Well, I'm guessing they'd at least change the relevant portions  |
|
|
|
But answer this before I get put into the bot: what is the bit depth of the zero knowledge security that you guys claim to have? Just give a number.
There is no bot, third time i've told you in the last hour. And not just because of that but it broke the camels back you too can take a hike, no one took your serious before. Why would they now! You didn't understand that a chandran signature was untracable/unlinkable the first time so why would any of this compute in your tiny little brain now! You clowns are here because you think you found a chink in shadows armor but you are dead wrong. and dont deserve to be answered anymore. You were interested in xst cause you found yourself buying it while bob pumped it. You're still there because you are drawn to teh stupid marketing they do stealthweb=hotwallet stealthvault=cold wallet pffft nearly lost my coffee all over me when i saw that..just like marketing leveldb when yas added it..What a bloody joke! What's the bit depth of the zero knowledge security? Just give a number. |
|
|
|
"it's no bigger then a cryptonote"
why don't you just use original cryptonote the way it's without these tech terms, just to hype the coin?
I have a feeling that "it's no bigger than a cryptonote" comes with several qualifications that affect security. I'd like to know what those qualifications are. |
|
|
|
Seriously you don't have a clue what an untraceable/unlinkable chandran signature meant not long ago how do you expect me to believe all of a sudden you are interested in this.
You are wrong about this. Go look at my posts in the XST thread. When the traceability issue was brought up, I never argued. |
|
|
|
Shadows commitment scheme is more robust and sophisticated it doesn't leak info. Meaning it is not witness indistinguishable but its proper zero knowledge. Snarks will then blow that into another dimension of useful and scalable. Snarks can also be slotted right in.
The only info that cryptonote leaks is the ring of public keys. Are you saying that the ring of public keys is not included in the current implementation of shadow send (or whatever it's called) that is on the test net now? And if so, just point to a paper where this is possible. Go find the links yourself look up zero knowledge proof. That is what is produced from the ring in Shadows implementation. Seriously you don't have a clue what an untraceable/unlinkable chandran signature meant not long ago how do you expect me to believe all of a sudden you are interested in this. Go back to snap chat and report to emilioman he is yet again barking up the wrong tree. You are a fool. I know what a zero knowledge proof is. I have been following shadow since the earliest of zk-snarks promises. I followed stealth because they promised something tenable like ring signatures. It's funny that the shadow devs came around only months later. When I asked about zk-snarks long ago, I was met with hostility and several of my posts were deleted. That's why my money has never been on shadow. I asked serious questions and was met with hostility. But this current zero knowledge promises sound like the zk-snarks promises. But answer this before I get put into the bot: what is the bit depth of the zero knowledge security that you guys claim to have? Just give a number. |
|
|
|
more tech more bloat. all these tech terms trying to jams pack into shadow to create more bloat. these terms for the HYPE do sound good though.
Tell me how big the transactions are for a Shadow transaction benthach the zk shadow transaction. how big is it and how is it classed as bloat? Give me a comparison. I saw one at 3kb. How many keys in that ring? |
|
|
|
My point is there is no bot here! There is nothing to hide. You will get deleted if you come here with no proof trying to cause problems. There is a difference.
Haha! Ask inconvenient questions and you will get deleted here. |
|
|
|
Shadows commitment scheme is more robust and sophisticated it doesn't leak info. Meaning it is not witness indistinguishable but its proper zero knowledge. Snarks will then blow that into another dimension of useful and scalable. Snarks can also be slotted right in.
The only info that cryptonote leaks is the ring of public keys. Are you saying that the ring of public keys is not included in the current implementation of shadow send (or whatever it's called) that is on the test net now? And if so, just point to a paper where this is possible. |
|
|
|
That post deleting bot is made for xst and xc/blocknet. Hense the name "XSTerminate" and the stealthcoin logo. It was made after i spent three days trying to tell you twits about hondos failed paper which he even thanks me for.. Talk about you twits not having a clue! It was made to hide that kind of technical scrutiny. You kids are off your heads i swear it. Its a fast track to the world we are working to release ourselves from!
Look I know I'm going to get entered into the bot here if I press the issues. But it's clear that your claim that "the whole ring signature is not included in the transaction" relies on a zk-snark to get around the inclusion. The zk-snarks are still vaporware. They are vaporware for zerocoin and they are vaporware here. So I ask you, what is the point of cloning cryptonote when there are already 3 in the top 100 coin market cap? |
|
|
|
Because you weirdly removed parts of my quote again. Search the term "one-time" "witness indistinguishable" I don't have time for you and never will. Call it what you want, you always were and always will be a problem to everyone around you.
You have spent months abusing this communities every action now you want us to be polite and help you. move along kid!
Let's see how fast the bot takes me out. The cryptonote proofs are zero knowledge, witness indistinguishable. That's why they can be used for a cryptocurrency. That bot is made for xst and xc/blocknet. Its a fast track to the world we are working to release ourselves from! Ugh, you can go take a hike too, i remember you from all the crap too child. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness-indistinguishable_proofThanks for the link. The cryptonote ring signature system fits the definition. |
|
|
|
Because you weirdly removed parts of my quote again. Search the term "one-time" "witness indistinguishable" I don't have time for you and never will. Call it what you want, you always were and always will be a problem to everyone around you.
You have spent months abusing this communities every action now you want us to be polite and help you. move along kid!
Let's see how fast the bot takes me out. The cryptonote proofs are zero knowledge, witness indistinguishable. That's why they can be used for a cryptocurrency. |
|
|
|
to penalize late comers 500% is off the wall ridiculous, what is the stake % anyways
Hindsight is 20/20. People who bought early took a chance and had to come up with BTC in less time. There was a full week of 6000 BRO / BTC prices. Most people missed NXT, XCP, etc. This is just another ICO. If you think the coin is going to go down when it hits exchanges, wait until then to buy it. Really, what you are unhappy about is not a "penalty", but missing the boat on rewards for early investors. This is crypto, so you may need to accept one day that early investors get rewarded. Instead of complaining, you should be searching around for the next opportunity. Those of us who invested here early have that many fewer bitcoins to invest in opportunities that are springing up right now. Maybe you should take up that disparity as your crusade. |
|
|
|
When this coin hit exchange? I want to buy some.
There will be another ICO before it is traded on exchanges. |
|
|
|
|
Wow. It lives. One of the first hybrid PoW/PoS coins.
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone, we did not expect such a negative response to an incentive that we thought would spark more interest. We can adjust the changes if the community feels strong about it.
There was not much participation after the level dropped below 5000. We wanted to offer an incentive for some people that may have been sitting on the fence. We can cancel the bonus if the existing community that have been with us feels strongly about this.
The change was meant to be a nice gesture, not in any way was it done out of greed. We are already way below our targeted range. The coins was going to be sold "privately" or through the coin sale. We thought it wold be cool to offer it to you guys and give a nice incentive before we closed out the first phase.
The change is NOT necessary and if you want it to remain at this level, then we have ni problem with it. We do understand your point of view.
The way to do it is to release the video now to drive some sales and see what happens. You changed 2 variables at one time and annoyed everyone who invested on or before the 5500 level. |
|
|
|
Even though changing price may upset some, lets look it at different perspective. Its better for all of us if BG gets more funds with second round of ICO. So i agree with ILoseAtPoker!
If they have a working platform they don't need to lower the price. This change was ill conceived and penalizes early investors because of the BTC price drop. The BRO team needs to change the reward for the earliest levels, up to and including the previous offering at 5k. There is no way investors now should be rewarded relative to investors who bought a couple of weeks ago. |
|
|
|
With a working prototype, this isn't going to be necessary. Let this ICO end at these prices and then come back and start at 2000 BRO/BTC. People will buy then, once they learn you have a functioning platform.
Lowering the price now isn't going to drive sales in the short term. People aren't buying because they don't know about the working tech, not because BRO is too expensive.
Please don't change the current pricing structure! Too late. |
|
|
|
The added incentive all the participants are receiving does not dilute your existing percentages. The 10m total BRO for sale will not change under any circumstances.
Yes, it does dilute the investment because people who invest now invest with more certainty. They have a fraction of the risk with knowledge of a working platform (the video). This makes their ROI several times higher. Hindsight is 20/20, so you are ignoring how a good investor calculates risk and expected reward when you make a statement like "the current prices don't dilute existing investments". A lot of earning time for the invested BTC has been lost because the price increases have been wiped out. You need to go back and reward early investors relative to investors now. You simply didn't have to lower the prices like this. People would have bought anyway. |
|
|
|
I agree - raising the price to 5000 is only going to make people angry. I for one could have put my btc to good use when the price was up - however a good portion of it was invested in this ICO. You're basically slapping me in the face and telling me that I could have waited until after the ICO after all?
Well they lowered the price, which is not good. Some of us have been in since the early hours with a lot of BTC tied up in this. The price of BTC itself has fallen a greater percentage than the the price of BRO has climbed in going from 6600 to 5000. Basically, we have now been penalized for investing early. That's the exact opposite from what should happen. Did the BRO team think twice before they made this move? The BRO team needs to go back and reward early investors with the bitcoin price fluctuations in mind. Normally price fluctuations would be caveat emptor, but not when someone is changing the rules of the game on those of us who have already committed. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
