Pages:
Author

Topic: Peter Todd calls dash snake oil. - page 9. (Read 12039 times)

legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
July 19, 2015, 04:28:15 PM
#81
In cryptonote, I still can't verify it with logic, therefore I will not trust it.  That's all I have to say on it, I'm going to go back to my hole.  I can see your point, that you are willing to trust.  This is a philosophical difference, a difference in what we value to be important.  In this case, the argument can never be resolved.  Good day to you Smiley

That's all very nice but none of that changes the fact that Pater Todd says that Dash is snake oil, and I agree with him.

If you don't like Monero, then don't use it. Maybe stick with Bitcoin or look for something else. Stay away from Dash Oil.
hero member
Activity: 966
Merit: 1003
July 19, 2015, 04:27:44 PM
#80


I don't trust this system.  I can't see it and verify it.  What good is it for everything to be hidden completely, to the point where you have to trust that it is working?

With a simple, understandable system that fully protects the privacy of the user,  yet requires no trust - as was always the whole point of the decentralized crypto currency of Bitcoin - DASH is not more superior due to it's complexity, but due to it's simplicity.  If you're such a technocrat that you don't understand this, I can only feel bad for you because the majority of the world will.

LOL. Here's the attack vector Evan created out of ignorance, stupidity or pure not giving a fuck.

The easiest attack is to buy masternodes and ddos attack competing nodes until you own the traffic. Evan claims it's financially implausible, but ignores that nodes are most profitable when there about a 1,000 masternodes (he has a ROI graphic on the dash BCT thread that underscores this). He also ignores that the attacker would be pulling incomes from these masternodes--given that most are held on corporate servers underlies that no one knows who owns them outside of the host and the owner. He also ignores how motivated an attacker may be, that he or another masternode operator might comply given the right circumstances (threat or lawful compliance) and how deep LE's pockets are--silly, dangerous, stupid.

If you trust that system knowing the flaws, you deserve whatever comes your way--except maybe being linked to pedophiles--can you show that link on your explorer?

DOS'ing masternodes doesn't reduce the anonymity set of the transactions or coins mixed before the DOS. If the masternode count drops 50% for example all of a sudden, mixing coins at that moment is not a good idea. It was already suggested a year ago or so that the wallet would take care of this and protect the user during the network downtime. It hasn't been implemented yet afaik, DASH must grow at least 100x at minimum before this (an appearance of such a motivated attacker) would become even a possibility.
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1001
July 19, 2015, 04:22:36 PM
#79
Toknormal's description of how Cryptonote works or what is required for money to work was not legitimate.  With his pictures, he seemed to even imply that central bankers are needed for money to function at all.  Is this guy shilling?

He's trying to rationalize dash is better than bitcoin and monero at the things bitcoin and monero are best at. Bitcoin is the world's largest most secure decentralized clear blockchain. Monero is the world's largest and most secure decentralized opaque blockchain. He thinks (or wants us to believe)that masternodes are the preferred bridge between these two networks, but refuses to see (or admit) masternodes for what they really are: middlemen who can be bought and have control over the network they are supposed to decentralize and secure--so yeah, he is actually replacing bankers with masternodes and saying it is a good thing. Good for him and the other dash bagholders, bad for anyone who wants decentralization and/or privacy.

Whereas Bitcoin and Monero miners and payment processors can't be bought and controller, nor Monero coins borrowed and amassed to produce large amounts of ouputs to reduce the anonymity set.

Smooth has covered this with you and the other dashtards on multiple occasions. I need to save it so i can copy and paste it to your foreheads. Not that it makes dash any less snake oily.

To state it simply, creating outputs has an inherent cost since it consumes a non-renewable resource (block space). The design is carefully constructed so even miners or someone working in collusion with miners can't create unlimited outputs without incuring that cost, and can really only create a linear number of outputs over time. Even a high but limited number of sybil outputs does not significantly reduce anonymity because of the exponential explosion of tracing paths. (I've given numerical examples before, I won't repeat them here.)

