This coin does not need to be innovative, it has the best chance of any to replace Darkcoin. The other difficulties you mention apply to any current coin. We are not interested in making a system that can be used by criminals. Nor is Darkcoin, the government/NSA have all the transactions as an open book for any of these public currencies. What we are interested in is a legitimate amount of personal privacy. There is no reason my purchases should be traceable to my ex-wife or bank manager without my permission, as they are with Bitcoin.
Darkcoin is doomed as it relies on trusted servers that can be exposed either by break ins to master nodes, or by government action.
At this stage, neither BCN / BCN-clones or DRK can claim to be NSA-proof by themselves, without following best practices regarding anonymity etc etc. They are private for all intents and purposes for everything except NSA action. We are talking about 99% anonymity and we are waiting, as users, for the extra 1% that will lock governments (actually the US government which has the big resources - not any government) out. That 1% is the big evolution that must be done. |
|
|
|
You're forgetting that the market for this coin is potentially massive. Also the Bitcoin/Altcoin market is set to grow by leaps and bounds this year. What seems like a huge market cap right now for Litecoin for example might be normal for top 10 coins soon.
Actually I don't. A price increase of Bitcoin would require much more fiat to preserve (let alone increase) price levels of MRO. This is basic finance of supply/demand. Over the next 8 or so years (the period when most of the coins will be mined numerically)? I have no idea, and neither do you. 8 years ago Bitcoin didn't even exist.
What we do know is the inflation curve and the fiat or fiat equivalent to absorb daily supply. Even in current prices the demands are significant. Just to be clear - by direct comparison with Darkcoin, whose values you have tirelessly espoused in this thread, almost 5% of all Darkcoins that will ever be created were mined in the first 8 hours of the coins launch.
That actually had a positive side-effect for further inflation / debasement. Right now DRK requires something like 72 BTC per day to buy all new darkcoins vs 604 BTC of Litecoin. The difference is massive. MRO will require insane amounts of BTCs if it hits anything like the levels of DRK price. This means price stagnation, community bitching about price, negative feedback loop, frustration, clones with "we solved the issue of inflation that kept MRO price down" competing in the same BCN-clone space, people jumping ship etc. I don't think the community would object with a change towards a less inflating or scarcer coin. note: My personal philosophy regarding cryptos is heavily against strong inflation. |
|
|
|
Not to mention that removing traceability on the "block chain" of DRK is a bad thing because now you can't really tell if the devs are giving themselves more coins and selling them.
How exactly are they giving themselves more coins? What type of FUD is this? If it is truly anonymous then that would be possible. Not something I would want to touch.
No it wouldn't. The coin's code is opensource. There's no extra coin generation for the devs. Also does this imply that DarkSend is not open source? that would make sense for it to be truly anonymous.
Darkcoin is opensource. DarkSend is in development (RC status). DarkSend will be opensourced when finalized. |
|
|
|
In fact to this day, only about 5% of the coins have been mined, and it is FAR from the case that developers or very early adopters have been the only ones mining.
This is a bit damning for future price really. How can the market absorb another 20 times the coin supply at current prices? - It would either require 50mn USD (100mn USD if MRO price doubled or 200mn USD if price went up 4x) - Or price would have to drop significantly so that the new MROs can be absorbed at much lower prices As it is right now it is not sustainable, inflation-wise / price-wise. Investors would quickly lose money on their investment as the coin is debased. Alternatively, they'd rather go with a BCN clone that doesn't have this type of "weakness". My suggestion is a reduction in the number of coins or altering of the reward curve. |
|
|
|
Oh come on!  Even a 12-year old could easily create volatility and insane volume if he had instamined a coin like this. All he needs is two Mintpal (or any other exchange) accounts. A simple trading robot can do this without needing you watching the screen. Yeah, all trading action for months was a masterplan of bogus transactions to suppress the price of highly valuable instamined coins, which as we now know culminated in May's #3 position. Cool story bro. |
|
|
|
What does it matter? Coins were so cheap.. You could have bought 200k for 10. Btc
It means that instaminers still didn't have to pay anything. 10 btc that much considering it would be 2 millions now?  Yep, but nobody knew. For miners the mined coins were nearly worthless and never considered to reach that worth. Standard rate for selling was something like 1000 DRK for 0.02 / 0.025 BTC and that was also the price when it hit the exchanges ~2 weeks later, gradually escalating upwards. |
|
|
|
2. Low inflation: BTC gives out 3600 BTCs per day. LTC gives out 28.800 BTC LTC per day. DRK produces only 2880 BTC DRK per day - and it will lower 7% next year.
I think those were typos. Am I right? Yep, fixed. |
|
|
|
Interesting thread. I do wonder when a better dark spinoff will come around.
I'm looking at Monero and Qazar. Any thoughts? Download a client and try using them or mining them. Share the experience... |
|
|
|
|
Regardless of what the price will do from now (down, sideways, up) some of the fundamentals of DRK to keep in mind:
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.
