Technicals are good, but I'll take fundamentals any day of the week: Back in March (price 0.0012) I wrote: As for large investment interest mentioned earlier, that's natural: The "transparent" market cap of bitcoin and alts is 10 billion USD. The anonymous market is peanuts: 4mn USD (1mn anoncoin + 3mn darkcoin). When the anonymous market delivers, if even 1% of the transparent money move to privacy-centric coins, we are talking about 100mn marketcap to be shared between anonymous coins. You can't go wrong there, although from an investment perspective I doubt they are talking exclusively about DRK. It would probably be a portfolio of coins with unique anonymity characteristics. That would also serve as a hedge to a potential loss in the bitcoin and alt market which would seem as problematic for being transparent. This type of money involved as investment and hedging is more important for coin price than market adoption in commercial trades done with DarkSend, simply due to the enormous volume of USD that are involved. Adoption in transactions will be slow. Today you can't even buy things with Bitcoins (except 0.01% of the cases), so the issue of adoption of altcoins is in itself somewhat of an oxymoron. But there will be a day when this will change.
In early April I wrote again (same price 0.0012) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=549572.msg6020352#msg6020352As for Hirocoin vs DRK, Hirocoin is competing in the transparent market vs other altcoins.
The transparent market is a monopoly right now of 10bn market cap value where Bitcoin is the undisputed leader. Darkcoin is creating a new market and providing a new choice: Do you want your transactions and your money to be tracked, or do you want privacy?
So, just as you have one shop and everyone goes there (100% market) and then another one opens and the marketshare is shifted towards the new choice, it's the same situation with Darkcoin.
By presenting a new choice, people will now be able to choose on whether they want public or private cryptocurrencies. If even 1% of the transparent market opts for privacy, we are talking about 100 mn market cap. If 10% goes for the private market, we are talking about a billion USD.
I don't know how Hirocoin, or any other plain altcoin can have a better "this is the coin to watch" prospect than DRK. The fundamentals are very strong.
So we went from a 4mn anonymous market to ~70-100mn (depending if one counts the Bytecoin marketcap), getting the 1% milestone. Next stop is the 10% milestone for anonymous coins. It could take a while though. This is not a ride for people with Attention Deficit Disorder who want to see the price move up every day and panic if it doesn't, or people who are into pumps and dumps between coins. Now show me ONE technical analysis which predicted anonymous marketcaps of 70-100mn USD. Oh, there is none because they ignore the fundamentals. |
|
|
|
do not want to hate here or anything - I still have quite a few darks which I bought early.
The big competitor for dark is NOT existing coins adding coin mixtures, the big competitors are cryptonotes who really offer trustless anonymity.
For me it was a huge turn down when evan said that he is not implementing ring signature - I see his reasoning (it basically makes the economic model of masternodes useless), but still think it is a failure not to add it.
Evan says he has something better than ring signatures. Ring signatures are good for anonymity but they bloat up the block chain (up to 8x of bitcoin) and that will be a major barrier to any kind of large scale adoption. If Evan's solution is 95% as anonymous and saves us from the bloat then we would be the clear choice over the cryptonote clones from a technical perspective. His solution is planned for RC4 (July). Good things come to those that wait... I am using cryptonote coins to get acquainted with them... too many problems... ram use, bloated blockchain, problematic transactions due to size limit, all-around-scaling issues in terms of cpu/ram/disk requirement, problematic adoption from exchanges/merchants etc... the only thing that seems fixable is the gui. All the rest need heavy modification or redesign to even be usable. And that's on a technical level, because on an economic level the inflation of cryptonote coins is killing the investors and those who hedged DRK with them. I think both drk and cryptonote coins have the same opponent: a cryptonote v2 coin that solves the first generation issues and retains or even improves the anonymity capabilities. And even then it will have the question of "is it robust and safe?" - because it's a new blockchain that hasn't been time-tested as well as bitcoin has. |
|
|
|
What is happening ?! Who can save the price ;( ?!! I jsut bought 100 DRK, thats all I have !
It's just that the buying power is off the book and that means that low volume can send the price down. But it can easily go back up once a buyer places an order (as it happened with the 10k order @195). |
|
|
|
Someones trying to keep LTC propped up - 1737 BTC buy wall at 0.017 on BTC-e.
They'll withdraw it when the dumping starts...  |
|
|
|
While all this FUD is going on I think ill remind you all why you are here.
1) XC has the best Dev in the Alt-Currency community fullstop. Check out his LinkedIn profile, this isn't up for debate.
Credentials look good indeed. 2) XC has the best plan for anonymous technology, and probably the only Dev who could pull it off
This is the problem right now: Trusted solution = bad plan / fundamental design flaw 3) XC is getting updated pretty much every other day, its moving at a faster pace than nearly any other coin
True 4) XC isn't just a currency, they are building an entire fucking platform.
So are other coins 5) XC still hasn't been noticed yet by the media
True 6) XC is hugely undervalued.
It's still top 20 marketcap... you can't go top10 in a few days. Seriously. The price went ahead of the fundamentals. |
|
|
|
Rebounce ?
More like dead cat bounce... When its back at 0.00016 this time tomorrow I'm gonna remember you, and how you probably only lose money. It will make me smile I'm actually buying the way down trying to trade it, but it's making me losses already since it broke 0.0011 you bash XC like crazy and now say you buying? just crazy Trading a coin requires having the coin... otherwise you can't really trade it, can you? |
|
|
|
Rebounce ?