An attacker trying do to this will need to compete with regular users for block space and therefore incur a cost proportional to the share of the outputs created. This in turn is likely to be pointless for the reason stated in the last sentence. As with most good cryptography, you have a linear function competing with an exponential function. The exponential wins.



In cryptonote, I still can't verify it with logic, therefore I will not trust it.  That's all I have to say on it, I'm going to go back to my hole.  I can see your point, that you are willing to trust.  This is a philosophical difference, a difference in what we value to be important.  In this case, the argument can never be resolved.  Good day to you Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
July 19, 2015, 04:22:23 PM
#78
Then why are none of these attacks working?  We're #4 on coin market cap.  You think we're not being attacked?  Aside from monero's verbal attacks, you think there aren't hackers out there trying to attack our network?  We're over a year and a half old, we've been attacked, we solved those issues within hours each time.  Proof is in the pudding.  Good luck with that.

There are known attacks on Bitcoin that aren't happening, such as spending money to buy hash rate, the NSA using its own semiconductor facilities to build ASICs (or paying Intel to do it - something even much smaller governments could do since they too have secret contracts with major corporations), or a small number of pools working together, or being hacked and then used together, or even selfish mining. There are also more exotic attacks that have been published recently that also work. None of these happen in practice largely because all of crypto is tiny, and major attacks won't come until it is much larger.

#4 cmc sounds all impressive but it is less than 1% of the size of #1 (probably even less than that in terms of actual use), and #1 is still very small relative to finance generally.

Attacks will come in time. Now is the time to choose the strongest systems and continue working to strengthen defenses.
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1001
July 19, 2015, 04:19:09 PM
#77
Then why are none of these attacks working?  We're #4 on coin market cap.  You think we're not being attacked?  Aside from monero's verbal attacks, you think there aren't hackers out there trying to attack our network?  We're over a year and a half old, we've been attacked, we solved those issues within hours each time.  Proof is in the pudding.  Good luck with that.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
July 19, 2015, 04:16:20 PM
#76
Toknormal's description of how Cryptonote works or what is required for money to work was not legitimate.  With his pictures, he seemed to even imply that central bankers are needed for money to function at all.  Is this guy shilling?

He's trying to rationalize dash is better than bitcoin and monero at the things bitcoin and monero are best at. Bitcoin is the world's largest most secure decentralized clear blockchain. Monero is the world's largest and most secure decentralized opaque blockchain. He thinks (or wants us to believe)that masternodes are the preferred bridge between these two networks, but refuses to see (or admit) masternodes for what they really are: middlemen who can be bought and have control over the network they are supposed to decentralize and secure--so yeah, he is actually replacing bankers with masternodes and saying it is a good thing. Good for him and the other dash bagholders, bad for anyone who wants decentralization and/or privacy.

Whereas Bitcoin and Monero miners and payment processors can't be bought and controller, nor Monero coins borrowed and amassed to produce large amounts of ouputs to reduce the anonymity set.

Smooth has covered this with you and the other dashtards on multiple occasions. I need to save it so i can copy and paste it to your foreheads. Not that it makes dash any less snake oily.

To state it simply, creating outputs has an inherent cost since it consumes a non-renewable resource (block space). The design is carefully constructed so even miners or someone working in collusion with miners can't create unlimited outputs without incuring that cost, and can really only create a linear number of outputs over time. Even a high but limited number of sybil outputs does not significantly reduce anonymity because of the exponential explosion of tracing paths. (I've given numerical examples before, I won't repeat them here.)

An attacker trying do to this will need to compete with regular users for block space and therefore incur a cost proportional to the share of the outputs created. This in turn is likely to be pointless for the reason stated in the last sentence. As with most good cryptography, you have a linear function competing with an exponential function. The exponential wins.

legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1036
Facts are more efficient than fud
July 19, 2015, 04:15:31 PM
#75


I don't trust this system.  I can't see it and verify it.  What good is it for everything to be hidden completely, to the point where you have to trust that it is working?

With a simple, understandable system that fully protects the privacy of the user,  yet requires no trust - as was always the whole point of the decentralized crypto currency of Bitcoin - DASH is not more superior due to it's complexity, but due to it's simplicity.  If you're such a technocrat that you don't understand this, I can only feel bad for you because the majority of the world will.

