Official Anoncoin chat thread (including history)

[LucyLovesCrypto]

Are we close to release of the next client?

[anonymousxx1503]

Are we close to release of the next client?

Between 1 day and 1 year away. Think I'm gonna lower my big sell wall and cap the price since no one is buying this shit coin anyway!

[Cryptoslave]

Hi Darkota,

I don't think that Anoncoin has been pumped and dumped repeatedly by the developers. It is true that Anoncoin has seen price manipulation like any other coin with low trading volume, but I don't see the hands of the developers in this. It is also true that the Gnosis's implementation of zerocoin was overhyped: my impression is that he was overly naive about the time commitment required to finish the job and that he did not profit from this (though I could be wrong, I am basing this on personal communication with him and judgement of his character).

Now that Cryptoslave and myself and acting as project managers, all development on the coin will be in the open on the Anoncoin development schedule. We will announce here only when new builds/release-candidates/releases are available, or when important milestones have been met. There will be no hype coming from the development team. If we have lost your trust, we hope to earn it back.

When will you be asking for volunteers for testnet? The development schedule says testnet 4 is "soon"?

Thanks!

Are we close to release of the next client?

The Anoncoin development schedule got updated today, please check it.

In short, we have now decided to do a hardfork instead of a softfork. I will briefly explain why.

At first, we are still plagued with mining issues due to the timewarp attack on the old KGW difficulty algorithm. Because we think this shall be overcome as soon as possible, we decided to change the difficulty algorithm in this very fork. This change can only be done with a hardfork so we acknowledged the need for one. This being stated, it was deemed beneficiary to also switch to a two algos chain at the same time, in this fork, instead that later.

So more precisely, with regard to the difficulty algorithm, GroundRod has developed AncShield, a fork of Digibyte's Multishield. The parameters have been chosen to avoid a timewarp attack by adjusting difficulty up more harshly than down, in contrast to digishield/multishield. Those parameters have yet to be tested by the devteam with several attack vectors and could be further modified, if needed.

Secondly, to avoid our chain been stuck at a high diff due to multipools jumping on and off, because our AncShield parameters are chosen to primarily avoid TW attack and hence for this purpose will be taking more time than digishield/multishield to return to the mean difficulty, we have decided to fork now on a two algos chain POW model. Thus, by following myriadcoin example, we will incorporate, in this fork, two POW algos, namely the original Scrypt algo but also SHA256d. Both mining algorithms will thus be ASIC minable and blocks will be distributed equally between the two algorithms, thus a Scrypt/SHA256d 1/1 mining model. Each algo will on average finds one block every 6 minutes, keeping the normal pace of Anoncoin mining schedule as actually used (ie one block every 3 min). The benefits for the Anoncoin network will be a better security with regards to a 51% attack as well as a better spread of block mining time (if one algo is stuck at a high diff due to a multipool jumping off, the other algorithm will not be affected). No merge mining will be allowed for any of the two algorithms in this hardfork, although for security reason this could eventually happen in a (distant) future. Until then Anoncoin will remain a pure POW coin. We also finally chose to not include a CPU mining algorithm such as PRIME for fear of low hashrate and thus opening risk of an attack from botnet. Same logical reasoning made us avoid GPU algorithms, to not be in the same situation than myriadcoin is with Groestl right now. The two algos implementation is still a work in progress.

Thirdly, a recent analysis by GroundRod of our 70007 node protocol version was effected. As it turns out, there is the need to improve the compatibility of the clearnet and the I2P nodes. This is a serious issue and we shall make wise use of the hardfork to implement a new way for both networks (clearnet and I2P) to communicate flawlessly. We will not release a public version of the client without having corrected it as we want to have the best I2P implementation for Anoncoin, due to our coin being the default I2P-cipherspace cryptocurrency. This is what is taking the time of the devteam right now.

Fourthly, the Anoncoin's test network (testnet) and regression test mode (regtest) were both updated to our new codebase. As soon as we will switch to the two algo mining, we will run a testnet and let interested people know about it to help us in detecting any bug that can result from all those changes. Meanwhile the Anoncoin develop builds are available, soon we will be at 0.9.4.5 version. BTW anyone using the 0.9.4.2 develop version shall update to the most recent version. Please check How to build Anoncoin.

