In the best interest of darkcoin I will turn in my twitter, if we can find someone worthy!
We turned our twitter over to a marketing professional, and paid them ozziecoins. Marketing is not my strong suit either. 
Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 5473. (Read 9723733 times)
May 29, 2014, 12:59:38 AM
May 29, 2014, 12:59:27 AM
In the best interest of darkcoin I will turn in my twitter, if we can find someone worthy!
Why? What happened?Some people didnt like what I was tweeting.
Some got their panties all twisted up. 
https://twitter.com/DarkcoinCrypto/status/471855988241227776
May 29, 2014, 12:57:24 AM
In the best interest of darkcoin I will turn in my twitter, if we can find someone worthy!
Ok. Let's put this into perspective. First, the price. It was awesome watching it runaway into the nexus but now it has returned to a more 'normal' place. What does this mean? For one, the run up and all definitetly means people want anonymous transactions and are down for masternodes. If you would have told me two weeks ago we would be at .01 I would have been ecstatic, however, we blew through that and landed way up in the .02s. Now, I'm not saying we should forget that we can get back there and not to aim higher, but this is all happening at an accelerated pace. Masternodes are not yet running and darksend is still not able to process transactions over 10 drk. Not to say these wont be fixed and done so with alacrity and fastidiousness. I want to say to everyone here, we have been and are continually getting trolled. Seriously. For weeks. FOR WEEKS. From ymer a self admitted troll to clown-baby-ass or whatever. We have to just ignore them. It's insane. There's nothing more dangerous than a stupid person who thinks they are a genius. Now, with the precipitous drop in price, trolls roll in and we gotta just chill. It's hard to do, but .01 is damn impressive. These guys are getting us riled up over stupid shit like, 'you want anonymity for public data? sounds stupid'. They dont deserve an explanation. All they need is a reply either with a link to the white paper or a 'no.' That's it. I have seen this forum devolve into a frenzied state. We're agitated and they know it. We can't let them rile us up.
May 29, 2014, 12:54:49 AM
In the best interest of darkcoin I will turn in my twitter, if we can find someone worthy!
May 29, 2014, 12:47:16 AM
I stopped reading when you drew an analogy between Bitcoin and cold hard cash.
lol. You are either trolling or totally naive to how Bitcoin functions. You should see how well they mapped addresses in wallets of Silk Road users to user ID's on this forum based solely on addresses in people's signatures.
lol. You are either trolling or totally naive to how Bitcoin functions. You should see how well they mapped addresses in wallets of Silk Road users to user ID's on this forum based solely on addresses in people's signatures.
Yes. It is frustrating how Bitcoin-Qt never tells you about your change addresses, and does not let you pick inputs when creating a transaction. The last transaction I sent, Bitcoin-Qt pulled from like 5 separate addresses in my wallet when it could have easily filled the needs with 1 or 2 at the most. I pulled up the transaction in a block explorer and was like "Gee, thanks, asshole!"
May 29, 2014, 12:44:02 AM
Anyone who wants to set up masternodes but doesn't know how, just post what youre doing in this thread, me and others will help you for free. Or go in the irc room and people will help you there to, its not hard.
Sleepyx and others happy to help people who want to set one up for free. Good if you know linux. Else, I do it for you for 10 Drks.If anyone wants me to setup a Masternode for them, PM me.
If you want more than 3 MNs, it will be 8 drks each. More than 10, I'll do for 5 Drks each. More than 25, we should do a deal.
If you're worried about security, you keep your own wallet encryption passphrase secret. I never need to know it. The passphrase cannot be hacked if more than 15 strings.
You then change your server password. And I'll show you how to lock down your server.
We will NEVER EVER install a keylogger or any malware on your fresh Ubuntu server. We make an honest living. You can do checks after the install, to ensure no malware.
If you're truly paranoid, contact DyslexicZombei and he may be able to do further hardening steps (note: we do not warrant their work). MN count increased to 375 from 371 yesterday.
Why setup a Masternode you ask?
Now, with the new 20% of block reward payment to MNs (starting from June 14th), below are the new estimated ROIs, (Masternode count on left and ROI on right):
374 = 56% p.a. (current Masternode count)
500 = 42% p.a.
750 = 28% p.a.
1000 = 21% p.a.
1500 = 14% p.a.
2000 = 10.5% p.a.
