If Evan thinks Peter is out of line, he should correct him.
Evan is in his hole  trying to finish his product while you are trying to drag him out Is a hole where he refines his snake oil? |
|
|
|
That's a dumb assumption considering it's easier and more expansive now and a dash mining pedo ring is motivation enough.
Are you worried this imaginary pedo mining ring would get caught? Or that it turns out there never was such ring?
But keep to the shill script; i'm sure snake oil sales is a noble profession in some circles.
Just trying to keep it in touch with the current reality. I presume you being used to stalled development makes you think all the progress is finished after GUI wallet is released and no further improvements are expected. Hoping its imaginary doesn't make it imaginary, and last time i checked, law enforcement doesn't need much prodding (or proof) to flex their muscles. But go on saying, "Nothing to see here, everything is under control..." I'm sure that the power of wishing will make technical flaws disappear. And I'm sure creating more MONERO threads and wishing DASH would go away will make MONERO go to moon anytime now. This isn't a Monero thread - why do you keep bringing it up? If you feel strongly about DASH standing up to scrutiny, maybe you should get Peter Todd to do a debate on a podcast with someone from the DASH team? This is a great idea. I don't think Fluffy or Smooth would stand back and let supporters handle it if Monero was put in a similar position. If Evan thinks Peter is out of line, he should correct him. |
|
|
|
That's a dumb assumption considering it's easier and more expansive now and a dash mining pedo ring is motivation enough.
Are you worried this imaginary pedo mining ring would get caught? Or that it turns out there never was such ring?
But keep to the shill script; i'm sure snake oil sales is a noble profession in some circles.
Just trying to keep it in touch with the current reality. I presume you being used to stalled development makes you think all the progress is finished after GUI wallet is released and no further improvements are expected. Hoping its imaginary doesn't make it imaginary, and last time i checked, law enforcement doesn't need much prodding (or proof) to flex their muscles. But go on saying, "Nothing to see here, everything is under control..." I'm sure that the power of wishing will make technical flaws disappear. And I'm sure creating more MONERO threads and wishing DASH would go away will make MONERO go to moon anytime now. And i'm sure attacking monero will sidestep the puddle of snake oil you are standing in. |
|
|
|
That's a dumb assumption considering it's easier and more expansive now and a dash mining pedo ring is motivation enough.
Are you worried this imaginary pedo mining ring would get caught? Or that it turns out there never was such ring?
But keep to the shill script; i'm sure snake oil sales is a noble profession in some circles.
Just trying to keep it in touch with the current reality. I presume you being used to stalled development makes you think all the progress is finished after GUI wallet is released and no further improvements are expected. Hoping its imaginary doesn't make it imaginary, and last time i checked, law enforcement doesn't need much prodding (or proof) to flex their muscles. But go on saying, "Nothing to see here, everything is under control..." I'm sure that the power of wishing will make technical flaws disappear. |
|
|
|
...
That's a dumb assumption considering it's easier and more expansive now and a dash mining pedo ring is motivation enough. But keep to the shill script; i'm sure snake oil sales is a noble profession in some circles. Hey this is OT. Stop calling names Back to poloniex Dumb assumptions are made by smart people when it serves their agenda. The whole thread is calling dash snake oil, so you better get used to getting called out when you bring your weak dash-marketing-spin into play. |
|
|
|
So if masternode will be blinded, will it help you?
Perhaps not the same blinding you're talking about, but this might help: It wouldn't necessarily need a complete redesign to shut that attack vector. All that's needed is to prevent the mixing masternode from knowing which outputs (of the mixing transaction) belong together with which inputs. The mixing peers could do a key exchange and encrypt their own outputs with random mixing peer's public key, and decrypt the others' outputs they can using their private key, and then pass clear text outputs to the mixing masternode.
But then again, before that kind of motivated attacker (who infiltrates all the masternodes in the world) appears, DASH will need to probably grow at least 100x, so that's gonna be maybe a year away still.  And sorry about posting OT in this Monero thread. That's a dumb assumption considering it's easier and more expansive now and a dash mining pedo ring is motivation enough. But keep to the shill script; i'm sure snake oil sales is a noble profession in some circles. |
|
|
|
I don't trust this system. I can't see it and verify it. What good is it for everything to be hidden completely, to the point where you have to trust that it is working?
With a simple, understandable system that fully protects the privacy of the user, yet requires no trust - as was always the whole point of the decentralized crypto currency of Bitcoin - DASH is not more superior due to it's complexity, but due to it's simplicity. If you're such a technocrat that you don't understand this, I can only feel bad for you because the majority of the world will.
