So, who in this forum is:
- a blogger
- involved with a news site
- neither, but keen to spread the word about XC anyway?
If you are, PM me. We have some pretty exciting news to put out in the coming weeks.
I'm not trying to be Debbie Downer here, but every coin says this and after the announcement it's like, meh. I have a lot of XC, so I hope this is different. Fair point. It's reasonable to wait and see what actually happens. But I think it's safe to extrapolate from the dev's release schedule and expect a similar rate of progress as we move forward. |
|
|
|
|
So, who in this forum is:
- a blogger
- involved with a news site
- neither, but keen to spread the word about XC anyway?
If you are, PM me. We have some pretty exciting news to put out in the coming weeks.
|
|
|
|
Hello all. This is to announce that I have taken on the role of PR and media liaison for XC.
I'm co-ordinating the PR side of the project and developing a great strategy based on XC's brand (which, as you're probably aware, is currently being created by Thrash).
You'll be hearing a lot of news from us in the near future: we'll be unveiling the development plan, the team, and of course be building up a wave of public awareness about XC's market-leading tech. So stick around, and anticipate big things.
Synechist
Please do us justice We have been wronged for so long. You might want to start with a better and more descriptive name for your coin. Previous 'X11Coin' name made it too clear that this coin was a ripoff from Darkcoin. Then it became XC, which is quite meaningless and random. What about 'Darkcoin Lite'? Very inspirational. Time and Again this has been brought up, and the community has overwhelmingly decided that XC was the right decision. People want to get stuck on shitcoinname1 and whatevercoin2. XC is more than a coin -it is a platform under development that encompasses more than "anyothercopycatcoin" and keeping "coin" out of the name was one of the best decisions that the community made. The thing about names is that they only signify to the imagination the first few times your hear it. After that they just represent your experience of the entity with the name, not whatever the name itself might suggest. XC, as you'll all know by now, signifies market-leading cryptographic tech. That's pretty much all there is to it. |
|
|
|
Hello all. This is to announce that I have taken on the role of PR and media liaison for XC.
I'm co-ordinating the PR side of the project and developing a great strategy based on XC's brand (which, as you're probably aware, is currently being created by Thrash).
You'll be hearing a lot of news from us in the near future: we'll be unveiling the development plan, the team, and of course be building up a wave of public awareness about XC's market-leading tech. So stick around, and anticipate big things.
Synechist
That is really cool congrats!  May I ask what is your background in Marketing? My background is mostly PR rather than strictly marketing. That, and academic anthropology, which is like the metaphysics of marketing. But I have extensive experience in the magazine and music industries. Promoting tours for international bands, facilitating the creation of music scenes, launching publications, creating an ad niche for advertisers, that sort of thing. Generally what I do is create a compelling narrative around a brand, that serves to embody the facts about it, demonstrate why it's important, and keep misconstruals at bay. I'm sure you'll all agree that this is what XC needs, given the FUD it's endured. Sounds great! I have read a lot of your post in XC. I like what I have seen from you. Thanks. I try to keep the level of discourse at least a few inches above the mud. :-) |
|
|
|
Hello all. This is to announce that I have taken on the role of PR and media liaison for XC.
I'm co-ordinating the PR side of the project and developing a great strategy based on XC's brand (which, as you're probably aware, is currently being created by Thrash).
You'll be hearing a lot of news from us in the near future: we'll be unveiling the development plan, the team, and of course be building up a wave of public awareness about XC's market-leading tech. So stick around, and anticipate big things.
Synechist
That is really cool congrats! May I ask what is your background in Marketing? My background is mostly PR rather than strictly marketing. That, and academic anthropology, which is like the metaphysics of marketing. But I have extensive experience in the magazine and music industries. Promoting tours for international bands, facilitating the creation of music scenes, launching publications, creating an ad niche for advertisers, that sort of thing. Generally what I do is create a compelling narrative around a brand, that serves to embody the facts about it, demonstrate why it's important, and keep misconstruals at bay. I'm sure you'll all agree that this is what XC needs, given the FUD it's endured. Congratz! well confident you pull of the job. If you ever need help I'm here to help Thanks. How are you able to contribute? |
|
|
|
Hello all. This is to announce that I have taken on the role of PR and media liaison for XC.
I'm co-ordinating the PR side of the project and developing a great strategy based on XC's brand (which, as you're probably aware, is currently being created by Thrash).
You'll be hearing a lot of news from us in the near future: we'll be unveiling the development plan, the team, and of course be building up a wave of public awareness about XC's market-leading tech. So stick around, and anticipate big things.
