Yes, I'm aware of this, but the Bytecoin people made CryptoNote into a coin. A coin which has issues and which might be heavily improved in more than one aspects, anonymity included (to a larger or lesser extent). It is unlikely that their familiarity with the code and their headstart has not produced insights on what they would do better, in the technical department, if they started the coin now. Every dev that makes his code has these flashes "ah, I wish I had gone that other route and fixed this from the start".

We'll see how it goes. If they do it, I'll just take my loss. It's a risk going against first mover but then again I can't go with first mover because of the premine. And all the laundry from one community to the other, it's damaging the ecosystem. Anyway.

Something making "cryptonote 1" vs "cryptonote 2" incompatible for forking purposes and which could require a new coin. If they have, on purpose, done various stuff in the past regarding things like un-optimizing code, as people write, chance is they will do it again even with changes on how the protocol operates, writes the blockchain, does the anonymity - stuff like that.

They sell their BCNs, get whatever they can in BTCs, say ok cryptonote 1 is dead (they hadn't much to lose anyway as MRO was taking the pie), then announce cryptonote 2 (and having the "testimony" of their good solution through cryptonote 1 which will make them the "innovators"), launch some kind of IPO to get even more money and voila. They've both got the money + killed the clones... sounds like a plan. MRO can then only hope to clone or adapt the new coin's features but with no moral high ground in terms of fairness.

This is the scenario that seems problematic - for me at least. Even announcing such a plan could make Monero crash. It's too high a dependency in terms of investment.

2011 wasn't exactly 2014. Post-2013 boom, the crypto landscape was filled with clones and thus the level of acceptability has gone down.


It's a stretch to go the "centralized" route by virtue of money supply distribution. But no, with 80% premine I'm not interested in being dumped by the bagholders, even if they are selling at 1 satoshi.

Coin-numbers-adjusted for an identical number of coins circulating, DRK is cheaper than DOGE and 10 times cheaper than LTC.

Doge is infinite (bad store of value) and the meme fades. LTC failed in its primary mission of ASIC resistance. Even their networks with issues like 51% resemble smaller coins so they don't even have the network security aspect going in their favor.

So the real question is why are they +20% and +900% more expensive per coin than DRK?

There are two ways to look at this:

-LTC and Doge are overpriced, so they will have to come down.
-DRK is underpriced so it will have to go up.

...if either of these perceptions sink in (because it's all related to market inertia) the only result is DRK climbing the ladder.

Deposit 0.06 and then withdraw it. (0.9 that is... minus the 0.1 fee).

I'm generally on the anonymous train and I also have some vertcoins (that rocket will never take off it seems - might as well sell them if I lose patience).

I don't marry my coins because every single one of them has weaknesses. DRK V1 will need improvement, Bytecoin is 80% premine so it's doomed, Anoncoin is going nowhere with zerocoin, Zerocoin itself seems too uncertain and too government-funded, Libertycoin saying it wants to implement a basic darksend as libertysend in a week or so seems absurd and desperate (a week? wtf), Monero and other Bytecoin clones are just clones.

The only two that seem fixable, regarding their weaknesses, are DRK in V2 with all-around-anonymity and Bytecoin but not in its current state (due to the 80% premine), rather a second incarnation with technical upgrades which obsolete the current cryptonote model. Or that's my estimation anyway. If I knew the future I'd be a trillionaire

What I know for sure is that the anonymous market will be too large to ignore and that's why there is all this "competition" and rivalry. I've been saying it ever since it had something like 2-3mn market cap and now it's over 40 or 50mn. The main bet is that Bitcoin will not really adopt private features due to wanting to be transparent for regulators, or if it does, these features will not be at the level of the anonymous competitors who will conduct these transactions.

When you have 80% premine, it's fairly evident what they want: money. And if MRO takes their money by making BCN irrelevant, guess what they'll do next. Use their tech know-how to reclaim their "rightful" place, reducing the greed factor that was proven a weakness in the first stage, providing cryptoland with an improved product. It might take weeks or months, but they could make big money out of it - especially if they first dump their BCNs and then move to BCN 2.0 (named something different of course).

I don't think that mining software (clients, pools), or supporting exchanges to add monero "count" as coin-tech development. Bugfixes, more so.


It would be filtered out due to premine. So no top5.


The problem is that you telling them what to do, and where to be, when they've made the coin is ...problematic. You can't put them in a box and tell them these are the rules you'll play with. They made the coin. Don't you get it? They have immense power compared to clones because they can relaunch tomorrow a new coin with cryptonote tech V2 or something and pull the carpet underneath the clones big time. It will be like obsoleting "v1" and rendering it useless. It's their nuke option. They had two years to think of problems in their implementation, saying "ah, if we made the coin now, we'd do that in a different way". The potential for improvement should be significant for a reboot or a new coin by the same devs.

As I see it, having MRO take everything and upsetting the BCN devs by capitalizing on their work can backfire big time as they might "nuke" the clones and go with a V2 which heavily improves on V1. And then it's game over.

Personally I'm on the Dark train, but have some MROs just in case - keeping in mind the above. I like the prospects of the anonymous market in general, and I am holding more than one anon coins so as to be properly positioned and hedged, but the fact that MROs fortune is dependent on what BCN developers will do (because they are the innovators and first movers) is unsettling for escalating any investment.