LOL. Here's the attack vector Evan created out of ignorance, stupidity or pure not giving a fuck. The easiest attack is to buy masternodes and ddos attack competing nodes until you own the traffic. Evan claims it's financially implausible, but ignores that nodes are most profitable when there about a 1,000 masternodes (he has a ROI graphic on the dash BCT thread that underscores this). He also ignores that the attacker would be pulling incomes from these masternodes--given that most are held on corporate servers underlies that no one knows who owns them outside of the host and the owner. He also ignores how motivated an attacker may be, that he or another masternode operator might comply given the right circumstances (threat or lawful compliance) and how deep LE's pockets are--silly, dangerous, stupid. If you trust that system knowing the flaws, you deserve whatever comes your way--except maybe being linked to pedophiles--can you show that link on your explorer? DOS'ing masternodes doesn't reduce the anonymity set of the transactions or coins mixed before the DOS. If the masternode count drops 50% for example all of a sudden, mixing coins at that moment is not a good idea. It was already suggested a year ago or so that the wallet would take care of this and protect the user during the network downtime. It hasn't been implemented yet afaik, DASH must grow at least 100x at minimum before this (an appearance of such a motivated attacker) would become even a possibility. DDOS is to control the majority of nodes, not to directly reduce the anonymity set--though by doing so while monitoring the nodes you posses would break anonymity--which was my point. Nice suggestion, but wouldn't an attacker take control of the nodes before any measures were taken, while it was cheapest, and while they could gain the most info for the longest time without raising any red flags? Also, you still have no measure in reality or in the works to stop an organization from using coercion or compliance to motivate a node operator to turn over data--this is even better since the whatevermine granted the first users such a large stash of coins and the masternodes are most likely concentrated in a few hands. But here's the big problem: masternodes are human controlled intermediaries that perform important functions. Whatever breaks dash's anonymity will happen because you trust this moronic system that is begging to be broken. You are playing a game of whack-a-mole and apparently no one in dashland has the theoretical capability to see it or the moral compass to speak up. Snake oil. NO^ Look back at the post history, it is your fellow dashers who rerouted this thread into a dash versus monero thread. So prove that evan's coin isn't snake oil or go back to your echo chamber. Yea, right...and you are...a monero supporter who attacked dash first. I'm still waiting for your fella with his deanonymizer  The way masternodes work, they may already be monitored and there's no way you could check.  So if masternode will be blinded, will it help you? I'm at poloniex now, forgive me |
|
|
|
I don't trust this system. I can't see it and verify it. What good is it for everything to be hidden completely, to the point where you have to trust that it is working?
With a simple, understandable system that fully protects the privacy of the user, yet requires no trust - as was always the whole point of the decentralized crypto currency of Bitcoin - DASH is not more superior due to it's complexity, but due to it's simplicity. If you're such a technocrat that you don't understand this, I can only feel bad for you because the majority of the world will.
LOL. Here's the attack vector Evan created out of ignorance, stupidity or pure not giving a fuck. The easiest attack is to buy masternodes and ddos attack competing nodes until you own the traffic. Evan claims it's financially implausible, but ignores that nodes are most profitable when there about a 1,000 masternodes (he has a ROI graphic on the dash BCT thread that underscores this). He also ignores that the attacker would be pulling incomes from these masternodes--given that most are held on corporate servers underlies that no one knows who owns them outside of the host and the owner. He also ignores how motivated an attacker may be, that he or another masternode operator might comply given the right circumstances (threat or lawful compliance) and how deep LE's pockets are--silly, dangerous, stupid. If you trust that system knowing the flaws, you deserve whatever comes your way--except maybe being linked to pedophiles--can you show that link on your explorer? DOS'ing masternodes doesn't reduce the anonymity set of the transactions or coins mixed before the DOS. If the masternode count drops 50% for example all of a sudden, mixing coins at that moment is not a good idea. It was already suggested a year ago or so that the wallet would take care of this and protect the user during the network downtime. It hasn't been implemented yet afaik, DASH must grow at least 100x at minimum before this (an appearance of such a motivated attacker) would become even a possibility. DDOS is to control the majority of nodes, not to directly reduce the anonymity set--though by doing so while monitoring the nodes you posses would break anonymity--which was my point. Nice suggestion, but wouldn't an attacker take control of the nodes before any measures were taken, while it was cheapest, and while they could gain the most info for the longest time without raising any red flags? Also, you still have no measure in reality or in the works to stop an organization from using coercion or compliance to motivate a node operator to turn over data--this is even better since the whatevermine granted the first users such a large stash of coins and the masternodes are most likely concentrated in a few hands. But here's the big problem: masternodes are human controlled intermediaries that perform important functions. Whatever breaks dash's anonymity will happen because you trust this moronic system that is begging to be broken. You are playing a game of whack-a-mole and apparently no one in dashland has the theoretical capability to see it or the moral compass to speak up. Snake oil. In case you forgot. |
|
|
|
Look back at the post history, it is your fellow dashers who rerouted this thread into a dash versus monero thread. So prove that evan's coin isn't snake oil or go back to your echo chamber. Yea, right...and you are...a monero supporter who attacked dash first. I'm still waiting for your fella with his deanonymizer The way masternodes work, they may already be monitored and there's no way you could check. |
|
|
|
The money I want is simple: about everyone takes it, it's fungible, and it won't be traced back to me--like a coin, which is even better than cash. Monero fits this definition and i don't need graphics or links or convoluted sentences to explain why it works for me.
