Gold mining also raised socialist-warmonger ambitions: it was forbidden in the U.S. during WWII, because it was seen as waste of resources. (I would have argued that the war was the waste of resources, not gold mining, but nobody asked my opinion..)
Logically processed, it was just a bullshit excuse. For the gold miner, it's not like a ban would make him mine something else (say a strategic metal like nickelium or copper) instead. His equipment is specifically designed to mine gold due to separating very heavy ore and particles (gold) from light ores and dirt. Thus the only waste of resources comes from having such machines sitting idle. |
|
|
|
|
Use both to determine what's better for said purpose and then focus on the one you are doing best.
|
|
|
|
I'm here to collect my DaRKcoins ! Little trolling and these fools sold me ther darkcoins . Now
I'm done trolling, because i dont have more btc to spent on drk.
Next on the schedule is DARKCOIN MASTERNODE !
Thank you guys !
Quoted for Epicness (for those who have him on ignore)... "a little trolling and these fools sold me their darkcoins" ahahahaha... |
|
|
|
Litmus Test for Software Excellence
Driven by the desire to use his or her own creation, is often the genesis of the excellent software successes.
Who involved with any of the coins discussed here is leading the development because of their personal intense desire to use certain features that are not available in any other coin? How much of their life is involved every day in using these features?
From this, I bet we can determine which if any coins have any chance of succeeding big time.
As a sidenote since you are big into IP obfuscation improvement: Evan is planning to build an IP obfuscation network with the masternodes of DRKcoin, when work with DarkSend is complete... DarkTor or something. You might want to help with the specifications or provide feedback (?). You are good at nailing all those "oh that won't work" issues so that Evan will have to find the workarounds  He's still working on DarkSend for now, but work will commence in a month or two for the DarkTor, from what I understand. https://darkcointalk.org/threads/development-update-august-19-2014.2086/...he also had a proposed plan for the IP obfuscation aspect of DarkSend posted here: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/development-update-july-30th.1924/ |
|
|
|
So were are dumpers today?...  I hope we can see <0.003 (or at least 0.0035) dumps again? I think the dumping wave spikes have resumed... small quantities for now, 500-1000-2000 etc. |
|
|
|
Dark is rising again, and is now above 0.045 ($2.07), and that is with the 3rd highest volume after BTC and LTC.
DRK still has plenty of life left in it.
And the dumpers seem to have plenty of ammo left... I was watching the blockchain earlier, thousands of DRKs were being moved into Mintpal and Cryptsy.. I won't be surprised if we see a big dumping spike at some point as it hasn't appeared in a while. The dumping pattern is similar to pre-RC4, RC4 on etc... frequent spikes at certain intervals which sometimes stop and then resume. It's like they let the orderbook fill itself with buys so that they can then sweep it. But indeed, the volume is quite good. |
|
|
|
Like I said, anon tech is coming in other forms.
Yes, it's called "white papers"  |
|
|
|
I thought the market would forgive a closed source RC4. I was wrong about that and paid for it. I saw no new money was coming in after RC4. This was a clear sign the speculative money was abandoning Drk. The closed source anon tech was not a winner (and new money was needed). I then made some suggestions, which you are referring to as "trolling".
I have never tried to troll.
The only thing that happened was that the primary buyer, which is also invested in a shitload of other altcoins, has bailed / is bailing. And being a heavy holder of DRK this means that he is also creating a larger pressure on DRK. LTC has gone from 0.027- 0.03 a couple months ago to 0.0079 a couple of hours ago - evaporating hundreds of millions in marketcap. Was it "closed source RC4" for them? What about a huge list of coins that have experienced tremendous losses in the last hours/days? Was it RC4 for them? Was it closed source? Seriously? I say it is a blessing for the market to have Darksend closed source till now. The reason is that the market can see that for MONTHS nobody has made what Darkcoin has. They were all sitting on the sidelines waiting in their incompetence so that DRK would opensource so that they can come here, rip the source, and then blame Darkcoin for being "a scam", all the while scamming their users. They couldn't do that with Darksend, so they scammed their users with a whole sort of ways: central mixers, trusted solutions, non-anonymous solutions, anonymity through exchanges (LOL), anonymity through IP obfuscation/TOR (lol), "anonymity airdrops" etc. And when they couldn't do anything, they made a scam through a WHITE PAPER. Promise the world, deliver nothing, run away with the money. The market has now seen who is serious with developing anonymity and what the dangers of copycat scammers are. Darkcoin did a great service to the community for this as only legitimate projects will survive after the pumps/dumps. And when it's time to open source, the market will know who to trust. Wake up Alex, even with Ltc having no tech and crashing, it's current marketcap is higher than Drks. In the last crash, Drk's decline was magnitudes larger than Ltc. Not really. Start of the month (jul31/aug1), LTC was 0.013... now it's 0.008 nearly 40% down. DRK was 0.008 now it's 0.004 - 50% down. The difference isn't in orders of magnitude. And the fact that LTC has higher marketcap, is even more problematic as they should theoretically be less volatile. But when even BTC can be flashcrashed ~35-40% in a day from 500 to 300 or crashed 10% in a day losing 600mn marketcap, there's a deeper problem in cryptoland. How has the closed source helped Drk? It's just scared away investors. There was a brief moment where the market swallowed the "soon to be open sourced" line but RC4 proved to me the market was not prepared to accept it anymore.
