You do realise the US has stated in no uncertain terms that dark currency will not be permitted. To be honest i think crypto would already have had the ban hammer if US were not giving it some kind of chance, the rest of them are dying to slap the ban hammer down....they just fear they will loose the economic edge the US will get by adopting it alone.
The rest of the crypto community will do well to cut off these currencies.
Wait and see, a few months down the road exchanges will be shut down who deal with dark currency, then the price will get a super slap down.
Sure it sounds cool,but if you're not selling drugs, kids or smack probably don't need it.
I almost don't agree with a single thing in this post. In fact its content seems practically clueless.
First of all, any regulation that appears associated with cryptos applies to FIAT, not cryptos directly. That's because regulating cryptos boils down to telling people they're not allowed to pass pieces of paper between each other containing a bunch of letters and numbers. Saying "dark currency will not be permitted" is a meaningless generalisation thats about as relevant as saying "email will not be permitted".
Why would the "The rest of the crypto community will do well to cut off these currencies" when dark currencies embody the very essence of much of what cryptos stand for - anonymity, de-centralisation and integrity (in that there's no counterparty involved) ?
The attempt to associate dark currencies with illegal and subversive activities is also disingenuous. The entire fiat money system is totally opaque (at least as far as the general public is concerned) and yet the majority of the trading population isn't engaged in drug dealing and terrorism. Even commercial retailers don't freely divulge information about income from their various product lines etc.
A technology like darkcoin is one of THE most innovative developments in crypto since the outset. Saying that others can implement it does nothing to mitigate its achievements which are considerable. Apart from anything else, it's taken a good deal of constructive contribution from those that were involved in the development and testing which appears to have been done to a highly professional level. The approach to securing the network using paid for masternodes is also a well thought out and powerful concept.
This kind of post is nothing but dismissive FUD. I don't know what's behind it - whether you just want to malign a good thing for the sake of it or whether you've got some other axe to grind, but it's content is baseless. Sure the price may go back down - or it may more likely go up in my opinion. The thing is doing what it says on the tin and is going to provide a valuable service to the rest of the crypto economy.
All the same, whatever the price does, I find it difficult to arrive at any other conclusion than this is a great breakthrough in truly de-centralised, trustless and anonymous transaction technology. To me (and I only got into it a couple of weeks ago) it seems its valuation as things stand right now is properly greater than Litecoin, which given DRK's low coin supply is still a few 100%'s to go.
