[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 4258.

qwizzie

legendary

Activity: 2548

Merit: 1245

Quote from: raganius on August 19, 2014, 02:48:08 PM

Hey there, my friends, I am so glad that things are getting calmer here again. These last days have been so distressful with all the boring trolls and fights. During these days my ignore button helped so much, but still, I have avoided coming here.

But now we have peace again, and that's so good

One awesome thing in these last days was the opportunity everyone had to buy cheap DRKs! I bought as much as I could afford (I wish I could have been able to buy even more) and I am so happy with it.

I'd like, once again, to congratulate Evan, our Dev team, and our community for Darkcoin's achievements.

Now, I would like to know if there are still any Masternode shares services running and accepting new investors. I was participating in vertoe's, and I was very satisfied (vertoe is really great), but unfortunately he had to stop his services, so now I am an orphan of masternode Wink

It's good to be with you guys.

All the best

Try Ghostplayer.. i think he has a link in his signature.

Edit : on second thought he is more involved in setting up MN ... not so much in shares i think .. but contact him anyways.

coins101

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Freckleg on August 19, 2014, 02:21:04 PM

Tor and legality:

- if the provider (exit node owner) has no control over data send through his node and he is not snooping data in any way there is no responsibility for the data handled. This is exactly what Master Node Tor will look like.

ISPs have some obligations on the traffic that they allow through their networks (DarkWallet has been targeted I understand). But ISPs make enforcement based on evidence of illegality and court orders being presented.

If 99% of DarkTor traffic is legal, then they need to track down those hosting the illegal content. DarkTor nodes are relays like millions of Cisco boxes around the world. No one tries to shut down Cisco boxes.

erok

hero member

Activity: 896

Merit: 1000

Avatars are overrated.

Quote from: aigeezer on August 19, 2014, 02:43:55 PM

Quote from: erok on August 19, 2014, 02:42:02 PM

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 02:33:18 PM

Quote from: TsuyokuNaritai on August 19, 2014, 02:31:14 PM

Quote from: Kyune on August 19, 2014, 02:20:31 PM

Quote

We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept. TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq). For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes.

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.

If that's a serious concern, presumable Evan could set it up so masternodes can opt out of being an exit node (so just be a relay), and have a specific fee paid just to exit nodes. Then the market will sort it out. The less masternodes want to be exit nodes the more the remaining exit nodes will get, adding incentive to be an exit node.

That's a very good idea actually.

Essentially you would be getting paid to be watched and tagged by the government as node passing packets about ton of illegal crap? There is a good idea. But then if that person got hit, post mortem data would point everything back to it's original sender.

Would it not also incentivize acronym agencies to own exit nodes?

It does currently so I don't see how they would mitigate that.

sharkbyte093

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: aigeezer on August 19, 2014, 02:43:55 PM

Quote from: erok on August 19, 2014, 02:42:02 PM

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 02:33:18 PM

Quote from: TsuyokuNaritai on August 19, 2014, 02:31:14 PM

Quote from: Kyune on August 19, 2014, 02:20:31 PM

Quote

We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept. TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq). For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes.

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.

If that's a serious concern, presumable Evan could set it up so masternodes can opt out of being an exit node (so just be a relay), and have a specific fee paid just to exit nodes. Then the market will sort it out. The less masternodes want to be exit nodes the more the remaining exit nodes will get, adding incentive to be an exit node.

That's a very good idea actually.

Essentially you would be getting paid to be watched and tagged by the government as node passing packets about ton of illegal crap? There is a good idea. But then if that person got hit, post mortem data would point everything back to it's original sender.

Would it not also incentivize acronym agencies to own exit nodes?

This is a good point.

The smaller the pool of participants the easier it will be to gain a portion of that pool to potentially compromise DarkTor.

One can assume that there will be a portion of Masternode operators who will not want to operate Tor nodes at all.

Lets assume the rest will. There will be a portion within this group that doesn't want to operate exit nodes.

So essentially a spy agency could purchase just enough to compromise the DarkTor network, specifically exit nodes, without having to even come close to the power necessary to compromise the Masternode network.

This is a valid concern and something that needs to be considered.

thelonecrouton

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1000

ewok, as a croak gobbler, are you panicking about your croak wallet hosting a croakmarket full of overpriced weed?

Or not, since it'll probably never actually work anyway?

raganius

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

Hey there, my friends, I am so glad that things are getting calmer here again. These last days have been so distressful with all the boring trolls and fights. During these days my ignore button helped so much, but still, I have avoided coming here.

But now we have peace again, and that's so good

One awesome thing in these last days was the opportunity everyone had to buy cheap DRKs! I bought as much as I could afford (I wish I could have been able to buy even more) and I am so happy with it.