Finally now we have bootstrap files available as explained in How to use a bootstrap.

We are sorry the price does not follow the work we are applying to the coin, but in time we hope this will be aknowledged by the community and price will correct. Of course, we cannot avoid people cashing out of anoncoin during this bitcoin rally.

CS

[dewdeded]

Start a new blockchain! Make a fair launch.

How can changing how nodes communicate can be a hard fork? Why? All other coins can do this without hardk forking.

[lunokhod2]

Start a new blockchain! Make a fair launch.

How can changing how nodes communicate can be a hard fork? Why? All other coins can do this without hardk forking.

Anoncoin was launched fairly. Why would we relaunch?

As for hardforking: Any coin that changes from a single POW algorithm to two would have to hardfork.

[dewdeded]

Obvious, I may misread Cryptoslaves posting. To me it sounded like the node communications changes are so big, that they alone also need a/would be a hardfork.


Relaunch because it looks to me (from this thread), that the distribution is so bad, that it hinders adoption/community growth. Judging from (the activity in) this thread, there cant be more then 15 people that hold significant amounts of ANC and want to develope an vivid ANC ecosystem.

[anonymousxx1503]

Hi Darkota,

I don't think that Anoncoin has been pumped and dumped repeatedly by the developers. It is true that Anoncoin has seen price manipulation like any other coin with low trading volume, but I don't see the hands of the developers in this. It is also true that the Gnosis's implementation of zerocoin was overhyped: my impression is that he was overly naive about the time commitment required to finish the job and that he did not profit from this (though I could be wrong, I am basing this on personal communication with him and judgement of his character).

Now that Cryptoslave and myself and acting as project managers, all development on the coin will be in the open on the Anoncoin development schedule. We will announce here only when new builds/release-candidates/releases are available, or when important milestones have been met. There will be no hype coming from the development team. If we have lost your trust, we hope to earn it back.

When will you be asking for volunteers for testnet? The development schedule says testnet 4 is "soon"?

Thanks!

Are we close to release of the next client?

The Anoncoin development schedule got updated today, please check it.

In short, we have now decided to do a hardfork instead of a softfork. I will briefly explain why.

At first, we are still plagued with mining issues due to the timewarp attack on the old KGW difficulty algorithm. Because we think this shall be overcome as soon as possible, we decided to change the difficulty algorithm in this very fork. This change can only be done with a hardfork so we acknowledged the need for one. This being stated, it was deemed beneficiary to also switch to a two algos chain at the same time, in this fork, instead that later.

So more precisely, with regard to the difficulty algorithm, GroundRod has developed AncShield, a fork of Digibyte's Multishield. The parameters have been chosen to avoid a timewarp attack by adjusting difficulty up more harshly than down, in contrast to digishield/multishield. Those parameters have yet to be tested by the devteam with several attack vectors and could be further modified, if needed.

Secondly, to avoid our chain been stuck at a high diff due to multipools jumping on and off, because our AncShield parameters are chosen to primarily avoid TW attack and hence for this purpose will be taking more time than digishield/multishield to return to the mean difficulty, we have decided to fork now on a two algos chain POW model. Thus, by following myriadcoin example, we will incorporate, in this fork, two POW algos, namely the original Scrypt algo but also SHA256d. Both mining algorithms will thus be ASIC minable and blocks will be distributed equally between the two algorithms, thus a Scrypt/SHA256d 1/1 mining model. Each algo will on average finds one block every 6 minutes, keeping the normal pace of Anoncoin mining schedule as actually used (ie one block every 3 min). The benefits for the Anoncoin network will be a better security with regards to a 51% attack as well as a better spread of block mining time (if one algo is stuck at a high diff due to a multipool jumping off, the other algorithm will not be affected). No merge mining will be allowed for any of the two algorithms in this hardfork, although for security reason this could eventually happen in a (distant) future. Until then Anoncoin will remain a pure POW coin. We also finally chose to not include a CPU mining algorithm such as PRIME for fear of low hashrate and thus opening risk of an attack from botnet. Same logical reasoning made us avoid GPU algorithms, to not be in the same situation than myriadcoin is with Groestl right now. The two algos implementation is still a work in progress.

