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

[shojayxt]

...

Darkcoin suffers from a bad methodology to achieve anonymity and it's put everything into this one basket.

Sorry to hear you lost faith in the project. Also, sorry you're going to be getting out at a horrible time (right before I announce I have EVERYTHING figured out to make Darkcoin mainstream?).

Over the past couple of days, I've made huge leaps in the Darksend technology. In fact, RC4 will be the final solution to Darkcoin's anonymity. The client will automatically look at all of your funds and it will be able to tell which funds are not anonymized, if it finds non-anonymous outputs it will run them through a darksend with other clients. After that process, users can send without Darksend using the anonymous outputs for instant transactions without waiting for other nodes (with no upper limit on transaction sizes).

The other thing you're missing is that there is a reason I forked Bitcoin. Adoption for Darkcoin will be MUCH faster and easier for vendors, because all of the APIs are the same.

Expect more news in a few days. I have lots of work to do, but soon we can start testing all of this new functionality.

See?

 Bitcoin is one thing, LTC is another.

 If you're a BTC merchant, you're a brave warrior, plowing new territory.
 If you're also an LTC merchant, you're 2 steps ahead of the previous , tech wise.
 Merchant regulation SUCKS, but has societal purpose.
 DRK solves BTC's prime problem for merchants.
 DRK solves BTC's prime problem for merchant's clients
 DRK solves BTC's prime problem for immense immovable scrutinised private capital.

  No need to have a cryptography degree to solve this equation.  

Darkcoin is brilliant both for micro and macro transactions

How does DRK solve any problem for merchants and clients?  I have bought items from reputable merchants using Bitcoin. I didn't notice any problems.  In fact, every purchase I have made from overstock.com was flawless and immediate.  There isn't any problem that needs to be solved.    
 and as long as you pay taxes when you convert to fiat they
DRK does indeed solve BTC's traceability when it comes to money laundering and other nefarious purposes.  

The beauty of BTC not being anonymous is that it will be adopted by the mainstream and used for actual financial transaction.  I still have not heard where you will be able to spend DRK or even any reputable vendor embracing DRK as a payment method.  It likely won't happen because businesses are not going to put themselves in a position where they could potentially run into trouble with FinCEN.  In case you don't know, FinCEN "Financial Crimes Enforcement Network http://www.fincen.gov/ " mission is:
 
"FinCEN’s mission is to safeguard the financial system from illicit use and combat money laundering and promote national security through the collection, analysis, and dissemination of financial intelligence and strategic use of financial authorities."

I would hate to have my fortune tied up in an anonymous cryptocurrency that could be shut down at anytime by the United States Government using the Patriot Act and National Security as justification.  They find a Darkcoin wallet on a seized terrorist laptop and it's lights out for Darkcoin.  Any company hosting masternodes in the United States will comply with any order to shut down Darkcoin network traffic.  European governments would follow suit, most South American countries will do whatever the US tells them to do and the Chinese don't want any crytptocurrency.

What many fail to see is that the main selling point of Darkcoin could actually cause it's demise.  Do you actually think that the United States government is just going to allow people to send whatever they want to whoever they want?  Potentially funding terrorists or laundering money to avoid paying taxes?  Not gonna happen.  Congress would find bipartisan support to enact laws to prevent just that from happening.  

Jennifer Shasky Calvery, Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, United States Department of the Treasury, confirms that financial privacy is a real and important aspect of all financial transactions.

The view on regulation is currently being considered in a similar light to Bitcoin. The Bank Secrecy Act and existing AML policies towards digital currency will still apply. In general, moving in and out of fiat requires the use of regulated entities.

Non disclosure of financial transactions on a blockchain ledger is not a reason to stop anonymity tools such as Darkcoin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7bbDpwlTws&feature=youtu.be&t=11m48s

~12mins

You seem to have missed the person who enforces the section of law you are quoting, saying anonymous crypto is OK.

The US government ain't shutting anything down.

