Well it only makes sense that if Gmaxwell releases CT which shocks everyone, then with days Denis released CCT which shocks me more (and most people ignore it), then it is likely going to spawn more than one attempt to merge one-time rings with homomorphic value hiding.

Rambling comment...

Let me clarify that it wasn't my idea to seek donations. I had always thought it was a non-optimum (almost like slavery to beg for donations) funding model (and then to have to explain to novices why your tech feature is worth the amount requested when valuation is very complex matter of futures), because only people who are vested have an incentive to give you their money. But others have tried to convince me that is a viable funding model and that fair distribution goes along with it (i.e. no ICO and no premine).

I just decided to follow their suggestion and give it a whirl and see how it goes. Then make a decision based on the feedback.

I am becoming more and more convinced from the feedback in this thread, that it is best to either launch your own coin or sell your services (and designs) to some coin that did sell an ICO or premine and thus has the funds to pay for your services. Seems the people working on Monero for bounties are getting paid only a couple $1000s for week or two of work, which basically means they are donating their time. Good programmers earn in excess of $100,000 a year. Even Google was paying $200,000 (+ stock options) for fresh college grads with no experience.

The idea is that he who can expand markets should go for his market value which can only be expressed in a two-way trading market, not in a one-way donation. So my inclination has always been that direction. I just decided to try the suggestion of others.

Perhaps Shen's can be used in Monero for free and perhaps it will good enough (or maybe even the best). That we still need to determine based on more information from Shen. I will just say that $21,000 is nothing when you are aiming for a $5m or even $50 million market cap. You would choose the algorithm that is best regardless of that small price differential for development cost. I still need to determine if Shen's algorithm is as good or better than mine. For the moment, I am thinking it lacks generality because it apparently (afaics) forces outputs to be bundled with inputs in the same signature. Also I really can't yet determine if there might be other flaws because I haven't yet digested all the math, e.g. the "MG" sig is still an enigma to me at this moment.

Since I understand my algorithm well and do not see any such flaws or potential for such flaws, I am lean towards the odds that mine is going to be superior to Shen's. But I don't yet know that for sure. Waiting on further elucidation or for myself to have more time to go learn more about the LLW sigs and his extension to his new invention of "MG" sigs.

Well I am more in poverty than the Monero devs, so they need not feel relatively poor, lol.

About quick buck, my point is I need to decide between other projects which might pay me a good salary (assuming I can find one), or other projects I could create that are not pigeon-holed to crypto, when determining my opportunity cost of working on crypto.

But here is the kicker for me. So many (e.g. social media) projects I would like to do, require the features I wanted to build for crypto that would expand markets (e.g. 1 second microtransactions to any party, not that addon channel design on top of Bitcoin). So I have always viewed my interest in crypto as foundational to other projects I want to do that are not just crypto. If Monero or anyone else was building what I needed for my other projects, then I wouldn't have to create my own project.

We all just want success. Who is going to lead us there? Gmaxwell, smooth, SuperNet, Daniel, Ethereum, myself, Dash?

We all have our theories and vestments. Who will end up being correct. I love competition. Exciting to get out there and compete on creativity. My problem is the realities of my life became so pressingly urgent lately. So I wasn't able to just lose days upon days coding with no sure income. Any way, my gut instinct is just go back to coding my own project. But I am trying to fight that, because I am not 34 years old and healthy (or am I?).

I was planning to reply to his post. Actually I very much appreciated his willingness to help. I felt bad that I pissed him off (if I did, but I think he wasn't pissed when he used the word fuck just he was putting emphasis on me working with smooth). But I hope he can understand that there are so many attacks flying here and there, it is very difficult to discern who is sincere or who is planting political traps.

Any way, I don't think he necessarily needs to give it to me for free, especially if I can afford to pay something and what he has can make me more productive. Discussion can add clarity on it.

