Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 185. (Read 387552 times)

From your post its clear that you are BTC oriented guy and you are ignoring crypto evolution.
Many alts are pure copies but many of them are bringing new value to crypto.

New economy difternt approach to coin to crypto ONE big "-" is dystrybution.

Doge bring many new people to crypto world and have large community oposite to many clones their charity was made some good things
in real world beside PnD. In longer run it can be more popular than you think.


BC 1st coin from PPC line which dared turned of almighty POW part Before BC all were saying that PPC POS system is insecure and can not be trusted...
now you are testing live protocol and its seciurity.
100% premine - good joke - was fast mine 7day minig only.
Yes because of that was heavily manipulated but so far development is quide impressive.
1st smart contract client in open beta - and multisign client too.
And core dev is sitill VERY active even after mega pump so... i don't think that his sntecion was gt quik rich at the end.
His donations were untouched during pump.


bittalk history shows that it was mined by many people in six month price was 50-150 before big pump at end of mining.
+ for queak - for force fast algorithms and fast transaction times in p2p system.

about Mro i have miss feelings i like support original devs, steel someones concept is easy and put own name on it.
But volume mro over BCN is impressive.

Anyway PnD are every where BTC is best example of that too.
China news and price + - 30%.

________________________

Alts are improving over time transaction speed - security no 51% attacks - mining asics proff coins (mining centralization like BTC )
alts are doing that what BTC is trying avoid "fear of fork"...core evolution.

You can't stop evolution some day some of those ats will be bigger than slow BTC BTC will be like e-gold but p2p functionality will be in alts side.

bonero

I have a dream: BBR and XMR devs become one team

Good stuff thanks. It seems we can put the Dark vs Monero debate to rest. The price will follow once people realize this and the inflation for Monero tapers off.

Would be great to see a similar comparison for Monero vs Boolberry if someone is up for it.

I do not want to join bagholders war but you guys are aware that enough anonymity is quite a funny idea - something is anonymous or it is not. the rest is easily achievable with bitcoin.

yeah ruining the thread.

Back to Altwall observing 

Sick of this massive holy war. Can you guys stop garble the information to your own preference?

FTFY OP.

What a crock of shit. Had you just spouted off about how good MRO is, I would have taken your advice to heart. But because you decided to bash every Alt except the one you hold, I think you are no more than a propaganda artist with the incentive to make sure you make money regardless of truths.

Please dont feed the obvious trolls about Darkcoin (or any other already debunked coins)

On a side note, this thread has gained 5 pages in one day.  It would seem the more they are trolling this thread, the more its kept at the number 1 position in this subsection for all to see, causing more people to be informed about XMR.   

Bytecoin devs, someone writes about you and CryptoNote http://www.cryptobang.com/2014/07/09/bytecoin/

PS: Time to dump DRK

Define substantial. I expect to see perhaps 10% of Bitcoin's transaction volume.

Darkcoin has enough (and will have more than enough) anonymity for all practical purposes - the headway it has stems from being compatible with bitcoin. Anyone who is already operating with bitcoin (either end user, retailer, or financial corporation) can easily start operating with drk as well. And all future improvements that bitcoin will have can be ported to drk. How much this matters in a year or two though remains to be seen.

I don't expect any of the coins under discussion to achieve substantial real-world impact in the next 12 months.

Do you?

dga, I'm not denying Moore's law (although things aren't looking good for processors...). Hard drive sizes will eventually make block chain size less of an issue. I just hope you're ok with waiting 5+ years for that to happen. All in the vain hope for "more anonymity". We won't get true anonymity until we have open source hardware. Hope you're ok with waiting anywhere up to 20 years. In the meantime, Darkcoin will deliver privacy that meets 99.9% of peoples' need for "anonymity".

Anyone who had a drk masternode that got taken down can just as easily set up a new node. He doesn't lose his 1000 coins if the masternode is taken down as you don't store the 1000 coins in the masternode's wallet, you store them in a local cold wallet where they'll be safe. Again, you can setup a new masternode "in no time".



No, but it will prevent people from connecting to the network so for them it doesn't matter if there's anonymity or not if they can't even use it.

You're sure posting a lot for someone who is confident in the superiority of a given technology.

Let's try to inject a little bit of reason into this discussion.

(1)  As long as Moore's law continues, the bloat in the cryptonote family will be relatively inconsequential in comparison to the overhead in Bitcoin.  Unlike others in this thread, I'm not going to make any claims of a 2x overhead, because I think that's incorrect.  Let's call it a roughly 14x overhead.

At present, the Bitcoin blockchain is roughly 20GB, with most of that growth in the last two years.

