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

[RenegadeMan]

This could be a distinguishing feature to create a moat (In the Warren Buffett sense) A perceptual moat and also a physical moat of certitude, if you connect through this you kids can no longer be exposed to pornography while utilizing the web system that supports the information used for daily business, such as goods and payments Think about a kid who looks up a toy online and gets directed to a sex toy with sexual popups or something like this, all of a sudden this would be avoided and this could be used as a selling point too.

Creating this would require a designated blacklist. It should be the end user's responsibility to create one for their own personal computers than to require a mandatory one on all users.

Eventually people will connect to whichever Internet they want to depending on what they want to do.

Exactly. Even if it was decided to impose censorship on the network, there would always be a way around it. Once again, it's better to let the end user decide on what content get's displayed to them.

we are open to compromise as long as the fundamentals of freedom we believe in stay true.

Once information becomes hard to obtain regardless of what it is, your freedom of information becomes moot.

We understand this could seem like a favouritism towards other kinds of industries, however we are not making a judgment on the specifics of any businesses

You are making a judgement by trying to purge adult entertainment industries from the get go. Personally, I like adult entertainment; it's natural.

Now do i prevent my own kids from watching porn? Absolutely! Yet that is done with my own internal home network not a global ban.

TLDR;

Basically Rando, while the idea is noble, it shouldn't be a requirement on a global basis. End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to.

Great feedback Propulsion! Thank you! So basically it would be better to incorporate a filter option for kids or sensitives... a Darkcoin Kids wallet and browser?

NO r-ando, no filtering, no censorship, no control of any sort. The notions you keep propounding are ridiculous and ignorant. Propulsion's final summary point was "End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to". How much clearer do we all need to be?

[braxx]

DRK and XC Communities,

The toxic back and forth between our two communities has reached a level with which neither of us are comfortable or impressed.  The competitive space for our coins lies in the results, and the results will speak for themselves as they are brought online.  Whatever mistakes or provocations were undertaken by either side are in the past, and we would like them to remain there.  We are all interested in one thing: the advancement of anonymous cryptocurrency.   Let go of the tribalism and start thinking of how you can positively contribute to that end.

Evan and Dan

I would like to remind you of this

[thelonecrouton]

http://cointelegraph.com/news/112415/a-glimpse-into-xcurrencys-mission-to-decentralize-everything

 

I don't mind that they copy me, I mind that they don't have any ideas of their own

A blockchain based web?


Ahahahahahahahaha! That's so daft I don't know where to begin... let them get on with it... 

[r-ando]

This could be a distinguishing feature to create a moat (In the Warren Buffett sense) A perceptual moat and also a physical moat of certitude, if you connect through this you kids can no longer be exposed to pornography while utilizing the web system that supports the information used for daily business, such as goods and payments Think about a kid who looks up a toy online and gets directed to a sex toy with sexual popups or something like this, all of a sudden this would be avoided and this could be used as a selling point too.

Creating this would require a designated blacklist. It should be the end user's responsibility to create one for their own personal computers than to require a mandatory one on all users.

Eventually people will connect to whichever Internet they want to depending on what they want to do.

Exactly. Even if it was decided to impose censorship on the network, there would always be a way around it. Once again, it's better to let the end user decide on what content get's displayed to them.

we are open to compromise as long as the fundamentals of freedom we believe in stay true.

Once information becomes hard to obtain regardless of what it is, your freedom of information becomes moot.

We understand this could seem like a favouritism towards other kinds of industries, however we are not making a judgment on the specifics of any businesses

You are making a judgement by trying to purge adult entertainment industries from the get go. Personally, I like adult entertainment; it's natural.

Now do i prevent my own kids from watching porn? Absolutely! Yet that is done with my own internal home network not a global ban.

TLDR;

Basically Rando, while the idea is noble, it shouldn't be a requirement on a global basis. End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to.

Great feedback Propulsion! Thank you! So basically it would be better to incorporate a filter option for kids or sensitives... a Darkcoin Kids wallet and browser?

NO r-ando, no filtering, no censorship, no control of any sort. The notions you keep propounding are ridiculous and ignorant. Propulsion's final summary point was "End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to". How much clearer do we all need to be?

"End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to". How much clearer do we all need to be?------------- Please don't turn a specific quote into a general thought, start thinking, and who is the end user, the one who decides to use the wallet, the one who decides to browse, please ask me more...

