That part: If the pool doesn't pay the correct amount to the correct node, we'll know and we'll shame them. We'll get miners to move to honest pools.
...won't work. We couldn't even get the miners of coinmine to switch when they were >51% because they were getting consistency and low variance (compared to the official which was DOS'ed). The days of 2-3 pools also seem to be over: http://drk.poolhash.org/poolhash.htmlThe pie chart is revealing. Just use hard fork and another system of election/payment that doesn't affect network stability. "Honest pools" won't work. Guaranteed.It's 3 hours %, changed 6 hours to 3 hours. I will add more graphs. Aha... the point I was making is that these type of guys will not cooperate: 7 mins ago May 28 2014 05:24:19 75865 6461.618 5 pool_unknown_11 259 mins ago May 28 2014 05:23:00 75864 6630.923 5 coinmine.pw 62 14 mins ago May 28 2014 05:17:24 75863 6611.335 5 miningpoolhub 13 14 mins ago May 28 2014 05:17:11 75862 6438.863 5 trademybitcom 4018 mins ago May 28 2014 05:13:51 75861 6270.039 5 pool_unknown_61 618 mins ago May 28 2014 05:13:45 75860 5930.718 5 coinmine.pw 68 19 mins ago May 28 2014 05:12:37 75859 5650.398 5 pool_unknown_56 419 mins ago May 28 2014 05:12:31 75858 6471.832 5 pool_unknown_57 928 mins ago May 28 2014 05:03:18 75857 7113.108 5 official 28 34 mins ago May 28 2014 04:57:32 75856 7241.690 5 pool_unknown_24 4337 mins ago May 28 2014 04:54:58 75855 6584.788 5 pool_unknown_59 2339 mins ago May 28 2014 04:52:35 75854 6407.375 5 trademybitcom 3441 mins ago May 28 2014 04:50:39 75853 6027.662 5 official 21 42 mins ago May 28 2014 04:50:05 75852 5941.220 5 pool_unknown_11 3243 mins ago May 28 2014 04:48:39 75851 6091.048 5 suchpool 27 44 mins ago May 28 2014 04:47:18 75850 5793.907 5 coinmine 78 46 mins ago May 28 2014 04:46:01 75849 5813.018 5 suchpool 45 46 mins ago May 28 2014 04:45:17 75848 5800.880 5 trademybitcom 4548 mins ago May 28 2014 04:43:38 75847 5732.337 5 coinmine.pw 32 49 mins ago May 28 2014 04:42:44 75846 5809.016 5 official 28 50 mins ago May 28 2014 04:41:38 75845 6072.799 5 miningpoolhub 30 55 mins ago May 28 2014 04:36:32 75844 6519.874 5 pool_unknown_61 291 hour ago May 28 2014 04:32:01 75843 7003.063 5 pool_unknown_58 54We need different strategy. |
|
|
|
That part: If the pool doesn't pay the correct amount to the correct node, we'll know and we'll shame them. We'll get miners to move to honest pools.
...won't work. We couldn't even get the miners of coinmine to switch when they were >51% because they were getting consistency and low variance (compared to the official which was DOS'ed). The days of 2-3 pools also seem to be over: http://drk.poolhash.org/poolhash.htmlThe pie chart is revealing. Just use hard fork and another system of election/payment that doesn't affect network stability. "Honest pools" won't work. Guaranteed. |
|
|
|
if mro wants to win the race against XC its gonna need to hurry up
XC is a pump and dump. Nobody will be touching it 2 weeks from now. why will no one be touching it 2 weeks from now. what does monero need to get the lift. Less inflation. There are too many BTCs required per day just to keep the price steady. |
|
|
|
So why 20% fees for masternode payments? This essentially will create twice as many nodes and create a much higher cost to spy on the network. It also creates a larger feedback loop for the price (because as darkcoin is taken out of the supply, it drives the price up), which is good for all of the investors and security of DarkSend. Miners will get less coin, but it's been proven time and time again that when you decrease the coins generated the price will just go up to meet the cost of mining.
