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

[eltito]

NO REAL WORLD BUSINESS WILL EVER USE ANONYMOUS TRANSFERS.  I work in finance / accounting and let me tell you for a fact that this will NEVER happen.  One word: AUDIT

Please show us all invoices, business bank statements, how much you pay yourselves for what you sell, etc. for your company.

Or maybe you don't want to? You think they should be private and not potentially viewable by anyone with an internet connection?

Look, I am CPA (USA) and this is my professional opinion.  I just don't see it happening, ever.  Because with anon transfers there is no way to prove the recipient nor the sender (unless I am mistaken?).  When you are keeping records, even with cash (as the example was given earlier), you need copies of receipts and invoices for documentation.  With anonymous transfers all you have is "your word" which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.  

And what, exactly, is stopping a company from keeping receipts and invoices with DRK?

I think you're missing the point.  Records can be kept internally between buyer and seller just like with cash.  There is no difference.  

The point is that, unlike with BTC (or, technically even bank transfers/checks/credit), nobody external to the buyer and seller can see what's going on while it's going on.  But the business is no less obligated to report those transactions and keep documentation of them simply because they're using DRK.

[1714243108]

1714243108

[1714243108]

1714243108

[1714243108]

1714243108

[battbot]

NO REAL WORLD BUSINESS WILL EVER USE ANONYMOUS TRANSFERS.  I work in finance / accounting and let me tell you for a fact that this will NEVER happen.  One word: AUDIT

Please show us all invoices, business bank statements, how much you pay yourselves for what you sell, etc. for your company.

Or maybe you don't want to? You think they should be private and not potentially viewable by anyone with an internet connection?

Look, I am CPA (USA) and this is my professional opinion.  I just don't see it happening, ever.  Because with anon transfers there is no way to prove the recipient nor the sender (unless I am mistaken?).  When you are keeping records, even with cash (as the example was given earlier), you need copies of receipts and invoices for documentation.  With anonymous transfers all you have is "your word" which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.  

We don't care about your professional opinion keep it for your coin. Go tell the same thing to your dear friend the XC dev. Shoo.

I am supporting XC and DRK I own both.  And I support anonymous tech as well.  But this will not be adopted into business.  Most companies impose heavy restrictions on the amount of physical cash that can be used for these exact reasons.  And the law (USA) requires that trades and businesses report cash payments of more than $10,000 to the federal government by filing IRS/FinCEN Form 8300 (Exhibit 1).  So, this immediately shuts down the possibility of anon transfers of more than $10,000 for any business.  But in general I can never see any business adopting anonymous transactions.

You can hate on me all you want, but what I'm saying is true.  I am 100% for anon tech, and I don't know about other countries, but this will never be adopted by companies in USA.  

[aleix]

Great sport Amir 

He is a technologist and not as biased. He is already rich and has probably been accumulating Darks.

You don't know what you are taking about. Amir is a squatter. He lives in a squad right now. He created the first exchange for bitcoins (and he had a lot of bitcoins), but he spend it a long time ago. Today his friends are still laughing and complaining about it.  
 
He he lives based on donations. He lives the same way he think. Is a true believer on bitcoin, I respect a lot that.

[Ozziecoin]

Look, I am CPA (USA) and this is my professional opinion.  I just don't see it happening, ever.  Because with anon transfers there is no way to prove the recipient nor the sender (unless I am mistaken?).  When you are keeping records, even with cash (as the example was given earlier), you need copies of receipts and invoices for documentation.  With anonymous transfers all you have is "your word" which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.  

I had an auditing partner once say to me: accountants are those people that go to stab the dead once the business warfare has ended. Please, the people who say it can't be done should not get in the way of the people doing it.  Ever even considered that the tax code will have to changed because of this technology? Bet you didn't

[minerjav]

Look, I am CPA (USA) and this is my professional opinion.  I just don't see it happening, ever.  Because with anon transfers there is no way to prove the recipient nor the sender (unless I am mistaken?).  When you are keeping records, even with cash (as the example was given earlier), you need copies of receipts and invoices for documentation.  With anonymous transfers all you have is "your word" which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.  

I don't understand what is the difference between pay in cash to somebody and print a receipt (or request an invoice) and paid with DRK and get exactly the same.
if you paid with any other value and you need an invoice, just ask for it.

Should be easy to understand for any CPA and CPA consultant.

[Ozziecoin]

Great sport Amir 

He is a technologist and not as biased. He is already rich and has probably been accumulating Darks.

You don't know what you are taking about. Amir is a squatter. He lives in a squad right now. He created the first exchange for bitcoins (and he had a lot of bitcoins), but he spend it a long time ago. Today his friends are still laughing and complaining about it.  
 
He he lives based on donations. He lives the same way he think. Is a true believer on bitcoin, I respect a lot that.

Of course he will have you believe that. But what I see is someone travelling the world with no obvious source of income. Think about it. 

[battbot]

NO REAL WORLD BUSINESS WILL EVER USE ANONYMOUS TRANSFERS.  I work in finance / accounting and let me tell you for a fact that this will NEVER happen.  One word: AUDIT

Please show us all invoices, business bank statements, how much you pay yourselves for what you sell, etc. for your company.

Or maybe you don't want to? You think they should be private and not potentially viewable by anyone with an internet connection?

Look, I am CPA (USA) and this is my professional opinion.  I just don't see it happening, ever.  Because with anon transfers there is no way to prove the recipient nor the sender (unless I am mistaken?).  When you are keeping records, even with cash (as the example was given earlier), you need copies of receipts and invoices for documentation.  With anonymous transfers all you have is "your word" which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.  

We don't care about your professional opinion keep it for your coin. Go tell the same thing to your dear friend the XC dev. Shoo.

I am supporting XC and DRK I own both.  And I support anonymous tech as well.  But this will not be adopted into business.  Most companies impose heavy restrictions on the amount of physical cash that can be used for these exact reasons.  And the law (USA) requires that trades and businesses report cash payments of more than $10,000 to the federal government by filing IRS/FinCEN Form 8300 (Exhibit 1).  So, this immediately shuts down the possibility of anon transfers of more than $10,000 for any business.  But in general I can never see any business adopting anonymous transactions.

You can hate on me all you want, but what I'm saying is true.  I am 100% for anon tech, and I don't know about other countries, but this will never be adopted by companies in USA.  

Not to mention if this were to ever be even a remote possibility, DRK would have to become REGULATED by the U.S government (or anywhere that is trying to use DRK in business).  Which it is not and will not be for quite some time at least.  

[eltito]

I am supporting XC and DRK I own both.  And I support anonymous tech as well.  But this will not be adopted into business.  Most companies impose heavy restrictions on the amount of physical cash that can be used for these exact reasons.  And the law (USA) requires that trades and businesses report cash payments of more than $10,000 to the federal government by filing IRS/FinCEN Form 8300 (Exhibit 1).  So, this immediately shuts down the possibility of anon transfers of more than $10,000 for any business.  But in general I can never see any business adopting anonymous transactions.

You can hate on me all you want, but what I'm saying is true.  I am 100% for anon tech, and I don't know about other countries, but this will never be adopted by companies in USA.  

I'm curious - which law prohibits such transfers in the form of crypto-currency?

[Ozziecoin]

Not to mention if this were to ever be even a remote possibility, DRK would have to become REGULATED by the U.S government (or anywhere that is trying to use DRK in business).  Which it is not and will not be for quite some time at least.  

Accountants believe everything has to be REGULATED. But here is a technology that CANNOT be regulated.  Seriously, you need to do some basic homework! You're embarrassing yourself and your profession by revealing your ignorance.

[aleix]

Great sport Amir  

He is a technologist and not as biased. He is already rich and has probably been accumulating Darks.

You don't know what you are taking about. Amir is a squatter. He lives in a squad right now. He created the first exchange for bitcoins (and he had a lot of bitcoins), but he spend it a long time ago. Today his friends are still laughing and complaining about it.  
 
He he lives based on donations. He lives the same way he think. Is a true believer on bitcoin, I respect a lot that.

Of course he will have you believe that. But what I see is someone travelling the world with no obvious source of income. Think about it.  

   

People from US, Canada, etc. pay the air tickets to get Amir to the hacklabs and events, of course!  And a nice hotel and some expenses. He is no dumb

I know what I am talking about  

[TanteStefana2]

Okay, I'm sorry, anonymous transactions certainly have their benefits, but I have to say this:  NO REAL WORLD BUSINESS WILL EVER USE ANONYMOUS TRANSFERS.  I work in finance / accounting and let me tell you for a fact that this will NEVER happen.  One word: AUDIT

So no real world business ever uses cash?  Something tells me you don't understand how this works? 

[jonesT]

What about governments close exchanges (like Silk Road) or forbid them to trade DRK?

How to trade DRK without site exchanges?

[Ozziecoin]

People from US, Canada, etc. pay the air tickets to get Amir to the hacklabs and events, of course!  And a nice hotel and some expenses. He is no dumb

I know what I am talking about  

Ok, I defer to your expert opinion. Too bad for Amir. He should setup some MNs with some mates then. Actually, he can create a darkcoin casino tonight and be rich! LOL.

[toknormal]

Look, I am CPA (USA) and this is my professional opinion.  I just don't see it happening, ever.  Because with anon transfers there is no way to prove the recipient nor the sender (unless I am mistaken?).  When you are keeping records, even with cash (as the example was given earlier), you need copies of receipts and invoices for documentation.  With anonymous transfers all you have is "your word" which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.

I think you're confusing the infrastructure of the clearing banks with the bookkeeping records of a commercial entity.

In an audit, it is the latter that auditors are concerned with, not the former.

Whether a particular blockchain's transactions are transparent or opaque has little to do with how it's users get audited. Blockchain transactions are so wildly different in nature from traditional banking ones that there will be far more hurdles to jump before you get to ease of auditing. For a start, you don't have a counter party in any of them.

That fact right there puts most crypto currency income and expenditure beyond the reach of regulators and auditors - not the fact that you can't look something up in Block explorer. So if Darkcoin has a problem, Bitcoin has as well. There is no record of the payer or payee - just a bunch of cryptic numbers and letters that don't prove anything. So from an "audit" point of view. Bitcoin is no use. It does not provide the auditor with any information - the company's own records have to do that.

I suppose the nearest equivalent is a retailer who dumps their cash tills into the bank every day. The only record on the bank reconciliations will be "cash receipts". No names or addresses.

[AlexGR]

holly mother of nodes....btc is rocking back to life

btc sees a 5x times rise from here, dragging everything along, drk at 5x from here is $55.....happy days.

I can see DRK at $50+ relatively soon but BTC at $3000? When the US bond market collapses, sure.

Well, BTC at $7.9 Billion is 0.11% of the global asset market.

Longer term I can see DRK dragging BTC up if businesses are happier adopting DRK because it allows them to retain their financial privacy...

Okay, I'm sorry, anonymous transactions certainly have their benefits, but I have to say this:  NO REAL WORLD BUSINESS WILL EVER USE ANONYMOUS TRANSFERS.  I work in finance / accounting and let me tell you for a fact that this will NEVER happen.  One word: AUDIT

We'll settle for the (at least) 10% of personal/corporate transactions that want privacy at 700mn - 1bn market cap. You can take the 90% of the transparent ones...

[TanteStefana2]

Amir Taaki, one of the main developers and founders of DarkWallet, thinks DRK will be bigger than LTC soon: https://twitter.com/AmirTaaki/status/469844777803206657

At first I thought it was a fake account, but it's indeed Amir Taaki twitter account, interesting.

yep....looks real

Great sport Amir 

I don't believe Evan is doing ring signatures.  They cause bloat.  Evan said he figured out a way to make DarkSend just as anonymous as using ring signatures, but without the bloat.  Looking forward to this

[Kai Proctor]

NO REAL WORLD BUSINESS WILL EVER USE ANONYMOUS TRANSFERS.  I work in finance / accounting and let me tell you for a fact that this will NEVER happen.  One word: AUDIT

Please show us all invoices, business bank statements, how much you pay yourselves for what you sell, etc. for your company.

