Most masternodes are hosted on Amazon Servers. Amazon and all other major companies are monitored by the government....AKA the government sees everything going on with Darkcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Navajocoin, a PoS coin, was recently attacked and two doublespends occured from the attacker gaining over 30% of all coins. Pos really is Piece of Shit...
|
|
|
|
No surprise that DRK has been rated as a sell, it's way overvalued and should at most be $5/coin. I still hae yet to see a truly anonymous coin.
In all honesty, there should just be a coin that has a large server with large bandwidth that runs all transactions through the one transaction node, and miners just mine to confirm, they can't do much else, and deletes all transactions made over a 24-hour period. As well as truly random addresses, and difficulty with tracking it. That should sum up an anonymous coin, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Glad I didn't invest in DRK...
You're entirely wrong lol. What you've detailed is not anonymous in the least. Transactions cannot be deleted btw...and running transactions through one node means the coin is Centralized and would make it extremely susceptible to attack, even more centralized than DRK's masternodes. There are already anonymous coins, that so far are truly untraceable, they are the Cryptonote coins like Monero, Quazarcoin, etc. They do not use coinjoin or any masternode system. Instead, they use Ring Signatures, which offer the highest level of anonymity there is for cryptocoins. This is the cryptonote whitepaper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdfTrue, I did goof up with my statement. But You are correct with your other statement, and a smidge of researching proves that. I do like the anonymity appeal of these coins, it's a shame that they aren't more popular. If there was any indication that they'll stick around longer, I'll consider investing in them. I also wonder if more coins will pop up with the Ring Signature system... It is the most fascinating form of anonymity I've seen in a while. Haha no problem. Indeed, Cryptonote coins like Monero are truly fascinating. True Anonymity isn't a fad, it's a real Need for anyone that wants privacy in a ever growing, extremely transparent world( NSA etc), and it's even affecting Bitcoin, since Bitcoin is extremely open and transparent, it makes it very suspectible to be regulated to limit it's anonymity. As a matter of fact, some countries have already passed laws for Regulating Bitcoin to decrease it's anonymity and the # of them passing laws for bitcoin regulation is growing steadily, check this out: http://bitcoinvox.com/article/854/france-working-on-bitcoin-regulation In a matter of years, Bitcoin could be under the same regulations as Fiat is, especially since Addresses and such can be linked to People, and you will see every transaction they make. |
|
|
|
No surprise that DRK has been rated as a sell, it's way overvalued and should at most be $5/coin. I still hae yet to see a truly anonymous coin.
In all honesty, there should just be a coin that has a large server with large bandwidth that runs all transactions through the one transaction node, and miners just mine to confirm, they can't do much else, and deletes all transactions made over a 24-hour period. As well as truly random addresses, and difficulty with tracking it. That should sum up an anonymous coin, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Glad I didn't invest in DRK...
You're entirely wrong lol. What you've detailed is not anonymous in the least. Transactions cannot be deleted btw...and running transactions through one node means the coin is Centralized and would make it extremely susceptible to attack, even more centralized than DRK's masternodes. There are already anonymous coins, that truly untraceable, they are the Cryptonote coins, like Monero, Quazarcoin, etc. They do not use coinjoin or any masternode system. Instead, they use Ring Signatures, which offer the highest level of anonymity there is for cryptocoins. This is the cryptonote whitepaper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf |
|
|
|
|
Another PoS Coin, NavajoCoin, was successfully Doublespent after the attacker claimed over 50% of Navajocoins...
My conclusion? PoS= PIECE OF SHIT.
|
|
|
|
So much arguing.  "Make Peace Not War" |
|
|
|
How does Bitcoin protect its self from double spend attacks?
It doesn't use PoS(thank god) so even if you have 99% of the coin supply, you cannot do a doublespend, only with 50% hashwpoer, and even if a doubespend attack was about to be done, it had mechanisms to stop it. |
|
|
|
That is my first post of that link and you call it "cluttering" the thread? And you have to add the "Unlike you" comment, just to rub it in? I missed the OP's comment and didn't realize it was bad to post a list, but then what do you go ahead and do? Post a link with that list and your responses to it? Double standard, no?
Yes, please read the earlier posts in this thread when the back and forth was going on. We don't want another round of the same. Illodin's "arguments" were answered as well by myself around 10 pages back and by reading those posts and their "responses", anyone can see that the outcome of that debate is obvious  . I listed everything(flaws for drk, gmaxwells comments over drk, anonymints comments over drk) and answered all to what they said. I don't want to get into it since OP says all points have already been made and not to talk about it anymore. |
|
|
|
Banned for being a alcoholic who can't hold there drink.  Banned for not liking wine, the greatest thing invented after the wheel. |
|
|
|
|
As I said before, unless you want that coin to be only used as Play Money and not by the "regular joe", then yes a 3,000 PoS distribution is Horrible. The USA alone has 300million people. Basically, that 3,000 distribution means that that coin was not meant to be eventually accepted by mainstream society..Simple. If it was a PoW coin, then anyone could buy there own miner and mine coins, for decades to come. That's not the case with 100% PoS coins, unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin developers may let the ecosystem design interesting new features (hello, Ethereum!) and then incorporate them into bitcoin. That line right there, is extremely important. It means if an alt-coin were to design something "innovative" and it's using the Bitcoin codebase, Bitcoin can simply incorporate whatever features that alt-coin has, into Bitcoin. GO BITCOIN!! and what if its not using the bitcoin code base and is totally incompatible? what then? ok great now we have established that, please refer to this post and note the very partial list of features. for the record, nxt is totally new codebase. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=694410.msg7847575#msg7847575still "go bitcoin"? edit: eeehhh BUUUUURRRN!!!!!.