Avoid multiple tickets for masternodes. It will reduce number of nodes making the system less resilient. |
|
|
|
8-10% of the monetary base was instamined. 90% is not (2 out of 22).
I'm not a member of the instamine fear squadron, but DRK will likely have 14 million max, not 22 million, since the minimum block reward has been hit years before the 'most likely' scenario that Duffied used to come up with 22 million number. This amounts to ~20% of supply in 2030 and ~14% of the eventual maximum around 2070. See page 6 of DRK whitepaper. I think I remember the graph you are referring to. The curve is on top of the existing coins (aka newly issued), so it wasn't a total. If block reward hits 5 and stabilizes at 5, it'll be 16-17 (someone did the math on the thread). Still 2 out of 16 or 17 are not 100% (PoW/PoS instamine within a week or two). That would label a coin as instamined (100% of monetary base, not a fraction of it). |
|
|
|
I sent some money from poloniex to mintpal and cryptsy around the same time. Cryptsy got them, Mintpal shows them with 0 confs.
Hm...
so they should start to confirm soon... Okay, looks good, everything is back in order.. I will continue to monitor the blockchain They arrived a few minutes ago to mintpal. Ok now. |
|
|
|
|
I sent some money from poloniex to mintpal and cryptsy (like split amount to both) around the same time. Cryptsy got them OK, Mintpal shows them with 0 confs.
Hm...
|
|
|
|
At this time, please download the pre-compiled Release Candidates and read the PDF regarding the use of the wallet. When fully functional, the source will be made available. Please follow this link: http://darkcoin.io/beta.php Use these binaries I get a 404 at this link... Where should I go to make sure I'm up to date after fork? |
|
|
|
Until proof of even FPGAs are posted, ASIC = Pulled out of Obama's ass vaporware and not A real NSA product.
Proof of FPGA is not required, we know that FPGA can do it if someone programs them to. However their acceleration factor is not that big and it's highly unlikely to find thousands of them. ASIC = I don't know. But even at a 500x acceleration factor compared to a GPU (say a 3 MHs GPU / 1.5 GHs ASIC) it'd take HUNDREDS of them to pull stuff like 800-900 gigahash. FPGAs even more so because their acceleration is much closer to GPUs. I saw the link the guy gave as "x11 fpga program" which was bullshit, but hashpower is hashpower and it was tremendous. The main propagandist behind that campaign is cryptohunter who has been pushing this in order to discourage Darkcoin miners since it claims ASIC resistance. If ASICs existed you mean to say they were tested on the crapcoin first and never on DRK ?
If I were the NSA I'd make sure to have hardware ASICs for every single algorithm out there. If I want to break a wallet, or control a crypto network, I won't do it with GPUs. The budget for acquiring such equipment is pretty low for their standards. They could control 51% of bitcoin right now if they spent something like 100-200mn in ASIC for SHA256 and destroy bitcoin. Even 1 bn budget for ASIC hardware is peanuts compared to protecting the hegemony of the dollar. I believe they have the theoretical possibility of overriding every single POW network out there with 51% but a POS coin would remain resilient from a POW attack as it works through POS staking. So they would have a mess at their hand with an anonymous coin that remains resilient. So their hardware would be useless for 51% override. But it wouldn't be useless in the coin generation phase (POW). That's where I suspect they put their hardware on and started mining with that insane hashrate to get a 51% stake and control the future of the coin. If they didn't manage that, they'll manage it through buying a few more to get there. The absence of that hashrate from every other x11 coin is a huge indicator. The fact that, suddenly, 900gh of x11 hashpower appeared out of nowhere just to mine XC, doesn't "just" happen. Government agencies like the NSA have a lot to gain from ensuring DRK is a major success... Governments have more to hide than the average punter out there, it would make funding their wars offshore so much more efficient... The modus operandi of US embassies around the world is money bags and briefcases of money. Money delivery is not hard. On top of that, the funding is zero-cost due to the printing of all the money that they want. The dollar is an infinite resource. This infinity can only be maintained if rivals to the dollar are not more stable than it, so the elite ensure that the politicians of the "developed" world all go into the route of competitive debasement. Third-world-countries are even more debased. Gold and silver are manipulated with paper contracts that are like 100x the actual supply traded. Bitcoin is the only one standing and it is safe to assume that the double digit trillion M3 of USD will not be under threat by it (or other cryptos). If I were the elite I'd want a "Bitcoin kill switch" at my disposal, whether that involves buying asics to control 51%, or other tactics. The cost would be peanuts compared to what's at stake. For POS coins that might be a future threat => I'd have to buy them off or mine them at the initial stage. I consider the existence of NSA-owned SHA256/scrypt/x11/scrypt-n/quark/cryptonote ASICs as a given. Anything less would be incompetence both on their part / the Elite's part. |
|
|
|
Not really vert related but I finished reading up on the DRK thread.