I'd like, once again, to congratulate Evan, our Dev team, and our community for Darkcoin's achievements.

Now, I would like to know if there are still any Masternode shares services running and accepting new investors. I was participating in vertoe's, and I was very satisfied (vertoe is really great), but unfortunately he had to stop his services, so now I am an orphan of masternode Wink

It's good to be with you guys.

All the best

aigeezer

legendary

Activity: 1450

Merit: 1013

Cryptanalyst castrated by his government, 1952

Quote from: erok on August 19, 2014, 02:42:02 PM

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 02:33:18 PM

Quote from: TsuyokuNaritai on August 19, 2014, 02:31:14 PM

Quote from: Kyune on August 19, 2014, 02:20:31 PM

Quote

We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept. TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq). For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes.

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.

If that's a serious concern, presumable Evan could set it up so masternodes can opt out of being an exit node (so just be a relay), and have a specific fee paid just to exit nodes. Then the market will sort it out. The less masternodes want to be exit nodes the more the remaining exit nodes will get, adding incentive to be an exit node.

That's a very good idea actually.

Essentially you would be getting paid to be watched and tagged by the government as node passing packets about ton of illegal crap? There is a good idea. But then if that person got hit, post mortem data would point everything back to it's original sender.

Would it not also incentivize acronym agencies to own exit nodes?

coins101

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Minotaur26 on August 19, 2014, 02:39:25 PM

I think a decentralized BTC-DRK exchange, that will allow folks to take advantage of Darksend+ without having to go through an exchange would be a big hit.

sent the Devs a message yesterday to think about adding that to the services that Master Node operators can offer.

matching BTC input requests for DRK, with DRK input requests for BTC. you really don't need an exchange at all, where it is legal to offer such a service

erok

hero member

Activity: 896

Merit: 1000

Avatars are overrated.

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 02:33:18 PM

Quote from: TsuyokuNaritai on August 19, 2014, 02:31:14 PM

Quote from: Kyune on August 19, 2014, 02:20:31 PM

Quote

We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept. TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq). For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes.

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.

If that's a serious concern, presumable Evan could set it up so masternodes can opt out of being an exit node (so just be a relay), and have a specific fee paid just to exit nodes. Then the market will sort it out. The less masternodes want to be exit nodes the more the remaining exit nodes will get, adding incentive to be an exit node.

That's a very good idea actually.

Essentially you would be getting paid to be watched and tagged by the government as node passing packets about ton of illegal crap? There is a good idea. But then if that person got hit, post mortem data would point everything back to it's original sender.

coins101

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 02:33:18 PM

Quote from: TsuyokuNaritai on August 19, 2014, 02:31:14 PM

Quote from: Kyune on August 19, 2014, 02:20:31 PM

Quote

We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept. TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq). For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes.

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.

If that's a serious concern, presumable Evan could set it up so masternodes can opt out of being an exit node (so just be a relay), and have a specific fee paid just to exit nodes. Then the market will sort it out. The less masternodes want to be exit nodes the more the remaining exit nodes will get, adding incentive to be an exit node.

That's a very good idea actually.

@Drobek: "Anonymised payments are IMO more sensitive than anonymous traffic. So I am all in. "

Well if you think about it, anonymous payments can lead to people paying anonymously for hosting if you could find a company willing to do that. So someone could anonymously host a Masternode that runs a Tor exit relay.

its a big wide world. not everything is illegal in every country.

Bitcoin will soon be illegal in Russia, while in the UK there is a focal point being planned by the UK Government to encourage Bitcoin and crypto.

Where there is money to be made, there are options that can be found

Minotaur26

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1000

I think a decentralized BTC-DRK exchange, that will allow folks to take advantage of Darksend+ without having to go through an exchange would be a big hit.

othe

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

Quote from: Drobek on August 19, 2014, 02:26:35 PM

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 02:23:09 PM

Quote from: Freckleg on August 19, 2014, 02:21:04 PM

Tor and legality:

- if the provider (exit node owner) has no control over data send through his node and he is not snooping data in any way there is no responsibility for the data handled. This is exactly what Master Node Tor will look like.

Yes this is the law theory, yet still you have incidents like what happened in Australia where the cops essentially raided a guys home with a SWAT team because he was running a Tor exit relay. I'm struggling to find cases in the USA where people were arrested for operating Tor nodes. There must be at least one, maybe a test case?

Raided the house because they thought he was the provider of child abuse material.. They will not do the same mistake twice

https://rdns.im/court-official-statement-part-1

Mistake? Will lost in front of the courts and is on probation now.