He seems to be implying some connection to LDL or cholesterol. I am learning that so many things are interrelated. Any way, I came across a new revelation about low glutathione (actually I was aware of it before about the Methylation Cycle but some key aspects of this I hadn't studied sufficiently  before), and so I was planning to make a post about that first then reply to him and see what he thought after reading that and then go into him about what he might know and what value I might have to give in trade.

It is not impossible that smooth and I could work together. I think the key issue is financial reality.

I am trying to figure out now what is best role for me. Based on my past, I would prefer to lead a project. I think I can bring a fresh perspective to expanding markets. But my damn illness has so frustrated me to the point of exasperation.

So any way, I came here based on the urging of others who wanted me to share my algorithms so they would get implemented in a project if was too ill to finish Ion. And when Shen announced, it seemed like that was a good time to consider opening up my algorithms.

But as I said, I have a new insight on my illness and I still have a itch to lead my own project. Yet if I fit very well into an existing project, maybe that is the better role for me. Or if I can raise some cash and only lose "first mover" on my anonymity algorithm, that may make sense given my precarious financial+health situation. The illness beat me down and made me realize that maybe I could no longer will power months of non-stop coding and sleeping under my desk.

Any way, I am hopeful about this breakthrough on the glutathione. Let me go write that up... (all the tabs for that research still open on my browser ... haha my gf always teases me "how many tabs you have open now" since the number always grows and rarely shrinks).

I have not thought Shen, Monero team, and gmaxwell were copying my work. I did think for a brief moment perhaps someone had tipped them off that I had claimed the same feature and maybe that motivated them to attempt the same, but I never thought they literally copied my work since no one else had seen it so that was impossible (unless someone hacked my computer which I don't think is the case).

Their algorithm is significantly different than mine, so it is also quite obvious we independently developed our solutions.

I believe now based on new information from Shen that it is likely he has a solution to the same problem set as I do. But I do believe his may be less general, e.g. the open question about whether he can merge multiple inputs from different signers in same transaction (I am nearly certain he can not but awaiting his reply). Also so far I view his as more mathematically complex to explain and trust. But perhaps he can improve that with more english elucidation in his paper. He may not wish to do that, if he prefers the typical "math snob" style of academic papers (where the reader is burdened with acquiring the domain knowledge rather than it being explained) which is fine for academically targeted white papers. Our market is crypto and the users need to trust and understand tech. One of my talents is explaining complex tech in simple ways. My white paper could use some more refinement on this aspect of explanation to the laymen, yet I am very sure I can do it.

I do believe I have something of value even if Shen is able to resolve every flaw I might find, because there is more than one way to skin a cat and mine is I think simpler to understand. Also mine should be more generally useful, because mine can sign the transaction even to 0 outputs, e.g. a burn transaction or signing to a future of outputs that will be decided later. And there are probably other scenarios where not conflating the inputs and the outputs in the signature has some use case that Shen's can't do (other than the one I already asked him about).

Separation-of-concerns is a fundamental design concept I follow. Conflation violates this and invariably leads to corner cases.

He may be awesome at math, but I have a lot of experience with design patterns.

So in end, I expect my invention to be worth $millions in the market. The question is how to best capture some of that future value now.

Well I am saddened to read that Monero devs are in poverty. I want to read that we are expanding the crypto markets and all of us are getting wealthy while improving the world.

Hopefully we can lead in that direction. I am trying to be healthy so I can do more coding less talking. I am not really happy about talking here. But I need to make a wise decision about what to do with my anonymity algorithm at this juncture given the recent competitive developments.

How can you release a white paper on one-time ring signatures hiding values, and then not address the fact that your design as presented allows duplicate signatures of the one-time key that can't be detected.

That is lack of respect for or awareness about people who expend their precious time to read your paper.

On top of that he was condescending before we got to the point of me stating that fact.

I honestly didn't fathom that he might have a solution for the one-time key (the "MG" sig) that he would not have published in his paper. Who would? You read a white paper expecting all the pivotal elements to be covered. That is the point of a white paper.

The signature he showed in his 0.1 paper was broken. Now he changes to an "MG" sig. Moving the goal posts as if white papers should be a ball kicking sport.

Bottom line is he should have taken the time to finish his white paper before announcing it on Reddit. I didn't go publishing my white papers in half-finished state, thus wasting the time of my readers.

The time of my readers gets wasted by all the bickering and explanation of bickering.

Any way, I understand your point that we just want to get to the truth as efficiently as possible. And I do accept that your comment was a reflection of your perspective wherein you thought I was attacking him. I was defending myself from his condescending and unwillingness to help me learn efficiently what he had invented. I asked him several times to tell me where in his paper he was associating the 'a' with the 'Pi' and I never did get a straight answer from him. I had to go back to his paper and clarify it. Why ask.

I think what we have here is a guy (Shen) who is better at math than at human interaction. And then myself getting more easily ticked off because I am so tired of everything (illness, bickering, wasting time, losing massive hours where I should have been producing income).

Frustration seems to run together at the same time.

Any way, I would like to efficiently understand the differences in our algorithms, but Shen will need to make the math more intelligible for people who don't have time to build the domain knowledge on the symbolism he is employing. Some english text can go a long way to explaining a few things and make it much, much easier for people to make the little leaps in symbolism to full understanding.

If he only wants a few math heads to understand it, then he can leave it as now. It is his choice of priorities and I will react accordingly. I don't have unlimited time.

Okay I replied to Shen:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/3oi16k/ring_ct_for_monero_a_work_in_progress_comments/cw3c8dw

I thought of a new potential flaw due to conflating inputs and outputs.

I already did that. It can't be denied:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/3oi16k/ring_ct_for_monero_a_work_in_progress_comments/cw3b936


And I saw your rude comment there where I just posted as linked above. Sigh.

I like your idea. So true that we lose so much time to bickering. So exhausting.

Bottom line is Shen may have a solution too, but his apparently is under development and thus it is difficult to fully analyze what is still changing and perhaps not even well vetted. What if I expend a lot of time analyzing that more than I did, and then later they find a bug and declare it all invalid. So all my time was wasted. That happens with white papers. Might even happen to mine once submitted to the public.

What incentive do I have to talk with someone who totally disrespects me and is condescending to me even after he wrote he wouldn't do that again.

I don't know how participating in smear campaign against me is easier for everyone.

He can explain his reduction to a layman. And make sure all of us can understand it. My crypto paper can be so explained.

As for his condescending comment about all digital signatures being probabilistic (of course I know this! there he goes again with nonsense assumptions that I don't know even most basic things), I specifically wrote in one of my comments which you may not have quoted for him, that the probabilistic assumptions appear to be more complex and unvetted as compared to the crypto I employed.

If he can show how MG is so well formed in simple and easy to understand terms, then he can be so convincing. As of yet, I don't see it.

othe you are just playing politics by making selective quotes. He made that reply after I wrote what you are quoting from me. Any one can go read that entire thread and see how he was being condescending to me and then in the quote you just made he is being condescending again. Instead of answering my question he leaves it as a wild goose chase into his deeper math in Lemmas and such. He is just being snobbish again. He could have simply answered the question directly the first time instead of trying to purposely frame me up so he could be snobbish. I am not going to dig too much into his papers because they are not finished. He can try to explain his paper to a layman so they can trust it (I doubt it!). Mine will be so explained.

I wrote in my Ion project thread while I was making those posts in his Reddit thread comments such as:


My statement below was entirely accurate based on the white paper he had published at the time I wrote this statement:


Then after that he reveals hidden math that he was withholding from us. Sneaky.


Yeah it would be nice if all parties did. Readers I am sure can read the Reddit thread and see his attitude towards me throughout.

I am definitely ready to contribute and dig myself out of a very big hole.

I can't yet be sure if the info I found is a cure for my health issue. I will go write up my new found insight as soon as I complete answering any posts here.

