Serious concerns and HUGE issues about Darkcoin:[/b]
Are you serious? You are promoting Monero and then claiming to have concerns for Darkcoin? Here, for your concerns: http://wiki.darkcoin.eu/wiki/FAQStill waiting for your Monero responses. I agree with you completely. Evan Duffield may or may not be honest, but he is defenitely NOT a specialist, NOT a new Satoshi Nakamoto.
Ahh... so Evan isn't Nakamoto and that's a minus... Please tell us what coin devs are on Nakamoto's level and beyond? Monero's? |
|
|
|
Darkota, since you want so much to talk about Monero, let's talk.
Pretend I am a millionaire and want to invest in Monero.
Please answer me the following:
a) Who made Monero and why? What was their vision?
b) What had the Monero team done for privacy, before copying the Bytecoin code?
c) Are they really interested in anonymity, or did they try to cash out in the wake of DRK? Why did they make an anonymous coin in May - when DRK was already making a splash? If they were really interested in anonymity, why not earlier?
d) Can Monero scale?
e) Is Monero's PoW futureproof, for providing almost 90% of its coins in just 4 years? Why would someone invest in such a curve?
f) Why would I put my money on something with 2% daily inflation? As a currency, does it fulfill one of the basic criteria - that being an adequate store of value?
g) What is the cost to render the blockchain DOA for someone who wants to kill Monero, in terms of Bitcoins? Can a kid, a hacker, a government spend 10 BTCs and make the blockchain so bloated that it doesn't even load the wallet - killing my multi-million investment?
h) Is Monero anonymous in itself, or does it also need IP obfuscation to achieve anonymity? If it is the later, how exactly is it so anonymous, and how can you vouch for the IP obfuscation network that it will be using? Is there an IP obfuscation network that is 100% reliable for anonymity purposes? As far as I am aware, there is none.
i) Why should I pick Monero instead of Boolberry? The specs of Boolberry are superior and the dev is seemingly doing more work on his own than the Monero devs. Remember I am a buyer and I don't care about who mines what so I don't care about CPU and GPU miners.
k) What happens if the Bytecoin guys (who made the code) discover a flaw, patch it in their own coin and then kill the clones by exploiting the flaw? If they are really underground hackers that hate the Monero copycats, isn't that a real possibility?
l) What is the advancement potential given that Monero is a clone and Bytecoin is the original?
m) What assurances do I have that the codebase is solid? For all I know it's totally untested in public use, being public for 2 or 3 months. Even the boolberry dev openly declares it to be untested.
n) Is it usable by average joe?
o) Is it usable by companies and businesses?
I can ask you questions about Monero all day long if you are so inclined to advertise Monero in the DRK thread.
This one gets bookmarked. The best pieces are actually all around the BCN and MRO threads with all the unbelieveable problems people encounter every day. If I made a list of these perls, we'd be laughing all the way to the DRKbank - but at least they are trying... heh... For example, a while ago Mintpal added Monero and ...money isn't moving around in the chain: Adaptive block sizing means right now it's hard to get money around in XMR chain because it is saturated. However, over the next hour the blockchain will expand its blocksize and this will be less of an issue. Please wait for your tx to be included in the blockchain.
Saturation... "Please wait for your tx"... Yep... That will scale well for prime-time use... Darkota are you still with us? |
|
|
|
|
Darkota, since you want so much to talk about Monero, let's talk.
Pretend I am a millionaire and want to invest in Monero.
Please answer me the following:
a) Who made Monero and why? What was their vision?
b) What had the Monero team done for privacy, before copying the Bytecoin code?
c) Are they really interested in anonymity, or did they try to cash out in the wake of DRK? Why did they make an anonymous coin in May - when DRK was already making a splash? If they were really interested in anonymity, why not earlier?
d) Can Monero scale?
e) Is Monero's PoW futureproof, for providing almost 90% of its coins in just 4 years? Why would someone invest in such a curve?
f) Why would I put my money on something with 2% daily inflation? As a currency, does it fulfill one of the basic criteria - that being an adequate store of value?
g) What is the cost to render the blockchain DOA for someone who wants to kill Monero, in terms of Bitcoins? Can a kid, a hacker, a government spend 10 BTCs and make the blockchain so bloated that it doesn't even load the wallet - killing my multi-million investment?