There are apparent relations and there are relations of causality. You are ascribing relations of causality to non-causal factors. As have others regarding a large number of things. It has nothing to do with RC4, opensource etc. It has everything to do with the market being unable to absorb tremendous sell pressure in a small time frame, all the while being in a btc downtrend. If Dark Wallet did not exist, I would agree with you that maybe Darkcoin has the time to slowly open source. Even then XMR and the other cryptonote coins are making steady advancement and one of these days they are going to nail it.
Cryptonote coins are proof of concept coins. They can't be used widely because they can't scale and their developers, for the most part, pretend the problem is insignificant so they are not doing much to address it. On top of that, the economic parameters are problematic: They are not adequate store of value with extremely high inflation. How are they going to nail it if you know your money is debased with high velocity, day in day out? Who's gonna throw in millions and millions to keep price afloat? Inflation is a serious issue for coins, requiring BTC drain. As for Dark Wallet, I do not believe it will manage to attain similar level of functionality for a whole sort of reasons, but since I have a healthy dose of respect for its developers, I think I will avoid saying anything bad about it. |
|
|
|
I thought the market would forgive a closed source RC4. I was wrong about that and paid for it. I saw no new money was coming in after RC4. This was a clear sign the speculative money was abandoning Drk. The closed source anon tech was not a winner (and new money was needed). I then made some suggestions, which you are referring to as "trolling".
I have never tried to troll.
The only thing that happened was that the primary buyer, which is also invested in a shitload of other altcoins (probably with hacked BTCs for laundering), has bailed / is bailing. And being a heavy holder of DRK this means that he is also creating a larger pressure on DRK. LTC has gone from 0.027- 0.03 a couple months ago to 0.0079 a couple of hours ago - evaporating hundreds of millions in marketcap. Was it "closed source RC4" for them? What about a huge list of coins that have experienced tremendous losses in the last hours/days? Was it RC4 for them? Was it closed source? Seriously? I say it is a blessing for the market to have Darksend closed source till now. The reason is that the market can see that for MONTHS nobody has made what Darkcoin has. They were all sitting on the sidelines waiting in their incompetence so that DRK would opensource so that they can come here, rip the source, and then blame Darkcoin for being "a scam", all the while scamming their users. They couldn't do that with Darksend, so they scammed their users with a whole sort of ways: central mixers, trusted solutions, non-anonymous solutions, anonymity through exchanges (LOL), anonymity through IP obfuscation/TOR (lol), "anonymity airdrops" (the "honorable" scam of honorcoin) etc. And when they couldn't do anything, they made a scam through a WHITE PAPER. Promise the world, deliver nothing, run away with the money. The market has now seen who is serious with developing anonymity and what the dangers of copycat scammers are. Darkcoin did a great service to the community for this as only legitimate projects will survive after the pumps/dumps. And when it's time to open source, the market will know who to trust. |
|
|
|
Instead, Drk went closed source and became ostracised from the Btc community, killing my investment with it.