More like dead cat bounce... When its back at 0.00016 this time tomorrow I'm gonna remember you, and how you probably only lose money. It will make me smile I'm actually buying the way down trying to trade it, but it's making me losses already since it broke 0.0011 |
|
|
|
Rebounce ?
More like dead cat bounce... |
|
|
|
are we getting some kinda of double spend?
No... just bagholders that bought at 3 and can sell at 85 with >20x profit Only problem is that other bagholders want to dump their coins too so they are competing downwards on who'll get to the exit first and cash out. |
|
|
|
I cannot transfer XMR to bittrex. What's wrong?  Protocol limitations. Is there any dev, from any BCN-coin trying to fix this? It's quite annoying - and not only that, but people used to Bitcoin consider it a ridiculous limitation. |
|
|
|
|
Bagholders competing for the exit... (trying to lock profits from cheap coins)
|
|
|
|
This was consistent with the fact that any time Max Keiser tries to pump any crypto currency market he has almost a 100% record of the price going 180 degrees in the opposite direction. Bitcoin, Quark, Maxcoin, DRK - you name it, he's the coin Jinx. Kind of "RMT" (Reverse Midas Touch). The only one he ever got right was Bitcoin itself years ago so I suppose we can forgive him all the small misses given that he got the big one right  True... he did get one right though, a few days after the fork when he said DRK was cheap... it was like 0.01-0.013 or something. But that was quite obvious really. |
|
|
|
Is Cryptsy acting up?
I can see trades for Drk coin happening as the price keeps changing, but on the buy and sell windows, nothing is moving and the last trade was ages ago.
Wanted to buy some Drk coin but it just seems stuck.
I have logged in and out and used different browsers, same thing.
Last trade I can see listed was:
2014-06-05 03:41:08
It's stuck... It does make some transactions but very slowly and with no relation to the orderbook prices. |
|
|
|
i'm not worried about the price personally i could sell now and still be way up, just sad to see how a thriving community, just goes silent, just because the price doesn't indefiently rise, it was 500 when i bought in less then 3 weeks ago now it's 100k down from 4 and people are like" ohh XC is dead'  WTF. Welcome to cryptoland... if a coin doesn't go up everyday it's obviously dead |
|
|
|
|
Checkpointing should stay for RC3/4 to have a stable network while hardforking, but after DarkSend is finalized it should go out with a new fork. Checkpointing centralizes the network.
Checkpointing is good
a) for testing dev updates on mainnet that have a certain risk of causing network forks (like the masternode payments bug)
and
b) small coins or shitcoins that experience 51% attacks due to lack of hashpower
...so it's not something that we really want to have on a permanent basis, lest we "associate" ourselves with the (b) crowd.
|
|
|
|
|
One of the mind-blowing properties of gold is its weight... most people do not really understand it because they haven't had the "luxury" of dealing in any significant quantity. Yet if one took a 2lt soft-drink bottle and filled it up with gold dust, that bottle would weigh approximately 40kg.
Storing 1 ton of gold requires something like a 37cm cube that one can fit in a safe or even a ...backpack. Silver stacking is a real problem in terms of sizes, but gold... well... not really. This weight/space relation allows gold to be hidden in many resourceful ways, if one is so inclined to hide it.
|
|
|
|
|
Manfred: Miners mine, miners sell. Distribution occurs.
What's exactly your problem? That eduffield bought his own coin from the miners?
Oh yes, because that doesn't fit the theory that he instamined 2 million coins himself. For if he had, why buy from miners? According to that theory he not only instamined, but actually ...solo-mined the 100% of the coin... So there shouldn't be any miners... right. But there were (even cpu farms were on it), and they were also selling for cheap (100k DRKs for 2.5 BTC)
So why is the dev accused ? For buying coins from the miners? Such horror.
|
|
|
|
Trust me when I say media attention is not really desirable while the "nodes-can-steal-money" issue remains.
Atcsecure already said dynamic trust system will prevent bad actors from stealing. Are you more or as qualified as him to present an argument opposing this? If so, let's hear it. Because all I've seen you do is offer up ungrounded "thesis statements" with no supporting arguments. Not trying to troll, but I'd like to see a solid argument of why you oppose atcsecures method. Until then, nothing you say holds any water. Operative word: will. Which means, as it is right now, with nodes being able to steal money, you don't want much attention because it can instantly snap the other way around to ...negative attention. Let's see the fix first... You seem to spend most of your time on the DRK thread.. What a shock.. Apols in advance for giving you some competition. I've given the exact same advice regarding DRK marketing in the past. Finish the product, market later. No need to have broken functionality trigger people "ohhh this is broken" type of stuff. |
|
|
|
Trust me when I say media attention is not really desirable while the "nodes-can-steal-money" issue remains.
Atcsecure already said dynamic trust system will prevent bad actors from stealing. Are you more or as qualified as him to present an argument opposing this? If so, let's hear it. Because all I've seen you do is offer up ungrounded "thesis statements" with no supporting arguments. Not trying to troll, but I'd like to see a solid argument of why you oppose atcsecures method. Until then, nothing you say holds any water. Operative word: will. Which means, as it is right now, with nodes being able to steal money, you don't want much attention because it can instantly snap the other way around to ...negative attention. Let's see the fix first... |
|
|
|
|
Trust me when I say media attention is not really desirable while the "nodes-can-steal-money" issue remains.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