Or maybe you don't want to? You think they should be private and not potentially viewable by anyone with an internet connection?

Look, I am CPA (USA) and this is my professional opinion.  I just don't see it happening, ever.  Because with anon transfers there is no way to prove the recipient nor the sender (unless I am mistaken?).  When you are keeping records, even with cash (as the example was given earlier), you need copies of receipts and invoices for documentation.  With anonymous transfers all you have is "your word" which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.  

We don't care about your professional opinion keep it for your coin. Go tell the same thing to your dear friend the XC dev. Shoo.

I am supporting XC and DRK I own both.  And I support anonymous tech as well.  But this will not be adopted into business.  Most companies impose heavy restrictions on the amount of physical cash that can be used for these exact reasons.  And the law (USA) requires that trades and businesses report cash payments of more than $10,000 to the federal government by filing IRS/FinCEN Form 8300 (Exhibit 1).  So, this immediately shuts down the possibility of anon transfers of more than $10,000 for any business.  But in general I can never see any business adopting anonymous transactions.

You can hate on me all you want, but what I'm saying is true.  I am 100% for anon tech, and I don't know about other countries, but this will never be adopted by companies in USA.  

I don't hate you. I'm tired of those dumb affirmations, which pop up when there are no more arguments. And the popular "I know 'cause I'm an expert" that goes along with them.

[Ozziecoin]

I don't believe Evan is doing ring signatures.  They cause bloat.  Evan said he figured out a way to make DarkSend just as anonymous as using ring signatures, but without the bloat.  Looking forward to this

Tweet was 23 May, when Evan was going to do it but since has changed his mind.  

[Ozziecoin]

You can hate on me all you want, but what I'm saying is true.  I am 100% for anon tech, and I don't know about other countries, but this will never be adopted by companies in USA.  

Yet so many American's have Swiss bank accounts and all US multi nationals have head offices in low tax jurisdictions like Ireland, Singapore, Hong Kong etc...  LOL 

[coins101]

NO REAL WORLD BUSINESS WILL EVER USE ANONYMOUS TRANSFERS.  I work in finance / accounting and let me tell you for a fact that this will NEVER happen.  One word: AUDIT

Please show us all invoices, business bank statements, how much you pay yourselves for what you sell, etc. for your company.

Or maybe you don't want to? You think they should be private and not potentially viewable by anyone with an internet connection?

Look, I am CPA (USA) and this is my professional opinion.  I just don't see it happening, ever.  Because with anon transfers there is no way to prove the recipient nor the sender (unless I am mistaken?).  When you are keeping records, even with cash (as the example was given earlier), you need copies of receipts and invoices for documentation.  With anonymous transfers all you have is "your word" which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.  

You make some reasonably valid points. But you forget that cash is still used by the majority of the world. How do they get along? Last time I checked, people were not writing down serial numbers for every note, for every transaction. So lets look at a few issues with anonymity payment protocols:

Firstly, you seem to fail to recognise that confirmation of payment is distinct from public access to transaction data. I get an email to confirm my Amazon order went through, that is not broadcast to everyone with an internet connection.

Secondly, I send you some money, you fail to deliver the goods is a real world problem. My resolution is, I call the police, you have just identified yourself as a criminal and you go to jail.

Thirdly, businesses do just that, business. If payment for goods and services is not delivered or acknowledged, the business relationship breaks down. As a CPA you would know that most of your custom is repeat custom. One scam, and the business relationship breaks down. No more repeat business, and you still go to jail.

Fourth, payment processors and merchants will require some level of engagement with the person making the payment. It is ok for them to know who is making payment. It is not ok for the whole world to know.

Fifth, payment tools can incorporate transaction confirmations. Receipts can be issued and emailed to people. Anonymity from the block chain is again maintained.

Sixth, buy some DRKs man, were going to the moon, dude. Chill out. ZeroCash was sponsored by governments and the military, that means we'll be rocking in Hawaii and zerocash has a PR problem  

Seriously, the whole point is eCash. That old saying 'caveat emptor' doesn't go away, nor does it go away if you have a credit card.