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

[toknormal]

you either have no idea how it works

And how does it work ?

By making the blockchain as visible as possible ? By having every aspect of it out in the open, scrutinisable from the point a block is mined and at what address ? Because that's what gives it its value - not much else.

The blockchain is an "out there" thing. You just control some small random part of it and the fact that you can is what makes your private key have some value but if it ceases to be "out there" then it ceases to be worth anything. Sure you have your privacy but no value.

Make the blockchain invisible and it ceases to exist as a credible monetary resource. So will the coins in your pocket. Making it fungible is a whole different matter.

[1713536468]

1713536468

[1713536468]

1713536468

[1713536468]

1713536468

[Joshuar]

It's soon going to start dawning on people what a lunatic idea cryptonote is.

"We like the blockchain but we don't know how to make it fungible...".

"...I know, lets just make the whole f*cking thing invisible instead !!"

That is how I know Monero already won, you either have no idea how it works or you have to lie to yourself/your compadres to make this DASH shitscamcoin tolerable to hold

One viewpoint, notice how (Monero & Bitcoin are mentioned). Dash/Darkcoin isn't even in the "competition".

Each core dev has their own views and that is the beauty of "decentralized" development", unlike Dash/Darkcoin where even it's top former developer stated it to be wholly centralized. Anyway, by "far" future, that's to mean years and years in the future, as you should also note(But you haven't) that he said Zerocash would have to fix the bloat, fix the plethora of holes that will pop up(They're using an entirely new "architecture", unlike Ring Signatures or even coinjoin that's been out in the open and had the code vetted for years), and make it easy for common people to use(It's too anonymous to it's own detriment). Of course that may never happen, or it may just happen, only time will tell. Monero may even adopt in Zerocash features to make a ring/zero combo anon system, who knows.


Besides that, for the meantime and for the distant future, Cryponote offers the absolute best anonymity that you can get on Earth, along with optional transparency.

[sangoku]

Careful with your wallets guys, we've hit a sticky spork at block 246490 and my wallet has been stuck on it for over an hour now !!

spork show:

"SPORK_1_MASTERNODE_PAYMENTS_ENFORCEMENT" : 1427838635,
    "SPORK_3_INSTANTX_BLOCK_FILTERING" : 1424217600,
    "Unknown" : 1444217600,
    "Unknown" : -1

Same problem

[Joshuar]

you either have no idea how it works

And how does it work ?

By making the blockchain as visible as possible ? By having every aspect of it out in the open, scrutinisable from the point a block is mined and at what address ? Because that's what gives it its value - not much else.

The blockchain is an "out there" thing. You just control some small random part of it and the fact that you can is what makes your private key have some value but if it ceases to be "out there" then it ceases to be worth anything. Sure you have your privacy but no value.

Make the blockchain invisible and it ceases to exist as a credible monetary resource. So will the coins in your pocket. Making it fungible is a whole different matter.

I don't agree with you on many things, but this is the few that I do agree on... A big difference is that Cryptonotes' blockchains aren't "invisible", you just can't make any use of what's happening(You can't see who sent what or who received what, etc, but you can see the total amount of coins mined, things of that general nature). Zerocash's blockchain however, is "invisible", so you can't see anything period.

[coins101]

.....
Any way to tell what % of hash power is on wrong fork?

"MoneroPulse will allow us to add both block hash checkpoints and blob hash checkpoints (to defeat attacks like the Block 202612 attack). For ordinary nodes that are checked at least occasionally, the daemon will notify you in angry red letters when your local chain doesn't meet a checkpoint. If you run an unattended node (merchant systems, pools, etc.) you will want to turn on the "--enforce-dns-checkpointing" flag so that these checkpoints are enforced and not merely notified."

 

I still remember the drama, like it was last October.

[DaveyJones]

Guys, this is the end ? For Real?

Link, please

Link, please ;-)

worst german ever

[toknormal]

along with optional transparency.

Transparency means that the whole world can see every block - their's and everyone else's.

The "viewkey" concept already exists - it's called a private key. It only has value because it has leverage over a communal resource. Bitcoin already has privacy perfectly worked out using that model. What's missing is that over time, the tokens can form patterns that are identifiable. So the solution to that is to support conditional large scale recycling of the tokens periodically to keep them "fungible" - job done.

Burying the whole blockchain from view is just kissing your entire value proposition goodbye.

[toknormal]

That block 246491 is sure gonna be worth its weight in gold when it pops, given the amount of "work" thats invested in it 

[Joshuar]

along with optional transparency.

Transparency means that the whole world can see every block - their's and everyone else's.

The "viewkey" concept already exists - it's called a private key. It only has value because it has leverage over a communal resource. Bitcoin already has privacy perfectly worked out using that model. What's missing is that over time, the tokens can form patterns that are identifiable. So the solution to that is to support conditional large scale recycling of the tokens periodically to keep them "fungible" - job done.

Burying the whole blockchain from view is just kissing your entire value proposition goodbye.