NXT faces that same issue+the absolutely horrible distribution. actually it was nothing to do with vericoin. vericoin was the target of the hack, but it was the exchange that was hacked. vericoin itself was never hacked. that "nothing-at-stake" thing it total nonsense aswell. even vitalik buterin called over to the nxt forum to discus it and he stated that nxt actually does things far better than he thought and agreed they had solved(or nxt never suffered from) nothing-at-stake. i can link that to you if you want? as for distribution, that will solve itself over the long term.
It details how a Nothing at Stake attack can be done. Along with that attack being a huge threat, there are many other issues with PoS coins, such as they eventually Centralize over Time.
And for NXT's distribution, it will never get any better. The first 50 NXT addresses Own over 48% of all NXT coins there is. NXT's distribution, unfortunately, will always be doomed. 50 addresses, of which 1 individual possibly owns more than 1, stands among the worst distributions there ever was for a cryptocoin.read here: https://nxtforum.org/general/how-does-nxt-fix-the-nothing-at-stake-problem/can you explain how they become centralised over time? due to "rich getting richer"? i could say the same about mining. how many times has "51%" attack been an issue in the last 6 months? an entire 50% of mining power has been controlled by one party multiple times. i actually agree with you that the distribution was very bad and still is, and its one of the reasons i heavily support nem. ok lets for the sake of making some kind of progress, assume you are correct. enter nem - New Economy movement. PoS + PoI (proof of importance) 3000 original stake holders 1200 being veteran accounts - sock puppets removed via taint analysis. each stake holder getting an equal amount being 1 million nem. proof of importance is an algorithm that decides your forging power based on how important you are to the network by giving a weight to every transaction - or lack of transactions - you do. ie. hoarders are punished for hoarding, you get higher weight the more you distribute the coin and higher weight for the more transactions you do to other nodes who are also of benefit to the network. sending transactions back and forth from your own accounts actually lowers your importance. this eliminates the "rich getting richer" issue and promotes the growth of a healthy network and incentivises distribution. i stand by the "nothing at stake" being pure bollox but even if it wasnt PoI would eliminate that issue if it was an issue. due to having 3000 stake holders getting equal amounts - the initial distribution is a gigantic benefit. due to PoI the network is poised for rapid growth and then add the 3000 people. thats a network effect with incentive to grow the network effect. with little fear of anyone dumping. PoI ensures that rich dont get richer and the little guy can get just as high a chance of forging as a large holder. nem is also written from scratch so bitcoin cant clone any of it. it will support all the features of nxt - plus more not yet announced. its a given that nxt does have advantages over bitcoin but it also has flaws of its own. nem has these benefits over bitcoin plus benefits over nxt and doesnt have the flaws of nxt or bitcoin. sounds to good to be true right? well its not. nem stakes were trading for 1500 dollars prior to the alpha release - there are many reasons for that, the ones iv listed being only a handful. want to find out more? 
The original points made were:
1) Any coin using Bitcoin's codebase is useless, because Bitcoin can always incorporate whatever features that coin has into Bitcoin.
and
2) The only coins that can stand alongside Bitcoin/Compete with it, are coins that do not use the Bitcoin codebase. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin developers may let the ecosystem design interesting new features (hello, Ethereum!) and then incorporate them into bitcoin. That line right there, is extremely important. It means if an alt-coin were to design something "innovative" and it's using the Bitcoin codebase, Bitcoin can simply incorporate whatever features that alt-coin has, into Bitcoin. GO BITCOIN!! and what if its not using the bitcoin code base and is totally incompatible? what then? ok great now we have established that, please refer to this post and note the very partial list of features. for the record, nxt is totally new codebase. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=694410.msg7847575#msg7847575still "go bitcoin"? edit: eeehhh BUUUUURRRN!!!!!.
NXT faces that same issue+the absolutely horrible distribution. actually it was nothing to do with vericoin. vericoin was the target of the hack, but it was the exchange that was hacked. vericoin itself was never hacked. that "nothing-at-stake" thing it total nonsense aswell. even vitalik buterin called over to the nxt forum to discus it and he stated that nxt actually does things far better than he thought and agreed they had solved(or nxt never suffered from) nothing-at-stake. i can link that to you if you want? as for distribution, that will solve itself over the long term.
It details how a Nothing at Stake attack can be done. Along with that attack being a huge threat, there are many other issues with PoS coins, such as they eventually Centralize over Time.
