here is crypto-zoigberg response to annonymints concerns: maybe somone with knowledge can compare and discuss CryptoNote's one-time ring signature as a way of obfuscating who is the payer (the spender), is optional and can only be used when there are other payees who have matching input amounts. In other words, it can't do any obfuscation for you on spending unless there are other coins that have the same balance as yours. [/quote] That's why coinbase and wallet by default split outs into standart amounts, and when you need to send money to someone anonymously you almost always have some outs for mixin, you can learn this in Bytecoin blockchain, just check blockchain index. That very infrequent opportunity for use is coupled with constant use of elliptical curve cryptography which is known to be broken under quantum computing, as well is suspect to broken by the NSA[1] or could be broken since it is number theoretic public key cryptography.
Quantum computer is like Schrödinger's cat - it is both real and unreal.  The worst that can happend in case that quantum computer will become a real is hard fork. And the use of one-time ring signatures mucks up the pruning of the block chain of spent addresses. There is a tweak to improve this over the current CryptoNote (one of the tweaks I alluded to upthread).
For this reason in Boolberry we chaged tx identification from whole blob hash to tx_prefix hash, and when blockchain entry will be covered by checkpoin the ring signatures could be cutoff. Bottom line is most of your anonymity will come from obfuscating your IP address with something more reliable than Tor and I2P, not from the block chain mixing of CryptoNote or Zerocash/coin, i.e. if your IP is correlated to your identity, then the one-time ring signature doesn't obscure your identity when you spend.
I disagree with you here. Crypto-currency, particularly Boolberry/CryptoNote, is a set of rules which is obligatory for all. First of all it is a currency_core that doesn't even know about network protocols or ip addresses. It's just guarantees compliance with currency rules. You (or anonymint) actually talks here about the way of delivering transactions to crypto currency net. But even if we don't provide a way to anonymize your ip now, just act via third party anonymizer if you prefer. The case where the one-time ring signature is really useful is a transaction with multiple inputs wherein the spender is merging his coins, thus enabling tracing of those coins to the same entity (the current spender). And it is very unfortunate the one-time ring signature is optional in this case, because it is the identity of the upchain spenders who suffer from this action by the current spender, thus the motivation is not there.
If i understand you right, we solved this problem by adding attribute to each out, that can force spender to use this out only with ring singature. So we can see as it is currently structured, CryptoNote doesn't really support anonymity much.
Sorry to blow holes in your enthusiasm. Reality sucks if you haven't taken the time to do some serious work before launching.
Note that the use of a separate payee address for each transaction is a very useful strategy. This is a positive aspect of CryptoNote that adds anonymity, but again it is not so effective without reliable IP obfuscation, as the payee will reveal himself on spending.
Thanks for this post, you didn't blew holes in our enthusiasm. We still belive that this is most interesting technology in crypto-currencies field. [/quote] [/quote] |
|
|
|
What is the difference between Bytecoin and Monero in terms of technology?
Nothing. Monero is a fork/clone of Bytecoin. darkato: on a serious note. how does darkcoin/evan address the anonymity issue regarding the permutation affixers that are brought about multi-mining where the master nodes are inversely proportional to the income generated by solo miners. This seems to create a huge problem for a sector issue that is over fluxed by the dark send protocol in my opinion this can all be aovided by using a dark sent protocol. In this way not only do you not know who the reciever is, but your money is sent with out you knowing about it. hence anonymity is increased 10,100 percent. I can not believe evan has not even addressed this issue. this is for a fact quatum resistent. according the the Guatemalan journal of Technology ( a very respected journal in quantum computation using alien techonology from mayans). |
|
|
|
I hope Darksend Masternode investors did their homework on Ring Signature technology. When coins already exist (Monero) that are more anonymous than Darkcoin/Darksend without requiring centralized nodes only accessible to those rich enough to afford the arbitrary amount, it stands to topple your whole system.
Monero is like a decentralized Darkcoin if you think about it.
