[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[Ambros]

Wow ! This coin is amazing and the X11 is even better ... Now i have cooler gpu and no problems ! Thank to devs

[JGCMiner]

Nice coverage in Wired all! I would think that with the release pending (a month or so, correct?) we might finally start the push to .01.

This is correct.  Here is the current development schedule as stated by eduffield.

Here's the new schedule for development:

- RC2 (masternode payments, DGW3) : May 14th
- RC3 (1000 DRK limit and denominated change) : May 21st
- After this, I'll find someone to vet the code and open source.
- RC4 (Bugs, security issues)
- Testing, then opensource

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6488297#msg6488297



P.S. Evan, I still think this should be somewhere easy to find (like in the first post) so long as it is valid. 

[janos666]

Wow ! This coin is amazing and the X11 is even better ... Now i have cooler gpu and no problems ! Thank to devs

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

We have our relatively expensive hardware (with it's own price amortization over time) which is partially idle during X11 mining.

Of course, it's absolutely not a problem in practice if GPUs are still better than anything else available and every GPU miners have a very similar speed penalty (nobody can utilize the full raw power of his/her GPU better than others). But it's technically still inefficiency which is never good, only neutral at best.

So, instead of a feature, it's more like a bug which doesn't need to be fixed. It's not an improvement but a neutral thing with a possibility to become a negative thing.

[blajde]

Wow ! This coin is amazing and the X11 is even better ... Now i have cooler gpu and no problems ! Thank to devs

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

We have out relatively expensive hardware (with it's own price amortization over time) which is partially idle during X11 mining.

Of course, it's absolutely not a problem in practice if GPUs are still better than anything else available and every GPU miners have the exact same speed penalty (nobody can utilize the full raw power of his/her GPU better than others). But it's technically still inefficiency which is never good, only neutral at best.

This is a bullshit approach tbh.

so you are saying you can max a 280x to 5mh/s it just hasn't been done yet and possibly scheming other people have and are mining at this rate?

even if can run at higher degrees and consume more power what would it matter if the roof of workload is already met?

The roof requires less energy doesn't mean you can raise the roof by increasing energy.

[panicbuythenpanicsell]

Notes about the site design. I mainly looked at intro.html

I think the max-width of the design is too wide. Wide paragraphs are not as easy to read on screens. And paragraphs and titles use the same font, which makes for less readability and less contrast between title and paragraph. The font used is suitable for headlines, but less so for longer paragraphs. Check out this awesome article: http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/11/04/best-practices-of-combining-typefaces/

Here are two screenshots comparing the original and a narrower version with a different font for paragraphs. Note that you can use any two fonts and font-sizes etc. for headlines/paragraphs and that the font I chose is just an example. Which of the two versions is more readable?

https://i.imgur.com/fRFuiKZ.png

vs

https://i.imgur.com/23pnpiP.png

The Darkcoin details section should have bullet points for each point IMO.

Also, about the HTML: <center> is used to center, while that is deprecated. CSS should be used for styling, not HTML tags. Paragraphs are made with <h4> on this page, while that should be used for headlines, not paragraphs. You can use <p> for paragraphs.

[ImI]

But it's technically still inefficiency which is never good, only neutral at best.

All PoW-Mining is "technically inefficient" as there is no "real" work done or calculations made. Its just pure air that is being processed.

And thats likewise for Bitcoin, Litecoin or whatever PoW-Coin you take.

So the term "technically inefficient" is misleading in terms of cryptocurrencies.

[coins101]

In Wired article all the reviewed coins represented in bad light IMO. The conclusion leads to deduction that their primary purpose is money laundry and black markets:

Anoncoin, Zerocoin, and Darkcoin are all unlikely to ever achieve the same acceptance for goods and services as bitcoin has. But it’s worth nothing that if exchanges allow the trade of bitcoins for these more private currencies without requiring identification, they could serve as giant laundry services, anonymizing any funds that are traded into and then out of their networks.

When you lead with 'anonymous' there is an invitation to discuss financial privacy in terms of money laundering.

I've always maintained that this approach should be short-term, if at all.

Leading with things like 'internet money' or eCash frames the conversation in terms of fiat - cash that is already in your pocket. The conversation has to be moved to illicit activity but if it is then you also have to question the role of fiat in such activities. This makes it harder to label Darkcoin as a pure money laundering tool.

[batty634]

Can someone link me the working windows wallet please

[luke997]

Wow ! This coin is amazing and the X11 is even better ... Now i have cooler gpu and no problems ! Thank to devs

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

We have our relatively expensive hardware (with it's own price amortization over time) which is partially idle during X11 mining.

Of course, it's absolutely not a problem in practice if GPUs are still better than anything else available and every GPU miners have the exact same speed penalty (nobody can utilize the full raw power of his/her GPU better than others). But it's technically still inefficiency which is never good, only neutral at best.

