Bitcoin Forum
July 26, 2021, 02:20:07 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 »
1  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency on: March 02, 2017, 11:42:39 PM
So yes, I was one of those Amazon miners that people complained about early on.  Here are my January and February 2014 bills:

Thanks for sharing this.  I played around with Amazon mining back in 2014 and this brings back memories.  Was never willing to spend thousands of USD on it in a single month though.  In hindsight...I probably should have! Roll Eyes
2  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency (mandatory upgrade) on: September 21, 2014, 05:02:24 PM
Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

there are many reasons why I have been and still am confident about by Monero investement but the amount of trolls, haters & FUD around it may be #1

rarely have we seen this amount of naysayers since Bitcoin itself

I find troll volume to be a useful leading indicator.
3  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | DarkSend+ Is Live! on: August 30, 2014, 01:52:03 AM
I think I will set-up a second DRK foundation - it's goals:

1. Make Master Node Operators Rich
2. As above

 Grin

Having read the works of Isaac Asimov, I'm fairly sure you're not supposed to let the first foundation become aware of the Second Foundation for this to work.
4  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / Re: [XMR] Monero Speculation on: August 25, 2014, 03:05:55 PM
I think Monero has two obstacles to overcome before it permanently moves up into a higher price bracket, relative to Bitcoin.

First, Monero will need to definitively put to rest the perception -- whether accurate or not -- that Monero may have a bloat problem, in terms of blockchain size and/or memory usage.  This perception has dogged Monero from the beginning and it does Monero no favors.  

Second, Monero will need a no frills GUI -- something simple and easy, friendlier than the command line interface.  I love me a good CLI.  Many don't.

I am confident both of these issues will get addressed.   All in good time.

The bloat/blockchain size is not a problem. It will not be a problem in even 5 years, stop with the nonsense. People are getting this wrong (so have I).
Fluffy can throw you some numbers and you will see. I do however see a problem with the memory usage, 3+ GB of RAM is indeed too much. I was forced to close most of my work that I had previously started.
A GUI is necessary for adoption! Many do not like using a console, and even more do not know how to use one.
Just to be clear, I did not say Monero has an actual bloat problem, from a technical perspective.  I'm saying, whether or not the "bloat" thing has any merit to it whatsoever, this perception has managed to get out there -- perhaps through a misunderstanding, or through the intentional work of Monero's detractors, I don't know.  I guess it is a communications/PR issue at this point.  I just know the perception is out there, and that it sometimes turns people off to Monero when they don't look very deeply.   Such people -- "new money", if you will -- are not each going to individually contact Fluffy for numbers to address their concerns.

The problem is precisely that "[p]eople are getting this wrong."
5  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / Re: [XMR] Monero Speculation on: August 25, 2014, 07:28:43 AM
I think Monero has two obstacles to overcome before it permanently moves up into a higher price bracket, relative to Bitcoin.

First, Monero will need to definitively put to rest the perception -- whether accurate or not -- that Monero may have a bloat problem, in terms of blockchain size and/or memory usage.  This perception has dogged Monero from the beginning and it does Monero no favors. 

Second, Monero will need a no frills GUI -- something simple and easy, friendlier than the command line interface.  I love me a good CLI.  Many don't.

I am confident both of these issues will get addressed.   All in good time.
6  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | DarkSend+ Is Live! on: August 19, 2014, 07:20:31 PM
Quote
We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept.  TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq).  For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes. 

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.
7  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | DarkSend+ Is Live! on: August 19, 2014, 01:23:04 AM
My Darkcoin/DarkSend wallet tutorial is up.  I hope it helps anyone who is apprehensive about using DarkSend because they're not sure how it works or how to do it "right".  It should answer all your questions.  I did do it as if for an old lady like myself, but hope everyone can get something out of it Cheesy

http://coinbrief.net/how-to-use-darkcoin-wallet-darksend/

Thank you...thank you...can we post that in the OP?!?  Have Evan review it maybe?

great work Tante! thank you
This is a great write-up.   Very accessible, well-illustrated.  Thank you Tante. 