Do you doubt that the United States government wouldn't pull the plug.  The person that enforces the law isn't the person making the laws so her opinion doesn't mean too much. She'll enforce whatever law is in place whether she agrees with it or not.

http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/testimony/html/20140220.html

On the virtual currency front, with all we have seen transpire this past year; it is clear that the virtual currency industry has reached a crossroads. I think we can all agree that the stakes are too high – for both the industry and the government – to allow virtual currency systems to be used by bad actors. FinCEN will continue to draw from the knowledge we have gained through our regulatory efforts, use of targeted financial measures, analysis of the financial intelligence we collect, independent study of virtual currency, outreach to industry, and collaboration with our many partners in law enforcement to protect the integrity and transparency of the U.S. financial system.




PREPARED REMARKS OF JENNIFER SHASKY CALVERY DIRECTOR FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK
http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/speech/pdf/20140318.pdf

What is important is that financial institutions that deal in virtual currency put effective anti-money
laundering and counter terrorist financing (AML/CFT) controls in place to harden themselves
from becoming the targets of illicit actors that would exploit any identified vulnerabilities.




Jennifers boss doesn't necessarily share Jennifers views on cryptocurrency.

Just this morning, David Cohen, the Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial
Intelligence at the U.S. Department of the Treasury – and my boss – delivered remarks on virtual
currency at an event in New York City, where he made a compelling case for transparency and
regulation in the virtual currency space.

However, if levels of adoption increase more
significantly, and if it appears that daily financial life can be conducted for long stretches
completely within a virtual currency environment, we may need to consider whether to apply a
more “cash-like” regulation to the virtual currency space.

This guy isn't the county Sheriff and it's people like him that will set the policy not Jennifer Shasky Calvery.

[eltito]

Also, like I pointed out earlier, this means that Masternodes now have no direct involvement in the actual person to person transaction, so if someone decides to use Darkcoin to so something illegal, there is no reasonable grounds for Masternode owners to be held liable.

Plausible deniability ftw!

As someone pointed out above, of course, aways consult your attorney.

That said, I'm not sure it's just plausible deniability.  Once this is implemented, Masternodes will simply be denominating funds.  They will no longer be facilitating the actual transfer of funds for purchases between a buyer and a seller.  They are completely bypassed in that regard.

Wait, so in this case there isn't any Coinjoin?  The pre-denominated funds are directly send from A to B without using a masternode?

No Coinjoin mix on the second phase, correct.

Non-denominated funds are sent out automatically to a MN for denomination, then sent back to your wallet (this may or may not involve several MN hops, I haven't spoken to Evan about that for a day or two and he comes up with new ideas every 5 minutes).  

Once back in your wallet, they just sit there, all smug and anonymous until you decide to use them.  There's no real need for a need for a 2nd Coinjoin mix to occur after that.  When you send funds, your wallet automatically selects pre-anonymized denominations and sends them directly to your intended recipient.

I would go so far as to say no Coinjoin at all, right? The denomination step only involves your coins, right?

If this is the final solution then I would say that DRK has moved away from Coinjoin to something better which is of Evan's own invention.

No, Coinjoin is still there.  Coinjoin mixes would happen simultaneously across the network at scheduled intervals.  I don't yet have the specifics on how he intends to do that, but broadly speaking:

At x time or x block, everyone sends their unmixed coins to whichever MN is elected for mixing (this happens automatically in the background).  They're mixed and returned in homogeneous denominations to wherever they came from (at random addresses).

[coins101]

However, if levels of adoption increase more
significantly, and if it appears that daily financial life can be conducted for long stretches
completely within a virtual currency environment, we may need to consider whether to apply a
more “cash-like” regulation to the virtual currency space.

This guy isn't the county Sheriff and it's people like him that will set the policy not Jennifer Shasky Calvery.

So, he's saying regulate more like cash. So, you agree, we are creating eCash.

You also have to agree, its regulation, not ban. Read the context again. Just in case you missed the meaning of what you were posting.

Man, when you get this, I can see you going out and selling everything you own to buy as much DRK as possible.

