[SDC] ShadowCash | Welcome to the UMBRA

[Hueristic]

SDC is only a few months old mate this is not the final product it will be improved and right now it's as good if not better then anything else out there, that being said please stop talking about monero this is the SDC thread and everyone of your posts mentions it

I mention it only in response to others who do so, particularly when the statements are incorrect. Example:

with Monero this fails, i.e. person A can tell the money comes from me with a high probability.

then xmr

Now you are doing it. Why?

I never mentioned it once here until you started talking about it the other day anyways just seams like subtle advertisement to me, carry on, not looking for a back and forth.

You probably missed this post.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg9947874#msg9947874

[1714895865]

1714895865

[1714895865]

1714895865

[dadon]

SDC is only a few months old mate this is not the final product it will be improved and right now it's as good if not better then anything else out there, that being said please stop talking about monero this is the SDC thread and everyone of your posts mentions it

I mention it only in response to others who do so, particularly when the statements are incorrect. Example:

with Monero this fails, i.e. person A can tell the money comes from me with a high probability.

then xmr

Now you are doing it. Why?

I never mentioned it once here until you started talking about it the other day anyways just seams like subtle advertisement to me, carry on, not looking for a back and forth.

You probably missed this post.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg9947874#msg9947874

yep sure did i don't go on that thread anymore, only here.

[smooth]

SDC is only a few months old mate this is not the final product it will be improved and right now it's as good if not better then anything else out there, that being said please stop talking about monero this is the SDC thread and everyone of your posts mentions it

I mention it only in response to others who do so, particularly when the statements are incorrect. Example:

with Monero this fails, i.e. person A can tell the money comes from me with a high probability.

then xmr

Now you are doing it. Why?

I never mentioned it once here until you started talking about it the other day anyways just seams like subtle advertisement to me, carry on, not looking for a back and forth.

There is no advertisement, I'm just having a semi-technical discussion, and people seem to frequently ask about SDC compared to other coins, so those other coins come up. DRK has come up as well, and I'm certainly not advertising for that.

[child_harold]

Guys/Gals, can we please please stop getting carried away with this shadow and cryptonote...  Shadow is not based on cryptonote and does not function like cryptonote!

Sorry, but you are incorrect. It is using the exact same techniques of one time ring signatures (intractability) and stealth addresses (unlinkability). The code may be brand new but the cryptography techniques and math behind the one time ring signatures are the same (which include the zero knowledge proof) and were invented by cryptonote.

I could go and rewrite the code to do this stuff yet again (in fact I have done so for my own experimental purposes) but I wouldn't claim it to be anything other than a reimplementation of cryptonote. Someone else on the Monero project did it in python, and called it mininero.

If anyone is claiming otherwise they are either confused or trying to scam you (I don't suggest the latter necessarily, just pointing out the possibilities).

SDC is only a few months old mate this is not the final product it will be improved and right now it's as good if not better then anything else out there, that being said please stop talking about monero this is the SDC thread and everyone of your posts mentions it

I mention it only in response to others who do so, particularly when the statements are incorrect. Example:

with Monero this fails, i.e. person A can tell the money comes from me with a high probability.

then xmr

Now you are doing it. Why?

I never mentioned it once here until you started talking about it the other day anyways just seams like subtle advertisement to me, carry on, not looking for a back and forth.

There is no advertisement, I'm just having a semi-technical discussion, and people seem to frequently ask about SDC compared to other coins, so those other coins come up. DRK has come up as well, and I'm certainly not advertising for that.

Thanks smooth for coming to discuss the tech. Unfortunately Ryno has been unavailable for comment (since he's celebing xmas/sleeping/whatever) BUT I am hopeful he'll be making an appearance today.

Regarding this line of yours: "If anyone is claiming otherwise [of ssv2 being like cryptonote] they are either confused or trying to scam you (I don't suggest the latter necessarily, just pointing out the possibilities)".

there is no way dasourec is trying to scam anybody. he is sound and in the Team iirc. we can discount that. I suppose confusion is a possibility (although unlikely since he's a smart cookie), but so is you not being in possession of all the facts.

I look forward to hearing from the Team and Ryno in particular regarding shadowsend's similarity (or not) to cryptonote, and more info regarding the inner workings of SSv2.

There's lots of people still scratching their heads about what exactly has been achieved (I know I am). Certainly nobody has studied the code in any great detail and the paper is terse, so some further education would be most helpful.

Thanks.

[smooth]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

[dadon]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done  and we stop talking about cryptonote coins here because SDC is not a cryptonote coin and this is the SDC thread sound good? it does to me, what perplexes me is how people make a big deal about price speculation here but they listen to this shit and say nothing, and we don't have to give cryptonote respect or credit like seriously why? give me a reason why we should give them respect and credit, what did they do for SDC again?

