|
Biggest losses (24hr):
44 CloakCoin CloakCoin -62.53 %
69 SuperCoin SuperCoin -41.32 %
30 Nxttycoin Nxttycoin -39.42 %
40 Qora Qora -34.45 %
88 KeyCoin KeyCoin -31.27 %
83 Scotcoin Scotcoin -29.73 %
27 Feathercoin Feathercoin -26.59 %
97 Tickets Tickets -25.24 %
8 Darkcoin Darkcoin -23.34 %
92 Stealthcoin Stealthcoin -21.72 %
24 VeriCoin VeriCoin -20.45 %
28 Infinitecoin Infinitecoin -20.21 %
89 WankCoin WankCoin -19.35 %
100 BoostCoin BoostCoin -19.27 %
91 Navajo Navajo -18.21 %
6 Peercoin Peercoin -18.04 %
64 USDe USDe -17.49 %
2 Litecoin Litecoin -16.58 %
|
|
|
|
WTF
take that "C" talk somewhere else !!!!My apologies. Post removed. I did not know it was not permitted to link to an article about how "C" failed their Audit and made a backhanded reference about Darkcoin masternodes in reporting it. I will try to be more considerate in the future. No need to apologize - thanks for bringing it up. |
|
|
|
Interesting article. And they were kind enough to give DRK a backhanded shout out. "It requires the active participation of nodes involved in the transaction. If that participation ceases due to malicious activity or even something benign like prolonged failed connectivity, the funds will be stuck in transit of the offline node until connectivity is regained and the node cooperates. The funds can’t be stolen, just stuck until the node cooperates. This is trust, like masternodes, and we don’t want it in our system. To avoid this very unlikely issue in PoSA wallets, it’s best to set posa=0 in your CloakCoin.conf file for the mean time and avoid sending PoSA transactions." What is the situation with master nodes going offline? I thought Evan mentioned that there are failsafe mechanisms in place for this scenario? Ever since the mixing part and the transaction part were split, one is not really darksending money to another as it was in RC3 and prior. He's just sending anonymous / pre-mixed funds in a normal transaction (not masternode related). Thus the transaction will not have any issue related to masternode misbehavior as it is not being transacted by darksend / masternode. For the pre-mixing stage (and if I understand it correctly): a) A very large number of masternodes must be malicious so that the "if then else" failsafe loops back to problematic after problematic after problematic node - in order to create a significant delay... This would also require a very large number of DRKs to be spent to acquire all these nodes, as you can't just run a node without 1000 DRK for each. From a game theory perspective, it seems relatively sound that one won't be spending money to devalue the network and his money. But even that, is not really devaluing the network, as it's in ...premixing, not actual transactions. So time is not so much of the essence there. b) Even if someone wanted to play bad, there is an additional penalty in the form of collateral, for misbehaving nodes. Misbehaving nodes would get hit by such a collateral fee and thus the attacker would run out of money. For RC4 it is disabled, IIRC because some legitimate nodes were being hit with it (it seems that misbehavior detection is a bit on the aggressive side). |
|
|
|
Cloak is imploding so hard it might trigger fusion.
