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

[coins101]

Help test the RC3 prelaunch!

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rc3-prelaunch-testing.1523/

new IP address for test P2P Pool : http://54.213.244.5:18998/static/
test pool working now.

-- connection string: sgminer.exe -o stratum+tcp://54.213.244.5:18998 -u mt2ScQSwpsohN8KC9CuFGCuCuvyJkCY8iEn1K5Y5JGe5svtfmrJ6J9McsZPJdWXPvuRq -p 1

bump

No need to use that address. You can generate your own testnet address and collect the tDRKs for yourself

bump

[coins101]

I've missed being around recently

c

Had to switch off to deliver a pretty big project

c

But that should finish this week, with a float for next week

m

So, I'm looking forward to spending more time helping out

f

And getting my nodes up and running

[pbremen01]

One technical question about DarkSend.

Let's say that I have 110 DRK in one address and I want to pay 30 DRK to another user using DarkSend.

DarkSend does something called "denomination". What does this mean? That it will send first 100 DRK to another address and then include these 100 DRK in DarkSend pool from this address?

Is this just this one transaction (in this example) or maybe denomination does also something else so that the original address (with 110 DRK at the beginning) is somehow obfuscated?

Thanks.

[bitcoinsid]

please stop feedin the troll , i think hes a sleep now so last 2 pages have been quiet. this forum is full of smart people , id rather listen to them than have 5pages of the same boring fud over n over. its obvious he wants cheap drk thats why he wasting so much time on this forum. 
Time to help on testnet, 4mhs, on the way 

[Kai Proctor]

One technical question about DarkSend.

Let's say that I have 110 DRK in one address and I want to pay 30 DRK to another user using DarkSend.

DarkSend does something called "denomination". What does this mean? That it will send first 100 DRK to another address and then include these 100 DRK in DarkSend pool from this address?

Is this just this one transaction (in this example) or maybe denomination does also something else so that the original address (with 110 DRK at the beginning) is somehow obfuscated?

Thanks.

Recap of How DarkSend Works

DarkSend functions in a way that is very similar to a tumbler, which is an idea that has been around for quite a while, but with a few specifications that increase the effectiveness.  It has went through multiple changes and updates, but the most recent release, release candidate 2 (RC2), is nearing complete anonymity.

When a user, let’s call him Tim, sends darkcoins through DarkSend to another user, let’s call her Sandy, he must send 10 darkcoins, even if that amount is larger than what he would like to pay her.  DarkSend then puts his coins in a pool, and pauses until two additional users initiate transactions.  These new users will add their own 10 darkcoins to the pool, and DarkSend blends the 30 coins into a random assortment.  If we assume that Tim wanted to send Sandy 8 darkcoins, then at this point 8 darkcoins would be deposited into Sandy’s wallet, but those 8 coins would be a mix of coins from all 3 users that had initiated transactions.  Tim’s remaining 2 coins are placed into a Random Pool Address (RPA) which was created during the transaction.  This RPA is not tied to any user, thus it is impossible to connect to a specific user, but Tim can access it.

This process is happening for the other 2 users that  sent 10 darkcoins through DarkSend as well, so at the end, it is impossible to determine which transaction was related to a specific user.  To an outside observer, 3 users put 30 darkcoins in, and 3 – 6 addresses receive coins out (3 if each user intended to send a full 10 darkcoins, up to 6 if each user intended to send less than 10 darkcoins).

Source : http://coinbrief.net/darkcoin-darksend-bitcoin/

Some additional (more recent) informations :

[...]

Thanks for the questions. It does seem like you're missing something. Although, it might not be your fault. The whitepaper is definitely out of date. We've done a lot of work at tweaking the trust model so that it can't be exploited. I'll try to explain how it works briefly, then hopefully if I get time I can revisit the whitepaper soon.

- Masternodes don't have any power over the transactions. They just coordinate the signing. All parties must sign in order for the transaction to be valid. So there's no way to cheat and take the money.
- Users submit collateral. At a later phase if a user doesn't provide the signature as agreed, the transaction will fail. Without colateral this could be done over and over bringing the system to a halt.
- Masternodes have the ability to take the collateral transaction if they wish, but it's paid to the bounty fund. So it doesn't benefit them, it just benefits the community. This removed the incentive to cheat and take the money.

There's no relying on pools at all anymore. Payments to masternodes are done with a voting system embedded into the blockchain. It would take 51% of the mining power to pay the wrong masternode, or another party (because the last few miners to solve blocks must agree on who should be paid)

Transaction currently require 3 parties to be created, so there's a short wait. There are no fake transactions to make that quicker, although this could be done. There's usually 5 or so transaction per 2.5 minutes, so the network should be able to function pretty efficiently under these requirements.

