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

[peteycamey]

difficulty over 1000+

and price went down to $ 0.62

[coins101]

But aren't you also in your current design trusting the master node not to steal the collateral inputs?

The whitepaper has my proposed solution to that in the "Defending Against Attack" section: http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/DarkcoinWhitepaper.pdf

Things have changed since then, so we'll have to come up with something else.

I don't see how that could have worked. The master node can simply lie about which collateral payments didn't fulfill all the stages. There is no way to know if the master node lied to other signatories. Did I misunderstand?

If collateral payments can be stolen, then this needs to be abandoned.

I am so sorry, but CoinJoin is a can of worms. I tried to tell you that weeks or months ago back on page 3xx of this thread.

Probably the only thing you can do is move master nodes to a reputation system. But this means you give your coin to the government. Reputation always ends up just like the power vacuum of democracy.

The entire point of Satoshi's brilliant PoW invention, is you don't have to trust any node. He solved the Byzantine General's problem.

I thought of another solution which I am sure you also thought of?

Charge a transaction fee to all inputs of the Darksend.

That may be the only possible solution that works. Anonymity won't be broken. And collateral can't be stolen.

Then Sybil attacking the master nodes won't have any effect because you no longer correlate collateral to the triple of IP, input and output. The collateral is removed from the design. You instead charge a tx fee to every input. Master node can't correlate to blind signed outputs.

And Sybil attacking the inputs will be very very costly.

The downside is of course Darksends are not free. Nothing in life is free.

Yeah I think this is your only realistic option.

Edit: but the master node can steal the tx fees. And then not include the input in the output signing. So scratch this idea.

See CoinJoin just doesn't work. I tried to tell everyone that, but they get all angry at me. Sorry.

DarkSend does charge a very small fee to use, which is fine. The fee goes to the miners.

"but the master node can steal the tx fees." That's impossible. Fees always go to miners.

1. Why isn't DarkSend the default choice to max the number of transactions? Bloat?
2. Why is the DarkSend fee so small? If you solve a practical problem and provide a valuable service, charge for it. Facebook is free to join, but it is not free. They monetize everyone.
3. Reduced fees, tick to use the Darkcoin option.

[blajde]

I love this thread. It is awesome and most awesome right now. I loved it from the beginning but now it's just awesome.

I stopped understanding what the last 20 pages said but I do understand people are doing some stuff.

[thelonecrouton]

I stopped understanding what the last 20 pages said but I do understand people are doing some stuff.

It's like being an observer of some momentous historical event. Or it will be when Anonymint posts, "Huh. OK then."

I just wish the bloody coin was profitable to mine.

Don't worry I'm buying it instead. Because I know you were worried.

But yeah, big difference between this and, for example, the LTC "dev" team: "Don't worry, it will be OK!"

[tifozi]

difficulty over 1000+

and price went down to $ 0.62

Anyone willing to sell DRKs, please PM me (serious offers only), reasonable prices please.

[goin2mars]

I love this thread. It is awesome and most awesome right now. I loved it from the beginning but now it's just awesome.

I stopped understanding what the last 20 pages said but I do understand people are doing some stuff.

I'm enjoying the posts today greatly. My biggest regret so far is that I don't have the immersion yet to participate in the discussion . . and probably won't for months.

I think what's so exciting right now is that the line between privacy and anonymity is being further defined in this thread . . with every post.

There are a few choices available right now that offer a private cryptocurrency experience, but either aren't seeking, can't achieve, or just lie and claim actual anonymity for whatever reasons.

There's a lot of tough choices to make, and with how far this has already been taken . . we might actually see ourselves becoming part of a coin that has gone well beyond privacy and entered some form of anonymity.

For example, after reading today, it seems like a large part of anonymity comes from the actual costs incurred in exposing identity to begin with by the person seeking to identify . . amongst other things of course. Before today that wasn't something I had been able to consider as a factor.

Where this leads me to is that if someone has to pay thousands of dollars in fees only to get hundreds of dollars in information . . the incentive to expose is greatly reduced.

I can only continue to hope that with the amount of work already done in bringing it this far can lead it into further anonymity.

[blajde]

I stopped understanding what the last 20 pages said but I do understand people are doing some stuff.

It's like being an observer of some momentous historical event. Or it will be when Anonymint posts, "Huh. OK then."

I just wish the bloody coin was profitable to mine.

Don't worry I'm buying it instead. Because I know you were worried.

But yeah, big difference between this and, for example, the LTC "dev" team: "Don't worry, it will be OK!"

Well it is profitable to mine - you just can't cash out yet

But yeah mine something else at the moment and instasell and put it into darkcoin = more money in DRK = increased value. The diff is lightyears from not being sustainable so just pump dem cash into DRK

[thelonecrouton]

Well it is profitable to mine - you just can't cash out yet

Good way of looking at it! Since even it it was worth more currently I still wouldn't be selling it.