[BTCgraphics]

Found this article, is this all true?

1. DarkCoin claims to be an anonymous cryptocurrency Let’s get one thing straight from the very beginning – DarkCoin is NOT an anonymous digital currency. It uses a special feature known as “darksend”, which is basically a protocol that labels transactions in a way that the destination and the source of the coins are vague. Darksend doesn’t provide complete anonymity, though. At best, it offers pseudonimity. DarkCoin use unscrupulous methods to promote its coin, and it won’t hesitate to promote it by using deceptive buzzwords; they labeled the coin as groundbreaking and completely unique, which is not. Apparently, at this point DarkCoin is as anonymous as Bitcoin.

2. DarkCoin uses Darksend, a closed source, totally unoriginal Darksend claims to be a unique DarkCoin feature, but it’s not. It was not developed by Evan Duffield, the lead developer for DarkCoin. It is solely an implementation of a CoinJoin specification created by one of the most important developers for Bitcoin, Greg Maxwell. To make things worse, Darksend is not an open-source because it’s not completed yet. This goes against the basic principles of the digital currency movement. What did they think, that the users will not notice?

3. DarkCoin can’t ensure payment anonymization DarkCoin has a lot of limitations, and that can only mean it can’t be trusted. While we can agree that it created a hype and made a lot of people curious, it’s definitely “dark” in nature. It uses “masternodes” that support darksend transactions. Recently, a bug implemented in the code stirred things up in the network, triggering continuous fork and making the coin nonfunctional. To fix this issue, a hardfork was required. Evan Duffield is well aware Darkcoin has limitations; however, he’s not concerned at all because the coin is extremely good at creating hype. Hype triggers price appreciation and thus, coin holders are the main beneficiaries. Are they creating a cryptocurrency or specialized PR?

4. Subsidy reduction and tremendous instamine DarkCoin has tremendous instamine linked to it. In the initial 15 hours, between block 1 and block 4000, there were created nearly 1.75m darkcoins. When the IekNpA1 period ended, Duffield claimed that the block reward calculations had a “bug”; to address it, he issued a hardfork, which led to a decrease in the block reward. The result: 80,000 blocks yet there’s only 4.3 DRK out in the open. 5 months later, 1.75m produced during the first 4,200 blocks still accounts for 40% of all existing DRK. Sorry for the ones mining after first 15 hours.

5. Shady beginnings DarkCoin started as XCoin, and for many it looked like a scam. It was launched without having a working windows client and mining the coin was really difficult. The ideal candidates to mine the first 4,200 blocks were, of course, Duffield and his associates. It looked like that “bug” we just mentioned was intentional. It allowed the developer to mine a huge number of coins for his own personal use, in a desperate attempt to shun the negative stigma linked to obvious premining/instamining. The users from outside of Duffield circle might have the feeling they are on the party they were not invited to.

6. Inexplicable problems Darkcoin experienced a lot of problems since its creation, and many users didn’t like this aspect. The “masternodes” were just implemented and used to “mix” the darkcoins, thus making transactions totally anonymous. Those who owned 1 masternode received 10% of the block reward, each time their masternode was selected. This could have been extremely profitable, if the user didn’t have to pay 1,000 darkcoins ($10,000) to set up their own masternode. DarkCoin was forced to change its code to use masternodes, and they performed a controlled fork of the block chain to attain their goal. Everything went smoothly for a couple of hours, after the masternodes started working; however, the Darkcoin blockchain fissured into many forks due to some “bad” masternodes. Another “helpful” solution to make the coin even less convenient.

eI9t28P7. Blockchain forks are bad for digital currency Are you ready to lose your darkcoins for good? Because with DarkCoin, that may happen. Sending DarkCoins during the fork can be extremely risky. Users may lose their darkcoins forever if they send them on the wrong fork. In the end, 1 blockchain will receive recognition, and if your coins wind up on a different blockchain, they will vanish. There are many reports with darkcoins fading from mining pools, considering that the pools were mining on a wrong fork. The exchanges took a hit as well, considering that DarkCoin deposited from wrong forks were confirmed initially and vanished afterwards. At least they are helping the users to practice their accuracy, thoroughness and conscientiousness.

