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

[FoldingTime]

Encrypted chat: Will this be released as a brand new app for all devices?

Any news on how the architecture will look like for this to be enabled?

[policymaker]

I HODL drk, xc, cloak, veil, and other anon coins.  Yes, you can HODL them all.  

Sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night and fight myself.  

that is a smart investor's choice. If only people weren't so toxic and/or stupid they would know what to do. If I had the capital of like half the people in this topic I would be rich by now following such advice.


@the guys with the wallet problem, if you backed up ur wallet.dat u have nothing to fear, delete old wallet and even app folder, reinstall wallet, open it once to creat app data folder, close it, then replace ur new wallet.dat with your backed up one. Your new wallet will re-sync all the way to current date, it doesnt matter if u were staking or just holding or w/e the wallet will get synced to the correct amount of XC you had.

[JakeThePanda]

I HODL drk, xc, cloak, veil, and other anon coins.  Yes, you can HODL them all.  

Sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night and fight myself.  

that is a smart investor's choice. If only people weren't so toxic and/or stupid they would know what to do. If I had the capital of like half the people in this topic I would be rich by now following such advice.

Yup, while you guys are fighting like idiots I'm making a mint in VRC.

[flashbit]

Got to say the chart looks great. We will be well over 002 before the release with bullish momentum. If you are on the fence the time is now to buy. Don't miss out. You will be kicking yourself next week. The chart speaks for itself.  The 12hr and 6 hr macd is signalling buy.

[FoldingTime]

Got to say the chart looks great. We will be well over 002 before the release with bullish momentum. If you are on the fence the time is now to buy. Don't miss out. You will be kicking yourself next week. The chart speaks for itself.  The 12hr and 6 hr macd is signalling buy.

Yes, we are getting higher lows and higher highs all pointing up.

[Artoodeetoo]

I HODL drk, xc, cloak, veil, and other anon coins.  Yes, you can HODL them all.  

Sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night and fight myself.  

that is a smart investor's choice. If only people weren't so toxic and/or stupid they would know what to do. If I had the capital of like half the people in this topic I would be rich by now following such advice.

Yup, while you guys are fighting like idiots I'm making a mint in VRC.

you better get back there then.. You have a habit of reasonable comment stupid comment..

[Youghoor]

the chart explain the road map clearly, lets wait and watch.

[JakeThePanda]

I HODL drk, xc, cloak, veil, and other anon coins.  Yes, you can HODL them all.  

Sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night and fight myself.  

that is a smart investor's choice. If only people weren't so toxic and/or stupid they would know what to do. If I had the capital of like half the people in this topic I would be rich by now following such advice.

Yup, while you guys are fighting like idiots I'm making a mint in VRC.

you better get back there then.. You have a habit of reasonable comment stupid comment..

lol, get back to where?  Which stupid comment are you referring to?

[synechist]

Urgh. I take a little nap and emerge to find 11 pages of bickering. What an unpleasant read.

I'll post a little later to substantiate XC's claims, contra those frustrating users who seem not to have read up on XC before forming an opinion.

[policymaker]

Urgh. I take a little nap and emerge to find 11 pages of bickering. What an unpleasant read.

I'll post a little later to substantiate XC's claims, contra those frustrating users who seem not to have read up on XC before forming an opinion.

yup. w8ing for ur statement!

[kylam]

A very powerful coin.

[Jacques de Molay]

Come on guys, quit stooping to their level and just ignore them, Use the handy dandy ignore button! Let's focus on our community and continue to make it stronger. When someone new comes in here and sees all this worthless arguing it is a huge turn off. If we ignore them then they are the only ones looking stupid.

Agreed, lets focus on the community and move on from these fud attacks.

Problem is, like everything in life, if you dont refute attacks or fud, its get repeated as a fact then. As the saying goes, if you tell a lie enough times, it becomes the thought of truth... ( something along those lines... but the meaning over all holds true. )

Maybe so, but the problem is (especially here in this broken lying manipulative scammy crypto world)

Is if you do refute the lies with facts - the fudsters ignore it, then repeat their bullshit thinking it IS true.  People know the school yard tactics on display and what people do its gets to the poin t you get sick and tired of correcting bullshit - but it will NOT stoip the people lying hard for your money.  Greed is the problem = you will get people lying hard until they make profit.


