|
Anyone know of a DRK to USD payment gateway?
|
|
|
|
What is the roadmap for Darkcoin after Darksend+ is perfected and open sourced?
As was stated by Darkcoin's lead developer eduffield today:
Darkcoin will focus on providing a host of anonymity services using the Darksend implementation. This would mean my next project would be to rewrite electrum to use the masternodes to anonymize funds, then an android wallet that can use Darksend, then iPhone, etc. The foundation would also be tasked with trying to get businesses to accept Darkcoin and expand the user base.
It means that ALL users will have an out-of-the-box nearly perfect anonymous payment solution, which could be a big deal in the near term future.
I was wondering if it is possible to send anonymous messages to an address with darkcoin. So that the reciever could potentially even read the message within his wallet. Kinda like BitMessage built into darkcoin. THAT would be so awesome. I know that I can sign a message with darkcoin, ... hmm... but not sure if this is the same. My goal is, to one day be able to send someone a serial number (or similar things) back after he anonymously payed me with darkcoin.Yes. This is basically how the ip obfuscation tech works that I detailed a few weeks ago. It could very easily be turned into an encrypted messaging service. |
|
|
|
Today's update from Evan I wanted to put this out there to get the communities take on what Darkcoin should be in the future. I think there's a fork is the road for Darkcoin. I have a few different ideas for what masternodes could do. A few months ago when I came up with the idea of paying Masternodes I was thinking they could pretty much decentralize everything on the internet. That being said, it looks like other coins are already focusing on this.
As a result I don't believe we should do what others are doing. The thing I think we've really succeeded at is building an anonymity layer that's robust enough to provide nearly total anonymity while also not bloating the blockchain. I don't think there's much competition on that front and we have the brand for that service.
So we need to choose one of these options:
1.) We provide services and try to compete with centralized and next-gen decentralized providers. I think this hurts the anonymity brand by diluting what we're doing.
2.) We focus on providing a host of anonymity services using the Darksend implementation. This would mean my next project would be to rewrite electrum to use the masternodes to anonymize funds, then an android wallet that can use Darksend, then iPhone, etc. The foundation would also be tasked with trying to get businesses to accept Darkcoin and expand the user base.
I think I want to go with #2. It means that ALL users will have an out-of-the-box nearly perfect anonymous payment solution, which could be a big deal in the near term future.
Also, going with #2 would mean we abandon providing Darktor/Iris and similar services. There has been overwhelming support from the community about going with #2! So I think that is probably the direction we are taking. But chime in and give your opinion here: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/darkcoin-fork-in-the-road.2244/The nr 1 point is exactly what i was very worried about in my post a few pages back: Darknet is not a feature we need for Darkcoin,developers are doing the wrong thing,they should work more on the coin instead of creating a better Tor. Darknet will only hurt us more then it would help,scammers that can hide on it,child porn,gun sellers,drug sellers etc,it's going to stain te legit coin in a very bad way!! they should brand Darkcoin as a private coin like paying in cash,bitcoin in 2014 is moving away out of this negative things and then the developers are putting Darcoin in it's place,not good. i dont want my Darkcoins to get a bad name but it will,the big public will only speak of the coin criminals use,how is that going to help us? Criminals use the coin for doing criminal transactions you put yourself at risk when owning a masternode or even use the coin,i dont want the NSA or any goverment take this coin down or investor dont invest because they get stained with the stamp CRIMINAL on it. I think Darkcoin is a great coin that keeps your spending private like cash does,but in these days when regulation is forming that will help crypto currency it's a very big risk of damaging this coin when you facilitate all the bad things the regulators dont want. The regulation is needed so bussines can be run in the same legal matter as normal company's so big money investors will know there money is safe and can not be stolen and also consumers know they cant be ripped off. The crypto industry can not grow large like we all want if no one can be put to court when stealing like what happend @ MTgox. I am very sceptic about darknet in a way it's to close linked to Darkcoin now,they should finish RC5,help merchants adapoting it,do the marketing,Darknet should be a new bussines not related Darkcoin,get it's own brand,website and marketing. Definitely going with number two! |
|
|
|
So the guy who sold celeb photos for bitcoin, he should really have used darkcoin...
Why? Bitcoin is as secure as Darkcoin, if he wanted real anonymity he would have used Monero. I can't imagine someone with your amount of history would be so ill informed? Darkcoin is quite anonymous. Have you even read how it works? It's my own implementation of coinjoin that is much more anonymous than anything offered on the bitcoin network, plus it's not vulnerable to any of the coinjoin attacks (coinjoin sudoku). It's decentralized, secure, timing-attack resistant and it works on mainnet, right now. I'm going to just guess that you haven't actually done any reading about Darksend and show you how it works: http://blog.anonymousbitcoinbook.com/2014/08/visualizing-one-round-of-darkcoins-darksend/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.0Here's an example transaction: http://test.explorer.darkcoin.fr/tx/6f52d97497c6f6ff2d866de53a1dcd8b3d3b74c8feb16e2e91624fda0985a917So the gist is if you put 550DRK into the pool, it'll be broken down into 100DRK*5, 10DRK*5 and paired with the same denominations from another user. So after that transaction, no one can tell who is paying for what. It's also very low bloat compared to monero /bytecoin because it only happens when it's needed. The whole blockchain is 346MB right now. Monero is not even close to as old and already is many times that size. |
|
|
|
I kind of agree with that post. I don't think the development of Darkcoin was handled in a very logical way. The masternodes are the foundation of Darkcoin. Logically, anything involving masternodes should be brought to completion prior to focusing on everything that comes after. The whole DarkTor idea is very interesting, but at this point it's a complete distraction. Before even spending a single moment's thought on building infrastructure on top of masternodes, everything involving masternode payment should have been brought to completion. Why are we nearly nine months into this project, and we still don't know how masternode payments are going to be enforced? I know I sound like a broken record here, but this is beyond critical. Without enforcement, Darkcoin is dead. Until this is figured out and finished, everything else should be placed on the back burner. There's no point in even thinking about DarkTor if payments aren't being enforced. It's like thinking about what sort of rims you are going to buy for your car, when you don't even have an engine! I saw this and decided to go back and see if I could answer the questions more thoroughly. https://darkcointalk.org/threads/losing-faith-in-drk.2210/page-5#post-18919 |
|
|
|
Initial Board of directors membership: 1. Evan Duffield 2. Edward Moncada 3. Fernando Gutierrez Mosquera 4. Christopher Carlo Rimoldi 5. Harold Boo I believe #3 is btc user fernando and #4 is eltito. What do we know about #2 and #5? Also: is there a public charter, vision, mission statement? Correct about Fernado and Eltito. Edward represents some of the largest Darkcoin investors and Harold is a long term Darkcoin supporter and attorney who helped setup the foundation. We've setup the foundation to equally represent all aspects of the coin (Development, Legal, Investment and Community). We'll be releasing much more detailed information with RC5 |
|
|
|
Why you guy are so scared ? Little price drop huh ? Lets talk price right now.
What are your predictions ?
Le me tellyou mine :
Two weeks after RC5 one DRK is going to cost 0.045 BTCand rising !
I don't see how RC5 is going to drive the price up. Unless some big holders stop dumping their coins the bearish trend will continue. RC5 will mean DarkSend+ is open source and then the marketing will commence... Or soon after that anyway... Nobody trust close source . RC5 and the open source is going to be the start of the race ! I'm thinking about opening the source at release of RC5. I've actually been having various close friends of mine look at the source and no one sees anything seriously wrong with it besides some organizational issues (which I'm working on now). I believe we're ready to go. |
|
|
|
People here go from circle jerking to panic mode very fast. I don't see the problem  . It all depends on what Evan meant by that statement. I think we can all agree that no enforcement is very very problematic. Miners do not necessarily have to be sympathetic to DRK. Additionally, no enforcement would open up an attack vector on the Masternode network. Someone who doesn't like DRK can simply mine at a 20% advantage to everyone else, while undermining the system that lets DRK function. There has to be enforcement. I suppose the advantage of the RC3 voting method is that is has been tried and tested so in that regards surely less risky to turn on? Let's wait to hear from the captain.. The RC4 system has inherent issues that were documented in Jira, plus it also has a systematic risk to the network (Sporking is less risky than a hard fork, but there's a risk the network forks wouldn't actually go away when the spork was turned off after a failure). These few issues combined with the fact that we've reached 80-90% payment efficiency tells me that it's not worth the risk to the network to move from the RC3 payment system. Also, I have a separate plan I've been considering as an alternative that carries no risk and can be done at RC5's launch. Basically, I would set a minimum protocol version and boot anyone not running RC4 or later off the network. This should get us to 98%+ payments. |
|
|
|
Does this diagram mean that with 1 round mixing for 2 users - coins are traceable (related to ours) with 50% chance?
So in simplified model, to make our coins 99% chance untraceable we need to mix it with at least 99 other Darkcoin's users? Is it correct?
If DS+ works as intended it means that there's an equal possibility that either party could own the prior money from the viewpoint of the blockchain after 1 round of mixing. Even then there's plausible deniability from future transactions. With more rounds of DS+ things get much harder to track, for example 8 rounds of DS+, there's 2^8 users with an equal likelihood of owning the prior money (256 possible users). With 3 participants per join, there's 3^8 users (6561). DS+ just removes the blockchain as being used as proof that any user did anything with absolute certainty, which is our goal. |
|
|
|
I like Iris too. The DarkNet is almost exclusively for illegal purposes. Darkcoin is about privacy and civil liberties. So maybe we should just avoid "Dark" altogether. |
|
|
|
Note that when he used the word DarkTor, everyone instantly know what is he talking about. That is a functionality of a good name.
We can't use the name "Tor" in the project at all it seems. So we'll have to come up with something else. https://www.torproject.org/docs/trademark-faq.html.enCan I use the word "Tor" as part of the name of my product or my domain name?
Please don't use Tor in your product name or domain name. Instead, find a name that will accurately identify your products or services. Remember that our goal is to make sure that people aren't confused about whether your product or project is made or endorsed by The Tor Project. Creating a new brand that incorporates the Tor brand is likely to lead to confusion, and commercial confusion is a sign of trademark infringement. |
|
|
|
|
Hello Everyone,
If you're running a larger than normal wallet and set "Amount to anonymize" to a really high amount, the client will prioritize money that has not been denominated, in effect denominating the entire amount ONCE (this could look like the round > 1 bug, but it's not). No input will reach 2 rounds before that amount is met. When the client detects you've reached the threshold you set, it will then start denominating round 2, then 3, etc.
From the looks of the thread all issues users are experiencing are not bugs at this point, just a misunderstanding of how Darksend works. All major bugs have been resolved and I'm going to move on to RC5 and other unique features of Darkcoin that we've had in the works for awhile (I'm going to wait till all of the weak hands have left the building then I have some really cool stuff to announce).
-Evan
|
|
|
|
|
If your client seems to be denominating too many times (more than your setting), try restarting the client. I've been denominating and noticed it's caching the rounds, after a restart they calculate correct. I'll be pushing a fix sometime soon, but that's a way to get around the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
