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

[therightmintality]

.15 BTC sent for xc promotion to 16WffZKRbnCKSBGXaVpra4dqT72pf3TT3V

[Pizpie]

I see we have some car enthusiasts in here!
Thank you for your donation and support!

[jly77]

I can mine XC again! Many thanks to the pool and the team!

[Driv3n]

.15 BTC sent for xc promotion to 16WffZKRbnCKSBGXaVpra4dqT72pf3TT3V

Thanks its great to see so many ppl donating and helping out on here.

[yetiripper]

K back to 22

[shfc]

I have a question, the first post is released on May 29, Poloniex began trading XC May 21, why?
 

[cryptoholic11]

I have a question, the first post is released on May 29, Poloniex began trading XC May 21, why?
 

This is not the original thread. The original thread was locked due to spam and fud overload

[shfc]

I have a question, the first post is released on May 29, Poloniex began trading XC May 21, why?
 

This is not the original thread. The original thread was locked due to spam and fud overload

thanks

[mecc]

https://twitter.com/moolah_io/status/484891910663053312
https://v2.moolah.io/

Good idea to get on board.

[infinitechaos]

https://twitter.com/moolah_io/status/484891910663053312
https://v2.moolah.io/

Good idea to get on board.

+1

[benthach]

game

is there anything different between litecoin, darkcoin, XC, bitcoin.... nothing. anonymous.. no one use this crap   heck, there is no reason to use bitcoin.

[cryptoholic11]

game

is there anything different between litecoin, darkcoin, XC, bitcoin.... nothing. anonymous.. no one use this crap   heck, there is no reason to use bitcoin.

You decide, and if you're here for fudding purposes and will have an unwillingness to accept truth or reason, stop wasting your time and go find a coin that you do think is different.  

[restless]

XC multipool is a joke, right?
0.026858 XC per MH of X11 ? Seriously?

[benthach]

thanks. no one use it beside tech savvy investors.

[Pizpie]

https://twitter.com/moolah_io/status/484891910663053312
https://v2.moolah.io/

Good idea to get on board.

We are looking into them, but nothing has been decided at this exact moment.

[CryptoGretzky]

game

is there anything different between litecoin, darkcoin, XC, bitcoin.... nothing. anonymous.. no one use this crap   heck, there is no reason to use bitcoin.

Hmm... if you don't believe in crypto currencies, then you are in the wrong website.     You should also stop wasting your own time and everyone's bandwidth by needing to download your total garbage message.

[okusdi]

Anonymous real too much

[suppersz]

Anonymous real too much

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.

Can you find another anonymous like XC?XC had first Xnodes

[yetiripper]

Anonymous real too much

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.

Can you find another anonymous like XC?XC is first Xnodes

Are you implying that that was a coherent post?

[synechist]

.15 BTC sent for xc promotion to 16WffZKRbnCKSBGXaVpra4dqT72pf3TT3V

Thank you! Received... though you sent it to my personal address.

I'll forward it to the donation address unless you intended to tip me :-)