LOL. Here's the attack vector Evan created out of ignorance, stupidity or pure not giving a fuck.

The easiest attack is to buy masternodes and ddos attack competing nodes until you own the traffic. Evan claims it's financially implausible, but ignores that nodes are most profitable when there about a 1,000 masternodes (he has a ROI graphic on the dash BCT thread that underscores this). He also ignores that the attacker would be pulling incomes from these masternodes--given that most are held on corporate servers underlies that no one knows who owns them outside of the host and the owner. He also ignores how motivated an attacker may be, that he or another masternode operator might comply given the right circumstances (threat or lawful compliance) and how deep LE's pockets are--silly, dangerous, stupid.

If you trust that system knowing the flaws, you deserve whatever comes your way--except maybe being linked to pedophiles--can you show that link on your explorer?
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1036
Facts are more efficient than fud
July 19, 2015, 04:11:28 PM
#74
Toknormal's description of how Cryptonote works or what is required for money to work was not legitimate.  With his pictures, he seemed to even imply that central bankers are needed for money to function at all.  Is this guy shilling?

He's trying to rationalize dash is better than bitcoin and monero at the things bitcoin and monero are best at. Bitcoin is the world's largest most secure decentralized clear blockchain. Monero is the world's largest and most secure decentralized opaque blockchain. He thinks (or wants us to believe)that masternodes are the preferred bridge between these two networks, but refuses to see (or admit) masternodes for what they really are: middlemen who can be bought and have control over the network they are supposed to decentralize and secure--so yeah, he is actually replacing bankers with masternodes and saying it is a good thing. Good for him and the other dash bagholders, bad for anyone who wants decentralization and/or privacy.

Whereas Bitcoin and Monero miners and payment processors can't be bought and controller, nor Monero coins borrowed and amassed to produce large amounts of ouputs to reduce the anonymity set.

Smooth has covered this with you and the other dashtards on multiple occasions. I need to save it so i can copy and paste it to your foreheads. Not that it makes dash any less snake oily.
sr. member
Activity: 453
Merit: 500
hello world
July 19, 2015, 04:10:37 PM
#73
Please show me you can do the same on your blockchain, which I can't see how to do, and then I'll be satisfied that monero is trustless.  Otherwise, I'll never be a fan Smiley

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11919237


http://moneroblocks.eu/

Yes, that is a cryptonote block explorer, but what you can not show me is the hash that the coins previously came from, because it's hidden.  you can't tell what the "names" of the coins are going back to their creation.  The "name" or account number, changes whenever the original coin is broken up, merged or changes hands.  In XMR, this information is completely lost and not stored on the blockchain.  I can't see it, I have to trust in cryptography.  If anything goes wrong, nobody would ever know.  And at it's worst, if computers ever get strong enough, which is quite possible with quantum computers on the horizon, all transactions will lose their privacy, the very reason for all this convoluted mess.

I don't trust this system.  I can't see it and verify it.  What good is it for everything to be hidden completely, to the point where you have to trust that it is working?

With a simple, understandable system that fully protects the privacy of the user,  yet requires no trust - as was always the whole point of the decentralized crypto currency of Bitcoin - DASH is not more superior due to it's complexity, but due to it's simplicity.  If you're such a technocrat that you don't understand this, I can only feel bad for you because the majority of the world will.

legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
July 19, 2015, 04:10:19 PM
#72
With a simple, understandable system that fully protects the privacy of the user,  yet requires no trust

You don't understand what the concept of 'no trust' means. It means that you can verify the cryptography yourself on your own computer, generally using a program (although in theory you could do it by hand on paper). Without doing that you have no way to do know that a blockchain (be it Dash or Bitcoin or Monero) is valid. Once you do that, you do know it is valid.

It especially does NOT mean that you trust masternodes to not reveal the mixing they are doing for you, and without that Dash is no better than Bitcoin terms of privacy. It is either not trustless or completely worthless.


hero member
Activity: 966
Merit: 1003
July 19, 2015, 04:07:52 PM
#71
Toknormal's description of how Cryptonote works or what is required for money to work was not legitimate.  With his pictures, he seemed to even imply that central bankers are needed for money to function at all.  Is this guy shilling?