Thirdly, a recent analysis by GroundRod of our 70007 node protocol version was effected. As it turns out, there is the need to improve the compatibility of the clearnet and the I2P nodes. This is a serious issue and we shall make wise use of the hardfork to implement a new way for both networks (clearnet and I2P) to communicate flawlessly. We will not release a public version of the client without having corrected it as we want to have the best I2P implementation for Anoncoin, due to our coin being the default I2P-cipherspace cryptocurrency. This is what is taking the time of the devteam right now.

Fourthly, the Anoncoin's test network (testnet) and regression test mode (regtest) were both updated to our new codebase. As soon as we will switch to the two algo mining, we will run a testnet and let interested people know about it to help us in detecting any bug that can result from all those changes. Meanwhile the Anoncoin develop builds are available, soon we will be at 0.9.4.5 version. BTW anyone using the 0.9.4.2 develop version shall update to the most recent version. Please check How to build Anoncoin.

Finally now we have bootstrap files available as explained in How to use a bootstrap.

We are sorry the price does not follow the work we are applying to the coin, but in time we hope this will be aknowledged by the community and price will correct. Of course, we cannot avoid people cashing out of anoncoin during this bitcoin rally.

CS

How can you guys suck this much? Switching to a new algo should be a matter of days, not weeks and definitely not months. The darkcoin dev team puts you guys to shame it's ridiculous.

[jolskeboll]

Why so angry? I think it's good that the admins really ARE dedicated, and that is what matters. Thumbs up!

[sorrros]

Why so angry? I think it's good that the admins really ARE dedicated, and that is what matters. Thumbs up!

+1

Thanks guys for your continuous development efforts on ANC!
DRK may develop things faster, but they are less and less focused on anonymity...

[lunokhod2]

Hi Darkota,

I don't think that Anoncoin has been pumped and dumped repeatedly by the developers. It is true that Anoncoin has seen price manipulation like any other coin with low trading volume, but I don't see the hands of the developers in this. It is also true that the Gnosis's implementation of zerocoin was overhyped: my impression is that he was overly naive about the time commitment required to finish the job and that he did not profit from this (though I could be wrong, I am basing this on personal communication with him and judgement of his character).

Now that Cryptoslave and myself and acting as project managers, all development on the coin will be in the open on the Anoncoin development schedule. We will announce here only when new builds/release-candidates/releases are available, or when important milestones have been met. There will be no hype coming from the development team. If we have lost your trust, we hope to earn it back.

When will you be asking for volunteers for testnet? The development schedule says testnet 4 is "soon"?

Thanks!

Are we close to release of the next client?

The Anoncoin development schedule got updated today, please check it.

In short, we have now decided to do a hardfork instead of a softfork. I will briefly explain why.

At first, we are still plagued with mining issues due to the timewarp attack on the old KGW difficulty algorithm. Because we think this shall be overcome as soon as possible, we decided to change the difficulty algorithm in this very fork. This change can only be done with a hardfork so we acknowledged the need for one. This being stated, it was deemed beneficiary to also switch to a two algos chain at the same time, in this fork, instead that later.

So more precisely, with regard to the difficulty algorithm, GroundRod has developed AncShield, a fork of Digibyte's Multishield. The parameters have been chosen to avoid a timewarp attack by adjusting difficulty up more harshly than down, in contrast to digishield/multishield. Those parameters have yet to be tested by the devteam with several attack vectors and could be further modified, if needed.

Secondly, to avoid our chain been stuck at a high diff due to multipools jumping on and off, because our AncShield parameters are chosen to primarily avoid TW attack and hence for this purpose will be taking more time than digishield/multishield to return to the mean difficulty, we have decided to fork now on a two algos chain POW model. Thus, by following myriadcoin example, we will incorporate, in this fork, two POW algos, namely the original Scrypt algo but also SHA256d. Both mining algorithms will thus be ASIC minable and blocks will be distributed equally between the two algorithms, thus a Scrypt/SHA256d 1/1 mining model. Each algo will on average finds one block every 6 minutes, keeping the normal pace of Anoncoin mining schedule as actually used (ie one block every 3 min). The benefits for the Anoncoin network will be a better security with regards to a 51% attack as well as a better spread of block mining time (if one algo is stuck at a high diff due to a multipool jumping off, the other algorithm will not be affected). No merge mining will be allowed for any of the two algorithms in this hardfork, although for security reason this could eventually happen in a (distant) future. Until then Anoncoin will remain a pure POW coin. We also finally chose to not include a CPU mining algorithm such as PRIME for fear of low hashrate and thus opening risk of an attack from botnet. Same logical reasoning made us avoid GPU algorithms, to not be in the same situation than myriadcoin is with Groestl right now. The two algos implementation is still a work in progress.

