Can I be inducted into the Monero Hall of Infamy ?
You are my favourite troll of all time:) Yay! |
|
|
|
|
Can I be inducted into the Monero Hall of Infamy ?
|
|
|
|
|
If I ever choose to invest in a CN coin, it'll definitely be Boolberry. I like a coin with devs that you know, actually develop. The other CN coins just copy off of crypto zoidberg's work.
|
|
|
|
i would rather sell now and invest in XMR. But also i would recommend you to do your own research and make your decision.
Invest in BCN, XMR is just a clone. BCN was premined, XMR is the best atm. Markets don't care about a premine, only which coin delivers the best result. If BCN builds a complete product before Monero, the premine won't mean anything. |
|
|
|
|
Lol, the Monero Github is basically dead. Check out Boolberry to see what a coin that actually has active developers looks like. Seems like Monero is mainly hype. The only thing it has going for it is the name, which is admittedly better than Bytecoin or Boolberry. But a name won't get you anywhere if your devs slack off, like they seem to be doing.
|
|
|
|
i would rather sell now and invest in XMR. But also i would recommend you to do your own research and make your decision.
Invest in BCN, XMR is just a clone. |
|
|
|
|
Leave the marketing to the professionals, I say.
|
|
|
|
https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rc4-development-and-path-going-forward.1604/With this launch, we introduced a new soft-fork method, which some users have affectionately dubbed the “spork”. As clients update, new features - Masternode payments, in this case - are implemented and available, though not strictly enforced by the network. After almost all users are updated, the fork can be remotely activated, which would enforce the new feature rules. If successful, the new feature(s) would be permanently activated and enforced. If unsuccessful, enforcement can be deactivated remotely for the whole network without the need for users to update their clients. In the latter case, a checkpoint would be added to put the whole network back on the same chain.
This allows us to test higher risk, innovative features in mainnet without having to hard fork the network and without the risk of a live rollback where all users must update.
DRK is so dangerous. By installing DRK wallet, people is tricked into installing malware, virus or becoming part of botnets. DRK devs are so dangerous. They control you remotely. People, be careful. I hope this was sarcasm, as the sheer amount of abject stupidity in this post may bring this thread to a critical mass, creating a spacetime singularity, a void which will consume us all. |
|
|
|
If you don't have perpetual emission of coins, the cost of mounting an attack will drop to the point that it becomes trivial. Not sure why everyone fears a low perpetual inflation.
hahaha and here we have the proof I wanted, a know troll and monero basher wanting perpetual emission of coins because, of course, it will kill the coin for investors instantly, well I'm not worried, I dumped doge at 250 when I saw this coming and many will do the same if Monero chose this route.  That's rather shortsighted. |
|
|
|
|
If you don't have perpetual emission of coins, the cost of mounting an attack will drop to the point that it becomes trivial. Not sure why everyone fears a low perpetual inflation.
|
|
|
|
If, however, you had a balance of 37.5456 coins, anonymized them to a bunch of addresses, and then sent the whole lot of them to a new address, a causal link could then be made.
I think that this will be an issue with any currency that uses a blockchain. You'll always be able to scan addresses at different points in time and try to make a match. |
|
|
|
The quantity going in and out of the mix is still obvious. Maybe it can't be tied to me with IP obfuscation, but block timing will still give away too much info Do you mean that the nature of the transaction could be identified simply from the amount being transacted ? I'm saying that the send can be correlated to the receive. The nature of it, who knows. I'm saying that it's too much information. The blockchain is still transparent, and always should be. Information always adds up. Put as little correlative data out there as possible. The same script that correlates BTC could still correlate DRK. It's less information, but it's still enough for a 3rd party to gather that A sent X to B. You won't be able to tell that the change addresses from which A sends belong to A. So you'll see that B received X coins, but there's no way to link A and B. When you open your wallet, your DRK will be sent ,in denominated amounts, to change addresses you control. Because there are a large number of coins involved, and the amounts are like, external observers won't be able to tie the change to your old address. |
|
|
|
The way I understand it, nothing is added to the blockchain between the green boxes. The masternodes never actually hold the funds, they just facilitate signing. Someone correct me if I am mistaken.
This is correct the masternodes never actually hold the funds they just facilitate transactions. Pardon me for playing Devil's Advocate: But, if the coins don't actually change hands, how does this obfuscate anything? We'll have to wait for a more detailed explanation of what exactly happens when the change is generated. In the past, it was obfuscated because it looked like you sent 10, when in reality the masternode would send your recipient 5, and you'd get 5 back in change. Using multiple masternodes in the process would have just made it nearly impossible for transactions to be traced through node collusion. |
|
|
|
Hmmm.... I'd like to know what the inter-master-node TXes look like. Are they just a send of 26DRK? Or are they denominated at the first hit and remain thusly denominated? Do they mix? I guess my question is; How does the circle of green boxes work between the boxes? Another way of saying it: Those black arrows between the green boxes, what's going on there? What do those TXes look like on the BC? The way I understand it, nothing is added to the blockchain between the green boxes. The masternodes never actually hold the funds, they just facilitate signing. Someone correct me if I am mistaken. |
|
|
|
Please don't do a fixed percent. That's a terrifying proposition. The benefits for getting it right are so overshadowed by the costs of getting it wrong that its not worth it.
What is terrifying about it? What could be the worst case scenario for 1% per year? The death of the currency as inflation out-paces adoption leading to decline in purchasing power leading to people switching to a crypto that doesn’t cause a decline in their purchasing power. If by the time you get there your currency is widely adopted with innumerable network effects, then nobody switches. Maybe if you actually know how to make blockchains scalable. But if you dont than this argument doesnt hold. And if you do, than again, for the 10,000 time what are you doing here, please for christ sake go prove it. If your block chain can't scale then the entire discussion is pointless. Of course I know how to make block chain scale, but I am not going to tell you. And there goes your last shred of credibility. How so? If I knew how to solve such a problem, I'd make my own currency, not reveal it to a competitor. |
|
|
|
So Evan is the central banker here I guess ?
He couldnt implement Masternode payments so now decides to tax miners 20% ?
I personally have DRK but I think its time to part with them.
Next he is going to make DRK POS and cut supply (LMFAO)
Sorry guys but thats not how cryptos work.
Please wise one, continue to tell us how cryptos work while we create the first viable ecash. |
|
|
|
That can be fixed instantly by turning enforcement on, but will not be until the new voting system is implemented in 2 weeks. |
|
|
|
|
Masternode payments cannot be cheated. If you use outdated versions or otherwise modify your MN's code, your votes will be rejected.
"
Each round, a winning Masternode is chosen to carry out Darksend transactions. This process is carried out by the individual nodes across the network independently using the masternode election algorithm. This algorithm chooses a winning node for Darksend, but there is also a runner up, third, forth, fifth place, etc.
Utilizing this code, we can make a deterministic list of the “top 10 masternodes” with the winning scores. These will be the same nodes accross the network and they will vote on who they believe should get paid for that round. The winning Masternode will be the one with the most votes (up to 10 votes) and the network will reject blocks not containing that payment entry."
|
|
|
|
DRK/BTC
On the other end, Darkcoin is falling continuously from recent days. Its last 24 hours have been equally disappointing. The DRK/BTC dropped 4.5% in the last 24 hours, while staying in it bearish mood. This is indeed due to the lack of any major announcement – the only thing Darkcoin charts are depending on lately. As its next hardfork in not until the end of July, it is believed that the pair will drop a few dollar more in the upcoming days, but will soon pickup upon reaching its lowest threshold.
At the present press time, Darkcoin’s value is $5.99.I agree with this analysis. Who cares? The assessment acknowledges that the price drop is due to a lack of an announcement. The more important thing to consider is what will be in RC4. |
|
|
|
I don't really get it. You have CryptoNote on one hand with working anon tech with little to no criticism. And on the other hand you and DRK which looks to be a technological boondoggle singing a chorus of "we can make it work!".
I just bought some XMR and BBR and I can see no reason to think that I made the wrong choice. Or that DRK is a reasonable alternative at all when you have XMR here already.
Saying that CN anon tech is working, is like saying that carbon nanotube transistors are working. Factually accurate, but still a misrepresentation of the amount of work and time necessary to bring each to market. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
