I'm a bit confused the logic behind this whole hardfork = a drop in price thing.
I would expect if anything that the successful implementation to increase the price. Can anyone explain this to me?
There is no logic really. Just FUD. "Yeah wait, the crash is round the corner, sell your coins now". Those who did yesterday at 0.019 are now crying for the rebound to 0.026. I would expect a drop too, coz dogecoin halvings didnt rise da coins value due to assumed rarity.
There is no rarity in dogecoin, that's why. The coin is infinite and is spewing billions of coins every day. Btw, what does dogecoin halving have to do with implementing DarkSend functionality? Nothing. |
|
|
|
One huge problem with all CPU coins and that is bots. What about viruses, etc. infecting computers and having them serve as miners for DRK, MRO and other CPU coins?
Not 100% bad as it does strengthen the network but it can lead to problems later on. I could hear the department of homeland security now. But then again, any
anonymising technology (e.g. darkwallet), will probably cause similar reactions.
IAS
Bitcoin was a cpu coin for half its life. So... DRK is cpu/gpu. Bytecoin and clones (MRO included) are cpu only right now and thus affected more. |
|
|
|
Why you keep talking BTC vs. DRK
DRK is nowhere near BTC. It's going to take months/years to get such an adoption that BTC currently has. I'm a big supporter of both but talking about there can only be one is just stupid
I'm not saying there will be one, there are thousands and there always will be. The argument that a second coin will exist with a significant market cap in comparison to Bitcoin is even plausible and I agree with it. If Darkcoin or Monero succeeds in being number 2 or 3 or 4, they could easily have a multi billion dollar market cap with Bitcoin sitting at the top ($100 billion). I never said anything against Darkcoin being worth 10% of Bitcoin, or Monero being worth 10% of Bitcoin. What I did say was this: Wow altcoins are a mess right now. So many coins talking about implementing anonymous transactions. Coins getting 400% price pumps just on the rumour that they will be able to do what DarkSend already does. DRK trolls everywhere. It's all pretty ugly.
I like it, it's shaking up the market. It seems we've caused a mini-boom in altcoin world. I guess we are platinum to bitcoin's gold... platinum is a catalyst, so we are catalyzing the whole field. These people actually believe that Darkcoin will overtake and replace Bitcoin as the main CryptoCurrency. With all the issues about Darkcoin (Masternode centralisation weakness, CoinJoin being inferior to CryptoNote, the source being closed for a long time, the insta-mine) I cannot see any reality where Darkcoin overtakes Bitcoin. And that is what AlexGR believes will happen. What I say is calculated. Your extrapolations are not. I said DRK is catalyzing the field. Hence the platinum label because platinum = catalyst.Silver is the most reflective metal and the most conductive metal. So Litecoin reflects the qualities of Bitcoin and conducts transactions faster. The problem of silver? It tarnishes over time and its original reflectivity is lost (it doesn't appear so "shiny" after a while), while its conductivity (in LTC case transaction time) is not. |
|
|
|
For those who expect anonymous coins to have 10% of the crypto volume, please consider silkroad statistics.
I'd advise to consider common logic: 1. People have the option of having all their transactions (similar to the transactions of their bank or credit card), online, forever, so that others can see (transparent coins and public ledger / blockchain) 2. People have the option of obfuscating their transactions so that these are not visible to third parties (perhaps except the NSA -for now- who is better equipped to crack the obfuscation) Yes, I'd say a considerable amount of people can opt for #2. Not to mention escaping government oppression in areas where cryptos would be banned. |
|
|
|
Wow altcoins are a mess right now. So many coins talking about implementing anonymous transactions. Coins getting 400% price pumps just on the rumour that they will be able to do what DarkSend already does. DRK trolls everywhere. It's all pretty ugly.
