XMR vs DRK

[Joshuar]

As I said earlier, not equally. The government will have a hell of a easier time forcing masternode owners to give themselves in or just taking down the servers the masternodes are hosted on, than forcing users of Monero or Zerocash to do the same. It's a hell of a lot harder for the gov to do that to users of coins that dont utilize external masternodes to provide anonymity(monero).

For non gov entities, I suppose finding another flaw in darksends rounds, or a flaw in masternodes themselves would be much more plausible.

Look, people host MNs on VPS cos it's easy to do and the workload is lightweight (presently). You think if Guv started going after VPS people would still host on there? No, they'd host in just the same places that Monero workloads are hosted, meaning the challenge of finding the nodes would be equitable.

Anyway, the point is that guv/TLA is an unassailable adversary - they're going to win whatever you do.

The real-world, fit-for-purpose debate has to be around lesser adversaries, so give me just one example of such an adversary who could mount a successful attack on a 2,400 strong network of nodes spread across 30+ countries.

I know, I'm saying that you cannot compare these coins equally, since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

I gave an example of someone finding another flaw in darksends code and being able to deanonymize transactions, or finding a flaw in the masternodes themselves.

[1714510021]

1714510021

[1714510021]

1714510021

[1714510021]

1714510021

[Hueristic]

Well, people like me appreciate the analysis. True, you may not influence people who are heavily financially invested in DRK, but people who are legitimately interested in evaluating the technology will probably pay attention.

I would appreciate it too.

I know I've nitpicked at fluffy, but I respect his knowledge and would love to see him properly review DASH. The more I learn about the Monero project the more it interests me, so to see a fair (and I stress fair) review of DASH by fluffy would be very interesting for me as an investor.

there is one on reddit, try a search.

[Joshuar]

The government will have a hell of a easier time forcing masternode owners to give themselves in or just taking down the servers the masternodes are hosted on, than forcing users of Monero or Zerocash to do the same. It's a hell of a lot harder for the gov to do that to users of coins that dont utilize external masternodes to provide anonymity(monero).

If an evil Govt shut down a VPS, the same masternode can reappear in another country as soon as an instance is provisioned.  Minutes or hours.  No fuss, no muss.

For non gov entities, I suppose finding another flaw in darksends rounds, or a flaw in masternodes themselves would be much more plausible.

What does that even mean?

If the coins are held on the masternode and not a cold wallet, that masternode isnt reappearing anywhere. The gov can just take control of the servers the masternodes are hosted on.

Someone found a flaw in darksend and was able to deanonymize a transaction back in late 2014, such a thing is much more plausible IMO for a non gov entity.

[majamina]

since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is far more easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

OK so Monero lives on longer than DASH in the face of Guv/TLA, is that your point?

Aside from this Guv scenario, as I said, the real-world fit-for-purose debate is surely around lesser adversaries. In this case DASH is fit-for-purpose IMO. On with adoption!

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

OK fair comment.....is it possible to obtain monero node IPs?

[nsimmons]

As I said earlier, not equally. The government will have a hell of a easier time forcing masternode owners to give themselves in or just taking down the servers the masternodes are hosted on, than forcing users of Monero or Zerocash to do the same. It's a hell of a lot harder for the gov to do that to users of coins that dont utilize external masternodes to provide anonymity(monero).

For non gov entities, I suppose finding another flaw in darksends rounds, or a flaw in masternodes themselves would be much more plausible.

Look, people host MNs on VPS cos it's easy to do and the workload is lightweight (presently). You think if Guv started going after VPS people would still host on there? No, they'd host in just the same places that Monero workloads are hosted, meaning the challenge of finding the nodes would be equitable.

Anyway, the point is that guv/TLA is an unassailable adversary - they're going to win whatever you do.

The real-world, fit-for-purpose debate has to be around lesser adversaries, so give me just one example of such an adversary who could mount a successful attack on a 2,400 strong network of nodes spread across 30+ countries.

I know, I'm saying that you cannot compare these coins equally, since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

I gave an example of someone finding another flaw in darksends code and being able to deanonymize transactions, or finding a flaw in the masternodes themselves.

