Next PR campaign will attract a lot of attention with our EM working and our new futur project of anonymous voice call (and maybe video). I can't wait to see the undisclosed anonymous feature! Could it be possible to have an XC mail adress being able to communicate outside the XC network? For exemple sending a mail from XCwallet to xxx@hotmail.com adress. Is it possible to do something like that? Or even better have xchat communicate to a Skype address? In terms of anonymity it would be a huge deal because you can remain anonymous to all parties including the party you are communicating with. I see the usefulness of this. It makes a lot of sense. It should be easy to code, but it partly defeats the point. It'll involve trusting some server to send your message on to the recipient. So although you might remain anonymous, your message will become vulnerable once it enters a centralised email/Skype system. But hey, building an imap/smtp server and whatever Skype uses into the XC app doesn't sound impossible. Thanks. Even if the message could be compromise circulating though servers, sender identity would stay anonymous,ip adress would stay anonymous, no relationship proof could be find. Next point, i would imagine a tag that show the origin source of the message or voice call, for exemple our XCpseudo + @XCplatform or xxx@XCmail. Basically each communication from xc wallet to outside wallet would be an advertising moove. Non XC users receiving a mail or voice call would ask where does your adress come from...how is it working...Anonymous really? free really? ho but it's also a currency... Best way to show real application to the mass and create the first and most important feeling of confidence that XC technology is working for real. It would spread around the world XC existence really quick. I agree that this would effectively be "marketing" for XC. It would be pretty effective. One thing we'd need to be careful about though is that users often don't want to come across as being cagey when they mail people. Using an XC-to-email service with an address like "pseudo@..." would be pretty cagey. So the appearance of this sort of thing is important... |
|
|
|
On another note, was the undisclosed rev2 privacy feature revealed yet? Or are we still waiting for that?
That's still coming :-) |
|
|
|
Perfectly orchestrated Pump and Dump via feedback from shady developers who deleted their own altcoin github sources back in the day (XC). Another developer from XC was pumping Cachecoin a few weeks ago. This whole scene thing with "XC" wreaks of manipulation, malice and heck of lot of red-tape and corruption. Apparently the premine was used to "hire" other people in the team, who were later announced on a day where they did another pump and dump as the announcements came in of some guys who said they will integrate this altcoin in ATM.
You can also see some BTC-E trolls pumping KeyCoin at the moment. Same familiar faces. Everyone knows this too, they are just in it for doubling/tripling their BTC holdings and leave a lot of new forum members/crypto newbies bagholding who will inadvertently later on create threads about how awesome KeyCoin is and pollute other coin threads with their incessant shilling, while the puppet/pump masters are gone and onto the next anon coin. Same story over and over.
I think XC is the first such coin, along a now growing list of anon wannabe coins.
You refer to old and discredited FUD about XC. - XC does not use Github for development. Dan temporarily put some early XC code into Github to refute FUD-claims that it was a Fedora clone. The code was subjected to peer review, clearing the allegations, and then deleted. - XC open-sources its code on a delayed timeline. Recently XC released its Rev 1 mixer. - XC's Team have made their identities public and thus put their reputations at stake. If you think they're shady, you'll need to substantiate your view, because the evidence here is to the contrary. - Cachecoin is a project of Jasinlee's, and Jasin is an XC developer. Cachecoin is in active development, none of the premine has been dumped there is no premine, and its future concerns PoBC, which is part of how XC will run on mobile phones. - XC's ATM integration is not related to hiring anyone. The first two members of the incipient XC Foundation are involved in ATMs. As they're Foundation members they're not being paid. So that part of your statement is ill-informed conjecture. - XC's premine is necessary to fund sustained development. You're welcome to disagree, but I fail to see how it constitutes something suspicious. (a) It can't be spent unaccountably, since people are always watching it. (b) It's more candid than an instamine and (c) it doesn't require taking other people's money upfront like an IPO. I'm open to discussion on this last point, but I don't think that it can be used to substantiate claims of XC being suspicious without substantial further argument as to why this might be the case. - Lastly I cannot comment on KeyCoin's legitimacy, other than to note my public annoyance at their frequent omission of the fact that they're using last-gen XC tech. |
|
|
|
Anyone care to review KeyCoin ?? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=695457.0Only 1,000,000 coins POS 22 member Dev Team See Dan MetCalf's comments viz a viz KeyCoin's autonomous solution ( Which is fully functional atm ) Lots of cheerleaders as the price runup has been substantial in the past week .. Just interested in opinions if there is anything there or just a well orchestrated P&D .. See the OP and posts #1664 and #1795 for the main features .. Triff .. This one is pretty controversial. From the one side, Dan Metcalf (XCurrency dev, if someone doesn't know) said a lot of good things about it. From another side, they took XC's rev.1 code and built upon it a new coin, however failing to acknowledge this. At least in the opening post. I saw someone claimed they avoid this in their further posts as well, haven't checked myself. I can confirm that KeyCoin uses XC's Rev 1 mixer. It is a non-trustless mixer and, for XC, is last-gen tech. XC made its code open-source as per its stance on open sourcing code: Q: Is XCopen sourced?
