Unmoderated XC thread

[Propulsion]

So XC is at least semi anonymous. The other day Chaeplin showed he could trace transactions with both addresses, has there been any changes to the XC wallet? or is that where we are at right now..

At the moment this coin isn't anonymous at all.
The dev hasn't released any technical documents on how he plans to make it work.
The distribution of coins is awful. Source: http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/#!rich

The person who posted the bet is refusing to publish the account "1" address. A forum member has already broken the "anonymity" of the coin once. To see if any developments have been made, that above address needs to be published.

Seriously, if you can not afford to lose money, withdrawal your capital from this crypto.

[ballzdeep]

So XC is at least semi anonymous. The other day Chaeplin showed he could trace transactions with both addresses, has there been any changes to the XC wallet? or is that where we are at right now..

At the moment this coin isn't anonymous at all.
The dev hasn't released any technical documents on how he plans to make it work.
The distribution of coins is awful. Source: http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/#!rich

The person who posted the bet is refusing to publish the account "1" address. A forum member has already broken the "anonymity" of the coin once. To see if any developments have been made, that above address needs to be published.

Seriously, if you can not afford to lose money, withdrawal your capital from this crypto.

So is darksend anonymous ? can you test it somehow ?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/227369807/Bitcoin-Coinjoin-Not-Anonymous-v01

[chaeplin]

So XC is at least semi anonymous. The other day Chaeplin showed he could trace transactions with both addresses, has there been any changes to the XC wallet? or is that where we are at right now..

At the moment this coin isn't anonymous at all.
The dev hasn't released any technical documents on how he plans to make it work.
The distribution of coins is awful. Source: http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/#!rich

The person who posted the bet is refusing to publish the account "1" address. A forum member has already broken the "anonymity" of the coin once. To see if any developments have been made, that above address needs to be published.

Seriously, if you can not afford to lose money, withdrawal your capital from this crypto.

So is darksend anonymous ? can you test it somehow ?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/227369807/Bitcoin-Coinjoin-Not-Anonymous-v01

Evan's reply

Random FUD

The problems addressed in this were handled hundreds of pages ago. Darksend isn't finished yet and was never promised to be 100% anonymous unless you use great care. Plus RC4 will have great improvements to the anonymity offered.

[ballzdeep]

So XC is at least semi anonymous. The other day Chaeplin showed he could trace transactions with both addresses, has there been any changes to the XC wallet? or is that where we are at right now..

At the moment this coin isn't anonymous at all.
The dev hasn't released any technical documents on how he plans to make it work.
The distribution of coins is awful. Source: http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/#!rich

The person who posted the bet is refusing to publish the account "1" address. A forum member has already broken the "anonymity" of the coin once. To see if any developments have been made, that above address needs to be published.

Seriously, if you can not afford to lose money, withdrawal your capital from this crypto.

So is darksend anonymous ? can you test it somehow ?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/227369807/Bitcoin-Coinjoin-Not-Anonymous-v01

Evan's reply

Random FUD

The problems addressed in this were handled hundreds of pages ago. Darksend isn't finished yet and was never promised to be 100% anonymous unless you use great care. Plus RC4 will have great improvements to the anonymity offered.

Ok but then why you so focused on XCs anonymity when yours isnt 100% and isnt live until 1.5 months from now ?

Edit, oh yeah the question kinda answers itself lol....

[chaeplin]

So XC is at least semi anonymous. The other day Chaeplin showed he could trace transactions with both addresses, has there been any changes to the XC wallet? or is that where we are at right now..

At the moment this coin isn't anonymous at all.
The dev hasn't released any technical documents on how he plans to make it work.
The distribution of coins is awful. Source: http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/#!rich

The person who posted the bet is refusing to publish the account "1" address. A forum member has already broken the "anonymity" of the coin once. To see if any developments have been made, that above address needs to be published.

Seriously, if you can not afford to lose money, withdrawal your capital from this crypto.

So is darksend anonymous ? can you test it somehow ?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/227369807/Bitcoin-Coinjoin-Not-Anonymous-v01

Evan's reply

Random FUD

The problems addressed in this were handled hundreds of pages ago. Darksend isn't finished yet and was never promised to be 100% anonymous unless you use great care. Plus RC4 will have great improvements to the anonymity offered.

