You DRK folks have nothing to say against arguments because you have 0 objectivity, you're just blind fanboys who fell in love with an overated coin... Every coin mentionned in this thread is in fact better than Dash tbh
I'll give you that Cryptonote is an interesting technology and - at least as far as cryptography goes - can be more secure than a single round in a mixer. But I don't think it's very well suited to supporting anonymity or fungibility in cryptocurrencies.
The problem is that while it might be very secure in terms of 'hiding' a transaction, cryptonote puts all its eggs in one basket - a totally centralised solution. Break the cryptonote algo and you've rendered the entire money supply useless with subsequent collapse of the whole financial system based around that currency.
That might be only a theoretical threat, but the fact that it's architectured in that centralised way creates a huge potential single point of failure that hangs over the currency forever.
On the other hand, the way that DRK/DASH has approached fungibility is far more of a monetary oriented solution.
You manage to de-anonymise a single transaction ? So what ? You need to reproduce the effort iteratively a million times to even begin to threaten the money supply because each transaction has to be separately solved on a case by case basis. It's the very *absence* of a systematic cryptographical approach that keeps the coin supply secure as a whole and stops that crack from propagating.
Further, all the comparisons you get on these threads between the security of "cryptography" and the security of "mixing" are totally unrealistic because they compare a single cryptographically secured transaction with a single mixing transaction. In fact the way that the Darkcoin network is architected means that you're mixing transaction has hundreds of layers of redundancy behind it. You aren't transfering from a known source entity to a known payment entity and trying to hide it, your transferring from a mixed wallet to another mixed, anonymous wallet to another mixed, anonymous wallet....add infinitum.
In addition to that, the coin supply is pre-emptively anonymised, so at the point of transaction you're just doing a regular Joe bitcoin payment from one address to the other. There's another monetary property ticked: visibility and accountability. No nuclear-secret paranoia, it's all out in the open just anonymous - exactly as true cash should operate.
So I don't deny the cryptography fanclub their 'Concorde' against DRK's Boeing 747. I just think they're solving the wrong problem - messaging encryption instead of monetary fungibility and maximum adoption by way of supporting the legacy infrastructure.
)
