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

[TanteStefana]

well, i do have one addition to the plan :-)

when this weeks lottery has been done, im going to put 200 drk in the lottery pool for the lottery after that...

OK, then, so I don't miss a day, I will have to take the ol Ubuntu and stop serving up games, the heck with the kids, LOL, and put it back to work mining darkcoin!  LOL  I worry with my little hash power that disappears from the radar will cause me to lose a lottery ticket day, LOL

Besides, I need more coin....

Maybe I can serve the games up on my laptop??  LOL

[gumi]

Not sure where this pulls the rate from but...

http://darkcoinprice.com

Hey, that's cool, who made it?

you have something similar here:
http://preev.com/

[daddeo]

So, HUGE progress this morning! I have a proof-of-concept of the anonymous transactions working on testnet! Here's some screenshots, these were 3 separate transactions sent to 3 different addresses, at separate times.

Notice how you can't tell who is sending to who. Soon all blocks will only have 2 transactions, 1 for the creation event and a merged transaction with everything else.

http://www.xcoin.co/coinjoin1.png
http://www.xcoin.co/coinjoin2.png

That's so cool you got it working, but could you explain to those of us that aren't knowledgeable what it all means please?  I understand how it's supposed to work, I just don't understand how to read the chart,    

I also feel that if you were to explain it, there would be great interest from the public!  Thanks!

Bitcoin is often promoted as being somewhat anonymous, but the main problem is that if I know your address, I can literally tell everyone you've ever paid. Imagine everyone you met, was able to see everything you bought in your checking account. That's pretty much the situation Bitcoin and other alt-coins are currently in. We need to move quickly to a anonymity-by-default approach.

There are many solutions out there for fixing this and we know how to implement them. But, the developers are very scared of implementing these fixes, with the possibility of bringing down a 10+ billion dollar economy.  So it will take years at the very minimum to do this.

So, that's where XCoin comes into play. I want solve many of these problems that Bitcoin and other alt-coins experience, making XCoin the beta to Bitcoin. The goal is to be years ahead in development, with cutting edge features that would be insanely difficult to pull off in their codebase.

So what progress was made this morning? I implemented a rough version of CoinJoin. The idea behind what I'm working on was originally put forward by Gregory Maxwell  and it's a great idea (if you want to read more, the original post is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=279249.0).

In short, transactions in the Bitcoin Blockchain are stored like this:

"User1 paid User12 the amount 1.2BTC"
"User4 paid User2 the amount 1.2BTC"
"User11 paid User3 the amount 1.2BTC"

In XCoin they'll look like this:

"Debit User1 the amount 1.2XCO, Debit User4 the amount 1.2XCO, Debit User11 the amount 1.2XCO"
and
"Credit User12 the amount 1.2XCO, Credit User2 the amount 1.2XCO, Credit User3 the amount 1.2XCO"

Notice, in the XCoin you can't tell who paid who. But in Bitcoin the parties are linked together. This will be a large step forward to providing anonymity by default.

It appears the technical design of this DarkCoin is fundamentally flawed and can't be fixed.

There must be some proof that senders sent transactions for all peers on the network to verify before they can accept the block and begin working on the next block solution. Such proof must exist otherwise balances could be stolen by rogue peers.

Thus I must assume you are doing a CoinJoin-like proof for all senders that in that block. And I assume these proofs are transmitted with the block, even if you purge them later (using a proof-of-work chain such as in the mini block chain design).

The problem is that CoinJoin is subject to denial-of-service attack in that if any sender fails to sign in the second step, then no senders can send.

Thus CoinJoin can't scale to a larger number of senders joined. It works best with a few senders and the probability of denial-of-service (rogue sender) is low.

Did you even read the CoinJoin thread carefully?

There is a second insoluble flaw that CoinJoin does nothing to obscure IP address and thus you have no anonymity against powerful entities.

P.S. I don't have time to read 300 pages of this thread to find out if you already addressed this issue. Please give me a link to any prior reply.

Wow, it's that open eh?

Still, this example implies that one could still link up the amounts of the transactions to find the end users.  How unique are transaction amounts, and how hard would it be to hide that level?  Is there a breaking up of the payment so that the amounts are harder to compare or something?  Or am I missing something due to the simplification of the explanation?  

Yes, you could still use the transaction amounts to track money through the system. This combined with some logic to use common transaction amounts or some other logic like that in the wallet could definitely help. Even with the problems, having coinjoin implemented directly into the client is a huge step in the right direction.

