I think he means three or five chain myriad.  Look at how Myriadcoin works having not one but many blockchains.  Anoncoin is doing something similar except with merged-mine auxPoW chains.  Similar to how Dogecoin is now merged-mined with Llitecoin and how Namecoin is merged-mined with Bitcoin.  Using a three chain myriad an attacker would need to control two of the three chains to pull a 51% attack or similar control of the coins networks.  Using a five chain myriad an attacker would need to control three of the five chains to pull a 51% attack or similar.  Also by using multiple chains we avoid a lot other problems that are affecting Anoncoin now.  Like multipools jumping on and off the only chain as they would either be two or four other chains hashing away.  Depending on whether a three or five chain myriad is implemented.  Using auxPoW merged-mine chains we'll poach a lot of miners off these large chains to also merged-mine Anoncoin at no extra costs.  

Yeah and they're also implementing an auxPoW of either three or five chains myriad.  Which should help to add even more redundancy.

Yeah lots of small exchanges is better than just one big one.  Faircoin is back up on MintPal now - https://www.mintpal.com/market/btc/fair

Well the most anonymous way to acquire an anonymous cryptocurrency would be solo mining via Tor.  I'd imagine the network has quite a few large solo-miners.  Maybe someone could start watching the block explorer for the IP address associated with new blocks.  Then seeing if the IP addresses correspond with Tor public gateways.  Or if the IP addresses associated with new blocks can be linked to anywhere else.  The dev's did say they were planning on soon changing from Scrypt to a three of five auxPoW chains myriad.  While meeh did say he'd have an important announcement for us soon.

It's not very decentralised in having to trust on one central exchange.  The current MintPal problem helps to show this problem.  Other small alts with similar market capitalisation as Faircoin are traded on multiple exchanges.  I think we need a really big push to try and get Faircoin listed on few other exchanges too. Even if they're only smaller or newer exchanges.

Is there any news regarding Monero and I2p development.   

Thanks for that I've just set up - https://www.noip.com - as its still a free service.  Although not everyone can run a node 24/7/365 continuously, but maybe they could run a node for eight hours a day five days a week if encouraged to do so.

About the feedback, as well as supporting VPS nodes on static IP's.  Maybe you could add an incentive for users to keep their full nodes/wallets open at home as well on their dynamic IP addresses.  Say 1NHZ for every hour of your wallet/node being open with it exponentially rising every extra hour your node/wallet stays open up to a maximum for full time nodes.  These full time nodes on dynamic IP addresses are helping to support the network too.  And you could argue even more so as they're a lot more decentralised  and distributed than 99% of the static nodes just on Digital Ocean servers.  Also yes I agree with extending the distribution time over a longer period.   IMHO the longer and more spread out the initial distribution the better by far.

Am I right in thinking that your wallet has to be open and unlocked to take part in minting.  Plus only once your transactions are mature enough.  Also does your wallet have to be open and unlocked for your transactions to mature.  Information regarding this should be somewhere easy to find IMHO.

Also a X11 multipool to earn Faircoon wouldn't go amiss.  As would probably a Cryptonight and/or Primes multipool.  As not a lot of people have Scrypt ASIC's for Hashcows.  Yet a lot of people do have GPU's for X11 and NeoScrypt and even more people have CPU's for Cryptonight and Primes.

No offense taken I'm not really a fan of closed garden social networks much either but the FBook does have a lot of content.  I2p is being developed for Android so why not potentially an Android wallet via I2p.  Instead of an Electrum build blockchain.info code could potentially be ported and exteneded for Zerocoin.  I'm a desktop PC nerd with a big HDTV for a monitor user myself, but for a large majority of people now it's either smartphones, tablets, netbooks and nettops only.  Although the amount of full PC's in use worldwide is expected to still grow by 25% over the next five years.  So it's certainly not the end of the world staying full and paper wallet only.  Or at least until I2p on Android is fully developed?

There's now a lot more sole mobile and lightweight devices users then there is people who have access to their own PC.  Plus sooner rather than later Electrum will be officially in the Android Play store.   

Most people use mobile or lightweight devices for bitcoin and running a full wallet is not an option to the majority of users.  It will really hamper Anoncoin adoption not having lightweight wallets like Electrum plus mobile wallets.  Maybe someone could fork the blockchain.info GitHub for a suitable bounty instead.  We do need lots of people running full nodes though.  To try and avoid the sybil attack problem  So maybe we should look at the Peercoin model.  Where full nodes get paid via staking by running full time nodes 24/7/365.  This would of course make the coin inflationary in nature although it could be done a very small rate. 