I like it, it's shaking up the market. It seems we've caused a mini-boom in altcoin world. I guess we are platinum to bitcoin's gold... platinum is a catalyst, so we are catalyzing the whole field. You're a joke account right? You really believe that Darkcoin is the platinum to Bitcoin's gold? Isn't DRK catalyzing the crypto market? (Platinum = catalyst) Anonymity, X11, DGW, Masternode payments... LTC in panic, X11 fork threat, Anonymity implementation vote for LTC, VTC implementing stealth addresses, BTC considering privacy, Bytecoin came out of the shadows after 2 years to say "hey I was here too", etc etc. |
|
|
|
Wow altcoins are a mess right now. So many coins talking about implementing anonymous transactions. Coins getting 400% price pumps just on the rumour that they will be able to do what DarkSend already does. DRK trolls everywhere. It's all pretty ugly.
I like it, it's shaking up the market. It seems we've caused a mini-boom in altcoin world. I guess we are platinum to bitcoin's gold... platinum is a catalyst, so we are catalyzing the whole field. |
|
|
|
Excellent! Thank you for your hard work!
In my opinion, XC is earlier than DRK in implementing the annomous feature,
that is very impressive
This is not so much a matter of opinion... rather a matter of historic facts: DarkSend was/is live since Feb (testnet) / March (mainnet). I am confused, I think DRK is still in the testing (i know they started in Feb, but i think they are still testing and they are trying to implement masternode soon), but XC is almost ready for implement. Please point it out if I am wrong. DRK is implementing masternode payments in a few hours. That's part of RC2. DarkSends work ok but, up to now, masternodes weren't getting paid 10% of mining output. RC3 will bring more in terms of anonymity and a lift of the 10 DRK limit per transaction (as it has implemented denomination pools of same sizes for improving anonymity). Basic mixing was achieved within days back in February. For 99% of the cases a mixer is private enough for most uses. However governments can still catch you if they can monitor the nodes. That's the 1% extra effort that DRK is trying to do in the last months in the form of negative incentives to run multiple nodes from "bad actors" (that's why masternode payment protocol / 1000 DRK requirement was put into place). RC3 will try to improve anonymity further - always that last 1%. Many thanks for the tech briefing, one question; lets say 10-20 years from now, whats preventing gov or what we have at that time, to buy there way in and hold the masternodes, there by canceling the anon feature ? The escalating cost of buying all market liquidity. It's extremely costly to do so as the more you buy, the more the price goes up - so it's not like "ah DRK costs 0.025, so I can buy every node for 0.025 x number of nodes". You'll buy a few at 0.025, then it goes to 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.5 btc etc etc - as all market liquidity is sucked. But there is also the issue of technological advancement. Now nodes do know what they are transacting, but improvements are on the way, so buying the nodes might prove futile, not in 20 years, but in 2 months. |
|
|
|
Also, the masternode payments are currently estimated at 1.3 DRK per day per masternode, which at current prices puts owning a masternode as having the best cost-benefit versus mining anything in the crypto world. Is that also accurate?
288 coins per day for masternodes / number of masternodes... if there are 200 nodes, it'll be 1.44 DRK per node. No real CAPEX because you get to keep the 1000 DRK (it's not spenditure), and OPEX is pretty low. I doubt that most rich people will do this though. They'd rather have it in their wallets. Less risk until the system is proven to be failsafe, etc. |
|
|
|
You tell me to respect the host, but it is you that has no respect Rpetila and his readers: instead of being straightforward and nuanced at the beginning of this thread, you came in here trying to promote something that has no future value for the host and his readers. Worse than that, as you are invested into it, it's a shameless promotion to defend your interest at the expand of all of us.
Now I'll stop engaging you because we are all derailing this thread towards altcoins instead of TA.
I merely pointed out a logic fallacy in grouping all altcoins together. Where is the disrespect towards Risto? You are making stuff up. As to others, they sit on false information regarding Darkcoin, Monero and stuff. Most in here are trully clueless about +/-'s of the anonymous coins out there yet they pretend to be investment experts having found out about them like a week ago, propagating false information. I have holdings in pretty much every anonymous coin there is precisely for this moment of boom, when everyone was like "anonymity? naaah... too shady" and stuff like that. So give me a break. DRK is on the verge of collapse anytime, we are all aware of it.