Ok but then why you so focused on XCs anonymity when yours isnt 100% and isnt live until 1.5 months from now ?

Edit, oh yeah the question kinda answers itself lol....

Darksend is live.
I am curious how does it work.

Really anonymous ?

[kalisto]

So XC is at least semi anonymous. The other day Chaeplin showed he could trace transactions with both addresses, has there been any changes to the XC wallet? or is that where we are at right now..

At the moment this coin isn't anonymous at all.
The dev hasn't released any technical documents on how he plans to make it work.
The distribution of coins is awful. Source: http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/#!rich

The person who posted the bet is refusing to publish the account "1" address. A forum member has already broken the "anonymity" of the coin once. To see if any developments have been made, that above address needs to be published.

Seriously, if you can not afford to lose money, withdrawal your capital from this crypto.

activity 126 and you still dont understand the logic of an anonymous transaction? shame on you

the bet is to find out what address belongs to "1". on the bitcoin blockchain this is done in less then 5 seconds...

[ballzdeep]

Explain to me why XC has to prove it´s anonymous when all we have its the sects word for it that darksend is ?

I propose that we test both these anonymous solutions and then we can close the book ey ??

[Profetu]

So XC is at least semi anonymous. The other day Chaeplin showed he could trace transactions with both addresses, has there been any changes to the XC wallet? or is that where we are at right now..

At the moment this coin isn't anonymous at all.
The dev hasn't released any technical documents on how he plans to make it work.
The distribution of coins is awful. Source: http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/#!rich

The person who posted the bet is refusing to publish the account "1" address. A forum member has already broken the "anonymity" of the coin once. To see if any developments have been made, that above address needs to be published.

Seriously, if you can not afford to lose money, withdrawal your capital from this crypto.

"At the moment this coin isn't anonymous at all."

You seem to need the send address and receiver address to do what? Find a connection between them? What a joke ! You have the blockchain, and the receiver address. What more do you want? You are basically contesting the definition of "anonymity". If the FBI busts you and they get your wallet they are gonna be like: "Sir we also need the send addresses to prove something..." you can start laughing at them.

[Joshuar]

So XC is at least semi anonymous. The other day Chaeplin showed he could trace transactions with both addresses, has there been any changes to the XC wallet? or is that where we are at right now..

At the moment this coin isn't anonymous at all.
The dev hasn't released any technical documents on how he plans to make it work.
The distribution of coins is awful. Source: http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/#!rich

The person who posted the bet is refusing to publish the account "1" address. A forum member has already broken the "anonymity" of the coin once. To see if any developments have been made, that above address needs to be published.

Seriously, if you can not afford to lose money, withdrawal your capital from this crypto.

So is darksend anonymous ? can you test it somehow ?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/227369807/Bitcoin-Coinjoin-Not-Anonymous-v01

Evan's reply

Random FUD

The problems addressed in this were handled hundreds of pages ago. Darksend isn't finished yet and was never promised to be 100% anonymous unless you use great care. Plus RC4 will have great improvements to the anonymity offered.

Ok but then why you so focused on XCs anonymity when yours isnt 100% and isnt live until 1.5 months from now ?

Edit, oh yeah the question kinda answers itself lol....

Darksend is live.
I am curious how does it work.

Really anonymous ?

Darksend has been live for the past 3 months. XC is a copycoin with no anonymity, paid to be made, by loljosh from atsecure. Nothing more.

[kalisto]

Darksend has been live in beta for the past 3 months. XC is a copycoin with no anonymity, paid to be made, by loljosh from atsecure and is less then a month old. Nothing more.

corrected your post

[Joshuar]

Darksend has been live in beta for the past 3 months. XC is a copycoin with no anonymity, paid to be made, by loljosh from atsecure and is less then a month old. Nothing more.

corrected your post

Do you know what Beta means? It's the testing phase. You could of still used Darksend. You can now....

[the_game1224]

I do not understand why you need address 1. The whole purpose is to not be able to find address 1 and you want him to give you address 1. LOL

Give me a bitcoin transaction receiving address and I will be able to tell you the sending address in two seconds by just knowing the amount.

Stop your irrationality and respond with logic.

Yeah I'm not following why address 1 is needed and I understand it the exact way you described it.

[ballzdeep]

Darksend has been live in beta for the past 3 months. XC is a copycoin with no anonymity, paid to be made, by loljosh from atsecure and is less then a month old. Nothing more.

corrected your post

Do you know what Beta means? It's the testing phase. You could of still used Darksend. You can now....

Then lets test it against XC and see if both are anon yes ?

[AlexGR]

You can't have a contest / puzzle, without a solution (even if it's closed in an envelope).

The right procedure is this:

1) The one sending the money should know his addresses (not the "label" - this is not what the blockchain has... the blockchain has addresses)
2) The one sending the money should write these addresses from where the money actually originated in an envelope (in our case a .zip protected .txt file) and upload it. This will be the "correct answer" that the puzzle solver will have to find.
3) The transaction is conducted
4) The recipient address is being publicized so that the money flow can be tracked how it reached the recepient.
5) People start tracking the moneyflow backwards
6) Those who crack the anonymity post their findings
7) The "envelope" is opened (in our case the password protected zip file is opened - by distribution of the password)
8] The findings of step6 are measured against the actual addresses of the "envelope" (step2)
9) Finders of step6 collect the bounty.

Problem is that some people here are confusing labels / accounts with address/addresses and hence the above measurement and bounty scheme is impossible. There is nothing to calibrate the right answer to and prove it.

[studio1one]

You can't have a contest / puzzle, without a solution (even if it's closed in an envelope).

The right procedure is this:

1) The one sending the money should know his addresses (not the "label" - this is not what the blockchain has... the blockchain has addresses)
2) The one sending the money should write these addresses from where the money actually originated in an envelope (in our case a .zip protected .txt file) and upload it. This will be the "correct answer" that the puzzle solver will have to find.
3) The transaction is conducted
4) The recipient address is being publicized so that the money flow can be tracked how it reached the recepient.
5) People start tracking the moneyflow backwards
6) Those who crack the anonymity post their findings
7) The "envelope" is opened (in our case the password protected zip file is opened - by distribution of the password)
8] The findings of step6 are measured against the actual addresses of the "envelope" (step2)
9) Finders of step6 collect the bounty.

Problem is that some people here are confusing labels / accounts with address/addresses and hence the above measurement and bounty scheme is impossible. There is nothing to calibrate the right answer to and prove it.

OK, there seems to be some confusion here

The sender knows his address, he has only publicised the label.

He wants people to find the address for wallet label "1" using the block chain, tracing backwards from the receiving address (it has only had one incoming transaction)

The only bit missing is the answer in envelope.

password protected zip uploaded to a known location would be perfect, can be checked by time and date stamp that it hasn't been changed.

[ballzdeep]

You can't have a contest / puzzle, without a solution (even if it's closed in an envelope).

The right procedure is this:

1) The one sending the money should know his addresses (not the "label" - this is not what the blockchain has... the blockchain has addresses)
2) The one sending the money should write these addresses from where the money actually originated in an envelope (in our case a .zip protected .txt file) and upload it. This will be the "correct answer" that the puzzle solver will have to find.
3) The transaction is conducted
4) The recipient address is being publicized so that the money flow can be tracked how it reached the recepient.
5) People start tracking the moneyflow backwards
6) Those who crack the anonymity post their findings
7) The "envelope" is opened (in our case the password protected zip file is opened - by distribution of the password)
8] The findings of step6 are measured against the actual addresses of the "envelope" (step2)
9) Finders of step6 collect the bounty.

Problem is that some people here are confusing labels / accounts with address/addresses and hence the above measurement and bounty scheme is impossible. There is nothing to calibrate the right answer to and prove it.

OK, there seems to be some confusion here

The sender knows his address, he has only publicised the label.