And for NXT's distribution, it will never get any better. The first 50 NXT addresses Own over 48% of all NXT coins there is. NXT's distribution, unfortunately, will always be doomed. 50 addresses, of which 1 individual possibly owns more than 1, stands among the worst distributions there ever was for a cryptocoin. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin developers may let the ecosystem design interesting new features (hello, Ethereum!) and then incorporate them into bitcoin. That line right there, is extremely important. It means if an alt-coin were to design something "innovative" and it's using the Bitcoin codebase, Bitcoin can simply incorporate whatever features that alt-coin has, into Bitcoin. GO BITCOIN!! and what if its not using the bitcoin code base and is totally incompatible? what then? ok great now we have established that, please refer to this post and note the very partial list of features. for the record, nxt is totally new codebase. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=694410.msg7847575#msg7847575still "go bitcoin"? edit: eeehhh BUUUUURRRN!!!!!.
NXT faces that same issue+the absolutely horrible distribution. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin developers may let the ecosystem design interesting new features (hello, Ethereum!) and then incorporate them into bitcoin. That line right there, is extremely important. It means if an alt-coin were to design something "innovative" and it's using the Bitcoin codebase, Bitcoin can simply incorporate whatever features that alt-coin has, into Bitcoin. GO BITCOIN!! and what if its not using the bitcoin code base and is totally incompatible? what then? |
|
|
|
Bitcoin developers may let the ecosystem design interesting new features (hello, Ethereum!) and then incorporate them into bitcoin. That line right there, is extremely important. It means if an alt-coin were to design something "innovative" and it's using the Bitcoin codebase, Bitcoin can simply incorporate whatever features that alt-coin has, into Bitcoin via copy/paste, rendering said alt-coin, useless.
GO BITCOIN!! |
|
|
|
Sorry but how does my message convey anger?
Because you make no sense, aka you're a troll and support one of the coinjoin coins.Without any Bias:
1st of all: 99% of cryptocurrencies have "coin" in there name, Pinkcoin, Yellowcoin, Orangecoin, Whitecoin. Frankly, that makes all those currencies unoriginal, so your second point is Invalid simply because Monero does not have coin in it's name. Not having coin in it's name also makes it only more likely to be taken seriously by regular folk. Anyone hearing about Pinkcoin for example, would think it's a joke/play money, just like they originally thought Bitcoin was a joke/play money. Monero, and other cryptocurrencies that do not have coin in their name, makes them seem all the more serious and professional, like an actual currency, not some toy money. 2nd of all: Monero, unoriginal? It's the 2nd cryptonote coin to be released, and the 1st with a fair distribution(no premine and no instamine like Bytecoin's 82% premine). It's code is superbly optimized, the dev team have a partnership with I2P(and frankly, Ring Signatures+ I2P would make Monero the complete anonymous coin), it has a large and stable community, and much more. Feel free to go read up on all the info(I dont have the time to write up a 3 page summary on everything Monero devs have done to optimize Monero), the Developers release Weekly Missives, that show what they accomplished each week. For the record, I do not have much stake in Monero so nothing that I say is Bias. I simply recognize the good alt-coins(Monero) vs the shit alt-coins(Insert Here) |
|
|
|
Peercoin is not 100% PoS, it's mixed between PoW and PoS. |
|
|
|
Vintagetrex(the OP) is trying to promote an altcoin called, Datacoin. He mentioned it in this thread. And he's on some heavy drugs as well.
no, I am not promoting datacoin I love the technology, the decentralized consensus is awesome. I am a crypto 2.0 developer and see awesome potential in the technology but Bitcoin is not the potential. This was and is a bubble caused by Fed inflation that will end as soon as mining is centralized.
My sources are me, my experience, mathematical skill, and implementations of the technology make me a valid source.
I did the math proofs for datacoin's algorithm on the Alt block chains forum in November 2013. Datacoin is one of the most innovative ledgers out there and it is being used to launch StorJ, the first Crypto 2.0 to hit the market.
 |
|
|
|
HELP CRASH BITCOIN ..??I am certain you could find some enthusiastic support for "crashing" some alt coins. I am in. What was the name of vintagetrex's POS alt coin? Let's start there. I did a quick search and the last 40 posts he has made almost entirely in this thread (what a waste) Someone will know the name of his alt coin, or I'm sure we can look forward to him returning and telling us. @vintagetrex BTC is too successful for you to do any real damage: Chill out and have some fun. Vintagetrex(the OP) is trying to promote an altcoin called, Datacoin. He mentioned it in this thread. And he's on some heavy drugs as well. |
|
|
|
Regulation will come in the form of monitoring the exchanges cryptocurrencies are traded on. That's how cryptocurrencies will become regulated in a sense.
However, private transactions between individuals can't be regulated. It's only trading on the exchanges that will be regulated, and I don't understand how anyone could find fault with that.
Businesses will also have to hold information about transactions with customers. But yea, you are right, two transactions between individuals is like two cash transactions between individuals. Indeed, making anonymous cryptocurrencies True "digital cash". Unlike using Paypal accounts and other online money exchanges, where they(Paypal employees/governments), see every transaction you make, clear as day. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
