Pretty sure poloniex is working on getting their mixin to 3.
They almost had it working, but reverted for now, im not sure why, but there were a few angryish posts about having to pay higher fees .. maybe that's why they went back?
I'm sure they'll get it working, they're pretty on top of things.
The issue with poloniex is somewhat structural. They get a huge number of small deposits from miners who mine directly to the exchange with frequent small payouts. When they try to use these outputs to pay withdrawals the transactions become huge and thus the fees large. To fix this they may need to institute a minimum deposit or per-deposit fee (can be waived for deposits above some threshold) or some other way to crack down on miners (especially pools) doing this. Otherwise the cost of people making a lot of very small deposits gets shifted to the exchange itself and/or those making withdrawals. WTF?  I can't believe in this, are the miners putting as the mining address an address which belongs to an exchange insteaad of using their own addresses? Some pools have a specific feature that lets you specify a payment ID. There is no other purpose for that. |
|
|
|
...
To fix this they may need to institute a minimum deposit or per-deposit fee (can be waived for deposits above some threshold) or some other way to crack down on miners (especially pools Botnets) doing this. Otherwise the cost of people making a lot of very small deposits gets shifted to the exchange itself and/or those making withdrawals.
FTFY  No its mostly pools (not solo mining) and its more likely small miners on pools than large ones, though that could certainly include small botnets. A big botnet would get fairly large payouts on most pools, and solo mining deposits or a big botnet on a private pool would be large too |
|
|
|
There are plenty for sale. 40btc worth under the previous high 24 hours after hitting it.
40 btc is plenty? I guess it depends on the scale you have in mind but I don't really consider that a deep market. |
|
|
|
Pretty sure poloniex is working on getting their mixin to 3.
They almost had it working, but reverted for now, im not sure why, but there were a few angryish posts about having to pay higher fees .. maybe that's why they went back?
I'm sure they'll get it working, they're pretty on top of things.
The issue with poloniex is somewhat structural. They get a huge number of small deposits from miners who mine directly to the exchange with frequent small payouts. When they try to use these outputs to pay withdrawals the transactions become huge and thus the fees large. To fix this they may need to institute a minimum deposit or per-deposit fee (can be waived for deposits above some threshold) or some other way to crack down on miners (especially pools) doing this. Otherwise the cost of people making a lot of very small deposits gets shifted to the exchange itself and/or those making withdrawals. |
|
|
|
The OP says the coin is discontinued, is this not true?
You can't "discontinue" a decentralized cryptocurrency. That is a contradiction in terms. The coin is still working just fine. The original developer abandoned it. I have an up to date patched version. Well somewhat up to date except that the seed node doesn't work. |
|
|
|
Hi all, As you may recall I have a patched version of the aeon code on my github: https://github.com/iamsmooth/aeonOne of the things I did was update the seed node. Well it turns out the seed node I had listed appears to no longer be available. If you are running a stable, reachable aeon node and are willing to be listed as a seed node, please let me know and I will patch it into the code. Although seed nodes aren't needed if you are already running a node yourself, having a working one listed would be a great help to new users. |
|
|
|
Because its overrated and majority doesn't care about it and those who care use cash.