Darksend/Masternodes are a brilliant Idea by Evan. They give incentive to host nodes to uphold the network And allow anonymous transactions...Basically, you get paid to help uphold the Darkcoin network and have anonymous transactions at the same time, unlike Bitcoin and such where you get nothing in return. Evan has also perfected Masternodes to where they're as anonymous as Ring Signatures. And he's not done. He's going to implement Both Ring Signatures and I2P ontop Masternodes. Monero and other Bytecoin clones don't stand a chance against Darkcoin practically... No he will not, and if he does it will be a shitty, forced implementation whereas the natural enviorment for ring signatures is within Monero's code. Just deal with the fact being a Bitcoin fork presents 0.0 advantages for being anonymous. No offense, but you sound really stupid. CryptoNote isn't that anonymous, as anonymint said. You can definitely implement Ring Signatures into a Bitcoin type coin and have it working pretty much the same it does on Bytecoin forks... It doesn't matter the algorithim lmao...So implementing Ring Signatures on Darksend would grant the same exact anonymity that it does to Bytecoin forks...Your arguement is invalid. You dont get it. With Ring Singatures the whole darksend and masternode stuff is OBSOLETE. If you thing you can simply add all that stuff to the btc codebase, you are just wrong...yes it may be possible with a major rewrite but then you have a completly different coin...and it may not even be worth the manhours needed todo so. You are referring to anonymints stuff that has already been answered a dozen time and he said himself that cryptonote based stuff is better then the darksend/masternode solution, so what? By the way,the 32bit binaries are not working. I tried both 15/5 and 20/5 versions
Provide Details? Whats the error, whats your os? I tried it on Windows XP 32bit.The error message is "bitmonerod.exe is not a valid Win32 application" Simplewallet.exe and simpleminer.exe give the same error message too. Its not compatible with Win XP 32 Bit - XP is dead and not even supported by Microsoft anymore  You're not making any sense...Which is better? Darkcoin: Masternodes that allow for anonymous transactions And incentive to uphold the netowrk Bytecoin/Monero/Quazarcoin etc etc: Ring Signatures that cause extreme bloating, but offer anonymous transactions. Now you see that Darkcoin's Masternodes are still better right? Now look at this Darkcoin months from now will have:1) Masternodes that allow for anonymous transactions And incentive to uphold the network 2) Ring Signatures with the major bloating/scaling issues gone 3) I2P Monero months from now will have: 1) Ring Signatues with horrible bloating and scaling issues. It's a no brainer..Darkcoin is 10x better than a fork of Bytecoin(i.e Monero, Quazarcoin, HoneyPenny etc) Darkota... you have proven your point. but I know for a fact that all this will be obsolete in 2044. Because then we will have a technology called master dark night crypto node rings. This will blow everything away and Evan will have died of an heart attack while trying to implement and and so we are all wasting our time. My suggestion for Darkota is to wait for this technology and mine it on day one. You will be filthy rich. It will be mine able on anything that can perform any sort of computation. An ordinary abacus will get 233.65 kh/s. I have seen this. It's amazing I am the developer of this new technology and an expert. |
|
|
|
Lets hear it again:
Thus on balance I prefer CN, but I like to see it altered to use a quantum computer resistant algorithm. And then we need to add IP address obfuscation as well that is superior to Tor and I2P.
CN must take the steps necessary to upgrade itself and so must DRK. Having no serious anonymity without IP obfuscation or being able to be broken through a Quantum Computer is not funny. Scaleability issues must also be solved, both in blockchain size and cpu power required to verify stuff. The question is: Can MRO do these things? here is crypto-zoigberg response to annonymints concerns: maybe somone with knowledge can compare and discuss there is a user saying that there is no true anonimity until there is a way of obfuscating the IP address. Until that is done, the anonimity provided by cryptonote is not assured. can you please comment on this.
following are his thoughts (anonymint):
CryptoNote's one-time ring signature as a way of obfuscating who is the payer (the spender), is optional and can only be used when there are other payees who have matching input amounts. In other words, it can't do any obfuscation for you on spending unless there are other coins that have the same balance as yours.
That's why coinbase and wallet by default split outs into standart amounts, and when you need to send money to someone anonymously you almost always have some outs for mixin, you can learn this in Bytecoin blockchain, just check blockchain index. That very infrequent opportunity for use is coupled with constant use of elliptical curve cryptography which is known to be broken under quantum computing, as well is suspect to broken by the NSA[1] or could be broken since it is number theoretic public key cryptography.
Quantum computer is like Schrödinger's cat - it is both real and unreal. The worst that can happend in case that quantum computer will become a real is hard fork. And the use of one-time ring signatures mucks up the pruning of the block chain of spent addresses. There is a tweak to improve this over the current CryptoNote (one of the tweaks I alluded to upthread).
For this reason in Boolberry we chaged tx identification from whole blob hash to tx_prefix hash, and when blockchain entry will be covered by checkpoin the ring signatures could be cutoff. Bottom line is most of your anonymity will come from obfuscating your IP address with something more reliable than Tor and I2P, not from the block chain mixing of CryptoNote or Zerocash/coin, i.e. if your IP is correlated to your identity, then the one-time ring signature doesn't obscure your identity when you spend.
I disagree with you here. Crypto-currency, particularly Boolberry/CryptoNote, is a set of rules which is obligatory for all. First of all it is a currency_core that doesn't even know about network protocols or ip addresses. It's just guarantees compliance with currency rules. You (or anonymint) actually talks here about the way of delivering transactions to crypto currency net. But even if we don't provide a way to anonymize your ip now, just act via third party anonymizer if you prefer. The case where the one-time ring signature is really useful is a transaction with multiple inputs wherein the spender is merging his coins, thus enabling tracing of those coins to the same entity (the current spender). And it is very unfortunate the one-time ring signature is optional in this case, because it is the identity of the upchain spenders who suffer from this action by the current spender, thus the motivation is not there.
If i understand you right, we solved this problem by adding attribute to each out, that can force spender to use this out only with ring singature. So we can see as it is currently structured, CryptoNote doesn't really support anonymity much.
Sorry to blow holes in your enthusiasm. Reality sucks if you haven't taken the time to do some serious work before launching.
Note that the use of a separate payee address for each transaction is a very useful strategy. This is a positive aspect of CryptoNote that adds anonymity, but again it is not so effective without reliable IP obfuscation, as the payee will reveal himself on spending.
Thanks for this post, you didn't blew holes in our enthusiasm. We still belive that this is most interesting technology in crypto-currencies field. |
|
|
|
Anyone with an idea, I'm having problems with the .net gui
It seems like it gets stuck with just a few blocks remaining,
plus the address is always initializing.
[img]
Is there a solution to the problem above?  I don't have a solution, but it might be worth saying that I have this problem too. The final 2-4 blocks don't download, even if the wallet is left active for hours/days. Non GUI wallet is fine. i usually stop the daemon and restart. that seems to solve it. |
|
|
|
We've contributed a massive amount to the infrastructure of the coin so far, enough to get recognition from cryptonote, including optimizing their hashing algorithm by an order of magnitude, creating open source pool software, and pushing several commits correcting issues with the coin that eventually were merged into the ByteCoin master. We also assisted some exchange operators in helping to support the coin.
I don't think that mining software (clients, pools), or supporting exchanges to add monero "count" as coin-tech development. Bugfixes, more so. If they added BCN right now it would be laughably in the top 5. Roll Eyes
It would be filtered out due to premine. So no top5. As I have said before, the bytecoin developers are welcome here. If they want to develop the technology they are free to do so, here, without a hidden 80% premine. This was not an attempt to steal anything from them, it was just a relaunch of an otherwise good coin without a premine scam, nothing more.
