Let There Be Dark! Bitcoin Dark Wallet - page 6.

NewLiberty

legendary

Activity: 1204

Merit: 1002

Gresham's Lawyer

Quote from: phillipsjk on January 14, 2014, 10:57:25 AM

well, I have been using the sx tools to manually build transactions: without having the coins actually stored on my machine until I move them.

The project seems to be a effort to tie together a bunch of separate tools that together can replace Bitcoind that tries to do everything.

We probably think about these terms differently. So I translate in my head when I read this, so please excuse my misunderstanding. I never think of coins as stored on any machine except all of them, in the block chain, but to me it seems what you are saying is that you have coins spendable by a private key which is only sometimes stored on your machine?
A private key can be recorded on a machine, or not.
Do you mean the private keys are on your machine only at the time of a transaction?

phillipsjk

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

Let the chips fall where they may.

well, I have been using the sx tools to manually build transactions: without having the coins actually stored on my machine until I move them.

The project seems to be a effort to tie together a bunch of separate tools that together can replace Bitcoind that tries to do everything.

NewLiberty

legendary

Activity: 1204

Merit: 1002

Gresham's Lawyer

Quote from: phillipsjk on January 11, 2014, 11:45:51 AM

Quote from: NewLiberty on January 11, 2014, 09:16:57 AM

Will this implement coinjoin by default for transactions or enable one to participate continuously in the background when running?

Doing Coinjoin transactions in the background sounds like a bad idea to me.

First, it would require a network-connected machine to have access to your private wallet keys.

Second, even if randomized, the "spam" transactions may be distinguishable from real transactions.

The way coinjoin integration should work is: if you don't need to send immediately, the client should look for other coinjoin participants.

I agree background transactions under the scenario you described would be a poor solution, one might easily imagine better implementations.
The question was a sort of a shot in the dark as the Dark Wallet project seems opaque in what it delivers.
Is there some published feature list yet? Or is it still at the stage of a bundle of hoped-for benefits and rhetoric?

Trade101

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Bitstamp trader

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on January 11, 2014, 12:09:06 PM

lets wait for Zerocoin. thats a better solution:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3878992

where can i buy Zerocoin? Can´t find them on Coinmarketcap or other sites, which offer an overview of
existing crypto currencies. Or is Zerocoin still to launch?

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

lets wait for Zerocoin. thats a better solution:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3878992

phillipsjk

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

Let the chips fall where they may.

Quote from: NewLiberty on January 11, 2014, 09:16:57 AM

Will this implement coinjoin by default for transactions or enable one to participate continuously in the background when running?

Doing Coinjoin transactions in the background sounds like a bad idea to me.

First, it would require a network-connected machine to have access to your private wallet keys.

Second, even if randomized, the "spam" transactions may be distinguishable from real transactions.

The way coinjoin integration should work is: if you don't need to send immediately, the client should look for other coinjoin participants.

NewLiberty

legendary

Activity: 1204

Merit: 1002

Gresham's Lawyer

Will this implement coinjoin by default for transactions or enable one to participate continuously in the background when running?

MEpatriot

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

I want to believe this is possible, but I really have my doubts.

TPTB aren't TPTB for nothing. They will find a way to bust this too.

dewdeded

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1011

Monero Evangelist

Please support the brain-storming about funding an real, independent, international and usefull bitcoin organisation/foundation, under:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/interest-in-free-world-bitcoin-foundation-371581

genjix

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1076

http://cooperativa.cat/en/do-it-yourself-calafou_hacklab-at-dark-wallet-meeting/

productive meeting in milan. see update on indiegogo page.

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

Quote from: hamiltino on November 17, 2013, 08:02:31 AM

I'm hoping however zerocoin will be eventually implemented into bitcoin.

it will not. zerocoin will be released as a new coin in 2014 which you can swap for bitcoins. interesting times...

genjix

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1076

Video updates:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuPo5NJ-AZQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn3m_K5AJec

Alpaca Bob

full member

Activity: 153

Merit: 100

Are you developing it in Barcelona?

edit: Never mind, I figured it out. (It's Milan.)

hivewallet

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 325

hivewallet.com

Quote from: hivewallet on November 25, 2013, 11:55:06 AM

Despite the naysayers, Dark Wallet is being built before our very eyes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuPo5NJ-AZQ

btcven

hero member

Activity: 715

Merit: 500

Bitcoin Venezuela

Quote from: SeansOutpost on November 25, 2013, 11:15:10 PM

Quote from: waxwing on November 02, 2013, 04:46:14 PM

It's a very interesting argument.
Both sides consider the other naive - the 'Foundation' side thinks it naive to think Bitcoin can grow without finding a common ground with the authorities, the 'go dark' side think it naive to think the authorities will ever cede any control voluntarily.

To be honest, whichever side I personally fall on, I'm happier knowing that both sides of the argument exist, and I'd like them both to continue to exist.

This.

This must be pasted on every discussion where these two sides collide.

SeansOutpost

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: waxwing on November 02, 2013, 04:46:14 PM

It's a very interesting argument.
Both sides consider the other naive - the 'Foundation' side thinks it naive to think Bitcoin can grow without finding a common ground with the authorities, the 'go dark' side think it naive to think the authorities will ever cede any control voluntarily.

To be honest, whichever side I personally fall on, I'm happier knowing that both sides of the argument exist, and I'd like them both to continue to exist.

This.

hivewallet

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 325

hivewallet.com

Despite the naysayers, Dark Wallet is being built before our very eyes.

phillipsjk

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

Let the chips fall where they may.

Quote from: Alpaca Bob on November 22, 2013, 09:28:04 AM

Quote from: genjix on November 22, 2013, 06:45:21 AM

satoshi is not a god.

Source?

Even if he is the second coming of Jesus, that does not necessarily mean he is a god. The Muslim view is that Jesus was a prophet.

Must re-read the book of revelations.

masterluc

legendary

Activity: 938

Merit: 1013

I don't see any innovation in this project. Like Mike said, it's just yet another Electrum. And I don't understand how they improve privacy with centralized model?

And yes, too much conspiracy and too less technical details.

PS. Mike Hearn is an asshole.

hivewallet

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 325

hivewallet.com

Quote from: Alpaca Bob on November 22, 2013, 09:28:04 AM

Quote from: genjix on November 22, 2013, 06:45:21 AM

satoshi is not a god.

Source?

+1

Topic: Let There Be Dark! Bitcoin Dark Wallet - page 6. (Read 50471 times)