Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 4846. (Read 9723748 times)

downloaded the binary

I don't have a linux box handy, but the binary tgz alone is over 15MB.  Did you compile from source or download binary?

Debug symbols removed via 'strip' - should not affect the functionality.

Can you provide the error message please?

Why are you refering to a 3 month old post - is this a current issue?

Here we mainly hunt trolls, for good stuff you can go to: htts://darkcointalk.org  

darkcoind for linux  v.10.11.5 had 53 MB. The new one under 10MB. I did try to start it on the server and got a fault massage.
Anything wrong or did i make something wrong ?

1 & 2. They would have to buy an extraordinary amount of DRK considering there are already 600 masternodes. Furthermore, with IP obfuscation and I2P, they wouldn't know who the user was. If they bought 50% of the network they'd be selected 25% of the time as both masternodes. To mitigate this, a potential solution would be to DarkSend multiple times to yourself before sending to the recipient.

I'll look into the PoSA.

3. To each their own. Your scenario is not feasible, even if all the pools were taken down.

I can delete it correct

We experienced the same problem on centos with our own project.

Upgrading the build process to use a newer qt4 for linux resolved the problem, we have swapped to qt-4.8.6 when gitian building.

no.

1 & 2. Say a government bought a sizeable amount of DRK and opened a lot of MasterNodes. What stops them from tracking at least a potion of the transactions that are supposed to be anonymous? CloakCoin's main feature (expected in the next couple of days) is called Proof of Stake Anonymous (PoSA), and it uses the PoS feature to conduct anonymous transactions. Pretty cool stuff and no MasterNodes required. Glad to hear DRK is taking steps to alleviate the potential risk here though.

3. I can see where you're coming from, but it also lowers the upkeep of the network significantly. What happens if somehow everybody stops mining DRK all at once? Not saying it's going to happen, just a thought though. PoS obviously has some weaknesses too. The main one to me is that you can just open your wallet once in awhile and get full stake without really securing that network much. This is what also got me looking at BlackCoin and its upcoming PoS 2.0 as they're calling it. A major change there is that wallets must be open to stake.

Nice to have a good discussion here once in awhile haha

do I need this darkcoind  file in the same folder as the wallet ?

The power lays in teamplay.

1. DRK's CoinJoin implementation is much better than a regular CoinJoin transaction. Coming in RC4 is a split masternode system, where 2 masternodes are selected and then one splits your transaction amount into denominated units (1 DRK, 5 DRK, 10 DRK, and so on) before you send it to the other one for the actual transaction. No timing analysis can be done on the blockchain to see who denominated at any point in time. The only weakness is that if you own both masternodes, you can trace the payments because you are seeing realtime what clients belong to denominationed units and where those units end up. At some point we are getting IP obfuscation, as well as I2P.

I haven't looked at CLOAK (is it really all caps like that?) in some time, but I know in the beginning they were talking about sending coins through exchanges to remove taint.

2. Yes, masternodes are trustless. They cannot steal your coins. This is DRK's greatest feature. All the other implementations I've seen rely on trust. If CLOAK still works as I've described above, then it is laden with trust and therefore very insecure. It will work until it doesn't.

There is a caveat here though. DRK has a lot of masternodes hosted on Amazon. Amazon has access to the physical machines (which are most likely virtualized instances all the way down to the network switches and controllers). If they wanted to, they could map a great number of transactions. Someone proposed yesterday limiting masternodes 1 and 2 from being in the same IP address range, meaning 54.54.54.54 and 54.54.55.54 would never be selected as masternodes simultaneously. This seems like a good stepping off point to limit concentration of nodes on one provider. If 60% of nodes are hosted on Amazon and they cannot be simultaneously selected for the current round, that means the other 40% will be selected more of the time then Amazon nodes will. This will add an incentive to distribute masternodes across more providers.

3. Proof of stake merely enriches the rich, fuck that. At least with DRK you have to provide a service to the network to increase your wealth, and it is a greatly needed service at that.

Excellent news !! and i agree.. they rock.

 THIS... is true sign of professionalism.

 I would not usually do something like this, exposing a private message... but I think it is well deserved.

 MineP.it have shown to be TOP pool operators.

 In a land packed-filled with shitcoins, it is natural to not be up to speed on true innovation, and not instantly be aware of whats going on with each coin-

A simple communication exchange clearly shows the ethics behind this team.

 Miners beware !! MineP.it  ROCKS !!

 grazie mille, Dan !!

To be fair, I don't think not having any in the US would be the best bet, but potenitally, going forward, it could be a little risky for those using their own personal details in contracting any server package. Again, my understanding is that a warrant would not be needed under the patriot act (the full name is the USA Patriot Act, or "Uniting and Strengthening America Act by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001") to obtain the personal details under some trumped up money laundering financial terrorism investigation. I think having such a concentration in the US with companies subservient to the US Gov could potentially be an issue.

While it's reasonable to believe that if the US gov really wanted details they could probably get them from server providers in other coutries anyway, another thing altogether is having a legal obligation to provide the data, and as you point out, the disclosures remaining in secret. In many (most?) other countries the entities providing the servers presumably would not be run by the state and would have to seek a warrant to obtain the data, not being subject to the PATRIOT act, which is a prime example of the erosion of civil liberties since 9/11.

Maybe the best option is a server in Russia

thanks .. appreciate it

I've updated the text, Evan will paste it in when he has a minute (I don't have access to his bitcointalk account ).

Can you pls update first post.. specially below part as its no longer up to date :

Latest Client Stable: 9.11.5 and RC3 with Darksend is 10.11.5 - See downloads!