The problem is that you telling them what to do, and where to be, when they've made the coin is ...problematic. You can't put them in a box and tell them these are the rules you'll play with. They made the coin. Don't you get it? They have immense power compared to clones because they can relaunch tomorrow a new coin with cryptonote tech V2 or something and pull the carpet underneath the clones big time. It will be like obsoleting "v1" and rendering it useless. It's their nuke option. They had two years to think of problems in their implementation, saying "ah, if we made the coin now, we'd do that in a different way". The potential for improvement should be significant for a reboot or a new coin by the same devs. As I see it, having MRO take everything and upsetting the BCN devs by capitalizing on their work can backfire big time as they might "nuke" the clones and go with a V2 which heavily improves on V1. And then it's game over. Personally I'm on the Dark train, but have some MROs just in case - keeping in mind the above. I like the prospects of the anonymous market in general, and I am holding more than one anon coins so as to be properly positioned and hedged, but the fact that MROs fortune is dependent on what BCN developers will do (because they are the innovators and first movers) is unsettling for escalating any investment. first of all didnt the bytecoin developers borrow from cryptonote developers? |
|
|
|
The entire idea of free and open source is ripping off someone else's hard work. That's why I would never release code I'm proud of under a license like the GPL.
Nobody said you can't rip-off stuff. You can do it alright, but you'll face the consequences of self-limitation into parasitic mentality. That's especially true when you do it in a way where you aren't really taking something to improve it technically, but rather cloning it and re-branding it to achieve your own financial advantage. Your idea of what the subconscious says, however, is ridiculous. You're trying to say that everyone's subconscious mind believes stealing means that the thief is pathetic, which is absurd.
It's not my "idea". It's how the mind operates. Ask, for example, a hypnotist about presuppositions, and how he uses them to slip the affirmations and suggestions he wants directly to the subconscious. The human mind produces dual thoughts, not single thoughts. For every thought or action, there is an implied thought. The implied thought tends to go unnoticed (unless one is trained to observe them - which is not difficult, it just takes time) and when it goes unnoticed it then becomes subconscious programming since it goes down uncontested. Humans are taught that if they can do evil and get away with it they are ok. They will never get away from their own implied self-programming that says "if I harmed others to advance myself, then apparently I'm unable to advance myself on my own powers -> therefore I have no powers". Self-sabotaging. If there is anything like "karma" or "hell" or "divine punishment", this is it. But it's not performed by some higher power. It's performed by us. Be virtuous and expand yourself. Be a scam and limit yourself. if we agree that no one knows how the mind works then we do not know how the mind works. |
|
|
|
I didn't know about this. That is my mistake. We have moved out some of our investment. Bytecoin was forked into a coin that the community could participate in from day one.
Alas, none of the bugs or short comings were fixed in doing that— and it doesn't appear that any of the people involved in it have the background for the low level work. So you might have just written out the only active developers of the software, may not bode well for continued development. ... is this fud? he claims to be an expert and he implies he has his finger on the pulse of cryptocurrency. yet, he found out about this coin 1 month after it has come out. I had only heard of bitcoin in passing, never knew whta it was and signed up on bitcointalk and found out about this coin the day it was announced. either he is a fud spreder, or this should be humbling as he may not be the expert he claims to be. i am not in the mining business - but this is kind of funny. It was completely visible here. I found this coins maybe 3-4 after the announcement, the thread already had 20 pages, there was a well managed otc trade in the marketplace. what do people expect? - an anouncement in the new york times? gmaxwell is one of Bitcoin's most important core devs, so this is not FUD or ignorance. He is a genuine expert. In the altcoin space, a pre-announced launch on this forum is considered 'fair', but it's likely you'd miss it if you only follow Bitcoin communication channels. Some context is needed. gmaxwell is among those who believe altcoins have little reason to exist (there are many fair reasons to think that, and it's flat-out true for most altcoins). So he likely sees Bytecoin as a testbed for innovation from which Bitcoin can learn, but doesn't care for the ultimate fate of it as a separate currency. From this perspective, Monero is ruining the party by doing a fair launch and overtaking Bytecoin is usage because Bytecoin devs might now lose interest because their coin isn't getting used. From our community's perspective, it's worth trying to make CryptoNote succeed on its own and only a publicly launched one has the legitimacy required to succeed. The point about the emission curve is a fair one. Several of us including me wanted to change but the community as a whole didn't like it. It's not a huge deal -- after all Bitcoin has implanted an idea in our heads for how a coin "should" distribute over time, but there's no fundamental theoretical backing. so he thinks that the only techonology that is worth investing (exisiting is bitcoin) this is no different from the narrow minds that we see here regarding anonimity and the dark coin fanatics who see no reason for any other alt existing in the anonymity space. as educated as he is, he is not above greed, closed mindedness, or any other characteristic that befalls FUD spreaders. His comment was negative and baseless. same as any FUD |
|
|
|
|
just got back from my tea leaves, and i was able to confirm from my crystal ball. there will be more bashing in the days ahead
|
|
|
|
Risky investing is something with so many clones, and no first mover advantage. At this point it's naive to suggest that Monero will be "the" Cryptonote coin simply because it was the first Bytecoin clone.