Wow... just wow... went to their thread to see, people say Bob should be in jail... no idea what he's done... but I do remember coming here and trashing drk / pumping cloak... Best is to clone his repo and create a pull request for the changes/errata Smiley
Hmm... I don't have github... never thought I might need one for texts, lol. |
|
|
|
"Darkcoin was launched in March of 2014" => January 2014 "Total currency: 22 million DRK" => "Total currency: 22 million DRK maximum". |
|
|
|
I really don't get it why is drk crashing so hard??  rc4 seems a success, yes it is till closed source but it seems to work. People went crazy when rc3 was released and now we have a real working anon solution what cant even be compared to rc3 and instead of gaining some value its falling more and more. I really dont get it .. bitshares still doing good did I invest in the wrong anoncoin..? I must say I am/was really convinced about drk so I took a large amount of my btc in the last weeks to buy drk but I'm questioning myself now if it was a big mistake. And still when I think about it, it should be gaining value, all of the improvements that have been made lately and all the things you can do with these masternodes. Its a brand new concept that seems to work with probably endless possibilities and yet price is only falling ?? Can someone enlighten me ? I really don't get it. Or is everybody in the dark on this one ....? Thanks Because everyone was expecting a huge price bump for RC4. Except market-wise when RC4 was released BTC started to move downwards. Alts get slaughtered when BTC starts moving down. DRK held up surprisingly well, until after the RC4 release when people realized the price wasn't going to immediately pump. The reason for this was that money was exiting the crypto market in general, so obviously it would be hard to increase DRK's price as BTC is falling because BTC is the gateway into crypto. The reason RC3 pushed the market so well is because the market was primed for it, and was waiting for news on which to move. By market, I generally mean market makers, IE what some people may commonly refer to as whales. There was a feeling of general optimism as the BTC price was stable/increasing. Another thing. When you have lengthy periods of stability in BTC, which have been rare in its history, people look for profits elsewhere; IE, altcoin markets. Traders are like crackheads who constantly need a fix. If BTC stabilizes you'll see them complaining all over the place about the stability. They want volatility so they can make money. So, to recap... BTC price falls... People flee alts to btc to fiat... thereby alt prices suffer greatly. Even if they are totally legitimate coins with bright futures, they are not immune when BTC goes down. Will alts forever be tied to btc? Who knows, but it's the way it is right now. Thanks almost missed your post, thank you for your explanation. But still drk has lost much more then for example btsx. Thats what I dont understand we have fallen more then any other big alt while we have this amazing news that rc4 is live and kicking... It depends on what timeframe you are using. Remember DRK was at 0.0011 in April... now it's at 0.0051. |
|
|
|
Perhaps I am still misstating the math or misunderstanding the spread-sheet.
Let's say I have 1 different coin sources. 60/600 compromised nodes I choose 2 hops and make 1 transaction. Then according to the spreadsheet, that one transaction has 1% chance of being compromised.
Now lets say I have 100 different coin sources, one for each of 100 transactions. 60/600 compromized nodes at a 2-hop rate. Now each transaction itself has a 1% chance of compromise. thus in total, 63% that at least one of them is compromized.
An example: let's say I have 100 dice with each having 100 sides. So each dice has 1/100 chance of rolling a "7". Now if I roll all 100, then there is 63% chance that at least one out of the 100 gets a "7", regardless of the fact that they are different dice. It's just acumulating the independent probabilities of the unrelated events
What is being traced? You have 1% chance of traced back to the one address. But that original address has no context. The coins for that address has itself been mixed. My original question was why are there different numbers of masternodes being chosen, in other words, 1, 2, etc.. rounds of mixing. the purpose of this question was I was wondering the speed of transaction involved. The answer was that "The several rounds are just to eliminate the possibility of a large number of masternodes colluding with each other to deanon transactions." and a spreadsheet was given with the probability of de-anoning happening. So as I understand it, the spreadsheet is telling you the chance of a de-anon'd transaction. Is this incorrect? My main point here is why do I have to do many hops if it takes a long time? If I only have to do 1 hops, why is there an option for 2 hops? why not just always do 1 hops? It's not the speed of transaction you are concerned about, but the speed of the pre-mixing. Up to RC3, transaction and mixing was in the same stage. Therefore if mixing was delayed, the transaction was delayed. In RC4 you premix the coins at some point of time and this process might take minutes or hours - it depends on the number of other people who are also mixing. Essentially you are readying the coins for when you want to make transactions. Now... When you transact, the transaction speed is like Litecoin (2.5m confirmation block), whether you transact non-anonymized funds, or anonymized funds. Regarding the rounds of mixing / hops. In a 60 sockpuppet nodes / 600 total nodes scenario, this is how I see it: one round of mixing means you have 10% risk of deanonymization. two rounds means 10% x 10% = 1% three rounds mean 0.1% four means 0.01% five means 0.001% six means 0.0001% seven means 0.00001% eight means 0.000001% So if you do 5000 transactions after 8 round mixing, the possibility that just one of these transactions might be deanonymized by the holder of the 60 nodes is 0.000001% x 5000 = 0.005% If you are more paranoid about your security, you can probably do 8 rounds x 8 rounds of mixing for a total of 16 rounds  |