Thirdly, a recent analysis by GroundRod of our 70007 node protocol version was effected. As it turns out, there is the need to improve the compatibility of the clearnet and the I2P nodes. This is a serious issue and we shall make wise use of the hardfork to implement a new way for both networks (clearnet and I2P) to communicate flawlessly. We will not release a public version of the client without having corrected it as we want to have the best I2P implementation for Anoncoin, due to our coin being the default I2P-cipherspace cryptocurrency. This is what is taking the time of the devteam right now.

Fourthly, the Anoncoin's test network (testnet) and regression test mode (regtest) were both updated to our new codebase. As soon as we will switch to the two algo mining, we will run a testnet and let interested people know about it to help us in detecting any bug that can result from all those changes. Meanwhile the Anoncoin develop builds are available, soon we will be at 0.9.4.5 version. BTW anyone using the 0.9.4.2 develop version shall update to the most recent version. Please check How to build Anoncoin.

Finally now we have bootstrap files available as explained in How to use a bootstrap.

We are sorry the price does not follow the work we are applying to the coin, but in time we hope this will be aknowledged by the community and price will correct. Of course, we cannot avoid people cashing out of anoncoin during this bitcoin rally.

CS

How can you guys suck this much? Switching to a new algo should be a matter of days, not weeks and definitely not months. The darkcoin dev team puts you guys to shame it's ridiculous.

For your info, Darkcoin uses a single proof of work algorithm. You are correct that if we changed simply from Scrypt to SHA that it would be simple. However, we are implementing a model similar to Myriad where we will be using two different proof of work algos at the same time. Also, i believe that Darkcoin has full time developers, whereas Anoncoin is, and always has been, based on volunteers.

Cheers,

[lunokhod2]

Obvious, I may misread Cryptoslaves posting. To me it sounded like the node communications changes are so big, that they alone also need a/would be a hardfork.


Relaunch because it looks to me (from this thread), that the distribution is so bad, that it hinders adoption/community growth. Judging from (the activity in) this thread, there cant be more then 15 people that hold significant amounts of ANC and want to develope an vivid ANC ecosystem.

So, relaunch the same coin with a new logo, along with promises we can't keep? Maybe you weren't paying attention, but over the past year several such coins were released!

[lunokhod2]

Obvious, I may misread Cryptoslaves posting. To me it sounded like the node communications changes are so big, that they alone also need a/would be a hardfork.


Relaunch because it looks to me (from this thread), that the distribution is so bad, that it hinders adoption/community growth. Judging from (the activity in) this thread, there cant be more then 15 people that hold significant amounts of ANC and want to develope an vivid ANC ecosystem.

So, relaunch the same coin with a new logo, along with promises we can't keep? Maybe you weren't paying attention, but over the past year several such coins were released!

One last (serious) comment concerning the ANC ecosystem. It used to be that my anoncoin client would only connect to a couple of i2p peers, but for the past month or so I have consistently been connecting to the maximum number: 12. So, someone is using Anoncoin. Fortunately, since i2p is anonymous, I don't know who.

[coinfinance]

Big Drop Today:

http://www.coinfinance.com/currencies/ANC-AnonCoin

[NullProto]

Very disappointed to see the switch from pure Scrypt.  I've seen coin after coin make this switch thinking they will better protect themselves or increase value.  Without a single exception, I've seen the value of all of the coins I've watched do this dramatically drop immediately after the change, maybe some have recovered that I've missed, but I've not seen one yet.  Difficulty?  Again I don't see an immediate need to fix.  51%?  Don't understand the concern for the coin...the value is so low and what could possibly be gained by controlling a coin of little value at this point... this is a rhetorical question; I understand the possibilities but I can't see it as the priority right now.

The priority has to be updating the wallet so transactions don't get stuck...job 1.
Secondly, the only long-term (or near-term) value for this coin is zerocoin.  If that doesn't get done, the coin is history.

