Topic: DRK vs XMR warez - page 7. (Read 13368 times)

one thing i'd really like to know about drk is a good comparison with darkwallet and if darkwallet is able to adopt all(!) of drk anon features (if that means MN needs to be ported so be it).

i think darkwallet can do it - but i always like to learn something new...

What was this thread about again?

• Pumping Shadow?
• Discussing pro's and con's to two different technological approaches to achieving anonymity?

Waiting for the Navajo coin pumpers to come say hi.

child_harold. No one Cares about the Shitcoin Shadowcash. The only popular anoncoins are Monero and Darkcoin.

Again, No.One.Cares.About.Shadowcash. The title of this thread is DRK vs XMR. No where does it say SDC. ffs.

Example of the kind of pumpers'  drivel being spammed on a non-SDC thread I was describing earlier ^^

harold, I'm going to explain it to you like a child:

The "NIZKP" part of Shadow is just a tiny part of the cryptonote signature scheme that was reimplemented by SDC, nothing more, nothing less.

You're a d*ck and have now stooped to the pidgeon-shit…
Hmm… ur an XMR dev??

Total Fail. GTFO.

Shadow crypto draws circles around yours (c what I did there?)

The lady doth protest too much methinks

Shadow has a working NIZKP implementation on a BTC blcockchain so… wtf is ur prob?
Oh yeah - u dont even have a GUI wallet or a stable DB!

Just look for anyone posting silly comments about how SDC uses "zero knowledge" and spamming SDC on unrelated threads such as those discussing XMR and DRK.

As for the price, I never said they were effective pumpers, but they try.

so simple… yet so powerful

thank you

First off I want to know where these shadowcash pumpers are, a whopping all-time high of what, 5-6 cents a coin vs Moneros ATH of $4-5 dollars and Dark's $15?

Funny how the shadow community is seemingly accused of being manipulators and scoundrels when most of its holders have yet to seen any riches from it yet! And its also been one of the most stable priced coins for months now going mostly sideways, and now they are accused of "buying" a good review from Isidor for a measly 5 btc as if the guy is that hard up for money.

Hey smooth… You're a (blamk)

No, that is not only not "established", it is not even true. The only thing that is "taken" from zerocoin is the vague concept of converting between btc and another coin type. How it is done and what the other coin type is and how it works, including the minting process itself, is totally different.

Just look in the SDC whitepaper man, there is no footnote that cites zerocoin with reference to any of the cryptography whatsoever, only with the general concept of converting from btc to another token. That is the only connection. If you think that by itself is a big deal then sure go ahead and keep bringing it up like the other SDC pumpers do. You (and they) probably will regardless.

Well the minting is taken from zerocoin, that much has been established.  Whether it contributes to the underlying anonymity is another issue, and hopefully the review will shed more light on that. 

There are pumpers, shills, and fools in every community, including in Monero.  There has been admittedly some confusion over ShadowCash mostly because the documentation on the system is sparse. But the code is there. There is no conspiracy going on.  I have a genuine interest in learning about the tech.  If Shadow is the exact same as cryptonote, then I still like it because its on a bitcoin blockchain, and its the only cryptonote like coin with a functional wallet where you can control your own private keys, and privacy.  However the devs have said its different than cryptonote and a unique new system.  I saw some similarities in the minting process in the zerocoin paper, and wondered if it added to the anonymity of the system.  Wouldn't this be an obvious inquiry by a layman looking at the papers?

I hope your coin is wildly successful.  If Monero gets a functional wallet then I will consider investing some Bitcoin into it.  I prefer it much better to DRK.  But if Shadow does what they say it does, then I think its a winner, imo.  Good luck to you, and I really hope our communities can be friends.

Now, now, you are the one making false accusations here. I never said they lied. It is true that the original zerocoin paper was presented as an "add on" to the bitcoin blockchain that include a conversion/minting process (of course that idea was resoundingly rejected by the bitcoin community). If SDC is going to also propose an add-on to a bitcoin-style blockchain then there is going to be a conversion process and it is reasonable to cite zerocoin. However, in both cases, zerocoin and cryptonote-with-conversions, the fact that there is conversion has nothing to do with the underlying cryptography, it is just a means of integration.

It is confusing this last point where pumpers in the SDC community who constantly make claims about "zero knowledge" and how it is "like zerocoin because it has minting" are being either ignorant or willfully ignorant. I have no idea if those pumpers are sanctioned by the project.

Ohh I think you shouldn't accuse a project of being a scam unless you can be 100% sure.  As far as I know, you have not read or audited the code. You know there is going to be a review coming out, and if you are wrong about your accusations that Shadow is just a scam and the devs lied about their citations in their whitepaper, then its going to hurt your credibility a bit. 

Maybe for the same reason people keep parroting comments about "zero knowledge" and how it isn't really like cryptonote, and how many coins make silly claims. Because it is perceived to be good for pumping, though that game seems to be up.

Can we get back on topic of discussing XMR and DRK, or are you going to continue spamming SDC here?

Oh I see, I wonder why the ShadowCash whitepaper cites zerocoin when mentioning the minting aspect of SDC and Shadow.  

I have read the paper yes.


No, and no this has nothing to do with zerocoin.

Ohh I see, are you well versed on zerocoin also? Wouldn't Shadow have to stop double spending two times?  Once for the ring sigs, and also again for the minting of tokens?  I believe maybe the double spend prevention on the minting of tokens is then from zerocoin?  Or no?  Not trying to FUD at all, trying to learn.  I like Monero too.

But there is no rational reason to do so


It isn't FUD that the distribution is terrible, at least you don't think so since you acknowledge it. Nor is it FUD that false or misleading claims like "zero knowledge" and "not a clone of cryptonote" and "uses ideas from zerocoin" are thrown around a lot by a small number of SDC pumpers. See you did it below again...

I'm not being rude, I'm being frank. Enough double talk.


The method Shadow uses to prevent double spends is from cryptonote. Section 4.4 LNK phase.

No need to get rude imo. I was continuing the discussion.  Its easy to own a lot of SDC, anyone can become "an insider" and own 1% of all coins for about 9 BTC, so your point really seems like FUD.

All I did was mention a legitimate point that the destroying and minting of SDC is taken from the zerocoin whitepaper, and anybody can look for themselves to see that. Also it seems the method that Shadow uses to prevent double spends is also from zerocoin.

The price of SDC is unlikely to go up other than a few insiders who own essentially all the coins (which you acknowledge) trading the coins between each other at higher prices to create an illusion of interest. There is no substance there, it is just a warmed over immature reimplementation of cryptonote run by a few pumpers, and if people want cryptonote, they know where to go. All this "zerocoin," "minting" and "zero knowledge" obfuscation you guys throw around is nonsense, and everyone knows it now.

Please stop spamming threads discussing DRK and XMR, two coins that more than a few people even care about.

BTW, it is absolutely true that if you have a high percentage (say 99%) of traceable transactions, you have a high degree of traceability of the chain as a whole. You can review the math for this in MRL-0001 and MRL-0004, but you won't because you don't care about math or substance, just pumping.