Topic: [ANN][PIVX] - PRIVATE INSTANT VERIFIED TRANSACTION - PROOF OF STAKE - ZEROCOIN - page 453. (Read 782382 times)
April 21, 2016, 01:56:45 AM
They should already do PoW supply reduction it would have impact on the price of dnet.
April 21, 2016, 01:49:19 AM
New lows, guys. You still don't agree with PoW supply reduction?
April 20, 2016, 07:26:25 PM
Why probably?? I have yet to sell a single DNET. I have either purchased or mined my own DNET just like everyone else.
I don't know, I just assumed since you need funds to develop it. I missed that you said earlier that you haven't sold any.
I don't get it why you need donations to develop on the coin? Usually as the developer you hold enough coins to have an incentive to improve it.
If you look thru the transactions from that donation address dev got well over a million coins and that's just a quick glance thru.
Because they had MN when no one else had any and count was low they made shit loads of that so they do have gd incentive.
As long as stuff keeps rolling out and they don't just dump and run I got no probs.
The initial 60k will be burned when the coin goes PoS, not sure what you mean by loads. I have purchased or mined ALL of my personal DNET. the 1 Mil in the general fund is for Development uses as well. but not nearly enough to accomplish what we need. Please feel free to help us out by donating to the cause. I can assure you, the two of us who are working on this coin have invested more than any single person to this point. I believe that shows our dedication.
April 20, 2016, 07:20:03 PM
Is there a webpage dedicated dnet distribution stats?
There will be a Stats page on the new website which is in development now April 20, 2016, 06:57:13 PM
Is there a webpage dedicated dnet distribution stats?
April 20, 2016, 03:19:30 PM
Why probably?? I have yet to sell a single DNET. I have either purchased or mined my own DNET just like everyone else.
I don't know, I just assumed since you need funds to develop it. I missed that you said earlier that you haven't sold any.
I don't get it why you need donations to develop on the coin? Usually as the developer you hold enough coins to have an incentive to improve it.
If you look thru the transactions from that donation address dev got well over a million coins and that's just a quick glance thru.
Because they had MN when no one else had any and count was low they made shit loads of that so they do have gd incentive.
As long as stuff keeps rolling out and they don't just dump and run I got no probs.
April 20, 2016, 12:16:44 PM
Why probably?? I have yet to sell a single DNET. I have either purchased or mined my own DNET just like everyone else.
I don't know, I just assumed since you need funds to develop it. I missed that you said earlier that you haven't sold any.
I don't get it why you need donations to develop on the coin? Usually as the developer you hold enough coins to have an incentive to improve it.
April 19, 2016, 05:19:48 PM
Why probably?? I have yet to sell a single DNET. I have either purchased or mined my own DNET just like everyone else.
I don't know, I just assumed since you need funds to develop it. I missed that you said earlier that you haven't sold any.
well i got 123K of DNET
and i have not sold any
there a lot of coins in masternodes and i think this coin can go a lot further
i will keep reinvesting all the payments i get into masternodes and continue
to support this coin and its network.

master node count 793 as of 23:35 GMT 18/04/2016

master node count now 806 its still going up
thanks
Paul
April 19, 2016, 05:03:15 PM
Why probably?? I have yet to sell a single DNET. I have either purchased or mined my own DNET just like everyone else.
I don't know, I just assumed since you need funds to develop it. I missed that you said earlier that you haven't sold any.
April 19, 2016, 04:44:23 PM
So after reading through coinpayments last additions, our goal is around 1000 votes to get added..
April 19, 2016, 04:14:14 PM
April 19, 2016, 01:56:20 PM
Until I have time to study the dash paper could you give a brief summary of how the system could mitigate and check for a malicious service node?
The masternode network continuously checks itself for Bad or Mis-behaving Nodes. Since all activity that uses the Masternodes is chosen pseudo-randomly the attacker would have to personally control enough masternodes to guarantee that he/she would be chosen a minimum of 8 consecutive times to be able to fake the network in any way.
If you are referring to specifically snooping on the transactions. take this example;
if an attacker has control of 100 nodes, and there are 800 nodes in existence. If the transactions were being obfuscated eight times the attacker would have less than 1% probability of actually succeeding. You would also need to take into account the cost of owning (100) nodes and accumulating the 1 Mil DNET to create them. (Yes at the moment the cost is relatively low)
As the network grows, and more masternodes come online, this will become more and more difficult to accomplish.
so going off that it is better for the network to have more masternodes? if you are still planning to set it so there is not much in it between staking and masternodes the network will be less secure?
so therefore he masternode rewards needs to be at a worthwhile weight.
Thats not entirely true. As it was discussed and specified before. The PoS mechanism will work as a seesaw as the network gets out of balance, the rewards will shift the opposite direction until it is brought back into balance. The Masternodes will be rewarded for their involvement in other services as they are brought online by the fee's that these services produce. Everything needs to be working with a tight equilibrium between the Masternodes and the Staking wallets. This is not and will never be a quick road to get rich by hosting many many masternodes. it is in the value of the coin. Which will come with time and services.