So, gtfo, quick...and buy a shitload of monero while is declining and cheap. You don't have to make a new thread in need to atack Dash and on its back make a little support. Dash is about not only a privacy but something else, and Monero is about being anonymous only in order to support darkmarkets etc. Be fine with it. What a coincidence. Second time Dash is attacked in ridiculous way Nicely done guys, you achieved what you wanted...I bought some because as smooth said:
If you buy it you are making a bet on whether or not that happens. Simple as that. You don't buy XMR because you want to use it to buy a pack of gum at your local convenience store. It's 100% speculative. Decide how you want to bet, and bet, or don't bet.
So you know what to do now. It's showtime...second time or third or fourth Look back at the post history, it is your fellow dashers who rerouted this thread into a dash versus monero thread. So prove that evan's coin isn't snake oil or go back to your echo chamber. |
|
|
|
As capitalism marches off the plank of zero marginal costs, what happens to physical value?
...
Capitalism is dead and we're all scared shitless so we keep running around the track playing the "remember when?" game.
What replaces this system?...
Answer: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg11917056#msg11917056The zero marginal costs are only in the physical realm. The knowledge component can never be 0 unless you can make entropy reversible and stop time. What if you could turn off? Stop your time. We can't, at least not in our current state, but an AI could experiment with what happens when time moves forward, but you do not. Could you scale yourself down to a point where there isn't even interactions with or on a subatomic level--to achieve a state of non-movement? Humans tend to think in terms of expansion, but what if AI goes the other way? Dying (Emily Dickinson) I heard a fly buzz when I died; The stillness round my form Was like the stillness in the air Between the heaves of storm. The eyes beside had wrung them dry, And breaths were gathering sure For that last onset, when the king Be witnessed in his power. I willed my keepsakes, signed away What portion of me I Could make assignable,-and then There interposed a fly, With blue, uncertain, stumbling buzz, Between the light and me; And then the windows failed, and then I could not see to see. This is Emily playing with the idea of past, present, and future colliding. Though her future self cannot see beyond the last moment, but maybe that is the real divine state: a point of zero-interaction. |
|
|
|
^  Good piece. Once a direct neural to computer interfaces reach the point where neurons can interact intimately with data, the bony veil of our skull will be lifted and our brain's capacity will expand into computer assisted consciousness. Though some may want to sit in their dusty recliners and muse (too much) over the meaning of symbols, without really getting that it's subjective and can't be redistributed in the value driven world with out some sort of mental violence--usually in the form of name and link dropping. I want to be inside the computer and see what alien values arise, if any.... |
|
|
|
My point is how does the way we value physical things transfer or change--what becomes valued? Do states that only wield physical force get lowered on the totem as digital worlds creep into our lives. But thanks for the lecture, dad, but remember context next time.
"[Ѕ]tates" (generalizethis), as well, are not "physical" (generalizethis) and, therefore, cannot, within the real, "wield physical force" (generalizethis): those subject to the "virtual reality" (i.e., hyperreality [i.e., any network of symbols that, exclusively, references symbols]) do so (in reality, not in effect [for their collective delusions about the constitution of Real]). How much do i value your opinion? This symbol has been closed for work. |
|
|
|
As capitalism marches off the plank of zero marginal costs, what happens to physical value?
Baudrillard presents hyperreality as the terminal stage of simulation, where a sign or image has no relation to any reality whatsoever, but is “its own pure simulacrum” (Baudrillard 1994, 6). The real, he says, has become an operational effect of symbolic processes, just as images are technologically generated and coded before we actually perceive them. This means technological mediation has usurped the productive role of the Kantian subject, the locus of an original synthesis of concepts and intuitions, as well as the Marxian worker, the producer of capital though labor, and the Freudian unconscious, the mechanism of repression and desire. “From now on,” says Baudrillard, “signs are exchanged against each other rather than against the real” (Baudrillard 1993, 7), so production now means signs producing other signs. The system of symbolic exchange is therefore no longer real but “hyperreal.” Where the real is “that of which it is possible to provide an equivalent reproduction,” the hyperreal, says Baudrillard, is “that which is always already reproduced” (Baudrillard 1993, 73). The hyperreal is a system of simulation simulating itself.
(Red colorization mine.) Possession is to the hyperreal what control is to the real. Epicurus believed that, on the basis of a radical materialism which dispensed with transcendent entities such as the Platonic Ideas or Forms…
“[V]alue” (generalizethis) is not “physical” (generalizethis); therefore, “physical value” (generalizethis) does not exist (in the real) to have something (thereof) “happen[] to [it]” (generalizethis). Not my point. My point is how does the way we value physical things transfer or change--what becomes valued? Do states that only wield physical force get lowered on the totem as digital worlds creep into our lives. But thanks for the lecture, dad, but remember context next time. |
|
|
|
A viewkey acts as receipt with all the information that an accountant would need. Smooth's point is that the blockchain is reviewable without giving up private information. This is no different than how cash works. So is cash not money?
A viewkey is not remotely a substitute for transparency. In fact it's an example of exactly the design cludge I'm talking about since it's a compromise between transparency and privacy - without enhancing either. What are you talking about--I can let people view my transactions with a viewkey, so the tax man is satisfied which all the transparency I need. Never mind that Smooth just corrected all your misconceptions. But keep on harping about it while you shilling your snake oil. I've got the money I want. Bitcoin, Monero, and Darkcoin all have the same large problem. The ASIC came too soon for Bitcoin, so a wide distribution, which is required for currency, is a fraction of what it would have been if off the shelf hardware could have been used for even a couple more years. Even Satoshi has quotes talking about a "gentlemen's agreement" to not use GPU miners, heh. Whether the Bitcoin distribution is good enough for it to succeed in the long run is unknown.
For Darkcoin, having block rewards set to 10x what they're supposed to be the first day or two, then reducing coin supply afterwards from 80 mil to 20 mil is a show stopper. Does anyone really think Bitcoin would be as big as it is now if Satoshi pulled off that blunder? The answer is an obvious no. People would refer to Bitcoin as "Scamcoin" if Satoshi had done that, and the market cap never would have broke a dollar. Every other coin that's had a blunder that huge on launch, such as "GPUcoin", was relaunched. The fact that Darkcoin was not relaunched after a mistake that huge is nuts.
Then for Monero, just like all CPU mined coins, trying to mine any with the botnets on it is almost impossible. I tried mining Monero the third day it was released with two Haswells and got zero. I don't think it even had botnets on it then. Ironically, Dogecoin probably has a better distribution than everything else in the top 10.
I think cheap coins and the darkmarket will help distribute monero--though how long coins stay under dollar and how big the darkmarket gets is anyone's guess. The official GUI will have smart (background) mining and that should help distribution and network strength. Most people won't get much, but it will be like free change depending on your energy costs. |
|
|
|
As I explained to you earlier, you can do exactly the same type of audit. Every single transaction except coinbases have inputs exactly equal to outputs (if fees are included in outputs), and that is entirely visible. Coinbases can be verified to match the published reward schedule in every instance starting from block 0 all he way to block infinity (unlike Dash, BTW), again all visible. Thus you can be assured that coins are not and never have been created out of thin air.
You further need to verify that transactions have valid signatures (for which all the necessary inputs are, again, visible), which is finally exactly the same thing you need to do (but with slightly different mathematical equations) with every other cryptocurrency.
This is just technological B.S. that nobody monetary user is interested in or needs to know. It is not a financial audit. I already described what an "audit is" and it is not something that cryptonote supports because the relevant information is obscured. The originating address is obscured, the destination addresses are obscured, even the balance itself is obscured - that is the whole *point* of the cryptonote technology which is why I say it's relevant for bookkeeping or record keeping of a trusted party-backed currency but not for defining a new form of base money. Again viewkeys, TOk, you keep repeating this tripe and you know, at least you should, that it is complete BS. A viewkey acts as receipt with all the information that an accountant would need. Smooth's point is that the blockchain is reviewable without giving up private information. This is no different than how cash works. So is cash not money? |
|
|
|
inaccurate and mean spirited comment by a so called "bitcoin developer" who is acting childish and insecure. And you continue to act childish and insecure. We just want to make sure that anyone opening this thread gets the other point of view as well.
Using quotations around "bitcoin developer" to describe an actual Bitcoin Developer is childish and inaccurate. And calling Icebreaker an idiot was mean spirited. This is the internet, you have as many words as any of us, so playing victim comes off as a last ditch ploy. |
|
|
|
Masternodes are a human controlled point of failure that has never nor ever will be incorporated into a serious cryptosystem. These systems are fragile enough without excessive parts that serve no real purpose other than to funnel money into the greedy hands of early adopters. There's no technology in existence that you can't cherry pick aspects of and make such idle remarks. What is lazy and disingenuous about Peter Todd's comments is that they don't address any of the real priorities identified by the various competing projects in the cryptocurrency space. Rather they are the remarks of an overgrown schoolboy trainspotting programmer who could care less about what he's implementing and everything about the tools he uses to implement it. I'm not saying that's necessarily what he is, but I am saying that that is what such remarks characterize. I have tried to address those things in this thread - ie present some level of business (or monetary) process analysis that is abscent from all the technological mud slinging. I've supported my arguments with a whole lot more background than Peter Todd did so I don't feel the need to defend petty point scoring factoids about perceived weaknesses in network security. This debate is about something much more fundamental. Tok, no one cares (except dashers) about your weird theory of money that happens to mangle dash into your prescribed fit. If it were a good theory, you would be able to explain in a clear and concise manner, not like someone who got a hold of really good ganja and watched a documentary about money once. The money I want is simple: about everyone takes it, it's fungible, and it won't be traced back to me--like a coin, which is even better than cash. Monero fits this definition and i don't need graphics or links or convoluted sentences to explain why it works for me. I don't know why your bitching that a cryptographer is giving technical analysis--that's what he's an expert in, so trying to shift his criticism away from what he's an expert in misses why his critique matters so much and why you can't just dismiss it with, "But I think money...." Either meet his criticism head-on or find yourself being ridiculed for not adding to the conversation or what this thread is addressing. |
|
|
|
I want to pay a hooker without my wife knowing. Do I read a mantra on what money should be written by a pseudoeconomist and buy a coin with same the anonymity level as bitcoin? Or do I use the coin that's agreed upon to have the best anonymity? How will I ever decide?  I think for you, you should definitely be a Lemming Follow what you're told. It's the best policy, just ask Ross Ulbricht, You're the one following the master to his node and paying him for the risk to your privacy. And you probably have spent so much time in that cult that you believe people accidentally instamine coins, but don't have the heart to fair launch. OOOPSY I completely and thoroughly understand DASH. I understand completely how and how well it protects my privacy. This is why I'm inclined not to trust other solutions, because I don't trust them. Aside from that, if cryptonote were to actually prove to me that it can not be manipulated, I still wouldn't be inclined to back it because it has a major issue in blockchain size. Dash is 50% older than Monero, yet has 25% the blockchain size. Can the chain be trimmed and still be solid? Can this be done with a completely hidden chain such as cryptonote's, which I already don't trust? It's going to be hard to convince me. But I will keep an open mind and continue to try to see my way through this otoh is by far the biggest DASH holder. Nobody out there touches him. And he bought them all, so I think the dam braking in the begining, and it's subsequent sell off (because it was just another silly alt coin for all anyone knew back then) means absolutely nothing to anyone who is serious about the technology. So it's your loss. I'm not trying to convince you of anything; you're obviously a hardened loyalist who is trying to spin a Bitcoin Dev's analysis of their investment into a hand-waving distraction, "But over here..." Masternodes are a human controlled point of failure that has never nor ever will be incorporated into a serious cryptosystem. These systems are fragile enough without excessive parts that serve no real purpose other than to funnel money into the greedy hands of early adopters. Snake oil. |
|
|
|
I want to pay a hooker without my wife knowing. Do I read a mantra on what money should be written by a pseudoeconomist and buy a coin with same the anonymity level as bitcoin? Or do I use the coin that's agreed upon to have the best anonymity? How will I ever decide? I think for you, you should definitely be a Lemming Follow what you're told. It's the best policy, just ask Ross Ulbricht, You're the one following the master to his node and paying him for the risk to your privacy. And you probably have spent so much time in that cult that you believe people accidentally instamine coins, but don't have the heart to fair launch. OOOPSY |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
