I find it fascinating how Alex misses that the worse he tries to make Monero look, the worse dash looks--I never asked for NSA proof transactions, nor was I promised them, but I would like protection from non-state actors, and if the right network evolves within I2p or TOR or something else, then a coin that can be NSA proof would be even better, so no dash, yes Monero. Regarding Monero's anonymity, do you stand by the statement you've expressed below in the past (regarding broken anonymity due to metadata correlation)? Cryptonote was created by anonymous people. Even Monero's cryptographer is anonymous. Who created this anonymity that is easily broken by meta-data. I don't know if that is circumspect or just the way the world turns.
Against the NSA yes I stand by the assertion that IP address correlation unmasks, overlapping rings unmask, etc. It all adds up if you are trying to hide from governments, then I don't trust Monero or any anonymous coin. Notice I wrote "privacy" and not anonymity in prior post upthread. For privacy, I think Monero is suitable and Dash is not (because not autonomous End-to-End). |
|
|
|
I guess my quote button works fine, maybe you should hire an expert to look over your system to see what's wrong instead of just accepting it as broken.
I just insert quote / unquote by hand if it's from the SAME post that I'm quoting. I quoted 4 pieces. The first has the timestamp, the second, right below it, doesn't need to. It's the same post (as the first). The third (from a locked thread) isn't quotable, so I'm just inserting the message link. The fourth doesn't need the link again. It's the same post (as the third). In case anyone is stupid enough to don't get it, there are "..." between (quote 1/quote 2) and (quote 3/quote 4) But then again, arguing about quotes, timestamps, trolls, etc, seems to be all that you can do in this debate where XMR is proven to be bad crypto  Let's get back to the point. Regarding Monero's anonymity, do you stand by the statement you've expressed below in the past (regarding broken anonymity due to metadata correlation)? Cryptonote was created by anonymous people. Even Monero's cryptographer is anonymous. Who created this anonymity that is easily broken by meta-data. I don't know if that is circumspect or just the way the world turns.
Against the NSA yes I stand by the assertion that IP address correlation unmasks, overlapping rings unmask, etc. It all adds up if you are trying to hide from governments, then I don't trust Monero or any anonymous coin. Notice I wrote "privacy" and not anonymity in prior post upthread. For privacy, I think Monero is suitable and Dash is not (because not autonomous End-to-End). |
|
|
|
It took me 30 seconds to find out that this is BS: Second, you're taking many of TPTB_need war's statements out of context and purposely removing the time stamps I can't always use time-stamped quotes on locked threads with the "quote" button. That's why I'm inserting a link instead where this is not possible.
Here's one of your unattributed quotations that wasn't locked, are the rest as locked? And here's me quoting it with the quote button (*notice it's 3 months old). Monero is not anonymous when your metadata can be correlated. One example of metadata which unmasks your anonymity is your IP And IP address is not the only metadata that can destroy your anonymity in ring signatures. Other examples can include cookies in your browser and other activity you did on the web. Other examples also include telephone calls and other activity you did around that time, which have statistical significance.
And here's what he says today on this thread (which you may or may not read in full). Now that you quoted the entire post, does it change the fact that he says MONERO IS A BROKEN DESIGN?
Not quite. I said Bitcoin is broken and both can't scale to million tx/s. But that doesn't make Monero broken for its target market. Bitcoin is broken both for scaling and for centralization of mining. Monero has advantages on the latter and also adds strong privacy. My reasons for not wanting to be folded into the development group of Monero, is because I would be a little fish in a little pond. And I am not enthralled about coding on C++ code bases. So what is the redeeming factor, when I have so much opportunity and excitement on what I am working on now? I find it a bit insulting (but more humorous and motivates my competitive fire) when iCEBREAKER and americanpegasus insinuate that the only useful coding I could do in this world would be on the itsy bitsy coins they own. That is because they are speculators and not developers. The developers don't say that to me, because they know better. And what he says comparing dash and Monero's privacy on this thread. Regarding Monero's anonymity, do you stand by the statement you've expressed below in the past (regarding broken anonymity due to metadata correlation)? Cryptonote was created by anonymous people. Even Monero's cryptographer is anonymous. Who created this anonymity that is easily broken by meta-data. I don't know if that is circumspect or just the way the world turns.