And timing analysis too.

Anyone care to embellish? Perhaps in such a manner that us idiots would understand. Could this be a problem?

[TanteStefana]

It appears the technical design of this DarkCoin is fundamentally flawed and can't be fixed.

There must be some proof that senders sent transactions for all peers on the network to verify before they can accept the block and begin working on the next block solution. Such proof must exist otherwise balances could be stolen by rogue peers.

Thus I must assume you are doing a CoinJoin-like proof for all senders that in that block. And I assume these proofs are transmitted with the block, even if you purge them later (using a proof-of-work chain such as in the mini block chain design).

The problem is that CoinJoin is subject to denial-of-service attack in that if any sender fails to sign in the second step, then no senders can send.

Thus CoinJoin can't scale to a larger number of senders joined. It works best with a few senders and the probability of denial-of-service (rogue sender) is low.

Did you even read the CoinJoin thread carefully?

There is a second insoluble flaw that CoinJoin does nothing to obscure IP address and thus you have no anonymity against powerful entities.

P.S. I don't have time to read 300 pages of this thread to find out if you already addressed this issue. Please give me a link to any prior reply.

Wow, it's that open eh?

Still, this example implies that one could still link up the amounts of the transactions to find the end users.  How unique are transaction amounts, and how hard would it be to hide that level?  Is there a breaking up of the payment so that the amounts are harder to compare or something?  Or am I missing something due to the simplification of the explanation?  

Yes, you could still use the transaction amounts to track money through the system. This combined with some logic to use common transaction amounts or some other logic like that in the wallet could definitely help. Even with the problems, having coinjoin implemented directly into the client is a huge step in the right direction.

And timing analysis too.

Hi, I don't want your question to go unanswered, but I'm hardly the person to answer.  I'm doing two things at once here and can't look up the  posts our developer made at the moment, it'll take a lot of digging to find them.  However, our developer, I believe, works in bank security, and seems to know a lot about cryptography.  He has explained things in semi simple to understand terms on this thread, and one thing he is not doing is a simple adaptation of coinjoin.  I hope he sees your question, and answers it soon.  Glad you are challenging him and I look forward to hearing what you have to say once you get the information

Also, regarding ip addresses and other ways of detection, darksend was never said to be bullet proof, but to at least afford a person reasonable privacy.  Nobody here, despite recent talk, ever condoned illegal activities with this coin, and doing such things with it would hardly be risk free.  Those that don't understand that, I can't help.

[AnonyMint]

Someone please send a private message to me to alert me when he responds.

I am knowledgeable about this subject matter.

[sdersdf2]

I think I saw on the coins specs that the block reward is now halved at 2 years instead of 1

source?

https://github.com/evan82/darkcoin

What is DarkCoin?
DarkCoin is a lite version of Bitcoin using X11 as a proof-of-work algorithm.

Super secure hashing algorithm: 11 rounds of scientific hashing functions (blake, bmw, groestl, jh, keccak, skein, luffa, cubehash, shavite, simd, echo)
Block reward is controlled by moore's law: (11111 / (((Difficulty+51)/6) ^ 2))
CPU only mining
Block generation: 2.5 minutes
Difficulty Retargets every 576 blocks
84 Million Coins Max
Block reward halving every 2 years
Encrypted transaction network: Work In Progress
Anonymous blockchain using coinjoin technology: Work In Progress

Actually there is no more halving at all. After 5000 difficulty the block reward hits the minimum of 5 coins per block and that is supposed to be the reward until all 84 000000 are mined. Which @ 1 million a year will take a long time. In 10 years there will just a hit more coins than what bitcoin has now, so how about calming down for everyone who is saying it's not scarce anymore?

This is accurate. The halving was a mistake, for the currency to work there needs to be some inflation, even if it's really low. I don't want the mining to collapse on itself and it won't happen with a reward of 5.  Also, I believe the curving that I'm using is less shocking to the ecosystem than the halving that other currencies use, it happens much slower and has the same overall effect on scarcity.

You've done excellent work, and I'm sure you're doing what you think is best for the coin's long-term development. You're focused on the R&D and technical enhancement of the coin's top features first, marketing last - which is admirable and helps really set this coin apart for the long-term.

But please be advised: This is a very fragile and very cynical market environment, where people will bolt at the smallest hint of trouble (dump first and ask questions later). Billions of dollars in alt market cap have already picked up and left. I really dont think any coins can afford to break promises and deviate from the original specs given unless it's absolutely necessary and extremely well justified.