What? No, the private key is your funds, without said private key, you own no "x"coins. The viewkey is nothing like the private key, the viewkey only allows a 3rd party to view your holdings, they can't do anything else, they can't even see who you sent (x) amount, or who sent you (x) amount.

You can see every block, you just can't see what's happening(Where the funds are getting sent to, etc). Basically, you see only very general things like amount of coins emitted, nothing specific that would would link "1+1" together.

[coins101]

,,,

....for the meantime and for the distant future, .....

So you are in agreement.

Monero is temporary.

Good for you. Make your money, and dump it on the suckers that don't do their research.

[Lukas_Jackson]

They provoke you and then come here with their insistent advertising 

[toknormal]

The viewkey is nothing like the private key, the viewkey only allows a 3rd party to view your holdings, they can't do anything else, they can't even see who you sent (x) amount, or who sent you (x) amount.

That's my point.

You DO want to see that. You want to see the blockcain in operation - every single aspect of it and every address. You just don't want to be able to know who's controlling those addresses. That's where the fungibility comes in. How do you think people have been getting away with all these Bitcoin heists lately without every being found ?

Making it invisible isn't an option - because it ceases to have any monetary value. Visibility is an essential element of monetary value since most forms of money are some kind of 'call' on a common resource and that common resource must be out in the open - even though the private keys to control it are not.

Take a gold bar - it has value because it is part of the universally endorsed continuum known as the element with atomic number 79. The only reason it has value is because gold is an "out there" thing. Sure I can shove it under my bed but no-one's going to buy it from me unless I put it back in the public domain to have it rubber stamped as part of what everyone else agrees is that particular element of the earth's crust.

Similarly, a private key which controls part of a blockchain who's existence is only implicit will always be worth less than one that controls part of a blockchain thats explicit.

In both cases - as long as the tokens are sufficiently fungible - privacy is preserved because my private key is...."private"  

[BrainShutdown]

They provoke you and then come here with their insistent advertising 

Well, they NEED to advertise... 

[coins101]

They provoke you and then come here with their insistent advertising 

Well, they NEED to advertise... 

they NEED to advertise for suckers.....

Fixed it for you 

[Joshuar]

The viewkey is nothing like the private key, the viewkey only allows a 3rd party to view your holdings, they can't do anything else, they can't even see who you sent (x) amount, or who sent you (x) amount.

That's my point.

You DO want to see that. You want to see the blockcain in operation - every single aspect of it and every address. You just don't want to be able to know who's controlling those addresses. That's where the fungibility comes in. How do you think people have been getting away with all these Bitcoin heists lately without every being found ?

Making it invisible isn't an option - because it ceases to have any monetary value. Visibility is an essential element of monetary value since most forms of money are some kind of 'call' on a common resource and that common resource must be out in the open - even though the private keys to control it are not.

Take a gold bar - it has value because it is part of the universal continuum known as the element with atomic number 79. The only reason it has value is because gold is an "out there" thing. Sure I can shove it under my bed but no-one's going to buy it from me unless I put it back in the public domain to have it rubber stamped as part of what everyone else agrees is that particular element of the earth's crust.

Similarly, a private key which controls part of a blockchain who's existence is only implicit will always be worth less than one that controls part of a blockchain thats explicit.

In both cases - as long as the tokens are sifficiently fungible - privacy is retained because my private key is...."private"  

Does the USD operate the way you propose right here? Does the government see every transaction that people make with their physical FIAT bills? Nope, so if even government issued currencies aren't that transparent, why restrict cryptocurrencies that way? Being "invisible" has nothing to do with it, as I previously said, Cryptonote coins are not invisible, they are "visible", but there is nothing you can know about the sender or receiver, which is how it's supposed to be and what makes them fungible and anonymous/private. Compare the amount and total value of bitcoins stolen vs the amount and total value of Fiat holdings stolen. The amount of bitcoins stolen are in the hundreds of millions, the amount of fiat stolen are in the hundreds of billions.

What you're describing isn't Cryptonote or even Coinjoin, it's Zerocash. If you're talking about "invisiblity" and not being able to see anything at all happening, sure, that's what Zerocash gives.

[arielbit]

let me have this one..

taadaaaa..  

[etoque]

let me have this one..

taadaaaa..  

Can you go fuck yourself away please ?

I'd give you 1 dash to buy up you a brain

[RenegadeMan]

That was funny...

[toknormal]

so if even government issued currencies aren't that transparent, why restrict cryptocurrencies that way?

Fiat currencies are operated by a counterparty known as the banking system and they are totally transparent to that counterparty.

In crypto, the counterparty is eliminated but so are the "people". The cryptocurrency money system is just a ledger with numbers. I notice that in your previous posts you've used terms like "you can't see who they sent it to". That implies that you see people as synonymous with blockchain addresses which they are not. Only a private key is directly associated with a blockchain address. Even at that level there's not even any sense in which anyone is associated with a private key other than that they have access to it.

So you cannot see "who" anyone's sending money to even though you can see coins moving between addresses. Any associations can only be inferred. Making that monetary movement invisible doesn't do anything for privacy, it just makes the whole blockchain suffer a loss of integrity and credibility. It's an engine, not a telephone book.

Cryptonote coins are not invisible, they are "visible"

Do you mean I can just parachute in without a "viewkey" and see what's in every address, see which address transfers were made to and from and so on ? Because thats what I mean. As I've described above, that isn't a breach of privacy that's just being able to endorse the integrity of the system. Any money system needs an arbitration layer. In fiat it's the banking system, in crypto it's the public. Take that away and your money's worth nothing. A "viewkey" to see a single account doesn't cut it. This is another area where cryptonote has the systems analysis all wrong. The analogue of the "arbiter" in the fiat system is the banking system itself, not some auditor that comes and visits your office.

The fungibility of the tokens is a different matter. That can be massively improved by embedding what I've called previously a "cash drawer" mechanism or token recycler to keep the whole blockchain at a high level of fungibility so that patterns remain largely random. That's the real challenge here, not obscuring it from view. Your private key is already obscured from view using the most secure cryptology known to man.

[Joshuar]

so if even government issued currencies aren't that transparent, why restrict cryptocurrencies that way?

Fiat currencies are operated by a counterparty known as the banking system and they are totally transparent to that counterparty.

In crypto, the counterparty is eliminated but so are the "people". The cryptocurrency money system is just a ledger with numbers. I notice that in your previous posts you've used terms like "you can't see who they sent it to". That implies that you see people as synonymous with blockchain addresses which they are not. Only a private key is directly associated with a blockchain address. Even at that level there's not even any sense in which anyone is associated with a private key other than that they have access to it.

So you cannot see "who" anyone's sending money to even though you can see coins moving between addresses. Any associations can only be inferred. Making that monetary movement invisible doesn't do anything for privacy, it just makes the whole blockchain suffer a loss integrity and credibility. It's an engine, not a telephone book.

Cryptonote coins are not invisible, they are "visible"

Do you mean I can just parachute in without a "viewkey" and see what's in every address, see which address transfers were made to and from and so on ? Because thats what I mean. As I've described above, that isn't a breach of privacy that's just being able to endorse the integrity of the system. Any money system needs an arbitration layer. In fiat it's the banking system, in crypto it's the public. Take that away and your money's worth nothing. A "viewkey" to see a single account doesn't cut it. This is another area where cryptonote has the systems analysis all wrong. The analogue of the "arbiter" in the fiat system is the banking system itself, not some auditor that comes and visits your office.

The fungibility of the tokens is a different matter. That can be massively improved by embedding what I've called previously a "cash drawer" mechanism or token recycler to keep the whole blockchain at a high level of fungibility so that patterns remain largely random. That's the real challenge here, not obscuring it from view. Your private key is already obscured from view using the most secure cryptology known to man.

What are the definitions upon the terms by which you're using? You're making it seem as if fungibility and "invisiblity" are the same things. "Invisiblity" cannot be seen or made out, such a thing is not in Cryptonote. Cryptonote gives you the option to allow yourself to be transparent(By using a mixin of 0), or to allow yourself to be anonymous/private. It's not restricted in any one way. The points that you're making has nothing to do with Cryptonote, as Zerocash is the only anon scheme that makes it so that literally everything is "invisible", to the extent that you can't even prove you own (x) amount of coins in your own wallet.

The blockchain is not just a monetary system, Bitcoin is not just a currency, it's a commodity and more as well. You're restricting the blockchain by putting it into little neat categories that you picked out, and you're wrong. What you've said in your earlier posts was

You want to see the blockcain in operation - every single aspect of it and every address. You just don't want to be able to know who's controlling those addresses. That's where the fungibility comes in.

So, why are you going back and forth? What you've previously said is exactly what Cryptonote does. Cryptonote is not "invisible", it's visible but obscured you can say, so you can see a general outline of things happening(Like # of coins emitted), but you can't delve any deeper.

Do you mean I can just parachute in without a "viewkey" and see what's in every address, see which address transfers were made to and from and so on ? Because thats what I mean. As I've described above, that isn't a breach of privacy that's just being able to endorse the integrity of the system.

What? What you're describing isn't privacy, so you went from being a supporter of privacy to a now supporter of total transparency? If I were to give you a $20 bill, will you be able to see who previously had that $20 bill? So then why would you not want the same thing for crtypcurrencies?

Fiat currencies are operated by a counterparty known as the banking system and they are totally transparent to that counterparty.

Ok? Why did Satoshi make bitcoin/the blockchain? To get away from middlemen aka the banking system. That's the entire point of the blockchain being created, what you're proposing is a step backwards to those middlemen. Having an arbiter is useless when speaking about cryptocurrencies, you simply don't need one. Cryptocurrencies are supposed to be decentralized and not have to rely on a centralized authority to make decisions or oversee things, you saying that we need an arbiter is taking a step back towards the traditional banking/monetary system, which is what we(everyone or mostly everyone involved with Bitcoin/cryptos) are against.