If people "use cash" they will want to "use cash" online too. That is inevitable. If you say people are comfortable with everything be tracked and traced that's one thing. But once you acknowledge the need for cash, the need for anon online has to be there too, for all the same reasons, and some others too. I agree with the past few comments that it got ahead of itself and blown out of proportion by speculators. Basically this:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hype_cycleThat graph looks eerily like DRK over the last year...massive pump before we'd even finished any features! Yes that is the whole point and it looks like a graph of all of the "anonymous coins" that were around back then and are still around. Arguably it looks like Bitcoin too going back about 18 months or so. |
|
|
|
Maybe you should take a look at the Kristov Atlas review on DRK I have read it but thank you for the suggestion anyway! work to 3rd parties to develop wallets (how is this secure) Most if not all of the wallets are wrappers around the core code or recompile and link with core code. They did not reimplement the cryptography. Good question though! that time Dark adoption will be mainstream and too late for Monero to even be noticed. Oh wait thats already starting to happen. Dark mainstream adoption is starting to happen? That's a good one! Funny! |
|
|
|
What a viper. In almost every post you are trying to cut drk head to feel a bit taller.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
I'm criticizing some aspects of DRK because they are deeply flawed and snake oil anonymity is profoundly dangerous. If you want to ascribe other motives to avoid confronting the inconvenient truth of your emperor having no clothes, I can't stop you. I'm also not going to remain silent and watch people hawking this crap without speaking out just to avoid being called names or accused of "talking trash' Your wallet seems pretty, the logo is good, InstantX seems cool, I have no problem with any of these things, and there are probably other parts of the DRK project that are great. Anonymity-wise your whole approach is a disaster. Sorry., Why don't you write a paper on why darksend is a disaster rather than just post here saying that it is without going into details? That way you could really give people facts to help their decision making. Not an entirely bad idea I must say. Thank you for the suggestion. |
|
|
|
And you all think XMR is totally safe ? Naivety everywhere
Nothing is perfectly safe and we've even been working hard on breaking it so we can fix it (see MRL reports). There is a difference between possibly having weaknesses or bugs and having a terribly weak and even dangerous design to begin with. Very different. |
|
|
|
I really don't enjoy that drk-bashing recently. It reminds me of the smear-campaign against Monero last year. All those threads appearing at the same time against drk code, insta-mine, community and what not... doesn't really look like an organic debate but a coordinated FUD rush.
Best technology will win the game in the long run, I don't see the point of all that trollrama. There's no dignity in that.
(Disclaimer: I don't own any darkcoin)
I have to say I've been vocal on one of the threads, out of a personal interest in speaking out against their dangerous technology and ethically questionable history. But I haven't even noticed the other threads (I guess this one counts though). If there is a "campaign" of some kind, its certainly not obvious, but maybe you are right. |
|
|
|
What a viper. In almost every post you are trying to cut drk head to feel a bit taller.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
I'm criticizing some aspects of DRK because they are deeply flawed and snake oil anonymity is profoundly dangerous. If you want to ascribe other motives to avoid confronting the inconvenient truth of your emperor having no clothes, I can't stop you. I'm also not going to remain silent and watch people hawking this crap without speaking out just to avoid being called names or accused of "talking trash' Your wallet seems pretty, the logo is good, InstantX seems cool, I have no problem with any of these things, and there are probably other parts of the DRK project that are great. Anonymity-wise your whole approach is a disaster. Sorry., |
|
|
|
Bytecoin at Facebook: two community pages nowFacebook recently changed their Pages Terms. That is the reason why nowadays there are two different pages about Bytecoin BCN there. But don't worry! New Bytecoin page is supported by BCN community as well as the oldest one. So we would post news, important information and funny pics on both pages. You are welcomed to join, like and share at Bytecoin Community and Bytecoiner Community pages. I just saw this in another thread. So, I asked myself, does Monero has an Facebook community? Can't check myself, I don't own an FB account. Obvious Monero would need and maybe benefit from an (good managed) FB community. Sorry if Monero already has FB. I can't read and process all altcoin & XMR news and developments anymore. (Working an 10 hours non crypto office job, fuck my life.) This is the official Monero Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/monerocurrencyIt currently isn't actively managed, because Quanttek had not enough much time on his hands to do this. To make sure the FB is actively managed again we (davidlatapie, dnaleor, greekbitcoin, wpalczysnki, quanttek and me) have set up a team and we will make sure there will be regular posts on the page again. Posts will include the missives, digest, old and new articles which spoke nicely about Monero and some bitcointalk posts which we think are very informing. Fantastic work guys. Looking forward to the updates and hopefully more activity. Have you considered ideas how to encourage people to like the pages? That is one of the things that gets tracked by say coingecko. |
|
|
|
People will see that corporations taking over masternodes would (or at least could) lead to privacy failure,
Your the one who doesn't "understand economic reasoning very well" with idle scaremongering remarks like that. For that to happen, corporations would also have to overtake the coin supply which would simply be equivalent to comprehensive buying out of any cryptocurrency. From the perspective of 'security' a masternode isn't a PC, it's a portion of the coin supply. Masternodes are profit-making businesses. There is no other reason to own one (other than idealism, which I discount in the long term). Yes it requires a portion of the currency and if that's what it requires, that's what will happen. The argument about it being more profitable for them than to you still applies. If they can pay 1000 DRK and get a real return of say 1% while you only make a real return of 0% or -1% they will find it attractive to run a node while you will find it more attractive to cash out your DRK and go buy an island or something. So same effect. |
|
|
|
History is being made and all you guys want to do is fight. Why not fucking work together for a change so we can get crypto out to the world faster? We sure as fuck need it out there.
I'll agree with you on that. I'd in fact like to see DRK succeed rather than having nothing succeed I suppose, but frankly the DRK technology scares me to some extent because it is NSA PRISM 2.0 in my opinion. I'd rather see something, anything, without "nodes" succeed, whether I have a stake in it or not. So if you turn bitcoin wallet on, does it become a node? Yes that was obviously a bit too literal saying there should be no nodes at all. Rather silly you would focus on that. What I obviously meant is nodes that others rely on for their privacy. |
|
|
|
If 3 = getting better, why not crank it up to 4, 5 or 6?
And then why not 7, 8 or 9? 10? 11? See how that works? Obviously the tradeoff is transaction size (and also processing time). I can't say which is "best" objectively. the mymonero wallet mix limit is 3 iirc) I thought it offered 3,4, or 5 but I could be wrong. Anyway all of this stuff will likely change over time, nothing is set in stone. I cant say as I've noticed any diffs in "processing time" when selecting higher ring values (and only slightly higher tx fees). At least from the users point of view there is not perceptible difference. I'm not sure what's happening "under the hood". Im sure a dev will fill us in at some point. 3 rings (getting better) just seemed a low cap. At some point you can draw a line about max ring sizes if you so choose, point taken. Just felt 3 was slightly "stingy" (for want of a better word). thx again smooth (i should prob tip you for yourr helpful answers) Processing time refers to nodes handling large numbers of transactions on a busy network. Either way its going to be measured in milliseconds for an individual transaction, not something you would notice. |
|
|
|
I don't believe it can have any confidence of even doing that, because there is a reasonable probability that masternodes will ultimately be owned by corporations in the business of mining data for profit. The whole internet tracking and tracing industry didn't start out that way either, it happened over time because it was profitable. Many early pioneers on the internet were advocates for privacy and individual empowerment, but in reality the internet turned into a massive surveillance machine, not only for the NSA, but for business too. Masternodes are the same. If you are an individual and have a masternode that is laying golden eggs for the rest of your lifetime, why would you give it up to some corporation? Because that's how markets work. If it is more profitable for them then it is for you, and it will be, they buy it from you. Such a deal is good for you (price is higher than what you would make) and good for them (price is lower than what they will make). Wow.. can't wait to become millionaire then. If you really believe that, you should buy a masternode right now. You don't really understand economic reasoning very well. If the scenario plays out his way and leads to failure, then it won't play out this way. Its' called backward induction. People will see that corporations taking over masternodes would (or at least could) lead to privacy failure, and flee for a solution that doesn't lead to this failure. Now its possible people could be ignorant or fooled though, and I never said DRK can't be pumped a lot higher. It might very well be a great investment. Technology wise, no, I don't think so. |
|
|
|
it is about the the cloud of incompetence and/or fraud. A lot of coins mined in the beginning because the dev made a mistake in reward calculations and some people doubting whether it was intentional or not must still be better than having no doubt at all that a coin was started by scammers intending and partially succeeding to scam people, like monero was, correct? It certainly would be if the scammers were still involved. That's why they're not. I think I said once that if all the original developers and other insiders involved with DRK and the instamine were to leave, it would become much less of an issue. Consider MtGox. Clearly an incompetently and/or fruadulently run operation, one of the worst. But if someone were to take over with new management, there would be no reason not to use it. If Karpeles were still running it... |
|
|
|
If 3 = getting better, why not crank it up to 4, 5 or 6?
And then why not 7, 8 or 9? 10? 11? See how that works? Obviously the tradeoff is transaction size (and also processing time). I can't say which is "best" objectively. the mymonero wallet mix limit is 3 iirc) I thought it offered 3,4, or 5 but I could be wrong. Anyway all of this stuff will likely change over time, nothing is set in stone. |
|
|
|
Because that's how markets work. If it is more profitable for them then it is for you, and it will be, they buy it from you. Such a deal is good of you (price is higher than what you would make) and good for them (price is lower than what they will make).
If I were you with your superior 'cryptographic' knowledge, I wouldn't waste another second in trying to break and fully de-anonymise a darksend transaction because that's what you've now staked your entire project's existence on. Let me know when you've actually read what I wrote. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