Could you explain why these considerations weren't made before you released the coin? At a minimum, DarkSend should be set up asap and a full explanation provided for the inflation change -- an explanation even most noobs will fully understand and agree with.

Understand you have your hands full - again, appreciate all the work done. Just dont want that hard work and integrity to go to waste.

[InternetApe]

Could anyone make a price checker widget for android? would be cool

+1
yes plz!

Will see if I can get that built..

In the mean time you can use: http://drkpool.com/stats.php

This will show ticker for Exchanges, I have C-Cex, Poloinex and Cryptsy on there so far.

[chompyZ]

I'm sad, nobody has even noticed my libertarian commentary

imho,
1. put the text in white background below the pic.
When the text is on the pic itself, it is not readable.

2. change "Darkcoin, because privacy matters" to-
"Privacy matters." followed by the darkcoin logo and name.

3. I think the pic gives a sense of someone buying drugs more than buying lunch.
This makes the coin less legitimate.
Perhaps change the pic.

4. Well done for the effort. Imho it's a good start  

[TanteStefana]

Found a couple of explanations here, so just forwarding the quotes:

In reply to: http://www.reddit.com/r/DRKCoin/comments/1yit1a/using_coinjoin_for_anonymity_is_errorprone/

I'm posting this here, for everyone's benefit. Thanks!

Hi, I am Gnosis, the Anoncoin developer working on implementing Zerocoin. First of all, I think it is excellent that there is so much interest in developing a fully anonymous currency. I am not just a developer but also a user, or I will be when an anonymous currency exists! When coin creators compete, the coin users win!
However, CoinJoin has been around for a while, and it has not seen much use for anonymity. There's a good reason for that: it's not very anonymous.
Quoting my bitcointalk post:

CoinJoin has questionable anonymity compared to Zerocoin. The reason is that with CoinJoin, two or more users must somehow partner up and forge a transaction together. They communicate over a secure channel to do this. The coins are only mixed among these "partners." Picking partners you can trust is a significant obstacle: how can you know that your partners will "forget" the mixing that happened? One may try to repeat this 10 times with randomly chosen partners, but how can you know that your partners are not all just sock puppets of one malicious entity (on an anonymous network, it is trivial to create as many fake users as you want )? If that is the case, then your efforts are in vain.
Compare this with Zerocoin, where you put your coins in an accumulator, and they are mixed with the coins of all users who have put coins into that accumulator, since the beginning of Zerocoin. There would be a different accumulator for different denominations of Anoncoins (1, 5, 10, 50 ANC, etc.).
To put it simply, the more users' coins your coins are mixed with, the more anonymity you have.
I cannot speak to Darkcoin's implementation (or planned implementation) of CoinJoin since I cannot seem to find any specs or code on their Github or their site. If anyone knows, please point me to them.

I look forward to a practical and secure solution for anonymity from the DarkCoin devs!

First off, these are fantastic questions. The answer to implementing this in such a way where it is very difficulty to exploit is by adding cost and verification.

Here’s the gist of how I envision DarkSend to work in the long run. Some of what I’m going to mention is done, some of it I’m working on currently. I’d love some ideas on possible attack vectors on my implementation, so we can make it as bulletproof as possible.

Pools

DarkSend adds various extensions to the Bitcoin protocol for implementing transaction pooling. Like normal Coinjoin the pools take transactions in stages. The stages currently are:

POOL_STATUS_IDLE
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_INPUTS
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_OUTPUTS
POOL_STATUS_SIGNING
POOL_STATUS_TRANSMISSION

So the users relay these items throughout the network as the stages happen. After all items are gathered into the pool, the transactions are merged together into one, remotely signed and then broadcasted.

Masters

To defeat propagation problems, master nodes are elected each new block. They are responsible for being the authority of what goes into the joined transaction each session. This is done in a tamperproof way, but I think it’s not important to the discussion.

So what is the cost?

There must be a cost to using this anonymous network, otherwise like you say there will be issues with millions of accounts popping up. I’m not dead set on which solution(s) to implement, but here’s a couple ideas:

Burnt Identities

Higher difficulty shares to the current block would be mined and then stored in the blockchain permanently. Multiple of these would be used for each transaction and would be “burnt” when misused, causing the attacker to have to mine them again.  

Verification?