He wants people to find the address for wallet label "1" using the block chain, tracing backwards from the receiving address (it has only had one incoming transaction)

The only bit missing is the answer in envelope.

password protected zip uploaded to a known location would be perfect, can be checked by time and date stamp that it hasn't been changed.

So no problem doing this on darksend and XC at the same time right ?

[studio1one]

You can't have a contest / puzzle, without a solution (even if it's closed in an envelope).

The right procedure is this:

1) The one sending the money should know his addresses (not the "label" - this is not what the blockchain has... the blockchain has addresses)
2) The one sending the money should write these addresses from where the money actually originated in an envelope (in our case a .zip protected .txt file) and upload it. This will be the "correct answer" that the puzzle solver will have to find.
3) The transaction is conducted
4) The recipient address is being publicized so that the money flow can be tracked how it reached the recepient.
5) People start tracking the moneyflow backwards
6) Those who crack the anonymity post their findings
7) The "envelope" is opened (in our case the password protected zip file is opened - by distribution of the password)
8] The findings of step6 are measured against the actual addresses of the "envelope" (step2)
9) Finders of step6 collect the bounty.

Problem is that some people here are confusing labels / accounts with address/addresses and hence the above measurement and bounty scheme is impossible. There is nothing to calibrate the right answer to and prove it.

OK, there seems to be some confusion here

The sender knows his address, he has only publicised the label.

He wants people to find the address for wallet label "1" using the block chain, tracing backwards from the receiving address (it has only had one incoming transaction)

The only bit missing is the answer in envelope.

password protected zip uploaded to a known location would be perfect, can be checked by time and date stamp that it hasn't been changed.

So no problem doing this on darksend and XC at the same time right ?

up to the people who want to get involved. I'm just an idle observer.

[ballzdeep]

I dont think DRK people wanna get involved, they just wanna bash compeditors. I just hope they will prove me wrong now

[AlexGR]

You can't have a contest / puzzle, without a solution (even if it's closed in an envelope).

The right procedure is this:

1) The one sending the money should know his addresses (not the "label" - this is not what the blockchain has... the blockchain has addresses)
2) The one sending the money should write these addresses from where the money actually originated in an envelope (in our case a .zip protected .txt file) and upload it. This will be the "correct answer" that the puzzle solver will have to find.
3) The transaction is conducted
4) The recipient address is being publicized so that the money flow can be tracked how it reached the recepient.
5) People start tracking the moneyflow backwards
6) Those who crack the anonymity post their findings
7) The "envelope" is opened (in our case the password protected zip file is opened - by distribution of the password)
8] The findings of step6 are measured against the actual addresses of the "envelope" (step2)
9) Finders of step6 collect the bounty.

Problem is that some people here are confusing labels / accounts with address/addresses and hence the above measurement and bounty scheme is impossible. There is nothing to calibrate the right answer to and prove it.

OK, there seems to be some confusion here

The sender knows his address

Don't bet your house on it. I've seen indications that clearly show people think their address is "main", "1" etc.

[studio1one]

You can't have a contest / puzzle, without a solution (even if it's closed in an envelope).

The right procedure is this:

1) The one sending the money should know his addresses (not the "label" - this is not what the blockchain has... the blockchain has addresses)
2) The one sending the money should write these addresses from where the money actually originated in an envelope (in our case a .zip protected .txt file) and upload it. This will be the "correct answer" that the puzzle solver will have to find.
3) The transaction is conducted
4) The recipient address is being publicized so that the money flow can be tracked how it reached the recepient.
5) People start tracking the moneyflow backwards
6) Those who crack the anonymity post their findings
7) The "envelope" is opened (in our case the password protected zip file is opened - by distribution of the password)
8] The findings of step6 are measured against the actual addresses of the "envelope" (step2)
9) Finders of step6 collect the bounty.

Problem is that some people here are confusing labels / accounts with address/addresses and hence the above measurement and bounty scheme is impossible. There is nothing to calibrate the right answer to and prove it.

OK, there seems to be some confusion here

The sender knows his address

Don't bet your house on it. I've seen indications that clearly show people think their address is "main", "1" etc.

well, I'm not betting my house on it, but as his question was 'what was the sending address' in this case I am fairly confident.