[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 6695.

TanteStefana

full member

Activity: 280

Merit: 100

The Future Of Work

Quote from: humanitee on March 03, 2014, 08:13:46 PM

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 08:05:59 PM

Not really, you're missing the denomination part.

User A wants to pay $103
User B wants to pay $254
User C wants to pay $51
User D wants to pay $53

-- All of them deposit their bills into the bucket:
$100,$1,$1,$1 == 103
$100,$100,$50,$1,$1,$1,$1 == 254
$50,$1 == 51
$50,$1,$1,$1 == 53

---- Now, count the bills of each kind
3x $100
3x $50
11x $1

Now the people randomly come collect what they're owed.

Who paid who?

Could you not just see that the destination address balance matches the total amount withdrawn from the beginning address(es)?

Does the change get DarkSent too? That would be pretty cool.

The payments into the buckets are made by different addresses that only the sender's wallet recognize as being theirs. Those are mixed up with other people sending via darkcoin, then the analogy eduffield put up makes much more sense!

kadrek

sr. member

Activity: 327

Merit: 250

Just wondering about the difficulty, it's at 317 right now, what would our difficulty be if DRK was a scrypt coin? Or I guess if everyone mining DRK switched to a scrypt coin how many GH's would we have? Just trying to compare our hashrate to a scrypt coin I guess. I'm not sure how to word this haha.

HammerHedd

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: eduffield on March 02, 2014, 02:22:55 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on March 02, 2014, 12:02:51 PM

Any thing deterministic violates the Byzantine General's solution of proof-of-work and can be defrauded. What will happen is the fraudsters will game this deterministic selection to put themselves in control. Understand that the fundamental genius of Satoshi's invention is that nothing can be known about the next block winner a priori. I explained in great detail why all non-PoW systems, e.g. proof-of-stake, are thus not secure. If you introduce determinism (e.g. a pseudorandom number generator is controlled by whom ever controls the initial seed) then you've lost that key attribute of PoW w.r.t. to your use in controlling the denial-of-service of enjoining transactions in the CoinJoin algorithm.

Ah, you're replying to something completely 100% different than what I said. I suppose it's super complicated. How about this, I'll write the code for this into DarkSend in the next few days. We'll do a public beta test on testnet and you can try to break it. I'll document it and make flow charts and everything so you can see how it works.

It's actually fun looking up these references <--NERD!

humanitee

hero member

Activity: 1302

Merit: 502

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 08:05:59 PM

Not really, you're missing the denomination part.

User A wants to pay $103
User B wants to pay $254
User C wants to pay $51
User D wants to pay $53

-- All of them deposit their bills into the bucket:
$100,$1,$1,$1 == 103
$100,$100,$50,$1,$1,$1,$1 == 254
$50,$1 == 51
$50,$1,$1,$1 == 53

---- Now, count the bills of each kind
3x $100
3x $50
11x $1

Now the people randomly come collect what they're owed.

Who paid who?

Could you not just see that the destination address balance matches the total amount withdrawn from the beginning address(es)?

Does the change get DarkSent too? That would be pretty cool.

TanteStefana

full member

Activity: 280

Merit: 100

The Future Of Work

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 08:07:50 PM

Yes! This is correct, Tante's is better use this on Wikipedia.

Oh good, now I understand! Cheesy

Thank you!

TanteStefana

full member

Activity: 280

Merit: 100

The Future Of Work

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 08:05:59 PM

Quote from: watuba on March 03, 2014, 07:57:07 PM

If I know how much each of the six wallets had that were emptied, couldn't I also link that up with the 6 different people that come in and take out their amounts(since each of the 6 people would take out an amount equal to one of the wallets that was emptied)? Sorry, I'm really slow too!

For example, 6 people drop off their payments $123, $31.45, $1, $2, $3, $4, and six different people later collect $123, $31.45, $1, $2, $3, $4, don't I know who paid who?

Not really, you're missing the denomination part.

User A wants to pay $103
User B wants to pay $254
User C wants to pay $51
User D wants to pay $53

-- All of them deposit their bills into the bucket:
$100,$1,$1,$1 == 103
$100,$100,$50,$1,$1,$1,$1 == 254
$50,$1 == 51
$50,$1,$1,$1 == 53

---- Now, count the bills of each kind
3x $100
3x $50
11x $1

Now the people randomly come collect what they're owed.

Who paid who?

