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

[eltito]

Darkcoin has been added to Bter.com 's BTC market

Deposit at

https://bter.com/myaccount/deposit/DRK

and Trade at

https://bter.com/trade/drk_btc

About time. BTC38, are you watching?

Slightly aroused.

[1715636441]

1715636441

[Kartoff]

Aaah finally 

[eduffield]

I spent a fair amount of time thinking about the discussion with dime, humanitee, luigi1111, camosoul and others yesterday about the anonymity of Darksend.  I suspected that the logic behind darksend as currently implemented was not sound, and I thought it would be best to determine how exactly darksend was working, and do an in-depth analysis of a mixing cycle and the transactions that follow mixing.

...

Best,
Sim

Wow! This is great. About 400+ pages ago I talked about having a different kind of pool for change outputs only. Put in all of your change outputs and you'll get new fresh clean inputs of 10DRK. The client could automatically do this after each darksend, which would also get you new inputs for the next round.

I'm currently embedded in patching stratum and p2pool to support the masternode payments, which is why I haven't been around. It takes a lot of work to make something so different from anything else out there, dare I say, revolutionary?

[eltito]

Couldn't you just clean XYZ wallets by sending yourself dummy transactions between legit ones (or having the client automate it)?  Anonymint talked about this I believe.  The more you send yourself the better.  Also wasn't there talk of having some sort of injection nodes churning out constant dummy transactions?

Wow! This is great. About 400+ pages ago I talked about having a different kind of pool for change outputs only. Put in all of your change outputs and you'll get new flesh clean inputs of 10DRK. The client could automatically do this after each darksend, which would also get you new inputs for the next round.

That must be what I was thinking of.

[GhostPlayer]

 Yup... Evan is the REAL Satoshi Nakam * WHAAAAAAMM*..... ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz........

 Wow, this article really blew my mind! Something was bugging me about Mastercoin, now I know what it is! (I already did, but was trusting the "market" - making me the biggest idiot for not trusting my gut... that and the lack of actual factual development)

 100% moving out of Mastercoin, and the reason its falling so quick
 
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/the-brokenness-of-maidsafe/

[solo20]

Just to give an update to users in here, no need to panic, no coins were affected as this was only hung cron-jobs.

They have been fixed, we even issued double payouts for a bunch of blocks, so enjoy the extra coins as a compensation!

http://dark.suchpool.pw

This is bullshit. You did NOT send out double payout for blocks. Double payment simply happened because you've had DB issue AGAIN!
You're saying people have had issues with your service, and your reward by RANDOMLY awarding double payout for random blocks?!

Hell yeah, let me go point my miner at you  right now!   Random compensation for random block, for lucky winners? That is not compensation, that is a lottery. What about those who gain without loses, or theses who double loos by sheer bad "random compensation luck"?

Your backend is crap and you've been screwing with everyone's mining. This time, it double payed out. It was not intentional, or you'd have made a nice email or forum "spam" about it.

Nor did I receive an email from a admin expressing whatever feeling that they should double payout as compensation for downtime, locked payouts, stratum failure and constant DDoD's, all of which you've previously promised to have fixed and never happen again.

 I've lost more mining to you guys than to scrypt-algo mining instability with 280x's peaking 85ºC and CGwatcher rebooting.
 BE HONEST; DONT BULLSHIT, and people will understand that the world is not perfect and shit happens.

 I don't like being bullshitted. You completely screwed me over twice, on a coin launch and with DRK.

 I like your fronted GUI, mais je n'aime pas votre fausses promesses

did you ever get your coins back
i have not received any coins back this blows donkey ass

[chompyZ]

My only concern about having a change-address-only pool is that it will shed a little light on the original darksend mixes (ie now you know which coins were change and which coins were not change when you look at the mixing step).  

Small question-
After mixing in the change-address-only pool, do the 10 DRK get sent to another change address, or to the address A from where they initially went out.

My concern - as in your example of buying something costly at Amazon, I'll still be using the 2 addresses together.

[AlexGR]

I would like to ask the devs to make it compulsory to include the blockchain as part of the supernodes, and have it as 'read by anyone'.
I think that once we have the supernodes up and running with a readable blockchain that is accessible by anyone, different services might evolve independent of the darkcoin devs on top of this, such as the thin wallet described by TS.

I think masternodes should not be merged with the task of preserving a blockchain for all others, as this would seriously impact on their bandwidth + increase the vulnerability of the network by taking down a large number of them.

