I sympathize for his job, as he is not reviewing static code but rather something that is constantly changing / evolving / reprogrammed to new functionality. You can't really rubber stamp if you have to face this (otherwise positive) problem.


Crypto-traders, buyers, etc do not usually understand technical concepts, not necessarily because they are stupid, but because they might lack the knowledge to properly evaluate stuff.

1. We've seen that in "complex" coins: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=637645 (read post #2 and post #9 by me)

2. We've seen that in the anonymous market: a lot of people were unable to properly evaluate the worthiness of certain coins in the marketplace. People were getting excited by vapor, believing FUD as truth, claiming scummy P&Ds are innovative anonymous coins, equating DRK being trustless and decentralized with other trusted and centralized solutions, not understanding the difference between actual coins that can be used versus proof-of-concept coins etc etc.

1. How do you judge that it wasn't a big deal? By market reaction? Market reaction, in this economic micro-climate says nothing. LTC went from 0.013 to 0.009 just because. What did the market react to during that fall? No RCsomething... no nothing... same with other coins that had no development.

2. There is no moving the goal posts. RC4 promised to

a) lift the 10 DRK limit
b) improve anonymity

...it did both. As a bonus we also got increased practicality due to coin premixing / coin denomination. This allows transactions to occur right away, instead of the way transactions occurred in RC3 and prior versions (waiting for DarkSend participants). Separating the two phases of anonymizing and transacting was brilliant.

Btw increased anonymity and IP obfuscation was on the cards for V2 of DarkSend, so DarkSend+ implemented in RC4 and IP obfuscation being considered for next RCs is actually ahead of schedule.

It will be only when big sell and buy walls support that price range... say 1000 BTC buy on 0.0075 and another 1000 sell on 0.0085 so that it finds equilibrium in 0.008.

With no walls, the price can move wildly with off-the-book buying and selling of large quantities. If one wants to buy 10k DRK for example, what's the settled price of DRK?

Friend of mine, who has flown Mirage 2000 and F-16s in the Hellenic Air Force, was laughing at the supposed "stunt" of the passenger plane. He said the hit is way more consistent with a cruise missile or, if it was a plane, perhaps a remote controlled one.

Another friend, who is now co-pilot in an Airbus, also questions how is that even possible... he is not sure he could have done it himself so "cleanly" because there are turbulences, obstacles and stuff which would render the feat almost impossible (meaning using the jet to break through the side of the building the way it was done). He believes that so low clearance would have been extremely risky for colliding with terrain objects that would jeopardize the objective (hitting the pentagon) and that there is simply no reason why one would do it that way - plus the impact momentum and blast would be better if one crashed it while diving at an angle.

If you know any pilots, ask them what's the chance that an amateur pilot (hijacker), would crash the plane HORIZONTALLY on the pentagon, like he was landing or something... This is a very difficult maneuver to perform, especially in a city environment with poles, trees etc (unlike an airport which has much horizontal clearance in most directions).

If you go too slow, you'll stall the plane and crash. If you go too fast, you can't maneuver it as you like through the terrain (which is still mighty difficult in itself with a huge passenger plane, unlike a fighter jet).

Normally an amateur hijacker would fly higher than the pentagon, spot it, then dive into the pentagon with an angle and crash the plane in this manner.

Double spend attempts or actual double spends?

Ok...


All hope lost => Faith restored

Alright, it's building up nicely for the final version...

Is IP obfuscation through masternodes enabled with RC4? Or is it RC5 material?

Actually they can't be lost with forking either. A fork can only double the number of coins (double spend).

As far as I know, coins can never be lost, under any circumstance. The only issue is whether a wallet can see them or not (corruption scenario for example).

Coins can't be lost in a transaction... it's either in your side, or MPs side. If they haven't gone through the blockchain to MP, then they are at your side but the wallet acts like it sent them (while it actually has the money).


A possibility that doubles the number of coins, not evaporates them.

Camo chill out today and decide what you'll do about it tomorrow. As you said, you are not thinking clearly, so get some rest, sleep, whatever, and the DRKs will be there waiting to be unlocked anyway.

Nothing beats RC(x) drama

Pretty shitty day for major alts:

1   Bitcoin Bitcoin    $ 7,558,980,892   $ 575.71    13,129,750 BTC   $ 15,634,900   -2.40 %   
2   Litecoin Litecoin    $ 175,078,004   $ 5.64    31,055,304 LTC   $ 7,791,980   -18.89 %   
3   Ripple Ripple    $ 42,871,930   $ 0.005195    8,252,600,677 XRP *   $ 294,352   4.62 %   
4   Nxt Nxt    $ 32,851,405   $ 0.032851    999,997,096 NXT *   $ 148,855   -11.26 %   
5   Darkcoin Darkcoin    $ 22,945,342   $ 5.04    4,551,717 DRK   $ 222,400   -9.11 %   
6   Peercoin Peercoin    $ 18,664,494   $ 0.862854    21,631,114 PPC   $ 171,565   -10.44 %   
7   BitSharesX BitSharesX    $ 17,337,031   $ 0.008669    1,999,775,140 BTSX *   $ 74,543   -3.39 %   
8   Dogecoin Dogecoin    $ 12,596,578   $ 0.000141    89,541,278,777 DOGE   $ 234,752   -14.98 %   
9   MaidSafeCoin MaidSafeCoin    $ 12,344,725   $ 0.027278    452,552,412 MAID *   $ 29,963   2.52 %   
10   Namecoin Namecoin    $ 12,300,611   $ 1.29    9,570,300 NMC   $ 107,895   -9.31 %

"Virtual currencies are not backed by any government or central bank"

And fiat money is backed by what exactly? LOL...

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/btce/ltcbtc

0.0099 for LTC.

Fixed it

The whale's buying power was almost always off the book. Nothing, in terms of book order, indicated that DRK would go from 0.0011 to 0.025+.

As for the 1000 DRK obligation, it makes absolute sense as a disincentive for owning many nodes and deanonymizing transactions. Otherwise DRK would be DOA if anybody could make a large number of nodes and map everything out with small or zero cost.

The cost is the game theory component that allows the anonymity to work with a very low percentage risk of deanonymization - over a large number of rounds.

As for what will happen post-RC4, the market and the whales will decide. If the whales decide that they want DRK to reach all-time-high levels and beyond, so it will be. If not, it won't.

BTW the order-book is thin on the upside too. Darkproton bought a few thousands and took it from 0.01 to 0.013 for the lulz a few weeks ago.

Yes, I know.. trading is attractive if one thinks they know a certain market well, in order to increase their long-term position... but the real trade-off to trading is that it is very stressful -as you noted- plus one can lose much if a coin breaks out towards a significant uptrend. I've experienced both (stress and whitening hair + losses from uptrends) but I still trade when I think it's worth it.

PS. January and early Feb prices were 0.000025 BTC per DRK... so you'd be up 380 times or ~38.000% (@0.0095). Not bad...

There are competing investing influences... pump & dumpers, short-term investors, long-term investors, people diversifying etc.

I remember the relative stability of the 0.0012-0.0016 days (~2 months) and the "complains" that we are not going to see 0.0018 to 0.002 ever again and that some decided to dump and move on to more exciting things etc, etc...