Topic: Honestly, which is better? Monero or Dash? - page 23. (Read 35954 times)

Come on, Dash is realistically used in hardly any shops.

If you are talking about some distant future (where, maybe, some of these coins will be widely used in stores), the can very well be instant (or more instant) transaction methods employed on top of Monero too.

In fact the most "instant transactions" I've seen in crypto is shopping on Bitpay merchants with Bitcoin which are usually accepted instantly (but with risk of reversal, handled in a context-decedent manner).

I agree that hardware wallet support is important a valuable plus for Dash. Monero does have cold storage which is sufficient for speculators to protect their stash long term against malware and exploits. I'm not really sure Trezor is entirely "noob friendly" either.

I got you on logic...


You constructed a strawman whose only purpose logically is to avoid addressing my point. My point is that one case is provable (I constructed my txn in a safe room and Zerocash is provably anonymous) and the other case is never provable (I don't know if my IP mixnet or my RingCT/Cryptonote was Sybil attacked).

My point is distinguishing between two different classes, not about arguments about how both classes are equivalent for the masses. Your argument about the pigeon was at least an expert could attain anonymity (meaning your goal was at least someone could get anonymity if they expend enough resources and effort), but the fact is the only way an expert can mathematically prove his transaction is anonymous is with the Zerocash model, not the RingCT model (even regardless of IP address correlation because RingCT's can be Sybil attacked and intersection analyzed too!). So corporations could prove their privacy with Zerocash which has been one of your big target market arguments for Cryptonote.

Also the masses can be helped with dedicated hardware devices. The potential of the NSA monitoring every person on earth with RF detectives in a van outside their house is laughable. The main thing is to prevent the run of the mill viruses which can be accomplished easily with a dedicated hardware device. And then even the masses can have very strong assurances their transactions are private.


Focusing on IP addresses doesn't help you, per above that even RingCT/CN mixing is vulnerable to Sybil attack and combinatorial analysis. IP addresses are just yet another weakness of mixnets that are ephemeral and grouped, versus a single universal, persistent mixnet such as Zerocash. The difference is the class difference on the entropy. There is no comparison between them in terms of provable security.

Also I find that idea of using others implausible as a reliable security measure, but that is besides the point regardless.


Never will you have an equation which tells me what the probability of my privacy is in Cryptonote or RingCT, because it simply can't be computed. There are unknowns that can't be known. The entropy of the question is unbounded (non-deterministic).

So not only won't be as good theoretically, we can't even measure how much worse. We will never know. Because we won't know which Sybils and big correlation meta databases haven't yet come forth.


I would not capitulate so easily that is provably true. Because for example Monero cryptographer (with pseudonym) Shen-Noether messed up the most basic thing about combinatorial analysis. Do I need to go dig up the link to the Reddit thread? You remember the thread because you jumped on my back assuming he was superior in intellect than me, and then I had to explain it out for both of you. I don't imply that he is dumb nor do I imply that he is not more skilled than me in cryptography and math. I am saying that he can't see all holistic issues, because he is not Daniel Berstein. That is not to lift myself up to their level in their field of expertise because I am not. But rather to recognize that even Monero doesn't have the resources of the SCIPR Lab.

I would tend to agree that given enough open minded people analyzing it, RingCT could end up being more solidly vetted sooner than Zerocash. But the devil is also in the details of implementation and meta attacks (even timing attacks!). I mean you don't have Daniel Bernstein working for you. You don't even have Ralph Merkle. Zerocash has some serious PhDs working on it because zk-SNARKs are fundamentally very important for so many applications.

Also the problem for Cryptonote and Blockstream is they are so damn snobbish (just look the way they treated me in the aforementioned Reddit thread), that they are closing off peer review. They expect it to only come one way and yet they don't even have the resources to hire or interest the real greats in the crypto field.

So although I will tend to lean towards you may have somewhat of a point there, it isn't a slam dunk point. It is dubious.

And besides, I want the best class of crypto for the future. The sooner we can get busy moving that direction, my opinion the better. But if others wish to have other opinions, that is their (and your) prerogative. I am trying to convince you.


So many bandaids on top of bandaids, or finger in a leak then another finger in another leak and then...no more fingers. As I thought more about as a software engineer, I realized that K.I.S.S. beats a maze of spaghetti. I think ya know what I mean.