[stealth923]

People make stupid statements to think they dont need privacy and anonymity for bitcoin because the use case for it right now is still quite limited. Those statements made by Shojayxt show how naive and immature his thinking is. "ohh I can purchase stuff now and its all fine"....what you dont realise is that we are still in a very early adoption phase. Would you be OK if someone today could look up your bank account number and see every transaction you have ever made in the past, link that to businesses and how much money you have?

Once btc becomes more mainstream there will be a big opportunity (and its already started) to scrape and data mine addresses for the purpose of marketing & selling that information.  - you can bet your left ass cheek that bitcoin is going to have a SERIOUS privacy issue on its hands.

[Icebucket]

Also, like I pointed out earlier, this means that Masternodes now have no direct involvement in the actual person to person transaction, so if someone decides to use Darkcoin to so something illegal, there is no reasonable grounds for Masternode owners to be held liable.

Plausible deniability ftw!

As someone pointed out above, of course, aways consult your attorney.

That said, I'm not sure it's just plausible deniability.  Once this is implemented, Masternodes will simply be denominating funds.  They will no longer be facilitating the actual transfer of funds for purchases between a buyer and a seller.  They are completely bypassed in that regard.

If the United States government gets a hint that a one cent of funds was transferred to any terrorist organization using the Darkcoin network it's lights out.  Plausible deniability doesn't mean a thing when Amazon and every other provider in the United States complies with a court order and shuts down the masternodes.  

I'm not promoting cryptonote coins as they have plenty of their own problems.  But they offer true P2P anonymity that isn't subject to having a masternode network shut down.

I host a couple MNs in Iceland.  I'm not sure they care what the US Gov't thinks.

Actually Iceland has one of the strongest internet privacy regulations, there is a browser in beta (called Icebrowser) that channels all traffic through Iceland and encrypting everything giving everyone in the world the same rights as Icelanders on the Internet. Kindof cool just saw this today.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/introduction-icebrowser-ushers-era-internet-123000740.html

Quote:
Iceland places an exceptionally strong emphasis on privacy rights, such that what is now commonplace in the U.S. and parts of Europe would be unthinkable there.

.. If anyone wants to host a MN in Iceland then I managed to convince a company to accept DRK for VPS rent 
http://www.flokinet.is/

[Kokk]

Hi,

this video his cool (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7bbDpwlTws&feature=youtu.be&t=11m48s)
Just for American...
A few countries have allowed Bitcoins and some have fordidden.
Watch the world !

DRK coin could still stay black today, no?

best regards,

[splawik21]

Isn't this MACD bad news generally ? NB: im terrible at TA.

Use 3days
http://scr.hu/1ame/xcxqn
after red comes green right ?

[coins101]

However, if levels of adoption increase more
significantly, and if it appears that daily financial life can be conducted for long stretches
completely within a virtual currency environment, we may need to consider whether to apply a
more “cash-like” regulation to the virtual currency space.

This guy isn't the county Sheriff and it's people like him that will set the policy not Jennifer Shasky Calvery.

So, he's saying regulate more like cash. So, you agree, we Evan and the team ( ) are creating eCash.

You also have to agree, its regulation, not ban. Read the context again. Just in case you missed the meaning of what you were posting.

Man, when you get this, I can see you going out and selling everything you own to buy as much DRK as possible.

Little edit needed there. Getting a bit carried away with the 'Royal We.'  Next, I'll be in the bar telling some hot chick how I'm coding the next big thing since Bitcoin.

[toknormal]

Jennifers boss doesn't necessarily share Jennifers views on cryptocurrency.

Just this morning, David Cohen, the Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial
Intelligence at the U.S. Department of the Treasury – and my boss – delivered remarks on virtual
currency at an event in New York City, where he made a compelling case for transparency and
regulation in the virtual currency space.

However, if levels of adoption increase more
significantly, and if it appears that daily financial life can be conducted for long stretches
completely within a virtual currency environment, we may need to consider whether to apply a
more “cash-like” regulation to the virtual currency space.

