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

[Propulsion]

Look, I don't consider myself a threat to human existence because I would like there to be a way to censor child pornography. That is all. I would like the right to choose as much as all of you here what to view. The inherent problem is that these are victims who were not given any choice as to whether their images in acts they were coerced or forced should be 'shared'. Let's step back and realize that there will always be moral obligations to a society for it's members. Freedom does not equal safety. Whether it is doable to censor seems to be a problem and I understand it may not be possible. I do believe, that if censorship is possible, cp should be censored and at that the only thing. There are those here who complain about their rights and the rights of society et al, but what about the rights of the abused, in this case I mean the victims of cp? They have been violated by a sex act and then by images or video being 'shared'. Think about it.
[addendum]I am only talking about cp, child pornography. The kind that I hope no one hear has seen and thereby does not fully understand the cruelty involved[/addendum]

Child porn is disgusting, sick, and cruel. To block it from the network would require surveillance and monitoring of the traffic of the network itself though.

It's a lose lose. On one hand you would destroy the privacy aspect of the network. On the other, you would allow any and all content regardless of type to be sent through including the above.

[valentino007]

Darknet is not a feature we need for Darkcoin,developers are doing the wrong thing,they should work more on the coin instead of creating a better Tor.
Darknet will only hurt us more then it would help,scammers that can hide on it,child porn,gun sellers,drug sellers etc,it's going to stain te legit coin in a very bad way!!
they should brand Darkcoin as a private coin like paying in cash,bitcoin in 2014 is moving away out of this negative things and then the developers are putting Darcoin in it's place,not good.
i dont want my Darkcoins to get a bad name but it will,the big public will only speak of the coin criminals use,how is that going to help us?
Criminals use the coin for doing criminal transactions you put yourself at risk when owning a masternode or even use the coin,i dont want the NSA or any goverment take this coin down or investor dont invest because they get stained with the stamp CRIMINAL on it.

I think Darkcoin is a great coin that keeps your spending private like cash does,but in these days when regulation is forming that will help crypto currency it's a very big risk of damaging this coin when you facilitate all the bad things the regulators dont want.
The regulation is needed so bussines can be run in the same legal matter as normal company's so big money investors will know there money is safe and can not be stolen and also consumers know they cant be ripped off.
The crypto industry can not grow large like we all want if no one can be put to court when stealing like what happend @ MTgox.
I am very sceptic about darknet in a way it's to close linked to Darkcoin now,they should finish RC5,help merchants adapoting it,do the marketing,Darknet should be a new bussines not related Darkcoin,get it's own brand,website and marketing.

[sin242]

I don't see how you can possibly add the means to censor one paticular thing (ie child porn) without also adding the ability to censor everything else.  Nor do i see how it can be
clamied that DarkTor (or whatever it's name hapens to end up being) is 100% completely anon if MNs have a way to check the data being relayed to look for censored content.


You simply cannot have a true, 100% anon system AND censorship at the same time.  



Edit: Also, I would think allowing the MNs to scan relayed data would also add some serious liability issues for operators.

[gotqn]

How to fix this:

Warning: There is an incompatibility in the new RC4+ wallet due to the larger keypool.It only effects encrypted wallets, but can cause a loss of data in rare situations. Please create a new wallet and move the funds from this wallet.

[coins101]

As far as darktor goes, I think it is perfectly reasonable to eliminate child pornography. If anyone has a host on darktor that has cp, I hope it will not be allowed. I believe it is ok to take a moral stand on issues and not hide from them under the freedom of speech/ well if we ban x then y,z, and all of alpha and half of that is up for discussion. No. Take a fucking stand. Child pornography hurts innocent people. Scars them. FOR LIFE. Don't equate the freedom one chooses to purchase drugs, sell images of their own bodies, etc., to the forceful filming of 4-8 yearolds, or 15 month olds, in sexual situations.