To use the pools it will require unique unspend outputs, someone that wants to mess with the system would have to have a large pool of funds in many addresses. So to attack a pool with 100 slots, you would require funds dispersed to 99 addresses, on 99 nodes working in common.

Other possible fee-less solutions?

There is interesting research on protecting against sybil attacks that lends itself really well to a decentralized ledger, such as this paper:

http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Workshops/InformationSecurity/slides/gamesandreputation.pdf

The idea is to build a social graph of the inputs and outputs of each entry and they should all know different people. If 99 of them all have the same “friends” that they associate with, then they’ll have to enter a different pool. Which will ensure the pool is not full of the nodes belonging to the attacker.

An application for machine learning?

I’m been making models for trading equities for over 7 years now. I ran a financial firm that sold the signals for a few years and I have experience with natural language processing using classifiers. So, I could make a classifier and actually embed it into Darkcoin to determine which pool a node should use, to separate out nodes that seem to be in common.

Other ideas?

I’m open to ideas on how to provide the best security to the network. I would love to hear what people have in mind.

I’ve been working on DarkSend about a month and we’ve already fixed the decentralization and propagation issues, this is just another bridge to cross in the future.

Thanks!

Is it possible to implement 3 solutions to work side by side?  Or would that conflict or slow things down too  much??  I like repetition

I think that's what the end result will be and it shouldn't slow down anything

[TanteStefana]

I'm sad, nobody has even noticed my libertarian commentary

imho,
1. put the text in white background below the pic.
When the text is on the pic itself, it is not readable.

2. change "Darkcoin, because privacy matters" to-
"Privacy matters." followed by the darkcoin logo and name.

3. I think the pic gives a sense of someone buying drugs more than buying lunch.
This makes the coin less legitimate.
Perhaps change the pic.

4. Well done for the effort. Imho it's a good start  

Thank you so much for looking, it made me happy.  I agree it's sloppy, just was my sentiment about how the government is intruding into our lives, now they want to tell us what we can and can't eat, etc...  McDonnalds being the most vilified of course.  Wasn't supposed to be much more than that, I'm not good at graphic art, lol. 

Thanks again for looking!   

[darkproton]

Found a couple of explanations here, so just forwarding the quotes:

In reply to: http://www.reddit.com/r/DRKCoin/comments/1yit1a/using_coinjoin_for_anonymity_is_errorprone/

I'm posting this here, for everyone's benefit. Thanks!

Hi, I am Gnosis, the Anoncoin developer working on implementing Zerocoin. First of all, I think it is excellent that there is so much interest in developing a fully anonymous currency. I am not just a developer but also a user, or I will be when an anonymous currency exists! When coin creators compete, the coin users win!
However, CoinJoin has been around for a while, and it has not seen much use for anonymity. There's a good reason for that: it's not very anonymous.
Quoting my bitcointalk post:

CoinJoin has questionable anonymity compared to Zerocoin. The reason is that with CoinJoin, two or more users must somehow partner up and forge a transaction together. They communicate over a secure channel to do this. The coins are only mixed among these "partners." Picking partners you can trust is a significant obstacle: how can you know that your partners will "forget" the mixing that happened? One may try to repeat this 10 times with randomly chosen partners, but how can you know that your partners are not all just sock puppets of one malicious entity (on an anonymous network, it is trivial to create as many fake users as you want )? If that is the case, then your efforts are in vain.
Compare this with Zerocoin, where you put your coins in an accumulator, and they are mixed with the coins of all users who have put coins into that accumulator, since the beginning of Zerocoin. There would be a different accumulator for different denominations of Anoncoins (1, 5, 10, 50 ANC, etc.).
To put it simply, the more users' coins your coins are mixed with, the more anonymity you have.
I cannot speak to Darkcoin's implementation (or planned implementation) of CoinJoin since I cannot seem to find any specs or code on their Github or their site. If anyone knows, please point me to them.

I look forward to a practical and secure solution for anonymity from the DarkCoin devs!

First off, these are fantastic questions. The answer to implementing this in such a way where it is very difficulty to exploit is by adding cost and verification.

Here’s the gist of how I envision DarkSend to work in the long run. Some of what I’m going to mention is done, some of it I’m working on currently. I’d love some ideas on possible attack vectors on my implementation, so we can make it as bulletproof as possible.

