I have a faucet that will be online later today ... It will only give out small amounts of SDC but is a starter for ten.
The idea of having a fund and paying for contributions towards the project is good idea.

EDIT :
http://faucet.shadow.blockexplorer.cc/
Give it a test and the donation address is in in the top menu.

Actual amount was 24 .... our dinner date if off for the moment
Point made though, it is almost impossible to prove what the transact amount was.

It is not quite as simple as that ....
Look here : http://shadowtn.blockexplorer.cc/tx/47da4aca657ec9fe4ab7de6fa1e3dd5e935474151bfcc18d39c3b537885f25bd

Now tell me how much Shadow --> Shadow I sent

These things need to happen in parallel and Bitcoin core needs to continue to evolve (Sidechains being part of that as it opens many over avenues) ...
We all need to play our part; if you have something to offer then reach out.

Bitcoin is still very young; give it another few years and the landscape will be different.

Also try and compare your last block with the explorer to see if the hash is the same ... if its not then you will need to rewind back to where it does match and then restart.

Firstly, my post on this thread was to clear the confusion amongst those who do not fully understand ShadowSend i.e. "ShadowCash a CryptoNote based currency" etc.. It is quite obvious this is coming from this thread and all the talk of CryptoNote and Shadow

Secondly, I am sorry but you are wrong. I very carefully choose my words and repeat ...


So lets address my two points

1. Shadow is not based on CryptoNote
Shadow is as much based on CryptoNote as CryptoNote is based on Bitcoin by your analogy. Surely because CryptoNote has a blockchain and uses PoW the CrytoNote developers based their entire technology on Bitcoin? That sounds as absurd as your statement saying Shadow is based on CryptoNote.

Yes there has been inspiration, just like the CrytoNote developers where inspired by Satoshis work; However Shadow is *NOT* based on CryptoNote. If it was (and I am sure it would have been much easier for the team) they would have just called this "ShadowSend a CryotoNote implementation on Bitcoin codebase".
There is in total 9 white papers referenced in the ShadowSend whitepaper. Today ring sigs are used and tomorrow it will be something entirely different as technology matures.

2. Shadow does not function like CrytoNote
This is the easiest to address, just because ShadowSend uses Stealth Addresses + Ring Sigs does not mean it functions like CryptoNote ...
For starters in Shadow you can move from SDC to SDT which uses a technique of minting similar to ZeroCoin. Shadow keyimages are reusable whereas in CryptoNote they are one-time if I recall correctly. The list is endless of how Shadow differs from CryptoNote.

ShadowSend is a unique implementation and should and will hold its own against the likes of CrytoNote/ZeroCash etc.

Lastly and most importantly coming back to the reason I originally posted; I really could care less about you did this first and you copied my style of x ... What is important to me is that those that are reading this thread over the past several dozen pages are getting confused with all this referencing of CryptoNote and Shadow hence why we are seeing confusing and misleading (I am not pointing fingers) statements.

All I am asking for is lets keep this sensible until we have clear hard facts and those far more intelligent that I have reviewed the full implementation. I know the team are working on some material to help understand this better.

Lastly Lastly, we are all here for the same purpose (I hope) .. lets support one another!
P.S. I am on the road so mind any typos/grammar!
P.S. This is my opinion and not that of the brains behind ShadowSend and I am sure they will chime their two shadowshi's worth.

Guys/Gals, can we please please stop getting carried away with this shadow and cryptonote...  Shadow is not based on cryptonote and does not function like cryptonote!

Thanks

Glad it all worked out

Hmm, I compiled QT from source on linux this morning without any issues.
IIRC you need QT5 and not QT4

There is no requirement to covert the same size i.e. you receive 100 Shadow .. you can then send them in any size as Shadow (5,10,20 etc) or convert them in any size as SDC (e.g. 14.1 SDC).


This is automated by the client ... as more Shadow tokens are created this will become even better than what it is right now.
Great way to see this is the "Chain Data" tab in the Wallet

PM me a TX so I can double check it but yes it would seem if you are lucky enough to mine a block which has a Shadow TX then the fee will be collected by you. (Shadow fee is 100x normal fee)


You should see a Shadow balance too (both GUI and daemon)

Time for us to get SDC/USD exchange then

The spend code has been on github for over two hours for the eagle eyed!

Msg me in IRC and I will take a look.

It was down as I had to rebuild the explorer .. richlist will update on the next hour and will be back in sync.

Thanks for the post, was good to see that the block chain aspect of bitcoin is getting more and more recognition for what it can bring to the market.

Ambitious project like this needs funding else it will run out of $$$ ... maybe dev should escrow the remaining XAI left for future rounds of funding if needed in future (rather than burn) if we cannot hit 200+ BTC?

This is a such a awful recommendation ... to create a paper wallet via the above method defeats the whole purpose.