h) Is Monero anonymous in itself, or does it also need IP obfuscation to achieve anonymity? If it is the later, how exactly is it so anonymous, and how can you vouch for the IP obfuscation network that it will be using? Is there an IP obfuscation network that is 100% reliable for anonymity purposes? As far as I am aware, there is none.
i) Why should I pick Monero instead of Boolberry? The specs of Boolberry are superior and the dev is seemingly doing more work on his own than the Monero devs. Remember I am a buyer and I don't care about who mines what so I don't care about CPU and GPU miners.
k) What happens if the Bytecoin guys (who made the code) discover a flaw, patch it in their own coin and then kill the clones by exploiting the flaw? If they are really underground hackers that hate the Monero copycats, isn't that a real possibility?
l) What is the advancement potential given that Monero is a clone and Bytecoin is the original?
m) What assurances do I have that the codebase is solid? For all I know it's totally untested in public use, being public for 2 or 3 months. Even the boolberry dev openly declares it to be untested.
n) Is it usable by average joe?
o) Is it usable by companies and businesses?
I can ask you questions about Monero all day long if you are so inclined to advertise Monero in the DRK thread.
|
|
|
|
Καλησπέρα σε όλους,
τι γνώμη έχετε σχετικά με τα altcoins, και συγκεκριμένα αυτά που υπόσχονται anonimity? Έχετε επενδύσει σε κανένα, ή δεν παρακολουθείτε καν την αγορά και ασχολείστε μόνο με το bitcoin? Ευχαριστώ!
Προσωπικα παρακολουθω το darkcoin απ'τον Ιανουαριο. Εκτιμουσα οτι τα ανωνυμα θα πιασουν 1-10% του συνολικου marketcap των cryptos, οταν ακομα αυτα ηταν στο 0%. Τωρα ειμαστε ~1% (~85mn marketcap). Post απ'το Μαρτη: The general crypto boom is over. Those who saw 8000%+ profits from BTC in < 2 years were the lucky few. Who we be the Levi Strauss of the crypto era - a man who started a small business selling new-fanged denim jeans to the gold miners back in '49. Perhaps you've heard Levi's?
I think cryptos in general have a lot of potential. I mean most people don't even know what Bitcoin is, let alone altcoins. And, if you factor in that around three quarters of the planet live in countries with high inflation rate (not EUR, GBP, USD etc - which of course are inflated too but to a lesser degree), cryptos could be a nice alternative to the national currency - and much more convenient than gold for trade purposes. DRK looks interesting enough, but whether or not it shoots up and outrageous amount to $20, or even $100 by next year is largely irrelevant,
Darkcoin is providing a second option vs the monopoly of transparency in which other coins are in. This means that if someone wants their crypto deposits / crypto transactions to be more private they'll have to move over to DRK. The transparent market is at 100% right now while the more-private market is at near 0%. In terms of "market growth potential" what will happen should be pretty easy to figure out. With a market cap of ~8bn (BTC+other alts) to 3mn (DARKcoin), the prospect of capital flowing toward the DRK side is "significant". Even if one per cent of the "transparent" market moves to the more private market, we're talking about 80mn USD boost that is there to share for DRK or other anon coins which may follow - and they will not be necessarily mutually exclusive (one could practice transferring money through 2-3 anon coins, implementing different solutions, for extra safety / privacy). Needless to say what may happen if tax authorities start to crack down on BTC. The "just 1%" may suddenly become several % - with a corresponding boost in value of the private coins. I mean, from a market perspective, and with such prospects being there, even if the anon market is shared by 2-3-5 different coins in the long run, this is a 9-digit to 10-digit market (xxx millions to billions) that they will share between them. Current market cap of a few million USD may seem like a joke by then. With such fundamentals, who needs hype, or pump and dumps? |
|
|
|
from DIME thread I was about to mention that I'm liking this coin, when I became distracted with that and other things. heh.. I've been mining DIME for a little over a month and so far.. I'm not smellin anything..  (wink wink) - the client is very stable ... very low reject/orphan count - its whale and multi pool free - block rewards and distribution seem fair ... I'm seeing an equal number of high and low reward blocks with my 2-6 mhash. i guess you only roll with 8% premine coins...pathetic you come in here but you support shit like DIME..probably implies how serious we should take you.. if there will ever be a new coin where the dev premines 30 BILLION+ again ill guess you'll be the first to mine  8% premine ? How did I miss that ? I quit and dumped DIME right after THIS was not properly explained. Mr Hippie Tech go back to DRK coin Thanks Not a DRKer. => https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.msg7342632#msg7342632 |
|
|
|
Personally I was hoping there would be no more cannibalization between CN coins and or a co-ordinated FUD against XMR from some disgruntled BCN followers. I respect BBR dev, but I can't understand the thought of breaking the market when a majority accepted XMR as the go to CN coin. With the private miner in BBR only a select few are enriching themselves for now and even the future with their big stashes. I noticed a slight simultaneous XMR downtrend and a corresponding BBR uptrend situation today for the first time.
i seriously doubt there is any meaningful correlation between bbr and xmr pricing, once you subtract beta factors. that doesn't mean bbr isn't dilutive -- it is dilutive, but only in the short-run. (in the long run dark liquidity will be a monopoly, i.e. radically dominated by one vehicle.) bbr is a one-man show run by a very talented control-freak. in order to have any hope of becoming the monopoly currency it would first need a complete relaunch under a new name, with a competent CEO type at the helm, and a diverse development team. that said, it has interest, it is making a contribution, and it will probably do well, as minor alt currencies go, if only on the strength of CZs talent and energy. as it is open source, we all benefit from those contributions. while it is understandable that one might prefer not to be diluted in the near term, that is just a necessary cost of benefiting from those contributions. In contrast, QCN, MCN, FCN - these are just crap. If I were the judge, the developers of these coins would be shot and their families billed for the bullet. The BCN founders would merely be sent to Fort Leavenworth for a decade or so. You are giving ideas now for BBR spinoffs with better names  |
|
|
|
|
I can't avoid thinking the silence is intentional.
|
|
|
|
And where does it write that Darkcoin is a fun project like DOGE? Nowhere. You misrepresent quotes. Let me enlighten you about something. This is a Quantum Reality, meaning thoughts interact with this world. But more importantly, visions interact with this world in a more potent way. A man with a vision can move mountains. But it's all related to the basic intent of the vision. Nothing happens here by accident, no matter what Evan has said - because even his quotes are contradictory on occasion, so you'll either go with one or the other. Evan's vision, stated since the start, was to make a top altcoin that could even give Bitcoin a run for its money. We're building XCoin into a moderately-anonymous network, where the transactions are sent encrypted and only able to be read the party who is receiving the funds. Blocks will be published via CoinJoin as to ensure some amount of anonymity. This is being built in such a way to compete with the other top alt-coins and maybe even Bitcoin.
My goal with Darkcoin has always been to take the #2 spot from Litecoin.
...and this vision is gradually being build up four-five months along the way. The whole chain of top altcoins is being catalyzed by DRK's ascent and Litecoin has lost half its value and gaining downward momentum as even the multi-thousand BTC walls were unable to preserve its price >0.017. The battle of Dark vs Lite is on. At the same time, ripples have been made in the altcoin world due to DRK and the pursuit of anonymity. The main "vision" and intent of coins that are trying to cash-in in the wake of Dark, is like this: " We can also make an anonymous coin / or promised anon coin and get some share of the pie / get some cash". Some by offering something, some by going the scam way in which the dev runs with the money straight away. But these coins will always be limited by the vision of their creator which was to be small-time players that are just going to take some part of the slice. Nobody has a larger vision and this lack of vision is what will forever hinder their project in ways that they cannot fathom or calculate. I could analyze that one further on how the lack of vision has affected other anon cryptocurrencies in their deficiencies but it would be perceived as an attack to them, so I won't. |
|
|
|
Source or GTFO. I think Evan would write better than that.  Evan said - Darkcoin's success was unexpected like Dogecoin - Originally he was going about it as a hobby but later got into it heavy / escalated his involvement to full-time / is in as a full-time dev for the next 2 years Take these two together and you have a nice misrepresentation of "fun project like dogecoin"  |
|
|
|
I'm ROFLing really hard because I'm in the same situation with the orders  |
|
|
|
Do you have any link to the analysis of their (DRK) concept? To the best of my knowledge: Dark uses modified coinjoin with game theory addition. Plain coinjoin with blind signatures is problematic in DOS scenarios as the attacker can't be punished and the transactions halt forever (that was the first DarkSend implementation back in February). It's also problematic in that inputs / outputs can be co-related as recently evidenced. DarkSend uses non-blind signing (the node knows what is being transacted) to solve the DoS issue (attacker penalized by losing transaction collateral) but it represents a regression (probably temporary) in terms of anonymity. To solve the mapping-the-transactions issue, two layers have been proposed. 