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

[qwizzie]

Wallets v9.11.6 (stable) and v10.11.6 were merged overnight and are now available for download.

Please update at your first convenience.

http://goo.gl/0NzEDn

Can you pls update first post.. specially below part as its no longer up to date :

Latest Client Stable: 9.11.5 and RC3 with Darksend is 10.11.5 - See downloads!

[eltito]

Wallets v9.11.6 (stable) and v10.11.6 were merged overnight and are now available for download.

Please update at your first convenience.

http://goo.gl/0NzEDn

Can you pls update first post.. specially below part as its no longer up to date :

Latest Client Stable: 9.11.5 and RC3 with Darksend is 10.11.5 - See downloads!

I've updated the text, Evan will paste it in when he has a minute (I don't have access to his bitcointalk account ).

[qwizzie]

Wallets v9.11.6 (stable) and v10.11.6 were merged overnight and are now available for download.

Please update at your first convenience.

http://goo.gl/0NzEDn

Can you pls update first post.. specially below part as its no longer up to date :

Latest Client Stable: 9.11.5 and RC3 with Darksend is 10.11.5 - See downloads!

I've updated the text, Evan will paste it in when he has a minute (I don't have access to his bitcointalk account ).

thanks .. appreciate it

[patrolman]

Is anyone knowledgeable enough about Amazon EC2 to tell me whether or not they are a threat to the masternode network? What I mean is, could they unveil large amounts of users if they wanted to simply because they have access to the physical machines? With all the xKEYSCORE and general NSA bullshit it seems like you can never be sure that a private company is operating privately any more.

Anyone using Amazon has an account there, with credit card or something.  So yah, Amazon has all the information to out you if you have a Masternode with them.  Like Google, they could give the Gov any info the Gov asked for (with a warrant) It has nothing to do with Amazon having access to your virtual machine, they don't have to mess with that any.

Our masternode ip addresses on the network will definitively show that we are running masternodes.

But, there is no law against crypto currency, and if they try to do that, they lose.

Maybe the law has changed, but to the best of my knowledge any entity based in the US, if requested, has to provide the government with the personal details they ask for, according to the Patriot Act, with no need for a warrant. So it could be claimed that the operator of a MasterNode is a supected terrorist - that old chestnut - and Amazon is legally obligated to supply the NSA/CIA/FBI etc. with the personal details associated with the account. Amazon, in theory, has to comply and probably does in practice.

In my opinion the safest bet for the DarkSend network would be using servers belonging to enities not based in the US, which are not legally obliged to provide guvthugs with any details they request. Of course for many Americans this could be seen as "unpatriotic", which kind of brings us back to the discussion that many have been having over the preceding pages about supporting oppression by actively participating in the oppressive system.

Yes, a FISA court can demand pretty much anything from a company, *and* compel the company to keep its disclosures secret. As far as hosting outside the U.S., it couldn't hurt, but just remember the U.S. government has an incredibly long reach. Don't fool yourself into thinking that another country is going to risk the wrath of the U.S. government (sanctions, loss of foreign aid, tariffs, etc.) in order to keep your information secret.

To be fair, I don't think not having any in the US would be the best bet, but potenitally, going forward, it could be a little risky for those using their own personal details in contracting any server package. Again, my understanding is that a warrant would not be needed under the patriot act (the full name is the USA Patriot Act, or "Uniting and Strengthening America Act by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001") to obtain the personal details under some trumped up money laundering financial terrorism investigation. I think having such a concentration in the US with companies subservient to the US Gov could potentially be an issue.

While it's reasonable to believe that if the US gov really wanted details they could probably get them from server providers in other coutries anyway, another thing altogether is having a legal obligation to provide the data, and as you point out, the disclosures remaining in secret. In many (most?) other countries the entities providing the servers presumably would not be run by the state and would have to seek a warrant to obtain the data, not being subject to the PATRIOT act, which is a prime example of the erosion of civil liberties since 9/11.

Maybe the best option is a server in Russia

[GhostPlayer]

 THIS... is true sign of professionalism.

 I would not usually do something like this, exposing a private message... but I think it is well deserved.

 MineP.it have shown to be TOP pool operators.

 In a land packed-filled with shitcoins, it is natural to not be up to speed on true innovation, and not instantly be aware of whats going on with each coin-

A simple communication exchange clearly shows the ethics behind this team.

 Miners beware !! MineP.it  ROCKS !!

 grazie mille, Dan !!

[qwizzie]

THIS... is true sign of professionalism.

 I would not usually do something like this, exposing a private message... but I think it is well deserved.

 MineP.it have shown to be TOP pool operators.

 In a land packed-filled with shitcoins, it is natural to not be up to speed on true innovation, and not instantly be aware of whats going on with each coin-

A simple communication exchange clearly shows the ethics behind this team.

 Miners beware !! MineP.it  ROCKS !!

 garzie mille, Dan !!

Excellent news !! and i agree.. they rock.

[humanitee]

Hey guys I'm going to open by stating that I'm currently mostly invested in CLOAK. With that said, I wanted to ask some questions and maybe open an actually useful discussion instead of FUD.

1. I've been told that DRK's anonymity implementation is based on CoinJoin and that there might be an issue with this method that allows transactions to be traced. Could somebody with understanding better than mine explain? And maybe better explain the mood CLOAK intends to use as well?

2. Are the MasterNodes trustless?

3. Why do most of you consider PoS coins to be... PoS's?

Thanks, and let's keep this civil haha

1. DRK's CoinJoin implementation is much better than a regular CoinJoin transaction. Coming in RC4 is a split masternode system, where 2 masternodes are selected and then one splits your transaction amount into denominated units (1 DRK, 5 DRK, 10 DRK, and so on) before you send it to the other one for the actual transaction. No timing analysis can be done on the blockchain to see who denominated at any point in time. The only weakness is that if you own both masternodes, you can trace the payments because you are seeing realtime what clients belong to denominationed units and where those units end up. At some point we are getting IP obfuscation, as well as I2P.

I haven't looked at CLOAK (is it really all caps like that?) in some time, but I know in the beginning they were talking about sending coins through exchanges to remove taint.

2. Yes, masternodes are trustless. They cannot steal your coins. This is DRK's greatest feature. All the other implementations I've seen rely on trust. If CLOAK still works as I've described above, then it is laden with trust and therefore very insecure. It will work until it doesn't.

There is a caveat here though. DRK has a lot of masternodes hosted on Amazon. Amazon has access to the physical machines (which are most likely virtualized instances all the way down to the network switches and controllers). If they wanted to, they could map a great number of transactions. Someone proposed yesterday limiting masternodes 1 and 2 from being in the same IP address range, meaning 54.54.54.54 and 54.54.55.54 would never be selected as masternodes simultaneously. This seems like a good stepping off point to limit concentration of nodes on one provider. If 60% of nodes are hosted on Amazon and they cannot be simultaneously selected for the current round, that means the other 40% will be selected more of the time then Amazon nodes will. This will add an incentive to distribute masternodes across more providers.

3. Proof of stake merely enriches the rich, fuck that. At least with DRK you have to provide a service to the network to increase your wealth, and it is a greatly needed service at that.

[splawik21]

THIS... is true sign of professionalism.

 I would not usually do something like this, exposing a private message... but I think it is well deserved.

 MineP.it have shown to be TOP pool operators.

 In a land packed-filled with shitcoins, it is natural to not be up to speed on true innovation, and not instantly be aware of whats going on with each coin-

A simple communication exchange clearly shows the ethics behind this team.

 Miners beware !! MineP.it  ROCKS !!

 garzie mille, Dan !!

The power lays in teamplay.

[solo20]

do I need this darkcoind  file in the same folder as the wallet ?

[rygamble]

Hey guys I'm going to open by stating that I'm currently mostly invested in CLOAK. With that said, I wanted to ask some questions and maybe open an actually useful discussion instead of FUD.

1. I've been told that DRK's anonymity implementation is based on CoinJoin and that there might be an issue with this method that allows transactions to be traced. Could somebody with understanding better than mine explain? And maybe better explain the mood CLOAK intends to use as well?

2. Are the MasterNodes trustless?

3. Why do most of you consider PoS coins to be... PoS's?

Thanks, and let's keep this civil haha

1. DRK's CoinJoin implementation is much better than a regular CoinJoin transaction. Coming in RC4 is a split masternode system, where 2 masternodes are selected and then one splits your transaction amount into denominated units (1 DRK, 5 DRK, 10 DRK, and so on) before you send it to the other one for the actual transaction. No timing analysis can be done on the blockchain to see who denominated at any point in time. The only weakness is that if you own both masternodes, you can trace the payments because you are seeing realtime what clients belong to denominationed units and where those units end up. At some point we are getting IP obfuscation, as well as I2P.

I haven't looked at CLOAK (is it really all caps like that?) in sometime, but I know in the beginning they were talking about sending coins through exchanges to remove taint.

2. Yes, masternodes are trustless. They cannot steal your coins. This is DRK's greatest feature. All the other implementations I've seen rely on trust. If CLOAK still works as I've described above, then it is laden with trust and therefore very insecure. It will work until it doesn't.

There is a caveat here though. DRK has a lot of masternodes hosted on Amazon. Amazon has access to the physical machines (which are most likely virtualized instances all the way down to the network switches and controllers). If they wanted to, they could most likely map a great majority of transactions. Someone proposed yesterday limiting masternodes 1 and 2 from being in the same IP address range, meaning 54.54.54.54 and 54.54.55.54 would never be selected as masternodes simultaneously. This seems like a good stepping off point to limit concentration of nodes on one provider. If 60% of nodes are hosted on Amazon and they cannot be simultaneously selected for the current round, that means the other 40% will be selected more of the time then Amazon nodes will.

3. Proof of stake merely enriches the rich, fuck that. At least with DRK you have to provide a service to the network to increase your wealth, and it is a greatly needed service at that.

1 & 2. Say a government bought a sizeable amount of DRK and opened a lot of MasterNodes. What stops them from tracking at least a potion of the transactions that are supposed to be anonymous? CloakCoin's main feature (expected in the next couple of days) is called Proof of Stake Anonymous (PoSA), and it uses the PoS feature to conduct anonymous transactions. Pretty cool stuff and no MasterNodes required. Glad to hear DRK is taking steps to alleviate the potential risk here though.

3. I can see where you're coming from, but it also lowers the upkeep of the network significantly. What happens if somehow everybody stops mining DRK all at once? Not saying it's going to happen, just a thought though. PoS obviously has some weaknesses too. The main one to me is that you can just open your wallet once in awhile and get full stake without really securing that network much. This is what also got me looking at BlackCoin and its upcoming PoS 2.0 as they're calling it. A major change there is that wallets must be open to stake.

Nice to have a good discussion here once in awhile haha

[GhostPlayer]

do I need this darkcoind  file in the same folder as the wallet ?

no.

[coinsolidation]

Try to use wallet, i have this error mesage :
./darkcoin-qt
./darkcoin-qt: symbol lookup error: ./darkcoin-qt: undefined symbol: _ZN10QTextCodec11validCodecsEv

We experienced the same problem on centos with our own project.

Upgrading the build process to use a newer qt4 for linux resolved the problem, we have swapped to qt-4.8.6 when gitian building.

[solo20]

do I need this darkcoind  file in the same folder as the wallet ?

no.

I can delete it correct

[humanitee]

1 & 2. Say a government bought a sizeable amount of DRK and opened a lot of MasterNodes. What stops them from tracking at least a potion of the transactions that are supposed to be anonymous? CloakCoin's main feature (expected in the next couple of days) is called Proof of Stake Anonymous (PoSA), and it uses the PoS feature to conduct anonymous transactions. Pretty cool stuff and no MasterNodes required. Glad to hear DRK is taking steps to alleviate the potential risk here though.

3. I can see where you're coming from, but it also lowers the upkeep of the network significantly. What happens if somehow everybody stops mining DRK all at once? Not saying it's going to happen, just a thought though. PoS obviously has some weaknesses too. The main one to me is that you can just open your wallet once in awhile and get full stake without really securing that network much. This is what also got me looking at BlackCoin and its upcoming PoS 2.0 as they're calling it. A major change there is that wallets must be open to stake.

Nice to have a good discussion here once in awhile haha

1 & 2. They would have to buy an extraordinary amount of DRK considering there are already 600 masternodes. Furthermore, with IP obfuscation and I2P, they wouldn't know who the user was. If they bought 50% of the network they'd be selected 25% of the time as both masternodes. To mitigate this, a potential solution would be to DarkSend multiple times to yourself before sending to the recipient.

I'll look into the PoSA.

3. To each their own. Your scenario is not feasible, even if all the pools were taken down.

[dotnetmin]

Wallets v9.11.6 (stable) and v10.11.6 were merged overnight and are now available for download.

Please update at your first convenience.

http://goo.gl/0NzEDn

darkcoind for linux  v.10.11.5 had 53 MB. The new one under 10MB. I did try to start it on the server and got a fault massage.
Anything wrong or did i make something wrong ?

[aleix]

Nice to have a good discussion here once in awhile hah

Here we mainly hunt trolls, for good stuff you can go to: htts://darkcointalk.org  

[dihydrogenmonoxide]

Try to use wallet, i have this error mesage :
./darkcoin-qt
./darkcoin-qt: symbol lookup error: ./darkcoin-qt: undefined symbol: _ZN10QTextCodec11validCodecsEv

We experienced the same problem on centos with our own project.

Upgrading the build process to use a newer qt4 for linux resolved the problem, we have swapped to qt-4.8.6 when gitian building.

Why are you refering to a 3 month old post - is this a current issue?

[dihydrogenmonoxide]

Wallets v9.11.6 (stable) and v10.11.6 were merged overnight and are now available for download.

Please update at your first convenience.

http://[Suspicious link removed]/0NzEDn

darkcoind for linux  v.10.11.5 had 53 MB. The new one under 10MB. I did try to start it on the server and got a fault massage.
Anything wrong or did i make something wrong ?

Debug symbols removed via 'strip' - should not affect the functionality.

Can you provide the error message please?

[eltito]

Wallets v9.11.6 (stable) and v10.11.6 were merged overnight and are now available for download.

Please update at your first convenience.

http://goo.gl/0NzEDn

darkcoind for linux  v.10.11.5 had 53 MB. The new one under 10MB. I did try to start it on the server and got a fault massage.
Anything wrong or did i make something wrong ?

I don't have a linux box handy, but the binary tgz alone is over 15MB.  Did you compile from source or download binary?

[dotnetmin]

Wallets v9.11.6 (stable) and v10.11.6 were merged overnight and are now available for download.

Please update at your first convenience.

http://goo.gl/0NzEDn

darkcoind for linux  v.10.11.5 had 53 MB. The new one under 10MB. I did try to start it on the server and got a fault massage.
Anything wrong or did i make something wrong ?

I don't have a linux box handy, but the binary tgz alone is over 15MB.  Did you compile from source or download binary?

downloaded the binary