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.
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 1/6th 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.
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 also scales badly and has usability issues which will hamper it for quite some time.
11. DRK has a coder that codes. Darkcoin has become something like a development platform of new features instead of a regular "shitcoin"-clone.
|
|
|
|
We need the market to correct some, when you go up this fast people are kind of stupid to not take some profits, and as soon as that cycle starts it will continue for a while.
I just removed my coins from the exchanges and will keep them locked up for a while. Things will get back to normal when the price drops 40% or so and people start seeing potential again in it going up.
There is nothing which inherently requires a price correction for taking profits. All the way up to current levels people were selling and taking profits because they bought lower. It's just that the buying power was absorbing these sells. Having said that, the price pulled from 0.028 to 0.024-0.025, so it's a correction in that sense. |
|
|
|
|
UPDATE YOUR WALLETS, HARD FORK ON THE 25TH OF MAY
|
|
|
|
instamined by a handful of people in 24 hours
There were a huge number of people mining in the first day. Yeah yeah, check the Block explorer you will see most of day one coins went to a handful of wallets. This has been proven many times. Really ? how was this HUGE amount of people mining with no windows qt and no pools? HUGE amount of people mining compared to what? zero? Most miners use linux. Add this to the "facts". Also keep in mind that there is a huge amount of people mining bytecoin and bytecoin clones which do not even have a graphic-based wallet for any operating system and are far harder to mine than your usual bitcoin-based-coin. If you give it a try you'll understand what I'm talking about. By the rationale that no windows wallet = disaster, these coins should be the scam of the scam for having such a barrier to entry / barrier to mine due to their different way that they are setup. |
|
|
|
Now they are jumping on the bandwagon, but with a twist so that they don't admit their mistake.
Yes, maybe, who cares if "they" admit it or not, but isn`t this stealth adress concept interesting? And again...my original question...I am not programmer, but couldn`t it be made an option with DRK? I`d like a coin with this feature and I would prefer having ONE having both features and yes, I`d be fine if the coin was DRK. PS: Sometimes many discussions here remind me discussions with gold bugs who do not like silver bugs who do not like bitcoin bugs who do not like altcoin bugs...it`s almost like the factions in the Life of Brian. It's interesting but DRK is past that point of privacy - it now aims for higher levels due to the pressure from Bytecoin and Zerocoin. Evan could implement stealth addresses at some point I guess... it shouldn't be too much work compared to creating DarkSend. PS. Or goldbugs/silverbugs who don't like bitcoin-bugs and vice versa, lol. |
|
|
|
Vertcoin is that funny green coin no one heard about. Darkcoin are the guys who had the guts to do WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE: give ordinary people a right to privacy with their funds.
I hold some Verts so I don't want to bad-mouth them or anything, but I remember vividly that when we were both around #20-25 in coinmarketcap that they were saying that they will not go for anonymity etc because it's shady, it'll go nowhere etc etc. Their prediction fell tremendously off because they never did their homework regarding explosive growth in new markets and transparent vs anonymous market share in terms of total marketcap. Even if they didn't, they could have read it (from me - if they read the DRK thread, as I don't post DRK market analyses on the vert thread). Now they are jumping on the bandwagon, but with a twist so that they don't admit their mistake. |
|
|
|
Dear DRK community, I have something I need to get off my chest.
I sold some of my coins at 0.02 the other day. It has been bothering me a lot that I momentarily lacked the faith and vision to hold. It was only a few coins but I am asking for forgiveness please.
I am stronger now and will hold the remainder of my coins and continue to mine at a loss.
I feel better that I have shared.
Thank you for listening.
Dude, seriously, this is not a matter of religion ("faith" and "vision"). Sorry that I pick on you, nothing personal, but the amateurish attitude in this thread is really becoming a contraindicator to me. Sentiment wise this sounds like seriously overbought to me, but I guess the mania has not even started so I`ll keep my masternodes...but please, man up folks. No. Get it through your thick skulls that darkcoin is the Swiss banking of the crypto world. Those of you who never owned significant assets before may not realise what you own. Don't give up your darks for chump change. Open the EYES. He's a holder. You are preaching to the choir. And he does have a point that the silly one-liner messages have escalated after the price rise, but that's, up to a degree, normal because there were a lot of new arrivals due to the attention. |
|
|
|
OP has a point, but damn those comments are beyond horrible and almost everyone of them has dangerous superficial knowledge. They're probably butthurt Litecoin2.0 aka Vertcoin didn't take off. Yeah, I know, but that is/was not the point of my post. I am an investor and I prefer not to fall too much in love with my investments, so I do not take it as the best indicator that there are no substantial answers to my questions. I really like DRK, but fanboi behavior makes me worry. To me, not only those spreading "FUD" are trolls. The immature "to da moon" and "drk über alles" guys are as well (not talking about you in particular, even if your comment about "butthurt" vtc investors does not add any substantial info and I`am saying this as someone who dumped almost all his VTC to jump on the DRK bandwagon a few weeks ago). Edit: I`m actually bottom fishing and rebalancing a bit towards VTC again. This Stealth Adress concept sounds interesting and so far no DRK expert could answer whether DRK is going to be able to replicate that. Contemplate this: Dark is simultaneously being "attacked" by Bytecoin clones for not being anonymous enough and then Vertcoin comes along and says "oh you are too anonymous for our preference". Darkcoin is the main river right now, carrying on with the anonymity. Everyone is trying to be the tributary river who gains money off Drk by inventing "problems" that they can "improve upon". Vertcoin discovered that the "problem" of Darkcoin is too much anonymity and it has the solution to "fix it": Privacy. Bytecoin clones discovered that the "problem" of Darkcoin is that it's level of anonymity is not like NSA-proof grade, and thus "not anonymous" (yet BCN + clones aren't NSA proof either and if they say they are = it's snake oil). But that's secondary to the huge other problems they have in terms of being an untested blockchain platform (or those of usability and scaling). |
|
|
|
Hi, I bought into drk back when it was .002ish, glad to be on board and am very excited. Have two questions though if someone has a second...
