At this point you do sound more and more like a concern troll.
I can quite imagine I might be coming off that way, but Im not. It is admittedly a rather legitimate and serious concern so I think we can discredit trolling.
ChildHarold is most definitely a concern troll, offering no facts and just trying to create a discussion hoping to include his solution as an alternative when it is not. The easiest way to respond to this is with facts so here we go:
A concerned user could mix his coins using Darksend to a depth of 8 rounds, assuming a network of 1300MN, a person controlling 100 MN would have a 0.000000093986159131% chance of uncovering a particular transaction.
A person controlling 50% of the network, meaning owning 650MN, would have a chance of 0.382253675331956000% of uncovering a specific transaction. In this case he would have to acquire 650000DRK in the open markets which would sky rocket the price, and do this knowing he has 99.62% probability of not uncovering the transactions he is looking for.
The system is very well designed an attacker would have to control 90% plus of the network to have a chance of around 40% of uncovering a transaction at which point he would be the only one with Darkcoins and the price would surge to the thousands.
Having said this, a really concerned user could just send his coins through more rounds. Other anon systems are vulnerable to sybil attacks too and use secret keys or cryptography that could one day be uncovered. Darksend is future proof.
Besides this solid anon solution, it supports instantaneous transactions and the ahead of time mixing prevents timing analysis. It is really best balanced all around anon coin in the market and the market recognizes this period.
Also, is there anything stopping Darkcoin from incorporating zero knowledge proof as well as Darksend if another coin implements it with zero drawbacks in the future? This would give Darkcoin Dual anonymity and the other coin will have done most of the work :-)
Edit: Maybe that's what Evan was thinking when talking to the Shadowcoin devs.
No, that is most definitely not what Evan was thinking when he thought of the merger idea. That was just an idea about acquiring additional manpower and community support by working together with other groups. It was more of a principle thing trying to show openness and collaboration, yet it was met with deceit and lack of professionalism and was discarded.
Plus, the Darksend concept is scalable, just add rounds as needed.
ok, but is there anything to stop zero knowledge proof being implemented as well as Darksend? Just wondering :-)