Thank you. Sorry if I am just screaming, but I am just so sick of bickering. I feel sometimes I want to pull my hair out when it starts again. I understand I may have contributed to it with some of my posts in the past, but you know even smooth who is very respected and deserving of respect has also had his moments of going on and on ad nauseum.

We are just human beings. I wasn't satisfied with where Bitcoin was in 2013 technically. I never expected Gmaxwell to go invent really cool anonymity. I was totally against his CoinJoin because I was the first person to point out that you can't blacklist the one caught jamming it, because the point is you are making UXTO anonymous via mixing (unless you have have all CoinJoin mixes talk to a master blacklist, but that is dangerous for other reasons). So yeah I was critical of some things before and especially because I thought Gmaxwell wasn't sincere about anonymity and scalability. But then I see what he is doing with Blockstream and I am commending him.  Even messaging him in private to commend him. Once he realizes I am AnonyMint the guy who criticized his CoinJoin, then he stops replying and the only nods I get from him are condescending shit behind my back and then this leap of foolishness in my thread.

Originally I was critical or dubious w.r.t. to rings but over many months of discussion in the forums with smooth, I came to the realization that on chain rings were the best. But remember I am the one who pointed out the combinatorial unmasking flaw first (to smooth). And I am the one who pointed out how to defeat that flaw by controlling who mixes with whom (which also makes the rings prunable reducing block chain bloat). I do believe Monero got those ideas from me. So it has been a two-way street. I was promoting anonymity back in mid-2013 before others were. It wasn't until Mike Hearn's redlisting proposal that everyone suddenly got more serious about anonymity for the fungibility reason.

All of us need to have cooler heads. If gmaxwell can back away from the ledge of contempt, I also want to. I don't like the animosity. To the extent I created it by trying to analyze tech, sometimes making mistakes, and being demanding of what I wanted for crypto, I plead guilty.

Tl;; dr  is I am just human. Learning over time how to fit into this. What my role should be. What my core values for this market are. Etc.

He didn't answer the point I made about not being able to combine balances because he associates each input (C_in) to a set of outputs (Cj_out). This afaics, he can't have more than one input feed to a set of outputs, thus balances can't be combined. Since he did not reply to that point I already made, then his reply is insufficient for me to reply to him.

Why should I have to repeat what I already said which he didn't respond to. He is a very bright guy, I am sure he can read carefully.

As for his "Mokum-gane signature" maybe that does prevent the duplicate spending that I alleged which is a separate issue to the one above. But afaik that is not a standard signature that has been already vetted and vetted in this context where I don't know yet how any external correlations might work against what appears to me more complex probabilistic assumptions. The zero knowledge proof in Cryptonote appears to be less complex and more straightforward, yet if that was just released for the first time today, we'd all need a year or two to trust it while it is vetted.

So I avoided using any new complex crypto primitives in my design. Maybe once he gets his white paper well written and more near to publish quality, then that would be the time to go into that when I can better grasp his explanation of that new signature and also be sure it isn't a moving target still changing with more edits and hidden maths that suddenly appear in version N+1 of his paper.

So what I am saying is, he hasn't yet replied. I'll give him some time to refine his paper and answer the other concern. In the meantime, no one is paying me to do peer review and I have to balance a lot of priorities on my side.

And I am pretty much turned off about talking to any of those in that snobbish community who interact with Gmaxwell et al. Because it is always been a ticket to ill feelings. I don't need that in my life.

I have mentioned this anonymity white paper publicly in these forums months ago. Just because you aren't aware of it, doesn't give you the right to make ASS-U-MPTIONs unless you enjoy making a fool of yourself.

The scientific method is to first gather the evidence before you shoot from the hip.

I also know for a fact that certain people don't like me. So all the more motivation for me to prove them wrong.

I have not criticized every work. I have commended a lot of works. You cherry pick my posts to form a bias that suits the view you want to have towards me.

I write what I think. I don't bullshit people. I make mistakes and I also make achievements. This is the life of a human being.

It is clear that I came forward now with my white paper other than just mentioning it before, because Shen came forward with his, thus the race to market implementation was necessarily accelerated. And also because I had been in a whirlwind of ill health spiral since I tried water only fasting for 10 days in August (the thought for a need for which was likely brought on by the ill health spiral likely caused by overeating omega B meats given that my health issue seems to be as I learned just recently an inflammatory cascade caused by insufficient glutathione). And I just managed to get myself stabilized a few days ago, and starting communicating in Bitmessage again with my angel investors after disappearing for 1.5 months. I went from 73 kilos to 55 kilos and not back up to 70 kilos. I have been going to a literal hell. And so my mind was so discombobulated and I was trying to get myself back on track.

Immediately I realized I needed to do something with my work. I couldn't just leave it there waiting longer.

But at the same time, over these past few days I also had a major insight on my chronic health issue. And this is also changing my thinking (even today my thinking changed a bit) more towards I can work, because for the past 3 days I have hadn't had much indication of illness. But I am also not yet sure about this, so I continue to gather feedback here and try to make the best decision for myself, my angel investors, and the community on balance.

Just because you have a suspicion, you should put yourself in the other person's shoes and try to gather some information and ask a few questions before leaping. All you had to do is ask me in this thread some questions and I would clearly explain to you that if my white paper is not entirely different than Shen's method, then I will not be allowed by the escrow agent to receive the $21k.

You would then have received the assurances you need to know that your assumptions were incorrect.

I have nothing against Blockstream. I was even commending some of the principles of side-chains.

My problem is with the attitude of at least two of their key players towards me. The way they talk about me derisively behind my back I also know about.

This invention was personal effort of mine to teach them a lesson about mutual respect. I was very determined.

Well some quantum resistance seems to come from using wider ECC curves because practical quantum computers will likely be limited in qubits for a while if they ever (or already are secretly) a reality.

But I also think it will be possible to add some quantum resistance by adapting the recent advances with super-singular isogenies. But that is far out of my expertise and so we would defer that to the super math nerds. We in cypto land need to grow our markets and so we can superfund such.

My predominate talent is combining marketing and programming (along with my cleverness) and I find ways to grow markets, as I did in 2001 when CoolPage in only 2 years from initial release had risen to 335,000 published websites as reported by Altavista. This was when the internet was 1/10 of its current population.

In doing this anonymity invention, I was really stretching beyond my core expertise, but I was very, very determined to solve it. And I did (unless I have an error) independently! Any one who accuses me of plagiarism is going to be shown to be a fool.

I am simply amazed that Gregory Maxwell would set himself up to be made a fool because I never even knew of Shen's work when I produced mine, so it is nothing at all similar which will be clear to all when the paper is published.

It blows my mind how fucked crypto is with people like him at the helm. I must have really hit a nerve for him to lose it like that. He assumes everything and all his assumption (which became accusations) are all wrong.

If I was a rational developer looking from the outside, I would run as far away from crypto as I can. These people are insane.

Apologies I was so livid that I didn't pay attention to the "m". Hmmm my request for $21k versus Blockstream's $21m. Do they have 1000 times more features and developers? Good point!

Sure I'll see if I can edit the poll to accommodate without erasing the prior votes.

That is if you don't want my white paper then you can go with Gmaxwell's and Shen's inferior broken solution for integrating Cryptonote with CT. Denis's CCT is not viable without my improvement to it.

I guess you didn't realize that I wrote 3 times already that Denis's CCT requires a 768-bit ECC which is impractical. I removed that requirement.

My white paper is done. Give me $21K now, and I will publish it now. In 2 seconds. Where is the $21K?

Why all the FUD?

Are some people offended by a free market?

You fools might just destroy crypto if you continue FUDing me. I am legit and you demonstrate that you are going to roast a sincere developer, then maybe others will begin to see crypto land as totally corrupt and unethical from the very top including Gregory Maxwell's despicable post, wherein he accuses me of things he has no evidence whatsoever of and in fact I can prove those statements are lies.