Nice big sell wall on Mintpal for those that where looking to buy DRK in bulk  |
|
|
|
It's a paid PR from the XC team, what else would you expect. Pookie is a trader. He liked DRK when it was cheaper and probably traded out and is riding XC (or at least reduced). Again, he traded in and out of that as well.
Bitcoin Magazine wasn't a paid PR... there PR Web article on Yahoo Finance was... With content essentially from the PR. It's misleading as it relates to centralization. Well master-nodes are semi centralized ( and dont use that every person can have a Masternode crap because the price and set up isnt for EVERYONE) as opposed to every wallet being a node meaning DE-centralization because even if people cant afford to run a node or have the no-how to set up a masternode the wallets in XC do it for ya BTW i hold 2k Dark... I also have XST XC and SDC Im fully hedging ANNON lol, there was more than ample time to buy 1000 coin blocks if you wanted to set up a MN. Further, how is having every client able to setup a node any better than one person (or government entity) setting up tens of thousands (if not more). There is no barrier to snooping so to speak. In theory, every wallet acting as a node is great and true decentralization, however, the end result is no restriction for malicious parties from putting nodes up.Exactly. Was just going to post about Sybil attacks. Not sure how many people were around back when masternodes where first discussed, but there are very good reasons why every node was not made into a masternode. |
|
|
|
What do Instant Transaction exactly change for DRK and the customer ? DRK is already fast.  Would you rather wait 10 minutes for anonymous coins or 2 hours? Oh and there is the fact that it eliminates the possibility of double spend attacks.  |
|
|
|
Woah! 15 second blocks mean that instead of waiting 1-2 hours to get all of your coins anonymized you are looking at 5-10 minutes.
This could be Massive.
Edit: It is a little early to start the coin name flamewar ehem... debate. Let's wait and see exactly what is possible and exactly what the coin becomes first.
This is hypothetical but - if that was true IF we had 15 sec's block times.... That would mean that the coins per block would need to be changed. 5DRK / 2.5mins = 2DRK/min 2DRK/min / 60sec = 0.03333333DRK/sec 0.03333333DRK/sec * 15sec = 0.5DRK per Block 6DRK / 2.5mins = 2.4DRK/min 2.4DRK/min / 60sec = 0.04DRK/sec 0.04DRK/sec * 15sec = 0.6DRK per Block 7DRK = 0.7DRK per Block 8DRK = 0.8DRK per Block and so on........ Like I said, This is hypothetical - but I'm sure Evan has a better plan then this :-) because he said NO BLOAT... Unless he's gonna have something like mini-blocks within the block it's self - who knows??? LOL MasterBlocks I should stop - lol Well he said no hardfork and changing the subsidy is the very definition of an action that requires a hardfork. Now mini-blocks, hmmm... maybe it is something along those lines. |
|
|
|
|
Woah! 15 second blocks mean that instead of waiting 1-2 hours to get all of your coins anonymized you are looking at 5-10 minutes.
This could be Massive.
Edit: It is a little early to start the coin name flamewar ehem... debate. Let's wait and see exactly what is possible and exactly what the coin becomes first.
|
|
|
|
Evan was very clear on Jira about avoiding any other references to the technology. Our brand is Darksend. If you could check it out and edit your posts it woild be nice.
Satoshi was very clear, no central authority  Actually, this has brought up something that pissed me off when Kristov talked about Darkcoin recently. He called it an implementation of CoinJoin as proposed by gmaxwell. Really? gmaxwell has previously gone out of his way to say he didn't want Darkcoin implementation to be associated with his concept. Actually, I agree. It's nothing like it. It's a pre-mix. Much, much, order of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000x better - because it works. gmaxwell did not come up with the idea of hiding amongst others. That concept was considered in the 80s. It led to the development of Tor: You can't hide alone, but you can hide if you mix with lots of others. DarkMix, a random pre-mix with many peers, is its own definition of mixing Sorry coins101 got to disagree here. Nobody is saying that Evan is the central authority who gets to decide all... we are saying that those who want to keep the name are the majority (the devs are part of this majority) and that some people calling it by another name is confusing and counterproductive. There have already been people wondering if darkmix refers to some new feature. There can be only ONE name. Now, if the current name is going to change then it should be done properly by first getting the majority to agree and then getting the devs onboard. Somehow I doubt you will gather a majority that want to change the name, but regardless, anything other method, especially one that has people randomly calling it whatever they want, only hurts the coin and hurts the brand. |
|
|
|
Evan was very clear on Jira about avoiding any other references to the technology. Our brand is Darksend. If you could check it out and edit your posts it woild be nice.
