015, 09:15:27 PM
One thing that I've noticed is that the instamine seems to actually have turned out to be a good thing for DRK(in the short term at least) as it clearly gives Evan Duffield a massive incentive to continue to develop and foster growth. Also it enables funding to further the project and it seems that DRK has been pretty consistent with development. Personally I completely dismissed DRK at some point last year and I'm surprised to see that it's continued to do fairly well. But it makes sense because the incentives are aligned with continued development. Long term though single individuals holding so much supply can be dangerous. Even Bitcoin has this same issue though with Satoshi.

Contrast this to XMR where developer funding is a big problem. The XMR devs have put a very large amount of their own money in to paying for research and code reviews and such. And from what I've read the entire team holds less than 80k XMR between them(7 people?). This has been used as a selling point by some people in the XMR community as evidence of a fair distribution, which it seems to be. But fair in the short term doesn't necessarily equate to a situation where those who have the ability to produce the most value actually have the resources to do so. So we get to see the trade offs here between two currencies with similar goals.

edit: that 80k XMR number is probably way out date and doesn't consider the likelyhood that they've all bought more since the price has come down quite a bit.
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

"handouts" from performing skilled labour? That's a first.
not at all. Every shitcoin clone out there asks for donations /handouts to continue to "develop" their
copy pasta scam. You "clone" a currency that you want others to use. But you want others to pay you to continue to develop the coin? labor rotflmao Real labor is a chinese building your iphone. Or a bangladeshi sewing your nike shoes.

What? OK so you rather choose a coin that has 2 million coins instamined(Darkcoin) in less than 3 days, most going to the developers at the time, over a coin that chooses to ask for donations(Monero) instead(and is like the holy grail in comparison)?

Nice judgement skills there mate.

edit


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BCwinning on February 23, 2015, 09:22:56 PM
One thing that I've noticed is that the instamine seems to actually have turned out to be a good thing for DRK(in the short term at least) as it clearly gives Evan Duffield a massive incentive to continue to develop and foster growth. Also it enables funding to further the project and it seems that DRK has been pretty consistent with development. Personally I completely dismissed DRK at some point last year and I'm surprised to see that it's continued to do fairly well. But it makes sense because the incentives are aligned with continued development. Long term though single individuals holding so much supply can be dangerous. Even Bitcoin has this same issue though with Satoshi.

Contrast this to XMR where developer funding is a big problem. The XMR devs have put a very large amount of their own money in to paying for research and code reviews and such. And from what I've read the entire team holds less than 80k XMR between them(7 people?). This has been used as a selling point by some people in the XMR community as evidence of a fair distribution, which it seems to be. But fair in the short term doesn't necessarily equate to a situation where those who have the ability to produce the most value actually have the resources to do so. So we get to see the trade offs here between two currencies with similar goals.

edit: that 80k XMR number is probably way out date and doesn't consider the likelyhood that they've all bought more since the price has come down quite a bit.
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

"handouts" from performing skilled labour? That's a first.
not at all. Every shitcoin clone out there asks for donations /handouts to continue to "develop" their
copy pasta scam. You "clone" a currency that you want others to use. But you want others to pay you to continue to develop the coin? labor rotflmao Real labor is a chinese building your iphone. Or a bangladeshi sewing your nike shoes.

What? OK so you rather choose a coin that has 2 million coins instamined in less than 3 days, most going to the developers at the time, over a coin that chooses to ask for donations instead(and is like the holy grail in comparison)?

Nice judgement skills there mate.
exactly which coin are you referring to Because I don't use either xmr or mon, and I aint your mate


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Johnny Mnemonic on February 24, 2015, 02:59:09 AM
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

You have no idea who Satoshi is, nor whether he (or they) got paid.

If you'd rather developers steal coins from their users in the form of pre/insta-mines as opposed to asking for contributions, then you have a plethora of options. The rest of us have XMR.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: othe on February 24, 2015, 03:29:54 AM
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

You have no idea who Satoshi is, nor whether he (or they) got paid.

If you'd rather developers steal coins from their users in the form of pre/insta-mines as opposed to asking for contributions, then you have a plethora of options. The rest of us have XMR.

Not to mention that Bitcoin is also funded by donations since years...


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BCwinning on February 24, 2015, 04:05:40 AM
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

You have no idea who Satoshi is, nor whether he (or they) got paid.

If you'd rather developers steal coins from their users in the form of pre/insta-mines as opposed to asking for contributions, then you have a plethora of options. The rest of us have XMR.

Not to mention that Bitcoin is also funded by donations since years...
yes and there is nothing wrong with people making donations because they want to vs   developers begging for money and threatening to stop developing because of lack of donation support. There is a difference in my mind.
If its that good than someone will step in and donate their time because they believe in it. Or the community will raise funds to help. Not because some greedy developer feels their time isn't being compensated enough for a project they supposedly believed in enough to create.  It's your money, donate to whatever scam you want.
But you won't change my mind about investing in what I consider bad behavior.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Este Nuno on February 24, 2015, 07:22:45 AM
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

You have no idea who Satoshi is, nor whether he (or they) got paid.

If you'd rather developers steal coins from their users in the form of pre/insta-mines as opposed to asking for contributions, then you have a plethora of options. The rest of us have XMR.

Not to mention that Bitcoin is also funded by donations since years...
yes and there is nothing wrong with people making donations because they want to vs   developers begging for money and threatening to stop developing because of lack of donation support. There is a difference in my mind.
If its that good than someone will step in and donate their time because they believe in it. Or the community will raise funds to help. Not because some greedy developer feels their time isn't being compensated enough for a project they supposedly believed in enough to create.  It's your money, donate to whatever scam you want.
But you won't change my mind about investing in what I consider bad behavior.


Lol. The XMR devs have never begged for money or threatened to stop developing. I have no idea where you're getting that idea from. All I was saying before is that if they had some huge instamine that they could fund themselves with it's likely that things would be a bit different now as having that much money to put towards development is a huge advantage. Even with minimal funding they've done a lot of work. They do obviously believe in it else they wouldn't have spent so much time and money on the project.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BCwinning on February 24, 2015, 07:42:09 AM
any coin that begs for money for the developer is a shitcoin.
Satoshi never did and I hold all developers to that standard.
Don't develop it than if you can't handle not getting handouts back from it.

You have no idea who Satoshi is, nor whether he (or they) got paid.

If you'd rather developers steal coins from their users in the form of pre/insta-mines as opposed to asking for contributions, then you have a plethora of options. The rest of us have XMR.

Not to mention that Bitcoin is also funded by donations since years...
yes and there is nothing wrong with people making donations because they want to vs   developers begging for money and threatening to stop developing because of lack of donation support. There is a difference in my mind.
If its that good than someone will step in and donate their time because they believe in it. Or the community will raise funds to help. Not because some greedy developer feels their time isn't being compensated enough for a project they supposedly believed in enough to create.  It's your money, donate to whatever scam you want.
But you won't change my mind about investing in what I consider bad behavior.


Lol. The XMR devs have never begged for money or threatened to stop developing. I have no idea where you're getting that idea from. All I was saying before is that if they had some huge instamine that they could fund themselves with it's likely that things would be a bit different now as having that much money to put towards development is a huge advantage. Even with minimal funding they've done a lot of work. They do obviously believe in it else they wouldn't have spent so much time and money on the project.
I don't know anything about monero, I don't want to know either. Too many fucking shills pumping the coin.
If it's good it will find its place. I was speaking in general like I thought you were.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Johnny Mnemonic on February 24, 2015, 08:57:53 AM
I don't know anything about monero, I don't want to know either. Too many fucking shills pumping the coin.

So you don't want to know about the coin because too many people are enthusiastic about it?

If you're saying you're jaded by all the hype of crypto scams, I totally understand you there. But the project has been around for a while now and the developers have shown no lack of honesty and professionalism.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. I just want to understand your logic.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: pandher on February 24, 2015, 10:50:13 AM
I don't know anything about monero, I don't want to know either. Too many fucking shills pumping the coin.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. I just want to understand your logic.

Unfortunately there is no logic


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Este Nuno on February 24, 2015, 04:05:19 PM
Well, to be fair a lot of people were turned off by both the rhetoric surrounding XMR and a few of the worst offenders constantly posting zealotry. Since the price drop though those people haven't been posting at all from what I've seen and things have gone back to normal. There were two people I can think of that probably were mostly responsible for the public perception of 'shilling', Nekomata and Skinnavaj(sp?). Drawingthesun was somewhat similar for a while but he quickly realized that sort of attitude was doing more harm than good and did a good job of reigning it in.

And then someone came along and created Moneroman88 as a parody of XMR supporters. And it's safe to assume that a lot of people reading the forum didn't realize that the account was a 'reverse shill' meant to cause damage.

So it's not too hard to see why many people here have a bad impression of XMR from their readings here. That and a lot of people seemed to have a problem with the amount of separate XMR threads that were active at one point. But they were all legitimate separate topics though like mining, speculation ect. People here get offended easily though over the smallest things. :P


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Oscilson on February 24, 2015, 04:45:01 PM

[1] - stop with the instamined crap. It wasn't and everyone's bored with that year-old stale fud


I could have sworn I saw some pretty good evidence that there was in fact a large instamine. I remember seeing graphs and such. The number 2 million seems to ring a bell, but I'm not sure.
Unlike conventional instamines where devs stash diminishes over time in this scam the dev stash gets bigger with his masternode payments every passing day, together with early whales making it totally centralized.
It is a dead coin walking, the only good thing no execution date is set.

That is the main concern.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: r0ach on February 25, 2015, 11:07:21 AM

Who were the original authors and who are the devs today?


~BCX~

https://getmonero.org/knowledge-base/people


Heh, unrelated issue, but on the Monero team, I noticed for David Latapie it says, "David Latapie is a French publisher, transhumanist"

I've never understood this Ray Kurzweil and others cult.  If you transfer yourself into the digital world, you're obviously only creating a copy if the original can still exist at the same time.  The whole thing is a logical fallacy.  There's no such thing as "transhumanism", only a movement to create a copy machine for humans for some unknown reason.  We can already do this now for physical creatures with cloning, yet nobody does it.  Doing this with a digital creature is the same difference, except it would store and interpret data faster, but it's still a clone.

It might function similar to how a computer virus does.  Since it can process all sensory data in an extremely fast manner, it would do it very quickly, then lay dormant with idle bandwidth awaiting triggers for it to leap into action to do something.  The notion of time would either become irrelevant, or extremely monotonous, since you would process all external sensory very quickly and constantly wait on something new.  So there you are sitting at 0.0000001% CPU utilization forever.  

It's interesting that the human brain has low CPU utilization already with no known triggers to max it out.  Perhaps the system disabled it's processing power to conserve resources and/or avoid boredom or insanity, or perhaps monitoring the position of every photon provides no benefit, or is impossible due to quantum effects.  The law of diminishing returns at work.  

If the universe has a beginning, and travel is constrained by the speed of light, then processing of external data would have to be constrained at some point as well.  One constraint for external data available, limited by physical laws, and one constraint for available resources needed to process that data.  At this point, complexity could also be much higher than available means to detect it, so a real computer AI could also just sit at 100% CPU utilization forever, trying to track the position of every photon, failing, and accomplishing basically nothing.

Since all human debug systems are biological in nature, AI based off of humans would be in danger of being stuck in a hard loop with no way to recover.  Creating a digital AI would require a debug and error checking system to run on top of whatever you consider to be the real AI.  The only problem is that the debug and error checking system would define much of what the system actually was doing at any given time, and this element would obviously be rigidly human created and specified.  If the inflexible, human defined rules are that pronounced, can you really call it AI?  Have I just debunked the possibility of true AI entirely?

If you wanted to get really complex, the AI could possibly re-write it's debug systems itself.  The question here is, does the old version actually terminate on version updates, or does a new virtual and/or physical presence of the AI spawn each time, who then fight each other over resources.  It would basically be recreating evolution.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BitcoinFX on February 25, 2015, 03:56:32 PM
A better comparison would probably be DRK vs BBR (Boolberry)

Darkcoin provides a reasonable solution for making anonymous transactions. Boolberry has the best CryptoNote implementation to date, ihmo.

 
Let me sum this up for you. 

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin.  It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

Monero cons

Original authors are scam artists so other devs have taken it over (for XMR)
Low market cap
Mostly held up by bitcoin whales who have no experience in altcoins
Not enough money to fund development (devs are using their own money).  Probably will run out at some point and project will die.
Kinda fubar'd emission

Dark cons

Massive premine
Alternated emission curve to jack price up (make early guys rich on shoulders of late guys after the fact).  Use of node required funding to prop price up.
Spaghetti code
Hypeish name that attracts the wrong crowd
Project will die as soon as devs don't have more coins to unload on a market they create by releasing features.  Even if that isn't the case, changing emission curve as dramatically as it was PLUS the massive instamine will kill it longterm.

This I think is a very accurate description of the cons. I think the underlying theme is they are both bullshit and better can be done.

In terms of 'true' anonymity no coin offers this at present.

It is one thing to be able to make anonymous and obfuscated transactions, however the main issues still to be solved are that of acquisition / ownership and traffic analysis.

- The originator of an 'anonymous' transaction is perhaps much less likely to be identified by tracing a transaction. For example, researching individuals who are mining (or mined) coins in clear net mining pools or who brought and exchanged coins using a 3rd party service makes for a much easier starting point. In fact, simply running an 'anonymous' coins client wallet would most likely flag an individual in a sub-set in terms of the meta data alone.

A truly 'anonymous' coin would need to offer PoW pool mining through Tor (or a similar trusted anonymity network), with a strong focus on decentralization, from the get-go.

Stealthcoin is a good example of a coin that protects its users from traffic analysis using Tor. However, PoW mining is still a much better way to secure a network in terms of user based anonymity and privacy.

Bitcoin actually offered good anonymity when it was first released and users could mine solo in the wallet, without pools.

Creating 'truly anonymous' digital cash is not an easy task.

Privacy, Security, Anonymity and Trust. Pick any 3.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: illodin on February 25, 2015, 04:53:12 PM
^ There is a debate going on currently whether DRK should move its whole network under tor (or i2p) - apparently that would mean pools as well then. Problem is I guess, that people would need to install tor separately, unless it is possible (does the license allow it? other problems?) to include tor client within the wallet itself so the users don't even have to know it's running under tor.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Este Nuno on February 25, 2015, 06:19:48 PM
A better comparison would probably be DRK vs BBR (Boolberry)

Darkcoin provides a reasonable solution for making anonymous transactions. Boolberry has the best CryptoNote implementation to date, ihmo.

 
Let me sum this up for you. 

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin.  It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

Monero cons

Original authors are scam artists so other devs have taken it over (for XMR)
Low market cap
Mostly held up by bitcoin whales who have no experience in altcoins
Not enough money to fund development (devs are using their own money).  Probably will run out at some point and project will die.
Kinda fubar'd emission

Dark cons

Massive premine
Alternated emission curve to jack price up (make early guys rich on shoulders of late guys after the fact).  Use of node required funding to prop price up.
Spaghetti code
Hypeish name that attracts the wrong crowd
Project will die as soon as devs don't have more coins to unload on a market they create by releasing features.  Even if that isn't the case, changing emission curve as dramatically as it was PLUS the massive instamine will kill it longterm.

This I think is a very accurate description of the cons. I think the underlying theme is they are both bullshit and better can be done.

In terms of 'true' anonymity no coin offers this at present.

It is one thing to be able to make anonymous and obfuscated transactions, however the main issues still to be solved are that of acquisition / ownership and traffic analysis.

- The originator of an 'anonymous' transaction is perhaps much less likely to be identified by tracing a transaction. For example, researching individuals who are mining (or mined) coins in clear net mining pools or who brought and exchanged coins using a 3rd party service makes for a much easier starting point. In fact, simply running an 'anonymous' coins client wallet would most likely flag an individual in a sub-set in terms of the meta data alone.

A truly 'anonymous' coin would need to offer PoW pool mining through Tor (or a similar trusted anonymity network), with a strong focus on decentralization, from the get-go.

Stealthcoin is a good example of a coin that protects its users from traffic analysis using Tor. However, PoW mining is still a much better way to secure a network in terms of user based anonymity and privacy.

Bitcoin actually offered good anonymity when it was first released and users could mine solo in the wallet, without pools.

Creating 'truly anonymous' digital cash is not an easy task.

Privacy, Security, Anonymity and Trust. Pick any 3.

This is what SuperNET is trying to achieve with BBR.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: othe on February 25, 2015, 06:55:06 PM
No its not,
and you can mine every coin with tor or whatever, just host your mining pool at an onion address..goddamn tor is just a simple socks proxy.

PS: There are Bitcoin seednodes hosted at an .onion domains.
PS2: Miners don't even want that - bad latency is bad for mining.
PS3: Mining pools are already acting like a proxy.
PS4: You only see the nodes who broadcast the transactions around but not neccessarily from where they are originating.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Este Nuno on February 25, 2015, 08:25:56 PM
^ There is a debate going on currently whether DRK should move its whole network under tor (or i2p) - apparently that would mean pools as well then. Problem is I guess, that people would need to install tor separately, unless it is possible (does the license allow it? other problems?) to include tor client within the wallet itself so the users don't even have to know it's running under tor.

Monero is working on i2p implementation from what I understand.

Bitcoin Core already includes Tor and has forever so I'd assume there's no licencing issues. The problem is that a lot of people aren't very confident about Tor these days.

Network level anonymity is important though for sure. Whether it's through Telepathy, i2p, or some other proprietary solution. I thought I remembered a while ago reading that DRK was working on their own verison of Tor or something like that with the masternodes. What happened to that?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: rikkejohn on February 26, 2015, 02:50:22 AM
I dislike both coins, but I have to admit that DRK has surprised me. I thought it wold have been out of the game now, given every alt, and BTC, is taking a bashing.

XMR, well I have no reason to see it beyond a small-time operation on Poloniex. I don't think DRK has been shilled anywhere near the extent of XMR. I have a litter of deleted posts from moderated XMR threads.

I have none from DRK thtreads, nor do I notice it being shilled so much.

Someone could do a count over 6 months, if they can be bothered.

In saying that, I see no point to DRK, it is a variation on everything else.

But it has been a success, there is no doubt of that.

Putting XMR against DRK is like putting Digitalcoin against Bitcoin.

The winner is not difficult to spot.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: pandher on February 26, 2015, 06:24:38 AM
The winner is not difficult to spot.

The smart are interested in the core technology while the foolish are awestruck by the ricer looks


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Johnny Mnemonic on February 26, 2015, 10:44:06 AM
I dislike both coins, but I have to admit that DRK has surprised me. I thought it wold have been out of the game now, given every alt, and BTC, is taking a bashing.

XMR, well I have no reason to see it beyond a small-time operation on Poloniex. I don't think DRK has been shilled anywhere near the extent of XMR. I have a litter of deleted posts from moderated XMR threads.

I have none from DRK thtreads, nor do I notice it being shilled so much.

Someone could do a count over 6 months, if they can be bothered.

In saying that, I see no point to DRK, it is a variation on everything else.

But it has been a success, there is no doubt of that.

Putting XMR against DRK is like putting Digitalcoin against Bitcoin.

The winner is not difficult to spot.

Compelling argument. Exactly none of your points addressed the technical merits of either coin.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: fluffypony on February 27, 2015, 11:35:28 AM
Without getting into bloat issues of Monero, or Darkcoin instamine, a PoW coin, if actually able to achieve anonymous transactions, is in a difficult position.  Governments would regulate against it, and PoW mining data centers are large attack vectors to be legislated against or just taken over.  Yea, they would be located in many countries, but governments seem to cooperate a lot on things like drugs, so they might cooperate on issues like this too.  I guess you could say Bitcoin sort of faces this issue as well, but they haven't made any big moves against it yet.

I would say that Bitcoin is even more at risk due to the ongoing centralisation of mining.

Where Monero is in direct contrast is that the PoW algorithm closes the performance gap between CPU, GPU, and ASIC mining, so even if ASIC miners are eventually created they will not be so significantly more efficient than CPU mining so as to make CPU mining pointless. Thus, in practicality, Monero could operate completely and entirely on solo miners with no pools operating.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: David Latapie on February 27, 2015, 10:33:09 PM
Heh, unrelated issue, but on the Monero team, I noticed for David Latapie it says, "David Latapie is a French publisher, transhumanist"

I've never understood this Ray Kurzweil and others cult.
Ad personam (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right#Become_Personal.2C_Insulting.2C_Rude):

Quote from: Shopenhauer, the art of being right
A last trick is to become personal, insulting, rude, as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand, and that you are going to come off worst. It consists in passing from the subject of dispute, as from a lost game, to the disputant himself, and in some way attacking his person. It may be called the argumentum ad personam, to distinguish it from the argumentum ad hominem, which passes from the objective discussion of the subject pure and simple to the statements or admissions which your opponent has made in regard to it. But in becoming personal you leave the subject altogether, and turn your attack to his person, by remarks of an offensive and spiteful character. It is an appeal from the virtues of the intellect to the virtues of the body, or to mere animalism. This is a very popular trick, because every one is able to carry it into effect; and so it is of frequent application. Now the question is, What counter-trick avails for the other party? for if he has recourse to the same rule, there will be blows, or a duel, or an action for slander.