Against the NSA yes I stand by the assertion that IP address correlation unmasks, overlapping rings unmask, etc. It all adds up if you are trying to hide from governments, then I don't trust Monero or any anonymous coin. Notice I wrote "privacy" and not anonymity in prior post upthread. For privacy, I think Monero is suitable and Dash is not (because not autonomous End-to-End).
I guess my quote button works fine, maybe you should hire an expert to look over your system to see what's wrong instead of just accepting it as broken. |
|
|
|
Monero is not anonymous when your metadata can be correlated. One example of metadata which unmasks your anonymity is your IP address. And no, Tor and I2P mixnets do not hide your IP address from the government, in fact they are thought to be Sybil attacked honeypots that not only tell the government your IP address but also alert the NSA et al that you should come under extra scrutiny.
... Additionally I have been making the point since the BCX incident that ring signatures can theoretically be unmasked by combinatorial analysis of the block chain. In the recent debate I had with Monero's cryptographer Shen-noether at Reddit about his white papers, I pointed out that his proposed solution to combinatorial unmasking was flawed. He and smooth did the usual ad hominem attack on my person, and then I rebutted them with logical facts and they were forced to finally put their tail between their legs.
Bullshit. So much bullshit in these discussions of cryptocurrency technology. Especially coming from all the Monero pumpers who haven't done their homework, because they are retarded, closed-minded, and boastfully so.
... Thus I have explained there is no Nash equilibrium in Monero's penalty feature (unlike for Satoshi's longest chain rule where there is indeed a Nash equilibrium because if miners don't converge on the longest chain then all their chains are invalid/orphans and worthless without consensus).
... Monero Review: Broken anonymity [ ✓] Broken scaling [ ✓] Broken game theory / Broken Nash Equilibrium [ ✓] Delusional, retarded and pumper-minded community [ ✓] Cryptographers with broken cryptographic ideas [ ✓] Broken de-centralization that will tend to centralization [ ✓] Congratulations. You passed your "broken crypto" review with flying colors. Monero #REKT So I wonder if you're some sort of reverse troll. Why? Two reasons: First, TPTB_need_war has more and harsher criticisms of dash, so the best you can do is make dash look worse than Monero. Second, you're taking many of TPTB_need war's statements out of context and purposely removing the time stamps to mask that many of those quotations are very old and do not reflect his current understanding of Monero--which is probably going to piss him off and entice him to find more failures in dash--though that list is long already. So who are you working for? Because you're not doing dash any favors  |
|
|
|
Now that you quoted the entire post, does it change the fact that he says BITCOIN IS A BROKEN DESIGN?
FTFY Now apologize for misreading and misquoting what was pretty obvious for anyone with high school reading skills. Yeah because if he considers bitcoin as "broken" due to its scaling which is 10 times better than monero, then monero ...isn't broken  Dat logic. And he also asserted time and time again (even two posts above) that the anonymity is broken against the state due to metadata correlation. Against the NSA yes I stand by the assertion that IP address correlation unmasks, overlapping rings unmask, etc. It all adds up if you are trying to hide from governments, then I don't trust Monero or any anonymous coin.
#badycrypto XMR Sigh, he also said dash is the worst of the three, so if you're going to use him as an authority figure, you have to accept that analysis. The enemy of my enemy is my friend until they become friends with my enemy because they just don't like you very much. Smooth has pointed out that metadata isn't the problem that Monero was designed to solve and it's still up for I2p and TOR and other anonymous networks to prevent metadata collection. Dash doesn't even solve the problem that Monero solves and dash even finds ways to create new problems, like having an instamine and node incentives aggregate power into the form of an oligarchy. |
|
|
|
Zcash appears to be demonstrating their lack of technical expertise on block chain related matters: Additionally I was thinking that this Equihash can be trivially sped up on an ASIC because the Equihash algorithm is not memory latency bound and thus is bound on the sorting and computation speed and/or the memory bandwidth, which can be optimized with specialized hardware.
There is no publicly available optimized code for Equihash, so we don't really know to what extent it is bandwidth or latency bound. There may be subtle trade offs between the two. We really need to see the memory behaviour of actual running optimized code. 1. You didn't address my electrical efficiency point, which I think is probably the most damning. I very much doubt that the memory power consumption will be even 1/10 of the computational power consumption. Thus an ASIC will be at least 10 times more power efficient, Don't I remember pointing out the same issue with your Cuckoo hash? What was your retort again? 2. I also very much doubt it will be latency bound (even after the 10X speed up of the computation), because optimized sorting doesn't have to be random access. For any memory bandwidth bound, there is this: Out of interest. Why does it matter for a coin which is currently in the alpha stage and only running on the test net? Isn't the whole point of this stage to weed out issues like this and work on a more sustainable architecture before it ever goes live? If it goes live with these issues then I would find it worrisome and quite comical, but I don't understand the point of complaining about a alpha stage. Not sure his bedside manner should be of much interest. If the concerns, complaints, (whatever you want to ascribe to the general term of potential issues) are valid, it becomes a question of whether they are solvable? Can the current organization solve them in their current state? Are they willing to adapt (gain resources, change plans, etc...) in order to solve them? Will changing (organization, code, etc...) result in a the desired state or did the initial state render all possible future states failures? --think of an organism that you want to fly, but starts with the evolutionary traits of an elephant; it may get there eventually, but it requires a long evolutionary road and/or new sciences to be developed to augment the evolutionary process--hardly an efficient process. My position is that the threat of financial information being at the whim of everyone with the knowledge, resources, or both, to exploit the average citizen into servitude (by means of control or theft) is of too great importance for bruised egos to get in the way of progress. Maybe a solution would be to focus on the facts as they are and not how they are served up. |
|
|
|
Now that you quoted the entire post, does it change the fact that he says BITCOIN IS A BROKEN DESIGN?
FTFY Now apologize for misreading and misquoting what was pretty obvious for anyone with high school reading skills. |
|
|
|
Why would I want respect from the community of a coin with a broken design
....
Sorry when I build up Monero because I state facts that are true about it
Monero #REKT XMR #badcrypto #broken #veryREKT Out of context much? You little creep. The only sure way to gain respect in the Bitcoin community is to contribute code.
Why would I want respect from the community of a coin with a broken design that I aim for my project to supercede  (note no one is excluded from leaving the broken design and joining the winner) iCEBREAKER, just admit you can't understand what I wrote at the linked research. Good to see iCEBREAKER is still going to need some proof from me. I love the competitiveness. Sorry when I build up Monero because I state facts that are true about it, it doesn't mean anything has changed in terms of my plans. Hell will freeze over before I will ever write a line of code for Monero[1]. No disrespect to those who created Monero, they will be welcome to join the winner. (can you tell I am getting healthy now, lol) [1] I am not going to get involved in any C++ source code bases, so no bitcoind and no Monero. I know C++ since I wrote CoolPage (million user app) in it, but been there, done that, never again. More importantly, I want to change the world, so I am not going to get involved with designs that can't possible scale to 1 million transactions per second. That would be a waste of my legacy. And I am not going to get involved with communities that are off in their little corner of the internet and haven't attracted superstar non-anonymous programmers. I want to see LinkedIn accounts and career history plus major accomplishments. Gmaxwell and Adam Back don't count, because they are number theoretic/cryptography nerds. They are not systems engineers (which was obvious in my technical debate with gmaxwell regarding the indexing of streaming audio formats) and certainly not savvy marketers for the large scale adoption we need. Honestly I think smooth is very smart, but I have no idea who he is and what he has done in his career in detail. I have some vague public rumor (and his private statement) that he worked in FinTech. |
|
|
|
I don't need anyone (especially a wanabee economist) to tell me that I need to see other people's balances for it to be money Firstly, in this case, we're talking about unbacked money, so I'm afraid you do. Secondly, a blockchain is anonymous - like a rock. So the fact that you hold a piece of it doesn't endow it with your identity. Nobody is therefore "seeing your balance" by catching sight of that piece of rock. You can relax. Are you stupid or does metadata not exist in your myopic view of the world--it's rhetorical. It's backed by the cryptography being secure and the parameters that the miners agree upon--so no, I don't need to see what happens to the transactions that don't belong to me. This lackadaisical attitude towards privacy explains dash's shoddy design-- "just relax, we've got it all under control, OSPEC? That's overkill, just put your node on amazon." Also, your idea of money falls flat on its face when applied to a coin that uses an insecure chain like X11. An attack can go on for so long that there is no way to roll back the chain as a fix--so maybe, just maybe, the cryptography is more important than just a bunch hs mathers eyeballing the blockchain and saying, "Looks good, must be money." |
|
|
|
What makes Bitcoin money is that people believe it is money. End of story. Not end of story. The reason they believe it's money is that they can see it's money. On the other hand, with an obscured blochain they can't see f*ck all. (Hence the title "obscured"). So it's even less believable. The words emperor and clothes spring to mind I can see my balance and I can see my transactions and I know that the ring signitures work, so I don't need anyone (especially a wanabee economist) to tell me that I need to see other people's balances for it to be money. I think you missed the meeting where we discussed that the highest form of human functioning is to think in the abstract, to imagine concepts into being. As long as the cryptography checks out, I'm good. Don't need your seeing is believing concept of money to infringe on my right or anyone else's right to privacy. |
|
|
|
So do you think Monero's cryptography is broken No more broken than SSL. But SSL is not a store of value. It is a decentralised cryptographic messaging system. Invest in it if you like it. The only thing that distinguishes a cryptographic messaging system from Bitcoin is that Bitcoin is a public blockchain and cryptographically obscurred blockchains are not. Thats what makes Bitcoin money. If it was not a public blockchain and everyone could not inspect every single address - regardless of whether they possesed a private key to that address or not - then it would not constitute (base) money. What makes Bitcoin money is that people believe it is money. End of story. If you want to poke around and see everyone's balances and transactions like some financial perve, be my guest, but it's people like you that make me want to keep my transactions and balance as private as possible. |
|
|
|
Did Monero's emissions and transactions suddenly become unverifiable? They've always been unverifiable. I get the feeling your idea of unverifiable is much different than mine. The same as your idea of privacy is different than mine. Or good cryptography. Or what constitutes fair distribution. So do you think Monero's cryptography is broken or are using the "I don't understand it, so therefore no one will use it" attack/defense? |
|
|
|
|
Did Monero's emissions and transactions suddenly become unverifiable?
The reason I ask is that all I need or want is to know the supply is as stated and that my amount is secure and that I can send stuff without it being broadcast to the whole world. As long as Monero does that, it has all the money properties I want--seems kind of stupid to tell me I'm wrong about I want.
If you want centralized money that everyone can see, that's your business, just don't call it anything else--and don't tell me the instamine is redistributed because you read some market tea leaves.
|
|
|
|
So should I be buying this Monero?  well... not an easy decision ........ no! don't  I agree. If your asking someone other than your wife or financial advisor, then you probably haven't researched it enough. And that was exactly the point behind that upthread-posted quote from smooth: It dangerous experimental technology. Unless you are an expert capable of evaluating everything carefully and an extreme speculator, and in all cases capable of securing your crypto coins properly, you shouldn't buy it. If you have a short term use, well you still need to be able to secure your crypto coins properly, and no that doesn't mean GUI.
I interpreted his words as a strongly-worded disclaimer. In bland form, "Don't buy any Monero unless you're very sure you know what you're buying. Unless you have technical chops or a desire to learn techy stuff, there's a good chance you will not know what you're buying." I'd offer the same advice for anyone buying any coin. This is supposed to be early adopter friendly, not rope greater fools with promises of moon. |
|
|
|
Unlike people wasting their time on forums mudslinging, Evan uses his time to code the next features of DASH.
If he sits here debating all day then we'd hear: "doesn't he have anything better to do, like code?"
If he codes and doesn't debate endlessly the (self-defeating - from a game theory perspective) scenario of ...jamming an instantx transaction after acquiring a large number of masternodes => "he run away".
You can spin it any way you want really. It doesn't matter.
If you think mudslinging is a good tactic for promoting Monero, then be my guest. You'll be actively contributing to defining what bad crypto is: Crypto that wants to rise not by virtue of its better characteristics, but by throwing mud at their opponents.
This is now, what? The 10th thread or so of "Monerotards" attacking DASH? Get a life. Or a better coin. Then the market will appreciate it, if it becomes such. You won't get any value from the market without providing value to the coin. Even if DASH never existed, Monero would still be stuck. Contemplate that for a change.
You couldn't spin the narrative away from Evan's shortcomings, so you're going to take your ball and what? I guess the apple doesn't fall from the Dev. Now, as for mudslingin', you just threw a hissy about Monero's mudslinging while calling us Monerotards, and while your quoting someone to do it, you're still doing it. I'd rather not get into a hypocrisy debate, but grow the fuck up. We're all big boys here and should be able to take it as well as we dish it--but I'm sure you're preaching the anti-mudslinging mantra to Tok, Ceti, and Macrochip. As far as markets go, given Monero's volume compared to Dash's, I think we are doing just fine--imagine if we had 3,700,000 coins locked up in a masternode scheme? Now the thread is completely derailed from the hs math versus cryptography, but seeing how Evan isn't good at hs math, maybe the thread should ask if middle school math is good enough? |
|
|
|
So the errors or "errors" that TPTB indicate only ...matter depending the various time-space coordinates, and his likes, or dislikes, at any given point within that 4-dimensional array.
Sounds legit.
You'll have to ask Shelby. My guess is he'll tell you before you get a chance to ask, but my point is that Evan runs away when he can't explain a failure. Shen actually argued with Shelby for days, but then again, Shen knew he was right and didn't need to run. |
|
|
|
He has since changed his opinion of Shen and admitted he's a more than capable cryptographer--his opinion of Evan has gotten worse over time, but nice attempt to change the subject.  What were talking about, oh how Evan fails hs math and runs away when it's pointed out to him. |
|
|
|
I've seen the discussion between Evan and TPTB_ which went something like "oh this could be lowered to 0.% of transactions even if the attacker held XXX masternodes", and then after some back and forth it degraded to "Oh the masternodes are illegal in the usa, the financial authorities this, and that" etc etc.
Not even. Evan asserted that tptb had miscalculated something and ran away after tptb corrected him. The same thing happened when I confronted Evan about X11--though I had some help from Shelby on understanding the problem. |
|
|
|
So should I be buying this Monero? well... not an easy decision ........ no! don't I agree. If your asking someone other than your wife or financial advisor, then you probably haven't researched it enough. |
|
|
|
i feel like something profound is being communicated,
yet i'don't have the foggiest of clues :?
Don't worry, you're in good company Why are there guys who try make simple things sound as complicated as possible to obscure the truth and there are guys who try to make complex things as simple as possible to reveal the truth?
The visibility of the transactions in the blockchain enables anyone and everyone to confirm the validity of the ledger. Cryptonote does not have this visibility, therefore the validity of the transactions cannot be confirmed, which means there is no independent way of verifying that the implementation or the protocol have not been broken.
It could be broken, we dont know and we have no way of showing that it is not being exploited right now.
That's not true. You can verify Monero's coinbase as you do in Bitcoin. Yes, but not the rest of the chain unfortunately. Not sure what you're talking about, even when CT is implemented, you can still validate the coin total. "[–]fluffyponyzaXMR Core Team 3 points 2 months ago "So, having only the blockchain data, is it possible to mathematically prove that all blocks inside followed the rules?"
Yes - read gmaxwell's write-up on CT and you'll see that amounts can still be verified. To illustrate it as simply as I can: imagine if every transaction input was 1000 XMR. But, using ring signatures, you mix your real input of 55 XMR with a bunch of other ones that adds up to 1000 XMR. Analysing the blockchain we can still verify that it adds up to 1000 XMR, but we can't tell which value is yours." |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