Pools

DarkSend adds various extensions to the Bitcoin protocol for implementing transaction pooling. Like normal Coinjoin the pools take transactions in stages. The stages currently are:

POOL_STATUS_IDLE
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_INPUTS
POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_OUTPUTS
POOL_STATUS_SIGNING
POOL_STATUS_TRANSMISSION

So the users relay these items throughout the network as the stages happen. After all items are gathered into the pool, the transactions are merged together into one, remotely signed and then broadcasted.

Masters

To defeat propagation problems, master nodes are elected each new block. They are responsible for being the authority of what goes into the joined transaction each session. This is done in a tamperproof way, but I think it’s not important to the discussion.

So what is the cost?

There must be a cost to using this anonymous network, otherwise like you say there will be issues with millions of accounts popping up. I’m not dead set on which solution(s) to implement, but here’s a couple ideas:

Burnt Identities

Higher difficulty shares to the current block would be mined and then stored in the blockchain permanently. Multiple of these would be used for each transaction and would be “burnt” when misused, causing the attacker to have to mine them again.  

Verification?

To use the pools it will require unique unspend outputs, someone that wants to mess with the system would have to have a large pool of funds in many addresses. So to attack a pool with 100 slots, you would require funds dispersed to 99 addresses, on 99 nodes working in common.

Other possible fee-less solutions?

There is interesting research on protecting against sybil attacks that lends itself really well to a decentralized ledger, such as this paper:

http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Workshops/InformationSecurity/slides/gamesandreputation.pdf

The idea is to build a social graph of the inputs and outputs of each entry and they should all know different people. If 99 of them all have the same “friends” that they associate with, then they’ll have to enter a different pool. Which will ensure the pool is not full of the nodes belonging to the attacker.

An application for machine learning?

I’m been making models for trading equities for over 7 years now. I ran a financial firm that sold the signals for a few years and I have experience with natural language processing using classifiers. So, I could make a classifier and actually embed it into Darkcoin to determine which pool a node should use, to separate out nodes that seem to be in common.

Other ideas?

I’m open to ideas on how to provide the best security to the network. I would love to hear what people have in mind.

I’ve been working on DarkSend about a month and we’ve already fixed the decentralization and propagation issues, this is just another bridge to cross in the future.

Thanks!

Is it possible to implement 3 solutions to work side by side?  Or would that conflict or slow things down too  much??  I like repetition

I think that's what the end result will be and it shouldn't slow down anything

thanks TanteStefana!!

[TanteStefana]

Oh no problem!

[chompyZ]

I've read in several places that Darkcoin uses "X11" as a proof-of-work algorithm.
I don't understand if merely mean 11 different hash functions combined, or whether it is it a recognized / defined technology, or something else?
I'd love to read more about it and learn. If anyone can reffer me by posting some links or an answer about this, i'd appreciate. thnx.

[CHAOSiTEC]

I've read in several places that Darkcoin uses "X11" as a proof-of-work algorithm.
I don't understand if merely mean 11 different hash functions combined, or whether it is it a recognized / defined technology, or something else?
I'd love to read more about it and learn. If anyone can reffer me by posting some links or an answer about this, i'd appreciate. thnx.

its 11 different hashing algorithms nothing specific about the name, its just, lets call it a shorthanded version

[TanteStefana]

I've read in several places that Darkcoin uses "X11" as a proof-of-work algorithm.
I don't understand if merely mean 11 different hash functions combined, or whether it is it a recognized / defined technology, or something else?
I'd love to read more about it and learn. If anyone can reffer me by posting some links or an answer about this, i'd appreciate. thnx.

It's 11 different algorithms that the developer named X-11 hence the original name of this coin, Xcoin.  A good cpu computer can still hold it's own in the mining of this coin.  Check out the first page, he lists them

[CHAOSiTEC]

A good cpu computer can still hold it's own in the mining of this coin.  Check out the first page, he lists them

well, the ebay seller i bought my blade server from, has promised me, that i will get it delivered tomorrow...

then we will see what it can do :-p

[CHAOSiTEC]

All locked accounts on lotterymining have been unlocked

old drk.lotterymining.com pool has finished forcing a payout to all miners
(well, 5 where missing their recieving account number - check your mail)

[illodin]

Even more people wouldn't want their neighbors (or colleagues, or employers, or insurance companies, or ex-wives etc) to know! So I think emphasizing that aspect would be at least equally important. Me personally, I don't care if my government or police knows what I buy, but I wouldn't like everyone else to know.

[tabnk]

Mined total 23 DRK. I'm will keep my precious for 1 whole year . Wait for it to be $1200 .