Hoping that helps . Thanks,

Evan

[pbremen01]

One technical question about DarkSend.

Let's say that I have 110 DRK in one address and I want to pay 30 DRK to another user using DarkSend.

DarkSend does something called "denomination". What does this mean? That it will send first 100 DRK to another address and then include these 100 DRK in DarkSend pool from this address?

Is this just this one transaction (in this example) or maybe denomination does also something else so that the original address (with 110 DRK at the beginning) is somehow obfuscated?

Thanks.

Recap of How DarkSend Works

DarkSend functions in a way that is very similar to a tumbler, which is an idea that has been around for quite a while, but with a few specifications that increase the effectiveness.  It has went through multiple changes and updates, but the most recent release, release candidate 2 (RC2), is nearing complete anonymity.

When a user, let’s call him Tim, sends darkcoins through DarkSend to another user, let’s call her Sandy, he must send 10 darkcoins, even if that amount is larger than what he would like to pay her.  DarkSend then puts his coins in a pool, and pauses until two additional users initiate transactions.  These new users will add their own 10 darkcoins to the pool, and DarkSend blends the 30 coins into a random assortment.  If we assume that Tim wanted to send Sandy 8 darkcoins, then at this point 8 darkcoins would be deposited into Sandy’s wallet, but those 8 coins would be a mix of coins from all 3 users that had initiated transactions.  Tim’s remaining 2 coins are placed into a Random Pool Address (RPA) which was created during the transaction.  This RPA is not tied to any user, thus it is impossible to connect to a specific user, but Tim can access it.

This process is happening for the other 2 users that  sent 10 darkcoins through DarkSend as well, so at the end, it is impossible to determine which transaction was related to a specific user.  To an outside observer, 3 users put 30 darkcoins in, and 3 – 6 addresses receive coins out (3 if each user intended to send a full 10 darkcoins, up to 6 if each user intended to send less than 10 darkcoins).

Source : http://coinbrief.net/darkcoin-darksend-bitcoin/

Some additional (more recent) informations :

[...]

Thanks for the questions. It does seem like you're missing something. Although, it might not be your fault. The whitepaper is definitely out of date. We've done a lot of work at tweaking the trust model so that it can't be exploited. I'll try to explain how it works briefly, then hopefully if I get time I can revisit the whitepaper soon.

- Masternodes don't have any power over the transactions. They just coordinate the signing. All parties must sign in order for the transaction to be valid. So there's no way to cheat and take the money.
- Users submit collateral. At a later phase if a user doesn't provide the signature as agreed, the transaction will fail. Without colateral this could be done over and over bringing the system to a halt.
- Masternodes have the ability to take the collateral transaction if they wish, but it's paid to the bounty fund. So it doesn't benefit them, it just benefits the community. This removed the incentive to cheat and take the money.

There's no relying on pools at all anymore. Payments to masternodes are done with a voting system embedded into the blockchain. It would take 51% of the mining power to pay the wrong masternode, or another party (because the last few miners to solve blocks must agree on who should be paid)

Transaction currently require 3 parties to be created, so there's a short wait. There are no fake transactions to make that quicker, although this could be done. There's usually 5 or so transaction per 2.5 minutes, so the network should be able to function pretty efficiently under these requirements.

Hoping that helps . Thanks,

Evan

Ok, thanks, but I don't see any "denomination" happening in these examples?

[Kai Proctor]

One technical question about DarkSend.

Let's say that I have 110 DRK in one address and I want to pay 30 DRK to another user using DarkSend.

DarkSend does something called "denomination". What does this mean? That it will send first 100 DRK to another address and then include these 100 DRK in DarkSend pool from this address?

Is this just this one transaction (in this example) or maybe denomination does also something else so that the original address (with 110 DRK at the beginning) is somehow obfuscated?

Thanks.

Recap of How DarkSend Works

DarkSend functions in a way that is very similar to a tumbler, which is an idea that has been around for quite a while, but with a few specifications that increase the effectiveness.  It has went through multiple changes and updates, but the most recent release, release candidate 2 (RC2), is nearing complete anonymity.

