If anybody is mad about Cryptsy's wallet being broken for months, and them telling people the coin is broken and needs a dev to fix it, please contact user "mullick".  You can PM him here on bitcointalk, info here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=99433

Also it says he has an e-mail: mullick@cryptsy.com

He is the one in charge of fixing the wallets.  We can also send e-mails to cryptsy, make support tickets, complain in trollbox, tweet, and warn others about Cryptsy's incompetence.

Does anybody think it would be grounds for a lawsuit, since they are wrecking our coin, and hurting our investment by giving the appearance that ShadowCash is broken?  Are there any lawyers in the SDC community that could draft a letter to Cryptsy?  We don't have to actually take action, although we can, but mostly just to scare them into actually doing something to fix it.  Is this a bad idea?

Thanks for the clarification, that makes sense.

However I would like to note that it seems still important to have a large amount of coins stay in Shadow at any point in time as well.  To illustrate this, imagine if there were actually zero coins in Shadow at present time.  Yes there could still be anonymous inputs and outputs from people who transferred into and out of Shadow in the past.  However someone trying to break the anonymity of the system could simply add up all of the SDC on the blockchain.  They would realize by adding it all up that actually no Shadow exists in the network at that time and its all in SDC.  Then if someone tries to wash some coins by sending 1000 SDC to Shadow, and then back to SDC, it may be pretty easy to identify and unmask the addresses.

However if there were say 100,000 or 1 million Shadow in Shadow at all times, this allows you to blend in with the rest of the Shadow to achieve more plausible deniability.  The larger the pool of Shadow the greater the plausible deniability.  However at a certain threshold it should be enough, and at that threshold adding more Shadow to the system will have smaller and smaller effect on plausible deniability.

Would anyone disagree or agree with this assessment?

I think it really depends what your goals are.  Its good for the network to make transfers many times between Shadow and SDC.  Its also good for the network to leave a portion or % of your holdings in Shadow.  But its also good for the network to be staking your coins, which requires SDC.  You cannot stake Shadow, you can only stake SDC.  A healthy network will have a good balance of all of these things.  So perhaps if you plan to leave your coins offline and not stake, then you may convert a higher % into Shadow.  If you want to stake your coins to receive 2% annually then you may want a high % of your coins in SDC.

Also as a note, sometimes you will run into errors when trying to convert Shadow back to SDC, it will say not enough available anonymous outputs of that ring size.  You can fiddle with the ring size and the amount of Shadow you are changing to SDC to get it to work.  As the network grows this will become less of a problem.  By converting many times between Shadow and SDC, we increase the available anonymous outputs making the network solve this problem better over time.

Ok well I guess the jury is still out then

But I think you are right its still important to have a large pool of Shadow.  It will still help guard against certain attacks against anonymity on the network if there is a large pool of Shadow to blend transactions in with.

Hey child_harold, did you see this part of the thread?  Coolstoryteller, along with the slide presentation on the new website seem to suggest that leaving your coins in Shadow may not be the total best thing for the network, although its still helpful.  Actually it seems if you change from SDC to Shadow and then back to SDC, those anonymous outputs remain forever.  So it seems the most help we can do for the network is transfer back and forth between Shadow and SDC many times.  Every time we do it, it makes more anonymous outputs that remain forever.

Also good on the tweet.  I will light Craptsy up in the trollbox later too, starting Monday when I know user Mullick will be in there.

Yeah I would stay away from Craptsy.  Even if they get it fixed, I am too scared to add any volume there for SDC and risk getting my coins locked up for months.  As for the price, FULL potential would mean being on the moon my friend, LOL.

Yeah Cryptsy is aweful.  Their wallet has been broken all year long.  User Mullick there is supposed to fix the wallet but they just ignore.  There was a fork or something a while back and some people had syncing issues including me.  To fix it you can just go to the wallet click on help, then debug window.  Then click console and type rewindchain 249000.  Then press enter and wait, and it will re-sync.  This worked for me.  I think Cryptsy just doesn't realize that Shadow has decent volume on other exchanges like Bittrex. They told me Shadow is not a priority.  Its pretty annoying, I wish they would just de-list the coin.  Maybe if others e-mail them too, then they will get their act together, but they just seem to ignore me.  Cryptsy is turning a lot of investors away from Shadow, who think the coin is broken because its in constant maintenance.  I bet if Cryptsy worked, the price would be over 30K satoshi right now.

Good questions.  I am not sure exactly how the devs are preparing to solve these problems, and I am interested in the answers as well.  I know Open Bazaar had some interesting solutions to this. I heard something before about how some people would act as escrow agents.  A buyer and seller could if they wish, select an escrow from the free market based on their feedback.  Then if there were a problem with the transaction the escrow agent would decide who gets the money.  I think the main difference between markets like evolution and agora are those markets are centralized.  This means they are located and held on a single server somewhere, or bounced around on different servers.  They are also run and maintained by centralized individuals.  This gives governments and hackers a central point to attack and cause failure.  However with a decentralized marketplace like ShadyBay, it is much more resilient and resistant to attack.  ShadyBay will not be run by 1 or a few people, it will be run by all of the nodes on the network.  If the network grows large enough, it can be essentially impossible for any adversary to shut it down.  

Also fees might be lower in a decentralized marketplace.  Also there may be less of a risk of the owners of the marketplace taking the money and running or getting hacked and losing all coins like with centralized markets.  With a centralized marketplace you have one entity holding all the coins and acting as escrow, which is a giant target for thieves and hackers.  With a decentralized market the coins are spread out among different users, so there can never be one large hack or theft where everything gets stolen.

