The success can be measured this way -> People from other communities posting here on a daily basis. Do you see Dash people worried about the business and trolling the threads of other coins?  Frankly, one of your community members named "Herp" has been quite active in the Monero threads with trollish behavior. Herp? Sorry I am Dash supporter since february 2014, never heard about any herp. You need to try harder . He might have been posting under another nickname, see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=135549 |
|
|
|
The success can be measured this way -> People from other communities posting here on a daily basis. Do you see Dash people worried about the business and trolling the threads of other coins? Frankly, one of your community members named "Herp" has been quite active in the Monero threads with trollish behavior. Probably a reverse troll paid by Monero Marketing Department trying to make Dash look bad.  Getting paid 5 XMR per day of course :-P @Ghostplayer, well he seems to be a avid DASH proponent. |
|
|
|
The success can be measured this way -> People from other communities posting here on a daily basis. Do you see Dash people worried about the business and trolling the threads of other coins? Frankly, one of your community members named "Herp" has been quite active in the Monero threads with trollish behavior. |
|
|
|
Not to off clutter off topic on that thread I reply on this post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1139756.msg13635019#msg13635019 with idea that seems important to me. What is missing from your analysis smooth is that at what level of featureness are businesses willing to embrace block chains. I argue CN/RingCT is below the acceptable level and can not be raised to that level because the fundamentals are not End-to-End principled (also because can only make the payers, payees, and values obscured and not any type of script and other aspects of the block chain data). Business will prefer private databases where they can hide all the data until public block chains mature enough to do so. Public block chains promise more interoption and network effects, once we can make them truly private.
I try to light a fire under you guys to get you refocused on technology that can meet your goal of being a privacy block chain for businesses. That is where the real market is.
It is better for Monero to stay what it stands for - literally "Money", not "sonic screw driver" jack of all trades multitool for everything. If I recall correctly he recently came back from that quote. |
|
|
|
So DASH isn't that anonymous after all it seems. This shouldn't surprise anybody. Blockchain analysis is turning into a pretty big field, and the same principles that apply to Bitcoin will apply to DASH. Yes DASH has a mixer, but at its heart it works the same as Bitcoin utilizing addresses and transactions that are publicly accessible and traceable. Unless the DASH team is working non stop to harden their mixing service it will eventually be defeated. Or at least somebody will have a software tool that is able to correlate addresses well enough to de-anonymize the largest users. Mixing is merely an attempt to gain security by piling on obscurity. One problem with mixing is it depends on other people wishing to commingle their tainted coins at the same time you want to. Otherwise, you spend hours or days waiting. And there is the threat those other people might be Sybil attackers using their coins as stalking horses to flush out yours. De-obfuscating mixed coins is trivial. You can use Bitcoin Sudoku or invent your own method. Breaking Darksend would be too boring for Shen to even bother. He might assign to his freshmen seminar students the task of de-anonymizing Dash as a homework assignment or pose it as an extra credit question on the first midterm. You or Shen should totally do it. It would be great publicity for XMR. What stops the community members of DASH (accompanied by the DGBB) to put up a few bounties? At least there will be some incentive to deanonymize transactions then. Furthermore, if I recall correctly the DGBB has a budget of around 20-30k per month. Moreover, you could set up a bounty for the deanonymization of an 1 round transaction, which Evan Duffield said would be the default in Evolution and another bounty for an 8 round transaction. |
|
|
|
Any update on adding Monero? With the database implemented it won't take many resources to host it.
Thanks for the update. Glad to hear the improvement we waited for has been implemented. I can't make any promises but we will look into it. Perhaps soon(tm) :-P |
|
|
|
Any update on adding Monero? With the database implemented it won't take my resources to host it.
Thanks for the update. Glad to hear the improvement we waited for has been implemented. I can't make any promises but we will look into it. Great to hear! Also, if you need any help with respect to the implementation, just head over to #monero or #monero-dev @ freenode. |
|
|
|
FROM THE RUMOUR MILL...
Awesome news if true!
Watch out. Somebody's been putting up fake pages that certain coins are going on Bitfinex and then doing huge cashouts on the pump on Poloniex. There was an Ethereum one that set the market on fire for a bit until the page was identified as a fake and the mods started bannhammering everyone who posted the link. (Including me - but I was innocent, didn't realise it was a fake - ok, guilty then but unconsciously so). Just sayin. Could be true, could not be true. Best wait to see what Bitfinex say. Good point, such photos could easily be photoshopped. |
|
|
|
@Otoh, 9 & 11 might be exchange wallets.
Yep, obviously (no offense), #4 too, still no reason that they couldn't place the bulk of their cold wallets in masternodes if they choose. I am not sure if #4 is an exchange address. Activity seems too low for that. Seems more like a large holder that is sending to and receiving from exchanges. |
|
|
|
|
@Otoh, 9 & 11 might be exchange wallets.
|
|
|
|
14 owner control about 1868 masternodes.
But there are 3550 masternodes, not 1868. If this is accurate, this is pretty surprising to me. I would have guessed the top 50% of masternodes were in the hands of just 4 or 5 big whales. 14 is pretty impressive. 14 is better than 4 or 5 but still its a bit worrisome isn't it ? The majority of voting power in hands of such a tiny elite group who effectively can permit budgets that benefit them and block ones that don't. How hard is it for them to know each other and form a cartel. Isn't this recipe for rich getting richer at expense of everyone? In the end this could kill Dash It's not optimal, but with such a tiny marketcap and such a young project, is definitely to be expected. Honestly, I would not be surprised to see many public corporations with the same distribution of ownership (top 14 holders--pension funds, etc.--with over 50% of the equity). At least in theory, these holders would have strong incentives to do things to help the coin, since doing so increases their own wealth. No way the top 14 pension funds hold over 50% over the equity. I would be suprised if they held a few percent. Furthermore, pension funds usually are required to hold a large percentage (think 25-50%) of their assets in "safe investments" such as bonds. |
|
|
|
This seems like too much of a coincidence to me. Two ASIC manufacturers posting an announcement only one day apart? It's likely that their ASICs become obsolete and subsequently they try to "dump" them on gullible investors. See Wolf0's comment as well: For a long while, my birdies have been chirping about X11 hardware implementations in the wild. I always knew it was possible - as I know some hardware dev, but then the first whispers came. Then more and more. As of late, maybe a couple months ago, it was pretty much confirmed - the sources were almost impeccable. This tells me something, that the tech is SPREADING. This is bad for the people that already have it, and THIS is why that ASIC is being sold. Not reaching 100% ROI on it at this price is nearly certain; it's time to dump the bottom of the barrel ASICs onto people with more money than sense and let the hardware race begin. https://dashtalk.org/threads/ibelink-dm384m-asic-dash-miner.8070/page-2#post-85031 |
|
|
|
Here is the big issue everyone is ignoring:
If somehow mandatory ring signatures, and protocol level mixing, etc etc were all added to Bitcoin.... Then we would need a new Bitcoin.
Why? Because a public, non-fungible Blockchain enables applications and functions that can't mathematically and logically be done with a fungible and private Blockchain.
So there is no point. If you were born with a natural talent for coding or painting, don't try to be a football superstar. Develop your natural talent - in the case of Bitcoin this is being a public and non-fungible Blockchain.
There isn't really a thing a private, fungible Blockchain can't do which a public, non-fungible Blockchain can do. Not true. You'd get a whole lot of things to require cooperation of the involved parties, that you at the moment get whether they like it or not. (detective work, tracing, proovable reserves...). Some others are technically not that clear, depending how private you go. The concept of colored coins is antagonist to perfect fungibility (if such thing exists) for instance. Fluffypony and dnaleor's comments here suggest otherwise though: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/47288y/if_bitcoin_added_ring_signatures_mandatory_mixing/ |
|
|
|
Well thats gonna be the case for *any* cryptocurrency. With this line of logic, the next major effort should be electrum style infrastructure.
That's what I'm hinting at. I edited my previous post: That said, what will a future XMR wallet look like for the "average joe" Monero user in, say, 2020?
Monero has a hurdle in that Electrum style wallets come with a significant privacy cost. Will this be a scalability bottleneck? EDIT: Not to mention the "electrum style" wallets that we're used to aren't really possible with Monero, as you need the private key (or viewkey) and have to scan the entire blockchain in order to get an address balance. Perhaps by the time it will become a scalability bottleneck there is a solution already. |
|
|
|
While I agree that a packaged GUI would benefit XMR, usability at this point should generally be a third-party concern. Does anyone still use Bitcoin QT?
I'm more interested in seeing new third-party projects like XMR.TO or MyMonero that make the currency accessible to people unwilling or unable to run full nodes.
Have you seen how ugly and inconvenient it is? That might be the reason. |
|
|
|
Here is the big issue everyone is ignoring:
If somehow mandatory ring signatures, and protocol level mixing, etc etc were all added to Bitcoin.... Then we would need a new Bitcoin.
Why? Because a public, non-fungible Blockchain enables applications and functions that can't mathematically and logically be done with a fungible and private Blockchain.
So there is no point. If you were born with a natural talent for coding or painting, don't try to be a football superstar. Develop your natural talent - in the case of Bitcoin this is being a public and non-fungible Blockchain.
There isn't really a thing a private, fungible Blockchain can't do which a public, non-fungible Blockchain can do. |
|
|
|
"Will this new feature let Satoshi spend his coins without anyone being able to know he moved them?" Interesting question. IDK. I should give credit to americanpegasus for coming up with that question. Interestingly, adding ring sigs to Bitcoin is the only way I can think of that would allow Satoshi to spend his coins without anyone knowing (for sure). I believe most of his presumed holdings have their public keys exposed, so it could actually work. CoinJoin, CT, all manner of sidechains, etc., cannot help Satoshi at all. Mandatory Coinjoin + CT enforced on the protocol level would make BTC fungible though. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