April 19, 2016, 01:48:23 PM
Until I have time to study the dash paper could you give a brief summary of how the system could mitigate and check for a malicious service node?
The masternode network continuously checks itself for Bad or Mis-behaving Nodes. Since all activity that uses the Masternodes is chosen pseudo-randomly the attacker would have to personally control enough masternodes to guarantee that he/she would be chosen a minimum of 8 consecutive times to be able to fake the network in any way.
If you are referring to specifically snooping on the transactions. take this example;
if an attacker has control of 100 nodes, and there are 800 nodes in existence. If the transactions were being obfuscated eight times the attacker would have less than 1% probability of actually succeeding. You would also need to take into account the cost of owning (100) nodes and accumulating the 1 Mil DNET to create them. (Yes at the moment the cost is relatively low)
As the network grows, and more masternodes come online, this will become more and more difficult to accomplish.
so going off that it is better for the network to have more masternodes? if you are still planning to set it so there is not much in it between staking and masternodes the network will be less secure?
so therefore he masternode rewards needs to be at a worthwhile weight.
April 19, 2016, 01:28:41 PM
Until I have time to study the dash paper could you give a brief summary of how the system could mitigate and check for a malicious service node?
The masternode network continuously checks itself for Bad or Mis-behaving Nodes. Since all activity that uses the Masternodes is chosen pseudo-randomly the attacker would have to personally control enough masternodes to guarantee that he/she would be chosen a minimum of 8 consecutive times to be able to fake the network in any way.
If you are referring to specifically snooping on the transactions. take this example;
if an attacker has control of 100 nodes, and there are 800 nodes in existence. If the transactions were being obfuscated eight times the attacker would have less than 1% probability of actually succeeding. You would also need to take into account the cost of owning (100) nodes and accumulating the 1 Mil DNET to create them. (Yes at the moment the cost is relatively low)
As the network grows, and more masternodes come online, this will become more and more difficult to accomplish.
April 19, 2016, 12:52:38 PM
still got no luck with solo mining.
should I use a different miner?
checked for the port and ip, all matches.
help would be greatly appreciated
should I use a different miner?
checked for the port and ip, all matches.
help would be greatly appreciated
To my understanding the wallet uses a different protocol of communicating with miners so it doesn't work.
Here is a new proposal to gather funding to create a truly untraceable transaction. The previous proposal was voted in, but was not paid as the initial budget fund was paid first.
I have done some research and have devised a means to create a truly untraceable transaction in a 100% trust-less manner. Utilizing the same masternodes that we have right now.
Proposal to Add to Darknet Untraceable Transactions;
hash=7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb yes" to vote in favor
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb no" to vote against
"mnbudget getinfo untraceable-tx” to check the status
I have done some research and have devised a means to create a truly untraceable transaction in a 100% trust-less manner. Utilizing the same masternodes that we have right now.
Proposal to Add to Darknet Untraceable Transactions;
hash=7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb yes" to vote in favor
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb no" to vote against
"mnbudget getinfo untraceable-tx” to check the status
500k DNET will be used to fund development? Will you dump all 500k at market prices?
Probably.
It would be nice to see more info about how the trustless untraceable transactions would work before voting.
Well, without going into specifics, which I will be happy to do after it is released. By using side channel communications between the masternodes, we will be able to achieve a "Trustless air-gap" essentially removing the transaction details in the middle of the transaction from the blockchain. If a portion of the transaction details are not on the blockchain how would you trace the transaction from point 'a' to point 'b'?
Time frame you looking for it being completed?
That is a hard answer to give and I would not want to be one of those guys who puts a specific time frame on something that has not been done before.
anything planned to be complete for this month? website finished and upto date with masternode tracker be good.
It is unlikely that those items will be completed by the end of the month, but they are being actively worked on.
April 19, 2016, 12:37:50 PM
still got no luck with solo mining.
should I use a different miner?
checked for the port and ip, all matches.
help would be greatly appreciated
should I use a different miner?
checked for the port and ip, all matches.
help would be greatly appreciated
To my understanding the wallet uses a different protocol of communicating with miners so it doesn't work.
Here is a new proposal to gather funding to create a truly untraceable transaction. The previous proposal was voted in, but was not paid as the initial budget fund was paid first.
I have done some research and have devised a means to create a truly untraceable transaction in a 100% trust-less manner. Utilizing the same masternodes that we have right now.
Proposal to Add to Darknet Untraceable Transactions;
hash=7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb yes" to vote in favor
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb no" to vote against
"mnbudget getinfo untraceable-tx” to check the status
I have done some research and have devised a means to create a truly untraceable transaction in a 100% trust-less manner. Utilizing the same masternodes that we have right now.
Proposal to Add to Darknet Untraceable Transactions;
hash=7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb yes" to vote in favor
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb no" to vote against
"mnbudget getinfo untraceable-tx” to check the status
500k DNET will be used to fund development? Will you dump all 500k at market prices?
Probably.
It would be nice to see more info about how the trustless untraceable transactions would work before voting.
Well, without going into specifics, which I will be happy to do after it is released. By using side channel communications between the masternodes, we will be able to achieve a "Trustless air-gap" essentially removing the transaction details in the middle of the transaction from the blockchain. If a portion of the transaction details are not on the blockchain how would you trace the transaction from point 'a' to point 'b'?
