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

[BrewCrewFan]

Given the price now, it would appear many are not happy with this update?

Perhaps dates tied to milestones would help boost confidence Arlyn.

In any business, a project with dates tied to milestones always ensures success. Estimate dates with contingency added should be doable in any project. I understand your opinion on this but you should admit a roadmap is not really a roadmap if you don't know how long it would take to get there and when you will arrive?

I would be interested to know if Dan shares your same sentiment on this as I understand you speak for him and the team?

btw: thank you for your great communication today its been helpful.

No, please don't. Release dates create speculation bubbles, this in turn creates volatility and ultimately discontent. Lets just enjoy the fact we have an excellent team working on an excellent project and enjoy the steady rise in value.

Anyways, Keep up the great work synechist. It was a great idea to employ you and your doing an excellent job, as are the rest of the team. Im really looking forward to Rev 2.5 and then Rev 3. Current belief is a value of $25 million to coincide with the latter and its subsequent PR, this doesn't include any potential bitcoin bubble either.

Really happy with everything that's going on here. Hopefully once I'm done on my travels I can come meet you guys in person at one of the conferences to express our gratitude.

Take care guys, hope you all have a splendid week.

Completely agreed.   No date until it's completely ready.   Why give trolls materials to FUD.   Long term holders don't care about short term delivery.  We are here for the post rev 3 rise.

We are here for the post rev 3 rise.
+1000

The rise will happen before the release IMO.

I even think we'll crack 0.003 again and stabilise once 2.5 is out. After that rev 3 will take us above and beyond the 0.01 range

No we will be on NXT price levels. Being +.1 could become a reality. I think there was a investor who said he could see the cap of XC being was it 60 million or 600 million??.... but he pretty much said it would be close to NXT price levels.

[DFJ]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?  

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

[CryptoGretzky]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?  

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

Then you shouldn't touch cryptos especially cryptos with bulletproof privacy.   Stick with credit card where all of your purchasing behaviors are tracked so you can be marketed to....

[synechist]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC. 

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC. 

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it? 

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

All good points - and let me emphasise that we're certainly not going to ignore online marketplaces that accept cryptocurrencies. That idea is solid.

As for Mastercards and privacy, storing funds in XC is a great way to retain control over your privacy, and if you can then use it anywhere without disclosing your savings or accounts in general, it's a pretty good deal IMO. Surrendering some privacy in exchange for mainstream convenience is what will appeal to the average user.

Secondly, think about how this stuff comes together: mobile wallets + POS integration is what so many BTC users want but don't have. The "average" non-techie user isn't so fussed about privacy that (s)he won't use a mastercard. They just think Bitcoin is cool, interesting, cheap, and on the side of the individual vs. the authorities. With XC, this comes together even more powerfully. And if we're on mobile and are POS integrated then the value proposition seriously gets going.


P.S. Aha, I should've mentioned: privacy is not XC's mainstream marketing point. Useability, fast transaction times, mobile wallets, powerful apps, and real-world integration will be.

[DFJ]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?  

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

Then you shouldn't touch cryptos especially cryptos with bulletproof privacy.   Stick with credit card where all of your purchasing behaviors are tracked so you can be marketed to....

So your thesis is that XC will serve people who are so worried about being marketed to based on purchase history that using BTC is not private enough?  That they are so worried that Catalina Marketing is going to do blockchain analysis to figure out how to help P&G send them an ad for diapers that BTC doesn't cut it?

[DFJ]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?  

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

All good points - and let me emphasise that we're certainly not going to ignore online marketplaces that accept cryptocurrencies. That idea is solid.

As for Mastercards and privacy, storing funds in XC is a great way to retain control over your privacy, and if you can then use it anywhere without disclosing your savings or accounts in general, it's a pretty good deal IMO. Surrendering some privacy in exchange for mainstream convenience is what will appeal to the average user.

Secondly, think about how this stuff comes together: mobile wallets + POS integration is what so many BTC users want but don't have. The "average" non-techie user isn't so fussed about privacy that (s)he won't use a mastercard. They just think Bitcoin is cool, interesting, cheap, and on the side of the individual vs. the authorities. With XC, this comes together even more powerfully. And if we're on mobile and are POS integrated then the value proposition seriously gets going.


P.S. Aha, I should've mentioned: privacy is not XC's mainstream marketing point. Useability, fast transaction times, mobile wallets, powerful apps, and real-world integration will be.

Edit: Having looked further into the issue, it looks like coinbase already offers PoS functionality for BTC.  Coinbase has $30mm+ in VC funding from A16Z.  I wouldn't want my differentiator to be that I can create a better app than them... I would want it to be that I have privacy features that they aren't even thinking about.  And to get back to the original point, I don't think you can achieve those features at the PoS level because you still have to integrate with the dollar payment network, which is regulated.  I also don't think PoS users have demand for better than BTC privacy, because after all I am in a store showing my face, but maybe we agree to disagree on that.

[CryptoGretzky]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?  

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

Then you shouldn't touch cryptos especially cryptos with bulletproof privacy.   Stick with credit card where all of your purchasing behaviors are tracked so you can be marketed to....

So your thesis is that XC will serve people who are so worried about being marketed to based on purchase history that using BTC is not private enough?  That they are so worried that Catalina Marketing is going to do blockchain analysis to figure out how to help P&G send them an ad for diapers that BTC doesn't cut it?

Privacy is defined by yourself.   If you feel that however you spend your hard earned money is not just your own private business, then by all means, do what you feel like.   As for me, I love my privacy.  

