Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 6159. (Read 9723787 times)

My mind just exploded. What are X1, S1, and W1?

X will always be less than 10DRK, therefore we need another input to bring it to 10DRK total. This way no one can tell who is receiving which inputs, thus cleaning them in the inverse way DarkSend works. Checkout my post above again, I modified it a bit.

Make sense?

My mind just exploded. What are X1, S1, and W1?

John darksends 2 coins from A to C, gets 8 back as change on address X
a few days later..
John darksends 8 coins from B to D, gets 2 back as change on address Y

Joe darksends 3 coins from E to G, gets 7 back as change on address W
a few days later..
Joe darksends 1 coins from F to H, gets 9 back as change on address Z

Suzie darksends 3 coins from K to Q, gets 7 back as change on address S
a few days later..
Suzie darksends 1 coins from J to R, gets 9 back as change on address T

Now, we make a pool with X+Y+X1+W+Z+W1+S+T+S1.

Pool total output == 60DRK

X+Y+X1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
W+Z+W1 = 10DRK + 10DRK
S+T+S1 = 10DRK + 10DRK

Make sense?

On second thought, I'm not sure this solves the problem.  My understanding is that you want to accumulate the dirty change in the wallet until it breaches a certain amount (say 10 for example), then it is washed in a "change only" wash with a bunch of "10" transactions.  The problem I see is that even the clean coins could be linked to the original transaction.  Just to explain:

John darksends 2 coins from A to C, gets 8 back as change on address X
a few days later..
John darksends 8 coins from B to D, gets 2 back as change on address Y

Y+X are submitted to the change mixing pool (10 coins), and come out "clean" at address Z.

The problem is that the coins at address Z are not clean really, they are "suspect", they could have possibly participated in any darksends that generated the dirty coins that composed the "change washing" pool.

Now when Johns wants to spend coins from A, B, and Z in the same transaction.

So if John wants to send coins from A+B+Z in one transaction, the fact that Z participated in a pool that contained X and Y is enough to expose A and B as the original participants in the darksend transaction.

Really it leaves us at the same position that we were at previously after the original darksends.

I hope that made sense.

Wow! This is great. About 400+ pages ago I talked about having a different kind of pool for change outputs only. Put in all of your change outputs and you'll get new fresh clean inputs of 10DRK. The client could automatically do this after each darksend, which would also get you new inputs for the next round.

I'm currently embedded in patching stratum and p2pool to support the masternode payments, which is why I haven't been around. It takes a lot of work to make something so different from anything else out there, dare I say, revolutionary?

May be it's full now but it doesn't matter because it did sync up until 46226 (using connect=www.drkpool.com, starting from block 0), the block which most people got stuck with.


This doesn't seem like a coincidence to me!

Thank you for the update Evan.

I'm currently embedded in patching stratum and p2pool to support the masternode payments, which is why I haven't been around. It takes a lot of work to make something so different from anything else out there, dare I say, revolutionary?

Wow! This is great. About 400+ pages ago I talked about having a different kind of pool for change outputs only. Put in all of your change outputs and you'll get new fresh clean inputs of 10DRK. The client could automatically do this after each darksend, which would also get you new inputs for the next round.

I'm currently embedded in patching stratum and p2pool to support the masternode payments, which is why I haven't been around. It takes a lot of work to make something so different from anything else out there, dare I say, revolutionary?

I would like to ask the devs to make it compulsory to include the blockchain as part of the supernodes, and have it as 'read by anyone'.
I think that once we have the supernodes up and running with a readable blockchain that is accessible by anyone, different services might evolve independent of the darkcoin devs on top of this, such as the thin wallet described by TS.

My only concern about having a change-address-only pool is that it will shed a little light on the original darksend mixes (ie now you know which coins were change and which coins were not change when you look at the mixing step).  

This is bullshit. You did NOT send out double payout for blocks. Double payment simply happened because you've had DB issue AGAIN!
You're saying people have had issues with your service, and your reward by RANDOMLY awarding double payout for random blocks?!

Hell yeah, let me go point my miner at you  right now!   Random compensation for random block, for lucky winners? That is not compensation, that is a lottery. What about those who gain without loses, or theses who double loos by sheer bad "random compensation luck"?

Your backend is crap and you've been screwing with everyone's mining. This time, it double payed out. It was not intentional, or you'd have made a nice email or forum "spam" about it.

Nor did I receive an email from a admin expressing whatever feeling that they should double payout as compensation for downtime, locked payouts, stratum failure and constant DDoD's, all of which you've previously promised to have fixed and never happen again.

 I've lost more mining to you guys than to scrypt-algo mining instability with 280x's peaking 85ºC and CGwatcher rebooting.
 BE HONEST; DONT BULLSHIT, and people will understand that the world is not perfect and shit happens.

 I don't like being bullshitted. You completely screwed me over twice, on a coin launch and with DRK.

 I like your fronted GUI, mais je n'aime pas votre fausses promesses

Couldn't you just clean XYZ wallets by sending yourself dummy transactions between legit ones (or having the client automate it)?  Anonymint talked about this I believe.  The more you send yourself the better.  Also wasn't there talk of having some sort of injection nodes churning out constant dummy transactions?

Wow! This is great. About 400+ pages ago I talked about having a different kind of pool for change outputs only. Put in all of your change outputs and you'll get new flesh clean inputs of 10DRK. The client could automatically do this after each darksend, which would also get you new inputs for the next round.

I spent a fair amount of time thinking about the discussion with dime, humanitee, luigi1111, camosoul and others yesterday about the anonymity of Darksend.  I suspected that the logic behind darksend as currently implemented was not sound, and I thought it would be best to determine how exactly darksend was working, and do an in-depth analysis of a mixing cycle and the transactions that follow mixing.

...

Best,
Sim

About time. BTC38, are you watching?