One thing that really rings alarm bells to me is the level of blind faith and expectation they have on their developer. Its scary. They seem to be idolizing him like a prophet that has arisen to show them all towards the light. Having such a high profile single point of failure is a strong warning sign. Im not knocking him or his coin he has brought it a long way, but some of the members over there seem to be overcome with irrational exuberance. when they start posting his time zone, suggesting he gives his telephone number out to certain members on the thread so they can check up on him, speculating if he is asleep or not, talking about his social life and schedule...its just...wrong on many levels. It cant end well.
Well, back in february people were like "Evan is working his ass of to make us rich"... and he did make them rich. So a lot of people owe gratitude, in a sense, because he took their money to 15-1000x levels. If you finished the thread you probably saw that some people were trolling* with like "oohhh where is the dev" to spread uncertainty, when clearly it was 5am in Arizona and the dev was asleep, so... What most realize, and comment on, is that he is stretched thin... The community understands as well that he is put into a spotlight that he shouldn't be in, due to the price increase when the "product" is still in beta/rc phase and not final and some having unrealistic expectations. Nobody cared about the prior 10-15 forks of DRK, but suddenly everybody does because there's a lot at stake. Suddenly "he failed" , "he fucked up" etc etc because of the buggy behavior of the masternode election system when much bigger issues have been dealt with in the past (darksend's first implementation in February was DOA due to DDOS issues and had to be altered to be DDOS-hardened in order to play). But who cared when the price was 0.0002? Nobody. * Trolling in the DRK thread has gone to another level. Trolls open account, troll, then close the account and say ok, enough trolling with this, I'll open a new one. Some openly admit they are getting paid to troll DRK. It was a total troll-fest yesterday. |
|
|
|
pretty dissapointing performance of the cryptonote-coins lately...
i would have expected them to do a lot better in the shadow of drk and the drk problems lately.
but no all of them are down monero, quazar, bytecoin, etc.....
I don't know if it's a stretch to say that investors seem to trust the bitcoin-blockchain tech rather than the bcn-blockchain tech. Perhaps the fact that anyone can install a client or that exchanges are quickly adding bitcoin-based coins (compared to bcn) is also playing a role. XC is walking in the same steps of DRK. Admittedly it's many months behind, somewhere around Feb-March levels both in terms of price per coin (although it has more coins) and technology. Although parts of DarkSend were rewritten to become better back in April. The fact that it is based, more or less, on the same principle of DRK is interesting because the dev there seems to know his stuff. It's, in a way, a vote of confidence for DRK's model. The branding changes from masternodes to supernodes... they also see the potential for hosting services over the nodes. Apparently they cannot pay with mining output (as there is no mining after POW phase) so they'll use fees instead. They also add encryption (which is already planned for DRK as I remember Evan saying it back in March or April). So more or less the same. So we'll get more or less a similar system with different code. Supernodes or Masternodes are a central banker structure. That model is a lame duck. It is either a bad implementation or a way to sell 1000 coin lots of your premine.
The world is moving away from centralization. Build on that foundation at your peril.
Are bitcoin nodes centralization? Are seeds in a p2p network centralization? |
|
|
|
Good luck, facts still are the facts  Indeed they are. |
|
|
|
What I wrote is clear: As for the instamine, Darkcoin is not instamined because that would imply the whole monetary base is instamined. This is true for pow/pos hybrids.
A number of ~2m coins though WERE instamined over the first 2 days.
8-10% of the monetary base was instamined. 90% is not (2 out of 22). Is the whole coin instamined? No. Is it bad for distribution? No. The market decided these were worth pennies and people paid accordingly and distributed it through the market. Otherwise PoW/PoS hybrids would be dead with one-week instamines for the 100% of the monetary base. If you want to isolate stuff, like you did with the 2mn wallet that evan supposedly holds (from the airdrop that never came and as such no 2mn extra coins were created) continue doing it. Readers can read, even if you bold stuff. |
|
|
|
So you know and accepted that Darkcoin has instamined ~2 millions ?
Why wouldn't I accept it? I had the chance to buy the instamined coins for 0.00008 but I didn't. You know why? Because I thought the spread was ridiculous. Want to buy orders were at 0.000025 (as in PMs / thread) and sell orders were 0.00007x - 0.00008x. I said screw that, it's like 3x... Then I watched it go to 0.000180 as orders were coming through to buy massive quantities and people selling them thinking "wow we are damn smart, hoho we unloaded 10 BTC's worth of dark on the whale buyer"... and then it went to 0.0005 and they stopped laughing... and then some sold again, and the laughter was over as buyers bought it up all until 0.002. |
|
|
|
How do you know ? Proof ? ..... Wait, you accepted that Darkcoin has instamine ?
Unlike you, I was there since late January and saw what was happening in WTS/WTB and the rate upon hitting ccex, and the consequent transactions and volume. Even if someone WASN'T there, they can find the messages in the thread "hey WTS 10k DRKs for 0.25btc" CCEX chart upon entry was 0.00001 (10k DRKs for 0.1 btc), quickly adjusted to 0.000025 to reflect prior volume that was taking place through pms. The proof you seek is in the thread pages (WTS/WTB) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg4889177#msg4889177https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg4861558#msg4861558 + the charts of ccex and poloniex. As for the instamine, Darkcoin is not instamined because that would imply the whole monetary base is instamined. This is true for pow/pos hybrids. A number of ~2m coins though WERE instamined over the first 2 days. Did miners appreciate these coins? No. They sold them for pennies. Just because one makes a coin doesn't mean it has value. At that period there were 10 coins coming out per day, all shitcoins - so why would anyone pay much for these? Dark gave value to worthless coins by innovation and anonymity (introduced over a month later). In the meantime people were exchanging worthless coins for pennies. |
|
|
|
Fact: 100.000 DRKs cost 2.5 BTC to buy for 15 days after launch. The entire worth of the instamine was less than 50 BTC at then rates. Fact2: People bought, the instamine was distributed Fact3: People sold later on locking profits of 10x-100x etc Fact4: People who bought from those who sold at 0.00018 / 0.0005 / 0.0012-0.002, also got gains of 10-20x+ Keep trolling  |
|
|
|
Re: mapping coinjoins, I assume you mean logging which inputs match with which outputs. This doesn't need an anti-incentive to prevent, you can simply make it so it isn't possible to log through the use of blind signatures.
I think DarkSend does not implement blind sigs because they didn't work when DOS'ed (?) or something to that effect: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6001085#msg6001085...and, again, if I remember correctly the solution was one where the node knows what is being transacted. (note: I'm no coder or cryptography expert, so I'm going with my understanding of past discussions I've read - some of which may be inaccurate). Re: Bitcoin foundation, they aren't involved with this decision. All it takes is one person to implement it and upload the implementation  That's unsettling for Bitcoin's stability It's like the opposite end of bureaucracy (=>anarchy) Re: delaying payments, no, it isn't possible to have consensus that way. You can check yourself, but anyone that's offline will need to trust someone. This means if the party they trust lies, consensus is broken.
Hm... edit: check this too https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6003693#msg6003693 |
|
|
|
Max Keiser Although I believe him to be number 1 What's the net worth of Keiser in terms of BTC? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
