I have a withdrawal from Cryptsy that's missing. It's got a tx id and everything but the blockchain isn't showing it.

Not sure if it's a Cryptsy problem or a blockchain issue

Thank you for you XST:) just bought some xD

It is awesome that our thread is back. Let's go forward and make history.

Can you really call ten people a community? 

we honestly dont want anyone that would read this thread and take you trolls seriously in the shadow community. so thanks for doing us a favor.

and that's up 0.65% 

That's just completely irrelevant to any argument being made and directly interpreted as FUD.

Because he's trying to keep our thread civilized and not covered in shit. They welcome civil discussion without personal attacks and inflammatory comments directed at community members.

Oct. 4  Close 25.800
Oct. 6  Close 23.500
Oct. 8  Close 19.887
Oct. 10 Close 18.104
Oct. 11 Close 15.667
--------------------
Oh... How do you think where it's going? Shocked

So you are saying that an illiterate and dyslexic man successfully orchestrated a systematic FUD attack on your coin from his original account with no basis of truth in his attacks which caused someone to dump 90 btc worth of XST at once and then 60 btc worth of XST 3 days later?

Also pookie is a troll. He attacks everything and nothing he ever says should be taken seriously. I think almost all of crypto knows that.

Yeah i've only singlehandedly presented truthful facts even your dev is acknowledging but you still seem to have issues comprehending ..hmm sounds legit!

i care if you get hurt

just keep it up you might one day learn something..prolly when you have lost everything and dragged down everyone around with it!
just keep being ignorant if thats what helps you sleep!

Oh great here comes the graphics spam to hide the truth

They're trying to get us all angry and put us on tilt by insulting us and lying to us. Then we dump our coins and they buy them up cheap and rebuilt the community. Notice how he speaks "in its current form". They don't want to destroy the coin, they just want to start a pissed off panic dump. Look at the massive amount of time and effort they (a group of shadowcoin guys) put into this. If anything it's a validation.

They will insult you. Don't feed them. Respond to their lies and insults respectfully. I know they don't deserve respect but it's the only way we can make them leave.

Before addressing the criticisms raised in this thread, I would like to express my sincere appreciation for these criticisms. Although some believe the manner in which they have been introduced may not be optimal to promote civil discourse, they are valuable criticisms nevertheless, and help to strengthen crypto-currencies in general. It is far better to address weaknesses in crypto systems during implementation than it is to address attacks after deployment.

Chandran signatures [1] make use of a common reference string. The common reference string generator (CRSGen) is a necessity for a model that does not require a random oracle, as described in [1]. CRSGen produces a string that is used as an input to a key generation function. The key generation function produces the user's public-private key pair. This key pair has specific properties in that it is a member of a particular mathematical group. In principle, key generation can be replaced by a cryptographic one-way function if the random oracle assumption is introduced.

Admittedly a more difficult issue to address is one of "unlinkability/untraceability", which boils down to the potential for a double spend. In short, Chandran signatures require the generation of a secret random parameter, g, that serves as an input to a "commitment" to a specific key in the key ring. This commitment basically identifies the public key from which the money is spent. The problem is that any number of g can be produced, creating the potential for any number of commitments to the specific public key.

In reality, this same issue exists with CryptoNote ring signatures except that the CryptoNote system incorporates a key image, I, into signing and verification, such that I can only ever be used once. A similar approach can be taken with Chandran signatures. As presented in [1], a key image I can be incorporated into Step 3 of signing and appended to the final signature. In addition to other parameters, Step 3 commits to the public keys of a subset of the ring. Just as with CryptoNote ring signatures, such a modification would commit to the key image and prevent its use for double-spends.

[1] Chandran N., et al. Ring Signatures of Sub-linear Size Without Random Oracles. ICALP 2007, LNCS 4596, pp. 423–434, 2007.


-- Hondo