MAID just seems like "Its Tor but we charge" ... am i missing something here? Why combine a payment protocol with an anonymous cloud networking system thing?

Bitcoin should be payment protocol only with smart contracts or side chains or notary secondary priority

Thanks for the info on Macchanger. I realize there is a lot of Linux based security solutions like Tails for instance.

What I meant by mesh network was a future tech solution, its obviously not anything practical we have access to today. But, its my feeling that the only way to truly change things is decentralize media and thus 3d printed electronics is one of my favorite candidates for it.
You have too much censorship on "google" and on all the internet in general. In fact, google almost anything of importance and the search engine itself will lie to you. First 2 pages is usually nothing but propaganda. Removing IP protocol entirely and also encouraging everyday consumers to do it with an open source 3d printable cell phone or router is the way to go about that. You can't expect consumers to want to switch unless its free and accessible to the extremely lazy and backwards compatible to their previous platform. A 3d printer could do that and minimize their effort of participating.

Plus there is ICANN and other things. It is unrealistic to think consumers will use domain name resolution on a blockchain(like namecoin for example, good idea but people forget blockchains are payment systems before they are notary systems and the coin must function as a payment system FIRST or else it will not succeed). However the consumers might use these alternative systems if they had free cellphones and free internet with a totally different IP protocol as long as they could print it from the comfort of their couch/beds while they watch Jerry Springer.

But thats just my best guess with available techology today. For now its obviously a dream, may never come to fruition. 3d printed electronics are not ready yet. Graphene printers are breaking some ice but still young tech. Plus getting materials is still in its infancy.

Solutions like Bitmessage, Crypto, Halo, etc exist today can be downloaded as proof of concept and immediately be improved.

So yeah I like the idea of making a Linux build that does all this for you.

My major issue with Linux is lack of user friendliness and UI. Being open source, they expect you to do a lot from the terminal. But unfortunately, consumers want user interface. That was the first criticism I had with my software and I'm sure you guys can sympathize here. If you don't hold the users hands with a fully immersive UI they won't care about the tech.

So Linux needs a better UI and honestly with KDE it seems like a big improvement can be made since they use the very fungible QT platform. So its a good start. And improvements can and should be made to make it so brand new users never have to see the console but still have access to automation scripts that pull from repositories and build and download all dependencies. So they still get the open source but don't need to know anything about the computer to get it.

This is why I commend Shadows use of an installer. Good idea. I wonder about Linux users and their variety of UI options if your installer will work in those situations. Not to mention multiple platforms like Mac and Windows.

I find the majority of my job consists of catering to shitty operating systems and fixing bugs that should never have been there in the first place. (like in windows I had to use a runasadmin trick to prevent the program from not booting on some overly security conscious versions of windows that block anything a new program tries to do)

And Mac I just said screw it and used winebottler

Okay so staking goes like this and its not limited to multisig, it just lets you have more control over staking in general. In this case you put the blocksignature into an output with 6a

Check for a block once per 16 seconds (more often makes no sense) you check your inputs/coins with:
checkkernel [{"hash1":n1},{"hash2":n2},...] which usually returns { "result":false }
or when you are lucky to create new block { "result":true, "kernel":{"hash":"hash", "n":n, "time":time}, "blocktemplate":"hex", "blocktemplatefees":fees, "blocksignkey":"hex" }

Then Halo creates coinstake tx, using info returned by checkkernel, as follows:
create empty tx set time to kernel time add the kernel input if you want add more inputs (this is a bit tricky so don't for now)

Now we need to know reward, so call getstakesubsidy coinstake blocktemplatefees
Continue to build coinstake add output to empty script, 0 coins add output to script "6a + blocksignkey", 0 coins
add outputs to your addr which is staking fees+staked coins+all your inputs
you can even send outputs to voting addresses if you like

Last step you call submitstakeblock blocktemplate, {coinstake} It will add coinstake to block template, recalculate merkle tree, sign block, and announce it to the network

Here is my example on BLK:
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/blk/tx.dws?6ef2849263110c5c6dc6443766be883ea1798851cba45ad6eda9903ba283762c.htm