For me (on the road, unable to tinker with DarkSend yet), Reading Tante's article did a remarkable job of slicing through all the gloomy market noise and renewing my sense of marvel at just how innovative DRK continues to be.   
8  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | Fork for Masternode Payment on: July 15, 2014, 08:26:35 PM
You're asking if a coin that is being built for anonymity can be easily traced?
I respectfully disagree with you, the final transaction the person to person transaction occurs directly so that you can see the coins leave your wallet directly to the recipient's address and you can see the address getting the coins in the blockchain. So you can verify any transaction between buyer and seller just like you do now, but you are using previously mixed and denominated coins so that it is really a fog for everyone else! It is just brilliant, basically ecash! Great for business applications and way better than Bitcoin for B2B.

Thanks for your responses.  I'm probably not conveying my concern very well.

I'm a big fan of Darkcoin's anonymity features and I agree with Minotaur26 that even after RC4, a blockchain explorer can still be used to confirm a specific payment took place.  My worry is that, if there is no way to shield certain coins in your wallet from automatic premixing, RC4 will actually go a step too far in removing the benefits of a public accounting ledger from the coin's features.  There are many common everyday uses of the blockchain explorer to prove to others the history of coins that you currently control, and these are sometimes quite useful in the real world.  Pre-RC4 (if I am not mistaken) these were all available to Darkcoin, since using Darksend was just an optional choice -- as an individual user you COULD mix your coins, but you didn't HAVE to.  

Thus, pre-RC4, Darkcoin let you keep certain coins entirely outside the mixing process, and you could use a blockchain explorer to, say, prove the date you mined or acquired your coins for tax purposes (e.g. U.S. long-term capital gains), or prove that you haven't moved or spent coins you are holding on behalf of someone else (e.g., escrow), or prove how coins sent to a donation address were spent (i.e., allow an audit).  My concern is that, if RC4 forces pre-mixing of all coins, these uses of the blockchain as an accounting ledger become harder, and the paths to Darkcoin adoption narrow.   I see this as a bad outcome -- while I want Darkcoin to be a form of anonymous ecash, I also want it to be able to function as a full-fledged cryptocurrency.  Perhaps your vision is different.

TLDR: Should background mixing be opt-out so Darkcoin can still function as a full-fledged cryptocurrency even while providing anonymous transactions?

9  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | Fork for Masternode Payment on: July 15, 2014, 07:03:28 PM
From the update:

Quote
Every 10 blocks, user clients network-wide will send any unmixed, traceable Darkcoins in their possession through an anonymization phase. In this phase, Masternodes are used in chained succession to mix the coins they receive from the network and break them down into homogenous denominations. After being processed by a minimum of 2 Masternodes, the coins are either sent to the next Masternode in the chain or back to the user’s wallet at randomly generated change addresses.

Can a user opt-out of this background anonymization for some or all of his or her coins, or is Darkcoin moving to a model where it is essentially mandatory that all coins be mixed in this way even if they are just sitting in wallets?

I ask because it seems like there are use cases where being able to trace the history of your own coins -- or proving that history to others, by pointing them to a neutral third party block explorer -- is a desired feature.  Scrambling the ability to trace and document that history (when the ability to document that history is actually desired, of course) by mixing coins in the background introduces some new wrinkles, especially for business use cases.
10  Economy / Securities / Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It on: June 23, 2014, 04:01:47 PM
Is there a place to find historical price data on Asicminer shares older than its listing on Havelock, for example, old btct.co data or even forum auction trades?  Has that been charted or graphed anywhere?



11  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread on: June 16, 2014, 07:32:08 PM
Is there a thread other than this one where the details of Swarm are being discussed?  (Things like...percentage of newly-issued coins that would ultimately trickle back to SWARMCOIN holders...when we can expect to see an alpha client).  I can't find such a thread.  Their website itself is light on details.  Thanks.

12  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant on: June 03, 2014, 01:24:01 AM
I am really surprised so many people are selling given we just hit 0.025 after ATH of 0.0275.  Things should shape up nicely over the next week.

Just a reminder not to get misled by the intermediary DRK/BTC ratio if what you ultimately care to measure is the absolute dollar value.  The recent local maximum at 0.025 is actual a higher valuation per DRK and higher market cap, in dollars, than the "all-time high" in terms of the DRK/BTC ratio of 0.0275 ten days ago.  This is because bitcoin itself rose roughly $100 in the intervening time period.

Back of the envelope math:

ten days ago: 1 DRK * 0.0275 BTC/DRK * $535/BTC = $14.71 per DRK.
earlier today:   1 DRK * 0.025 BTC/DRK * $630/BTC =  $ 15.75 per DRK.

(I grabbed these BTC values by eyeballing bitcoinwisdom very roughly, so they are imprecise.)

One nice thing about the addition of DRK to to Bitfinex is that it should end up making graphs and stats about DRK/USD trends more accessible, since they've created a direct market for it.

13  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant on: June 02, 2014, 08:48:08 PM
just imagine >>> 333333.333 x 300$(101 price) = wow

not "...anonymous darkcoin millionaire" but, anonymous darkcoin trillionaire
 Grin

Uh, your math is off.  Even this would be ten cents less than $100 million.  Still just a multi-millionaire.
14  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: Wolf's MRO CPUMiner - 2x speed compared to LucasJones' on: June 01, 2014, 05:19:15 AM
Win64 binaries exist but require AES-NI.
If I compile from source should I be able to run it on a processor without AES-NI then?  I compiled it successfully in an Virtualbox Ubuntu 13.04 virtual machine (on a Win 7 host without AES-NI), but get:

Code:
[2014-05-31 09:46:38] Using JSON-RPC 2.0
[2014-05-31 09:46:38] 2 miner threads started, using 'cryptonight' algorithm.
Illegal instruction (core dumped)

upon starting up the miner.

Configure with --disable-aes-ni

Thank you.  That worked. 

Without AES-NI available to me on this machine, I get a slower hash rate with your miner compared to the Lucas Jones miner.  I'm sure this comes as no surprise, since you have been optimizing for AES-NI.  Inside my virtual machine, per core, I get about 11 H/s with yours, and about 18.5 H/s with Lucas Jones.

15  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: Wolf's MRO CPUMiner - 2x speed compared to LucasJones' on: May 31, 2014, 04:55:05 PM
Win64 binaries exist but require AES-NI.
If I compile from source should I be able to run it on a processor without AES-NI then?  I compiled it successfully in an Virtualbox Ubuntu 13.04 virtual machine (on a Win 7 host without AES-NI), but get:

Code:
[2014-05-31 09:46:38] Using JSON-RPC 2.0
[2014-05-31 09:46:38] 2 miner threads started, using 'cryptonight' algorithm.
Illegal instruction (core dumped)

upon starting up the miner.
16  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant on: May 30, 2014, 07:22:42 PM
Hey Darkies, X-men, trolls and all the other types who seem to be lurking around this thread.

Some other guy( I don't remember the name) came up with the idea to support Evan financially to create this amazing dev-team we've been talking about. After all it doesn't seem fair that he has so spend his own savings to make savings for us! I know some of you doesn't have alot of darks or btc either but I also see plain loaded users who should be busy munching plankton and setting out whalebait. A little will also do because as we say in Denmark: Mange bække små, gør en stor å (Many small creeks, create a large liver) I advice you guys to get this confirmed first before you throw you darks this way, just to get you use to having a sceptical attitude towards things like this. Just pm Evan and get him to confirm or maybe he could confirm in this thread. Either ways thanks and please help spread the word and let's get this devteam to kick some ass! Cheesy

Message from eduffield:

Hey, thanks for this. I made a software development wallet that I'll use to support all of the developers. It's address is here: XpAy7r5RVdGLnnjWNKuB9EUDiJ5Tje9GZ8

Thanks!

And now a brief PSA:

Please always check the primary source where the donation address was originally posted before donating to this or any other cryptocurrency address.  Why?  Even if an address is accurately quoted at first (I haven't checked), it can always be edited maliciously later down the line, or it can fail to be updated even if Evan abandons the donation address/wallet.

I believe the original can be found here, but doublecheck for yourself:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6982496#msg6982496

I do not mean to impugn StefanJ's honor or reputation in any way.  He may be the most trustworthy man on the planet.  Just a PSA.
17  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant on: May 30, 2014, 06:17:12 AM
i guess topic op should change to |NOW ON BITFINEX TOO|  Cool

NO.  Don't jump the gun.  Not unless and until Bitfinex confirms it first.  

This. I wonder how long that's been there? It may be that they planned on listing DRK after it surge to #3 in market cap and subsequent media blitz, but following the recent crash, who knows if that's still the plan. But if this news gains enough traction, they might not have much choice but to go ahead with it even if they weren't planning on it.

I'm cautiously optimistic.

Yep.  A lot of assumptions being made here.  While this is an exciting prospect if DRK does go live on Bitfinex, we don't have actual confirmation right now.  I would hate to see everyone treat this as a done deal only to have Bitfinex say "oh, we were just testing the possibility of a third coin but haven't decided which one" or something like that.

18  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant on: May 30, 2014, 05:45:58 AM
i guess topic op should change to |NOW ON BITFINEX TOO|  Cool

NO.  Don't jump the gun.  Not unless and until Bitfinex confirms it first. 
19  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant on: May 28, 2014, 09:24:37 PM
What has been accomplished in such a small time frame for XC is simply staggering and what lies ahead is going to be a game changer. Why else do you see DRK tanking badly and XC rising up magnificently.
He may be a hyperbolic troll, but the point is valid.
No, not really. One time price momentum is not an indicator of anything.
I'm not talking about the price. You said it yourself, the tenets are roughly the same... And they're moving a lot faster with easier to enable features. It's just true. I'm as much a member of the Cult of Evan as anyone else, but it doesn't blind me to facts.

All the while I'm having nothing but weird-ass problems with the most recent client with zero debug.log entries to explain it... HAve a send pending for almost an hour now... Deducted, not on the network mempool...

From their thread:
May not answer all your questions, but from what I have gathered, the current implementation is mixer based off a masternode. Revision 2 will utilize decentralized nodes in the sense that any wallet can act as an xnode and will utilize a separate protocal which can be run over TOR. Would be cool if android wallets supported xnode functionality, though just being able to stake will be nice.

http://www.reddit.com/r/XCofficialreddit/comments/26px5q/community_qa_week_1/
^ This is pure gibberish and tells you nothing.
The OP is pure gibberish and tells you nothing.


None of this makes any fucking sense to me. The people in the thread can't even address the question of how it works, lol. They are talking about something, and then just throwing the word paradigm liberally in every sentence.

I wouldn't touch that with a 10 foot pole. From what I can tell, it looks like they aren't moving any faster than Evan. You can already enable Darkcoin to work with TOR, so what is the difference other than PoW vs PoS?

I'm having the same problem looking under the hood.  I've been digging through the posts of the XC dev but the technical implementation of XC's anonymity features remain opaque to me so far.
20  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant on: May 27, 2014, 08:45:19 PM
I am not a troll but I honestly don't understand how it's possible to start paying masternodes from block rewards without hardfork.
We already had the hardfork to start paying them, but then had to switch them off temporarily. The fix & switching back on doesn't need a hardfork.

But wasn't that temporal shutdown carried out by a (yet another, very quick) hardfork just like the earlier start of the payments was?
How does the network know if masternodes should be paid or not?

pool updates probably.

smart guys...

i want to really hear evan to report the cause of fork!

I was very eager to initiate an all-in the panic buy in the moment when Evan posted an update (because I figured the price will bounce back if his news are great). But honestly, I wouldn't touch the DRK market with a stick until somebody explains this (with not too much technoblabby but not just a short scifi magic wizard tale about giant metal dragons).


Some one correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I can see the fork to support masternode payments was made and successfull.
Later some problems were found because there were some MN/clients in older versions that caused (back?)forks.
So Evan launched a patch so that the correct nodes simply ignored the older ones and patched pools to stop the payments...

To sum up things we are in the correct fork that allows MN payments.

I have the same confusion as janos666 over why it would not require another hardfork to restart masternode payments and/or to increase the amount of the mining reward that is allocated to masternodes.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!