I believe that a different solution, based on a similar concept, can be employed.

Just as darksend nodes will get 10% of the mining output, we can have blockchain nodes that are simply used to preserve the blockchain while others enjoy some thin clients in their mobile phones, tablets etc. Blockchain nodes could receive, say, 5-10% of the mining output for providing the service of storage and network bandwidth. Unlike darksend nodes which are limited in number, blockchain nodes could be in the thousands (=good for network security).

In a sense we create a new type of masternode, with a different functionality. If someone wants to run both on the same machine (darksend node / blockchain node) he can.

[mattmct]

I spent a fair amount of time thinking about the discussion with dime, humanitee, luigi1111, camosoul and others yesterday about the anonymity of Darksend.  I suspected that the logic behind darksend as currently implemented was not sound, and I thought it would be best to determine how exactly darksend was working, and do an in-depth analysis of a mixing cycle and the transactions that follow mixing.

...

Best,
Sim

Wow! This is great. About 400+ pages ago I talked about having a different kind of pool for change outputs only. Put in all of your change outputs and you'll get new fresh clean inputs of 10DRK. The client could automatically do this after each darksend, which would also get you new inputs for the next round.

I'm currently embedded in patching stratum and p2pool to support the masternode payments, which is why I haven't been around. It takes a lot of work to make something so different from anything else out there, dare I say, revolutionary?

You you do dare! lol. Everything is revolutionary about DarkCoin.  I love these random check ins.  Lets us know the big boss is reading, and very open to ideas...,while working his arse off haha.

[bonesoul]

http://dark.coinium.org/

Coinium.org Network: http://www.coinium.org/
Graphs & Stats: http://www.coinium.org/pool/DRK

[philipmicklon]

I'm currently embedded in patching stratum and p2pool to support the masternode payments, which is why I haven't been around. It takes a lot of work to make something so different from anything else out there, dare I say, revolutionary?

Thank you for the update Evan.

[ErrorId]

I'm currently embedded in patching stratum and p2pool to support the masternode payments, which is why I haven't been around. It takes a lot of work to make something so different from anything else out there, dare I say, revolutionary?

Thank you for the update Evan.

Thank you for the hard work Evan!

[thefrog]

Hmm, strange.

I started the latest 0.10.0 beta Windows client with connect=www.drkpool.com after cleaning my appdata folder and I can't sync past 46226 even though that pool is on block 46556.
Possible explanations:
-> www.drkpool.com is on a wrong blockchain (if the latest client has a correct checkpoint)
-> the latest client is broken (possibly incorrect hardcoded checkpoint or other bug)

remove connect=www.drkpool.com from your darkcoin.conf
If you use 'connect=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx', darkcoind and darkcoind-qt only connect to xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx.
If you want faster syncing, use 'addnode=' or 'seednode='.

I intentionally connected to a single node (I know what that command does), so I should be able to get synced with that node even if there are multiple forks around the network.
I didn't want to sync faster, I tested if I can sync at all.

Well, your intention will not work, when www.drkpool.com connection is full.

Code:

www.drkpool.com.	21438	IN	A	162.252.83.44

2014-04-06 14:09:25 connected www.drkpool.com
2014-04-06 14:09:25 send version message: version 70002, blocks=46620, us=myip:9999, them=162.252.83.44:9999, peer=162.252.83.44:9999
2014-04-06 14:09:25 Added time data, samples 4, offset +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-06 14:09:25 Moving 162.252.83.44:9999 to tried

www.drkpool.com's inbound connection is full.

May be it's full now but it doesn't matter because it did sync up until 46226 (using connect=www.drkpool.com, starting from block 0), the block which most people got stuck with.

my blockchain stopped synchronizing at block 46226.
I'm running v0.9.1.0-unk-beta and have 8 active connections to the network
Anyone else having problems?

This doesn't seem like a coincidence to me!

Hi

did someone successfully build and run the wallet on a i686 (=32 bit) linux ?

i build successfully, but then after start, the sync stops at block "blocks" : 45993,

2014-04-29 20:04:48 received block 00000000000b304562f734cdc04f201f9e0497188a26362f76b4642606ebbc70
2014-04-29 20:04:48 ERROR: AcceptBlock() : incorrect proof of work
2014-04-29 20:04:48 ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED

I have used the latest git source.

Please help, I would like to set up a p2pool node for DRK.
And no, I can not switch to x86_64, as I have other p2pools up and running at the moment on the same node.

DRK is the only one that does not work (at the moment).

thanks

cheers

[scorpio18]

DarkCoin P2Pool


address: stratum+tcp://scorp.hopto.org:7903
Username: Your DarkCoin address
Passoword:  Does not matter, anything!

Status p2pool:
http://scorp.hopto.org:7903/static/

Node fee: 0.5%

Spread the hashes!!

Recommended Settings:

./sgminer -k darkcoin -o stratum+tcp://scorp.hopto.org:7903 -u WALLET -p x

Manual Share Difficulty

Reccomended Share Difficulty
1 +0.00000116

5 +0.00000582

10 +0.00001164

50 +0.00005821

100 +0.00011641

250 +0.00029103

500 +0.00058207

750 +0.00087310

1000 +0.00116414

Add this number to the end of your username (wallet address)

Example: WalletAddress+0.00116414​

[Simcom]

I spent a fair amount of time thinking about the discussion with dime, humanitee, luigi1111, camosoul and others yesterday about the anonymity of Darksend.  I suspected that the logic behind darksend as currently implemented was not sound, and I thought it would be best to determine how exactly darksend was working, and do an in-depth analysis of a mixing cycle and the transactions that follow mixing.

...

Best,
Sim

Wow! This is great. About 400+ pages ago I talked about having a different kind of pool for change outputs only. Put in all of your change outputs and you'll get new fresh clean inputs of 10DRK. The client could automatically do this after each darksend, which would also get you new inputs for the next round.

I'm currently embedded in patching stratum and p2pool to support the masternode payments, which is why I haven't been around. It takes a lot of work to make something so different from anything else out there, dare I say, revolutionary?

On second thought, I'm not sure this solves the problem.  My understanding is that you want to accumulate the dirty change in the wallet until it breaches a certain amount (say 10 for example), then it is washed in a "change only" wash with a bunch of "10" transactions.  The problem I see is that even the clean coins could be linked to the original transaction.  Just to explain:

John darksends 2 coins from A to C, gets 8 back as change on address X
a few days later..
John darksends 8 coins from B to D, gets 2 back as change on address Y

Y+X are submitted to the change mixing pool (10 coins), and come out "clean" at address Z.

The problem is that the coins at address Z are not clean really, they are "suspect", they could have possibly participated in any darksends that generated the dirty coins that composed the "change washing" pool.

Now when John wants to spend coins from A, B, and Z in the same transaction.

So if John wants to send coins from A+B+Z in one transaction, the fact that Z participated in a pool that contained X and Y is enough to expose A and B as the original participants in the darksend transaction.

Really it leaves us at the same position that we were at previously after the original darksends.

I hope that made sense.

[eduffield]

I spent a fair amount of time thinking about the discussion with dime, humanitee, luigi1111, camosoul and others yesterday about the anonymity of Darksend.  I suspected that the logic behind darksend as currently implemented was not sound, and I thought it would be best to determine how exactly darksend was working, and do an in-depth analysis of a mixing cycle and the transactions that follow mixing.

...

Best,
Sim

Wow! This is great. About 400+ pages ago I talked about having a different kind of pool for change outputs only. Put in all of your change outputs and you'll get new fresh clean inputs of 10DRK. The client could automatically do this after each darksend, which would also get you new inputs for the next round.

I'm currently embedded in patching stratum and p2pool to support the masternode payments, which is why I haven't been around. It takes a lot of work to make something so different from anything else out there, dare I say, revolutionary?

On second thought, I'm not sure this solves the problem.  My understanding is that you want to accumulate the dirty change in the wallet until it breaches a certain amount (say 10 for example), then it is washed in a "change only" wash with a bunch of "10" transactions.  The problem I see is that even the clean coins could be linked to the original transaction.  Just to explain:

John darksends 2 coins from A to C, gets 8 back as change on address X
a few days later..
John darksends 8 coins from B to D, gets 2 back as change on address Y

Y+X are submitted to the change mixing pool (10 coins), and come out "clean" at address Z.

The problem is that the coins at address Z are not clean really, they are "suspect", they could have possibly participated in any darksends that generated the dirty coins that composed the "change washing" pool.

Now when Johns wants to spend coins from A, B, and Z in the same transaction.

So if John wants to send coins from A+B+Z in one transaction, the fact that Z participated in a pool that contained X and Y is enough to expose A and B as the original participants in the darksend transaction.

Really it leaves us at the same position that we were at previously after the original darksends.

I hope that made sense.

John darksends 2 coins from A to C, gets 8 back as change on address X
Joe darksends 3 coins from E to G, gets 7 back as change on address W
Suzie darksends 3 coins from K to Q, gets 7 back as change on address S

Now, we make a pool with X+X1+W+W1+S+S1.

Pool total output == 30DRK

X+X1 = 10DRK
W+W1 = 10DRK
S+S1 = 10DRK

X will always be less than 10DRK, there for we need another input to bring it to 10DRK total. This way no one can tell who is receiving which inputs, thus cleaning them in the inverse way DarkSend works.

Make sense?

[humanitee]

John darksends 2 coins from A to C, gets 8 back as change on address X
a few days later..
John darksends 8 coins from B to D, gets 2 back as change on address Y

Joe darksends 3 coins from E to G, gets 7 back as change on address W
a few days later..
Joe darksends 1 coins from F to H, gets 9 back as change on address Z

Suzie darksends 3 coins from K to Q, gets 7 back as change on address S
a few days later..
Suzie darksends 1 coins from J to R, gets 9 back as change on address T

Now, we make a pool with X+Y+X1+W+Z+W1+S+T+S1.

Pool total output == 60DRK

X+Y+X1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
W+Z+W1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
S+T+S1 = 10DRK + 10DRK

Make sense?

My mind just exploded. What are X1, S1, and W1?

[eduffield]

John darksends 2 coins from A to C, gets 8 back as change on address X
a few days later..
John darksends 8 coins from B to D, gets 2 back as change on address Y

Joe darksends 3 coins from E to G, gets 7 back as change on address W
a few days later..
Joe darksends 1 coins from F to H, gets 9 back as change on address Z

Suzie darksends 3 coins from K to Q, gets 7 back as change on address S
a few days later..
Suzie darksends 1 coins from J to R, gets 9 back as change on address T

Now, we make a pool with X+Y+X1+W+Z+W1+S+T+S1.

Pool total output == 60DRK

X+Y+X1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
W+Z+W1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
S+T+S1 = 10DRK + 10DRK

Make sense?

My mind just exploded. What are X1, S1, and W1?

X will always be less than 10DRK, therefore we need another input to bring it to 10DRK total. This way no one can tell who is receiving which inputs, thus cleaning them in the inverse way DarkSend works. Checkout my post above again, I modified it a bit.

Make sense?

[eltito]

John darksends 2 coins from A to C, gets 8 back as change on address X
a few days later..
John darksends 8 coins from B to D, gets 2 back as change on address Y

Joe darksends 3 coins from E to G, gets 7 back as change on address W
a few days later..
Joe darksends 1 coins from F to H, gets 9 back as change on address Z

Suzie darksends 3 coins from K to Q, gets 7 back as change on address S
a few days later..
Suzie darksends 1 coins from J to R, gets 9 back as change on address T

Now, we make a pool with X+Y+X1+W+Z+W1+S+T+S1.

Pool total output == 60DRK

X+Y+X1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
W+Z+W1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
S+T+S1 = 10DRK + 10DRK

Make sense?

My mind just exploded. What are X1, S1, and W1?

X will always be less than 10DRK, therefore we need another input to bring it to 10DRK total. This way no one can tell who is receiving which inputs, thus cleaning them in the inverse way DarkSend works. Checkout my post above again, I modified it a bit.

Make sense?

Inputs to the change pool are always 10DRK, divided between two or more change addresses from the same wallet.  At best you could say there were some DRK from the change pool used in a tx, but since everybody always sends and receives the exact same amounts from the change pool, it doesn't matter (and if you're worried about that, you could just DarkSend the change to yourself once you get it back from the change pool).

Right?

[coins101]

John darksends 2 coins from A to C, gets 8 back as change on address X
a few days later..
John darksends 8 coins from B to D, gets 2 back as change on address Y

Joe darksends 3 coins from E to G, gets 7 back as change on address W
a few days later..
Joe darksends 1 coins from F to H, gets 9 back as change on address Z

Suzie darksends 3 coins from K to Q, gets 7 back as change on address S
a few days later..
Suzie darksends 1 coins from J to R, gets 9 back as change on address T

Now, we make a pool with X+Y+X1+W+Z+W1+S+T+S1.

Pool total output == 60DRK

X+Y+X1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
W+Z+W1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
S+T+S1 = 10DRK + 10DRK

Make sense?

My mind just exploded. What are X1, S1, and W1?

money in the bank, I think.