By the way, you also insulted a substantial amount of cryptocurrency enthusiasts (including several deeply respected ones), since I found out that cryptocurrency have an unusually large concentration of transhumanists.

That being said, if you wish to continue on this topic (since you seem to be interested to understand), I replied extensively to your consideration on the off-topic forum: Transhumanism (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=971275).


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Propulsion on February 28, 2015, 03:29:40 AM
Compelling argument. Exactly none of your points addressed the technical merits of either coin.

Here's one that I think a lot of people seem to overlook.

Darkcoin is forked from Bitcoin v0.10.

That means that anything created for Bitcoin can be easily adopted for Darkcoin.
  • Mycellium
  • Trezor
  • Electrum
  • Openbazaar
  • Darkleaks
  • Etc...

Monero doesn't have the luxury of being able to use some of these great projects that have been in development for years.

Having most of the base work already completed is a major advantage for Darkcoin.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stopsigningbitch on February 28, 2015, 04:08:17 AM
Compelling argument. Exactly none of your points addressed the technical merits of either coin.

Here's one that I think a lot of people seem to overlook.

Darkcoin is forked from Bitcoin v0.10.

That means that anything created for Bitcoin can be easily adopted for Darkcoin.
  • Mycellium
  • Trezor
  • Electrum
  • Openbazaar
  • Darkleaks
  • Etc...

Monero doesn't have the luxury of being able to use some of these great projects that have been in development for years.

Having most of the base work already completed is a major advantage for Darkcoin.

Actually, that works the other way around propulsion.  Think of it this way: Bitcoin has had people build that infructaure around it, they built all those things for profit and to be the dominant companies/people in that field(like coinbase is trying to be for regulated exchanges, etc). The reason why bitcoin has all those things built around it is many other things in life are based around, To gain Money/Profit.

If a coin that doesn't possess the same underlying code as Bitcoin reaches heights where it's being used continually for buying/selling, then that infrastructure that was built around Bitcoin would happen to said coin as people compete to be the dominant leaders of whatever infrastructure they build around said coin.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on February 28, 2015, 01:03:11 PM
A better comparison would probably be DRK vs BBR (Boolberry)

Darkcoin provides a reasonable solution for making anonymous transactions. Boolberry has the best CryptoNote implementation to date, ihmo.

 
Let me sum this up for you. 

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin.  It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

Monero cons

Original authors are scam artists so other devs have taken it over (for XMR)
Low market cap
Mostly held up by bitcoin whales who have no experience in altcoins
Not enough money to fund development (devs are using their own money).  Probably will run out at some point and project will die.
Kinda fubar'd emission

Dark cons

Massive premine
Alternated emission curve to jack price up (make early guys rich on shoulders of late guys after the fact).  Use of node required funding to prop price up.
Spaghetti code
Hypeish name that attracts the wrong crowd
Project will die as soon as devs don't have more coins to unload on a market they create by releasing features.  Even if that isn't the case, changing emission curve as dramatically as it was PLUS the massive instamine will kill it longterm.

This I think is a very accurate description of the cons. I think the underlying theme is they are both bullshit and better can be done.

In terms of 'true' anonymity no coin offers this at present.


What about ShadowCash: http://www.slideshare.net/shadowcash/presentation3-43827434

If Shadow truly does what they say, then its the only coin to offer true anonymity with non-interactive zero knowledge proofs.  This along with dual-key stealth addresses, and ring signatures for further obfuscation means its an obvious winner does it not?  The dual key stealth addresses are also very important also for severing the link between transactions.

Monero uses ring signatures for obfuscation and its just another form of mixing, from what I understand.  DRK is also more mixing and coinjoin.  Shadow is the only coin using zero knowledge from what I have seen.  Correct me if I'm wrong.  What do you think of Shadow?  Am I just shilling?  Because to me it honestly seems like the best solution, but I am open to change my mind if someone can offer any insight, thanks.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: illodin on February 28, 2015, 01:12:34 PM
Shadow is the only coin using zero knowledge from what I have seen.

Is there more zero knowledge technology in Shadow than for example in DuckNote?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Propulsion on February 28, 2015, 01:13:38 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong.  What do you think of --------?  Am I just shilling?  Because to me it honestly seems like the best solution, but I am open to change my mind if someone can offer any insight, thanks.

Yeah Pline you're just shilling. Look at the damn title of the thread. The discussion is about two currencies not every single 'anonymous coin' like Nojavo and whatever the ooooh me tooo is.

 


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on February 28, 2015, 01:15:15 PM
Why even compare those two coins when Shadow (sdc) beats them all in privacy, distribution and usability.

+1

Quite right. Did whoever start this thread deliberately ignore the dark horse in this race.

Like DRK, Shadow is A BTC fork
Like XMR, Shadow has cryptonote-like ZK transactions, but better*

So Shadow has a cutting-edge NIZKP (non-interactive zero-knowledge proof) implementation, the first of its kind on a BTC blockchain, and is ready for B2B use today.

It is super fast. No waiting for DarkSend. No Masternodes.
And a working GUI wallet.

And the wallet has a built-in P2P encrypted chat system allowing merchant/customer to deal securely.


*pending the Zeuner peer review both XMR and DRK know is coming.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: illodin on February 28, 2015, 01:20:37 PM
Why even compare those two coins when Shadow (sdc) beats them all in privacy, distribution and usability.

+1

Quite right. Did whoever start this thread deliberately ignore the dark horse in this race.

Like DRK, Shadow is A BTC fork
Like XMR, Shadow has cryptonote-like ZK transactions, but better*

So Shadow has a cutting-edge NIZKP (non-interactive zero-knowledge proof) implementation, the first of its kind on a BTC blockchain, and is ready for B2B use today.

It is super fast. No waiting for DarkSend. No Masternodes.
And a working GUI wallet.

And the wallet has a built-in P2P encrypted chat system allowing merchant/customer to deal securely.


*pending the Zeuner peer review both XMR and DRK know is coming.

Shadow is so yesterday, Navajoe coin is clearly the best with its State of Art Double Encrypted Anonymous Technology Blockchain.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on February 28, 2015, 01:22:44 PM
Shadow is the only coin using zero knowledge from what I have seen.

Is there more zero knowledge technology in Shadow than for example in DuckNote?

Not sure, I tried looking into ducknote/darknote before but didn't gleam too much info about it. I think it is just a cryptonote clone.  Where Shadow is a unique system of itself.  Does ducknote really use zero knowledge? How do they implement it?

Correct me if I'm wrong.  What do you think of --------?  Am I just shilling?  Because to me it honestly seems like the best solution, but I am open to change my mind if someone can offer any insight, thanks.

Yeah Pline you're just shilling. Look at the damn title of the thread. The discussion is about two currencies not every single 'anonymous coin' like Nojavo and whatever the ooooh me tooo is.

 

Ohhh I don't think its shilling though.  Its an honest question, because seems on the surface that Shadow blows these other coins away with their zero knowledge tech.  Maybe you see it as a threat to your favored coin?  I am looking for the best anon solution, not just to make profit off my holdings.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on February 28, 2015, 01:26:07 PM
Shadow is the only coin using zero knowledge from what I have seen.

Is there more zero knowledge technology in Shadow than for example in DuckNote?

LOL

I'll go out on a limb here and say YES

Shadow is so yesterday, Navajoe coin is clearly the best with its State of Art Double Encrypted Anonymous Technology Blockchain.


Laugh it up while u still can…

p.s. hey Pline \o/


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: illodin on February 28, 2015, 01:55:11 PM
Laugh it up while u still can…

I have larger percentage of the float of SDC than I have DRK, so please pump it up already so I can get second round of profit from it.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on February 28, 2015, 02:09:25 PM
Laugh it up while u still can…

I have larger percentage of the float of SDC than I have DRK, so please pump it up already so I can get second round of profit from it.


1) DUDE! I'm so happy to hear you have SDC! In our encounters I have not missed your obvious shrewdness and stuborness - two great qualities for a crypto-player

2) This is not difficult given the outrageous price difference between Shadow (now ~$0.04) compared to DRk and XMR (esp given SDC has much lower inflation than either of you!)

3) How many XMR do u own :) hehe

respect

p.s. doin' my best for you bro!




Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: illodin on February 28, 2015, 02:15:03 PM
3) How many XMR do u own :) hehe

If rpietila's visions about the price become true I will be billionaire.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: 00Smurf on February 28, 2015, 02:30:03 PM
3) How many XMR do u own :) hehe

If rpietila's visions about the price become true I will be billionaire.

I own all 3 but the majority is in SDC shadowcash. Tech wise I think SDC is the leader.

But I have no doubt the other two will be able to have good money made on them. Any good investor is diversified.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on February 28, 2015, 02:47:35 PM
3) How many XMR do u own :) hehe

If rpietila's visions about the price become true I will be billionaire.

I own all 3 but the majority is in SDC shadowcash. Tech wise I think SDC is the leader.

But I have no doubt the other two will be able to have good money made on them. Any good investor is diversified.

Much to my chagrin you prove my point. shrewd.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on February 28, 2015, 03:26:40 PM
In saying that, I see no point to DRK, it is a variation on everything else.

Let's split "the point" to DRK into 2 categories:

 - monetary
 - technological

Monetarily, there are generally 6 accepted "properties": portability, durability, divisability, scarecity, un-consumability and fungibility.

Bitcoin exhibits all of these except 1: fungibility. So there's the first "point" to DRK - it adds fungibility where there is a problem in bitcoin.

Technologically, the "point" to DRK is that it's technology is designed to support the fungibility requirement as optimally as possible. For example the coins are pre-mixed while in the wallet. This is a very different approach from attempting to "hide" individual transactions right at the point of use because it places the emphasis on supporting a monetary property rather than a technological one.

As far as "the point" to DRK relative to other anonymous coins, there are probably several but the one I would pick out is that the others are almost exclusively obsessed with pursuing "anon-technology". This is admirable but it isn't where the value or marketcap comes from. Most of it comes from a monetary premium gained from adoption as a monetary medium whether that be a as store of value or as a token of goods exchange. So pursuing monetary properties over technological ones will always produce more effective returns in terms of value.

If you look at the history of crypto-currencies you can see that first mover advantage combined with a trusted development plan thats seen to be delivering is an almost guarantee of market supremacy. Even if others come along which improve on your tech, they don't do anything to your marketcap unless you make some kind of catastrophic mistake. This has been true for so many cases - bitcoin, litecoin, NXT, Bitshares, Peercoin etc. They've all had both clones and originals in the same market sector, none of which really challenged their market position.

I'd probably even include Monero in that category because it was one of the early cryptonote coins that has sustained its position in the top 20 and it has a respectable 2M+ cap. So it's not a sh*tcoin. It's also a good hedge for DRK because it uses a completely different algo, however the fact that Darkcoin is compatible with Bitcoin's API is a huge commercial advantage for it which will help to consolidate its position IMO.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stopsigningbitch on February 28, 2015, 07:16:27 PM
Lmao, even the shitcoin Darkcoin cant be compared to the even shittier shitcoin Shadowcash

Shadowcash's implementation of "ring sigs" is mediocre at best. In simple terms, it's kind of like a rusty, broken down version of cryptonote's ring signatures.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on February 28, 2015, 11:39:53 PM
Lmao, even the shitcoin Darkcoin cant be compared to the even shittier shitcoin Shadowcash

Shadowcash's implementation of "ring sigs" is mediocre at best. In simple terms, it's kind of like a rusty, broken down version of cryptonote's ring signatures.

And u are? Pls provide some evidence for your claims and a member of the Shadow team will forward to Zeuner for review.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: fluffypony on March 01, 2015, 11:23:45 AM
Lmao, even the shitcoin Darkcoin cant be compared to the even shittier shitcoin Shadowcash

Shadowcash's implementation of "ring sigs" is mediocre at best. In simple terms, it's kind of like a rusty, broken down version of cryptonote's ring signatures.

And u are? Pls provide some evidence for your claims and a member of the Shadow team will forward to Zeuner for review.

I can't speak for the person you're replying to, but I see this card being played a lot recently, and it gives me pause. Who is Isidor Zeuner, and what qualifies him to evaluate the cryptographic soundness of the proposed scheme as well as the merits and security of the code? I Google'd around to try figure it out, but to no avail.

According to his LinkedIn profile (https://de.linkedin.com/pub/isidor-zeuner/76/b39/604) he is an "IT Consultant" whose "mission is to provide quality software solutions to demanding small and medium sized businesses."

His work history details that he has been involved in projects such as "custom functionality for embedded linux devices", "crawling, indexing and retrieval of content", and "web development".

I can find no mention of him on any publication available on arXiv (http://arxiv.org), so given this body of evidence it's safe to say that he is not a recognised cryptographer (or a cryptographer at all).

I'm also not sure if the ShadowCoin team are paying him, but the top review on hie Freelancer profile (https://www.freelancer.com/u/zeuner.html) is quite disturbing.

Don't get me wrong, in today's day and age nearly everyone has had something "controversial" splashed across the Internet, and invariably there are multiple sides to the story etc. etc., but nevertheless I think the term "renowned cryptographer" or whatever should not be bandied about without clarification thereof.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on March 01, 2015, 12:26:43 PM

Fungibility:

ring sigs = keep the gold coins and try to hide the exchange
drk = melt the gold coins and show the exchange

No comparison.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: rustynailer on March 01, 2015, 12:38:56 PM
Lmao, even the shitcoin Darkcoin cant be compared to the even shittier shitcoin Shadowcash

Shadowcash's implementation of "ring sigs" is mediocre at best. In simple terms, it's kind of like a rusty, broken down version of cryptonote's ring signatures.

And u are? Pls provide some evidence for your claims and a member of the Shadow team will forward to Zeuner for review.

I can't speak for the person you're replying to, but I see this card being played a lot recently, and it gives me pause. Who is Isidor Zeuner, and what qualifies him to evaluate the cryptographic soundness of the proposed scheme as well as the merits and security of the code? I Google'd around to try figure it out, but to no avail.

According to his LinkedIn profile (https://de.linkedin.com/pub/isidor-zeuner/76/b39/604) he is an "IT Consultant" whose "mission is to provide quality software solutions to demanding small and medium sized businesses."

His work history details that he has been involved in projects such as "custom functionality for embedded linux devices", "crawling, indexing and retrieval of content", and "web development".

I can find no mention of him on any publication available on arXiv (http://arxiv.org), so given this body of evidence it's safe to say that he is not a recognised cryptographer (or a cryptographer at all).

I'm also not sure if the ShadowCoin team are paying him, but the top review on hie Freelancer profile (https://www.freelancer.com/u/zeuner.html) is quite disturbing.

Don't get me wrong, in today's day and age nearly everyone has had something "controversial" splashed across the Internet, and invariably there are multiple sides to the story etc. etc., but nevertheless I think the term "renowned cryptographer" or whatever should not be bandied about without clarification thereof.

Here is a link to a recent article he has wrote. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Kienbui on March 01, 2015, 02:20:24 PM
I am disappointed when trying Monero.

What can I use Monero without trading on the exchange?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 01, 2015, 02:51:40 PM
Lmao, even the shitcoin Darkcoin cant be compared to the even shittier shitcoin Shadowcash

Shadowcash's implementation of "ring sigs" is mediocre at best. In simple terms, it's kind of like a rusty, broken down version of cryptonote's ring signatures.

Ring sigs are only one part of the Shadow system.  They serve as an added layer of obfuscation and are just one piece of the puzzle.  The other pieces of the puzzle are dual-key stealth addresses, and non-interactive zero knowledge proofs. If you don't know what those are you should look into them, its cutting edge tech. Its a unique system, and its better than cryptonote imho.  Please study this slide show and captions for a complete understanding of how the Shadow System works: http://www.slideshare.net/shadowcash/presentation3-43827434

Also here is a good article to better understand how the system works: http://www.deepdotweb.com/2015/01/28/shadowcash-zero-knowledge-anonymity/


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 01, 2015, 02:56:14 PM
Lmao, even the shitcoin Darkcoin cant be compared to the even shittier shitcoin Shadowcash

Shadowcash's implementation of "ring sigs" is mediocre at best. In simple terms, it's kind of like a rusty, broken down version of cryptonote's ring signatures.

And u are? Pls provide some evidence for your claims and a member of the Shadow team will forward to Zeuner for review.

I can't speak for the person you're replying to, but I see this card being played a lot recently, and it gives me pause. Who is Isidor Zeuner, and what qualifies him to evaluate the cryptographic soundness of the proposed scheme as well as the merits and security of the code? I Google'd around to try figure it out, but to no avail.

According to his LinkedIn profile (https://de.linkedin.com/pub/isidor-zeuner/76/b39/604) he is an "IT Consultant" whose "mission is to provide quality software solutions to demanding small and medium sized businesses."

His work history details that he has been involved in projects such as "custom functionality for embedded linux devices", "crawling, indexing and retrieval of content", and "web development".

I can find no mention of him on any publication available on arXiv (http://arxiv.org), so given this body of evidence it's safe to say that he is not a recognised cryptographer (or a cryptographer at all).

I'm also not sure if the ShadowCoin team are paying him, but the top review on hie Freelancer profile (https://www.freelancer.com/u/zeuner.html) is quite disturbing.

Don't get me wrong, in today's day and age nearly everyone has had something "controversial" splashed across the Internet, and invariably there are multiple sides to the story etc. etc., but nevertheless I think the term "renowned cryptographer" or whatever should not be bandied about without clarification thereof.

I saw that negative review when looking into Isidor also.  It made me think twice for a bit too, but I don't think its fair to judge on one person's comments.  

When looking further into him, I read his posts on the bitcoin developer mailing list.  I saw he was active there and many times commenting on anonymity.  This made me feel much better about him doing the review.  Here is the link, you can search his posts on the bitcoin dev mailing list if you like: https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/

Here are a couple examples of his posts having to do with anonymity and Tor:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg06525.html

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg03712.html



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: neurotypical on March 01, 2015, 03:39:58 PM
Without getting into bloat issues of Monero, or Darkcoin instamine, a PoW coin, if actually able to achieve anonymous transactions, is in a difficult position.  Governments would regulate against it, and PoW mining data centers are large attack vectors to be legislated against or just taken over.  Yea, they would be located in many countries, but governments seem to cooperate a lot on things like drugs, so they might cooperate on issues like this too.  I guess you could say Bitcoin sort of faces this issue as well, but they haven't made any big moves against it yet.

On the other hand, and without getting into why PoS is making the big holders even bigger, PoS coins are not secure since Governments can achieve to hold 51% of coins by using some gag orders on the exchanges without anyone ever realizing.

I wouldn't touch DRK with a stick. Nodes can be attacked easily by an adversary with the required resources, the initial instamine thing and the name... on the other hand Monero has ring signatures which I trust a lot more.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: fluffypony on March 01, 2015, 04:25:01 PM
Here is a link to a recent article he has wrote. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card)

Unfortunately that has zero cryptography in it, and reads more as a fluff piece, so not really relevant.

I saw that negative review when looking into Isidor also.  It made me think twice for a bit too, but I don't think its fair to judge on one person's comments.  

When looking further into him, I read his posts on the bitcoin developer mailing list.  I saw he was active there and many times commenting on anonymity.  This made me feel much better about him doing the review.  Here is the link, you can search his posts on the bitcoin dev mailing list if you like: https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/

Here are a couple examples of his posts having to do with anonymity and Tor:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg06525.html

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg03712.html

I've read his occasional emails to the dev list over the course of 2014 as they came in, I only made the connection after I put my post up. Sending emails to the Bitcoin dev list certainly doesn't make one a cryptographer unless those emails are cryptographic in nature, and Zeuner's have not been. Let me provide a contrast by showing a conversation between two actual cryptographers, Andrew Poelstra (https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew/) and Adam Back (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Back). Just in case anyone's credentials are in question, Adam is the creator of hashcash (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash), which is the proof-of-work system (not algorithm, but the actual system) that Bitcoin and virtually every other cryptocurrency uses.

http://i.imgur.com/3mXXMJi.png?1


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 01, 2015, 05:27:54 PM
Here is a link to a recent article he has wrote. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card)

Unfortunately that has zero cryptography in it, and reads more as a fluff piece, so not really relevant.

I saw that negative review when looking into Isidor also.  It made me think twice for a bit too, but I don't think its fair to judge on one person's comments.  

When looking further into him, I read his posts on the bitcoin developer mailing list.  I saw he was active there and many times commenting on anonymity.  This made me feel much better about him doing the review.  Here is the link, you can search his posts on the bitcoin dev mailing list if you like: https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/

Here are a couple examples of his posts having to do with anonymity and Tor:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg06525.html

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg03712.html

I've read his occasional emails to the dev list over the course of 2014 as they came in, I only made the connection after I put my post up. Sending emails to the Bitcoin dev list certainly doesn't make one a cryptographer unless those emails are cryptographic in nature, and Zeuner's have not been. Let me provide a contrast by showing a conversation between two actual cryptographers, Andrew Poelstra (https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew/) and Adam Back (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Back). Just in case anyone's credentials are in question, Adam is the creator of hashcash (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash), which is the proof-of-work system (not algorithm, but the actual system) that Bitcoin and virtually every other cryptocurrency uses.

http://i.imgur.com/3mXXMJi.png?1


Yes. I know who Adam Back is.
No I do not know who Satoshi is.
No I do not know who fluffypony is.

Zeuner? Some people know who Zeuner is…

By all means fluffypony you r entitled to undermine his credibility.
U r equally entitled to ignore his review. Altho it behooves u to do the opposite.

G'day (enjoy the BBQ)

n.b playing with fire now: ur credibility is established how? Can u link me to ur CV/linkedin?

thx

p.s. i like how elusive Isidor is. Hallmark of a crypto-dude imo. He lives in Leipzig Area btw ;)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: HCLivess on March 01, 2015, 06:08:35 PM
Let me sum this up for you.  

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin.  It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

Monero cons

Original authors are scam artists so other devs have taken it over (for XMR)
Low market cap
Mostly held up by bitcoin whales who have no experience in altcoins
Not enough money to fund development (devs are using their own money).  Probably will run out at some point and project will die.
Kinda fubar'd emission

Dark cons

Massive premine
Alternated emission curve to jack price up (make early guys rich on shoulders of late guys after the fact).  Use of node required funding to prop price up.
Spaghetti code
Hypeish name that attracts the wrong crowd
Project will die as soon as devs don't have more coins to unload on a market they create by releasing features.  Even if that isn't the case, changing emission curve as dramatically as it was PLUS the massive instamine will kill it longterm.

Thank you, I have bookmarked this


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 01, 2015, 06:58:59 PM
Let me sum this up for you.  

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin.  It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

… snipped

Thank you, I have bookmarked this

And the technology behind Shadow could well obliterate Monero (since it has all the plusses of XMR on a BTC blockchain with a few neat twists ;) )

p.s.@UnicornFarts

Criticizing DRK for its name might not be wise.
As I understand it Monero is the Esperanto for 'money"

Esperanto is … a joke
and more accurately a dead (still-born) language


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stopsigningbitch on March 01, 2015, 07:12:58 PM
Let me sum this up for you.  

The technology behind cryptonote obliterates darkcoin.  It's mathematically provable, it doesn't have random nodes that mostly exist in the amazon cloud to mix shit.

… snipped

Thank you, I have bookmarked this

And the technology behind Shadow could well obliterate Monero (since it has all the plusses of XMR on a BTC blockchain with a few neat twists ;) )

p.s.@UnicornFarts

Criticizing DRK for its name might not be wise.
As I understand it Monero is the Esperanto for 'money"

Esperanto is … a joke
and more accurately a dead (still-born) language

Does it say DRK vs XMR vs SDC? No, Shadowcash is utter shit. No one cares about Shadowcash and its crackpot scam signatures. And honestly, any wannabe currency with the English word coin in it's name(Dark"coin"), is going to go nowhere marketing wise.

"Esperanto is a language introduced in 1887 by Dr. L.L. Zamenhof after years of development. He proposed Esperanto as a second language that would allow people who speak different native languages to communicate, yet at the same time retain their own languages and cultural identities."= Global, unifying language

I don't really care, but I admit that choosing the Esperanto word for coin, monero, as a name was a genius marketing move.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: fluffypony on March 01, 2015, 07:27:57 PM
Yes. I know who Adam Back is.
No I do not know who Satoshi is.
No I do not know who fluffypony is.

Zeuner? Some people know who Zeuner is…

By all means fluffypony you r entitled to undermine his credibility.
U r equally entitled to ignore his review. Altho it behooves u to do the opposite.

G'day (enjoy the BBQ)

n.b playing with fire now: ur credibility is established how? Can u link me to ur CV/linkedin?

thx

p.s. i like how elusive Isidor is. Hallmark of a crypto-dude imo. He lives in Leipzig Area btw ;)

I'm not trying to undermine his credibility, I'm trying to establish it. My credibility is irrelevant, mentioning it is clearly argumentum ad hominem.

As to the rest of your rambling word-salad, I have neither the patience nor the time to try and extract a coherent thought out of it to formulate a reply.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 01, 2015, 09:39:47 PM
Ring sigs are only one part of the Shadow system.  They serve as an added layer of obfuscation and are just one piece of the puzzle.  The other pieces of the puzzle are dual-key stealth addresses, and non-interactive zero knowledge proofs. If you don't know what those are you should look into them, its cutting edge tech. Its a unique system, and its better than cryptonote imho.

Then you are quite confused because cryptonote includes (cryptonote paper sections):

a) ring sigs (4.4)

b) dual-key stealth addresses (4.3)

c) nizkp (4.4, under 2nd heading "SIG")

Shadow's implementation is a warmed-over reimplementation using different elliptic curve paramters. That's analogous to (and about as substantive as) using hexadecimal instead of octal for arithmetic.

I don't know about this Zeuner guy. He might be an expert, but I've seen no evidence of it.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 01, 2015, 09:54:18 PM
Ring sigs are only one part of the Shadow system.  They serve as an added layer of obfuscation and are just one piece of the puzzle.  The other pieces of the puzzle are dual-key stealth addresses, and non-interactive zero knowledge proofs. If you don't know what those are you should look into them, its cutting edge tech. Its a unique system, and its better than cryptonote imho.

Then you are quite confused because cryptonote includes (cryptonote paper sections):

a) ring sigs (4.4)

b) dual-key stealth addresses (4.3)

c) nizkp (4.4, under 2nd heading "SIG")

Shadow's implementation is a warmed-over reimplementation using different elliptic curve paramters. That's analogous to (and about as substantive as) using hexadecimal instead of octal for arithmetic.

I don't know about this Zeuner guy. He might be an expert, but I've seen no evidence of it.


Thanks smooth, I didn't realize that.  You seem to be right from what I saw in the cryptonote whitepaper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

So does Monero also use these dual-key stealth addresses? Also is Monero completely a trustless setup?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 01, 2015, 09:59:48 PM
Thanks smooth, I didn't realize that.  You seem to be right from what I saw in the cryptonote whitepaper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

So does Monero also use these dual-key stealth addresses? Also is Monero completely a trustless setup?

Yes and yes.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: coinpr0n on March 01, 2015, 10:18:06 PM
XMR wins for naming (come on: ringsignatures and cryptonight) but I know DRK better. Anyway why the competition?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 01, 2015, 10:20:46 PM
Thanks smooth, I didn't realize that.  You seem to be right from what I saw in the cryptonote whitepaper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

So does Monero also use these dual-key stealth addresses? Also is Monero completely a trustless setup?

Yes and yes.


Interesting, thanks for the insight.  So it seems the main differences between the two, is that Shadow is on a bitcoin blockchain, which gives it some advantages.  For example it can plug in better with existing infrastructure, and have benefits of both transparent chain and anonymous chain. Also since only about 1% of transactions are used for anonymity, it will have less blockchain bloat than Monero where 100% of the transactions are done using ring sigs. Also Shadow's system is slightly different because the destruction of SDC, and then the minting of new SDC, which is not happening with cryptonote.  I believe the SDCDev had highlighted this fact before when comparing the two systems.  I wonder if this destruction and reminting gives it any privacy advantages.  I am really interested to see the review and how these systems compare to each other.




Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 01, 2015, 10:29:17 PM
What mythical Bitcoin infrastructure are you guys referring to? Bitpay et al will never allow other coin that is not BTC on their end, Monero not having the same code as BTC is a market multiplier motherload as we'll have to work hard to create or our stuff, stuff that most of the BTC eco-system have proven to not like to share with other coins (see LTC rejected by coinbase, etc).

Well for example https://shapeshift.io/ just added ShadowCash recently.  They have not added Monero probably because it doesn't plug in easy with their system.  Also Cryptsy has not added Monero probably for the same reason.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 01, 2015, 11:57:24 PM
Interesting, thanks for the insight.  So it seems the main differences between the two, is that Shadow is on a bitcoin blockchain, which gives it some advantages.  For example it can plug in better with existing infrastructure, and have benefits of both transparent chain and anonymous chain. Also since only about 1% of transactions are used for anonymity, it will have less blockchain bloat than Monero where 100% of the transactions are done using ring sigs.

If only 1% of transactions are used for anonymity you will have massive timing anonymity leaks and such. If you take transparent coins, convert to anon, pay someone, and he converts back (both of which are logical if most commerce is taking place non-anonymously) then the whole thing is quite obviously traceable.

I don't really see much advantage to a coin that is 99% transparent, and definitely see disadvantages. Just use Bitcoin, or if you really want PoS, use whatever is the leading PoS coin, probably BitShares I guess. BitShares has stealth addresses by the way.

Quote
I wonder if this destruction and reminting gives it any privacy advantages.

It does not. The creation and destruction process is entirely transparent.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 02, 2015, 12:08:09 AM
OK. Deja VU.

smooth and fluffypony in da house!
admittedly u guys know shit, but u dont know the shadow shit

havent yet read the back/forth with Pline (an awesome Shadow community member) but i have a feeling how it goes…

Irregardless I will reiterate what XMR dudes hace been told for some time now…

SHADOW is NOT CRYPTONOTE. PHEW!

I really cant wait 4 this review…

gentlemen… as u were o/

n.b. im no cryptographer but the use of these ZK shadow tokens on a BTC blcokchain smacks of genius. THX.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 02, 2015, 12:15:32 AM
admittedly u guys know shit, but u dont know the shadow shit

I'm afraid I do, having read the shadow whitepaper, and having some level of understanding of the technology which is more than I can say for a bunch of people accounts running around talking about "shadow Zero Knowledge, woo hoo" as if that is something new. It isn't, it comes straight out of cryptonote.

BTW, I though this thread was about XMR vs. DRK. Why are you SDC pumpers showing up and spamming it?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 02, 2015, 12:37:42 AM
Interesting, thanks for the insight.  So it seems the main differences between the two, is that Shadow is on a bitcoin blockchain, which gives it some advantages.  For example it can plug in better with existing infrastructure, and have benefits of both transparent chain and anonymous chain. Also since only about 1% of transactions are used for anonymity, it will have less blockchain bloat than Monero where 100% of the transactions are done using ring sigs.

If only 1% of transactions are used for anonymity you will have massive timing anonymity leaks and such. If you take transparent coins, convert to anon, pay someone, and he converts back (both of which are logical if most commerce is taking place non-anonymously) then the whole thing is quite obviously traceable.

I don't really see much advantage to a coin that is 99% transparent, and definitely see disadvantages. Just use Bitcoin, or if you really want PoS, use whatever is the leading PoS coin, probably BitShares I guess. BitShares has stealth addresses by the way.

Quote
I wonder if this destruction and reminting gives it any privacy advantages.

It does not. The creation and destruction process is entirely transparent.

Smooth is right Shadow is very similar to cryptonote.  I was reading cryptonote whitepaper, and its some genius stuff going on in there.  We should be honest about what the system is and its pros and cons.  I like Monero, seems like a cool coin, much better than DRK. I do think Shadow does have some advantages being on a bitcoin blockchain.  Also I believe Shadow differs in the anonymity system in one major way from what I can tell, and that is the destruction and minting of SDC.  To me it seems like this extra part of the system does something extra to sever the link between identities, but I could be wrong.  Hopefully the review will help clarify that.  Hope our communities can all be friends, as we all are striving for the same goal of privacy and anonymity.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 02, 2015, 12:42:16 AM
Interesting, thanks for the insight.  So it seems the main differences between the two, is that Shadow is on a bitcoin blockchain, which gives it some advantages.  For example it can plug in better with existing infrastructure, and have benefits of both transparent chain and anonymous chain. Also since only about 1% of transactions are used for anonymity, it will have less blockchain bloat than Monero where 100% of the transactions are done using ring sigs.

If only 1% of transactions are used for anonymity you will have massive timing anonymity leaks and such. If you take transparent coins, convert to anon, pay someone, and he converts back (both of which are logical if most commerce is taking place non-anonymously) then the whole thing is quite obviously traceable.

I don't really see much advantage to a coin that is 99% transparent, and definitely see disadvantages. Just use Bitcoin, or if you really want PoS, use whatever is the leading PoS coin, probably BitShares I guess. BitShares has stealth addresses by the way.

Quote
I wonder if this destruction and reminting gives it any privacy advantages.

It does not. The creation and destruction process is entirely transparent.

Smooth is right Shadow is very similar to cryptonote.  I was reading cryptonote whitepaper, and its some genius stuff going on in there.  We should be honest about what the system is and its pros and cons.  I like Monero, seems like a cool coin, much better than DRK. I do think Shadow does have some advantages being on a bitcoin blockchain.  Also I believe Shadow differs in the anonymity system in one major way from what I can tell, and that is the destruction and minting of SDC.  To me it seems like this extra part of the system does something extra to sever the link between identities, but I could be wrong.  Hopefully the review will help clarify that.  Hope our communities can all be friends, as we all are striving for the same goal of privacy and anonymity.

Well i agree with you that the Bitcoin codebase and APIs, etc. are an advantage in terms of integration, etc. I don't agree that the minting/destruction add value to anonymity, and in fact I think the opposite as I explained above. But overall yes the more popular APIs and such are valuable.

I don't think the communities are or need to be unfriendly but there is some confusion that has been spread about the nature of the Shadow solution that has led to some frustration on both sides. We certainly share the goal of greater privacy.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 02, 2015, 12:43:22 AM
admittedly u guys know shit, but u dont know the shadow shit

I'm afraid I do, having read the shadow whitepaper, and having some level of understanding of the technology which is more than I can say for a bunch of people accounts running around talking about "shadow Zero Knowledge, woo hoo" as if that is something new. It isn't, it comes straight out of cryptonote.

BTW, I though this thread was about XMR vs. DRK. Why are you SDC pumpers showing up and spamming it?

Interesting. Isidor was unsatisfied by the WP and has been asking Ryno and Technovert a whole bunch of follow-up questions to fill in the gaps… Perhaps you are brighter than Isidor or you simply filled them in for yourself?

The achievement of implementing a cryptonote-like (BUT NOT CN) token on a BTC blockchain must be applauded, yes?

BTW Its a public forum, just saying (literally) … (weird)



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 02, 2015, 12:46:20 AM
Interesting. Isidor was unsatisfied by the WP and has been asking Ryno and Technovert a whole bunch of follow-up questions to fill in the gaps… Perhaps you are brighter than Isidor or you simply filled them in for yourself?

Good for him. If I were paid to do a review I would be more thorough. But as I am not, I read it and understood it to my satisfaction.

Quote
The achievement of implementing a cryptonote-like (BUT NOT CN) token on a BTC blockchain must be applauded, yes?

We disagree whether it is merely cryptonote-like. I would say it is essentially identical in function to cryptonote with only token (no pun intended) differences.

Yes I agree that the Bitcoin codebase/APIs add value, as I said in my previous post.

Quote
BTW Its a public forum, just saying (literally) … (weird)

Yes but different topics within the forum exist for a reason as I understand it.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 02, 2015, 01:00:52 AM
Good for him. If I were paid to do a review I would be more thorough. But as I am not, I read it and understood it to my satisfaction.

This I can quite believe :|


I am disinclined to give u a tecchy question since you'll have a clever answer I am unqualified to handle.
BUT
Since rules r made 4 breaking lets rock this smooth…

When I have converted SDC to Shadow tokens (SDT) or sent SDT 2 SDT or converted Shadow to SDC…

I have been able to do so using up to 60 ring sigs in an almost instantaneous tx.

I have played with XMR and had a wallet on mymonero.  
There was an option of a "3 mix" or something iirc. Does this equate to 3 ring sigs?

(Lamentably exchanges inc Polo only do a 0 mix? which I assume means no-anonymity?)

Run with the ball smooth ;)



Quote
Quote
BTW Its a public forum, just saying (literally) … (weird)
Yes but different topics within the forum exist for a reason as I understand it.

With respect let us not pull on this thread…


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 02, 2015, 01:03:41 AM
I have played with XMR and had a wallet on mymonero. 
There was an option of a "3 mix" or something iirc. Does this equate to 3 ring sigs?

Yes, mymonero has a restricted range of mix factors for ease of use as the UI is intended largely for less-technical users. I expect as it matures it will have an "advanced" mode or some kind.

Using the native wallet you can use any factor you want, even >100.

Quote
(Lamentably exchanges inc Polo only do a 0 mix? which I assume means no-anonymity?)

I'm told Polo is using mix 3 now? I haven't confirmed that myself though. BTW mix=0 isn't "no-anonymity" though, as stealth-addresses are always used. I would call it weak anonymity for sure.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 02, 2015, 01:12:14 AM
I have played with XMR and had a wallet on mymonero. 
There was an option of a "3 mix" or something iirc. Does this equate to 3 ring sigs?

Yes, mymonero has a restricted range of mix factors for ease of use as the UI is intended largely for less-technical users. I expect as it matures it will have an "advanced" mode or some kind.

Using the native wallet you can use any factor you want, even >100.

Quote
(Lamentably exchanges inc Polo only do a 0 mix? which I assume means no-anonymity?)

I'm told Polo is using mix 3 now? I haven't confirmed that myself though. BTW mix=0 isn't "no-anonymity" though, as stealth-addresses are always used. I would call it weak anonymity for sure.


How many XMR users have used 60 ring sigs? Or over 24?
These numbers are common in Shadow

Im assuming 24 or 60 is better than 3 or 6…

And it is devilishly fast to boot. Have u tried the wallet?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 02, 2015, 01:14:18 AM
I have played with XMR and had a wallet on mymonero. 
There was an option of a "3 mix" or something iirc. Does this equate to 3 ring sigs?

Yes, mymonero has a restricted range of mix factors for ease of use as the UI is intended largely for less-technical users. I expect as it matures it will have an "advanced" mode or some kind.

Using the native wallet you can use any factor you want, even >100.

Quote
(Lamentably exchanges inc Polo only do a 0 mix? which I assume means no-anonymity?)

I'm told Polo is using mix 3 now? I haven't confirmed that myself though. BTW mix=0 isn't "no-anonymity" though, as stealth-addresses are always used. I would call it weak anonymity for sure.

With mymonero do I have to trust others to hold my private keys?  Is there an easy to use wallet for beginners where I can control my own private keys?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 02, 2015, 01:18:25 AM
I have played with XMR and had a wallet on mymonero.  
There was an option of a "3 mix" or something iirc. Does this equate to 3 ring sigs?

Yes, mymonero has a restricted range of mix factors for ease of use as the UI is intended largely for less-technical users. I expect as it matures it will have an "advanced" mode or some kind.

Using the native wallet you can use any factor you want, even >100.

Quote
(Lamentably exchanges inc Polo only do a 0 mix? which I assume means no-anonymity?)

I'm told Polo is using mix 3 now? I haven't confirmed that myself though. BTW mix=0 isn't "no-anonymity" though, as stealth-addresses are always used. I would call it weak anonymity for sure.

With mymonero do I have to trust others to hold my private keys?  Is there an easy to use wallet for beginners where I can control my own private keys?

mymonero does not have your spend key, it does have your view key. So you are trusting it with your privacy but not your coins.

There are some easy to use wallets that are not hosted at all. I recommend lightWallet torrent since downloading the full blockchain another way is somewhat painful.

https://xmrmonero.com/news/choose-your-wallet

If you want non-Windows you are somewhat limited to the command line (or mymonero) at this point.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 02, 2015, 01:22:43 AM
How many XMR users have used 60 ring sigs? Or over 24?

I don't know the answer to that.

Quote
Im assuming 24 or 60 is better than 3 or 6…

In some ways, but there are also overall privacy effects viewing question of blockchain analysis wholistically. If everyone is using 3-6 and coins are constantly being mixed and remixed you are in very good shape because the entirety of the blockchain is essentially opaque. If you are using 60 and everyone else is using zero, not so much.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 02, 2015, 01:32:11 AM
How many XMR users have used 60 ring sigs? Or over 24?

I don't know the answer to that.

Quote
Im assuming 24 or 60 is better than 3 or 6…

In some ways, but there are also overall privacy effects viewing question of blockchain analysis wholistically. If everyone is using 3-6 and coins are constantly being mixed and remixed you are in very good shape because the entirely blockchain is essentially opaque. If you are using 60 and everyone else is using zero, not so much.



Could u hazard a guess how many XMR users have sent with over 24 ring sigs?


FYI

The default amount of Ring Sigs in the wallet is set to 16
There is also a button labelled "Suggest Ring Size" which I press before sending.
In my experience this has almost always lifted the default of 16 to 24 and up to 60.

Nobody is using 0. That's 4 sure.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stopsigningbitch on March 02, 2015, 01:33:20 AM
child_harold has also been on a trolling spree in the Darkcoin thread for days on end. Just some insight.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 02, 2015, 01:41:47 AM
child_harold has also been on a trolling spree in the Darkcoin thread for days on end. Just some insight.

No no. Not trolling. More like asking questions

For example this exchange which boils down to why should a masternode "cost" 1000DRK?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg10624038#msg10624038


LETS ASSUME A WORST CASE SCENARIO

50% of MN's are run by "bad actors" or have backdoors (thru VSP provider consent)

Question:Why did TOR get compromised??
Answer: NSA style traffic analysis

Just like TOR ur crypto (such as it is i.e. antiquated) is prob sound. But how do you combat NSA style traffic analysis for MN's?

Ignore me if you want…
but this is another important question complements of yous truly.

Answers on a postcard  8)

I'll bite. Assuming there were 50% rogue nodes, each round would be an independent event, in this case 50/50 that a compromised node is selected processing the transaction. To be able to prove with reasonable doubt, you would need to have your rogue nodes selected every round, or 50%^# of rounds for probability. At 4 rounds, you're looking at a 6.25% chance of having your rogue nodes selected every round, at 8 rounds, 0.39%, at 16 rounds, .0015%. That's just as the system stands right now--with masternode blinding which is currently in development, no single node would have all the inputs so your probabilities essentially go to 0.

Good try.

Yeah I think he did try very hard, but his attempt discredits him even more.

@oblox

I suppose I was really making three points:

1) CRYPTO:What happens if 50% of MN's are run by "bad actors" or have backdoors (thru VSP provider consent)

Comment:
The answer of ~6% if 4 rounds chosen was the answer given. Interesting but not really to my point. BTW What is the avg no. of rounds usually selected? What is the default number?

2 ) FLOW: Since MN's have static IP's (at this time) and are obvious targets for traffic flow analysis how can u combat traffic flow analysis like "upstreaming" which were used to compromise TOR?"

As I said initially it is not so much the crypto that is the weakness (albeit slightly outdated imo), but rather the patterns derived from traffic analysis techniques like "upstreaming" which may reveal sensitive information.

Comment:
Certainly every crypto-currency network is also threatened by such analysis, but for DRK it is the limited number of MN's currently sitting on fixed IP's which make a juicy target. The crypto in TOR was by all accounts strong and it was these sorts of attacks which compromised TOR's security iirc. Interestingly there were similar numbers of TOR nodes that you have MN's. I'm thinking maybe 3-4k TOR nodes were being run worldwide.
Perhaps MN's will have to grow in number to help deal with this and maybe a 500DRK sum should be permitted to run an MN so as to create more. In fact why shouldn't every node be capable of serving as an MN? And if DRK adopts a ZK (Zero-Knowledge) solution like Shadow then why have MN's at all (InstantX I guess)

3) BLEND: A "blended attack" where a bad actor runs (or has access to) a number of MN's combined with traffic analysis is most likely the true threat model here. It is unclear to me at this point if "Masternode blinding' might help the bad actors as much as the good ones.

Comment:
?

Throwing it to the floor.

@bigrcanada
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=745352.msg10612920#msg10612920

I'm not spokesman for Shadow (definitely not) and without any action by the Shadow Team I voluntarily back down outta some sense of good. TBH Im more of a mad renegade…

I gotta say that I dont really regard the above Q I posed as FUD.
It would be wise to have in place counter-measures against the sort of attacks that compromised TOR. As I also said it applies to all crypto-currencies, altho due to the MN infrastructure and the depth of ur Team it (maybe) behooves u to plan for such attacks.

At the very least I asked why cant you have MN's for 500DRK? Or 250? More MN's better, right?

Anyway bigrcanada, you were very polite. Thanks. I shall return the favor and politely go away - altho Id really be interested in some answers to my Q's and will keep reading…
thanks

pax romanus



It is not just about having loads of masternodes, the 1000 DARK is about making it a meaningful investment / commitment to the project. 250 Dark would be too low especially at current prices, maybe in the future that would change.[/b]

OK
Almost outta here…

Is this the answer ur sticking with?
Why should an MN cost 1000DRk when more MN's should be beneficial IMO?


Quote:
It is not just about having loads of masternodes, the 1000 DARK is about making it a meaningful investment / commitment to the project. 250 Dark would be too low especially at current prices, maybe in the future that would change.

Really? Does it boil down to this? I can think of other "organisations" that require a demonstration of commitment thusly…

???


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 02, 2015, 02:10:55 AM
How many XMR users have used 60 ring sigs? Or over 24?

I don't know the answer to that.

Quote
Im assuming 24 or 60 is better than 3 or 6…

In some ways, but there are also overall privacy effects viewing question of blockchain analysis wholistically. If everyone is using 3-6 and coins are constantly being mixed and remixed you are in very good shape because the entirely blockchain is essentially opaque. If you are using 60 and everyone else is using zero, not so much.



Could u hazard a guess how many XMR users have sent with over 24 ring sigs?

I have no idea really. People are experimenting at this stage. Some have used 100+ rings, 10 gets used quite often I've seen in the block explorers.

Quote
Nobody is using 0. That's 4 sure.

Sure they are, that is the effect of SDC (transparent blockchain) transactions. They are traceable. Someone earlier claimed they were 99% of all Shadow/SDC transactions, but I have no idea if that is correct.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 02, 2015, 02:24:19 AM
How many XMR users have used 60 ring sigs? Or over 24?

I don't know the answer to that.

Quote
Im assuming 24 or 60 is better than 3 or 6…

In some ways, but there are also overall privacy effects viewing question of blockchain analysis wholistically. If everyone is using 3-6 and coins are constantly being mixed and remixed you are in very good shape because the entirely blockchain is essentially opaque. If you are using 60 and everyone else is using zero, not so much.



Could u hazard a guess how many XMR users have sent with over 24 ring sigs?

I have no idea really. People are experimenting at this stage. Some have used 100+ rings, 10 gets used quite often I've seen in the block explorers.

Quote
Nobody is using 0. That's 4 sure.

Sure they are, that is the effect of SDC (transparent blockchain) transactions. They are traceable. Someone earlier claimed they were 99% of all Shadow/SDC transactions, but I have no idea if that is correct.



I was referring to SDC>SDT, SDT>SDT, SDT>SDC and not SDC/SDC (the first 3 all require stealth addys)


Interestingly I first assumed that SDT (Shadow token)  to SDC conversions reduced the available anon I/O in the system (since SDC > SDT increases it)
In actual fact converting Shadow tokens (SDT) back to SDC increases the anon IO yet further

could u explain how that works smooth?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 02, 2015, 02:34:09 AM
Interestingly I first assumed that SDT (Shadow token)  to SDC conversions reduced the available anon I/O in the system (since SDC > SDT increases it)
In actual fact converting Shadow tokens (SDT) back to SDC increases the anon IO yet further

could u explain how that works smooth?

It's false. Nether increases anonymity in the system, because they provide visible tracing points on the transparent chain. You are perhaps suggesting that SDT->SDC increases anonymity because there is another step of mixing and stealth, but this is mistaken, because the alternative is not nothing, it is spending those SDT by sending them to someone else. which gives the same mix+stealth, but minus the tracepoint.

Your best case for anonymity is really to just use SDT exclusively. Long chains of mixed transactions with stealth addresses at every hop = anonymous.

If you use SDC for the purpose of interoperating with BTC-based APIs, fair enough that may be a worthwhile tradeoff, but it doesn't improve anonymity at all, it decreases it.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 02, 2015, 02:59:04 AM
Interestingly I first assumed that SDT (Shadow token)  to SDC conversions reduced the available anon I/O in the system (since SDC > SDT increases it)
In actual fact converting Shadow tokens (SDT) back to SDC increases the anon IO yet further

could u explain how that works smooth?

It's false. Nether increases anonymity in the system, because they provide visible tracing points on the transparent chain. You are perhaps suggesting that SDT->SDC increases anonymity because there is another step of mixing and stealth, but this is mistaken, because the alternative is not nothing, it is spending those SDT by sending them to someone else. which gives the same mix+stealth, but minus the tracepoint.

Your best case for anonymity is really to just use SDT exclusively. Long chains of mixed transactions with stealth addresses at every hop = anonymous.

If you use SDC for the purpose of interoperating with BTC-based APIs, fair enough that may be a worthwhile tradeoff, but it doesn't improve anonymity at all, it decreases it.


I will pass this up the chain. In the meantime this may illuminate…
(dasource is a Team member)

All I can tell u is what I gather…

Oh and the explorer…
http://shadow.blockexplorer.cc/chain/ShadowCash



Just for sake of clarity :)

OK, so every time I convert Shadow to SDC I create a new SDC address.

Yes every-time you send coins (shadow or SDC) to a stealth address it will generate a new SDC Address

Quote
Is this a new private key?

Every SDC Address has a new private key, however because this SDC Address was generated by sending coins to a "stealth address" aslong as you have a backup of your wallet when you created the stealth address you do not need to back it up again. All future SDC addresses created by sending money to that "stealth address" are covered. This is a bit like a HD wallet but not quite ...
Obviously you can never be too careful so backup as necessary.

Quote
It seems like over time I will have hundreds of keys and stealth/public addresses in the wallet.

Yes but as per above, if the funds where sent to a "stealth address" then it does not matter as you can re-create those SDC Addresses and corresponding private keys from your stealth address backup.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: MalMen on March 02, 2015, 09:07:40 PM
Judging from the OP's posting history the whole thread might be intended to advertise Monero.

This past days i was just reading without saying anything.. of course i have my favorite, that doesnt mean that i cant look at good side on other projects...

I read here alot of posts about shadowcash, i did a small research (i have to admit that i didnt search enough to have a good opinion), but from the first point what i found is that the shadowcash is the fusion of the bitcoin protocol with the multisig from the cryptonote protocol (i think some guy from bitcoin told few months ago that the monero sould do the same).. the good thing is that you can integrate that easy on apps arround it using the core already done on bitcoin but have 2 blockchains, i dont like much that, i dont like POS coins either, but that is me... for those who like it may be its a good option.. in terms of privacy i need more research to get a conclusion

About darkcoin i think i know mutch more about, the price is the result of each masternode needs 1000 coins and the current low inflaction, from short term it seems that is the most annon used coin, in the long term only the technology will decide if its safe or not to use the "darksend"

About monero i will not say anything, i have my personal opinion and dont want to be called an fanboy


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 02, 2015, 09:22:05 PM
About monero i will not say anything, i have my personal opinion and dont want to be called an fanboy

i have no such issues ;)

one of the main reasons i have so much faith in xmr is the core-team.
i simple cant trust somebody without a deep cryptographic background to invent an anonymous system

coding experience is simply not enough if you do want to implement / invent new crypto stuff.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: bitcoin revo on March 03, 2015, 02:34:06 AM
decentralized or anonymous, or you can consider them as anonymous as the internet is, which we know is not as anonymous as we would like ?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 03, 2015, 08:53:05 PM
Interesting, thanks for the insight.  So it seems the main differences between the two, is that Shadow is on a bitcoin blockchain, which gives it some advantages.  For example it can plug in better with existing infrastructure, and have benefits of both transparent chain and anonymous chain. Also since only about 1% of transactions are used for anonymity, it will have less blockchain bloat than Monero where 100% of the transactions are done using ring sigs.

If only 1% of transactions are used for anonymity you will have massive timing anonymity leaks and such. If you take transparent coins, convert to anon, pay someone, and he converts back (both of which are logical if most commerce is taking place non-anonymously) then the whole thing is quite obviously traceable.

I don't really see much advantage to a coin that is 99% transparent, and definitely see disadvantages. Just use Bitcoin, or if you really want PoS, use whatever is the leading PoS coin, probably BitShares I guess. BitShares has stealth addresses by the way.

Quote
I wonder if this destruction and reminting gives it any privacy advantages.

It does not. The creation and destruction process is entirely transparent.

Smooth is right Shadow is very similar to cryptonote.  I was reading cryptonote whitepaper, and its some genius stuff going on in there.  We should be honest about what the system is and its pros and cons.  I like Monero, seems like a cool coin, much better than DRK. I do think Shadow does have some advantages being on a bitcoin blockchain.  Also I believe Shadow differs in the anonymity system in one major way from what I can tell, and that is the destruction and minting of SDC.  To me it seems like this extra part of the system does something extra to sever the link between identities, but I could be wrong.  Hopefully the review will help clarify that.  Hope our communities can all be friends, as we all are striving for the same goal of privacy and anonymity.

Well i agree with you that the Bitcoin codebase and APIs, etc. are an advantage in terms of integration, etc. I don't agree that the minting/destruction add value to anonymity, and in fact I think the opposite as I explained above. But overall yes the more popular APIs and such are valuable.

I don't think the communities are or need to be unfriendly but there is some confusion that has been spread about the nature of the Shadow solution that has led to some frustration on both sides. We certainly share the goal of greater privacy.

I am not really yet buying that if only 1% of transactions in Shadow are used for anonymity there will be timing attacks.  If you take care of the amounts of Shadow you are transferring then you can still maintain anonymity.  Then that leaves timing attacks, and its only a problem if you are immediately changing to Shadow and then back.  The risk for this attack is not much different whether 1% or 99% are used for Shadow.  Admittedly if 100% was used for Shadow only then it eliminates it completely, but without the benefits of a transparent bitcoin blockchain.  As the network grows 1% will be a larger and larger amount of transactions and that will help users to blend in.

Also I was reading the white paper on zerocoin.  I found it very interesting how some of the ideas for ShadowCash are taken from zerocoin, and a big part of zerocoin is also the destruction and minting of coins.  So there may in fact be something to the idea that the Shadow implementation of destroying and minting coins could have value for anonymity and privacy.  It seems Shadow is a unique system taking ideas from both cryptonote and zerocoin. There is not much documentation on ShadowCash yet and their whitepaper could be a lot more detailed and seems like it was rushed out a bit. The devs are now working on providing better documentation. I think its going to take some time and peer reviews to come out before we all have a better understanding how these systems compare.

If anyone is interested to compare the white papers here they are:

http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

http://zerocoin.org/media/pdf/ZerocoinOakland.pdf


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 03, 2015, 10:29:54 PM
If anyone is interested to compare the white papers here they are:

http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

http://zerocoin.org/media/pdf/ZerocoinOakland.pdf

You missed an important one: http://pastebin.com/S7aKCDgy

Lol, interesting.  Although I wouldn't condone this type of deceptive behavior, you should consider that at current prices 50,000 SDC is only about 8 BTC.  The reason why the distribution would be bad at this point is because the market cap is so low at like $330,000.  It doesn't take much to buy a lot of SDC.  As the price goes up people tend to sell some of their stash and distribution becomes more even.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 03, 2015, 11:16:52 PM
If anyone is interested to compare the white papers here they are:

http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

http://zerocoin.org/media/pdf/ZerocoinOakland.pdf

You missed an important one: http://pastebin.com/S7aKCDgy

Lol, interesting.  Although I wouldn't condone this type of deceptive behavior, you should consider that at current prices 50,000 SDC is only about 8 BTC.  The reason why the distribution would be bad at this point is because the market cap is so low at like $330,000.  It doesn't take much to buy a lot of SDC.  As the price goes up people tend to sell some of their stash and distribution becomes more even.

The price of SDC is unlikely to go up other than a few insiders who own essentially all the coins (which you acknowledge) trading the coins between each other at higher prices to create an illusion of interest. There is no substance there, it is just a warmed over immature reimplementation of cryptonote run by a few pumpers, and if people want cryptonote, they know where to go. All this "zerocoin," "minting" and "zero knowledge" obfuscation you guys throw around is nonsense, and everyone knows it now.

Please stop spamming threads discussing DRK and XMR, two coins that more than a few people even care about.

BTW, it is absolutely true that if you have a high percentage (say 99%) of traceable transactions, you have a high degree of traceability of the chain as a whole. You can review the math for this in MRL-0001 and MRL-0004, but you won't because you don't care about math or substance, just pumping.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 03, 2015, 11:40:41 PM
If anyone is interested to compare the white papers here they are:

http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

http://zerocoin.org/media/pdf/ZerocoinOakland.pdf

You missed an important one: http://pastebin.com/S7aKCDgy

Lol, interesting.  Although I wouldn't condone this type of deceptive behavior, you should consider that at current prices 50,000 SDC is only about 8 BTC.  The reason why the distribution would be bad at this point is because the market cap is so low at like $330,000.  It doesn't take much to buy a lot of SDC.  As the price goes up people tend to sell some of their stash and distribution becomes more even.

The price of SDC is unlikely to go up other than a few insiders who own essentially all the coins (which you acknowledge) trading the coins between each other at higher prices to create an illusion of interest. There is no substance there, it is just a warmed over immature reimplementation of cryptonote run by a few pumpers, and if people want cryptonote, they know where to go. All this "zerocoin," "minting" and "zero knowledge" obfuscation you guys throw around is nonsense, and everyone knows it now.

Please stop spamming threads discussing DRK and XMR, two coins that more than a few people even care about.

BTW, it is absolutely true that if you have a high percentage (say 99%) of traceable transactions, you have a high degree of traceability of the chain as a whole. You can review the math for this in MRL-0001 and MRL-0004, but you won't because you don't care about math or substance, just pumping.

No need to get rude imo. I was continuing the discussion.  Its easy to own a lot of SDC, anyone can become "an insider" and own 1% of all coins for about 9 BTC, so your point really seems like FUD.

All I did was mention a legitimate point that the destroying and minting of SDC is taken from the zerocoin whitepaper, and anybody can look for themselves to see that. Also it seems the method that Shadow uses to prevent double spends is also from zerocoin.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 03, 2015, 11:49:56 PM
No need to get rude imo. I was continuing the discussion.  Its easy to own a lot of SDC, anyone can become "an insider" and own 1% of all coins for about 9 BTC

But there is no rational reason to do so

Quote
so your point really seems like FUD.

It isn't FUD that the distribution is terrible, at least you don't think so since you acknowledge it. Nor is it FUD that false or misleading claims like "zero knowledge" and "not a clone of cryptonote" and "uses ideas from zerocoin" are thrown around a lot by a small number of SDC pumpers. See you did it below again...

I'm not being rude, I'm being frank. Enough double talk.

Quote
All I did was mention a legitimate point that the destroying and minting of SDC is taken from the zerocoin whitepaper, and anybody can look for themselves to see that. Also it seems the method that Shadow uses to prevent double spends is also from zerocoin.

The method Shadow uses to prevent double spends is from cryptonote. Section 4.4 LNK phase.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 03, 2015, 11:59:12 PM
No need to get rude imo. I was continuing the discussion.  Its easy to own a lot of SDC, anyone can become "an insider" and own 1% of all coins for about 9 BTC

But there is no rational reason to do so

Quote
so your point really seems like FUD.

It isn't FUD that the distribution is terrible, at least you don't think so since you acknowledge it. Nor is it FUD that false or misleading claims like "zero knowledge" and "not a clone of cryptonote" and "uses ideas from zerocoin" are thrown around a lot by a small number of SDC pumpers. See you did it below again...

I'm not being rude, I'm being frank. Enough double talk.

Quote
All I did was mention a legitimate point that the destroying and minting of SDC is taken from the zerocoin whitepaper, and anybody can look for themselves to see that. Also it seems the method that Shadow uses to prevent double spends is also from zerocoin.

The method Shadow uses to prevent double spends is from cryptonote. LNK phase.

Ohh I see, are you well versed on zerocoin also? Wouldn't Shadow have to stop double spending two times?  Once for the ring sigs, and also again for the minting of tokens?  I believe maybe the double spend prevention on the minting of tokens is then from zerocoin?  Or no?  Not trying to FUD at all, trying to learn.  I like Monero too.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 12:10:12 AM
Ohh I see, are you well versed on zerocoin also?

I have read the paper yes.

Quote
Wouldn't Shadow have to stop double spending two times?  Once for the ring sigs, and also again for the minting of tokens?

No, and no this has nothing to do with zerocoin.




Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 04, 2015, 12:18:30 AM
Ohh I see, are you well versed on zerocoin also?

I have read the paper yes.

Quote
Wouldn't Shadow have to stop double spending two times?  Once for the ring sigs, and also again for the minting of tokens?

No, and no this has nothing to do with zerocoin.


Oh I see, I wonder why the ShadowCash whitepaper cites zerocoin when mentioning the minting aspect of SDC and Shadow.  


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 12:35:34 AM
Ohh I see, are you well versed on zerocoin also?

I have read the paper yes.

Quote
Wouldn't Shadow have to stop double spending two times?  Once for the ring sigs, and also again for the minting of tokens?

No, and no this has nothing to do with zerocoin.


Oh I see, I wonder why the ShadowCash whitepaper cites zerocoin when mentioning the minting aspect of SDC and Shadow.  

Maybe for the same reason people keep parroting comments about "zero knowledge" and how it isn't really like cryptonote, and how many coins make silly claims. Because it is perceived to be good for pumping, though that game seems to be up.

Can we get back on topic of discussing XMR and DRK, or are you going to continue spamming SDC here?





Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 04, 2015, 12:44:31 AM
Ohh I see, are you well versed on zerocoin also?

I have read the paper yes.

Quote
Wouldn't Shadow have to stop double spending two times?  Once for the ring sigs, and also again for the minting of tokens?

No, and no this has nothing to do with zerocoin.


Oh I see, I wonder why the ShadowCash whitepaper cites zerocoin when mentioning the minting aspect of SDC and Shadow.  

Maybe for the same reason people keep parroting comments about "zero knowledge" and how it isn't really like cryptonote, and how many coins make silly claims. Because it is perceived to be good for pumping, though that game seems to be up.

Can we get back on topic of discussing XMR and DRK, or are you going to continue spamming SDC here?

Ohh I think you shouldn't accuse a project of being a scam unless you can be 100% sure.  As far as I know, you have not read or audited the code. You know there is going to be a review coming out, and if you are wrong about your accusations that Shadow is just a scam and the devs lied about their citations in their whitepaper, then its going to hurt your credibility a bit. 


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 12:48:42 AM
Ohh I see, are you well versed on zerocoin also?

I have read the paper yes.

Quote
Wouldn't Shadow have to stop double spending two times?  Once for the ring sigs, and also again for the minting of tokens?

No, and no this has nothing to do with zerocoin.


Oh I see, I wonder why the ShadowCash whitepaper cites zerocoin when mentioning the minting aspect of SDC and Shadow. 

Maybe for the same reason people keep parroting comments about "zero knowledge" and how it isn't really like cryptonote, and how many coins make silly claims. Because it is perceived to be good for pumping, though that game seems to be up.

Can we get back on topic of discussing XMR and DRK, or are you going to continue spamming SDC here?

Ohh I think you shouldn't accuse a project of being a scam unless you can be 100% sure.  As far as I know, you have not read or audited the code. You know there is going to be a review coming out, and if you are wrong about your accusations that Shadow is just a scam and the devs lied about their citations in their whitepaper, then its going to hurt your credibility a bit. 

Now, now, you are the one making false accusations here. I never said they lied. It is true that the original zerocoin paper was presented as an "add on" to the bitcoin blockchain that include a conversion/minting process (of course that idea was resoundingly rejected by the bitcoin community). If SDC is going to also propose an add-on to a bitcoin-style blockchain then there is going to be a conversion process and it is reasonable to cite zerocoin. However, in both cases, zerocoin and cryptonote-with-conversions, the fact that there is conversion has nothing to do with the underlying cryptography, it is just a means of integration.

It is confusing this last point where pumpers in the SDC community who constantly make claims about "zero knowledge" and how it is "like zerocoin because it has minting" are being either ignorant or willfully ignorant. I have no idea if those pumpers are sanctioned by the project.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 04, 2015, 01:20:21 AM
Ohh I see, are you well versed on zerocoin also?

I have read the paper yes.

Quote
Wouldn't Shadow have to stop double spending two times?  Once for the ring sigs, and also again for the minting of tokens?

No, and no this has nothing to do with zerocoin.


Oh I see, I wonder why the ShadowCash whitepaper cites zerocoin when mentioning the minting aspect of SDC and Shadow.  

Maybe for the same reason people keep parroting comments about "zero knowledge" and how it isn't really like cryptonote, and how many coins make silly claims. Because it is perceived to be good for pumping, though that game seems to be up.

Can we get back on topic of discussing XMR and DRK, or are you going to continue spamming SDC here?

Ohh I think you shouldn't accuse a project of being a scam unless you can be 100% sure.  As far as I know, you have not read or audited the code. You know there is going to be a review coming out, and if you are wrong about your accusations that Shadow is just a scam and the devs lied about their citations in their whitepaper, then its going to hurt your credibility a bit.  

Now, now, you are the one making false accusations here. I never said they lied. It is true that the original zerocash paper was presented as an "add on" to the bitcoin blockchain that include a conversion/minting process (of course that idea was resoundingly rejected by the bitcoin community). If SDC is going to also propose an add-on to a bitcoin-style blockchain then there is going to be a conversion process and it is reasonable to cite zerocoin. However, in both cases, zerocoin and cryptonote-with-conversions, the fact that there is conversion has nothing to do with the underlying cryptography, it is just a means of integration.

It is confusing this last point where pumpers in the SDC community who constantly make claims about "zero knowledge" and how it is "like zerocoin because it has minting" are being either ignorant or willfully ignorant. I have no idea if those pumpers are sanctioned by the project.

Well the minting is taken from zerocoin, that much has been established.  Whether it contributes to the underlying anonymity is another issue, and hopefully the review will shed more light on that. 

There are pumpers, shills, and fools in every community, including in Monero.  There has been admittedly some confusion over ShadowCash mostly because the documentation on the system is sparse. But the code is there. There is no conspiracy going on.  I have a genuine interest in learning about the tech.  If Shadow is the exact same as cryptonote, then I still like it because its on a bitcoin blockchain, and its the only cryptonote like coin with a functional wallet where you can control your own private keys, and privacy.  However the devs have said its different than cryptonote and a unique new system.  I saw some similarities in the minting process in the zerocoin paper, and wondered if it added to the anonymity of the system.  Wouldn't this be an obvious inquiry by a layman looking at the papers?

I hope your coin is wildly successful.  If Monero gets a functional wallet then I will consider investing some Bitcoin into it.  I prefer it much better to DRK.  But if Shadow does what they say it does, then I think its a winner, imo.  Good luck to you, and I really hope our communities can be friends.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 01:35:26 AM
Well the minting is taken from zerocoin, that much has been established.

No, that is not only not "established", it is not even true. The only thing that is "taken" from zerocoin is the vague concept of converting between btc and another coin type. How it is done and what the other coin type is and how it works, including the minting process itself, is totally different.

Just look in the SDC whitepaper man, there is no footnote that cites zerocoin with reference to any of the cryptography whatsoever, only with the general concept of converting from btc to another token. That is the only connection. If you think that by itself is a big deal then sure go ahead and keep bringing it up like the other SDC pumpers do. You (and they) probably will regardless.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 02:17:58 AM
Well the minting is taken from zerocoin, that much has been established.

No, that is not only not "established", it is not even true. The only thing that is "taken" from zerocoin is the vague concept of converting between btc and another coin type. How it is done and what the other coin type is and how it works, including the minting process itself, is totally different.

Just look in the SDC whitepaper man, there is no footnote that cites zerocoin with reference to any of the cryptography whatsoever, only with the general concept of converting from btc to another token. That is the only connection. If you think that by itself is a big deal then sure go ahead and keep bringing it up like the other SDC pumpers do. You (and they) probably will regardless.



Hey smooth… You're a (blamk)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: solid12345 on March 04, 2015, 02:18:04 AM
First off I want to know where these shadowcash pumpers are, a whopping all-time high of what, 5-6 cents a coin vs Moneros ATH of $4-5 dollars and Dark's $15?

Funny how the shadow community is seemingly accused of being manipulators and scoundrels when most of its holders have yet to seen any riches from it yet! And its also been one of the most stable priced coins for months now going mostly sideways, and now they are accused of "buying" a good review from Isidor for a measly 5 btc as if the guy is that hard up for money.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 02:20:41 AM
First off I want to know where these shadowcash pumpers are, a whopping all-time high of what, 5-6 cents a coin vs Moneros ATH of $4-5 dollars and Dark's $15?

Funny how the shadow community is seemingly accused of being manipulators and scoundrels when most of its holders have yet to seen any riches from it yet! And its also been one of the most stable priced coins for months now going mostly sideways...

so simple… yet so powerful

thank you


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 02:21:30 AM
First off I want to know where these shadowcash pumpers are

Just look for anyone posting silly comments about how SDC uses "zero knowledge" and spamming SDC on unrelated threads such as those discussing XMR and DRK.

As for the price, I never said they were effective pumpers, but they try.




Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 02:24:37 AM
First off I want to know where these shadowcash pumpers are

Just look for anyone posting silly comments about how SDC uses "zero knowledge" and spamming SDC on unrelated threads such as those discussing XMR and DRK.

As for the price, I never said they were effective pumpers, but they try.


You're a d*ck and have now stooped to the pidgeon-shit…
Hmm… ur an XMR dev??

Total Fail. GTFO.

Shadow crypto draws circles around yours (c what I did there?)

The lady doth protest too much methinks

Shadow has a working NIZKP implementation on a BTC blcockchain so… wtf is ur prob?
Oh yeah - u dont even have a GUI wallet or a stable DB!


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 02:43:57 AM
Shadow has a working NIZKP implementation

Example of the kind of pumpers'  drivel being spammed on a non-SDC thread I was describing earlier ^^

harold, I'm going to explain it to you like a child:

The "NIZKP" part of Shadow is just a tiny part of the cryptonote signature scheme that was reimplemented by SDC, nothing more, nothing less.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stopsigningbitch on March 04, 2015, 02:46:35 AM
child_harold. No one Cares about the Shitcoin Shadowcash. The only popular anoncoins are Monero and Darkcoin.

Again, No.One.Cares.About.Shadowcash
. The title of this thread is DRK vs XMR. No where does it say SDC. ffs.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Propulsion on March 04, 2015, 02:47:32 AM
What was this thread about again?

  • Pumping Shadow?
  • Discussing pro's and con's to two different technological approaches to achieving anonymity?

Waiting for the Navajo coin pumpers to come say hi.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 02:50:01 AM
one thing i'd really like to know about drk is a good comparison with darkwallet and if darkwallet is able to adopt all(!) of drk anon features (if that means MN needs to be ported so be it).

i think darkwallet can do it - but i always like to learn something new...


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 02:57:13 AM
child_harold. No one Cares about the Shitcoin Shadowcash. The only popular anoncoins are Monero and Darkcoin.

Again, No.One.Cares.About.Shadowcash
. The title of this thread is DRK vs XMR. No where does it say SDC. ffs.

What was this thread about again?

  • Pumping Shadow?
  • Discussing pro's and con's to two different technological approaches to achieving anonymity?

Waiting for the Navajo coin pumpers to come say hi.



Shadow has every right to be in this convo, with or without your impotent consent. On a tech basis alone it blows DRK and XMR out the water.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 02:59:51 AM
[Shadow has every right to be in this convo, with or without your impotent consent. On a tech basis alone it blows DRK and XMR out the water.

then make your own thread - this thread is about XMR and DRK.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 03:01:26 AM
Shadow has a working NIZKP implementation

Example of the kind of pumpers'  drivel being spammed on a non-SDC thread I was describing earlier ^^

harold, I'm going to explain it to you like a child:

The "NIZKP" part of Shadow is just a tiny part of the cryptonote signature scheme that was reimplemented by SDC, nothing more, nothing less.


I cannot f\ing wait for you to get burned by ur own words
What an unprofessional slack-jawed yokel u r irregardless.

o/


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 03:02:56 AM
[Shadow has every right to be in this convo, with or without your impotent consent. On a tech basis alone it blows DRK and XMR out the water.

then make your own thread - this thread is about XMR and DRK.

The people have a right to know a better option exists.
This is a "public forum" yes?
And people can quote eachother, YES??
U dig?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 03:05:43 AM
[Shadow has every right to be in this convo, with or without your impotent consent. On a tech basis alone it blows DRK and XMR out the water.

then make your own thread - this thread is about XMR and DRK.

The people have a right to know a better option exists.
This is a "public forum" yes?
And people can quote eachother, YES??
U dig?

most people here know drk, xmr and sdc (at least heard the name).
if they want a comparison there is a search function (right top in case you wonder).

if they want to educate themselves about drk they will find this thread. what will they find when they search for sdc? i hope you - would be the best advertising ever :D


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 03:11:00 AM
You muthers cannot control the flow of information here as well as can can on Poloniex (XMR) and Cryptsy (DRK)
Each of ur BS currencies is controlled by a cople whales (whom I wont mention by name altho we all know who they are)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 03:12:26 AM
Shadow has a working NIZKP implementation

Example of the kind of pumpers'  drivel being spammed on a non-SDC thread I was describing earlier ^^

harold, I'm going to explain it to you like a child:

The "NIZKP" part of Shadow is just a tiny part of the cryptonote signature scheme that was reimplemented by SDC, nothing more, nothing less.


I cannot f\ing wait for you to get burned by ur own words

You're going to have to wait a long damn time (forever), because what I wrote is absolutely correct.

Stop spamming your SDC "zero knowledge" drivel on threads about other coins please.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 03:14:08 AM
You muthers cannot control the flow of information here as well as can can on Poloniex (XMR) and Cryptsy (DRK)

sorry i am german and my english is not that good. what does muther mean?
i found a MUTHERS institut for strategic chance management - but i am quit sure you didnt refer to that (its german anyway)???


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 03:15:39 AM
Shadow has a working NIZKP implementation

Example of the kind of pumpers'  drivel being spammed on a non-SDC thread I was describing earlier ^^

harold, I'm going to explain it to you like a child:

The "NIZKP" part of Shadow is just a tiny part of the cryptonote signature scheme that was reimplemented by SDC, nothing more, nothing less.


I cannot f\ing wait for you to get burned by ur own words

You're going to have to wait a long damn time (forever), because what I wrote is absolutely correct.

Stop spamming your SDC "zero knowledge" drivel on threads about other coins please.






Not so long ago u espoused SDC was a cryptonote clone or some such BS
No better than XMR was ur ill-informed conclusion


and now ur what… just tossing lies? Must be fun not to be in a controlled thread anymore ;) Welcome to the Real World


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 04, 2015, 03:15:59 AM
Well the minting is taken from zerocoin, that much has been established.

No, that is not only not "established", it is not even true. The only thing that is "taken" from zerocoin is the vague concept of converting between btc and another coin type. How it is done and what the other coin type is and how it works, including the minting process itself, is totally different.

Just look in the SDC whitepaper man, there is no footnote that cites zerocoin with reference to any of the cryptography whatsoever, only with the general concept of converting from btc to another token. That is the only connection. If you think that by itself is a big deal then sure go ahead and keep bringing it up like the other SDC pumpers do. You (and they) probably will regardless.


From zerocoin whitepaper: http://spar.isi.jhu.edu/~mgreen/ZerocoinOakland.pdf

Quote
Intuition behind our construction. To understand the intuition behind Zerocoin, consider the following “pencil and paper” protocol example. Imagine that all users share access to a physical bulletin board. To mint a zerocoin of fixed denomination $1, a user Alice first generates a random coin serial number S , then commits to S using a secure digital commitment scheme. The resulting commitment is a coin, denoted C , which can only be opened by a random number r to reveal the serial number S. Alice pins C to the public bulletin board, along with $1 of physical currency. All users will accept C provided it is correctly structured and carries the correct sum of currency.

To redeem her coin C, Alice first scans the bulletin board to obtain the set of valid commitments (C1 ;:::;CN) that have thus far been posted by all users in the system. She next produces a non-interactive zero-knowledge proof # for the following two statements: (1) she knows a C2 (C1;:::;CN) and (2) she knows a hidden value r such that the commitment C opens to S. In full view of the others, Alice, using a disguise to hide her identity, 1 posts a “spend” transaction containing (S;#). The remaining users verify the proof # and check that S has not previously appeared in any other spend transaction. If these conditions are met, the users allow Alice to collect $1 from any location on the bulletin board; otherwise they reject her transaction and prevent her from collecting the currency.

 This simple protocol achieves some important aims. First, Alice’s minted coin cannot be linked to her retrieved funds:in order to link the coin C to the the serial number S used in her withdrawal, one must either know r or directly know which coin Alice proved knowledge of, neither of which are revealed by the proof. Thus, even if the original dollar bill is recognizably tainted (e.g., it was used in a controversial transaction), it cannot be linked to Alice’s new dollar bill. At the same time, if the commitment and zero-knowledge proof are secure, then Alice cannot double-spend any coin without re-using the serial number S and thus being detected by the network participants

Seems this is very similar to ShadowCash minting scheme and double spend protection as described in section 3 and 4 of the Shadow whitepaper: http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

Guys stop the troll wars, if they want to be rude to the Shadow community that is their decision.  But we should act as gents, and they will expose themselves for being jerks.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 03:39:38 AM
^ /me bows


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Polycoin on March 04, 2015, 03:46:19 AM
I fully support Shadowcash and its scamming ways. Lets rain shadowz on you mothfuckas


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 03:48:24 AM
Seems this is very similar to ShadowCash minting scheme and double spend protection as described in section 3 and 4 of the Shadow whitepaper: http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

Again I'm going to explain it to you. It is up to you if you wish to learn or continue to spam the drivel.

The NIZKP in the SDC whitepaper has nothing to do with "minting" and is just a regular part of the construction used to create cryptonote signatures. Yes this is described in sections 3 and 4 (mostly 4) of the SDC white paper, just as it is likewise described in section 4.4 of the cryptonote white paper. The more puzzling question is why the SDC white paper never cites the cryptonote white paper in the section where it uses the same cryptographic constructions, instead of merely listing a non-specific reference to cryptonote at the end. A careless oversight perhaps. You will have to ask the author, though.

No one is being a jerk here, I'm responding to inaccuracies in your spam, that is all.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Pline on March 04, 2015, 03:56:48 AM
Seems this is very similar to ShadowCash minting scheme and double spend protection as described in section 3 and 4 of the Shadow whitepaper: http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

Again I'm going to explain it to you. It is up to you if you wish to learn or continue to spam the drivel.

The NIZKP in the SDC whitepaper has nothing to do with "minting" and is just a regular part of the construction used to create cryptonote signitures. Yes this is described in sections 3 and 4 (mostly 4) of the SDC white paper, just as it is likewise described in section 4.4 of the cryptonote white paper. The more puzzling question is why the SDC white paper never cites the cryptonote white paper in the section where it uses the same cryptographic constructions, instead of merely listing a non-specific reference to cryptonote at the end. A careless oversight perhaps. You will have to ask the author, though.

No one is being a jerk here, I'm responding to inaccuracies in your spam, that is all.

Well all I did was continue a conversation, and make statements saying, what it "seems" like and providing evidence.  I am very happy for you to correct me if I am wrong.  How else is someone suppose to find the truth?  I was basically asking questions about the similarities that I saw.  Personally I don't believe asking questions or having a conversation is spam, and calling it that is rather rude and insulting imo.  Personally I think you are a little biased in your opinion(and possibly threatened) since you are so personally invested in Monero (and I don't mean financially invested, I mean investing your time and energy).  So it will be nice when a 3rd party review comes out.  Again we have common goals of privacy and anonymity, and a little respect goes a long way.  Being rude has a ripple effect and then trolls come out from the woodwork and it causes a flame war.  We are all more professional than that.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 03:57:35 AM
Seems this is very similar to ShadowCash minting scheme and double spend protection as described in section 3 and 4 of the Shadow whitepaper: http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

Again I'm going to explain it to you. It is up to you if you wish to learn or continue to spam the drivel.

The NIZKP in the SDC whitepaper has nothing to do with "minting" and is just a regular part of the construction used to create cryptonote signitures. Yes this is described in sections 3 and 4 (mostly 4) of the SDC white paper, just as it is likewise described in section 4.4 of the cryptonote white paper. The more puzzling question is why the SDC white paper never cites the cryptonote white paper in the section where it uses the same cryptographic constructions, instead of merely listing a non-specific reference to cryptonote at the end. A careless oversight perhaps. You will have to ask the author, though.

No one is being a jerk here, I'm responding to inaccuracies in your spam, that is all.

Well all I did was continue a conversation, and make statements saying, what it "seems" like and providing evidence.  I am very happy for you to correct me if I am wrong.  How else is someone suppose to find the truth?  I was basically asking questions about the similarities that I saw.  Personally I don't believe asking questions or having a conversation is spam, and calling it that is rather rude and insulting imo.  Personally I think you are a little biased in your opinion(and possibly threatened) since you are so personally invested in Monero (and I don't mean financially invested, I mean investing your time and energy).  So it will be nice when a 3rd party review comes out.  Again we have common goals or privacy and anonymity, and a little respect goes a long way.  Being rude has a ripple effect and then trolls come out from the woodwork and it causes a flame war.  We are all more professional than that.

Carry on brother.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: 00Smurf on March 04, 2015, 03:58:03 AM
Seems this is very similar to ShadowCash minting scheme and double spend protection as described in section 3 and 4 of the Shadow whitepaper: http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

Again I'm going to explain it to you. It is up to you if you wish to learn or continue to spam the drivel.

The NIZKP in the SDC whitepaper has nothing to do with "minting" and is just a regular part of the construction used to create cryptonote signitures. Yes this is described in sections 3 and 4 (mostly 4) of the SDC white paper, just as it is likewise described in section 4.4 of the cryptonote white paper. The more puzzling question is why the SDC white paper never cites the cryptonote white paper in the section where it uses the same cryptographic constructions, instead of merely listing a non-specific reference to cryptonote at the end. A careless oversight perhaps. You will have to ask the author, though.

No one is being a jerk here, I'm responding to inaccuracies in your spam, that is all.

Well all I did was continue a conversation, and make statements saying, what it "seems" like and providing evidence.  I am very happy for you to correct me if I am wrong.  How else is someone suppose to find the truth?  I was basically asking questions about the similarities that I saw.  Personally I don't believe asking questions or having a conversation is spam, and calling it that is rather rude and insulting imo.  Personally I think you are a little biased in your opinion(and possibly threatened) since you are so personally invested in Monero (and I don't mean financially invested, I mean investing your time and energy).  So it will be nice when a 3rd party review comes out.  Again we have common goals of privacy and anonymity, and a little respect goes a long way.  Being rude has a ripple effect and then trolls come out from the woodwork and it causes a flame war.  We are all more professional than that.

Well said pline.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 04:01:52 AM
Well as we are all back to topic: is there anything DarkWallet can not adopt from DRK?

I think they can adopt the Masternode concept, maybe except the 80% blockreward they will get in the future.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 04:02:59 AM
Well as we are all back to topic: is there anything DarkWallet can not adopt from DRK?

I think they can adopt the Masternode concept, maybe except the 80% blockreward they will get in the future.

The instamine, or did we cover that earlier in this thread? It is hard to remember what was discussed before the shadow invasion.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 04:06:17 AM
Well as we are all back to topic: is there anything DarkWallet can not adopt from DRK?

I think they can adopt the Masternode concept, maybe except the 80% blockreward they will get in the future.

The instamine, or did we cover that earlier in this thread? It is hard to remember what was discussed before the shadow invasion.


oh come on... you know what i meant!
to be more specific: is there any anon-specific tech that darkwallet could not adopt?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 04, 2015, 04:52:52 AM
Well as we are all back to topic: is there anything DarkWallet can not adopt from DRK?

I think they can adopt the Masternode concept, maybe except the 80% blockreward they will get in the future.

The instamine, or did we cover that earlier in this thread? It is hard to remember what was discussed before the shadow invasion.


oh come on... you know what i meant!
to be more specific: is there any anon-specific tech that darkwallet could not adopt?

I wasn't being entirely facetious although it might have seemed that way. The instamine (and cutting of mining rewards, which is what redirecting those to masternode operators does in economic effect) is arguably a good thing for investors because as long as the insiders don't dump, it drives the price higher and higher. Everyone thinks he can get out before everyone else.

In terms of anon-specific tech, no I don't think so.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 05:04:57 AM

I wasn't being entirely facetious although it might have seemed that way. The instamine (and cutting of mining rewards, which is what redirecting those to masternode operators does in economic effect) is arguably a good thing for investors because as long as the insiders don't dump, it drives the price higher and higher. Everyone thinks he can get out before everyone else.

In terms of anon-specific tech, no I don't think so.


i think so too, but i'd like to here from them what they think (drk).

all i found is this:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6119570#msg6119570 (by eduffield)

1.) We're decentralized. The clients automatically discover all masternodes and will use those
2.) Everyone will use DarkSend by default. The problem with a product you must setup like this is you'll have far fewer legitimate users to mix with. 
3.) Masternodes create a new type of investment opportunity within our ecosystem much like mining. The result? We get a ton of super high quality full nodes, anonymity and happy investors.
4.) If they're accepting inputs and outputs separately they can be shut down simply by a user offering an input, but refusing to send the output. If they're accepting inputs and outputs together, it's not anonymous and it MUST be decentralized to spread the knowledge of who did what to keep anonymity. My guess is they're taking inputs and outputs separately and banning inputs that do this. In that case you could attack it by using another mixing service to get fresh inputs.

1) could be archieved by darkwallet (though i dont know if they plan to do that)
2) thats a good one; but it depends how much their system is used at all.
3) i dont like masternodes, so i am biased on this one.
4) i think(!) he talks about the 1000drk colleteral which is needed to run a masternode.

ok so point 4 is (in my eyes) the only real difference regarding anon.
he is assuming how they implemented it and use that to come to an conclusion? seems strange.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on March 04, 2015, 07:37:11 AM

1) could be archieved by darkwallet (though i dont know if they plan to do that)

DRK Wallet is a gimmick IMO.

It's a client-side tool that lets you mix incidental amounts, not an institutionalised solution.

It's a product who's existence is motivated by a distaste for authority rather than the need for widespread corporate, personal and commercial privacy at a protocol level.

You say you "don't like" masternodes. I don't think it's a question of whether people like them or not, it's a question of what job are they doing and whether that job is justified. Darkcoin is a 2-tier network by design for some very good reasons. One of them is to retain full compatibility with the Bitcoin API, blockchain and commercial infrastructure.

Another is to decouple the "anon" development from the core blockchain. This is very important now that Bitcoin has prevailed over the alts in marketcap because the more it gains trust and value, the less people want it "f*cked about with" when they have large holdings.

De-coupling the anon from the core blockchain has allowed Darkcoin to make huge advances while preserving the core value of the monetary asset and not threatning it technologically.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 11:21:00 AM
Seems this is very similar to ShadowCash minting scheme and double spend protection as described in section 3 and 4 of the Shadow whitepaper: http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

Again I'm going to explain it to you. It is up to you if you wish to learn or continue to spam the drivel.

The NIZKP in the SDC whitepaper has nothing to do with "minting" and is just a regular part of the construction used to create cryptonote signitures. Yes this is described in sections 3 and 4 (mostly 4) of the SDC white paper, just as it is likewise described in section 4.4 of the cryptonote white paper. The more puzzling question is why the SDC white paper never cites the cryptonote white paper in the section where it uses the same cryptographic constructions, instead of merely listing a non-specific reference to cryptonote at the end. A careless oversight perhaps. You will have to ask the author, though.

No one is being a jerk here, I'm responding to inaccuracies in your spam, that is all.

Well all I did was continue a conversation, and make statements saying, what it "seems" like and providing evidence.  I am very happy for you to correct me if I am wrong.  How else is someone suppose to find the truth?  I was basically asking questions about the similarities that I saw.  Personally I don't believe asking questions or having a conversation is spam, and calling it that is rather rude and insulting imo.  Personally I think you are a little biased in your opinion(and possibly threatened) since you are so personally invested in Monero (and I don't mean financially invested, I mean investing your time and energy).  So it will be nice when a 3rd party review comes out.  Again we have common goals of privacy and anonymity, and a little respect goes a long way.  Being rude has a ripple effect and then trolls come out from the woodwork and it causes a flame war.  We are all more professional than that.


Pline: I wouldnt bother with smooth. He refuses to open his mind or wait for the Zeuner review. smooth is entirely convinced he knows best and that will never change. I have even tried learning Esperanto to assist in my communication with him, all to no avail I fear…

onemorexmr: did u get a good answer from the DRK guys why a masternode should cost 1000DRK and not say 500DRK to double the amount of MN's (a good thing right?)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 11:53:02 AM

Pline: I wouldnt bother with smooth. He refuses to open his mind or wait for the Zeuner review. smooth is entirely convinced he knows best and that will never change. I have even tried learning Esperanto to assist in my communication with him, all to no avail I fear…


at least he tries to explain things - instead of you just throwing buzzwords around and expecting others to explain it for you.

when you dont like their explanation you start crying....

DRK Wallet is a gimmick IMO.

It's a client-side tool that lets you mix incidental amounts, not an institutionalised solution.


at first: thank you for your answer. i really appreciate it.
obviously we have a different opinion, let me explain myself:

It's a product who's existence is motivated by a distaste for authority rather than the need for widespread corporate, personal and commercial privacy at a protocol level.

when i look at the premine i am note sure that its existance is motivated by your claim.

You say you "don't like" masternodes. I don't think it's a question of whether people like them or not, it's a question of what job are they doing and whether that job is justified. Darkcoin is a 2-tier network by design for some very good reasons. One of them is to retain full compatibility with the Bitcoin API, blockchain and commercial infrastructure.

you are right: it doesnt matter if i like them or not.
let me explain why i dont like them:
 - they get a huge portion of the mining reward by doing nothing (compared to a miner) imho this will lead to a full pos system or something very insecure.
 - there are not enough of them to really make sure they dont get hijacked
 - i dont understand what masternodes have to do with bitcoin-api compatibility

Another is to decouple the "anon" development from the core blockchain. This is very important now that Bitcoin has prevailed over the alts in marketcap because the more it gains trust and value, the less people want it "f*cked about with" when they have large holdings.

true, thats the reason why darkcoin can not change their system (same is true for monero) without loosing much confidence.

De-coupling the anon from the core blockchain has allowed Darkcoin to make huge advances while preserving the core value of the monetary asset and not threatning it technologically.

lol?
that doesnt even make sense.. let me rephrase it:
"because we didnt integrate anon in the blockchain we have made huge advances [..]" (btw you had many hardforks in the way - you just call them different; so i dont see anything which could have been a problem because of anon in the chain)

still: there is nothing darkwallet cant adopt.

this is one of the main reasons i use monero: anon inside blockchain, automatically without any intervention (mn in case of drk). tested and approved by multiple cryptographers.

if i want something like drk i would use btc with mixers or darkwallet.

an anoncoin requires huge trust in his developer/s.
i cant trust eduffield with it, because as far as i know he never worked in cryptograhic before. the same is true for any of your team members: https://www.darkcoin.io/about/team-contact/

so HOW should i trust them?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 12:21:38 PM

Pline: I wouldnt bother with smooth. He refuses to open his mind or wait for the Zeuner review. smooth is entirely convinced he knows best and that will never change. I have even tried learning Esperanto to assist in my communication with him, all to no avail I fear…


at least he tries to explain things - instead of you just throwing buzzwords around and expecting others to explain it for you.

when you dont like their explanation you start crying....

smooth and I (and other members of Shadow) have engaged repeatedly on this point. He does not back down in his assessment of SDC, and neither does the Shadow Team. They know what they made better than smooth can gleam from the WP.

how about u try answering the ONLY question i asked you rather than hurling insults? see below


onemorexmr: did u get a good answer from the DRK guys why a masternode should cost 1000DRK and not say 500DRK to double the amount of MN's (a good thing right?)



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 12:24:28 PM

how about u try answering the ONLY question i asked you rather than hurling insults? see below


onemorexmr: did u get a good answer from the DRK guys why a masternode should cost 1000DRK and not say 500DRK to double the amount of MN's (a good thing right?)



you insult me (called me muthers) and now you expect me to answer your questions?
gtfo


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 12:30:23 PM

how about u try answering the ONLY question i asked you rather than hurling insults? see below


onemorexmr: did u get a good answer from the DRK guys why a masternode should cost 1000DRK and not say 500DRK to double the amount of MN's (a good thing right?)



you insult me (called me muthers) and now you expect me to answer your questions?
gtfo

I did? I called u the plural of muther? Perhaps I had one too many snifters  of brandy last night…Well I can go back and delete that…
Seriously: you dont want to tackle my straightforward question. You wouldnt be interested in the answer?

If anybody here can give me a good reason why a masternode costs 1000DRK and not 500 I'm all ears.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 04, 2015, 12:33:18 PM

Seriously: you dont want to tackle my straightforward question.answer?


yes, i dont answer questions of people insulting me ;)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 12:39:42 PM

Seriously: you dont want to tackle my straightforward question.answer?


yes, i dont answer questions of people insulting me ;)

OK

I am incredibly sorry for calling you "muthers". I apologize.

Now… the answer is??


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GingerAle on March 04, 2015, 12:41:01 PM
wanna watch


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 12:48:33 PM
wanna watch

Is it possible onemorexmr doesn't have the answer?  ???

I'm watching too


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 01:07:49 PM
wanna watch

Is it possible onemorexmr doesn't have the answer?  ???

I'm watching too

I did get one answer in the DRK thread a few days ago to the question:
why does a masternode should cost 1000DRK and not say 500DRK to double the amount of MN's (a good thing right?)

I'm paraphrasing the member of the DRK community who replied:
It's a demonstration of loyalty and commitment.


His answer left me feeling cold inside and I did mention to him I'd heard about such practices in other circles outside crypto.

If anybody wants to try and improve on that answer that'd be great! :)

UPDATE: heres the link
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg10615196#msg10615196

the actual quote is:
It is not just about having loads of masternodes, the 1000 DARK is about making it a meaningful investment / commitment to the project. 250 Dark would be too low especially at current prices, maybe in the future that would change.

I wasn't satisfied by this answer so if anybody else wants to add to it IM sure all crypto-communities would be interested to know the answer.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 04, 2015, 02:16:27 PM
You don't seem to ask questions of the right people.  If you spent half the time you spend bitching about Darkcoin on the Shadowcash IRC channel actually doing your research you'd have more info.

Masternodes require 1000 DRK to be set up as a negative incentive that disallows one party running or controlling too many of them in conjunction with a rarity of supply caused by masternodes removing coins from supply (until the owner of a masternode decides to cash out thus returning those coins to the economy).




Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on March 04, 2015, 02:26:08 PM
when i look at the premine i am note sure that its existance is motivated by your claim.

What has DRK's "premine" got to do with Darkwallet's 'motivation' ?

- they get a huge portion of the mining reward by doing nothing (compared to a miner)

So what ? They are needed just as miners are needed so they get rewarded. The miners are happy, masternodes holders are happy and the network gets the services it needs.

- there are not enough of them to really make sure they dont get hijacked

Who says ?

What is enough ? And what do you mean by "secured" ? I think you're confusing mining 50% attacks with someone owning lots of masternodes. The darkcoin blockchain is secured by miners the same as Bitcoin's is. What is someone who hijacks a bunch of masternodes going to do other than "be of service" to the network ? (People already have "hijacked" loads of masternodes to use your terms and all they can do is run them. There's no 50% attack like in mining).

Vulnerabilities have been identified (by Darkcoin's own devs and community) such as being able to access logs etc and somehow "mine" them to work back and de-anonymise certain transactions but that doesn't bother me. Over time the network improves in security and gets hardened. Anyway, they are not systemic vulnerabilities which is what's important.

- i dont understand what masternodes have to do with bitcoin-api compatibility

They don't have anything to do with it. The Darkcoin blockchain does.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 02:35:48 PM
You don't seem to ask questions of the right people.  If you spent half the time you spend bitching about Darkcoin on the Shadowcash IRC channel actually doing your research you'd have more info.

Masternodes require 1000 DRK to be set up as a negative incentive that disallows one party running or controlling too many of them in conjunction with a rarity of supply caused by masternodes removing coins from supply (until the owner of a masternode decides to cash out thus returning those coins to the economy).


thanks for the reply. will add it to my files.

a 500drk sum would potentially double the available masternodses. do u agree this would benefit teh DRk anon system?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: coins101 on March 04, 2015, 02:42:13 PM
A review of Darkcoins distribution as at September 2014

Summary

The general history / creation period of 3.8m (82%) of the 4.6m DRK in circulation is reviewed below.

Top 300 Wallets [10 Sept-14]

This is needed as a record of the top wallets as the final release of Darkcoin's anonymity software is due to be open sourced and put into production making analysis on some wallets impossible.

OP to be extended as analysis is updated:

http://i.imgur.com/3aisNGa.jpg
http://bitinfocharts.com/

http://i.imgur.com/R7KZ9Ih.jpg

http://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-darkcoin-addresses-1.html

Top 300 Wallets: total held in all wallets by month they were created, and still in existence:

*Jan-14: 146,000 DRK
*Feb-14: 175,000 DRK
*Mar-14: 315,300 DRK
*Apr-14: 524,200 DRK
*May-14: 522,500 DRK
*Jun-14: 332,900 DRK
*JUL-14: 96,300 DRK
*Aug-14:713,855 DRK
*Sep-14: 125,624 DRK

Total: 2.94m DRK [~63%]

January 2014 Wallets

Darkcoin was launched on 18th January 2014 / No premine.

http://wiki.darkcoin.eu/wiki/FAQ#Was_Darkcoin_Instamined.3F

http://i.imgur.com/uQqhGoe.jpg

Of the top 300 wallets in circulation at 10 Sept 2014 and created in January, the total number of coins held in all those combined wallets from the first month is 146,000 DRK, around 3%.

Known Wallets

Several of the top 100 wallets have been flagged as belonging to exchanges or pools.

http://i.imgur.com/eBlOM1i.jpg

These collectively contain 450,300 DRK [~10% of the 4.64m coins in circuclation]

Wallets Above 10k DRK

http://i.imgur.com/lMcyBwE.jpg


Activity of top 4 Wallets which contain 1.1m DRK

Nr1. Wallet (https://coinplorer.com/DRK/Addresses/XosXcEm3Y6Mv6tmBKd1rUWhqB9Pf1hABj7)
XosXcEm3Y6Mv6tmBKd1rUWhqB9Pf1hABj7

Nr2. Wallet (https://coinplorer.com/DRK/Addresses/XnuCAYmAiVHE6Xv3D7Xw685wWzqtcfexLh)
XnuCAYmAiVHE6Xv3D7Xw685wWzqtcfexLh

Nr3.Wallet (https://coinplorer.com/DRK/Addresses/XdiD28mjurK1koGgYy7NUSQqK1XeCfwvGX)
XdiD28mjurK1koGgYy7NUSQqK1XeCfwvGX

Nr4. Wallet (https://coinplorer.com/DRK/Addresses/XwXtGyj1NZnmHfWFDYjGsyY4qzkJXBLCjV)
XwXtGyj1NZnmHfWFDYjGsyY4qzkJXBLCjV


-snip-

Master Nodes are the future of crypto Apps......


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 04, 2015, 02:42:50 PM
You don't seem to ask questions of the right people.  If you spent half the time you spend bitching about Darkcoin on the Shadowcash IRC channel actually doing your research you'd have more info.

Masternodes require 1000 DRK to be set up as a negative incentive that disallows one party running or controlling too many of them in conjunction with a rarity of supply caused by masternodes removing coins from supply (until the owner of a masternode decides to cash out thus returning those coins to the economy).


thanks for the reply. will add it to my files.

a 500drk sum would potentially double the available masternodses. do u agree this would benefit teh DRk anon system?

More masternodes would potentially benefit the DRK anon system however natural growth of the number of masternodes is deemed enough as coins are mined, bought and invested.  The masternode count is slowly but surely growing.

Changing requirements is out of the question because that would disenfranchise the owners of existing masternodes by messing with their ROI.

Keep in mind that masternodes will be providing other services in the future.  If you're not thinking about this, you're missing a trick.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 02:54:31 PM

Changing requirements is out of the question because that would disenfranchise the owners of existing masternodes by messing with their ROI.


But surely the existing owners would have twice the number of masternodes so all wold be equal for them? Just 2x masternodes for the anon system to use


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 04, 2015, 03:02:00 PM

Changing requirements is out of the question because that would disenfranchise the owners of existing masternodes by messing with their ROI.


But surely the existing owners would have twice the number of masternodes so all wold be equal for them? Just 2x masternodes for the anon system to use

Perhaps, apart from hosting costs.

However, why change it?  The security reviews indicated that a value of 2,000+ masternodes would be optimal.  The current number has passed 2,000 and continues to grow gradually with the coin.

What benefit is there to reduce the entry point for a masternode if there is only marginal (debatable) benefit to security?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: darlidada on March 04, 2015, 03:04:34 PM
its sickening to see all those people refusing to aknowledge the technological prowess that is the cryptonote technology. its what people thought bitcoin was. its what bitcoin should have been from the beginning.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 04, 2015, 03:08:29 PM
its sickening to see all those people refusing to aknowledge the technological prowess that is the cryptonote technology. its what people thought bitcoin was. its what bitcoin should have been from the beginning.



And good luck to whichever anon coin you think is best.

Darkcoin is in the lead at the moment because of its adoption levels and so far unbreached privacy.  Maybe this will be different in future.  Time will tell.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 03:16:49 PM
The security reviews indicated that a value of 2,000+ masternodes would be optimal.  The current number has passed 2,000 and continues to grow gradually with the coin.

This is interesting. Does this imply that the system becomes less optimal/efficient with a larger number of masternodes, say 10k? Or is it just saying more is better? If the latter and there is no "downside"** to doing so why not change the limit to 500DRK. Doubling the MN's cannot hurt. Or can it?

Who carried out the security review?

Thanks for your replies
I hope the readers see the value in this exchange.

**I think we can disregard the added hosting costs. u could always host from home, anybody do that?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on March 04, 2015, 03:24:19 PM

its sickening to see all those people refusing to aknowledge the technological prowess that is the cryptonote technology. its what people thought bitcoin was. its what bitcoin should have been from the beginning.

I think you mean "refusing to buy it", not acknowledge it.

"Acknowledging" cryptonote technology and buying a cryptocurrency based on it are 2 very different things. For one thing, buying into a currency such as Monero, DarkNote, Boolberry etc comes with a whole load more baggage than just "cryptonote technology" - developers, roadmaps, incompatible API's, diverse blockchains that are work in progress, endless clonedom.

There's nothing "sickening" about it. I'm sure these technologies have a bright future - whether in crypto currencies or outside them.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 04, 2015, 03:26:11 PM
The security reviews indicated that a value of 2,000+ masternodes would be optimal.  The current number has passed 2,000 and continues to grow gradually with the coin.

This is interesting. Does this imply that the system becomes less optimal/efficient with a larger number of masternodes, say 10k? Or is it just saying more is better? If the latter and there is no "downside"** to doing so why not change the limit to 500DRK. Doubling the MN's cannot hurt. Or can it?

Who carried out the security review?

Thanks for your replies
I hope the readers see the value in this exchange.

**I think we can disregard the added hosting costs. u could always host from home, anybody do that?

Some people host from home (even on Raspberry Pi) but high bandwidth use (recently lowered quite a lot) and requirement for fixed IP could be a problem.

Our code review and security review was performed by Kristov Atlas, a fairly well known cryptographer.

Suddenly having 4000 masternodes would not hurt Darkcoin from a operational perspective but from an individual masternode owner's perspective or from an economical perspective I cannot answer as I do not have the necessary knowledge.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GingerAle on March 04, 2015, 03:27:38 PM
my main concern with DRK is the masternode concept, and what I assume is the centralized nature of it. Is there anyway to analyze the MN network? I'm sure there is - IP addresses and all can be traced back. What percentage are VPSs, that could be shut down due to misinterpretations of terms of service? EVen private servers hosted somewhere are still prone to terms of service interpretations. How many of these MNs are actually sitting in someones private residence, where they are at least relatively protected by whatever laws exist (and yes, this can spawn another debate) as opposed to a business arrangement?

For me, it's all about decentralization. Bitcoin is not decentralized or is increasingly becoming centralized in my opinion. I'm your relatively average joe. I can't afford the 1.2 kw miner to be running constantly, not at current XBT value. Will increase in value change things? Who knows. Probably not, because the rich get richer. I see this MN concept moving in the same direction.

We can have this healthy debate regarding privacy technology, but if the network is owned or capable of being owned by small groups of people, who cares?

And XMR doesn't have this decentralization thing completely figured out yet either, IMO.

Regardless, I'd like to see this component of the technologies discussed.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 04, 2015, 03:36:10 PM
my main concern with DRK is the masternode concept, and what I assume is the centralized nature of it. Is there anyway to analyze the MN network? I'm sure there is - IP addresses and all can be traced back. What percentage are VPSs, that could be shut down due to misinterpretations of terms of service? EVen private servers hosted somewhere are still prone to terms of service interpretations. How many of these MNs are actually sitting in someones private residence, where they are at least relatively protected by whatever laws exist (and yes, this can spawn another debate) as opposed to a business arrangement?

For me, it's all about decentralization. Bitcoin is not decentralized or is increasingly becoming centralized in my opinion. I'm your relatively average joe. I can't afford the 1.2 kw miner to be running constantly, not at current XBT value. Will increase in value change things? Who knows. Probably not, because the rich get richer. I see this MN concept moving in the same direction.

We can have this healthy debate regarding privacy technology, but if the network is owned or capable of being owned by small groups of people, who cares?

And XMR doesn't have this decentralization thing completely figured out yet either, IMO.

Regardless, I'd like to see this component of the technologies discussed.



You raise some very good points.

Firstly, Darkcoin masternodes are fully decentralized. Anybody with 1000DRK can run one wherever and however they like.  There is no central control over the masternode network.

Your concerns about distribution amongst VPS providers is entirely valid and one that the community has been concerned about since masternodes started to exist.  At one point over 50% of masternodes were hosted on AWS for example.  Since then there has been a concerted effort to spread hosting locations to other providers in different jurisdictions around the world.  I haven't seen a breakdown of VPS provider for a while but I suspect that there is considerable diversity now, if not a small preference towards AWS still.

Home hosting is a real minority but I wouldn't be suprised to see this increase in the future.  Testing on the new Raspberry Pi has gone very well and masternodes seem to be stable on them.

In terms of IP addresses, yet another valid point although the code for IP blinding was released onto Github by Evan yesterday.  This won't protect masternodes from direct attack rather blind masternodes of each other's existence and involvement in a transaction which greatly increases network security. 






Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on March 04, 2015, 03:47:46 PM

We can have this healthy debate regarding privacy technology, but if the network is owned or capable of being owned by small groups of people, who cares?

The network isn't "owned" by a small number of people any more than the Bitcoin network is owned by the "small number of people" who happen to be running full nodes at any given time.

The only thing anybody "owns" is portions of the coin supply - i.e. they control addresses holding coins. That makes the entire coin holding population the "owners" of the network whether they hold 50 DRK or 50,000. Sometimes certain people are running masternodes, sometimes others are.

Masternodes are *de-centralised*, not centralised.

What that means is that anyone who has access to sufficient coin supply can launch one anytime anywhere without recourse to a central authority. They don't even need 1000 DRK anymore to benefit, own and draw a return from the masternode network because there are masternode pools emerging which people can subscribe to by "parking" whatever balance they want with the pool - analogous to mining pools.

The idea that there are "2100 masternodes" makes it seem like a static block of nodes representing a static block of owners. It isn't, it's a constantly changing block representing a constantly changing block of owners.

Finally, the redundant coin supply also represents "implicit" masternodes ". With Bitcoin, we often refer to blockchain addresses as "wallets", even though no actual wallet application is running that accesses that address. Masternodes are exactly the same - any blockchain address that has a minimum of 1000 DRK in it is a potential masternode - it just needs the daemon to be launched against it. If the Darkcoin devs had called masternodes "wallets" (which they are - they are just regular wallet daemons with the masternode status set to "active") instead of masternodes the perception would be a whole lot different but the reality the same.

So there you see - masternodes are just as decentralised as regular wallets. In fact they *are* regular wallets and the fact that there's fewer of them does'nt make them any less decentralised.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GingerAle on March 04, 2015, 04:01:16 PM
Hrm, I guess then this transgresses into the POW POS debate.

But here its particularly interesting, due to the DRK networks privacy technology being intermingled with the value of the currency.

And this can spawn the "cc's wil be the only currency so it doesn't matter" but yes, it does. If DRK becomes worldwide, value skyrockets. Then MN requirements either have to change (by what authority?). Potential for epic forking.

BTW, pools are a stop gap measure. True decentralization will find a way to rid of these, IMO.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 04, 2015, 04:02:28 PM
Hrm, I guess then this transgresses into the POW POS debate.

But here its particularly interesting, due to the DRK networks privacy technology being intermingled with the value of the currency.

And this can spawn the "cc's wil be the only currency so it doesn't matter" but yes, it does. If DRK becomes worldwide, value skyrockets. Then MN requirements either have to change (by what authority?). Potential for epic forking.

BTW, pools are a stop gap measure. True decentralization will find a way to rid of these, IMO.

I have to agree with you on the pools front but thats a problem to solved by a man or lady greater than I.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 05:34:53 PM
You are too kind smooth, there is no argue with scammers, they know what they are into and want to suck people there, last time I had this kind of abrasive reaction (like the attacks from sdc clones in this thread) was when I argued about the 100% premined NXT in poloniex trollbox, trolls will jump at your throat if you start speaking what you see, best let the scams go down the sewage totally ignored.

Perhaps I was too harsh on smooth yesterday. I did have several pints of ale so prob got carried away.
Anyway as u can prob tell Im in a better frame of mind today…
Why pick out Pline btw? He's a gent.

p.s. aren't u the guy i tried speaking Esperanto to on twitter? You never got back to me :(



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 05:42:06 PM
p.s. aren't u the guy i tried speaking Esperanto to on twitter? You never got back to me :(

yes, please ignore that, I re-tweeted and responded the wrong tweets that day

replied you now :P

hehe… ill take a look… i think i know what to expect ;)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GTO911 on March 04, 2015, 05:48:45 PM
Lets end the war in simple words -

Darkcoin relies on masternodes for mixing. These masternodes are controlled by third parties. Why should i rely on third parties for my privacy?

Whereas Monero has mixing hardcorded into the system itself. No need to rely on anybody


Hence Monero > Darkcoin


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 05:54:54 PM
Lets end the war in simple words -

Darkcoin relies on masternodes for mixing. These masternodes are controlled by third parties. Why should i rely on third parties for my privacy?

Whereas Monero has mixing hardcorded into the system itself. No need to rely on anybody


Hence Monero > Darkcoin

^what he said. Replace references of XMR to SDC (obviously since it's me)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 04, 2015, 06:19:06 PM
LOL.  Well done!  Monero and SDC win!

We look forward to seeing you both further up the market cap list in the future  :)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 06:49:25 PM
LOL.  Well done!  Monero and SDC win!

We look forward to seeing you both further up the market cap list in the future  :)

So i guess that's First Blood? :P ;)
And the there were two…  8)

Here is something ur man smooth probably doesnt know about Shadow…  ;) LOL




Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 04, 2015, 07:03:32 PM
@MalMen

Could u pls update the name of this thread to:

SDC vs DRK vs XMR warez

Thx o/


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Polycoin on March 05, 2015, 01:49:46 AM
I fully support shadowcash dawg. Me and shadowcash wit Our preminz, we go rain on yo mothfuckaz!

Ayyo, SDC may be a scam 10x worse than darkcoin, but we still go own yall! #neverstopthefight


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 05, 2015, 03:28:21 AM
I fully support shadowcash dawg. Me and shadowcash wit Our preminz, we go rain on yo mothfuckaz!

Ayyo, SDC may be a scam 10x worse than darkcoin, but we still go own yall! #neverstopthefight

EXCELLENT!

So I dragged your sorry ass outta ur DRK cave ;)
Good. Back on neutral territory. I have you now, hehe.

BTW just in case u think i might be phased by ur horrible use of our language… ur wrong ;)

LETS DO THIS! \o/

C'mon XMR - come out & play :D


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: xxxgoodgirls on March 05, 2015, 04:39:48 AM
^ the cancer of btctalk


Title: SDC vs DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 05, 2015, 11:59:22 AM
^ the cancer of btctalk

That's quite the honorific. Altho I must say I prefer:
the caesar of bcttalk

Shadow is upsetting the "balance". Shadw is disruptive? Good.

http://i.imgur.com/XEnaIgdh.png


Title: SDC vs DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 05, 2015, 01:20:07 PM
Out of respect for all the hard work the Shadow Team,  and any other devs working hard, I will pull out of all threads in BCT which are not concerned with my primary area of interest i.e. SDC. I'll maintain this AT LEAST until after the Isidor Zeuner peer review is out.

Some might say I'm a troll or that I tarnished the Shadow brand. Neither of these statements is true.
My work here is done and I'm moving on.

But if anybody here is under some misapprehension that Shadow is not the real deal let me disabuse them of that notion right now.

There's a storm coming. Clouds gather. Shadows lengthen.




LET us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherized upon a table;
Let us go, through certain half-deserted streets,
The muttering retreats
Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels
And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:
Streets that follow like a tedious argument
Of insidious intent
To lead you to an overwhelming question….
Oh, do not ask, “What is it?”
Let us go and make our visit.

In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo
.


Be seeing you.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: coinpr0n on March 05, 2015, 01:49:16 PM
These wars are pretty funny. The tech is totally left aside and it's just insults being thrown around. I see it on one of the main DRK threads too. What's going on?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 05, 2015, 02:03:01 PM
These wars are pretty funny. The tech is totally left aside and it's just insults being thrown around. I see it on one of the main DRK threads too. What's going on?

As a DRK team member and bag holder, I really have no idea.  May the best coin win.  Which may well be none of us.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GingerAle on March 05, 2015, 04:36:24 PM
this thread was doin OK up until a point. My comment seemed to have flummoxed the dark side.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 05, 2015, 04:37:48 PM
this thread was doin OK up until a point. My comment seemed to have flummoxed the dark side.

Which comments did I not respond to?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Hueristic on March 05, 2015, 04:42:16 PM
First of all I want to thank the shill who linked this old worthless thread that I wasted my morning on reading. It contains nothing that is not common knowledge. But there are some things I couldn't let pass so HERE is a free bump for the moron who linked this thread thinking it helped his case when in fact it makes him look as retarded as he must be to have linked it.

Pline: I wouldnt bother with smooth. He refuses to open his mind or wait for the Zeuner review.

I fail to see why you throw this around as if it holds weight. Also I have no clue why you referenced this post in a XMR thread as if it contained anything to support your shilling. It actually detracts from any point you are trying to make. Have you actually sat down and read this thread straight through? You and SDC crew come off looking very foolish. If I were you I would want this thread to die.

Hah and after a quick google I see this touted review still hasn't occured! What a joke you guys are.
https://plus.google.com/118328794351657039283/posts/avgmVgEdURX
Quote
ShadowCash
Shared publicly  -  Jan 15, 2015
 #shadow
Support Shadow Whitepaper Review and Code Audit

Only 0,45911939 BTC remaining from 5 BTC goal of independent Shadow's code audit by Isidor Zeuner. Support SDC/Shadow and donate a few mBTC, we're almost there!


...
Here is a link to a recent article he has wrote. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card)
...

Here are a couple examples of his posts having to do with anonymity and Tor:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg06525.html

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg03712.html

Holy shit! From what you guys have linked this guy is nothing more than a programmer. He can peer review that the code is functioning but nothing more. He is in no way shape or form capable or qualified to make a determination on topology of said implementation.




I wouldn't touch DRK with a stick. Nodes can be attacked easily by an adversary with the required resources, the initial instamine thing and the name... on the other hand Monero has ring signatures which I trust a lot more.

Smart man! Even if DRK is adopted it will be broken immediately as soon as LEA wants it and alot of people will be in the headlines and the floor will drop out in one day. I wouldn't be surprised if Gov agencies aren't helping pump it just so fools start using it thinking they are safe, if I was them I would. ;)



Master Nodes are the future of crypto Apps......

Did you actually read this thread? ::)




HEY OP, Do you know what warez are? I think you mean Warz, Amirite?




Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GingerAle on March 05, 2015, 05:05:47 PM
yeah, i wasted my yesterday morning on it as well. I wanted somewhere to discuss, or get input from DRK people because I really don't understand 1. the hostility and 2. why peeps are all about DRK. And I didn't want to venture into their ANN thread because there's a lot of activity there and I assumed I would get lambasted with "troll" or "shill" or whatever.  So I saw this thread... I hope I wasn't the one that bumped it hueristic:)

stonehedge: there was no comment on the intrinsic connection between currency valuation and privacy technology and its subsequent implications. You focused on my pool comment, which is something that we apparently agree on re: decentralization.

Imagine if DRK goes to, i dunno, something ridiculous - $10k
based on current code, thats 10 million USD.
So, this either entrenches the existing MN network and reduces entry for increased network privacy and essentially centralizes this component.
Or it causes decrease in privacy because everyone has their price (sell my MN for 10 million? sure, whoever you are and whatever you plan on doing if you can just throw 10 million $$ around)

I mean, yes, the above scenario may be extreme but these sorts of things need to be considered if we are talking about creating technology that will be used worldwide as a means of transferring value.

One potential solution, of course, is to modify the code to adjust the wallet level cutoff for masternodes, but I can imagine this would be a hardfork (fork A continues with only 1k masternodes, fork B continues with 0.5k masternodes, whatever). ANd this type of forking requires full network consensus, else you'll end up with two different networks eventually... if I understand my cryptocurrency tech correctly.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Hueristic on March 05, 2015, 05:15:14 PM
yeah, i wasted my yesterday morning on it as well. I wanted somewhere to discuss, or get input from DRK people because I really don't understand 1. the hostility and 2. why peeps are all about DRK. And I didn't want to venture into their ANN thread because there's a lot of activity there and I assumed I would get lambasted with "troll" or "shill" or whatever.  So I saw this thread... I hope I wasn't the one that bumped it hueristic:)...

No, child had it linked in another thread.

Since this thread is moderated the op should go through and delete all the trash that came after the real discussion.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 05, 2015, 05:16:06 PM
yeah, i wasted my yesterday morning on it as well. I wanted somewhere to discuss, or get input from DRK people because I really don't understand 1. the hostility and 2. why peeps are all about DRK. And I didn't want to venture into their ANN thread because there's a lot of activity there and I assumed I would get lambasted with "troll" or "shill" or whatever.  So I saw this thread... I hope I wasn't the one that bumped it hueristic:)

stonehedge: there was no comment on the intrinsic connection between currency valuation and privacy technology and its subsequent implications. You focused on my pool comment, which is something that we apparently agree on re: decentralization.

Imagine if DRK goes to, i dunno, something ridiculous - $10k
based on current code, thats 10 million USD.
So, this either entrenches the existing MN network and reduces entry for increased network privacy and essentially centralizes this component.
Or it causes decrease in privacy because everyone has their price (sell my MN for 10 million? sure, whoever you are and whatever you plan on doing if you can just throw 10 million $$ around)

I mean, yes, the above scenario may be extreme but these sorts of things need to be considered if we are talking about creating technology that will be used worldwide as a means of transferring value.

One potential solution, of course, is to modify the code to adjust the wallet level cutoff for masternodes, but I can imagine this would be a hardfork (fork A continues with only 1k masternodes, fork B continues with 0.5k masternodes, whatever). ANd this type of forking requires full network consensus, else you'll end up with two different networks eventually... if I understand my cryptocurrency tech correctly.

Oh yes.  I didn't answer because I don't have the knowledge to answer the question without a lot of guesswork.  It might seem like a bother but if you signed up on darkcointalk.org you wouldn't be treated as a troll or shill.  You are asking a very valid question.    Either that or go to darkcoin.io, pick a dev and send them an email.  The'd be glad to help.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GingerAle on March 05, 2015, 05:20:22 PM
^^^ Thanks, I'll just wait for a reply here, unless I get really motivated.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 05, 2015, 05:21:29 PM
^^^ Thanks, I'll just wait for a reply here, unless I get really motivated.

I'll see if I can get somebody to pop over and answer it for you...most of the Darkcoin brains steer clear of BCT.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Propulsion on March 05, 2015, 05:32:33 PM
^^^ Thanks, I'll just wait for a reply here, unless I get really motivated.

I'll see if I can get somebody to pop over and answer it for you...most of the Darkcoin brains steer clear of BCT.

Pish....  :D


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: MalMen on March 05, 2015, 06:00:54 PM
yeah, i wasted my yesterday morning on it as well. I wanted somewhere to discuss, or get input from DRK people because I really don't understand 1. the hostility and 2. why peeps are all about DRK. And I didn't want to venture into their ANN thread because there's a lot of activity there and I assumed I would get lambasted with "troll" or "shill" or whatever.  So I saw this thread... I hope I wasn't the one that bumped it hueristic:)

stonehedge: there was no comment on the intrinsic connection between currency valuation and privacy technology and its subsequent implications. You focused on my pool comment, which is something that we apparently agree on re: decentralization.

Imagine if DRK goes to, i dunno, something ridiculous - $10k
based on current code, thats 10 million USD.
So, this either entrenches the existing MN network and reduces entry for increased network privacy and essentially centralizes this component.
Or it causes decrease in privacy because everyone has their price (sell my MN for 10 million? sure, whoever you are and whatever you plan on doing if you can just throw 10 million $$ around)

I mean, yes, the above scenario may be extreme but these sorts of things need to be considered if we are talking about creating technology that will be used worldwide as a means of transferring value.

One potential solution, of course, is to modify the code to adjust the wallet level cutoff for masternodes, but I can imagine this would be a hardfork (fork A continues with only 1k masternodes, fork B continues with 0.5k masternodes, whatever). ANd this type of forking requires full network consensus, else you'll end up with two different networks eventually... if I understand my cryptocurrency tech correctly.



Thats a very good question.. the price now is pumping in my opinion because of the need of masternodes, and the need of 1000DKR to own a masternode, after the masternode stop beeing profitable for the small owners they will dump, and the price that time or will stablizate as the big masternode players buy back that coins to create more masternodes, or will go down...
I am almost sure that will happen at some point, and the masternode system will be soo descentralized as the bitcoin mining is right now

note: this is just my opinion, i am all ears to know what you people think :)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 05, 2015, 06:04:42 PM
There are so many possible permutations.

We've just made another major release (this one includes masternode blinding!)  so people might be busy for a while but I'd like to see an informed debate on this topic here...


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 05, 2015, 06:05:13 PM
^^^ Thanks, I'll just wait for a reply here, unless I get really motivated.

I'll see if I can get somebody to pop over and answer it for you...most of the Darkcoin brains steer clear of BCT.

Pish....  :D

Come on then props, step up with a view :D


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Hueristic on March 05, 2015, 06:06:00 PM
There are so many possible permutations.

We've just made another major release (this one includes masternode blinding!)  so people might be busy for a while but I'd like to see an informed debate on this topic here...

Wanna link what masternode blinding is. I've never heard of it.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 05, 2015, 06:16:46 PM
My bad, its just a testnet update.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: qwizzie on March 05, 2015, 06:35:13 PM
There are so many possible permutations.

We've just made another major release (this one includes masternode blinding!)  so people might be busy for a while but I'd like to see an informed debate on this topic here...

Wanna link what masternode blinding is. I've never heard of it.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-11-1-instantx-development-update.3769/

Quote
Masternode Blinding

Recently a paper by 3 researches at Saarland University came out describing a new technique, while there are some serious problems with the approach they take, the concept of blinding the users they use is novel. In CoinShuffle, each output is sent to the next peer in a circle, one at a time. The new peer adds an output, shuffles and then sends the list again. We can do this and actually improve upon it.

To implement blinding, each user would connect to one completely random masternode and say "Send masternode X this output/value for mix N" and pass a single output. That output would be passed to the leading masternode. It would take access to all masternodes used to know who did what, which is as solid as M rounds mathematically (M = number of outputs). This is great because all users can submit all inputs at once. So it's super fast compared to CoinShuffle and even more secure.

This looks like something that could be implemented relatively fast (its being tested on Testnet as we speak). It creates far more anonymity, works faster and needs less rounds of mixing (4 to 6 rounds will now give very very strong anonymity).  


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 05, 2015, 06:57:24 PM
There are so many possible permutations.

We've just made another major release (this one includes masternode blinding!)  so people might be busy for a while but I'd like to see an informed debate on this topic here...

Wanna link what masternode blinding is. I've never heard of it.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-11-1-instantx-development-update.3769/

Quote
Masternode Blinding

Recently a paper by 3 researches at Saarland University came out describing a new technique, while there are some serious problems with the approach they take, the concept of blinding the users they use is novel. In CoinShuffle, each output is sent to the next peer in a circle, one at a time. The new peer adds an output, shuffles and then sends the list again. We can do this and actually improve upon it.

To implement blinding, each user would connect to one completely random masternode and say "Send masternode X this output/value for mix N" and pass a single output. That output would be passed to the leading masternode. It would take access to all masternodes used to know who did what, which is as solid as M rounds mathematically (M = number of outputs). This is great because all users can submit all inputs at once. So it's super fast compared to CoinShuffle and even more secure.

This looks like something that could be implemented relatively fast (its being tested on Testnet as we speak). It creates far more anonymity, works faster and needs less rounds of mixing (4 to 6 rounds will now give very very strong anonymity).  


The net effect of this is as follows:

Probability of following Darksend through
  - 4 non-blinded rounds with 10 masternodes* is (10/2300)^4 == 3.5734577849564574e-10
  - 4 blinded rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)**4 == 1.1528508353537067e-189

Each round uses 20 random masternodes of 2300, so you must control 20 of 2300 four times in a row. It's super secure .

Here's the new probablities for each successive round:
  - 1 rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)^1 == 5.826976675086318e-48
  - 2 rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)^2 == 3.3953657171999996e-95
  - 3 rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)^3 == 1.9784716837512123e-142
  - 4 rounds with 1000 masternodes is ((1000/2300.0)^20)^4 == 1.1528508353537028e-29
* attacker controlled


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 05, 2015, 10:43:08 PM
4 what its worth…

"According to documents newly released by Edward Snowden, …

Please allow me to stop u there.

From day one I have always felt Snowdon was a shill for 3 reasons:

1) He escaped the U.S without death
2) Nobody lost a job cause of his "revelations"
3) The NSA budget increased the folloeing year


In short, anything outta the U.S. is prob BS
This includes DRK (eduffield) who by now should've had a couple meetings with the NSA.

p.s 12 months ago I urged Duffield to get outta the U.S

He didn't respond. He still lives there.

What can I say?


p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: xxxgoodgirls on March 06, 2015, 12:34:47 AM

p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced how can MNs contain backdoors


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 06, 2015, 12:37:39 AM

p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced

I was referring to the VPS providers MN ops utilize e.g. vultr and AWS
You ignored my comments about evan's geo-location. Fair enuff. Not my prob anymore.

Bye bye.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 06, 2015, 12:39:33 AM

p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced

you obviously dont have coding experience. otherwise you'd know how easy it is to place nefarious code in a way which is very hard to find.

for starters: http://underhanded.xcott.com/

( i didnt say that drk has a backdoor and to be honest i dont believe that this is the case now. )


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: onemorexmr on March 06, 2015, 12:40:38 AM

p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced

I was referring to the VPS providers MN ops utilize e.g. vultr and AWS
You ignored my comments about evan's geo-location. Fair enuff. Not my prob anymore.

Bye bye.

wow... is the sdc-code review done? where can i find it?


Title: SDC vs DRK vs XMR warz ;)
Post by: child_harold on March 06, 2015, 12:46:16 AM

p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced

I was referring to the VPS providers MN ops utilize e.g. vultr and AWS
You ignored my comments about evan's geo-location. Fair enuff. Not my prob anymore.

Bye bye.

wow... is the sdc-code review done? where can i find it?

No its not

To answer ur question I still feel my area of interest (SDC) is represented here.
Do u plan to address any of the issues I raised…?

We should all be grateful I will no longer post in ur primary threads, at least for the time being.


REMINDER: if smooth is right then SDC is XMR on a BTC blockchian. If he's wrong than maybe it's better…



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: toknormal on March 06, 2015, 11:07:35 AM

Here you go folks, the first fruits of Darkcoin's original design priorities - legacy compatibility with Bitcoin and Schaum's blind signature approach:

[1] - Trezor (http://www.coindesk.com/review-bitcoin-vault-trezor-lives-name/) wallet now available for Darkcoin: https://twitter.com/taoofsatoshi/status/573702695078531072

[2] - some mainstream recognition

http://i.imgur.com/z78MGyH.png (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/06/tips-tricks-anonymous-privacy)




Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BaxterJames on March 06, 2015, 03:06:09 PM
Allegedly Darkcoin has been cracked, anyone care to comment?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.0


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: illodin on March 06, 2015, 03:11:00 PM
Allegedly Darkcoin has been cracked, anyone care to comment?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.0

Dunno if it's a problem, but if it is, seems to be easy fix, and likely obsolete anyway, as the new masternode blinding process is totally different.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BaxterJames on March 06, 2015, 03:19:50 PM
Allegedly Darkcoin has been cracked, anyone care to comment?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.0

Dunno if it's a problem, but if it is, seems to be easy fix, and likely obsolete anyway, as the new masternode blinding process is totally different.

Even if masternode blinding solves the problem, this still implies that every Darksend transaction up to this point has been traceable, that does not look good.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: BaxterJames on March 06, 2015, 03:24:39 PM
Of course the whole thing could be hot air, we shall see.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: stonehedge on March 06, 2015, 04:48:12 PM
So far there has been a hypothetical debate but E-K has not come up with the goods.  That doesn't mean that he won't though.  I guess we just wait and see.  I suspect that if there is a problem it will be patched faster than it can be exploited.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Este Nuno on March 06, 2015, 04:58:29 PM
I've gotten the impression for a long time from people who know a lot more about crypto than I that mixing in general is not a strong form of anonymity. And that given enough resources an attacker should be able to link the transactions and deanonymize the user.

Maybe the technology has improved over time though.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: nachoig on March 06, 2015, 07:14:09 PM
So far there has been a hypothetical debate but E-K has not come up with the goods.  That doesn't mean that he won't though.  I guess we just wait and see.  I suspect that if there is a problem it will be patched faster than it can be exploited.

The problem is how to fix this for past transactions.

_____

Just a comment about coin supplies, which is a constant issue in Darkcoin:  changing coin supply or emission is a bad idea. This is why Darkcoin looks an instamined coin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=970176.msg10612547#msg10612547
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=977003.msg10676123#msg10676123

A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. I'm not saying a fixed supply is better than a non-fixed supply or vice-versa, but what I'm saying is this shouldn't be changed afterwards.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Oscilson on March 06, 2015, 07:20:43 PM
A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. I'm not saying a fixed supply is better than a non-fixed supply or vice-versa, but what I'm saying is this shouldn't be changed afterwards.

A low inflation is good to keep the monetary supply with economy growth and discourage hoarding. It will also compensate lost coins.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: GingerAle on March 06, 2015, 07:39:36 PM
A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. I'm not saying a fixed supply is better than a non-fixed supply or vice-versa, but what I'm saying is this shouldn't be changed afterwards.

A low inflation is good to keep the monetary supply with economy growth and discourage hoarding. It will also compensate lost coins.

also, its one thing to change the original emission so that is it less than intended, vs what XMR plans to do which is an increase in emission, which in theory does not benefit early adopters.

/derail


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: fluffypony on March 06, 2015, 07:42:53 PM
A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.0534v11.pdf) paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (https://web.archive.org/web/20140520215957/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0) (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Joshuar on March 06, 2015, 09:59:03 PM
A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.0534v11.pdf) paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (https://web.archive.org/web/20140520215957/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0) (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.

Well said!


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 01:37:45 AM
A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.0534v11.pdf) paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (https://web.archive.org/web/20140520215957/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0) (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.

Well said!

thats why I like Monero, ethics and sound math, code is being worked on, the only anonymous crypto worth any money/attention.

respectfully disagree.

SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth.
the diffs r that SDC is a BTC fork so is ready for B2B use toady with a gorgeous GUI wallet, something Monero users have long wished for.

I believe the phrase "magic wallet" has been bandied around thr XMR thread. what is the ETA btw?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 01:46:40 AM
A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.0534v11.pdf) paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (https://web.archive.org/web/20140520215957/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0) (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.

Well said!

thats why I like Monero, ethics and sound math, code is being worked on, the only anonymous crypto worth any money/attention.

respectfully disagree.

SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth.

That would be true if the implementation were as mature and well-developed, and if you continue to follow our research lead on how various edge conditions in cryptonote need to be addressed.

Quote
the diffs r that SDC is a BTC fork so is ready for B2B use toady with a gorgeous GUI wallet, something Monero users have long wished for.

I believe the phrase "magic wallet" has been bandied around thr XMR thread. what is the ETA btw?

Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 01:53:05 AM
A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.0534v11.pdf) paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (https://web.archive.org/web/20140520215957/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0) (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.

Well said!

thats why I like Monero, ethics and sound math, code is being worked on, the only anonymous crypto worth any money/attention.

respectfully disagree.

SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth.

That would be true if the implementation were as mature and well-developed, and if you continue to follow our research lead on how various edge conditions in cryptonote need to be addressed.

Quote
the diffs r that SDC is a BTC fork so is ready for B2B use toady with a gorgeous GUI wallet, something Monero users have long wished for.

I believe the phrase "magic wallet" has been bandied around thr XMR thread. what is the ETA btw?

Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

But getting back on point:

You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 01:59:24 AM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 02:08:30 AM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.


whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…  the fact SDC is a BTC fork should mean B2B is pretty much setup already, no?

IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:33:21 AM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.


whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…

I'm not arguing it, I said I can't say. Just because you are a Bitcoin fork doesn't mean you don't have bugs, etc. I have no idea, so I can't say.

Quote
IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?

For b2b the DB is largely irrelevant, as having a few GB of RAM on a server is really not a big deal (and in return for having everything in RAM at essentially zero access time you do get better performance than any DB, including Bitcoin's). The DB matters for low end laptops and some low end desktops, running nodes on a Raspberry Pi, etc.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: ArticMine on March 07, 2015, 02:35:10 AM
...
As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?
...

It is fair to say that one area Monero is still lacking is a GUI Wallet for GNU/Linux. Yes there is myMonero.com but that is an alternative to blockchain.info. The choice faced by one wishing to run one's own Monero client is 1) Learn the GNU/Linux terminal or 2) Run the risk of providing one's private keys to the NSA via Microsoft’s membership in the PRISM program. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29). Of course those of use willing to learn the GNU/Linux terminal can take advantage of the current situation and purchase cheap XMR. My take is this situation will not last long; however in the meantime this may well be a reason why DRK is still trading at over 5X the capitalization of XMR.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 02:39:40 AM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.


whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…

I'm not arguing it, I said I can't say. Just because you are a Bitcoin fork doesn't mean you don't have bugs, etc. I have no idea, so I can't say.

Quote
IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?

For b2b the DB is largely irrelevant, as having a few GB of RAM on a server is really not a big deal (and in return for having everything in RAM at essentially zero access time you do get better performance than any DB, including Bitcoin's). The DB matters for low end laptops and some low end desktops, running nodes on a Raspberry Pi, etc.


1) Let me firstly say thanks for your answers.
2) but if the DB was "stable" it would be out of RAM, yes? Or to get to the point why is it still in RAM?



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:46:50 AM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.


whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…

I'm not arguing it, I said I can't say. Just because you are a Bitcoin fork doesn't mean you don't have bugs, etc. I have no idea, so I can't say.

Quote
IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?

For b2b the DB is largely irrelevant, as having a few GB of RAM on a server is really not a big deal (and in return for having everything in RAM at essentially zero access time you do get better performance than any DB, including Bitcoin's). The DB matters for low end laptops and some low end desktops, running nodes on a Raspberry Pi, etc.


1) Let me firstly say thanks for your answers.
2) but if the DB was "stable" it would be out of RAM, yes? Or to get to the point why is it still in RAM?

The DB is still in testing, and quite a few people are using it. It has been somewhat stable for a month or so, but we aren't pushing it out on an aggressive schedule because the existing solution works fine given sufficient RAM (so everywhere except lower-end systems). It is critical code and can use even more testing. The performance can also be improved, although if we had to we could live with the current performance.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Johnny Mnemonic on March 07, 2015, 02:58:59 AM
SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth...

Want to know the difference between SDC and XMR?

Just take a look at the 100 richest SDC addresses and compare them to the 100 richest XMR addresses.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 03:00:21 AM
good chat smooth… just to quickly wrap-up

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.
Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?
That'll do me for now…  
cheers


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 03:02:26 AM
good chat smooth… just to quickly wrap-up

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.
Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?

Sure, that's true for any of the hundreds of Bitcoin clones. What makes SDC different and valuable I thought was Shadow (?), and integration of that is not something you can do "BTC style."

If anything this is a better argument for DRK as opposed to XMR, and that is also conveniently on-topic for the thread and not someone from another coin spamming.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 03:03:27 AM
SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth...

Want to know the difference between SDC and XMR?

Just take a look at the 100 richest SDC addresses and compare them to the 100 richest XMR addresses.

OK. assuming I did what would it show? Uneven distribution or something? that's the scourge of the whole crypto space imo

(SDC has only 2% interest btw and is a proof-of-stake coin)


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 03:03:56 AM
...
As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?
...

It is fair to say that one area Monero is still lacking is a GUI Wallet for GNU/Linux.

The open source ones should compile on Linux.

LightWallet is a python program and should directly work on Linux, but there may be some minor tweaks required (file paths and such).

The ones that are very problematic for Linux are:

1. .NET since it doesn't use portable APIs that can run with mono, as I understand it.

2. The one that is implemented using the popular Windows scripting tool (forget the name).


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 03:04:58 AM
good chat smooth… just to quickly wrap-up

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.
Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?

Sure, that's true for any of the hundreds of Bitcoin clones. What makes SDC different and valuable I thought was Shadow (?), and integration of that is not something you can do "BTC style."

If anything this is a better argument for DRK as opposed to XMR, and that is also conveniently on-topic for the thread and not someone from another coin spamming.


I thought it was. Just a stealth addy required. There r QR generators I believe.

that should do it, no?


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 03:07:27 AM
good chat smooth… just to quickly wrap-up

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.
Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?

Sure, that's true for any of the hundreds of Bitcoin clones. What makes SDC different and valuable I thought was Shadow (?), and integration of that is not something you can do "BTC style."

If anything this is a better argument for DRK as opposed to XMR, and that is also conveniently on-topic for the thread and not someone from another coin spamming.


I thought it was. Just a stealth addy required. There r QR generators I believe.

that should do it, no?

The format of addresses is different and may not "just work" with back end systems. You need a payment Id to identify transactions (or scan on many stealth addresses which is enormously computationally expensive) and you have to understand how to scan for incoming transactions. That's different from BTC where they just arrive on a fixed address. You also have to specify a mix factor on outgoing transactions, but its possible there is a default for that or something. Multisig doesn't exist.

Overall it is not "drop in" the way BTC clones (including DRK and SDC) are.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: Johnny Mnemonic on March 07, 2015, 03:16:56 AM
SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth...

Want to know the difference between SDC and XMR?

Just take a look at the 100 richest SDC addresses and compare them to the 100 richest XMR addresses.

OK. assuming I did what would it show? Uneven distribution or something? that's the scourge of the whole crypto space imo

(SDC has only 2% interest btw and is a proof-of-stake coin)

Nope. Has nothing to do with distribution. Just take 3 minutes and compare them.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 03:23:18 AM
SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth...

Want to know the difference between SDC and XMR?

Just take a look at the 100 richest SDC addresses and compare them to the 100 richest XMR addresses.

OK. assuming I did what would it show? Uneven distribution or something? that's the scourge of the whole crypto space imo

(SDC has only 2% interest btw and is a proof-of-stake coin)

It can't be done for XMR, I think that was his point.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 03:32:06 AM

It can't be done for XMR, I think that was his point.


Ah yes, I remember now.
Similarly Shadow tokens (SDT) are invisible on the SDC blockchain. quite.

If u might permit one more technical q smooth…

when sending SDC>SDT(shadow tokens) or SDT>SDT or SDT>SDC (all of which require stealth addys) the wallet has a "Suggest Ring Size" button which a user normally hits before sending. The typical values range from a ringsize of 16 to 60. Transactions fees are small (0.005-0.01 depending on ringsize iirc) annd the tx;s go thru very fast (1 min blocks)

I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

thanks
(this will be my final q for tonight)
 


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 03:39:40 AM
I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 03:41:39 AM
I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.

actually i dont think the bloat you describe exists. will confirm.

~20% of the currency is now shadow(sdt)
and converting back to sdc does not reduce anon I/O iirc
numbers here: http://shadowchain.info/chain/ShadowCash


Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 03:46:00 AM
I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.

actually i dont think the bloat you describe exists. will confirm.

It's in the white paper section 5.1

Quote
The affine coordinates are 64 bytes per ring member per coin value.

Shadow also has somewhat larger transactions than XMR too, because it uses fewer denominations (just 1, 3, 4, 5 instead of 1-9). That is an arguable tradeoff but it does make things bigger (to send 9 you have to send 4 and 5, so two sigs, not just 9).



Title: Re: DRK vs XMR warez
Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 03:53:32 AM
I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.

actually i dont think the bloat you describe exists. will confirm.

It's in the white paper section 5.1

Quote
The affine coordinates are 64 bytes per ring member per coin value.

Shadow also has somewhat larger transactions than XMR too, because it uses fewer denominations (just 1, 3, 4, 5 instead of 1-9). That is an arguable tradeoff but it does make things bigger (to send 9 you have to send 4 and 5, so two sigs, not just 9).




Interesting. Will forward this on to the relevant peoples for extra confirm.
Sufficed to say Shadow and Monero have much in common, except we got bigger default ring sizes (sounds dirty) and a shinier wallet ;)
(+ POS, BTC fork yada yada yada)

Thanks for dialoguing. gn