XMR vs DRK

[toknormal]

What you might be missing though is the optional visibility of the monero blockchain, right? I'd be interested in your take on this with that in mind.

I like the idea of the "viewkey" from the perspective of personal privacy. But a financial system has 2 aspects:

[1] - disegregated private facing one.

[2] - an aggregated, public facing one that provides integrity and accountability

The viewkey opens a "peekhole" on a granular level for one person, but for it to have any value it has to be part of a greater whole who's existence is open and accountable. It has to have confidence and integrity which comes from demonstrating that it squares with the sum of its parts. The public aspect of any financial system is huge. Companies report balances, nations declare and spend budgets, wages are paid etc. (We can check Target2 to see how much money everyone owes the Germans   )

In the fiat money system, accountability is managed for us by the counterparty network known as the “banking system” plus armies of auditors who check that totals equal the sum of their parts. Without that aspect of it you's have no confidence and no value - you'd just have a very private account in an invisible, dead network.

What Satoshi did was to remove the counterparty layer and put the whole thing in public hands, thereby putting "us" in the role of auditors. That public, transparent aspect of the blockhain is absolutely a core principle that underpins its security, integrity and therefore value. In this model, privacy is replaced with anonymity.

I've got no objection to innovation and pursuing new ways to enhance personal privacy in crypto. But what Dash is attempting to do is an optimal approach - i.e. greatly enhance Bitcoin's anonymity without compromising the public ledger. That is an admirable objective that's difficult to acheive. Because it's difficult to achieve, it's easy to shoot holes in it over all kinds of low level technical implementation issues, but hey, what technology in the history of the internet wasn't like that. Http was leaky as a sieve. Add an "s" and it's unbreakable.

Likeways, the Cryptonote tech and persuit of totally "invisible" money is an admirable pursuit. But sell it for what it is not what it isn't. The material difference isn't nuances of cryptology but rather the priority you give to having a public ledger or not.

The contradiction that keeps hitting me in the face with Cryptonote is this: It's "selling point" is  ultra security and ultra privacy, whereas for me the one thing that Bitcoin brought as that supports integrity and security far more than any algo is public visibility.

IMO, if I wanted to corrupt a cryptocurrency, what are the two strategies I'd employ ?

[1] - remove the public ledger from view

[2] - give myself a backdoor to the encryption algo

I've never been a proponent of the second of those conspiracy theories because I generally think that if both the research papers and the code are in the public domain then it's fair game for public use and can be sufficiently scrutinised. But the first of those two - if that goes then no algo is going to secure the system IMO.

[GingerAle]

What you might be missing though is the optional visibility of the monero blockchain, right? I'd be interested in your take on this with that in mind.

I like the idea of the "viewkey" from the perspective of personal privacy. But a financial system has 2 aspects:

[1] - disegregated private facing one.

[2] - an aggregated, public facing one that provides integrity and accountability

The contradiction that keeps hitting me in the face with Cryptonote is this: It's "selling point" is  ultra security and ultra privacy, whereas for me the one thing that Bitcoin brought as that supports integrity and security far more than any algo is public visibility.

I think I finally DO get your points, but I may disagree, and perhaps its due to nuances in how we use the terms private, public, visible, invisible.

IMO, the monero blockchain is still public in the sense that it is still being distributed and validated by the network system. The public ledger is still in plain view, its just impossible to understand it without the proper keys.

And this second component of a financial system that your propose:
[2] - an aggregated, public facing one that provides integrity and accountability

Perhaps you are drawing parallels to the existing financial systems. IMO, these public facing components are just an attempt to create the illusion of integrity and accountability. Due to the inherrent nature of existing "soft" currencies, this presentation is required so people trust them.

Cryptocurrencies provide the first "hard" currency in which the integrity and accountability are inherent in the system. You can't fudge the numbers.

[toknormal]

Cryptocurrencies provide the first "hard" currency in which the integrity and accountability are inherent in the system. You can't fudge the numbers.

At least we can agree on that 

[Joshuar]

What you might be missing though is the optional visibility of the monero blockchain, right? I'd be interested in your take on this with that in mind.