Prove your claim, otherwise its conjecture.

Anyone can spout anything they want, without evidence its just bullshit.


Prove your claim

[Joshuar]

As I said earlier, not equally. The government will have a hell of a easier time forcing masternode owners to give themselves in or just taking down the servers the masternodes are hosted on, than forcing users of Monero or Zerocash to do the same. It's a hell of a lot harder for the gov to do that to users of coins that dont utilize external masternodes to provide anonymity(monero).

For non gov entities, I suppose finding another flaw in darksends rounds, or a flaw in masternodes themselves would be much more plausible.

Look, people host MNs on VPS cos it's easy to do and the workload is lightweight (presently). You think if Guv started going after VPS people would still host on there? No, they'd host in just the same places that Monero workloads are hosted, meaning the challenge of finding the nodes would be equitable.

Anyway, the point is that guv/TLA is an unassailable adversary - they're going to win whatever you do.

The real-world, fit-for-purpose debate has to be around lesser adversaries, so give me just one example of such an adversary who could mount a successful attack on a 2,400 strong network of nodes spread across 30+ countries.

I know, I'm saying that you cannot compare these coins equally, since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

I gave an example of someone finding another flaw in darksends code and being able to deanonymize transactions, or finding a flaw in the masternodes themselves.

Prove your claim, otherwise its conjecture.

Anyone can spout anything they want, without evidence its just bullshit.


Prove your claim

Are you trolling? Most masternodes are hosted on centralized servers online, such as Amazon. The government can easily subpoena Amazon or simply forcefully take control of the server the masternodes are hosted on. Ring Signatures has been around for over a decade, monero uses no external nodes to rely on for anonymity, meaning it'd be much harder for a gov entity to do the same thing to Monero than it could do to Dash.

You dont seriously need a explanation for something this mediocre do you...

[majamina]

Are you trolling? Most masternodes are hosted on centralized servers online, such as Amazon. The government can easily subpoena Amazon or simply forcefully take control of the server the masternodes are hosted on.

You dont seriously need a explanation for something this mediocre do you...

dude we went through this in quite a lot of detail back up the thread.....look at my MN distribution post and the subsequent debate.

[oaxaca]

If the coins are held on the masternode and not a cold wallet, that masternode isnt reappearing anywhere. The gov can just take control of the servers the masternodes are hosted on.

Coins are stored in cold wallets.  Nothing on the servers to take.

[Joshuar]

Are you trolling? Most masternodes are hosted on centralized servers online, such as Amazon. The government can easily subpoena Amazon or simply forcefully take control of the server the masternodes are hosted on.

You dont seriously need a explanation for something this mediocre do you...

dude we went through this in quite a lot of detail back up the thread.....look at my MN distribution post and the subsequent debate.

Ok I wont respond to him anymore.

since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is far more easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

OK so Monero lives on longer than DASH in the face of Guv/TLA, is that your point?

Aside from this Guv scenario, as I said, the real-world fit-for-purose debate is surely around lesser adversaries. In this case DASH is fit-for-purpose IMO. On with adoption!

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

OK fair comment.....is it possible to obtain monero node IPs?

Hmm, I'm not completely sure about that. Probably, if you can its the same as obtaining the ip of a bitcoin node, you cant do anything with it though if you control the node(no spying or anything), so I dont see how it would matter.

[iCEBREAKER]

Well it's disappointing to get up this morning and find the thread only talking about 'instamine'. I realise that DASH opponents see good reason to keep this going, but I also think it's a topic that's been done to absolute death with every possible angle having been explored on these forums.

Endless re-iteration is not a characteristic of reasonable debate. In a formal debate both sides generally have a set time to state their case on a topic, after which it would be closed and those witnessing the debate would be left to make up their minds.

Both sides have had endless opportunity to state their 'Instamine' case, so at least in this thread we should close the topic and keep things moving with fresh or unexplored aspects of DASH vs XMR.

New evidence has come to light, and we must in that context reconsider the instamine issue.