Time frame you looking for it being completed?
That is a hard answer to give and I would not want to be one of those guys who puts a specific time frame on something that has not been done before.
anything planned to be complete for this month? website finished and upto date with masternode tracker be good.
April 19, 2016, 12:22:28 PM
Until I have time to study the dash paper could you give a brief summary of how the system could mitigate and check for a malicious service node?
April 19, 2016, 10:40:26 AM
still got no luck with solo mining.
should I use a different miner?
checked for the port and ip, all matches.
help would be greatly appreciated
should I use a different miner?
checked for the port and ip, all matches.
help would be greatly appreciated
To my understanding the wallet uses a different protocol of communicating with miners so it doesn't work.
Here is a new proposal to gather funding to create a truly untraceable transaction. The previous proposal was voted in, but was not paid as the initial budget fund was paid first.
I have done some research and have devised a means to create a truly untraceable transaction in a 100% trust-less manner. Utilizing the same masternodes that we have right now.
Proposal to Add to Darknet Untraceable Transactions;
hash=7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb yes" to vote in favor
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb no" to vote against
"mnbudget getinfo untraceable-tx” to check the status
I have done some research and have devised a means to create a truly untraceable transaction in a 100% trust-less manner. Utilizing the same masternodes that we have right now.
Proposal to Add to Darknet Untraceable Transactions;
hash=7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb yes" to vote in favor
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb no" to vote against
"mnbudget getinfo untraceable-tx” to check the status
500k DNET will be used to fund development? Will you dump all 500k at market prices?
Probably.
It would be nice to see more info about how the trustless untraceable transactions would work before voting.
Well, without going into specifics, which I will be happy to do after it is released. By using side channel communications between the masternodes, we will be able to achieve a "Trustless air-gap" essentially removing the transaction details in the middle of the transaction from the blockchain. If a portion of the transaction details are not on the blockchain how would you trace the transaction from point 'a' to point 'b'?
Time frame you looking for it being completed?
That is a hard answer to give and I would not want to be one of those guys who puts a specific time frame on something that has not been done before.
April 19, 2016, 10:38:00 AM
What if during side channel communication between the masternodes, one MN deliberately decides to go offline? Will there by any adverse effects?
Well, without going into specifics, which I will be happy to do after it is released. By using side channel communications between the masternodes, we will be able to achieve a "Trustless air-gap" essentially removing the transaction details in the middle of the transaction from the blockchain. If a portion of the transaction details are not on the blockchain how would you trace the transaction from point 'a' to point 'b'?
Quote from: s3v3nh4cks
Well, without going into specifics, which I will be happy to do after it is released. By using side channel communications between the masternodes, we will be able to achieve a "Trustless air-gap" essentially removing the transaction details in the middle of the transaction from the blockchain. If a portion of the transaction details are not on the blockchain how would you trace the transaction from point 'a' to point 'b'?
While that is a lot of information to discuss here in detail, the same securities and functionality of the masternode system would stay intact as it is when using Obfuscation (Darksend) and SwiftTX (InstantX). here is the link to the explanation of how the PoS (Proof of Service) is carried out, and how the network is kept safe from attacks and such. (Yes I know we need our own white paper, and it is on the list of things to do.. )
https://www.dash.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Dash-WhitepaperV1.pdf
April 19, 2016, 10:27:11 AM
still got no luck with solo mining.
should I use a different miner?
checked for the port and ip, all matches.
help would be greatly appreciated
should I use a different miner?
checked for the port and ip, all matches.
help would be greatly appreciated
To my understanding the wallet uses a different protocol of communicating with miners so it doesn't work.
Here is a new proposal to gather funding to create a truly untraceable transaction. The previous proposal was voted in, but was not paid as the initial budget fund was paid first.
I have done some research and have devised a means to create a truly untraceable transaction in a 100% trust-less manner. Utilizing the same masternodes that we have right now.
Proposal to Add to Darknet Untraceable Transactions;
hash=7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb yes" to vote in favor
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb no" to vote against
"mnbudget getinfo untraceable-tx” to check the status
I have done some research and have devised a means to create a truly untraceable transaction in a 100% trust-less manner. Utilizing the same masternodes that we have right now.
Proposal to Add to Darknet Untraceable Transactions;
hash=7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb yes" to vote in favor
"mnbudget vote 7ab87af4eb15979b0e542e389a37022feedf0455abf0494bb3df2fcadab210eb no" to vote against
"mnbudget getinfo untraceable-tx” to check the status
500k DNET will be used to fund development? Will you dump all 500k at market prices?
Probably.
It would be nice to see more info about how the trustless untraceable transactions would work before voting.
Well, without going into specifics, which I will be happy to do after it is released. By using side channel communications between the masternodes, we will be able to achieve a "Trustless air-gap" essentially removing the transaction details in the middle of the transaction from the blockchain. If a portion of the transaction details are not on the blockchain how would you trace the transaction from point 'a' to point 'b'?
Time frame you looking for it being completed?
Jump to: