Pages:
Author

Topic: DRK vs XMR warez (Read 13368 times)

hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
March 06, 2015, 10:53:32 PM
I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.

actually i dont think the bloat you describe exists. will confirm.

It's in the white paper section 5.1

Quote
The affine coordinates are 64 bytes per ring member per coin value.

Shadow also has somewhat larger transactions than XMR too, because it uses fewer denominations (just 1, 3, 4, 5 instead of 1-9). That is an arguable tradeoff but it does make things bigger (to send 9 you have to send 4 and 5, so two sigs, not just 9).




Interesting. Will forward this on to the relevant peoples for extra confirm.
Sufficed to say Shadow and Monero have much in common, except we got bigger default ring sizes (sounds dirty) and a shinier wallet Wink
(+ POS, BTC fork yada yada yada)

Thanks for dialoguing. gn
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
March 06, 2015, 10:46:00 PM
I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.

actually i dont think the bloat you describe exists. will confirm.

It's in the white paper section 5.1

Quote
The affine coordinates are 64 bytes per ring member per coin value.

Shadow also has somewhat larger transactions than XMR too, because it uses fewer denominations (just 1, 3, 4, 5 instead of 1-9). That is an arguable tradeoff but it does make things bigger (to send 9 you have to send 4 and 5, so two sigs, not just 9).

hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
March 06, 2015, 10:41:39 PM
I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.

actually i dont think the bloat you describe exists. will confirm.

~20% of the currency is now shadow(sdt)
and converting back to sdc does not reduce anon I/O iirc
numbers here: http://shadowchain.info/chain/ShadowCash
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
March 06, 2015, 10:39:40 PM
I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures. Also, these Shadow tokens apparently get relatively little use or your blockchain would be 5-20 times the size of XMR's blockchain due to that.
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
March 06, 2015, 10:32:06 PM

It can't be done for XMR, I think that was his point.


Ah yes, I remember now.
Similarly Shadow tokens (SDT) are invisible on the SDC blockchain. quite.

If u might permit one more technical q smooth…

when sending SDC>SDT(shadow tokens) or SDT>SDT or SDT>SDC (all of which require stealth addys) the wallet has a "Suggest Ring Size" button which a user normally hits before sending. The typical values range from a ringsize of 16 to 60. Transactions fees are small (0.005-0.01 depending on ringsize iirc) annd the tx;s go thru very fast (1 min blocks)

I have used Monero and am familiar with a MIXIN of 3. Is this equivalent to a ringsize of 3?
If so what comments do you have about the massive diff in ringsize numbers employed by the two coins?

thanks
(this will be my final q for tonight)
 
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
March 06, 2015, 10:23:18 PM
SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth...

Want to know the difference between SDC and XMR?

Just take a look at the 100 richest SDC addresses and compare them to the 100 richest XMR addresses.

OK. assuming I did what would it show? Uneven distribution or something? that's the scourge of the whole crypto space imo

(SDC has only 2% interest btw and is a proof-of-stake coin)

It can't be done for XMR, I think that was his point.
hero member
Activity: 795
Merit: 514
March 06, 2015, 10:16:56 PM
SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth...

Want to know the difference between SDC and XMR?

Just take a look at the 100 richest SDC addresses and compare them to the 100 richest XMR addresses.

OK. assuming I did what would it show? Uneven distribution or something? that's the scourge of the whole crypto space imo

(SDC has only 2% interest btw and is a proof-of-stake coin)

Nope. Has nothing to do with distribution. Just take 3 minutes and compare them.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
March 06, 2015, 10:07:27 PM
good chat smooth… just to quickly wrap-up

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.
Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?

Sure, that's true for any of the hundreds of Bitcoin clones. What makes SDC different and valuable I thought was Shadow (?), and integration of that is not something you can do "BTC style."

If anything this is a better argument for DRK as opposed to XMR, and that is also conveniently on-topic for the thread and not someone from another coin spamming.


I thought it was. Just a stealth addy required. There r QR generators I believe.

that should do it, no?

The format of addresses is different and may not "just work" with back end systems. You need a payment Id to identify transactions (or scan on many stealth addresses which is enormously computationally expensive) and you have to understand how to scan for incoming transactions. That's different from BTC where they just arrive on a fixed address. You also have to specify a mix factor on outgoing transactions, but its possible there is a default for that or something. Multisig doesn't exist.

Overall it is not "drop in" the way BTC clones (including DRK and SDC) are.
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
March 06, 2015, 10:04:58 PM
good chat smooth… just to quickly wrap-up

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.
Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?

Sure, that's true for any of the hundreds of Bitcoin clones. What makes SDC different and valuable I thought was Shadow (?), and integration of that is not something you can do "BTC style."

If anything this is a better argument for DRK as opposed to XMR, and that is also conveniently on-topic for the thread and not someone from another coin spamming.


I thought it was. Just a stealth addy required. There r QR generators I believe.

that should do it, no?
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
March 06, 2015, 10:03:56 PM
...
As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?
...

It is fair to say that one area Monero is still lacking is a GUI Wallet for GNU/Linux.

The open source ones should compile on Linux.

LightWallet is a python program and should directly work on Linux, but there may be some minor tweaks required (file paths and such).

The ones that are very problematic for Linux are:

1. .NET since it doesn't use portable APIs that can run with mono, as I understand it.

2. The one that is implemented using the popular Windows scripting tool (forget the name).
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
March 06, 2015, 10:03:27 PM
SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth...

Want to know the difference between SDC and XMR?

Just take a look at the 100 richest SDC addresses and compare them to the 100 richest XMR addresses.

OK. assuming I did what would it show? Uneven distribution or something? that's the scourge of the whole crypto space imo

(SDC has only 2% interest btw and is a proof-of-stake coin)
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
March 06, 2015, 10:02:26 PM
good chat smooth… just to quickly wrap-up

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.
Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?

Sure, that's true for any of the hundreds of Bitcoin clones. What makes SDC different and valuable I thought was Shadow (?), and integration of that is not something you can do "BTC style."

If anything this is a better argument for DRK as opposed to XMR, and that is also conveniently on-topic for the thread and not someone from another coin spamming.
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
March 06, 2015, 10:00:21 PM
good chat smooth… just to quickly wrap-up

vis-a-vis the B2B angle between DRK/SDC (BTC forks) and XMR it is more to do with the fact merchants are already set-up BTC style.
Therefor a transition (or adoption) to SDC would be less "jarring" than to XMR (new API's etc).

Ayy thoughts?
That'll do me for now…  
cheers
hero member
Activity: 795
Merit: 514
March 06, 2015, 09:58:59 PM
SDC has everything anon-wise XMR has, according to ur own dev smooth...

Want to know the difference between SDC and XMR?

Just take a look at the 100 richest SDC addresses and compare them to the 100 richest XMR addresses.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
March 06, 2015, 09:46:50 PM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.


whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…

I'm not arguing it, I said I can't say. Just because you are a Bitcoin fork doesn't mean you don't have bugs, etc. I have no idea, so I can't say.

Quote
IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?

For b2b the DB is largely irrelevant, as having a few GB of RAM on a server is really not a big deal (and in return for having everything in RAM at essentially zero access time you do get better performance than any DB, including Bitcoin's). The DB matters for low end laptops and some low end desktops, running nodes on a Raspberry Pi, etc.


1) Let me firstly say thanks for your answers.
2) but if the DB was "stable" it would be out of RAM, yes? Or to get to the point why is it still in RAM?

The DB is still in testing, and quite a few people are using it. It has been somewhat stable for a month or so, but we aren't pushing it out on an aggressive schedule because the existing solution works fine given sufficient RAM (so everywhere except lower-end systems). It is critical code and can use even more testing. The performance can also be improved, although if we had to we could live with the current performance.
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
March 06, 2015, 09:39:40 PM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.


whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…

I'm not arguing it, I said I can't say. Just because you are a Bitcoin fork doesn't mean you don't have bugs, etc. I have no idea, so I can't say.

Quote
IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?

For b2b the DB is largely irrelevant, as having a few GB of RAM on a server is really not a big deal (and in return for having everything in RAM at essentially zero access time you do get better performance than any DB, including Bitcoin's). The DB matters for low end laptops and some low end desktops, running nodes on a Raspberry Pi, etc.


1) Let me firstly say thanks for your answers.
2) but if the DB was "stable" it would be out of RAM, yes? Or to get to the point why is it still in RAM?

legendary
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1050
Monero Core Team
March 06, 2015, 09:35:10 PM
...
As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?
...

It is fair to say that one area Monero is still lacking is a GUI Wallet for GNU/Linux. Yes there is myMonero.com but that is an alternative to blockchain.info. The choice faced by one wishing to run one's own Monero client is 1) Learn the GNU/Linux terminal or 2) Run the risk of providing one's private keys to the NSA via Microsoft’s membership in the PRISM program. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29. Of course those of use willing to learn the GNU/Linux terminal can take advantage of the current situation and purchase cheap XMR. My take is this situation will not last long; however in the meantime this may well be a reason why DRK is still trading at over 5X the capitalization of XMR.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
March 06, 2015, 09:33:21 PM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.


whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…

I'm not arguing it, I said I can't say. Just because you are a Bitcoin fork doesn't mean you don't have bugs, etc. I have no idea, so I can't say.

Quote
IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?

For b2b the DB is largely irrelevant, as having a few GB of RAM on a server is really not a big deal (and in return for having everything in RAM at essentially zero access time you do get better performance than any DB, including Bitcoin's). The DB matters for low end laptops and some low end desktops, running nodes on a Raspberry Pi, etc.
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
March 06, 2015, 09:08:30 PM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.


whoa! no spamming intended. thanks 4 the answers.

edit: hold on, the 2nd statement is that SDC is better prepared than XMR for B2B as of today?! I dont c how u can argue this point…  the fact SDC is a BTC fork should mean B2B is pretty much setup already, no?

IIRC: the XMR db is still a work in progress?
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
March 06, 2015, 08:59:24 PM
Quote
Monero has at least five GUI wallets. If you want one, you have no excuse for waiting. Very few people use Bitcoin Core as their GUI wallet any more; the real action in user-friendly wallets is competition and third party developers. That applies to Monero and Bitcoin alike. As with Bitcoin, the core team is focusing on the core technology first and foremost. I'm glad we have done that rather than be distracted by pretty wallets.

The five GUI wallets r "unofficial" iirc i.e. not released by Core Devs

As are Electrum, Multibit, Trezor, blockchain.info, coinbase, and almost every other Bitcoin wallet people actually use today. Do you disagree?

Quote
You did say that SDC was like XMR (NIZKPs, ring sigs etc)
and the fact remains it is a BTC fork and much readier for B2b than XMR as of today.

Do u disagree?

I agree with the first statement. The second statement I can't evaluate because I haven't tried to use it or spoken with people who have. In theory it could be true, in practice it may or may not be true. Much depends on the maturity of the code. I can say that merely being a BTC fork won't give you very good integration at the level of Shadow. B2b integrators who treat it as a Bitcoin clone will be using SDC, with reduced anonymity and less convenince for users who want to stick with the more anonymous cryptonote-like Shadow.

Maybe a thread that was about SDC would be a better place to discuss that instead of spamming your coin here on a discussion about DRK and XMR though.
Pages:
Jump to: