DRK vs XMR warez

[child_harold]

^ the cancer of btctalk

That's quite the honorific. Altho I must say I prefer:
the caesar of bcttalk

Shadow is upsetting the "balance". Shadw is disruptive? Good.

[1714892857]

1714892857

[1714892857]

1714892857

[1714892857]

1714892857

[1714892857]

1714892857

[child_harold]

Out of respect for all the hard work the Shadow Team,  and any other devs working hard, I will pull out of all threads in BCT which are not concerned with my primary area of interest i.e. SDC. I'll maintain this AT LEAST until after the Isidor Zeuner peer review is out.

Some might say I'm a troll or that I tarnished the Shadow brand. Neither of these statements is true.
My work here is done and I'm moving on.

But if anybody here is under some misapprehension that Shadow is not the real deal let me disabuse them of that notion right now.

There's a storm coming. Clouds gather. Shadows lengthen.




LET us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherized upon a table;
Let us go, through certain half-deserted streets,
The muttering retreats
Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels
And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:
Streets that follow like a tedious argument
Of insidious intent
To lead you to an overwhelming question….
Oh, do not ask, “What is it?”
Let us go and make our visit.

In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.


Be seeing you.

[coinpr0n]

These wars are pretty funny. The tech is totally left aside and it's just insults being thrown around. I see it on one of the main DRK threads too. What's going on?

[stonehedge]

These wars are pretty funny. The tech is totally left aside and it's just insults being thrown around. I see it on one of the main DRK threads too. What's going on?

As a DRK team member and bag holder, I really have no idea.  May the best coin win.  Which may well be none of us.

[GingerAle]

this thread was doin OK up until a point. My comment seemed to have flummoxed the dark side.

[stonehedge]

this thread was doin OK up until a point. My comment seemed to have flummoxed the dark side.

Which comments did I not respond to?

[Hueristic]

First of all I want to thank the shill who linked this old worthless thread that I wasted my morning on reading. It contains nothing that is not common knowledge. But there are some things I couldn't let pass so HERE is a free bump for the moron who linked this thread thinking it helped his case when in fact it makes him look as retarded as he must be to have linked it.

Pline: I wouldnt bother with smooth. He refuses to open his mind or wait for the Zeuner review.

I fail to see why you throw this around as if it holds weight. Also I have no clue why you referenced this post in a XMR thread as if it contained anything to support your shilling. It actually detracts from any point you are trying to make. Have you actually sat down and read this thread straight through? You and SDC crew come off looking very foolish. If I were you I would want this thread to die.

Hah and after a quick google I see this touted review still hasn't occured! What a joke you guys are.
https://plus.google.com/118328794351657039283/posts/avgmVgEdURX

ShadowCash
Shared publicly  -  Jan 15, 2015
 #shadow
Support Shadow Whitepaper Review and Code Audit

Only 0,45911939 BTC remaining from 5 BTC goal of independent Shadow's code audit by Isidor Zeuner. Support SDC/Shadow and donate a few mBTC, we're almost there!

...
Here is a link to a recent article he has wrote. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/competing-completing-isidor-zeuner?trk=mp-reader-card

...

Here are a couple examples of his posts having to do with anonymity and Tor:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg06525.html

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg03712.html

Holy shit! From what you guys have linked this guy is nothing more than a programmer. He can peer review that the code is functioning but nothing more. He is in no way shape or form capable or qualified to make a determination on topology of said implementation.

I wouldn't touch DRK with a stick. Nodes can be attacked easily by an adversary with the required resources, the initial instamine thing and the name... on the other hand Monero has ring signatures which I trust a lot more.

Smart man! Even if DRK is adopted it will be broken immediately as soon as LEA wants it and alot of people will be in the headlines and the floor will drop out in one day. I wouldn't be surprised if Gov agencies aren't helping pump it just so fools start using it thinking they are safe, if I was them I would.

Master Nodes are the future of crypto Apps......

Did you actually read this thread?




HEY OP, Do you know what warez are? I think you mean Warz, Amirite?

[GingerAle]

yeah, i wasted my yesterday morning on it as well. I wanted somewhere to discuss, or get input from DRK people because I really don't understand 1. the hostility and 2. why peeps are all about DRK. And I didn't want to venture into their ANN thread because there's a lot of activity there and I assumed I would get lambasted with "troll" or "shill" or whatever.  So I saw this thread... I hope I wasn't the one that bumped it hueristic:)

stonehedge: there was no comment on the intrinsic connection between currency valuation and privacy technology and its subsequent implications. You focused on my pool comment, which is something that we apparently agree on re: decentralization.