Why don't we completely eliminate the moral problems of MN owners by encrypting all data transferred and stored, so that MN owners don't what they transfer or what they have in storage or what others are accessing etc etc?

This is good. But what if it just makes it easier to store trojans and the like on the network?

Doesn't work like that. It would be sending the information encrypted but once it reaches the end user the information would become plain text. Just like HTTPS.

So no data that is 'stored' is encrypted? Just the data transfer?

I'm not just thinking of this as a router, I'm thinking MNs as data servers too.

As I said before, people don't seem prepared to pay for the secure routing data. you would have to come up with a commercial model such as Firefox which tries to push particular search providers.

But people would be prepared, I would venture, to pay to store secure web data for all manner of adult content.

[Propulsion]

How to fix this:

Warning: There is an incompatibility in the new RC4+ wallet due to the larger keypool.It only effects encrypted wallets, but can cause a loss of data in rare situations. Please create a new wallet and move the funds from this wallet.

Do what it says. Make a new wallet, encrypt it, back it up, and then send the funds to the newly created wallet.

[Kai Proctor]

Look, I don't consider myself a threat to human existence because I would like there to be a way to censor child pornography. That is all. I would like the right to choose as much as all of you here what to view. The inherent problem is that these are victims who were not given any choice as to whether their images in acts they were coerced or forced should be 'shared'. Let's step back and realize that there will always be moral obligations to a society for it's members. Freedom does not equal safety. Whether it is doable to censor seems to be a problem and I understand it may not be possible. I do believe, that if censorship is possible, cp should be censored and at that the only thing. There are those here who complain about their rights and the rights of society et al, but what about the rights of the abused, in this case I mean the victims of cp? They have been violated by a sex act and then by images or video being 'shared'. Think about it.
[addendum]I am only talking about cp, child pornography. The kind that I hope no one hear has seen and thereby does not fully understand the cruelty involved[/addendum]

"the road to hell is paved with good intentions". The goal is to provide anonymity not to promote any site or become the internet police, neutrality is the key word here.

[darkproton]

Look, I don't consider myself a threat to human existence because I would like there to be a way to censor child pornography. That is all. I would like the right to choose as much as all of you here what to view. The inherent problem is that these are victims who were not given any choice as to whether their images in acts they were coerced or forced should be 'shared'. Let's step back and realize that there will always be moral obligations to a society for it's members. Freedom does not equal safety. Whether it is doable to censor seems to be a problem and I understand it may not be possible. I do believe, that if censorship is possible, cp should be censored and at that the only thing. There are those here who complain about their rights and the rights of society et al, but what about the rights of the abused, in this case I mean the victims of cp? They have been violated by a sex act and then by images or video being 'shared'. Think about it.

Darkproton I'm as appalled as you by cp and the whole reprehensibly evil "industry" it represents. Yes there are real victims of this very dark part of human nature and yes, there are hideously nasty people profiting from it too. I wouldn't think there'd be anyone on here that doesn't abhor what cp does to its victims.

However, the minute (the very second) we start down this track of "filtering" or "combing" content for any evidence of cp we're on the slippery slope and before you know it, caught in the cross fire of a million considerations. Like, photo of teenager in sexy pose where she looks 18 but turns out to be 15...is that cp? Or photo of some kids innocently playing at a nudist beach...they're nude which (in my view) is completely innocent but there are many many people that would consider that borderline cp....do we filter that? Or what about a young child fully clothed but with a strong sexually suggestive pose...is that cp? Do you see the mess you'd end up in here?

For all these reasons the MN network MUST be completely and utterly free of ANY interference as to what content is on there. It's not for DRK to be making sociological rulings on what is and isn't appropriate. It's a private anonymous network: end of story.

I understand your point of view. To further save us typing back and forth, it boils down to you valuing free speech above moral implications vs. me applying a morality that is greater than free speech.

A quick note, I believe free speech in and of itself is a moral issue as well.

