Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 126. (Read 387493 times)

99.999% also have no idea what is monero, since it is only about 2000 people know esperanto .

Nobody's gamed it yet - while I agree it needs analysis, if you can, do it. It's easy to sit in your armchair and point out there's a possibility that there is a weakness, it's a whole different story to either look for one or get someone to. One is easy and worthless, the other is harder, yet constructive.

I agree with you here.

 
And this is the main reason why we are looking for partnership/investment now. We have technical ideas and ability to improve project(colored coins, multisig transactions etc), and we are looking for a credible person with marketing/PR experience.

Correct.  I have contributed to both the XMR and BBR code.  I do not develop for any coins, but I have a soft spot in my heart for the cryptonotes because they're the most technically interesting coins I've seen arise.

(For those watching from home confused about why I'm replying to a reply, I have AnonyMint on ignore;  as you can probably tell from the tone of the comments, we seem to get along like baking soda and vinegar, and life is too short to let people waste your time.)

Please clarify your statement? Do you mean you disclaim the need for cryptanalysis of a new hash function used in PoW or do you disclaim something Wolf0 wrote?

Wolf0 I apologize to lose my temper, but I don't like the deal where you require me to do all work for your group, else I can't speak to common methodology in cryptography to offer some insights.

Everyone knows that cryptography breaks when your input entropy is broken. Duh!

That is why it is so important to insure your random generator isn't subject to a birthday attack. The same applies to the random oracles you use when doing lookups in a scratchpad.

Just to clarify (again) - there are only 7 members of the core team, as listed earlier. We do not make any such claims.

Proof? Evidence?

Anybody can blow any nonsense words out their arse. Cryptographers understand that until you do cryptanalysis, you don't fucking know.


I am so tired of that genre of Dunning-Kruger illogic.

If you can't fucking get a clue, then please stop forcing me to come back and repeat the same damn cryptography education for you again.


You want to criticize Zerocash for having unvetted crypto, but you won't accept the same criticism when you generate a new hash function and someone points out that the design deviates glaringly from accepted cryptography practices and you ignore it.

It behoves you to go review the Round 1 candidates for SHA-3 and see that many were broken and they were designed by cryptographers who did some analysis on their designs. Perhaps they were not broken in a way that would impact use in PoW, but these were (later broken) designs attempted to be reasonably correct by cryptographer designers, so one wouldn't expect major snafus.

Whereas, the egregious mistakes (radical experiments) made on these two PoW hashes by non-cryptographers are quite glaring. I don't know for sure they lead to significant breakage.

And you don't know either. So STFU. Mofo.  

P.S. what I did from my armchair was give up extremely valuable time that I should be applying to other work, to be kind of enough to explain the potential vulnerabilities I see. As a starting point, for someone who has time to dig and study further. Also as warning and clue to novices who have no idea otherwise.

Edit: take it from the words of your own paid cryptographer review:

http://monero.cc/downloads/whitepaper_review.pdf


He fails to mention "refrain from including any sort of cryptanalysis to back up that algorithm. Upon which. Your entire. Coin. Is. Based. Ugh.".

Edit#2: also it has been alleged that the Cryptonote PoW was likely a trojan planted to mine most of the coins for the developers of Bytecoin. So it was perhaps never designed to be secure, but rather designed to maximize obfuscation of the alleged Bytecoin scam.

Every masternode could be spying, but unless they are co-operating there's not much for them to gain. Competing investors co-operating in competitive market? Nahh...



Distribution by operator is what it is mainly because the first guides written on how to set up a masternode used Amazon as an example, and people were already familiar with those big operators. So the people who wanted to have a node running asap with minimal effort started using those. We'll see if the distribution will change as time passes, probably at least some kind of education on the matter is needed.

But the thing is, look at the masternode distribution, you don't really need a sophisticated attack - a simple email to amazon, ovh and do from the FBI and they have access to 90% of them.