You are, to put it mildly, misrepresenting facts. DRK has been open in its code, whether it is x11, dgw1/2/3, masternodes etc. The only thing that has been closed is darksend. And it is closed since alpha status back in February (testnet) which was the first time it was used. It was never open so that it can go "closed" - something that you present as a fact or a change of policy. When Darksend was released on mainnet in March, it was still closed. And back then the price was far lower than it is now, so whether you bought prior to the first DarkSend implementation on testnet, or on mainet, or after their implementation, you are still higher on your money (0.001x vs 0.004x right now). It is simply impossible to have lost money. The only way to have lost money is if you bought after RC1-2, above 0.004 levels. What that means is that you already knew that DRK was building up in a closed fashion and would be opened when ready. And nothing has changed since then - except the development which has gone back by 2 entire months through the masternode payment issue. Therefore, why do you blame some non-existent shift of strategy for your investment losses, aside from trolling purposes? |
|
|
|
In a parallel world: Drk would be open source, AA would be singing its praises, KA confirms strong anonymity, a material chunk of the Btc community abandons Btc in favour of Drk, people forgive and forget the large mining at start and markets spring up around Drk that a copy cat clone can't replicate quickly enough.
Ozziecoin, At this time, i dont see what can do open source for DRK. (RC4, RC5 .....) I have a question, if DRK open source, do you use it for Ozziecoin ? I dont tel its good or bad, just want to know. Firstly, Drk forked from Ltc which is a fork of Btc. And under the licensing, all developments on top of the code must be open source. I could have chosen Ltc or Drk - didn't make much difference but I thought privacy is important, so selected Drk. Drk then closed source the code, which is why it is in trouble. Us using Drk or some other privacy tech is fine. When Dark Wallet is released, we can easily switch to that. The primary purpose of Ozziecoin is not to make money. It is to build a viable future currency for Aussies. We are not interested in Drk's core market. Regardless of what we do, Drk must stand on it's own feet. If a secondary coin can steal the number one position then there is something wrong with Drk. Ltc could never come within 10% of Btc's marketcap. Drk being afraid of us is a joke. Drk should do right by the community, the licensing agreement and its investors. This is not actually true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litecoinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_LicenseWith that said, I'm in favor of open source sooner rather than later. I don't see much risk in any clones taking off, but there's a slight chance I guess. The market has dropped already. Continuing with closed source will only hurt Drk further because markets are not likely to form around a closed source coin. I might be wrong, but it appears the market agrees. By year end, Dark Wallet will end that debate and Drk will have lost the ecash opportunity to Btc. Even if Drk is open sourced at that stage, it will probably be too late. Everyone and their grandma comes here to whine about price finding something to say. "It's the lack of faucets" "It's the open source" "It's the initial distribution" "It's the trolls" "It's the masternodes getting miners income" "It's Evan" "It's <insert whatever here>" ...thing is, price went to 0.028 with lack of faucets, closed source, initial distribution being what it is, trolls flooding the place, etc etc etc. Thus the theories don't hold water because a theory must be able to explain and predict, and in terms of prediction noone predicted that all these "problematic" factors (according to each one of the whiners) would take DRK from 0.001 to 0.028. Thus the theories are flawed and are only used to bitch and leverage stuff towards certain directions, or are used to troll. |
|
|
|
You are absolutely wrong on POS and no inflation, of course POS has the same inflation, why else should people stake and secure the network  It's different having 1-2% inflation per day vs an initial distribution / instamine period + 5% per year for example. |
|
|
|
|
Moderation is a tricky issue... you can moderate but that won't necessarily get rid of the trolls. Only the obvious ones... there will simply be a move to a different modus operandi where they'll pretend they are DRK buyers or something and then spew their shit indirectly.
|
|
|
|
And, as we saw, this has fucking infuriated the Bytecoin/CryptoNote developers. They're so angry they waste hours and hours with their Reddit accounts trawling the Monero sub-reddit, for what? Nobody has fallen for their scam, and after my revelation today nobody fucking will. Transparency wins, everything else is bullshit. As pointed out by canonsburg, when the Bytecoin/CryptoNote people realised they'd lost the fucking game, they took a "scorched earth" approach. If they couldn't have the leading CryptoNote coin...they'd fucking destroy the rest by creating a shit-storm of CryptoNote coins. Not only did they setup a thread with "A complete forking guide to create your own CryptoNote currency", but they even have a dedicated website with a fuckton of JavaScript. Unfortunately this plan hasn't worked for them, because they forgot that nobody gives a fuck, and everyone is going to carry on forking Bitcoin-based coins because of the massive infrastructure and code etc. that works with Bitcoin-based coins. My question is this: If they managed to pull off creating a brand new currency from scratch, why would they run out of options just like that and have Monero run away and take everything? They surely have the talent to create something like a V2 of Cryptonote that is not backwards compatible (so that Monero can't upgrade) and that will improve stuff that are not in the V1 spec. They've showed some samples that they know what they are doing when they pushed some improvements in BCN. Another option would be to implement POS + CN + easy GUI. A POS coin would be problematic in many regards but buyers have embraced them / they seem to like them as they do not have the constant pressure from inflation, despite their issues. This would be innovative in terms of CN coins "first POS CN / no inflation issues". And there are probably other stuff they can do that I haven't thought of. Surely if they are so good, Monero running away from their group of cloned currencies would not be such an issue (?). Why scorch everything when they can simply outdo the existing coins in some way? |
|
|
|
Also: After the initial furore over the first 24hrs of mining which led devs and early miners to essentially earn something of a pre-mine, how is it total 21m DRK was then reduced to ~30% of that and accepted by the community?
The first formula would theoretically produce tens of millions but in practice it would max out at something like 10mn coins, due to annual halving + no minimum reward minimum limit (now it's set at 5). The supply was actually increased in consequent changes as it would produce >10mn coins. |
|
|
|
just sent the last bitcoin i'm willing to part with to mintpal.
imo this is a result of the 2 million coin linux instamine.
The whole market is going down... -7% btc, -20% LTC, -20% Peercoin, -60% cloak etc. Is this a result of the instamine which is DRK-specific? Of course not. IMO, what is happening is this: A large number of hacked BTCs had found their way in alt-land (including the DRK pump and other pumps with the same buyer)... These were invested in a large number of coins, irrationally (meaning that the buys were very aggressive / pump-like)... as are the dumps, which are losing the owners money but still they don't care because these BTCs aren't really bought or worked for. They were stolen. Only one who has no concern of buying or exit price can behave like that pumping and crashing coins for the lulz. For some reason, a lot of this money is going out. All the coins which have been influenced by this pumping & dumping will gain because the market behavior of the buyer (now seller) is irrational. He bought high / sold low as he pressured the price to new depths. This money from his losses ended up in ordinary investors pockets but he doesn't care because they are probably stolen money to begin with. That's my theory at least. I didn't think of hacked coins, good one... So my top 3 reasons for this manipulation: - A very high net worth individual or organisation mitigating future currency risk
- Banksters putting crypto in it's place after a working Anon solution
- Hacked coins for the lulz
I first wrote about this with the Blackcoin pump: Personally I think BC is pumped as a laundry for hacked BTCs. Cryptsy top 9 volume: BC/BTC BlackCoin 5558 BTC DOGE/BTC Dogecoin 713 BTC LTC/BTC LiteCoin 417 BTC ZET/BTC ZetaCoin 312 BTC VTC/BTC VertCoin 118 BTC AUR/BTC AuroraCoin 106 BTC ZEIT/LTC ZeitCoin 45 BTC DRK/BTC DarkCoin 41.4 BTC NXT/BTC Nxt 36.3 BTC Yeah, sure 5558 BTC, >10 times the BTC/LTC volume. Ok. Someone had a couple thousands BTCs around and said yeah let's throw them on blackcoin... My guess is that most of these BTCs of the last few days (let's call him primary buyer) are probably "problematic" to cash out for the "owner" and is thus pumping or even trying to buy an altcoin... but not any altcoin: BC which is also prone to 51% monopoly advantage for the owner (!) - lol. But it would be somewhat irrational if the 51% controller undermined the network as he would lose himself through a blow to the currency's reliability. Unless he doesn't care. The buying pattern is irrational with no serious periods of adjustments to buy back more for cheaper by panicking "oh it's gonna fall soon" guys... and I kind of remember our own pump to 0.008 that exhibited similar irrational behavior, and it had ...330 stolen BTCs. You just don't spend thousands of BTCs like no tomorrow if you've earned them with mining, trading, investing etc or if you bought them with fiat, knowing full well that you are creating a bubble that you will be unable to dump to other parties. It's a sure loss (unless you know the future and it's ...BLACK  ) Then I wrote again about the influence of this guy in the DRK market vs the cryptonote coins: DRK has someone that that I call the "primary buyer". I estimate it's someone with vast BTC resources - probably 100k-500k BTCs or so. I don't know if these BTCs are legit or hacked, but he can spend them like no tomorrow. This guy has bought millions in DRKs. This same buyer (as I can see from his buying patterns) has also gone to diversify himself in XC, Vericoin and other "pumps & dumps"... however the money he used for Moneros is tiny compared to all other coins. I believe he was more actively engaged in the first run up to 0.007-8. If pumping & dumping was his sole purpose in engaging with all these coins, it only makes sense that he would be better served pumping a coin which he can then "sell" to others based on its superior properties. Otherwise how can he dump without crashing the market and everyone running away from the "crapcoin"? He would need adequate hype that the coin is "solid" rather than crappy. So, Monero, in this regard, given what everyone is saying, should be better pump material. One can buy more and hype it as superior, actually convincing buyers that it's a good coin to have. Once that happens, he can dump in waves - if his intention was to profit from the p&d, instead of HODLing long term. But this didn't happen. And it has sparked my curiosity as to why. What does the multi-million guy (who buys all anon coins except the bytecoin ones) know? Is it inflation that is the problem? Is it that he has somehow independently assessed the bytecoin coins as severely problematic in other areas beyond anonymity? What is it that makes him avoid them like the plague, creating market paradoxes where Boolberry is surpassed by bitcoin-based clones that only offer a whitepaper for anonymity and not even the features for it?  ...and interestingly enough, Monero and other CN coins aren't going down significantly - against the overall market trend of other altcoins. I believe it's because that buyer hadn't really touched them and thus he's not exiting their markets / creating an exit impact. But those that he did touch, are crashing hard due to market-sell orders and always to the degree that he had an active involvement. If I'm correct, his position in DRK is probably the largest among all altcoins. Btw, in POS coins he may have also acquired a future benefit for a nothing-at-stake attack if he managed to acquire a good percentage of the whole supply. PS. I think the real laundering is happening by the exchanges in this case, rather than RC4 of DRK. One gets the stolen money in the exchange, plays investor for a couple of months, exits the exchange and his BTCs are now "clean" - as they appear to originate from a very mixed pot of money that the exchange has. holly crap!! btc/$ hit 309 on btc-e with 10,5K BTC volume  Hacked BTCs ftw. |
|
|
|
just sent the last bitcoin i'm willing to part with to mintpal.
imo this is a result of the 2 million coin linux instamine.
The whole market is going down... -7% btc, -20% LTC, -20% Peercoin, -60% cloak etc. Is this a result of the instamine which is DRK-specific? Of course not. i'm not surprised cloak has died as i predicted it would because of the 7 day 4+ million coin instamine. i'm surprised xc is doing as well as it is with it's 3 week 4-5 million coin instamine. i guess their dev is holding his instamined coins and keeping the price somewhat stable. the other coins you listed did not go down that much in the last week like we did. litecoin did go down a lot but there was no reason for it to be as high as it was which is why i liquidated mine to buy dark months ago when dark prices were about where they are now. there's no other reason for dark to go down like it has as the fundamentals are still there. the instamine is the only thing that makes sense. There's coordinated dumping all across the board in multiple coins. This can't be DRK-specific. We are talking about >100mn in marketcap that has evaporated within a few days. |
|
|
|
just sent the last bitcoin i'm willing to part with to mintpal.
imo this is a result of the 2 million coin linux instamine.
The whole market is going down... -7% btc, -20% LTC, -20% Peercoin, -60% cloak etc. Is this a result of the instamine which is DRK-specific? Of course not. IMO, what is happening is this: A large number of hacked BTCs had found their way in alt-land (including the DRK pump and other pumps with the same buyer)... These were invested in a large number of coins, irrationally (meaning that the buys were very aggressive / pump-like)... as are the dumps, which are losing the owners money but still they don't care because these BTCs aren't really bought or worked for. They were stolen. Only one who has no concern of buying or exit price can behave like that pumping and crashing coins for the lulz. For some reason, a lot of this money is going out. All the coins which have been influenced by this pumping & dumping will gain because the market behavior of the buyer (now seller) is irrational. He bought high / sold low as he pressured the price to new depths. This money from his losses ended up in ordinary investors pockets but he doesn't care because they are probably stolen money to begin with. That's my theory at least. |
|
|
|
DarkCoin was largely held by insiders which is why they controlled the price so well on the way up. It's gonna be another worldcoin, another aurora. I still can't believe how many people paid $10 per coins for DarkScam. lol.
This is why you don't buy coins that have been instamined 50% on the first day by the dev.... LOL... The whole altcoin market is a bloodbath with losses ranging from -15 to -60%+ (Cloak), with LTC and Peercoin losing 20% in a day... perhaps Evan instamined them too... BTC losing 7% (edit: flascrashed 40%), also Evan's fault. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