I like the idea of the "viewkey" from the perspective of personal privacy. But a financial system has 2 aspects:

[1] - disegregated private facing one.

[2] - an aggregated, public facing one that provides integrity and accountability

The viewkey opens a "peekhole" on a granular level for one person, but for it to have any value it has to be part of a greater whole who's existence is open and accountable. It has to have confidence and integrity which comes from demonstrating that it squares with the sum of its parts. The public aspect of any financial system is huge. Companies report balances, nations declare and spend budgets, wages are paid etc. (We can check Target2 to see how much money everyone owes the Germans   )

In the fiat money system, accountability is managed for us by the counterparty network known as the “banking system” plus armies of auditors who check that totals equal the sum of their parts. Without that aspect of it you's have no confidence and no value - you'd just have a very private account in an invisible, dead network.

What Satoshi did was to remove the counterparty layer and put the whole thing in public hands, thereby putting "us" in the role of auditors. That public, transparent aspect of the blockhain is absolutely a core principle that underpins its security, integrity and therefore value. In this model, privacy is replaced with anonymity.

I've got no objection to innovation and pursuing new ways to enhance personal privacy in crypto. But what Dash is attempting to do is an optimal approach - i.e. greatly enhance Bitcoin's anonymity without compromising the public ledger. That is an admirable objective that's difficult to acheive. Because it's difficult to achieve, it's easy to shoot holes in it over all kinds of low level technical implementation issues, but hey, what technology in the history of the internet wasn't like that. Http was leaky as a sieve. Add an "s" and it's unbreakable.

Likeways, the Cryptonote tech and persuit of totally "invisible" money is an admirable pursuit. But sell it for what it is not what it isn't. The material difference isn't nuances of cryptology but rather the priority you give to having a public ledger or not.

The contradiction that keeps hitting me in the face with Cryptonote is this: It's "selling point" is  ultra security and ultra privacy, whereas for me the one thing that Bitcoin brought as that supports integrity and security far more than any algo is public visibility.

IMO, if I wanted to corrupt a cryptocurrency, what are the two strategies I'd employ ?

[1] - remove the public ledger from view

[2] - give myself a backdoor to the encryption algo

I've never been a proponent of the second of those conspiracy theories because I generally think that if both the research papers and the code are in the public domain then it's fair game for public use and can be sufficiently scrutinised. But the first of those two - if that goes then no algo is going to secure the system IMO.

What you're describing is Zerocash, where even the ledger itself is obscured totally, and it's initial release which requires trust in 3rd parties can allow for a "backdoor" to happen that would allow said attacker to get as much coins as they'd like. The tech behind ZC(If it ever comes out), would be very new and likely riddled with holes. Ring Signatures and even Coinjoin has been out and "time tested" for years. With ZC, it'd be *impossible* to even prove ownership of your own funds(There's no viewkey or anything similar that I know of). That's why I dislike zerocash personally, it doesn't seem fit for regular/everyday use imo.

Satoshi himself we could assume was even "fond" of Ring Signatures(basically cryptonote) according to his posts. He probably didn't have the time to try and implement such a system in Bitcoin before its release, as based on a few threads concerning the matter(I linked to a few earlier on in this thread).

[BrianM]

If I had to chose then would I say XMR.
I think DRK is a pump'n'dump like any other altcoin, I just don't see what i brings.
Also for wide adaptation, I cannot picture my mom or dad going down to the store and say
"oh dear, how many "Darkcoin" does the milk cost" - the name sucks adaption wise.
Same as with those "blackcoin" or "whitecoin", will never be adapted because of the name.

Just in time for your mom and dad:

http://cointelegraph.com/news/113781/darkcoin-is-now-dash-and-not-a-moment-too-soon

Seams suspicious too me. I think that I agree with those saying that XMR is something new and DarkCoinz are just another bitcoin.
I would not touch those XMR either.
The only altcoin I think is good is CLAM, because you can use it to have fun and gamble.
Also a CLAM is always CALM.