Nobody said you can't rip-off stuff. You can do it alright, but you'll face the consequences of self-limitation into parasitic mentality. That's especially true when you do it in a way where you aren't really taking something to improve it technically, but rather cloning it and re-branding it to achieve your own financial advantage.


It's not my "idea". It's how the mind operates. Ask, for example, a hypnotist about presuppositions, and how he uses them to slip the affirmations and suggestions he wants directly to the subconscious.

The human mind produces dual thoughts, not single thoughts. For every thought or action, there is an implied thought. The implied thought tends to go unnoticed (unless one is trained to observe them - which is not difficult, it just takes time) and when it goes unnoticed it then becomes subconscious programming since it goes down uncontested.

Humans are taught that if they can do evil and get away with it they are ok. They will never get away from their own implied self-programming that says "if I harmed others to advance myself, then apparently I'm unable to advance myself on my own powers -> therefore I have no powers". Self-sabotaging. If there is anything like "karma" or "hell" or "divine punishment", this is it. But it's not performed by some higher power. It's performed by us.

Be virtuous and expand yourself. Be a scam and limit yourself.

We don't disagree on the need for anonymous currencies. But stealing other's work to capitalize on them and then claim superiority as you throw the original devs from the cliff is indecent / a "crime" too.

You can't correct scam mentality (80% premine) with scam mentality (taking the entire code that others created and saying "oh, yeah, that works great and we fixed the premine").

The ultimate form of programming and hacking, is the programming of the human mind. Few know how the mind is programmed and even fewer know how they are self-programming themselves every day through their actions.

For every action there is a subconscious programming routine that is performed automatically: When you steal, your subconscious observes the stealing act and says "Since I'm stealing, my creative capacities are obviously not very good - otherwise I'd be able to manage on my own... the fact that I'm stealing proves that I have inadequate creative capacities". This is programming the subconscious of the thief into a very strong self-affirmation of limitation and parasitism. Nothing good can come out of that. This dynamic is inescapable in human affairs and it will blow up in some way, at some time.

Even so, Bytecoin (and to a lesser degree clones) is/are useful so that they can up the anonymity game in terms of technology. The market is sufficiently large where everyone can fit in. I estimate that even if 1% to 10% of the transparent market goes anonymous, we'll see 70-700mn market cap for anonymous coins (with current BTC prises). If BTC prices multiply we can also multiply the prior projection.

Yeah, altruism is always the main motive of clone coins...

With the exception of Bitcoin (and DOGE which was made for the lulz), I don't think many people created coins for the good of humanity.

An estimate for a desktop cpu?

Cloning it is easier than vetting it and I doubt many have done these checks since it's been under wraps.


Darkcoin is based on Bitcoin code base, so in the sense of monetary integrity it should be as sound as Bitcoin. If Bitcoin fails, so will all Bitcoin-based clones.

In terms of anonymity, DarkSend is not yet opensourced but it'll be open after V1 is finalized. Then it goes for V2, which I suspect will again be closed source until finalized.

Given that bitcoin has been at 5-10bn marketcap and that it's not yet "broken" by some catastrophic flaw after 5 years running, most would say it's pretty good at what it set out to do.

Bytecoin's code base though has yet to pass the test of time.

After the nvidia speedups, we now have some work done in the AMD front for DRK / X11 hashpower...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=616786

Note that this is closed source and gives ~2% to the author.

Litecoin now has 51% issues...

http://www.reddit.com/r/litecoin

Coinotron.com Control nearly 50% of the overall Hashrate of Litecoin (self.litecoin)
submitted 4 days ago by PUBLIC_SERVICE_ANN - stickied post

Coinotron hits %51 and they arent taking it seriously, this is what im doing and you can help (self.litecoin)
submitted 12 hours ago * by TheRealMageLitecoin Association

And we hit 50% (pic-upload.de)
submitted 15 hours ago by Arogtar

And now Coinotron officially has 51% (self.litecoin)
submitted 13 hours ago by FreeJack2k2

Thing with Monero is, and I've bought some just in case it blows up (as a short-term hedge), is that it was too violent in stealing Bytecoin's work. Kind of like "oh, you premined 80%, so we'll take your work and get rid of you bytecoin people". This is scam mentality. But MRO people need Bytecoin development*. This might backfire through stagnation.

Also MRO doesn't hold any "high ground" vs other Bytecoin clones. What will they say? Hi, we are the first clones of Bytecoin?

* Gmaxwell also commented on something to that effect a few hours ago: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=512747.msg6830290#msg6830290

There is no reason why, coin-numbers-adjusted, a DOGEcoin should cost more than a Darkcoin. DOGEs are infinite and as such their store-of-value potential is shit.

They'll be consumed by DRKness...

1: Coding requires time. Cloning does not (Monero being a Bytecoin clone). So V1 is out of the question.

2: Monero has a lot of issues in the usability and compatibility departments, and from what I read in their thread, serious bloat issues (?). If that's the problem now, then how the hell is this gonna scale in 3-5-10 years?

3. By V2 of DRK, Monero will be a subset of DRK's capabilities and DRK will have more anonymous features + bitcoin-level of usability and compatibility. So long-term hold prospect for Monero doesn't look good in that sense. It could be a short-term hedge for DRK though.

4. Evan will not stop with DRK's evolution after the anonymity job is finished. He has plans for killer mainstream features. At least I remember he said that when DarkSend is finished he'll implement something he believes will be a smash. I've no idea what it is.

Perhaps gathering a bounty so that he can release the code would do the trick.