You have it wrong.

You're not wasting your hardware resources unless you can do something more profitable with it.
And if you can, just mine most profitable coin and buy DRKs instead.

Technically it's not inefficiency too - it's just that X11 is less intensive on the GPU as there's latency when moving from algo to algo, nothing wrong with that.

Would you say to a gamer that it's better to run game X than Y just because game X stresses GPU more due to more compute but not necessarily better graphics?
Is it a waste to run game Y?

There's a lot going for X11 - less heat produced, less power use - so cheaper to mine and it's more environment friendly.

[coins101]

Can someone link me the working windows wallet please

the official developer thread on darkcointalk is a good place to start. there should be a link to github if preferred. haven't had to use it in a while 

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rc2-hard-fork-on-may-14th.357/

[traderman]

The world is starting to find out about Darkcoin, I think there will be a slew of new articles in the coming weeks. Buckle up people!

Looks like the Wired.com article has been posted...

http://www.wired.com/2014/05/bitcoin-anonymous-projects/

[thelonecrouton]

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

This is pure nonsense. Less effective than what? What are you practically wasting by mining DRK?

If you have a more profitable use for your hardware then go do whatever that is with it if you want.

[janos666]

Wow ! This coin is amazing and the X11 is even better ... Now i have cooler gpu and no problems ! Thank to devs

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

We have out relatively expensive hardware (with it's own price amortization over time) which is partially idle during X11 mining.

Of course, it's absolutely not a problem in practice if GPUs are still better than anything else available and every GPU miners have the exact same speed penalty (nobody can utilize the full raw power of his/her GPU better than others). But it's technically still inefficiency which is never good, only neutral at best.

This is a bullshit approach tbh.

so you are saying you can max a 280x to 5mh/s it just hasn't been done yet and possibly scheming other people have and are mining at this rate?

even if can run at higher degrees and consume more power what would it matter if the roof of workload is already met?

The roof requires less energy doesn't mean you can raise the roof by increasing energy.

No, it's not.

No, I do not.

You assume a linear throughput/power correlation which is a way too rough estimation. It doesn't work like that.

I simply argued that VGA cards aren't fully utilized during X11 mining. And I still stand beside this argument because it's a plain fact and I don't care how you try to twist reality to make a valid argument look like some stupid trolling. You are the troll here, not me!

But it's technically still inefficiency which is never good, only neutral at best.

All PoW-Mining is "technically inefficient" as there is no "real" work done or calculations made. Its just pure air that is being processed.

And thats likewise for Bitcoin, Litecoin or whatever PoW-Coin you take.

So the term "technically inefficient" is misleading in terms of cryptocurrencies.

Also true. But this doesn't conflict with my argument. I only spoke in relative terms.

---

Did you even finish reading my whole post before you all started to call bullshit on my arguments from plain reflex?
Did you read the post I answered???

Wow ! This coin is amazing and the X11 is even better ... Now i have cooler gpu and no problems ! Thank to devs

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

We have our relatively expensive hardware (with it's own price amortization over time) which is partially idle during X11 mining.

Of course, it's absolutely not a problem in practice if GPUs are still better than anything else available and every GPU miners have the exact same speed penalty (nobody can utilize the full raw power of his/her GPU better than others). But it's technically still inefficiency which is never good, only neutral at best.

You have it wrong.

You're not wasting your hardware resources unless you can do something more profitable with it.
And if you can, just mine most profitable coin and buy DRKs instead.

Technically it's not inefficiency too - it's just that X11 is less intensive on the GPU as there's latency when moving from algo to algo, nothing wrong with that.

Would you say to a gamer that it's better to run game X than Y just because game X stresses GPU more due to more compute but not necessarily better graphics?
Is it a waste to run game Y?

There's a lot going for X11 - less heat produced, less power use - so cheaper to mine and it's more environment friendly.

I don't think so.

I also stated this fact. Please read my whole post before you conclude that I am plain wrong.

Mining something else and buying DRK is a completely different topic which has absolutely nothing to with my argument.

-> Well, you just perfectly defined inefficiency there. Congratulations on arguing with me why I was wrong when I said that.

No. But when did I ever say you shouldn't mine X11 coins.
Read my fucking posts before starting a holly war based on them, please!

That there! That's bullshit! Plan stupid bullshit!
No offense, but it's just true. Plain fact! Not kidding. You are stupid if you interpret things like that. It doesn't work like that and you can't possibly win that argument.

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

This is pure nonsense. Less effective than what? What are you practically wasting by mining DRK?

If you have a more profitable use for your hardware then go do whatever that is with it if you want.

No, it's not. Nothing in practice. -> Read my original post please! (And read this from the beginning if that's not enough.)

I never said that? Where do you guys all read those stupid things? Who writes stupid things next to the lines of my posts?

