i was offline from weekend to today, do did i miss something good news? because i now i see that we need only ~30 btc to go to 90k sat.. its terrible price for XC... all people said that we are going very huge soon, but every day we are going lower and lower.. whats wrong with that community or that coin?? i cant understand...
Some mysterious whale keeps dumping on our news. Look up my post history. It's all good news for days. Then look at the times the announcements were made and the times at which 6-16K sells came in. XC is solid. Someone's trying very hard to make it look otherwise. They cannot fight reality though. We'll win out. |
|
|
|
Cryptographic contests and bounties where the systems inner working are not published, are generally not accepted among cryptographers.
While Kerckhoffs's principle mainly applies to cryptographic systems, following Shannon's maxim, I believe it should be applied analogously to anonymity systems. If the way the system works is opaque, you cannot reason well about its security.
Yes we have plans for external testing of the XC app around the official public launch (Rev 3). They'll need access to the code. However the last time we did this (Rev 1) a reviewer cloned XC, so we'll try to be strategic about it. - it's not coinjoin, because it’s not centralised or semi-centralised. There's nothing akin to masternodes in XC either.
This is a very strange claim. CoinJoin was originally designed to be decentralized and trustless. To me, it sounds more like you have implemented CoinJoin the way it was originally supposed to be built. Apologies, I should've been clearer on this point; I was combining the Darksend coinjoin implementation with gmaxwell's general concept for it. XC is not coinjoin, so say the devs. Let us hope for their sake that nobody hex edits name and certain other things in the binary to launch a clone coin. :-)
Indeed! |
|
|
|
Now that this has been cleared up, here's how XC works:
......
From my understanding, does XC still need a number of masternodes (or supernodes or simply nodes or whatever you call them) to perform mixing ? If the answer is yes, the coin will be less decentralized as long as amount of nodes smaller than amount of clients/users, is it true ? An who will operate these nodes ? what is the benefit for operating one ? Is there any potential leakage of user's anonymity in case one entity own a sizeable amount of nodes ? No, XC no longer has any degree of centralisation. Every node forwards/mixes transactions trustlessly. There's also currently no minimum amount of coins required to run an Xnode. The app does it automatically. The benefit of operating an xnode will be: - you get tx fees, though these are still to be determined. Chances are they'll be very low. - you get to use secure private messaging (currently working; update due shortly) - you get to stake The messaging thing is the strongest incentive to keep apps running. If we need to provide more of an incentive we might increase tx fees. But we expect tx volume to make up for low fees in due course. |
|
|
|
And a reminder to punt this news far and wide: |
|
|
|
Thanks, but what would make you think I'm a hater? I've posted respectfully on the Cloak thread and respectfully to you, even when you've been abusive. ..... Wait, it takes 9 minutes? |
|
|
|
Backfire:  |
|
|
|
|
Hi folks
Introducing:
**The XC Daily Update**
I think it would be a good idea to let the community know what the team is up to each day.
We always have a lot going on and it's futile to try report everything, but I'll give you regular updates on the agenda.
Today:
- Dan is working on the next update to secure private messaging (EM).
- I'm drafting the new OP for this thread.
- We're updating website materials, the FAQ, etc.
|
|
|
|
Mr. Boh is talking smack on Twitter again: https://twitter.com/cryptoboh/status/491595053874569216LOL, that post he screen-captured is a month old, he's really trying hard to smear XC. Anyone more familiar with these matters care to address his tweet? Or should we just let it go? Replied. |
|
|
|
Dasource will fill u in on those answers when He awake.. hes PoSA dev... did u have any luck tracing those transactions Theoretical gave u......