I constructed that one with pyblackcointools although i realize your code is in c++  the theory is the same

Cold staking allows you to stake from multisignatue asynchronously signing. So think "staking device" or "staking with two computers". This would make it harder for keyloggers to get your coins because
there is one key on each computer

Bitmessage 2 day resending rule is modified by editing class_singleCleaner.py line 94
(216000 max age of object 60 hours) was being multiplied exponentially which can cause gaps and lose messages now we have a linear system

So that is how you fix that. I agree for acknowledgement, your fix is obviously superior. Very simple and elegant concept. Also consider you can just send a public key with each message. In Halo Bob and Alice exchange Halo public keys and they immediately have fully double encrypted messages. Like PGP. I should remind you that Tor exit nodes are currently controlled by nefarious forces. I've heard these attacks are not trivial and some people think Tors security was never jeopardized. However, I think Bitmessage is harder to attack than you are thinking. This assumes more nodes will start to use Bitmessage and I think they will. Ever since I started on markets, I've seen my connections to the network go up, perhaps from Halo users or just a general renewed interest in it. I remember sending many messages to Aetheros asking him to fix the message header mutation attacks that was crippling the network. Very happy he updated it, I've heard a few others also asked him and it prevented it from being abandonware.

By the way, is your version of Bitmessage in Python? Do you have your own fork/github? My version of Bitmessage is not online. But I only changed message resending and also made the datadir automatically local since I store everything in C:\BlackHalo including the data files of the blockchain and Bitmessage.

Anyways the security is still pretty tricky to compromise, when there is 100s of nodes on the network, messages will be passed from node to node, if all 100 of them are using the channel for markets, it becomes very hard to find out who the originator of a message really even is. Especially because they can send from the channel to the channel. So its like everyone is shouting in an open forum

I was considering using this for broadcasting transactions to the Bitcoin network as well. Instead of broadcasting directly to Bitcoin nodes, send the raw TX to Bitmessage and let them do it. This makes it harder to tell the originating IP address of the Bitcoin transaction broadcast.

You can combine Bitmessage with Tor. And you are right, that paper is the one I was citing.
Although you may be correct in thinking that IP addresses could be triangulated in Bitmessage.

I'm a bigger fan of i2p in any case

And personally I think we will never have anonymity until there is mesh networks. In the meantime a person can always buy their own dish for receiving wifi signals within lets say a 10 mile range. Of course that signal could be triangulated.

Mesh networks, especially 3d printed electronics with mesh networks is a hard core way to go. If only there was a way to encrypt an ip address or change a mac or ip address. People are forced to rely on isps who are now taught to give away all their personal info.

As you guys probably know, Halo is a commercial program, which im trying to get larger masses interested in decentralization. So I'm not honestly as concerned if someone triangulates an IP in my system.
However with that said, I always put all my energy into the security because I'm trying to maintain the principals of decentralization. Of course this is why I designed double deposit escrow, to remove middle men and make lying unprofitable and obviate lawyers and courts (and especially arbiters).

Also you might be thinking to yourself that Python with Bitmessage is slow because POW is slow in Python. Also there is a problem with the equilibrium of using POW when super fast computers can smash your network because the POW must be good enough for regular laptops.

So obviously that wont work.

My solution to this I think you will find is awesome and elegant. You force nodes to lock funds per kilobyte using checklocktimeverify.
So Bob wants to send a message to Alice, his message is 100 KB

Instead of some crazy POW, he is asked by the protocol to lock for example 1 satoshi per byte (of course we can increase this or have it based on some global rate set by a custodial wallet)
So he send the coins checklocktimeverify for lets say 24 hours. The coins first go to 6a or the bitcoineater(burn address)... then you "revive" them like a zombie.
So output is 6a checklocktimeverify 24 hours to (your address)

The network can confirm his coins are indeed locked to himself of the blockchain forgoing POW entirely.

I dont have the time to implement this, but would love to see it done because it fixes an obvious problem with Bitmessage. The only drawback is this might make main-net nodes exclude you but perhaps you can still do it on the main-net giving the option to use both methods and ignore POW when using POL (proof of lock?)

Lastly, I spent a lot of time trying to understand zero proof. It was only this amazing little paper that made me "get it". Its called "How to explain zero knowledge to your children".
http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~mkowalcz/628.pdf


Not only does it explain zero, but it explains how to fake interactive zero and how to defend against it. And it explains it with the badass story of Alibaba and the 40 thieves.

To sum it up, that paper illustrates that zero is like having a tunnel that is actually a circle that is disconnected at first unless you know the passphrase. When you exit the tunnel you do so from right or left. But nobody saw you inside the tunnel.

Thus, if they say "we want you to exit out the left side", you do it. If they say "we want you to exit out the right", you do it. And this would be impossible without knowing the passphrase.

So by your ACTIONS you prove you knew a secret.

Applying this in a meaningful way is the part that I'm not sure of yet. If I prove I know my own age without telling you my age, can this be used for addresses as well? How?

The proof requires a public demonstration as the "asker of questions" must be there to randomly test the person with the burden of proof. Is there a way to perhaps generate the questions in a meaningful random way based on things they are unable to predict? (Perhaps their broadcast time they need to do their answers to questions off the hash of that combined with other hashes that they wouldn't have been able to predict making preparing for the questioning scheme pretty damn hard).

Obviously the future isn't predictable so there must be some sort of real time random data set to pull from on or off a blockchain. And perhaps one that can be confirmed in retrograde?

Non-interactive proofs I (think) have to do with setting up the "demonstration" in advance. So everyone runs their test of a really giant database of prescripted questions for the scheme? And correct me if I'm wrong but non-interactive requires a TRUSTED setup since I think there is a layer of obfuscation. So trust has to be placed that the person who set it up will not abuse his knowledge of the questions in advance allowing him to fake knowledge of facts pertaining to the Zero knowledge proofs.

I heard a rumor that you used zknips? But then I heard you had only used ring signatures. Then i heard all kinds of fud. I'm not sure what was true and what wasn't. In any case it would be interesting to know if you guys actually use zero knowledge in your code base? And how did you apply it in a useful way? I really could not understand zerocoins pouring and minting method... and I re-read the paper like 10 times.

Hey just wanted to swing by and say keep up the hard work. From one dev to another. The wallet looks nice.

If you need any advice on how to use the "cold staking" method of posv3 just lemme know(but via pm or reddit i hardly use bitcointalk). I finally did my first multisig stake last week in BLK(original pos3). Its here:
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/blk/tx.dws?6ef2849263110c5c6dc6443766be883ea1798851cba45ad6eda9903ba283762c.htm

Its pretty straightforward as you can see in the script.

I know how hard it is to code this stuff doing it first hand in Halo and am happy to see you have chosen bitmessage channels for markets. As we have been using them successfully for a few years now. You might want to modify your bitmessage to resubmit messages every 2 days. If you read the fine print, Bitmessage re-sends 2-4-8-16 day intervals or something like this. Which can result in lost messages if parties don't log in frequently. The network needs to always have a copy of outbound messages in contracts or else you can lose coins if the message you are sending is paramount to the transaction. Unless you are using blockchain messaging while in escrow. Anyways, its easy to modify. If I remember correctly it was only a couple lines to change.

Also, you might want to be careful in combining Tor with Bitcoin since I've heard there is a cheap attack that compromises anonymity.

It would be interesting to see how a person could correlate ip addresses that use all 3 (correlate tor, bitmessage and the coin network). I've always liked i2p the best.

I would be interested in reading the NIZKP implementation as I've always wondered how it can be applied proactively in a p2p network. (I'm fully aware of how zkp works and how the setup of nizkp works but am unsure of how tokens are transferred as I read about the minting and pouring process of zerocoin and was a bit confused.) And plus am wondering how the ip of a broadcast of a transaction can be correlated to a proof. (until there is mesh networks and 3d printed open source electronics there may never be true anon)

But I'm just musing aloud as usual...

Good luck y'all

Hey everyone! So I wanted to let you all know we did meet the deadline of the 30th for all 3 builds. However, the guys at slack felt that it was last minute for big marketing push so we are changing our
approach to coding deadlines vs marketing deadlines. This build does not have the next template but it does have major performance updates and the 3 platforms we so badly needed.

I'm extremely happy with these builds. Now we will work on almost all mac and linux. And with any exceptions I have building source we can link to with automated building scripts!

Finally I'm extremely relieved to be able to get back on those platforms after a delay of at least 6 months. Since we got the builds last minute around the 1st of the month, we should have links up shortly.

I will definitely want Mac and Linux testers, there will be a small push for testers in blackcoin and bitcoin as well to speed this up. (waiting for their site to be updated as well)
So now, github is updated, ive got 5 building environments set up at home with lots of scripts and automation... still need to automate my builds a bit more but its getting very nice. Plus we have dominated every
bug on the list. Special thanks to the members who helped me test. Thank you so much.

Future deadlines will decouple my coding deadline with the marketing deadline so we always get builds with 2 weeks lead time to market them. With build in hand. But I will always set separate coding deadlines. This one month deadline proved to be accurate give or take a few days.

I'm going to wait for the core slack team to update the links and post their announcements and feedback on this. So just keep posted for that in the next day or two.

Because there is no proof that the attack on Tor works on Bitmessage. Plus maybe you can combine Bitmessage+Tor

The article said not to combine Tor+Bitcoin. Some people even think the attack is theoretical. But you can actually set Tor yourself in Bitcoin by adding it to the config file.

In this next version I'm thinking of adding Tor support or proxy for outbound internet requests. Because right now, my client makes requests to google, davtonia, coinmarketcap and other servers

The reason im thinking of adding some of settings menu now is because I want to add cold staking. I was gonna wait for the templates to finish first but maybe its okay to do some settings now and the rest later.

The cold staking is good news for us and blackcoin. We wont be able to use cold staking until we fork. And I don't think we can use checklocktimeverify until we fork either. I've never done a fork so I need to also
learn how to do one

Plus if i do cold staking now, then I might consider doing checklocktimeverify support in the gui. Because in the "advanced sending" tab I've got multiple payees options. So locktime might go there.
And then im also thinking of multiple payors as a two step send! This would be useful for sending to a joint account because currently we have joint account support for no way for synchronous funding!
Of course you can sync fund with a smart contract by why go through the trouble we you only need to leverage 2 step send.

Its funny because if I had those two features, then a person could make a double deposit escrow without even using contract templates!

I knew it was but didn't want to be quoted on it. Plus, I wasn't sure if you made changes recently or if you do some info off the chain.
Plus, I knew you would answer this in your own words

Notice how on reddit when i spoke out against OB I didn't mention Sys. Thats because you support DDE and of course multiple other reasons.
Actually that post was more against the outrageous claims made by BitSquare and their omission of Halo.

By the way, be careful with TOR and Bitcoin, it makes you less anonymous.
http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-tor-anonymity-can-busted-2500-month/

Commenters say its only possible in theory but the fud comes from both sides. I think its logical to correlate IP addresses on Tor to a Bitcoin network. In fact, maybe even bitmessage runs similar risk.

However in bitmessage, you dont know who is the originator of a message, since everyone passes it around.

Well because the contracts can't be broken, its the best way to run a decentralized market. Also, its not blockchain based... and is completely anonymous.

I'm not sure if sys is blockchain based or not... I think OB is p2p.

I just posted about the serious security problems with OB and their use of arbiters. You can't use 3rd parties since they can steal the escrow.

Also, they have no way of deciding who is lying in a dispute and are forced to guess.

The markets we have here are tested for over a year now, there is almost no bugs we are pretty much at release candidate.
Aside from just markets Halo itself has like 20 different features. OB doesn't do anything other than markets.

There is templates like the cash for coins with price tracking.

And lastly there has been a reputation system that has been working for a while now. So lots of advantages, now its just a matter of expanding and marketing.
Plus, I've got lots of work to do with NT and the remaining templates/pegging.

Hey guys, I wanted to share the scripts(SH files) I've had custom made for building watchonly bitbayd on windows(from linux) linux and mac. These were useful to me while building the newest BitBay release.
These build by simply running a script.
Can be easily modified for building qt (although i dont maintain the qt and not sure if i even have oxidians qt in there).
Just download the script for your system, open a console and run! It requires the same VMs I used but most likely any system will work so you only need to remove the check for the OS.
www.github.com/dzimbeck/bitbay

Well a python contract is really just a programmable barter contract since it requires 2 peers to execute. If they want to put automated stop losses on a market wouidnt that require some sort of bot?

I cant market and code at the same time, there is too much left to code. Need someone to do my PR and help me secure articles, ive offered to pay for more articles.

Also syscoin is on poloniex. Who knows why they have volume, thats not my concern man. Could be any reason not going to make assumptions.

Easily fixed by just marketing more, publishing articles etc

Yes only Blackcoin can do this because its POS 3... and even people who fork it wont have a native multisig client so most likely BlackHalo will be the only software capable of this.

The wallets ARE online. Its just that you can stake from multiple locations. This prevents people from hacking your account with keyloggers. Since with this method you can use 2 keys.

For example, you have a multisig account in Halo. You find a block, you then sign 1/2 send to the 2nd location (which could be an entirely different computer or device) and then sign the OTHER HALF.

Then that second location knows its a stake and will broadcast.

Imagine you can do this with a 10 of 10 multisig or even 80 out of 100. Thus you send the transaction with the kernel to your other locations they all sign it, when it gets enough sigs they broadcast.


ALSO, you can now stake manually by checking the kernel and putting the block signature in 6a with no value out. This means people can design their own staking and payout schemes easily.

In fact it even means you can make a multipool where ALL the members are part of a giant multisig where they all sign the discovered block and divide it based on their proportion by their vote.


There is so many awesome staking schemes here.


Heres another one: you can do a multipool custom staking and send out all blocks to checklocktimeverify freezing coins preventing selling until a predetermined time.

Also this makes it easier to do decentralized voting schemes since miners can payout to a voting address, etc

BOOM! COLD STAKING!!

JUST STAKED FROM MULTISIGNATURE USING TWO KEYS BABY!

Now exchanges can stake from a cold wallet! And you guys will finally stake from BlackHalo if you want.

Transaction:
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/blk/tx.dws?6ef2849263110c5c6dc6443766be883ea1798851cba45ad6eda9903ba283762c.htm

Everything you said here is true. Also the distribution in an ICO is always going to be better than some ninja premine. Some of the top coins are only high cause dev premined 100%... I guess that is similar to "pegging" haha. Honestly, why would anyone care about the people who started the project when they are long gone. We have all the tools we need to be successful and everyone loves a good come back story. And you know we are almost back to ICO price which is very nice.

If course we are lacking marking and education. Also fast sync is a weekly topic on slack.. I know how bad they want that. I've got to wait until the prime features are done first before entertaining the idea of using online block explorers. So they are interested in packaging bootstrap but that still takes a little bit to get synced up.

Can anyone add to wikipedia? If so thats a pretty good idea.

Yeah its funny that a few people got upset about it. Considering when BitSqaure responded he didn't actually explain why the Arbiters deposits were safe from theft. It wasn't really even described in his paper.
Then he said the deposit went to the 2 of 3 and later he said it went to some super-arbiter or something. In any case, thats not safe for arbiters.

I do agree choosing arbiters is better than random selection. Its still possible for a person to fake identities. And arbiters dont really have a way of telling who is lying but consumers but still its better than
random selection

You are not alone, none of us understand either. It has been the best software in crypto for years.

Your guess is as good as ours.

The deposit is not async! You simply don't understand.

Both parties deposit to the 2 of 2 in the same transaction. You need to read the whitepaper more carefully next time. You realize you can have as many parties as you want on the same tx?

Also while in escrow there is a bomb transaction so its timed.

Lastly, when both parties are in escrow they could be in 1:1 or 2:1 (remember it was all done in one transaction, temporary transactions were only used to make the bomb)
Even if they are in 2:1 in escrow, an extortionist would not be able to profit since his funds are also at risk thus any extortion would obviously result in the loss of his deposit as well.