[ANN] [CLOAK] Cloakcoin | No Premine | X13 | Decentralized Market and PoSA

[DonQuijote]

Some news about openbazaar? Some screenshot?
We are supporting your coin, please, give us some info about it

[Maza-plan]

[20:10] <@alty> enough of the pdf files, we're going to be showing you a real posa 3 development that has taken a massive amount of time to put together
[20:10] <DITitit> so open source, as promised?
[20:10] <cashmen> awesome
[20:10] <DACLOAK_> nice
[20:10] <DACLOAK_> is there OneMarket included?
[20:10] <cashmen> DITitit:  wanna clone
[20:10] <DACLOAK_> waiting so long...
[20:11] == guest9286 [423786c2@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.66.55.134.194] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
[20:11] <DITitit> wanna see that alty can deliver on ONE promise

[DentIt]

@alty We have to make a decision with everyone do we open or close source it
@alty not everyone wants it open source

No open source, yet again, as predicted. Trustless anon no more.

[c4shm3n]

@alty We have to make a decision with everyone do we open or close source it
@alty not everyone wants it open source

No open source, yet again, as predicted.

yes so bad and now you cant just copycat this


************

[21:42:53] <svenp> who will be auditing it?
[21:42:57] <Blink^> ^
[21:43:06] <DITitit> because you would have to trust that person(s) Blink^
[21:43:09] <DaveyJones> id say first the audit... after that let the community decide
[21:43:28] <Blink^> w/o any audit or checks, it is nothing but a GUI change and promises
[21:43:34] <@alty> Well, why not let the community select an auditor then as a first step
[21:43:40] <@cashmen>

[DentIt]

yes so bad and now you cant just copycat this

Copy from CLOAK, you are hilarious. 

[c4shm3n]

[22:21:37] <@alty> Windows 1.9.7.34     PUBLIC BETA >> set .conf to testnet=1
[22:21:44] <@cashmen> nice
[22:21:50] <@alty> https://mega.co.nz/#!IEVFWCiK!QpfC2dAaJ6ASUtKTK67SJ4pg601tQiHAsYmpm0TpN5k
[22:22:02] <@cashmen> here we go
[22:22:06] <@alty> lets see what this does
[22:24:05] <@alty> addnode=testnet.cloakchain.info
[22:24:05] <@alty>  listen=1
[22:24:05] <@alty>  testnet=1
[22:24:10] <@alty> ^^ put that in .conf too

[DentIt]

[22:21:37] <@alty> Windows 1.9.7.34     PUBLIC BETA >> set .conf to testnet=1
[22:21:44] <@cashmen> nice
[22:21:50] <@alty> https://mega.co.nz/#!IEVFWCiK!QpfC2dAaJ6ASUtKTK67SJ4pg601tQiHAsYmpm0TpN5k
[22:22:02] <@cashmen> here we go
[22:22:06] <@alty> lets see what this does
[22:24:05] <@alty> addnode=testnet.cloakchain.info
[22:24:10] <@alty> ^^ put that in .conf too

So basically, a redesigned UI.

[NarC]

bought yesterday at 9000s sold today at 20000s = 24h profit 100% haha thx go to fuder!

congratulations with your first cloak profit after months of bagholding!

better than owing 10k to the bank

[CoinStandard]

I'm mildly happy. This might be a new beginning for cloak, only the future can tell. But first thing first, pass the audit.

[CryptoAllDay]

[22:21:37] <@alty> Windows 1.9.7.34     PUBLIC BETA >> set .conf to testnet=1
[22:21:44] <@cashmen> nice
[22:21:50] <@alty> https://mega.co.nz/#!IEVFWCiK!QpfC2dAaJ6ASUtKTK67SJ4pg601tQiHAsYmpm0TpN5k
[22:22:02] <@cashmen> here we go
[22:22:06] <@alty> lets see what this does
[22:24:05] <@alty> addnode=testnet.cloakchain.info
[22:24:10] <@alty> ^^ put that in .conf too

So basically, a redesigned UI.

Hmm?  The UI looks the same to me.  It's the PoSA 3 that's supposed to be different, it's supposedly trustless anon using ring escrow but pending an audit of course.

Here is the block explorer for the testnet:
http://testnet.cloakchain.info/chain/TestNet

[DentIt]

it's supposedly trustless anon using ring escrow but pending an audit of course.

So who is that auditor that every user of CLOAK would blindly trust with their money? And how would that be "trustless"? And what would stop the devs from inserting a backdoor into the closed source AFTER the audit? Or would all development stop after the audit?

[CryptoAllDay]

it's supposedly trustless anon using ring escrow but pending an audit of course.

So who is that auditor that every user of CLOAK would blindly trust with their money? And how would that be "trustless"? And what would stop the devs from inserting a backdoor into the closed source AFTER the audit? Or would all development stop after the audit?

[21:43:34] <@alty> Well, why not let the community select an auditor then as a first step

Also, I can tell you didn't download or test the new wallet at all since you said it's just a UI redesign when the UI is practically the same.
And that's silly, what would stop ANY closed source coin or software from inserting a backdoor?

[DentIt]

it's supposedly trustless anon using ring escrow but pending an audit of course.

So who is that auditor that every user of CLOAK would blindly trust with their money? And how would that be "trustless"? And what would stop the devs from inserting a backdoor into the closed source AFTER the audit? Or would all development stop after the audit?

[21:42:53] <svenp> who will be auditing it?
[21:42:57] <Blink^> ^
[21:43:06] <DITitit> because you would have to trust that person(s) Blink^
[21:43:09] <DaveyJones> id say first the audit... after that let the community decide
[21:43:28] <Blink^> w/o any audit or checks, it is nothing but a GUI change and promises
[21:43:34] <@alty> Well, why not let the community select an auditor then as a first step
[21:43:40] <@cashmen> Smiley

Also, I can tell you didn't download or test the new wallet at all since you said it's just a UI redesign when the UI is practically the same.

I can read the IRC myself, thanks. You didn't answer my question though. How would an audit in any way make CLOAK trustless if it remains closed source and the devs can make any changes they want at any time without anyone ever noticing? Trustless and closed source are mutually exclusive.

[DaveyJones]

it's supposedly trustless anon using ring escrow but pending an audit of course.

So who is that auditor that every user of CLOAK would blindly trust with their money? And how would that be "trustless"? And what would stop the devs from inserting a backdoor into the closed source AFTER the audit? Or would all development stop after the audit?

[21:43:34] <@alty> Well, why not let the community select an auditor then as a first step

Also, I can tell you didn't download or test the new wallet at all since you said it's just a UI redesign when the UI is practically the same.
And that's silly, what would stop ANY closed source coin or software from inserting a backdoor?

Kristov Atlas if he is available?

[issie81]

This coin is fundemantally wrong.. i have been fanboying this coin from day one how they conduct business is really dirty and unusual but i think you can also make money by playing it dirty.. i will never go back to cloak even if i knew it would go from 20k to 300k.. this coin is poison i mean let get back to saturday coin dips under 10k even hit 8k mark then the price is tanking (still no news) in some exchanges the trade volume was 70-100btc prior that the coin was almost dead at some point even got les then 1btc trade a day soo how can a coin which is basicly dead with no volume no news tank at 70-100btc yeah and then they tell you there is no insider trading here.. yeah right

[DentIt]

And that's silly, what would stop ANY closed source coin or software from inserting a backdoor?

That's EXACTLY my point. That's why no closed source coin can ever be trustless.

[CryptoAllDay]

And that's silly, what would stop ANY closed source coin or software from inserting a backdoor?

That's EXACTLY my point. That's why no closed source coin can ever be trustless.

I don't get it.  Why would open-source be a requirement of trustless anonymity?  If it works then it works, which the audit will determine.

[igor107th]

pump it up to the old price thanks 300 lol

[DentIt]

And that's silly, what would stop ANY closed source coin or software from inserting a backdoor?

That's EXACTLY my point. That's why no closed source coin can ever be trustless.

I don't get it.  Why would open-source be a requirement of trustless anonymity?  If it works then it works, which the audit will determine.

It's really not that complicated. If you have to trust someone/-thing, it's not trustless. Even if the auditor would declare the current code "trustless", you still would have to trust his judgement and honesty, and also trust the devs to not introduce new flaws(or even intentional backdoors) into the code with a later update. That's why open source is so important in the crypto community.

[Reoelliott]

it's supposedly trustless anon using ring escrow but pending an audit of course.

So who is that auditor that every user of CLOAK would blindly trust with their money? And how would that be "trustless"? And what would stop the devs from inserting a backdoor into the closed source AFTER the audit? Or would all development stop after the audit?

[21:42:53] <svenp> who will be auditing it?
[21:42:57] <Blink^> ^
[21:43:06] <DITitit> because you would have to trust that person(s) Blink^
[21:43:09] <DaveyJones> id say first the audit... after that let the community decide
[21:43:28] <Blink^> w/o any audit or checks, it is nothing but a GUI change and promises
[21:43:34] <@alty> Well, why not let the community select an auditor then as a first step
[21:43:40] <@cashmen> Smiley

Also, I can tell you didn't download or test the new wallet at all since you said it's just a UI redesign when the UI is practically the same.

I can read the IRC myself, thanks. You didn't answer my question though. How would an audit in any way make CLOAK trustless if it remains closed source and the devs can make any changes they want at any time without anyone ever noticing? Trustless and closed source are mutually exclusive.

Comon guys, They were honest enough to reveal the first Audit and in turn put their entire coin at stake to begin with, I think this has already proved enough honesty and integrity from alty!!!