After watching the RC4 testnet progress over the past couple weeks I just want to say now, on the eve of potential RC4 release, that #5 Technology Risk (https://darkcointalk.org/threads/10-reasons-to-invest-in-darkcoin.814/#post-14952) is probably the number one threat to DRK at this moment. It sounded like as recently as a couple days ago some testnet DarkSends still didn't go as planned and some DRK went missing for some testers.
It should be common sense for the dev's (who have amazed me with their abilities)but if, due to whatever technical malfunction, people's real world DRK disappears due to DS+ malfunction (or their own ignorance), that is a colossal negative for DRK.
But hopefully they've tested it beyond what is necessary and this isn't a viable risk any more because problems like this could be a coin-killer due to the negative PR/stigma that gets attached to DRK instantaneously.
TL;DR The one bug that RC4 can't have is losing people's DRK; that shit kills.
JL
It should be common sense for the dev's (who have amazed me with their abilities)but if, due to whatever technical malfunction, people's real world DRK disappears due to DS+ malfunction (or their own ignorance), that is a colossal negative for DRK.
But hopefully they've tested it beyond what is necessary and this isn't a viable risk any more because problems like this could be a coin-killer due to the negative PR/stigma that gets attached to DRK instantaneously.
TL;DR The one bug that RC4 can't have is losing people's DRK; that shit kills.
JL
Your list of risks is well constructed Jesse; thanks for putting it together. In regards to #5, I too am concerned that there still appears to be a number of issues with DS+ (and the wallet in general) within the testing environment. From the posts I'm reading on the testnet thread there are issues needing to either be rectified or clarified around values for the number of Darksend rounds, collateral fees and coins denominating being locked/unlocked in unexpected ways. Also there was mention there within the past 72 hours of the consequences of a user's PC going into standby/hibernate midstream thereby causing some halt to processing. I'm sure none of these are show-stoppers (and compared to the enormous strides that have been made, almost inconsequential), but, like you've pointed out, if users start having problems (and they will, it's inevitable) and those problems start coming thick and fast involving difficulties sending/receiving, trust will be eroded. I'd much rather see RC4 delayed further and testing be way more thorough. It's far easier to rectify these issues prior to release than go into fire-fighting mode after the event and have to deal with the backlash.
The other thing which you've touched on in your points but which I think everyone needs to consider is how to prevent Darkcoin ending up with an extreme bad-ass reputation (Silk Road style) so that members of the public in general don't perceive it's purpose is purely to subvert society and help terrorists/paedophiles/thugs. I really don't think you can underestimate how easily this could happen. All it will take is a couple of money laundering/drug warlord stories to hit the mainstream media with Darkcoin attached as the facility they used and we're on a slippery slope to this becoming seen as a criminal enterprise first and foremost. Then Evan's likely to be named alongside Ross Ulbricht as being a "bad person". This, of course, would be a travesty but it could happen easily and very rapidly. The public is completely clueless about the privacy being ripped to shreds by modern big business/government and they're just as clueless about the need for anonymity within financial transactions. We need to think about this in regards to corrective statements and press releases that can help educate the public as to why anonymous financial transactions are so important to freedom. You can bet your bottom darkcoin government everywhere will look to position Darkcoin as a serious threat and impediment to law enforcement and anti-terrorism activity (i.e. they're not going to like it, even though, as pointed out on this forum by other people, they'll use it extensively too)
Some things to think about....
Did you ever worked with development software from companies like Rockwell and Siemens. It´s my bussiness to work with both of them day by day in automation industries.
These products are used in around 95% of production lines around the globe. Each new version and product pops up, the endusers are betatester. Sometimes i am searching on
bugs over long time and i always think i did something wrong. In the end it´s a develpment bug that you can report and they fix it with a patch.
I followed the process from the beginning on testnet with each new version and the progress i have seen day by day was amazing.
It´s time to put it on mainnet. Thanks devteam for your great job.
No dotnetmin, haven't worked with those companies' products; more the usual corporate fair (MS, Oracle, SAP, etc). There's no doubt what we're seeing from this dev team is an agile process on steroids. A large multi-national software vendor couldn't get even close to this level of performance, so yes, hats off to Evan and the other devs, plus all who've been on testnet adding their input (thank you). My point about ensuring everything possible has been done to eliminate issues prior to release still stands, which undoubtedly is Evan's intent....but he's under enormous pressure and I'm adding my voice to the, don't-buckle-until-RC4-is-very-robust camp.
Very proud of what you've all done actually.
