Okay so he has a monero address on his profile but what has he actually said about the coin that makes you think is a Believer in it? What level does he believe in? Does he want to cannibalize Monero by putting some features into bitcoin?

I may be wrong on details, but this is afaik already used in Monero. And sounds like a good plan.

This is already implemented in certain altcoins, for instance the CryptoNote family whereby Monero currently is the biggest (ignore Bytecoin, it had a 80% premine which actually is a danger to anonymity). I personally don't know the details of it, but this is what I could find:




source: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/35azxk/screw_the_hard_limit_lets_change_the_block_size/cr2phqd
note: Tacotime is one of the 7 core team members of Monero

I think that the Internet is going to be one of the major forces for reducing the role of government. The one thing that’s missing, but that will soon be developed, is a reliable eCash, a method whereby on the Internet you can transfer funds from A to B without A knowing B or B knowing A. The way I can take a $20 bill hand it over to you and then there’s no record of where it came from.

I am aware of one notable exception to this general rule:  If you are aware of largish margined short positions, there is very little reason not to take their money.  In case you are unfamiliar with the process of running stops, it is as simple as placing a sell order just over the price at which margined positions are forced closed, and sweeping the market up to that price.  If you have the required data and do the math, it is as close as you can come to a guaranteed profit, and in a low cap market like this, it doesn't take much capital.  The down side to that is: As thin as the market is, there just isn't that much to be gained by it either;  I don't have the position info, but I do observe that the lend rates on XMR are miniscule, which means demand is quite low, which means positions are quite small, which means running stops just isn't going to net you a large win right now, limited as it is to a small fraction of the outstanding margined short position sizes.  What risk there is in the process comes from sellers on the side-lines dashing in to front-run your reaping order.

I've also suggested to Kraken about supporting XMR which (in their thread) Dargo replied that they're not yet considering it. BTW, exchanging XMRs in Polo under these circumstances, looks like an orchestrated movement which has it's (obvious) reasons. Not wearing any tinfoil hat here, but too many coincidences in order to move the price down looks fishy to me. So yes; the sooner we have a bigger/better exchange, the better.

What you are suggesting is a good temporary solution, just do not send any transactions with more than two decimal places and a mixin grater than 1 as there is a good chance they will fail. There is a very valid reason why exchanges are not implementing mixin greater than 1 and that is failed transactions leading to increased support issues. This needs to be addresed at the protocol level, otherwise it will continue to ba a problem. Any issue with bloat can be addressed via transaction size dependent transaction fees. If someone wishes to send a high precision high mixin transaction they should be able to provided they pay for it.

monero is a one trick pony that will be replaced by zerocash soon, even the monero devs know it.

ZeroCash is amazing, cutting-edge research. In the far future I fully expect it will make Monero and Bitcoin obsolete. However, it is somewhat unworkable right now. Firstly, it has a trusted accumulator problem that remains unsolved at this stage (although they posit solving this through an RSA UFO). Even if that is solved there is still the very real danger of it being impossible to see exploits in an absolutely opaque blockchain with relatively new and untested cryptography (ie. an exploit that lets an attacker create, say, 2 000 000 ZeroCash in a single day will go unnoticed). Finally, even with their newer ZKP schemes there is still a significant size impact for each transaction, and absolutely no way you'd be able to run SPV-style wallets or perform blockchain pruning. Once the cryptography has been more thoroughly tested, corner cases have been solved, and technology is at a point where the size impact is negligible, then I would imagine some future iteration of ZeroCash will become the dominant form for cryptocurrency payments.

The cryptosystem implementation underlying ZeroCash had a total break announced recently:
https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/437

A failure of the bleeding edge cryptography used for the proofs in ZC results in unbounded undetectable inflation.

Because of the way the proofs are used-- false proofs would allow the corruption of the system; even after replacing the proof system with a fixed version, if any bad proofs had made it in the state would be undetectably corrupted. So it wouldn't be trustworthy, and there would be little to no way to restore trustworthyness; short of forcing the unblinding all the coins and hoping all could be unblinded and the result wasn't more coins than should exist. So take a step back here and appreciate this fully: If we had deployed this months ago, Bitcoin might well be over now.

I'd ask for your thanks-- but it wasn't really a question: As far as "refused" goes, -- there exists no implementation; and the people who described it have declined to release their circuits, so I couldn't even get started on one without repeating a huge amount of work. Actually deploying this is quite hard, from an engineering perspective. No one has proposed deploying it, no one has turned it down. That said, the system has a huge negative scaling impact largely prevents pruning. Many of us that work on Bitcoin core are very much in favor of privacy features; but that doesn't mean rushing head long into every conjectural cryptosystem that comes across our desks.

As an aside; The ring signature scheme being discussed here has no real relation to transaction privacy. Ring signature transactions require a special kind of tracable ring signature to prevent double spends. Ring sigs are not especially hard to implement, and I've implemented one and am working on a second one now (though for something much cooler than how they're used in cryptocurrencies so far).

When will we have another Missive?  It almost 2 months since the last one.  I need my Missive...

Forgot to add - my travels have disrupted the Missive schedule, but we're trying to get everything back on track now:)

So in terms of untraceability cryptonote+stealth addresses is not less secure than darksend? Thought I read about an possible attack, even on wikipedia, but cant find it anymore.

Anyways thanks for all interesting answers.

Dude, Monero is neck-and-neck with Bytecoin...
You know... the coin Peter Todd characterized as having an "atrocious code base"...
That's the CryptoNote side show to watch... nothing else to see there.

Monero can't even deliver a wallet. Please.

I predict Monero will now form shadow governments and make Latapie the hyperPresident of France.

First:, I'm always a Dash supporter and this is not an attempt to troll.

When scrolling though coinmarketcap, Vertcoin got my attention again. 2000% last month, that is quiet a lot. So I went to their thead/site to see if there are some outstanding news. I found about "First Stealth Address - Privacy without mixer" https://vertcoin.org/wp/stealth-addresses .

Now I would be interested to hear from the technicans here how secure these Stealth Address are? Is it really the "best solution" for anonymity like promoted? Many coins claimed this before (cryptonote for example) and all of them failed against darksend. what is the advantage of darksend agains stealth addresses?

Also Stealth Address don't seem to be something "new, first". Already saw it in xcash for exmaple? do they want to jump the anon hype with extravagant words?

At least I hope you can strengthen my trust into Dash again.

To the trolls who may quote: fuck you! only honest answers please.

As I understand it, the "stealth address" is intended to address a very specific problem. If you wish to solicit payments from the public, say by posting a donation address on your website, then everyone can see on the block chain that all those payments went to you, and perhaps try to track how you spend them.

With a stealth address, you ask payers to generate a unique address in such a way that you (using some additional data which is attached to the transaction) can deduce the corresponding private key. So although you publish a single "stealth address" on your website, the block chain sees all your incoming payments as going to separate addresses and has no way to correlate them. (Of course, any individual payer knows their payment went to you, and can trace how you spend it, but they don't learn anything about other people's payments to you.)

But you can get the same effect another way: just give each payer a unique address. Rather than posting a single public donation address on your website, have a button that generates a new unique address and saves the private key, or selects the next address from a long list of pre-generated addresses (whose private keys you hold somewhere safe). Just as before, the payments all go to separate addresses and there is no way to correlate them, nor for one payer to see that other payments went to you.

So the only difference with stealth addresses is essentially to move the chore of producing a unique address from the server to the client. Indeed, in some ways stealth addresses may be worse, since very few people use them, and if you are known to be one of them, it will be easier to connect stealth transactions with you.

It doesn't provide "100% anonymity". The fundamental anonymity weakness of Bitcoin remains - that everyone can follow the chain of payments, and if you know something about one transaction or the parties to it, you can deduce something about where those coins came from or where they went.

We should start a donation campaign for this. Who should we send? RP and David Hasselhof?

Seriously speaking, a donation address to cover particular development or marketing issues like this would be worth a try. Is MEW doing anything in that direction?

We've been working on adding some needed functionality to the forum, and our next major task we're going to tackle is the funding system. The idea is:

1. Users / developers / anyone will pitch an idea in the Ideas section of the forum. This is already happening.

2. After some discussion it will be moved by one of the administrators (currently the Core Team only, but that would change in future) to the Open Tasks section of the forum. No tasks have been moved as yet.

3. Developers (including the core team, and initially probably only the core team for simplicity) will pitch against each of these open tasks. Later on I would expect that there would be more people / teams pitching against tasks, and the most competent / available / reasonably priced will be the one the community will veer towards.

4. Once the developer / team has been selected to complete the task it moves to the Funding Required section of the forum, and it is opened for funding.

5. Funding will be to a core team controlled address with a payment ID for that particular project/task, and there will be a funding progress bar. This information will be mirrored over to a funding page on the website that shows the funding progress per project/task.

6. When funding reaches 70% (for smaller tasks) or 30% (for larger and longer tasks) it goes into the Work in Progress section and work begins.

7. Funds are dispensed by the core team on a regular basis and only if there is actual progress / commits / whatever, so it doesn't go into a black hole.

Advantages of this approach:

- the core team's oversight role can eventually be replaced by a group selected from the community at large, so as not to have a stranglehold over things

- the core team's escrow role can eventually be replaced by a multi-sig system (2-of-3) where the signatories are the core team, the oversight group, and the recipient, so the recipient can't spend those raised funds without the involvement of one of the other 2 signatories

- this isn't limited to dev tasks, and things like "fly David Latapie to speak at a conference" or lobbying or PR or advertising can all have tasks created and funded

- funding is direct and specific to tasks instead of going into a big black hole and hoping for the best

We expect this system will still take us another short while before we can put it live, but we're already crunching away at the functionality for it (and this also further emphasises why the forum couldn't just be SMF with a theme;) )

These exchanges might not have the technical ability to add XMR. When Mintpal upgraded to V2.0, most bitcoin clone coins were stolen by the owner, but not the XMR as he did not figure out a way to do that.

i allready asked this question. they said to me the limit is the maximum, they said it's not possible to raise it because its part of the law they are following.
in the past, limits could've always been raised, but this was before this all happend..

to be honest it does not seem to work right now. i just made another payment to confirm but it is stuck for like 25 minutes allready.
also last time i had the feeling my xmr payment was processed manually

btw are there any insights regarding the conferences in europe someone wants to share?

 

Hmm, I haven't tried it myself, but I could've sworn that I read Shapeshift uses mixin 3 now. I thought it was on reddit, but not seeing it now. Did you try within the last week or two, or longer ago than that?