[coins101]

I stopped understanding what the last 20 pages said but I do understand people are doing some stuff.

It's like being an observer of some momentous historical event. Or it will be when Anonymint posts, "Huh. OK then."

I just wish the bloody coin was profitable to mine.

Don't worry I'm buying it instead. Because I know you were worried.

But yeah, big difference between this and, for example, the LTC "dev" team: "Don't worry, it will be OK!"

Well it is profitable to mine - you just can't cash out yet

But yeah mine something else at the moment and instasell and put it into darkcoin = more money in DRK = increased value. The diff is lightyears from not being sustainable so just pump dem cash into DRK

This is becoming the strangest coin to mine.

The difficulty has gone up double in the last week. The price has been about the same relative to BTC, if not up a little. The mining payout is so-so, but you sort of have to take into account reduced cost of power, switching off cooling fans and lowering fan speeds.

There are plenty of exchanges. But little selling.

But even as the profitability hits the margins, more and more people are coming to mine it. Go figure.

Breaking the laws of short-term greed is just another innovation of Darkcoin.

[slyA]

 WTF. It's like I stepped into bizarro land. I've followed the last couple of pages. I've only got a rudimentary understanding of what's being said but I'll be damned if anonymint hasn't been mature about this. Nothing gets me hotter than intellectual sparring. The menage a trois of Evan + Anonymint + Chaositec. Bloody good show guys, I'm just here to enjoy the debate.

[bigc1984]

HELP I'M DIEING! ... April fools I'm not really dieing BUT I am broke and pretty damn hungry. I did exchange of some BTC into my account via coinbase but its not going to be there until thursday. Can someone buy some darkcoin off me via google wallet so I can order a pizza or somethin? That would be awesome...

[AnonyMint]

No I meant the collateral payments can be stolen, not the tx fees. Are you meaning to write that collateral payments always go to the miners, thus master nodes have no incentive to lie?

No that's what you said earlier "Edit: but the master node can steal the tx fees. And then not include the input in the output signing. So scratch this idea."

We need to use specific terminology here. Tx fees are from the transaction and they go to the miners. Collateral payments are made out to the master nodes.

In either case, master nodes can lie and steal, they just make sure they also control miner(s) (or pools).

No one can prove the master node isn't being malicious to hurt the reputation of an innocent pool or miner.

Thus you can't stop theft.

You completely missed what I was saying. Collateral is multi-sig, requiring more than 1 party to lie. 99.999999999% they won't be the same party.

I'm getting tired, lets continue this another day.

As far as I can fathom, multisig doesn't protect you because master node can just lie and say none signed. How will the other signatories know if the master node is telling truth or not?

However, I have a partial solution for this. Send the collateral payment to the ether. Then master node loses some incentive. But still the master node might lie just to harm the coin and the owners of those collateral.

I guess the inputs can forward their communications to other signatories too?

In that case, your anonymity is more broken because more nodes would see the triplet of IP, input, and output on each Darksend. Thus the percent of master nodes needed to lower anonymity would be proportionally less (e.g. if 5 signatories, then need only 1/5 as many master nodes to be adversaries).

There's an even simpler solution.

User A: You
MasterNode A: The previous master node
MasterNode B: This rounds master node

User A makes the collater payment out to the Master A but sends it to Master B along with the input/out1/out2.

Master B can cash it, but it doesn't benefit him at all.

That solution doesn't decrease the anonymity, but complete destroys the incentives to cheat.

Adversary will wait until he is MasterNode A and MasterNode B. The more Sybil nodes he has, the more often that will be.

Actually adversary doesn't have to wait for that, if he has MasterNode B, he can spend it and cause trouble for DarkCoin. And who can prove he was lying?

[AnonyMint]

I stopped understanding what the last 20 pages said but I do understand people are doing some stuff.

It's like being an observer of some momentous historical event. Or it will be when Anonymint posts, "Huh. OK then."

I just wish the bloody coin was profitable to mine.

Don't worry I'm buying it instead. Because I know you were worried.

But yeah, big difference between this and, for example, the LTC "dev" team: "Don't worry, it will be OK!"

Well it is profitable to mine - you just can't cash out yet

But yeah mine something else at the moment and instasell and put it into darkcoin = more money in DRK = increased value. The diff is lightyears from not being sustainable so just pump dem cash into DRK

This is becoming the strangest coin to mine.

The difficulty has gone up double in the last week.

Probably nothing to do with me, but I been posting very aggressively in other threads that we really need an anonymous coin.

[AnonyMint]

I stopped understanding what the last 20 pages said but I do understand people are doing some stuff.

It's like being an observer of some momentous historical event. Or it will be when Anonymint posts, "Huh. OK then."