This guy isn't the county Sheriff and it's people like him that will set the policy not Jennifer Shasky Calvery.

You don't seem to have fully grasped the implications of cryptocurrency on the "regulatory environment".

There are no counterparties in crypto = so no regulation possible. END. OF. STORY.

Sure they can stop retailers from quoting prices in one cryptocurrency over another, but that's regulating retailing not crypto. Also, one you've allowed one in the door thats the thin end of the wedge because as we all know, all cryptos are readily interchangeable once your holdings are on a blockchain of any flavour.

Regulators do not understand this (understandibly). They live in a world where everything works by counterparties - everything you "own" is registered somewhere. But you do not "own" bitcoin so you cannot possibly be regulated based on that ownership. All you have is a bunch of letters that lets you control an address - that isn't ownership in any classic sense because anybody could theoretically control that address.

Put another way, a bitcoin address hasn't got your name on it as would be required to establish ownership. You've got its name on a piece of paper which means that theoretically, 7.046 Billion other people could have as well with equivalent entitlement as fas as the term "ownership" goes.

Another this regarding your quote:

if it appears that daily financial life can be conducted for long stretches
completely within a virtual currency environment, we may need to consider whether to apply a
more “cash-like” regulation to the virtual currency space.

Cash can only be regulated because it ultimately ends up in a bank - hence counterparties again. At least, it needs to end up in a bank for it to be of much use for anything other than buying chewing gum or paying off hitmen.

Cryptocurrencies on the other hand do not end up in a bank and, again, lack any counterparty involvement, so no regulation possible. The idea that opaque blockchains and transparent blockchains are any different in this respect doesn't get you very far because both are as much of a threat to the mainstream banking system.

You know what the threat is ? It's nothing to do with "dark currencies". It's the fact that crypto is unlevered base money whereas fiat is highly levered credit money.

Thats the real reason authorities are petrified, not laundering. Economics not criminality.

[thelonecrouton]

People make stupid statements to think they dont need privacy and anonymity for bitcoin because the use case for it right now is still quite limited. Those statements made by Shojayxt show how naive and immature his thinking is. "ohh I can purchase stuff now and its all fine"....what you dont realise is that we are still in a very early adoption phase. Would you be OK if someone today could look up your bank account number and see every transaction you have ever made in the past, link that to businesses and how much money you have?

Once btc becomes more mainstream there will be a big opportunity (and its already started) to scrape and data mine addresses for the purpose of marketing & selling that information.  - you can bet your left ass cheek that bitcoin is going to have a SERIOUS privacy issue on its hands.

Shojayxt likes nothing more than a big truncheon up his arse, he has a thing for men in uniforms. And there's nothing wrong with that, it's his combination of innate subservience with truly baffling stupidity that inspires mirth and pity...  

[tifozi]

These regulatory discussions are always showing up in DRK thread.

It is never found in any other so-called anonymous coins.

Hmmm  

And FUD is getting old and weary folks. Please move on.

[coins101]

You know what the threat is ? It's nothing to do with "dark currencies". It's the fact that crypto is unlevered base money whereas fiat is highly levered credit money.

Thats the real reason authorities are petrified, not laundering. Economics not criminality.

I'm so glad we promoted you to Chief Investment Officer.

Didn't we? Come on chaps, make it so.

[coins101]

These regulatory discussions are always showing up in DRK thread.

It is never found in any other so-called anonymous coins.

Hmmm  

And FUD is getting old and weary folks. Please move on.

ok.

To the moon, then infinity and beyond. 

[Kai Proctor]

You spend a lot of time on the thread of a coin you don't like.

[stealth923]

These regulatory discussions are always showing up in DRK thread.

It is never found in any other so-called anonymous coins.

Hmmm  

And FUD is getting old and weary folks. Please move on.

Thats because Dark is the only one with a chance to make mainstream. So we talk about real world issues.

All the other coins = ZOMMGGG look at this feature list, we are going to develop it in 2 weeks and blow everything out of the water etc...pump dump rinse repeat.

[Kokk]

Thx toknormal for your clarity.

[shojayxt]

However, if levels of adoption increase more
significantly, and if it appears that daily financial life can be conducted for long stretches
completely within a virtual currency environment, we may need to consider whether to apply a
more “cash-like” regulation to the virtual currency space.

This guy isn't the county Sheriff and it's people like him that will set the policy not Jennifer Shasky Calvery.

So, he's saying regulate more like cash. So, you agree, we are creating eCash.

You also have to agree, its regulation, not ban. Read the context again. Just in case you missed the meaning of what you were posting.

Man, when you get this, I can see you going out and selling everything you own to buy as much DRK as possible.

I don't know what so hard to understand.  They shut down Silk Road.  Seized the guys bitcoin, auctioned it off, and the guy is sitting in jail looking at spending the next couple decades in a Federal prison.  The only reason they didn't go after Bitcoin was because they needed it to build their case due to the fact that they could track the transactions on the blockchain.  If you take that ability away you are putting yourself in a position to be deemed as a threat.  An anonymous cryptocurrency can never be regulated like cash due to it's main purpose.  Bank records can be opened by subpoena.  How do you subpoena something that doesn't exist like anonymous transactions?  

If anyone thinks that the United States government isn't capable of shutting down a cryptocurrency they are mistaken.


Feds Use Patriot Act To Crack Down On Virtual Currency Exchange
http://americasfuture.org/feds-use-patriot-act-to-crack-down-on-virtual-currency-exchange/

http://www.wmitchell.edu/lawreview/Volume40/documents/Middlebrook.pdf

FinCEN acknowledges that the third-party exchange might appear to be conducting a bona fide purchase and thus entitled to an exemption, but notes that the safe harbor
does not apply when the only service being provided is money transmission

What does a masternode do other than transmit Darkcoin?  

An administrator or an exchange that transmits convertible virtual currency to another person or location would be required to register as an MSB.

“An administrator or exchanger that (1) accepts and transmits a convertible virtual currency or (2) buys or sells convertible virtual currency,” however, is a money transmitter unless an exemption
applies.102

It appears that FinCEN is fine with masternode operation as long as the administrator registers as an MSB.

How many masternode operators are registered as an MSB?

[toknormal]

I'm so glad we promoted you to Chief Investment Officer.

Didn't we? Come on chaps, make it so.

As long as it doesn't mean I have to serve the drinks at promotions rather than consume them  

[illodin]

What does a masternode do other than transmit Darkcoin?  

An administrator or an exchange that transmits convertible virtual currency to another person or location would be required to register as an MSB.

“An administrator or exchanger that (1) accepts and transmits a convertible virtual currency or (2) buys or sells convertible virtual currency,” however, is a money transmitter unless an exemption
applies.102

It appears that FinCEN is fine with masternode operation as long as the administrator registers as an MSB.

How many masternode operators are registered as an MSB?

Masternode does not transmit (= receive and send) coins.

[shojayxt]

People make stupid statements to think they dont need privacy and anonymity for bitcoin because the use case for it right now is still quite limited. Those statements made by Shojayxt show how naive and immature his thinking is. "ohh I can purchase stuff now and its all fine"....what you dont realise is that we are still in a very early adoption phase. Would you be OK if someone today could look up your bank account number and see every transaction you have ever made in the past, link that to businesses and how much money you have?

Once btc becomes more mainstream there will be a big opportunity (and its already started) to scrape and data mine addresses for the purpose of marketing & selling that information.  - you can bet your left ass cheek that bitcoin is going to have a SERIOUS privacy issue on its hands.

So I'm naive and immature because I am not paranoid or feel the need to hide in the shadows?  You're naive for thinking that the United States government wouldn't and couldn't shut down some altcoin called Darkcoin if they thought it was being used to facilitate financial transfers to those deemed as enemies.

Please continue with the insults and name calling instead of actually addressing some of the valid points I have made regarding government and it's capabilities to shut down an anonymous cryptocurrency if it is deemed to be used for purposes not in the best interests of the United States.