When a user, let’s call him Tim, sends darkcoins through DarkSend to another user, let’s call her Sandy, he must send 10 darkcoins, even if that amount is larger than what he would like to pay her.  DarkSend then puts his coins in a pool, and pauses until two additional users initiate transactions.  These new users will add their own 10 darkcoins to the pool, and DarkSend blends the 30 coins into a random assortment.  If we assume that Tim wanted to send Sandy 8 darkcoins, then at this point 8 darkcoins would be deposited into Sandy’s wallet, but those 8 coins would be a mix of coins from all 3 users that had initiated transactions.  Tim’s remaining 2 coins are placed into a Random Pool Address (RPA) which was created during the transaction.  This RPA is not tied to any user, thus it is impossible to connect to a specific user, but Tim can access it.

This process is happening for the other 2 users that  sent 10 darkcoins through DarkSend as well, so at the end, it is impossible to determine which transaction was related to a specific user.  To an outside observer, 3 users put 30 darkcoins in, and 3 – 6 addresses receive coins out (3 if each user intended to send a full 10 darkcoins, up to 6 if each user intended to send less than 10 darkcoins).

Source : http://coinbrief.net/darkcoin-darksend-bitcoin/

Some additional (more recent) informations :

[...]

Thanks for the questions. It does seem like you're missing something. Although, it might not be your fault. The whitepaper is definitely out of date. We've done a lot of work at tweaking the trust model so that it can't be exploited. I'll try to explain how it works briefly, then hopefully if I get time I can revisit the whitepaper soon.

- Masternodes don't have any power over the transactions. They just coordinate the signing. All parties must sign in order for the transaction to be valid. So there's no way to cheat and take the money.
- Users submit collateral. At a later phase if a user doesn't provide the signature as agreed, the transaction will fail. Without colateral this could be done over and over bringing the system to a halt.
- Masternodes have the ability to take the collateral transaction if they wish, but it's paid to the bounty fund. So it doesn't benefit them, it just benefits the community. This removed the incentive to cheat and take the money.

There's no relying on pools at all anymore. Payments to masternodes are done with a voting system embedded into the blockchain. It would take 51% of the mining power to pay the wrong masternode, or another party (because the last few miners to solve blocks must agree on who should be paid)

Transaction currently require 3 parties to be created, so there's a short wait. There are no fake transactions to make that quicker, although this could be done. There's usually 5 or so transaction per 2.5 minutes, so the network should be able to function pretty efficiently under these requirements.

Hoping that helps . Thanks,

Evan

Ok, thanks, but I don't see any "denomination" happening in these examples?

The amount sent, depending on its value, go thru a pool of 10, 100, 1000 etc. DRK.

[pbremen01]

One technical question about DarkSend.

Let's say that I have 110 DRK in one address and I want to pay 30 DRK to another user using DarkSend.

DarkSend does something called "denomination". What does this mean? That it will send first 100 DRK to another address and then include these 100 DRK in DarkSend pool from this address?

Is this just this one transaction (in this example) or maybe denomination does also something else so that the original address (with 110 DRK at the beginning) is somehow obfuscated?

Thanks.

Recap of How DarkSend Works

DarkSend functions in a way that is very similar to a tumbler, which is an idea that has been around for quite a while, but with a few specifications that increase the effectiveness.  It has went through multiple changes and updates, but the most recent release, release candidate 2 (RC2), is nearing complete anonymity.

When a user, let’s call him Tim, sends darkcoins through DarkSend to another user, let’s call her Sandy, he must send 10 darkcoins, even if that amount is larger than what he would like to pay her.  DarkSend then puts his coins in a pool, and pauses until two additional users initiate transactions.  These new users will add their own 10 darkcoins to the pool, and DarkSend blends the 30 coins into a random assortment.  If we assume that Tim wanted to send Sandy 8 darkcoins, then at this point 8 darkcoins would be deposited into Sandy’s wallet, but those 8 coins would be a mix of coins from all 3 users that had initiated transactions.  Tim’s remaining 2 coins are placed into a Random Pool Address (RPA) which was created during the transaction.  This RPA is not tied to any user, thus it is impossible to connect to a specific user, but Tim can access it.

This process is happening for the other 2 users that  sent 10 darkcoins through DarkSend as well, so at the end, it is impossible to determine which transaction was related to a specific user.  To an outside observer, 3 users put 30 darkcoins in, and 3 – 6 addresses receive coins out (3 if each user intended to send a full 10 darkcoins, up to 6 if each user intended to send less than 10 darkcoins).

Source : http://coinbrief.net/darkcoin-darksend-bitcoin/

Some additional (more recent) informations :

[...]

Thanks for the questions. It does seem like you're missing something. Although, it might not be your fault. The whitepaper is definitely out of date. We've done a lot of work at tweaking the trust model so that it can't be exploited. I'll try to explain how it works briefly, then hopefully if I get time I can revisit the whitepaper soon.

- Masternodes don't have any power over the transactions. They just coordinate the signing. All parties must sign in order for the transaction to be valid. So there's no way to cheat and take the money.
- Users submit collateral. At a later phase if a user doesn't provide the signature as agreed, the transaction will fail. Without colateral this could be done over and over bringing the system to a halt.
- Masternodes have the ability to take the collateral transaction if they wish, but it's paid to the bounty fund. So it doesn't benefit them, it just benefits the community. This removed the incentive to cheat and take the money.

There's no relying on pools at all anymore. Payments to masternodes are done with a voting system embedded into the blockchain. It would take 51% of the mining power to pay the wrong masternode, or another party (because the last few miners to solve blocks must agree on who should be paid)

Transaction currently require 3 parties to be created, so there's a short wait. There are no fake transactions to make that quicker, although this could be done. There's usually 5 or so transaction per 2.5 minutes, so the network should be able to function pretty efficiently under these requirements.

Hoping that helps . Thanks,

Evan

Ok, thanks, but I don't see any "denomination" happening in these examples?

The amount sent, depending on its value, go thru a pool of 10, 100, 1000 etc. DRK.

Yes, I understand this. But if I have for example 110 DRK in my wallet (one address) will the "denomination" create transaction that will send 100 DRK to new address and then this new address will go thru the pool?

[GambitBTC]

I'm very interested in learning more aboot darksend

Posted From bitcointalk.org Android App

[Brilliantrocket]

what IRC server is the #darkcoin channel on?

Freenode

[thunderdrum]

Help test the RC3 prelaunch!

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rc3-prelaunch-testing.1523/

current test pool hashrates :


Pool 1 : Mpos + Stratum: http://ec2-54-198-19-83.compute-1.amazonaws.com
Pool hashrate 47,7 MH

Pool 2 : P2Pool: http://54.213.244.5:18998/static/
Pool hashrate : 8.96 MH

Pool 3 : NOMP: http://54.183.73.24/
Pool hashrate : 6.55 MH

lets get more hashpower to these test pools

qwizzie

Just read here. Another 5MH frome China will be showed on the testnet when i get home.

[shfc]

dark will be good in the future.

[Simcom]

One technical question about DarkSend.

Let's say that I have 110 DRK in one address and I want to pay 30 DRK to another user using DarkSend.

DarkSend does something called "denomination". What does this mean? That it will send first 100 DRK to another address and then include these 100 DRK in DarkSend pool from this address?

Is this just this one transaction (in this example) or maybe denomination does also something else so that the original address (with 110 DRK at the beginning) is somehow obfuscated?

Thanks.

Recap of How DarkSend Works

DarkSend functions in a way that is very similar to a tumbler, which is an idea that has been around for quite a while, but with a few specifications that increase the effectiveness.  It has went through multiple changes and updates, but the most recent release, release candidate 2 (RC2), is nearing complete anonymity.

When a user, let’s call him Tim, sends darkcoins through DarkSend to another user, let’s call her Sandy, he must send 10 darkcoins, even if that amount is larger than what he would like to pay her.  DarkSend then puts his coins in a pool, and pauses until two additional users initiate transactions.  These new users will add their own 10 darkcoins to the pool, and DarkSend blends the 30 coins into a random assortment.  If we assume that Tim wanted to send Sandy 8 darkcoins, then at this point 8 darkcoins would be deposited into Sandy’s wallet, but those 8 coins would be a mix of coins from all 3 users that had initiated transactions.  Tim’s remaining 2 coins are placed into a Random Pool Address (RPA) which was created during the transaction.  This RPA is not tied to any user, thus it is impossible to connect to a specific user, but Tim can access it.

This process is happening for the other 2 users that  sent 10 darkcoins through DarkSend as well, so at the end, it is impossible to determine which transaction was related to a specific user.  To an outside observer, 3 users put 30 darkcoins in, and 3 – 6 addresses receive coins out (3 if each user intended to send a full 10 darkcoins, up to 6 if each user intended to send less than 10 darkcoins).

Source : http://coinbrief.net/darkcoin-darksend-bitcoin/

Some additional (more recent) informations :

[...]

Thanks for the questions. It does seem like you're missing something. Although, it might not be your fault. The whitepaper is definitely out of date. We've done a lot of work at tweaking the trust model so that it can't be exploited. I'll try to explain how it works briefly, then hopefully if I get time I can revisit the whitepaper soon.

- Masternodes don't have any power over the transactions. They just coordinate the signing. All parties must sign in order for the transaction to be valid. So there's no way to cheat and take the money.
- Users submit collateral. At a later phase if a user doesn't provide the signature as agreed, the transaction will fail. Without colateral this could be done over and over bringing the system to a halt.
- Masternodes have the ability to take the collateral transaction if they wish, but it's paid to the bounty fund. So it doesn't benefit them, it just benefits the community. This removed the incentive to cheat and take the money.

There's no relying on pools at all anymore. Payments to masternodes are done with a voting system embedded into the blockchain. It would take 51% of the mining power to pay the wrong masternode, or another party (because the last few miners to solve blocks must agree on who should be paid)

Transaction currently require 3 parties to be created, so there's a short wait. There are no fake transactions to make that quicker, although this could be done. There's usually 5 or so transaction per 2.5 minutes, so the network should be able to function pretty efficiently under these requirements.

Hoping that helps . Thanks,

Evan

Ok, thanks, but I don't see any "denomination" happening in these examples?

The amount sent, depending on its value, go thru a pool of 10, 100, 1000 etc. DRK.

It's worth mentioning that Evan decided to scrap denominated pools because of various issues (needing more coins than you want to send, "dirty" addresses that result from the splitting off of a denominated amount, etc).  The plan is to allow inputs of any size into a single pool (with a minimum resolution of .1 DRK), the change addresses will be denominated and sent back to several different addresses.  Denominated change addresses will come in RC4, pool size change will happen in either RC4 or maybe later, not sure.

[Simcom]

Yes, I understand this. But if I have for example 110 DRK in my wallet (one address) will the "denomination" create transaction that will send 100 DRK to new address and then this new address will go thru the pool?

Currently if you want to send say 15 coins for example - 10 coins will go to an address you own, 100 coins will enter the pool, 85 of those coins will come back as change.

Eventually Darksend will work slightly differently, the entire 115 coins enter the pool, you will receive 100 coins back as change at many different addresses in various denominations.

[AlexGR]

Ok, thanks, but I don't see any "denomination" happening in these examples?

See the inputs of 10:

http://explorer.darkcoin.io/tx/56b3b95b76995d3e4d3107cf753c8496493010f625fc04d971e9262d74e6a5a5

[pbremen01]

Yes, I understand this. But if I have for example 110 DRK in my wallet (one address) will the "denomination" create transaction that will send 100 DRK to new address and then this new address will go thru the pool?

Currently if you want to send say 15 coins for example - 10 coins will go to an address you own, 100 coins will enter the pool, 85 of those coins will come back as change.

Eventually Darksend will work slightly differently, the entire 115 coins enter the pool, you will receive 100 coins back as change at many different addresses in various denominations.

Thank you. Can the community post updated whitepaper and graphics on the first page of this thread? According to your answer it is obsolete and people may make wrong conclusions about DarkSend.

[Ozziecoin]

Yes, I understand this. But if I have for example 110 DRK in my wallet (one address) will the "denomination" create transaction that will send 100 DRK to new address and then this new address will go thru the pool?

Currently if you want to send say 15 coins for example - 10 coins will go to an address you own, 100 coins will enter the pool, 85 of those coins will come back as change.

Eventually Darksend will work slightly differently, the entire 115 coins enter the pool, you will receive 100 coins back as change at many different addresses in various denominations.

Thanks. Good explanation.

[mawa73]

DARKBIDS.......

https://darkbids.com/shop/tech/x4-gpu-mining-rig/


2 AVAILABLE

How old do I have to be so I have to generate the money back? 

How many Darkcoins can you mine approximate per day with this rig ( 4 x R9 270 )? I belive not enough and dont forget the costs of electricity!

[Lauda]

DARKBIDS.......

https://darkbids.com/shop/tech/x4-gpu-mining-rig/


2 AVAILABLE

I could sell as well, but shipping for me would be too expensive.

[sin242]

DARKBIDS.......

https://darkbids.com/shop/tech/x4-gpu-mining-rig/


2 AVAILABLE

How old do I have to be so I have to generate the money back?  

How many Darkcoins can you mine approximate per day with this rig ( 4 x R9 270 )? I belive not enough and dont forget the costs of electricity!

I dont run 270s myself but the newest sgminers seem to pull ~2.1mh  (YMMV) so @8.4mh you'd pull in approx 0.20291872 drk per
day at the current diff (4163.71557343).

So using those number (which will change constantly but to give you an idea) would set you @ 985.61 days to make the 200 dark back.