 

8. The Darksend issue Darksend is a DarkCoin technology employed to surpass a deficiency which is not a main concern for 99% of users, and apparently it can be fixed with an easy proxy protocol analysis, since the root of the problem is IP tracking. However, Darksend is limited to 10 DRK. It needs 3 parties to mix up the coins, and since it is in beta stage, it is limited to 10 DRK. It is like using a Kalashnikov to kill a fly.

9. Unexpected price drops For connoisseurs, these drops were expected, especially since it was obvious from the very beginning, that DarkCoin was unreliable. DarkCoin prices dropped when information about the fork was revealed. It went from 0.025 BTC per DarkCoin ($14.50) to 0.016 BTC per DarkCoin ($9.35). This 36% reduction was drastic, and it led to frozen markets for withdrawals and deposits. Is the tendency completely random or just decreasing?

10. Disappointing statistical reviews – things are not looking great for DarkCoin. Here’s why:

Energy Efficiency — Partial
51% protection — Partial
Stability in prices — Partial
Compress protocol — No
Fast confirmation times — No
Prevent instamine — No
Expansion Scope — No
Transaction comments — No
No or less transaction fee — No
Anonymous Payment – No

[coinzcoinzcoinz]

It's FUD. Obviously. Guy is making a huge effort to find find flaws, and puts a giant magnifying glass to them. If he couldn't find flaws, he fabricated them.

8 is not true anymore
9 is irrelevant, markets behave as markets behave
most other things are because the coin is still in development, for example, it is closed source because it is in development, forking issues because the coin was still in early development.

[coins101]

DRK and XC Communities,

The toxic back and forth between our two communities has reached a level with which neither of us are comfortable or impressed.  The competitive space for our coins lies in the results, and the results will speak for themselves as they are brought online.  Whatever mistakes or provocations were undertaken by either side are in the past, and we would like them to remain there.  We are all interested in one thing: the advancement of anonymous cryptocurrency.   Let go of the tribalism and start thinking of how you can positively contribute to that end.

Evan and Dan

I would like to remind you of this

I was going to post in the XC thread that the term web 3.0 was mentioned here a few weeks ago, but I didn't want to waste my time on a self-moderated thread.

It's more than a little suspect that something gets posted here and a few weeks later something sounding remarkably similar finds its way into the press.

So, yeah - remind away.

BTW.

Didn't take you long 

[RenegadeMan]

NO r-ando, no filtering, no censorship, no control of any sort. The notions you keep propounding are ridiculous and ignorant. Propulsion's final summary point was "End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to". How much clearer do we all need to be?

"End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to". How much clearer do we all need to be?------------- Please don't turn a specific quote into a general thought, start thinking, and who is the end user, the one who decides to use the wallet, the one who decides to browse, please ask me more...

This will be my last interaction with you as I'm clearly not getting too far.

"who is the end user, the one who decides to use the wallet, the one who decides to browse, please ask me more" what has this got to do with what the network is actually for? Are you saying "well some users might want this filtering/control feature"....(if yes, I really don't know what to say in light of everything that's already been explained to you)

It would appear that you have firmly planted in your mind that this "DarkTor" that Evan announced back on the 19th August is going to offer some sort of "fresh new start" Internet platform and be able to be free of pornography. As I and a few others on here have been pointing out for the past few pages, the notion of a private/anonymous network that also has restrictions on what content it carries, is the combination of two mutually exclusive concepts. Having a network that's filtered or censored in some way, whether by use of a regular commercial URL filter, some sort of skin-tones JPG image analyser, some sort of user voting/approval system or a panel of administrators that look through the content and decide what's not appropriate requires the web pages/data on the network to be fully open, unencrypted and trackable. Now I'm not sure if you're just having a joke with us all or you're just so fixated on what you think this think should be, you're simply not able to comprehend why the notions you're putting forward are completely unworkable, but I think it's been explained numerous times now that the content on a "DarkTor" simply cannot be controlled. As much as any of us don't want to see child porn being carried through this network, in order for it to fulfil its function, it has to be able to carry everything and anything otherwise (as has already been explained numerous times) the concept simply won't stand.

If you want to build a network that's free from pornography perhaps you need to go and find some religion-based crypto developers who are keen to develop something similar but without privacy, anonymity or full decentralisation and featuring a full filtering system that can remove any content and material that doesn't meet the owners' moral/religious standards.