Well, if you could tell how much each person put into the pool, and how much each person took out of the pool, totals, you could. However, if as you say, the sender sends using a different address for each denomination, it would be very confusing, and that's not shown on your chart. Is this correct though?

eduffield

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1036

Dash Developer

Quote from: TanteStefana on March 03, 2014, 08:07:00 PM

Yes! This is correct, Tante's is better use this on Wikipedia.

TanteStefana

full member

Activity: 280

Merit: 100

The Future Of Work

eduffield

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1036

Dash Developer

Quote from: watuba on March 03, 2014, 07:57:07 PM

If I know how much each of the six wallets had that were emptied, couldn't I also link that up with the 6 different people that come in and take out their amounts(since each of the 6 people would take out an amount equal to one of the wallets that was emptied)? Sorry, I'm really slow too!

For example, 6 people drop off their payments $123, $31.45, $1, $2, $3, $4, and six different people later collect $123, $31.45, $1, $2, $3, $4, don't I know who paid who?

Not really, you're missing the denomination part.

User A wants to pay $103
User B wants to pay $254
User C wants to pay $51
User D wants to pay $53

-- All of them deposit their bills into the bucket:
$100,$1,$1,$1 == 103
$100,$100,$50,$1,$1,$1,$1 == 254
$50,$1 == 51
$50,$1,$1,$1 == 53

---- Now, count the bills of each kind
3x $100
3x $50
11x $1

Now the people randomly come collect what they're owed.

Who paid who?

Lloydie

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

Darkcoin + airdrop = the most highly valued coin.

Just throwing out some ideas out there...

eduffield

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1036

Dash Developer

Quote from: HammerHedd on March 03, 2014, 07:28:03 PM

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 05:31:59 PM

Adding Complete Anonymity to DarkSend

As most of you are aware, we're currently building the decentralized foundation that that the future DarkSend implementation will sit on. DarkSend provides some basic anonymity currently, but this implementation shown above can be very robust, providing no way to determine the source or destination of money traveling through Darkcoin.

It'll use 2 separate stages in the pooling system, one to gather enough inputs to add a level of anonymity and one to merge them back together.

Can I add this chart to wikipedia?

Sure.

P2PHash

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

Hi guys, I'me setting up a new p2pool
Address: drk.p2phash.com

Could some of you try to connect to it, I'd like to test what kind of load my server can handle. Since it's p2pool you won't loose any shares coming from another p2pool and local hashrate doesn't impact your earnings
Low fee: 0.5%
Location: Switzerland

watuba

full member

Activity: 211

Merit: 100

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 07:46:34 PM

Quote from: TanteStefana on March 03, 2014, 06:59:46 PM

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 05:31:59 PM

Adding Complete Anonymity to DarkSend

As most of you are aware, we're currently building the decentralized foundation that that the future DarkSend implementation will sit on. DarkSend provides some basic anonymity currently, but this implementation shown above can be very robust, providing no way to determine the source or destination of money traveling through Darkcoin.

It'll use 2 separate stages in the pooling system, one to gather enough inputs to add a level of anonymity and one to merge them back together.

So the pay-ins and pay-outs end up being the same? That seems traceable? I'm sure I'm not understanding something... help please?

You pay into a bucket of 5's, 10's, 50's, etc. The bucket pays out exact amounts. So you can't tell who's money is who's between step 2 and step 3, so when they actually pay out the trail is gone.

How about this example, six people empty their wallets into a bucket, that bucket now has $2460 in it. A new group of 6 people come in take out their amounts. Who paid who?

If I know how much each of the six wallets had that were emptied, couldn't I also link that up with the 6 different people that come in and take out their amounts(since each of the 6 people would take out an amount equal to one of the wallets that was emptied)? Sorry, I'm really slow too!

For example, 6 people drop off their payments $123, $31.45, $1, $2, $3, $4, and six different people later collect $123, $31.45, $1, $2, $3, $4, don't I know who paid who?

TanteStefana

full member

Activity: 280

Merit: 100

The Future Of Work

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 07:52:11 PM

Quote from: TanteStefana on March 03, 2014, 07:45:54 PM

Thanks HammerHedd, I think you're right. But I think there is something to what watuba said as well.

eduffield, does our wallet also "collect" using one of it's pre-created addresses that sits in reserve? (colored hoping to catch his attention, LOL)

When it's in the first iteration it would be paying to the address pool, the unused addresses in that pool specifically. I'm hoping that's what you were asking?

Um, who's pool? the sender?

