Topic: [ANN][BURST] Burst | Efficient HDD Mining | New 1.2.3 Fork block 92000 - page 515. (Read 2171056 times)

is there any alternative
i cant use offline wallet
so coin now dont have a online wallet?

thank you xiz,

to let me understand better...

No mate, they are not saying that it is insecure. Especially not when "mixing only with yourself". They are only saying that there is a potential way to use AT to "anonymize" transactions. Burst is not threatened by this and as you pointed out yourself could be a nice benefit.

sorry but maybe i don't understand..
i'm not a dev...
but i follow and mine burst since the beginning and i'm a burst enthusiast user.
so i try to understand all burst dev planes.
are you saying who ACTs it is not secure now???
i hope to miss understand you!!!
because i think who ACCTs could be the "killer application" for burst!!!

yup

http://www.websitenotworking.com/burstcoin.io

https://burstcoin.io/index.html

online wallet down???

This is a very exciting development  

People are working on exactly this, and other stuff too. Can't give an ETA but it is a matter of day.

Answer here : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9840815

Stuck at the first step,

run_dump_address.bat doesnt generate anything in the txt file it makes :/

java installed/win81

anyone know why ?
NM i fixed it, some1 posted instructions for windows users to change java cmd to damn syswow folder :/, removed that and it worked
i also had to change the path in the wallet server batch file too :/

this coin has become a nightmare with a plethora of info about mining, some1 should consolidate it and maybe update the OP, the way it is they will lose a lot of newbies due to the mudbath of info on it...

I've thought about it more, and I think ATs could also be used to create CoinJoin transactions in a trustless manner without requiring any communication channel between users other than the blockchain itself..

The setup: there are two users, Alice and Bob, each have 1000 coins in their two public accounts: account_a and account_b. They both want to do a transaction such that their funds are transferred to anon_account_a and anon_account_b, while keeping it impossible for any observing parties to determine who owns which of the anon accounts. To this this, they could create a special AT:

1) Alice and Bob would each send the AT a message from anon_account_a and anon_account_b. The message would indicate to the AT where to send the funds to after it was fully funded.

2) Next, Alice and Bob would each send their 1000 coins to the AT. If either one fails to send, the AT would just issue a refund after a certain amount of time.

3) After the AT is fully funded, it would disperse the funds to anon_account_a and anon_account_b. Any outside observer would be unable to determine who owns which address.

This technique could easily be expanded upon to any number of people. The only downside to having more accounts participating in the transaction, is an increased risk that someone doesn't fund the AT in step 2.

One major drawback to this whole approach is that the anon_accounts will need to be funded somehow in order to send the message to the AT in step 1. This presents a challenge if you're trying to fund the account for the first time.

Am I missing anything, or is this a viable use-case for Automatic Transactions?

We already work with burstdev from mid November on integrating AT into burst and we are almost ready to release it. Also qora coin will have ATs, so this use case might be out there faster than i thought.

Yes you are totally right. Of course the idea to be feasible needs a lot of acct use cases to be running. The more coins support ATs the more feasible it gets to provide anonymity.

When is this happening? https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/at-can-be-used-to-anonymize-inter-blockchain-transfers-who-would-have-thought-893271 A partnership here would be a prime opportunity.

Any method of mixing across multiple chains using ACCTs can also be done on a single chain to obscure things. Amounts can also be broken down by having one or both sides making more than one AT. There doesn't even have to be a corresponding 2nd AT. Someone could just make one side that releases to another address they control, and release it after waiting a while to simulate coins being swapped.

Can't you always just send your funds from a Burst like blockchain to a Monero like blockchain, that has anonymity, send money from one account to another one over there, then then send it back over to a Burst blockchain again? Just make sure it's a standard amount of money being sent, such as breaking it into 100 Burst per mix so you can't match amounts.

Indeed - this variation of the acct can be used to "mix" the funds. I was always trying to figure out a way to use ATs for anonymity but always had in mind one underlying blockchain, and never thought "mixing" them between different blockchain's. I think this is the only way we can achieve "anonymity" with ATs. This way you still can trace the funds on each blockchain from one account to another, but lose the trail in between the blockchains.

My gut feeling is that the mixing approach I've outlined using "atomic cross-chain transfer" is going to be "the only method" for anonymizing but I can see that if we get AT on numerous blockchains then it could become the ultimate "mixing machine".

BTW - props should be for @vbcs and @burstcoin for getting AT integrated with Burst (I only created the specifications and C++ prototype).

we are all hoping like you!!!

but burst is an investment for the long run...

non for pump&dump!!!

we are waiting for the next dev updates...

some pages ago, i have read who dev is helped from other delvelopers...

so the team it is growing!!!

and this is good!!!

Very interesting, thanks for the insight. And congrats on nearing completion of getting ATs integrated into Burstcoin!

I like the idea of using the cross-chain transfers mechanism to trade funds between accounts in a way that is nearly unlinkable. It seems like this could even be used to trade unequal amounts, by incorporating randomness into the ATs (users that did this would have to accept a risk that they may lose coins for a given trade, but they should break even in the long run). This would help solve one of the major problems of CoinJoin - that you need to find people that want to trade the exact same amount of coins as you. The only major downside though, is that it still seems to need some sort of other channel of communication in order to communicate the secret function between the 2 parties.

It would be awesome if it were possible to create a lottery AT that uses some sort of zero-knowledge algorithm to choose a winner. The winner could claim their winnings by sending a message to the AT that proves they are the winner without revealing which account they originally sent the coins from. I feel like this should be possible, given that ATs are Turing complete, but I don't have an in-depth enough understanding to really say for sure.