[demgains]

I have a simple request for the wallets, could you include a changelog in the download directory with upcoming wallets so we know what improvements or enhancements have been made. Sometimes its difficult to dig through this thread and find the information ourselves. It would be much more efficient and professional to just include a simple text changelog that outlines in a few phrases what is new/improved/fixed etc.

edit: nvm didnt even realize there was one in the dl package

[Driv3n]

CLOAK PoSA just made all mixing coins completely obsolete

Actually XC has already implemented this feature.  Every wallet is an Xnode, but I'm sure you know that since you still hold so much XC.

[CryptoGretzky]

blah blah blah

Actually XC has already implemented this feature.  Every wallet is an Xnode, but I'm sure you know that since you still hold so much XC.

I was hoping no one would respond to Pookie the weasel....  

[infinitechaos]

blah blah blah blah

Actually XC has already implemented this feature.  Every wallet is an Xnode, but I'm sure you know that since you still hold so much XC.

+1000

[demgains]

blah blah blah

Actually XC has already implemented this feature.  Every wallet is an Xnode, but I'm sure you know that since you still hold so much XC.

I was hoping no one would respond to Pookie the weasel....  

pookie is a fucktard, the equivalence of trying to reason with a mentally challenged being.

Many of us have put him on our ignore list already, the rest of you should also do the same and spare yourself the time and aggravation dealing with that imbecile.

[Driv3n]

blah blah blah

Actually XC has already implemented this feature.  Every wallet is an Xnode, but I'm sure you know that since you still hold so much XC.

I was hoping no one would respond to Pookie the weasel....  

Usually I wouldn't... but the cloak board is going crazy over PoSA so I just thought I'd enlighten pookie on the fact that XC is already past the testing phase and has it already integrated in the active wallet.

[MemoryShock]

Just a heads up...XC is still listed as X11Coin on Cryptsy...

[demgains]

blah blah blah

Actually XC has already implemented this feature.  Every wallet is an Xnode, but I'm sure you know that since you still hold so much XC.

I was hoping no one would respond to Pookie the weasel....  

Usually I wouldn't... but the cloak board is going crazy over PoSA so I just thought I'd enlighten pookie on the fact that XC is already past the testing phase and has it already integrated in the active wallet.

XC has PoBC coming in the near future, no current time frame when exactly this will be implemented, but this could be the biggest advancement in crypto's ever.

http://xc-official.com/pobc/

[Driv3n]

Just a heads up...XC is still listed as X11Coin on Cryptsy...

I just emailed them.

[smokim87]

blah blah blah

Actually XC has already implemented this feature.  Every wallet is an Xnode, but I'm sure you know that since you still hold so much XC.

I was hoping no one would respond to Pookie the weasel....  

Usually I wouldn't... but the cloak board is going crazy over PoSA so I just thought I'd enlighten pookie on the fact that XC is already past the testing phase and has it already integrated in the active wallet.

SC already uses Proof of stake protocols to create anonymous transactions? Where can I see the whitepaper about it?

I found the roadmap image on XC main website and only noticed Trustless mixing for anon transactions.

Could you point me in the right direction, I must be missing something here.

Thanks.

[joshbtcmint]

Teka or Synechist!

If someone can get an XC paper wallet generator up, the guys over at https://bitkee.com/ have said they would definitely add it to the site.


I love these guy's cold storage cards, they are the best ones I have ever come across, and just so happens they are a business owned by brothers like my brother and I operate.

[Driv3n]

blah blah blah

Actually XC has already implemented this feature.  Every wallet is an Xnode, but I'm sure you know that since you still hold so much XC.

I was hoping no one would respond to Pookie the weasel....  

Usually I wouldn't... but the cloak board is going crazy over PoSA so I just thought I'd enlighten pookie on the fact that XC is already past the testing phase and has it already integrated in the active wallet.

SC already uses Proof of stake protocols to create anonymous transactions? Where can I see the whitepaper about it?

I found the roadmap image on XC main website and only noticed Trustless mixing for anon transactions.

Could you point me in the right direction, I must be missing something here.

Thanks.

Smokim,

XCs current feature may be slightly different, I don't know all the details of PoSA but I've owned some cloak before and do check out whats going on there from time to time.  The main similarity I see is that all XC wallets act as Xnodes for anonymizing transactions which it sounds like is the main advantage of PoSA that Cloak is working on.

Just to reiterate, I'm 100% for the advancement of crypto and keep my eye on a few of the promising ones which includes cloak.  Theres no whitepaper yet on the current XC system that I know of.  It's only been integrated for a couple of weeks and I believe all the whitepapers and in depth info will come with the Rev 3 release.

[policymaker]

blah blah blah

Actually XC has already implemented this feature.  Every wallet is an Xnode, but I'm sure you know that since you still hold so much XC.

I was hoping no one would respond to Pookie the weasel....  

Usually I wouldn't... but the cloak board is going crazy over PoSA so I just thought I'd enlighten pookie on the fact that XC is already past the testing phase and has it already integrated in the active wallet.

SC already uses Proof of stake protocols to create anonymous transactions? Where can I see the whitepaper about it?

I found the roadmap image on XC main website and only noticed Trustless mixing for anon transactions.

Could you point me in the right direction, I must be missing something here.

Thanks.

Smokim,

XCs current feature may be slightly different, I don't know all the details of PoSA but I've owned some cloak before and do check out whats going on there from time to time.  The main similarity I see is that all XC wallets act as Xnodes for anonymizing transactions which it sounds like is the main advantage of PoSA that Cloak is working on.

Just to reiterate, I'm 100% for the advancement of crypto and keep my eye on a few of the promising ones which includes cloak.  Theres no whitepaper yet on the current XC system that I know of.  It's only been integrated for a couple of weeks and I believe all the whitepapers and in depth info will come with the Rev 3 release.

The number of XC coins one must possess in a wallet in order for it to be considered as an XNODE has yet to be determined for public release though, if im not terribly mistaken.