The other things can come in time.

Do I really care?  Why?  I have stake in the coin with at least 1 account in the top 100.  I'd like to see the coin have long term viability.  I like it's charter.

my 0.02 ANC

-NP

[matthewh3]

Very disappointed to see the switch from pure Scrypt.  I've seen coin after coin make this switch thinking they will better protect themselves or increase value.  Without a single exception, I've seen the value of all of the coins I've watched do this dramatically drop immediately after the change, maybe some have recovered that I've missed, but I've not seen one yet.  Difficulty?  Again I don't see an immediate need to fix.  51%?  Don't understand the concern for the coin...the value is so low and what could possibly be gained by controlling a coin of little value at this point... this is a rhetorical question; I understand the possibilities but I can't see it as the priority right now.

The priority has to be updating the wallet so transactions don't get stuck...job 1.
Secondly, the only long-term (or near-term) value for this coin is zerocoin.  If that doesn't get done, the coin is history.

The other things can come in time.

Do I really care?  Why?  I have stake in the coin with at least 1 account in the top 100.  I'd like to see the coin have long term viability.  I like it's charter.

my 0.02 ANC

-NP

Yeah but have you seen any coins make the switch from pure Scrypt to a myriad of chains.  With three myriad chains an attacker would need to control at least two of the three chains to pull off a successful attack.  And with these myriad chains also going to be AuxPoW chains then their hashrate's will be a lot higher than otherwise.  So in effect the current Scrypt hashrate should greatly increase even though it'll only be one of the three chains.  As the Scrypt miners will also be able to merge-mine Litecoin, Dogecoin and several other Scrypt coins at the same time for next extra work or cost. 

The difficulty algorithm does have some serious problems.  As when a very large amount of hashrate joins and then leaves the chain suddenly.  Then it takes a very long time for the remaining hashrate to find a block.  Which means no transactions at all can be processed for a very long time.  I strongly feel that its the epically slow development that is causing the new all time lows in the price of the last twelve months.  Although the core dev moved over to core I2p development a few months ago.  So we need to give the two new devs time to get up to speed.

[Cryptoslave]

Very disappointed to see the switch from pure Scrypt.  I've seen coin after coin make this switch thinking they will better protect themselves or increase value.  Without a single exception, I've seen the value of all of the coins I've watched do this dramatically drop immediately after the change, maybe some have recovered that I've missed, but I've not seen one yet.  Difficulty?  Again I don't see an immediate need to fix.  51%?  Don't understand the concern for the coin...the value is so low and what could possibly be gained by controlling a coin of little value at this point... this is a rhetorical question; I understand the possibilities but I can't see it as the priority right now.

The priority has to be updating the wallet so transactions don't get stuck...job 1.
Secondly, the only long-term (or near-term) value for this coin is zerocoin.  If that doesn't get done, the coin is history.

The other things can come in time.

Do I really care?  Why?  I have stake in the coin with at least 1 account in the top 100.  I'd like to see the coin have long term viability.  I like it's charter.

my 0.02 ANC

-NP

Yeah but have you seen any coins make the switch from pure Scrypt to a myriad of chains.  With three myriad chains an attacker would need to control at least two of the three chains to pull off a successful attack.  And with these myriad chains also going to be AuxPoW chains then their hashrate's will be a lot higher than otherwise.  So in effect the current Scrypt hashrate should greatly increase even though it'll only be one of the three chains.  As the Scrypt miners will also be able to merge-mine Litecoin, Dogecoin and several other Scrypt coins at the same time for next extra work or cost.  

The difficulty algorithm does have some serious problems.  As when a very large amount of hashrate joins and then leaves the chain suddenly.  Then it takes a very long time for the remaining hashrate to find a block.  Which means no transactions at all can be processed for a very long time.  I strongly feel that its the epically slow development that is causing the new all time lows in the price of the last twelve months.  Although the core dev moved over to core I2p development a few months ago.  So we need to give the two new devs time to get up to speed.

NullProto:

Very disappointed to see the switch from pure Scrypt.  I've seen coin after coin make this switch thinking they will better protect themselves or increase value.

-> As far as I know there is no coin having switched from pure Scrypt to a myriad of 2 chains SHA and Scrypt, none of them merge mined.
There are three unknown altcoins (Parallelcoin, Trinity and Dvorakcoin) that have 2 or 3 algo but they dont offer more than this. Otherwise myriadcoin started 5 independent algos and digibyte switched to the same model with much better success due to their good difficulty adjustment algorithm. Thanks to this multialgo and its multishield Digibyte is a good attack resilient coin.
Also like Matthewh3 said, in time we may have to switch to a merge mined model, becoming a child chain, when the block reward will be too low to make mining profitable, but this will be in a few years.


Difficulty?  Again I don't see an immediate need to fix.

-> then look this very good analysis by Drakoin of the actual ANC situation.


51%?  Don't understand the concern for the coin...the value is so low and what could possibly be gained by controlling a coin of little value at this point...

-> This and the timewarp are security concerns and shall be dealed with. For this, two algos with a good difficulty retarget shall have increased security. We do not put a third (GPU) algo or CPU algo for fear of low hashrate and constant gaming like on myriad Groestl. Also our difficulty retarget AncShield is a fork of Multishield, which is much better than what myriadcoin use.


The priority has to be updating the wallet so transactions don't get stuck...job 1.

-> We heartfully agree on this point, and that is why we did/are doing:
- codebase change to 9.4
- difficulty retarget algo change from KGW to AncShield
- mining algo change from pure Scrypt to a mix of Scrypt and SHA256d
- 70007 node protocol reworking to improve connectivity


Secondly, the only long-term (or near-term) value for this coin is zerocoin.  If that doesn't get done, the coin is history.

-> This is our main objective, along with the other main objective being complete I2P integration as you know. The I2P cipherspace support is also a necessary anonymity feature, please do not forget it! The blockchain has to be anonymized, but IP address are also monitored heavily, like shown in the recent Chainalysis Sybil Attack on the Bitcoin network.
Also, what is the use of zerocoin if the main network is completely screwed like it is now? So first thing to do is to rework our code until the anc network is not plagued anymore with the various issues we are working on at the moment. Like lunokhod said, we are sorry if the ZC announcement by Gnosis led to an hype and became overdue. We will announce when our next release candidate is available, and keeping the development public, and with no hype.


I'd like to see the coin have long term viability.  I like it's charter.

-> We too, thank you for your longterm support! Our job is to give Anoncoin the best technicals, but people like you are in last analysis those who give the coin its long term value!



matthewh3:

Yes in fine we will go toward this direction, but only with two algos due to the low hashrate of the CPU algo (Prime and others) and potential abuse of the GPU algos by miners owing hundreds of GPU, like we saw on myriadcoin (but their diff retarget is flawed too).

About the jumping on/off the network by multipools, yes this is an issue that explain the chain is stuck, but here it is more the ongoing timewarp attack that is the culprit, like shown in the excellent analysis of drakoin, linked above. In the multishield and digishield retarget algo, we have to choose the value of retarget parameters. Digishield used asymetric retargeting to avoid the chain stuck due to multipools hoping, but because the retarget is quicker when going down, this is more open to potential timewarp abuse (although I have not seen one on digishield or multishield). We will use asymetric retargeting but with greater upward % increase, than when it is reducing the difficulty. This is more secure against TW but the chain can be stuck longer than with the original Digishield. But with two algos in parallel the consequences shall be mitigated by the independent mining going on on the other chain. This is why we are doing two algos with this particular AncShield.

Yes you are right, Meeh mainly moved to I2P development instead for his hobby, but GroundRod is highly competent and motivated so we are going forward!

[K1773R]

Some suggestions for anc. The coin is basically going to be dead in the water when Cryptos start rising unless a few simple steps are taken.

1) Acknowledge the drama in anc's history and use it to anc's advantage. Governments are heavily meddling in cryptocurrencies for aml and other reasons. Nobody doesn't know that. Put a statement to that effect somewhere obvious, acknowledge anc may have been victimized by govt wanksters, and move on tofull transparency.
Example of what the statement could say.
"It is widely known that cryptos challenge govt control of personal money and that numerous govts have invested heavily in cryptomeddling. Governments do not meddle in finance for good reasons. Very little data collected by the nsa and similar groups is used for legitimate domestic purposes. The only authorities that have unfettered access to this type of data are police agencies in client states like Bahrain, Egypt and Nigeria. If you cooperate with the agenda of controlling currency you are helping crush democracies in numerous places.