I will definitely congratulate if warranted. I'm also trying to think of how to make it rock solid.

[eduffield]

No I meant the collateral payments can be stolen, not the tx fees. Are you meaning to write that collateral payments always go to the miners, thus master nodes have no incentive to lie?

No that's what you said earlier "Edit: but the master node can steal the tx fees. And then not include the input in the output signing. So scratch this idea."

We need to use specific terminology here. Tx fees are from the transaction and they go to the miners. Collateral payments are made out to the master nodes.

In either case, master nodes can lie and steal, they just make sure they also control miner(s) (or pools).

No one can prove the master node isn't being malicious to hurt the reputation of an innocent pool or miner.

Thus you can't stop theft.

You completely missed what I was saying. Collateral is multi-sig, requiring more than 1 party to lie. 99.999999999% they won't be the same party.

I'm getting tired, lets continue this another day.

As far as I can fathom, multisig doesn't protect you because master node can just lie and say none signed. How will the other signatories know if the master node is telling truth or not?

However, I have a partial solution for this. Send the collateral payment to the ether. Then master node loses some incentive. But still the master node might lie just to harm the coin and the owners of those collateral.

I guess the inputs can forward their communications to other signatories too?

In that case, your anonymity is more broken because more nodes would see the triplet of IP, input, and output on each Darksend. Thus the percent of master nodes needed to lower anonymity would be proportionally less (e.g. if 5 signatories, then need only 1/5 as many master nodes to be adversaries).

There's an even simpler solution.

User A: You
MasterNode A: The previous master node
MasterNode B: This rounds master node

User A makes the collater payment out to the Master A but sends it to Master B along with the input/out1/out2.

Master B can cash it, but it doesn't benefit him at all.

That solution doesn't decrease the anonymity, but complete destroys the incentives to cheat.

Adversary will wait until he is MasterNode A and MasterNode B. The more Sybil nodes he has, the more often that will be.

Actually adversary doesn't have to wait for that, if he has MasterNode B, he can spend it and cause trouble for DarkCoin. And who can prove he was lying?

With 5000 master nodes the chances that you're both Master A & B are (1/5000)^2 or .000000004. I think we're fine.

So if someone wants to buy 1000DRK off of the open market to be a master node and charge random people fees, I think they'll help darkcoin more than they'll hurt it. They'll raise the price and 1 in 5000 transactions will get charged .1DRK, it's still cheap. 

Plus, charging fees could reset the age of that 1000DRK and we could require an age of 24 hours or something. So that really limits their ability to mess with Darkcoin.

My point is there's a million solutions.

[stealth923]

wowow just read through and my brain just exploded on the floor....Evan and Anonymint - thank you both for the great debate and discussions!

Lets make Darksend the best it can be!

[darkproton]

No I meant the collateral payments can be stolen, not the tx fees. Are you meaning to write that collateral payments always go to the miners, thus master nodes have no incentive to lie?

No that's what you said earlier "Edit: but the master node can steal the tx fees. And then not include the input in the output signing. So scratch this idea."

We need to use specific terminology here. Tx fees are from the transaction and they go to the miners. Collateral payments are made out to the master nodes.

In either case, master nodes can lie and steal, they just make sure they also control miner(s) (or pools).

No one can prove the master node isn't being malicious to hurt the reputation of an innocent pool or miner.

Thus you can't stop theft.

You completely missed what I was saying. Collateral is multi-sig, requiring more than 1 party to lie. 99.999999999% they won't be the same party.

I'm getting tired, lets continue this another day.

As far as I can fathom, multisig doesn't protect you because master node can just lie and say none signed. How will the other signatories know if the master node is telling truth or not?

However, I have a partial solution for this. Send the collateral payment to the ether. Then master node loses some incentive. But still the master node might lie just to harm the coin and the owners of those collateral.

I guess the inputs can forward their communications to other signatories too?

In that case, your anonymity is more broken because more nodes would see the triplet of IP, input, and output on each Darksend. Thus the percent of master nodes needed to lower anonymity would be proportionally less (e.g. if 5 signatories, then need only 1/5 as many master nodes to be adversaries).

There's an even simpler solution.

User A: You
MasterNode A: The previous master node
MasterNode B: This rounds master node

User A makes the collater payment out to the Master A but sends it to Master B along with the input/out1/out2.

Master B can cash it, but it doesn't benefit him at all.

That solution doesn't decrease the anonymity, but complete destroys the incentives to cheat.

Adversary will wait until he is MasterNode A and MasterNode B. The more Sybil nodes he has, the more often that will be.

Actually adversary doesn't have to wait for that, if he has MasterNode B, he can spend it and cause trouble for DarkCoin. And who can prove he was lying?

With 5000 master nodes the chances that you're both Master A & B are (1/5000)^2 or .000000004. I think we're fine.

So if someone wants to buy 1000DRK off of the open market to be a master node and charge random people fees, I think they'll help darkcoin more than they'll hurt it. They'll raise the price and 1 in 5000 transactions will get charged .1DRK, it's still cheap. 

Plus, charging fees could reset the age of that 1000DRK and we could require an age of 24 hours or something. So that really limits their ability to mess with Darkcoin.

My point is there's a million solutions.

Evan you rock man. Question for you or others. A fee can be charged by a holder of drk greater than 1000? If so, isn't it advantageous to own as much drk as possible? Should it all be in a single wallet or split up? Thanks for all your hard work evan.

[AnonyMint]

No I meant the collateral payments can be stolen, not the tx fees. Are you meaning to write that collateral payments always go to the miners, thus master nodes have no incentive to lie?

No that's what you said earlier "Edit: but the master node can steal the tx fees. And then not include the input in the output signing. So scratch this idea."

We need to use specific terminology here. Tx fees are from the transaction and they go to the miners. Collateral payments are made out to the master nodes.

In either case, master nodes can lie and steal, they just make sure they also control miner(s) (or pools).

No one can prove the master node isn't being malicious to hurt the reputation of an innocent pool or miner.

Thus you can't stop theft.

You completely missed what I was saying. Collateral is multi-sig, requiring more than 1 party to lie. 99.999999999% they won't be the same party.

I'm getting tired, lets continue this another day.

As far as I can fathom, multisig doesn't protect you because master node can just lie and say none signed. How will the other signatories know if the master node is telling truth or not?

However, I have a partial solution for this. Send the collateral payment to the ether. Then master node loses some incentive. But still the master node might lie just to harm the coin and the owners of those collateral.

I guess the inputs can forward their communications to other signatories too?

In that case, your anonymity is more broken because more nodes would see the triplet of IP, input, and output on each Darksend. Thus the percent of master nodes needed to lower anonymity would be proportionally less (e.g. if 5 signatories, then need only 1/5 as many master nodes to be adversaries).

There's an even simpler solution.

User A: You
MasterNode A: The previous master node
MasterNode B: This rounds master node

User A makes the collater payment out to the Master A but sends it to Master B along with the input/out1/out2.

Master B can cash it, but it doesn't benefit him at all.

That solution doesn't decrease the anonymity, but complete destroys the incentives to cheat.

Adversary will wait until he is MasterNode A and MasterNode B. The more Sybil nodes he has, the more often that will be.

Actually adversary doesn't have to wait for that, if he has MasterNode B, he can spend it and cause trouble for DarkCoin. And who can prove he was lying?

With 5000 master nodes the chances that you're both Master A & B are (1/5000)^2 or .000000004. I think we're fine.

Adversary can't even node-Sybil attack the anonymity (can still Sybil attack the Darksend inputs regardless) if he doesn't control a significant percentage of the MasterNodes. So if he controls 20% of them, then (1/5)^2 = 1 in 25. So every 25th Darksend could be stolen.

But the government probably isn't interested in destroying the Darksends. Rather they would want to silently collect the identity data.

So if someone wants to buy 1000DRK off of the open market to be a master node and charge random people fees, I think they'll help darkcoin more than they'll hurt it. They'll raise the price and 1 in 5000 transactions will get charged .1DRK, it's still cheap.

Buying DRK is not a zero sum game. They can sell their DRK later. I think there people with a lot of money in the world, especially the government because they can print money.

And they gain all the identity data and they can use that to confiscate and tax funds, then it is very lucrative for the government. But they can do that and really don't have an incentive to steal the payments. In fact, don't want to draw attention to themselves, so they wouldn't steal.

Perhaps you've solved the stealing issue. Congrats.

But the anonymity issue remains weaker. Government does have the incentive to buy up the MasterNodes.

Plus, charging fees could reset the age of that 1000DRK and we could require an age of 24 hours or something. So that really limits their ability to mess with Darkcoin.

Why? If they plan to be a MasterNode for years why is 24 hours delay a problem?

My point is there's a million solutions.

Hehehe, but you haven't explained a million of them yet.

[AnonyMint]

@ AnonyMint - will u invest in DRK?

AnonyMint promised slyA not to announce nor endorse any altcoin. Thus no comment.

[TanteStefana]

My client is not connecting to any nodes, anyone got a conf file example I could copy?

Had the same problem, it took like an hour + to connect to a node but it's all good now.  I just left it alone.

Both seed nodes were down, I forget to check them. Anyone else want to host a seed node?

- It needs to be configured to 200 connections max
- Must have 9999 open from the outside
- Must be a static IP
- Must be permanently available  

PM me and I'll add them to the source

Would it be of any help to use an amazon tiny ec2?  Only 1 cpu, but if it's just to run info through?  Let me know!