|
Is the NEM client C, C++ or Java?
I would like to see a C client that is far more secure than a Java one.
Also I'm not a fan of the Nxt client using 1.5gb ram on my machine.
|
|
|
|
I will revise a small portion of the Bitcoin Core C++ source code, and create a reference pool Java software program before the end of 2014
Why Java? Almost all CryptoCoin's and their associated programs are written in either C, C++ or Python. Java isn't really seen in a good light in the CryptoCoin community. |
|
|
|
So lame the price keeps going to shit. Im down alot but not much point selling now as then I'm just solidifying the loss. Hopefully positive news about the network will come out soon otherwise I am going down with the ship.
Just wait until they are converted into a real crypto-coin (Safecoin) Then they will be usable and listed on many exchanges. Remember the Mastercoin exchange the Maidsafecoin is listed on is pretty bare bones basic and investors cannot withdraw their Maidsafecoin. Until it turns into a real coin the price will be terrible. |
|
|
|
The author is not shown since May 6, damn shit,run away.
I don't want to call you a troll, but the links in the two posts above yours show the developers in discussion and designing Maidsafe. But you don't read and just post FUD. |
|
|
|
Concerning how useful this tech is, is there any chance it will be adopted into Bitcoin?
If not the core, how about a side chain?
Putting it in the Bitcoin chain itself is a hard-sell because there is a serious scalability downsize (all the cryptographically strong anonymity techniques break pruning), among other pedestrian reasons. A side-chain using it seems virtually certain to me, limited more by the deployment of sidechain tech than anything else... even more so than the ZeroCash anonymity design simply because the ring signature approach is so simple by comparison. But it's all a guess at this stage. Technology progress in Bitcoin is slow— for good reason— and now with the prospect that altcoin pumpers may we well funded to try to disrupt that progress… well, it'll be sad if what kills cryptocurrency isn't competition from traditional financial instruments or authorities but just poisonous behavior between competing systems. :-/ Well to be honest the quicker a true side chain implementation comes the better. Some of the alternative coins have new ideas, but they all have to fight hard to gain a share of the market. Look at very professional projects like Ethereum, one of the most discussed topics is what's fair for the "IPO" and many people already are going to create a "fair" fork (I personally think that their IPO intentions are very fair). Because these are coins and the money is here, now and real, there will always been fighting for the investment that rises above the others, even just for that one day. People see really good tech, but then become dismayed that the chain is two years old already, ask yourself, how can there not be poisonous behavior between competitors when millions of dollars are at stake? Everyone is looking to be on the next best thing, one thing that would help is side chains, because then Bitcoin can continue to be that next best thing instead of having a new coin every week offering better features. This isn't a new phenomenon, look at the battle between Tesla and Edison. When it comes to money, it's a dirty battle, people aren't fighting for the tech, but rather their return on investment. gmaxwell, are we close to solving the 51% attack on side chain weakness? (97% of people are here for the returns, the tech is a vessel for that return) (I may be completely wrong about all the above, I have been very wrong many times before!) |
|
|
|
|
Can we clear up one thing please?
eASIC are no longer involved, not sure where this is coming from but all eASIC stuff is 100% over.
|
|
|
|
The only way to save this coin is to relaunch with a fair start for everyone. Of course, that won't happen because you're heavily vested.
The relaunch is here! Monero. |
|
|
|
|
Big news is coming, might be good or bad!
|
|
|
|
Bytecoin was forked into a coin that the community could participate in from day one.
Alas, none of the bugs or short comings were fixed in doing that— and it doesn't appear that any of the people involved in it have the background for the low level work. So you might have just written out the only active developers of the software, may not bode well for continued development. The fork also can't claim to be roses and sunshine wrt fairness: As someone very interested in privacy technology and as someone who is usually near the hub of technical discussion in the Bitcoin system, I'd never heard of that fork until just recently— nearly a month after it's start. And… has a very fast coin distribution, and was started with a difficulty much lower than the network could support. A lot could have been done to improve fairness (e.g. fixing the subsidy to a low level at least until the difficulty crossed the level where the prior system was, or setting the minimum difficulty to a good fraction of the achieved rate), promoting it outside of pools of altcoin speculators (e.g. why do I hear about zerocash 100,000 times for every time I hear about this stuff?), etc. Not that I think that any of the altcoin stuff is advisable, but if you're going to make a fork on the virtue of fairness wouldn't it behoove you to actually be fair?  And, of course, the fork has now also been forked. That one at least tames the insanely fast distribution somewhat... but it too doesn't fix any of the worse parts... I can only imagine that we're going to continue to see once a month forks of that stuff— suits me fine, while the technology is interesting and useful, the speculative churn is not. Concerning how useful this tech is, is there any chance it will be adopted into Bitcoin? If not the core, how about a side chain? |
|
|
|
Bcn launched in 2012, where it was announced ? And Whats the relation of bcn and mro? I'm pretty confused yet interested.
Bytecoin has been mined for almost two years in secret, something like 80% of all coin has already been released. Because Bytecoin's technology through CryptoNote is too important for the world for such a pre-mine, Bytecoin was forked into a coin that the community could participate in from day one. That coin is Monero. Also the community has decided, Monero's hashrate is around 8 times that of Bytecoin. |
|
|
|
OMG why WAS this deleted? A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. I would like to know how much money this company has in case of shareholder return! We all want to know this!!!! Shareholders must be told this information, this is proof that Ken is hiding the truth!!! |
|
|
|
I posted this in the Nxt.org forum privacy discussion and user Eadeqa replies that a person could use a third party like bitpay or coinbase to maintain anonymity. -https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/%28poll-by-post%29-does-nxt-need-anonymity/msg24596/?topicseen#msg24596
The way I see it is, Monero is just a prototype, eventually, give it a year or two this tech is going to mature and the norm. I would like to see Crypto move towards a more cash like system, no trace back. I would not prefer to see it go to a more bank like system. Anyway, it'll happen and Crypto's will have to be developed to adapt. (including both Bitcoin and Monero, because better things will come) Will these coins sit on the sidelines and say "use coinbase" or instead embrace this tech? This is why sidechains could be perfect for bitcoin, allowing this additional ability. |
|
|
|
No matter what is better, Monero or Zerocash, just don't think they will be something very big like 'the next Bitcoin'.
The actual demands for privacy and anonymity is actually small. For many people, Bitcoin's privacy is enough.
I talked to the son of a billionaire about using Bitcoin personally and for the business he is in (Oil). He is smart and young and did his own research and in the end had to advise his fathers company against it and also decided it's not good for personal use. I asked him to explain. He said that he can't see any real business accepting the system because it's far too transparent. Imagine we are in a Bitcoin centric world. You can easily get bitcoin into a company or to a friend (buying or gifting) and then you can watch their wallets. Bitcoin gives real time information into things like what investments you're buying, when and where you bought your local coffee and so much more. The transparency provided by Bitcoin is creepy and invasive. I remember explaining this reality to my Dad when I was getting him into Bitcoin just a few weeks ago, he was amazed it had grown this much with such a massive hole. Bitcoin is less private than using paypal, VISA, MasterCard or your bank. Because in those situations a trusted third party knows your business but the world at large doesn't. My friend said his company can never use it, the competitive advantage it would give to other companies would be too much, they would be able to tell how much cash flow they had, where they send their money, what contractors they were using. I personally have always been a little bit into the "we must have privacy! Bitcoin isn't enough!" line, but since talking with real world people it became obvious how bad it really is. I doubt you are right. How many bitcoin millionaires think twice before sending $10 for a pizza from their wallet, so much of this can be traced and it'll get worse in the future. Companies are popping up to put as many company and individual names to addresses as possible. This technology is needed. |
|
|
|
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.1340"So we can see as it is currently structured, CryptoNote doesn't really support anonymity much. Sorry to blow holes in your enthusiasm. Reality sucks if you haven't taken the time to do some serious work before launching." Thanks Brilliant. His main point seems to be IP address tracking and blockchain pruning. I think that both Zerocash/coin and Monero have the pruning issue, however how can they not? It's apart of the design and perhaps some super genius can one day work it out. The negatives are not too bad. Monero is meant to be splitting payments into different amounts already. Zerocash is still trusted and therefore unacceptable and AnonyMint also said that CoinJoin/DarkCoin is so far removed from the capabilities of Zero and Monero that it's not even in the same ball park. So we are left with two current contenders, Monero and Zero. Zero is somewhat trusted, so that is out. All that is left is Monero. Monero is broken if the NSA can crack the cryptography, the same cryptography that protects every bitcoin address. |
|
|
|
I am absolutely dumbfounded by Jo and dts's reactions. Can they really be that clueless? Oh my god.  I mean come on guys, make a bloody effort to at least try and identify the dots. I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I've been hearing riddles like this for 8 months now. Some dot equals this and then that will make sense, all while my investment declined 99%. |
|
|
|
You'd have to be an idiot to use Zerocash, considering who funded the research.
This^^, Zerocash has too many flaws. Rather use Darkcoin. Zerocoin and Darkcoin have flaws. Monero on the other hand... Don't act like Monero doesn't have flaws. Refer to Anonymint's posts in the Monero thread. Interesting, I haven't read the entire thread, can you link me please. |
|
|
|
Zerocash: made by serious scientists, strongest privacy but totally new, untested technology. It might have exploits we don't know yet. Even Matthew Green himself adviced people not to invest too much hope and money into his design.
Monero: less privacy than Zerocash but appear to be 'more safe' because it utilize an existing technology.
Darkcoin: worst privacy because of inferior CoinJoin technique, instamined coin. Its anonymity is centralized on a small group of 'masternodes', which is not good for 'decentralized currency'.
Well Zerocash is forever trusted, that might be an issue especially for people looking for private trustless transactions. |
|
|
|
Let's sing the technical praises for what Bytecoin has brought to the table, but let's use the variant without the 80% premine k?
Bytecoin's chain is already 1.8 years old. How crazy, I thought it was only released 9 weeks ago! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