|
|
|
I was reading and suddenly my name popped up and I was like, lol? Then I clicked on the reddit link and I was WTF is this? Someone took my quote and posted it on reddit? Why? That's indeed batshit crazy from my perspective. Note that I don't have a reddit account. For me, versioning is proper for electronic texts and I'm always practicing it for my papers or ebooks. Unlike paper books which are "solid", electronic papers / books can "evolve", thus versioning makes sense and why I said "a forward looking individual". For the record, I have nothing to do with Bytecoin, Monero, BBR, Duckcoin etc etc, I am mainly into Darkcoin and only hold other anon coins as a hedge. I also believe that Bytecoin is problematic due to it's huge (effective) premine as well as the underlying tech which can't scale for real world adoption. Not until something is done for it that is. |
|
|
|
the implication may be correct but the assumption is highly questionable
I think the assumption can be improved massively by knowing how much money each new adopter brings. One "whale" is not the same as 20 "small fish", so... But you can't know that with any accuracy. |
|
|
|
There is not a single crypto backed by anything but promises and ppl's faith ......right? Seems not - there is some Real Gold trader,offering this community 100 g. of gold for their coins ! ......You will say hey...100 g.......think about the coin you just invested in.....did it offers you lowest price to bye your coins? Look @ http://4thjulycoin.com/ . Have some mining pool - http://inn.hash.sx/ , some BCT place: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=700145.80 "INNcoin is backed by 100 grams of physical gold stored in one of Anthem’s Salt Lake City vaults." Hahahaha, I have old biscuit tins with more gold than that in them. Are you serious? Hey...what ammount BTC is backed with ? ...or any other coin ....just wondering .....? Centralized digital currencies backed by gold are far older than Bitcoin... they didn't end up well, because they were raided of their gold by the government: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-gold |
|
|
|
Kristov, where r u mate?
Too much mention of KA as some kind of pumping scheme (it's not phrased that way) that will take the price upwards. Let him do the job he has to do and the price will fix itself once the dumper is over. The dumper is determined to unload his stash. He was selling pre-RC4, he is selling post-RC4, in same intervals of 1000-1500-2000 DRKs etc. He takes a nap, no dumping intervals etc for a few hours, wakes up, sees the price has gone up, unloads 4-5K DRKs... He's the only one selling but I don't see many willing to sell DRKs that low. If people haven't sold at 0.025, 0.02, 0.015, 0.01, 0.008 etc, why sell at 0.005? That's my take anyway. The only question is who is the dumper? Well, if someone wanted to track transactions through masternodes, it's now busted due to the 8-round mixing that allows something like 1% mapping of all transactions - so that's useless. So if NSA (scenario 1) had bought nodes, they might be selling them now. Camo said in the past he had 7-digit worth of DRKs... we only see 10.5k in sshots. Where are the rest? Still he should have run out of DRKs by now (scenario 2) The primary buyer of DRK, the one responsible for taking the price to the roof, no matter who he was, is dumping - perhaps along with some other coins that had his "signature" (scenario 3) Scenarios are not listed in order of plausibility btw. |
|
|
|
Look @ charts
what about the charts? You like them? sure do... it means im hoping to buy in <$1....i bought in at $0.20...  so im going to be ready when it gets close to my price... woot woot. Can i see you DRK balance in some screen ...? He's here from the start / big holder, he isn't bullshiting anyone. |
|
|
|
LTC is down....LTC is pared to BTC .......OK.! Dark doesent .. ? The pairings are irrelevant if some whales want to exit the market, creating huge selling pressure. LTC went down 10 times from 50$ to <5$ as whales sold millions of LTCs... so... |
|
|
|
Current growth of users has slowed down and is no more than 2-3% per week. (numbers used in my estimation are from the current week not used in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622708.msg8279959#msg8279959 ). Monthly estimates for altcoin that is baby are useless. Current trend is worrisome, but XMR is holding quite well compared to other alts. As long as inflation is outpacing user growth, price will not really stabilize on its own without necessitating big waves of buying from existing holders to preserve price. |
|
|
|
This is excellent news. Bitcoin is the future of digital currency and the marketplace is showing that. Don't worry, DRK will still have it's place for the shady exchanges between nefarious characters and modern day silk roads. Hi shojayxt Have your wallet started denominating finally? Or is it just you and camosoul out of the whole crypto community who cannot get that working  now now...play nice. Camosoul is having some legit issues in his case...can't speak for how shojayxt is doing, have you done all the updates...which would bring up an interesting observation...Camosoul is presumably having issues do the the shear size of his coinn holdings in his wallet possibly....and that could mean you too have a large chunk.....eh?!? I just had a small wallet with 17 coins. I was just testing. Nobody had a problem with 17 coins except you. Camosoul did have a problem with a >10.000 coins wallet. Note that with a 100 coin wallet he didn't have an issue. So, as far as we can tell, you are the only one left saying it doesn't play for them with normal amounts. And you also happen to be a troll. Hmmm... |
|
|
|
guys you must understand...