Now that the lightweight wallet Electrum has been ported to Litecoin.  I feel strongly that we should start a crowdfunding campaign for a bounty for porting Electrum to Anoncoin.  And the building of an Electrum plugin for Zerocoin.

I leave my spare CPU cycles to hash Monero.  On MinerGate you can also merge-mine a choice of at least two other cryptonight coins.  Primecoin looks good though and they're implementing side-chains soon.

Two weeks now until the expected test-net launch of Zerocoin.

I'd say it depends on how much you're paying for the miner and how much you're going to pay per kWh for power.  If you've got very cheap power costs and you're getting the miner relatively cheap.  Then it makes sense too, you can use claculators like this one to try and help to decide - http://btcinvest.net/en/bitcoin-mining-profit-calculator.php

Coinshuffle does sound very interesting though how can XC's implementation be trusted if it's proprietary?  Also Zero Proofs of Knowledge technique was a major break-through in number theory and has now had over three decades of research into it.  While Ring SIgs was considered a major breakthrough in cryptology and has now had over a decade of research on the matter.  So using either of those two would be building on very strong foundations.  Anoncoin aim to store some of their zero proofs outside of the blockchain.  While most of Monero's blockchain is bloated because of spam and dust.  Although the option of using the coinshuffle technique does sound a lot better than copying Darkcoin's Darksend or anything else built off CoinJoin.   The coinshuffle paper though is only a few months old that's my main concern with not being an expert cryptologist to make my own sure decision on it.  With ZPK and RS's they've been out there for decades to be studied and I take my opinions from the view of the many peer reviews over those many years.

The new update looks good.  About Darksend please try not to copy XC by redesigning CoinJoin or just copying Darkcoin's technique.  I feel that both coins will always be playing whack-a-mole with new found security exploits forever and a day as their found.  Due to trying to use a protocol based on CoinJoin.  CoinJoin transactions were proven to be able to be easily deciphered.  Patching it up and adding another layer is just building on bad foundations.  You could offer much more solid and stronger transaction anonymity by copying the Ring Signigture's technique that Cryptonote coins use.  Or possibly borrowing Anoncoin's soon to be released Zerocoin accumulators protocol.  Even better offer both ring sig's plus zerocoin to offer choice and provide fault tolerance.  Or possibly try and combine both techniques maybe if possible for a double-spin or pre-wash effect.

Kryptoradio are broadcasting blockchain data in a 7.5kbps channel on the UHF band using the DVB-T1(or possibly)T2 codec in Finland.  Using the Digital Radio Mondiale codec you could broadcast =>7.1kbps over a 5kHz channel on SW/MW/LW.  Although renting SW transmitter broadcast time costs around $25k per month for 24/7/365 broadcasts.  5kHZ though is about a quarter of the bandwidth that current AM radio broadcast stations use on MW or LW.

Another idea to look at terrestrial broadcasts although this time with full duplex is UHF IEEE 802.11ah meshnetworks.  With a good external antenna you could get very good local range at 900Mhz so it could really work well for mesh-networking.  The first IEEE 802.11ah chips are supposed to come out next year while the protocol should be finalised by 2016.  Plus it's an unlicensed band so no one would need a ham license to set up a low power node.

If Kryptoradio in Finland can do broadcasts in only a 7.5kbps channel.  Then instead of only broadcasting in UHF line of site. The same service could broadcast on SW/LW/MW over digital AM to much larger regions from a single transmitter using Digital Radio Mondiale technology.  A single LW transmitter could potentially give coverage to the whole of Scandinavia. 

Using the Digital Radio Mondiale codec you could broadcast =>7.1kbps over a 5kHz channel on SW/MW/LW.  Although renting SW transmitter broadcast time costs around $25k per month for 24/7/365 broadcasts.  5kHZ though is about half the bandwidth that AM stations use on MW.

Another idea to look at terrestrial broadcasts although this time with full duplex is UHF IEEE 802.11ah meshnetworks.  With a good external antenna you could get very good local range at 900Mhz so it could really work well for mesh-networking.  The first IEEE 802.11ah chips are supposed to come out next year while the protocol should be finalised by 2016.  Plus it's an unlicensed band so no one would need a ham license to set up a low power node.