Synechist
That is really cool congrats! May I ask what is your background in Marketing? My background is mostly PR rather than strictly marketing. That, and academic anthropology, which is like the metaphysics of marketing. But I have extensive experience in the magazine and music industries. Promoting tours for international bands, facilitating the creation of music scenes, launching publications, creating an ad niche for advertisers, that sort of thing. Generally what I do is create a compelling narrative around a brand, that serves to embody the facts about it, demonstrate why it's important, and keep misconstruals at bay. I'm sure you'll all agree that this is what XC needs, given the FUD it's endured. That is great and Yes I compleately Agree, I wish you the Best of Luck, If you will need help for translations in Italian let me know as I am Open to Help with Italian Translations of the Website also. Im doing it at the moment in the spare time at work and proposed my self for the IT translations just waiting for the Official OK. Thanks. That would be great. Much appreciated. |
|
|
|
Hello all. This is to announce that I have taken on the role of PR and media liaison for XC.
I'm co-ordinating the PR side of the project and developing a great strategy based on XC's brand (which, as you're probably aware, is currently being created by Thrash).
You'll be hearing a lot of news from us in the near future: we'll be unveiling the development plan, the team, and of course be building up a wave of public awareness about XC's market-leading tech. So stick around, and anticipate big things.
Synechist
Please do us justice We have been wronged for so long. Indeed. The idea is to tell the story of XC truthfully, and in a way that reduces misconstruals to near zero. FUD thrives on ambiguity. |
|
|
|
Hello all. This is to announce that I have taken on the role of PR and media liaison for XC.
I'm co-ordinating the PR side of the project and developing a great strategy based on XC's brand (which, as you're probably aware, is currently being created by Thrash).
You'll be hearing a lot of news from us in the near future: we'll be unveiling the development plan, the team, and of course be building up a wave of public awareness about XC's market-leading tech. So stick around, and anticipate big things.
Synechist
That is really cool congrats! May I ask what is your background in Marketing? My background is mostly PR rather than strictly marketing. That, and academic anthropology, which is like the metaphysics of marketing. But I have extensive experience in the magazine and music industries. Promoting tours for international bands, facilitating the creation of music scenes, launching publications, creating an ad niche for advertisers, that sort of thing. Generally what I do is create a compelling narrative around a brand, that serves to embody the facts about it, demonstrate why it's important, and keep misconstruals at bay. I'm sure you'll all agree that this is what XC needs, given the FUD it's endured. |
|
|
|
Hello all. This is to announce that I have taken on the role of PR and media liaison for XC.
I'm co-ordinating the PR side of the project and developing a great strategy based on XC's brand (which, as you're probably aware, is currently being created by Thrash).
You'll be hearing a lot of news from us in the near future: we'll be unveiling the development plan, the team, and of course be building up a wave of public awareness about XC's market-leading tech. So stick around, and anticipate big things.
Synechist
Great news, good luck mate... Now get promoting us  Heh. In earnest. |
|
|
|
|
Hello all. This is to announce that I have taken on the role of PR and media liaison for XC.
I'm co-ordinating the PR side of the project and developing a great strategy based on XC's brand (which, as you're probably aware, is currently being created by Thrash).
You'll be hearing a lot of news from us in the near future: we'll be unveiling the development plan, the team, and of course be building up a wave of public awareness about XC's market-leading tech. So stick around, and anticipate big things.
Synechist
|
|
|
|
Here, I am done - I think this makes sense.
Read this while reviewing the flow chaeplin posted:
The transactions sent from the mixer (C) to the end address is of a set size (his example was 10). This is D.
He can then search the blockchain for possible candidates (value 10) via a script. Which gets us to block 28531 - this matches the 10.00 XC value. This can be linked at blocked 28533 with the mixer C - we already know C (output 9.99999).
This allows him to trace back to 28531 in the blockchain - to find the values that == 10.00 and match to a specific address - in this case: XQdBjeQtH1JGrkd2MWcXbtsRVeKHWZbnqa which is B.
You can then take all the transactions for this address B - review them and find two matching amounts that == 10 which belong to one single address. This address is A. Since this address B has never been used before this transaction - this is easy to do - and - even if it had multiple transactions - they would not all related back to one single point with one single value (10).
Just for the record, - I think this is right.
Again - I'm participating to participate - nothing else.
If my logic is flawed, let me know please, this is vexing me - because this looks right and all I get is nothing constructive back.
Thanks, this is a helpful description of what Chaeplin did. However it does not adequately express what ATCsecure wanted tested. He wanted *proof* of a direct link, not just interestingly coincidental amounts sent and received. This is because he's testing the mixer and xnode functionality, not the multi-path feature which is yet to be implemented. For more information, read page 356 of this thread, and also the following quotation: sending 0.03 to both address's doesn't count as a LINK but thanks for the XC's So read page 356 and you will see that XC's implementation is successful and that Chaeplin was trying to test for the wrong thing. He returned later when ATCSECURE was gone and make his case again - yet concealed the fact that what he presents is not what's at stake here. You have missed one thing. I have spammed two address to create multiple input which should not occur. Have you heard satoshi spamming ? Anyway Xnode owner should not send any coins from Xnode. It will create multiple input. Yes, those are two relevant contributions you've made. The community is (or should be) grateful for your work. Thanks very much. However while your contributions are relevant for future work on XC, they don't have an impact on what ATCSECURE was testing yesterday. So all's well for now. And I hope you will remain involved in the XC community for future testing. As you know, there's a lot at stake. Dev denied everything. That makes me sick. He denied that you provided the proof he was looking for. And he was correct to do this. I don't think he denied that you have made helpful contributions. |
|
|
|
Here, I am done - I think this makes sense.