[r-ando]

NO r-ando, no filtering, no censorship, no control of any sort. The notions you keep propounding are ridiculous and ignorant. Propulsion's final summary point was "End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to". How much clearer do we all need to be?

"End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to". How much clearer do we all need to be?------------- Please don't turn a specific quote into a general thought, start thinking, and who is the end user, the one who decides to use the wallet, the one who decides to browse, please ask me more...

This will be my last interaction with you as I'm clearly not getting too far.

"who is the end user, the one who decides to use the wallet, the one who decides to browse, please ask me more" what has this got to do with what the network is actually for? Are you saying "well some users might want this filtering/control feature"....(if yes, I really don't know what to say in light of everything that's already been explained to you)

It would appear that you have firmly planted in your mind that this "DarkTor" that Evan announced back on the 19th August is going to offer some sort of "fresh new start" Internet platform and be able to be free of pornography. As I and a few others on here have been pointing out for the past few pages, the notion of a private/anonymous network that also has restrictions on what content it carries, is the combination of two mutually exclusive concepts. Having a network that's filtered or censored in some way, whether by use of a regular commercial URL filter, some sort of skin-tones JPG image analyser, some sort of user voting/approval system or a panel of administrators that look through the content and decide what's not appropriate requires the web pages/data on the network to be fully open, unencrypted and trackable. Now I'm not sure if you're just having a joke with us all or you're just so fixated on what you think this think should be, you're simply not able to comprehend why the notions you're putting forward are completely unworkable, but I think it's been explained numerous times now that the content on a "DarkTor" simply cannot be controlled. As much as any of us don't want to see child porn being carried through this network, in order for it to fulfil its function, it has to be able to carry everything and anything otherwise (a has already been explained numerous times) the concept simply won't stand.

If you want to build a network that's free from pornography perhaps you need to go and find some religion-based crypto developers who are keen to develop something similar but without privacy, anonymity or full decentralisation and featuring a full filtering system that can remove any content and material that doesn't meet the owners' moral/religious standards.

Ok, nice discussing this with you.

[georgem]

Great feedback Propulsion! Thank you! So basically it would be better to incorporate a filter option for kids or sensitives... a Darkcoin Kids wallet and browser? Maybe Darkcoin Business version too, so employers know no adult content is being streamed of downloaded on their office systems without their knowledge ?

NO r-ando, no filtering, no censorship, no control of any sort. The notions you keep propounding are ridiculous and ignorant. Propulsion's final summary point was "End users should take their own precautions on what type of content they and or others are exposed to". How much clearer do we all need to be?

Exactly.

r-ando, stop looking at your fellow human beings as if they are livestock that needs to be controlled, that needs to have blinders put around its eyes, so that the master can easier control it.
The blinders/filters are not here to help the livestock, they are here to help the farmer! Ofcourse!

Damn it!
We are not livestock.
We don't need to be controlled, neither thru blinders/filters put around our eyes/minds, nor thru fences.

Understand that we live in a world where slavemasters are trying to control you and me, much like a farmer controls his livestock.
If you let them treat you like livestock, they will build a fence around you, they will breed you and feed you and lead you to the butcher.

[r-ando]

Darkcoin is anonymous, maybe a focus for the safenet is to have a safe internet to use the anonymous Darkcoin? I'm just reiterating now, but instead of trying to sell the anonymity of the safeweb, why not sell its safety?

[sin242]

Darkcoin is anonymous, maybe a focus for the safenet is to have a safe internet to use the anonymous Darkcoin? I'm just reiterating now, but instead of trying to sell the anonymity of the safeweb, why not sell its safety?

You have a fucked up vision of "safe"

[coins101]

Ok, nice discussing this with you.

Chaps...

I could do with a little ideation around interacting with gaming sites and them adopting DRK as a currency solution. Its something that seems to be getting a few headlines and seems like a natural fit with DRK rather than BTC.



http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-gambling-boom-just-getting-started/

There probably isn't much more I can write to help them identify the pros and coins of BTC and DRK. So unless there are any ideas (give it a few weeks ), I'm going to start contacting gaming sites.

[SolomonRising]

So how low is DarkCoin going?

[RenegadeMan]

So how low is DarkCoin going?

I just love the way newbies come on here and ask a question like this as if they're asking "In Detroit, what are the typical daily temperature ranges in winter?"

[r-ando]

Darkcoin is anonymous, maybe a focus for the safenet is to have a safe internet to use the anonymous Darkcoin? I'm just reiterating now, but instead of trying to sell the anonymity of the safeweb, why not sell its safety?

You have a fucked up vision of "safe"

Because it involves being safe for everyone....

Why would you not have a children's client, a business edition client and a personal edition client? For you its a one size fits all kind of thing?

[georgem]

So how low is DarkCoin going?

How low?

I hope directly down to the earth's core...



... where it will no longer be affected by a gravitational pull anymore, and then NOTHING can hold darkcoin back anymore. NOTHING!!!

[braxx]

DRK and XC Communities,

The toxic back and forth between our two communities has reached a level with which neither of us are comfortable or impressed.  The competitive space for our coins lies in the results, and the results will speak for themselves as they are brought online.  Whatever mistakes or provocations were undertaken by either side are in the past, and we would like them to remain there.  We are all interested in one thing: the advancement of anonymous cryptocurrency.   Let go of the tribalism and start thinking of how you can positively contribute to that end.

Evan and Dan

I would like to remind you of this

I was going to post in the XC thread that the term web 3.0 was mentioned here a few weeks ago, but I didn't want to waste my time on a self-moderated thread.

It's more than a little suspect that something gets posted here and a few weeks later something sounding remarkably similar finds its way into the press.

So, yeah - remind away.

BTW.

Didn't take you long  

No worries... I was just going trough my watchlist and saw the somewhat disturbing hostile replies of your post
so I just looked up what Evan and Dan posted end of june and reposted it.

about the web 3.0...
I've looked up that it is revealed practically on the same day...
I must agree on august 19 darkweb was announced as being web 3.0.
But at the same time, on XC -thread, there was a partnership announced with qibuck and the details of that partnership would be announced on friday. So that friday, august 22, xc announced its web 3.0 (and what the partnership would mean)

here is the link with the announcement.

[coins101]

So how low is DarkCoin going?

I just love the way newbies come on here and ask a question like this as if they're asking "In Detroit, what are the typical daily temperature ranges in winter?"

No. Sorry, I'm with him on this one. keep reverse pumping please.

Ignition and I still have to get our cash out of fiat assets, into the banking system, out through the exchange system and then into crypto exchanges.

Lets hope it goes pretty low my son.

[luigi1111]

Found this article, is this all true?

1. DarkCoin claims to be an anonymous cryptocurrency Let’s get one thing straight from the very beginning – DarkCoin is NOT an anonymous digital currency. It uses a special feature known as “darksend”, which is basically a protocol that labels transactions in a way that the destination and the source of the coins are vague. Darksend doesn’t provide complete anonymity, though. At best, it offers pseudonimity. DarkCoin use unscrupulous methods to promote its coin, and it won’t hesitate to promote it by using deceptive buzzwords; they labeled the coin as groundbreaking and completely unique, which is not. Apparently, at this point DarkCoin is as anonymous as Bitcoin. Old and also wrong. 1/5

2. DarkCoin uses Darksend, a closed source, totally unoriginal Darksend claims to be a unique DarkCoin feature, but it’s not. It was not developed by Evan Duffield, the lead developer for DarkCoin. It is solely an implementation of a CoinJoin specification created by one of the most important developers for Bitcoin, Greg Maxwell. To make things worse, Darksend is not an open-source because it’s not completed yet. This goes against the basic principles of the digital currency movement. What did they think, that the users will not notice? Correct in being closed source. Old and incorrect in reference to gmaxwell being the sole creator. 2/5

3. DarkCoin can’t ensure payment anonymization DarkCoin has a lot of limitations, and that can only mean it can’t be trusted. While we can agree that it created a hype and made a lot of people curious, it’s definitely “dark” in nature. It uses “masternodes” that support darksend transactions. Recently, a bug implemented in the code stirred things up in the network, triggering continuous fork and making the coin nonfunctional. To fix this issue, a hardfork was required. Evan Duffield is well aware Darkcoin has limitations; however, he’s not concerned at all because the coin is extremely good at creating hype. Hype triggers price appreciation and thus, coin holders are the main beneficiaries. Are they creating a cryptocurrency or specialized PR? First part is old and very poorly written regarding what actually happened. The part about hype/hyping is silly. 1.5/5

4. Subsidy reduction and tremendous instamine DarkCoin has tremendous instamine linked to it. In the initial 15 hours, between block 1 and block 4000, there were created nearly 1.75m darkcoins. When the IekNpA1 period ended, Duffield claimed that the block reward calculations had a “bug”; to address it, he issued a hardfork, which led to a decrease in the block reward. The result: 80,000 blocks yet there’s only 4.3 DRK out in the open. 5 months later, 1.75m produced during the first 4,200 blocks still accounts for 40% of all existing DRK. Sorry for the ones mining after first 15 hours. Old news, but still a relevant part of the history of the coin. Last sentence is garbage though. 4/5

5. Shady beginnings DarkCoin started as XCoin, and for many it looked like a scam. It was launched without having a working windows client and mining the coin was really difficult. The ideal candidates to mine the first 4,200 blocks were, of course, Duffield and his associates. It looked like that “bug” we just mentioned was intentional. It allowed the developer to mine a huge number of coins for his own personal use, in a desperate attempt to shun the negative stigma linked to obvious premining/instamining. The users from outside of Duffield circle might have the feeling they are on the party they were not invited to. Perception/opinion/hearsay. 1/5

6. Inexplicable problems Darkcoin experienced a lot of problems since its creation, and many users didn’t like this aspect. The “masternodes” were just implemented and used to “mix” the darkcoins, thus making transactions totally anonymous. Those who owned 1 masternode received 10% of the block reward, each time their masternode was selected. This could have been extremely profitable, if the user didn’t have to pay 1,000 darkcoins [LOL?] ($10,000) to set up their own masternode. DarkCoin was forced to change its code to use masternodes, and they performed a controlled fork of the block chain to attain their goal. Everything went smoothly for a couple of hours, after the masternodes started working; however, the Darkcoin blockchain fissured into many forks due to some “bad” masternodes. Another “helpful” solution to make the coin even less convenient. Old, garbage, wrong, disingenuous, and other things. 0.5/5

eI9t28P7. Blockchain forks are bad for digital currency Are you ready to lose your darkcoins for good? Because with DarkCoin, that may happen. Sending DarkCoins during the fork can be extremely risky. Users may lose their darkcoins forever if they send them on the wrong fork. In the end, 1 blockchain will receive recognition, and if your coins wind up on a different blockchain, they will vanish. There are many reports with darkcoins fading from mining pools, considering that the pools were mining on a wrong fork. The exchanges took a hit as well, considering that DarkCoin deposited from wrong forks were confirmed initially and vanished afterwards. At least they are helping the users to practice their accuracy, thoroughness and conscientiousness. Utter garbage. Senders don't lose coins in forks. Receivers (aka exchanges) could, but it would be unusual and typically the result of a deliberate attack. It certainly didn't happen during the mini forks that occurred back when mainnet enforcement was switched on. 0/5

 

8. The Darksend issue Darksend is a DarkCoin technology employed to surpass a deficiency which is not a main concern for 99% of users, and apparently it can be fixed with an easy proxy protocol analysis, since the root of the problem is IP tracking. However, Darksend is limited to 10 DRK. It needs 3 parties to mix up the coins, and since it is in beta stage, it is limited to 10 DRK. It is like using a Kalashnikov to kill a fly. The "root of the problem" is not IP tracking. A portion of the problem is IP tracking. The rest is outdated or wrong. 1/5

9. Unexpected price drops For connoisseurs, these drops were expected, especially since it was obvious from the very beginning, that DarkCoin was unreliable. DarkCoin prices dropped when information about the fork was revealed. It went from 0.025 BTC per DarkCoin ($14.50) to 0.016 BTC per DarkCoin ($9.35). This 36% reduction was drastic, and it led to frozen markets for withdrawals and deposits. Is the tendency completely random or just decreasing? Irrelevant. 0/5

10. Disappointing statistical reviews – things are not looking great for DarkCoin. Here’s why:

Energy Efficiency — Partial
51% protection — Partial
Stability in prices — Partial
Compress protocol — No
Fast confirmation times — No
Prevent instamine — No
Expansion Scope — No
Transaction comments — No
No or less transaction fee — No
Anonymous Payment – No

Point 10 is just gibberish. Who can make sense of it? 1/5

This piece deserves a solid F-.