Evan Duffield (Darkcoin)

The process of hardening the code to possible vectors will probably be a long-drawn process. However that won't be a blocker for adoption for 90-95%+ of the cases.

Per my analysis concerning anonymity adoption, the two largest target markets for anonymity are

- those who know that their Bitcoin expenses can be tracked but do not desire to be tracked in this way by third parties (DRK is adequate for this - perhaps except very significant adversaries like the NSA)

- those who have an issue of using Bitcoin in their country because their country is actively enforcing a Bitcoin ban by monitoring traffic from the network and data from the blockchain (it might be a future issue - especially in countries where local fiat that is devaluated fast is dumped in favor of crypto for wealth preservation purposes). The vast majority of such countries do not have NSA-level capabilities, thus they wouldn't be able to initiate a crackdown on DRK users. But it would require a method of effectively obfuscating IP traffic of the users so that the government of a country cannot see that its citizens are transacting with Darkcoin. It shouldn't be observable (for a government) even as a pattern of network communication. Remember: What was transacted (DarkSend mixing) is irrelevant if the government can see that you are even using a cryptocurrency when you weren't supposed to (due to the ban).

DRK is based on Bitcoin which is a whole different game than finding fundamental issues on cryptonote.

The coin as a coin will never have an issue unless Bitcoin's code is found to be problematic. The anonymity "module" can have bugs or holes, but these are fixable - and such issues have been found and patched in the past (and more can be in the future). DRK is new and that's to be expected. So, from my perspective, there is nothing worrying here. If there was anything really serious (like in the BTC code), the entire BTC ecosystem would go down.

The instantx module might present new weaknesses, allowing new vectors of attack, but that too can't compromise the btc-code that runs the coin at a core level.

BCX comes here in curious mood because he got several PMs (and not because he had an agreement to find exploits DRK)

BCX says he has a deal with XMR.

XMR devs says no.

BCX says he has a deal with Risto.

Risto says no.

BCX's credibility seems rather low right now...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egDcPjd0JyI#t=220

Evan spotted in two places at once

What's the (unofficial) estimate for Vatican's gold reserves?

Since DRK and XMR are so far ahead of any other candidates, add both.

This is interesting... voted.

Evan Duffield, Darkcoin Developer (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615)

A dream come true

Don't worry, sound was ok - apart from the PC noise, heh... Are these 10 DRKs spendable right away? Can the client who received them send them to another address right away?

I think it's just new investors who learned about Darkcoin through the recent press. The buying is rational, not pump-like... chunks, breathing space for correction, chunks, breathing space for correction etc... unlike April-May pump when the order book was swallowed like no tomorrow.

https://bittrex.com/Market/?MarketName=BTC-DRK 

1m blocks, I meant 1 minute. Sorry for the misunderstanding. But the point remains... ring sigs + zk together in a sustainable non bloated coin? Seems extremely hard to envision.

For 99% of the people, more specs promised = better pump material. For anonymity investment veterans it smells like snake oil, so they prefer more "realistic" claims.

From an older post of Evan ===>

Thing is the community indeed can't be based on the Syscoin legal efforts... say Ryan gives the BTCs to Syscoin to get off the legal hook... what about the rest that are owed thousands of BTCs? There would simply be no case for them (except the complaints filed in the fraud fighting unit - which from what I understand is somewhat bureaucratic in their response times and methods).

Thing is, I had a dream two days ago that DRK would go to 0.00799... it was at 0.0051-54 at that point so didn't give much weight to it. Then the first buy happened, then the second, then the third, then it got to 0.0074... I was like "yeah it's happening"...

IMO, this jpeg should be erased from everywhere, lest the more knowledgeable anonymity crowd think this is overpromising / pumping at best or a huge scam at worst.

Ring signatures and zero knowledge stuff already have a lot of bloat... now imagine if you combine these two together and also issue 1m blocks... the bloat would be such that the coin would be 100% DOA from the specs alone...

I have a feeling this guy with the 5-8k periodic buys will continue doing the same...

The powers that be, indeed wanted -for a long time now- a global, electronic currency that they can issue, monitor and control.

- Issue on demand, and NOT deflationary as you said, because deflation would only lead to an imploding global debt. It is impossible to repay global debt that expands due to interest with a steady or diminishing monetary supply: The money runs out and the economy collapses.

- Monitor all transactions as they happen, so that they can learn everything about our buying habits, or use the mass information for mapping out patterns which are useful to their broader control agenda.

- Control the currency, and by association, its users, through flip-switches like freezing your funds if you do not comply with a government request so that you cannot buy anything (and therefore directly threatening your ability to survive while living inside-the-grid).


Bitcoin is "trolling" their agenda in at least 2 of the 3 fronts:

1) It cannot be issued on demand - it has a finite capacity.

2) It can be monitored but not with 100% success as a centralized system.

3) The currency and its users can't be controlled with "flip-switches". When the centralized digital money system will lock people out from transacting because they were not obedient to the system, people will have BTC or BTC-equivalents - something that preempted their plans. In a cashless society it will be gold, silver, btc and the "official" digital currency of the world - with gold and silver being slightly less practical (or much less practical for remote payments like over the internet).

What they can do though, is to attack Bitcoin due to all the non-reversible scams & hacks, bad PR, price fluctuations etc etc, and say "look, we will give you a digital currency that is all that Bitcoin was and safer, more stable due to government backing" etc etc. We give you safety and stability and we take your freedom kind-of-deal. The masses would take it any day btw with some proper conditioning. The problem is not the masses, it's the states/countries. Why give monetary control to an outside source? It is financial suicide if a country can't issue their own national currency and instead have to borrow it from a central bank which is elsewhere. So they might entice the countries by saying "we'll erase a large part of your debt if you accept this new currency" and that will give the puppet-rulers installed in each country a disguise of "legitimacy" for betraying their countries and handing over monetary control to the over-state of the global central bank.