VIA coredev Drak has identified THE DARKCOIN FOUNDATION's CEO, Ed Moncadas (aka Masternode), as an insider trader and extortionist with a shady background in gambling and altcoin pumping.

This changes our former good-faith assumptions about the instamine.

Before we could with some confidence attribute to incompetence what others may uncharitably attribute to malice.

In the old narrative, the instamine was actually a serendipitous little oopsy-mine, just part of the shambling shit-show that was Darkcoin's launch.

In the new post-Drak revelation story, the instamine becomes part of a larger pattern and continuing practice of fraud.

[nsimmons]

As I said earlier, not equally. The government will have a hell of a easier time forcing masternode owners to give themselves in or just taking down the servers the masternodes are hosted on, than forcing users of Monero or Zerocash to do the same. It's a hell of a lot harder for the gov to do that to users of coins that dont utilize external masternodes to provide anonymity(monero).

For non gov entities, I suppose finding another flaw in darksends rounds, or a flaw in masternodes themselves would be much more plausible.

Look, people host MNs on VPS cos it's easy to do and the workload is lightweight (presently). You think if Guv started going after VPS people would still host on there? No, they'd host in just the same places that Monero workloads are hosted, meaning the challenge of finding the nodes would be equitable.

Anyway, the point is that guv/TLA is an unassailable adversary - they're going to win whatever you do.

The real-world, fit-for-purpose debate has to be around lesser adversaries, so give me just one example of such an adversary who could mount a successful attack on a 2,400 strong network of nodes spread across 30+ countries.

I know, I'm saying that you cannot compare these coins equally, since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

I gave an example of someone finding another flaw in darksends code and being able to deanonymize transactions, or finding a flaw in the masternodes themselves.

Prove your claim, otherwise its conjecture.

Anyone can spout anything they want, without evidence its just bullshit.


Prove your claim

Are you trolling? Most masternodes are hosted on centralized servers online, such as Amazon. The government can easily subpoena Amazon or simply forcefully take control of the server the masternodes are hosted on. Ring Signatures has been around for over a decade, monero uses no external nodes to rely on for anonymity, meaning it'd be much harder for a gov entity to do the same thing to Monero than it could do to Dash.

You dont seriously need a explanation for something this mediocre do you...

Prove anonymity can be broken easier in dash, not that a single country can take over a vps. That requires demonstrative evidence, not your opinion.

Prove anonymity can be broken in dash easier than monero.
I will help

1. break anonymity in dash
2. break anonymity in monero
3. compare resources required for step 1 and 2

See you have a logic failure, to claim anonymity can be broken easier in dash than monero, PRESUPPOSES anonymity can be broken in either. You have literally argued monero is flawed. Well done.

[Joshuar]

If the coins are held on the masternode and not a cold wallet, that masternode isnt reappearing anywhere. The gov can just take control of the servers the masternodes are hosted on.

Coins are stored in cold wallets.  Nothing on the servers to take.

Dont lie please. Cold wallet storage is optional, most masternodes probably still have the 1k dark in the hot wallets.

[majamina]

Hmm, I'm not completely sure about that. Probably, if you can its the same as obtaining the ip of a bitcoin node, you cant do anything with it though if you control the node(no spying or anything), so I dont see how it would matter.

but guv/tla could take down the node, on their guv/tla quest to take down the coin....which is what we were talking about

[majamina]

If the coins are held on the masternode and not a cold wallet, that masternode isnt reappearing anywhere. The gov can just take control of the servers the masternodes are hosted on.

Coins are stored in cold wallets.  Nothing on the servers to take.

Dont lie please. Cold wallet storage is optional, most masternodes probably still have the 1k dark in the hot wallets.

I really don't think so....most people are doing cold wallets. There are features now where you can start all your nodes from a single cold wallet.

[Joshuar]

As I said earlier, not equally. The government will have a hell of a easier time forcing masternode owners to give themselves in or just taking down the servers the masternodes are hosted on, than forcing users of Monero or Zerocash to do the same. It's a hell of a lot harder for the gov to do that to users of coins that dont utilize external masternodes to provide anonymity(monero).

For non gov entities, I suppose finding another flaw in darksends rounds, or a flaw in masternodes themselves would be much more plausible.

Look, people host MNs on VPS cos it's easy to do and the workload is lightweight (presently). You think if Guv started going after VPS people would still host on there? No, they'd host in just the same places that Monero workloads are hosted, meaning the challenge of finding the nodes would be equitable.

Anyway, the point is that guv/TLA is an unassailable adversary - they're going to win whatever you do.

The real-world, fit-for-purpose debate has to be around lesser adversaries, so give me just one example of such an adversary who could mount a successful attack on a 2,400 strong network of nodes spread across 30+ countries.

I know, I'm saying that you cannot compare these coins equally, since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

I gave an example of someone finding another flaw in darksends code and being able to deanonymize transactions, or finding a flaw in the masternodes themselves.

Prove your claim, otherwise its conjecture.

Anyone can spout anything they want, without evidence its just bullshit.


Prove your claim

Are you trolling? Most masternodes are hosted on centralized servers online, such as Amazon. The government can easily subpoena Amazon or simply forcefully take control of the server the masternodes are hosted on. Ring Signatures has been around for over a decade, monero uses no external nodes to rely on for anonymity, meaning it'd be much harder for a gov entity to do the same thing to Monero than it could do to Dash.

You dont seriously need a explanation for something this mediocre do you...

Prove anonymity can be broken easier in dash, not that a single country can take over a vps. That requires demonstrative evidence, not your opinion.

Prove anonymity can be broken in dash easier than monero.
I will help

1. break anonymity in dash
2. break animosity in monero
3. compare resources required for step 1 and 2

See you have a logic failure, to claim anonymity can be broken easier in dash than monero, PRESUPPOSES anonymity can be broken in either. You have literally argued monero is flawed. Well done.

Do you even know what was being discussed, troll? We're not talking about breaking the anonymity, but for how easy it would be for a gov to take down the anonymity/coin.

Go back under your troll bridge thanks.

[majamina]

Well it's disappointing to get up this morning and find the thread only talking about 'instamine'. I realise that DASH opponents see good reason to keep this going, but I also think it's a topic that's been done to absolute death with every possible angle having been explored on these forums.

Endless re-iteration is not a characteristic of reasonable debate. In a formal debate both sides generally have a set time to state their case on a topic, after which it would be closed and those witnessing the debate would be left to make up their minds.

Both sides have had endless opportunity to state their 'Instamine' case, so at least in this thread we should close the topic and keep things moving with fresh or unexplored aspects of DASH vs XMR.

New evidence has come to light, and we must in that context reconsider the instamine issue.

VIA coredev Drak has identified THE DARKCOIN FOUNDATION's CEO, Ed Moncadas (aka Masternode), as an insider trader and extortionist with a shady background in gambling and altcoin pumping.

This changes our former good-faith assumptions about the instamine.

Before we could with some confidence attribute to incompetence what others may uncharitably attribute to malice.

In the old narrative, the instamine was actually a serendipitous little oopsy-mine, just part of the shambling shit-show that was Darkcoin's launch.

In the new post-Drak revelation story, the instamine becomes part of a larger pattern and continuing practice of fraud.

now I should know better than to reply to you, but that is a highly dubious accusation....i.e. a massive load of hairy old bollocks.

[nsimmons]

As I said earlier, not equally. The government will have a hell of a easier time forcing masternode owners to give themselves in or just taking down the servers the masternodes are hosted on, than forcing users of Monero or Zerocash to do the same. It's a hell of a lot harder for the gov to do that to users of coins that dont utilize external masternodes to provide anonymity(monero).

For non gov entities, I suppose finding another flaw in darksends rounds, or a flaw in masternodes themselves would be much more plausible.

Look, people host MNs on VPS cos it's easy to do and the workload is lightweight (presently). You think if Guv started going after VPS people would still host on there? No, they'd host in just the same places that Monero workloads are hosted, meaning the challenge of finding the nodes would be equitable.

Anyway, the point is that guv/TLA is an unassailable adversary - they're going to win whatever you do.