I heard that at 0.003, 0.005, 0.007, 0.01, 0.014, 0.02, 0.026. Traders lost their coins to the rise and expected the dump that never came. They are now waiting to get back in, so let it fall if it must. Keep in mind some fundamentals, whether the price corrects, flash-crashes, or goes to the moon and beyond: 1. Dark is aiming for the private/anonymous market. If just 1 out of 10 transactions are held privately/anonymously in the future, the anonymous coins will hold at least 10% of the whole cryptocurrency marketcap (so ~750mn out of 7.5bn with running prices). That leaves plenty of room for growth. 2. It provides real-world utility and stuff that people can actually use. Some of the top10 cryptos in coinmarketcap have some "fancy" concepts and features that most people do not even understand what they are / what they do / why they are useful. Privacy is something that everyone understands and has a need for in some degree. People do not want to have their bank statements online, so why would we do that with crypto? Businesses too (for competitive reasons). 2. Low inflation: BTC gives out 3600 BTCs per day. LTC gives out 28.800 LTC per day. DRK produces only 2880 DRK per day - and it will lower 7% next year. 3. Due to low inflation a significantly smaller amount of fiat (or fiat equivalent in BTCs) is required to keep the price stable compared to either LTC or BTC. 4. Due to low production of coins, coupled with the coins held for masternodes, the buying pressure for existing coins escalates. 5. BTC and LTC holders may hedge some of their investments with DRK, as DRK makes its ascent and scares them. Large bagholders of LTC in particular may have problems sleeping well and will either sell LTC or hedge with DRK. This creates a feedback loop that narrows the gap between LTC/DRK as money from LTC flows to DRK, allowing DRK to go to #2. 6. DRK represents a hedge of various forms. For example its security is not dependent on only 1 hash. It is also a bad-news-hedge in the sense that when news like "Bitcoin was banned in X country" hit, it can go the opposite way of Bitcoin. Kind'a like USD/EUR pairs when USD goes bad and EUR goes up and vice versa. Fiat hedging for BTC is unrealistic because it's a binary market. You either have BTC or fiat. But BTC/DRK is an actual hedge inside cryptos. "Bitcoin banned where? Great.. DRK to the mooooooon". 7. The numbers of coins in circulation is heavily in favor of DRK, in terms of scarcity: ~4 million DRKs vs ~12mn BTCs vs ~28mn LTCs. 8. Coin-numbers-adjusted, the price of DRK is 1/7th of LTC and 1/120th of BTC. This is grossly undervalued if one assumes that at least 5 or 10% of cryptocurrency transactions will be performed privately/anonymously and thus the price should move upwards to reflect this fact, even if DRK only occupies a far smaller percentage than now in the private/anonymous market. 9. The possibility of "mining" with masternodes, is like buying a mining ring that is free (you don't actually pay it as you still keep your DRKs) but also not obsoleted with time or new technology. Beats GPU / ASICs investment in both CAPEX and OPEX. 10. DRK is ahead of the competition. The competition has severe weaknesses and "blocker" issues. Zerocoin is the best solution but doesn't exist - and if it does come out, there will be a huge trust issue with the initial key. Bytecoin has good anonymity as a mixer but is based on an unproven/untested blockchain technology and consequently people can't trust much money on it, compared to the 5 years of running of Bitcoin. It's more like a gamble option - not something that you can throw heavy money. It also scales badly, has usability issues and is not interoperable with the bitcoin-based payment systems for merchants etc. These will hamper it for quite some time. The fact that Cryptonote technology is superior to the current implementation of DarkSend (which will change in next revision), doesn't make it NSA-proof in itself. This means that both coins are private, not anonymous, not nearly 100% anonymous and anything else is snake oil. In essence both DRK + Cryptonote coins will be adequate for privacy, combined with IP obfuscation and "best practices" followed by the user, except if the NSA has other plans. This is like 99% privacy and the 1% to make it 100%, will require extra work from both camps. So the "superiority" aspect of Cryptonote's anonymity is null and void, unless NSA-proofing is achieved. In the meantime, the drawbacks of the whole Bytecoin system are enormous and cannot justify the "costs" for the user or the merchant. So, overall, there is no advantage in going with a Bytecoin system, over a Bitcoin-based system which is proven. 