Ive started ignoring anyone that only comes in to stir shit with useless lies. I will call them on it and make them cry until they are banned.


These dark trolls aren't even worth it, a smart investor knows full well what dark lacks and what XC provides.  You would have to be a fucking moron to choose sides in all of this when its pretty clear all dark is relying on is LIES and BROKEN PROMISES = which explains all the animosity towards ANY coin that is further developed than...40% insta mined by the devs darkcoin.  Crypt coin was no different all fud and bs whihc to me is a scammy darkcoin clone in terms of delivering very very little for a high priced coin.

Id suggest people of xc just ignore the dark trolling, its pretty easy.  Let them ruin and burn their community by showing everyone how butthurt thery are at any coin in every thread.  

if they want to follow a lying manipulative scammy dev over at dark coin - let them.  If they are angry etc let them, just there is no need to reply to any of them here, they have their own thread to cry in.

[JakeThePanda]

Come on guys, quit stooping to their level and just ignore them, Use the handy dandy ignore button! Let's focus on our community and continue to make it stronger. When someone new comes in here and sees all this worthless arguing it is a huge turn off. If we ignore them then they are the only ones looking stupid.

Agreed, lets focus on the community and move on from these fud attacks.

Problem is, like everything in life, if you dont refute attacks or fud, its get repeated as a fact then. As the saying goes, if you tell a lie enough times, it becomes the thought of truth... ( something along those lines... but the meaning over all holds true. )

Maybe so, but the problem is (especially here in this broken lying manipulative scammy crypto world)

Is if you do refute the lies with facts - the fudsters ignore it, then repeat their bullshit thinking it IS true.  People know the school yard tactics on display and what people do its gets to the poin t you get sick and tired of correcting bullshit - but it will NOT stoip the people lying hard for your money.  Greed is the problem = you will get people lying hard until they make profit.


Ive started ignoring anyone that only comes in to stir shit with useless lies. I will call them on it and make them cry until they are banned.


These dark trolls aren't even worth it, a smart investor knows full well what dark lacks and what XC provides.  You would have to be a fucking moron to choose sides in all of this when its pretty clear all dark is relying on is LIES and BROKEN PROMISES = which explains all the animosity towards ANY coin that is further developed than...40% insta mined by the devs darkcoin.  Crypt coin was no different all fud and bs whihc to me is a scammy darkcoin clone in terms of delivering very very little for a high priced coin.

Id suggest people of xc just ignore the dark trolling, its pretty easy.  Let them ruin and burn their community by showing everyone how butthurt thery are at any coin in every thread.  

if they want to follow a lying manipulative scammy dev over at dark coin - let them.  If they are angry etc let them, just there is no need to reply to any of them here, they have their own thread to cry in.

We should really stop naming coins and just focus on XC.  It just draws the wrong kind of attention to the thread. 

[synechist]

Some useful facts about XC:

1) Xnodes are fully decentralised

• Any wallet can run as an Xnode, not just a few semi-centralised clients
• Xnode setup is not complicated or time-consuming

2) Xnodes are a trustless design

• An earlier iteration of XC's design specified a dynamic trust system; this has been improved upon with a fully trustless design
• Rev 2 Xnodes will use trustless multi-path multisig

3) Xnodes work

• Early tests of Xnodes' mixing function (Rev. 1) have not resulted in any kind of flaw in this aspect of XC's anonymity solution.
• Our not-so-well-intentioned friend Chaeplin claimed to have found a "design flaw" in Rev 1. However he fails to apprehend (a) precisely what was being tested, (b) what would constitute XC failing the test, and (c) what his results actually show. For a summary, see https://www.google.com/url?q=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php%3Ftopic%3D630547.msg7310485
• Tests of Xnodes' initial multipath implementation (Rev. 1.5) have turned up no problems. In fact, no one was even able to mount a claim for the bounty.
• Multi-path is being fully implemented as we speak for Rev. 2. When it is released, there will be (a) a sizeable public bounty, and (b) consultations with several cryptographers and other experts.
• Given past progress, we're pretty optimistic that Rev. 2 will be delivered on time, and will compound the anonymity that is already working in XC.

4) XC is already anonymous, and working

• I can't stress this enough. It's working! It doesn't mysteriously fork. It was released on time. There have been no setbacks.
• XC is only 5 weeks old, and we're already at this level.
• XC is not a completed design. It anonymity will compound. Its user-friendliness will become a 1-click thing. Thorough, professional testing will render it bulletproof. See the roadmap: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=630547.msg7535822#msg7535822.
• Xnodes do not steal coins. But for the sake of historical accuracy, here's where this rumour started: Rev. 1 was released to test whether anyone could prove that a link exists on the blockchain between sender and receiver. Chaeplin misconstrued the purpose of the release and harped on about the fact that because mixers forward coins, coins could be stolen. This is true, but it's besides the point. All we were testing was whether anyone could provide a link on the blockchain. The rest of the build, including vulnerable transaction-forwarding, was just scaffolding so that the tests could be carried out. But, alas, Chaeplin appeared not to be amenable to realising this fact. Perhaps if his intention was to contribute constructively he would have avoided this lapse of comprehension.

At this stage it appears that there'll be ongoing FUD attacks from competitor(s). I'd advise saving a link to this post, and using it to clarify the nature of XC whenever a fudder makes claims to the contrary. Then they'd either have to substantiate their claims or wander off.

To factuality over frustration,

Arlyn

[Driv3n]

We should really stop naming coins and just focus on XC.  It just draws the wrong kind of attention to the thread. 

Agreed, lets make an effort to do this going forward.

[ssmc2]

Some useful facts about XC:

1) Xnodes are fully decentralised

• Any wallet can run as an Xnode, not just a few semi-centralised clients
• Xnode setup is not complicated or time-consuming

2) Xnodes are trustless

• An earlier iteration of XC's design specified a dynamic trust system; this has been improved upon with a fully trustless system
• Xnodes will now use multisig

3) Xnodes work

• Early tests of Xnodes' mixing function (Rev. 1) have not resulted in any kind of flaw in this aspect of XC's anonymity solution.
• Our not-so-well-intentioned friend Chaeplin claimed to have found a "design flaw" in Rev 1. However he fails to apprehend (a) precisely what was being tested, (b) what would constitute XC failing the test, and (c) what his results actually show. For a summary, see https://www.google.com/url?q=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php%3Ftopic%3D630547.msg7310485
• Tests of Xnodes' initial multipath implementation (Rev. 1.5) have turned up no problems. In fact, no one was even able to mount a claim for the bounty.
• Multi-path is being fully implemented as we speak for Rev. 2. When it is released, there will be (a) a sizeable public bounty, and (b) consultations with several cryptographers and other experts.
• Given past progress, we're pretty optimistic that Rev. 2 will be delivered on time, and will compound the anonymity that is already working in XC.

4) XC is already anonymous, and working

• I can't stress this enough. It's working! It doesn't mysteriously fork. It was released on time. There have been no setbacks.
• XC is only 5 weeks old, and we're already at this level.
• XC is not a completed design. It anonymity will compound. Its user-friendliness will become a 1-click thing. Thorough, professional testing will render it bulletproof.
• Xnodes do not steal coins. But for the sake of historical accuracy, here's where this rumour started: Rev. 1 was released to test whether anyone could prove that a link exists on the blockchain between sender and receiver. Chaeplin misconstrued the purpose of the release and harped on about the fact that because mixers forward coins, coins could be stolen. This is true, but it's besides the point. All we were testing was whether anyone could provide a link on the blockchain. The rest of the build, including vulnerable transaction-forwarding, was just scaffolding so that the tests could be carried out. But, alas, Chaeplin appeared not to be amenable to realising this fact. Perhaps if his intention was to contribute constructively he would have avoided this lapse of comprehension.

At this stage it appears that there'll be ongoing FUD attacks from competitor(s). I'd advise saving a link to this post, and using it to clarify the nature of XC whenever a fudder makes claims to the contrary. Then they'd either have to substantiate their claims or wander off.

Arlyn

Thank you!!! This should be in the OP for sure.

[FoldingTime]

Some useful facts about XC:

1) Xnodes are fully decentralised

• Any wallet can run as an Xnode, not just a few semi-centralised clients
• Xnode setup is not complicated or time-consuming

2) Xnodes are trustless

• An earlier iteration of XC's design specified a dynamic trust system; this has been improved upon with a fully trustless system
• Xnodes will now use multisig

3) Xnodes work

• Early tests of Xnodes' mixing function (Rev. 1) have not resulted in any kind of flaw in this aspect of XC's anonymity solution.
• Our not-so-well-intentioned friend Chaeplin claimed to have found a "design flaw" in Rev 1. However he fails to apprehend (a) precisely what was being tested, (b) what would constitute XC failing the test, and (c) what his results actually show. For a summary, see https://www.google.com/url?q=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php%3Ftopic%3D630547.msg7310485
• Tests of Xnodes' initial multipath implementation (Rev. 1.5) have turned up no problems. In fact, no one was even able to mount a claim for the bounty.
• Multi-path is being fully implemented as we speak for Rev. 2. When it is released, there will be (a) a sizeable public bounty, and (b) consultations with several cryptographers and other experts.
• Given past progress, we're pretty optimistic that Rev. 2 will be delivered on time, and will compound the anonymity that is already working in XC.

4) XC is already anonymous, and working

• I can't stress this enough. It's working! It doesn't mysteriously fork. It was released on time. There have been no setbacks.
• XC is only 5 weeks old, and we're already at this level.
• XC is not a completed design. It anonymity will compound. Its user-friendliness will become a 1-click thing. Thorough, professional testing will render it bulletproof.
• Xnodes do not steal coins. But for the sake of historical accuracy, here's where this rumour started: Rev. 1 was released to test whether anyone could prove that a link exists on the blockchain between sender and receiver. Chaeplin misconstrued the purpose of the release and harped on about the fact that because mixers forward coins, coins could be stolen. This is true, but it's besides the point. All we were testing was whether anyone could provide a link on the blockchain. The rest of the build, including vulnerable transaction-forwarding, was just scaffolding so that the tests could be carried out. But, alas, Chaeplin appeared not to be amenable to realising this fact. Perhaps if his intention was to contribute constructively he would have avoided this lapse of comprehension.

At this stage it appears that there'll be ongoing FUD attacks from competitor(s). I'd advise saving a link to this post, and using it to clarify the nature of XC whenever a fudder makes claims to the contrary. Then they'd either have to substantiate their claims or wander off.

Arlyn

Thank you!!! This should be in the OP for sure.

I agree, additionally the Road Map should be in the OP and quoted in the thread on a regular basis.

[flashbit]

Some useful facts about XC:

1) Xnodes are fully decentralised

• Any wallet can run as an Xnode, not just a few semi-centralised clients
• Xnode setup is not complicated or time-consuming

2) Xnodes are trustless

• An earlier iteration of XC's design specified a dynamic trust system; this has been improved upon with a fully trustless system
• Xnodes will now use multisig

3) Xnodes work

• Early tests of Xnodes' mixing function (Rev. 1) have not resulted in any kind of flaw in this aspect of XC's anonymity solution.
• Our not-so-well-intentioned friend Chaeplin claimed to have found a "design flaw" in Rev 1. However he fails to apprehend (a) precisely what was being tested, (b) what would constitute XC failing the test, and (c) what his results actually show. For a summary, see https://www.google.com/url?q=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php%3Ftopic%3D630547.msg7310485
• Tests of Xnodes' initial multipath implementation (Rev. 1.5) have turned up no problems. In fact, no one was even able to mount a claim for the bounty.
• Multi-path is being fully implemented as we speak for Rev. 2. When it is released, there will be (a) a sizeable public bounty, and (b) consultations with several cryptographers and other experts.
• Given past progress, we're pretty optimistic that Rev. 2 will be delivered on time, and will compound the anonymity that is already working in XC.

4) XC is already anonymous, and working

• I can't stress this enough. It's working! It doesn't mysteriously fork. It was released on time. There have been no setbacks.
• XC is only 5 weeks old, and we're already at this level.
• XC is not a completed design. It anonymity will compound. Its user-friendliness will become a 1-click thing. Thorough, professional testing will render it bulletproof.
• Xnodes do not steal coins. But for the sake of historical accuracy, here's where this rumour started: Rev. 1 was released to test whether anyone could prove that a link exists on the blockchain between sender and receiver. Chaeplin misconstrued the purpose of the release and harped on about the fact that because mixers forward coins, coins could be stolen. This is true, but it's besides the point. All we were testing was whether anyone could provide a link on the blockchain. The rest of the build, including vulnerable transaction-forwarding, was just scaffolding so that the tests could be carried out. But, alas, Chaeplin appeared not to be amenable to realising this fact. Perhaps if his intention was to contribute constructively he would have avoided this lapse of comprehension.

At this stage it appears that there'll be ongoing FUD attacks from competitor(s). I'd advise saving a link to this post, and using it to clarify the nature of XC whenever a fudder makes claims to the contrary. Then they'd either have to substantiate their claims or wander off.

To factuality over frustration,

Arlyn

Fantastic response!

[Driv3n]

Some useful facts about XC:

1) Xnodes are fully decentralised

• Any wallet can run as an Xnode, not just a few semi-centralised clients
• Xnode setup is not complicated or time-consuming

2) Xnodes are trustless

• An earlier iteration of XC's design specified a dynamic trust system; this has been improved upon with a fully trustless system
• Xnodes will now use multisig

3) Xnodes work

• Early tests of Xnodes' mixing function (Rev. 1) have not resulted in any kind of flaw in this aspect of XC's anonymity solution.
• Our not-so-well-intentioned friend Chaeplin claimed to have found a "design flaw" in Rev 1. However he fails to apprehend (a) precisely what was being tested, (b) what would constitute XC failing the test, and (c) what his results actually show. For a summary, see https://www.google.com/url?q=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php%3Ftopic%3D630547.msg7310485
• Tests of Xnodes' initial multipath implementation (Rev. 1.5) have turned up no problems. In fact, no one was even able to mount a claim for the bounty.
• Multi-path is being fully implemented as we speak for Rev. 2. When it is released, there will be (a) a sizeable public bounty, and (b) consultations with several cryptographers and other experts.
• Given past progress, we're pretty optimistic that Rev. 2 will be delivered on time, and will compound the anonymity that is already working in XC.

4) XC is already anonymous, and working

• I can't stress this enough. It's working! It doesn't mysteriously fork. It was released on time. There have been no setbacks.
• XC is only 5 weeks old, and we're already at this level.
• XC is not a completed design. It anonymity will compound. Its user-friendliness will become a 1-click thing. Thorough, professional testing will render it bulletproof.
• Xnodes do not steal coins. But for the sake of historical accuracy, here's where this rumour started: Rev. 1 was released to test whether anyone could prove that a link exists on the blockchain between sender and receiver. Chaeplin misconstrued the purpose of the release and harped on about the fact that because mixers forward coins, coins could be stolen. This is true, but it's besides the point. All we were testing was whether anyone could provide a link on the blockchain. The rest of the build, including vulnerable transaction-forwarding, was just scaffolding so that the tests could be carried out. But, alas, Chaeplin appeared not to be amenable to realising this fact. Perhaps if his intention was to contribute constructively he would have avoided this lapse of comprehension.

At this stage it appears that there'll be ongoing FUD attacks from competitor(s). I'd advise saving a link to this post, and using it to clarify the nature of XC whenever a fudder makes claims to the contrary. Then they'd either have to substantiate their claims or wander off.