[shackleford]

The job interview analogy is a sales pitch. You don't need to be so desperate to sell yourself when you got the goods and nobody else does. Seems like we already went over that. Sales pitches are for shitcoins

No, just trying to use an analogy to display that I'm not having the argument you're pretending to have with me... But that's too many times you've gone your own way instead of paying attention. Is there a point to the argument you're having with yourself? Will you every notice or acknowledge the rather different topic I've presented instead of your own made-up angry bit?

I do like your point of dark being avoiding the criminals in high places though, I can see that applying. And the monopoly market-share point is also valid. Not what I was focusing on... But still valid points. I woke up with a boner this morning. A valid point as well, but not related...

I just don't care that much about this conversation anymore... I've said what I wanted to say (with little interest from anyone), and you're talking about something else... I'm tired. Buying some more DRK once my BTC confirms, then going to bed.

You continue to say and reference how bad the name is and invoke RapeYourDaughterCoin on different posts and how the anonymous features should not be showcased. Most everything I said was about the relevance of the name to adoption and criminal perception even if you couldn't follow. gday...

You lie.

I believe anonymity should be showcased. But in a way that demonstrates that it's not any more anonymous than cash, because that it the point being failed in propaganda already.

The bottom line is that the word 'dark' does not mean what you're pretending it means. You and I understand the meaning you're using, but the rest of the world already sees it as CrimeCoin and using the word Dark only solidifies it as such. You're subscribing tot he idea that all attention is good attention, but you're wrong.

"Just as anonymous as the cash that has existed for centuries." is the idea you're claiming, but you're advertising "Money for Crime!" instead. It seems like an attention-geting scheme, but not a good one. If I want to draw attention to myself or my product, in this case, a cryptocoin, I don't walk up to a cop and shout "hey look at me, free methamphetamine for everybody!"

I'm not suggesting a new name at this point. It's already been changed. I'm saying that this name is a dead albatross and effort will need to be made to explain what Dark means in the context WE want it to be seen, not the way the pre-existing shadow has already been cast. If you don't make that effort, then it will be, by default, seen in the light already cast on all cryptocurrencies; as CrimeCoin and ScamCoin and RapeTYourDaughterCoin and MtGoxFuckedUsAllCoin. If you want to use the word Dark in a completely different way than most people use it, then you'r going to have to say something about it in an infographic, like the one a few pages back that fails to do so... Emphasize it's anonymity through parallels with things already viewed as benign, not by making it sound like a bad thing.

I don't buy hand lotion that advertises it's uncanny ability to strip flesh from bone. Neither would you... The Media and Politicians are taking the "If you have nothing to hide, then you don't care if we're spying on you" approach. You need to counter that, not make it worse.

You Lie..
I clearly stated and made many paragraphs (waste of time) about how the utility of the coin was what is important and the branding was irrelevant if this was the only coin that provided the features (you later related this back to the irrelevance of your erection).  The first post you responded to you even bolded where I said "The name is irrelevant" & "I could give 2 shits about branding and market cap" "I think dark is perfect.. not that I really care.". Your the one not paying attention, you just want to spew the same thing over and over as if everyone is to stupid to understand your wisdom... Blah blah blah stupid masses.


I could take the time to show you how not showcasing (hint..#1syn Advertise) the anonymous (hint dark) features is exactly what your position is and the reason to not call it something like dark. This would be a waste of time also since your real position is:  

But this messenger knows what he is talking about.

Should have stopped right there, as name calling and attitude was inevitable.

A wise person would take my presence in this thread as an indicator that DarkCoin is a good idea that stands out among all other AltCoins.

You can't force people to be smart. I've tried... I'm getting a DeJa Vu feeling... :-p

I woke up with a boner this morning. A valid point as well, but not related...

And numerous other posts of general jackassery


Darkmail / Darknet / Darkwallet / darkweb /ect ect ect  

(PR 2/24/2014) Black Phone from Silent Circle & Geeksphone.  Phone targeted  as a privacy/security minded platform
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/blackphone-launches-at-mobile-world-congress-2014-246857881.html

(PR 2/26/2014) Black Smartphone from Boeing.  A secure phone platform targeted at government
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/defense-space/ic/black/index.page

Within 2 days of each other same similar black (syn dark) branding and same purpose, coincidence?

Been here with btc probably before you and this is also the first alt I am really interested in since name coin. No need to turn the tread into a personal trading blog and masturbation posts. Intelligent arguments won't fix a shitty attitude & personality.

done ignore