1) If darksend is anonymous and untraceable, how do I prove I made a payment to someone who says "they didn't receive it"?
He generates an address for you, you send him the money and you then check his balance in the blockchain for that specific address that the money arrived. 2) What's to keep the NSA or similar from hosting their own master node (or 10, they have the budget) and logging transactions that come through to defeat the anonymity?
When Evan started it, I don't think NSA-proofing was the goal. I don't know if it was even conceived as possible. The goal was to provide anonymity that would probably be good for 99.99% of the cases but perhaps beatable by an "adversary" as the NSA if they put the effort to it because they would be able to monitor networks, devices, emails, pretty much everything. As the heat started rising with Anonymint's constructive criticism, and later on with Bytecoin ring signatures, the perception cultivated was that "Darkcoin's anonymity is weak". By "weak" = not NSA-proof, which is interesting because right now, as they all are, there is no single solution providing NSA-proof levels of anonymity (Bytecoin and clones not excluded) by itself and without extra measures being taken. Zerocoin would be the only solution to do that, but it has other issues. As a sidenote: If you have to be the NSA to "crack" the anonymity, for all intents and purposes the solutions provided are good for 99% of the cases - like people not wanting their transactions being public, or citizens of some country (other than the US which lack NSA resources) who want to evade their government crackdown on cryptos. Anyway, the solution that Evan thought to counter the issue of a large adversary controlling a number of nodes (beyond the negative incentive of 1000 DRK requirement), was to use multiple DarkSends through multiple nodes. This would require NSA to not control a few or the majority, but something like 90% of the network in order to be able to map the transactions. Because if the transaction hopped between, say, 10 nodes and 2 were not controlled, that would be an issue of losing track of the money flow. I think (haven't analyzed it - the specs change all the time) this solution was not eventually implemented in DarkSend (but I figure it should be an option if the alternative fails). Evan has now thought something different to do with this, and we are all weird on what it is. We'll find out... |
|
|
|
I remember a time when people were saying a) Darkcoin? That's a sketchy name, it'll go nowhere (and went to the moon  ) b) Anonymity? Who needs that? It's for illegal activities. Yeah, good luck with that. c) It'll be pulled from the exchanges for being illegal d) 0.0005 per BTC? No, no... way too expensive. e) I'm tired of 0.0012-0.002, I'm dumping. f) Trolls @t 0.003 / 0.005 / 0.007 / 0.01 / 0.014 (stopped after that due to zero credibility): "Expect the dump, yes we can see it round the corner". Now everybody is scrambling for anonymity... |
|
|
|
The facts in the OP are the facts, check them out for yourself.
The OP is distorting reality with claims of dev having 2mn, citing a post for the proposed airdrop that never happened and purposefully muddling it with the instamine distribution. One thing though, this has ensured every coin is racing for anon features. Then we'll be on to the next "must have" feature. DRK took anon seriously so they have a jump start, the others will be on it now. Then when every coin is anon the next feature will pop up that all coins must have.
That's good in the broader sense of the cryptocurrency ecosystem. Competition for improving features benefits us significantly. The problem is that no-one is coding... There is 1. A camp that is expecting Evan to open up DarkSend for cloning and then say "ah yes, DRK was a scam, we are better because we stole their DarkSend and are now holding the moral high ground": clear scam mentality. 2. A camp that is cloning Bytecoin into multiple coins - many of which have clueless devs that can't even make a fricking GUI front-end. More scam mentality. 3. A camp that is scrambling to make something with basic anonymity so that they can capitalize on the rise of DRK as DRK-alternatives because they can't wait for DarkSend. They are not really promoting technology, just trying to get into the cash stream. Further scam mentality. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
