Ok, it isn't something with immediate implications, but it will be acknowledged as a security flaw if Anonymint's proposal becomes a standard.
Even if that case could happen, it's still not a flaw. He was discussing about improving Bitcoin protocol and the subject obviously doesn't apply to CryptoNote protocol. Think about Bitcoin as Windows and CryptoNote as Linux. You can't say Linux is flawed just because you can't install Photoshop directly on it. If you have a security standard, and something else cannot meet that standard, I would call that a flaw. It would be more like saying that operating system B is flawed if you can't determine whether it has malware on it, but with A you can. |
|
|
|
|
I like how he debunks all his future posts with one from the past.
|
|
|
|
Interesting how all the Darkcoin flaws are either losers whining about the instamine (You'd NEVER buy a POS coin, right?). Or a criticism of coinjoin. Anonymint himself has stated that Darkcoin has solved Coinjoin's biggest problem, the potential for jamming transactions. Yes, he has also criticized the anonymity, but there have been some big changes since he reviewed Darkcoin. It seems like none of the things mentioned in that list are fundamentally unsolvable. Others will only be valid until a few months from now, like the closed source criticism.
Come on this is rubbish! By "solving" coinjoin's biggest problem Darkcoin has introduced more problems. The nodes can track their own operation, if you own enough nodes you can easily graph the transaction path. If you have enough DDOS power you can also attack honest nodes driving more traffic to dishonest nodes. I'm really not sure that the Masternode idea is helping here. Also it doesn't take much to see problems with Darkcoin, almost every part of Darkcoin is problematic. The Masternodes are weak and easy to attack, the distribution is a premine, the developer is careless and willing to risk the entire network to look like he's keeping busy. By running the transaction through enough nodes, even someone who owns half the nodes would not be able to reliably unmask transactions. This criticism is not valid for anyone except a government group, and you know damn well that CN is not immune to such entities either. The team is working on further solutions, as well. A DOS solution has already been implemented (March wants its talking points back), if it ever becomes an issue, Evan will do further work. He's committed to full time work for 2 years. As far as the forks, the only people who were at any risk were the ones who deserved it, the pools that failed to update. They'll be put at risk again, and if they don't update, they won't be able to mine. Don't see the issue here. Remember that this is all beta software, being designed by small teams. Microsoft has thousands of people working on a project, and still you see bugs in the release version! We both know that you know better than to raise this as an issue. Anonymint's criticisms may not be gospel, but he is a genius when it comes to cryptography. Certainly well beyond any other (current  ) member of this site. |
|
|
|
Brilliantrocket , you're now calling all CryptoNote holders "bagholders"?
Are you offended? I'll change it to something less likely to offend your sensibilities. |
|
|
|
|
Interesting how all the Darkcoin flaws are either losers whining about the instamine (You'd NEVER buy a POS coin, right?). Or a criticism of coinjoin. Anonymint himself has stated that Darkcoin has solved Coinjoin's biggest problem, the potential for jamming transactions. Yes, he has also criticized the anonymity, but there have been some big changes since he reviewed Darkcoin. It seems like none of the things mentioned in that list are fundamentally unsolvable. Others will only be valid until a few months from now, like the closed source criticism.
|
|
|
|
Nice troll attempt. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=600436.msg7857659#msg7857659 - if you read this thread, you might notice comments from deathandtaxes, gmaxwell and others that Anonymints proposal is simply bad (like the whole paper linked in the first post). Not to mention hes wrong again on cryptonote, he simply doesnt understand the technical background it seems. CN proponents always seem to think that anyone who criticizes their precious just doesn't understand.  |
|
|
|
It's not a flaw. He was proposing an idea against double spend attack on Bitcoin in the case attacker has < 50% hash rate. He found that his idea doesn't apply to CryptoNote and other coin differ from Bitcoin protocol. Ok, it isn't something with immediate implications, but it will be acknowledged as a security flaw if Anonymint's proposal becomes a standard. |
|
|
|
The problem is hardly with PoS. Think about what would have happened if it were PoW instead. It would all have been stolen,as in lost. Mintpal's security and the decision of the developer of one coin cannot be extrapolated to the whole system. The other PoS coins are doing just fine.
Correct, but the integrity of the blockchain wouldn't be at a massive risk of compromise, as it was (is?) here. |
|
|
|
This sort of stuff is for those who can't be bothered to do the research for themselves. It's just a way for the owner of that site to fleece the sheep (his readers). Place sell rating, wait for price to drop, buy, easy profit. |
|
|
|
|
Why would we have PR now? It's a work in progress. People have short attention spans, that is why the price drops during times like this. Once we get a solid update (end of July), we will see the price pick up.
|
|
|
|
seriously what's happening to DRK ? the price keeps falling day by day and seems like it's getting harder to go back up
We aren't doing marketing yet. When RC4 hits and we have a more or less functional product, we'll be able to start doing marketing. At that point, you should see a price increase. |
|
|
|
|
I'll go first. I've contributed by trying to save CN investors from their stupidity. Sadly, the neurological degeneration has advanced beyond intervention.
|
|
|
|
XMR is just looking for a reason to go in bubble mode. At this point, anything could trigger it be it cryptsy adding it or an official GUI or whatever announcement they are gonna share with us in today's missive.
Hard to sustain a bubble when 22,000 coins are being mined everyday. A bubble would just invite botnets, who would promptly dump. |
|
|
|
|
You're paying him now.. not on potential market prices at a future date.
|
|
|
|
The conception of DRK was illegitimate, I will not buy it for this reason alone.
It is very unfortunate the launch happened as it happened. I was pissed off at the start too. The market has probably priced it in by now however. The market will continue to discount drk as a premine scam until it ceases to be a premine scam, forever. If there were not the alternative of superior cryptography with a fair launch and open development, drk might have surpassed ltc by now. That ship has sailed, however, and nothing will bring it back. Are you daft? The market has already decided that DRK has more potential than CN coins. The price is a representation of the market's view. All the nonsense that you guys spout on a daily basis has already been factored in. And yet it's many times larger than the next biggest anonymous coin. |
|
|
|
maybe this can help the darkcoin vs cryptonote guys here  Not much of a help as he apparently doesn't know anything about Darkcoin. Didn't prevent him from giving his opinion though, reminds me of many people in this thread. neither does you or you do but think we are stupid and can't understand how DRK model is flawed. This must be exactly the kind of conversation rpietila had in mind when he started the thread. f.l.a.w.e.d. if he doesnt like the conversation he can delete any post or tell me or you to not post anymore, its not like I didnt read the rules. Flawed in what way, may I ask? |
|
|
|
I was never offered a satisfactory response to the following question I asked a couple of days ago: If Cryptonote is not NSA proof, what does it offer over coins like Darkcoin that also give non-NSA proof anonymity ?
NSA-proof is not well defined. If you establish a goal which is undefined you establish one which is unattainable. Since you appear to consider xmr an insurmountable competitive threat I can see why you would employ such a 'disingenuous' sophistry, but i cannot see why i should take your bait. The current plan being implemented in xmr takes it one step closer to practical immunity from a large class of attacks on aspects of transactional privacy. It is already relatively easy to use xmr in a way which makes it practically immune to some classes of attack on transactional privacy which are of interest to me and to which darkcoin is now and likely will always remain susceptible: Darkcoin is vulnerable to fungibility crisis, just like bitcoin. Darkcoin will likely be ready about a year sooner than any CN coin.
It's done already. Evan proved this: he stuck a fork in it - twice, so far. There is no plan in evidence to transition drk to a technology which provides competitive privacy assurrances. It seems clear that Evan is not competent to execute such a plan were it dropped in his lap. You seem to think that by the sheer number of your words you can delude the markets into thinking drk is still a serious coin. It isn't working. The forks are meaningless. I feel like I have to explain this so many times. It's beta software. You are clearly clueless regarding software development. To expect zero bugs during beta is beyond stupid, it's insane. In addition, the forks happened due to not enough pools updating at that time. Blaming Evan is just ridiculous. Cryptonote coins are also open to various attacks, a number of these have been detailed by Anonymint. |
|
|
|
|
I do not believe that a date has been set. Late July is what I remember.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