Look, I don't consider myself a threat to human existence because I would like there to be a way to censor child pornography. That is all. I would like the right to choose as much as all of you here what to view. The inherent problem is that these are victims who were not given any choice as to whether their images in acts they were coerced or forced should be 'shared'. Let's step back and realize that there will always be moral obligations to a society for it's members. Freedom does not equal safety. Whether it is doable to censor seems to be a problem and I understand it may not be possible. I do believe, that if censorship is possible, cp should be censored and at that the only thing. There are those here who complain about their rights and the rights of society et al, but what about the rights of the abused, in this case I mean the victims of cp? They have been violated by a sex act and then by images or video being 'shared'. Think about it.
[addendum]I am only talking about cp, child pornography. The kind that I hope no one hear has seen and thereby does not fully understand the cruelty involved[/addendum]

Child porn is disgusting, sick, and cruel. To block it from the network would require surveillance and monitoring of the traffic of the network itself though.

It's a lose lose. On one hand you would destroy the privacy aspect of the network. On the other, you would allow any and all content regardless of type to be sent through including the above.

I see what you're getting at. The feesability of it, monitoring, that is.

[georgem]

I tend to agree with the quite controversial position of rick falkvinge when it comes to child pornography:

http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-must-be-re-legalized-in-the-coming-decade/

The creation of childporn is a horrible crime, and I wouldn't mind strangling those creators with my own hands.

But what about the possession of child porn ? (now bear with me for a minute, and read the article I posted above, it is very enlightening.)

How come I could be prosecuted like a child molestor if someone finds a child porn pic on my pc?
If the single possession of such a pic constitutes a crime, doesn't this make it the perfect tool to frame somebody?
Just smuggle such a pic on my pc and anonymously inform the police, and there goes my life. It's insane.

I say that any file no matter its content should be legal.

We must stop this extremely dangerous discussion that the only solution to the problem of childporn is that we all must be censored and let the government control our harddisks.
Because the endgame of this is pure totalitarianism.

Don't let the puritans and moralists take your rights away under false pretenses.
They DO NOT WANT to go after child molesters, in fact their only goal is to take our rights away.

Wake up people, we must find real solutions against child molesters, not false insane solutions that lead to a totalitarian state.

[Propulsion]

As far as darktor goes, I think it is perfectly reasonable to eliminate child pornography. If anyone has a host on darktor that has cp, I hope it will not be allowed. I believe it is ok to take a moral stand on issues and not hide from them under the freedom of speech/ well if we ban x then y,z, and all of alpha and half of that is up for discussion. No. Take a fucking stand. Child pornography hurts innocent people. Scars them. FOR LIFE. Don't equate the freedom one chooses to purchase drugs, sell images of their own bodies, etc., to the forceful filming of 4-8 yearolds, or 15 month olds, in sexual situations.

Why don't we completely eliminate the moral problems of MN owners by encrypting all data transferred and stored, so that MN owners don't what they transfer or what they have in storage or what others are accessing etc etc?

This is good. But what if it just makes it easier to store trojans and the like on the network?

Doesn't work like that. It would be sending the information encrypted but once it reaches the end user the information would become plain text. Just like HTTPS.

So no data that is 'stored' is encrypted? Just the data transfer?

I'm not just thinking of this as a router, I'm thinking MNs as data servers too.

As I said before, people don't seem prepared to pay for the secure routing data. you would have to come up with a commercial model such as Firefox which tries to push particular search providers.

But people would be prepared, I would venture, to pay to store secure web data for all manner of adult content.

Data sent encrypted doesn't necessarily mean that it is stored encrypted as well.

For instance, you can access a webpage over HTTPS and receive the data encrypted but the server side data can still be stored non-encrypted on the HDD itself. Plus, as soon as that data is saved on your own machine, it's not encrypted unless using an encrypted volume.

[darkproton]

Look, I don't consider myself a threat to human existence because I would like there to be a way to censor child pornography. That is all. I would like the right to choose as much as all of you here what to view. The inherent problem is that these are victims who were not given any choice as to whether their images in acts they were coerced or forced should be 'shared'. Let's step back and realize that there will always be moral obligations to a society for it's members. Freedom does not equal safety. Whether it is doable to censor seems to be a problem and I understand it may not be possible. I do believe, that if censorship is possible, cp should be censored and at that the only thing. There are those here who complain about their rights and the rights of society et al, but what about the rights of the abused, in this case I mean the victims of cp? They have been violated by a sex act and then by images or video being 'shared'. Think about it.
[addendum]I am only talking about cp, child pornography. The kind that I hope no one hear has seen and thereby does not fully understand the cruelty involved[/addendum]

"the road to hell is paved with good intentions". The goal is to provide anonymity not to promote any site or become the internet police, neutrality is the key word here.

the road to hell is also paved with those who stand by and do nothing. If you are calling me the internet police of cp than, yes I am and I thank you for the title. I am only talking about cp. I am not promoting anything except to not allow cp.

[darkproton]

I tend to agree with the quite controversial position of rick falkvinge when it comes to child pornography:

http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-must-be-re-legalized-in-the-coming-decade/

The creation of childporn is a horrible crime, and I wouldn't mind strangling those creators with my own hands.

But what about the possession of child porn ? (now bare with me for a minute, and read the article I posted above, it is very enlightening.)

How come I could be prosecuted like a child molestor if someone finds a child porn pic on my pc?
If the single possession of such a pic constitutes a crime, doesn't this make it the perfect tool to frame somebody?
Just smuggle such a pic on my pc and anonymously inform the police, and there goes my life. It's insane.

I say that any file no matter its content should be legal.

We must stop this extremely dangerous discussion that the only solution to the problem of childporn is that we all must be censored and let the government control our harddisks.
Because the endgame of this is pure totalitarianism.

Don't let the puritans and moralists take your rights away under false pretenses.
They DO NOT WANT to go after child molesters, in fact their only goal is to take our rights away.

Wake up people, we must find real solutions against child molesters, not false insane solutions that lead to a totalitarian state.

We must stop this extremely dangerous discussion that the only solution to the problem of childporn is that we all must be censored and let the government control our harddisks.
I didn't say that. I just said if its possible, exclude it. I said nothing in regards to it stopping cp or what have you.

[Kai Proctor]

Look, I don't consider myself a threat to human existence because I would like there to be a way to censor child pornography. That is all. I would like the right to choose as much as all of you here what to view. The inherent problem is that these are victims who were not given any choice as to whether their images in acts they were coerced or forced should be 'shared'. Let's step back and realize that there will always be moral obligations to a society for it's members. Freedom does not equal safety. Whether it is doable to censor seems to be a problem and I understand it may not be possible. I do believe, that if censorship is possible, cp should be censored and at that the only thing. There are those here who complain about their rights and the rights of society et al, but what about the rights of the abused, in this case I mean the victims of cp? They have been violated by a sex act and then by images or video being 'shared'. Think about it.
[addendum]I am only talking about cp, child pornography. The kind that I hope no one hear has seen and thereby does not fully understand the cruelty involved[/addendum]

"the road to hell is paved with good intentions". The goal is to provide anonymity not to promote any site or become the internet police, neutrality is the key word here.

the road to hell is also paved with those who stand by and do nothing. If you are calling me the internet police of cp than, yes I am and I thank you for the title. I am only talking about cp. I am not promoting anything except to not allow cp.

You can be the internet police if you want to, I'm talking about the network it's not its role to monitor the users activities. The same goes for a currency, it can't prevent them to buy whatever they want.

[Sniggly]

Let's step back and realize that there will always be moral obligations to a society for it's members.

Darkproton,
Could you expound on the statement above?  I am curious as to your exact meaning.  The way you've worded it leaves me with the following question:  Exactly 'where' is the moral obligation placed?....if it's 'to' a society...and 'for' it's members.

FWIW - Society's with mixed philosophies will have mixed ethics...and therefore conflicts within questions of ethics.

[georgem]

We must stop this extremely dangerous discussion that the only solution to the problem of childporn is that we all must be censored and let the government control our harddisks.
I didn't say that. I just said if its possible, exclude it. I said nothing in regards to it stopping cp or what have you.

I wasn't quoting you or anything, I was just giving my 2 cents.

[coins101]

Data sent encrypted doesn't necessarily mean that it is stored encrypted as well.

For instance, you can access a webpage over HTTPS and receive the data encrypted but the server side data can still be stored non-encrypted on the HDD itself. Plus, as soon as that data is saved on your own machine, it's not encrypted unless using an encrypted volume.

I've deployed SSL services.

I was just responding to the comment that data would be stored encrypted, which would be risky. But it doesn't sound like it will be the case. So, that's that 

If DarkTor is going to be introduced to make darkcoin super anonymous, then I'm cool with that and that would potentially add value.

If its just a web routing service, I don't think its commercially viable from what I've seen so far.

If we are doing all the above, plus storing adult web data and charging people for hosting of adult data - I'll sell everything I own, leverage and buy more DRK.

[darkproton]

Let's step back and realize that there will always be moral obligations to a society for it's members.

Darkproton,
Could you expound on the statement above?  I am curious as to your exact meaning.  The way you've worded it leaves me with the following question:  Exactly 'where' is the moral obligation placed?....if it's 'to' a society...and 'for' it's members.

FWIW - Society's with mixed philosophies will have mixed ethics...and therefore conflicts within questions of ethics.

I would but I feel my words may get twisted around. My arguments basically, at their core, arise from the value on all life. If there is an ethic/cultural belief that leads to suffering then it should be abandoned. Ex. slavery, foot binding, killing of widows, etc,. Cosmopolitanism. Also Kwame Anthony Appiah.

[luigi1111]

now bare with me for a minute [...]

*Raises hands* Whoa, whoa! Ok there! Let's start again. 

("bare" vs "bear" for those who don't get it)

[cyanez]

Darkproton, R-Ando:

So you're suggesting that MasterNodes be able to compare data traffic to a community-defined description of CP and then exclude any matches, is that correct?

Let me describe your proposal in a way that might help you understand why your idea is completely untenable, and counter to the very idea of DarkCoin:

"Hey, everyone, our MasterNode network is completely secure and anonymous! Well, except for the fact that we look at everything to make sure it's not CP. But we TOTES won't use that function to look at your stuff! And there will NEVER be a breach that would allow that to happen! C'mon guys! Guys? Hey, where did everybody go. . .?"

Congratulations. You just killed Dark Coin.

Who, in their right mind, would allow their transactions to be monitored by a system that is supposedly anonymous?! Even if it were for all the right reasons, there is no way you could PAY me to put my private transactions through a network that is DESIGNED to not be secure.

Explain to me how your idea isn't a complete disaster for Dark Coin?

[RenegadeMan]

I understand your point of view. To further save us typing back and forth, it boils down to you valuing free speech above moral implications vs. me applying a morality that is greater than free speech.

A quick note, I believe free speech in and of itself is a moral issue as well.

No it's more complex than that. The big issue is "Who decides what's cp and what isn't?" That's where censorship comes unstuck because someone has to apply a ruling based on their moral position and "their moral position" then becomes the interpretation for everyone else, which takes us right back to centralisation and control.

I'm almost gob smacked we're needing to have  this conversation. The technical complexities of filtering a "DarkTor" are absurd in the extreme. The legal/responsibility and actual "who/when/how" of this censorship is a whole other consideration that takes the concept to even greater levels of infeasibility.

Honestly, you're in the wrong place if you can't understand just how incompatible is the notion of excluding certain types of content from a private/anonymous network. As cyanez has pointed out, the concepts are mutually exclusive and would completely kill this project if attempted.