You dont get it. This question has been answered. If you think it's possible to do then please demo it for all of us.
demo you can not see anything. The cheating will not be done with cloakcoin released client, the question is what measures used to prevent it. Nono, go ahead and make your own client and try to steal coins. Trust me, as an investor I would like to see this happen. If you find a bug and it truly is a bug I'll be more then happy to throw some btc your way. Please demo this for us. Oh I see what you say. Yes I can try it, but from the algorithm we will know if it can be cheated or not. If you take no measures, it will be cheated easily. That's why the anonymous system most implemented the centralized mixer system, for the coinjoin (DRK, SUPER phase-1 etc). Because this way you don't need to take any measures against the cheating, these mixers nodes are trusted. The Cloakcoin claims any nodes can be elected. There you need forceful way to prevent this node from cheating. If you use mutlisig address/transactions (like supercoin claimed), you use an escrow that prevents any nodes from cheating, or they will lose their parts in escrow. In Cloak's whitepaper, there's nothing like this. The raw tx is transferred, and this raw tx can be changed and post to network any time. If you don't have any measures, cheating is very easy. |
|
|
|
Well the thread title seems abit misleading, are you saying PoSA is not a trustless system or claiming its not? From what I understand just by reading the title is that CLoaks PoSA is not trustless. Might want to take a look at that.
From what I read it is not. The title reflects what I found out. But if you can prove me wrong, and I will correct the title. |
|
|
|
You dont get it. This question has been answered. If you think it's possible to do then please demo it for all of us.
demo you can not see anything. The cheating will not be done with cloakcoin released client, the question is what measures used to prevent it. |
|
|
|
|
Actually for those who do not agree with me, please try to answer this question:
What is the logics how to prevent a middle node from cheating? If he uses Cloak released client, he can never cheat. The problem is that he can create his own client, with same interfaces, and does not do the transaction as described. Does the system have anyway to prevent it?
|
|
|
|
OK due to many fuds I re-open this thread as self-mod thread and closed the old thread. All fuds and unreasonable posts (such as personal attacks) will be removed. My purpose is not to attack any coins. My purpose is to seek the truth, as I myself am interested in the trustless anonymous transaction system. So please, state your facts, let's discuss, and let's understand the truth. Well Cloakcoin claimed that their PoSA is a trustless system, but I read their whitepaper in the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=637704.0It seems to me that this is not at all a trustless system. The reason is that the "elected" nodes have no restrictions at all to follow the rules (i.e. send coins to destination etc), he can change at will the transaction or even steal the coins. So the PoSA is a poorly designed trust system, which trust the "elected" node. Only until they cheated, they may be banned. Creating addresses is easy, so a cheater can simply create a new address, cheat once, then move to another address and cheat again. PoSA is not a trustless system. On the contrary, Supercoin is creating a trustless system by using multisig addresses and transactions. To be a trustless system, you must give restrictions to the middle nodes, so they must follow the rules. From what I read, the SuperCoin achieves this by creating multisig address, as an escrow, each party including middle nodes, have assets in the escrow, so they can't cheat, or they may lose the assets in escrow, which may be bigger than what they cheat. I am not associate with Supercoin or Cloakcoin, the reason I do not post these in Cloakcoin's thread is because their thread is self-mod, so they can delete anything at will. I welcome Cloakcoin dev to discuss here and prove me wrong, as although I am pretty experienced and understand most altcoin details, I could be wrong. But from what I read, I am pretty sure that Cloakcoin PoSA is not a trustless system, but a poorly designed trust system. |
|
|
|
Well Cloakcoin claimed that their PoSA is a trustless system, but I read their whitepaper in the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=637704.0It seems to me that this is not at all a trustless system. The reason is that the "elected" nodes have no restrictions at all to follow the rules (i.e. send coins to destination etc), he can change at will the transaction or even steal the coins. So the PoSA is a poorly designed trust system, which trust the "elected" node. Only until they cheated, they may be banned. Creating addresses is easy, so a cheater can simply create a new address, cheat once, then move to another address and cheat again. PoSA is not a trustless system. On the contrary, Supercoin.... (This is where everyone stopped reading and started doubting the intentions of this ad) There's a lot of guessing in this analysis. This is true in some sense. But I'd like to see how cheating at middle nodes can be prevented. From the whitepaper, there's no measures at all. |
|
|
|
Just from reading your nonsense it's clear you have not understanding or attempted to understand Cloak's method. You should talk to teh devs in IRC.
Bad vector protection has been discussed and protection is being developed.
He already acknowledged he could be wrong. Can the devs please reply here, to educate the rest of us reading this thread? There are 6 dev's for cloak and unlike all the scamcoin hype I'm reading the Cloak dev's are actually busy developing rather than spamming threads. If you have legitimate questions please post in cloak thread and you will be directed. Unfortunately riches don't come to you, you must do work and be patient. But I don't want to stand idle watching threads like these clog up the forum with cloak fud. Shame on you OP. Devs are not your slaves, they do a good deed for humanity. You are PIGS. Why not post the logics how to prevent a middle node from cheating? If he uses Cloak released client, he can never cheat. The problem is that he can create his own client, with same interfaces, and does not do the transaction as described. Does the system have anyway to prevent it? |
|
|
|
Just from reading your nonsense it's clear you have not understanding or attempted to understand Cloak's method. You should talk to teh devs in IRC.
Bad vector protection has been discussed and protection is being developed.
He already acknowledged he could be wrong. Can the devs please reply here, to educate the rest of us reading this thread? There are 6 dev's for cloak and unlike all the scamcoin hype I'm reading the Cloak dev's are actually busy developing rather than spamming threads. If you have legitimate questions please post in cloak thread and you will be directed. Unfortunately riches don't come to you, you must do work and be patient. But I don't want to stand idle watching threads like these clog up the forum with cloak fud. Shame on you OP. Devs are not your slaves, they do a good deed for humanity. You are PIGS. I said why I did not post in cloak thread. I open this thread for the facts, not for stupid fuds like youself. |
|
|
|
Really? Supercoin is trying to attack Cloakcoin? Get your shitcoin in order before you attempt to slander a real coin with 7 full time developers.
Feel free to download the new PoSA wallet and demonstrate your tinfoil hat conspiracy.
I opened a thread to discuss, if you have any points. But if you know nothing, better get out of here. It's not for FUD, it is for truth. |
|
|
|
You might want to change the post title to, "Bitcoin itself has failed and is not a trustless system". So how exactly is some fly by night altcoin going to solve what Satoshi didn't? Explanation below: The current Bitcoin model is already an obvious failure while people walk around in a delusional state pretending it isn't. It's advertised as requiring "no trusted 3rd parties", yet the entire thing relies on them in the form of a small number of mining pools for block verification. Since Bitcoin never solved the "no trusted 3rd parties" dilemma, it's time to admit that and come up with a solution, most likely assign a performance metric to regulate those parties (i.e. PoS with reputation variable).
Unless every single iota of Bitcoin dev manpower is redirected towards the solitary goal of getting rid of mining pools, they're operating under the textbook definition of insanity.
I guess people talk different thing here. This, if I understand correctly, talks about anonymous transaction where bitcoin does not support anyway. Sorry I may not stated it clearly. Yes this is about the anonymous transactions, I updated the title. Thanks jamesclark. |
|
|
|
Well Cloakcoin claimed that their PoSA is a trustless system, but I read their whitepaper in the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=637704.0It seems to me that this is not at all a trustless system. The reason is that the "elected" nodes have no restrictions at all to follow the rules (i.e. send coins to destination etc), he can change at will the transaction or even steal the coins. So the PoSA is a poorly designed trust system, which trust the "elected" node. Only until they cheated, they may be banned. Creating addresses is easy, so a cheater can simply create a new address, cheat once, then move to another address and cheat again. PoSA is not a trustless system. On the contrary, Supercoin is creating a trustless system by using multisig addresses and transactions. To be a trustless system, you must give restrictions to the middle nodes, so they must follow the rules. From what I read, the SuperCoin achieves this by creating multisig address, as an escrow, each party including middle nodes, have assets in the escrow, so they can't cheat, or they may lose the assets in escrow, which may be bigger than what they cheat. I am not associate with Supercoin or Cloakcoin, the reason I do not post these in Cloakcoin's thread is because their thread is self-mod, so they can delete anything at will. I welcome Cloakcoin dev to discuss here and prove me wrong, as although I am pretty experienced and understand most altcoin details, I could be wrong. But from what I read, I am pretty sure that Cloakcoin PoSA is not a trustless system, but a poorly designed trust system. DUE to many fud, I re-opened the thread with self-mod.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=713836.0 |
|
|
|
What is the #PoSA thing with the Cloak? PoS Protocol Anon. So they are working on "anonymous" features too? Is it competition or we're not developping the same thing?  My reading on their whitepaper seems to me that all the process is wrong. They actually used an implicated trust system, but this system assumes everyone is good, and they will ban bad guys if they find it (i.e. cheated). This clearly is not working. As we all know, anyone can create any number of addresses. A cheater, using a new address, just need to cheat once, then move on to another address. The so called PoSA system is wrong in that it has no way to force people randomly elected to follow the rule, there's no restriction at all, because if these "elected" nodes cheat, they don't lose anything. The SuperCoin Phase 2 uses a completely different system. From what I understand, they use multisig addresses and multisig transactions. These transactions will be approved and executed only with many parties agree at the same time. This means that they must have a pool of escrow service, where all parties participating will have some assets in it, so you are forced not to cheat, otherwise you lose your assets in the escrow. This is a fundamental differences that form the true trustless system. I see many claimed trustless system, but many have no idea what it is.  |
|
|
|
A lot of cool pictures for supercoin |
|
|
|
SuperCoin, has the easiest & fastest anonymous transfer (SuperSend) currently
Phase 2 is getting closer, everyday, the one of biggest event in the all altcoin history.
+1 |
|
|
|
This is the weekly status update from dev team, on our work for the phase-2, aka the decentralized p2p anonymous system (trustless system).
The implementation is going on fine, we've been making progresses each day. The system is very complex, there are 20-25 steps in the main scenario involving several multisig addresses and multisig transactions. The process is complex not only for the main scenario, but also in that there are many possible error conditions and "unexpected" situations that need to be handled correctly for each case, so the system will behave robustly in the real multi-threaded environment. This involves transaction creation, sign at different locations by different parties, transaction commit and reversal (in case of error conditions etc).
Many people asked for timeline for the phase-2 implementation, although in such complex software it is not easy to precisely provide the timeline, I will give an estimate based on the current progression. It is to note that unexpected things do happen, so please treat this estimate as an estimate, though I will tell you that I am pretty confident at my estimate, as I am the one who is doing the implementation, so I know this in every details and inside-out. My estimate is that the fully decentralized p2p anonymous system will probably be in test phase in about 3 weeks from now, plus or minus a week. Remember that the test phase means that all the implementations will basically be complete, and it will be running end-to-end. This of course means that there are still bugs to fix, and it is not releasable at that time. Usually it can be released after 1-2 weeks of testing. Also, after initial testing by the dev team, we will involve a few community members in the testing, so you can experience for yourself how the decentralized p2p anonymous system works and make suggestions to the features and usage from user's perspective. If you are interested in it, please post your intentions in this thread.
Again, SuperCoin and MammothCoin are great coins, the team knows clearly what they are doing. They do not hype the coins and give community un-realistic dreams, but they work hard to get the best done for the coin, and make the coin the most advanced one in all the alt coins. Please compare the feature set of Supercoin with some other high flyer coins, and see by yourself the features provided. Many of these high flyers are there not because of the advanced tech, but because they created unrealistic dreams and hypes among people. The unrealistic dreams and hypes will come to an end at some point. The Supercoin is real, it has concrete plans from the beginning, and the dev team did not miss any promises. This team has great track record, it delivers what it promises.
Excellent, I like you the SUPER dev team! |
|
|
|
I like Supercoin & I think its one of the real coins here for the duration.
Yes for sure. If dev can give timeline for phase 2, will help the coin |
|
|
|
now they understand they have nothing to do with multisig so changed the coin name to multicoin, lol |
|
|
|
Wow, high diff and networkhash: "blocks" : 1429,
"currentblocksize" : 1000,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : {
"proof-of-work" : 586.55411854,
"proof-of-stake" : 0.00024414,
"search-interval" : 1
},
"blockvalue" : 8800000000,
"netmhashps" : 29638.00889943, multipools are rushing in, they are looking for minable good coins everywhere |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