This is based on the price in Darks (or the USD/BTC at the time you buy the Darks to setup the Masternodes and assumes the price in USD/BTC does not change). You need 1000 Darks per Masternode.
Therefore, in time the system could level out to between 2000 and 4000 MNs for a 5 to 10% annual return. However, this implies 2 to 4 Million darks, which is 50 to 93% of current coin supply. This also implies the price of Darks are likely to rise, if people kept trying to setup MNs.
So get your MN setup and get regular income starting June 14! This is a solid opportunity in my view. I've setup 5 MNs already.
May 29, 2014, 12:35:57 AM
How is the current Bitcoin system going to spell any of this out? You can see transactions in/out. You don't know what's going to supplier or which ones. You don't know what's going back to customers. You don't know anything but money in/money out. It's like looking at a banking balance sheet that has everything blacked out but the amounts. It isn't going to give you any information that isn't already public. Blacking out the numbers as well has no benefit at all.
So your solution is the same at ymer's:
Never generate change and never combine dust/change addresses to pay for large debts.
Cool. You're right, Bitcoin is totally anonymous.
If I was standing in front of you and said "I just spent $0.98 and got $3.21 and then spent $1.00," what good would that do you? Now you know I have a net income of $1.23, but past that you don't know where the money went, what it was for or where the money came in from. You know nothing but that somewhere there are addresses where money went to and from and they happened to result in a net of $1.23. That $0.98 could have been a return or it could have been a purchase of hamburger meat (or part of a bill or x or y or z). The income could have been a purchase or accounts receivable or x or y or z. You know absolutely nothing other than that I now have $1.23 more than I had prior.
I stopped reading when you drew an analogy between Bitcoin and cold hard cash.
lol. You are either trolling or totally naive to how Bitcoin functions. You should see how well they mapped addresses in wallets of Silk Road users to user ID's on this forum based solely on addresses in people's signatures.
What did ymer say? Please don't quote him! LOL
It's too fun shooting down his crackpot ideas!
I had to click show to see it, he is normally ignored.
dunno...but if i remember right we used tumblers....sometimes two,three back to back....might not be feasible/trustworthy now but was common place iirc
May 29, 2014, 12:32:58 AM
How is the current Bitcoin system going to spell any of this out? You can see transactions in/out. You don't know what's going to supplier or which ones. You don't know what's going back to customers. You don't know anything but money in/money out. It's like looking at a banking balance sheet that has everything blacked out but the amounts. It isn't going to give you any information that isn't already public. Blacking out the numbers as well has no benefit at all.
So your solution is the same at ymer's:
Never generate change and never combine dust/change addresses to pay for large debts.
Cool. You're right, Bitcoin is totally anonymous.
If I was standing in front of you and said "I just spent $0.98 and got $3.21 and then spent $1.00," what good would that do you? Now you know I have a net income of $1.23, but past that you don't know where the money went, what it was for or where the money came in from. You know nothing but that somewhere there are addresses where money went to and from and they happened to result in a net of $1.23. That $0.98 could have been a return or it could have been a purchase of hamburger meat (or part of a bill or x or y or z). The income could have been a purchase or accounts receivable or x or y or z. You know absolutely nothing other than that I now have $1.23 more than I had prior.
I stopped reading when you drew an analogy between Bitcoin and cold hard cash.
lol. You are either trolling or totally naive to how Bitcoin functions. You should see how well they mapped addresses in wallets of Silk Road users to user ID's on this forum based solely on addresses in people's signatures.
I have to sleep now, good luck understanding Bitcoin and its implications.
What did ymer say? Please don't quote him! LOL
It's too fun shooting down his crackpot ideas!
I had to click show to see it, he is normally ignored.
May 29, 2014, 12:30:11 AM
What did ymer say? Please don't quote him! LOL
May 29, 2014, 12:29:43 AM
I just want to give my opinion as someone who holds alot of XC and some DRK; It's not about thin skinned or thick skinned, it's people forgetting why XC even rose in the first place, the utter greed of the Dark cartel. Yes, saying I'm sorry for the instamine can be a valid defense, but it wasn't exactly rectified when these 2 million coins mined for mere pennies were sold on the exchanges for as high as a dollar for months even before basic Darksend was ever implemented. At least XC started off cheap, you could have picked up as much as 50k of them for less than a Bitcoin in its opening days on the exchanges.