I'm also curious as to why the public key is shown in the wallet as well.  The address is derived from this public key.  I'm not sure if you can send to a public key, but probably you need to send to an address with the correct format instead. Bitcoin works the same way, but usually you only see the public address, and not the actual public key.

Anybody know if Isidor Zeuner will also be auditing ShadowChat along with the currency and Shadow Send features?

It can be used for anything.  Soon they will have a decentralized marketplace in the wallet finished called ShadyBay where you will be able to buy or sell anything with complete privacy.  If you want completely anonymous coins, just be wise with how you send them around.  You would probably want to send your coins from coinbase to an exchange, then purchase the SDC.  Then send it from the exchange to your own SDC address.  Once in your own SDC address, you will want to send the coins from SDC to Shadow using that option in your wallet.  SDC is the transparent side of the coin and can be tracked on the blockchain.  But once you convert to Shadow you are basically anonymous.  You may not want to send all the coins to Shadow at once, just send a portion at a time.  You can keep them there or you can turn them back into SDC by sending to a SDC stealth address.  The new SDC will be unlinkable to your original SDC.  You will see the options in the wallet.  You can send from SDC to SDC, or from SDC to Shadow, or from Shadow to Shadow, or from Shadow back to SDC.  When creating an address to make a stealth address just click new address, then click the box that says "stealth address", then click ok.

I think that the coins never run out, and the staking just continues at 2% per year forever, if I understand correctly.  The 2% is a reward for helping to secure the network.  When you stake your coins you help the network.  Its true that the inflation will be 2%, which may seem bad to have constant inflation.  But this is kind of different than other inflation that we are used to, because you yourself can stake your coins and receive the 2% as well.  So you are not really losing anything to inflation as long as you stake your coins.

No, you will just get more SDC over time for your staked coins.  Instead of miners minting new coins, they are minted through the staking process.  So say for example if you have 1000 SDC and you stake them in your wallet for 1 year.  Well as I understand by the end of the year you will have about 1020 coins from the staking process, receiving about 2% per year.

Sounds like a good idea.



Probably you mean staking.  Shadow is a proof of stake (POS) coin.  It initially had a Proof of Work (POW) period in the beginning then it switched to POS.  Basically POS is an alternative method of securing a blockchain rather than mining.  I am not too expert on POS, but basically it is an alternative incentive system to mining.  It has its pros and cons.  I think part of the incentive structure is in order to attack the network you would need to hold A LOT of coins, so it doesn't provide much incentive for someone to buy all those coins only to destroy their value by attacking the network.  But I think it gets even more complex than that.  I am also wondering more about how the Shadow POS system works, because every POS coin seems to have a slightly different scheme.  Also I think that the staking of Shadow allows 2% growth per year, so if you stake your coins all year, then your supply will increase by 2%

Isidor Zeuner is reviewing the code.  I guess he is a German cryptographer and active member of the Bitcoin developer mailing list.  You can read some of his stuff here: https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/

I think the results will be posted on shadowtalk.org  Some more info here: http://shadowtalk.org/topic/321/shadowcash-whitepaper-review-and-code-audit

One year from now I wouldn't be surprised to see the price over 100K satoshis.  It seems the market cap is really tiny right now, and this coin is way undervalued.  It is surprising that the devs have built so much for this project, yet not many people even know about Shadow.  If you look at a hyped coin like DRK, it has a market cap of like $9,000,000 right now.  Shadow only has a market cap of like $350,000.  I think Shadow is a much cooler project, and a much better anon coin than DRK. Shadow has way more going for it.  If we could just match the same marketcap as DRK right now, we could see a 25x increase in price of SDC, or a price of about 500K satoshis.  Its hard to say though, this market is very unpredictable, and often stupid.

I think Cryptsy is causing some problems and scaring investors away.  I had some friends I told about ShadowCash, then later they said they checked it out on Cryptsy and volume was nothing and the wallet was in maintenance so they didn't buy.  They thought the coin was broken or something.  I had to tell them no no Cryptsy just sucks, go to Bittrex instead.

It sucks pretty bad, the wallet on Cryptsy has been in maintenance at least since January 1st, and it was broken for a week or two before that also.  It only worked for a brief moment for like 1 day.  I e-mailed them a bunch of times, and contacted them in the chat and they just ignored me.  I told them if it is a sync issue to go to the console and do the "rewindchain 249000" trick.  I also asked them to just de-list the coin if they can't fix it, because they are giving Shadow a bad name.  But I just get ignored.  Maybe a dev could have better luck contacting them.

Thank you, that clarifies it then.  People should then know that if they want to help the network the most, don't just leave your coins in Shadow.  Keep changing into Shadow and back to SDC and back to Shadow many times to create more anonymous outputs.

I have question about slide #6, from transcript:
Also slide 10:  
Doesn't this mean that it would be helpful for the network if we transfer from SDC to Shadow and back to SDC many times?  The more times we go back and forth, then the more available outputs, which helps the anonymity of the network?  I believe many people tried to help the network by transferring their SDC to Shadow and leaving it in Shadow, but would it be more helpful if they transfer back and forth many times?  Also would a bot be helpful for increasing the anonymous outputs?

Woah, we have a cool new video too, check it out:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWEzGs2YJtM

You can use this bootstrap file to make syncing time go much faster.  Info here: http://shadowtalk.org/topic/308/bootstrap-instructions

Looks like they updated the main website: http://shadow.cash/

Did I see that right, marketplace is already 80% done? Or is it just the first phase of the marketplace is 80% complete?