Read this while reviewing the flow chaeplin posted:
The transactions sent from the mixer (C) to the end address is of a set size (his example was 10). This is D.
He can then search the blockchain for possible candidates (value 10) via a script. Which gets us to block 28531 - this matches the 10.00 XC value. This can be linked at blocked 28533 with the mixer C - we already know C (output 9.99999).
This allows him to trace back to 28531 in the blockchain - to find the values that == 10.00 and match to a specific address - in this case: XQdBjeQtH1JGrkd2MWcXbtsRVeKHWZbnqa which is B.
You can then take all the transactions for this address B - review them and find two matching amounts that == 10 which belong to one single address. This address is A. Since this address B has never been used before this transaction - this is easy to do - and - even if it had multiple transactions - they would not all related back to one single point with one single value (10).
Just for the record, - I think this is right.
Again - I'm participating to participate - nothing else.
If my logic is flawed, let me know please, this is vexing me - because this looks right and all I get is nothing constructive back.
Thanks, this is a helpful description of what Chaeplin did. However it does not adequately express what ATCsecure wanted tested. He wanted *proof* of a direct link, not just interestingly coincidental amounts sent and received. This is because he's testing the mixer and xnode functionality, not the multi-path feature which is yet to be implemented. For more information, read page 356 of this thread, and also the following quotation: sending 0.03 to both address's doesn't count as a LINK but thanks for the XC's So read page 356 and you will see that XC's implementation is successful and that Chaeplin was trying to test for the wrong thing. He returned later when ATCSECURE was gone and make his case again - yet concealed the fact that what he presents is not what's at stake here. You have missed one thing. I have spammed two address to create multiple input which should not occur. Have you heard satoshi spamming ? Anyway Xnode owner should not send any coins from Xnode. It will create multiple input. Yes, those are two relevant contributions you've made. The community is (or should be) grateful for your work. Thanks very much. However while your contributions are relevant for future work on XC, they don't have an impact on what ATCSECURE was testing yesterday. So all's well for now. And I hope you will remain involved in the XC community for future testing. As you know, there's a lot at stake. |
|
|
|
Seems like indeed there is a blockchain connection. At least in this state. Yes REV2 or the next patch will fix this but the dev made a test because he was sure there is no link. I think he should swallow his ego, pay the bounty and fix the problem. I'm not sure how will he fix this before REV2 without locking the XNODE coins. An address can be deleted from the wallet but it will still be used as a reference for the next transaction.
Thanks to chaeplin and the rest for the work and expertise. He helped this coin more than the defensive speculators in this thread using "arguments" like "but DRK is not anon either..." or "this is only REV1".
@short term speculators in this thread: don't worry, this bug won't affect the price as the whales control the market. It will only make this coin stronger.
there may be a problem, and it's small, but you must be delusional if you think cheplin is trying to help us, he is doing his best to find flaws in XC not so we can improve it, but to hurt it, because he is invested in DRK, he may of identified important flaws, even though this is rev 1 and the Dev said from the get go rev 1 would not be 100% anon, but this is not because he has a kind heart and wants to help us, the suggestion of this makes me roll my eyes....rev 2 it will be fixed, and all the drk boys will have to actually work harder on there product more instead of slapping it together calling them selves king,and slandering any competition that comes along, i'm not concerned still only a month old and we are neck to neck with drk that is 6 months old, so cheplin and all your sad little friends, best think of a better attack plan, concentrate on improving your own product because frankly it's a piece of shit that doesn't work, and Evan just used to get rich off, and soon after rev 2 and you can't trace the transactions anymore, you will have nothing but slanderous tweets to save your sorry excuse for cryto innovation, i would just dump and buy XC because seriously nothing can save DRK. So besides "but DARK..." and "this is only REV1" "arguments"(that you used again) you brought a 3rd great "argument" : "the guy has a DARK motive and hes not trying to help". Why the hell does that matter? Facts are facts. The guy spent his time proving a bug while you smucks were crying "FUD !". He didn't have to do this, or he could have waited to maybe damage the coin later, he didn't do it for the bounty and I thank him for his contribution. As suspected I didn't see any price drop. Yes there was FUD in the beginning but all I have seen on this thread lately are defensive speculators. did he really? as i understand he send his own 0.003 tx to the mixer then linking them in the blockchain cause he knew the amounts. i'm not expert enough to explain but thats how it looks to me. thats not a bug by any means then . he is just nowing all variables . if i tell you how many coins i sent to whom their would be no need for an anonymous transaction anyway. As i understand it, both where right: ATC was right all along: after an anonymous transaction there is "No Hard Link" between address B & C. What Cheaplin showed was that at a later time there was a possibility that the mixer spend some coins in a single transaction using both the funds from B & C as input, eg: linking them to the same wallet and so, creating the link. Think this can be fixed, so in my mind ATC won the challenge but Cheaplin did XC a favor by showing this possibility That some (previous) DRK supporters are interested in anon tech seems normal to me. Can we please stop using words like Troll & FUD and remember we are all crypto enthousiasts & focus on the facts? +1 |
|
|
|
Here, I am done - I think this makes sense.
Read this while reviewing the flow chaeplin posted:
The transactions sent from the mixer (C) to the end address is of a set size (his example was 10). This is D.
He can then search the blockchain for possible candidates (value 10) via a script. Which gets us to block 28531 - this matches the 10.00 XC value. This can be linked at blocked 28533 with the mixer C - we already know C (output 9.99999).
This allows him to trace back to 28531 in the blockchain - to find the values that == 10.00 and match to a specific address - in this case: XQdBjeQtH1JGrkd2MWcXbtsRVeKHWZbnqa which is B.
You can then take all the transactions for this address B - review them and find two matching amounts that == 10 which belong to one single address. This address is A. Since this address B has never been used before this transaction - this is easy to do - and - even if it had multiple transactions - they would not all related back to one single point with one single value (10).
Just for the record, - I think this is right.
Again - I'm participating to participate - nothing else.
If my logic is flawed, let me know please, this is vexing me - because this looks right and all I get is nothing constructive back.
Thanks, this is a helpful description of what Chaeplin did. However it does not adequately express what ATCsecure wanted tested. He wanted *proof* of a direct link, not just interestingly coincidental amounts sent and received. This is because he's testing the mixer and xnode functionality, not the multi-path feature which is yet to be implemented. For more information, read page 356 of this thread, and also the following quotation: sending 0.03 to both address's doesn't count as a LINK but thanks for the XC's So read page 356 and you will see that XC's implementation is successful and that Chaeplin was trying to test for the wrong thing. He returned later when ATCSECURE was gone and make his case again - yet concealed the fact that what he presents is not what's at stake here. |
|
|
|
I sold most of my coins at 0.00093..........
Now I want to kill myself........
What is going on in this market ?
Is it too late to buy it back ?
It's painful to buy it back 50% higher now ....
wtf..... life why ?
Take mikemikemike's advice: buy now and sell at 0.0025 or higher. It's the 50% Fib retracement from the peak of ~0.005, and so a reaction is likely at that price. yes, and 0.0025 is very real price after few days Indeed. Also, it makes obvious sense to have a longer term outlook for this coin. It's going to go way, way higher than it's been before. To view current prices as high only makes sense in the short term. So don't despair. Just get in. |
|
|
|
I sold most of my coins at 0.00093..........
Now I want to kill myself........
What is going on in this market ?
Is it too late to buy it back ?
It's painful to buy it back 50% higher now ....
wtf..... life why ?
Take mikemikemike's advice: buy now and sell at 0.0025 or higher. It's the 50% Fib retracement from the peak of ~0.005, and so a reaction is likely at that price. |
|
|
|
snip
Dude, you dont have nearly enough crap running in your task bar! I know ... i dont care of the 0.1xc lost but i need to understand why the xnode of this guy take the coin that i have sent and dont sent them to this destination... and for the time i live in france so that can explain the difference in time between the 2 wallet. Well Chaeplin did post why but everyone ignored him. The wallet steals coins.  Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=631052.msg7213284#msg7213284Neither you nor Chaeplin have given justification for this assertion. If wallets do steal coins, that's definitely something worth talking about, and therefore worth making a case for. What's the argument for this? |
|
|
|
Good job Dan and the whole XC team i know we have a brilliant future ahead
Who is the XC team? How many are in the XC team and what are their skills? Thanks To be announced. Soon. |
|
|
|
so...encrypted messaging released possibly this week, can't wait to see it, exciting stuff!  +1. The pace of development here leaves nothing to be desired. |
|
|
|
"...doesn't even have any Xnode code or implemenation available"
Perhaps you, dear fudder, only hold this opinion because you haven't visited this thread since the last FUDwar. (That's a guess, but the most plausible one that springs to mind.) The past three releases have had xnode functionality. The dev is now refining the xnode code before implementing the multi-path aspect. So if you could kindly substantiate any further opinions you voice on this thread, that would be appreciated. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