1) make the nodes expensive to acquire, otherwise a bad actor could flood the network with his nodes and map everything (1000 DRK requirement to buy a node). As more nodes are acquired price goes up and creates a positive feedback loop that escalates the price even more. Thus the bad actor will the require immense capital to acquire the vast majority of the nodes. 2) multiple DarkSends through the nodes. In this way even if a bad actor controls 40% of the network nodes, 5 darksends reduce the problem to 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 = 1% to get a mapped transaction. IF you do it 10 times even more. As for (2) an anonymity upgrade plans to replace the necessity for multiple darksends (undisclosed details) To solve the issue of coinjoin input-output matching, DRK uses a homogenizing denomination pool of 10 coins where all inputs are 10. The plan was to use multiple denomination pools (1-10-100-1000 etc) but there is a problem encountered in the need to send more coins. Imagine if you want to send 600 coins and you need to input 1000 coins. So the denomination pools will be redesigned to account for that issue or dealt with another way. Problems pending for fix are a) Change can still be linked for common ownership. This is planned to be fixed in upcoming RCs (denominated change or something like that) b) Strong IP obfuscation has to be merged (I2P) otherwise network broadcasts betray the user anyway c) The 10 DRK limit of the denominating pool has to be lifted but at the same time preserve homogeneity of input or find an alternate way to deal with input/output matching. d) Masternode payments (they get 20% of the mining income for providing the anonymity service / mixing) are glitching and presenting fork issues e) A way to conceal who is transacting what must be found so that the Masternode doesn't know as a way to eliminate the need for multiple DarkSends which would bloat the blockchain. f) Traffic on the network will have to increase when everything is done, so that mixing can occur - otherwise with no DarkSends there can be no mixing. g) The code has to be reviewed by third parties to fix outstanding issues or security holes (later RCs) Wow, thanks for your detailed answer. I will study this for sure. Where did you get such large amount of implementation details? Let's just say I've read ~2000 pages of the DRK thread (I've been following DRK since late January). |
|
|
|
Bitcoin jesus is sending us a message? http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/address.dws?188207.htmHe removed: - 333.0399919 DRK He now has: 333,000.2930081 DRK I'm trying to understand the 2930081 part. Could be a birth date (1981) if it weren't for an extra zero. In the richlist it appears as 333,000.3 DRK ...so it does a good symmetry as the 333,333.3 DRK became 333,000.3 DRK |
|
|
|
Do you have any link to the analysis of their (DRK) concept? To the best of my knowledge: Dark uses modified coinjoin with game theory addition. Plain coinjoin with blind signatures is problematic in DOS scenarios as the attacker can't be punished and the transactions halt forever (that was the first DarkSend implementation back in February). It's also problematic in that inputs / outputs can be co-related as recently evidenced. DarkSend uses non-blind signing (the node knows what is being transacted) to solve the DoS issue (attacker penalized by losing transaction collateral) but it represents a regression (probably temporary) in terms of anonymity. To solve the mapping-the-transactions issue, two layers have been proposed. 1) make the nodes expensive to acquire, otherwise a bad actor could flood the network with his nodes and map everything (1000 DRK requirement to buy a node). As more nodes are acquired price goes up and creates a positive feedback loop that escalates the price even more. Thus the bad actor will the require immense capital to acquire the vast majority of the nodes. 2) multiple DarkSends through the nodes. In this way even if a bad actor controls 40% of the network nodes, 5 darksends reduce the problem to 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 = 1% to get a mapped transaction. IF you do it 10 times even more. As for (2) an anonymity upgrade plans to replace the necessity for multiple darksends (undisclosed details) To solve the issue of coinjoin input-output matching, DRK uses a homogenizing denomination pool of 10 coins where all inputs are 10. The plan was to use multiple denomination pools (1-10-100-1000 etc) but there is a problem encountered in the need to send more coins. Imagine if you want to send 600 coins and you need to input 1000 coins. So the denomination pools will be redesigned to account for that issue or dealt with another way. Problems pending for fix are a) Change can still be linked for common ownership. This is planned to be fixed in upcoming RCs (denominated change or something like that) b) Strong IP obfuscation has to be merged (I2P) otherwise network broadcasts betray the user anyway c) The 10 DRK limit of the denominating pool has to be lifted but at the same time preserve homogeneity of input or find an alternate way to deal with input/output matching. d) Masternode payments (they get 20% of the mining income for providing the anonymity service / mixing) are glitching and presenting fork issues e) A way to conceal who is transacting what must be found so that the Masternode doesn't know as a way to eliminate the need for multiple DarkSends which would bloat the blockchain. f) Traffic on the network will have to increase when everything is done, so that mixing can occur - otherwise with no DarkSends there can be no mixing. g) The code has to be reviewed by third parties to fix outstanding issues or security holes (later RCs) |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is often criticized for having no backing of value. (kind of like the american dollar which is the worlds currency for the moment after the removal of the gold standard... The american dollar became based on speculation... similar to alt coins some would say?) All of a sudden this fundamental changes with Darkcoin with the masternodes and the quest to accumulate enough for a master node. All of a sudden their is more value in holding dark coin than in any other currency in the world. (kind of like stocks, dividend vs no dividend.) Don't quote buffet please and say no dividend is better because they reinvest in the company, because the government is reinvesting, unfortunately ''unlike'' a company in things that are not necessarily in the best interests of its shareholders and stakeholders, I have to put the comas around unfortunately because of the disgrace that is the actual concept or the abandonment of the concept of social responsibility. After all the shareholders often get fooled into believing their interest as shareholders is greater than their interest as stakeholders or other peoples interest as stakeholders. When it comes to Darkcoin, I am a shareholder and the whole world is a stakeholder. Are you with me, are we going to create something beautiful together, if you still are with me and are a person that believes that creation will bring us forward, and that compassion will make sure we never leave our hearts behind, I'm looking for people like you and will post again in a few minutes, coffee is ready, thank you. I remembered this: "Bitcoins have no dividend or potential future dividend, therefore not like a stock. (They’re) more like a collectible or commodity." - Satoshi ...node dividend indeed change the economic model. |
|
|
|
The potential of DRK in 2-3 weeks will not be the same than today. Regarding other coins, long term is more than 3 months. I will not start a debate about other coins, because we will not going anywhere. More than 1 month is fatal in crypto currency world.
My own proposal regarding this is to do parallel development: You can have Evan fix payments, another guy working on I2P integration, another one working on merged mining to create a "testbed" for future developments, another trying to merge bitcoin code developments on darkcoin, another working for an encrypted end-to-end system that will allow anonymous payments - etc etc. If we take stuff in a serial way where A must be finished to get the job done in B to then go to C to then go to D, instead of working A / B / C / D in parallel, you stay behind. Multi-threading is the answer |
|
|
|
I did so, but stopped at 88820.
Can add a config?
Do you have version .2? If not update to .2 |
|
|
|
The last block was 38 minutes ago and that is "not ready for prime time" or usable in the real world......We are delusional, this thing is not working!!  [/size] People wire billions/trillions through the banks and it takes ...days. So, even if it is used to transact a fraction of this volume in a few minutes time across the globe, it's still good. And remember there are A LOT of people that do not have access to banking services, credit cards etc on a global scale. Καλησπέρα Αλέξανδρε. Όλα καλά? Καλησπερα Σαββα, ολα μια χαρα  The OP's concern will go away when a "credit card" service will show up.
One that you load your coins to, and they perform the transaction instantly.
Somehow, like what happened with the banks.
They didn't have credit cards before did they?
I am sure that we are soon to find out that a service like this will be announced and it's probably from one of the big players.
Wouldn't be surprised if it was VISA itself.
Preloaded coins could work. But Bitpay is also offering near-instaneous payments. The moment you send the money everything is more-or-less accepted the same second, like you just entered your paypal ID or something. For the average person it's even easier than paypal or credit cards. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
