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

[thelonecrouton]

Ah, now I get it.
instant TX is only possible with previously anonymized coins. (I kept confusing "anonymization process" with darksend.)
Darksend and instant TX ARE two completely different ways of how you send the previously anonymized coins.
Or how exactly are they related?

Shit I am confuuuused...   but in an amusing way.

What good is darksend if we have instant TX?
Or is instant TX about to replace darksend for good?

Darksend is the process of anonymisation - denominating your balance and them mixing it with other users.

InstantX is completely unrelated, except that it is also made possible by Masternodes. You will be able to IntantX both anonymised and non-anonymised funds.

[tungfa]

I think I misunderstood something here.. If someone pays a small amount to be able to darksend for 24hours, then it means those people could mega spam during 24 hours, regardless of the MNs, no?

EDIT: or you meant people pay for the time the anonymization process? Then they actually darksend 10 days later for free if they want to? So if it's about anonymizing the funds, then yes people can't spam or DDOS

If you owned 20 masternodes, you could send 10-20 transactions a day for free. That's the idea. Without the signature of the masternode, the transactions would be rejected.

+1
gives owning more Masternodes more incentive !!
good thinking !

[georgem]

When you become a member of something, you have different set of rights and protections. There are terms and conditions....which brings in regulators - potentially.

Excellent point.
What happens if someone is unhappy with the subscription and wants his money back.
He could sue you... but wait, who would he sue? The darkcoin foundation?

On closer examination, all this doesn't make any sense.

But what if those subscriptions aren't really subscriptions, but something else?
Paying a fee is mandatory.... but voluntarily paying for a service/subscription makes you a "customer" who needs to be "protected" by government. lol

[coins101]

Fees for Darksend time seem less useful than fees for Darksend amounts. Depending on how many people are anonymising their DRK, 24hrs may or may not be enough, but if you could pay a fixed fee upfront to anonymise a fixed amount of DRK, that would be better IMO.

the fees are so cheap....just lose them - make it a feature and benefit of the service.

paying for instant transactions is where the money is at - doesn't matter if they are related or not.  instant transactions are facilitated by master nodes. pay them.

[thelonecrouton]

Where is everyone getting this notion of spamming Darksend? You can't spam Darksend, it's just the anonymisation process.

[thelonecrouton]

Fees for Darksend time seem less useful than fees for Darksend amounts. Depending on how many people are anonymising their DRK, 24hrs may or may not be enough, but if you could pay a fixed fee upfront to anonymise a fixed amount of DRK, that would be better IMO.

the fees are so cheap....just lose them - make it a feature and benefit of the service.

paying for instant transactions is where the money is at - doesn't matter if they are related or not.  instant transactions are facilitated by master nodes. pay them.

Yeah, I agree. Lose the anonymisation fees altogether. Charge a bit more for InstantX.

Losing the anonymisation fees would have the added huge bonus that we could turn Darksend on by default, providing instant huge liquidity for mixing. It's dog slow right now because nobody is using it. Make it on by default, and free, problem solved.

edit: your wallet needs to be unlocked, so maybe not quite, but at least if it was free more people would hopefully participate.

[georgem]

Ah, now I get it.
instant TX is only possible with previously anonymized coins. (I kept confusing "anonymization process" with darksend.)
Darksend and instant TX ARE two completely different ways of how you send the previously anonymized coins.
Or how exactly are they related?

Shit I am confuuuused...   but in an amusing way.

What good is darksend if we have instant TX?
Or is instant TX about to replace darksend for good?

Darksend is the process of anonymisation - denominating your balance and them mixing it with other users.

InstantX is completely unrelated, except that Masternodes also make it possible. You will be able to IntantX both anonymised and non-anonymised funds.

Thanks.

lol, now I know why camosoul bitched about the name darksend so much a few weeks/months ago.

So Darksend is mixing, and nothing else.
And when you have mixed funds, you can use them, and send them like a normal transaction to a reciever (who would not be able to understand who sent him the funds).

Instant TX (why keep people say InstantX?) is a new form of making a transaction, and this will be possible with both anonymised and non-anonymised funds.

Alright, thanks for the recap, my brain was slightly out of place.

[coins101]

Actually, why don't we set-up a series of scam coins and send the profits to the miners and MN operators every quarter.

Darkcoin could remain free for like 5-10 years

Let's start with XCShadowCash

 

[salmion]

Where is everyone getting this notion of spamming Darksend? You can't spam Darksend, it's just the anonymisation process.

Without fees though everyone might run it all the time. So the spam is bloat.

[patrolman]

When you become a member of something, you have different set of rights and protections. There are terms and conditions....which brings in regulators - potentially.

Excellent point.
What happens if someone is unhappy with the subscription and wants his money back.
He could sue you... but wait, who would he sue? The darkcoin foundation?

On closer examination, all this doesn't make any sense.

But what if those subscriptions aren't really subscriptions, but something else?
Paying a fee is mandatory.... but voluntarily paying for a service/subscription makes you a "customer" who needs to be "protected" by government. lol

How about credits? You pay whatever you want up front and it goes to miners/masternodes and the credits appear in the client, allowing you to perform a certain number of Darksend mixes or to send anonymised funds. Once the credit is gone, you have to top up again. I'm not sure about the technical side of whether the credit could be verified though.

[Kai Proctor]

Fees for Darksend time seem less useful than fees for Darksend amounts. Depending on how many people are anonymising their DRK, 24hrs may or may not be enough, but if you could pay a fixed fee upfront to anonymise a fixed amount of DRK, that would be better IMO.

the fees are so cheap....just lose them - make it a feature and benefit of the service.

paying for instant transactions is where the money is at - doesn't matter if they are related or not.  instant transactions are facilitated by master nodes. pay them.