Imagine if DRK goes to, i dunno, something ridiculous - $10k
based on current code, thats 10 million USD.
So, this either entrenches the existing MN network and reduces entry for increased network privacy and essentially centralizes this component.
Or it causes decrease in privacy because everyone has their price (sell my MN for 10 million? sure, whoever you are and whatever you plan on doing if you can just throw 10 million $$ around)

I mean, yes, the above scenario may be extreme but these sorts of things need to be considered if we are talking about creating technology that will be used worldwide as a means of transferring value.

One potential solution, of course, is to modify the code to adjust the wallet level cutoff for masternodes, but I can imagine this would be a hardfork (fork A continues with only 1k masternodes, fork B continues with 0.5k masternodes, whatever). ANd this type of forking requires full network consensus, else you'll end up with two different networks eventually... if I understand my cryptocurrency tech correctly.

[Hueristic]

yeah, i wasted my yesterday morning on it as well. I wanted somewhere to discuss, or get input from DRK people because I really don't understand 1. the hostility and 2. why peeps are all about DRK. And I didn't want to venture into their ANN thread because there's a lot of activity there and I assumed I would get lambasted with "troll" or "shill" or whatever.  So I saw this thread... I hope I wasn't the one that bumped it hueristic:)...

No, child had it linked in another thread.

Since this thread is moderated the op should go through and delete all the trash that came after the real discussion.

[stonehedge]

yeah, i wasted my yesterday morning on it as well. I wanted somewhere to discuss, or get input from DRK people because I really don't understand 1. the hostility and 2. why peeps are all about DRK. And I didn't want to venture into their ANN thread because there's a lot of activity there and I assumed I would get lambasted with "troll" or "shill" or whatever.  So I saw this thread... I hope I wasn't the one that bumped it hueristic:)

stonehedge: there was no comment on the intrinsic connection between currency valuation and privacy technology and its subsequent implications. You focused on my pool comment, which is something that we apparently agree on re: decentralization.

Imagine if DRK goes to, i dunno, something ridiculous - $10k
based on current code, thats 10 million USD.
So, this either entrenches the existing MN network and reduces entry for increased network privacy and essentially centralizes this component.
Or it causes decrease in privacy because everyone has their price (sell my MN for 10 million? sure, whoever you are and whatever you plan on doing if you can just throw 10 million $$ around)

I mean, yes, the above scenario may be extreme but these sorts of things need to be considered if we are talking about creating technology that will be used worldwide as a means of transferring value.

One potential solution, of course, is to modify the code to adjust the wallet level cutoff for masternodes, but I can imagine this would be a hardfork (fork A continues with only 1k masternodes, fork B continues with 0.5k masternodes, whatever). ANd this type of forking requires full network consensus, else you'll end up with two different networks eventually... if I understand my cryptocurrency tech correctly.

Oh yes.  I didn't answer because I don't have the knowledge to answer the question without a lot of guesswork.  It might seem like a bother but if you signed up on darkcointalk.org you wouldn't be treated as a troll or shill.  You are asking a very valid question.    Either that or go to darkcoin.io, pick a dev and send them an email.  The'd be glad to help.

[GingerAle]

^^^ Thanks, I'll just wait for a reply here, unless I get really motivated.

[stonehedge]

^^^ Thanks, I'll just wait for a reply here, unless I get really motivated.

I'll see if I can get somebody to pop over and answer it for you...most of the Darkcoin brains steer clear of BCT.

[Propulsion]

^^^ Thanks, I'll just wait for a reply here, unless I get really motivated.

I'll see if I can get somebody to pop over and answer it for you...most of the Darkcoin brains steer clear of BCT.

Pish.... 

[MalMen]

yeah, i wasted my yesterday morning on it as well. I wanted somewhere to discuss, or get input from DRK people because I really don't understand 1. the hostility and 2. why peeps are all about DRK. And I didn't want to venture into their ANN thread because there's a lot of activity there and I assumed I would get lambasted with "troll" or "shill" or whatever.  So I saw this thread... I hope I wasn't the one that bumped it hueristic:)

stonehedge: there was no comment on the intrinsic connection between currency valuation and privacy technology and its subsequent implications. You focused on my pool comment, which is something that we apparently agree on re: decentralization.

Imagine if DRK goes to, i dunno, something ridiculous - $10k
based on current code, thats 10 million USD.
So, this either entrenches the existing MN network and reduces entry for increased network privacy and essentially centralizes this component.
Or it causes decrease in privacy because everyone has their price (sell my MN for 10 million? sure, whoever you are and whatever you plan on doing if you can just throw 10 million $$ around)

I mean, yes, the above scenario may be extreme but these sorts of things need to be considered if we are talking about creating technology that will be used worldwide as a means of transferring value.

One potential solution, of course, is to modify the code to adjust the wallet level cutoff for masternodes, but I can imagine this would be a hardfork (fork A continues with only 1k masternodes, fork B continues with 0.5k masternodes, whatever). ANd this type of forking requires full network consensus, else you'll end up with two different networks eventually... if I understand my cryptocurrency tech correctly.

Thats a very good question.. the price now is pumping in my opinion because of the need of masternodes, and the need of 1000DKR to own a masternode, after the masternode stop beeing profitable for the small owners they will dump, and the price that time or will stablizate as the big masternode players buy back that coins to create more masternodes, or will go down...
I am almost sure that will happen at some point, and the masternode system will be soo descentralized as the bitcoin mining is right now

note: this is just my opinion, i am all ears to know what you people think

[stonehedge]

There are so many possible permutations.

We've just made another major release (this one includes masternode blinding!)  so people might be busy for a while but I'd like to see an informed debate on this topic here...

[stonehedge]

^^^ Thanks, I'll just wait for a reply here, unless I get really motivated.

I'll see if I can get somebody to pop over and answer it for you...most of the Darkcoin brains steer clear of BCT.

Pish.... 

Come on then props, step up with a view

[Hueristic]

There are so many possible permutations.

We've just made another major release (this one includes masternode blinding!)  so people might be busy for a while but I'd like to see an informed debate on this topic here...

Wanna link what masternode blinding is. I've never heard of it.

[stonehedge]

My bad, its just a testnet update.

[qwizzie]

There are so many possible permutations.

We've just made another major release (this one includes masternode blinding!)  so people might be busy for a while but I'd like to see an informed debate on this topic here...

Wanna link what masternode blinding is. I've never heard of it.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-11-1-instantx-development-update.3769/

Masternode Blinding

Recently a paper by 3 researches at Saarland University came out describing a new technique, while there are some serious problems with the approach they take, the concept of blinding the users they use is novel. In CoinShuffle, each output is sent to the next peer in a circle, one at a time. The new peer adds an output, shuffles and then sends the list again. We can do this and actually improve upon it.

To implement blinding, each user would connect to one completely random masternode and say "Send masternode X this output/value for mix N" and pass a single output. That output would be passed to the leading masternode. It would take access to all masternodes used to know who did what, which is as solid as M rounds mathematically (M = number of outputs). This is great because all users can submit all inputs at once. So it's super fast compared to CoinShuffle and even more secure.

This looks like something that could be implemented relatively fast (its being tested on Testnet as we speak). It creates far more anonymity, works faster and needs less rounds of mixing (4 to 6 rounds will now give very very strong anonymity).  

[stonehedge]

There are so many possible permutations.

We've just made another major release (this one includes masternode blinding!)  so people might be busy for a while but I'd like to see an informed debate on this topic here...

Wanna link what masternode blinding is. I've never heard of it.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-11-1-instantx-development-update.3769/

Masternode Blinding

Recently a paper by 3 researches at Saarland University came out describing a new technique, while there are some serious problems with the approach they take, the concept of blinding the users they use is novel. In CoinShuffle, each output is sent to the next peer in a circle, one at a time. The new peer adds an output, shuffles and then sends the list again. We can do this and actually improve upon it.

To implement blinding, each user would connect to one completely random masternode and say "Send masternode X this output/value for mix N" and pass a single output. That output would be passed to the leading masternode. It would take access to all masternodes used to know who did what, which is as solid as M rounds mathematically (M = number of outputs). This is great because all users can submit all inputs at once. So it's super fast compared to CoinShuffle and even more secure.

This looks like something that could be implemented relatively fast (its being tested on Testnet as we speak). It creates far more anonymity, works faster and needs less rounds of mixing (4 to 6 rounds will now give very very strong anonymity).  

The net effect of this is as follows:

Probability of following Darksend through
  - 4 non-blinded rounds with 10 masternodes* is (10/2300)^4 == 3.5734577849564574e-10
  - 4 blinded rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)**4 == 1.1528508353537067e-189

Each round uses 20 random masternodes of 2300, so you must control 20 of 2300 four times in a row. It's super secure .

Here's the new probablities for each successive round:
  - 1 rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)^1 == 5.826976675086318e-48
  - 2 rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)^2 == 3.3953657171999996e-95
  - 3 rounds with 10 masternodes is ((10/2300.0)^20)^3 == 1.9784716837512123e-142
  - 4 rounds with 1000 masternodes is ((1000/2300.0)^20)^4 == 1.1528508353537028e-29
* attacker controlled