[XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos

[Longenecker]

Why are we collaborating with a coin that is 1 week old (utilitycoin)? 

That sounds unwise to me... chances are they are a P&D coin just using collaboration with XC to help push that initial pump...

I am in the information gathering stage currently and collecting information

Dan

Ya but they can sell you anything with sweet talk.  Test of time should be requirement... wait for a coin to be established and past it's initial P&D phase.  Especially with projects that have anonymous dev's like utility... its very unwise to collaborate with them IMO.

[1714978586]

1714978586

[1714978586]

1714978586

[1714978586]

1714978586

[Conurtrol]

In the reddit thread there was someone from bitcloud who was very interested in the XC tech. Has he been in touch yet?

[Longenecker]

XC should really only be associating itself with coins that are established and have non-anonymous dev's (w/o new bct accounts).  There needs to be some sort of strict filtering process... come on now.  Just because a coin team asks does not mean XC should agree.  

And I see that you wrote on utility's thread basically asking "if the dev's are serious."  Really?  This stuff should be done through PM.  What do you think the bagholders are going to tell you?  And if this is the stage that you are at, you should not be telling us that you are collaborating, or even potentially collaborating with them.  

[laredo7mm]

XC should really only be associating itself with coins that are established and have non-anonymous dev's (w/o new bct accounts).  There needs to be some sort of strict filtering process... come on now.  Just because a coin team asks does not mean XC should agree.  

Before your post, Dan said:

I am in the information gathering stage currently and collecting information

Dan

What part of that don't you understand?  It doesn't sound like he has agreed to do anything yet, but he has been contacted.

[KimmyF]

Updated Wallet for XChat testing


http://downloads.xc-official.com/testing/v2.49/XCurrency_2.49.08b.exe


* Add's label

* Updated to resolve DUP msgs


Dan

Dan,

After the last time i asked did some research and now understand the need for re-entering the public key for Xchat.
But at the same time i feel this will limit the adaptation of XChat by non tech/altcoin people, just because its just a lot of hassle & they have no idea what a private key is. For many i know a XC address looks crazy enough.
Is there some (anon related) reason for not letting the wallet discover the public key by itself before encrypting the channel or do you think there is some way to build this tech into the core protocol before going public?
 
grtz

I have a different solution for this, using a basic blockchain 2.0 service, the user can register a nickname/alias assigned to the public/private key pair which eliminates that process altogether.  Thus you just add the "nickname/alias"

Dan

you just made my day  

[laredo7mm]

...And I see that you wrote on utility's thread basically asking "if the dev's are serious."  Really?  This stuff should be done through PM.  What do you think the bagholders are going to tell you?  And if this is the stage that you are at, you should not be telling us that you are collaborating, or even potentially collaborating with them.  

And if he doesn't let the community know what is going on he gets blasted for not communicating well enough.

There is no way to please everyone....obviously.

[Longenecker]

...And I see that you wrote on utility's thread basically asking "if the dev's are serious."  Really?  This stuff should be done through PM.  What do you think the bagholders are going to tell you?  And if this is the stage that you are at, you should not be telling us that you are collaborating, or even potentially collaborating with them.  

And if he doesn't let the community know what is going on he gets blasted for not communicating well enough.

There is no pleasing the needy here.

As far as I can tell, utilitycoin is a shit coin with an anonymous dev that is 1 week old.  Why the hell would XC collaborate with that?  I don't care what they attempt to "sell" you.  It's just plain stupid. 

[laredo7mm]

...And I see that you wrote on utility's thread basically asking "if the dev's are serious."  Really?  This stuff should be done through PM.  What do you think the bagholders are going to tell you?  And if this is the stage that you are at, you should not be telling us that you are collaborating, or even potentially collaborating with them.  

And if he doesn't let the community know what is going on he gets blasted for not communicating well enough.

There is no pleasing the needy here.

As far as I can tell, utilitycoin is a shit coin with an anonymous dev that is 1 week old.  Why the hell would XC collaborate with that?  I don't care what they attempt to "sell" you.  It's just plain stupid.  

Where in the quote below do you see where any commitment has been made by Dan?

On a side note, I've been contacted by several dev's on a various list of projects - just wanted to keep the community in the loop

* Ruble Code review
* Britcoin - license rev1 mixer code
* Utility Coin - collaboration
* Supernet - collaboration

You are making a scene about nothing.  Dan mentioned he has been contacted, not that he is going to do anything.  that was clarified by his following statement that he is in the investigation stage.  

For fucks sake, chill out.

[Longenecker]

...And I see that you wrote on utility's thread basically asking "if the dev's are serious."  Really?  This stuff should be done through PM.  What do you think the bagholders are going to tell you?  And if this is the stage that you are at, you should not be telling us that you are collaborating, or even potentially collaborating with them.  

And if he doesn't let the community know what is going on he gets blasted for not communicating well enough.

There is no pleasing the needy here.

As far as I can tell, utilitycoin is a shit coin with an anonymous dev that is 1 week old.  Why the hell would XC collaborate with that?  I don't care what they attempt to "sell" you.  It's just plain stupid.  

Where in the quote below do you see where any commitment has been made by Dan?

On a side note, I've been contacted by several dev's on a various list of projects - just wanted to keep the community in the loop

* Ruble Code review
* Britcoin - license rev1 mixer code
* Utility Coin - collaboration
* Supernet - collaboration

Ruble code review - this is fine, Dan's code review service does not impact XC's image in a negative way.

Britcoin - don't quite understand this but its probably fine.

Utility Coin - Has no credibility and nothing to distinguish it from the 4-5 other shitcoins that are created weekly, and has an anonymous dev.  Dan is "gathering information" by posting questions publicly on their bagholder thread, by which he will only receive biashed shill answers.  Information gathering should be done via PM, and information should only be made public to us when a definitive decision has been made.  IMO, XC should not even CONSIDER collaborating with a coin that is not established (by the test of time) or one that has an anonymous dev.  What is XC going to do when the dev of utilitycoin jumps ship for his next coin?  Now XC looks terrible.  It's just not wise.  

supernet - this is potentially fine, because they are established, past their initial P&D, and do not have anonymous dev's

[cryptico]

@ Dan Didn't you say that we were not going to be part of supernet?

I agree with the comment above WTF is utilitycoin??? Dan what's up with that??

[Longenecker]

@ Dan Didn't you say that we were not going to be part of supernet?

Yes he did.  So the collaboration is likely of a different nature.  We will have to wait and see.

[lucky88888]

what the... utility coin sounds exactly like getscamed coin.

even if the code is legit and the dev does some coding. i mean do we really need a coin for every subject in our daily lives?
watercoin gascoin taxcoin furniturecoin foodcoin applecoin vegetablecoin meatcoin fishcoin sexcoin swearcoin might as well have underwear coin.

[KimmyF]

Ok, there will be limitations in my block explorer.

Just finished a dynamic caching module in the back-end because some transactions where just to much for a browser to handle.
eg: if one or more outputs are not spend i let the browser render the graph, if all outputs are spend the svg is served without the need for any end-user processing. Simply because unspend outputs can change the graph & i needed some simple & quick caching able to run in the cloud.

But visualizing seemingly simple things can give crazy results, check this out: Thats a 6x times zoom in
[snip]
(https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?f14319b3154e5f6f1c0c46af46159d46308abb47b4e86710af23d8885e81d964.htm)

Just someone scraping together about 300 seperate inputs into a single tx-out without time-frame, this has nothing to do with anon (no multisigs)

Funny to see how (only for XC) regulair Anon transactions are more easy to handle by a browser (visual tech wise) and how some people had concerns about bloat because of the XCoinshuffle thats part of the anon:D

Overall ... am almost there ...

Where do you get that stuff from? People say it looks awesome, but I honestly can't figure out why or even how to read it.

Do you need to download a program for it?

All im making is a blockchain explorer but next to showing the raw data like hashes and stuff i also add a flow diagram visualizing where those coins came from and where they where send after the transaction. Nothing more, nothing less. Most transactions are really simple like this POS one:
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?58e8db4571c543116360d5be54fb8779b6e8b52e961a7145413e075d5f126c8a.htm
i just think that a display with all those hashes is not helping the wider adoptation of (alt)coins. So next to the same info i add this: Looks better & is more easy to understand imo. Also important in my view: XC has the option to send anon, by digging all info i can get out of the chain im hoping to add to the prove thats true.
Most examples posted before where complex but its a fact that a lot more transactions on the chain are really simple like:


All will be just a website, so all you will need is a browser and url to go to. But if you come by with a older browser my site will disappoint you, for stuff like this you need to have a recent browser.  So no download, just a different way of showing the same info online.

[laredo7mm]

...blah, blah, blah...

Again, no commitments have been made to do anything, as far as I can see.

Everyone knows Dan does code reviews and will collaborate with other coins.  That isn't a secret.  When he does, those coins get a pump on the market.  the issue in the past is that other coins have announced the review/collaboration before they were officially announced here.  When that happens, the XC Community misses out on the opportunity to ride the pump and make some money if they desired to speculate on that coin.

All Dan did was give a heads up as to which coins have contacted him for reviews or collaboration in case people here may be interested in investing in those coins to try and make some money.  That is it.  Plain and simple. IMO.

[KimmyF]

Am i the only one happy that Dan posted his current dealings with other coins/projects or what?

[Longenecker]

...blah, blah, blah...

Again, no commitments have been made to do anything, as far as I can see.

Everyone knows Dan does code reviews and will collaborate with other coins.  That isn't a secret.  When he does, those coins get a pump on the market.  the issue in the past is that other coins have announced the review/collaboration before they were officially announced here.  When that happens, the XC Community misses out on the opportunity to ride the pump and make some money if they desired to speculate on that coin.

All Dan did was give a heads up as to which coins have contacted him for reviews or collaboration in case people here may be interested in investing in those coins to try and make some money.  That is it.  Plain an simple. IMO.

My point is in the foolishness of collaborating with coins such as utilitycoin (1 week old, anonymous dev, thread is 10 pages long...).  What do you not understand?  The fact that Dan is even considering it is the problem.

[laredo7mm]

Am i the only one happy that Dan posted his current dealings with other coins/projects or what?

No, but you and I might be the only ones.   

[MemoryShock]

Am i the only one happy that Dan posted his current dealings with other coins/projects or what?

Nope.  I also think that he has his reasons which have been shown to be pretty awesome in the past.

Some people can't be pleased...

[laredo7mm]

...blah, blah, blah...

Again, no commitments have been made to do anything, as far as I can see.

Everyone knows Dan does code reviews and will collaborate with other coins.  That isn't a secret.  When he does, those coins get a pump on the market.  the issue in the past is that other coins have announced the review/collaboration before they were officially announced here.  When that happens, the XC Community misses out on the opportunity to ride the pump and make some money if they desired to speculate on that coin.

All Dan did was give a heads up as to which coins have contacted him for reviews or collaboration in case people here may be interested in investing in those coins to try and make some money.  That is it.  Plain an simple. IMO.

My point is in the foolishness of collaborating with coins such as utilitycoin (1 week old, anonymous dev, thread is 10 pages long...).  What do you not understand?  The fact that Dan is even considering it is the problem.

I understand everything completely.  You do not.

Contacted does not equal considering.  Collecting information and investigating does not equal considering.

Once the information is collected, then comes time to consider.  If it is an obvious shit coin, then it will be an easy choice to deny their request.

[bitcoin carpenter]

Go vote
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=809368.0