Bitcoin Forum
October 19, 2017, 03:06:39 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Shadowcash vs. Monero, an unbiased debate.  (Read 7400 times)
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
August 13, 2015, 05:40:54 PM
 #101

Nothing else besides anonymity is ever gonna be enough to ever match (or unseat) bitcoin.

Disagree. I think instant transactions and scaling to microtransaction volume (million transactions per second) will unseat Bitcoin.

Anonymity will become more important, but most people in the world don't care about anonymity. They care about social media and stuff like that. Monetizing that with microtransactions is the huge market.

Anonymity could end up being very important as the bankrupt States of the world start to tax everything that moves. Chicago is going to tax video streaming on the internet.

But these anonymity markets may be much slower to develop than microtransaction markets. I'd pursue both if I did a coin.

What marketing plans do you suggest for Monero? I also believe that Monero has the best tech but could benefit from more effective promotion

I would suggest making it super easy for people to mix BTC. Then try to hook them into using XMR from there.

I would suggest creating new uses for anonymous coins and especially combined with microtransactions.

1508425599
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508425599

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508425599
Reply with quote  #2

1508425599
Report to moderator
1508425599
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508425599

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508425599
Reply with quote  #2

1508425599
Report to moderator
1508425599
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508425599

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508425599
Reply with quote  #2

1508425599
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508425599
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508425599

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508425599
Reply with quote  #2

1508425599
Report to moderator
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
August 13, 2015, 05:48:53 PM
 #102

Also there is no discussion of the spam resistance.

Without spam resistance, an adversary can flood a channel and lower the anonymity set. Adversary could also drive users away from using the chat due to the spam overhead, thus further reducing the anonymity set.

Appears to me ShadowCash are trying to do too much at one time thus preoccupied away from being thorough in their white papers. See upthread for supporting facts.

erok
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


Avatars are overrated.


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 01:59:16 AM
 #103

Appears to me ShadowCash are trying to do too much at one time thus preoccupied away from being thorough in their white papers. See upthread for supporting facts.
Thats for damn sure. Shadow is tackling the crypto end game while most people are just dicking around digging for shit to fling.

Also I do not think instant transactions are feasible. How would you divy out blockchain authority and ensure that a one to one transaction is secure without a vote (can't rely on closest/quickest response time)? But that is a whole nother topic and this thread should stick to the main theme of POS vs. POW and the perceived benefits/flaws of SDT.



"the destruction of privacy widens the existing power imbalance between the ruling factions and everyone else" -- Julian Assange
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:14:43 AM
 #104

Also I do not think instant transactions are feasible. How would you divy out blockchain authority and ensure that a one to one transaction is secure without a vote (can't rely on closest/quickest response time)? But that is a whole nother topic and this thread should stick to the main theme of POS vs. POW and the perceived benefits/flaws of SDT.

Okay I won't go off on that tangent here.

KeyJockey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532



View Profile
October 09, 2015, 02:58:01 PM
 #105

Well... been a while... just bumpin' this thread to see if there's anything else to say here?  LOL

Seems like ALL of my (few) "alts" not doin' too well lately but still gonna hodl 'em just as hedge against any bitcoin catastrophe or whatever "natural evolution" may happen here in crypto-world.  

Fun times  Tongue



P.S. {Edit} Sig tag says, "formerly AnonyMint, UnunoctiumTesticles, iamback, contagion, TheFascistMind, etc…" and FWIW and IMHO your best coolest screen name by far has always been "AnonyMint" but really, why change accounts so much?  WTF, dude?  LOL

- 1KeyJKVWVxdavKTetDJpQWdUaota5jbtX6 -
MR1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 890



View Profile
October 10, 2015, 02:05:28 PM
 #106

I don't know about the SDC launch, I wasn't there.

The SDC distribution process of 100% of the supply going out in two weeks is terrible.

The Monero launch was fair, and the distribution process of 85% of the base supply going out in 4 years, with a 0.3 XMR (0.9%) disinflationary perpetual reward after about 8 years is a bit fast, but defensible.

Technology-wise they are somewhat comparable as the SDC anonymity scheme is based heavily on cryptonote. The SDC code base is largely based on Bitcoin, via Blackcoin or some other path of forking (I'm not sure of the details), so part of it is more mature than Monero, although the anon part is newly implemented and probably less mature.

The cryptonote alleged improvements on Bitcoin that aren't anon-related such as dynamic blocks sizes are not present in SDC, so that would be a point for Monero if you think those are good.

That SDC has an integrated non-anon portion of the chain could be viewed as a privacy negative since it will pull some of the transactions out of the anonymity set. Monero is going in the other direction pushing all transactions into the anonymity set, although that isn't implemented yet, so Monero also has a non-anon portion of its chain currently.

EDIT: I agree with fluffypony's later point that proof of stake is cryptographically unproven and likely unsound and unfixable.




Is SDC anon feature decentralized?
LiteBit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1105



View Profile
October 12, 2015, 01:59:52 PM
 #107

I don't know about the SDC launch, I wasn't there.

The SDC distribution process of 100% of the supply going out in two weeks is terrible.

The Monero launch was fair, and the distribution process of 85% of the base supply going out in 4 years, with a 0.3 XMR (0.9%) disinflationary perpetual reward after about 8 years is a bit fast, but defensible.

Technology-wise they are somewhat comparable as the SDC anonymity scheme is based heavily on cryptonote. The SDC code base is largely based on Bitcoin, via Blackcoin or some other path of forking (I'm not sure of the details), so part of it is more mature than Monero, although the anon part is newly implemented and probably less mature.

The cryptonote alleged improvements on Bitcoin that aren't anon-related such as dynamic blocks sizes are not present in SDC, so that would be a point for Monero if you think those are good.

That SDC has an integrated non-anon portion of the chain could be viewed as a privacy negative since it will pull some of the transactions out of the anonymity set. Monero is going in the other direction pushing all transactions into the anonymity set, although that isn't implemented yet, so Monero also has a non-anon portion of its chain currently.

EDIT: I agree with fluffypony's later point that proof of stake is cryptographically unproven and likely unsound and unfixable.




Is SDC anon feature decentralized?

Yes.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!