Zero Knowledge Transactions

[rdnkjdi]

So you can be held legally culpable for slander.

Why do people who want to get rid of the existing centralized legal system constantly threaten with it?  I'm not just picking on you ... Cryptsy, Paycoin, the guys on Bitcointalk when I tried to start a small angel funding for the guy who was doing the bitcoin malleability attack.

It seems so weird to me even if it really is slander or misinformation etc.  Seems like freemarket / educated people's opinions should be adequate to deal with who does / doesn't have something valid to say.

[rpietila]

lol
what a scammer wannabe

Kindly consider getting lost. This is a very important thread, and he is the OP, and I known him for 8 years, and your slander is not welcome.

[benthach]

lol
what a scammer wannabe

Kindly consider getting lost. This is a very important thread, and he is the OP, and I known him for 8 years, and your slander is not welcome.

important my a$$
real scammer will always get money first before work
real inventor will always get thing to worked first before asking for money

[TPTB_need_war]

The smartest thing to do would have been to work with smooth on Aeon.

But each to their own.

Smooth and I have talked on occasion in private about working together. Lately we are not talking about that. That is always a possibility again in the future. Realize any code I am off doing, can at any time be brought to smooth and say, "this is working, should we integrate this in Aeon?".

I think coming with some code in hand is maybe more instructive than a lot of verbiage.

I just want to code and know I have enough support out there if I produce something of value. Appears the support is out there. The onus is on me. If it makes most sense to ally with smooth, that can be discussed. Producing some code first might be the most convincing.

[TPTB_need_war]

real scammer will always get money first before work
real inventor will always get thing to worked first before asking for money

I think you failed to read what I wrote:

Thus you must complete your development work and debugging before you accept the funds from the crowdfunding.

If you are referring to the offer to sell my completed work in the whitepaper then apparently you have some kind of comprehension disability.

[TPTB_need_war]

So you can be held legally culpable for slander.

Why do people who want to get rid of the existing centralized legal system constantly threaten with it?  I'm not just picking on you ... Cryptsy, Paycoin, the guys on Bitcointalk when I tried to start a small angel funding for the guy who was doing the bitcoin malleability attack.

It seems so weird to me even if it really is slander or misinformation etc.  Seems like freemarket / educated people's opinions should be adequate to deal with who does / doesn't have something valid to say.

Slander is attacking someone's reputation with lies that have an economically damaging effect.

Asking him to put his legal name on his attacks is way of saying to readers that "please note this guy is attacking me but won't even use his real name, but I have used my real name". So it is way of stating to readers who is more trustworthy.

Also it was the easiest way to respond since this is not a moderated thread, otherwise I would have just deleted his posts and ignored them.

As for suing for slander and the legal system, obviously he isn't worth my time to do that. I only stated that he should be willing to be culpable (responsible for his actions) if he wants to claim righteousness.

When reading my posts, please note I am often an abstract thinker, so I often have something going in my mind that is conceptual and not just what is literally written.

[Wheatclove]

Benthach is a known troll. Best to ignore that trash.

[benthach]

real scammer will always get money first before work
real inventor will always get thing to worked first before asking for money

I think you failed to read what I wrote:

Thus you must complete your development work and debugging before you accept the funds from the crowdfunding.[/u]

If you are referring to the offer to sell my completed work in the whitepaper then apparently you have some kind of comprehension disability.

nowhere to be found on your OP. this only prove and make you a legitimated scammer wannabe. now go and editing your OP to included this statement, but then the fire already fizzle.
the scam team from shadowcoin already claimed to have zero knowledge and working so no one need your copy/paste shit anymore.

do you know and heard something call testnet?

[benthach]

Benthach is a known troll. Best to ignore that trash.

because i've proved again and again, your shitcoins are scam. altcoin=wild wild west scam world with no adoption. when i say anything, it will always right.

[TPTB_need_war]

From private messages, some Monero supporters (not rangedriver) think I could earn some XMR from doing a few coding jobs for donations, and they would like to see my creativity inside of Monero's community. I really appreciate that guys. Thank you for the warm invitation. And thanks for the help on my health. I will be looking more into the health tips.

I just want to point out something. I am 50 and I have no retirement, no savings, I live in a 3rd world country, and no one in my family can help me even a dime. And I have no insurance and no social welfare system to help me (I refused the USA system). So I don't have time for ideological giving. I need to produce with the few years I have remaining before I am old geezer (in the midst of a global crisis underway!!) and I need to know I am earning a market rate for my skills. So asap I need to do something in crypto and see if I can earn enough, else I need to get out and go work in other areas where I can earn a decent income.

The XMR donations model seems to pay about $1000 to $1500 per 2 weeks of work. So less than $40,000 per year. Sorry I was earning that much (inflation-adjusted) at age 19 back in 1984. That is totally incompatible with a man of my age and situation. Monero work is fit for those coders who have made already a lot of money and want to make an ideological contribution to crypto. Or who are young and live for example in Ukraine or Russia. I applaud their ethics, but I am also not sure if their ethics have not clouded their understanding of nature, economics, and market dynamics. But I don't want to judge. I am just saying the choice seems pretty clear that either I can earn enough in crypto or I can't. I need to find out as quickly as possible.

Sorry for writing so much. But I am tired of being misunderstood. I wanted to make it very clear.

Also I don't feel Monero really needs me. Because they need guys who fit well into a cooperative open source model where each of a multitude of people do coding tasks. Even though I am aware of this open source model, I have never done it. Never. I have always coded on small teams or by myself. I am not accustomed to interacting with code virtually. I think these guys get a great feeling from for example being on freenode talking tech. It doesn't drive my feelings. I feel no interest in that sort of thing. I go off by myself and create. That has been my style my entire life.

I suppose if I had no other options I would do it. But I really think you are asking to put a square peg in a round hole. Just isn't well matched. Perhaps I am mistaken, but usually my gut instincts are correct.

[coins101]

....I need to produce with the few years.......

That's a pretty realistic time frame to make a few $$million.

FWIW....VCs throw money at talented coders and they throw abuse at people that walk in with good ideas and no coding talent in their team.

So....what to code? That's the trick 

[TPTB_need_war]

So what if that was excellent tech that was generally considered to be the best out there. Then those market pumps might be like staircases lifting the valuation and ecosystem network effects. I don't think this model has been tested yet, except maybe Bitcoin is that model.

Tech alone doesn't drive success - you need to get marketing behind you;best if this comes in the form of having industry experts on your side / working for you. Bitcoin is only successful because of the first mover advantage.

Funding wise, I think etherium did it right, but its a huge project to arrange...seemingly outside the reach of the small developer.

You assume that Etherium did it correctly. There might be an epiphany that simplified the entire concept and enables one man to sort it out better than they did. Never underestimate the creativity of the odd thinker. When you think someone is odd, maybe that is sign they think differently than others thus are more likely to think of things in ways others don't.

What drives success more than anything is passion and commitment. Next comes a 6th sense of picking what is important. Next comes the aptitude to achieve it. Next comes some clever insights. Last comes some luck. Very rarely is it because of affiliations. Well that has been my experience at least. In terms of doing work as a group, work only with the very best, because the others just bog you down. And minimize the number of people you work with.

I don't think it is always best to have industry experts on your side. Sometimes the craziest damn unexpected thing comes from the one who was the least expected to do so and was the least conformist.

You know what I love about your post. You are challenging me. When I am not sick and someone says I can't do something, that is going to motivate me to do it. Lately I haven't been myself because illness physically removed what I could normally do in terms of effort and hours.

Any way enough about this. Thanks for your opinion. Very motivational.

That might make me worried because I might think that no one would invest in my work if I wasn't affiliated with other experts, but then I know that the smartest venture capitalists want to buy when everyone else won't so they get the lowest price and the go for the huge gains in appreciation.

I think one thing is clear. Drop a fully implemented Bitcoin killer in testnet on this forum, and the interest will be very high.

[illodin]

Wouldn't it be better for our community if I am off taking a stab at the other problems such as block chain overhaul that are not going to be on Monero's radar for some time yet?

Yep. Imo anonymity isn't really even needed until and if the coin gains a marketcap and user base (and hence the attention of the authorities) approaching those of Bitcoin's. But having an implied promise that there will be anonymity eventually is important for being able to gain that marketcap (although probably best not to literally promise anything that wouldn't be ready and sold at the crowdfund if that's the route you'll choose).

[coins101]

....

I think one thing is clear. Drop a fully implemented Bitcoin killer in testnet on this forum, and the interest will be very high.

That is far from clear. It has been tried and is being tried - Monero, to Dash, to xyz Coin.

Factom, for example, has raised $millions, by aligning with Bitcoin rather than trying to compete against it (I don't own any Factom or think they are legit under the hood).

However, first working ZKP might be enough to create a very comfortable retirement fund and enable decades of coding for fun.

[TPTB_need_war]

....

I think one thing is clear. Drop a fully implemented Bitcoin killer in testnet on this forum, and the interest will be very high.

That is far from clear. It has been tried and is being tried - Monero, to Dash, to xyz Coin.

I never viewed those as Bitcoin killers. If their supporters thought they were, they were delusional.

You don't replace Bitcoin by doing some obscure feature better. You replace Bitcoin because something everybody desperately needs NOW can't be done by Bitcoin and only by your coin.

Factom, for example, has raised $millions, by aligning with Bitcoin rather than trying to compete against it (I don't own any Factom or think they are legit under the hood).

However, first working ZKP might be enough to create a very comfortable retirement fund and enable decades of coding for fun.

Except one problem. Bitcoin's block size can't scale to large data. Not without mining becoming very centralized.

[funnyman21]

I could see my whitepaper being more valuable to a coin that has no strong anonymity yet and which has the funds or market size to pay me. Bitshares and Nxt are probably the strongest candidates for getting my white paper if they are interested because they have weak anonymity thus far and at least the SuperNet (although they are working it, mine is I think superior than what they came up with and I do know what they were working on) has the funds available (haven't spoken to them yet on this issue) and if not just keep it for my own coin. Boolberry may still be affiliated with SuperNet so perhaps SuperNet would fund the addition of my algorithm to both BBR and any other coin on the SuperNet.