[Simcom]

Hi Evan,

I think it is a good solution, but it has a couple small drawbacks - I want to make a couple additional proposals to address these issues:

Here are the drawbacks:

1) If John wants to darksend his whole balance of 102 he is granted little anonymity unless addtitional people step up and volunteer inputs of 102 coins. A mechanism to solicit the nodes participating in the pool to submit additional 102 coin inputs might need to be added.  Alternatively (or in addition), nodes could be sent CHANGE of 102 coins to one of their change addresses.  (this idea of sending known receive amounts to various change addresses might be useful in other situtations as well - I will try to think about this a bit more)

I suppose it is possible (in theory) that John could be inputting 102 coins into the pool and sending less, while someone else is inputting say 104 coins, sending 102 and receiving 2 back as change. I still think this is a problem though because extremely strong inferences could be drawn pointing to John as the sender of 102 coins.

2) The problem of large spends exposing the sender is still an issue, denominated change will help create some fog, but VERY strong inferences of who sent what to whom could still be drawn if a "full change block" is spent in a single large spend, for example if Joe sends that 80DRK change block above to coinbase, it could be strongly inferred that he was the sender of 73 coins to mary, and now the feds have his personal info (coinbase).  Although this doesn't prove that Joe sent mary 73 coins, it might be enough evidence to grant a warrant to search Joe's residence.  So I would like to propose a strong countermeasure that will largely solve this problem.

First, in order to prevent "full change blocks" from giving away the sender, I think you should try to build in some logic that tries (if possible) to break these large change blocks up when making subsequent spends. The key here is that you would want to try to break up these denominated "change blocks" into smaller chunks that might match one of the other "change chunks" from that pool.

For example:

 - John adds 102DRK to the pool, sends 101DRK to Lisa and receives back 1DRK as change addresses E=1DRK
 - Joe adds 153DRK to the pool, sends 73DRK to Mary and receives back 80DRK as change addresses F=50DRK, G=10DRK,H=10DRK,I=5DRK,J=5DRK
  -Suzy adds 240DRK to the pool, sends 100DRK to Jane and receives back 140DRK on change addresses K=50DRK, L=50DRK, M=10DRK, N=10DRK, O=10DRK, P=5DRK, Q=5DRK

Later Suzy wants to darksend a different person "Jack" 104 coins

She sends Jack 80 coins (composed of addresses L=50DRK, M=10DRK, N=10DRK, P=5DRK, Q=5DRK) + 24 coins from her wallet that did NOT participate in the above pool.

This would give the appearance of outing Suzy as the person who sent 73DRK to Mary and received 80 back as change.  But as you can see it was actually JOE that made this tranasction! Mary is faking it!

Of course we wouldn't want to tell suzy's wallet to try to make a chunk of 80 because then suzy would know that Joe sent 73 coins to mary, we want suzy's wallet to figure out all of the possible combinations, then just send one random one.

So:  

Suzy's wallet would try to spoof "possible change blocks"of:

102-1 = 1 <- an actual change block!
102-73= 29
102-100 = 2
153-101= 52
153-73 = 80<- an actual change block!
153-100= 53
240-101=139
240-73=167
240-100=140<- an actual change block!

As you can see some of these combos actually match real change blocks, others do not. Suzy doesn't know which do and which do not, she tries to assemble whichever change block she can from the change that she has.

The beauty of this is that suzy is not privy to any information that is NOT already on the blockchain, but she DOES have enough info to spoof ALL of the possible "change blocks"

I think this does a lot to ablate the "dirty change blocks" problem.

In the end I think the "Dark Receive" address idea (addresses composed of many sub-addresses) is a superior solution, but the above does a hell of a lot to ablate the problems that we have been talking about.

Let me know what you think.  Hopefully I didn't mess up the logic in my head  

Hi Simcom,

In spite of my non-formal-tech background, I like your solution VERY MUCH.

However, I couldn't figure out one aspect in the flow.
Can you ELI5 how the sender's wallet can look into past transactions on the blockchain, and determine 'possible change blocks'.

thank you  

Sure.  Basically the blockchain lists the inputs and outputs into the pool (ouputs include denominated change and non-denominated receives). So the inputs from my example are 102, 153, 240.  The big caveat here is that we are assuming these amounts are sitting on a single address each - it's possible that they are already denominated from previous transactions which helps anonymity quite a bit.  In addition to the inputs (102, 153, 240) the outputs are also visible on the blockchain (1, 80, 140) + all of the denominated change that is sent back to the senders via a bunch of different addresses. So suzy just needs to subtract the non-denominated outputs from the various inputs to give the size of all possible "denominated change blocks".

[Simcom]

On the website all of the mining software links are broken:

http://www.darkcoin.io/mining.html

The new website looks fucking awesome btw.

[Kai Proctor]

Wow ! This coin is amazing and the X11 is even better ... Now i have cooler gpu and no problems ! Thank to devs

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

We have our relatively expensive hardware (with it's own price amortization over time) which is partially idle during X11 mining.

Of course, it's absolutely not a problem in practice if GPUs are still better than anything else available and every GPU miners have a very similar speed penalty (nobody can utilize the full raw power of his/her GPU better than others). But it's technically still inefficiency which is never good, only neutral at best.

So, instead of a feature, it's more like a bug which doesn't need to be fixed. It's not an improvement but a neutral thing with a possibility to become a negative thing.

Wow I'm amazed at this pure nonsense.

1 - Less GPU intensive != less effective
2 - Less GPU intensive = lower energy consumption, that's a better energy efficiency
3 - Less GPU intensive = "our relatively expensive hardware", like you said, lasts longer

You spend less on your electricity bill and you can keep your hardware longer, even resell it at a good price. What are you complaining about ?

[GhostPlayer]

Wow ! This coin is amazing and the X11 is even better ... Now i have cooler gpu and no problems ! Thank to devs

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

We have our relatively expensive hardware (with it's own price amortization over time) which is partially idle during X11 mining.

Of course, it's absolutely not a problem in practice if GPUs are still better than anything else available and every GPU miners have a very similar speed penalty (nobody can utilize the full raw power of his/her GPU better than others). But it's technically still inefficiency which is never good, only neutral at best.

So, instead of a feature, it's more like a bug which doesn't need to be fixed. It's not an improvement but a neutral thing with a possibility to become a negative thing.

Wow I'm amazed at this pure nonsense.

1 - Less GPU intensive != less effective
2 - Less GPU intensive = lower energy consumption, that's a better energy efficiency
3 - Less GPU intensive = "our relatively expensive hardware", like you said, lasts longer

You spend less on your electricity bill and you can keep your hardware longer, even resell it at a good price. What are you complaining about ?

 Haters gonna hate.

 X11 different perspective. Summertime heat not an issue. Less electric consumed. Less noise. Rig works 24/7 for weeks without a hick-up, prolonged lifespan etc.

 Winter. a Truly excellent virtually silent heater, that makes a profit.

 Ineffective? Inefficient? Neither. DRK get sent and get received without issue, 2.5 minutes flat. 100% effective and efficient.

 Optimised is the word you're looking for.

[luke997]

(...)

(...)

(...)

I don't think so.

I also stated this fact. Please read my whole post before you conclude that I am plain wrong.

I re-read your post and I still stand by the fact that you are wrong - logically in the least. Let's start over:

You:

You do realize that cooler GPU means it's less effective to mine with a GPU and thus we practically waste our hardware resources, right...?

Me:

You're not wasting your hardware resources unless you can do something more profitable with it.
And if you can, just mine most profitable coin and buy DRKs instead.

There isn't anything you can do to mine X11 more efficiently, therefore you are as efficient as you can possibly be.
If it's not the most profitable coin at the moment, that's entirely different matter.

Mining something else and buying DRK is a completely different topic which has absolutely nothing to with my argument.

-> Well, you just perfectly defined inefficiency there. Congratulations on arguing with me why I was wrong when I said that.

Suggesting mining other coins and buying your desired coin with it does not make algorithm inefficient.
It just suggest to leverage temporary profitability (combination of current difficulty and market price) of other coin to your advantage.


P.S. Chill down, it's just a discussion, not a war, attacks etc.

[CryptoClub]

Looks like the Wired.com article has been posted...

http://www.wired.com/2014/05/bitcoin-anonymous-projects/

Later this year, they plan to release Zerocoin, another alternative to bitcoin that uses a technique to anonymize its coins that’s much stronger than Dark Wallet’s or DarkCoin’s, and that’s impossible with bitcoin as it currently functions.

Much stronger, sure ?

"Backdoor for Police" Zerocoin? Hard to unring that bell. I don't think they will build a backdoor for police in Zerocoin, just a mistake to blurt it out, like, "If people will buy Dogecoin they will buy anything", but they mentioned the possibility of a backdoor to catch money laundering. I know at that point it was all Darkcoin as the winner. Been recommending and mining DRK since the beginning, no brainier.

[thelonecrouton]

Read my fucking posts before starting a holly war based on them, please!

I read your post mate, I quoted the bit that I thought was silly. I think we have different ideas about what constitutes efficiency.

In most engineering scenarios, (unless you're actually trying to generate heat ) waste heat is an almost direct measure of inefficiency.

I would argue that since X11 earns me the same amount or more as scrypt or scrypt-n, while using half the power and running far cooler, it's much more efficient.

I'm sure improvements can be made to the X11 mining software to deliver more hash, but that doesn't automatically correlate to increased efficiency, which I would tie to £profit/kW. It's like overclocking your GPUs - when you do the math it's often not worth the increased power draw.