Exactly, there is nothing gained in breeding unnecessary confusion. OK, thanks for the feedback. Darksend+ sounds awesome enough to me; not so sure about DarkMix.
I would worry about it changing as the idea didn't come from or been endorsed by the dev team. It was just a passing idea of a couple community members. I think you mean "I wouldn't worry about it changing" (the other thing, apart from people making on-the-fly branding changes, that drives me batty is when someone get's their wouldn't/couldn't/shouldn't mixed up thereby changing the entire meaning of the sentence!) Sorry about that. Doing several things at once here... |
|
|
|
OK, thanks for the feedback. Darksend+ sounds awesome enough to me; not so sure about DarkMix.
I wouldn't(edit) worry about it changing as the idea didn't come from or been endorsed by the dev team. It was just a passing idea of a couple community members. |
|
|
|
*snip*
Hi, where can I read more about DarkMix? Is it a new secret feature in RC5? *sigh* and this is the problem... Some people just took to renaming Darksend+. RC5 brings better usability, enforcement, and faster (as well as stronger) anonymization. It is a pretty big improvement over RC4, but there are no brand new features. |
|
|
|
See 10,000 DRK going through DarkMix and DarkSend, for free
*snip*
Can we stop with the "Darkmix" thing unless there is something official? Communication has already been to distant second to tech development with DRK and many people have gotten confused on many occasions. I have no problem with the focus on tech, but let's not exacerbate the communication issue by randomly changing/adding new banding. |
|
|
|
but the new stable version has the same wallet structure as the old stable version I think...
also do I need to update my masternode wallets like this? I just used them with the new RC without sending coins to new wallet. Was there any official information for the 900 masternode owners?
Ok let me clear then... The current stable version doesn't require a new wallet, but there were two reasons that info was posted. 1. The poster who asked didn't say which version he was planning to use so "better safe than sorry" and 2. When we hit open source (which is looking like less than a month from now) the only wallet option will be the RC version and everybody with old wallets will have to go through that procedure. Best get that info out there. As for masternodes, if the version you are currently running is RC4 v30 or lower then yes this is required. (Masternodes can't be set up with the "stable version".) |
|
|
|
Hey guys, I haven't opened my wallet in probably 4 months so my wallet is way out of date. Is there anything special I need to do? Or do I just download the newest wallet, open it and let it sync, close it and then replace the wallet.dat it creates with my backup wallet.dat?
Go into %appdata% and change the name of your old wallet.dat file to something like OLDwallet.dat Delete peers and darkcoin.conf Open new Wallet and allow it to create new wallet.dat file. Allow it to sync Create a new RECEIVE ADDY and right click copy the addy Close the wallet back into %appdata% and rename the wallet.dat file to NEWwallet.dat rename OLDwallet.dat back to wallet.dat Open the old wallet client and send all your coins to the newly created addy from above. Once you send all coins close the wallet out. back into %appdata% rename wallet.dat to OLDwaallet.dat rename NEWwallet.dat to wallet.dat open new version of darkcoin - you should be good at this point... +1 Good post. @kadrek The reason for all this is that if you use an old wallet.dat you risk corruption with the new client. Also if you are on linux, make sure your libDB is the correct version (only if you are going to use the RC4 client). Is this really necessary? I think this might only be necessary if you use the Release-Candidate with activated darksend, but not if you just use the Stable wallet! (99% should be running the stable wallet...) Better get this right and dont confuse the users and investors... In rather short order there will not be a "stable version" and a "release client" it will just be one wallet. Best get people in the habit. |
|
|
|
I just love this MNs payment feeling ahhh
It will get even better. Enforcement is coming... |
|
|
|
Hey guys, I haven't opened my wallet in probably 4 months so my wallet is way out of date. Is there anything special I need to do? Or do I just download the newest wallet, open it and let it sync, close it and then replace the wallet.dat it creates with my backup wallet.dat?
Go into %appdata% and change the name of your old wallet.dat file to something like OLDwallet.dat Delete peers and darkcoin.conf Open new Wallet and allow it to create new wallet.dat file. Allow it to sync Create a new RECEIVE ADDY and right click copy the addy Close the wallet back into %appdata% and rename the wallet.dat file to NEWwallet.dat rename OLDwallet.dat back to wallet.dat Open the old wallet client and send all your coins to the newly created addy from above. Once you send all coins close the wallet out. back into %appdata% rename wallet.dat to OLDwaallet.dat rename NEWwallet.dat to wallet.dat open new version of darkcoin - you should be good at this point... +1 Good post. @kadrek The reason for all this is that if you use an old wallet.dat you risk corruption with the new client. Also if you are on linux, make sure your libDB is the correct version (only if you are going to use the RC4 client). |
|
|
|
Good Call |
|
|
|
|
Overall a positive review. Really liked the level of detail in the paper.
IMO, the next step should be an official response from Evan referencing each of the issues listed in the conclusion and explaining what the plan is to mitigate them. We know that the Sybil attack vector is going to be minimized by moving to 3 peers, but I would like to know about ideas for other improvements. Especially as it relates to "blinding" masternodes...
|
|
|
|
A generic date/week for RC5 would be great. That way we could hype.
I'm game for that. When it's ready, I'll just give a date a week out and let everyone do their thing. We'll see what happens. Assuming RC5=opensource then I think this is a good idea as well. Letting people know in advance that Darksend is ready for its full release and educating them on what is now possible (thanks to you and the other devs) makes a lot of sense. There is such a thing as the right time to brag  |
|
|
|
Someone in the XMR thread said this has already happened to DRK, when did it happen to DRK? Link? I think they just say drk forked a while ago, just like xmr now. nothing special Yes, well, DRK forked because it was a planned upgrade in terms of system functionality and it could either work or not... XMR forked just because some hacker exploited their codebase. From what I read the suspicions are on the BCN camp as there has been some animosity lately between Monero and other CN-coins. Personally I had highlighted what happened these last few weeks (low cost spam attack + vulnerability exploits of the code) as possible future risks: g) What is the cost to render the blockchain DOA for someone who wants to kill Monero, in terms of Bitcoins? Can a kid, a hacker, a government spend 10 BTCs and make the blockchain so bloated that it doesn't even load the wallet - killing my multi-million investment?
....
k) What happens if the Bytecoin guys (who made the code) discover a flaw, patch it in their own coin and then kill the clones by exploiting the flaw? If they are really underground hackers that hate the Monero copycats, isn't that a real possibility?
...
m) What assurances do I have that the codebase is solid? For all I know it's totally untested in public use, being public for 2 or 3 months. Even the boolberry dev openly declares it to be untested.
Having a 5yr code vs a few months old code, is certainly not the same in terms of being tested and robust. Wow! You nailed it... months ago. |
|
|
|
As far as darktor goes, I think it is perfectly reasonable to eliminate child pornography. If anyone has a host on darktor that has cp, I hope it will not be allowed. I believe it is ok to take a moral stand on issues and not hide from them under the freedom of speech/ well if we ban x then y,z, and all of alpha and half of that is up for discussion. No. Take a fucking stand. Child pornography hurts innocent people. Scars them. FOR LIFE. Don't equate the freedom one chooses to purchase drugs, sell images of their own bodies, etc., to the forceful filming of 4-8 yearolds, or 15 month olds, in sexual situations.
Whether it is reasonable or not isn't the problem. The problem is how do you do this in a decentralized fashion. Also child porn is easy, but there are many many things that people will disagree on whether it should be made available. I am sorry but slippery slopes do exist. The best thing is for someone to come up with a way to prevent certain content from being accessed when using their masternode. Hm, so every master node operator will decide what content he / she allows to get access to ? So like, in countries where cannabis is illegal, the master node does not allow access to cannabis related sites, in countries where age of consent is 21, you will ban any content to sexual content where the involved ones are below 21, and in states where drinking is prohibited, you will ban any alcohol related content ? Ah, and in other countries, where it's forbidden to eat beef, we ban access to 'how to make a perfect steak' content. Right. Where does it end once you start censorship ? Thing is, if operators are paid based on how much their node is used(i.e. by bandwidth) then the more they censor the less they make. I agree no central authority should decide what is allowed or not (hence the slippery slope comment) but I have no problem if individuals make moral decisions for themselves. Plus, the network as a whole wouldn't be censored because they will always be somebody willing to accept more money for have a uncensored node. Everything would just naturally balance out. |
|
|
|
As far as darktor goes, I think it is perfectly reasonable to eliminate child pornography. If anyone has a host on darktor that has cp, I hope it will not be allowed. I believe it is ok to take a moral stand on issues and not hide from them under the freedom of speech/ well if we ban x then y,z, and all of alpha and half of that is up for discussion. No. Take a fucking stand. Child pornography hurts innocent people. Scars them. FOR LIFE. Don't equate the freedom one chooses to purchase drugs, sell images of their own bodies, etc., to the forceful filming of 4-8 yearolds, or 15 month olds, in sexual situations.
Whether it is reasonable or not isn't the problem. The problem is how do you do this in a decentralized fashion. Also child porn is easy, but there are many many things that people will disagree on whether it should be made available. I am sorry but slippery slopes do exist. The best thing is for someone to come up with a way to prevent certain content from being accessed when using their masternode. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