He's trying to rationalize dash is better than bitcoin and monero at the things bitcoin and monero are best at. Bitcoin is the world's largest most secure decentralized clear blockchain. Monero is the world's largest and most secure decentralized opaque blockchain. He thinks (or wants us to believe)that masternodes are the preferred bridge between these two networks, but refuses to see (or admit) masternodes for what they really are: middlemen who can be bought and have control over the network they are supposed to decentralize and secure--so yeah, he is actually replacing bankers with masternodes and saying it is a good thing. Good for him and the other dash bagholders, bad for anyone who wants decentralization and/or privacy.

Whereas Bitcoin and Monero miners and payment processors can't be bought and controller, nor Monero coins borrowed and amassed to produce large amounts of ouputs to reduce the anonymity set.
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1001
July 19, 2015, 04:05:51 PM
#70
Please show me you can do the same on your blockchain, which I can't see how to do, and then I'll be satisfied that monero is trustless.  Otherwise, I'll never be a fan Smiley

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11919237


http://moneroblocks.eu/

Yes, that is a cryptonote block explorer, but what you can not show me is the hash that the coins previously came from, because it's hidden.  you can't tell what the "names" of the coins are going back to their creation.  The "name" or account number, changes whenever the original coin is broken up, merged or changes hands.  In XMR, this information is completely lost and not stored on the blockchain.  I can't see it, I have to trust in cryptography.  If anything goes wrong, nobody would ever know.  And at it's worst, if computers ever get strong enough, which is quite possible with quantum computers on the horizon, all transactions will lose their privacy, the very reason for all this convoluted mess.

I don't trust this system.  I can't see it and verify it.  What good is it for everything to be hidden completely, to the point where you have to trust that it is working?

With a simple, understandable system that fully protects the privacy of the user,  yet requires no trust - as was always the whole point of the decentralized crypto currency of Bitcoin - DASH is not more superior due to it's complexity, but due to it's simplicity.  If you're such a technocrat that you don't understand this, I can only feel bad for you because the majority of the world will.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
July 19, 2015, 04:04:15 PM
#69
You added that last bit, yes, the explorer, which is easily read.  It is indeed served up by anonymous people who check it via cryptography, to verify that the Proof of Work was done at every block.  These anonymous people come to a single consensus, yes, true.  HOWEVER, the LEDGER that is the blockchain, is easily readable right back to the creation of the coin, so you can see clearly the coin's integrity.

Not just verifying the proof of work, the signatures need to be verified as well, otherwise those blocks might contain invalid transactions making your coins worthless. That's hard core cryptography using actual math. It is essentially the same situation as crytponote, just slightly different math.
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 508
July 19, 2015, 03:53:23 PM
#68
Please show me you can do the same on your blockchain, which I can't see how to do, and then I'll be satisfied that monero is trustless.  Otherwise, I'll never be a fan Smiley

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11919237


http://moneroblocks.eu/
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 508
July 19, 2015, 03:50:01 PM
#67



As for what Tok is trying to say here (I believe, I could be getting him wrong, hate to put words in people's mouths) is that cryptonote was designed initially to be used with a central authority that holds the "keys".  Throwing those keys away only makes it impossible for anyone, not even a central authority to verify what happened, inside or outside of the blockchain.  The cryptography must be trusted, which kills the whole concept of trustless.  Thus his constant harping on illegitimatizing the blockchain.
except that cryptonote uses a decentralized ledger where all users control the keys and sign messages that get rolled into blocks and chained togeather. ie a blockchain
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1001
July 19, 2015, 03:40:47 PM
#66
Please show me you can do the same on your blockchain, which I can't see how to do, and then I'll be satisfied that monero is trustless.  Otherwise, I'll never be a fan Smiley

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11919237
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 508
July 19, 2015, 03:37:13 PM
#65
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1001
July 19, 2015, 03:37:13 PM
#64
As for what Tok is trying to say here (I believe, I could be getting him wrong, hate to put words in people's mouths) is that cryptonote was designed initially to be used with a central authority that holds the "keys".

