Bitcoin Forum
November 23, 2017, 02:33:23 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: DRK vs XMR warez  (Read 13002 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
child_harold
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812



View Profile
March 05, 2015, 10:43:08 PM
 #221

4 what its worth…

"According to documents newly released by Edward Snowden, …

Please allow me to stop u there.

From day one I have always felt Snowdon was a shill for 3 reasons:

1) He escaped the U.S without death
2) Nobody lost a job cause of his "revelations"
3) The NSA budget increased the folloeing year


In short, anything outta the U.S. is prob BS
This includes DRK (eduffield) who by now should've had a couple meetings with the NSA.

p.s 12 months ago I urged Duffield to get outta the U.S

He didn't respond. He still lives there.

What can I say?


p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511404403
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511404403

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511404403
Reply with quote  #2

1511404403
Report to moderator
xxxgoodgirls
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008



View Profile
March 06, 2015, 12:34:47 AM
 #222


p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced how can MNs contain backdoors
child_harold
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812



View Profile
March 06, 2015, 12:37:39 AM
 #223


p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced

I was referring to the VPS providers MN ops utilize e.g. vultr and AWS
You ignored my comments about evan's geo-location. Fair enuff. Not my prob anymore.

Bye bye.

onemorexmr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
March 06, 2015, 12:39:33 AM
 #224


p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced

you obviously dont have coding experience. otherwise you'd know how easy it is to place nefarious code in a way which is very hard to find.

for starters: http://underhanded.xcott.com/

( i didnt say that drk has a backdoor and to be honest i dont believe that this is the case now. )

XMR || Monero || monerodice.net || xmr.to || mymonero.com || openalias.org || you think bitcoin is fungible? watch this
onemorexmr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
March 06, 2015, 12:40:38 AM
 #225


p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced

I was referring to the VPS providers MN ops utilize e.g. vultr and AWS
You ignored my comments about evan's geo-location. Fair enuff. Not my prob anymore.

Bye bye.

wow... is the sdc-code review done? where can i find it?

XMR || Monero || monerodice.net || xmr.to || mymonero.com || openalias.org || you think bitcoin is fungible? watch this
child_harold
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812



View Profile
March 06, 2015, 12:46:16 AM
 #226


p.p.s all these MN stats r bollox if the MN's are backdoored (which they prob are)

you retarded DRK's code is fucking open sourced

I was referring to the VPS providers MN ops utilize e.g. vultr and AWS
You ignored my comments about evan's geo-location. Fair enuff. Not my prob anymore.

Bye bye.

wow... is the sdc-code review done? where can i find it?

No its not

To answer ur question I still feel my area of interest (SDC) is represented here.
Do u plan to address any of the issues I raised…?

We should all be grateful I will no longer post in ur primary threads, at least for the time being.


REMINDER: if smooth is right then SDC is XMR on a BTC blockchian. If he's wrong than maybe it's better…


toknormal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442


View Profile
March 06, 2015, 11:07:35 AM
 #227


Here you go folks, the first fruits of Darkcoin's original design priorities - legacy compatibility with Bitcoin and Schaum's blind signature approach:

[1] - Trezor wallet now available for Darkcoin: https://twitter.com/taoofsatoshi/status/573702695078531072

[2] - some mainstream recognition




BaxterJames
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 48


View Profile
March 06, 2015, 03:06:09 PM
 #228

Allegedly Darkcoin has been cracked, anyone care to comment?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.0
illodin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


View Profile
March 06, 2015, 03:11:00 PM
 #229

Allegedly Darkcoin has been cracked, anyone care to comment?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.0

Dunno if it's a problem, but if it is, seems to be easy fix, and likely obsolete anyway, as the new masternode blinding process is totally different.
BaxterJames
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 48


View Profile
March 06, 2015, 03:19:50 PM
 #230

Allegedly Darkcoin has been cracked, anyone care to comment?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.0

Dunno if it's a problem, but if it is, seems to be easy fix, and likely obsolete anyway, as the new masternode blinding process is totally different.

Even if masternode blinding solves the problem, this still implies that every Darksend transaction up to this point has been traceable, that does not look good.
BaxterJames
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 48


View Profile
March 06, 2015, 03:24:39 PM
 #231

Of course the whole thing could be hot air, we shall see.
stonehedge
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190


Decentralize Everything


View Profile WWW
March 06, 2015, 04:48:12 PM
 #232

So far there has been a hypothetical debate but E-K has not come up with the goods.  That doesn't mean that he won't though.  I guess we just wait and see.  I suspect that if there is a problem it will be patched faster than it can be exploited.
Este Nuno
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


amarha


View Profile
March 06, 2015, 04:58:29 PM
 #233

I've gotten the impression for a long time from people who know a lot more about crypto than I that mixing in general is not a strong form of anonymity. And that given enough resources an attacker should be able to link the transactions and deanonymize the user.

Maybe the technology has improved over time though.
nachoig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
March 06, 2015, 07:14:09 PM
 #234

So far there has been a hypothetical debate but E-K has not come up with the goods.  That doesn't mean that he won't though.  I guess we just wait and see.  I suspect that if there is a problem it will be patched faster than it can be exploited.

The problem is how to fix this for past transactions.

_____

Just a comment about coin supplies, which is a constant issue in Darkcoin:  changing coin supply or emission is a bad idea. This is why Darkcoin looks an instamined coin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=970176.msg10612547#msg10612547
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=977003.msg10676123#msg10676123

A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. I'm not saying a fixed supply is better than a non-fixed supply or vice-versa, but what I'm saying is this shouldn't be changed afterwards.
Oscilson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434



View Profile
March 06, 2015, 07:20:43 PM
 #235

A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. I'm not saying a fixed supply is better than a non-fixed supply or vice-versa, but what I'm saying is this shouldn't be changed afterwards.

A low inflation is good to keep the monetary supply with economy growth and discourage hoarding. It will also compensate lost coins.
GingerAle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
March 06, 2015, 07:39:36 PM
 #236

A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. I'm not saying a fixed supply is better than a non-fixed supply or vice-versa, but what I'm saying is this shouldn't be changed afterwards.

A low inflation is good to keep the monetary supply with economy growth and discourage hoarding. It will also compensate lost coins.

also, its one thing to change the original emission so that is it less than intended, vs what XMR plans to do which is an increase in emission, which in theory does not benefit early adopters.

/derail

< Monero Compile Instructions >   < Track your bitcoins! > < Track them again! > < Monero NVIDIA mining instructions > < MONERODO : An operating system for your dedicated decentralized node device > <<< What is fungibility? >>> 46P88uZ4edEgsk7iKQUGu2FUDYcdHm2HtLFiGLp1inG4e4f9PTb4mbHWYWFZGYUeQidJ8hFym2WUmWc p34X8HHmFS2LXJkf <<< Free subdomains at moneroworld.com!! >>> <<< If you don't want to run your own node, point your wallet to node.moneroworld.com, and get connected to a random node! >>> @@@@@ Simple Monero Node Installer and Monitor for Windows @@@@@
fluffypony
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com


View Profile WWW
March 06, 2015, 07:42:53 PM
 #237

A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.

Joshuar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504


eidoo wallet


View Profile
March 06, 2015, 09:59:03 PM
 #238

A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.

Well said!

██
█║█
║║║
║║║
█║█
██

                    ▄██▄
                  ▄██████▄
                ▄██████████
              ▄██████████▀   ▄▄
            ▄██████████▀   ▄████▄
          ▄██████████▀    ████████▄
         ██████████▀      ▀████████
         ▀███████▀   ▄███▄  ▀████▀   ▄█▄
    ▄███▄  ▀███▀   ▄███████▄  ▀▀   ▄█████▄
  ▄███████▄      ▄██████████     ▄█████████
  █████████    ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
   ▀█████▀   ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
     ▀▀▀   ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
          ██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
          ▀███████▀      █████████▀
            ▀███▀   ▄██▄  ▀█████▀
                  ▄██████▄  ▀▀▀
                  █████████
                   ▀█████▀
                     ▀▀▀
e i d o o
██


                    ▄██▄
                  ▄██████▄
                ▄██████████
              ▄██████████▀   ▄▄
            ▄██████████▀   ▄████▄
          ▄██████████▀    ████████▄
         ██████████▀      ▀████████
         ▀███████▀   ▄███▄  ▀████▀   ▄█▄
    ▄███▄  ▀███▀   ▄███████▄  ▀▀   ▄█████▄
  ▄███████▄      ▄██████████     ▄█████████
  █████████    ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
   ▀█████▀   ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
     ▀▀▀   ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
          ██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
          ▀███████▀      █████████▀
            ▀███▀   ▄██▄  ▀█████▀
                  ▄██████▄  ▀▀▀
                  █████████
                   ▀█████▀
                     ▀▀▀
██
█║█
║║║
║║║
█║█
██
child_harold
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812



View Profile
March 07, 2015, 01:37:45 AM
 #239

A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.

Well said!

thats why I like Monero, ethics and sound math, code is being worked on, the only anonymous crypto worth any money/attention.

respectfully disagree.

SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth.
the diffs r that SDC is a BTC fork so is ready for B2B use toady with a gorgeous GUI wallet, something Monero users have long wished for.

I believe the phrase "magic wallet" has been bandied around thr XMR thread. what is the ETA btw?

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610



View Profile
March 07, 2015, 01:46:40 AM
 #240

A similar idea was already discussed in Monero. Fortunately it was rejected, but they're still looking for changing this to remain with a 1% annual perpetually. I apply the same rume: introducing a change like this can be harmful for reputation of the coin. This is the type of the thing which should be decided at the coin's launch, instead of changing lately. Changing the rules of the game after it started is not good.

Well, there are two things there. Firstly: several core team members (myself and tacotime specifically) made it clear that we would not be changing the social contract, and if we were vetoed and the emission curve was changed we would be leaving the project. This was not a strong-arm tactic, it was because we couldn't, in good conscience, continue to support a project where the social contract is negotiable.

Nevertheless, we have always stated that we would likely add a tail emission to preserve mining incentives (we may not entirely agree with every conclusion Nicolas T. Courtois has made in his Programmed Self-Destruction of Crypto Currencies paper, but we do concur with section 5.3 on the dangers of ever-decreasing mining rewards). Just in case this is ever in doubt, our OP on Bitcointalk in May of 2014 (the earliest scanned by archive.org) already detailed this tail emission under the "Max Supply" note. So our implementing it is not a new idea, and is not in question - we always planned on this probability, and were always public about it.

Well said!

thats why I like Monero, ethics and sound math, code is being worked on, the only anonymous crypto worth any money/attention.

respectfully disagree.

SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth.

That would be true if the implementation were as mature and well-developed, and if you continue to follow our research lead on how various edge conditions in cryptonote need to be addressed.

Quote
the diffs r that SDC is a BTC fork so is ready for B2B use toady with a gorgeous GUI wallet, something Monero users have long wished for.

I believe the phrase "magic wallet" has been bandied around thr XMR thread. what is the ETA btw?

Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!