11. DRK has a coder that codes. Darkcoin has become something like a development platform of new features instead of a regular "shitcoin"-clone that offers nothing or that is stagnant. 12. Compared to LTC (which is ahead of DRK), LTC is a technological dinosaur. The LTC camp itself is worried: https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=19819https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=19955Additionally, the LTC camp has failed in its primary mission to "sell" ASIC resistance, a point that would improve Bitcoin's "inadequacy". In other words, there is no reason why DRK could not exceed LTC and take #2. 13. Top-100 richlist keeps stacking when weak hands are like "maybe I should cash out": http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/#!rich 14. DRK has first mover advantage as the public anonymous coin which succeeded and initiated the anonymity pursuit in other coins (which are now scrambling to say DRK is scam, is a fail, is this, that, so we should take its place because we are, of course, better). Bytecoin existed from 2012 but nobody knew it until March-April 2014. By then people were already DarkSending money with Darkcoin. |
|
|
|
For the bet: I'm not a betting guy anymore.
LOL. If you really believed what you were saying, you would have immediately his DRK under 6$ within 3 weeks' bet. Darkcoin is not Bitcoin. It's in active development. Its code is changing every day and there have been two hard forks in like 10 days. Something can go wrong with a bug, people can flash-crash it in an instant and a candle might appear at 6$. Why bet* on something like that? The masternode hack in particular can be tricky for it requires changes in stratum + p2pools. It got delayed 2 weeks and it'll still have bugs I believe, that might require extra hard fork. It also prevents you to use logic in order to reason with us since you think we are hyping a coin whereas we just think it's the one that has the best value at the moment out of all the privacy coins in the market.
I believe you do not understand that you lack spherical awareness of what is going on. You researched anonymity and coins for how long? I've been in this market for 4 months straight and I'm learning every day whatever I can and I'm still lagging behind cryptographers and programmers in evaluating and assessing parameters. Anyway, you just lost all your credibility when you refused his bet. Though I would think your best move would be to leave this thread quietly so people forget about you, I think as the idiot you are you will stay and try to justify your idiocy and thus keep derailing this thread.
That was uncalled for. Respect the host and his thread, if not me. * Re the bet: Supposing a 10bn BTC market cap, if just 1% of the transparent market chooses the emerging option of anonymity => that could translate to 100mn market cap. There is serious potential there. Will Bitcoin cover the anonymity/privacy needs of its user base? Nope because they want government approval. And the government needs Bitcoin's cooperation to tax the hell out of owners.
Likewise, in another thread: 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.
These were when DRK was like 60-70cents (0.0012) and had 2-3mn marketcap. That is my "bet". |
|
|
|
SERIOUSLY? That is your criticism of MRO? That it doesn't have a working client? LOL. That. Is. The. Time. To. Buy.
Buy all you want. I've bought prior to you so you are actually doing good to me  The time to buy DRK was when it didnt have a working client and people were selling it off exchange for 20k DRK for .45 BTC.
Dark always had a working client. And by working, we mean like Bitcoin-QT stuff. Monero guys took the backend of Bytecoin and couldn't even make a front-end. They issued a bounty. This is not confidence-inspiring stuff for maintaining a complex blockchain which is new and untested. If you don't realize that on your own, then let me reference you: Bytecoin was forked into a coin that the community could participate in from day one.