The real-world, fit-for-purpose debate has to be around lesser adversaries, so give me just one example of such an adversary who could mount a successful attack on a 2,400 strong network of nodes spread across 30+ countries.

I know, I'm saying that you cannot compare these coins equally, since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

I gave an example of someone finding another flaw in darksends code and being able to deanonymize transactions, or finding a flaw in the masternodes themselves.

Prove your claim, otherwise its conjecture.

Anyone can spout anything they want, without evidence its just bullshit.


Prove your claim

Are you trolling? Most masternodes are hosted on centralized servers online, such as Amazon. The government can easily subpoena Amazon or simply forcefully take control of the server the masternodes are hosted on. Ring Signatures has been around for over a decade, monero uses no external nodes to rely on for anonymity, meaning it'd be much harder for a gov entity to do the same thing to Monero than it could do to Dash.

You dont seriously need a explanation for something this mediocre do you...

Prove anonymity can be broken easier in dash, not that a single country can take over a vps. That requires demonstrative evidence, not your opinion.

Prove anonymity can be broken in dash easier than monero.
I will help

1. break anonymity in dash
2. break animosity in monero
3. compare resources required for step 1 and 2

See you have a logic failure, to claim anonymity can be broken easier in dash than monero, PRESUPPOSES anonymity can be broken in either. You have literally argued monero is flawed. Well done.

Do you even know what was being discussed, troll? We're not talking about breaking the anonymity(To which it would still be easier to do for Dash), but for how easy it would be for a gov to take down the anonymity/coin.

Go back under your troll bridge thanks.

Let me help you out, not discussing anonymity? Look up a little to the giant bold letters.

since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero/

Since I call out your easily proved lies and logically fallacies I'm a troll.  

[Joshuar]

If the coins are held on the masternode and not a cold wallet, that masternode isnt reappearing anywhere. The gov can just take control of the servers the masternodes are hosted on.

Coins are stored in cold wallets.  Nothing on the servers to take.

Dont lie please. Cold wallet storage is optional, most masternodes probably still have the 1k dark in the hot wallets.

I really don't think so....most people are doing cold wallets. There are features now where you can start all your nodes from a single cold wallet.

When I was involved with Dash(Darkcoin), most masternodes were hosted on Amazon and in the hot wallets. Its up for speculation though, he made it seem as if cold wallets was where coins are only stored, which isnt true.

[Joshuar]

As I said earlier, not equally. The government will have a hell of a easier time forcing masternode owners to give themselves in or just taking down the servers the masternodes are hosted on, than forcing users of Monero or Zerocash to do the same. It's a hell of a lot harder for the gov to do that to users of coins that dont utilize external masternodes to provide anonymity(monero).

For non gov entities, I suppose finding another flaw in darksends rounds, or a flaw in masternodes themselves would be much more plausible.

Look, people host MNs on VPS cos it's easy to do and the workload is lightweight (presently). You think if Guv started going after VPS people would still host on there? No, they'd host in just the same places that Monero workloads are hosted, meaning the challenge of finding the nodes would be equitable.

Anyway, the point is that guv/TLA is an unassailable adversary - they're going to win whatever you do.

The real-world, fit-for-purpose debate has to be around lesser adversaries, so give me just one example of such an adversary who could mount a successful attack on a 2,400 strong network of nodes spread across 30+ countries.

I know, I'm saying that you cannot compare these coins equally, since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

I gave an example of someone finding another flaw in darksends code and being able to deanonymize transactions, or finding a flaw in the masternodes themselves.

Prove your claim, otherwise its conjecture.

Anyone can spout anything they want, without evidence its just bullshit.


Prove your claim

Are you trolling? Most masternodes are hosted on centralized servers online, such as Amazon. The government can easily subpoena Amazon or simply forcefully take control of the server the masternodes are hosted on. Ring Signatures has been around for over a decade, monero uses no external nodes to rely on for anonymity, meaning it'd be much harder for a gov entity to do the same thing to Monero than it could do to Dash.

You dont seriously need a explanation for something this mediocre do you...