Okay well that's totally wrong.

Quote
Throwing those keys away only makes it impossible for anyone, not even a central authority to verify what happened, inside or outside of the blockchain.  The cryptography must be trusted, which kills the whole concept of trustless.

This totally misunderstands the concept of a blockchain. To verify a blockchain (even Bitcoin) requires cryptography. Unless you rely on cryptography, you could easily be given some fake bunch of data that looks like a blockchain but is actually nonsense.



No, not really.  I can follow the coins all the way back to when they were created.  I can do that with my own eyes, following the account numbers.  Nothing is obscured, even when mixing the coins, breaking them up into exact denominations, etc...  This is how Bitcoin works, this is how DASH works.

You can follow the coins back how? By looking at gigabytes of 1s and 0s? Or by using a chain explorer which is connected to a node, which in turn only knows it is receiving valid information from anonymous people on the internet by verifying the cryptography? I'm pretty sure it is the latter


You added that last bit, yes, the explorer, which is easily read.  It is indeed served up by anonymous people who check it via cryptography, to verify that the Proof of Work was done at every block.  These anonymous people come to a single consensus, yes, true.  HOWEVER, the LEDGER that is the blockchain, is easily readable right back to the creation of the coin, so you can see clearly the coin's integrity.
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1001
July 19, 2015, 03:33:23 PM
#63
As for what Tok is trying to say here (I believe, I could be getting him wrong, hate to put words in people's mouths) is that cryptonote was designed initially to be used with a central authority that holds the "keys".

Okay well that's totally wrong.

Quote
Throwing those keys away only makes it impossible for anyone, not even a central authority to verify what happened, inside or outside of the blockchain.  The cryptography must be trusted, which kills the whole concept of trustless.

This totally misunderstands the concept of a blockchain. To verify a blockchain (even Bitcoin) requires cryptography. Unless you rely on cryptography, you could easily be given some fake bunch of data that looks like a blockchain but is actually nonsense.



No, not really.  I can follow the coins all the way back to when they were created.  I can do that with my own eyes, following the account numbers.  Nothing is obscured, even when mixing the coins, breaking them up into exact denominations, etc...  This is how Bitcoin works, this is how DASH works.

You can follow the coins back how? By looking at gigabytes of 1s and 0s? Or by using a chain explorer which is connected to a node, which in turn only knows it is receiving valid information from anonymous people on the internet by verifying the cryptography? I'm pretty sure it is the latter


Are you serious?  Are you not familiar with the Bitcoin block explorers?  This example below is how you follow a coin back in time, on a DASH explorer:





I can continue this process with any coin, until I find the block / blocks where they were first created, as a block reward, and I can do this manually with the help of a block explorer to organize the information, and I can check how the information is disseminated on the web page by looking at it's code.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
July 19, 2015, 02:56:28 PM
#62
As for what Tok is trying to say here (I believe, I could be getting him wrong, hate to put words in people's mouths) is that cryptonote was designed initially to be used with a central authority that holds the "keys".

Okay well that's totally wrong.

Quote
Throwing those keys away only makes it impossible for anyone, not even a central authority to verify what happened, inside or outside of the blockchain.  The cryptography must be trusted, which kills the whole concept of trustless.

This totally misunderstands the concept of a blockchain. To verify a blockchain (even Bitcoin) requires cryptography. Unless you rely on cryptography, you could easily be given some fake bunch of data that looks like a blockchain but is actually nonsense.



No, not really.  I can follow the coins all the way back to when they were created.  I can do that with my own eyes, following the account numbers.  Nothing is obscured, even when mixing the coins, breaking them up into exact denominations, etc...  This is how Bitcoin works, this is how DASH works.

You can follow the coins back how? By looking at gigabytes of 1s and 0s? Or by using a chain explorer which is connected to a node, which in turn only knows it is receiving valid information from anonymous people on the internet by verifying the cryptography? I'm pretty sure it is the latter
Pages:
Jump to: