Author

Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 188. (Read 387493 times)

hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 500
July 09, 2014, 06:23:10 PM
My hypothesis on the decline of darkcoin is the following.  (Not that I care much, but I'll watch it attentively for the fun).

The hype is already partly over, and will keep declining, this is inherent to the life cycle of "hype" alts. Add to this the better cryptonote technology, recently instantiated in a fair-launch coin with monero, whose high-quality community keeps growing and will quickly attract part of the darkcoin one.
So the decline seems unavoidable, but noting unusual at this stage.

But, unlike other alts, darkcoin is relying on master nodes that require at least 1000 coins. Running a masternode earns the owner some interest. What I think will happen is that once the first masternode owners realize they will make better profit by selling their +1000 coins now rather than earning interest on a coin which is loosing value, well they will sell! This will be a catalyst to lowering even more the price, making more masternode owners realize that they'd better do the same as soon as possible, etc.
So the decline might be faster than "usual", due to this domino effect, waiting to trigger.


Your hypothesis is many other's hypothesis as well. In the beginning, any sort of announcement from the drk dark, evan, would create rapid hype and  a usual increase in price. However, his recent announcements have hardly budged the price positively at all. I think it also has to deal with the continuous failed RC3 launches(twice so far) and how Darkcoin's anonymity is trivial compared to others like Monero. Darkcoin could be getting ready to have a mega dump soon enough, once the whales supporting( I suspect a mighty few already stopped supporting drk) it sell off and move on.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
Still wild and free
July 09, 2014, 06:18:36 PM
My hypothesis on the decline of darkcoin is the following.  (Not that I care much, but I'll watch it attentively for the fun).

The hype is already partly over, and will keep declining, this is inherent to the life cycle of "hype" alts. Add to this the better cryptonote technology, recently instantiated in a fair-launch coin with monero, whose high-quality community keeps growing and will quickly attract part of the darkcoin one.
So the decline seems unavoidable, but noting unusual at this stage.

But, unlike other alts, darkcoin is relying on master nodes that require at least 1000 coins. Running a masternode earns the owner some interest. What I think will happen is that once the first masternode owners realize they will make better profit by selling their +1000 coins now rather than earning interest on a coin which is loosing value, well they will sell! This will be a catalyst to lowering even more the price, making more masternode owners realize that they'd better do the same as soon as possible, etc.
So the decline might be faster than "usual", due to this domino effect, waiting to trigger.
hero member
Activity: 723
Merit: 503
July 09, 2014, 06:12:11 PM
I don't know what it's worth but I've found some interesting stuff analyzing XMR latest 2 months of trading on poloniex. It seems that the trend we are in corresponds to the trend we were in 1 month ago:

6 June : high 2,58 / low 1,75
7 july  : high 3,9 / Low 3

Then we go up ~ 0,1 mbtc per day like in june. I advise you to compare the data for yourself as I'm too tired to copy everything.  The "big reversal" happened the 10th of June (high 3,5; low 2,1 ; close 2,6) so if XMR is really on a monthly cycle, history could repeat itself on 11th of July. Place your orders accordingly.



tl;dr: we hit bottom 3mbtc and buying at 3 was like buying at 1,75 one month ago.

edit: edited numbers typo (0,1 mbtc per day not 1 mbtc)
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1000
July 09, 2014, 05:58:40 PM
DRK supporter/dev lies as usual  Grin
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2053
Free spirit
July 09, 2014, 05:58:05 PM
Right then liquidated a bit and I placed a monero order. Lets see.

hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 500
July 09, 2014, 05:52:39 PM
Here is the post I referrenced earlier. It's quite a long post, but the part concerning CN is near the middle. And please don't bring up where he says Darkcoin is simple coinjoin (older post) , he acknowledges that it isn't further down.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7513123

CryptoNote doesn't hide the amount and the payer is mixed with a limited number of numerous other potential payers, so the IP correlation can be used to narrow the possibilities statistically and home in on identity, by observing patterns across all users. Thus the lack of IP address obfuscation in CryptoNote (assuming Tor is really a honey pots, and or most users fail to employ Tor) reduces the anonymity. -gmaxwell


While it may not be able to scale at Bitcoin levels, Monero's chain atm is twice Bitcoins, which is very reasonable considering it gives the highest level of anonymity there is for cryptocoins right now. He also doesn't say Anything about it being impossible to reduce, why you may ask? Because Crypto_Zoidber already reduced it for his own coin and reduced bloat by 50%-70%, and Monero also reduced the majority of the bloat, which was caused by dust transactions. Again, BrilliantRocket, it's either you greatly misinterpret information given to you, or you lie and try to manipulate others with selective wording

_______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________

CoinJoin’s algorithm suffers from not being atomic and thus it can be repeatedly jammed by an adversary, i.e. denial-of-service. This is because first the inputs have to be collected, then the outputs have to blind signed with a group signature, and then finally all inputs have to signed. If any one of the participant senders fails to complete all the steps, the transaction is jammed and the process must start again. All proposals for throttling or blacklisting adversaries was argued to be ineffective and intractable. Darkcoin innovated CoinJoin by adding a collateral payment which is forfeited by participants who fail to complete all steps. This requires a random master node to break the unlinkability as it knows the matching output of each input. It is assumed that not all master nodes will be adversaries and thus sending multiple times through different master nodes will provide a probablistic level of unlinkability. The master nodes are purchased and it isn’t clear that a sufficiently powerful adversary couldn't sufficiently Sybil attack by acquiring a larger percentage of the master nodes. There is also concern this might also enable the adversary to steal collateral payments. Also the master nodes aren’t untraceable and thus could perhaps be held liable by governments for breaking AML and KYC laws. CoinJoin and Darkcoin suffer from the simultaneity timing problem that other spenders need to send spends of the same amount simultaneously. -gmaxwell

Gmaxwell also shows that while Darkcoin have "advanced" coinjoin, it still suffers from the same issues, not to mention the Masternode centralization problem.

Darkcoin's anonymity is simply put, Trivial and Inferior to Cryptonote anonymity.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500
July 09, 2014, 05:49:23 PM

"The anonymity of CryptoNote (i.e. ByteCoin, Monero, and clones) requires that all transaction amounts be broken into separate transactions for standardized fragments which causes massive blockchain bloat (for any reasonable level of anonymity) and the blockchain can never be pruned. There is already a problem with Bitcoin's blockchain being too large and it doesn't have this massive bloat. In short, CryptoNote (and Zerocoin) can't scale."
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500
July 09, 2014, 05:45:42 PM
Here is the post I referrenced earlier. It's quite a long post, but the part concerning CN is near the middle. And please don't bring up where he says Darkcoin is simple coinjoin (older post) , he acknowledges that it isn't further down.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7513123
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
Credits CRD 1st Decentralized Exchange coin
July 09, 2014, 05:16:16 PM
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
Still wild and free
July 09, 2014, 04:27:23 PM
I'm just throwing out ideas here since I can't think of another good use case for FantomCoin

Maybe because there aren't (m)any.  Wink
hero member
Activity: 938
Merit: 1001
July 09, 2014, 04:06:40 PM
Btc Mike, that's not it. I'll link it when I get home.

Ok thanks. I am interested in reading.

I went digging through DRK thread. This is the post I referred to earlier. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6034036
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1002
amarha
July 09, 2014, 03:59:56 PM
If CryptoNote has scaling issues with it's anon technology, is that a potential use case for FantomCoin? First use case I can really think of for a merge mined CN coin, but it sounds like it's plausible. It could take some pressure off XMR or BBL or whatever emerges as the main coin.

FantomCoin is just another CryptoNote coin. What do you mean here?

From what I understand it's not a standard CN coin but a merge mined coin like Namecoin is with Bitcoin. So if everyone is using Monero but there is some sort of issue with scaling as people are mentioning in this thread(I'm not familiar with the technical details here, so I'm taking this on face value) then FantomCoin can be added to everyones regular Monero mining routines and then used as a sort of overflow currency. Since it shares the same core technology.

I'm just throwing out ideas here since I can't think of another good use case for FantomCoin since it's been designed to be merge mined.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500
July 09, 2014, 03:59:43 PM
Btc Mike, that's not it. I'll link it when I get home.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500
July 09, 2014, 03:55:15 PM
Way to cite old posts that are not fully relevant, Darkota. In his newer one he clearly states that CN cannot scale. He also acknowledges that Darkcoin solved a fundamental problem of coinjoin by requiring collateral. The software is not 100% complete, so why would it be open sourced now? The plan is to finish, then open source.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 500
July 09, 2014, 03:37:39 PM
Below is Anonymint's post on Zerocash, Cryptonote, and Darkcoin. He explicitly says he prefers Cryptonote over Zerocash, and his own words on Darkcoin are," Darkcoin (CoinJoin innovation) is really not at the level of the two above. You can review my comments in the Darkcoin thread to see why."

Zerocash will be announced soon (May 18 in Oakland? but open source may not be ready then?).

Here is a synopsis of the tradeoffs compared to CyptoNote:

1. Zerocash hides everything, even the money supply so if the master key was compromised or if the highly complex bleeding edge crypto is cracked, no one will know.

2. They will claim to generate the master key at a ceremony or devise a way to compute in parts, but nothing they can do will insure it isn't compromised. CPUs even have special firmware that allows the NSA to reprogram them remotely, and even computation can be intercepted wireless with RF signals. Whereas we have to place all trust in a single party with Zerocash, with CN the trusted parties are changing on each transaction. Compromising the master key doesn't compromise the anonymity, but does compromise the money supply which could be expanded invisibly. Cracking the highly complex bleeding edge crypto which has not been sufficiently vetted over years, could compromise the anonymity ex post facto (it is all on the block chain).

3. Both CN and Zerocash use a form of cryptography which is not immune to quantum computation attack, if that becomes a reality in the future.

4. Zerocash transactions add up to 3 minutes of additional transaction delay which is much worse than Zerocoin. Zerocash (full node computation and block chain) resource requirements are centralizing but much improved over Zerocoin.

5. Zerocash hides everything so it is not necessary to obscure your IP address.



Thus on balance I prefer CN, but I like to see it altered to use a quantum computer resistant algorithm. And then we need to add IP address obfuscation as well that is superior to Tor and I2P.

Darkcoin (CoinJoin innovation) is really not at the level of the two above. You can review my comments in the Darkcoin thread to see why.

Below is Gmaxwell's, the maker of coinjoin, post about Darkcoin. "More amusingly, what DarkCoin does is highly centralized because the software is closed"

Ozziecoin, Your pump and dump dance would probably be more effective if you were less transparently dishonest in your approach.  I'm normally happy to ignore the nonsense in the altcoin subform, but since you saw fit to go distrupt the coinjoin thread with some offtopic insult hurling I thought I'd bring the extensive response back here where its topical.

CoinJoin is trustless— which is orthogonal with centralized or decentralized, it could be implemented several ways (though trustlessness is usually a prerequisite to a decenteralized implementation). Post 5 in the CoinJoin thread writes in depth about implementing it in a decenteralized way, none of which appears to have been implemented by the darkcoin developers as far as I can tell— from what I've heard it seems that they're not even able to understand it. (This is a disappointment to me, since I was trying to describe these ideas clearly so others could understand them.)

More amusingly, what DarkCoin does is highly centralized because the software is closed— you can't get more centralized than closed source. What the actual behavior is, is anyone's guess— it's impossible to review due to it being closed— though "masternodes" does not sound like something decenteralized, it sounds like something that creates a small chokepoint which could be used to deanonymize its users.

As I've said before CoinJoin is interesting because it's inherently part of Bitcoin already— it just needed better tools (and now there are some, e.g. darkwallet) to make it available to people.  It's a privacy improvement over not having it, but it isn't perfect, but it also didn't require any changes to Bitcoin (much less a whole altcoin) to deploy it.  In an incompatible system much better is possible as is proposed by ZeroCash and much better is actually _realized_ by Bytecoin (and its forks... Monero, Fantomcoin, etc.), the later are actually working (if immature, due reinventing many wheels) implementations of much stronger privacy, decenteralized in their implementation, all released under a good open source license.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 500
July 09, 2014, 03:31:51 PM
...

Anonymint explained how CN bloat CANNOT be solved.

...

Where did he say this? I haven't seen that argument before.

Look through his posts, there's a recent one (about 1-2 weeks old) where he talks mainly about Zerocash, but mentions CryptoNote towards the end. There's also an older discussion in the Monero thread.

For those interested, here is Anonymint's post

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6662938

This is a positive aspect of CryptoNote that adds anonymity, but again it is not so effective without reliable IP obfuscation

Essentially Anonymint is declaring that coins that don't use I2P, don't support full anonymity., Also at the time he wrote about Cryptonote, he misinterprated the Cryptonote Whitepaper, see below

This is actually pretty easy to solve and CryptoNote already implements it: every transaction is broken up. There will always be outputs in the blockchain matching the broken-down components. Unlike CoinJoin, this is done without any participation from anyone else. The other matching amounts are not being spent at the same time; in fact they can be used as many times as needed as an ambiguity factor without actually being spent. This means the opportunity to use ring signatures isn't infrequent at all -- you can send any amount you want and it will be appropriately matched and mixed. (See section 4.5 in the white paper.)

hero member
Activity: 938
Merit: 1001
July 09, 2014, 03:29:25 PM
...

Anonymint explained how CN bloat CANNOT be solved.

...

Where did he say this? I haven't seen that argument before.

Look through his posts, there's a recent one (about 1-2 weeks old) where he talks mainly about Zerocash, but mentions CryptoNote towards the end. There's also an older discussion in the Monero thread.

For those interested, here is Anonymint's post

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6662938
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1000
July 09, 2014, 03:15:39 PM
If CryptoNote has scaling issues with it's anon technology, is that a potential use case for FantomCoin? First use case I can really think of for a merge mined CN coin, but it sounds like it's plausible. It could take some pressure off XMR or BBL or whatever emerges as the main coin.

FantomCoin is just another CryptoNote coin. What do you mean here?
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1002
amarha
July 09, 2014, 03:14:43 PM
If CryptoNote has scaling issues with it's anon technology, is that a potential use case for FantomCoin? First use case I can really think of for a merge mined CN coin, but it sounds like it's plausible. It could take some pressure off XMR or BBL or whatever emerges as the main coin.
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1000
July 09, 2014, 03:12:34 PM
DarkSend is a closed source software up to now. DRK devs don't want to open source it because of a lot of reasons

+ Software defects can be exploited. Masternodes are easy targets of attacks including DDOS  Wink
+ Competitions

When they open source it, they know that they lose the battle to CryptoNote protocol. Every CryptoNote coin wins: XMR, BBR, FNT, QCN ...
Jump to: