|
Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 02:09:25 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous! Proof inside. Post by: reRaise on March 06, 2015, 02:28:49 PM damn so dark coin is not anonymous
Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 02:30:42 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous! Proof inside. Post by: bytemuma on March 06, 2015, 02:35:10 PM Probably the price is going down, i'm gonna sell first. ;D
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous! Proof inside. Post by: JypsiCreme on March 06, 2015, 02:37:16 PM DarkCoin is not anonymous, while CryptoNote is!
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous! Proof inside. Post by: BrainShutdown on March 06, 2015, 02:38:49 PM Oh so you delete posts...
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous! Proof inside. Post by: Frank.Dux on March 06, 2015, 02:40:42 PM why dont you go further? if someone "CAN SUCCESSIVELY ESTABLISH THE ORIGINAL ORDER OF THE DARK SEND OUTPUTS" so you can do it too. do it and show us.
until that its just a fud. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous! Proof inside. Post by: GTO911 on March 06, 2015, 02:47:39 PM no further comment ! 8) Can you please stop posting useless stuff untill someone investigates and gives out some explanation? Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 03:00:11 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GTO911 on March 06, 2015, 03:01:49 PM You darkcoin holders, you know where the steam is coming from ? XMR is pumping and they want your place in the top... don't let them fool you with their dirty tricks. Comes along a fool Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: coins101 on March 06, 2015, 03:03:39 PM This sounds like an interesting approach. Its a bit obvious, but the nature of random assignment in the master node network probably means this fails to uncover the transaction history.
Waiting for replications reviews. Reserved. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous! Proof inside. Post by: Frank.Dux on March 06, 2015, 03:04:58 PM why dont you go further? if someone "CAN SUCCESSIVELY ESTABLISH THE ORIGINAL ORDER OF THE DARK SEND OUTPUTS" so you can do it too. do it and show us. until that its just a fud. I just gave an instruction of how to do it. Do it yourself and see that it works. do you think all drk investors are IT pro? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous! Proof inside. Post by: GTO911 on March 06, 2015, 03:06:45 PM do you think all drk investors are IT pro? Then on what grounds are they holding it? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 06, 2015, 03:07:44 PM Whilst logically set out I do not believe this takes the full mechanism into account. I give this a 1/10 chance of being replicable in the wild.
I hope that I am not proven wrong. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Sapereaude on March 06, 2015, 03:07:52 PM I have literally tried to follow op post's logic for the last 10 minutes... It seems to be held together by wishful thinking and the half chewed crayons the author stole from the psych ward he inhabits.
Also you know a post is legit when it uses tons of bold and font changes. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: NeuroticFish on March 06, 2015, 03:10:31 PM I would like this thread to live on and stay more technical. Can you guys do this please? It really started with something and I'd like to see how it goes on.
Why? Because this can develop to a proof that DRK is actually not anon OR it can strengthen DRK position as anonymous coin. Both cases would be a great help for us as community. Please keep the usual DRK vs XMR useless talk elsewhere, you have plenty of places for that. I've watched Evil-Knievel's attempts to find weaknesses in other places too (Bitcoin included), so let's give him some credit and maybe some smart guys can tell (and prove) if this is a start for something or not. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous! Proof inside. Post by: BrainShutdown on March 06, 2015, 03:10:44 PM why dont you go further? if someone "CAN SUCCESSIVELY ESTABLISH THE ORIGINAL ORDER OF THE DARK SEND OUTPUTS" so you can do it too. do it and show us. until that its just a fud. I just gave an instruction of how to do it. Do it yourself and see that it works. Oh boy even if this is true, it only requires a trivial patch to mitigate and you aren't even taking into account the new developments so your printscreens are just obsolete. Good cropping job though ::) Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 03:16:49 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 06, 2015, 03:19:54 PM Lets see what the devs say.
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: aleix on March 06, 2015, 03:26:11 PM I see, a constructive debate is not possible within this community. Sad, that people just close their eyes and "believe" instead of "knowing". hi, We have just now and active 4-5 pure FUD threads in this section, not to mention useless hundreds of pages just from troll attacks in our main thread. We have the automatic self-defense activated when see posts like this. Forgive us is we are a little protective to our project. Let devs talk. tnks. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Sapereaude on March 06, 2015, 03:26:53 PM I see, a constructive debate is not possible within this community. Sad, that people just close their eyes and "believe" instead of "knowing". Anyone who is at least a bit technically educated should see the problem here. I mean come on, it is not that hard, is it? 1. Inputs always unsorted 2. Outputs shuffled 3. Next transaction inputs unshuffled again which allows you to reassemble the original order in previous transaction 4. Multiple Amounts/Denominations allow only a few combinations how the original transaction looked like 4. Done! I wish that someone could post something technical, instead of the typical "troll" posts. How boring that is. Go on do it, go backwards four rounds and show us this holds up. First however you should actually find a transaction where mixing occurs because all I see is the wallet being broken down into smaller pieces for mixing and not actual mixing. Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 03:28:29 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 03:29:42 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 06, 2015, 03:29:57 PM I'm a fool to know that these threads only appear when other coins getting pumped ? I don't care about any pump, I am neither invested in DRK and I also do not plan to do so. I was hoping that it is possible to discuss here about technical details and question the techniques which are sold to us as "anonymous". But from the replies that I read here, I begin to understand why the markets are full of non-rational panicksters who blindly fall for every pump and dump. Why? Because the others "say something". Haven't you guys learned to question things? Are you always believing what someone tells you? I guess you have not even tried to follow what I have written. Sad stuff. Ed Duffield and the dev team area aware of your claims. Expecting non technical people to have a technical view of what you have done is unrealistic. Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 03:32:05 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 06, 2015, 03:33:32 PM Sad stuff. It's not sad stuff. You may have discovered an interesting angle on de-anonymisation and you may not have. But your posting it on bitcointalk, not an MIT science blog. As a previous poster already pointed out, statistically speaking there are about 100 FUD posts to every genuine "questioning post" as you put it. I'm also interested to see this technical discussion develop, but I'm not surprised that people go on the defensive if you post this out of the blue with no history of discussing the technology in other themes. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: eduffield on March 06, 2015, 03:42:14 PM Interesting approach, although the input order isn't random, it's randomly generated from multiple transactions on the client side. Even if it was completely not random, that doesn't allow you to "jump" the mixing transaction and know which outputs belong to which inputs.
Source TX: http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/9ad01adae3814abf9a9731f0003d95a0f9bf701d055152f7b54ee4b6be47bfca: Notice the inputs reference 5 transactions, but there's 3 participants. You can't tell where one stops and the next begins. Also, it's possible that multiple clients in this transaction were actually in 5bafee7a5397ad505658b1e37af812e64ebb2834601224e4f6f6675b4a25728b or b4534361c8247abcc6b428fd85a17546f23413b2777f3e3f372578d100b20c4e for example. http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/5bafee7a5397ad505658b1e37af812e64ebb2834601224e4f6f6675b4a25728b#o39 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/b4534361c8247abcc6b428fd85a17546f23413b2777f3e3f372578d100b20c4e#o40 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/1c1769d578f4632971dd699987931cf676a7356196a5b122c60d737fce3c836e#o76 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/7e452c1c5229fbbfdc1b4fc1d8577a6b9d0932bf5f00030d28ec7759dd9273ea#o61 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/3fba31e9cc32cd5e2c002ad4a8bd6908f3a76321e2d892f046265eb14352676e#o60 One more thing to note is that after coins are mixed through multiple sessions, there are "final" outputs that are just spent randomly. That can happen in any session, which causes more randomness. You most definitely can't map those randomly spent outputs to the inputs at all. That's what you should be trying to do, you need to be able to show anonymously spent coins and their original source funds. Nice try though PS. If you believe it's really a weakness you need to map the outputs to the inputs and show who's anonymously spending money on what. I'm not sure it's worth the time though, because masternode blinding randomizes the input order anyway. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: g4q34g4qg47ww on March 06, 2015, 03:44:01 PM I am betting all my 500 BTC on it, are you in? I would also accept an escrow. Interesting thread Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 03:48:34 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: eduffield on March 06, 2015, 04:00:49 PM Notice the inputs reference 5 transactions, but there's 3 participants. You can't tell where one stops and the next begins. Also, it's possible that multiple clients in this transaction were actually in 5bafee7a5397ad505658b1e37af812e64ebb2834601224e4f6f6675b4a25728b or b4534361c8247abcc6b428fd85a17546f23413b2777f3e3f372578d100b20c4e for example. I do not agree on this actually. From the transaction 5bafee... for example you can be sure that the inputs belong to one person only, as there is only one change output in the outputs list. (2 people would indicate two change outputs). Other input transactions can be analyzed the same way. Those transactions are a bad example of what I was saying. 5bafee7a5397ad505658b1e37af812e64ebb2834601224e4f6f6675b4a25728b and http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/b4534361c8247abcc6b428fd85a17546f23413b2777f3e3f372578d100b20c4e aren't mixing rounds at all. It's clients creating darksend compatible inputs. For example, this transaction http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/b649ff67a9863a9757049e6d6acc722043030b386d052f75839410f1f32bf3e5#i16 has 11 source transactions: http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/396016fb9d48cd648cbd46df016614128ca6ff71451548a64ef7cfd1bd6b86df#o19 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/7fdd4b736c9a9a78e5d09bdd5137c87af5d82c20035cbb4cbaf9970ea7f4b129#o45 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/aa87251f58213e5999d56fcd80fc5d4ddab0317af76bcb58751756fc27e05f7a#o12 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/7098889f50598e8e385e8f6108bcffbe4b9284165fb14f3d435c42a6fad50552#o50 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/50ce277e21dda233620163d2818a4998280381c937681d5ca1617ebc4d95ff9b#o35 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/b4534361c8247abcc6b428fd85a17546f23413b2777f3e3f372578d100b20c4e#o11 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/e0891c5fbebb9547cd86858646883fcd2d889c5a1f000b680ea06581a987f9c2#o8 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/8410744e1ab1f7a4e992031cd8f023fb00f65cf8271aecbe3aae0056c034cf99#o57 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/e0891c5fbebb9547cd86858646883fcd2d889c5a1f000b680ea06581a987f9c2#o4 It's possible that 1-3 participants are submitting funds from 4a067e00c76ccb554638c0d14d20e8f501f094ce9093fbf598c358c0835d77e5, it's impossible to tell otherwise. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Automatic Monkey on March 06, 2015, 04:07:57 PM Interesting approach, although the input order isn't random, it's randomly generated from multiple transactions on the client side. Even if it was completely not random, that doesn't allow you to "jump" the mixing transaction and know which outputs belong to which inputs. Source TX: http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/9ad01adae3814abf9a9731f0003d95a0f9bf701d055152f7b54ee4b6be47bfca: Notice the inputs reference 5 transactions, but there's 3 participants. You can't tell where one stops and the next begins. Also, it's possible that multiple clients in this transaction were actually in 5bafee7a5397ad505658b1e37af812e64ebb2834601224e4f6f6675b4a25728b or b4534361c8247abcc6b428fd85a17546f23413b2777f3e3f372578d100b20c4e for example. http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/5bafee7a5397ad505658b1e37af812e64ebb2834601224e4f6f6675b4a25728b#o39 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/b4534361c8247abcc6b428fd85a17546f23413b2777f3e3f372578d100b20c4e#o40 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/1c1769d578f4632971dd699987931cf676a7356196a5b122c60d737fce3c836e#o76 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/7e452c1c5229fbbfdc1b4fc1d8577a6b9d0932bf5f00030d28ec7759dd9273ea#o61 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/3fba31e9cc32cd5e2c002ad4a8bd6908f3a76321e2d892f046265eb14352676e#o60 One more thing to note is that after coins are mixed through multiple sessions, there are "final" outputs that are just spent randomly. That can happen in any session, which causes more randomness. You most definitely can't map those randomly spent outputs to the inputs at all. That's what you should be trying to do, you need to be able to show anonymously spent coins and their original source funds. Nice try though PS. If you believe it's really a weakness you need to map the outputs to the inputs and show who's anonymously spending money on what. I'm not sure it's worth the time though, because masternode blinding randomizes the input order anyway. It doesn't look like it would fully deanonymize it, but it could weaken the plausible deniability somewhat, and given the public ledger common to all cryptocurrency I think just a very high level of PD is the best we can hope for. The ideal level of PD would be one where all users of the system have the same level of it for each transaction, and thus could equally be held responsible for a particular transaction. What's not clear to me is how Darksend is different than just sending BTC through a mixer, or several unrelated mixers. Is it just the relatively large number of Darksend nodes that makes the difference? Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 04:08:22 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: eduffield on March 06, 2015, 04:23:46 PM It's possible that 1-3 participants are submitting funds from 4a067e00c76ccb554638c0d14d20e8f501f094ce9093fbf598c358c0835d77e5, it's impossible to tell otherwise. Then I just made the impossible possible, I know that these are exactly 2 people. When looking at http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/b649ff67a9863a9757049e6d6acc722043030b386d052f75839410f1f32bf3e5 There are exactly two sorted blocks from the 4a06 transaction appearing in the sorted input list of b649ff... which do not appear directly under each other They must have been submitted from two different people at two different times. Code: 7 4a067e00c7...:59 0.100001 XgVS4zvMm4ikZDtN2DSFgSgrrTrD2w5pq5 71:3044...8081 33:03f3...d69d and Code: 12 4a067e00c7...:55 1.00001 XvaXzvnWTwHRMfzLricVyxa3FtMqJvohRR 72:3045...8881 33:02b1...33f4 I think you're misunderstanding the random behavior of the client. It takes multiple transactions and submits them like this. Masternode blinding makes this whole conversation meaningless though, inputs will be random. Something like this: (This isn't deanonymizing the TX, I don't know who submitted what, it's just an example) Client 1: Code: 0 396016fb9d...:19 0.100001 XmEdFdQi99xwqn4SvZ47GQTgGWrwr8wGCj 72:3045...ad81 33:0322...86ef Code: 14 4a067e00c7...:50 1.00001 XbXrsJLGZSeW839LEHQh4K8HS7AvDRXjr6 71:3044...2d81 33:0231...538f Code: 21 8410744e1a...:57 0.100001 Xkj7CsXf9umYCTGSXH36UMV15Uyb4bFR1Z 71:3044...b981 33:0357...185e Example 2: Client 1: Code: 0 396016fb9d...:19 0.100001 XmEdFdQi99xwqn4SvZ47GQTgGWrwr8wGCj 72:3045...ad81 33:0322...86ef Code: 9 4a067e00c7...:41 1.00001 XmnDvUgBM8kQze5RATyozfkA9bazyWQ1W3 71:3044...2181 33:021a...a289 Code: 18 e0891c5fbe...:8 0.100001 XjvmB3XF6tfQW4TpZHFmmb5VpSdJfz63VU 71:3044...3881 33:0342...8b7b Example 3: Client 1: Code: 0 396016fb9d...:19 0.100001 XmEdFdQi99xwqn4SvZ47GQTgGWrwr8wGCj 72:3045...ad81 33:0322...86ef Code: 4 7098889f50...:50 0.100001 XqKzxHmJT1V2p4mUFQVp4tRMoKuiY5ooTU 72:3045...ed81 33:02fe...8220 Code: 11 b4534361c8...:11 0.100001 XvjDt1hjmNeX8Te2BSHMMrx794S3RW2UBh 72:3045...5681 33:03fb...f75f Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 04:27:02 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: eduffield on March 06, 2015, 04:32:25 PM Okay, agreed on this. However, as you have provided the original outputs sent by the clients we see that we at least have the correct order of them. And the point is that I do not think that it is important to know whether it is 1,2 or 3 people. As long as we have the correct order, all three trails will eventually lead to the originator. I am pretty sure that a transaction deanonymizer, which does this order reversal, could walk his way all the way back to the transactions where people started to denominating their funds, and get the # of users from the change outputs. Also, what I just thought, you can surely know which outputs belong together. Its just a little bit of bruteforce work from now on. As you said, those input belong together: 0 396016fb9d...:19 0.100001 XmEdFdQi99xwqn4SvZ47GQTgGWrwr8wGCj 72:3045...ad81 33:0322...86ef 1 7fdd4b736c...:45 1.00001 Xrw1JYmX2DgQ3GZ6g4EzpqigWrN7PFgmre 71:3044...ac81 33:039e...cee5 2 396016fb9d...:21 0.100001 XhyqpyLSRFWQrP2LuZup5XqZQ7o5qP4jvq 71:3044...8c81 33:0261...21a2 3 aa87251f58...:12 10.0001 Xg9cD2y8UVviaFLst3xESqt1gNPzfHxq25 72:3045...e881 33:02a8...6d95 4 7098889f50...:50 0.100001 XqKzxHmJT1V2p4mUFQVp4tRMoKuiY5ooTU 72:3045...ed81 33:02fe...8220 5 50ce277e21...:35 0.100001 Xged1P2SQ9Ntdb4yFxpiMHmuDCUkFbcwwS 71:3044...f881 33:02bf...eda9 6 b46f161497...:13 0.100001 Xyrz9y6J7633ZMRdsh7r5gY9ZVjQLRr9UL 72:3045...e981 33:023e...07d2 7 4a067e00c7...:59 0.100001 XgVS4zvMm4ikZDtN2DSFgSgrrTrD2w5pq5 71:3044...8081 33:03f3...d69d 8 4a067e00c7...:11 1.00001 XmAEq7k7n2spMATZbN2CpyPT6U4hNiefbr 72:3045...b981 33:03c4...ab69 9 4a067e00c7...:41 1.00001 XmnDvUgBM8kQze5RATyozfkA9bazyWQ1W3 71:3044...2181 33:021a...a289 10 b4534361c8...:23 1.00001 Xmi5ZRQUhV5eBicMYg3kLeVtgUYFtdPuco 72:3045...0381 33:0364...0ed3 11 b4534361c8...:11 0.100001 XvjDt1hjmNeX8Te2BSHMMrx794S3RW2UBh 72:3045...5681 33:03fb...f75f 12 4a067e00c7...:55 1.00001 XvaXzvnWTwHRMfzLricVyxa3FtMqJvohRR 72:3045...8881 33:02b1...33f4 13 4a067e00c7...:20 0.100001 XmHZ4DvHbBLmrHTHWCXYahp4n2SfnxWugt 72:3045...f081 33:02dd...b541 The blocks of the same color are in the correct order. The only open question is which of the blocks comes first, which second. For this we have 10*9*8*7*6*5*4*3*2 possibilities, SO TO CHECK HOW THE OUTPUTS WERE ORDERED IN THE PREVIOUS TRANSACTION ... we have to think. If the first input in the last transaction had a value of 0.10, only 5 of these blocks are candidates to come first. ... and so on! It is really easy and in a simple python test most transactions could be uncovered this way. You should try to build the python deanonymizer. I'd like to see what kind of results you get. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: g4q34g4qg47ww on March 06, 2015, 04:33:06 PM lol
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 06, 2015, 04:36:35 PM lol Doesn't somebody owe somebody else 500BTC? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: winteriscoming5 on March 06, 2015, 04:40:42 PM Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: BrainShutdown on March 06, 2015, 04:41:28 PM lol Doesn't somebody owe somebody else 500BTC? I didn't have time to move mine from the cold wallet. Damn non-instantX bitcoin transactions... :'( Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Longenecker on March 06, 2015, 04:55:24 PM We should set up a BTC donation fund for Evil-Knievel to build a Darkcoin python deanonymizer!
I pledge 1 BTC if Evil-Knievel successfully builds a Darkcoin python deanonymize. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: HinnomTX on March 06, 2015, 04:55:35 PM Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: tungfa on March 06, 2015, 05:05:09 PM Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: azguard on March 06, 2015, 05:06:52 PM this doens change anything for darkcoin
perhaps in future he will rise to some bigger point Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: CryptoChronic on March 06, 2015, 05:07:44 PM what evilknievel doesn't know is there're not just 3 people in each mixing...not from start to end ;)
However we do need more discussions like this! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: RW-Stott on March 06, 2015, 05:20:09 PM We should set up a BTC donation fund for Evil-Knievel to build a Darkcoin python deanonymizer! I pledge 1 BTC if Evil-Knievel successfully builds a Darkcoin python deanonymize. I'll add another 1 BTC to that. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MakingMoneyHoney on March 06, 2015, 05:27:47 PM what evilknievel doesn't know is there're not just 3 people in each mixing...not from start to end ;) However we do need more discussions like this! Yes, I find this fascinating. Even if something could show a vulnerability, with the Darkcoin dev being here and working on it constantly, any vulnerabilities can turn into strengths, when things get fixed (if they need fixing). Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: alex-ru on March 06, 2015, 05:29:44 PM In nearest future the only chance to buy big volume of DRK will be finding new temporary bugs. ;D
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: g4q34g4qg47ww on March 06, 2015, 05:36:47 PM OP when he finally gives up on his de-anonymizer..
http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/007/784/what-year-is-it-robin-williams.jpg Meanwhile masternode blinding is already on testnet and looking amazing. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: LucD88 on March 06, 2015, 05:44:55 PM Loving the conversations!
"Exposures" like this makes Darkcoin even stronger, whatever the outcome will be. Whether this is valid or not, thanks Evil-Knievel for pointing this out! :) Yes, I find this fascinating. Even if something could show a vulnerability, with the Darkcoin dev being here and working on it constantly, any vulnerabilities can turn into strengths, when things get fixed (if they need fixing). +1, amen to that! :DTitle: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Longenecker on March 06, 2015, 05:46:00 PM what evilknievel doesn't know is there're not just 3 people in each mixing...not from start to end ;) However we do need more discussions like this! Yes, I find this fascinating. Even if something could show a vulnerability, with the Darkcoin dev being here and working on it constantly, any vulnerabilities can turn into strengths, when things get fixed (if they need fixing). Can I have whatever koolaid you're drinking? What is more fascinating is that the Darkcoin dev has possibly been building upon a flawed foundation the entire time, unknowingly. This should lead you to question his capability and credibility. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: CryptoChronic on March 06, 2015, 05:49:36 PM what evilknievel doesn't know is there're not just 3 people in each mixing...not from start to end ;) However we do need more discussions like this! Yes, I find this fascinating. Even if something could show a vulnerability, with the Darkcoin dev being here and working on it constantly, any vulnerabilities can turn into strengths, when things get fixed (if they need fixing). Can I have whatever koolaid you're drinking? What is more fascinating is that the Darkcoin dev has possibly been building upon a flawed foundation the entire time, unknowingly. This should lead you to question his capability and credibility. LOL hows holding my shadow cash bags? I dumped THOUSANDS at 40k 36k and 29k... you all will never see that again ;) Edit: BTW the guardian recommends our anonymity http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/06/tips-tricks-anonymous-privacy (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/06/tips-tricks-anonymous-privacy) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Longenecker on March 06, 2015, 05:56:07 PM what evilknievel doesn't know is there're not just 3 people in each mixing...not from start to end ;) However we do need more discussions like this! Yes, I find this fascinating. Even if something could show a vulnerability, with the Darkcoin dev being here and working on it constantly, any vulnerabilities can turn into strengths, when things get fixed (if they need fixing). Can I have whatever koolaid you're drinking? What is more fascinating is that the Darkcoin dev has possibly been building upon a flawed foundation the entire time, unknowingly. This should lead you to question his capability and credibility. LOL hows holding my shadow cash bags? I dumped THOUSANDS at 40k 36k and 29k... you all will never see that again ;) Edit: BTW the guardian recommends our anonymity http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/06/tips-tricks-anonymous-privacy (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/06/tips-tricks-anonymous-privacy) Yes, I'm sure the Guardian is cryptographically qualified to make such an endorsement. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Havelivi on March 06, 2015, 05:57:31 PM that is really shocking to hear for me, DRK is not anonymous?
i don't understand well what op want to tell exactly ::) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: etoque on March 06, 2015, 05:58:23 PM what evilknievel doesn't know is there're not just 3 people in each mixing...not from start to end ;) However we do need more discussions like this! Yes, I find this fascinating. Even if something could show a vulnerability, with the Darkcoin dev being here and working on it constantly, any vulnerabilities can turn into strengths, when things get fixed (if they need fixing). Can I have whatever koolaid you're drinking? What is more fascinating is that the Darkcoin dev has possibly been building upon a flawed foundation the entire time, unknowingly. This should lead you to question his capability and credibility. Bitcoin is still patched,nothing is perfect,and look the price... If dev are here to patch thing fast,where problem ? Its a big 'plus' from all other coin/dev does nothing and take life to correct any problem... Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Minotaur26 on March 06, 2015, 05:59:36 PM what evilknievel doesn't know is there're not just 3 people in each mixing...not from start to end ;) However we do need more discussions like this! Yes, I find this fascinating. Even if something could show a vulnerability, with the Darkcoin dev being here and working on it constantly, any vulnerabilities can turn into strengths, when things get fixed (if they need fixing). Can I have whatever koolaid you're drinking? What is more fascinating is that the Darkcoin dev has possibly been building upon a flawed foundation the entire time, unknowingly. This should lead you to question his capability and credibility. Is like you are trying to ignore the conversation that just happen between Evil-Knievel and Evan. I think you are projecting what you were hoping was the outcome of this excercise. Evil-Knievel acknowledged it was as Evan said, now he believes that even though he was not correct in all his assumptions he may still do something with it. To which Evan invited him to try and report his results. This is no different than having auditors checking on your system, this guy thought he had something but he didn't, I think he should wait for a few days and test on the next version which will be released soon because it includes many updates and it would be better to test the latest one. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: splawik21 on March 06, 2015, 06:03:03 PM I just hope Evan & Evil-Knievel will make a good brainstorm conversation ;) we need more people like E-K.
As Minotaur26 stated before I`m with every his word and at the end all weaknesses are darkcoin future strenghtens. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 06, 2015, 06:10:07 PM Is this the guy that claimed to be able to crack ECDSA keys last year and was trying to flog an "app" for it ? This guy here ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TC43aOdsf4g (Because if he's right then bitcoin has a lot more to worry about than Darkcoin has) P.S. Whether you believe him or not, at least you'll be well entertained ;) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Minotaur26 on March 06, 2015, 06:23:00 PM Is this the guy that claimed to be able to crack ECDSA keys last year and was trying to flog an "app" for it ? This guy here ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TC43aOdsf4g (Because if he's right then bitcoin has a lot more to worry about than Darkcoin has) P.S. Whether you believe him or not, at least you'll be well entertained ;) Well that was funny. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 06, 2015, 07:05:05 PM Evil-Knievel is generally a genuine technical interrogator, and has made the odd useful insight (well, one at least) that's been accepted by devs, it's just that he also has a tendency to draw conclusions bordering on hyperbolic melodrama from benign philosophical observations. According to his findings: https://i.imgur.com/PWPAOng.png References: [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.msg5663483#msg5663483 [2] http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1wf5qb/possible_warning_btc_addresses_with_known_public/ [3] http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2ukp87/researcher_discovers_major_dos_vulnerability_in/ [4] https://bitcointa.lk/threads/private-key-cracker-apparently-demonstrated.248285/page-2 Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: fluffypony on March 06, 2015, 07:08:10 PM Yes, I find this fascinating. Even if something could show a vulnerability, with the Darkcoin dev being here and working on it constantly, any vulnerabilities can turn into strengths, when things get fixed (if they need fixing). Can I have whatever koolaid you're drinking? What is more fascinating is that the Darkcoin dev has possibly been building upon a flawed foundation the entire time, unknowingly. This should lead you to question his capability and credibility. There's a very simple solution to this. Instead of idiotic "dev worship" (especially when said dev demonstrates a key lack of understanding with respects to game theory, the nature of incentives, and basic cryptography) the responsibility should be on Darkcoin to prove, cryptographically, that their transactions are anonymous. Here is an example of a cryptographic proof of anonymity in transactions: https://i.imgur.com/EDzY8Fy.png?1 (https://lab.getmonero.org) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: AizenSou on March 06, 2015, 07:09:56 PM Evil-Knievel is generally a genuine technical interrogator, and has made the odd useful insight (well, one at least) that's been accepted by devs, it's just that he also has a tendency to draw conclusions bordering on hysterical melodrama from benign philosophical observations. According to his findings: https://i.imgur.com/PWPAOng.png References: [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.msg5663483#msg5663483 [2] http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1wf5qb/possible_warning_btc_addresses_with_known_public/ [3] http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2ukp87/researcher_discovers_major_dos_vulnerability_in/ [4] https://bitcointa.lk/threads/private-key-cracker-apparently-demonstrated.248285/page-2 The most funny part is that he claimed to bet 500 BTC for it. It's pure gold classic. Speechless. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 06, 2015, 07:19:36 PM (especially when said dev demonstrates a key lack of understanding with respects...... If I tell you I added two numbers to get a result of 8, tell me how my "lack of cryptographic understanding" lets you determine which two it was ? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: xxxgoodgirls on March 06, 2015, 07:26:36 PM man if child_harold reads this thread...
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 06, 2015, 07:33:45 PM man if child_harold reads this thread... Oh he has I'm sure. Thankfully I think that pillock has decided to promote his own coin and not try to break others. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: child_harold on March 06, 2015, 07:54:31 PM man if child_harold reads this thread... Oh he has I'm sure. Thankfully I think that pillock has decided to promote his own coin and not try to break others. Just watching this one… wow./me runs off to make more popcorn LOL hows holding my shadow cash bags? I dumped THOUSANDS at 40k 36k and 29k... you all will never see that again ;) Edit: BTW the guardian recommends our anonymity http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/06/tips-tricks-anonymous-privacy (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/06/tips-tricks-anonymous-privacy) You dumped a coin with a working non-interactive zero-knowledge proof implementation (a little like Monero) but on a BTC blockchain and with a gorgeous GUI wallet, for a coin which uses mixing? huh… Article also recommends using TOR ;) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: fluffypony on March 06, 2015, 07:56:16 PM (especially when said dev demonstrates a key lack of understanding with respects...... If I tell you I added two numbers to get a result of 8, tell me how my "lack of cryptographic understanding" lets you determine which two it was ? You're oversimplifying. Good cryptography requires formal proofs, not hand-waving and conjecture. You're clearly not a stupid person, so I won't insult your intelligence by reverting to argumentum ad hominem, but then you should not insult my intelligence by deflecting and degrading the nature of cryptographic proofs. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: r4vani on March 06, 2015, 08:03:45 PM If you could achieve your aims simply be wishing for them, life would be very easy.
https://i.imgur.com/so9ETf2.gif Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 08:19:53 PM If you could achieve your aims simply be wishing for them, life would be very easy. All those people wishing Darkcoin would just fade away .. while its actually doing the opposite. Must be frustrating as hell for them. edit : oh my, we reached 2349 masternodes, a new record i think. Masternodes running in 34 countries so far ... Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 06, 2015, 08:25:58 PM You're oversimplifying. Good cryptography requires formal proofs, not hand-waving and conjecture And you (nor any of your Monero fudding cohorts) are not understanding the difference between academic research and practical implementation. A "cryptographer" is not a coin developer (not even a Monero one) but someone who sits in a University lab for years developing cryptographic algorithms and writing research papers that get accepted by academic journals. They may or may not be coders but you don't have to be a cryptographer to implement successful applications anymore than you need to be an aerodynamicist to fly a plane. In fact they are usually completely distinct disciplines. All coin technologies are based on published academic research of one kind or another (Darkcoin's is - see white paper (https://www.darkcoin.io/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/DarkcoinWhitepaper.pdf) on blind signatures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_signature)) but you don't have to be the researcher to do the implementation - you do have to be a coder. One of the reasons Monero never got off the ground is because it tried to base it's whole value offering on a piece of academic theory rather than trying to produce something of practical value. Anyone who's ever used it will discover that in about 10 seconds. Consequently, since that's the only 'hammer' in your box then everything else has to be a nail - including having to make other coin devs the target of baseless accusations such as "lack of understanding" about cryptography. It's cheap, unsupported nonsense of the most unimaginative kind but as long as you keep sticking to that line no-one else will have anything to worry about. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: nakaone on March 06, 2015, 08:39:33 PM the plane analogy is quite fitting regarding the private coins - once they are broken it is catastrophic.
further the analogy is also not the worst by regarding xmr and drk: while xmr is really building an airplane, which is obviously needing a lot of research, drk is building a car with wings (btc protocol with implemented coinjoin). xmr at this point is also quite heavy (blockchain bloat), while no one knows if drks wings are strong enough to ensure privacy. we will see which one is dominating the market, the car with wings, which maybe becomes a somewhat airplane or the airplane which is at this point not able to fly for a long distance ;) all that said you guys should be grateful that you get help from evil Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 06, 2015, 08:44:48 PM further the analogy is also not the worst by regarding xmr and drk: while xmr is really building an airplane, which is obviously needing a lot of research, drk is building a car with wings ...what that analogy is missing is that as long as Bitcoin remains the dominant 'force', the whole world is driving on city roads. Planes are not an option. We don't have a 'clean sheet' where we can design our ideal technology from top to bottom any more than we have the option of designing the 'perfect html markup protocol' from scratch. (Well you can but nobody's goin to use it). Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Pline on March 06, 2015, 08:47:00 PM further the analogy is also not the worst by regarding xmr and drk: while xmr is really building an airplane, which is obviously needing a lot of research, drk is building a car with wings ...what that analogy is missing is that as long as Bitcoin remains the dominant 'force', the whole world is driving on city roads. Planes are not an option. We don't have a 'clean sheet' where we can design our ideal technology from top to bottom any more than we have the option of designing the 'perfect html markup protocol' from scratch. (Well you can but nobody's goin to use it). This is why ShadowCash is a contender that should not be ignored. It has the cryptonote like ring sigs implemented onto the Bitcoin blockchain. So in that way it has advantage over Monero. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: pozmu on March 06, 2015, 08:53:17 PM I was here ::)
Not sure how correct are OPs assumptions but it's good to see that people don't take anything for granted and try to find bugs - that's what opensource is all about. BTW I'm not up-to-date, is Darkcoin finally 100% opensource? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 08:54:27 PM the plane analogy is quite fitting regarding the private coins - once they are broken it is catastrophic. further the analogy is also not the worst by regarding xmr and drk: while xmr is really building an airplane, which is obviously needing a lot of research, drk is building a car with wings (btc protocol with implemented coinjoin). xmr at this point is also quite heavy (blockchain bloat), while no one knows if drks wings are strong enough to ensure privacy. we will see which one is dominating the market, the car with wings, which maybe becomes a somewhat airplane or the airplane which is at this point not able to fly for a long distance ;) all that said you guys should be grateful that you get help from evil We are gratefull, he helped us with a bug before, oct 2014 i think. He even informed our lead developer about it which was pretty decent (who fixed it the next day) Nobody is denying OP's ability to read and understand code but OP could be a bit more subtle in his announcements, specially when talking about a complicated process like Darksend and its anonymity. edit : also after having read the reply of our lead developer in here i have to conclude this topic is incorrect (based on OP's incorrect assumptions about how the anonymization process currently works) and due to impending update v0.11.2.x soon to be obsolete as well (masternode blinding will change things drastically, anonymization wise). Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: g4q34g4qg47ww on March 06, 2015, 08:59:33 PM I was here ::) Not sure how correct are OPs assumptions but it's good to see that people don't take anything for granted and try to find bugs - that's what opensource is all about. BTW I'm not up-to-date, is Darkcoin finally 100% opensource? Has been 100% open source for quite a while now: https://github.com/darkcoin/darkcoin Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 06, 2015, 09:00:30 PM sorry can't add much (popcorn without a gif)
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: coinits on March 06, 2015, 09:06:18 PM This is a good reason to look at an alternative:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=975984.msg10663673#msg10663673 Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 06, 2015, 09:11:21 PM If the OP is wrong, and admitted so, he should change the title of this post. Here let me add a question mark to make it look like I'm NOT starting FUD, or am I?
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 09:14:16 PM If the OP is wrong, and admitted so, he should change the title of this post. Here let me add a question mark to make it look like I'm NOT starting FUD, or am I? are you ? ;D oh dear, i answerred a question with a question. Doesnt that give like 10 years of bad luck or something ? ::) i'm gonna stick with this one though : after having read the reply of our lead developer in here i have to conclude this topic is incorrect (based on OP's incorrect assumptions about how the anonymization process currently works) and due to impending update v0.11.2.x soon to be obsolete as well (masternode blinding will change things drastically, anonymization wise). Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: fluffypony on March 06, 2015, 09:23:08 PM And you (nor any of your Monero fudding cohorts) are not understanding the difference between academic research and practical implementation. Silly duck, of course we understand the difference. Maybe you should take the time to look at our Design and Development goals (http://getmonero.org/design-goals/), which will likely take us several years to achieve, but which are based on solid cryptographic principles instead of imagining that you can shortcut consensus. A "cryptographer" is not a coin developer (not even a Monero one) but someone who sits in a University lab for years developing cryptographic algorithms and writing research papers that get accepted by academic journals. Thankfully Monero has both (http://getmonero.org/knowledge-base/people). They may or may not be coders but you don't have to be a cryptographer to implement successful applications anymore than you need to be an aerodynamicist to fly a plane. In fact they are usually completely distinct disciplines. All coin technologies are based on published academic research of one kind or another (Darkcoin's is - see white paper (https://www.darkcoin.io/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/DarkcoinWhitepaper.pdf) on blind signatures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_signature)) but you don't have to be the researcher to do the implementation - you do have to be a coder. I'm glad you brought up the Darkcoin whitepaper, because it includes this gem: "DarkCoin replaces abrupt reward halving with a reward curve, 2222222/(((Difficulty+2600)/9)^2). The maximum and minimum amounts are set to 25 and five respectively." This would mean a maximum daily block reward of 576 x 25 = 14 400 DRK. Reality begs to differ: If implementing such a simple formula can't even be done correctly, then it would seem your trust in your "dev" is deeply misplaced. One of the reasons Monero never got off the ground is because it tried to base it's whole value offering on a piece of academic theory rather than trying to produce something of practical value. Anyone who's ever used it will discover that in about 10 seconds. Consequently, since that's the only 'hammer' in your box then everything else has to be a nail - including having to make other coin devs the target of baseless accusations such as "lack of understanding" about cryptography. It's cheap, unsupported nonsense of the most unimaginative kind but as long as you keep sticking to that line no-one else will have anything to worry about. It's crazy how you misstate this. Let me ask you this: what has Darkcoin ever done for Bitcoin? You throw the "based on Bitcoin" card around, but what has it EVER contributed to the community that is responsible for 98% of its lines of code? On the other hand, Monero created the OpenAlias standard (http://openalias.org), and then went on to create and submit an implementation of the OpenAlias standard that is included in Electrum 2.0 (https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/master/plugins/openalias.py), directly contributing to the growth and usefulness of Bitcoin, despite Monero not sharing a single line of Bitcoin code. Hey - even Darkcoin could implement OpenAlias! OpenAlias also goes directly against your "practical value" comment - it has given more practical value to the new cryptocurrency user than literally anything Darkcoin has done. I guess the only cheap, unsupported nonsense in this thread is coming off of your keyboard. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 09:32:41 PM lets not deviate this into a monero versus darkcoin discussion, frankly thats not really popcorn material.
People will regret having bought popcorn for this thread then. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 06, 2015, 09:36:11 PM If implementing such a simple formula can't even be done correctly, then it would seem your trust in your "dev" is deeply misplaced. Monero Specifications
The last two blocks: http://chainradar.com/xmr/block/465073 2015-03-06 20:28:34 http://chainradar.com/xmr/block/465074 2015-03-06 20:28:37 You can't even get a simple 60 second number right. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 06, 2015, 09:38:27 PM argh, yeah, was hopin this wouldn't turn into xmr vs. drk.
fundamentals!! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: g4q34g4qg47ww on March 06, 2015, 09:42:27 PM fluffy dev put whole thread to sleep :'(
OP admitted he was wrong :'( I guess i'll find something else of interest :'( Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 09:44:25 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: fluffypony on March 06, 2015, 09:45:25 PM The last two blocks: http://chainradar.com/xmr/block/465073 2015-03-06 20:28:34 http://chainradar.com/xmr/block/465074 2015-03-06 20:28:37 You can't even get a simple 60 second number right. Now you're just trolling. Timestamps are set by miners and are not universally reliable, and in any event difficulty retargeting relies on the law of large numbers (ie. capacity for statistical variance has to exist). Also hey, the last 5 Darkcoin blocks tell exactly the same story: [1] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231179.htm) [2] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231178.htm) [3] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231177.htm) [4] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231176.htm) [5] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231175.htm) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 06, 2015, 09:50:24 PM fluffy dev put whole thread to sleep :'( OP admitted he was wrong :'( I guess i'll find something else of interest :'( I never, at no point admitted I was wrong. The flaw is obvious here, and anyone who tries with a block explorer and a pen and paper can reassemble the correct transaction without shuffling. I am working on a block explorer which allows deanonymization of darksend transactions ... it is trivial actually, an let it work only in 80% of all cases. Good luck, we look forward to seeing the results of your endeavours. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 09:55:50 PM fluffy dev put whole thread to sleep :'( OP admitted he was wrong :'( I guess i'll find something else of interest :'( I never, at no point admitted I was wrong. The flaw is obvious here, and anyone who tries with a block explorer and a pen and paper can reassemble the correct transaction without shuffling. I am working on a block explorer which allows deanonymization of darksend transactions ... it is trivial actually, an let it work only in 80% of all cases. I'm looking forward to it as any weakness thats exposed in Darkcoin now can only strengthen it in the future but to be honest i think we having a higher chance of seeing Masternode Blinding implemented on Darkcoin Mainnet before ever seeing a working block explorer that effectively deanonymize darksend transactions. But i would love to be proven wrong on this one, maybe you are The One ;D Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: ðºÞæ on March 06, 2015, 09:56:28 PM op is just pointing out the flaw. who is to say someone else is not already utilizing it for some time without telling anyone
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 06, 2015, 09:56:58 PM fluffy dev put whole thread to sleep :'( OP admitted he was wrong :'( I guess i'll find something else of interest :'( I never, at no point admitted I was wrong. The flaw is obvious here, and anyone who tries with a block explorer and a pen and paper can reassemble the correct transaction without shuffling. I am working on a block explorer which allows deanonymization of darksend transactions ... it is trivial actually, an let it work only in 80% of all cases. yes - this was an interesting phenomenon in this thread, the magic of "OP admitted he was wrong" appeared somewhere, whereas the last post of the two primary debaters was "good luck making that python thingy" or something along those lines. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: onemorexmr on March 06, 2015, 10:00:18 PM fluffy dev put whole thread to sleep :'( OP admitted he was wrong :'( I guess i'll find something else of interest :'( I never, at no point admitted I was wrong. The flaw is obvious here, and anyone who tries with a block explorer and a pen and paper can reassemble the correct transaction without shuffling. I am working on a block explorer which allows deanonymization of darksend transactions ... it is trivial actually, an let it work only in 80% of all cases. I'm looking forward to it as any weakness thats exposed in Darkcoin now can only strengthen it in the future but to be honest i think we having a higher chance of seeing Masternode Blinding implemented on Darkcoin Mainnet before ever seeing a working block explorer that effectively deanonymize darksend transactions. But i would love to be proven wrong on this one, maybe you are The One well, thats the reason why i need a formal proof on anonymity and some good reviews by cryptographers before i'll trust an anon feature. if you make a transaction thinking it is anonymous and a few weeks later someone says: no, sorry. only the next update may be safe (i dont need to proof that of course, because always when i said its anon you believed me: this time will be the same) -> you may be pretty fucked. if not: why did you do an anon transaction in the first place? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: g4q34g4qg47ww on March 06, 2015, 10:02:10 PM For this we have 10*9*8*7*6*5*4*3*2 possibilities, SO TO CHECK HOW THE OUTPUTS WERE ORDERED IN THE PREVIOUS TRANSACTION ... we have to think. OP has failed to unravel a single darksent transaction, and has found that he is missing a gigantic step in his process. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 10:05:13 PM back to basics :
Quote Post 1 from OP 1. Inputs always unsorted 2. Outputs shuffled 3. Next transaction inputs unshuffled again which allows you to reassemble the original order in previous transaction 4. Multiple Amounts/Denominations allow only a few combinations how the original transaction looked like 4. Done! Reply from Darkcoin lead developer : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10681184#msg10681184 Quote Interesting approach, although the input order isn't random, it's randomly generated from multiple transactions on the client side. Even if it was completely not random, that doesn't allow you to "jump" the mixing transaction and know which outputs belong to which inputs. One more thing to note is that after coins are mixed through multiple sessions, there are "final" outputs that are just spent randomly. That can happen in any session, which causes more randomness. You most definitely can't map those randomly spent outputs to the inputs at all. That's what you should be trying to do, you need to be able to show anonymously spent coins and their original source funds. Nice try though PS. If you believe it's really a weakness you need to map the outputs to the inputs and show who's anonymously spending money on what. I'm not sure it's worth the time though, because masternode blinding randomizes the input order anyway. that pretty much summarize this whole discussion and i agree with post above from g4q34g4qg47ww (who's name is remarkbly difficult to type if you happen to be in a situation where you can not copy and paste it). Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 10:06:51 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 06, 2015, 10:15:12 PM The last two blocks: http://chainradar.com/xmr/block/465073 2015-03-06 20:28:34 http://chainradar.com/xmr/block/465074 2015-03-06 20:28:37 You can't even get a simple 60 second number right. Now you're just trolling. Timestamps are set by miners and are not universally reliable, and in any event difficulty retargeting relies on the law of large numbers (ie. capacity for statistical variance has to exist). Also hey, the last 5 Darkcoin blocks tell exactly the same story: [1] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231179.htm) [2] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231178.htm) [3] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231177.htm) [4] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231176.htm) [5] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231175.htm) Yep, your example was basically the same thing. Difficulty retargets slow. And the reward curve described in the whitepaper was taken into use after GPU miners started to appear, so the graph you posted does not use that formula at the beginning. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 10:23:15 PM that pretty much summarize this whole discussion. Yes, and the claims the dev did are imho wrong. If you continue reading you will see the explanation. Specially, the message with the colors. i think the claim you are doing is wrong, i mean specifically this one : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10681598#msg10681598 Quote As long as we have the correct order, all three trails will eventually lead to the originator. I am pretty sure that a transaction deanonymizer, which does this order reversal, could walk his way all the way back to the transactions where people started to denominating their funds, and get the # of users from the change outputs. Pls make that transaction deanonymizer and prove your claim, that end trails can indeed be traced back to the originator through following correct order. You would be the first to deanonymize darksend transactions in the history of Darkcoin. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: onemorexmr on March 06, 2015, 10:31:37 PM You would be the first to deanonymize darksend transactions in the history of Darkcoin. https://darkcointalk.org/threads/dead-change-an-anonymity-issue.3019/ fixed long ago, not sure if anybody really used it to deanonymize darksend. but there was a problem... and old transaction may still be deanonymized. EDIT: my point is: how should i trust him with my privacy. i need some proofs that he is capable to do what he is claiming (formal proof, code reviews, code reviews by other cryptographers). but the speed at which it is developed cries for bugs (and we see them regularly): under such circumstances i think that good reviews are not even possible -> moving target. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: AizenSou on March 06, 2015, 10:37:27 PM fluffy dev put whole thread to sleep :'( OP admitted he was wrong :'( I guess i'll find something else of interest :'( I never, at no point admitted I was wrong. The flaw is obvious here, and anyone who tries with a block explorer and a pen and paper can reassemble the correct transaction without shuffling. I am working on a block explorer which allows deanonymization of darksend transactions ... it is trivial actually, an let it work only in 80% of all cases. Trivial? Yes Mr Genius. We're still waiting for your free NXT and your BTC private key cracker, which you claimed trivial too. https://i.imgur.com/PWPAOng.png Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 10:44:15 PM You would be the first to deanonymize darksend transactions in the history of Darkcoin. https://darkcointalk.org/threads/dead-change-an-anonymity-issue.3019/ fixed long ago, not sure if anybody really used it to deanonymize darksend. but there was a problem... and old transaction may still be deanonymized. yeah, i admit i forgot about the dead change issue : using non-anonimized change potentially but not necessarily deanonymize your previously anonymous spend. Aswan who posted about this problem became part of the Darkcoin Development Team very soon after btw. I see this differently then the supposed deanonymizer from OP that he claims can deanonymize 80% of current darksend transactions. edit : with regards to yr own edit .. how to trust our lead developer with your privacy ? Needing code reviews etc Quote EDIT: my point is: how should i trust him with my privacy. i need some proofs that he is capable to do what he is claiming (formal proof, code reviews, code reviews by other cryptographers). Darksend was code reviewed by Kristov Atlas, a well respected person in the cryptocurrency world. He outlined the Darksend mixing, stated the possible vulnerabilities towards certain types of attack and posted that in our forum and in his blog i think. An update was issued afterwards to deal with some of these type of attacks. https://stellartalk.org/topic/5435-kristov-atlas-paper-an-analysis-of-darkcoins-blockchain-privacy-via-darksend/ Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: ahoenk on March 06, 2015, 10:48:14 PM fluffy dev put whole thread to sleep :'( OP admitted he was wrong :'( I guess i'll find something else of interest :'( I never, at no point admitted I was wrong. The flaw is obvious here, and anyone who tries with a block explorer and a pen and paper can reassemble the correct transaction without shuffling. I am working on a block explorer which allows deanonymization of darksend transactions ... it is trivial actually, an let it work only in 80% of all cases. Trivial? Yes Mr Genius. We're still waiting for your free NXT and your BTC private key cracker, which you claimed trivial too. https://i.imgur.com/PWPAOng.png +10000 i wait for Mr genius claim..lol Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 06, 2015, 10:54:24 PM No matter how the OP came off, I don't think it's a good idea to ridicule him as I wouldn't want anyone to hesitate to report any potential issues in the future out of the fear of getting laughed at.
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: fluffypony on March 06, 2015, 10:59:27 PM Yep, your example was basically the same thing. Difficulty retargets slow. And the reward curve described in the whitepaper was taken into use after GPU miners started to appear, so the graph you posted does not use that formula at the beginning. Ok so then I went and got the formula from the Darkcoin OP as it was 3 weeks after launch (https://web.archive.org/web/20140209050500/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.0), which was "Block reward is controlled by moore's law: (11111 / (((Difficulty+51)/6) ^ 2))", and I graphed them all: So reality doesn't match any of the claimed block reward formulae, and this is deeply concerning because changing the social contract destroys the trust (or SHOULD destroy the trust) between the community and the developers of the cryptocurrency. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 11:02:17 PM <-- throws away his popcorn and wonders off
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 06, 2015, 11:18:51 PM The last two blocks: http://chainradar.com/xmr/block/465073 2015-03-06 20:28:34 http://chainradar.com/xmr/block/465074 2015-03-06 20:28:37 You can't even get a simple 60 second number right. Now you're just trolling. Timestamps are set by miners and are not universally reliable, and in any event difficulty retargeting relies on the law of large numbers (ie. capacity for statistical variance has to exist). Also hey, the last 5 Darkcoin blocks tell exactly the same story: [1] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231179.htm) [2] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231178.htm) [3] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231177.htm) [4] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231176.htm) [5] (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?231175.htm) Yep, your example was basically the same thing. LOL, thousands of blocks adding up to millions of coins is "basically the same thing" as random fluctuation on two blocks adding up to <25 coins. Nice one illodin though I have to say I'm a bit disappointed. Usually your trolling is a bit more subtle and intelligent than that. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 06, 2015, 11:27:59 PM So this is all about.
Provoke discussion about darksend, arguments always ends and then bring...yes say it..."instamine" argument on the table. You aren't just answering to illodin I puked all my popcorn :'( Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stealth923 on March 06, 2015, 11:38:46 PM So this is all about. Provoke discussion about darksend, arguments always ends and then bring...yes say it..."instamine" argument on the table. You aren't just answering to illodin I puked all my popcorn :'( Thats because Trolls and Monero fans have nothing but the instamine to grasp onto.....when all else fails go back to something the Dark dev has clearly explained over 6 months ago, the coin is now over 1 year old and in reality is not even so much as a small issue.... Just makes them look desperate and ignorant imo, especially when their coins are dying and their bags are feeling heavier as ever. EDIT: Case in point read one post above by kazuki49 - XMR Brain dead Troll Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: qwizzie on March 06, 2015, 11:39:02 PM Guess its my fault in the end for keep reading these threads but I'm really sick of this scam, its pretty clear how its a scam (instamined) and the anonymity doest work and was just put together to create hype and scam more people. DRK = another big scam in the top 20 coins. and the discussion quality goes lower and lower. qwizzie Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do. Benjamin Franklin Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 06, 2015, 11:40:49 PM So this is all about. Provoke discussion about darksend, arguments always ends and then bring...yes say it..."instamine" argument on the table. You aren't just answering to illodin I puked all my popcorn :'( If you are addressing me, yes I was just answering illodin. I haven't worked through the transactional details above so I have no comment to make on the OP, but when it comes to claiming that two blocks happening within a few seconds means anything at all, that's just absurd, and insults the intelligence of anyone who understands the slightest thing about how mining works. Which btw I'm pretty sure includes illodin. Obvious trolling attempt, and a pretty lame one. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 06, 2015, 11:41:30 PM Guess its my fault in the end for keep reading these threads but I'm really sick of this scam, its pretty clear how its a scam (instamined) and the anonymity doest work and was just put together to create hype and scam more people. DRK = another big scam in the top 20 coins. Because market said 'no' to your holdings? well sorry but in case you don't know, market=peopleTitle: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 06, 2015, 11:42:12 PM <-- throws away his popcorn and wonders off i'm hoping my bag of popcorn lasts long enough for evil-K's deanonymizer darkcoin explorer. From my last count its up to a 2 BTC bounty. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10681892#msg10681892 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10682106#msg10682106 summarized in this quote for archival purposes: We should set up a BTC donation fund for Evil-Knievel to build a Darkcoin python deanonymizer! I pledge 1 BTC if Evil-Knievel successfully builds a Darkcoin python deanonymize. I'll add another 1 BTC to that. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 06, 2015, 11:43:53 PM this is deeply concerning because changing the social contract destroys the trust (or SHOULD destroy the trust) between the community and the developers of the cryptocurrency. If there is a problem with reward formula it can't be fixed because you might get deeply concerned? The formula was changed, and people decided to download the client with the changed formula, thus the trust was not destroyed. That's one attribute of Evan, he doesn't ponder and mull over things for ages he just goes and does and accomplishes things. The launch was far from optimal, that much has been established after a year of talking about it. What has happened has happened, and what can be done is either to keep crying about it or to move on. Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 06, 2015, 11:44:46 PM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 06, 2015, 11:45:51 PM So this is all about. Provoke discussion about darksend, arguments always ends and then bring...yes say it..."instamine" argument on the table. You aren't just answering to illodin I puked all my popcorn :'( If you are addressing me, yes I was just answering illodin. I haven't worked through the transactional details above so I have no comment to make on the OP, but when it comes to claiming that two blocks happening within a few seconds means anything at all, that's just absurd, and insults the intelligence of anyone who understands the slightest thing about how mining works. Which btw I'm pretty sure includes illodin. Obvious trolling attempt, and a pretty lame one. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: solid12345 on March 06, 2015, 11:47:18 PM when all else fails go back to something the Dark dev has clearly explained over 6 months ago Actually to be fair it never was really explained. It was written off as, "well I fucked up the emission schedule, I COULD'VE had a re-do mining phase, but it's okay because all the coins were sold off cheaply anyway". Which is funny considering Shadowcash for instance gets crap for its uneven distribution yet anyone can buy themselves a big stake of the coin for just a few hundred bucks at 5 cents a coin compared to the going rate of as much as 50 cents to a dollar for Dark last spring when it didn't even have Darksend RC1 implemented yet! How were these insane prices able to be asked for what was then a generic coin other than a few whales controlled all the supply, most likely benefitting from this uneven mining schedule? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 06, 2015, 11:49:24 PM Guess its my fault in the end for keep reading these threads but I'm really sick of this scam, its pretty clear how its a scam (instamined) and the anonymity doest work and was just put together to create hype and scam more people. DRK = another big scam in the top 20 coins. Because market said 'no' to your holdings? well sorry but in case you don't know, market=peopleThe so-called crypto "market" is a tiny number of a people, a huge amount of manipulation, and very illiquid markets. In all it means little until any of these coins start getting used by more than a few speculators and insiders. I'm not just talking about DRK, but DRK is certainly included. Quote from: illodin what can be done is either to keep crying about it or move on Correct, I'd recommend moving on to another coin that doesn't have the baggage, and I do recommend that when people ask me. I'm not a fan of the whole idea of masternodes, nor a fan of PoS coins, so the tech has nothing to interest me, but if I were, I would clone DRK and relaunch it clean the way we did with Monero. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 06, 2015, 11:59:38 PM Guess its my fault in the end for keep reading these threads but I'm really sick of this scam, its pretty clear how its a scam (instamined) and the anonymity doest work and was just put together to create hype and scam more people. DRK = another big scam in the top 20 coins. Because market said 'no' to your holdings? well sorry but in case you don't know, market=peopleThe so-called crypto "market" is a tiny number of a people, a huge amount of manipulation, and very illiquid markets. In all it means little until any of these coins start getting used by more than a few speculators and insiders. I'm not just talking about DRK, but DRK is certainly included. I was just trying to be as low as kazuki49 Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stealth923 on March 07, 2015, 12:00:45 AM when all else fails go back to something the Dark dev has clearly explained over 6 months ago Actually to be fair it never was really explained. It was written off as, "well I fucked up the emission schedule, I COULD'VE had a re-do mining phase, but it's okay because all the coins were sold off cheaply anyway". Which is funny considering Shadowcash for instance gets crap for its uneven distribution yet anyone can buy themselves a big stake of the coin for just a few hundred bucks at 5 cents a coin compared to the going rate of as much as 50 cents to a dollar for Dark last spring when it didn't even have Darksend RC1 implemented yet! How were these insane prices able to be asked for what was then a generic coin other than a few whales controlled all the supply, most likely benefitting from this uneven mining schedule? It wasnt exactly as you put it and Evans explanation was accepted by the community. What would you do, just pack your bags and kill the coin or because the market has washed the coins over and over due to demand just let it be. Evans decision was the right one. Also, nice segway to being some attention to ShadowShit - The reason why you can buy it for so cheap is most of the community put that as much as a failure as XC and the other anon shitcoins, dont waste your time. The market has spoken. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 12:08:02 AM Maybe you should take the time to look at our Design and Development goals (http://getmonero.org/design-goals/), which will likely take us several years to achieve, but which are based on solid cryptographic principles instead of imagining that you can shortcut consensus. Well your not going to achieve them if your idea of "business acumen" is scurrying around bitcointalk with your nose out of joint that the "wrong coin" has got the most attention and maligning widely respected devs as being clueless about cryptography. If implementing such a simple formula can't even be done correctly, then it would seem your trust in your "dev" is deeply misplaced. Touche. You scored a point - unfortunately not the one made which is that most cryptocurrency technologies are based on some kind of established algorithms developed in academic research, Darkcoin included. Thats the easy bit. The hard bit is acquiring an $18m marketcap which takes more than having a few letters after your name and arriving at the stable after the horse has bolted. In case you hadn't noticed, the market is awash with sub-$3M cap cryptonote coins, all of them claiming technical supremacy - 14 at the last count no less. The entire coinmarketcap listing is also considerably more advanced technically than bitcoin but none of them ever made a dent in its valuation. One of the reasons Monero never got off the ground is because it tried to base it's whole value offering on a piece of academic theory rather than trying to produce something of practical value It's crazy how you misstate this. Let me ask you this: what has Darkcoin ever done for Bitcoin?…..Monero created the OpenAlias standard (http://openalias.org) Although that's a charming gesture, it wasn't quite my idea of "practical value". I was alluding to legacy technical compliance with the retail insfrastucture as well as well as maximising the inheritance of Bitcoin's monetary valuation by way of 100% faithful cloning. In a financial context, bitcoin is starting to work in an opposite direction to the alts - i.e. it's drawing its value from the fact that it is an original, is trusted and static - as opposed to the alts which gain value from being technically advanced. Darkcoin adds 1 missing (or deficient) monetary property to Bitcoin - that of fungibility by way of pre-emptively mixing the coin supply while still in the wallet. It remains to be seen whether the market thinks that 3rd party mixers can fulfil that role but one thing is for sure - they will never be an institutionalised solution and my own view is that the markets are fluid enough for another crypto to adopt that role (not a replacement but complimentary). Monero and other cryptonotes, on the other hand, are in a completely different market. They are a clean sheet technology with an entirely different basis for their valuation - at the moment it's almost purely a hedging one. The technology is interesting and may, as you say, mature in years to come to acquire its own market but one thing we can agree on - they are not bitcoin clones and will therefore not inherit any of bitcoin's valuation. They need to do their own "rights of passage phase" which is one of the things that does get you marketcap in the end. So I don't grudge you your "advanced tech" but I don't think you're doing yourself any favours going around slamming other devs for being technically incompetent when they're clearly not and when there is a valid, clearly documented basis for the design priorities they've made that are not the same priorities that you are attributing to them. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:08:31 AM It wasnt exactly as you put it and Evans explanation was accepted by the community. It was clearly not accepted by the entire community otherwise no one would still be criticizing it. I can tell you with certainty that I'm part of the crytpcurrency community and my opinion is that anyone who likes the DRK technology and wants to see it thrive should just relaunch it clean. Those who don't favor that are putting their holdings (which likely benefited directly or indirectly from the instamine) ahead of the given the tech the best chance to succeed unencumbered by a foundation of incompetence and/or fraud. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 12:09:05 AM I'd recommend moving on to another coin that doesn't have the baggage, and I do recommend that when people ask me. I'm not a fan of the whole idea of masternodes, nor a fan of PoS coins, so the tech has nothing to interest me, but if I were I would clone DRK and relaunch it clean the way we did with Monero. If you launch a new coin and it becomes successful, then after a year you will again have people whining they weren't there at the launch or didn't get to buy 10k coins for 0.25 BTC. The more successful it is, the more whine there will be. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 07, 2015, 12:11:30 AM If such fund is really established, I will add 1 BTC myself which should be distributed to the "supporters" if I should not be able to acheive such thing. I don't know what you mean by established - as you can tell, my status is slightly above noob. I therefore do not know the ins and outs of bounties - for instance, if escrows are required etc. Though I'm assuming it may be difficult to find a mediator / third party thats not vested. If any of the die-hard bitcoiners are around (i.e., there's only 1 true coin), their volunteering would be appreciated. Darnit, where's my decentralized truth oracle blockchain when I need it? I'm a man of science - and it looks like this is the crytpocurrencies equivalent of peer review. But for those following, Evil-K has offered a 1 BTC counter-bounty. If such fund is really established, I will add 1 BTC myself which should be distributed to the "supporters" if I should not be able to acheive such thing. I'm assuming the way this functions is 1 BTC will be distributed amongst those offering a bounty in the case that Evil-Knievel doesn't make a Darkcoin De-privatization Explorer. May I also present that this explorer should work on the latest "patch" as well - whatever the DRK devs are referring to as masternode blinding. Also, hopefully the XMR v DRK has died down - but if not, here's a thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=962235.240;topicseen Please - this thread is about DRK's privacy technology - not alleged coin distribution problems. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Longenecker on March 07, 2015, 12:12:06 AM If there is a problem with reward formula it can't be fixed because you might get deeply concerned? The formula was changed, and people decided to download the client with the changed formula, thus the trust was not destroyed. The dev of darkcoin is an instaminer and then a magician. I don't know how people are still buying that pump and dump scam. I will never buy that coin even if someone tell me that I can win millions. In the long term, darkcoin have no future because it's based on a lie. How people can continue to trust this dishonest developer? It's incredibly easy to pump a coin when you control the great majority of the total supply. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:14:09 AM The hard bit is acquiring an $18m marketcap Actually it is fairly easy if insiders stash away most or all of the coins and control how they are traded. You can more or less set the market cap of such a coin at anything you want. If I control 999999 out of a million coins and sell one for a dollar that does not make a meaningful market cap 1 million dollars, but it will be quoted that way. It may be hard to convince (arguably) impartial arbiters such as coinmarketcap to include your concentrated insider holdings as being part of the float. It does seem that DRK has pulled that off for now. Most if not all of the market cap figures thrown around in the cryptocurrency space are misleading at best and blatantly deceptive at worse. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 12:16:13 AM How people can continue to trust this dishonest developer? Quite simply because he's one of the very few who have been able to create a roadmap and deliver on it. Also he's been able to put up with unmitigated garbage like this post in quite a dignified manner and thankfully not get distracted by it. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:16:21 AM I'd recommend moving on to another coin that doesn't have the baggage, and I do recommend that when people ask me. I'm not a fan of the whole idea of masternodes, nor a fan of PoS coins, so the tech has nothing to interest me, but if I were I would clone DRK and relaunch it clean the way we did with Monero. If you launch a new coin and it becomes successful, then after a year you will again have people whining they weren't there at the launch or didn't get to buy 10k coins for 0.25 BTC. The more successful it is, the more whine there will be. As I said, I'm not interested in doing it, but if someone did it competently and without fraud then there wouldn't be a few million coins mined in a few days in complete disregard for the published schedule. Sure there might be other problems, but not that one. Much as you might like, might try to draw false equivalences or declare something quite recent by cryptocurrency standards to be ancient history, you DRKers are never going get out from under it. Fruit of the poison tree. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 12:16:25 AM It's incredibly easy to pump a coin when you control the great majority of the total supply. So why couldn't the SDC whales pump SDC then? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:20:02 AM It's incredibly easy to pump a coin when you control the great majority of the total supply. So why couldn't the SDC whales pump SDC then? Perhaps they are fools, are disorganized, or perhaps they don't quite control quite enough of it. Or all of the above. EDIT: Or maybe they are indeed successfully pumping it and their fair value would be more like $1 than $300K. A factor of 300000 from manipulation is nothing to sneeze at. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 12:21:22 AM Sure there might be other problems, but not that one. What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:25:33 AM Then tell me how your FUD campaign on XMR wasn't a inside job to crash the market so you can buy off all your cheap coins? Looks like its Phase 2 in Monero Pump the shit out of it and look for people to dump on... Look these stupid darkcoin people can be dumped on. I followed lots of Bitcoiners and their Scams, XMR is not a exception... Nobody controls the supply of XMR, its still being mined at a furious rate. If anything one can argue (snd some did quite loudly) that too much mining is why the price is too low, but as fluffypony explained earlier we are not going to change the reward schedule or try to lock up millions of coins with PoS in order to pump the price. We'll let things play out as they will in the market. Somewhat OT though, as this thread is about DRK, not XMR. Fairly interesting though, that criticism of something about DRK which is acknowledged by most (including illodin) to be worthy of criticism results in criticism of another coin. As if that fixes things? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stealth923 on March 07, 2015, 12:26:17 AM It wasnt exactly as you put it and Evans explanation was accepted by the community. It was clearly not accepted by the entire community otherwise no one would still be criticizing it. I can tell you with certainty that I'm part of the crytpcurrency community and my opinion is that anyone who likes the DRK technology and wants to see it thrive should just relaunch it clean. Those who don't favor that are putting their holdings (which likely benefited directly or indirectly from the instamine) ahead of the given the tech the best chance to succeed unencumbered by a foundation of incompetence and/or fraud. No problems, your solution is perfect, scrap the most innovative crypto in history with the largest anon community and marketcap just to appease a small minority of trolls - Im glad you are in the Monero camp and have no associations with DRK, please keep doing what you are doing at Monero. ::) Im going to be launching DarkMonero soon, its a clean relaunch of Monero because I feel that Monero's launch wasnt fair and that its inflation is hurting investors, if Monero is going to thrive I feel as though it needs to be relaunched cleanly to ensure investors are not putting their investment at risk. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 12:28:22 AM Yes with more than 2 Million DRK mined in few days by the dev and maybe some of his friend, he have money and time to continue the scam. And seems the guys like you enjoy and feed that scam. Then why he should stop the fraud? If the dev really had millions of coins and was out to fraud people, he would've exited in the Big Pump last year. But strangely he's still around working hard. Btw, are you one of those people who think the devs should work for nothing and the speculators should get to be rich? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:28:40 AM Sure there might be other problems, but not that one. What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch? Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them. That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market. Title: This message was too old and has been purged Post by: Evil-Knievel on March 07, 2015, 12:28:48 AM This message was too old and has been purged
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 12:29:45 AM ... Those who don't favor that are putting their holdings (which likely benefited directly or indirectly from the instamine) ahead of the given the tech the best chance to succeed unencumbered by a foundation of incompetence and/or fraud. It's incredibly easy to pump a coin when you control the great majority of the total supply. What an awful insinuations Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:30:35 AM Yes with more than 2 Million DRK mined in few days by the dev and maybe some of his friend, he have money and time to continue the scam. And seems the guys like you enjoy and feed that scam. Then why he should stop the fraud? If the dev really had millions of coins and was out to fraud people, he would've exited in the Big Pump last year. But strangely he's still around working hard. Nobody knows what the he did or didn't do. For all we know he sold say 1/3 of his coins at a nice profit, but wants more, or was very greedy and held on for higher prices until it was too late to sell, or indeed possibly the only reason there was such a big pump at all was because he didn't sell (much). As outsiders there is just no way to know, and the better choice is to find something cleaner. There is no shortage of choices (though somewhat of a shortage of clean ones unfortunately). Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stealth923 on March 07, 2015, 12:30:45 AM No problems, your solution is perfect, scrap the most innovative crypto in history with the largest anon community and marketcap just to appease a small minority of trolls... Actually, it is just bitcoin with coinjoin on top. Blockchain.info has implemented this feature long before. Now you just made yourself look even dumber and how little you actually know about DRK. Thanks Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 07, 2015, 12:31:03 AM I would clone DRK and relaunch it clean the way we did with Monero. The monero launch was anything but clean.Where is the info about the crippled monero miner and the secret optimized miner for insiders? how much monero was premined? why did they lie about the amount of premined coins? do the cryptonote nsa origins and fake white paper worry you? did y'all ever figure out how to put together a official gui wallet? how long did monero go without a gui wallet? will bloating be an even bigger issue when people actually start using the gui wallet? how do you propose solving the monero inflation problem? I did not see it on the wiki... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryptoNote#Controversy_and_criticism Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 12:32:49 AM No problems, your solution is perfect, scrap the most innovative crypto in history with the largest anon community and marketcap just to appease a small minority of trolls... Actually, it is just bitcoin with coinjoin on top. Blockchain.info has implemented this feature long before. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 07, 2015, 12:33:33 AM For those interested, I have created another thread self moderated by me that will document the discussion in here regarding DRK privacy technology. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=979315.msg10685711#msg10685711 Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 07, 2015, 12:34:30 AM Actually, it is just bitcoin with coinjoin on top. Blockchain.info has implemented this feature long before. https://i.imgur.com/4tzMcBi.jpg Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:36:10 AM I would clone DRK and relaunch it clean the way we did with Monero. The monero launch was anything but clean.False. Quote Where is the info about the crippled monero miner and the secret optimized miner for insiders? The Monero insiders had nothing to do with the crippled miner, it came from bytecoin and it was Monero who fixed it, but more to the point it didn't affect the supply at all. Unless you were around during the first month or two it doesn't affect you in the slightest. Someone was going to mine those coins in a few months (roughly 5% percent of the total supply, just as planned) after all. Quote how much monero was premined? why did they lie about the amount of premined coins? There was no premise at all, and no lying about it. WTF, I have no idea where you got that from? Quote do the cryptonote nsa origins and fake white paper worry you? No, the NSA troll was a joke on a on paid a "news" web site and the fake white paper doesn't worry me at all because we are well aware of the bytecoin/cryptonote scammers. That's why Monero was created in the first place, otherwise we would just be using bytecoin. Still off topic. Not clear at all how any of this is relevant to DRK and its problems. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: whocares on March 07, 2015, 12:36:28 AM I think it's clear who hired this clown to prove something that he doesn't understand how works ..
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: spatula on March 07, 2015, 12:37:31 AM Correct, I'd recommend moving on to another coin that doesn't have the baggage, and I do recommend that when people ask me. I'm not a fan of the whole idea of masternodes, nor a fan of PoS coins, so the tech has nothing to interest me, but if I were I would clone DRK and relaunch it clean the way we did with Monero. I wasn't gonna post in this thread until I saw this, as I like both DRK and XMR. The CPU miner that you all released on launch was de-optimized to 100x less than its optimized speed. Either maliciousness, incompetence, or negligence from being in a hurry to get launched. In any way, XMR was NOT a fair launch by any means. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 07, 2015, 12:39:24 AM I would clone DRK and relaunch it clean the way we did with Monero. The monero launch was anything but clean.Where is the info about the crippled monero miner and the secret optimized miner for insiders? how much monero was premined? why did they lie about the amount of premined coins? do the cryptonote nsa origins and fake white paper worry you? did y'all ever figure out how to put together a official gui wallet? how long did monero go without a gui wallet? will bloating be an even bigger issue when people actually start using the gui wallet? how do you propose solving the monero inflation problem? I did not see it on the wiki... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryptoNote#Controversy_and_criticism "The monero launch was anything but clean." This has been my exact thought the whole time reading this but I have not wanted to add to the DRK vs XMR off topic ranting going on here. What happened to the original devs? Why did they leave? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: JGCMiner on March 07, 2015, 12:39:46 AM No problems, your solution is perfect, scrap the most innovative crypto in history with the largest anon community and marketcap just to appease a small minority of trolls... Actually, it is just bitcoin with coinjoin on top. Blockchain.info has implemented this feature long before. *snore* Wake me up when you have actually traced a Darksend transaction from sender to reciever. Anybody (trolls included) can post wall of text. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:42:53 AM Correct, I'd recommend moving on to another coin that doesn't have the baggage, and I do recommend that when people ask me. I'm not a fan of the whole idea of masternodes, nor a fan of PoS coins, so the tech has nothing to interest me, but if I were I would clone DRK and relaunch it clean the way we did with Monero. I wasn't gonna post in this thread until I saw this, as I like both DRK and XMR. The CPU miner that you all released on launch was de-optimized to 100x less than its optimized speed. Either maliciousness, incompetence, or negligence from being in a hurry to get launched. In any way, XMR was NOT a fair launch by any means. I disagree, and I'll quote the expert on the topic who has nothing whatsoever to do with Monero: Quote from: dga This would be a very reasonable thing to assert if I had anything to do with Monero. I don't. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, none of the people who profited from early optimized Monero mining had anything to do with crippling the code in the first place. Think of it this way: You step in and inherit a legacy codebase for a promising and interesting new cryptocurrency. You're immediately beset with demands -- fix bugs, release binaries, answer help questions, etc. In retrospect, it turns out that the code you took over had been de-optimized by its original creators. Is that your fault? Of course not. What's the standard that we should hold the Monero developers to? To fix any bugs or deliberate weaknesses as fast as they can after they become aware of it. To get up to speed and review and understand the codebase they inherited as quickly as a reasonable developer can do. Pretty clear, and like I said, it still didn't affect the total supply at all, and is off topic. It says a lot that the best response DRK supporters have of their own flaws is to aim criticism at another. It's ineffective and pathetic. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:44:23 AM What happened to the original devs? Why did they leave? The original "bitmonero" dev (almost certainly the same as the byte coin devs, although using a pseudonym to try to appear independent) were given the boot by the community exactly because of stuff like this. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 07, 2015, 12:45:16 AM snip The Monero insiders had nothing to do with the crippled miner, it came from bytecoin and it was Monero who fixed it, but more to the point it didn't affect the supply at all. Unless you were around during the first month or two it doesn't affect you in the slightest. Someone was going to mine those coins in a few months (roughly 5% percent of the total supply, just as planned) after all. snip OOH so monero had an unfair launch... miners with the optimized miner got a ton more coins than miners with the shitty one? hmmm so someone had an advantage and some one had a disadvantage.... Sounds unfair to me. Oh, where did all those coins go? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 12:46:57 AM Correct, I'd recommend moving on to another coin that doesn't have the baggage, and I do recommend that when people ask me. I'm not a fan of the whole idea of masternodes, nor a fan of PoS coins, so the tech has nothing to interest me, but if I were I would clone DRK and relaunch it clean the way we did with Monero. I wasn't gonna post in this thread until I saw this, as I like both DRK and XMR. The CPU miner that you all released on launch was de-optimized to 100x less than its optimized speed. Either maliciousness, incompetence, or negligence from being in a hurry to get launched. In any way, XMR was NOT a fair launch by any means. I disagree, and I'll quote the expert on the topic who has nothing whatsoever to do with Monero: Quote from: dga This would be a very reasonable thing to assert if I had anything to do with Monero. I don't. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, none of the people who profited from early optimized Monero mining had anything to do with crippling the code in the first place. Think of it this way: You step in and inherit a legacy codebase for a promising and interesting new cryptocurrency. You're immediately beset with demands -- fix bugs, release binaries, answer help questions, etc. In retrospect, it turns out that the code you took over had been de-optimized by its original creators. Is that your fault? Of course not. What's the standard that we should hold the Monero developers to? To fix any bugs or deliberate weaknesses as fast as they can after they become aware of it. To get up to speed and review and understand the codebase they inherited as quickly as a reasonable developer can do. Pretty clear, and like I said, it still didn't affect the total supply at all, and is off topic. It says a lot that the best response DRK supporters have of their own flaws is to aim criticism at another. It's ineffective and pathetic. Ineffective and pathetic are your monero plugs Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 07, 2015, 12:51:39 AM snip The Monero insiders had nothing to do with the crippled miner, it came from bytecoin and it was Monero who fixed it, but more to the point it didn't affect the supply at all. Unless you were around during the first month or two it doesn't affect you in the slightest. Someone was going to mine those coins in a few months (roughly 5% percent of the total supply, just as planned) after all. snip OOH so monero had an unfair launch... miners with the optimized miner got a ton more coins than miners with the shitty one? hmmm so someone had an advantage and some one had a disadvantage.... Sounds unfair to me. Oh, where did all those coins go? I bought them so its fairly distributed :P kuriso is known xmr hater on polo trollbox, stealthcoin is a known xmr hater on this forum and the rest defending this scam are letting their bags talk. please make it more obvious. Hater? naw not really. More of a realist. I would rather attempt to warn people they are getting suckered than sit back and watch them loose their money. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:52:23 AM snip The Monero insiders had nothing to do with the crippled miner, it came from bytecoin and it was Monero who fixed it, but more to the point it didn't affect the supply at all. Unless you were around during the first month or two it doesn't affect you in the slightest. Someone was going to mine those coins in a few months (roughly 5% percent of the total supply, just as planned) after all. snip OOH so monero had an unfair launch... miners with the optimized miner got a ton more coins than miners with the shitty one? hmmm so someone had an advantage and some one had a disadvantage.... Sounds unfair to me. Oh, were you a miner? If not then you weren't affected. Somewhat surprisingly though, even unoptimized miners still made very good money. Quote Oh, where did all those coins go? They were sold, as stated by dga and others who were involved in it. They were just in it for the money and had no real interest in Monero. dba went on to work on BBR, a competing cryptonote, although he seems to have lost interest in that too. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: celestio on March 07, 2015, 12:55:01 AM I would assume that there is an enormous difference between a currency(Monero) that has had miners being able to make for themselves optimized mining code, which is bound to happen for any cryptocurrency(And has happened to Bitcoin), than a coin(Darkcoin) that has had it's initial block reward of 500 cut many times over to the benefit of a few individuals who happened to be mining within the first few hours of release on linux...
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 12:57:58 AM snip The Monero insiders had nothing to do with the crippled miner, it came from bytecoin and it was Monero who fixed it, but more to the point it didn't affect the supply at all. Unless you were around during the first month or two it doesn't affect you in the slightest. Someone was going to mine those coins in a few months (roughly 5% percent of the total supply, just as planned) after all. snip OOH so monero had an unfair launch... miners with the optimized miner got a ton more coins than miners with the shitty one? hmmm so someone had an advantage and some one had a disadvantage.... Sounds unfair to me. Oh, where did all those coins go? I bought them so its fairly distributed :P kuriso is known xmr hater on polo trollbox, stealthcoin is a known xmr hater on this forum and the rest defending this scam are letting their bags talk. please make it more obvious. You, kazuki49 are really a special case. Someone who don't understand darksend created this thread to undermine darkcoin. In response to that we, who understand darksend, are trying to defend this tech. You used the opportunity to, once again, say about beginning of drk and plug monero Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 01:04:20 AM I would assume that there is an enormous difference between a currency(Monero) that has had miners being able to make for themselves optimized mining code, which is bound to happen for any cryptocurrency(And has happened to Bitcoin), than a coin(Darkcoin) that has had it's initial block reward of 500 cut many times over to the benefit of a few individuals who happened to be mining within the first few hours of release on linux... You could mine it as well ::) I didn't mine but I bought in feb. Darkcoin at the beginning was a shitcoin (as any other alt), but with not anonymous dev. There were coins flying around for nothing. Where were you or where were trolls at that time? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: papa_lazzarou on March 07, 2015, 01:04:48 AM Oh, where did all those coins go? Well, it looks like they were fairly distributed... Quote from: dga I might write about BBR, but it wasn't nearly as fun a story (or profitable) as XMR. I obviously had an optimized miner for it, but decided to take a different strategy with BBR of mining a lot, holding it, and then contributing code back to the coin to try to improve its value, so I spent a lot of time taking those optimizations and putting them into the open source simpleminer. In contrast, with XMR, I just mined and sold instantly. It wasn't as profitable as keeping the xmr miner completely private, but it's hard to compare given the market cap difference. What I've found is that overall, "totally private miner" (XMR) >> "optimize, mine, release" (BBR) > "convince the developers to pay to open source" (PTS) > "open source miner with optional dev fee" (RIC) > "give code away and ask for donations" (scrypt). Not economically surprising, but some good lessons in there for future coin developers who want good miners -- get someone to do it ahead of time. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: celestio on March 07, 2015, 01:10:07 AM I would assume that there is an enormous difference between a currency(Monero) that has had miners being able to make for themselves optimized mining code, which is bound to happen for any cryptocurrency(And has happened to Bitcoin), than a coin(Darkcoin) that has had it's initial block reward of 500 cut many times over to the benefit of a few individuals who happened to be mining within the first few hours of release on linux... You could mine it as well ::) I didn't mine but I bought in feb. Darkcoin at the beginning was a shitcoin (as any other alt), but with not anonymous dev. There were coins flying around for nothing. Where were you or where were trolls at that time? I'm saying the difference is that Monero's emission rate has not been tampered with, so optimized miner or not, it doesn't matter since anyone with the knowledge can create their own "optimized" mining software(Just as the first people created mining GPU's/ ASIC's for Bitcoin). However, Darkcoin's emission rate has been cut many, many times over after over 10% of it's entire max coin supply was mined in a few hours on a very "restricted" linux-only release. That is borderline scamming what happened in Darkcoin as the few individuals that mined during the first hours on a Linux only release got more than 10% of Darkcoin's entire coin supply(2million+ coins), then the block reward was cut several times over, making those few individuals' darkcoins worth much more. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 07, 2015, 01:13:21 AM There was no premise at all, and no lying about it. WTF, I have no idea where you got that from? I thought monero was premined, i get all the shitcoins confused. Seems like i saw it was like 2+% premined. Maybe it was another anon shitcoin but pretty sure it was monero. I'll find it. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: celestio on March 07, 2015, 01:14:18 AM There was no premise at all, and no lying about it. WTF, I have no idea where you got that from? I thought monero was premined, i get all the shitcoins confused. Seems like i saw it was like 2+% premined. Maybe it was another anon shitcoin but pretty sure it was monero. I'll find it. Not sure if trolling or trying to make up lies, Monero was never premined. So in the face of scrutiny, you prefer to invent lies to splatter? Hilarious. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 07, 2015, 01:15:12 AM snip The Monero insiders had nothing to do with the crippled miner, it came from bytecoin and it was Monero who fixed it, but more to the point it didn't affect the supply at all. Unless you were around during the first month or two it doesn't affect you in the slightest. Someone was going to mine those coins in a few months (roughly 5% percent of the total supply, just as planned) after all. snip OOH so monero had an unfair launch... miners with the optimized miner got a ton more coins than miners with the shitty one? hmmm so someone had an advantage and some one had a disadvantage.... Sounds unfair to me. Oh, where did all those coins go? I bought them so its fairly distributed :P kuriso is known xmr hater on polo trollbox, stealthcoin is a known xmr hater on this forum and the rest defending this scam are letting their bags talk. please make it more obvious. If you look closely you will notice that i don't like Darkcoin either.. but its not about that which matters is Bitcoiners are playing dirty tricks again. fair enough, market manipulation will always exist, one thing we should not tolerate is emission manipulation. "one thing we should not tolerate is emission manipulation" True, deliberate emission manipulation is a problem. Dark launched and had an issue. They fixed it. What has to be determined is if that issue was deliberate or a mistake. No code is ever perfect. There will always be issues and fixes for those issues. Was it deliberate? I honestly don't think so but who am I? I'm just a monero 'hater' lol (trolling the above label as a xmr hater). On the other hand, we know for a fact that monero was launched with a deliberately reduced miner for the general public and an optimized miner for the devs. The original devs cashed out their huge profits and left the community holding bags. Luckily a team stepped up to take it over. Prove DRK's error was a deliberate mistake aimed at ripping off the community and you'll have a case. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 01:17:57 AM I would assume that there is an enormous difference between a currency(Monero) that has had miners being able to make for themselves optimized mining code, which is bound to happen for any cryptocurrency(And has happened to Bitcoin), than a coin(Darkcoin) that has had it's initial block reward of 500 cut many times over to the benefit of a few individuals who happened to be mining within the first few hours of release on linux... You could mine it as well ::) I didn't mine but I bought in feb. Darkcoin at the beginning was a shitcoin (as any other alt), but with not anonymous dev. There were coins flying around for nothing. Where were you or where were trolls at that time? I'm saying the difference is that Monero's emission rate has not been tampered with, so optimized miner or not, it doesn't matter since anyone with the knowledge can create their own "optimized" mining software(Just as the first people created mining GPU's/ ASIC's for Bitcoin). However, Darkcoin's emission rate has been cut many, many times over after over 10% of it's entire max coin supply was mined in a few hours on a very "restricted" linux-only release. That is borderline scamming what happened in Darkcoin as the few individuals that mined during the first hours on a Linux only release got more than 10% of Darkcoin's entire coin supply(2million+ coins), then the block reward was cut several times over, making those few individuals' darkcoins worth much more(Borderline scam). Is the reason you didn't buy or mine Darkcoin early on that you expected the emission to remain certain way so it will be better for you to buy or mine later? If not, then how do you feel you were scammed? Because if you didn't base your decision a year ago on the emission of that time and got surprised later when it had changed, then the situation for you is exactly the same as if the emission would've been originally programmed to be exactly like it actually turned out to be. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: celestio on March 07, 2015, 01:18:12 AM snip The Monero insiders had nothing to do with the crippled miner, it came from bytecoin and it was Monero who fixed it, but more to the point it didn't affect the supply at all. Unless you were around during the first month or two it doesn't affect you in the slightest. Someone was going to mine those coins in a few months (roughly 5% percent of the total supply, just as planned) after all. snip OOH so monero had an unfair launch... miners with the optimized miner got a ton more coins than miners with the shitty one? hmmm so someone had an advantage and some one had a disadvantage.... Sounds unfair to me. Oh, where did all those coins go? I bought them so its fairly distributed :P kuriso is known xmr hater on polo trollbox, stealthcoin is a known xmr hater on this forum and the rest defending this scam are letting their bags talk. please make it more obvious. If you look closely you will notice that i don't like Darkcoin either.. but its not about that which matters is Bitcoiners are playing dirty tricks again. fair enough, market manipulation will always exist, one thing we should not tolerate is emission manipulation. "one thing we should not tolerate is emission manipulation" True, deliberate emission manipulation is a problem. Dark launched and had an issue. They fixed it. What has to be determined is if that issue was deliberate or a mistake. No code is ever perfect. There will always be issues and fixes for those issues. Was it deliberate? I honestly don't think so but who am I? I'm just a monero 'hater' lol (trolling the above label as a xmr hater). On the other hand, we know for a fact that monero was launched with a deliberately reduced miner for the general public and an optimized miner for the devs. The original devs cashed out their huge profits and left the community holding bags. Luckily a team stepped up to take it over. Prove DRK's error was a deliberate mistake aimed at ripping off the community and you'll have a case. Ask yourself, why would a developer purposely release a coin with no future goals or intentions at the time, with 500 coins per block, on a linux only release, then drastically cut the block reward several times over after a few hours have passed, leaving over 2million coins mined by a few individuals in the span of a few hours? The instamine was intended. There is literally no other explanation. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: G2M on March 07, 2015, 01:19:59 AM Soooooo..
No proof. Just FUD, and magic python deanonymizer. Now just boring rehash of the last year. To the grey list you go! :D Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 01:20:19 AM There was no premise at all, and no lying about it. WTF, I have no idea where you got that from? I thought monero was premined, i get all the shitcoins confused. Seems like i saw it was like 2+% premined. Maybe it was another anon shitcoin but pretty sure it was monero. I'll find it. "Pretty sure" = "dead wrong" in this case. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 01:24:08 AM On the other hand, we know for a fact that monero was launched with a deliberately reduced miner for the general public and an optimized miner for the devs. The original devs cashed out their huge profits and left the community holding bags. Luckily a team stepped up to take it over. There was no "huge profit" for the original devs even. They might have made a little but if you take the total coins mined, subtract those mined by dga, and subtract those mined by people using the public miner (who still did quite well on it), there isn't a whole lot left. I'm pretty sure the original devs did not expect the community to shove them out and fix the miner within a couple of months the way it played out and were caught unprepared. They likely wanted to use their optimized miner in secret for a long time, or perhaps more likely the whole "bitmonero" project (as with quazarcoin, fantomcoin, etc. etc.) was just a sham to crowd out clones and prop up their real scam, bytecoin (which did have an 82% premine). In fact they intended to merge mine bitmonero with bytecoin. Still off topic though. Nice job obfuscating DRK's problems by rehashing early cryptonote history guys. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: g4q34g4qg47ww on March 07, 2015, 01:34:00 AM I think it is interesting to contrast of how Evan addressed the stated issue in this thread, which is about the coin he works on afterall, asked that the guy continue his work and contact him if he actually has any meaningful results.
By way of contrast, the XMR devs are distracted all day in a thread that is not even about their coin, sqauking like a bunch of jelly-jerkoffs. I bought quite a pile of monero when its trading symbol was still MRO, was not on poloniex yet, and this was the only exchange: https://cryptonote.exchange.to/ I sold at quite a profit about 2 weeks after it hit poloniex and never bought more. I noticed that its price was back to its pre-poloniex days recently and was considering buying back in. I stopped by the thread and noticed smooth was handling some FUD that day, was being patient with trolls and basically trying to keep the ship sailing, was pretty impressed at the time and remained open to buying back in, but don't like the emmission curve or liklihood of any significant adoption for years. Fluffypony always comes off bad but tacotime is usually alright and i had a decent impression of smooth. But, you guys are ridiculous! Totally unprofessional and you wear your jealousy on your face! Get to work on your coin! Why are you still here??? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 01:34:54 AM Im going to be launching DarkMonero soon, its a clean relaunch of Monero because I feel that Monero's launch wasnt fair and that its inflation is hurting investors, if Monero is going to thrive I feel as though it needs to be relaunched cleanly to ensure investors are not putting their investment at risk. Sure go ahead, I don't discourage this at all. It was tried with Quazarcoin and that seems to have died, but it may not have been a sincere effort in the first place. In reality I talk to a lot of people who are considering getting involved with Monero and a few who are evaluating both Monero and DRK, and in practice there is a lot more concern about the DRK instamine, etc. then about some miners who got a portion of the first few percent of coins on the cheap. But if you think this is a big deal and hurts the coin today, go for it! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 01:38:51 AM I noticed that its price was back to its pre-poloniex days recently and was considering buying back in. I stopped by the thread and noticed smooth was handling some FUD that day, was being patient with trolls and basically trying to keep the ship sailing, was pretty impressed at the time and remained open to buying back in, but don't like the emmission curve or liklihood of any significant adoption for years. Fluffypony always comes off bad but tacotime is usually alright and i had a decent impression of smooth. But, you guys are ridiculous! Totally unprofessional and you wear your jealousy on your face! Get to work on your coin! Why are you still here??? Look, criticism goes both ways and we get more than our fair share of it. When I post on these things I do so as a long-term cryptocurrency enthusiast whose interests go beyond just Monero. Also, we actively discourage the cultish sort of dev worship that drives a lot of other coins. Whether you like or dislike the Monero devs is not why we want you to support the coin. Evaluate the technology, the work being done, the economics, etc. If you dislike the emission curve (at least for now), for example, then you probably shouldn't buy, regardless of how much you might like, say, tacotime or perhaps (sometimes?) me. Let the substance speak for itself and leave personalities out of it. Cryptocurrency is not your favorite sports team or singer. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 07, 2015, 01:49:20 AM So monero had a optimized miner out while roughly 5% of the supply was mined. Who really knows for sure how much monero was mined with these miners and if any of it is still held. You believe the words of a scammer and a crook? Did they end up with more than 2%? DRK's so called instamine was like 2% i think based on some of the claims I seen.
Monero's community has had many talks about changing the emission. Unofficial votes have been for it but the devs have been against it (not sure if there were official votes). They want to sit back on their high horse and be able to say they never messed with their emissions even though they know it needs to be changed. I believe that some of the monero whales have let the markets plummet in an attempt to build support for the change. Now they look down on DRK for fixing its issues and think its honorable to do nothing to fix theirs. Ok, you guys have fun. I'm done stirring the pot for now. I'm going out. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: g4q34g4qg47ww on March 07, 2015, 01:49:46 AM I think it is interesting to contrast of how Evan addressed the stated issue in this thread, which is about the coin he works on afterall, asked that the guy continue his work and contact him if he actually has any meaningful results. By way of contrast, the XMR devs are distracted all day in a thread that is not even about their coin, sqauking like a bunch of jelly-jerkoffs. I bought quite a pile of monero when its trading symbol was still MRO, was not on poloniex yet, and this was the only exchange: https://cryptonote.exchange.to/ I sold at quite a profit about 2 weeks after it hit poloniex and never bought more. I noticed that its price was back to its pre-poloniex days recently and was considering buying back in. I stopped by the thread and noticed smooth was handling some FUD that day, was being patient with trolls and basically trying to keep the ship sailing, was pretty impressed at the time and remained open to buying back in, but don't like the emmission curve or liklihood of any significant adoption for years. Fluffypony always comes off bad but tacotime is usually alright and i had a decent impression of smooth. But, you guys are ridiculous! Totally unprofessional and you wear your jealousy on your face! Get to work on your coin! Why are you still here??? Look, criticism goes both ways and we get more than our fair share of it. When I post on these things I do so as a long-term cryptocurrency enthusiast whose interests go beyond just Monero. Also, we actively discourage the cultish sort of dev worship that drives a lot of other coins. Whether you like or dislike the Monero devs is not why we want you to support the coin. Evaluate the technology, the work being done, the economics, etc. If you dislike the emission curve (at least for now), for example, then you probably shouldn't buy, regardless of how much you might like, say, tacotime or perhaps (sometimes?) me. Let the substance speak for itself and leave personalities out of it. Cryptocurrency is not your favorite sports team or singer. I submit that the developement team of a coin is quite an important factor to consider when deciding whether to make an investment. :-* I am fully aware of your tech, which is why i bought in the past and had considered buying again. I don't think it makes economic sense for anyone to purchase monero at this time because of the reasons i stated, emission curve and no hope of adoption. In addition to those reasons, I now have quite a negative opinion of the dev team and their ability to control themselves. Kudos Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 01:55:18 AM I submit that the developement team of a coin is quite an important factor to consider when deciding whether to make an investment. :-* Interestingly, our development team includes seven core team members and several other developers and important contributors. Quote from: http://getmonero.org/knowledge-base/people There have been many individuals that have contributed to Monero code; a complete list of which can be found on our Github Contributors page. Some that have made outstanding contributions include: Thomas Winget, mikezackles, oranjuice, warptangent, rfree, moneromooo, jakoblind, and tomerkon. So you probably shouldn't judge a team or the work on the basis of your opinion of some of our posts. In fact if you are basing your opinion of the team on the relative few of us who do post on bitcointalk at all you are probably getting a very misleading perception (for better or worse) since most do not. But as I said you should make up your own mind about which coin(s) to support if any. I can't say that your own criteria are incorrect. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 01:56:35 AM Sure there might be other problems, but not that one. What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch? Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them. That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market. So the concrete and actual problem is FUD. Agreed pretty much. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: nsimmons on March 07, 2015, 01:59:01 AM I submit that the developement team of a coin is quite an important factor to consider when deciding whether to make an investment. :-* Interestingly, our development team includes seven core team members and several other developers and important contributors. Quote from: http://getmonero.org/knowledge-base/people There have been many individuals that have contributed to Monero code; a complete list of which can be found on our Github Contributors page. Some that have made outstanding contributions include: Thomas Winget, mikezackles, oranjuice, warptangent, rfree, moneromooo, jakoblind, and tomerkon. So you probably shouldn't judge a team or the work on the basis of your opinion of some of our posts. In fact if you are basing your opinion of the team on the relative few of us who do post on bitcointalk at all you are probably getting a very misleading perception (for better or worse) since most do not. But as I said you should make up your own mind about which coin(s) to support if any. I can't say that your own criteria are incorrect. Shouldn't you turds be building a release that doesn't brick my laptop every time i try to open it? You spend a lot of time bitching and not working. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:00:36 AM I submit that the developement team of a coin is quite an important factor to consider when deciding whether to make an investment. :-* Interestingly, our development team includes seven core team members and several other developers and important contributors. Quote from: http://getmonero.org/knowledge-base/people There have been many individuals that have contributed to Monero code; a complete list of which can be found on our Github Contributors page. Some that have made outstanding contributions include: Thomas Winget, mikezackles, oranjuice, warptangent, rfree, moneromooo, jakoblind, and tomerkon. So you probably shouldn't judge a team or the work on the basis of your opinion of some of our posts. In fact if you are basing your opinion of the team on the relative few of us who do post on bitcointalk at all you are probably getting a very misleading perception (for better or worse) since most do not. But as I said you should make up your own mind about which coin(s) to support if any. I can't say that your own criteria are incorrect. Shouldn't you turds be building a release that doesn't brick my laptop every time i try to open it? You spend a lot of time bitching and not working. Please post a link where you have reported this "bricking" issue because I'm not familiar with it. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:01:49 AM Sure there might be other problems, but not that one. What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch? Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them. That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market. So the concrete and actual problem is FUD. Agreed pretty much. FUD is a problem yes, but in this case it is the symptom and not the cause. The cause can only be addressed by moving to a different coin that wasn't instamined. It will forever be the case that people researching dark will hit google and find this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.0 or this: http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin You can't put humpty dumpty back together, sorry. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: celestio on March 07, 2015, 02:03:40 AM So monero had a optimized miner out while roughly 5% of the supply was mined. Who really knows for sure how much monero was mined with these miners and if any of it is still held. You believe the words of a scammer and a crook? Did they end up with more than 2%? DRK's so called instamine was like 2% i think based on some of the claims I seen. Monero's community has had many talks about changing the emission. Unofficial votes have been for it but the devs have been against it (not sure if there were official votes). They want to sit back on their high horse and be able to say they never messed with their emissions even though they know it needs to be changed. I believe that some of the monero whales have let the markets plummet in an attempt to build support for the change. Now they look down on DRK for fixing its issues and think its honorable to do nothing to fix theirs. Ok, you guys have fun. I'm done stirring the pot for now. I'm going out. Dgar, the guy who built his own optimized miner, wrote an entire article on it as well as how he sold all of his coins right after he mined them, feel free to look it up(P.S, the same optimized miner thing happened with Bitcoin, as I said earlier, anyone with the know how can create their own optimized miners, look at Bitcoins first GPU's/ASICs). Also, these coins are supposed to be "currencies", are they not? They are supposed to be "decentralized", are they not? So then why would a developer purposely change their coin's emission rate on their own accord, as well as the total coin supply?(Which is what Darkcoin's developer did several times). The very "social contract" has been violated, since the coin's parameters have been severely changed after conception. That means Darkcoin is not a decentralized cryptocurrency, but a centralized pennystock. Furthermore, Darkcoin's instamine was over 10%, not 2%. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 02:04:05 AM I agree most of went down here should've been in the DRk vs XMR thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=962235.0
Whilst i enjoyed the popcorn I am none the wiser about the attack vector described in the OP. I haven't learned much new but have rather been reminded of the (arguable) shortcomings of DRK and XMR respectively. If building a python script is all it might theoretically take to prove this or not then lots of people here are qualified to do just that. Do we know if this is a problem for DRK or not? Things r still unclear. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 02:10:11 AM Sure there might be other problems, but not that one. What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch? Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them. That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market. So the concrete and actual problem is FUD. Agreed pretty much. FUD is a problem yes, but in this case it is the symptom and not the cause. The cause can only be addressed by moving to a different coin that wasn't instamined. It will forever be the case that people researching dark will hit google and find this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.0 or this: http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin You can't put humpty dumpty back together, sorry. FUD is a symptom of instamine, which won't cause any concrete problems, only FUD. People in the future will find out many coins were mined fast early on, for them it won't make any difference whether they were mined in 2 seconds or in 2 years. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:11:11 AM So monero had a optimized miner out while roughly 5% of the supply was mined. Who really knows for sure how much monero was mined with these miners and if any of it is still held. You believe the words of a scammer and a crook? Did they end up with more than 2%? They had, at most, slightly over 50% of the hash rate for various periods (not the entire time). I can tell you that I mined without the optimized miner and had a good fraction of the hash rate for a while, as did a number of others, so it is clear their share of the 5% was certainly well under 5%, perhaps at most 2.5%, which comes to around 450 000 coins. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars doing this, over a period of months, which even if you don't believe they sold (in large part to pay for the mining) which certainly I do believe, amounts to a major investment, quite possibly higher than the price of the coin even today. They did not mine millions of coins over a couple of days for very little cost. You're also confusing two totally different issues entirely. No one claims that mining is totally "fair" at all times for everyone. People have ASICs with different efficiencies, different electricity costs, and all manner of optimized GPU miners. That's totally separate issue from the rate of coin distribution and whether or not millions of coins were distributed to a few people in a couple of days. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:15:48 AM Sure there might be other problems, but not that one. What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch? Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them. That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market. So the concrete and actual problem is FUD. Agreed pretty much. FUD is a problem yes, but in this case it is the symptom and not the cause. The cause can only be addressed by moving to a different coin that wasn't instamined. It will forever be the case that people researching dark will hit google and find this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.0 or this: http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin You can't put humpty dumpty back together, sorry. FUD is a symptom of instamine, which won't cause any concrete problems, except FUD. People in the future will find out many coins were mined fast early on, for them it won't make any difference whether they were mined in 2 seconds or in 2 years. It does make a difference. There is such a thing as integrity and reputation, and to normal people outside of the sociopaths who are all too common around cryptocurrencies, those do matter, plus as I mentioned before the practical fact that outsiders can't tell the difference between incompetence and fraud, and rationally dislike both. Perhaps the practical consideration might not matter if the original development team were no longer involved at all, but even then the reputation and integrity of the brand would be permanently damaged compared to similar but undamaged ones, which is going to be very hard to overcome in a competitive market. DRK is indelibly tarnished, and there is no good reason to pick such a coin among a universe of many, unless you are one of the insiders who are benefitting from this. That's not FUD, it is fact. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:16:53 AM I agree most of went down here should've been in the DRk vs XMR thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=962235.0 Whilst i enjoyed the popcorn I am none the wiser about the attack vector described in the OP. I haven't learned much new but have rather been reminded of the (arguable) shortcomings of DRK and XMR respectively. If building a python script is all it might theoretically take to prove this or not then lots of people here are qualified to do just that. Do we know if this is a problem for DRK or not? Things r still unclear. Good question harold. I am interested in further analysis from the OP, if he chooses to do it (or others do) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 02:18:42 AM In fact if you are basing your opinion of the team on the relative few of us who do post on bitcointalk at all you are probably getting a very misleading perception And what perception should we be getting ? That you guys are prepared to let your project stand on its merits without getting stuck into tribal flamewars or maligning the technical competence of other devs, or "recommending that competing coins be ditched" ? But as I said you should make up your own mind about which coin(s) to support if any. Really ? That remark's a bit difficult to square with the propaganda factory of the last few pages such as: In reality I talk to a lot of people who are considering getting involved with Monero and a few who are evaluating both Monero and DRK, and in practice there is a lot more concern about the DRK instamine Wrong. There's practically zero concern about the so called "DRK instamine" otherwise it would never have sustained its success and reached a number 5 marketcap more than a year after it was launched. Nor would it have consistently widened its gap over Monero from a factor of 3 a few months ago to nearly 6 now. When I post on these things I do so as a long-term cryptocurrency enthusiast whose interests go beyond just Monero. So are we all and believe it or not many of us actually appreciate diversity and the fact that the anonymous 'bandwagon' has several strings to its bow. But the tactics you guys use much of the time don't remotely do justice to that sentiment or the positions your hold within your own project. There doesn't seem to be any other reason for that other than the fact that you've got chips on your shoulders the size of houses over your market recognition deficit. Like g4q34g4qg47ww, I suggest you try getting on with the job, let the market take care of itself and find some footsoldiers to do your mud-slinging at the competition for you. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 02:22:03 AM Sure there might be other problems, but not that one. What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch? Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them. That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market. So the concrete and actual problem is FUD. Agreed pretty much. FUD is a problem yes, but in this case it is the symptom and not the cause. The cause can only be addressed by moving to a different coin that wasn't instamined. It will forever be the case that people researching dark will hit google and find this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.0 or this: http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin You can't put humpty dumpty back together, sorry. FUD is a symptom of instamine, which won't cause any concrete problems, except FUD. People in the future will find out many coins were mined fast early on, for them it won't make any difference whether they were mined in 2 seconds or in 2 years. It does make a difference. There is such a thing as integrity and reputation, and to normal people outside of the sociopaths who are all too common around cryptocurrencies, those do matter I disagree. Normal people outside of crypto think even Bitcoin is a ponzi scam and don't want to buy it because the Bitcoiners just want to sell their coins to the new idiots. And they don't want to be that new idiot. For them it doesn't make any difference whether the coins were mined in a day or a year. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:23:33 AM In reality I talk to a lot of people who are considering getting involved with Monero and a few who are evaluating both Monero and DRK, and in practice there is a lot more concern about the DRK instamine Wrong. There's practically zero concern about the so called "DRK instamine" from any quarter that matters otherwise it would never have reached a number 5 marketcap more than a year after it was launched. Nor would it have consistently widened its gap over Monero from a factor of 3 a few months ago to nearly 6 now. As I explained earlier the (essentially fake imo) market cap is easily explainable by most of the supply being controlled by insiders. With enough control of existing supply, reduction of new supply, redirecting new supply from mining to existing holders via PoS masternodes, etc., you can make the price and therefore "reported" market cap anything they want. Unless there are outsiders willing to buy your holdings at the current price, the reported cap is meaningless, and I don't believe there are. I will acknowledge I can't prove that, but will will see how it plays out. You can't play supply games forever, though historically such schemes have gone on for a very long time on occasion. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:27:16 AM I disagree. Normal people outside of crypto think even Bitcoin is a ponzi scam and don't want to buy it because the Bitcoiners just want to sell their coins to the new idiots. Some do, some don't, and in a sense they may be right. Bitcoin doesn't have exactly the best distribution. The first two year were a sort of slow motion instamine, though largely without the questions of integrity or incompetence. The game changed once cryptocurrencies matured to the point that coins trade and have value almost immediately. Quote And they don't want to be that new idiot. For them it doesn't make any difference whether the coins were mined in a day or a year. Disagree. Some criticize the two year "instamine" on exactly that basis. More would and do criticize a two day instamine even more harshly. Well designed coins that are not in fact intended as ponzi schemes should take care not to mine out too far ahead of adoption, and should not do so in a shady and/or incompetent way. That includes Bitcoin. I certainly don't see anything that was incompetent about Bitcoin's early years and very little that was shady about it. At the time, four years seemed like a reasonable adoption window to distribute 50% of the coins. This may have turned out to be wrong, but it was not unreasonable. Two days is unreasonable. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 07, 2015, 02:34:43 AM There was no premise at all, and no lying about it. WTF, I have no idea where you got that from? I thought monero was premined, i get all the shitcoins confused. Seems like i saw it was like 2+% premined. Maybe it was another anon shitcoin but pretty sure it was monero. I'll find it. "Pretty sure" = "dead wrong" in this case. Yeah i could not find it searching for "monero premine". I think what they were talking about was the crippled miner and they added it all up to like 2.6% of the coin that was "unfair mined". Most coins including bitcoin have issues with premine, instamine or unfair mining in the beginning. I can't think of any coins that don't have some kind of mining issue so 2+% is not a big deal imo. Are you saying you never heard that and don't know the statistic i'm talking about? You might as well come clean because i will find it. It was in one of the main monero threads. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:36:19 AM There was no premise at all, and no lying about it. WTF, I have no idea where you got that from? I thought monero was premined, i get all the shitcoins confused. Seems like i saw it was like 2+% premined. Maybe it was another anon shitcoin but pretty sure it was monero. I'll find it. "Pretty sure" = "dead wrong" in this case. Yeah i could not find it searching for "monero premine". I think what they were talking about was the crippled miner and they added it all up to like 2.6% of the coin that was "unfair mined". Most coins including bitcoin have issues with premine, instamine or unfair mining in the beginning. I can't think of any coins that don't have some kind of mining issue so 2+% is not a big deal imo. Are you saying you never heard that and don't know the statistic i'm talking about? You might as well come clean because i will find it. It was in one of the main monero threads. Yes i'm well aware of the optimized miner (and I'm also pretty sure that 100% of coins have optimized hardware/software miners at any given time). I don't think its the same thing as a premise or instamine at all. They mined say 2.5% of the coins over several months at a cost of probably hundreds of thousands of dollars, and apparently made a profit in that area by selling them. Good for them. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 02:36:26 AM As I explained earlier the (essentially fake imo) market cap is easily explainable by most of the supply being controlled by insiders. With enough control of existing supply, reduction of new supply, redirecting new supply from mining to existing holders via PoS masternodes, etc., you can make the price and therefore "reported" market cap anything they want. You must think we're complete idiots. You're arrogant enough to malign both the dev and the entire market anyway so I wouldn't put it past you. You might be surprised to find that I actually hold quite some Monero (it's not exactly expensive) but every time you post on here I feel increasingly that it's an un-neccessary hedge because that project looks like going exactly nowhere. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:39:20 AM As I explained earlier the (essentially fake imo) market cap is easily explainable by most of the supply being controlled by insiders. With enough control of existing supply, reduction of new supply, redirecting new supply from mining to existing holders via PoS masternodes, etc., you can make the price and therefore "reported" market cap anything they want. You must think we're all complete idiots. You're arrogant enough to malign both the dev and the entire market anyway so I wouldn't put it past you. I don't know who is an idiot, who is crazy, and who is crazy like a fox. It is quite hard to tell. You are denying that controlling supply can push up the price? Quote You might be surprised to find that I actually hold quite some Monero (it's not exactly expensive) but every time you post on here I feel increasingly that it's an un-neccessary hedge because that project looks like going exactly nowhere. Nice troll there, and if you want to dump, please do. We're not in the business of trying to pump up the coin at all. Too bad your comments bear no actual resemblance to the development work being done, but I wouldn't expect anything else from DRK supporters. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: ErrorId on March 07, 2015, 02:40:16 AM So basically what this thread boils down to is, someone thought they found an issue with Darksend, but now say the original issue isn't what they thought it was and are coming at it from a different angle, and everything else since then is people who have no stake in DRK or plan on ever having a stake bitching that people got too many coins in the beggining? Satoshi has a million BTC, nobody gives a fuck, a few others also have a good number and the world keeps turning.
A mistake was made and corrected. Good work has been done. People have been shouting scam from day one and nothing has changed, the market is doing its thing and will continue to do so. Why waste all this energy? Use it to do something useful. History is being made and all you guys want to do is fight. Why not fucking work together for a change so we can get crypto out to the world faster? We sure as fuck need it out there. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:43:44 AM History is being made and all you guys want to do is fight. Why not fucking work together for a change so we can get crypto out to the world faster? We sure as fuck need it out there. I'll agree with you on that. I'd in fact like to see DRK succeed rather than having nothing succeed I suppose, but frankly the DRK technology scares me to some extent because it is NSA PRISM 2.0 in my opinion. I'd rather see something, anything, without "nodes" succeed, whether I have a stake in it or not. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 07, 2015, 02:44:34 AM As I explained earlier the (essentially fake imo) market cap is easily explainable by most of the supply being controlled by insiders. With enough control of existing supply, reduction of new supply, redirecting new supply from mining to existing holders via PoS masternodes, etc., you can make the price and therefore "reported" market cap anything they want. You must think we're complete idiots. You're arrogant enough to malign both the dev and the entire market anyway so I wouldn't put it past you. You might be surprised to find that I actually hold quite some Monero (it's not exactly expensive) but every time you post on here I feel increasingly that it's an un-neccessary hedge because that project looks like going exactly nowhere. Well this thread has devolved anyway, so might as well..... the monero project is going as fast as a coin can go when the devs don't have an instamine stash :) (oh snap, he said it!) look, the instamine, if its real or not, whatever. So a handful of people are going to get filthy rich if DRK goes "to the moon". I'm not a fan of the approach, but I understand the "bootstrapping" as it were. I understand it, I don't agree with it. Now, whether the privacy tech actually holds water is a different story. If DRK privacy tech fails + instamine.... well then..... those two ingredients make a whole different type of cake. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 02:48:13 AM What matters is whether the coin will retain its value, or even increase in value, and what you can do with it. If someone else has more than you doesn't affect on how valuable it is to you. Might affect the jelly factor for some though as people in crypto have the highest sense of entitlement I've seen anywhere.
I'm gonna have to give up for today as I need to get some sleep. This relentless nitpicking on non-concrete issues is making me sort of understand why the Monero development is going so slow though. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 07, 2015, 02:48:32 AM So basically what this thread boils down to is, someone thought they found an issue with Darksend, but now say the original issue isn't what they thought it was and are coming at it from a different angle, and everything else since then is people who have no stake in DRK or plan on ever having a stake bitching that people got too many coins in the beggining? Satoshi has a million BTC, nobody gives a fuck, a few others also have a good number and the world keeps turning. A mistake was made and corrected. Good work has been done. People have been shouting scam from day one and nothing has changed, the market is doing its thing and will continue to do so. Why waste all this energy? Use it to do something useful. History is being made and all you guys want to do is fight. Why not fucking work together for a change so we can get crypto out to the world faster? We sure as fuck need it out there. I've made a copy of the thread with only the Evil Knieval (alleged exploit finder) & Ed Duffy (DRK Developer) primary conversation in the opening post. IMO, its still open. Evil Knieval claims he's making a darkcoin deanonymizing blockchain explorer, and there's current 2 BTC bounty for it, and Knieval has offered 1 BTC counter bounty. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=979315.0 Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 02:49:59 AM So basically what this thread boils down to is, someone thought they found an issue with Darksend, but now say the original issue isn't what they thought it was and are coming at it from a different angle, and everything else since then is people who have no stake in DRK or plan on ever having a stake bitching that people got too many coins in the beggining? Satoshi has a million BTC, nobody gives a fuck, a few others also have a good number and the world keeps turning. A mistake was made and corrected. Good work has been done. People have been shouting scam from day one and nothing has changed, the market is doing its thing and will continue to do so. Why waste all this energy? Use it to do something useful. History is being made and all you guys want to do is fight. Why not fucking work together for a change so we can get crypto out to the world faster? We sure as fuck need it out there. I've made a copy of the thread with only the Evil Knieval (alleged exploit finder) & Ed Duffy (DRK Developer) primary conversation in the opening post. IMO, its still open. Evil Knieval claims he's making a darkcoin deanonymizing blockchain explorer, and there's current 2 BTC bounty for it, and Knieval has offered 1 BTC counter bounty. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=979315.0 I'd rather a bounty was put up to hack the new MN blinding version currently on testnet. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 02:52:51 AM We're not in the business of trying to pump up the coin at all. No. Your in the opposite business - of trying to throw as much mud as possible at a perfectly good competing project and hoping that some of it sticks simply because you've got a personal bone with their technical approach and the fact that it's popular. The irony of all this is that their technical approach perfectly suits their design objectives and your technical approach perfectly suits yours so your sense of discomfort is completely unneccesary. There is no conflict but you don't appear to have an articulated enough understanding of the relative monetary and technical priorities to appreciate that. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Brilliantrocket on March 07, 2015, 02:56:43 AM The Monero team should really focus on developing their coin, rather than being envious of others. I said around 4 months ago that I'll put money into Monero the second I see a coin that I can actually use (Stable database+GUI). How much longer must I wait?
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:58:15 AM No. Your in the opposite business - of trying to throw as much mud as possible at a perfectly good competing project and hoping that some of it sticks simply because you've got a personal bone with their technical approach and the fact that it's popular. That would be what I was doing, if I saw it as a "perfect good" project, but I don't, both on the basis of competence and/or integrity, and also technical grounds. Your opinion and mine are equally valid though, so people can make up their own minds. That's why they make chocolate and vanilla. If another project comes along that has masternodes (at least for anonymity; using masternodes for something else might be fine) but no instamine and no blatant supply manipulation, I'll just criticize it on technical grounds alone, and likewise for the reverse. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 03:12:37 AM If another project comes along that has masternodes (at least for anonymity; using masternodes for something else might be fine) but no instamine and no blatant supply manipulation, I'll just criticize it on technical grounds alone, and likewise for the reverse. Well if another project comes along without devs who can't get a useable wallet released in 8 months but still want to claim technical superiority, who don't need to scrape the barrel with allegations of "supply manipulation" to justify marketcaps, who can distinctly articulate monetary and technical design priorities and who don't need to malign their peers to justify their own existence, I'm sure I'll just criticise it on technical grounds as well ;) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 03:35:08 AM If another project comes along that has masternodes (at least for anonymity; using masternodes for something else might be fine) but no instamine and no blatant supply manipulation, I'll just criticize it on technical grounds alone, and likewise for the reverse. Well if another project comes along without devs who can't get a useable wallet released in 8 months but still want to claim technical superiority, who don't need to scrape the barrel with allegations of "supply manipulation" to justify marketcaps, who can distinctly articulate monetary and technical design priorities and who don't need to malign their peers to justify their own existence, I'm sure I'll just criticise it on technical grounds as well ;) Hello? There are at least 5 usable wallets. Its something that is being quite adequately addressed by third parties so we've reduced its priority in favor of focusing on the core. Other than trolling the wallet issue is a non-issue in practice. It's also rather lame that you continue to respond to criticism of DRK not on its merits but by attacking another coin. It would be as if someone criticized XMR for the blockchain being too big (a valid potential criticism) and our response was to say that someone else has an instamine. It's nonsense both ways. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 03:47:25 AM It's also rather lame that you continue to respond to criticism of DRK not on its merits but by attacking another coin What you've promoted are not "criticisms" they're simply person preferences - a very different thing. A valid technical "criticism" is where you point out areas that the project doesn't meet it's design specifications or market priorities - not *your* design specifications or priorities. You've never even indicated that you remotely understand what Darkcoin's design goals were because otherwise you'd have realised that your so called "critiscisms" are actually where it is succeeding. That's what's disingenuous of your entire repertoire here and the only reason it came to my attention was because of your blatant arrogance over other aspects such as your dismissal of the dev's competence and nonsense about "fake marketcaps". Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 07, 2015, 03:49:07 AM The Monero team should really focus on developing their coin, rather than being envious of others. I said around 4 months ago that I'll put money into Monero the second I see a coin that I can actually use (Stable database+GUI). How much longer must I wait? https://getmonero.org/home check the latest news. glad we're all on topic. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 04:06:46 AM It's also rather lame that you continue to respond to criticism of DRK not on its merits but by attacking another coin What you've promoted are not "criticisms" they're simply person preferences - a very different thing. A valid technical "criticism" is where you point out areas that the project doesn't meet it's design specifications or market priorities - not *your* design specifications or priorities. I said criticisms, not technical criticisms. I have both. As for design goals, it is stated quite clearly that darkcoin aims to allow you to remain anonymous. It is not stated that it allows you remain anonymous as long as masternodes aren't spying on you or themselves being spied upon, something which can never be verified, and can't rationally be blindly trusted. I criticize this as technically weak, at such a fundamental and profound level such that it makes the entire core mission of the system a sham. If you want throw meaningful anonymity overboard and focus on things like market cap, API compatibility with BTC, etc. be my guest, but as far as I know the stated core mission still includes anonymity. Quote That's what's disingenuous of your entire repertoire here and the only reason it came to my attention was because of your blatant arrogance over other aspects such as your dismissal of the dev's competence and nonsense about "fake marketcaps". LOL, nice way to dismiss the fact that both enormous concentration of ownership (likely but difficult to prove) and blatant manipulation of supply in the form of enormously cut to available new supply (which has inarguably occurred), a) matter, b) can affect market cap, and c) make the whole thing look like some kind of penny stock joke. Really I don't think any of the market caps matter very much though, as they are all trivially small. We'll see what happens if and when that isn't the case. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 07, 2015, 04:14:54 AM yeah, market discussion in these threads drives me bonkers. By these lines of reason paycoin is still a winner!
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: AlexGR on March 07, 2015, 04:15:24 AM So then why would a developer purposely change their coin's emission rate on their own accord, as well as the total coin supply?(Which is what Darkcoin's developer did several times). The very "social contract" has been violated, since the coin's parameters have been severely changed after conception. That means Darkcoin is not a decentralized cryptocurrency, but a centralized pennystock. I think you are missing some key elements of history where the community has debated these issues in the DRK-thread / DRK-forum or participated in off-DRK-thread polls by eduffield, for issues regarding inflation / emission, total number of coins, fixing initial distribution through an airdrop of new coins, masternode payments etc. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=525093 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=559932 (I think there are a couple of threads like this around btctalk and darkcointalk). Thus you make it sound quite dictatorial, in a sense, when things are not at all like this. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Hueristic on March 07, 2015, 04:23:13 AM Hello? There are at least 5 usable wallets. Its something that is being quite adequately addressed by third parties so we've reduced its priority in favor of focusing on the core.... Are there any vids of these wallets in operation? I think that would go along way on this front. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 04:29:28 AM Hello? There are at least 5 usable wallets. Its something that is being quite adequately addressed by third parties so we've reduced its priority in favor of focusing on the core.... Are there any vids of these wallets in operation? I think that would go along way on this front. Not that I know of but that is a good suggestion, I will pass it on. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: AlexGR on March 07, 2015, 04:33:44 AM LOL, nice way to dismiss the fact that both enormous concentration of ownership (likely but difficult to prove) and blatant manipulation of supply in the form of enormously cut to available new supply (which has inarguably occurred), a) matter, b) can affect market cap, and c) make the whole thing look like some kind of penny stock joke. Really I don't think any of the market caps matter very much though, as they are all trivially small. We'll see what happens if and when that isn't the case. Regarding "blatant manipulation" see what I wrote above to celestio. Regarding market caps, high marketcaps tend to spread coin ownership. Darkcoins costing 17$ each at its high, do not leave much space for the instamine argument. People who get coins for nothing do not usually appreciate them. That's what happened at the launch and why people were selling batches of 10k DRKs for 0.25 BTC. A few months later, why would an instaminer ...hold at 17$ a coin? Market dynamics and market behavior indicates that he would sell a lot of his coins as the price rose. And that's precisely what happened all the way from 0.0000x BTC per DRK, to 0.000x BTC per DRK, to 0.002 BTC per DRK, to 0.028 BTC per DRK, with waves of market reshuffling. Things like mintpal going down and scammers getting wallets like 400k DRKs and then dumping them at frequent batches were more of an actual factor compared to the instamine non-issue (for the last year or so and in relation to the market). The instamine is only brought up to increase the FUD-vector... "DRK instamine... DRK not secure... DRK forks... blah blah blah" etc. As for DRK / NSA PRISM 2.0 analogy, I mean please... it's Bitcoin code with mixing on top. Open source stuff. Too much FUD ::) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stealth923 on March 07, 2015, 04:39:39 AM LOL, nice way to dismiss the fact that both enormous concentration of ownership (likely but difficult to prove) and blatant manipulation of supply in the form of enormously cut to available new supply (which has inarguably occurred), a) matter, b) can affect market cap, and c) make the whole thing look like some kind of penny stock joke. Really I don't think any of the market caps matter very much though, as they are all trivially small. We'll see what happens if and when that isn't the case. Regarding "blatant manipulation" see what I wrote above to celestio. Regarding market caps, high marketcaps tend to spread coin ownership. Darkcoins costing 17$ each at its high, do not leave much space for the instamine argument. People who get coins for nothing do not usually appreciate them. That's what happened at the launch and why people were selling batches of 10k DRKs for 0.25 BTC. A few months later, why would an instaminer ...hold at 17$ a coin? Market dynamics and market behavior indicates that he would sell a lot of his coins as the price rose. And that's precisely what happened all the way from 0.0000x BTC per DRK, to 0.000x BTC per DRK, to 0.002 BTC per DRK, to 0.028 BTC per DRK, with waves of market reshuffling. Things like mintpal going down and scammers getting wallets like 400k DRKs and then dumping them at frequent batches were more of an actual factor compared to the instamine non-issue (for the last year or so and in relation to the market). The instamine is only brought up to increase the FUD-vector... "DRK instamine... DRK not secure... DRK forks... blah blah blah" etc. As for DRK / NSA PRISM 2.0 analogy, I mean please... it's Bitcoin code with mixing on top. Open source stuff. Too much FUD ::) Its quite sad when one of the Monero team is considered one of the biggest trolls - NSA Prism = LOL Re-launch Darkcoin LOL DRK Marketcap fake LOL Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 04:42:07 AM As for DRK / NSA PRISM 2.0 analogy, I mean please... it's Bitcoin code with mixing on top. Open source stuff. Too much FUD ::) No that is not true at all. You as a user can verify that you are using Bitcoin code or whatever code you want to use. If it were peer-to-peer like bitcoin that could be enough. But it isn't. It is peer-to-masternode(s)-to-peer. You can't and never will be able to verify what masternodes are doing, as long as they appear to be doing what they are supposed to. But what else they are doing you have no idea. At all. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: AlexGR on March 07, 2015, 04:53:45 AM As for DRK / NSA PRISM 2.0 analogy, I mean please... it's Bitcoin code with mixing on top. Open source stuff. Too much FUD ::) No that is not true at all. You as a user can verify that you are using Bitcoin code or whatever code you want to use. If it were peer-to-peer like bitcoin that could be enough. But it isn't. It is peer-to-masternode(s)-to-peer. You can't and never will be able to verify what masternodes are doing, as long as they appear to be doing what they are supposed to. But what else they are doing you have no idea. At all. The elegance of DRK (prior to MN blinding) is that it assumes the worst of the nodes (=that they are corrupt in a high percentage) and works around the issue by multiple rounds of mixing, thus getting very low probabilities of identification even with controlled nodes. You know someone has a FUD vector when he cites the 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000x % probability as a definite loss of privacy or "real danger" or "not anonymous" etc etc. The fact that it also takes a loooot of money to buy all the nodes, which would make the price reach astronomical levels if done by a single entity like the NSA, also helps from a Game Theory perspective so that it can't really happen as the acquisition cost multiplies while an NSA-like player tries tries to obtain the remaining percentages of the MN network. I think it's about time all the FUDstorm is buried with the masternode blinding where the MNs don't even know what they transact. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 04:57:04 AM As for DRK / NSA PRISM 2.0 analogy, I mean please... it's Bitcoin code with mixing on top. Open source stuff. Too much FUD ::) No that is not true at all. You as a user can verify that you are using Bitcoin code or whatever code you want to use. If it were peer-to-peer like bitcoin that could be enough. But it isn't. It is peer-to-masternode(s)-to-peer. You can't and never will be able to verify what masternodes are doing, as long as they appear to be doing what they are supposed to. But what else they are doing you have no idea. At all. The elegance of DRK (prior to MN blinding) is that it assumes the worst of the nodes (=that they are corrupt in a high percentage) and works around the issue by multiple rounds of mixing, thus getting very low probabilities of identification even with controlled nodes. You know someone has a FUD vector when he cites the 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000x % probability as a definite loss of privacy. No, I simply disagree with the math and find that number implausible. I believe that most masternodes will ultimately be compromised, either directly or via VPS or other back doors. If you have one or a few out of 2000 masternodes compromised, yes multiple rounds reduces the risk to nearly nothing. But if you have say 80-90% of masternodes compromised, the number of rounds and the cost of the system to achieve high confidence becomes costly and impractical. And for that matter you can't rationally rule out 99% or even 100% being compromised eventually. I expect that in fact. Quote The fact that it also takes a loooot of money to buy all the nodes, which would make the price reach astronomical levels if done by a single entity like the NSA, also helps from a Game Theory perspective so that it can't really happen as the acquisition cost multiplies while an NSA-like player tries tries to obtain the remaining percentages of the MN network. That's false an assumes only that someone attempts to buy all the nodes very quickly and drives up the price. In fact what is more plausible is for someone buy the nodes slowly and/or attack competing nodes to make them less profitable to encourage node abandonment. Furthermore I don't really expect nodes being bought to be the primary mode attack, thought that could certainly happen over time too. It will be a combination of legal and quasi-legal attacks (i.e. PRISM) against the node operators themselves and/or VPS operators, and/or flat out compromises via VPS and other back doors. The NSA didn't have to buy all the IT companies, they just got them do the work of collecting the data. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 07, 2015, 05:00:19 AM The fact that it also takes a loooot of money to buy all the nodes, which would make the price reach astronomical levels if done by a single entity like the NSA, also helps from a Game Theory perspective so that it can't really happen as the acquisition cost multiplies while an NSA-like player tries tries to obtain the remaining percentages of the MN network. I think it's about time all the FUDstorm is buried with the masternode blinding where the MNs don't even know what they transact. yes, we all want to see evil-k break the blinded testnet masternode thing. a looooooooot of money. Aren't we in a world.... where.... the governments.... can just print money..... to buy.... masternodes? I was hoping the DRK dev's ventures to bitcointalk would get him to comment on the intrinsic connection between network privacy and currency valuation that I discuss in the XMR v DRK thread, but I guess that concern still sits there, waiting. Anyhoo, for those that are still interested in the original post subject (and are just coming into the conversation because this has been bumped like cah razy). I've compiled it here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=979315.0 Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: AlexGR on March 07, 2015, 05:02:36 AM No, I simply disagree with the math and find that number implausible. I believe that most masternodes will ultimately be compromised, either directly or via VPS or other back doors. When you deal with entire eco-systems, then you simply have to try your best at the area of your expertise. Our own PCs might be compromised. HDD firmware, processors, network equipment firmware, software backdoors, RNG fixing, etc etc. And then the entire Internet might be controlled, thus someone like NSA can see the whole network flow in a "transparent" way. If we take such hypotheses as somewhat probable, then no coin will ever be private or anonymous. We (all people involved in anon projects) might as well throw the towel and go home. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 05:08:53 AM No, I simply disagree with the math and find that number implausible. I believe that most masternodes will ultimately be compromised, either directly or via VPS or other back doors. When you deal with entire eco-systems, then you simply have to try your best at the area of your expertise. Our own PCs might be compromised. HDD firmware, processors, network equipment firmware, software backdoors, RNG fixing, etc etc. And then the entire Internet might be controlled, thus someone like NSA can see the whole network flow in a "transparent" way. If we take such hypotheses as somewhat probable, then no coin will ever be private or anonymous. We (all people involved in anon projects) might as well throw the towel and go home. You're incorrect. Even full (as in 100%) network flow for example, does not deanonomize Monero transactions. It does identify Monero users (which is why we are adding i2p to obscure it) but not the flow of coins. As long as there is some piece of hardware, under your own control that you can use to sign transactions properly, the rest need not be trusted. That's a much lower and more plausible expectation of trust than some nodes operating mostly in VPS hosting centers. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: AlexGR on March 07, 2015, 05:21:49 AM No, I simply disagree with the math and find that number implausible. I believe that most masternodes will ultimately be compromised, either directly or via VPS or other back doors. When you deal with entire eco-systems, then you simply have to try your best at the area of your expertise. Our own PCs might be compromised. HDD firmware, processors, network equipment firmware, software backdoors, RNG fixing, etc etc. And then the entire Internet might be controlled, thus someone like NSA can see the whole network flow in a "transparent" way. If we take such hypotheses as somewhat probable, then no coin will ever be private or anonymous. We (all people involved in anon projects) might as well throw the towel and go home. You're incorrect. Even full (as in 100%) network flow for example, does not deanonomize Monero transactions. It does identify Monero users (which is why we are adding i2p to obscure it) but not the flow of coins. As long as there is some piece of hardware, under your own control that you can use to sign transactions properly, the rest need not be trusted. That's a much lower and more plausible expectation of trust than some nodes operating mostly in VPS hosting centers. If the nodes know not what they transact, what advantage does it give you to control the hosting company or the nodes? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 05:37:22 AM No, I simply disagree with the math and find that number implausible. I believe that most masternodes will ultimately be compromised, either directly or via VPS or other back doors. When you deal with entire eco-systems, then you simply have to try your best at the area of your expertise. Our own PCs might be compromised. HDD firmware, processors, network equipment firmware, software backdoors, RNG fixing, etc etc. And then the entire Internet might be controlled, thus someone like NSA can see the whole network flow in a "transparent" way. If we take such hypotheses as somewhat probable, then no coin will ever be private or anonymous. We (all people involved in anon projects) might as well throw the towel and go home. You're incorrect. Even full (as in 100%) network flow for example, does not deanonomize Monero transactions. It does identify Monero users (which is why we are adding i2p to obscure it) but not the flow of coins. As long as there is some piece of hardware, under your own control that you can use to sign transactions properly, the rest need not be trusted. That's a much lower and more plausible expectation of trust than some nodes operating mostly in VPS hosting centers. If the nodes know not what they transact, what advantage does it give you to control the hosting company or the nodes? That's not how 'blinding' works. It just breaks up the transaction into more pieces so data from more nodes is needed to reconstruct it. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: g4q34g4qg47ww on March 07, 2015, 06:05:58 AM ^ Astronomical increase in nodes needed. You are still sad by the way
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 07, 2015, 07:14:35 AM No, I simply disagree with the math and find that number implausible. I believe that most masternodes will ultimately be compromised, either directly or via VPS or other back doors. You simply disagree? Really? You are sitting here arguing about something that you 'simply disagree' on? Sounds like a waste and a feeble attempt at spreading the on going FUD. Have you done any calculations that can plausibly prove/support why you simply disagree? If so, I'd like to see it. If you can't, beyond a reasonable doubt, prove that the math is wrong then you're just spreading FUD. I'll tell you right now that I haven't looked at the math. I aint gots no time for that. In other news... Google and your ISP is monitoring everything you do already. Nothing you do is safe. AAHHH!!!! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 07:50:58 AM No, I simply disagree with the math and find that number implausible. I believe that most masternodes will ultimately be compromised, either directly or via VPS or other back doors. You simply disagree? Really? You are sitting here arguing about something that you 'simply disagree' on? Sounds like a waste and a feeble attempt at spreading the on going FUD. Have you done any calculations that can plausibly prove/support why you simply disagree? If so, I'd like to see it. If you can't, beyond a reasonable doubt, prove that the math is wrong then you're just spreading FUD. I'll tell you right now that I haven't looked at the math. I aint gots no time for that. In other news... Google and your ISP is monitoring everything you do already. Nothing you do is safe. AAHHH!!!! That's exactly why if you want anonymity or even some modest degree of privacy on the Internet you better be doing it with strong cryptography and not trusting "nodes" Look I get that DRK was created before the cryptonote technology was released and arguably at the time it was the best we had to try to make Bitcoin more anonymous. Building that out was an admirable goal. It isn't any more. And yes, I do have some idea of the math. It works against a few bad apples but falls apart if many of the masternodes are dishonest or compromised (with or without their knowledge). I'll take a closer look at blinding when it is release but from what I've seen so far I expect much the same. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stealth923 on March 07, 2015, 08:11:41 AM Look I get that DRK was created before the cryptonote technology was released and arguably at the time it was the best we had to try to make Bitcoin more anonymous. Building that out was an admirable goal. It isn't any more. Do you have a solution to replace DRK?? If so please tell the world Please dont say Monero - Adoption is Zero (0%), the problems that the coin has are at this point are not marketable (No official Wallet, Bloat, Inflation etc etc) and will never gain adoption because who in their right mind as a business would try and maintain and secure two different code bases. Bitcoin is having enough of a hard time trying to convince people to use it. Looka at directbet.eu - they Took DRK over Monero..Why is that I wonder? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 07, 2015, 08:19:30 AM No, I simply disagree with the math and find that number implausible. I believe that most masternodes will ultimately be compromised, either directly or via VPS or other back doors. You simply disagree? Really? You are sitting here arguing about something that you 'simply disagree' on? Sounds like a waste and a feeble attempt at spreading the on going FUD. Have you done any calculations that can plausibly prove/support why you simply disagree? If so, I'd like to see it. If you can't, beyond a reasonable doubt, prove that the math is wrong then you're just spreading FUD. I'll tell you right now that I haven't looked at the math. I aint gots no time for that. In other news... Google and your ISP is monitoring everything you do already. Nothing you do is safe. AAHHH!!!! That's exactly why if you want anonymity or even some modest degree of privacy on the Internet you better be doing it with strong cryptography and not trusting "nodes" Look I get that DRK was created before the cryptonote technology was released and arguably at the time it was the best we had to try to make Bitcoin more anonymous. Building that out was an admirable goal. It isn't any more. And yes, I do have some idea of the math. It works against a few bad apples but falls apart if many of the masternodes are dishonest or compromised (with or without their knowledge). I'll take a closer look at blinding when it is release but from what I've seen so far I expect much the same. Whats 'many'? 5 nodes, 10 nodes, 1%, 10%, 20% of the nodes, more? Based on your calculations, how many dishonest masternodes does it take for transactions to becomes less than 'even some modest degree of privacy'? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 08:21:41 AM Look I get that DRK was created before the cryptonote technology was released and arguably at the time it was the best we had to try to make Bitcoin more anonymous. Building that out was an admirable goal. It isn't any more. Do you have a solution to replace DRK?? If so please tell the world Please dont say Monero - Adoption is Zero (0%), the problems that the coin has are at this point are not marketable (No official Wallet, Bloat, Inflation etc etc) and will never gain adoption because who in their right mind as a business would try and maintain and secure two different code bases. If you monkey with the code base at all, you are still inviting security issues and bugs. The masternode code isn't based directly on Bitcoin and had had issues as I understand it. (I mean this not as an attack on the code, which I can't do because I haven't personally reviewed it, but only to point out that if you want to do anything new you are going to have new code and have to develop, review, test, and debug carefully, and there will be bugs, etc. to be fixed.) Likewise for the non-Bitcoin parts of the DRK wallet, which include Darksend. As far as Monero having a different codebase, so far the core of the cryptonote code (including Monero but really all of them) has held up reasonably well after almost a year. There was one major exploit, but other than that, just minor growing pains. Quote Bitcoin is having enough of a hard time trying to convince people to use it. Fair point. Maybe DRK should just give up and DRK supporters should help get behind Bitcoin instead? Only partially serious here, but the fact is, again, if you are doing something different, whatever it is, you are going to have these issues. Quote Looka at directbet.eu - they Took DRK over Monero..Why is that I wonder? Because it was easier and the market is somewhat bigger (they're both very small though, really, even compared to BTC). No question that integrating Bitcoin-based coins is easier for sites that already support BTC. The other side of that is you simply don't get the sort of strong cryptographic anonymity you get with something a little farther away from Bitcoin. If you think anonymity is important, that matters. It certainly can be done. Several sites have integrated cryptonote coins and it's worked for them. That includes quite a few different exchanges, xmr.to, crypotcoins-dice, and probably some others I'm forgetting. Either way, there is no free lunch here. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 08:30:32 AM Whats 'many'? 5 nodes, 10 nodes, 1%, 10%, 20% of the nodes, more? Based on your calculations, how many dishonest masternodes does it take for transactions to becomes less than 'even some modest degree of privacy'? There are different vectors of attack here. If we ignore inherent coinjoin-type issues (the sorts of things this thread was originally about, which may be a false alarm, but those sorts of issues still exist in general terms and may apply to DRK in some ways), then the numbers I'm talking about involve most of the masternodes being malicious or compromised for catastrophic failure to occur. I don't believe that is the case today; I think most masternodes are run by people who either support the DRK project or are just doing it for the money (the latter is fine, short term, as it means they aren't interested in compromising privacy). But let's face it, what is going on now doesn't really matter at all. The whole point of this exercise is to build something secure for the hypothetical future where these technologies are very widely used and important. That is the point where I do not expect the current degree of masternode fidelity to continue, or at least I find the blind trust that it will irrational and unacceptable. That said, even in the case where most (but not all) masternodes are honest, at least with the current system, some transactions will be vulnerable. With 3 rounds chosen randomly and 2% of masternodes being dishonest, it means one out 100 000 transactions will be completely unmixed (more will have reduced anonymity). That may sound great, unless you are that one. Still, this might be an acceptable degree of risk, if there weren't a better way. There is simply no substitute for strong cryptography that does not rely on third parties for your privacy. If there is no feasible cryptographic way to do what needs to be done, sure build trusted third parties and try to minimize that trust by working through several of them. But there is a feasible way to do this without any third party trust at all, which makes the masternode approach unnecessarily dangerous. This really applies only to anonymity and similar cryptographic applications though. If you want to use masternodes to validate instant payments or provide other services that don't have the same trust requirements as anonymity, that might make a lot more sense. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 07, 2015, 08:53:40 AM Look I get that DRK was created before the cryptonote technology was released and arguably at the time it was the best we had to try to make Bitcoin more anonymous. Building that out was an admirable goal. It isn't any more. Do you have a solution to replace DRK?? If so please tell the world Please dont say Monero - Adoption is Zero (0%), the problems that the coin has are at this point are not marketable (No official Wallet, Bloat, Inflation etc etc) and will never gain adoption because who in their right mind as a business would try and maintain and secure two different code bases. Bitcoin is having enough of a hard time trying to convince people to use it. Looka at directbet.eu - they Took DRK over Monero..Why is that I wonder? Directbet now take more bets in DRK than they do in BTC and indeed in any other currency, by value or volume. Satoshibet adopted Darkcoin last week. DRK adoption is happening. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: LongAndShort on March 07, 2015, 09:23:01 AM Look I get that DRK was created before the cryptonote technology was released and arguably at the time it was the best we had to try to make Bitcoin more anonymous. Building that out was an admirable goal. It isn't any more. Do you have a solution to replace DRK?? If so please tell the world Please dont say Monero - Adoption is Zero (0%), the problems that the coin has are at this point are not marketable (No official Wallet, Bloat, Inflation etc etc) and will never gain adoption because who in their right mind as a business would try and maintain and secure two different code bases. Bitcoin is having enough of a hard time trying to convince people to use it. Looka at directbet.eu - they Took DRK over Monero..Why is that I wonder? Directbet now take more bets in DRK than they do in BTC and indeed in any other currency, by value or volume. Satoshibet adopted Darkcoin last week. DRK adoption is happening. Which makes it yet another, highly potential, negitive, media timebomb. Especially in regards to the mass adoption of CRYPTO related currency. MN are not a viable option, in fact, i think its fair to say its a fools errand for both developers and investors. I predict that it will be busted wide open within the next 10 years with devastating effects to the anon space and CRYPTO trust in general. The US Justice Department is trying to expand federal powers to search and seize digital data. (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/18/google-warns-government-hacking-committee-hearing) These proposals are never going to stop and the uses for darkcoin are only ever going to strengthen their cases towards allowing such an act to take place by the US and any country. So why build something to compete with, and fuel that. Hence it being a fools errand and far from future proof. Thats my argument anyway. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: barwizi on March 07, 2015, 09:37:12 AM The US Justice Department is trying to expand federal powers to search and seize digital data. (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/18/google-warns-government-hacking-committee-hearing) Less than 30% of crypto users are subject to american law. Then consider the massive exodus of crypto- related business to more viable nations. Do keep in mind that America is pretty high on the majority of the globe's shit list on digital matters at the moment. They'll either meet very little compliance, or outright resistance. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 09:38:27 AM That said, even in the case where most (but not all) masternodes are honest, at least with the current system, some truncations will be vulnerable This whole line of argument is largely hypothetical and falls apart for 3 reasons: [1] - whatever other 'technologies' and cryptocurrencies exist, monetarily speaking the highest value proposition is a successful bitcoin clone that supports private transactions and maximum fungibility. That means some kind of optimal compromise between bitcoin and and anonymous network layer = Darkcoin's design priorities. Sure, have your "high tech" but don't expect "high cap". [2] - the subtext of smooth's line of propaganda is that the masternode network is some kind of 'static' network that represents a fixed target which can be progressively 'bought'. It isn't. Masternodes are simply wallet daemons. They are as decentralised as any other wallet daemon in that *every* part of the coin supply supports them. Any wallet can operate in 'masternode' mode and new ones can and are set up continuously. [3] - the technology's now a year into development. Despite being open sourced and probably one of the most investigated , attacked and 'fudded' out there, it's never yet been compromised. Meanwhile all these attacks only serve to harden the architecture with every successive code release. Add to that the fact that the blockchain itself inherits Bitcoin's full confidence value and you have a much more optimal balance of anonymity, value proposition, adoption and financial security than you do with any cryptonote coin Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: LongAndShort on March 07, 2015, 09:47:01 AM The US Justice Department is trying to expand federal powers to search and seize digital data. (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/18/google-warns-government-hacking-committee-hearing) Less than 30% of crypto users are subject to american law. Then consider the massive exodus of crypto- related business to more viable nations. Do keep in mind that America is pretty high on the majority of the globe's shit list on digital matters at the moment. They'll either meet very little compliance, or outright resistance. I'm not comfortable betting on that though. Mainly because i don't have a crystal ball. I can only go on what i can see happening here. US has strong alliance and influence with a lot more of the world then you are making out. And its also, believe it or not, in many ways, a template for many developing countries. But i'm sure you are smart enough to realise this is not just the US moving to do things like this and i think you will find a fair chunk of the MN in US territory and or influenced countries. In case you missed the headline on that and the other 40+ articles on the subject "Google warns of US government 'hacking any facility' in the world" -------------- To get back on topic, Evil-Knievel, can you please give an update into your findings. I find his proposed de-anonymisation plausible. Is there any resource from the DRK community to fund his research time? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 10:05:42 AM [1] - whatever other 'technologies' and cryptocurrencies exist, monetarily speaking the highest value proposition is a successful bitcoin clone that supports private transactions and maximum fungibility. That means some kind of optimal compromise between bitcoin and and anonymous network layer = Darkcoin's design priorities. Sure, have your "high tech" but don't expect "high cap". Im pretty sure that remains very much to be seen. The current market cap of any of these coins is approximately zero. Quote [2] - the subtext of smooth's line of propaganda is that the masternode network is some kind of 'static' network that represents a fixed target which can be progressively 'bought'. It isn't. Masternodes are simply wallet daemons. They are as decentralised as any other wallet daemon in that *every* part of the coin supply supports them. Any wallet can operate in 'masternode' mode and new ones can and are set up continuously. Well no. Masternodes have a significant cost (they have to, in order to prevent sybil attacks), will likely generate significant income from fees in a successful system, and are important infrastructure that won't work just running some random wallet on a cell phone. They are and will be running predominantly in data centers or possibly by a few amateurs with unusually good facilities to do it, though frankly I consider the latter rather unlikely in a scaled-up system. If you want to design a system that is fully peer-to-peer where workload is shared among arbitrarily many wallets in a highly fault tolerant manner, without the possibility of sybil attacks or other attacks, have at it, but that's not masternodes (it's somewhat closer to what Dark Wallet is trying to build). This all seems rather pointless for anonymity though, now that we know how to do anonymity using cryptography in a completely trustless manner. You seem to want to put that technolgoical genie back in the bottle and go back to the days of "coinjoin is the best we've got", but that wishful thinking won't work. Technologically, you've been leapfrogged here. In terms of market adoption, we will see. That remains to be seen. Quote [3] - the technology's now a year into development. Despite being open sourced and probably one of the most investigated , attacked and 'fudded' out there, it's never yet been compromised. wat?! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg9121343#msg9121343 You don't inherit magic bug-freeness by forking Bitcoin. Once you start messing with the code you give up the proven reliability and start introducing new vulnerabilities. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 10:29:21 AM Technologically, you've been leapfrogged here. In terms of market adoption, we will see. That remains to be seen. About a year ago, I was much more open minded about this. Things were not at all clear about where the market was going. Everyone was waiting and debating about what was going to "overtake bitcoin" - largely because it was being 'technologically leapfrogged' left right and centre. New algos were appearing, POS, Bitcoin 2.0, 'shares' you name it. A year later, after all that flotilla of 'technological prowess' it turns out that none of it even made a dent in bitcoin's market cap. For me, that changes everything in terms of investment priorities. I have no problem with you pursuing the latest and greatest' tech - in fact I positively support it. What is a bit miserable - specially coming from project staff members - is the levels of adverse petty propagandising you do about competitors while trying to dress it up as 'technical critiques'. Any technical project is going to have its share of strengths and weaknesses. What matters is that those are consistent with the design specifications which in turn should have a high relevance to the market's priorities. Anyone can come along after the fact and give themselves a 'clean sheet' to rewrite history as long as they don't expect much adoption - as I said, the market's now littered with 'technological leapfroggers' including 14 dirt cheap cryptonotes. But there's only 1 original. That goes for almost every cryptocurrency sector without exception - Bitcoin 1, asset trading, shares, pop-coins, anonymity and 'fiat-friendly'. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 10:35:34 AM To get back on topic, Evil-Knievel, can you please give an update into your findings. I find his proposed de-anonymisation plausible. Is there any resource from the DRK community to fund his research time? I don't think it would be productive use of funds to support researching something that's gonna be obsolete soon anyway. If he wants to research the system based on masternode blinding currently on testnet then that is a fund that could be supported. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 10:37:44 AM blatant manipulation of supply Who was manipulated when the reward formula was changed? Were you manipulated into not mining and buying early on because you thought the formula would remain the same and it would for some reason be better for you to buy or mine later on? And then when the formula was changed, and people voted for it by downloading the new client, that was the moment when you got scammed and manipulated? When a coin is still new (as it was just a couple of months old), that's the time when you can still make changes to the parameters of the coin if deemed necessary to prevent a problem imo. If we would adopt your puristic view, all coin's features would have to be carved in stone at the launch. If later on you come up with a new feature or a service for the coin that will be very valuable and increase the price, there would be people screaming manipulation and scam because adding value to the coin would unfairly benefit those who were early and got their coins cheaper. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 10:44:26 AM If it were peer-to-peer like bitcoin that could be enough. But it isn't. It is peer-to-masternode(s)-to-peer. You can't and never will be able to verify what masternodes are doing, as long as they appear to be doing what they are supposed to. But what else they are doing you have no idea. At all. That's why there is the 1000 DRK requirement for a wallet to function as a masternode. To prevent and deter bad actors from just simply launching millions of nodes for free. Darkcoin is still being developed, and is moving to a direction where the masternodes know less and less about the details - the latest step in the evolution being masternode blinding. By the time NSA gets interested enough DRK might be running totally hidden under TOR or I2P on raspberry pi 3's or custom made Darkcoin hardware. It is though quite possible NSA proof anonymity simply cannot be achieved if you ever want to use a computer or a phone, or IoT in the future. What can be achieved though, is keeping your finances private from your neighbors, friends, relatives, employers, competitors, insurance company, bank, police, local authorities, irs, etc, and to keep your coins actually fungible. This is the flaw of Bitcoin that Darkcoin aims to fix. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 10:49:33 AM all coin's features would have to be carved in stone at the launch. What kind of idiot would suggest such a thing The nature of Bitcoin is such that once version 0.1 was released, the core design was set in stone for the rest of its lifetime. Satoshi clearly got it all wrong, and Evan fixed it. Thank you for clearing that up. Either that, or DRK is being run more like a penny stock and will likely end the same way. I'm going to go with B, I think. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 10:53:06 AM What can be achieved though, is keeping your finances private from your neighbors, friends, relatives, employers, competitors, insurance company, bank, police, local authorities, irs, etc, and to keep your coins actually fungible. This is the flaw of Bitcoin that Darkcoin aims to fix. I don't believe it can have any confidence of even doing that, because there is a reasonable probability that masternodes will ultimately be owned by corporations in the business of mining data for profit. The whole internet tracking and tracing industry didn't start out that way either, it happened over time because it was profitable. Many early pioneers on the internet were advocates for privacy and individual empowerment, but in reality the internet turned into a massive surveillance machine, not only for the NSA, but for business too. Masternodes are the same. What you want to achieve can be done trustlessly with cryptography. It can't be done by pretending that nodes operating a for-profit service on the internet are going to remain in the hands of enthusiasts and idealists. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 10:53:41 AM There are at least 5 usable wallets. P.S. This may be your idea of 'useable' but it isn't most people's. https://i.imgur.com/PHB9p99.png Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 10:55:21 AM There are at least 5 usable wallets. P.S. This may be your idea of 'useable' but it isn't most people's. https://i.imgur.com/PHB9p99.png I was not even including the command line wallet, though it is certainly usable by many. There are five graphical wallets listed here, and I think the list is missing one or two: https://moneroeconomy.com/news/choose-your-wallet Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 11:10:34 AM I was not even including the command line wallet, though it is certainly usable by many. There are five graphical wallets listed here, and I think the list is missing one or two: https://moneroeconomy.com/news/choose-your-wallet The only Mac wallet available appears to be mymonero.com which seems to be a hot web wallet. ok, I won't nitpick over wallets, your perfectly entitled to de-prioritise that and delegate it to 3rd parties if you have genuine reason for doing so which you appear to have. I also don't wish the project ill - as I've stated before I'm a fan of diversity and technical creativity. I just think you should change your style and quit the unnecessary flamewar mud slinging that you get engaged in. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: bitcreditscc on March 07, 2015, 11:15:38 AM And monero people wonder why there is dying interest. You have become like door to door salesmen who double up with being Jehovah's witness. This thread is about DRK, where is there an invitation to discuss your coin? Some of us were looking forward to continued technical discussion on the subject matter but you have to bring in your agenda where it is non-applicable and unwanted. I swear a lot more people would pay attention to monero if you didn't always try to force it down their throats and/or mention it in places it has no business. It gets seriously annoying, and the moment people are annoyed by a community, the less likely they are to take what you say seriously, let alone become interested in what you are selling.
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 11:23:48 AM I was not even including the command line wallet, though it is certainly usable by many. There are five graphical wallets listed here, and I think the list is missing one or two: https://moneroeconomy.com/news/choose-your-wallet The only Mac wallet available appears to be mymonero.com which seems to be a hot web wallet. I don't know what you mean by "hot" but MyMonero doesn't store private keys. Quote I just think you should change your style and quit the unnecessary flamewar mud slinging that you get engaged in. I disagree that technical criticism of what I see as a dead end approach is "flamewar mud slinging" I'm all for technical diversity too. I'm just increasingly convinced you DRK guys are wasting your time with what you are doing, for this reason: None of these coins is going much of anywhere anytime soon in terms of having any real impact on the world or achieving a really significant value by fiat standards, with the possible exception of Bitcoin and even that is at this moment quite a long shot. Everything about crypto and especially non-BTC crypto given today's reality is a very long term endeavor. Pragmatic and expedient solutions like building fragile (but somewhat better than BTC) anonymity on top of a Bitcoin codebase make sense in some cases, like when trying to address a large and/or very rapidly growing market. It may have seemed like that was going to happen when anon was "hot" but its just not happening now, so there is really no point to it. If you're going to work on this stuff you might as well build technology that is actually game changing in some way. Sure you might have a somewhat higher market cap and somewhat higher number of users with the current approach, but really its still a flea on a dog's ass in terms of actual impact, if perhaps a slightly bigger flea. Quote from: bitcreditscc This thread is about DRK, where is there an invitation to discuss your coin? I agree, and I've called out people for bringing up Monero, and tried to stop it. My comments have for the most part been focused on DRK's fundamentally and fatally flawed approach to anonymity (whether or not the OP exploit is real). The response from DRK supporters to any criticism of DRK is to bring up Monero. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 11:43:51 AM I don't believe it can have any confidence of even doing that, because there is a reasonable probability that masternodes will ultimately be owned by corporations in the business of mining data for profit. The whole internet tracking and tracing industry didn't start out that way either, it happened over time because it was profitable. Many early pioneers on the internet were advocates for privacy and individual empowerment, but in reality the internet turned into a massive surveillance machine, not only for the NSA, but for business too. Masternodes are the same. If you are an individual and have a masternode that is laying golden eggs for the rest of your lifetime, why would you give it up to some corporation? That is the difference between the early pioneers on the internet who were advocates for privacy and individual empowerment and masternode owners. The former didn't have a golden goose and all the incentive they had was their enthusiasm. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 11:44:36 AM DRK's fundamentally and fatally flawed approach to anonymity r.o.t.f.w.l. You people just can't help yourselves. bitcreditscc was right - you're not 'cryptographers' your double glazing salesmen. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 11:44:47 AM None of these coins is going much of anywhere anytime soon in terms of having any real impact on the world or achieving a really significant value by fiat standards, with the possible exception of Bitcoin and even that is at this moment quite a long shot. Everything about crypto and especially non-BTC crypto given today's reality is a very long term endeavor. None of these coins are anywhere nor going anywhere anytime soon, and yet the fact that how many coins were mined in the first day, first week, or first year is such a decisive factor whether a coin should live or die. Again, let's follow your principles whenever it suits you best. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:00:51 PM None of these coins is going much of anywhere anytime soon in terms of having any real impact on the world or achieving a really significant value by fiat standards, with the possible exception of Bitcoin and even that is at this moment quite a long shot. Everything about crypto and especially non-BTC crypto given today's reality is a very long term endeavor. None of these coins are anywhere nor going anywhere anytime soon, and yet the fact that how many coins were mined in the first day, first week, or first year is such a decisive factor whether a coin should live or die. Again, let's follow your principles whenever it suits you best. You're really going in circles on something we already discussed like 30 pages back. It isn't the the about where or when the coins were mined, it is about the the cloud of incompetence and/or fraud. That's why Bitcoin's "slow motion instamine" over two years is much less of big deal than DRKs instamine over two days. And even then some people still object to Bitcoin's. Given that how can you expect people to not object to DRK's which is clearly worse in every conceivable way. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:04:46 PM I don't believe it can have any confidence of even doing that, because there is a reasonable probability that masternodes will ultimately be owned by corporations in the business of mining data for profit. The whole internet tracking and tracing industry didn't start out that way either, it happened over time because it was profitable. Many early pioneers on the internet were advocates for privacy and individual empowerment, but in reality the internet turned into a massive surveillance machine, not only for the NSA, but for business too. Masternodes are the same. If you are an individual and have a masternode that is laying golden eggs for the rest of your lifetime, why would you give it up to some corporation? Because that's how markets work. If it is more profitable for them then it is for you, and it will be, they buy it from you. Such a deal is good for you (price is higher than what you would make) and good for them (price is lower than what they will make). Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 12:07:32 PM Because that's how markets work. If it is more profitable for them then it is for you, and it will be, they buy it from you. Such a deal is good of you (price is higher than what you would make) and good for them (price is lower than what they will make). If I were you with your superior 'cryptographic' knowledge, I wouldn't waste another second in trying to break and fully de-anonymise a darksend transaction because that's what you've now staked your entire project's existence on. Wake me up when your finished and I might put more of my money where your mouth is. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:08:34 PM Because that's how markets work. If it is more profitable for them then it is for you, and it will be, they buy it from you. Such a deal is good of you (price is higher than what you would make) and good for them (price is lower than what they will make). If I were you with your superior 'cryptographic' knowledge, I wouldn't waste another second in trying to break and fully de-anonymise a darksend transaction because that's what you've now staked your entire project's existence on. Let me know when you've actually read what I wrote. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 12:09:27 PM it is about the the cloud of incompetence and/or fraud. A lot of coins mined in the beginning because the dev made a mistake in reward calculations and some people doubting whether it was intentional or not must still be better than having no doubt at all that a coin was started by scammers intending and partially succeeding to scam people, like monero was, correct? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 07, 2015, 12:11:20 PM I don't believe it can have any confidence of even doing that, because there is a reasonable probability that masternodes will ultimately be owned by corporations in the business of mining data for profit. The whole internet tracking and tracing industry didn't start out that way either, it happened over time because it was profitable. Many early pioneers on the internet were advocates for privacy and individual empowerment, but in reality the internet turned into a massive surveillance machine, not only for the NSA, but for business too. Masternodes are the same. If you are an individual and have a masternode that is laying golden eggs for the rest of your lifetime, why would you give it up to some corporation? Because that's how markets work. If it is more profitable for them then it is for you, and it will be, they buy it from you. Such a deal is good for you (price is higher than what you would make) and good for them (price is lower than what they will make). Wow.. can't wait to become millionaire then. If you really believe that, you should buy a masternode right now. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:16:33 PM it is about the the cloud of incompetence and/or fraud. A lot of coins mined in the beginning because the dev made a mistake in reward calculations and some people doubting whether it was intentional or not must still be better than having no doubt at all that a coin was started by scammers intending and partially succeeding to scam people, like monero was, correct? It certainly would be if the scammers were still involved. That's why they're not. I think I said once that if all the original developers and other insiders involved with DRK and the instamine were to leave, it would become much less of an issue. Consider MtGox. Clearly an incompetently and/or fruadulently run operation, one of the worst. But if someone were to take over with new management, there would be no reason not to use it. If Karpeles were still running it... Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 12:17:17 PM In fact if you are basing your opinion of the team on the relative few of us who do post on bitcointalk at all you are probably getting a very misleading perception And what perception should we be getting ? That you guys are prepared to let your project stand on its merits without getting stuck into tribal flamewars or maligning the technical competence of other devs, or "recommending that competing coins be ditched" ? But as I said you should make up your own mind about which coin(s) to support if any. Really ? That remark's a bit difficult to square with the propaganda factory of the last few pages such as: In reality I talk to a lot of people who are considering getting involved with Monero and a few who are evaluating both Monero and DRK, and in practice there is a lot more concern about the DRK instamine Wrong. There's practically zero concern about the so called "DRK instamine" otherwise it would never have sustained its success and reached a number 5 marketcap more than a year after it was launched. Nor would it have consistently widened its gap over Monero from a factor of 3 a few months ago to nearly 6 now. When I post on these things I do so as a long-term cryptocurrency enthusiast whose interests go beyond just Monero. So are we all and believe it or not many of us actually appreciate diversity and the fact that the anonymous 'bandwagon' has several strings to its bow. But the tactics you guys use much of the time don't remotely do justice to that sentiment or the positions your hold within your own project. There doesn't seem to be any other reason for that other than the fact that you've got chips on your shoulders the size of houses over your market recognition deficit. Like g4q34g4qg47ww, I suggest you try getting on with the job, let the market take care of itself and find some footsoldiers to do your mud-slinging at the competition for you. They are ''software developers'', ''cryptographers'', ''coders'' and what not, that only ''code'' in English here on bitcointalk all day long Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:19:35 PM I don't believe it can have any confidence of even doing that, because there is a reasonable probability that masternodes will ultimately be owned by corporations in the business of mining data for profit. The whole internet tracking and tracing industry didn't start out that way either, it happened over time because it was profitable. Many early pioneers on the internet were advocates for privacy and individual empowerment, but in reality the internet turned into a massive surveillance machine, not only for the NSA, but for business too. Masternodes are the same. If you are an individual and have a masternode that is laying golden eggs for the rest of your lifetime, why would you give it up to some corporation? Because that's how markets work. If it is more profitable for them then it is for you, and it will be, they buy it from you. Such a deal is good for you (price is higher than what you would make) and good for them (price is lower than what they will make). Wow.. can't wait to become millionaire then. If you really believe that, you should buy a masternode right now. You don't really understand economic reasoning very well. If the scenario plays out his way and leads to failure, then it won't play out this way. Its' called backward induction. People will see that corporations taking over masternodes would (or at least could) lead to privacy failure, and flee for a solution that doesn't lead to this failure. Now its possible people could be ignorant or fooled though, and I never said DRK can't be pumped a lot higher. It might very well be a great investment. Technology wise, no, I don't think so. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 12:26:49 PM History is being made and all you guys want to do is fight. Why not fucking work together for a change so we can get crypto out to the world faster? We sure as fuck need it out there. I'll agree with you on that. I'd in fact like to see DRK succeed rather than having nothing succeed I suppose, but frankly the DRK technology scares me to some extent because it is NSA PRISM 2.0 in my opinion. I'd rather see something, anything, without "nodes" succeed, whether I have a stake in it or not. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 07, 2015, 12:27:55 PM People will see that corporations taking over masternodes would (or at least could) lead to privacy failure, Your the one who doesn't "understand economic reasoning very well" with idle scaremongering remarks like that. For that to happen, corporations would also have to overtake the coin supply which would simply be equivalent to comprehensive buying out of any cryptocurrency. From the perspective of 'security' a masternode isn't a PC, it's a portion of the coin supply. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:29:14 PM History is being made and all you guys want to do is fight. Why not fucking work together for a change so we can get crypto out to the world faster? We sure as fuck need it out there. I'll agree with you on that. I'd in fact like to see DRK succeed rather than having nothing succeed I suppose, but frankly the DRK technology scares me to some extent because it is NSA PRISM 2.0 in my opinion. I'd rather see something, anything, without "nodes" succeed, whether I have a stake in it or not. Yes that was obviously a bit too literal saying there should be no nodes at all. Rather silly you would focus on that. What I obviously meant is nodes that others rely on for their privacy. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 12:33:13 PM People will see that corporations taking over masternodes would (or at least could) lead to privacy failure, Your the one who doesn't "understand economic reasoning very well" with idle scaremongering remarks like that. For that to happen, corporations would also have to overtake the coin supply which would simply be equivalent to comprehensive buying out of any cryptocurrency. From the perspective of 'security' a masternode isn't a PC, it's a portion of the coin supply. Masternodes are profit-making businesses. There is no other reason to own one (other than idealism, which I discount in the long term). Yes it requires a portion of the currency and if that's what it requires, that's what will happen. The argument about it being more profitable for them than to you still applies. If they can pay 1000 DRK and get a real return of say 1% while you only make a real return of 0% or -1% they will find it attractive to run a node while you will find it more attractive to cash out your DRK and go buy an island or something. So same effect. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 12:55:29 PM Look I get that DRK was created before the cryptonote technology was released and arguably at the time it was the best we had to try to make Bitcoin more anonymous. Building that out was an admirable goal. It isn't any more. Do you have a solution to replace DRK?? If so please tell the world Please dont say Monero - Adoption is Zero (0%), the problems that the coin has are at this point are not marketable (No official Wallet, Bloat, Inflation etc etc) and will never gain adoption because who in their right mind as a business would try and maintain and secure two different code bases. Bitcoin is having enough of a hard time trying to convince people to use it. Looka at directbet.eu - they Took DRK over Monero..Why is that I wonder? Directbet now take more bets in DRK than they do in BTC and indeed in any other currency, by value or volume. Satoshibet adopted Darkcoin last week. DRK adoption is happening. Which makes it yet another, highly potential, negitive, media timebomb. Especially in regards to the mass adoption of CRYPTO related currency. MN are not a viable option, in fact, i think its fair to say its a fools errand for both developers and investors. I predict that it will be busted wide open within the next 10 years with devastating effects to the anon space and CRYPTO trust in general. The US Justice Department is trying to expand federal powers to search and seize digital data. (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/18/google-warns-government-hacking-committee-hearing) These proposals are never going to stop and the uses for darkcoin are only ever going to strengthen their cases towards allowing such an act to take place by the US and any country. So why build something to compete with, and fuel that. Hence it being a fools errand and far from future proof. Thats my argument anyway. What left for you, is to lay down on the floor and cry? Don't be so pessimistic and exhausted Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 07, 2015, 01:11:37 PM Smooth, aren't you a core dev for a coin? Havent you got more important things to be doing than talking trash on here?
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 01:17:46 PM I don't believe it can have any confidence of even doing that, because there is a reasonable probability that masternodes will ultimately be owned by corporations in the business of mining data for profit. The whole internet tracking and tracing industry didn't start out that way either, it happened over time because it was profitable. Many early pioneers on the internet were advocates for privacy and individual empowerment, but in reality the internet turned into a massive surveillance machine, not only for the NSA, but for business too. Masternodes are the same. If you are an individual and have a masternode that is laying golden eggs for the rest of your lifetime, why would you give it up to some corporation? Because that's how markets work. If it is more profitable for them then it is for you, and it will be, they buy it from you. Such a deal is good for you (price is higher than what you would make) and good for them (price is lower than what they will make). Wow.. can't wait to become millionaire then. If you really believe that, you should buy a masternode right now. You don't really understand economic reasoning very well. If the scenario plays out his way and leads to failure, then it won't play out this way. Its' called backward induction. People will see that corporations taking over masternodes would (or at least could) lead to privacy failure, and flee for a solution that doesn't lead to this failure. Now its possible people could be ignorant or fooled though, and I never said DRK can't be pumped a lot higher. It might very well be a great investment. Technology wise, no, I don't think so. What a viper. In almost every post you are trying to cut drk head to feel a bit taller. The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 01:23:21 PM History is being made and all you guys want to do is fight. Why not fucking work together for a change so we can get crypto out to the world faster? We sure as fuck need it out there. I'll agree with you on that. I'd in fact like to see DRK succeed rather than having nothing succeed I suppose, but frankly the DRK technology scares me to some extent because it is NSA PRISM 2.0 in my opinion. I'd rather see something, anything, without "nodes" succeed, whether I have a stake in it or not. Yes that was obviously a bit too literal saying there should be no nodes at all. Rather silly you would focus on that. What I obviously meant is nodes that others rely on for their privacy. Others don't rely on this, yet. Darkcoin is one year old...in heavy development. Do you see wide adoption already? where? It is only people who see something big happening and take the risk. In a few years from now, you will be still here ''coding'' at bitcointalk Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 01:35:16 PM What a viper. In almost every post you are trying to cut drk head to feel a bit taller. The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on. I'm criticizing some aspects of DRK because they are deeply flawed and snake oil anonymity is profoundly dangerous. If you want to ascribe other motives to avoid confronting the inconvenient truth of your emperor having no clothes, I can't stop you. I'm also not going to remain silent and watch people hawking this crap without speaking out just to avoid being called names or accused of "talking trash' Your wallet seems pretty, the logo is good, InstantX seems cool, I have no problem with any of these things, and there are probably other parts of the DRK project that are great. Anonymity-wise your whole approach is a disaster. Sorry., Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 07, 2015, 01:45:10 PM What a viper. In almost every post you are trying to cut drk head to feel a bit taller. The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on. I'm criticizing some aspects of DRK because they are deeply flawed and snake oil anonymity is profoundly dangerous. If you want to ascribe other motives to avoid confronting the inconvenient truth of your emperor having no clothes, I can't stop you. I'm also not going to remain silent and watch people hawking this crap without speaking out just to avoid being called names or accused of "talking trash' Your wallet seems pretty, the logo is good, InstantX seems cool, I have no problem with any of these things, and there are probably other parts of the DRK project that are great. Anonymity-wise your whole approach is a disaster. Sorry., Why don't you write a paper on why darksend is a disaster rather than just post here saying that it is without going into details? That way you could really give people facts to help their decision making. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 01:48:01 PM What a viper. In almost every post you are trying to cut drk head to feel a bit taller. The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on. I'm criticizing some aspects of DRK because they are deeply flawed and snake oil anonymity is profoundly dangerous. If you want to ascribe other motives to avoid confronting the inconvenient truth of your emperor having no clothes, I can't stop you. I'm also not going to remain silent and watch people hawking this crap without speaking out just to avoid being called names or accused of "talking trash' Your wallet seems pretty, the logo is good, InstantX seems cool, I have no problem with any of these things, and there are probably other parts of the DRK project that are great. Anonymity-wise your whole approach is a disaster. Sorry., Why don't you write a paper on why darksend is a disaster rather than just post here saying that it is without going into details? That way you could really give people facts to help their decision making. Not an entirely bad idea I must say. Thank you for the suggestion. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 07, 2015, 01:48:36 PM I'm criticizing some aspects ...... . Anonymity-wise your whole approach is a disaster. Sorry., You are not describing any technical problems. What you are doing, is endlessly talking about instamine, ''manipulated emission'' and "understand economic reasoning very well". Your opinion is biased. EDIT: Why don't you write a paper on why darksend is a disaster rather than just post here saying that it is without going into details? That way you could really give people facts to help their decision making. Not an entirely bad idea I must say. Thank you for the suggestion. Maybe you will make something useful, finally. What a waste of time and energy here. I'm finished Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stealth923 on March 07, 2015, 02:10:33 PM What a viper. In almost every post you are trying to cut drk head to feel a bit taller. The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on. I'm criticizing some aspects of DRK because they are deeply flawed and snake oil anonymity is profoundly dangerous. If you want to ascribe other motives to avoid confronting the inconvenient truth of your emperor having no clothes, I can't stop you. I'm also not going to remain silent and watch people hawking this crap without speaking out just to avoid being called names or accused of "talking trash' Your wallet seems pretty, the logo is good, InstantX seems cool, I have no problem with any of these things, and there are probably other parts of the DRK project that are great. Anonymity-wise your whole approach is a disaster. Sorry., Why don't you write a paper on why darksend is a disaster rather than just post here saying that it is without going into details? That way you could really give people facts to help their decision making. Not an entirely bad idea I must say. Thank you for the suggestion. Maybe you should take a look at the Kristov Atlas review on DRK..all the concerns that were raised were fixed....although I dont think his review will live up to your standards will it. You live in a mindset the the world is doomed and apart from digging a hole and burring yourself, there is no solution. At the end of the day Dark is winning because we are moving forward and continuously have innovation to SHOW. Monero is still stuck trying to farm off work to 3rd parties to develop wallets (how is this secure) whilst they deal with database and bloat issues. You arent moving forward, just stuck in the mud and slowly sinking. So yes, feel free to continue throwing around your "its my way or the highway with cryptography" statements which will take 30 years to complete. By that time Dark adoption will be mainstream and too late for Monero to even be noticed. Oh wait thats already starting to happen. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: LongAndShort on March 07, 2015, 02:25:38 PM What a viper. In almost every post you are trying to cut drk head to feel a bit taller. The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on. I'm criticizing some aspects of DRK because they are deeply flawed and snake oil anonymity is profoundly dangerous. If you want to ascribe other motives to avoid confronting the inconvenient truth of your emperor having no clothes, I can't stop you. I'm also not going to remain silent and watch people hawking this crap without speaking out just to avoid being called names or accused of "talking trash' Your wallet seems pretty, the logo is good, InstantX seems cool, I have no problem with any of these things, and there are probably other parts of the DRK project that are great. Anonymity-wise your whole approach is a disaster. Sorry., Why don't you write a paper on why darksend is a disaster rather than just post here saying that it is without going into details? That way you could really give people facts to help their decision making. Not an entirely bad idea I must say. Thank you for the suggestion. Maybe you should take a look at the Kristov Atlas review on DRK..all the concerns that were raised were fixed....although I dont think his review will live up to your standards will it. You live in a mindset the the world is doomed and apart from digging a hole and burring yourself, there is no solution. At the end of the day Dark is winning because we are moving forward and continuously have innovation to SHOW. Monero is still stuck trying to farm off work to 3rd parties to develop wallets (how is this secure) whilst they deal with database and bloat issues. You arent moving forward, just stuck in the mud and slowly sinking. So yes, feel free to continue throwing around your "its my way or the highway with cryptography" statements which will take 30 years to complete. By that time Dark adoption will be mainstream and too late for Monero to even be noticed. Oh wait thats already starting to happen. *facepalm* Would you kindly remove yourself from the internets please. It is quite clear that you have never contributed anything but dribble to it thus wasting perfectly good server space. This topic is about a possibly deanonomised, anon CRYPTO project. Smooth seems to be replying only to the onslaught of loaded statements. But you are just being a doofus, as usual. Be nice if we can stop the dick measuring and actually just get on with the topic. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 07, 2015, 02:38:10 PM Maybe you should take a look at the Kristov Atlas review on DRK I have read it but thank you for the suggestion anyway! Quote work to 3rd parties to develop wallets (how is this secure) Most if not all of the wallets are wrappers around the core code or recompile and link with core code. They did not reimplement the cryptography. Good question though! Quote that time Dark adoption will be mainstream and too late for Monero to even be noticed. Oh wait thats already starting to happen. Dark mainstream adoption is starting to happen? That's a good one! Funny! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 07, 2015, 02:53:23 PM Dark mainstream adoption is starting to happen? That's a good one! Funny! To my knowledge we have 59 merchants accepting DRK. From VPS providers, VPN Providers to hardware stores, wine merchants, 3d printing services, a lawyer(!), precious metals traders, electronics shops to general shops. 59 isn't much, agreed, but its a start. Glad it makes you laugh. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GTO911 on March 07, 2015, 03:02:05 PM To my knowledge we have 59 merchants accepting DRK. From VPS providers, VPN Providers to hardware stores, wine merchants, 3d printing services, a lawyer(!), precious metals traders, electronics shops to general shops. Thats a respectable achievement Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: LongAndShort on March 07, 2015, 03:59:37 PM To my knowledge we have 59 merchants accepting DRK. From VPS providers, VPN Providers to hardware stores, wine merchants, 3d printing services, a lawyer(!), precious metals traders, electronics shops to general shops. Thats a respectable achievement For a generic brand of peanuts maybe. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 07, 2015, 04:57:59 PM To my knowledge we have 59 merchants accepting DRK. From VPS providers, VPN Providers to hardware stores, wine merchants, 3d printing services, a lawyer(!), precious metals traders, electronics shops to general shops. Thats a respectable achievement For a generic brand of peanuts maybe. Where can I spend my SDC? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: PoS on March 07, 2015, 05:01:01 PM To my knowledge we have 59 merchants accepting DRK. From VPS providers, VPN Providers to hardware stores, wine merchants, 3d printing services, a lawyer(!), precious metals traders, electronics shops to general shops. Thats a respectable achievement For a generic brand of peanuts maybe. Where can I spend my SDC? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: bigrcanada on March 07, 2015, 06:17:53 PM To my knowledge we have 59 merchants accepting DRK. From VPS providers, VPN Providers to hardware stores, wine merchants, 3d printing services, a lawyer(!), precious metals traders, electronics shops to general shops. Thats a respectable achievement For a generic brand of peanuts maybe. Where can I spend my SDC? ::) got to love haters! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Este Nuno on March 07, 2015, 06:21:04 PM Dark mainstream adoption is starting to happen? That's a good one! Funny! To my knowledge we have 59 merchants accepting DRK. From VPS providers, VPN Providers to hardware stores, wine merchants, 3d printing services, a lawyer(!) Good thing too. Sounds like people using DRK are going to need one! :P (sorry, couldn't resist :D) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: bigrcanada on March 07, 2015, 06:30:01 PM Dark mainstream adoption is starting to happen? That's a good one! Funny! To my knowledge we have 59 merchants accepting DRK. From VPS providers, VPN Providers to hardware stores, wine merchants, 3d printing services, a lawyer(!) Good thing too. Sounds like people using DRK are going to need one! :P (sorry, couldn't resist :D) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: child_harold on March 07, 2015, 08:24:21 PM /me enters stage left
;) /me exits stage right Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 07, 2015, 08:45:32 PM /me enters stage left ;) /me exits stage right Ok, I LOL'd Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Hueristic on March 07, 2015, 09:59:20 PM You cannot argue logic with people that have an agenda, they are bag holders and will argue with every fallacy they can squirm into.
I can't believe you guys have the patience to deal with these fools, let them sink when their ship does. It makes no difference in the end anyway. :) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: kadrek on March 08, 2015, 01:34:09 AM You cannot argue logic with people that have an agenda, they are bag holders and will argue with every fallacy they can squirm into. Maybe if your dev wasn't in here arguing about petty things XMR might see some progress. If you haven't noticed, Evan hasn't been in here arguing. I think that shows the work ethic of both of them. ;)I can't believe you guys have the patience to deal with these fools, let them sink when their ship does. It makes no difference in the end anyway. :) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Hueristic on March 08, 2015, 01:55:50 AM You cannot argue logic with people that have an agenda, they are bag holders and will argue with every fallacy they can squirm into. Maybe if your dev wasn't in here arguing about petty things XMR might see some progress. If you haven't noticed, Evan hasn't been in here arguing. I think that shows the work ethic of both of them. ;)I can't believe you guys have the patience to deal with these fools, let them sink when their ship does. It makes no difference in the end anyway. :) NOW this is amusing! EVAN is the ONE person who should be in this thread! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: tacotime on March 08, 2015, 02:24:25 AM Well, I haven't really gone through the entire thread but I don't think the DRK CoinJoin is entirely unsound from the perspective of being a centralized CoinJoin.
The theory is basically, you have n many outputs (O_n) of denomination size D. For simplicity, for any O_n there is an owner Z_n. Z_n sends her output O_n to a masternode (MN) along with a new receiving address A_n. The MN shuffles these O_n as inputs and makes shuffled outputs to A_n in a single tx. The tx is then signed by all Z_n. The MN submits the tx to the network and the outputs are indistinguishable to everyone except the MN. Well, they're slightly known to the participants too, because they know which address and input is theirs. It suffers from some of the same flaws as ring signatures (I'm not going to go over that, we've already published on them). But at the same time, ring signatures (a) don't require a MN (centralized) to do mixing because you can use any previous outpoint and (b) are somewhat more expensive space wise (but not really; see below) and (c) the MNs know 100% the outputs owned by their participants, who obviously have to connect to them somehow over TCP/IP. The last point is a big deal in terms of privacy, and even with Tor you can have timing correlation attacks. The size of the ring signature is O(n), but then again, so is sequential DarkCoin mixing, per mix tx. The cost per mix for DRK is that of the signed input and output for the recipient, and the obfuscational security of a single tx is also O(n). For the latter I mean number of participants in terms of inputs/outputs... obviously a single participant is useless, and two participants is nearly useless. So, the DRK method still introduces O(n) bloat. It just load balances it differently. The fact that the MNs are the centralized authority in the CoinJoin and now in network consensus (as of instant tx, since the MN decide which chain is valid by which tx is allowed to be in it) is more of an issue, along with providing correct incentives. Long term most of the rewards go to the MNs who I would guess will, over time, become progressively more pernicious in their activities. Another issue is legal ones for potential people running MNs, as they're effectively laundering money on behalf of the participants and directly benefiting from doing so monetarily. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 08, 2015, 02:29:26 AM (a) don't require a MN (centralized) to do mixing This is ultimately what really matters and renders the rest of the mixing process irrelevant (though flaws in that, such as those allegedly found by the OP, can compound the failure and make things even worse). Masternodes can't be trusted, and their behavior can't be verified. Even with so-called "blinding" the necessarily information to reverse the mixing still flows throw masternodes and therefore its security can never be trusted. If someone comes up with a way to do this without disclosing the private information to the masternodes, then it could be a system that isn't entirely unsound in the sense of having an undetectable information leak. But that is not DRK. Quote become progressively more pernicious in their activities Exactly. There is no mechanism to prevent that. Information is valuable, so masternodes will collect it, sell it, and likely inadvertently leak it. In some sense the best case possible would be the NSA actually running them all. At least they won't sell it. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: kadrek on March 08, 2015, 03:07:38 AM You cannot argue logic with people that have an agenda, they are bag holders and will argue with every fallacy they can squirm into. Maybe if your dev wasn't in here arguing about petty things XMR might see some progress. If you haven't noticed, Evan hasn't been in here arguing. I think that shows the work ethic of both of them. ;)I can't believe you guys have the patience to deal with these fools, let them sink when their ship does. It makes no difference in the end anyway. :) NOW this is amusing! EVAN is the ONE person who should be in this thread! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Hueristic on March 08, 2015, 03:35:25 AM You cannot argue logic with people that have an agenda, they are bag holders and will argue with every fallacy they can squirm into. Maybe if your dev wasn't in here arguing about petty things XMR might see some progress. If you haven't noticed, Evan hasn't been in here arguing. I think that shows the work ethic of both of them. ;)I can't believe you guys have the patience to deal with these fools, let them sink when their ship does. It makes no difference in the end anyway. :) NOW this is amusing! EVAN is the ONE person who should be in this thread! You mean where he posted It's random this and random that and you can never unravel it so go ahead and do it? Let me let you in on a little secret, IT is IMPOSSIBLE for a computer to generate anything random except a fire maybe. :D What he should be doing is answering posts like this. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10683089#msg10683089 AND especially this! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10684983#msg10684983 Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: barwizi on March 08, 2015, 04:35:54 AM You cannot argue logic with people that have an agenda, they are bag holders and will argue with every fallacy they can squirm into. Maybe if your dev wasn't in here arguing about petty things XMR might see some progress. If you haven't noticed, Evan hasn't been in here arguing. I think that shows the work ethic of both of them. ;)I can't believe you guys have the patience to deal with these fools, let them sink when their ship does. It makes no difference in the end anyway. :) NOW this is amusing! EVAN is the ONE person who should be in this thread! You mean where he posted It's random this and random that and you can never unravel it so go ahead and do it? Let me let you in on a little secret, IT is IMPOSSIBLE for a computer to generate anything random except a fire maybe. :D What he should be doing is answering posts like this. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10683089#msg10683089 AND especially this! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10684983#msg10684983 You are intentionally using misleading statements and it's no surprise that you would refer to posts by an open supporter of XMR, and we alll know the disgusting habits of XMR supporters. Let me correct you before you think you can get away with what is tantamount to a lie Quote IT is IMPOSSIBLE for a computer to generate anything random except a fire maybe. :D Quote Several computational methods for random number generation exist. Many fall short of the goal of true randomness — though they may meet, with varying success, some of the statistical tests for randomness intended to measure how unpredictable their results are (that is, to what degree their patterns are discernible). In response to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10683089#msg10683089 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10683089#msg10683089) let me pose you an interesting concept-- "The proof is in the pudding" Many a so called developer have written proofs and whitepapers, yet very few came through with an actual product. The OP conceded defeat in his original hypothesis and has returned to the drawing board. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10684983#msg10684983 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10684983#msg10684983) Now that is sheer desperation. This thread was made buy a guy who jumped the gun, and was proven wrong. Leave it to XMR fanboys to turn it into a discussion about difficulty and emissions. ::) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lebubar on March 08, 2015, 04:47:45 AM But for the fire yes it is possible (and JUST the fire...) lol
You are right Noir... XMR suporter are really pathetics. (can you read the title of the thread?) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Hueristic on March 08, 2015, 05:35:25 AM ...You are intentionally using misleading statements and it's no surprise that you would refer to posts by an open supporter of XMR, and we alll know the disgusting habits of XMR supporters. Let me correct you before you think you can get away with what is tantamount to a lie Quote IT is IMPOSSIBLE for a computer to generate anything random except a fire maybe. :D Quote Several computational methods for random number generation exist. Many fall short of the goal of true randomness — though they may meet, with varying success, some of the statistical tests for randomness intended to measure how unpredictable their results are (that is, to what degree their patterns are discernible). If you think this debunks my statement of fact your reading comprehension is non-existent. Quote In response to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10683089#msg10683089 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10683089#msg10683089) let me pose you an interesting concept-- "The proof is in the pudding" Many a so called developer have written proofs and whitepapers, yet very few came through with an actual product. The OP conceded defeat in his original hypothesis and has returned to the drawing board. So you attempt to answer a question that was not asked and sell it as a retort to a valid question? Quote https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10684983#msg10684983 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10684983#msg10684983) Now that is sheer desperation. This thread was made buy a guy who jumped the gun, and was proven wrong. Leave it to XMR fanboys to turn it into a discussion about difficulty and emissions. ::) Once again, a fanboi who cannot find an answer to this question so tries to divert. Your attempts are shallow and in-effective. Care to try again? Damn and I fell into the pit I was wondering about how others could get mired in. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: RenegadeMan on March 08, 2015, 05:49:15 AM I've read through this thread.
Good grief! What a tedious, boring, pedantic and ridiculously unnecessary waste of time! "Smooth" and others who just want to rubbish Darkcoin and bring never ending suggestions to the table of it being terribly flawed, UNTIL you have broken the anonymity and can demonstrate how it can be done and shown a repeatable process, your words and innuendo of Darkcoin being susceptible to all these issues are just words and innuendo, nothing more (but certainly copious quantities of). Frankly you need to put up or SHUT THE F%^* UP!!! What an incredibly verbose, long winded and torturous series of posts smooth! Can you like just put a sock in it ffs?!! WHEN you've proven Darkcoin has these fatal flaws and WHEN you've demonstrated how to repeatably break the anonymity THEN you have something important to say and people from the Darkcoin community will be very interested and thankful to you. But at the moment you're just peddling conjecture, rubbish, absurdity and pontifications (let's see Conjecture, Rubbish, Absurdity and Pontifications....CRAP!....yep, you're just peddling CRAP!) PS - And pleeaassseee! For the sanity of all of us, don't come back with yet another long winded rebutal and pontification about how what I'm saying is not addressing what you're saying blah blah (OMG, I think I need to watch the 10 hour "tra la la la lah" Youtube guy) blah. GO AND "BREAK" DARKCOIN'S ANONYMITY THEN COME BACK TO US. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 08, 2015, 07:07:31 AM GO AND "BREAK" DARKCOIN'S ANONYMITY THEN COME BACK TO US. THE ABOVE IS A FALLACY, AND A PARTICULARLY STUPID ONE. I can't track you on the web and record and correlate nearly every web site you visit they way Google, Facebook, your ISP, the NSA, and hundreds of little companies nobody has heard of in the internet tracking and data brokering business can and do. Nor can I track every electronic financial transaction you make the way Visa, MC, banks, the NSA, IRS, etc. can and do. That doesn't make these systems private and anonymous just because they aren't wide open to some random idiot. Likewise, DRK's architecture for "anonymity" is a flimsy house of cards that provides only an illusion of anonymity whether or not I personally can unravel a conjoin transaction or two. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: RenegadeMan on March 08, 2015, 09:02:02 AM GO AND "BREAK" DARKCOIN'S ANONYMITY THEN COME BACK TO US. THE ABOVE IS A FALLACY, AND A PARTICULARLY STUPID ONE. I can't track you on the web and record and correlate nearly every web site you visit they way Google, Facebook, your ISP, the NSA, and hundreds of little companies nobody has heard of in the internet tracking and data brokering business can and do. Nor can I track every electronic financial transaction you make the way Visa, MC, banks, the NSA, IRS, etc. can and do. That doesn't make these systems private and anonymous just because they aren't wide open to some random idiot. Likewise, DRK's architecture for "anonymity" is a flimsy house of cards that provides only an illusion of anonymity whether or not I personally can unravel a conjoin transaction or two. The above is not a fallacy nor is it stupid. It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. More muddying of the waters and obfuscation of what this thread is about and a never ending need on your part to just keep going on and on without any substance or proof of what you're talking about does nothing for your credibility or integrity. The OP Evil Knievel started this thread with: Quote Here I will tell you, how I think one can deanonymize every single darksend transaction from beginning of Darkcoin up to now. Maybe someone of you guys can comment on this! He laid out the steps of how he thought this would work. Then Evan Duffield responded and negated what the OP was portending with: Interesting approach, although the input order isn't random, it's randomly generated from multiple transactions on the client side. Even if it was completely not random, that doesn't allow you to "jump" the mixing transaction and know which outputs belong to which inputs. Source TX: http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/9ad01adae3814abf9a9731f0003d95a0f9bf701d055152f7b54ee4b6be47bfca: Notice the inputs reference 5 transactions, but there's 3 participants. You can't tell where one stops and the next begins. Also, it's possible that multiple clients in this transaction were actually in 5bafee7a5397ad505658b1e37af812e64ebb2834601224e4f6f6675b4a25728b or b4534361c8247abcc6b428fd85a17546f23413b2777f3e3f372578d100b20c4e for example. http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/5bafee7a5397ad505658b1e37af812e64ebb2834601224e4f6f6675b4a25728b#o39 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/b4534361c8247abcc6b428fd85a17546f23413b2777f3e3f372578d100b20c4e#o40 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/1c1769d578f4632971dd699987931cf676a7356196a5b122c60d737fce3c836e#o76 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/7e452c1c5229fbbfdc1b4fc1d8577a6b9d0932bf5f00030d28ec7759dd9273ea#o61 http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/3fba31e9cc32cd5e2c002ad4a8bd6908f3a76321e2d892f046265eb14352676e#o60 One more thing to note is that after coins are mixed through multiple sessions, there are "final" outputs that are just spent randomly. That can happen in any session, which causes more randomness. You most definitely can't map those randomly spent outputs to the inputs at all. That's what you should be trying to do, you need to be able to show anonymously spent coins and their original source funds. Nice try though PS. If you believe it's really a weakness you need to map the outputs to the inputs and show who's anonymously spending money on what. I'm not sure it's worth the time though, because masternode blinding randomizes the input order anyway. Since then people like you have come on here and put forward copious amounts of FUD and general negativity about Darkcoin's architecture and the nature of the Darkcoin community's belief that it is valid and does offer the anonymity being claimed. What you need to do now is what Evan suggested: Quote If you believe it's really a weakness you need to map the outputs to the inputs and show who's anonymously spending money on what. Until you do this and can demonstrate how it's done, and how it can be repeatably and reliably done, you are just blowing a whole lot of hot air that carries no substance or authority as it's just your opinion. So your "THE ABOVE IS A FALLACY, AND A PARTICULARLY STUPID ONE" is a statement that (once again) is about you avoiding needing to back up your claims with proof and documentary evidence and does nothing to further confirm this thread's core suggestion which is "Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside". What you think about "Google, Facebook, your ISP, the NSA, and hundreds of little companies nobody has heard of in the internet tracking and data brokering business can and do" is completely and utterly irrelevant to the debate at hand which is that Darkcoin's Darksend transactions can be deanonymized. I won't be responding to you again because all of your posts are about shifting the conversation onto a tangential issue or set of issues and obfuscating so you don't ever have to prove or confirm anything (and not to mention they're a ridiculous waste of time). And it's all your opinion, not the proof that was being suggested potentially is here which, although was being proffered by Evil Knievel, you have added to with a whole lot of rhetoric that you need to substantiate. So again, put up or shut up. That means "show and demonstrate" how Darkcoin is not anonymous. When you do this and can reliably and repeatably trace transactions I (and no doubt many other Darkcoin proponents) will be very interested and ready to take your counsel on what is wrong with Darkcoin's anonymity. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 08, 2015, 09:14:39 AM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. OK then, I'll be happy to, just as soon as you demonstrate how you can track my web browsing the way google, etc. do. OR, alternatively, you could claim that because YOU, personally, can't track my web browsing, it must be private and anonymous. Which is it? I'll assume neither, but certainly correct me if I'm wrong. To that end here's my new "product" -- Smooth's Unbreakable Anonymous Web Browsing (who needs Tor?) Step 1: Wave your hands over your computer and think positive thoughts. Step 2: Say a prayer to the Flying Spaghetti Monster that your browsing today remains private. Now, here's the good part. If you think my product doesn't work go ahead and put up or shut up: Deanonymize my browsing! Can't do it? I guess my product must be good after all. I should start selling it to suckers right? Reality check dude. If you are disclosing information to third parties (which dark does), and it isn't protected by strong and well-vetted cryptography (which dark does not), it isn't secure. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: RenegadeMan on March 08, 2015, 09:35:35 AM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. OK then, I'll be happy to, just as soon as you demonstrate how you can track my web browsing the way google, etc. do. OR, alternatively, you could claim that because YOU, personally, can't track my web browsing, it must be private and anonymous. Which is it (as I have nothing more of substance to put forward so I'm reverting to the old 'turn the tables' and putting it onto you to prove stuff to me)? I'll assume neither, but certainly correct me if I'm wrong. To that end he's my new "product" -- Smooth's Unbreakable Anonymous Web Browsing (who needs Tor?) Step 1: Wave your hands over your computer and think positive thoughts. Step 2: Say a prayer to the Flying Spaghetti Monster that your browsing today remains private. Now, here's the good part. If you think my product doesn't work go ahead and put up or shut up: Deanonymize my browsing! Can't do it? I guess my product must be good after all. I should start selling it to suckers right? Reality check dude. If you are disclosing information to third parties (which IMO dark does), and it isn't protected by strong and well-vetted cryptography (which IMO dark Fixed it for you. Over and out. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: paratox on March 08, 2015, 12:20:45 PM You can't make someone see, if he is not willing to.
I can understand your concerns, smooth, and there are IMO valid. But you are trying to hard to get them to understand what consequences an "anonymous" design based on trust can have. It's their choice to either think about it or ignore it. You have made your point clear and anyone who wan't to research the matter will come to their own conclusions Please, for your own well being, let them believe what they want. My conclusion: trusting a third party with my anonymity is not the best way to be anonymous.. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: stonehedge on March 08, 2015, 12:38:12 PM If you believe that your are risking privacy by trusting masternodes to anonymise your transactions then you do not know how Darksend works.
Even if one entry controls 50% of all masternodes, the chance of tracing one transaction is tiny. Prove your theories or they just fall into the category of ill-informed chit chat. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: paratox on March 08, 2015, 01:37:18 PM If you believe that your are risking privacy by trusting masternodes to anonymise your transactions then you do not know how Darksend works. Even if one entry controls 50% of all masternodes, the chance of tracing one transaction is tiny. Prove your theories or they just fall into the category of ill-informed chit chat. In the first sentence you say, if I would understand how Darksend works, I wouldn't see a risk in trusting masternodes to anonymise my transactions, but in your second line you talk about a tiny risk potential. That seems contradictory to me. I don't say that DRK isn't anonymous, I am just saying that it's not the best possible way to be anonymous at this point in time. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lebubar on March 08, 2015, 04:20:32 PM So let see the empty speah of smooth :
He's saying that if someone don't know something (ie: visa, mastercard payment) he can't say if it's anonymous or what else... Ok so this guy is saying that he don't know darksend because he can say anything about it, nor prooves nothing Cqfd! End of the discution until you make your homework Ok so that all what we were thinking about those endless empty blatering of this smooth : He don't know what is it talking about (and since 14 pages)... Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: onemorexmr on March 08, 2015, 04:22:14 PM So let see the empty speah of smooth : He's saying that if someone don't know something (ie: visa, mastercard payment) he can't say if it's anonymous or what else... Ok so this guy is saying that he don't know darksend because he can say anything about it, nor prooves nothing Cqfd! End of the discution until you make your homework Ok so that all what we were thinking about those endless empty blatering of this smooth : He don't know what is it talking about (and since 14 pages)... lol the only thing you just proved is that you cant read (but what did i expect from drk-folks :D) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lebubar on March 08, 2015, 04:42:59 PM We are speaking of an open source technology here. Not a private banking system, stupid man.
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 08, 2015, 04:46:33 PM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. OK then, I'll be happy to, just as soon as you demonstrate how you can track my web browsing the way google, etc. do. OR, alternatively, you could claim that because YOU, personally, can't track my web browsing, it must be private and anonymous. Which is it? I'll assume neither, but certainly correct me if I'm wrong. To that end he's my new "product" -- Smooth's Unbreakable Anonymous Web Browsing (who needs Tor?) Step 1: Wave your hands over your computer and think positive thoughts. Step 2: Say a prayer to the Flying Spaghetti Monster that your browsing today remains private. Now, here's the good part. If you think my product doesn't work go ahead and put up or shut up: Deanonymize my browsing! Can't do it? I guess my product must be good after all. I should start selling it to suckers right? Reality check dude. If you are disclosing information to third parties (which dark does), and it isn't protected by strong and well-vetted cryptography (which dark does not), it isn't secure. He isn't asking you to track his web traffic so why are you asking him to track yours? Why is it not possible for you guys to directly answer a question or take a challenge? He's asking you to track coins sent from one address to another. Who the fuck cares about the rest of your net traffic. Break the anonymous transaction. Stop deflecting and muddying the water. Track the transaction. "... put up or shut up. That means "show and demonstrate" how Darkcoin is not anonymous." You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address! Unless you are doing face to face transactions with no personal information exchanged AND you are wearing a mask while doing it, you're not going to be anonymous..... There's a whole host of potential what if's and hypothetical situations that can be dreamed up and thrown around. That's not what this thread was about. Prove the transactions themselves are traceable or shut the fuck up. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: toknormal on March 08, 2015, 05:02:41 PM You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address! Unless you are doing face to face transactions with no personal information exchanged AND you are wearing a mask while doing it, you're not going to be anonymous.... Totally. It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem. Cryptonote fanatics (In particular, Monero devs) have their heads stuck so far down the cryptography manhole that they’ve lost sight of all monetary objectives other than “hiding from the NSA”, which isn’t even a monetary objective. A bit like a formula 1 car designer that becomes so obsessed with the tyre tread that they forget to make the car light and get lapped in the first round (as Monero has been by Darkcoin). We’re talking about money here. The goal is to address a particular monetary property - fungibility, the only property in which Bitcoin is deficient - as well as financial privacy and to do that at least as well as the current fiat banking system (which is not the least bit opaque as far as NSA et al are concerned). At this moment, Darkcoin’s implementation of anonymity suits a cryptocurrency far better than cryptonote does because it supports all immediate commercial design objectives and leaves options open for the future. In addition to that, it supports the oldest boost to reliability known to man - multiple redundancy. If you want commercial privacy, use a standard number of rounds. If you want super anonymity just put it through the full 16 rounds. Contrary to what highly conflicted Monero coin developers would have you believe, useful modern cryptography was not invented 4 years ago, it was invented about 70 years ago and a myriad of successful implementations of every conceivable type have been in use ever since. More specific monetary-oriented cryptographic algorithms came along in the eighties so even those have been around for 30 years. Also contrary to what conflicted Monero devs would have you believe, there is more than 1 solution that satisfies the design objectives of a bitcoin-based currency which addresses the fungibility and privacy issue. Success will not go to the solution that has the most modern cryptography - or even the most secure - but the one that best addresses all of the priorities across the board. For me, that is Darkcoin by a mile right now. Whatever amounts of sand get thrown in its devs’ and its community’s face over hypothetical security scenarios it still has way more forethought and relevance across the whole offering. In addition, having read all of the challenges in this thread I think its security model is well in excess of what’s needed for the role it has to fulfil. A far more realistic weakness than ‘NSA tracing your transactions’ for example is simply some 3rd party buying up the coin supply and that’s something that applies to all coins / mining power / you name it. Cryptographic priorities aren’t the biggest issue here - monetary ones are. So before deciding what’s the optimal design cryptographically you need to decide what’s the optimal one monetarily and how much difference a legacy compliant blockchain makes because everything else flows from there. What's it Worth ? Monero staff have made a clusterfuck of a PR job for their coin in this thread by attacking Darkcoin’s anonymity approach because it’s a straw man. The real question is not Darkcoin’s anonymity approach, it’s its legacy compliance approach and how much that’s worth. A year ago that wasn’t clear but now it’s crystal clear - Bitcoin’s marketcap has continued to prevail over all alts. Darkcoin’s cap was sustained, Monero’s tanked. None of the alts have made a dent in Bitcoin’s cap despite being more advanced technically. So legacy compliance IS worth something big according to the market and in that regard it will accept the optimal anonymity solution if it wants a high-privacy version of it. So critics can keep on pulling on that (it’s not secure !!) chain - it won’t matter because Darkcoin has the right solution for what it’s trying to do at the moment and it’s only likely to consolidate from here according to the conclusions of last year’s alt-coin arms race. https://i.imgur.com/YFzdHsF.png Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 08, 2015, 05:41:21 PM You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address! Scratch that. Still not anonymous enough. Even if you are wearing a mask you better be driving a stolen car so it cant be tracked back to you. Make sure you do 4 loops around a city block (personal ring signatures and 1 more than required by XMR) while ditching the stolen car for a new one and making sure no one is following you. At this point, if you don't suspect someone is following you, proceed to your real car and then do 4 more personal ring signatures. After these steps are successfully taken, proceed home. For an added layer of security, make sure one of the cars you ditch is in a tunnel or under a bridge so the drones and spy satellites can't watch you. Make sure you have a pair of gloves on too so you don't leave finger prints inside those stolen cars. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: onemorexmr on March 08, 2015, 05:43:35 PM You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address! Scratch that. Still not anonymous enough. Even if you are wearing a mask you better be driving a stolen car so it cant be tracked back to you. Make sure you do 4 loops around a city block (personal ring signatures and 1 more than required by XMR) while ditching the stolen car for a new one and making sure no one is following you. At this point, if you don't suspect someone is following you, proceed to your real car and then do 4 more personal ring signatures. After these steps are successfully taken, proceed home. For an added layer of security, make sure one of the cars you ditch is in a tunnel or under a bridge so the drones and spy satellites can't watch you. Make sure you have a pair of gloves on too so you don't leave finger prints inside those stolen cars. for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out ;) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 08, 2015, 06:14:32 PM You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address! Scratch that. Still not anonymous enough. Even if you are wearing a mask you better be driving a stolen car so it cant be tracked back to you. Make sure you do 4 loops around a city block (personal ring signatures and 1 more than required by XMR) while ditching the stolen car for a new one and making sure no one is following you. At this point, if you don't suspect someone is following you, proceed to your real car and then do 4 more personal ring signatures. After these steps are successfully taken, proceed home. For an added layer of security, make sure one of the cars you ditch is in a tunnel or under a bridge so the drones and spy satellites can't watch you. Make sure you have a pair of gloves on too so you don't leave finger prints inside those stolen cars. for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out ;) From A to Z please...after 16 rounds Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: onemorexmr on March 08, 2015, 06:16:52 PM for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out ;) From A to Z please...after 16 rounds i really like that comparison.... stealing a car is dangerous and you may get caught. fits perfectly to masternodes :D Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 08, 2015, 06:31:54 PM for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out ;) From A to Z please...after 16 rounds i really like that comparison.... stealing a car is dangerous and you may get caught. fits perfectly to masternodes :D Applies to any anon coin. You think monero is any different? Tell me how monero provides anonymity for my personal information when I have to provide it for shipping. Show me how monero provides protections for face to face transactions. How does monero protect my browser traffic? It doesn't do any of that nor does any other coin. That's the point. So why do your monero shills constantly deflect and muddy the water with all of these different situations? Focus on the purpose of this thread. Prove the transactions themselves are traceable. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: tacotime on March 08, 2015, 06:41:08 PM It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem. DRK's solution is also O(n) in size and thus has the same relative amount of bloat, as I stated earlier in the thread... The only real reason I can see that DRK stuck to their CoinJoin model was because so much effort had already been made into writing a method of trying to decentralize CoinJoins, and because implementing ring signatures is a giant pain in the ass (you need to keep track of a whole separate database where you keep outputs of the same age in order of their incidence in the blockchain, for one). Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: barwizi on March 08, 2015, 07:12:20 PM It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem. DRK's solution is also O(n) in size and thus has the same relative amount of bloat, as I stated earlier in the thread... The only real reason I can see that DRK stuck to their CoinJoin model was because so much effort had already been made into writing a method of trying to decentralize CoinJoins, and because implementing ring signatures is a giant pain in the ass (you need to keep track of a whole separate database where you keep outputs of the same age in order of their incidence in the blockchain, for one). Hmm, but the question is can a transaction be traced? I have heard that SDC tried to apply ring signatures, how does their bloat compare? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Joshuar on March 08, 2015, 07:16:52 PM for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out ;) From A to Z please...after 16 rounds i really like that comparison.... stealing a car is dangerous and you may get caught. fits perfectly to masternodes :D Applies to any anon coin. You think monero is any different? Tell me how monero provides anonymity for my personal information when I have to provide it for shipping. Show me how monero provides protections for face to face transactions. How does monero protect my browser traffic? It doesn't do any of that nor does any other coin. That's the point. So why do your monero shills constantly deflect and muddy the water with all of these different situations? Focus on the purpose of this thread. Prove the transactions themselves are traceable. That's quite silly. The discussion is about the anonymous currency's protocol, not other external factors(Like shipping information) that would de-anonymize you. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 08, 2015, 07:17:12 PM It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem. DRK's solution is also O(n) in size and thus has the same relative amount of bloat, as I stated earlier in the thread... The only real reason I can see that DRK stuck to their CoinJoin model was because so much effort had already been made into writing a method of trying to decentralize CoinJoins, and because implementing ring signatures is a giant pain in the ass (you need to keep track of a whole separate database where you keep outputs of the same age in order of their incidence in the blockchain, for one). Hmm, but the question is can a transaction be traced? I have heard that SDC tried to apply ring signatures, how does their bloat compare? child_harold and smooth talking about SDC ring sigs: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=745352.msg10688532#msg10688532 Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 08, 2015, 07:32:47 PM for funs sake: a drkler needs to steal mutliple cars before he even can go out ;) From A to Z please...after 16 rounds i really like that comparison.... stealing a car is dangerous and you may get caught. fits perfectly to masternodes :D Applies to any anon coin. You think monero is any different? Tell me how monero provides anonymity for my personal information when I have to provide it for shipping. Show me how monero provides protections for face to face transactions. How does monero protect my browser traffic? It doesn't do any of that nor does any other coin. That's the point. So why do your monero shills constantly deflect and muddy the water with all of these different situations? Focus on the purpose of this thread. Prove the transactions themselves are traceable. That's quite silly. The discussion is about the anonymous currency's protocol, not other external factors(Like shipping information) that would de-anonymize you. Sure it's silly but go back a few post and see where RenegadeMan ask smooth (or anyone else) to prove the transaction is traceable and smooth continues to shift the conversation and talks about tracking his web browsing in an attempt to tie that to tracking anon transactions. I had a bit of fun and attempted to point out that's there's several more realistic problems with anonymity. The coin tech is just 1 layer of the puzzle. I digress.... That's not what this thread was started for. The thread suggest that the transactions are traceable. With the block explorer no less. So far its been proven wrong yet shills and fud-artist continue to tell you its possible by going off on completely different scenarios. Again, focus on the purpose of this thread. Prove the transactions themselves are traceable. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Este Nuno on March 08, 2015, 08:51:54 PM Isn't bloat kind of a non-issue at this point considering even Bitcoin itself is likely going to be moving towards 20mb blocks and beyond? In a sense Bitcoin's existence and continued growth of its blockchain will demonstrate whether or not bloat is really going to be a limiting factor.
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: bitcreditscc on March 08, 2015, 09:05:29 PM Isn't bloat kind of a non-issue at this point considering even Bitcoin itself is likely going to be moving towards 20mb blocks and beyond? In a sense Bitcoin's existence and continued growth of its blockchain will demonstrate whether or not bloat is really going to be a limiting factor. Actually, that is MAX block size. For now most blocks will remain the same size. ~ 1 MB Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Johnny Mnemonic on March 08, 2015, 10:33:59 PM He isn't asking you to track his web traffic so why are you asking him to track yours? Why is it not possible for you guys to directly answer a question or take a challenge? He's asking you to track coins sent from one address to another. Who the fuck cares about the rest of your net traffic. Break the anonymous transaction. You sure are good at playing dumb. But just in case you're not: Smooth's point is that just because your system is secure against regular folk doesn't mean it's invulnerable to greater threats with more access and resources (ISPs, large corporations, governments, etc.). Just like you can't deanonymize smooth's web browsing, he can't identify your transactions. Does that imply either are truly anonymous or secure? Nope. Is this starting to make sense to you? This is why "put up or shut up" is an argument for retards: Link my bitcoin address to my identity. Go ahead, Kuriso. Can't you do it? If not, then I guess we don't even need darkcoin, right? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: RenegadeMan on March 08, 2015, 10:43:03 PM You people realize that when you make a purchase with your anon coins, if you are buying something that has to be shipped, which would be most of your online purchases, they have your fucking address! Unless you are doing face to face transactions with no personal information exchanged AND you are wearing a mask while doing it, you're not going to be anonymous.... Totally. It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem. Cryptonote fanatics (In particular, Monero devs) have their heads stuck so far down the cryptography manhole that they’ve lost sight of all monetary objectives other than “hiding from the NSA”, which isn’t even a monetary objective. A bit like a formula 1 car designer that becomes so obsessed with the tyre tread that they forget to make the car light and get lapped in the first round (as Monero has been by Darkcoin). We’re talking about money here. The goal is to address a particular monetary property - fungibility, the only property in which Bitcoin is deficient - as well as financial privacy and to do that at least as well as the current fiat banking system (which is not the least bit opaque as far as NSA et al are concerned). At this moment, Darkcoin’s implementation of anonymity suits a cryptocurrency far better than cryptonote does because it supports all immediate commercial design objectives and leaves options open for the future. In addition to that, it supports the oldest boost to reliability known to man - multiple redundancy. If you want commercial privacy, use a standard number of rounds. If you want super anonymity just put it through the full 16 rounds. Contrary to what highly conflicted Monero coin developers would have you believe, useful modern cryptography was not invented 4 years ago, it was invented about 70 years ago and a myriad of successful implementations of every conceivable type have been in use ever since. More specific monetary-oriented cryptographic algorithms came along in the eighties so even those have been around for 30 years. Also contrary to what conflicted Monero devs would have you believe, there is more than 1 solution that satisfies the design objectives of a bitcoin-based currency which addresses the fungibility and privacy issue. Success will not go to the solution that has the most modern cryptography - or even the most secure - but the one that best addresses all of the priorities across the board. For me, that is Darkcoin by a mile right now. Whatever amounts of sand get thrown in its devs’ and its community’s face over hypothetical security scenarios it still has way more forethought and relevance across the whole offering. In addition, having read all of the challenges in this thread I think its security model is well in excess of what’s needed for the role it has to fulfil. A far more realistic weakness than ‘NSA tracing your transactions’ for example is simply some 3rd party buying up the coin supply and that’s something that applies to all coins / mining power / you name it. Cryptographic priorities aren’t the biggest issue here - monetary ones are. So before deciding what’s the optimal design cryptographically you need to decide what’s the optimal one monetarily and how much difference a legacy compliant blockchain makes because everything else flows from there. What's it Worth ? Monero staff have made a clusterfuck of a PR job for their coin in this thread by attacking Darkcoin’s anonymity approach because it’s a straw man. The real question is not Darkcoin’s anonymity approach, it’s its legacy compliance approach and how much that’s worth. A year ago that wasn’t clear but now it’s crystal clear - Bitcoin’s marketcap has continued to prevail over all alts. Darkcoin’s cap was sustained, Monero’s tanked. None of the alts have made a dent in Bitcoin’s cap despite being more advanced technically. So legacy compliance IS worth something big according to the market and in that regard it will accept the optimal anonymity solution if it wants a high-privacy version of it. So critics can keep on pulling on that (it’s not secure !!) chain - it won’t matter because Darkcoin has the right solution for what it’s trying to do at the moment and it’s only likely to consolidate from here according to the conclusions of last year’s alt-coin arms race. https://i.imgur.com/YFzdHsF.png And, as you can see from Toknormal's brilliant analysis above (tremendously well articulated and he even knows how to use grammar properly.....my kind of guy) we have highly intelligent people within the Darkcoin community who are constantly thinking through the bigger picture on how all this stuff hangs together and what the higher level considerations are to making an anonymous digital currency. This (Toknormal's observance of the need for focus on sound monetary objectives) is what separates Darkcoin from Monero and the other 13 or so wannabe anon coins and why Darkcoin's market cap is more than 5½ times that of Monero. We're thinking about, and considering, the overall landscape of qualities, attributes and the robustness/integrity of the architecture against the commercialisation and real-world adoption issues rather than taking this "head down the cryptography manhole" approach that has you caught up in pedanticism and the never ending need for obtuse muddying of this thread's main point. And, I would put it to you smooth and others, it's what's getting so far up your collective noses that you need to partake in such obviously childish attempts to discredit Darkcoin, the Darkcoin devs and community. As per previous postings and what people are constantly pointing out. Demonstrate how the anon transactions can be deanonymized and traced or STFU! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: RenegadeMan on March 08, 2015, 10:51:43 PM He isn't asking you to track his web traffic so why are you asking him to track yours? Why is it not possible for you guys to directly answer a question or take a challenge? He's asking you to track coins sent from one address to another. Who the fuck cares about the rest of your net traffic. Break the anonymous transaction. You sure are good at playing dumb. But just in case you're not: Smooth's point is that just because your system is secure against regular folk doesn't mean it's invulnerable to greater threats with more access and resources (ISPs, large corporations, governments, etc.). Just like you can't deanonymize smooth's web browsing, he can't identify your transactions. Does that imply either are truly anonymous or secure? Nope. Is this starting to make sense to you? This is why "put up or shut up" is an argument for retards: Link my bitcoin address to my identity. Go ahead, Kuriso. Can't you do it? If not, then I guess we don't even need darkcoin, right? Just more of the same. FFS! You people are unbelievably determined to keep moving the conversation off onto a tangential angle away from the issue at hand to a whole raft of other hypothetical possibilities that are so far out in "one in ten trillion" land it's a pointless exercise. No one is saying Darkcoin's anon is "for regular folk", its anonymity is ANONYMITY.....period. Demonstrate to us HOW Darkcoin's anonymity can be broken. It's simple.....it's what this thread is about.....it's what's troubling you all just SOOO MUCH! Do it.....or SHUT UP.....that's the whole point of this thread and all your other stuff is just rhetoric and a never ending attempt to discredit Darkcoin. Lame....so lame. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: kadrek on March 08, 2015, 11:15:24 PM He isn't asking you to track his web traffic so why are you asking him to track yours? Why is it not possible for you guys to directly answer a question or take a challenge? He's asking you to track coins sent from one address to another. Who the fuck cares about the rest of your net traffic. Break the anonymous transaction. You sure are good at playing dumb. But just in case you're not: Smooth's point is that just because your system is secure against regular folk doesn't mean it's invulnerable to greater threats with more access and resources (ISPs, large corporations, governments, etc.). Just like you can't deanonymize smooth's web browsing, he can't identify your transactions. Does that imply either are truly anonymous or secure? Nope. Is this starting to make sense to you? This is why "put up or shut up" is an argument for retards: Link my bitcoin address to my identity. Go ahead, Kuriso. Can't you do it? If not, then I guess we don't even need darkcoin, right? Just more of the same. FFS! You people are unbelievably determined to keep moving the conversation off onto a tangential angle away from the issue at hand to a whole raft of other hypothetical possibilities that are so far out in "one in ten trillion" land it's a pointless exercise. No one is saying Darkcoin's anon is "for regular folk", its anonymity is ANONYMITY.....period. Demonstrate to us HOW Darkcoin's anonymity can be broken. It's simple.....it's what this thread is about.....it's what's troubling you all just SOOO MUCH! Do it.....or SHUT UP.....that's the whole point of this thread and all your other stuff is just rhetoric and a never ending attempt to discredit Darkcoin. Lame....so lame. Exactly this. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: ArticMine on March 08, 2015, 11:28:23 PM The weak point would be to regulate the masternodes as MSBs. Collect enough data from enough masternodes and over time one could start to unravel DRK transactions even with blinded masternodes. How resistant are blinded masternodes to this type of Sybil attack?
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Kuriso on March 08, 2015, 11:48:04 PM He isn't asking you to track his web traffic so why are you asking him to track yours? Why is it not possible for you guys to directly answer a question or take a challenge? He's asking you to track coins sent from one address to another. Who the fuck cares about the rest of your net traffic. Break the anonymous transaction. You sure are good at playing dumb. But just in case you're not: Smooth's point is that just because your system is secure against regular folk doesn't mean it's invulnerable to greater threats with more access and resources (ISPs, large corporations, governments, etc.). Just like you can't deanonymize smooth's web browsing, he can't identify your transactions. Does that imply either are truly anonymous or secure? Nope. Is this starting to make sense to you? This is why "put up or shut up" is an argument for retards: Link my bitcoin address to my identity. Go ahead, Kuriso. Can't you do it? If not, then I guess we don't even need darkcoin, right? I do try to dumb it down a bit. Most people only read at a 7th grade level. Do you fit into this category? Did you respond to my previous post before reading the rest of the posts made? Who here has claimed to be able to track an address to a personal identity? I surely never have but this could happen when: a) you decide to buy something and have to provide personal information like shipping, b) your ISP or gov agency tracks traffic from your IP to an IP that is associated with an anon coin that's on a watch list, c) face to face transactions where you are not wearing a mask and driving your own car ;D. Any of the 3 possibilities are a problem for any and every coin. I digress again.... The OP and the purpose of this thread was to confirm or debunk the "... possible proof ..." that DRK's transactions were traceable. The OP suggests that the transactions are traceable. With the block explorer no less. So far its been proven wrong yet shills and fud'sters continue to say its possible by going off on completely different scenarios. Again, focus on the purpose of this thread. Prove the transactions themselves are traceable. This is where the "put up or shut up" argument becomes VERY valid. If DRK's darksend transactions are traceable, prove it or STFU and move on. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 08, 2015, 11:49:23 PM The weak point would be to regulate the masternodes as MSBs. Masternodes are not transacting coins. They can be ran in any country, not just in the USA. And moreover, I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution. Collect enough data from enough masternodes and over time one could start to unravel DRK transactions even with blinded masternodes. How resistant are blinded masternodes to this type of Sybil attack? What is enough data? I'd say they are extremely resistant. You'd probably need to collect the data from 95% of the masternodes depending on the rounds of mixing used to get any hope of unraveling anything, and the 1000 DRK requirement for running a masternode is exactly for that purpose. To get it expensive enough to gain large enough percentage. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: ArticMine on March 09, 2015, 12:02:29 AM Collect enough data from enough masternodes and over time one could start to unravel DRK transactions even with blinded masternodes. How resistant are blinded masternodes to this type of Sybil attack? What is enough data? I'd say they are extremely resistant. You'd probably need to collect the data from 95% of the masternodes to get any hope of unraveling anything, and the 1000 DRK requirement for running a masternode is exactly for that purpose. To get it expensive enough to gain large enough percentage. The question becomes what happens when one trades time for the percentage of compromised masternodes? Over a short period of time yes it may take 95% of the masternodes, but what happens where the attacker collects data over say a period of 6 months or longer using a much smaller percentage of compromised masternodes. I am talking here of a regulator or a group of regulators who persuade a fraction of the masternodes to provide the regulator(s) with data at essentially no cost to the compromised masternodes. All of this is of course separate from an attack on the proof of stake aspect of DRK (the 1000 DRK masternode requirement) using "borrowed" stake. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: ArticMine on March 09, 2015, 12:10:18 AM The weak point would be to regulate the masternodes as MSBs. Masternodes are not transacting coins. They can be ran in any country, not just in the USA. And moreover, I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.... Every time I raise the question of regulating the masternodes as MSBs the response is 1) This is a US only issue which it is not and 2) We will "go dark", pardon the pun, to solve the problem. This is nothing more than an admission of defeat and justifies the argument that government regulation of the masternodes is the real Achilles Heel of Darkcoin. Edit: There is also the argument that "all anonymous coins will be made illegal anyway", which is again a further admission of defeat. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 09, 2015, 12:16:43 AM The weak point would be to regulate the masternodes as MSBs. Masternodes are not transacting coins. They can be ran in any country, not just in the USA. And moreover, I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.... Every time I raise the question of regulating the masternodes as MSBs the response is 1) This is a US only issue which it is not and 2) We will "go dark", pardon the pun, to solve the problem. This is nothing more than an admission of defeat and justifies the argument that government regulation of the masternodes is the real Achilles Heel of Darkcoin. Edit: There is also the argument that "all anonymous coins will be made illegal anyway", which is again a further admission of defeat. No, the response was also that the masternodes are not transacting money. And every anon coin will need to "go dark" eventually. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: oblox on March 09, 2015, 12:23:24 AM Collect enough data from enough masternodes and over time one could start to unravel DRK transactions even with blinded masternodes. How resistant are blinded masternodes to this type of Sybil attack? What is enough data? I'd say they are extremely resistant. You'd probably need to collect the data from 95% of the masternodes to get any hope of unraveling anything, and the 1000 DRK requirement for running a masternode is exactly for that purpose. To get it expensive enough to gain large enough percentage. The question becomes what happens when one trades time for the percentage of compromised masternodes? Over a short period of time yes it may take 95% of the masternodes, but what happens where the attacker collects data over say a period of 6 months or longer using a much smaller percentage of compromised masternodes. I am talking here of a regulator or a group of regulators who persuade a fraction of the masternodes to provide the regulator(s) with data at essentially no cost to the compromised masternodes. All of this is of course separate from an attack on the proof of stake aspect of DRK (the 1000 DRK masternode requirement) using "borrowed" stake. You want to try to piece together a web of tx's with fragments over months? Ok. And it's not proof of stake for the last time. Proof of service if anything. There is no borrowed stake... no one is going to lend you the coins to create a masternode when they could run one themselves. /facepalm Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: ArticMine on March 09, 2015, 12:23:56 AM ... No, the response was also that the masternodes are not transacting money. And every anon coin will need to "go dark" eventually. This comes down to 1) The regulators won't do this and 2) It won't matter anyway. The real issue here is this is a real structural weakness in Darkcoin that is not present in its closest competitor, and there is nothing that can be done about it. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: oblox on March 09, 2015, 12:25:39 AM The weak point would be to regulate the masternodes as MSBs. Masternodes are not transacting coins. They can be ran in any country, not just in the USA. And moreover, I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.... Every time I raise the question of regulating the masternodes as MSBs Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 09, 2015, 12:27:42 AM ... No, the response was also that the masternodes are not transacting money. And every anon coin will need to "go dark" eventually. This comes down to 1) The regulators won't do this and 2) It won't matter anyway. The real issue here is this is a real structural weakness in Darkcoin that is not present in its closest competitor, and there is nothing that can be done about it. Sure there is. We could go ask FinCEN's permission if someone feels like it's important for them, or "go dark" as any other anon coin will eventually have to do. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: ArticMine on March 09, 2015, 12:37:49 AM ... Sure there is. We could go ask FinCEN's permission if someone feels like it's important for them, or "go dark" as any other anon coin will eventually have to do. Getting a favourable ruling from FinCEN on the masternodes as MSBs issue is the one way to put an end to this. Furthermore this needs to presented to FinCEN by a member of the DRK community with a significant stake in the success of DRK and not by someone who stands to profit from an unfavourable ruling, eg an XMR holder such as myself. As for the "go dark" argument we both know this is simply an admission of defeat in this context. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Joshuar on March 09, 2015, 12:51:35 AM ... No, the response was also that the masternodes are not transacting money. And every anon coin will need to "go dark" eventually. This comes down to 1) The regulators won't do this and 2) It won't matter anyway. The real issue here is this is a real structural weakness in Darkcoin that is not present in its closest competitor, and there is nothing that can be done about it. Sure there is. We could go ask FinCEN's permission if someone feels like it's important for them, or "go dark" as any other anon coin will eventually have to do. That's an interesting case. I don't feel the same however. While the currencies themselves offer anonymity(though they vary, Cryptonote>Masternode based), they can still easily be used in conjunction with the law. In Monero's case, there's a viewkey that would allow other's to see your balance if you let them. So say you need to let tax authorities or police or w/e see the amount of Moneroj you have, you can simply hand them your viewkey. Both anonymity and transparency in one. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 09, 2015, 12:55:35 AM ... No, the response was also that the masternodes are not transacting money. And every anon coin will need to "go dark" eventually. This comes down to 1) The regulators won't do this and 2) It won't matter anyway. The real issue here is this is a real structural weakness in Darkcoin that is not present in its closest competitor, and there is nothing that can be done about it. Sure there is. We could go ask FinCEN's permission if someone feels like it's important for them, or "go dark" as any other anon coin will eventually have to do. That's an interesting case. I don't feel the same however. While the currencies themselves offer anonymity(though they vary, Cryptonote>Masternode based), they can still easily be used in conjunction with the law. In Monero's case, there's a viewkey that would allow other's to see your balance if you let them. So say you need to let tax authorities or police or w/e see the amount of Moneroj you have, you can simply hand them your viewkey. Both anonymity and transparency in one. You don't feel the same about what? So you can hand them viewkey to one of your wallets or addresses, and hide the other wallet or address? And this is somehow better than Darkcoin wrt transparency? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Joshuar on March 09, 2015, 12:58:18 AM ... No, the response was also that the masternodes are not transacting money. And every anon coin will need to "go dark" eventually. This comes down to 1) The regulators won't do this and 2) It won't matter anyway. The real issue here is this is a real structural weakness in Darkcoin that is not present in its closest competitor, and there is nothing that can be done about it. Sure there is. We could go ask FinCEN's permission if someone feels like it's important for them, or "go dark" as any other anon coin will eventually have to do. That's an interesting case. I don't feel the same however. While the currencies themselves offer anonymity(though they vary, Cryptonote>Masternode based), they can still easily be used in conjunction with the law. In Monero's case, there's a viewkey that would allow other's to see your balance if you let them. So say you need to let tax authorities or police or w/e see the amount of Moneroj you have, you can simply hand them your viewkey. Both anonymity and transparency in one. You don't feel the same about what? So you can hand them viewkey to one of your wallets or addresses, and hide the other wallet or address? And this is somehow better than Darkcoin wrt transparency? I read a previous statement of yours that said anonymous coins will be deemed illegal eventually which most likely isn't going to happen. Btw, with Monero you only need one address because for each transaction a new stealth address is created.(You can obviously have more than 1 though). I never said anything about Darkcoin and have no idea what "wrt" means. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 09, 2015, 01:08:12 AM I read a previous "statement" of yours that said anonymous coins will be deemed illegal eventually which most likely isn't going to happen. Btw, with Monero you only need one address because for each transaction a new stealth address is created.(You can obviously have more than 1 though). I never said anything about Darkcoin and have no idea what "wrt" means. Ok, this being a thread about Darkcoin I quickly assumed that presenting a feature of Monero was meant to highlight that said feature as something that is missing from Darkcoin and giving some sort of regulatory edge to Monero. But as it is, the tax authorities or police won't be able to tell if your viewkey address is your only address, so they can't tell or trust the level of transparency. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 09, 2015, 01:30:15 AM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. OK then, I'll be happy to, just as soon as you demonstrate how you can track my web browsing the way google, etc. do. OR, alternatively, you could claim that because YOU, personally, can't track my web browsing, it must be private and anonymous. Which is it? I'll assume neither, but certainly correct me if I'm wrong. To that end he's my new "product" -- Smooth's Unbreakable Anonymous Web Browsing (who needs Tor?) Step 1: Wave your hands over your computer and think positive thoughts. Step 2: Say a prayer to the Flying Spaghetti Monster that your browsing today remains private. Now, here's the good part. If you think my product doesn't work go ahead and put up or shut up: Deanonymize my browsing! Can't do it? I guess my product must be good after all. I should start selling it to suckers right? Reality check dude. If you are disclosing information to third parties (which dark does), and it isn't protected by strong and well-vetted cryptography (which dark does not), it isn't secure. Good analogy Smooth. This one made me LOL. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 09, 2015, 01:53:05 AM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. ... Good analogy Smooth. This one made me LOL. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Johnny Mnemonic on March 09, 2015, 02:58:25 AM This is where the "put up or shut up" argument becomes VERY valid. If DRK's darksend transactions are traceable, prove it or STFU and move on. You can't even prove that bitcoin transactions are traceable. Why do I even need darkcoin? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Johnny Mnemonic on March 09, 2015, 03:40:30 AM Okay, let's be reasonable.
