I think it will have the opposite effect, as it will prove that something like that is not doable.

It escalated from a democracy/51% situation to 100%-total-consensus-needed-to-succeed.

If even 1 exchange declines to shift, the LTC-x network will be vulnerable to an enormous dumping attack with cloned LTCs.

Yes, I've read so. Are they using anything good? In general, do you have any suggestions on what might be good for the purpose of a cryptocurrency network?

In a good, user-friendly solution, all that a user should do is just tick a checkbox and be ok, with the client taking care of everything.

IP obfuscation (TOR or something else, I don't know) will have to be integrated next for the same reason as the one I mentioned earlier: It will be a market weakness. Someone else will take DarkSend, integrate IP obfuscation and claim to solve the IP issue that DRK had in order to take the market.

Btw, enjoying the brainstorming between Evan & Anonymint.

Ok, we'll see. I'll buy a few LTCs for dumping on the LTC-x fork and see who's right. Although what I'm mostly worried about is that not a single exchange will actually buy my cloned LTC-x's rather than not finding a single exchange to sell my scrypt LTCs.

Yes, it's not doable really. Because it will literally require EVERYONE on board to work, otherwise it won't work. If I can buy LTC-scrypts prior to the fork and find even one exchange to sell them back after the fork, then I can have free LTCs for dumping on the LTC-x11 fork. And chances are there will be more than one exchange where I can sell back scrypt LTCs (actually chances are 95-100% of the exchanges will still operate with scrypt LTC).

The probability of every single BTC/LTC exchange to go with the LTC-x11 plan is so remote that it's not even funny. And with that probability goes away the chance to successfully do what you want to do.

This escalates from a democracy 51% percent, to a unanimous decision of 100% agreement (impossible).

Yes, you are right: The question is really how can LTC-x coinholders be protected from the dumping that is possible from cloning LTCs of the main fork.

Let's say the fork is on 5th April 16:00 GMT.

1. On April 5, 15:00 GMT, I go on cryptsy, sell 10 BTC for 400 LTCs, send the 400 LTCs to my wallet.

2. 16:00 GMT- => Fork happens using the blockchain info up to that point.

3. On 17:00 GMT I send my 400 LTCs back to cryptsy and sell them for 10 BTCs. So I have my 10 BTCs back.

4. I now have 400 LTCs on the LTC-x fork which I'm ready to dump whenever it hits an exchange.

This is too exploitable.

Actually that's a different issue because we are really talking about two different coins where the LTC-x will have as "premine" the exact situation of the LTC blockchain up to block number <to be determined>.

Normal hardforks are one fork pulling ahead and making the other obsolete by virtue of 51% hashpower on the exact same network. There will be no hashpower competition in two different algorithm networks. What will be, is two different coins where one is trying to obsolete the other, but that will, in itself, be in a very vulnerable position for an economic attack.

Non-LTC stakeholders have nothing to lose by buying a few LTCs prior to the fork, cloning them automatically to the alternate fork which will use the same blockchain, selling the LTCs they bought on the main fork, and then waiting for a few months to see if LTC-x is ever adopted in some exchange so that they can dump the heck out of it with the cloned LTCs.


I'm a DRK / X11 fan as well, and I understand the miners love towards X11. Thing is, and LTC devs have a point there, if something is GPU mineable = it is ASICable. Whether it's X11, Scrypt, Scrypt-N etc etc. It's all the same really, except the price perhaps: X11 asics can be more affordable for regular people as they will require less ram - so the "ASICs are great for the network" and "X11 is actually easier to ASIC" combined with the higher mem prices = epic win through affordable X11 ASICs, instead of expensive-only-for-the-rich scrypt/scryptN asics

The time involved is probably not even 1 to 2 years, but more like a few months for designing and manufacturing. But right now, yes, X11 is practically ASIC-resistant as it doesn't have any ASICs chasing it down. And with electricity prices being what they are, and heat being an issue, X11 will probably be the summer choice for north hemisphere.

As for Hirocoin vs DRK, Hirocoin is competing in the transparent market vs other altcoins.

The transparent market is a monopoly right now of 10bn market cap value where Bitcoin is the undisputed leader. Darkcoin is creating a new market and providing a new choice: Do you want your transactions and your money to be tracked, or do you want privacy?

So, just as you have one shop and everyone goes there (100% market) and then another one opens and the marketshare is shifted towards the new choice, it's the same situation with Darkcoin.

By presenting a new choice, people will now be able to choose on whether they want public or private cryptocurrencies. If even 1% of the transparent market opts for privacy, we are talking about 100 mn market cap. If 10% goes for the private market, we are talking about a billion USD.

I don't know how Hirocoin, or any other plain altcoin can have a better "this is the coin to watch" prospect than DRK. The fundamentals are very strong.

So if someone is a BTC holder and buys 10.000 LTC, intentionally, one block prior to the fork, and sells these 10.000 LTC back one block after the fork, then he'll suddenly have both his BTCs and the LTCs on the alternate fork.

Now, if and whenever some exchange adopts xLTC, then he'll have 10.000 LTC to spend / dump in the alternate fork. Yeah, I mean, what can possibly go wrong there... hmmm... 

For most people, the privacy aspect will be adequately covered. But it's not that hard to imagine the scenario of a potential altcoin adversary spreading FUD about DRK's operation with master nodes in order to promote their "superior" solution and how they "solved the problem".  

As I've said, if digital currencies have a worth of 10bn market cap and one percent goes to anonymity, it's 100mn market cap. That's a lot of money right there and it won't be distributed without a fight. If we assume ten percent transition from the transparent to the private/anonymous market, that's one billion. Too much money for "kindness" between market adversaries that are competing for this billion: Every weakness of Darkcoin will be highlighted as to why it shouldn't be the leading anonymous cryptocurrency but rather why some other altcoin should (to get a better position so that more of the flow of money towards the private/anonymous market can end up to them).

I like it... thing is, from a market perspective, someone can still implement the D&Q and claim that they "solved the inherent problem of darkcoin for trusting master nodes that know who is transacting what". It's just how it goes with altcoins. Other are expecting every weakness to capitalize (and cannibalize the market cap).

It will depend on the quality of fiat. For the majority of the countries out there BTC is better than hard currency like the USD or EUR, because in many cases they have restrictions regarding foreign exchange. Convertibility to better quality fiat, which is regarded as "stable", is another issue though. But EU and USA are like 1/10th of the world's population, not 100%.

I do believe NSA-proofing is a virtually impossible task, since they have control on factors beyond our own code (hardware, networks) but the issue here is this: DarkSend is launched, everything rolls, it's open sourced etc etc. Then another one comes along, takes Dark Send code, implements divide & conquer and then boooom. He claims they have the superior anonymous coin. It's a market weakness for DRK placement right there if it lags behind.

Now, the situation is obviously difficult having to choose one or the other, so I propose this: What if DarkSend had 2 checkboxes, one that is simple "Enable DarkSend" and a further one which activates "Divide and Conquer" for "extra anonymity". I've been thinking about a slide bar actually that enhances the degree of anonymity, with something like 1 to 10 - and increasing parameters like time delay for transaction or laundry depth (multiple laundering) to make it more obfuscated, but maybe it could simply go the Div/Conq way at max setting for the more paranoid about their secrecy.

I see waves of Darkcoin mentioning all over the place. Please are discovering Darkcoin organically and indirectly through stuff like the threatened LTC fork*, DGW, new coins with X11 that are saying to miners "use darkcoin miner" etc.

* The irony: The Light side is at risk of being consumed by the DRKness


There are some moments in your life when you see the ripples you've created and how they create a global impact and you're like "wow". I bet Evan will be increasingly experiencing those type of moments...

Est. Shares   4,297 (done: 117.01%)
Pool Valid   5,028
Pool Invalid   139,990 (96.53%)

When we say the govt is printing money, we are not really talking about the paper notes in circulation, rather electronic money (digits in a computer screen) that exists in bank accounts.

The long answer is here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/157370969/Hyperinflation-Dollar-Collapse-Precious-Metals.

The short answer in bullets:

1) Hyperinflation is one thing, large inflation is another. Hyperinflation is end-game scenario / doomsday scenario with prices escalating so fast that it's not even funny. You could wake up in the morning and bread costing 1$ and by noon it could cost 10$. This has been blown out of proportion as being a realistic possibility right here, right now, without a catastrophic event.
2) Manipulation of the markets regarding precious metals, energy, etc keep currencies like USD artificially "stable".
3) Western countries are in competitive devaluation - which make things in USD terms seem stable. Even switzerland promised to print as much as they can in order to keep their value steady and prevent inflow of capital to their currency from people fleeing EUR / USD etc.
4) The global-debt control mechanism through which tens of countries are indirectly controlled through a USD-denominated debt, would essentially be set free by a worthless USD debt that could be repaid easily. This will not happen.
5) The USD is still much better than most national currencies out there, especially of developing nations, which have no international demand and thus their printing is producing actual inflation much larger than the USD. Think of it as a bitcoin inflation vs altcoin inflation type of situation.
6) While the money quantity is inflating, at the same time ordinary people do not get access to this extra money. In fact people are experiencing deflation, in that they have a decreasing amount of money to spend for things due to increased cost of life, taxation, stagnant or reduced salaries etc etc. Banks are also regulating the flow of money to/from society in that they decide when to loan or when to gather past loans. If the government is on an expansive monetary policy, commercial banks can (and do) reduce liquidity on the market to counteract the effect that this would have if suddenly everyone went on a buying spree. For example if banks stop loaning out and start collecting past debts in a larger percentage than the issuance of new loans, society will experience a liquidity crisis and deflationary tendencies - no matter if the money supply of the central bank goes 2-5-10x.

It's code... code can break if it's not clean, extremely well thought out, trial-tested, reviewed, etc etc. It needs time to be patched to better levels of reliable functionality and prove itself, just like BTC code is taking years and still has questionmarks if something can break it and render it useless. Even things like stratum, kgw, dgw, need fixing. You can't have complicated code working flawlessly from day 1, no matter the assurances. That's just how it is.

It's always better to have realistic expectations rather than unrealistic ones because that way no disillusionment can occur later on and comments like "ohhhhhh disaster, darksend is a flop" start to spring up after some bug or something.

If the gamble is hedged by integrating further layers of user anonymity beyond DarkSend, any potential risk is reduced significantly. If DarkSend is the only layer, and under certain circumstances the identity is uncovered, it's a single point of failure situation: You need something extra, whether it is IP obfuscation, or something else (preferably as many layers as you can get).

Something is going on in general with weird messages, broken english, three sentences that are repeated by multiple user ids that say the same etc. It reminds me of the carbon/copy comments on chinese online shops in which the products are rated by "clients", all saying the same, in the same broken way.