 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 »
|
bbr, did you enter your password to unlock for staking?
I have done that and it works that way but I thought atcsecure stated that it did not need to be unlocked? It will still need to be unlocked to stake (check the box for staking only). The bug was that when you entered your passphrase before the fix, it would say it was unlocked for staking only, but you could still send coins. |
|
|
|
|
bbr, did you enter your password to unlock for staking?
|
|
|
|
If Dan is really serious about chat and voice (video does not matter a lot currently) over the XC protocol, what can I say, this is a totally new, grandiose, multibillion market. And most importantly it means freedom of communications - the missing link in the IT sector (for now). Anyone selling below 0.25 BTC makes a big financial mistake, remember this statement till Christmas.
Yes I am very serious about this. The current XChat test release is 100% secure in its communication channel[message layer] and combined with a new initiative that has already started [details next week], I expect the XC community will be very excited with whats coming. Dan I'm ready...  |
|
|
|
***The XC Daily Update***
Hello all It's been confirmed by the developers that XChat will include voice calling in post-Rev 3 editions, and video calling further into the future. So basically we have a decentralised, private, Skype.  Here's to the future! Wow... just wow... Not much takes me by surprise with XC, because I have nothing but super high expectations, but this one sure did. This.. is... huge. |
|
|
|
This is not a discuses anyone more ... everyone is just throwing his coin in here and trying to advertise so their coin gets pumped how pathetic is this really... Please stay on the topic and let us only focus on DARKCOIN and CLOAKCOIN. Can we do this ? Thank you
I feel we should discuss any Anon coin as long as its related to similar protocols so they are comparable.. If you want a thread on a one vs one, then i suggest you create a self moderated topic so you can do that. Then you don't understood why we made this thread in the first place.... Ummm.. maybe I'm missing something, but seeing that he's the OP, I'm sure he does lol. Not sure what your goal is but there's good discussion going on here, and your Willy Wonka videos etc aren't really adding useful info to the conversation. |
|
|
|
I may have missed it, but are we able to purchase the XC TOR stick next thursday?
I believe it will be available for download, not for purchase, and XChat will be included in the download. |
|
|
|
The goal when ddos'ing nodes is to first set up many nodes yourself, then ddos the other nodes, so you can then have a control of big enough percentage of the nodes so you can spy the transactions with good enough success. Again, since transactions are fragmented into small pieces and then sent through the network, this attack would not be effective. The attacker could try to spy the network, but the truth of the matter is that the remaining good nodes are still going to end up handling the transactions, however few they may be. But again, since every single wallet is a node, I just don't see this attack being feasible. How can you tell which nodes are good and which nodes are spying? You can't. If a bad node/spying node makes an attempt on the funds, or if it refuses to sign off on the transaction, the funds go on to the next good node. |
|
|
|
You're right about Cryptonote coins. I should've worded my statement more carefully.
My opinion of Cryptonote is that it causes an unworkable degree of blockchain bloat - so much so that it's unlikely to scale even on PCs, never mind on mobile phones. Boolberry have made hotly disputed claims about being able to reduce bloat, but to my knowledge this has not been implemented yet.
If a coin bloats, then in my opinion it should not be considered "workable", since it simply can't scale to mainstream (or even sizeable niche) adoption.
So although there's a clear sense in which Cryptonote coins are "working", there's also a clear sense in which they're not workable solutions.
XC, on the other hand, is designed from the ground up for mobile. It's eminently scalable.
I'm confused, are you suggesting that mobile devices will run a full node? That seems ill-advised for XC or Monero or any other cryptocurrency. I'll let Synechist speak for himself, but I do want to add in my opinion  Being able to run a full node on a mobile device is not only a great idea, it's absolutely necessary for the advancement of crypto. Just think about the direction everything is going in our world today... it's going mobile. That's where crypto should be looking to expand, and XC has been bearing that in mind from the beginning. |
|
|
|
Glad to hear that Darkcoin has built-in protection for this attack vector, it's certainly a valid concern.
It doesn't have that, it was just something I was suggesting in DRK thread earlier and asking what people's thoughts about it are. But if the idea is feasible and provides additional security, the implementation probably should be pretty straightforward. My bad, I thought you were saying they had that in place. I stand corrected. XC does also, in that every single wallet is a node. Thus, there's no central point that can be targeted for a ddos.
It's the same thing. XC node that participates in anonymization requires an open incoming TCP port, and the attacker can ddos those nodes just as well as drk masternodes. Very much true in theory, but what would be the point? When you can't see where the transaction is coming from or where it's going, you'd have to choose to attack a random node, and when that node fails to sign off on the funds due to the attack, the funds go on to the next node anyhow. In addition, transactions are multisig so they require several parties to sign before they are processed. If a bad node alters a transaction to steal funds, or refuses to sign, the transaction won't be processed, so you can't lose funds. Also, since there are redundant connections between nodes that provide multiple pathways for funds, if a node fails to sign a transaction there are others ready to take its place. Pretty cool stuff, really.
The goal when ddos'ing nodes is to first set up many nodes yourself, then ddos the other nodes, so you can then have a control of big enough percentage of the nodes so you can spy the transactions with good enough success. Again, since transactions are fragmented into small pieces and then sent through the network, this attack would not be effective. The attacker could try to spy the network, but the truth of the matter is that the remaining good nodes are still going to end up handling the transactions, however few they may be. But again, since every single wallet is a node, I just don't see this attack being feasible. |
|
|
|
4. and 5. (no clue how this relates to 5) - collusion on its own is irrelevant. Of course it will be ineffectual. It would always be coupled with the compromise or the DDoSing of additional "masternodes". In such an event, the number of available masternodes is massively reduced, which means the the little Google spreadsheet is incorrect. Many hosts will null-route a dedicated server (even more so a VPS) if it is experiencing a DDoS. Other attacks such as a DDoS group constantly requesting a stream of blocks from a masternode would lead to its traffic exceeding normal use and massive traffic bills. Similarly, a DDoS group could broadcast thousands of bad blocks a second to a masternode, leading to it chewing through CPU cycles doing very heavy X11 verifications, ultimately leading to it becoming inaccessible or being killed by the oomkiller. Those are just off the top of my head, of course, and the attack stands regardless of whether these specific scenarios can be mitigated against.
Refreshing to read opinions of someone who actually has a clue instead of crypto noobs hyping their vapor buzzwords. I consider myself to be crypto noob as well, however: What if the Darkcoin wallet was monitoring the state of the network, and if the running masternode count fell for example 50% in a short period of time, it would stop denominating funds (denomination is the anonymization process which runs in the background). This wouldn't affect people sending or receiving coins because they already have them denominated/anonymized. It would only prevent people from re-sending received funds during this ddos period. Every other coin has to use nodes as well, and they can be ddos attacked which can halt the network for the duration of the attack. It's not only Darkcoin that is susceptible to ddos. Glad to hear that Darkcoin has built-in protection for this attack vector, it's certainly a valid concern. XC does also, in that every single wallet is a node. Thus, there's no central point that can be targeted for a ddos. In addition, transactions are multisig so they require several parties to sign before they are processed. If a bad node alters a transaction to steal funds, or refuses to sign, the transaction won't be processed, so you can't lose funds. Also, since there are redundant connections between nodes that provide multiple pathways for funds, if a node fails to sign a transaction there are others ready to take its place. This means that if there was a ddos attack, even though it's not really possible due to the completely decentralized nature of XC, you'd still be able to send and receive funds. Pretty cool stuff, really. |
|
|
|
If you guys are up for discussing XCurrency too, here's a brief introduction to get the conversation started:
- XC is the only project with an already-implemented anonymity solution that is currently working.
Stopped reading right there. Illodin, you shouldn't need to read about XC, you've been in our thread plenty already.  |
|
|
|
Excellent Update I assume the XChat will remain stand-alone for now until REV2.5? Or will it be inside the app? Yes XChat and privacy mode transactions will be merged in Rev 2.5. Awesome, that's what I was thinking. |
|
|
|
Excellent Update I assume that XChat will remain stand-alone for now until REV2.5? Or will it be inside the app? |
|
|
|
Hoertest, generosity is a virtue, and virtues have long-term and short-term benefits. There's absolutely no need to be less than virtuous, ever.
There is little doubt in my mind that Dan's review will be beneficial to all parties, and mostly to XC.
You showed public interest in cloak some days ago. look where cloak is now and how beneficial it was to us. .... Where is cloak now? It has nothing special really, just a pump and dump related to the hype taking place into the trade... There is too much centralization there...and cheap fancy developments... cloaksend? a mere 3-4 hours php script http://www.cloaksend.com/api/cloaks/CBnkPKapz8U2FKc7EQSeCcSZ3qPD82XpGp/C5qKmSjW1K1CiADtnMHMPBjQWybHQ9S8ce/50.0onemarket? another centralized king-of-website, integrated into the WALLET... Anyway, I'm happy for a thing related to cloak right now, which is seeing that mintpal has not lost the trust yet, and there is still volume on the exchange... I know that its all hot air atm. good luck to anyone trying to ride the pump. i don't have the balls anymore . one more thing. I'm all for giving value and recieving value type of actions in this crypto community. Tell me where is the value keycoin devs is giving to XC in exchange for Dans time except that one line thank you so far? Sorry, but I agree with this until we have a fucking white paper or something explaining our tech. I'm sick of hearing that XC is way ahead in terms of the tech... HOW DO WE KNOW THIS IS TRUE? WHERE IS THE DOCUMENTATION OR PROOF? Start using your heads, my god. Wake up angry? For one, how about the fact that no one has cracked XC's anonymity? And people have TRIED HARD. Two, REV1 has been open sourced in good faith to show that there is indeed real development here. And even though REV1 was excellent, it's still like comparing a Honda Civic to a Pagani Zonda with what we have now. Three, XChat uses the same multi-path approach as transacting XCurrency, to ensure fast and secure communications. This is nearing completion to be fully implemented into the app. If you can't see the positives, sell me your coinnnnsssssss.... |
|
|
|
Hoertest, generosity is a virtue, and virtues have long-term and short-term benefits. There's absolutely no need to be less than virtuous, ever.
There is little doubt in my mind that Dan's review will be beneficial to all parties, and mostly to XC.
You showed public interest in cloak some days ago. look where cloak is now and how beneficial it was to us. i don't want to bash other coins. but helping out left and right while the own project is not yet in the possition to do such things is a mistake too. If the REV3 campaign would be already on the road and Dan would have some sparetime I would be fine with such reviews . but now? Only one liners and short updates from him for weeks in here and then he has the time for that write up and checking the code. This was a ego thing, you can tell me what you want about the philanthropic intentions. Think what you will.. but don't think that I'm not spending 8+ hours per day working on XCurrency, We are currently on RC4 EM testing, just finished a new build a few minutes ago, not to mention the other development activities happening and getting prepared for the xc-tor-stick release I recently discovered XC since your opinion about Key I thought XC was a scam, because i read a lot of Fud posts and i change my mind now Your name seems know and respected by the community I will focus more and i think invest Welcome sir! Let us know if we can help you in any way, we have a good community here. |
|
|
|
[XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy / Encrypted XChat / Privacy Platform
so cool roadmap,is it true or just a map.
The items with green bullets are actually complete, so I'd say it's "true"  The yellow bullets indicate works in progress, and the rest are future developments. Seeing what I've seen from this team so far, nothing on that list is going to go unfinished. |
|
|
|
So, I've been doing a little research on XC and other anonymous coins, just so that I can have a better understanding of something I might invest in. I'm a little hung up on how the xNode protocol works, though. Is it like Monero's CryptoNote? I'm not sure if there's tension between XC and Monero/CryptoNote/etc, and if there is then I'll bring my question elsewhere. Not trying to cause any trouble, I'm just genuinely curious.
One of Monero's faults is enormous blockchain bloat... it will never be suitable for mobile platforms because of this, and it lends to slow transaction times. XC was built ground-up to be operable on mobile platforms, and even though transactions are divided by the trustless mixer and sent across multiple nodes and then brought back together at their final destination, there is little to no blockchain bloat in the process. This means fast transaction times, and the ability for the devs to integrate XCurrency into mobile platforms when the time is right, opening the door to vast opportunities that have been for the most part untouched. |
|
|
|
Hello,
I must be doing something wrong with staking XC. Is there a minimum number I need to stake and earn interest? I deposited coins into my wallet on 7/20, however my wallet seems to be stuck between 6 and 13hrs (it goes up and down). Any ideas? I'm on wallet 9.2.45
Thanks
You'll get stake, just give it some time. Staking takes up to 30 days, and it's a lottery, so in time you'll receive stake, and it will average out to 3.3% per year. Also, make sure your app is unlocked for staking. The estimation isn't always accurate, so just be patient. For further reading, here's a link to the staking section of the website: http://xc-official.com/staking/Happy staking!  |
|
|
|
Wow Beautiful Synechist is this done by Teka?
No I did it. IT WAS A MISSION Wow Well Done My Friend Are you working to the APP GUI as well with Teka? This look really Sleek and The Forum Also. Combining your Skills for the New GUI will be a win win XC ON A MISSION  |
|
|
|
|