Alas, none of the bugs or short comings were fixed in doing that— and it doesn't appear that any of the people involved in it have the background for the low level work. So you might have just written out the only active developers of the software, may not bode well for continued development. That's what happens when the coin is a clone. However everyone is like "oh, litecoin was a clone too so that one might work, who knows". Maybe it does. That's why I hedged DRK with MRO. If both succeed, why not. The time to buy DRK is NOT NOW, when its been pumped and it officially launches tomorrow which means the price will CRASH in the next day or so.
You don't understand what you are talking about. There is no "culmination" tomorrow in the form of a launch. It's just the next release, followed by the next release. Today it's RC2 fork which adds masternode payments, then comes RC3 with denomination changes and anonymity enhancements. |
|
|
|
It won't. It requires a hard fork and Bitcoin will not hard fork for DarkSend, nor jeopardize regulation issues.
It doesn't require a hardfork if the coinjoin organizers aren't paid by block reward, but instead by those they are coinjoining for. Or better yet, it would be decentralized and no one would be paid at all.
Re: regulation, the Bitcoin foundation is claiming transparency etc etc. If they go the "shady" route, they can't claim the same. Re: hardfork, how do you provide a dis-incentive for having nodes that map coinjoin transactions in your scenario? TL;DR PoR is an oxymoron because you can't construct a proof that you are offering a resource.
If you delay payments for a couple of blocks, can't everyone see who did actually offer a service and pay them? There is no hurry to pay in the same block. |
|
|
|
Actually the DarkCoin anthem sounds quite similar to "The Imperial March", I will upload very soon the video, so you can all enjoy it  Nice...  |
|
|
|
For the bet: I'm not a betting guy anymore. For DRK vs MRO, have you actually tried using MRO? Please go right now, download the client and try using it. See what it is, how it works etc. Come back and report your findings. Even ignoring all its flaws, Darkcoin will not see widespread adoption simply based on the fact that its "darkness" was not designed to appeal to the masses. That's the thing. Even if it's outside 90% of the mainstream, with just 10% of transaction going private/anonymous, it will still appeal to a 700mn marketcap. |
|
|
|
DRK covers a real world need that LTC (or BTC) cannot cover. It is superior to LTC technologically, safer, more private, scarcer by a ratio of 1:7, has 1/10th inflation (2880 coins per day vs 28.800) and pays its users who allocated 1000 DRKs for running a supernode, for providing the anonymity service (Proof of Service).
In which world does an inflation of 2,880 vs. 28,800 equal one tenth, when something is scarcer by a ratio of 1:7  I'm comparing absolute numbers for inflation but your point is valid when you add both these facts together. In terms of economics, the real point in altcoin inflation is this: How many USD are required per day to buy your daily supply. LTC: 28.800 x 11$ = 316k USD DRK: 2.880 x 12$ = 34k USD Over a year, LTC will require 115mn USD to preserve its price (or 57.5m USD if miners hold 50% of their mining). Over a year, DRK will require 12.4mn USD to preserve its price (or 6.2m USD if miners hold 50% of their mining). Even if DRK quadruples in price it'll still have a low requirement of 50m USD / 25m USD for 100% selloff and 50% selloff. |
|
|
|
The fact that you mentioned Monero (MRO) is interesting. The current narrative in the alt-coin community is "privacy," which was further reinforced by Darkcoin's recent moon shot. But Darkcoin was illegitimately pre-mined, has closed-source binaries, is not technologically innovative, and has a volatility-enhancing block reward equation 1. Darkcoin will likely collapse, some will call it a scam, and others will say they shouldn't have invested in something they didn't understand. 1. There was ZERO premine. The argument is about the fairness of the distribution to the first miners who got a disproportionate amount of coins. Yet, precisely because of this factor, they sold them for pennies because they didn't value them, hence the distribution was one of the best among altcoins (until the heavy accumulation phase in April/May). 2. Darkcoin is opensource. Those who want to use DarkSend can opt for the binary. DarkSend source will be opensourced in a month or so, after being finalized (RC status). 3. It is innovative as it covers a need that is not covered by existing transparent coins. 4. You too don't understand it, but claim that you do. 5. The whitepaper is old, the spec has evolved. But like Satoshi said, "we are pattern-seeking story-telling animals." The privacy narrative will remain, and in an effort to avoid the pitfalls of Darkcoin, Monero may appear as the legitimate alternative. Monero is an open-source clone of Bytecoin so the technology has a track record. It does not *really* have a track record because nobody actually used it en mass. It was like used by a few dozen people, unlike Bitcoin's blockchain which does have a track record. Usability, scaling, basic functionality, interoperability - all have issues for mainstream adoption, and some stuff like scaling problems might render it DOA (dead on arrival). That's in addition to the fact that the dev team of MRO is not the team responsible for developing the back-end / core implementation and as such being less experienced to maintaining it. On a final note, I think people speculating in alt-coins should look at it more like short-term human psychology analysis rather than long-term investing. I worry that a lot of the people in the Darkcoin, Blackcoin, XRP, Nxt, etc. threads really believe those coins' ledgers have long-term potential.
