[ANN][XC] >> Mandatory Update to new Wallet - The first POS X11 anonymous wallet

[veebee]

you guys want him to describe everything before its released.. give him a break. let him get the wallet out and im sure he will release all info at that time


you guys are so impatient


chill the hell out

[1714688456]

1714688456

[1714688456]

1714688456

[1714688456]

1714688456

[1714688456]

1714688456

[drawingthesun]

Yes but thats not wallet #2 nor does he have the private keys to that wallet

What is doing the mixing? It's not ring signatures, so what is it?

Who cares that I can't trace 'A' tx output to 'B' tx input due to a mixer? I could do that with Bitcoin today.

What sets the XC mixer apart from a normal, conventional mixer?

Well for starters the details are encrypted to protect identifiable information and no we are not using ring sig's at this time, that is for the next release. 

What is encrypted? The transaction is encrypted?

Ok I have no idea what system is performing the mixing in your anonymous wallet, it's really confusing me. Darkcoin has these centralised masternodes, Monero has ring signatures and you have?

Lets just call whatever it is XCMixer for now.

- So I send 1,000 XC to XCMixer. (This is encrypted)
- Now XCMixer mixes the coins with other coins. (The mixer would need to decrypt the transactions at this point otherwise how could it know what outputs and inputs to mix?)
- I receive in a new wallet coins from the XCMixer. (This is encypted)

My confusion is this, what is XCMixer and how is it safe to rely on? Nothing here stops XCMixer from watching all the mixing being done and logging it all.

This was the point of ring signatures, they don't have the "mixer knows all" issue. Even in Darkcoin enough bad acting nodes can cause all sorts of surveillance problems.

Also, how are you going to add ring sig, the blockchain is completely different and the lead developers of Bitcoin said it's not possible.

[CryptoGretzky]

dedicatedpool steals your coins by making phony miners. I quit mining there coz they so obviously scam people its not even funny anymore

That is complete fud and you know it.

once your pool was ok, but now it became total crap. You can't keep your shit working, you miss launches and now you steal money. Weak

DEDICATEDPOOL.COM = SCAM

there, I warned you guys

i know the last launch was bad but do you think they are stealing coins realy?

dedicatedpool does seem to be stealing coins latelay and it was reported multiple times. If you try to report it in their chat binaryclock will just ban you there.

Failed launches:
Binaryclock fucked up not only supercoin launch, but violincoin launch as well. I believe there was annother failed launch that I've heard of, but that is the time when I wasn't personally fucked up by dedicatedpool like with supercoin and violincoin

SYNC... all the other pools were up while dedicated wasn't that dedicated....

+1
it is time more people will bring binary clock and his scam pool out to the open

Ive been reading these boards since the end of 2013 when I started mining and never had a reason to post here. But dedicatedpool totally gone too far, too much people being fooled by binaryclock

Not saying dedicated pool is a scam or not cause I have not experienced issues with coins from them.  

I am just answering your question of what other coin launch was botched.  SYNC along with SUPER (Which is fine since he had a family issue) was just the ones I experienced.  

No comment on coins issues.

[BEECoinfan]

Yes but thats not wallet #2 nor does he have the private keys to that wallet

What is doing the mixing? It's not ring signatures, so what is it?

Who cares that I can't trace 'A' tx output to 'B' tx input due to a mixer? I could do that with Bitcoin today.

What sets the XC mixer apart from a normal, conventional mixer?

Well for starters the details are encrypted to protect identifiable information and no we are not using ring sig's at this time, that is for the next release. 

Looks awesome so far, better then I was expecting!  And don't stress about all the trolls happens as soon as you get listed on Mintpal because they all want a piece of the action, that or they want to steal your ideas and coding to implement in their own coin!

Just keep doing your thing, I started buying at 1100 and I am still buying at 100,000 XC is an awesome ground breaking coin (First POS coin with ANON)!

And for anybody wondering why XC got pumped it wasn't because of the Anon (Maybe a bit) but mainly because the community found out who the dev is and what he is capable of.  I prefer to invest in the individual behind the coin and not just a coin itself!

[atcsecure]

Yes but thats not wallet #2 nor does he have the private keys to that wallet

What is doing the mixing? It's not ring signatures, so what is it?

Who cares that I can't trace 'A' tx output to 'B' tx input due to a mixer? I could do that with Bitcoin today.

What sets the XC mixer apart from a normal, conventional mixer?

Well for starters the details are encrypted to protect identifiable information and no we are not using ring sig's at this time, that is for the next release. 

What is encrypted? The transaction is encrypted?

Ok I have no idea what system is performing the mixing in your anonymous wallet, it's really confusing me. Darkcoin has these centralised masternodes, Monero has ring signatures and you have?

Lets just call whatever it is XCMixer for now.

- So I send 1,000 XC to XCMixer. (This is encrypted)
- Now XCMixer mixes the coins with other coins. (The mixer would need to decrypt the transactions at this point otherwise how could it know what outputs and inputs to mix?)
- I receive in a new wallet coins from the XCMixer. (This is encypted)

My confusion is this, what is XCMixer and how is it safe to rely on? Nothing here stops XCMixer from watching all the mixing being done and logging it all.

This was the point of ring signatures, they don't have the "mixer knows all" issue. Even in Darkcoin enough bad acting nodes can cause all sorts of surveillance problems.

Also, how are you going to add ring sig, the blockchain is completely different and the lead developers of Bitcoin said it's not possible.

So yes bad actor nodes are a problem, that is why we are going to offer a better solution in the next release and as you stated ring sigs are not compatible, that is why I said "another solution"

[AlexGR]

Also, how are you going to add ring sig, the blockchain is completely different and the lead developers of Bitcoin said it's not possible.

Not really. I pointed DRK's dev to the fact that ring sigs create scaling and vast bloat issues that might make DRK a coin that can't be used for mainstream adoption / a DOA product.

He said he came up with an idea to get a comparable level of anonymity without the ring sig bloat that he'll implement in RC3.

[JesstersDead]

Yes but thats not wallet #2 nor does he have the private keys to that wallet

What is doing the mixing? It's not ring signatures, so what is it?

Who cares that I can't trace 'A' tx output to 'B' tx input due to a mixer? I could do that with Bitcoin today.

What sets the XC mixer apart from a normal, conventional mixer?

Well for starters the details are encrypted to protect identifiable information and no we are not using ring sig's at this time, that is for the next release. 

And for anybody wondering why XC got pumped it wasn't because of the Anon (Maybe a bit) but mainly because the community found out who the dev is and what he is capable of.  I prefer to invest in the individual behind the coin and not just a coin itself!

+1

Even is the reason I invested in Dark, anonymous transactions aren't that big of deal to me personally. atcsecure is the reason I invested in XC beyond what I mined. A lot of real world companies with groundbreaking tech have folded due to shoddy management in their upper echelons. Same has shown to be true with crypto.

[Brilliantrocket]

I would advise any would be investors to be EXTREMELY cautious of this coin. If the dev cannot provide a full explanation of what this technology does and how, assume it is vaporware intended to create a pump.

[drawingthesun]

Also, how are you going to add ring sig, the blockchain is completely different and the lead developers of Bitcoin said it's not possible.

Not really. I pointed DRK's dev to the fact that ring sigs create scaling and vast bloat issues that might make DRK a coin that can't be used for mainstream adoption / a DOA product.

He said he came up with an idea to get a comparable level of anonymity without the ring sig bloat that he'll implement in RC3.

Lets assume he can't get the same level of anonymity without ring signatures.

In that case, isn't the bloat worth being the only way to get decentralised anonymity?

[itraxe]

panic sell we going down

[Brilliantrocket]

Also, how are you going to add ring sig, the blockchain is completely different and the lead developers of Bitcoin said it's not possible.

Not really. I pointed DRK's dev to the fact that ring sigs create scaling and vast bloat issues that might make DRK a coin that can't be used for mainstream adoption / a DOA product.

He said he came up with an idea to get a comparable level of anonymity without the ring sig bloat that he'll implement in RC3.

Lets assume he can't get the same level of anonymity without ring signatures.

In that case, isn't the bloat worth being the only way to get decentralised anonymity?

You're making the assumption that there aren't any other ways of achieving decentralized anonymity.

[BEECoinfan]

Yes but thats not wallet #2 nor does he have the private keys to that wallet

What is doing the mixing? It's not ring signatures, so what is it?

Who cares that I can't trace 'A' tx output to 'B' tx input due to a mixer? I could do that with Bitcoin today.

What sets the XC mixer apart from a normal, conventional mixer?

Well for starters the details are encrypted to protect identifiable information and no we are not using ring sig's at this time, that is for the next release. 

And for anybody wondering why XC got pumped it wasn't because of the Anon (Maybe a bit) but mainly because the community found out who the dev is and what he is capable of.  I prefer to invest in the individual behind the coin and not just a coin itself!

+1

Even is the reason I invested in Dark, anonymous transactions aren't that big of deal to me personally. atcsecure is the reason I invested in XC beyond what I mined. A lot of real world companies with groundbreaking tech have folded due to shoddy management in their upper echelons. Same has shown to be true with crypto.

So with Mintpal adding, is it safe to assume Cryptsy wont be too far behind?

[AlexGR]

Also, how are you going to add ring sig, the blockchain is completely different and the lead developers of Bitcoin said it's not possible.

Not really. I pointed DRK's dev to the fact that ring sigs create scaling and vast bloat issues that might make DRK a coin that can't be used for mainstream adoption / a DOA product.

He said he came up with an idea to get a comparable level of anonymity without the ring sig bloat that he'll implement in RC3.

Lets assume he can't get the same level of anonymity without ring signatures.

In that case, isn't the bloat worth being the only way to get decentralised anonymity?

The bloat prevents the coin from scaling, which prevents it from being used for real life purposes rather than a speculatory proof of concept. Unless Bytecoin devs come up with a better solution regarding bloat, cryptonote tech will have "serious issues".

Remember that neither CN or DRK is nsa-proof in itself. And 99.9% of the rest can't see through the obfuscation. So, for practical intents and purposes, cryptonote and DRK are private for all circumstances except NSA unless they improve their design which kind'a places them in the same boat regarding what they can cover (99%) and what they can't (NSA).

[shogun47]

you can still get the coins. I'm not 100% sure how so I let another tell exactly but you can send coins to other coins wallets as long as you have the private key for the wallet you sent it to.

[binaryclock]

Yes but thats not wallet #2 nor does he have the private keys to that wallet

What is doing the mixing? It's not ring signatures, so what is it?

Who cares that I can't trace 'A' tx output to 'B' tx input due to a mixer? I could do that with Bitcoin today.

What sets the XC mixer apart from a normal, conventional mixer?

Well for starters the details are encrypted to protect identifiable information and no we are not using ring sig's at this time, that is for the next release. 

And for anybody wondering why XC got pumped it wasn't because of the Anon (Maybe a bit) but mainly because the community found out who the dev is and what he is capable of.  I prefer to invest in the individual behind the coin and not just a coin itself!

+1

Even is the reason I invested in Dark, anonymous transactions aren't that big of deal to me personally. atcsecure is the reason I invested in XC beyond what I mined. A lot of real world companies with groundbreaking tech have folded due to shoddy management in their upper echelons. Same has shown to be true with crypto.

So with Mintpal adding, is it safe to assume Cryptsy wont be too far behind?

Not true sir.  Cryptsy seems to have their own schedule.  Not all coins added to Mintpal get on Cryptsy.

But you never know.. they are unpredictable and vern or anyone from cryptsy are no longer contactable via IRC so who knows.

http://xc.v2.dedicatedpool.com
Ryan, dedicatedpool.com support/admin
admin@dedicatedpool.com / IRC on freenode ##dedicatedpool

[drawingthesun]

Also, how are you going to add ring sig, the blockchain is completely different and the lead developers of Bitcoin said it's not possible.

Not really. I pointed DRK's dev to the fact that ring sigs create scaling and vast bloat issues that might make DRK a coin that can't be used for mainstream adoption / a DOA product.

He said he came up with an idea to get a comparable level of anonymity without the ring sig bloat that he'll implement in RC3.

Lets assume he can't get the same level of anonymity without ring signatures.

In that case, isn't the bloat worth being the only way to get decentralised anonymity?

You're making the assumption that there aren't any other ways of achieving decentralized anonymity.

Decentralised anonymity has been the topic of discussion since day one of Bitcoin.

Almost all the Bitcoin developers have tried to come up with a solution, the Zerocoin team came up with their idea using cutting edge mathematics and CryptoNote was a genuine surprise, it was a very well developed idea (see their whitepaper)

But the XC developer claims to have achieved the same in mere weeks what many very smart people have been trying for years. CryptoNote took two years to develop, Zerocoin has been under construction for over a year.

But XC does it in a weekend.

That is why I am skeptical, and what the developer says does not sound convincing.

[studio1one]

anyone know who the operator of reject mining is?

[heartastack]

I'm literally on the edge of my seat. Either the most successful crypto hoax yet, or pure legitimate genius. Good luck to all. I missed this boat, happy to watch

[AlexGR]

But the XC developer claims to have achieved the same in mere weeks what many very smart people have been trying for years. CryptoNote took two years to develop, Zerocoin has been under construction for over a year.

But XC does it in a weekend.

That is why I am skeptical, and what the developer says does not sound convincing.

Actually he said that anonymity will be improved and that right now what he has is alpha / basic mixing with encryption that does not yet beat the bad actor scenario. He has plans to improve it.

So what are you talking about?

[cyberhacker]

But the XC developer claims to have achieved the same in mere weeks what many very smart people have been trying for years. CryptoNote took two years to develop, Zerocoin has been under construction for over a year.

But XC does it in a weekend.

That is why I am skeptical, and what the developer says does not sound convincing.

Actually he said that anonymity will be improved and that right now what he has is alpha / basic mixing with encryption that does not yet beat the bad actor scenario. He has plans to improve it.

So what are you talking about?

+1