I admit I can't personally unravel darkcoin transactions. Does that mean your ISP can't either? What about the NSA? Do you expect the NSA to join the discussion and truthfully comment on the matter? Assuming you're a reasonable person, what criticism would you see as valid, short of the NSA showing up and graciously giving you a demonstration? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Ingatqhvq on March 09, 2015, 05:50:45 AM So no coin is 100% Anonymous?
There lots coins claim they are 100% Anonymous, but most of them just like darkcoin. Anonymous is not necessary for coins. Most of people don't really need it. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: rustynailer on March 09, 2015, 06:00:35 AM So no coin is 100% Anonymous. Some are more anonymous than others. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Este Nuno on March 09, 2015, 08:25:46 AM Isn't bloat kind of a non-issue at this point considering even Bitcoin itself is likely going to be moving towards 20mb blocks and beyond? In a sense Bitcoin's existence and continued growth of its blockchain will demonstrate whether or not bloat is really going to be a limiting factor. Actually, that is MAX block size. For now most blocks will remain the same size. ~ 1 MB Yeah, but the general idea is that bloat isn't really going to be a limiting factor for cryptocurrencies from a technical perspective. Only the preference that blockchains be as small as possible to maximize decentralisation by making nodes easier to run. But bloat itself doesn't seem to be much of a concern for cryptos at this point. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 09, 2015, 08:40:24 AM Look I get that DRK was created before the cryptonote technology was released and arguably at the time it was the best we had to try to make Bitcoin more anonymous. I'll take a closer look at blinding when it is release but from what I've seen so far I expect much the same. i thought the nsa created cryptonote/bytecoin and premined/released it on the deep web years before drk. Faked versions of CryptoNote whitepaper & NSA involvement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryptoNote#Faked_versions_of_CryptoNote_whitepaper Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 09, 2015, 08:44:15 AM The US Justice Department is trying to expand federal powers to search and seize digital data. (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/18/google-warns-government-hacking-committee-hearing) Less than 30% of crypto users are subject to american law. Then consider the massive exodus of crypto- related business to more viable nations. Do keep in mind that America is pretty high on the majority of the globe's shit list on digital matters at the moment. They'll either meet very little compliance, or outright resistance. I'm not comfortable betting on that though. Mainly because i don't have a crystal ball. I can only go on what i can see happening here. US has strong alliance and influence with a lot more of the world then you are making out. And its also, believe it or not, in many ways, a template for many developing countries. But i'm sure you are smart enough to realise this is not just the US moving to do things like this and i think you will find a fair chunk of the MN in US territory and or influenced countries. In case you missed the headline on that and the other 40+ articles on the subject "Google warns of US government 'hacking any facility' in the world" -------------- To get back on topic, Evil-Knievel, can you please give an update into your findings. I find his proposed de-anonymisation plausible. Is there any resource from the DRK community to fund his research time? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 09, 2015, 08:55:53 AM There are at least 5 usable wallets. P.S. This may be your idea of 'useable' but it isn't most people's. https://i.imgur.com/PHB9p99.png I was not even including the command line wallet, though it is certainly usable by many. There are five graphical wallets listed here, and I think the list is missing one or two: https://moneroeconomy.com/news/choose-your-wallet i burst out laughing so hard when i seen that "wallet" pic. i keep hearing that monero has 3rd party wallets so i went to check it out and it's a total joke. all they got is a few incomplete wallets that either don't have a gui or are web wallets or closed source scams waiting to happen. it's a total embarrassment for the whole anon crypto scene in general. y'all need to stop fuding darkcoin and put together a halfway decent official gui wallet. y'all need get your priorities straight and get your shit together. i think it's actually intentional because if people start to actually use monero the massive bloating will cause monero folks computers to explode in their mom's basements worldwide. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 09, 2015, 08:57:32 AM So no coin is 100% Anonymous. we have a winner!Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 09, 2015, 09:09:37 AM i burst out laughing so hard when i seen that "wallet" pic. i keep hearing that monero has 3rd party wallets so i went to check it out and it's a total joke. all they got is a few incomplete wallets that either don't have a gui or are web wallets or closed source scams waiting to happen. You either completely ignorant or lying. Not a single one of the third party wallets is closed source, and every one is a GUI. Even MyMonero which isn't "officially" open source is effectively open source because you can see the JavaScript in your browser. (the only "x" below is MyMonero, discussed above) https://i.imgur.com/x4PLnbe.png Nice try to FUD though. Get your facts straight next time and you might get somewhere. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 09, 2015, 10:17:26 AM i burst out laughing so hard when i seen that "wallet" pic. i keep hearing that monero has 3rd party wallets so i went to check it out and it's a total joke. all they got is a few incomplete wallets that either don't have a gui or are web wallets or closed source scams waiting to happen. You either completely ignorant or lying. Not a single one of the third party wallets is closed source, and every one is a GUI. Even MyMonero which isn't "officially" open source is effectively open source because you can see the JavaScript in your browser. (the only "x" below is MyMonero, discussed above) https://i.imgur.com/x4PLnbe.png Nice try to FUD though. Get your facts straight next time and you might get somewhere. "code will eventually be open sourced" https://i.imgur.com/eHROENq.png Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 09, 2015, 10:34:55 AM "code will eventually be open sourced" Let's break this down and make it simple so even you can understand it. either don't have a gui Q: Which ones of the 6 wallets listed don't have a GUI? A: 1 out of 6 Quote or are web wallets Q: How many out of the the 6 are web wallets? A: 1 out of 6 Quote or closed source scams waiting to happen. Q: How many of the 6 are closed source A: Only the web wallet (same 1 out of 6), however even that one, as explained above, you can in fact see the source in your browser (not obfuscated or anything). Summary Q: In total, how many don't have a GUI, are web wallets, or are closed source: A: 2 out of 6 Q: How many do I have to choose from if I want a wallet that has a GUI, is not a web wallet, and is open source: A: 4 out of 6 Quit trolling and learn to read. EDIT: corrected as noted below for inclusion of simplewallet Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: MasterMined710 on March 09, 2015, 11:37:56 AM Q: Which ones of the 6 wallets listed don't have a GUI? A: buzz...wrong answer again. https://i.imgur.com/EoowCTX.png apology accepted! with all the time you spent trolling drk you could have thrown together an official, open sourced, gui desktop wallet. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: smooth on March 09, 2015, 11:40:12 AM Q: Which ones of the 6 wallets listed don't have a GUI? A: buzz...wrong answer again. https://i.imgur.com/EoowCTX.png apology accepted! with all the time you spent trolling drk you could have thrown together an official, open sourced, gui desktop wallet. Oops. I agree, I screwed up. I never realized simple wallet was even on that chart! I thought it was only third party ones listed... Still, there are 5 GUI wallets and 4 fully-open source wallets there. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 09, 2015, 01:12:54 PM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. ... Good analogy Smooth. This one made me LOL. I have read the OP and its you that is making a fool of yourself but I don't expect you to understand logic and reasoning behind smooth's argument so I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 09, 2015, 01:21:39 PM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. ... Good analogy Smooth. This one made me LOL. I have read the OP and its you that is making a fool of yourself but I don't expect you to understand logic and reasoning behind smooth's argument so I guess we will have to agree to disagree. "Here I will tell you, how I think one can deanonymize every single darksend transaction from beginning of Darkcoin up to now. Maybe someone of you guys can comment on this!" Using blockchain you fool. I am exhausted Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 09, 2015, 02:06:10 PM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. ... Good analogy Smooth. This one made me LOL. I have read the OP and its you that is making a fool of yourself but I don't expect you to understand logic and reasoning behind smooth's argument so I guess we will have to agree to disagree. "Here I will tell you, how I think one can deanonymize every single darksend transaction from beginning of Darkcoin up to now. Maybe someone of you guys can comment on this!" Using blockchain you fool. I am exhausted Smooth's argument wasnt related to using the blockchain. The points he makes are not related to the claim made by the OP but are valid none the less. Is that too difficult for your feeble mind to understand. If you are too exhausted and that tiny little brain of yours is overheating perhaps you should run some cold water over your head and come back and re-read his arguments. Better yet, maybe have you mom come down to the basement and have her try to help you understand. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 09, 2015, 04:20:23 PM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. ... Good analogy Smooth. This one made me LOL. I have read the OP and its you that is making a fool of yourself but I don't expect you to understand logic and reasoning behind smooth's argument so I guess we will have to agree to disagree. "Here I will tell you, how I think one can deanonymize every single darksend transaction from beginning of Darkcoin up to now. Maybe someone of you guys can comment on this!" Using blockchain you fool. I am exhausted Smooth's argument wasnt related to using the blockchain. The points he makes are not related to the claim made by the OP but are valid none the less. Is that too difficult for your feeble mind to understand. If you are too exhausted and that tiny little brain of yours is overheating perhaps you should run some cold water over your head and come back and re-read his arguments. Better yet, maybe have you mom come down to the basement and have her try to help you understand. So read OP. Fool. Better yet, maybe have you mom come down to the basement and have her try to help you understand. Did you learn this sentence from the forum? FoolIt is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 09, 2015, 04:47:51 PM It is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. ... Good analogy Smooth. This one made me LOL. I have read the OP and its you that is making a fool of yourself but I don't expect you to understand logic and reasoning behind smooth's argument so I guess we will have to agree to disagree. "Here I will tell you, how I think one can deanonymize every single darksend transaction from beginning of Darkcoin up to now. Maybe someone of you guys can comment on this!" Using blockchain you fool. I am exhausted Smooth's argument wasnt related to using the blockchain. The points he makes are not related to the claim made by the OP but are valid none the less. Is that too difficult for your feeble mind to understand. If you are too exhausted and that tiny little brain of yours is overheating perhaps you should run some cold water over your head and come back and re-read his arguments. Better yet, maybe have you mom come down to the basement and have her try to help you understand. So read OP. Fool. Better yet, maybe have you mom come down to the basement and have her try to help you understand. Did you learn this sentence from the forum? FoolIt is a challenge to you to put up or shut up. As I see that you have no reading comprehension at all I am regrettably going to have to give up on your ignorant ass. Fool. LMAO Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: billotronic on March 09, 2015, 05:01:27 PM I'm gonna save you all the trouble.... MY DICK is WAAAAY bigger....
There, now you can stop arguing. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 09, 2015, 05:14:28 PM Is the DASH re-branding going to be followed with a shift of focus away from anonymity?
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 09, 2015, 05:17:19 PM https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rebranding-and-scalability.4254/
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 09, 2015, 05:24:15 PM Is the DASH re-branding going to be followed with a shift of focus away from anonymity? Yes, the focus will be shifted to fudding other coins on bitcointalk forums as that has been shown to be the most successful strategy of them all. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 09, 2015, 05:28:38 PM Is the DASH re-branding going to be followed with a shift of focus away from anonymity? Yes, the focus will be shifted to fudding other coins on bitcointalk forums as that has been shown to be the most successful strategy of them all. I find it strange that such a monumental decision was made without a vote or input from investors. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: AdamWhite on March 09, 2015, 06:07:20 PM Is the DASH re-branding going to be followed with a shift of focus away from anonymity? Yes, the focus will be shifted to fudding other coins on bitcointalk forums as that has been shown to be the most successful strategy of them all. I find it strange that such a monumental decision was made without a vote or input from investors. What's the difference? DRK fanboys do whatever their cult leader tells them to. Drink the kool-aid! ;D Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 09, 2015, 06:36:24 PM Is the DASH re-branding going to be followed with a shift of focus away from anonymity? Yes, the focus will be shifted to fudding other coins on bitcointalk forums as that has been shown to be the most successful strategy of them all. I find it strange that such a monumental decision was made without a vote or input from investors. What's the difference? DRK fanboys do whatever their cult leader tells them to. Drink the kool-aid! ;D Maybe this is some last ditch attempt at a pump in order to dump their pre-mine. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Brilliantrocket on March 09, 2015, 06:50:29 PM I wonder why the Monero fanboys feel the need to FUD all day long. If your coin is truly superior, then why even waste your time on the inferior alternatives? I don't really care who wins, because I always hedge my bets. Monero being nearly worthless helps with that ;D. The funny thing is that I bet many Darkcoiners have more Monero than the Monero fanboys! Thanks to massive gains in DRK, of course.
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Hueristic on March 09, 2015, 06:58:15 PM I wonder why the Monero fanboys feel the need to FUD all day long. If your coin is truly superior, then why even waste your time on the inferior alternatives? I don't really care who wins, because I always hedge my bets. Monero being nearly worthless helps with that ;D. The funny thing is that I bet many Darkcoiners have more Monero than the Monero fanboys! Thanks to massive gains in DRK, of course. I agree, the smart money will move over slowly. It's not FUD if it's true BTW. I haven't seen any lies. Except a few Morons from both camps which are on ignore anyway. ;) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: tacotime on March 09, 2015, 07:11:41 PM https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rebranding-and-scalability.4254/ Eduffield has gone on a full out Ether(eum) binge Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 09, 2015, 07:45:17 PM It's not FUD if it's true BTW. I haven't seen any lies. Except a few Morons from both camps which are on ignore anyway. ;) Is it true? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Hueristic on March 09, 2015, 08:21:21 PM It's not FUD if it's true BTW. I haven't seen any lies. Except a few Morons from both camps which are on ignore anyway. ;) Is it true? ROTFLMFAO! Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Rishblitz on March 09, 2015, 10:00:16 PM You can follow the inputs and outputs of bitcoin transactions too but still can maintain you anonymity.
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 09, 2015, 10:04:49 PM What a childish and miserable people they are. The fools feel need to pick a fight with darkcoin in order to be seen ::)
You have no idea how entertained I am Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Rishblitz on March 09, 2015, 10:05:50 PM What a childish and miserable people they are. The fools feel need to pick a fight with darkcoin in order to be seen ::) You have no idea how entertained I am Its stupid that people care what other people do with their money. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 09, 2015, 10:06:19 PM Is the DASH re-branding going to be followed with a shift of focus away from anonymity? Yes, the focus will be shifted to fudding other coins on bitcointalk forums as that has been shown to be the most successful strategy of them all. I find it strange that such a monumental decision was made without a vote or input from investors. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 09, 2015, 10:19:09 PM Is the DASH re-branding going to be followed with a shift of focus away from anonymity? Yes, the focus will be shifted to fudding other coins on bitcointalk forums as that has been shown to be the most successful strategy of them all. I find it strange that such a monumental decision was made without a vote or input from investors. Judging by your vocabulary you must be from the southern US, part of a mountain clan with no lifeguards at the gene pool. Try to be a little more creative, use your words boy. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Jeff8247 on March 09, 2015, 10:38:11 PM Judging by your vocabulary you must be from the southern US, part of a mountain clan with no lifeguards at the gene pool. Try to be a little more creative, use your words boy. Seriously get off that high horse, you sound like an utter twat. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 09, 2015, 10:48:56 PM Is the DASH re-branding going to be followed with a shift of focus away from anonymity? Yes, the focus will be shifted to fudding other coins on bitcointalk forums as that has been shown to be the most successful strategy of them all. I find it strange that such a monumental decision was made without a vote or input from investors. Judging by your vocabulary you must be from the southern US, part of a mountain clan with no lifeguards at the gene pool. Try to be a little more creative, use your words boy. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: nachoig on March 09, 2015, 10:50:18 PM https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rebranding-and-scalability.4254/ A bad idea. There is already a Dashcoin, which by the way, is a CryptoNote-based coin. Even worse, Dashcoin is part of the CryptoNote scams. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0 Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 09, 2015, 10:51:21 PM Judging by your vocabulary you must be from the southern US, part of a mountain clan with no lifeguards at the gene pool. Try to be a little more creative, use your words boy. Seriously get off that high horse, you sound like an utter twat. utter twat and fool Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Lukas_Jackson on March 09, 2015, 10:53:24 PM https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rebranding-and-scalability.4254/ A bad idea. There is already a Dashcoin, which by the way, is a CryptoNote-based coin. Even worse, Dashcoin is part of the CryptoNote scams. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0 Dash...not Dashcoin Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: nachoig on March 09, 2015, 11:06:29 PM https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rebranding-and-scalability.4254/ A bad idea. There is already a Dashcoin, which by the way, is a CryptoNote-based coin. Even worse, Dashcoin is part of the CryptoNote scams. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0 Dash...not Dashcoin Even with this, the new name resembles a lot Dashcoin's name. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 09, 2015, 11:24:04 PM Even with this, the new name resembles a lot Dashcoin's name. And this matters, why exactly? I haven't even heard of Dashcoin until today/yesterday. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Hueristic on March 10, 2015, 12:03:43 AM Even with this, the new name resembles a lot Dashcoin's name. And this matters, why exactly? I haven't even heard of Dashcoin until today/yesterday. No-one has. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 10, 2015, 03:53:42 AM Is the DASH re-branding going to be followed with a shift of focus away from anonymity? Yes, the focus will be shifted to fudding other coins on bitcointalk forums as that has been shown to be the most successful strategy of them all. I find it strange that such a monumental decision was made without a vote or input from investors. What do you say now about not getting community consensus fool? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: 00Smurf on March 10, 2015, 04:12:53 AM Well maybe it was found tot to be fully anonymous so he felt it was better to change to a name that was more clearnet then darknet.
Prolly not the case though. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 10, 2015, 07:48:13 AM Well maybe it was found tot to be fully anonymous so he felt it was better to change to a name that was more clearnet then darknet. Prolly not the case though. Or maybe they had realized after working with a lot of businesses in the past year that a name like Darkcoin or ShadowCoin for example will never get any real adoption. ::) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: 00Smurf on March 10, 2015, 09:05:11 AM Well maybe it was found tot to be fully anonymous so he felt it was better to change to a name that was more clearnet then darknet. Prolly not the case though. Or maybe they had realized after working with a lot of businesses in the past year that a name like Darkcoin or ShadowCoin for example will never get any real adoption. ::) well it's a good thing its not shadowcoin, its shadowcash. And my comment was more meant as a joke. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 10, 2015, 09:22:41 AM well it's a good thing its not shadowcoin, its shadowcash. Oh yea my bad, that changes everything. ;D Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: AizenSou on March 10, 2015, 10:18:08 AM https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rebranding-and-scalability.4254/ Eduffield has gone on a full out Ether(eum) binge Sad but true. >:( Btw this thread could be closed now. The OP just wants to have his fame and he got it now. No point to discuss anymore. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: child_harold on March 10, 2015, 11:04:19 AM SO what happened with Evil-Knievel? Does he have something or not re DarkSend de-anonymization?
Has anything come from this besides a power struggle between anon coins? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: 00Smurf on March 10, 2015, 11:11:11 AM well it's a good thing its not shadowcoin, its shadowcash. Oh yea my bad, that changes everything. ;D Of course, branding means alot. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: f2000 on March 10, 2015, 11:13:24 AM SO what happened with Evil-Knievel? Does he have something or not re DarkSend de-anonymization? Has anything come from this besides a power struggle between anon coins? You've hit the nail on the head there. I think there has been three or so people claiming to do this (same guy?) but nothing every materialises... Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: GingerAle on March 10, 2015, 11:39:27 AM SO what happened with Evil-Knievel? Does he have something or not re DarkSend de-anonymization? Has anything come from this besides a power struggle between anon coins? You've hit the nail on the head there. I think there has been three or so people claiming to do this (same guy?) but nothing every materialises... yeah, I've been watching this thread closely. Nothing has come yet, but then again, he did post on friday, and if he is actively developing something, I'm sure it takes time. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: f2000 on March 10, 2015, 12:04:20 PM SO what happened with Evil-Knievel? Does he have something or not re DarkSend de-anonymization? Has anything come from this besides a power struggle between anon coins? You've hit the nail on the head there. I think there has been three or so people claiming to do this (same guy?) but nothing every materialises... yeah, I've been watching this thread closely. Nothing has come yet, but then again, he did post on friday, and if he is actively developing something, I'm sure it takes time. I never actually took that into consideration, you could be right. I have drk myself so enjoy these posts discussing the tech, the trolling...not so much. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 10, 2015, 12:17:49 PM If the re-branding is going to coincide with a shift away from anonymity I think the DASH dev knows something we don't, perhaps some flaw not yet disclosed to general public was discovered which is so fatal to anonymity that only re-purposing and re-braning the whole project makes sense.
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: darlidada on March 10, 2015, 12:25:29 PM If the re-branding is going to coincide with a shift away from anonymity I think the DASH dev knows something we don't, perhaps some flaw not yet disclosed to general public was discovered which is so fatal to anonymity that only re-purposing and re-braning the whole project makes sense. i heard dash was the name of a detergent. maybe thats the new purpose? cleaning your bitcoins from taint Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: wpalczynski on March 10, 2015, 12:31:46 PM If the re-branding is going to coincide with a shift away from anonymity I think the DASH dev knows something we don't, perhaps some flaw not yet disclosed to general public was discovered which is so fatal to anonymity that only re-purposing and re-braning the whole project makes sense. i heard dash was the name of a detergent. maybe thats the new purpose? cleaning your bitcoins from taint Or maybe you use DASH to clean your taint? Taint -> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=taint Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: infofront on March 10, 2015, 01:33:13 PM If the re-branding is going to coincide with a shift away from anonymity I think the DASH dev knows something we don't, perhaps some flaw not yet disclosed to general public was discovered which is so fatal to anonymity that only re-purposing and re-braning the whole project makes sense. This sounds likely to me. The one thing DarkCoin had going for it was that it was faux-anonymous. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Este Nuno on March 10, 2015, 06:37:04 PM SO what happened with Evil-Knievel? Does he have something or not re DarkSend de-anonymization? Has anything come from this besides a power struggle between anon coins? You've hit the nail on the head there. I think there has been three or so people claiming to do this (same guy?) but nothing every materialises... yeah, I've been watching this thread closely. Nothing has come yet, but then again, he did post on friday, and if he is actively developing something, I'm sure it takes time. He has a reputation for creating drama with grand claims. He's done it before with Bitcoin. Although in general I'd expect any mixing based anonymity to be traceable by a sufficiently motivated attacker. So I wouldn't be surprised if his claims are true. But I don't think he's ever followed through on one of these types of threads. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: nachoig on March 10, 2015, 10:53:19 PM Even with this, the new name resembles a lot Dashcoin's name. And this matters, why exactly? I haven't even heard of Dashcoin until today/yesterday. Wwll, this matters if you want to use an original name. And sometimes using a name which is already in use by another can cause some confusion. For example, there are 2 coins with the name Paycoin. When the second Paycoin was launched by GAW, some people confused it with the original Paycoin and caused a little spike on its volume and price. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: iCEBREAKER on March 19, 2015, 03:21:18 PM If the re-branding is going to coincide with a shift away from anonymity I think the DASH dev knows something we don't, perhaps some flaw not yet disclosed to general public was discovered which is so fatal to anonymity that only re-purposing and re-braning the whole project makes sense. This sounds likely to me. The one thing DarkCoin had going for it was that it was faux-anonymous. I couldn't figure out why Duff would buy a perfectly good coin, with proven state-of-the-art Cryptonote anon, only to ruin it with shitty trusted 3rd party Masternodes. Now I'm thinking the DASH rebranding is an attempt to escape Darkcoin's widespread reputation for being an instamined scam with questionable, frequently-broken crypto. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 19, 2015, 03:37:15 PM I'm thinking the DASH rebranding is an attempt to escape Darkcoin's widespread reputation for being an instamined scam with questionable, frequently-broken crypto. Actually the reason is that it's easier to approach a merchant or a business and ask if they'd like to accept "DASH" than "Darkcoin", because whether we like it or not, people will associate anything "dark" with illicit activities. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: iCEBREAKER on March 19, 2015, 03:46:12 PM I'm thinking the DASH rebranding is an attempt to escape Darkcoin's widespread reputation for being an instamined scam with questionable, frequently-broken crypto. Actually the reason is that it's easier to approach a merchant or a business and ask if they'd like to accept "DASH" than "Darkcoin", because whether we like it or not, people will associate anything "dark" with illicit activities. That's very true. But it raises some questions. Darkcoin initially marketed to and found success with supporters of "dark" activities/markets, so isn't it tremendously unfair to them that the coins they purchased/mined have been suddenly rebranded to a generic squeaky-clean detergent name? From a technical point of view DASH's changes are INCOMPATIBLE with the Darkcoin code/blockchain, so should we expect a chain swap or are we looking at a fresh start, with a possible new premine/instamine?? Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: illodin on March 19, 2015, 04:05:25 PM Darkcoin initially marketed to and found success with supporters of "dark" activities/markets, so isn't it tremendously unfair to them that the coins they purchased/mined have been suddenly rebranded to a generic squeaky-clean detergent name? From a technical point of view DASH's changes are INCOMPATIBLE with the Darkcoin code/blockchain, so should we expect a chain swap or are we looking at a fresh start, with a possible new premine/instamine?? Officially Darkcoin was never marketed to dark markets or for criminal activities. Evan Duffield was very clear on that. The wallet even had (dunno if it still has) a dialog that popped up on the first launch that made the user agree that he would not use it for anything illegal. Eager fans obviously tried to market it to anyone and everywhere, but the official policy was to steer away from that. Dashcoin (the Bytecoin clone) will stay the way it is, and Darkcoin will just change its name to DASH. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: dadon on March 23, 2015, 04:39:17 PM Shadow Motherboard Article:
https://i.imgur.com/3NeQCsm.jpg (http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-race-for-the-first-decentralised-silk-road-is-on) Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: xxxgoodgirls on March 23, 2015, 05:01:03 PM poor SDC holders claiming for attention in every thread
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Polycoin on March 24, 2015, 12:44:06 AM OP broke darkcoins darksend thing? Wow that's bad if he did... :-*
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: whocares on March 24, 2015, 12:57:04 AM poor SDC holders claiming for attention in every thread Their bags are deep and abandoned ::) .. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: adhitthana on March 24, 2015, 09:28:10 AM fluffy dev put whole thread to sleep :'( OP admitted he was wrong :'( I guess i'll find something else of interest :'( I never, at no point admitted I was wrong. The flaw is obvious here, and anyone who tries with a block explorer and a pen and paper can reassemble the correct transaction without shuffling. Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: adhitthana on March 24, 2015, 10:17:45 AM delete
Title: Re: [DRK] Darkcoin is NOT Anonymous? Possible Proof inside. Post by: Polycoin on June 02, 2015, 11:04:31 PM program unravels darkcoin now renamed DASH's mixing, dash's anonymity is gone. simpl
|