They exist to avoid sybil attacks.

[coins101]

Where is everyone getting this notion of spamming Darksend? You can't spam Darksend, it's just the anonymisation process.

Without fees though everyone might run it all the time. So the spam is bloat.

there is passive mixing going on - there could be some controls placed around how many rounds you do in a given period? A reasonableness test applied.

[coins101]

Fees for Darksend time seem less useful than fees for Darksend amounts. Depending on how many people are anonymising their DRK, 24hrs may or may not be enough, but if you could pay a fixed fee upfront to anonymise a fixed amount of DRK, that would be better IMO.

the fees are so cheap....just lose them - make it a feature and benefit of the service.

paying for instant transactions is where the money is at - doesn't matter if they are related or not.  instant transactions are facilitated by master nodes. pay them.

They exist to avoid sybil attacks.

its been a while since I've had to think about this stuff.....isn't that the job of the 1000DRK?

[salmion]

When you become a member of something, you have different set of rights and protections. There are terms and conditions....which brings in regulators - potentially.

Excellent point.
What happens if someone is unhappy with the subscription and wants his money back.
He could sue you... but wait, who would he sue? The darkcoin foundation?

On closer examination, all this doesn't make any sense.

But what if those subscriptions aren't really subscriptions, but something else?
Paying a fee is mandatory.... but voluntarily paying for a service/subscription makes you a "customer" who needs to be "protected" by government. lol

How about credits? You pay whatever you want up front and it goes to miners/masternodes and the credits appear in the client, allowing you to perform a certain number of Darksend mixes or to send anonymised funds. Once the credit is gone, you have to top up again. I'm not sure about the technical side of whether the credit could be verified though.

That the session model again. Which I still think is the way to go

Because you get what you pay for. X coins by y rounds = session fee,

[salmion]

Where is everyone getting this notion of spamming Darksend? You can't spam Darksend, it's just the anonymisation process.

Without fees though everyone might run it all the time. So the spam is bloat.

there is passive mixing going on - there could be some controls placed around how many rounds you do in a given period? A reasonableness test applied.

I spose once all your coins are 8 rounds it stops.

[k0vic]

• I hate the idea of a subscription. It just sounds scammy and lumps us in with the other bs going on in crypto.
• Having multiple payment methods for different "features" between with or without darksend and instanttx is not user friendly, everything should be simple and straight forward for the user.
• This is not a bug. A bug is something that is semi-working or is working but can be "flaky." Darksend is currently broken and does not anonymize which is our flag ship.
• I do not think this is something that can be answered in 4-6 hours. While there have been some decent ideas I think the dev team needs to examine the darksend "protocol" and come back with their suggestions as they are the closest to project
• Changing everything else around Darksend is wrong and we could irreverently back our self into a corner by taking the easy way instead of and I hate to say it, fixing darksend even if it's rewriting it.

I work in IT and so many times we try to fix the items that seem easiest/cheapest/quickest route instead of fixing the root cause. I feel like the majority of the suggestions are short term fixes/change to current payment/fee structures to avoid how darksend works today.

So I guess my thoughts come down to, how do we fix darksend without having to change everything that resolves around it?

Edit: Grammar

[Kai Proctor]

Fees for Darksend time seem less useful than fees for Darksend amounts. Depending on how many people are anonymising their DRK, 24hrs may or may not be enough, but if you could pay a fixed fee upfront to anonymise a fixed amount of DRK, that would be better IMO.

the fees are so cheap....just lose them - make it a feature and benefit of the service.

paying for instant transactions is where the money is at - doesn't matter if they are related or not.  instant transactions are facilitated by master nodes. pay them.

They exist to avoid sybil attacks.

its been a while since I've had to think about this stuff.....isn't that the job of the 1000DRK?

No that's for snooping attack.

Whereas a Masternode snooping attack involves a malicious Masternode, a Sybil attack — also known as a pseudospoofing attack — involves malicious Darksend+ peers.

Source : http://cdn.anonymousbitcoinbook.com/darkcoin/darksend-paper/Atlas_Darksend-Analysis-v001.pdf

[g4q34g4qg47ww]

Maybe if we had the fee come out of the same wallet address that the mixed coins wind up in? That way you could only *connect the fee paid to the same address that is anon?

[thelonecrouton]

I'm not seeing how having lots of users mixing counts as an attack or as spam. It's what we want. And the mixing is off-chain, there's minimal bloat after everyone has initially anonymised their stash.

[stealth923]

Fees for Darksend time seem less useful than fees for Darksend amounts. Depending on how many people are anonymising their DRK, 24hrs may or may not be enough, but if you could pay a fixed fee upfront to anonymise a fixed amount of DRK, that would be better IMO.

Solution 1: Fixed Fee Session Model
You enter how many DRK you wish to anonymize and it calculates the fee and will give you access to the masternode network until your set amount of DRK has been anonymized to your requested number of rounds. After that you are locked out and need to pay the fee again to access the masternodes based on how many DRK you want to mix.

This way its a guaranteed delivery of service. However I think it has a major drawback...There might be a way that the fixed fee could be tracked to your mixing input (as its fixed and needs to be tied with your input signature) and compromise your anonymity.

Solution 2: Subscription Model
As I see it the subscription model will just give you a "token" to say you can mix whatever you want for X period of time and not tie your inputs to that subscription hence upholding anonymity. Drawback here is if there isnt enough liquidity during the time period you have been granted, you risk not matching inputs and spending 0.1DRK for nothing. Although talking with Evan the liquidity will solve itself over time as more users mix.

Not sure if ive been smoking too much but let me know if im way off