DRK vs XMR warez

[child_harold]

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)

[1714123165]

1714123165

[1714123165]

1714123165

[1714123165]

1714123165

[1714123165]

1714123165

[xxxgoodgirls]

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]

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]

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. )

[onemorexmr]

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?

[child_harold]

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]

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]

Allegedly Darkcoin has been cracked, anyone care to comment?

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

[illodin]

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]

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]

Of course the whole thing could be hot air, we shall see.

[stonehedge]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[fluffypony]

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]

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!

[child_harold]

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]

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.

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.