[wpalczynski]

What you might be missing though is the optional visibility of the monero blockchain, right? I'd be interested in your take on this with that in mind.

I like the idea of the "viewkey" from the perspective of personal privacy. But a financial system has 2 aspects:

[1] - disegregated private facing one.

[2] - an aggregated, public facing one that provides integrity and accountability

The viewkey opens a "peekhole" on a granular level for one person, but for it to have any value it has to be part of a greater whole who's existence is open and accountable. It has to have confidence and integrity which comes from demonstrating that it squares with the sum of its parts. The public aspect of any financial system is huge. Companies report balances, nations declare and spend budgets, wages are paid etc. (We can check Target2 to see how much money everyone owes the Germans   )

In the fiat money system, accountability is managed for us by the counterparty network known as the “banking system” plus armies of auditors who check that totals equal the sum of their parts. Without that aspect of it you's have no confidence and no value - you'd just have a very private account in an invisible, dead network.

What Satoshi did was to remove the counterparty layer and put the whole thing in public hands, thereby putting "us" in the role of auditors. That public, transparent aspect of the blockhain is absolutely a core principle that underpins its security, integrity and therefore value. In this model, privacy is replaced with anonymity.

I've got no objection to innovation and pursuing new ways to enhance personal privacy in crypto. But what Dash is attempting to do is an optimal approach - i.e. greatly enhance Bitcoin's anonymity without compromising the public ledger. That is an admirable objective that's difficult to acheive. Because it's difficult to achieve, it's easy to shoot holes in it over all kinds of low level technical implementation issues, but hey, what technology in the history of the internet wasn't like that. Http was leaky as a sieve. Add an "s" and it's unbreakable.

Likeways, the Cryptonote tech and persuit of totally "invisible" money is an admirable pursuit. But sell it for what it is not what it isn't. The material difference isn't nuances of cryptology but rather the priority you give to having a public ledger or not.

The contradiction that keeps hitting me in the face with Cryptonote is this: It's "selling point" is  ultra security and ultra privacy, whereas for me the one thing that Bitcoin brought as that supports integrity and security far more than any algo is public visibility.

IMO, if I wanted to corrupt a cryptocurrency, what are the two strategies I'd employ ?

[1] - remove the public ledger from view

[2] - give myself a backdoor to the encryption algo

I've never been a proponent of the second of those conspiracy theories because I generally think that if both the research papers and the code are in the public domain then it's fair game for public use and can be sufficiently scrutinised. But the first of those two - if that goes then no algo is going to secure the system IMO.

What you're describing is Zerocash, where even the ledger itself is obscured totally, and it's initial release which requires trust in 3rd parties can allow for a "backdoor" to happen that would allow said attacker to get as much coins as they'd like. The tech behind ZC(If it ever comes out), would be very new and likely riddled with holes. Ring Signatures and even Coinjoin has been out and "time tested" for years. With ZC, it'd be *impossible* to even prove ownership of your own funds(There's no viewkey or anything similar that I know of). That's why I dislike zerocash personally, it doesn't seem fit for regular/everyday use imo.

Satoshi himself we could assume was even "fond" of Ring Signatures(basically cryptonote) according to his posts. He probably didn't have the time to try and implement such a system in Bitcoin before its release, as based on a few threads concerning the matter(I linked to a few earlier on in this thread).

ZeroCash doesn't sound very promising.

[toknormal]

What you're describing is Zerocash, where even the ledger itself is obscured totally

Nice. Sounds like everyone's falling over themselves to be more "invisible" than the next. If anyone thought Darkcoin had a branding problem then selling "invisible money" to the masses should be interesting.

IM Vendor to potential adopter:

Hey mate ! You should check out this new money. It's invisible.

Potential adopter:

Really ? But how do I know it's real ?

IM Vendor:

Easy ! We'll give you this special key so you can only see your money and no one else's

Potential adopter:

Really ? But how do I know their's is real ?

IM Vendor:

Easy ! You can see them buying stuff with it !

Potential adopter:

Really ? Where ?

IM Vendor:

Easy ! There's this thing called the block......

oops  

[generalizethis]

What you're describing is Zerocash, where even the ledger itself is obscured totally

Nice. Sounds like everyone's falling over themselves to be more "invisible" than the next. If anyone thought Darkcoin had a branding problem then selling "invisible money" to the masses should be interesting.

IM Vendor to potential adopter:

Hey mate ! You should check out this new money. It's invisible.

Potential adopter:

But how do I know it's real ?

IM Vendor:

Easy ! We'll give you this special key so you can only see your money and no one else's

Potential adopter:

Really ? But how do I know there's is real ?

IM Vendor:

Easy ! You can see them buying stuff with it !

Potential adopter:

Really ? Where ?

IM Vendor:

Easy ! There's this thing called the block......

oops  

How is it any more invisible than btc, not like the average person is gonna stare at a blockchain all day? I can see MY transactions, and if i want others to see them i can use the viewkey--this is a great thing if you want privacy. Not sure why you don't get why people want privacy, but good luck with your Amway nodes.

[I2S2SI]

A vs B

My crypto anthem( Not mine but could be an anthem)

2nd verse:

Well I woke up to see them, these two mighty steeds
With their mouths grinning wildly expressing my needs

As they stood there above me, being flanked on each side
I felt no need to fear them, no reason to hide

So I reached up to touch but they faded too soon
Yet their mouths still remained and stacked up towards the moon

How that ladder of mouth waved so soft in the night
And I looked up in awe at that beautiful sight

And I dreamt about climbing into the night sky
But I knew had I touched them they'd mouth back 'bye bye'
So I got up and walked down the path in the dark
And there deep in the distance my eye caught a spark

Of a crab twice my size with incredible strength
Oh it greeted me kindly and then we all drank

And we drooled out together right onto the ground
And the ocean grew up quickly right up all around

And the earth looked at me and said "wasn't that fun?"
And I replied "I'm sorry if I hurt anyone"

And without even thinking cast me into space
But before she did that she wiped off my own face

She said better luck next time don't worry so much
Without ears I couldn't hear I could just feel the touch

As I feel asleep softly at the edge of a cave
But I should have gone deeper but I'm not so brave

https://vimeo.com/123219861

Lyrics http://lyrics.wikia.com/Dan_Deacon:When_I_Was_Done_Dying

Crypto, Better than a bank 

[coinits]

A vs B

My crypto anthem( Not mine but could be an anthem)

2nd verse:

Well I woke up to see them, these two mighty steeds
With their mouths grinning wildly expressing my needs

As they stood there above me, being flanked on each side
I felt no need to fear them, no reason to hide

So I reached up to touch but they faded too soon
Yet their mouths still remained and stacked up towards the moon

How that ladder of mouth waved so soft in the night
And I looked up in awe at that beautiful sight

And I dreamt about climbing into the night sky
But I knew had I touched them they'd mouth back 'bye bye'
So I got up and walked down the path in the dark
And there deep in the distance my eye caught a spark

Of a crab twice my size with incredible strength
Oh it greeted me kindly and then we all drank

And we drooled out together right onto the ground
And the ocean grew up quickly right up all around

And the earth looked at me and said "wasn't that fun?"
And I replied "I'm sorry if I hurt anyone"

And without even thinking cast me into space
But before she did that she wiped off my own face

She said better luck next time don't worry so much
Without ears I couldn't hear I could just feel the touch

As I feel asleep softly at the edge of a cave
But I should have gone deeper but I'm not so brave

https://vimeo.com/123219861

Lyrics http://lyrics.wikia.com/Dan_Deacon:When_I_Was_Done_Dying

Crypto, Better than a bank 

It's all maths

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDiSYp_51iY

[dewdeded]

Subscribed.

[duid88]

I think for the price of exchange BTC/drk higher than 0.00364780 xmr

[generalizethis]

I think for the price of exchange BTC/drk higher than 0.00364780 xmr

And Jewel sold more poetry books than Emily Dickinson in her lifetime.... Markets take time to figure out genius from vaporware.

[ahoenk]

RIP XMR, wish u all the best...

[hodlmybtc]

RIP XMR, wish u all the best...

XMR gained more value or lost less than DRK in the last 7 and 30 days.

Does this mean this DRK scamcoin is finally dead? 

[BrianM]

RIP XMR, wish u all the best...

XMR gained more value or lost less than DRK in the last 7 and 30 days.

Does this mean this DRK scamcoin is finally dead?  

DRK was always suspicious too me, it will die a slow and painful dead like litecoin.

What does XMR bring of new things to the crypto scene?
I seen many high rank members support this coin.
Do you think it will substitute bitcoin eventually?

[GTO911]

DRK was always suspicious too me, it will die a slow and painful dead like litecoin.

What does XMR bring of new things to the crypto scene?
I seen many high rank members support this coin.
Do you think it will substitute bitcoin eventually?

Cryptonote protocol with privacy which can be turned on or off on demand

Check it out - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0

[David Latapie]

IF "David Latapie" = "boy"
  THEN  "Nice to see a Monero core team player in action.  So adult.  So admirable"
  ELSE  "Ignore me, I'm not supposed to call girls out on their bullshit"  //see above
ENDIF

Ad personam (emphasis' mine):

A last trick is to become personal, insulting, rude, as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand, and that you are going to come off worst. It consists in passing from the subject of dispute, as from a lost game, to the disputant himself, and in some way attacking his person. It may be called the argumentum ad personam, to distinguish it from the argumentum ad hominem, which passes from the objective discussion of the subject pure and simple to the statements or admissions which your opponent has made in regard to it. But in becoming personal you leave the subject altogether, and turn your attack to his person, by remarks of an offensive and spiteful character. It is an appeal from the virtues of the intellect to the virtues of the body, or to mere animalism. This is a very popular trick, because every one is able to carry it into effect; and so it is of frequent application.

To acheive this, they’ve got to convince people of three things:

[1] - that the public ledger is of little or no benefit to them either collectively or individually and it is in fact “a threat”

[2] - that any technology attempting to enhance anonymity directly while preserving the concept of the public ledger is either flawed, a scam or unsecure

[3] - that “visibility” and “fungibility” are interchangeable monetary properties and therefore that money will retain its value even if “invisible”

Three possibilities:

• Mandatory transparency (Bitcoin)
• Optional transparency (Monero)
• Mandatory privacy (Zerocash, if ever)

The dangers of mandatory transparency




The power of optional transparency



The low demand for mandatory privacy

I consider the demand for mandatory privacy (Zerocash) is much lower than the one for optional transparency (Monero). Much like the demand for throwaway email addresses is real but much lower than for regular mail addresses. And this is independant of the feasibility of zerocash (which presently is low), so even if Zerocash would happen (good luck with that), it would not enjoy much success (compared to the other two configurations).



"Monero : bringing bank secrecy and net neutrality to the blockchain."

[illodin]

I wonder how Illodin feels about that since from the quotes it appears that he was one of the people trying to get this mining up and running trying to be one of the first to insta-mine it.

I would not be happy if i was mislead like that.  It seems that in this case Evan certainly did not keep his word at least not as it could have been reasonably understood from his posts.

I managed to mine just fine on my Windows desktop using VirtualBox + Ubuntu. I also bought more coins at the rate of 10k @ 0.25 BTC. I would say I'm pretty happy how things turned out. I hope my answer didn't disappoint you too much.

[illodin]

From:
http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/html/FIN-2013-G001.html

c. De-Centralized Virtual Currencies

            A final type of convertible virtual currency activity involves a de-centralized convertible virtual currency (1) that has no central repository and no single administrator, and (2) that persons may obtain by their own computing or manufacturing effort.

            A person that creates units of this convertible virtual currency and uses it to purchase real or virtual goods and services is a user of the convertible virtual currency and not subject to regulation as a money transmitter.

To note is that this document is a Guidance, not actual code or regulation. It is very helpful and descriptive and references the pertinent code, however.

I heard Evan and his Mom have the spork ability. So there goes your daydream.