A: XC is committed to the open source model. Open source code is vital for the health and advancement of cryptographic technologies, and it is a privilege to share our technical breakthroughs with a community such as this. We believe that XC's code embodies several world-firsts enabling anonymity that is scalable, mobile-friendly, POS-integrated, and is ultimately a platform upon which a broad range of Blockchain 2.0 technologies will be built.
However people’s faith in cryptocurrency projects is significantly hindered by clones. Therefore we believe that the ethical way to engage with the community is to make our code available on a delayed timeline. This way, the community will still benefit from our work, while we'd reduce the incentive for developers to flood the marketplace with clones that lack a long term future and reduce the trustworthiness of the altcoin phenomenon. XC represents several market-leading innovations, and we are honoured to make these available to the community in the near future.
|
|
|
|
Next PR campaign will attract a lot of attention with our EM working and our new futur project of anonymous voice call (and maybe video). I can't wait to see the undisclosed anonymous feature! Could it be possible to have an XC mail adress being able to communicate outside the XC network? For exemple sending a mail from XCwallet to xxx@hotmail.com adress. Is it possible to do something like that? Or even better have xchat communicate to a Skype address? In terms of anonymity it would be a huge deal because you can remain anonymous to all parties including the party you are communicating with. I see the usefulness of this. It makes a lot of sense. It should be easy to code, but it partly defeats the point. It'll involve trusting some server to send your message on to the recipient. So although you might remain anonymous, your message will become vulnerable once it enters a centralised email/Skype system. But hey, building an imap/smtp server and whatever Skype uses into the XC app doesn't sound impossible. |
|
|
|
Also hope XC stays on track, the little detour from anon to Xchat is nice, the future extention to voice & video great but hope this team first finishes the anon part, including public bounty then focusses on the next thing.
A lot of teams are working on the same 'holy grail', lets be the first with unbreakable & stable anon, build from there
I can confirm that we're well on track with private payments. In fact there are some significant developments that I can't reveal yet. The reason that we're focusing on XChat for the moment is because chat is a huge market, and messaging is necessary for Bitcoin 2.0-type apps. Also, XC's anonymity is both stable and unbroken. Post-Rev 3 third party and public testing will give it "bulletproof" status. :-) Lastly, I think the holy grail is scalable bulletproof privacy. For example cryptonote coins have strong (though not particularly flexible, afaik) anonymity, but they can't scale. Scalability is absolutely critical for mobile markets. And mobile is the future (and present) of computing. |
|
|
|
Didn't Dan accept and say he will review this weekend? Perhaps I misunderstood...?
Well, he didn't "accept" because he wasn't offered a review. He just expressed an interest in being allowed to download the software and test it out (i.e. not to look at the source code). |
|
|
|
Dan here is a little look into the glass bowl of "forum psychology" befor considering that review.