Prove anonymity can be broken easier in dash, not that a single country can take over a vps. That requires demonstrative evidence, not your opinion.

Prove anonymity can be broken in dash easier than monero.
I will help

1. break anonymity in dash
2. break animosity in monero
3. compare resources required for step 1 and 2

See you have a logic failure, to claim anonymity can be broken easier in dash than monero, PRESUPPOSES anonymity can be broken in either. You have literally argued monero is flawed. Well done.

Do you even know what was being discussed, troll? We're not talking about breaking the anonymity(To which it would still be easier to do for Dash), but for how easy it would be for a gov to take down the anonymity/coin.

Go back under your troll bridge thanks.

Let me help you out, not discussing anonymity? Look up a little to the giant bold letters.

since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero/

Since I call out your easily proved lies and logically fallacies I'm a troll.  

Are you dumb? I said taking down anonymity, taking down the coin's anonymity is not the same as breaking into the coin's anonymity. Please, troll better.

[nsimmons]

As I said earlier, not equally. The government will have a hell of a easier time forcing masternode owners to give themselves in or just taking down the servers the masternodes are hosted on, than forcing users of Monero or Zerocash to do the same. It's a hell of a lot harder for the gov to do that to users of coins that dont utilize external masternodes to provide anonymity(monero).

For non gov entities, I suppose finding another flaw in darksends rounds, or a flaw in masternodes themselves would be much more plausible.

Look, people host MNs on VPS cos it's easy to do and the workload is lightweight (presently). You think if Guv started going after VPS people would still host on there? No, they'd host in just the same places that Monero workloads are hosted, meaning the challenge of finding the nodes would be equitable.

Anyway, the point is that guv/TLA is an unassailable adversary - they're going to win whatever you do.

The real-world, fit-for-purpose debate has to be around lesser adversaries, so give me just one example of such an adversary who could mount a successful attack on a 2,400 strong network of nodes spread across 30+ countries.

I know, I'm saying that you cannot compare these coins equally, since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero.. Thats it. If a scenario came where the government was banning all use of cryptocurrencies etc, you can expect masternodes on coins to be one of the first things taken down by the government.

The challenge of finding the nodes? The ip's of all masternodes are in the open.

I gave an example of someone finding another flaw in darksends code and being able to deanonymize transactions, or finding a flaw in the masternodes themselves.

Prove your claim, otherwise its conjecture.

Anyone can spout anything they want, without evidence its just bullshit.


Prove your claim

Are you trolling? Most masternodes are hosted on centralized servers online, such as Amazon. The government can easily subpoena Amazon or simply forcefully take control of the server the masternodes are hosted on. Ring Signatures has been around for over a decade, monero uses no external nodes to rely on for anonymity, meaning it'd be much harder for a gov entity to do the same thing to Monero than it could do to Dash.

You dont seriously need a explanation for something this mediocre do you...

Prove anonymity can be broken easier in dash, not that a single country can take over a vps. That requires demonstrative evidence, not your opinion.

Prove anonymity can be broken in dash easier than monero.
I will help

1. break anonymity in dash
2. break animosity in monero
3. compare resources required for step 1 and 2

See you have a logic failure, to claim anonymity can be broken easier in dash than monero, PRESUPPOSES anonymity can be broken in either. You have literally argued monero is flawed. Well done.

Do you even know what was being discussed, troll? We're not talking about breaking the anonymity(To which it would still be easier to do for Dash), but for how easy it would be for a gov to take down the anonymity/coin.

Go back under your troll bridge thanks.

Let me help you out, not discussing anonymity? Look up a little to the giant bold letters.

since taking down a coin's anonymity with masternodes like Dash is much easier than taking down a coin that doesn't use masternodes like Monero/

Since I call out your easily proved lies and logically fallacies I'm a troll.  

I said taking down anonymity, are you dumb? Is taking down anonymity synonymous with breaking into the anonymity?No. So, please, get educated.

Then you are misinformed, coins are pre-mixed. Once mixed, all master nodes can vanish. Anonymity remains, and yes you can use a cold wallet, since last summer.