TanteStefana

full member

Activity: 280

Merit: 100

The Future Of Work

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 07:46:34 PM

You pay into a bucket of 5's, 10's, 50's, etc. The bucket pays out exact amounts. So you can't tell who's money is who's between step 2 and step 3, so when they actually pay out the trail is gone.

How about this example, six people empty their wallets into a bucket, that bucket now has $2460 in it. A new group of 6 people come in take out their amounts. Who paid who?

ok, since I'm not the smartest person, but still think I'm average so that other people might have the same question, does the block chain show person A spit out 10, 9, .6 and .03

and person B received the same denominations (which is what the chart shows)?

I mean, did you mistakenly make the chart a bit too simple? Wouldn't the combinations change?

eduffield

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1036

Dash Developer

Quote from: TanteStefana on March 03, 2014, 07:45:54 PM

Thanks HammerHedd, I think you're right. But I think there is something to what watuba said as well.

eduffield, does our wallet also "collect" using one of it's pre-created addresses that sits in reserve? (colored hoping to catch his attention, LOL)

When it's in the first iteration it would be paying to the address pool, the unused addresses in that pool specifically. I'm hoping that's what you were asking?

eduffield

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1036

Dash Developer

Quote from: TanteStefana on March 03, 2014, 06:59:46 PM

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 05:31:59 PM

Adding Complete Anonymity to DarkSend

As most of you are aware, we're currently building the decentralized foundation that that the future DarkSend implementation will sit on. DarkSend provides some basic anonymity currently, but this implementation shown above can be very robust, providing no way to determine the source or destination of money traveling through Darkcoin.

It'll use 2 separate stages in the pooling system, one to gather enough inputs to add a level of anonymity and one to merge them back together.

So the pay-ins and pay-outs end up being the same? That seems traceable? I'm sure I'm not understanding something... help please?

You pay into a bucket of 5's, 10's, 50's, etc. The bucket pays out exact amounts. So you can't tell who's money is who's between step 2 and step 3, so when they actually pay out the trail is gone.

How about this example, six people empty their wallets into a bucket, that bucket now has $2460 in it. A new group of 6 people come in take out their amounts. Who paid who?

TanteStefana

full member

Activity: 280

Merit: 100

The Future Of Work

Thanks HammerHedd, I think you're right. But I think there is something to what watuba said as well.

eduffield, does our wallet also "collect" using one of it's pre-created addresses that sits in reserve? (colored hoping to catch his attention, LOL)

HammerHedd

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: TanteStefana on March 03, 2014, 06:59:46 PM

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 05:31:59 PM

Adding Complete Anonymity to DarkSend

As most of you are aware, we're currently building the decentralized foundation that that the future DarkSend implementation will sit on. DarkSend provides some basic anonymity currently, but this implementation shown above can be very robust, providing no way to determine the source or destination of money traveling through Darkcoin.

It'll use 2 separate stages in the pooling system, one to gather enough inputs to add a level of anonymity and one to merge them back together.

So the pay-ins and pay-outs end up being the same? That seems traceable? I'm sure I'm not understanding something... help please?

Well, in one way, they would have to be since you (payer A) are sending a specific amount to Receiver A. But instead of getting the amount all at one time, they would ge4t it in chunks, which would be more difficult to trace back.

Consider -

I mine on a pool or two, so I get a coin or fraction of a coin every day. Now, someone sends me 10 DRK. Instead of getting a transaction of 10 DRK, I get a transaction of 5 DRK, 2.5 DRK, 1 DRK, etc.. Although at some point Payer A sent similar amounts to the BBOF in the middle, so did anyone else sending Darksend coins. So, payers A, B, and C all sent similar small amounts, and Receivers A, B, and C all receive similar amounts. You could eventually possibly calculate this with only one or two people sending and receiving, but after 100 people, it could realistically become impossible.

I feel like I didn't explain that very well.... Sad

It makes more sense in my head.

HammerHedd

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: eduffield on March 03, 2014, 05:31:59 PM

Adding Complete Anonymity to DarkSend

As most of you are aware, we're currently building the decentralized foundation that that the future DarkSend implementation will sit on. DarkSend provides some basic anonymity currently, but this implementation shown above can be very robust, providing no way to determine the source or destination of money traveling through Darkcoin.

It'll use 2 separate stages in the pooling system, one to gather enough inputs to add a level of anonymity and one to merge them back together.

Can I add this chart to wikipedia?

Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 6695. (Read 9723597 times)