I am not sure what is best to do now. There is a lot of effort invested in CN. Do you expend more effort to add RingCT? Well RingCT does simplify a lot because no longer need to maintain equal denomination balances for mixing (which was a simultaneity issue also).

Seems to me you finish off by implementing RingCT, then you start looking at Zerocash for the next move forward?

But I hate slow moving evolution. My tendency would be to move straight to what is going to be the best future. I gather from your statements that you are not convinced Zerocash is a better future. You are apparently worried that the cryptography might be broken. I doubt it, but I need to study it more. I think what ever is broken on it can be fixed, because it appears to be built on solid theoretical findings over decades. When I have more time, I will continue my thread for trying to understand Zerocash from first principles.

Thank smoothie,
You show to us that this forum also have stupid people.

The information that comes up in Google would be the very threads you have a problem with in the first place.

Despite all the threads there are still new investors victims of the Dash Deception who have no idea about its shady history, due to their "sweep it under the rug" tactics, and increasing marketing efforts. There is obviously more work to be done.

Semantics.. not going to debate them.

FTFY

Oh rly?

CH was just shown to have not done his research before speaking.

Thanks CoinHoarder.
This forum still have inteligent people. 

There are many Pow coins that have been attacked, it doesn't mean Pow is insecure. I was not aware of this instance, but NC is a long dying cryptocurrency's so I'm not suprised.

oh no, not again. please stopp this.

You seriously need to consider doing your research before speaking. This is the second time in a few months that you've done this. First time in the Monero thread...now here.

If the only place you look is an ANN thread and the cryptocurrency's Web site when researching a cryptocurrency's to invest in then you are doing it wrong and deserve to lose your money. This information is easily obtainable in just a few minutes on Google. You guys are simply a broken record repeating information about Dash that everyone knows repeatedly for what seems like eternity.

Lol at Smoothies "scam buster" reputation. He has a history of attacking people when it is in his best interest to do so. See the link in my trust rating for an example, one that he refuses to remove even though it is clear I had no intentions of scamming anyone, and all parties involved were happy with the outcome..

My apologies if you're not a Monero cheerleader. Pretty much everyone else that is posting in this thread is, so I found you guilty by association.

When the information is being actively hidden through misinformation on their ANN page, their various instamine DUFFsplanation websites, and multiple name changes like with DASH where exactly do you expect they'll find it?

You're also making wild generalizations about everyone that has a problem with DASH being involved with Monero. Smoothie has busted scams before DASH such as Solidcoin (before Monero ever existed) so once again your explanation falls flat on its face.

Based on your continued sympathy for this high-profile scam one has to wonder if you're the one with the ulterior motives here.

I wouldn't go for any of them. But if I was forced to pick one I would go for DASH since there are strong suspicions of Monero being a Scam

No, I just feel like if someone wants to invest in Dash considering everything you mention then they have a right to do that. Then on the other hand, if they are stupid enough to invest without doing the proper research to find all of that out then it is their fault for being stupid.

I also find it funny that you guys seem obsessed with spreading the word that Dash is a scam considering your Monero allegiances. I don't see you guys policing other scams as religously. You play like white knights yet if you read in between the lines there seems to be at the very least a slight ulterior motive.

You don't even need to look at any of the coin's tech to dismiss it as an outright scam. Just look at the actions of the Evan Duffield and his supporting cast of fellow shitcoiners Minotaur26 (Evan's errand boy) and whale manipulator Otoh, along with about 2 dozen sockpuppet accounts bumping/scam defending in the DASHcoin thread day in, day out.

Let's look at just a few of Evan's lies and shady actions:

- lied about the launch date/time
- lied about the instamine
- advertised "0.00000000% pre-mined" like a weasel
- instamined 1.5 million coins in 8 hours
- cut the emission from 500 coins to 5 coins per block when he was done instamining
- lied about starting Xcoin/DRK/DASH as a hobby, when he posted a few weeks before darkcoin launch on the bitcoin-dev mailing list looking for c++ coders for a for profit startup
- lied about masternode blinding being working
- lied about masternode blinding being delayed due to mobile wallets when the real reason is he just wasn't smart enough to figure out how to implement it
- advertises that he's buying coins on the exchange while selling coins OTC


Seems like you're willing to brush all this aside. Are you a scam sympathiser in general or do you just make an exception for Dash?

That attacks as to the centralization of masternodes are reminiscent of people harping on about possible attacks on PoS. Two (ish) years later no successful attacks have been documented. The attack methods, although they technically may be possible, are highly unlikely to ever occur.

You guys also ignore the centralization all PoW coins (which come into play here because the coins you are championing are PoW based) inherently succumb to when it comes to mining and pools.

It's nice you guys want to play crypto currency police, but I feel like it is up to each investor to do the research themselves. This is the internet, people will get scammed daily... it happens. If someone is stupid enough to invest in something without doing extensive research then that is their fault, and perhaps they will learn a good lesson from it that will save them more money in the future.

Cramming this information down people's throat looks like spam considering you guys are pushing a competing alternative cryptocurrency. There are plenty of other scam-like coins in existence, yet you guys focus most of your "policing" on a competing cryptocurrency. It looks more like propaganda considering the circumstances.

1. There is always an analog hole. If you are interacting with a device outside your brain, then whatever you are doing exists in an unencrypted state and can be observed, even if your private key is inside a safe "compartment". Yes, you can interact inside a properly shielded and otherwise uncompromised room, but few people outside of professionals are ever going to do that. More realistic is that you will interact on a smart phone in public (or within sight of a window) and much of what you do will be observed by cameras or other surveillance devices. From there is is a small matter of archiving and search technology to find the recordings of your activity.

2. There are ways of getting your transactions out that don't require direct IP communications at all. The bar to find some way to do that is really very, very low. (As opposed to, say, interactively browsing a web site, which is a much tougher problem to solve.)

3. Monero can be made very resilient to network-level surveillance, because of its end to end properties, similar to Zerocash. It won't be as good in terms of theoretical zero-knowledge properties, but it has a much better cryptographic and engineering margin of safety in practice. Yes there are potential weaknesses but they can be mitigated (for example by being careful how you respend your own change). It is already probably possible to do this with the existing tools as a careful and sophisticated user. We can make it easier for normal users (as in my analogy of how good end-to-end encryption exists today even though most users don't understand how it works or how to do it).

I will argue that you are equating threats which have a paradigmatic distinction, in that one is globally unbounded and the other is locally bounded (at least at the non-quantum mechanics model). And just as the difference between proof-of-stake and proof-of-proof is fundamental on the distinction between unbounded entropy (and implications thereof such as the ability to defraud with a combination of shorting and stake control as I explained in some comments last month or so responding to older jl777 quotes ... no time to go digging for that now...), I argue this distinction on privacy threats is fundamental.

Obfuscating your IP address can never be provably controlled by you, because the threat is unbounded in entropy. Whereas, the ability to encrypt your blob without someone having access to your private key is a local perimeter threat (and you are incorrect to imply that merely observing whom is encrypting is any form of a threat if you did mean to imply that). As long as you do your encryption inside of a lead and RF shielded case and your private key has not been compromised, then you can be 100% sure that the activity in that encrypted blob is secure (up to the limits of number theory for encryption and the Star Trek-like quantum mechanics threats that science doesn't know about or fully understand yet such as tunneling, many worlds hypothesis, etc..).

You could retort that the number theory of the encryption can also be cracked with unbounded computation, but it is intractable else crypto is intractable. Whereas, IP unmasking is not intractable. Many white papers have been written on various tractable attack threats. My point in saying the threat level is unbounded for IP address, is we can't prove the unmasking is intractable because in one example we can't even know the level of Sybil attack on the anonymity sets. And there are numerous other reasons. I have spun my head around and around on this many times.

The problem is, at that threat level you can't know that any of those 10 cameras on every rooftop along with other such techniques known and unknown aren't shoulder-surfing you before that blob leaves your computer or using some other techniques. It is even possible to use technology to see through walls, so closing the window or staying away from windows may not help you. (Maybe they can't see your screen through walls, but they can see your fingers typing, or eavesdrop as you use a voice interface.)

Guarding against surveillance of all kinds is really extremely difficult. To make any progress you have to narrow the problem, and attack in pieces. Zerocash is no panacea.