That's not accurate. The rate for DRKs was 100.000 DRKs for 2.5 BTC for ~15 days straight since launch plus the first days in the exchanges (ccex opened at 0.00001 - 0.00002).
The whole instamine of 1.7m was priced at 25 to 42.5 BTC (with then rates) for two weeks.
As cheap as XC was, (I got in at 0.00007 and out at 0.004+) there was simply no comparison, and the price spike was much quicker for people to get in. And of course the POW monetary base was instamined at 100% (XC), not a fraction of it - because that's the nature of POW/POS hybrids.
May 29, 2014, 12:28:53 AM
That's a lot of if, you seriously think that companies will not (want to) consolidate those addresses at one point ?
Well then why don't you buy something from Overstock and come back and tell me how much BTC they own and who their customers are.
You can do the same for KNC.
I will wait patiently.
May 29, 2014, 12:28:46 AM
So your solution is the same at ymer's:
Never generate change and never combine dust/change addresses to pay for large debts.
Cool. You're right, Bitcoin is totally anonymous.
Not cool, see bit iodine.Never generate change and never combine dust/change addresses to pay for large debts.
Cool. You're right, Bitcoin is totally anonymous.
I was being hella sarcastic.
Useful site though, had never seen it.
May 29, 2014, 12:28:22 AM
How is the current Bitcoin system going to spell any of this out? You can see transactions in/out. You don't know what's going to supplier or which ones. You don't know what's going back to customers. You don't know anything but money in/money out. It's like looking at a banking balance sheet that has everything blacked out but the amounts. It isn't going to give you any information that isn't already public. Blacking out the numbers as well has no benefit at all.
So your solution is the same at ymer's:
Never generate change and never combine dust/change addresses to pay for large debts.
Cool. You're right, Bitcoin is totally anonymous.
If I was standing in front of you and said "I just spent $0.98 and got $3.21 and then spent $1.00," what good would that do you? Now you know I have a net income of $1.23, but past that you don't know where the money went, what it was for or where the money came in from. You know nothing but that somewhere there are addresses where money went to and from and they happened to result in a net of $1.23. That $0.98 could have been a return or it could have been a purchase of hamburger meat (or part of a bill or x or y or z). The income could have been a purchase or accounts receivable or x or y or z. You know absolutely nothing other than that I now have $1.23 more than I had prior.
May 29, 2014, 12:27:42 AM
How is the current Bitcoin system going to spell any of this out? You can see transactions in/out. You don't know what's going to supplier or which ones. You don't know what's going back to customers. You don't know anything but money in/money out. It's like looking at a banking balance sheet that has everything blacked out but the amounts. It isn't going to give you any information that isn't already public. Blacking out the numbers as well has no benefit at all.
So your solution is the same at ymer's:
Never generate change and never combine dust/change addresses to pay for large debts.
Cool. You're right, Bitcoin is totally anonymous.
Why would you combine dust? Just make 100000 dust transactions to the address of whoever you are paying to, or make 100000 dust transactions to 100000 addresses of the recipient.
Easy as pie.
May 29, 2014, 12:27:34 AM
How is the current Bitcoin system going to spell any of this out? You can see transactions in/out. You don't know what's going to supplier or which ones. You don't know what's going back to customers. You don't know anything but money in/money out. It's like looking at a banking balance sheet that has everything blacked out but the amounts. It isn't going to give you any information that isn't already public. Blacking out the numbers as well has no benefit at all.
So your solution is the same at ymer's:
Never generate change and never combine dust/change addresses to pay for large debts.
Cool. You're right, Bitcoin is totally anonymous.
I was being hella sarcastic.
Useful site though, had never seen it.
May 29, 2014, 12:27:20 AM
I don't think anonymity is a fad. It's a requirement for digital cash.
+1. As businesses get into using cryptocurrency, they will make it an automatic requirement. No company is going to want to open its books to competitors, but that is what will potentially happen every time an accounting employee goes from Company A to Company B (or simply sells out for cash). That was a "light bulb" moment for me regarding anonymity - ALL SERIOUS ALTCOINS MUST HAVE IT going forward.
How does the lack of anonymity open the doors for competitors? Because now they can see how much a company is earning? Congrats; that does absolutely nothing.
Anonymity only serves to thwart the governments, which is what will lead to stronger regulation.
You can't be serious, it's a joke right ? You don't see the issue for a company to let its competitors see its income, when it sells the most/the less, how much it receives per transaction in average etc.
You're going to have to spell this out to me. We know how much Microsoft earns. We know how much they spend. We know where they source things from. Same with Apple. Same with Blizzard. Same with Exxon. How is ANY of this going to matter? And if it's so important, why is it all public information anyways? Basically you want to anonymize data that is already publicly displayed. That's asinine.
You talk about turnover, I talk about account details, transactions in real time, how the money is used, how much did they pay a supplier etc. sensitive informations. You are either dumb or naive.
Please tell me how are you gonna tell how many bitcoins someone owns if he uses a different address for each customer/transaction and doesn't move them to a concentrating address.
That's a lot of if, you seriously think that companies will not (want to) consolidate those addresses at one point ?
May 29, 2014, 12:26:16 AM
How is the current Bitcoin system going to spell any of this out? You can see transactions in/out. You don't know what's going to supplier or which ones. You don't know what's going back to customers. You don't know anything but money in/money out. It's like looking at a banking balance sheet that has everything blacked out but the amounts. It isn't going to give you any information that isn't already public. Blacking out the numbers as well has no benefit at all.
So your solution is the same at ymer's:
Never generate change and never combine dust/change addresses to pay for large debts.
Cool. You're right, Bitcoin is totally anonymous.
May 29, 2014, 12:24:54 AM
It's this high barrier of entry into Dark and the fact the Masternode system seems setup to further enrich all those big early Dark holders that has turned so many people off.
Now I'm not going to say Evan is responsible for the instamine or that he intended for an elite few to take hold of most of the coins, I don't know what is in his heart or mind, but I'm just saying this is all the PERCEPTION that many people have of Dark, and little has been done to fix that image. At the end of the day you can have the best product on the block but if you price yourself out of the market, you lose out, a good example is Apple v.s Microsoft in the 80s. This twitter drama only further enforces the view that Dark has an ivory tower mentality.
Yes, MNs have to have a basic limit, else they can't guarantee that the MNs are legit. And it is designed to drive the price of Darks up.
May 29, 2014, 12:24:49 AM
How is the current Bitcoin system going to spell any of this out? You can see transactions in/out. You don't know what's going to supplier or which ones. You don't know what's going back to customers. You don't know anything but money in/money out. It's like looking at a banking balance sheet that has everything blacked out but the amounts. It isn't going to give you any information that isn't already public. Blacking out the numbers as well has no benefit at all.
So your solution is the same as ymer's:
Never generate change and never combine dust/change addresses to pay for large debts.
Cool. You're right, Bitcoin is totally anonymous.
May 29, 2014, 12:22:39 AM
I don't think anonymity is a fad. It's a requirement for digital cash.
+1. As businesses get into using cryptocurrency, they will make it an automatic requirement. No company is going to want to open its books to competitors, but that is what will potentially happen every time an accounting employee goes from Company A to Company B (or simply sells out for cash). That was a "light bulb" moment for me regarding anonymity - ALL SERIOUS ALTCOINS MUST HAVE IT going forward.
How does the lack of anonymity open the doors for competitors? Because now they can see how much a company is earning? Congrats; that does absolutely nothing.
Anonymity only serves to thwart the governments, which is what will lead to stronger regulation.
You can't be serious, it's a joke right ? You don't see the issue for a company to let its competitors see its income, when it sells the most/the less, how much it receives per transaction in average etc.
You're going to have to spell this out to me. We know how much Microsoft earns. We know how much they spend. We know where they source things from. Same with Apple. Same with Blizzard. Same with Exxon. How is ANY of this going to matter? And if it's so important, why is it all public information anyways? Basically you want to anonymize data that is already publicly displayed. That's asinine.
You talk about turnover, I talk about account details, transactions in real time, how the money is used, how much did they pay a supplier etc. sensitive informations. You are either dumb or naive.
How is the current Bitcoin system going to spell any of this out? You can see transactions in/out. You don't know what's going to supplier or which ones. You don't know what's going back to customers. You don't know anything but money in/money out. It's like looking at a banking balance sheet that has everything blacked out but the amounts. It isn't going to give you any information that isn't already public. Blacking out the numbers as well has no benefit at all.
Jump to: