This coin got on mintpal and 24 hours later everyone is nitpicking the little things.

Why don't you guys ask these questions in private and offer help if you can? You are basically feeding the trolls with stuff like this.

It's perfectly fine to publish your own android app and not go through google play. You can find this information on the google site. The app works fine, so why rally around this one point?

A week later and your stupid predictions are proven false, you lying scammer.

No coin has been around for 10 years, so how that could be a criterion for you is beyond me. But ok.

I'm refuting the notion that there exists some causal relationship between expenditure and value. That relationship is correlation in some cases, but not causation. Plenty of coins have been mined with great expenditure of resources yet are worthless now. The inverse is also true. Some coins have been mined quickly and without much expenditure, but are highly valued.

And what would keep them from creating a wallet that saved electricity by not mining? And how do you prevent someone from writing a malicious wallet when all the others have adopted the cheaper non-miner that they can run on their phones?

People are stuck on the question of value, and come to the conclusion that value is derived from expenditure of resources. But that's simply not the case. Value is derived from utility. In other words, the question of value is related to usefulness, not expenditure.

Expenditure is required to help ensure honesty. If a reward requires resources, but cheating jeopardizes the reward, then the incentive is to be honest when expending those resources. That's the PoW model. This model has absolutely nothing to do with imparting value on a commodity. The utility of the commodity takes care of the value.

If you combine Tor with CryptoNote (BBR is the best CryptoNote, technically), then you have pretty much ultimate anonymity. But it is not sustainable with CryptoNote at the moment because it is too demanding of storage.

In the end, the decision will be one of compromises. Both CryptoNote and SSD provide "plausible deniability" levels of anonymity, which may be enough for most users who want to protect privacy and identity. CryptoNote can provide "military grade" anonymity that would probably be appropriate for governments to use if they needed an anonymous transaction system.

Given that they both provide excellent privacy protection, in the end, the value of either will be tied to their ease of use, ease of implementation, and ubiquity, not simply to which provides the hardest-core anon.

At present the most adopted anonymous system is CryptoNote. It suffers badly from blockchain bloat, so it is expensive in terms of storage and bandwidth. Bytecoin and monero as they presently exist will be unuseable in 3 or 4 years, especially if adoption increases. Boolberry relies on "pruning" to address this problem, but it still exists because the memory-expensive ring signatures can't be pruned until the coins have been spent. One way around this problem is to "expire" coins and then prune on expiration--but as you can imagine, do you want to wake up one day and see your nest egg disappear just to save some guy some harddrive space? StealthCoin seeks to address this problem using "sublinear" signatures, but they really only defer the problem because, for a typical ring size, it only reduces by a constant factor (about 2/3 reduction for the typical scenario). That's actually an amazing improvement, if it can be done, but it doesn't solve the problem completely.

The other solution to very strong anonymity is zerocoin/zerocash, which is still vaporware. It is promised for anoncoin, but as yet undelivered. It has a very real problem that some information required to seed the so-called Merkle tree needs to be destroyed. These systems therefore trust a "third party" (non-participant) to seed the Merkle tree and then destroy the information completely. The problem with zerocoin/zerocash, therefore is this aspect of trust.

The third solution is stealth addresses, which actually provide very good anonymity. A stealth address hides the recipient of a transaction completely. It does not hide the sender, though, so it leaks a lot of information about the transaction. But if you are missing every other dot in a transaction chain, it becomes very hard to connect them to make a clear picture. A huge advantage that stealth address transactions have over the other systems is that they require no more storage than a bitcoin transaction. So stealth addresses are a compromise, but in reality an excellent compromise. These work perfectly in SSD.

SSD is unique in that it is the first coin that offers anonymous transactions (stealth addresses) with anonymous networking (tor). Because of that combination, I call it the "most anonymous coin". That's a qualitative assessment, but in my opinion it is a fair one.

I hope that helps. And if I didn't convince you, feel free to dump into my buy orders.

You say smart things, but you don't recognize humor.

"Electricity and mechanics of printing paper money." 

What, are you living in the 1870s?

Today they "print money" by adding ledger entries.

Johnny Mnemonic, meet the U.S. Treasury, a place where the laws of physics do not apply.

Be honest with yourself. You'd feel differently if it could shoot gold bullion out of its ass. We all would.

So the whole point of the fud post is to get back at people making hype posts?

What a fucking waste of time.

They will feel the regret as they are buying back in at a loss.

It's not verifiable because no specific claims were made nor was any evidence provided to support any claims. So "true" or "false" can not apply in this case.

Yeah. So fix the implementation (if broken) and you get anonymity. (Note: RSA is not the same as ring signatures.)

The bullshit part is in bold (well it's all bullshit). There may be an exploit in XMR that may work under some theoretical circumstances, but unless Ronald Rivest and Adi Shamir (the R & S from RSA cryptography) screwed up in a way that has not been detected by everyone in the field of cryptography, there is no need to sacrifice anonymity for "keyrings" (i.e. the ring signature system).

And the part about hijacking addresses is laughable too. Signatures and derivative keys in these systems come from cryptographic one way functions. The implementation of these functions are easy to test using known inputs and reference implementations. So, to reverse engineer a signature or derivative key is impossible with current technology except in cases of weak keys.

BCX probably killed coins, but judging from his assertions, any success is more likely related to the mining power at his disposal than with any specific insight into cryptography.

Some people have a bad case of troll fever.

There is a tiny teapot orbiting the sun. It is too small to see with any telescope, nor can we get close enough to the sun to detect it.

Now, what has me concerned is the lack of any response form any astronomer refuting this. Seems to me if not true they would debunk this asap.

The more hyperbolic you get, the more you look like the clown you are.

Bark clown bark.

You are mad because you feel scammed from the past, but just remember this: YOU GOT SCAMMED BECAUSE YOU ARE STUPID.