[dadon]

your name suits you smooth,smoothest most sneaky troll on btc.org, i take my hat off too you, but it's time to go back to your own thread.

[smooth]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done

How about you stop posting that lie? Especially since your own devs included the cryptonote white paper as a reference in their white paper. It was somewhat questionable that they never explained how that reference relates to the rest of the paper (hint: extensively) but perhaps that was an honest oversight.

But since I've explained this to you several times already, and cited specific technical details to back it up, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately dishonest. Let's hope you are the only one. Individual trolls on bitcointalk are no big deal. The rest of the SDC community seems pretty cool about the whole thing.

[child_harold]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done  and we stop talking about cryptonote coins here because SDC is not a cryptonote coin and this is the SDC thread sound good? it does to me, what perplexes me is how people make a big deal about price speculation here but they listen to this shit and say nothing, and we don't have to give cryptonote respect or credit like seriously why? give me a reason why we should give them respect and credit, what did they do for SDC again?

Easy. I invited smooth yesterday to rejoin the tech convo.
There clearly might be similarities between the two systems and I'm all up for comparing.

At this point we await Ryno and the cryptographer Techovert who together wrote SSv2 to weigh in.

CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND SHOULD BE ON HOLD TILL MORE INFO COMES FROM SDC DEVS

[child_harold]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done

How about you stop posting that lie? Especially since your own devs included the cryptonote white paper as a reference in their white paper. It was somewhat questionable that they never explained how that reference relates to the rest of the paper (hint: extensively) but perhaps that was an honest oversight.

But since I've explained this to you several times already, and cited specific technical details to back it up, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately dishonest. Let's hope you are the only one. Individual trolls on bitcointalk are no big deal. The rest of the SDC community seems pretty cool about the whole thing.

Easy. I invited smooth yesterday to rejoin the tech convo.
There clearly might be similarities between the two systems and I'm all up for comparing.

At this point we await Ryno and the cryptographer Techovert who together wrote SSv2 to weigh in.

CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND SHOULD BE ON HOLD TILL MORE INFO COMES FROM SDC DEVS

~~Insert meme of dude eating popcorn here~~

[dadon]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done

How about you stop posting that lie? Especially since your own devs included the cryptonote white paper as a reference in their white paper. It was somewhat questionable that they never explained how that reference relates to the rest of the paper (hint: extensively) but perhaps that was an honest oversight.

But since I've explained this to you several times already, and cited specific technical details to back it up, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately dishonest. Let's hope you are the only one. Individual trolls on bitcointalk are no big deal. The rest of the SDC community seems pretty cool about the whole thing.

You forget to tell me why the SDC community needs to give give credit and respect to cryptonote, what did they do for us again? And im not a troll i don't go on other coins threads i am one of the largest SDC holders and have been holding for about 4 months now, i bet you don't even own any SDC so why the interest..if it's almost exactly the same as cryptonote as you claim.

[dadon]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done

How about you stop posting that lie? Especially since your own devs included the cryptonote white paper as a reference in their white paper. It was somewhat questionable that they never explained how that reference relates to the rest of the paper (hint: extensively) but perhaps that was an honest oversight.

But since I've explained this to you several times already, and cited specific technical details to back it up, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately dishonest. Let's hope you are the only one. Individual trolls on bitcointalk are no big deal. The rest of the SDC community seems pretty cool about the whole thing.

Easy. I invited smooth yesterday to rejoin the tech convo.
There clearly might be similarities between the two systems and I'm all up for comparing.

At this point we await Ryno and the cryptographer Techovert who together wrote SSv2 to weigh in.

CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND SHOULD BE ON HOLD TILL MORE INFO COMES FROM SDC DEVS

There is no Cryptonote vs Shadow just some guy constantly comparing them, saying they are the same, and telling us we should give them credit for something our dev team did and they had nothing to do with, I respect the hard work our dsev team has done, and giving credit to cryptonote for there hard yards and constantly comparing them is fucking rude.

[child_harold]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done

How about you stop posting that lie? Especially since your own devs included the cryptonote white paper as a reference in their white paper. It was somewhat questionable that they never explained how that reference relates to the rest of the paper (hint: extensively) but perhaps that was an honest oversight.

But since I've explained this to you several times already, and cited specific technical details to back it up, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately dishonest. Let's hope you are the only one. Individual trolls on bitcointalk are no big deal. The rest of the SDC community seems pretty cool about the whole thing.

You forget to tell me why the SDC community needs to give give credit and respect to cryptonote, what did they do for us again?

Dadon. Respect the passion. Lets keep it clean.

Easy. I invited smooth yesterday to rejoin the tech convo.
There clearly might be similarities between the two systems and I'm all up for comparing.

At this point we await Ryno and the cryptographer Techovert who together wrote SSv2 to weigh in.

CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND SHOULD BE ON HOLD TILL MORE INFO COMES FROM SDC DEVS

~~Insert meme of dude eating popcorn here~~

[child_harold]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done

How about you stop posting that lie? Especially since your own devs included the cryptonote white paper as a reference in their white paper. It was somewhat questionable that they never explained how that reference relates to the rest of the paper (hint: extensively) but perhaps that was an honest oversight.

But since I've explained this to you several times already, and cited specific technical details to back it up, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately dishonest. Let's hope you are the only one. Individual trolls on bitcointalk are no big deal. The rest of the SDC community seems pretty cool about the whole thing.

Easy. I invited smooth yesterday to rejoin the tech convo.
There clearly might be similarities between the two systems and I'm all up for comparing.

At this point we await Ryno and the cryptographer Techovert who together wrote SSv2 to weigh in.

CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND SHOULD BE ON HOLD TILL MORE INFO COMES FROM SDC DEVS

There is no Cryptonote vs Shadow just some guy constantly comparing them, saying they are the same, and telling us we should give them credit for something our dev team did and they had nothing to do with, I respect the hard work our dsev team has done, and giving credit to cryptonote for there hard yards and constantly comparing them is fucking rude.

YOU might well be right my passionate friend, but let's wait to hear it straight from the Ryno's mouth

p.s. u guys type fast!

[dadon]

Mother of God...Sorry i just really appreciate all the hard UNPAID!! work our team has done, and refuse to give anyone credit but them untill they say it's okay to give credit to someone else, i don't think that's going to happen.

[smooth]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done

How about you stop posting that lie? Especially since your own devs included the cryptonote white paper as a reference in their white paper. It was somewhat questionable that they never explained how that reference relates to the rest of the paper (hint: extensively) but perhaps that was an honest oversight.

But since I've explained this to you several times already, and cited specific technical details to back it up, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately dishonest. Let's hope you are the only one. Individual trolls on bitcointalk are no big deal. The rest of the SDC community seems pretty cool about the whole thing.

You forget to tell me why the SDC community needs to give give credit and respect to cryptonote, what did they do for us again?

Let's see, they first applied the ring signature technique combined with stealth addresses to distributed cryptocurrencies, which is the exact same combination of techniques that SDC has now adopted as its core feature.

It should pretty damn obvious that something implemented 9 months later in the same market -- that the developers damn well knew about -- is clearly a derivative.

Your comment is about as absurd as asking what Satoshi did for us.

[child_harold]

Mother of God...

It is for the best dadon…

[child_harold]

What perplexes me is why people are bending over backward to claim that shadowsend doesn't use (something very close to the) the cryptonote design for anonymous coins. It's a great system, the best one around. Your project and developers should be congratulated for choosing it and apparently implementing it effectively.

Instead this turns into a food fight over claims of "No, it's completely new!" (which as someone else pointed out is rather silly even if it weren't incorrect with respect to cryptonote, since every single coin is copied from bitcoin) and who is supposedly advertising in your thread. Silly.

Just give cryptonote their due credit for their part of all this (which is sort of done in the white paper since they are listed as a reference) and get back to the business of building and promoting the coin.

How about we give our Devs credit because cryptonote has nothing to do with what they have done

How about you stop posting that lie? Especially since your own devs included the cryptonote white paper as a reference in their white paper. It was somewhat questionable that they never explained how that reference relates to the rest of the paper (hint: extensively) but perhaps that was an honest oversight.

But since I've explained this to you several times already, and cited specific technical details to back it up, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately dishonest. Let's hope you are the only one. Individual trolls on bitcointalk are no big deal. The rest of the SDC community seems pretty cool about the whole thing.

You forget to tell me why the SDC community needs to give give credit and respect to cryptonote, what did they do for us again?

Let's see, they first applied the ring signature technique combined with stealth addresses to distributed cryptocurrencies, which is the exact same combination of techniques that SDC has now adopted as its core feature.

It should pretty damn obvious that something implemented 9 months later in the same market -- that the developers damn well knew about -- is clearly a derivative.

Your comment is about as absurd as asking what Satoshi did for us.

Your pushing it a little smooth…
please
CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND SHOULD BE ON HOLD TILL MORE INFO COMES FROM SDC DEVS

[smooth]

CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND SHOULD BE ON HOLD TILL MORE INFO COMES FROM SDC DEVS

Fair enough, but I keep telling you there is no "CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND" except that one particular person seems to want to make it into that.

[dadon]

CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND SHOULD BE ON HOLD TILL MORE INFO COMES FROM SDC DEVS

Fair enough, but I keep telling you there is no "CRYPTONOTE VS SHADOWSEND" except that one particular person seems to want to make it into that.

NO!! i just want you to cut it out couldn't care less for cryptonote, i bought em i dumped em now im here, why are you?