To factuality over frustration,

Arlyn

+1 thanks for posting the facts

[Jacques de Molay]

Some useful facts about XC:

1) Xnodes are fully decentralised

• Any wallet can run as an Xnode, not just a few semi-centralised clients
• Xnode setup is not complicated or time-consuming

2) Xnodes are trustless

• An earlier iteration of XC's design specified a dynamic trust system; this has been improved upon with a fully trustless system
• Xnodes will now use multisig

3) Xnodes work

• Early tests of Xnodes' mixing function (Rev. 1) have not resulted in any kind of flaw in this aspect of XC's anonymity solution.
• Our not-so-well-intentioned friend Chaeplin claimed to have found a "design flaw" in Rev 1. However he fails to apprehend (a) precisely what was being tested, (b) what would constitute XC failing the test, and (c) what his results actually show. For a summary, see https://www.google.com/url?q=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php%3Ftopic%3D630547.msg7310485
• Tests of Xnodes' initial multipath implementation (Rev. 1.5) have turned up no problems. In fact, no one was even able to mount a claim for the bounty.
• Multi-path is being fully implemented as we speak for Rev. 2. When it is released, there will be (a) a sizeable public bounty, and (b) consultations with several cryptographers and other experts.
• Given past progress, we're pretty optimistic that Rev. 2 will be delivered on time, and will compound the anonymity that is already working in XC.

4) XC is already anonymous, and working

• I can't stress this enough. It's working! It doesn't mysteriously fork. It was released on time. There have been no setbacks.
• XC is only 5 weeks old, and we're already at this level.
• XC is not a completed design. It anonymity will compound. Its user-friendliness will become a 1-click thing. Thorough, professional testing will render it bulletproof.
• Xnodes do not steal coins. But for the sake of historical accuracy, here's where this rumour started: Rev. 1 was released to test whether anyone could prove that a link exists on the blockchain between sender and receiver. Chaeplin misconstrued the purpose of the release and harped on about the fact that because mixers forward coins, coins could be stolen. This is true, but it's besides the point. All we were testing was whether anyone could provide a link on the blockchain. The rest of the build, including vulnerable transaction-forwarding, was just scaffolding so that the tests could be carried out. But, alas, Chaeplin appeared not to be amenable to realising this fact. Perhaps if his intention was to contribute constructively he would have avoided this lapse of comprehension.

At this stage it appears that there'll be ongoing FUD attacks from competitor(s). I'd advise saving a link to this post, and using it to clarify the nature of XC whenever a fudder makes claims to the contrary. Then they'd either have to substantiate their claims or wander off.

Arlyn

+1 thanks for this, the rest of this post is me in general with how things have been going lately on xc/drk threads.



The problem is, we already know this, everyone else already knows this.  We are excited for the future.

XC is far better then most of the coins out there, people are going to protect their investments and they will use every means possible.  If I was heavily invested in say World Cup Coin coin Id be upset if another coin came out with the same concept and did it better.  Wouldnt go the the lengths of darkcoin though, thats just a brat mentality.


I am starting to believe that darkcoin has nothing going for it in terms of developmental abilities, or they are paying someone else to take their sweet time to deliver..nothing.


Take ATC for example he is pumping out far more advancements at a steady pace and yet dark coin is doing what ?? Promising so much and delivering so little.  I lol at their claim at first anonymous coin in their ann title - when it isn't and it doesn't even work.

This is what I am saying, XC came out day 1 with this working and no one has disproved it not working, xnodes are working, this road map all bodes well for XC credibility as a software designer and has more potential of reaching mainstream world community because of it.

When are people going to think for themselves about the pump and dump scam coin dark when they see how little their "dev" team actually deliver ? Thats my point but always gets overlooked by dead shits of this forum.


In fact in protest at the scammy/bs nature of the darkcoin and the dark community I mined the shit out of LightCoin or LIT coin because it IS in everyway a darkcoin clone (minus the 40-50% insta mine) it was fair launch and from what I read will clone everything about dark coin = minus the fud, insta mine, unfair launch and shit community.  WIN