actually, it is the only cryptonote coin that matters so far, and the best privacy of any crypto on the market. And what makes you think that besides that fact that you're invested in it? A different clone could gather a better development team, and then surpass Monero. It's not something you can definitively say won't happen. then that coin would definately not have first mover advantage compared to this coin. your concerns seem to be contorted to fit your argument. is this fud? It's not first mover advantage if it's a carbon copy. "Well we cloned it first!" Sounds a bit trivial doesn't it ? not at all. look at the market reaction. does not seem trivial. perhapse your conclusions are wrong. have you considered that your view point maybe wrong. 1. bytecoin: we do not know if it was a test of cryptonight. it was mined for 2 years with 80 percent of coins mined in that 2 years in secret. No announcement on usual forms. 2. Monero is first implementation of cryptonight, on the clear web with announcement. Certain changes were made. As the current developers are not the developers of they techonology nor of bytecoin, it was deemed to best clone with certain changes. slower emission. change in confirmation time. Much of the current changes are back implemented into bytecoin not the other way around. open source pools, optimized miners. gui wallet bounty. 3. What other innovative changes do you think will a clone of monero bring that will unseat monero from first mover advantage. for all intense and purposes, monero is first mover advantage incorporating innovative techology some thing completely different from bitcoin which explains its current popularity. |
|
|
|
Monero is now on minergate! First and only reliable CN pool. Join in.
what are the fees |
|
|
|
Risky investing is something with so many clones, and no first mover advantage. At this point it's naive to suggest that Monero will be "the" Cryptonote coin simply because it was the first Bytecoin clone.
actually, it is the only cryptonote coin that matters so far, and the best privacy of any crypto on the market. And what makes you think that besides that fact that you're invested in it? A different clone could gather a better development team, and then surpass Monero. It's not something you can definitively say won't happen. then that coin would definately not have first mover advantage compared to this coin. your concerns seem to be contorted to fit your argument. is this fud? |
|
|
|
I didn't know about this. That is my mistake. We have moved out some of our investment. Bytecoin was forked into a coin that the community could participate in from day one.
Alas, none of the bugs or short comings were fixed in doing that— and it doesn't appear that any of the people involved in it have the background for the low level work. So you might have just written out the only active developers of the software, may not bode well for continued development. The fork also can't claim to be roses and sunshine wrt fairness: As someone very interested in privacy technology and as someone who is usually near the hub of technical discussion in the Bitcoin system, I'd never heard of that fork until just recently— nearly a month after it's start. And… has a very fast coin distribution, and was started with a difficulty much lower than the network could support. A lot could have been done to improve fairness (e.g. fixing the subsidy to a low level at least until the difficulty crossed the level where the prior system was, or setting the minimum difficulty to a good fraction of the achieved rate), promoting it outside of pools of altcoin speculators (e.g. why do I hear about zerocash 100,000 times for every time I hear about this stuff?), etc. Not that I think that any of the altcoin stuff is advisable, but if you're going to make a fork on the virtue of fairness wouldn't it behoove you to actually be fair?  And, of course, the fork has now also been forked. That one at least tames the insanely fast distribution somewhat... but it too doesn't fix any of the worse parts... I can only imagine that we're going to continue to see once a month forks of that stuff— suits me fine, while the technology is interesting and useful, the speculative churn is not. is this fud? he claims to be an expert and he implies he has his finger on the pulse of cryptocurrency. yet, he found out about this coin 1 month after it has come out. I had only heard of bitcoin in passing, never knew whta it was and signed up on bitcointalk and found out about this coin the day it was announced. either he is a fud spreder, or this should be humbling as he may not be the expert he claims to be. |
|
|
|
Penalty for too large block size is disastrous in the long run.
Once MRO value increases a lot, block penalties will become more critical of an issue. Pools will fix this issue by placing a limit on number and size of transactions. Transaction fees will go up, because the pools will naturally accept the most profitable transactions. It will become very expensive to send with more than 0 mixin. Anonymity benefits of ring signatures are lost, and the currency becomes unusable for normal transactions.
This should be removed in the coming hardfork.
I agree on most points. Something cleverer is needed because the current formula is too blunt. But the scenario you described is actually the system working as intended. The CryptoNote developers didn't want blocks getting very large without genuine need for it because it permits a malicious attack. So miners out of self-interest would deliberately restrict the size, forcing the network to operate at the edge of the penalty-free size limit but not exceed it. The maximum block size is a moving average so over time it would grow to accommodate organic volume increase and the issue goes away. This system is most broken when volume suddenly spikes. how does a miner place transaction fees. from reading this, it seems as a miner can choose which transactions to process. how can this be done. |
|
|
|
The 32bit windows version from the first post does not run on a 32bit XP box. This coin is so broken, nothing works. Dev has been instamining for over a month..
wow. really? which dev. |
|
|
|
Why are people wanting this on more exchanges? It barely even functions. Right now, there are no reliable pools, and those pools when they work, are like 1 percent of the network total. So, most likely one or few people with access to like an university computer lab, is getting like 90%+ of the coins.
Anyway, this is in alpha stage not launch stage. I've been mining this for like 3 days and got 8 coins. LOL. And about a 1/4 of that time the pool just says disconnecting, trying again.
wow is this true. what university is it. will they use the funds to grow their curriculum and campus? and why are you laughing out loud. I hope you are not with a group of people laughing out loud, because you will look crazy. |
|
|
|
If http://moneropool.org has stopped working for you, you must temporarily use http://www.moneropool.orgMining on port 80 is now available. Use mine.moneropool.org:80 or pool.moneropool.org:80The web server is now separate from the mining server, and apache is no longer installed on 198.199.79.100 You may know this, The CPUMiner -Multi with Cryptonote will not load all threads, is there a command that I have to use to make all 8 threads? use simpleminer -a cryptonight -o mine.moneropool.org:80 -u address -p x -t THREADS please explain this as it is unusual command for simpleminer. is the above actually for simple miner or for cpuminer. the command for simple miner that I have been using is: simpleminer.exe --pool-addr=mine.moneropool.org:5555 --login=YOUR_PUBLIC_ADDRESS_HERE --pass 123 I still dont know if i should change pass to x |
|
|
|
I asked two very specific questions. Your large quote shows the answer to question one is "zero." You did not answer question two.
Unfortunately i dont know the formula. crypto_zoidberg should be able to answer that. where do you get that there is a premine. there are only 19 pages in the thread. have you even read some of it. |
|
|
|
on http://monero.crypto-pool.fr/ it says blocks found = never but the it also says pay out 16. can you please clarify this. thank you. i directed some mining to you. |
|
|
|
|
is running the daemon what secures the network or is it the mining
can the daemon be made to run on cell phone. even if cell phone does not mine a coin. wouldnt running it on cell phones secure the network also.
thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