Anc may have been fiddlefucked to some degree by the nsa and similar groups, as have many coins. Henceforth all developmental work on anc will be done in plain sight with no bullshit."

2) To further the goal of trustable transparency, anc should offer a choice of algorithms, not a mix of algorithyms. There should be several algorythms available as modules in the wallet, and a person chooses which one they would like to use. As I understand the new version a person mixes algos, and that makes little sense. A modular wallet with severasl algorithm modules would let a person encrypt the trasaction with their choice of algo. Obviously this provides another level of complexity, another opportunity for the syphillus breath antiliberty bureaucrats to meddle, so people have to examine the code etc carefully.

3) Another option is simply switching back to a basic trusted code like bitcoin or litecoin.

4) As has been said before, anc really has nothing except its brand. There has been some question in the past about which "brand" anc represents. Is it anonymous transactions? The anonymous collective? Something else? Anonymous coins are aa dime a dozen at this point. If anc wants to stay aslive it has to actually represent something that people will support. So my suggestion is go full bore in support of the anonymous collective. Combined with the acknowledgement that anc has been raped and brutalized by govt shills, this could lead to a strong long term net gain in the image of the coin.

If nothing is done, anc is finished. If the half hearted lame steps that have been suggested in recent posts are done, also the coin slowly fizzles and dies. Coins require legitimate steps to stay ahead, not half assed shit steps.

1) im no marketing guy, so cant say anything about that.
2) you misunderstood something. the plan/talk is to use multiple algos for PoW (mining). Transactions are NEVER encrypted as bitcoin and its alternatives use a public ledger.
3) we didnt change anything related to privkeys (your BTC/ANC key), hence its the same as upstream (bitcoin).
4) ANC has one big strength that other coins dont have; I2P. With clearnet, a person can be located by watching the network in realtime. This is not the case with ANC in case you use I2P only.

If you want to help, just get in touch with us in #anoncoin on either irc2p (prefered) or freenode.

[dewdeded]

Monero also has a clear focus & commitment to (support) I2P and already done some/alot I2P development/integration work.

[K1773R]

2) you misunderstood something. the plan/talk is to use multiple algos for PoW (mining). Transactions are NEVER encrypted as bitcoin and its alternatives use a public ledger.

Just to clarify.

When a person uses a coin, the transaction process is encrypted and the ledger is public.

When doubts exist as to the integrity of the development process and quality of cryptography used in a transaction, a coin is worthless. Those doubts do exist with anc. In other words anc has reached a point where it either must use a trusted algorithm or it has no real value.

In practical terms it means the algorithm should be something like bitcoin, litecoin, etc, and not something like zerocoin, cryptonote etc.

Offering people the option of which algorithm to use is a solution that settles all sides. For example if a person can choose between zerocoin, litecoin, cryptonote etc then the coin can survive. How this would be done I don't know. But as it stands now if you are going to offer a mixture of algorithms, under the guise of protecting against attacks, but the user has no control over the mix, then you are offering nothing.

Everything about anc now resembles a corporate mindset. It is nothing like it was in the beginning. Now iis sort of like a cross between Ripple and Mexican Pesos. I think it is finished unless big changes happen.

Again, transactions are not encrypted. You are talking about the kind of transaction. There isnt a "bitcoin algorithm" nor similiar. Please read more about transactions: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction
If ANC will support ZeroCoin (ZC), then of course you can use either ZC or the old bitcoin style transactions. there is no difference in bitcoin/litecoin transactions for example.
As i said before, the "mixture of algorithms" are for mining (Proof of Work) and not for creating/signing transactions.

[jolskeboll]

One thing, though. I'm not into how things are working and I do not use the dedicated anoncoin wallet client either, but all my ANC are stored in Cryptsy. This question has probably been asked a few times, but I'm still wondering what do you think of the situation at Cryptsy? When could one expect them to remove the "Wallet under maintenance" symbol and what would yet be needed from the ANC community? There has not been much pushes to github lately either, so I just wonder what's the current situation. I have seen a few goals at the Anoncoin wiki, but frankly, I have no clue what they mean.