LTC has a 300mn marketcap and sitting where it is because of branding itself as the silver to bitcoin's gold. DRK covers a real world need that LTC (or BTC) cannot cover. It is superior to LTC technologically, safer, more private, scarcer by a ratio of 1:7, has 1/10th inflation (2880 coins per day vs 28.800) and pays its users who allocated 1000 DRKs for running a supernode, for providing the anonymity service (Proof of Service). There is no single reason why LTC should be higher than DRK in the long run. It seems like a dinosaur in comparison. 1The Darkcoin block reward decreases with increasing network hashrate and increases with decreasing network hashrate. This tends to further limit new coin supply during rallies (adding to the pump), and increase new coin supply when miners have lost interest (adding to the dump).
Minimum block reward 5, so after a point it can't go lower. It's not proportional to the pump. Unfortunately, there's too much misunderstanding regarding Darkcoin. Big investors have made their homework, apparently, but some people are quick to judge without knowing the facts. http://wiki.darkcoin.euhttp://wiki.darkcoin.eu/wiki/FAQ...for info. |
|
|
|
|
Fair enough.
The recipe to success: No hype / no marketing / no snake-oil / no scam tactics / pure dedication to the goal of 100% anonymity and doing the work necessary - not getting distracted by bullshit.
Coinmarketcap will take care of the rest.
|
|
|
|
Excellent! Thank you for your hard work!
In my opinion, XC is earlier than DRK in implementing the annomous feature,
that is very impressive
This is not so much a matter of opinion... rather a matter of historic facts: DarkSend was/is live since Feb (testnet) / March (mainnet). I am confused, I think DRK is still in the testing (i know they started in Feb, but i think they are still testing and they are trying to implement masternode soon), but XC is almost ready for implement. Please point it out if I am wrong. DRK is implementing masternode payments in a few hours. That's part of RC2. DarkSends work ok but, up to now, masternodes weren't getting paid 10% of mining output. RC3 will bring more in terms of anonymity. Basic mixing was achieved within days back in February. For 99% of the cases a mixer is private enough for most uses. However governments can still catch you if they can monitor the nodes. That's the 1% extra effort that DRK is trying to do in the last months in the form of negative incentives to run multiple nodes from "bad actors" (that's why masternode payment protocol / 1000 DRK requirement was put into place). RC3 will try to improve anonymity further - always that last 1%. We will be switching away from the masternode topology in REV v2 - I don't want to give away the secret sauce, but it is going to be high-end anonymous end to end encryption, provide 100% true anonymity and be the foundation of our blockchain v2.0 phase Also our Rev v1 release can't be "monitored" at the node layer :-) Good stuff... btw, I see you are a qualified dev, which is kind of a rare quality around these cryptocurrency places. Do you believe you can achieve NSA-proofing? For the time being it is an elusive property for most coins of this kind. Great question, not going to answer that here.. once the encrypted messaging system is place within the XC wallet - we can discuss Ok let me rephrase it in a "government-friendly" manner: Is the solution superior to ring signatures? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