Since you offered to do it and havent been approached this are the two possible outcomes:
1: Your review is positive like the keycoin one, Cloak PR knows how to capitalise on this and cloak will outperform XC short term (long term is the summ from alot of short terms) Cloak will officilly be no P&D anymore cause of Dan Metcalf approval stamp.Ratio between positive effect on XC and Cloak: 1 to 10 ( like keycoin)
2: your review is negative. since you asked to do it and not been asked you look like an ass that just wants to sabotage the competition leading up to our REV3 release. i know thats not your intentions but this is how its gonna be made to look , and as of now our community while having quality members doesn't have the manpower to equal out the perception.
No matter what this review will not turn out positiv for your project I'm 100% shure, and I'm good at anticipating people/crowd reactions.
I know you mean good but not now . please , please, please
Did I miss something? Where did he say he was going to review cloak? If such a thing where to happen I agree it's risky either way. To be honest I think with key everyone was a bit surprised at how influential his opinion would be. Let's clear a few things up: - Someone stole a private IRC conversation, allegedly in which Dan participated, and put it into pastebin. - This does not amount to Dan (or anyone from XC) publicly saying anything against Cloak. - So XC does not need to "make amends" or do anything of the sort. - Dan further expressed interest in reviewing Cloak. I'm also interested, since I have a number of questions about how their approach could be feasible. But I agree that a review from Dan would be politically complex. And I doubt the Cloak devs will want one. |
|
|
|
How on earth was XC "decloaked" ? It has nothing to do with cloakcoin or its tech. There will be no problem with bloating blockchain, and the reason the anon rev is stalled for gui is because the encrypted messaging was being worked. There have been many releases since "a few weeks ago". Don't take my words for it, if you consider yourself an intelligent individual just go search the topic and official XC forums for yourself, but don't just throw FUD around like that.
xc anon was cracked by chaeplin but they are redoing it now. i don't have time to keep up with xc anymore and have moved on, sorry. it's too hard to tell what they have working and what is just more vapor. they talk like everything is working but all i see is vapor. please educate me to what is working now and what is just planned for release (rev 3) and when. good to see they have some bounties unlike cloak. Ah, that opinion. It's old FUD. Chaeplin didn't understand what was being tested. Here's why. |
|
|
|
XC offers both completely anonymous transactions and instant p2p encrypted messaging. In other words, XC offers a complete platform that protects one's rights to privacy. Bye NSA.
working or vaporware? when is all this stuff supposed to happen, rev 3? release date? Once again, this stuff has happened already. To sum it all up: Rev 2.45 (private payments). XChat RC 6 (true P2P instant messaging with end-to-end encryption) XC TOR Stick (releasing on Thursday; doesn't use TOR exit nodes so packet sniffers can't find you) |
|
|
|
I don't get it but ok I guess.  I don't get it either. i have no want or need to use xchat. not a feature i would use unless send payment in which case i would just use bitshares x which is working and not promised vapor. This is not vapour. It's working. Download XChat RC 6 here, and then send me a message using the details on my sig. Just in case you're not quite convinced, here's a screenshot of XChat RC 6 (the current test release) on my computer:  |
|
|
|
You can't spy productively on XC nodes because private transactions are fragmented and because every node forwards them trustless. This creates a scenario where there's no telling if the sender/recipient of a fragment is the original sender or final recipient, and there's no telling whether the amount sent is the whole amount.
Furthermore since fragments can be sent, even non-private transactions become "private" in this respect, since the amount sent could be a fragment, and so a spy has no grounds to assert that the amount sent/received is the total amount, or that the sender/recipient is the original sender/final recipient.
"You can't" or you won't be able to when rev 3 is released? you're talking vaporware right now right? when will this be released? My comment above refers to the existing Rev 2.45 release. Download it, try it out. |
|
|
|
This is not vapour. It's working. Download XChat RC 6 here, and then send me a message using the details on my sig. As for the future, this is vaporware that XC will bring to market post-Rev 3: ***The XC Daily Update***
Hello all It's been confirmed by the developers that XChat will include voice calling in post-Rev 3 editions, and video calling further into the future. So basically we have a decentralised, private, Skype.  Here's to the future! |
|
|
|
I don't get it but ok I guess. I don't get it either. i have no want or need to use xchat. not a feature i would use unless send payment in which case i would just use bitshares x which is working and not promised vapor. This is not vapour. It's working. Download XChat RC 6 here, and then send me a message using the details on my sig. |
|
|
|
- XC is the only project with an already-implemented anonymity solution that is currently working.
is it working? last i saw a few weeks ago it was not working in the gui wallet (still command line, right?). after the odd midnight rev release a few weeks ago i quit watching that thread. please update me if that has changed. It's working. Download XC Rev 2.45 here. |
|
|
|
If Dan is really serious about chat and voice (video does not matter a lot currently) over the XC protocol, what can I say, this is a totally new, grandiose, multibillion market. And most importantly it means freedom of communications - the missing link in the IT sector (for now). Anyone selling below 0.25 BTC makes a big financial mistake, remember this statement till Christmas.
+1 |
|
|
|
Just go download Rev 2.45 or XChat RC 6 and see for yourself. Both work, and both are and will continue to be tested (with bounties).
I'm not sure how high your standards are but the goal is for XC to be bulletproof by Rev 3. And at their current (early) stage of development XC is solid, and working.
Lastly if you keep up with the XC team you'll know that these future-oriented announcements are not said lightly. We're under a lot of pressure because people's expectations are very high; the price will crash very hard if we're even late for an update, never mind if we were to fail. So we do not make promises we're not confident we can deliver on.
All I see on the site are binaries - is it closed source??? No. XC recently released the code for the Rev 1 (trusted) mixer (which KeyCoin has happily adopted). XC is currently using its Rev 2 trustless mixer (which is a world-first). Here's XC's stance on open-source: Q: Is XC open sourced?
A: XC is committed to the open source model. Open source code is vital for the health and advancement of cryptographic technologies, and it is a privilege to share our technical breakthroughs with a community such as this. We believe that XC's code embodies several world-firsts enabling anonymity that is scalable, mobile-friendly, POS-integrated, and is ultimately a platform upon which a broad range of Blockchain 2.0 technologies will be built.
However people’s faith in cryptocurrency projects is significantly hindered by clones. Therefore we believe that the ethical way to engage with the community is to make our code available on a delayed timeline. This way, the community will still benefit from our work, while we'd reduce the incentive for developers to flood the marketplace with clones that lack a long term future and reduce the trustworthiness of the altcoin phenomenon. XC represents several market-leading innovations, and we are honoured to make these available to the community in the near future.http://xc-official.com/faq-page/ |
|
|
|
pushing VoIP over multi-path wireless is very similar [in some ways] as RF conditions on a moving vessel change constantly, thus that "path" could go from steady to unsteady in milliseconds.
There are numerous variables at play and a "dial up" user isn't going to be able to do video with XChat as there will be certain bandwidth requirements.
I do have extensive experience with voice/video over a wide-range of network topologies [wired,wireless and satellite] and appreciate the challenges this task will face. Part of it comes down the codec's used as well.
Dan
So you're saying this should be fun for you  We're aware of how bold the claim we made today is. XC is under a lot of pressure because people's expectations are very high; the price would crash very hard if we're even late for an update, never mind if we were to fail. So we do not make promises we're not confident we can deliver on. XChat really can have voice (and eventually video). It'll be encrypted, P2P and decentralised. It's gonna happen. |
|
|
|
So XC teamm announced its working on making the wallet/app Skype like, albeit totally anonymous and decentralized. Surely that must be worth some looking into. But no, lets argue whether s topic should be moderated or not...
I can announce all sorts of bullshit, doesn't make it viable, workable, or even doable. Let's wait and see if they deliver on something that works AND is cryptographically sound. Just go download Rev 2.45 or XChat RC 6 and see for yourself. Both work, and both are and will continue to be tested (with bounties). I'm not sure how high your standards are but the goal is for XC to be bulletproof by Rev 3. And at their current (early) stage of development XC is solid, and working. Lastly if you keep up with the XC team you'll know that these future-oriented announcements are not said lightly. We're under a lot of pressure because people's expectations are very high; the price will crash very hard if we're even late for an update, never mind if we were to fail. So we do not make promises we're not confident we can deliver on. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