That means that a roughly equivalent Cryptonote blockchain might be on the order of 380GB *if* CN became as popular as Bitcoin.

The key thing about that is that that's a size that can be stored on a commodity SSD today - which means that with continued growth, as long as Moore's law continues to bless us with density advances (in flash, HDD, or a future nonvolatile memory), we'll be able to fit the CN blockchain on a single commodity storage device for the forseeable future.

That's good.  It's not great, and it should be improved, because it does mean that running a full cryptonote node requires dedicating some real hardware to it.  But it's easy to engineer things so that the vast majority of the blockchain is stored only on HDD, for which 380GB is negligible even with today's 2-4TB disks, and uses on the order of 10GB of SSD to store the more active portions.

Is it trivial?  No.  Is it research?  No;  it's pretty well-understood engineering.  And we've got a few years in which to get such a solution engineered.

380GB/year is roughly 1GB/day of data transfer.  Again, that's a fair bit by today's standards, but keeps people under even Comcast's horrid monthly cap.  Two or three years from now, it will remain fairly negligible.

But all that said, neither Bitcoin or any of its derivatives, or Cryptonote, is good enough.  As others have noted, the need to split transactions into fixed-size pieces (as DRK's masternode approach does as well) is part of the cause of the bloat, and thus, one might reasonably expect DRK to suffer somewhere between Bitcoin and Cryptonote.

Conclusion:  All of these systems are kind of OK for what they're doing today, and *all* of them need substantial improvements before they can become the de facto payment system.

You're welcome to bet that DRK will solve this before XMR - that's not something I'm qualified to judge.  But please be honest that what you're really claiming here is a prediction about longer-term technical innovation, not the immediate state of the art with any of these currencies.

(2)  You're ignoring the Boolberry improvements in ring signature trimming, which substantially reduce the longer-term size of the blockchain, and numerous other *substantive* improvements by both the XMR and BBR developers, when you claim that all they've done is fix a few trivial things in the pool code.

That's silly, and an easily falsifiable claim, and it makes you sound like you're being dishonest in pursuit of promoting your favorite coin.  Don't do that.  As a brief list of some of the improvements that have come post-BCN, consider:

  * GUI wallets [Several in beta for XMR, one released for BBR].  This is a much less trivial exercise than it is for Bitcoin clones, which can take advantage of the existing ecosystem to a greater degree.
  * Multiple exchanges support.  Again, see above.
  * Progress on external review of cryptonote (from xmr)
  * Transaction auto-splitting addresses a major usability issue with cryptonote (XMR)
  * Ring signature trimming for blockchain compaction (BBR)
  * (Up for debate between bbr/xmr camps) out mixin count restrictions for increased long-term anonymity (BBR)
  * RPC-able wallet (XMR)
  * Deterministic wallets (XMR)
  * Addressing numerous robustness issues with dust attacks, networking bugs, etc. (both BBR & XMR)

It's up to you to decide whether these are "significant", but it behooves us all to keep the debate factual.

Who said anything about mixing? Argument was that a government could take down the nodes of a coin or hold people running one liable for breaking whatever law. -illodin

Ok in this scenario , if the government decides to take down nodes for Bitcoin or Monero which wouldn't make much sense on their part, anyone who has a spare $20 can setup a new node in no time, Plus the taking down of nodes will not affect Monero's ability to provide anonymity in anyway. Bitcoin runs perfectly and it's Lacking nodes, Monero will also run perfectly if it ever lacks nodes

If the government decides to take down nodes for Darkcoin however, Darkcoin's entire coinjoin-based trivial, "anonymity" will be destroyed, as Darkcoin's coinjoin/mixing feature Relies on the centralized masternodes to mix a user's coins. Without the masternodes, Darkcoin is just another 50% instamined scamcoin.

>> government could take down the nodes of a coin

Yes, government can take DRK masternodes but not Bitcoin or XMR nodes



There are a big difference between masternodes (Darksend) and regular wallets (DRK daemon). What do you mean here?

Who said anything about mixing? Argument was that a government could take down the nodes of a coin or hold people running one liable for breaking whatever law.



Exactly, masternodes and regular wallets form a decentralized network.



Source will be opened, in not so far future. And, when running a masternode, you can keep your 1000 coins in a local cold wallet, and the masternode's wallet doesn't even have to be encrypted! It doesn't hold any coins!

The reason that Amazon has so many masternodes, is because the first step-by-step guide to run one used Amazon as an example. This will change in time I'm sure. Here is the current node distribution by operator: http://drk.poolhash.org/darksend.html

I've already stated that anonymity is a fallacy. You're not getting anywhere.