Boolberry and SuperNET (who has the money) should be very interested.

Please contact jl777
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=177323

Here is a recent post he made on the issue:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1198276.msg12617626#msg12617626

Can you add a poll to OP for donating to SuperNET to fund integration of Boolberry and your CT work?

[TPTB_need_war]

Wouldn't it be better for our community if I am off taking a stab at the other problems such as block chain overhaul that are not going to be on Monero's radar for some time yet?

Yep. Imo anonymity isn't really even needed until and if the coin gains a marketcap and user base (and hence the attention of the authorities) approaching those of Bitcoin's. But having an implied promise that there will be anonymity eventually is important for being able to gain that marketcap (although probably best not to literally promise anything that wouldn't be ready and sold at the crowdfund if that's the route you'll choose).

As I wrote up thread about my block chain design, the transaction processing format is orthogonal to the block chain, so anybody can add any kind of transaction processing they want.

I am talking really radical concepts. You all haven't even seen the tip of the iceberg yet. My anonymity paper is just a small smidgen of what is up my sleeve. (fucking health problem!)

[TPTB_need_war]

I could see my whitepaper being more valuable to a coin that has no strong anonymity yet and which has the funds or market size to pay me. Bitshares and Nxt are probably the strongest candidates for getting my white paper if they are interested because they have weak anonymity thus far and at least the SuperNet (although they are working it, mine is I think superior than what they came up with and I do know what they were working on) has the funds available (haven't spoken to them yet on this issue) and if not just keep it for my own coin. Boolberry may still be affiliated with SuperNet so perhaps SuperNet would fund the addition of my algorithm to both BBR and any other coin on the SuperNet.

Boolberry and SuperNET (who has the money) should be very interested.

Please contact jl777
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=177323

Here is a recent post he made on the issue:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1198276.msg12617626#msg12617626

Can you add a poll to OP for donating to SuperNET to fund integration of Boolberry and your CT work?

What Debate? NXT Votes Unanimously to Add Coin Mixing Anonymity
NXT, the finance 2.0 blockchain platform, has voted unanimously to implement CoinShuffle, a coin mixing anonymity technique to NXTcoin and other 'Monetary System' tokens. Implementation is expected on the next major release.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/114915/what-debate-nxt-votes-unanimously-to-add-coin-mixing-anonymity

And who do think suggested jl777 to use CoinShuffle as a first step? Me.

But now there is something better available (or you can use both together as I also gave jl777 the idea of using CoinShuffle as a way to send messages anonymously):

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12740753#msg12740753

[coins101]

So.

Close the thread.

Create a new ANN.

 

[TPTB_need_war]

Readers please note the voting is not locked. Just the topic. Unfortunately I had to lock the topic because of that one troll. And also I think we said enough already. I need to get back to work. I am available in private messages.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/3oi16k/ring_ct_for_monero_a_work_in_progress_comments/cw67x1d

it is harder than you think to prove that some public key has gotten rid of all the "H" (I wouldn't know how to do this and I study elliptic curves)

Because of the conditional security of elliptic curves it is assumed to be computational implausible to pick a value for the private key (x and/or z) which can offset any specific point bH, thus if the adversary knows the hidden values for all the outputs and a set of prospective hidden values for the all the inputs, then if these sum to 0 then the adversary can assume he has proven those inputs are the one who signed the ring even without knowing the private key that was used to sign. That elliptic security cuts both ways because it must be the case otherwise it might be possible to find a value of 'z' that would allow signing inputs more than once in the ring. So the security that works for you, also works against you, because the fuzz z that is employed to delink the outputs from the inputs in the ring is orthogonal security-wise to the sum of the hidden values. This was key distinction between CT and CCT when integrated with rings and that is why I had to do something different and end up with a design that doesn't sign the outputs when signing the ring for an input (or inputs).

it's not too hard to make the combinatorial type attack impossible using the pidgeonhole technique I mention in mrl_notesv0.3

https://github.com/ShenNoether/MiniNero/blob/master/mrl_notes_v0.3.pdf

In section "4.1  Example of the attack", why are you not acknowledging me as the first person to both communicate that sort of attack to smooth during the BCX incident in 2014 which I assume was relayed because the issue was subsequently mentioned in a Monero Labs Report and then sometime earlier this year I wrote down that tree case in a post in the Monero forum (and even explained that my solution would provide a method to prune the block chain) and they told me they had relayed this info to you and I believe you even replied there. So please give acknowledgement to prior art.

Btw, your stated solution attempts to be more general than the solution I stated which was simply to insure that all pubkey outputs mixed with the same set of pubkey outputs. Your proposed solution instead eliminates the possibility to prune the block chain. Also I believe there are other combinatorial faults in your stated solution, but maybe not, I will need to think about it more deeply.

In any case, even if you apply my prior art solution from 2014, it doesn't completely address the risk of combinatorial cascade, because the additional knowledge which eliminates some of the pubkey outputs as candidates thus reduces the effective value of 'n' and you can't know how small 'n' has become because you don't know how much information the adversary will have.

And this is why your design based on CT is inferior to mine.