DARKCOIN is not ALT-COIN... it can be MAIN-coin
people makes mistake when put DRK into altcoin
Well there is the transparent market and the anonymous market. The main coin of the transparent market is bitcoin. The main coin of the anonymous market is darkcoin. |
|
|
|
Hello Everyone,
If you're running a larger than normal wallet and set "Amount to anonymize" to a really high amount, the client will prioritize money that has not been denominated, in effect denominating the entire amount ONCE (this could look like the round > 1 bug, but it's not). No input will reach 2 rounds before that amount is met. When the client detects you've reached the threshold you set, it will then start denominating round 2, then 3, etc.
From the looks of the thread all issues users are experiencing are not bugs at this point, just a misunderstanding of how Darksend works. All major bugs have been resolved and I'm going to move on to RC5 and other unique features of Darkcoin that we've had in the works for awhile (I'm going to wait till all of the weak hands have left the building then I have some really cool stuff to announce).
-Evan
Camo said he tried with smaller amounts and still it does the same: did a backup. deleted my wallet and everything. installed fresh .31 wallet and downloaded block chain. Installed backup. Now it works. Weird. Glad its finally working though.
I've done this 4 times. No effect. Still does only 1 round, fees, 1 round, fees, 1 round, fees... Or sometimes just locks the whole wallet and does nothing... I've just recently started trying it with smaller quantities. No effect. 100 in wallet, 500, 600, 400, 1200, 4000, 1500, 2000... It doesn't matter. Same problems.I wish it weren't true. But it is... I've been up all damn night with it. It's 7am now... It doesn't work. ...perhaps there is something in his setup that is causing a failure that doesn't appear in other people (?). TOR-related perhaps? I don't know. |
|
|
|
No your problem is that you don't want people to hear about these bugs with RC4. Nobody but the cheerleaders go to darkcointalk, everyone else comes here. You guys want to paint a picture of a perfect RC4 rollout. Well it doesn't exist.
Are you for real? Seriously? We are "trying to paint a picture of perfect RC4 rollout"? With 10 patches and quite a number of bugs? People are giving feedback to improve so that bugs are squashed. And they are being squashed and from, say, a few people getting it work correctly first time round, we are now at a percentage where it works for 95% of the people just a couple days later. It's been steadily improving to perfection. You have a bug? NICE. That's good, because Evan can then patch it and make it go to 98-99 and eventually 100% correct. You report it and it gets fixed. You don't even need to report it to Darkcointalk, it will actually be picked up by people who are reading the thread. But insisting on "OHHHHHHHHHH THIS IS BROOOKEEEENNN" and all the debating back and forth is not really bug-finding and reporting. It's about your usual trolling. If it didn't have bugs it would be called FINAL, not beta/rc. And still it would have a few bugs down the road as all final releases do. That's how software works. |
|
|
|
~10 days ago: In my opinion, RC4 is going to be a game changer if it launches without any issues.
I think it's highly unlikely it won't have any issues and be 100% ready. After all it's not called "final". It'll probably need tens of bugfixes post-release. The rate of bug-squashing is significant, which means that mainnet functionality will surely uncover more bugs that weren't discovered in test-net scenarios. But unlike network forking issues with MN payments, these bugs do not carry the same weight. Forking is a game-stopper. Darksend bugs aren't. You patch them and move on. Told ya  |
|
|
|
yeah true....the masses will never completely or even remotely brace crypto....
We actually don't need the masses. Even 1% of fiat marketcap is enough. And if 1% of that 1% is private, that's enough for DRK too. Total money supply (M3) for EU and USA should be more >25 trillion USD. If we add the rest of the planet, that's ...a lot. Anyway 1% of that is 250 billion USD. 1% of that 1% is 2.5bn USD for the anon marketcap. And 99% can enjoy fiat  Same goes for gold/silver/platinum/palladium investors who generally dislike or hedge fiat. The marketcap of the physical should be around 10 trillion USD easy (gold is upwards of 7 trillion in itself). If you go to the marketcap of physical+paper, that's even more... The cryptomarket is still too small. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
