That's all extra fluff on top of the basic functionality (and btw, DRK is not a PoS coin so it doesn't need "staking mobile wallet"). Maybe it would be best for XC to just concentrate on those extra features and fork from DRK if they're gonna follow its lead anyway so they could at least get the fundamentals right.

"MUCH better" is highly debatable imo, when you consider the following timeline:

- XC thought that transferring the actual coins to xnodes was a good idea
- when the trust issue was repeatedly pointed out, it was decided that a "dynamic trust model" would be implemented to fix the issue
- when the flaws in that model were pointed out, it was decided that it's better to follow what DRK did, and implement multisigs so the nodes couldn't steal the coins

It looks to me like XC is following DRK's lead and not the other way around. This can be 100% confirmed after XC announces plans to add collateral.

So narrow minded - you can keep your technology that you "hope" will be superior. Monero has better anonymity, look how far its gotten, not far. Why - because it doesnt have the whole package. Technology is a small piece of the pie.

XC's reputation is a pump & dump and thats where it will stay, the market confirms this. The damage it has done to investors by confusing everyone with XCache and how the Dev did not address the FUD around loljosh has put the nail in the coffin. Let alone you claim it to be 100% anonymous by offering 1btc reward for a few hours and claim its uncrackable. No one takes the coin seriously. Chaeplin proved a hard-link and the dev just brushed it aside - good way for an investor to feel comfortable.

Not to mention the copy paste from Fedora, and how the dev cannot use github, do you think investors are stupid. They would take one look and know its another copy/clone CINNI/CLOAK/RAZR basket. Dont fool yourself! Denial is a bitch.

What you dont realise is we are just having fun with you - no one cares about XCacheJosh Coin anymore...you can release anything you want, it will just be tumbleweeds, all thats left are a few core shills who are holding on tight to the grave. And you are one of them

LOL im crying laughing at how stupid this guy is.....hahahaha

Yes, seriously... don't go there.

It was you who made the claims of XC being ahead of DRK wasn't it?



That's a retarded bet. If I win and XC goes to zero I win 10000*nothing lol. How does that bet make any sense?

You are confusing DRK (trustless) with XC (trusted transactions - undoing Satoshi's work). The node of DRK doesn't own your coins. It's the "lawyers office" that signs the agreement that the two parties want to change coins. It only signs the agreement.

The number 10 is used for identical inputs that increase obfuscation. If everyone puts 10 in, how can you know who put what?

http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/56b3b95b76995d3e4d3107cf753c8496493010f625fc04d971e9262d74e6a5a5

That's the reason, not because coins can be lost. The plan was to increase denomination pools (10 / 100 / 1000) etc - so the limit would be then 100 or 1000, depending the highest pool. However changes in spec might move away from denomination pools.


Trusted transactions = inferior tech. Sorry. Satoshi invented trustless transactions for a reason and XC destroyed trustless transactions and marketed them as ...innovation.

and supports the hot/cold setup for masternode operators (allowing your money to not be risked at all.).

Dude, you're the one who is wrong.

1 XC is worth about $1

1 Dark is worth about $8

Since dark is worth 8x more than XC, then it has a smaller percentage of going up if it does, aka if it hits $16, it only went up 2x.

XC is worthless, so if it went up to even $5, that's 5x.

The original bet makes sense. The one you propose now doesn't, especially since XC can be pumped with a mere 200 btc or so..Dark would take a lot more than that since it has a huge marketcap.

Darkcoin,Pinkcoin, and practically any coin that doesn't have trusted masternodes that are able to steal their users coin > XC

I will be doing another AMA on Wednesday

i think they said EM will be delivered in rev 2 release...

Is it really that close?

too many promised, none exist. just hope they can even get 1 part working out of many promised.

Veribit and Verisend. go read a bit on the forum. i hold  XC but also VRC.

you are blind then.

I notice Vericoin have followed the team's lead. Publicising their team
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=602041.msg7462147#msg7462147
VRC had some interesting news today too.

Yup watching and cracking myself up the whole day. I obviously resisted the urge to post. This is as spectacular a scam as can be. Jaslee = Ultra Douchebag de jour.

Hi folks

We'll publish something soon that clarifies several aspects of PBoC, XC, Cache, and our plans for the future.

For the time being, here's a little bit of information:

- In distinction from PoS, which secures a blockchain, roughly speaking PoBC allows blockchains to talk to each other.

- PBoC is such new tech that (a) no-one except people at XC understand it (it's Jasinlee's invention), (b) it's not coded yet.

- PBoC is not going to be implemented in the near future because it will take an enormous amount of work and there are more immediate goals, like real staking Android wallets.

- XC and Cache will not share features

- XC and Cache will not have the same function, therefore there is no question of XC's money supply doubling. Why would any team want to do that to their coin? It's suicide. So why would it be reasonable to suppose that we'd do that?

- The team working on Cache is a completely different one to the one developing XC. There's no dilution of time or attention. Cache's development will have no effect on the pace or direction of XC or on ATCsecure's focus on it.

- Cache is not new to the XC project - it's been a facet in the project for a while - and yet you've seen the same reliability when it comes to release dates, and the same consistently rapid pace of development all along. So there's nothing that suggests a change or that anything is amiss.

- The XC devs have extensive business experience and know full well how to develop a technology. So when new technologies, partnerships, or functions are introduced into XC, it is done by capable hands. We know when a small, focussed team is best. We also know when and how to form partnerships. We're going to do both, because it'll create the brightest future for XC.


Now you can either doubt this information or run with it. I ask you to consider it in the light of XC's past developments, especially their reliability and professionalism. To my mind it's obvious: today the community became aware of an incredibly powerful facet of the XC project, and one that will be a game-changer in its mid-term future.

So take the bet then??? - ill setup escrow between propulsion and illodin??

You have better anon? lol you must be smoking some serious crack -  at this single point in time, you transfer the ACTUAL coins to someone elses wallet and call it a mixer, no multi-sigs, nothing....XC 1.5 is not even close to a better solution....and dont even bother quoting "BUT BUT BUT in Rev 2".....pfft ill just let the market do its talking.

That's the spirit. Post some more negative fork stuff (before it's fixed, please), or maybe make up something. Lies always seem to work well in this forum. More cheap Drks before the fix would be nice.

Price has actually gone up since the OP started this thread... wrong direction.

This bet was about XC/DRK nothing to do with BTC. Anyone with half a brain knows that DRK will not have a marketcap higher than BTC in 2 months - you make yourself look like an idiot to even try and make that comparison.

Not a single XC shill was willing to step up to the plate because they all really know its a chop shop hack solution. XC/CACHe/Loljosh coin - what ever the fuck you call it is dead now anyways.