That is more lucid than my and your prior attempts to explain that upthread. I'm a bit cross-eyed at the moment. Did 21 hours straight on Saturday...

I guess you mean BBR, as Monero has a lot more code contributed to it and is far more diversed from the CN reference code.

You don't need to resort to power law wealth for masternodes to be Sybil attacked. If they are an investment that is priced for a market return then someone who wants to also use them to spy has a competitive advantage. That being the case one should expect that every masternode in a competitive market is secretly spying. Similar to your argument about who is providing Tor bandwidth for free.

I doubt they would "destroy their investment" by spying, as with all intelligence sources the spying would be kept secret in order to protect its value.

Odd phrasing. While both Boolberry and Monero are based on Bytecoin only one has "minimal and questionable changes."

Edit: Btw, I was not lumping you together dga. I was admiring your posts, until you said I ruined my reputation. Lol.


DarkCoin if evaluated solely on anonymity plus and minuses is also in the competitive mix.

As compared to Cyptonote, although its unlinkability and untraceability are subject to potential Sybil attack on masternodes (even if unlikely?), it can at least offer the hope of exponential pruning. They have to work out a balance between premixing scaling and blockchain bloat scaling. At least they have those variables to play with, and Cryptonote doesn't (unless not mixing is considered a variable). Mixed coins in Cryptonote can't be pruned.

DarkCoin may be the sleeper that sneaks up on us. One thing I can admire about Evan. He is a doer, not a talker like me.

DarkCoin's design feels messy or unelegant to me, but if it works with all the duct tape, then it works.


A vaporware, IPO elephant in the room that may disintegrate or successfully stomp on everything.


Zerocash without an accumulator isn't Zerocash any more. Since the I2P/Tor is also not guaranteed to be anonymous, users might just decide Zerocash is a cleaner elegant solution. I think you dismiss it too easily. Strange they are totally quiet though since May.

I edited my summary comparison, because am I correct that Boolberry doesn't have nor plan to be adding I2P/Tor support as Monero is?

Also added '*' category for comparison enumeration.


Lol. Love you too bro.  

I for one appreciate your contributions to crypto, especially when they are in the more level headed vein as they have been the last week or so.  I hope you don't mind me pointing it out, but your tone has been far more reasonable recently, and it makes your positions and arguments much easier to navigate and consider.

I would always be interested in what coins you contribute to, and which you feel have serious potential.

But secrecy is your prerogative obviously.

Never. But that doesn't mean that I didn't secretly contribute to a coin that is released. I will never tell you. I will never use AnonyMint's forum reputation to market a coin, so you don't have to bother slandering it.

Never count vaporware as "sure to be released". Shit happens.

Anonymint is releasing a coin?

Where did I say Claymore is a Bytecoin dev? That is silly. I was referring to the intentionally crippled hash. I never said premine either.

I am not certain at all in Monero being the one. This is my position:

I am only adamant about Monero keeping its lead over Boolberry. I take Hal's position but instead of Bitcoin/Litecoin I apply it to Monero/Boolberry. Boolberry does not have enough reason to overtake the market leader. The POW and pruning are nothing amazing and not what the focus should be on. True pruning perhaps.

This is my position:

1. Monero, without another anonymous currency competing should continue to cement its place as the main anonymous cryptocurrency.
2. Boolberry should not be in a position to overtake Monero based on it's minimal and questionable changes.

IF: Boolberry overtakes Monero then the precedent is set for some other CN clone to overtake Boolberry based on marketing hype.
Under this conditions it's likely something like DuckNote would replace Boolberry and so on and so fourth.
DO: I am out of CryptoNote for good once this happens. (In fact I'll probably release drawingthesuncoin to compete!)

3. Ethereum may not compete for anon, but it will take the spot light away from Monero, not sure how to use this to my advantage.
4. Zerocash that does not need an accumulator and has been extensively crypto-analyzed will be a major threat. This may not ever exist.

5. Anonymint's super coin, keep an eye on this. There might be more chance Monero is developed to scale before this super coin is released.