If you have an unreversible mixer, congratulations. Bitcoin will almost certainly want to adopt it. However, it won't fix fungibility.
When you say that, are you referring to Bitcoin 3rd party development like Dark Wallet? Or the core dev team? I don't think the core dev team would ever implement that tech in to Bitcoin even if it was perfect. Why would they not want to adopt it? We're talking about Bitcoin as in the open source beta phase project. I would put the line at 100-1 that the current Bitcoin development team with it's current political situation would ever add such a thing to Bitcoin. If it's possible for 3rd parties to add it then people will be all over that at light speed. But Gavin et al? I highly doubt that. But maybe I'm wrong. I wonder what everyone else thinks. |
|
|
|
Meeting living costs and striking a balance does not = reward, it = survival, whilst hopefully building a 'reward' for all. Without meeting fundamental needs, working toward the 'reward' is virtually impossible..
Yes, making ends meet is definitely not the reward but it's required in order to seek the eventual reward. That was a very good way to put it. |
|
|
|
If you have an unreversible mixer, congratulations. Bitcoin will almost certainly want to adopt it. However, it won't fix fungibility.
When you say that, are you referring to Bitcoin 3rd party development like Dark Wallet? Or the core dev team? I don't think the core dev team would ever implement that tech in to Bitcoin even if it was perfect. |
|
|
|
6 BTC would cover all of my time for a full month, allow for budget of resources, and allow to tip the people who help.
In some places in the world 6 BTC in a month is a very good salary. Is this going to be setting a precedent? Will another 6 BTC be required for development next month etc etc. I am not saying that you (the developer) are not doing great work with Bitmark, but I do think this is potentially a dangerous path. Should the reward not be in the projects success? Ideally we would all have the resources to be able to focus all of our attention singularly on Bitmark but in reality with living expenses it's generally not going to be possible with out some method of sustaining oneself. Coinsolidation/Mark has been working like crazy since this idea was born and I don't think he's had much time for much else. Since there is no IPO or no premine that can be sold off the alternative is development funded by donation, or in this case crowdfunded projects that are separate from Bitmark but still add significant value to the project. This is an issue we've been debating for a long time now, how to ensure sustainable development and proper incentive. Projects like this should pay for themselves many times over, but it's an investment in both Bitmark and an what is basically an open source startup. People will also be able the take to project and expand its scope as an internet value transfer system outside(but still connected to) Bitmark. But that comes after. |
|
|
|
Why would the code not be open sourced? That's a bit scary. Any reasonable explanation as to why they would choose this path?
hey nuno, thanx for taking interest in XC. Im just a small holder, like many others, but ive been in XC thread since day 1. If you have the time and want to search the topic for clues, you will see for yourself that it is no regular P&D alt. It does not follow altcoins trading rules(parties have been manipulating from the start, probably big holders), and there is a a talented team behind it(you can check official XC team .pdf). Synechist is a part of it, and he's been doing a great deal of work. There is no concern of their legitimacy(there are actual photos of the bitcoinbeltway in DC where they promoted XC) and there appears to be a significant amount of work being done backstage. They work by a real business plan, not P&D promises. Most importantly, the things being developed are not limited to privacy-anonimity per se, but a lot of other groundbreaking stuff, which were NOT announced because of "anon" trend fading away, but were included in core development since the get-go. ps: I realise most guys here have a good programming or tech related background and despise closed source, but I respect one's right to protect one's -possibly- life's work. Yeah, personally I don't doubt XC's legitimacy at all and I'm mainly just curious about it as I hadn't seen it comp up in conversation here recently. |
|
|
|
|
Well, in CrypoNote's case it actually helped that Monero was a clone of Bytecoin.
I see the point of not wanting clones but it's inevitable that good open source tech will be forked.
So the anon tech is currently in use and working but not fully open source yet? Am I understanding that correctly?
If there wasn't a demand by the community to see open source code I guess in theory projects could keep parts like this closed indefinitely to keep some competitive advantage. But I think having closed source parts alienates a large part of the community. Hell, I run all the open source stuff on a vm anyway just because I know it's not impossible that people slip malicious code into these things. And I don't mean to imply that XC is doing anything malicious at all and I'm sure they're not. Just that there have been many issues over the years.
|
|
|
|
|
Why would the code not be open sourced? That's a bit scary. Any reasonable explanation as to why they would choose this path?
|
|
|
|
Finally, there is also an opportunity to profit by giving out loans. This includes mortgage loans. A business could be set up that allows investors to pool their money together and give out loans. The profits would come from the interest that is paid once the loan is repaid.
zopa.com? lendingclub.com ? peer2peer lending is a thing already. As someone who used to lend on Prosper, I'd advise to stay away. There's a reason a lot of these people can't get loans from banks. Do banks even loan money out to regular people anymore? Besides home mortgages of course. |
|
|
|
GPU miners can't mine it fairly, it's impossible, arguments there in wiki ain't make GPU owners to mine it. Lots of Titans will land on this coin and in a week expect incredible difficulty. You have to make it at least scrypt-n, so home miners can win several months. This is it. Good luck. It's not easy these days to come up with a system that covers all the bases. On one hand you have botnets and AWS instances dominating networks and on the other hand you can make it difficult for regular GPU miners such as yourself to mine fairly. At least we're still at the point where someone with a decent GPU setup can still accumulate a decent amount of Bitmarks still. I know I've rented a few GPU rigs over the last week or so and they were good value for the money. A few MH still goes a long way at this point. |
|
|
|
God, WHY? ASICs will mine everything. Does it really make a difference as long as the blocks are coming somewhat on schedule? Emission would be the same either way. And scrypt has been used long enough now that we can be certain that it's a solid algo. And a lot of us aren't miners and are just renting ASICs to mine. So we would just be renting rigs either way. At least this way we know the network is healthy and secure. I was initially skeptical of using scrypt as well, but I think it's been working out quite well so far. |
|
|
|
|
Why would anyone want to invest in people who act so unprofessional?
I think maybe we should make it a requirement at Vod tags all projects on the forum just to see how the people presenting them react. Emotional overreactions and business are not a good combination.
On the hand if the person calmly worked the issue out in a public manner without over reacting that would reflect well on them.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm attempting to enroll on through the google forms app, but the last page is asking me to request a payment before I've even started? I'm sure this has come up before but reading through the last few posts I'm not seeing any answers. Should I just request a payment of 0 and then before Aug 17th request my real payment?
|
|
|
|
Before ever making a cold storage wallet, scan your pc thoroughly, use up2date antivirus, and also scan with Hitman Pro after that.
Or just use an Linux OS, no need to mess about with any of that nonsense. PHD Candidate Bitcoin researcher had ~9000 BTC stolen while he was using Linux. CDecker on this forum. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=49Notice his user number is 49 too. Hell he could even be Satoshi(probably not though). Link to post where this loss occurred please! Was he using an encrypted wallet? Were encrypted wallets even available at the time? Using GNU/Linux with an encrypted wallet will drastically reduce by many orders of magnitude the threat of Bitvoin theft. Wallet was encrypted but any old wallet.dat that isn't encrypted is of course fair game for hackers. This is the saddest theft of all since this guy has been around forever and 9222 btc or whatever he lost is an insane amount of money. |
|
|
|
|
Is it possible that there is a bot that crawls the web to find domain names that are not registered and register them? Seems plausible.
Like, *edited out* is taken already. But if it wasn't, I wonder if it could get poached from me writing it there.
Anyway,
some domain suggestions:
*edited out*
|
|
|
|
(a) Use end-to-end encryption to support transaction broadcasting, secure messaging, and true P2P anonymous transactions.
(b) Upon this is built an optional mixer that testing has shown to eliminate any record in the blockchain of a link between sender and receiver.
(c) This mixer is a revolutionary “multi-path” implementation that employs multi-sig to route fragments of transactions down separate paths through the network, compounding anonymity while adding redundancy and security.
(d) Communication between nodes is optionally via TOR, which obfuscates users’ IP addresses.
Emphasis mine. Legit new tech or same old CoinJoin? |
|
|
|
Personally I'm very interested on someone's technical analysis of the anon tech in XC. I mean Darkcoin is constantly criticised due to it's technical failings over the past few months. But the lack of criticism of XC leads me to believe that it's might fall in to one of these two categories:
1) That the anon tech is actually solid.
or
2) That the distribution and such was so bad that people don't even think it's worth analysing the tech and thus we don't actually know whether it works well or not.
Just the one above point from darkota, strongly smacks it technical merits, and you can be sure that intelligence agencies are flooding this space. If not, they should be named "ignorant" agencies. If you are going to invest into multiple cryptos, I would break the investment down % wise by what technically is on top, but also on just public perception The latter can create a snowball effect from a pump but usually won't last. E.g. Dogy. Regular coinjoin can be unraveled but since the XC dev is claiming that their anonymity works perhaps it's an improved version? I clicked a link to a pdf on one of XC's ann threads but I got a 503 error or something. I'll go look again and see if I can find any documentation. |
|
|
|
|
Personally I'm very interested on someone's technical analysis of the anon tech in XC. I mean Darkcoin is constantly criticised due to it's technical failings over the past few months. But the lack of criticism of XC leads me to believe that it's might fall in to one of these two categories:
1) That the anon tech is actually solid.
or
2) That the distribution and such was so bad that people don't even think it's worth analysing the tech and thus we don't actually know whether it works well or not.
|
|
|
|
What do people think about the possibility of anonymous transactions in a currency based on Bitcoin technology as opposed to the brand new CN ring signature method?
Possible, but harder? Or just too much effort? Or not possible realistically at all?
XC is a bitcoin based PoS coin, and the dev says their implementation is 100% anonymous & bullet-proof: and this isn't our last layer, we have 1 more layer of blockchain privacy coming out as well with REV3, and at that stage it will be 100% anonymous & bullet-proof when combined with all the layers we have built
Thanks. I'll go check it out. |
|
|
|
What do people think about the possibility of anonymous transactions in a currency based on Bitcoin technology as opposed to the brand new CN ring signature method?
Possible, but harder? Or just too much effort? Or not possible realistically at all?
if you speak of something like coinjoin: i believe it is only a matter of time until somebody develops a wallet which offers something like "dezentralized coinjoin" (sry... just loving this buzzword) I mean anything really. CoinJoin, CoinSwap, other theoretical things I might not know about. I'm curious about how realistic it is for a non-CN coin to achieve a similar level anonymity. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