Thanks. Yes, I'll wait until he's awake. I didn't try to track those transactions because I'm not testing Cloak's anonymity. Before we can do that I'll need to understand how it works. Questions for now are: - how do you prevent blockchain bloat if nodes are sending dust to each other all the time? - if staking coins are spent to mix/forward txs to recipients, then how can you trust the nodes won't steal coins instead of forwarding them? - if new addresses are mined to anonymise transactions, then how do you avoid losing transactions due to orphaned blocks? - alternatively if you wait for the blocks to mature, then how do you avoid long transaction times? So for now let's say that C***k's approach leaves much to be explained. |
|
|
|
I understand where you guys come from but not sure what you expect of a coin that is work in progress. The code will eventually be all open source, as of now the code of the previous implementation is open source. So we could pretend the coin is at REV1 at there is the mixer open source. Any thoughts on it? http://pastebin.com/G4mH4AxR"Closed source can be everything and nothing." - you are free to make a transaction and find a link between sender and receiver in the blockchain. I think a bounty is still in effect for this. I can't use the code if it is not open source. It is a coin stealer, presumptively, and a key logger. When the source is open and the coin is usable, then peer review will be effective. Until then, it is a joke. If you have an unreversible mixer, congratulations. Bitcoin will almost certainly want to adopt it. However, it won't fix fungibility. Of course. You're under no pressure to use XC until all the code is open source. That's quite understandable. But it's still a solid project and an attractive investment, regardless. There's no incentive to wait until it's an established product before investing. |
|
|
|
So, we're now integrated into edigicash!  "Hello!
This is to inform the community that we have added XCurrency to eDigiCash, our crypto-currency payment gateway.
Merchants can sell in 63 (fiat) currencies and get paid in Bitcoin, Litecoin, Peercoin, Darkcoin, Dogecoin, Vertcoin and now XCurrency.
No registration is required. No red tape, and no Big Brother.
Merchants and webmasters can add "Pay Now" buttons to their website or blog, or payment links to their emails. API libraries for PHP and JSP/Java are available.
For shopping cart users, a Wordpress/WooCommerce plugin has been released. Plugins for other shopping carts will follow.
The payment pages are optimized for mobile and desktop users. Following languages are supported: English, German, French and Spanish.
You will find more info here: http://www.edigicash.co"
- http://www.reddit.com/r/XCofficialreddit/comments/2bdzlm/announcement_edigicash_express_supports_xcurrency/Just curious, did this happen because the team or community asked them to add it or did they select XC as there new currency? I didn't do anything. They just decided XC is great. |
|
|
|
- the average newbie to crypto has trouble telling the difference between P&D scams and legit projects
- there's a general lack of clear information to guide newbies
- coins thus only rise to prominence by getting pumped
- the majority of speculators thus only hear about it 3/4 of the way to the top and get burned.
We really want to avoid contributing to this dynamic.
That all sounds very idealistic. And, yet, you will be contributing to exactly this dynamic once you release your delayed open source. No we won't, because there'll be a clear differentiator between us and whoever clones us. It'll be obvious. In all fairness, we'd avoid this dynamic even less by being completely closed source. But then we'd not get to share our tech breakthroughs with the crypto community. And that would be worse. |
|
|
|
So, we're now integrated into edigicash! "Hello!
This is to inform the community that we have added XCurrency to eDigiCash, our crypto-currency payment gateway.
Merchants can sell in 63 (fiat) currencies and get paid in Bitcoin, Litecoin, Peercoin, Darkcoin, Dogecoin, Vertcoin and now XCurrency.
No registration is required. No red tape, and no Big Brother.
Merchants and webmasters can add "Pay Now" buttons to their website or blog, or payment links to their emails. API libraries for PHP and JSP/Java are available.
For shopping cart users, a Wordpress/WooCommerce plugin has been released. Plugins for other shopping carts will follow.
The payment pages are optimized for mobile and desktop users. Following languages are supported: English, German, French and Spanish.
You will find more info here: http://www.edigicash.co"
- http://www.reddit.com/r/XCofficialreddit/comments/2bdzlm/announcement_edigicash_express_supports_xcurrency/ |
|
|
|
For those who don't follow on reddit (why aren't you) here is an pretty awesome connection that was made through reddit. Announcement - eDigiCash Express supports XCurrency (self.XCofficialreddit) submitted an hour ago by edigicash Hello! This is to inform the community that we have added XCurrency to eDigiCash, our crypto-currency payment gateway. Merchants can sell in 63 (fiat) currencies and get paid in Bitcoin, Litecoin, Peercoin, Darkcoin, Dogecoin, Vertcoin and now XCurrency. No registration is required. No red tape, and no Big Brother. Merchants and webmasters can add "Pay Now" buttons to their website or blog, or payment links to their emails. API libraries for PHP and JSP/Java are available. For shopping cart users, a Wordpress/WooCommerce plugin has been released. Plugins for other shopping carts will follow. The payment pages are optimized for mobile and desktop users. Following languages are supported: English, German, French and Spanish. You will find more info here: http://www.edigicash.coWow! Very good news! They should've posted it here. Ha ha. |
|
|
|
Still need assistance in getting the private transactions to work on build 2.45. Over 15 attempts of various amounts between 1 and 10 and no dice. Correct ports open on both the router and win firewall, wallet has full network access, etc. No coins lost, just no transactions showing up and certainly nothing ending up on the other end. It shouldn't be this difficult... what am I missing?
That's odd. Is your internet connection through a large institution or some entity that might have all manner of filtering on its network? For example the Oxford University network doesn't let private tx's through at present. This is an issue that'll be resolved in future updates. |
|
|
|
I see the point of not wanting clones but it's inevitable that good open source tech will be forked.
Yes and no. It gets forked certainly, because it can, but only when there is something seriously wrong with the direction taken by the original developers (such as the example you gave) does the fork stand a chance of community support. Unsuccessful forks, by contrast, make the original much stronger. By blocking forks you remove credible tests of your fitness, which makes the rational observer question your fitness. I get what you're saying and I agree for the most part. However there's a very strong additional motivation to fork: Start a new blockchain, mine from the beginning and try make 10000% profit. There is no reason for the community to support such a fork, as described. It is just an imitation with some obvious scammer behind it, while the brand value of the original developer will be vastly stronger. Such as fork will go nowhere, and as explained above will serve as a test, which once passed, will make the original stronger. If there are other differences, then in that case, the community might just have a reason. Good point. I personally wouldn't support such a fork. However the reality is that a whole lot of people (and pump groups) do support such forks. It's unfortunately eminently practically feasible to pull these things off: - the average newbie to crypto has trouble telling the difference between P&D scams and legit projects - there's a general lack of clear information to guide newbies - coins thus only rise to prominence by getting pumped - the majority of speculators thus only hear about it 3/4 of the way to the top and get burned. We really want to avoid contributing to this dynamic. |
|
|
|
I see the point of not wanting clones but it's inevitable that good open source tech will be forked.
Yes and no. It gets forked certainly, because it can, but only when there is something seriously wrong with the direction taken by the original developers (such as the example you gave) does the fork stand a chance of community support. Unsuccessful forks, by contrast, make the original much stronger. By blocking forks you remove credible tests of your fitness, which makes the rational observer question your fitness. I get what you're saying and I agree for the most part. However there's a very strong additional motivation to fork: Start a new blockchain, mine from the beginning and try make 10000% profit. Therefore it doesn't make sense not to release code for currencies on a delayed timeline. Pure open source is great for a lot of scenarios, but not for a currency. |
|
|
|
They are all calling for discussion on coins without complete open source code to be banned now. *sigh* I don't think Risto would possibly take such action. We still need to get the word out. Agreed. I don't think discussion of XC will get banned. We have a fair and mutually beneficial policy on open sourcing our code. I've posted this on the thread, so they'll all appreciate it now. My hope is that fruitful discussion will ensue. We're having a productive discussion about XC on rpietila's thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=624223.new#new |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