Drobek

sr. member

Activity: 504

Merit: 251

Visual market analysis of Mintpal in the last 30 minutes:

Price - stable
Supply - stable
Demand - sinking down

qwizzie

legendary

Activity: 2548

Merit: 1245

i'm not sure everyone clicked the link at the end in the latest Development Update

These are the details of that link :

Nice job TanteStefana

thelonecrouton

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1000

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 02:23:09 PM

Quote from: Freckleg on August 19, 2014, 02:21:04 PM

Tor and legality:

- if the provider (exit node owner) has no control over data send through his node and he is not snooping data in any way there is no responsibility for the data handled. This is exactly what Master Node Tor will look like.

Yes this is the law theory, yet still you have incidents like what happened in Australia where the cops essentially raided a guys home with a SWAT team because he was running a Tor exit relay. I'm struggling to find cases in the USA where people were arrested for operating Tor nodes. There must be at least one, maybe a test case?

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jul/29/us-government-funding-tor-18m-onion-router

The US govt publicly funded TOR to the tune of $1.8 million last year, the Aussie guy was probably borking up their 100% exit node coverage, causing an annoying little red dot on someone's screen.

edit: There's a bunch of ways Evan could implement new features, personally I would just put the hooks in the daemon and have anything else as a separate package. Don't want to run it? Don't install it.

Freckleg

hero member

Activity: 508

Merit: 500

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 02:33:18 PM

Quote from: TsuyokuNaritai on August 19, 2014, 02:31:14 PM

Quote from: Kyune on August 19, 2014, 02:20:31 PM

Quote

We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept. TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq). For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes.

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.

If that's a serious concern, presumable Evan could set it up so masternodes can opt out of being an exit node (so just be a relay), and have a specific fee paid just to exit nodes. Then the market will sort it out. The less masternodes want to be exit nodes the more the remaining exit nodes will get, adding incentive to be an exit node.

That's a very good idea actually.

It's brilliant bring it to darkcoin talk

sharkbyte093

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: TsuyokuNaritai on August 19, 2014, 02:31:14 PM

Quote from: Kyune on August 19, 2014, 02:20:31 PM

Quote

We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept. TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq). For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes.

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.

If that's a serious concern, presumable Evan could set it up so masternodes can opt out of being an exit node (so just be a relay), and have a specific fee paid just to exit nodes. Then the market will sort it out. The less masternodes want to be exit nodes the more the remaining exit nodes will get, adding incentive to be an exit node.

That's a very good idea actually.

@Drobek: "Anonymised payments are IMO more sensitive than anonymous traffic. So I am all in. "

Well if you think about it, anonymous payments can lead to people paying anonymously for hosting if you could find a company willing to do that. So someone could anonymously host a Masternode that runs a Tor exit relay.

Drobek

sr. member

Activity: 504

Merit: 251

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 02:27:16 PM

Quote from: erok on August 19, 2014, 02:25:28 PM

Quote from: Kyune on August 19, 2014, 02:20:31 PM

Quote

We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept. TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq). For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes.

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.

THANK YOU. Call me a troll, you haven't seen me troll. I'm legitimately asking questions here not saying fake buy points or "DUMP DUMP DUMP".

There needs to be a dialog for Masternode owners to opt-out obviously. Some people are not going to be comfortable running a Tor node, or at least an exit node.

Anonymised payments are IMO more sensitive than anonymous traffic. So I am all in.

TsuyokuNaritai

hero member

Activity: 574

Merit: 500

Quote from: Kyune on August 19, 2014, 02:20:31 PM

Quote

We’re very interested to get the community’s response to see if it’s viable .

I do have concerns about viability of the DarkTor concept. TOR exit nodes face some challenging liability issues because of the statistical likelihood they will output illegal content at some point (see discussion at https://www.torproject.org/eff/tor-legal-faq). For that reason many TOR node operators choose to only operate relay nodes.

If the proposal here is to essentially turn every masternode into a potential TOR exit node (when its turn comes up in some deterministic algorithm), I think that could present new and challenging new legal risks for DRK's masternode operators AND the providers that host them, at least in many jurisdictions.

If that's a serious concern, presumable Evan could set it up so masternodes can opt out of being an exit node (so just be a relay), and have a specific fee paid just to exit nodes. Then the market will sort it out. The less masternodes want to be exit nodes the more the remaining exit nodes will get, adding incentive to be an exit node.

Honest Tim

hero member

Activity: 768

Merit: 1000

Quote from: sharkbyte093 on August 19, 2014, 01:57:29 PM

Quote from: Brilliantrocket on August 19, 2014, 01:54:35 PM

It's not a conspiracy to suggest that there are backdoors in computer hardware. It's a fact and we've known about it for a while.

It's still a conspiracy to people who haven't been paying attention for the past few years.

"No way the NSA is spying on everyone! That can't be possible."

so painfully true.

Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 4258. (Read 9723748 times)