Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 218. (Read 387552 times)

I'm going to disagree with #2 - I think the issue with aliases is that they haven't been yet pushed hard enough.  For example, there should be an alias rebinding mechanism (perhaps using a tx fee and a signature from the originally bound key).  But aliases are optional, just like publishing your view key is.  Many recipients may wish to be publicly known but be able to have senders retain their anonymity, and aliases fit into this use model.  Aliases are an interesting, though fairly unimportant in the big picture as of now, exploration of the use of the blockchain.

update: Rebinding is apparently coded, just not available via external commands yet.  Sorry for the partial mis-information.

4)  You left off a discussion of transaction identification by prefix.  Comments?  As a mechanism to keep the blockchain smaller, this seems like one of the most technically relevant ways in which BBR departs from XMR, given that the blockchain size is one of the big deals with the entire cryptonote family.

This is a nice feature in BBR. You don't need to use it at all. Alias name is just as anonymous as CryptoNote address. It can not be used to identify the sender if sender doesn't want to. Similarly, who knows Satoshi is?

I still don't know enough of the coin, so I'll stick with XMR. The little I know does not warrant a switch.

ADD: Boolberry is so stupid a name that it must be changed before I'll consider

1) Using the block header hashes as the scratchpad was intended to keep individual miners full nodes, but this was naive and pools simply send the (tiny) headers out to the miners themselves. There is lots of discussion about how to prevent pool centralization in Bitcoin lately, and Boolberry's solution has been criticized as being "the worst of both worlds" (requires lots of extra data to hash, but doesn't prevent pooled/centralized mining at all).
2) Aliases attach additional, permanent identity pieces to your addresses and should probably be avoided in my opinion.
3) The mandatory mixin=n for txouts doesn't solve fundamental issues with privacy relating to ring signatures. Monero has the same issues, but this will be discussed in an upcoming softfork proposal I'm coming up with thanks to some guidance from gmaxwell. Right now, because Monero is mostly used speculatively, it's not really an issue and is probably a boon to trading over the chain. Further, Boolberry's feature attaches identifier information to outputs which may be further used in analysis to identify spenders.

I think it is generally helpful for the particulars of these differences to be well-known.  Can you provide a reference?  Or even just high-entropy keywords?

We have way more active FOSS devs than that.

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/network/members
https://github.com/zone117x/node-cryptonote-pool
https://github.com/tsiv/ccminer-cryptonight/
https://github.com/Jojatekok/monero-client/
https://github.com/Neozaru/bitmonero-qt/

Marketing and PR, etc, way more of that too, although I think that's not as important.

BoolBerry introduced a lot of fairly strange design decisions that I don't really agree with, but we're thankful for the bugfixes he's made that we can introduce into our code.

Now this is the stuff of legend. For you to make this claim you must actually know nothing about CryptoCoins.

If you do, I'm sorry to tell you that you don't. Please unlearn and relearn as you missed something the first time around. Good luck and be open minded.

Looks like BBR is taking over. What does rpietila think about this?

BBR team has 4 people now: 1 designer, 1 marketing, 2 devs

Yes.

Also I'd like to add, that monero was originally made by tft, who has some relationshop with the BCN devs (they probably wanted to control the market of forks), who then stopped working with the community

And the anonymity isn't flawed like CoinJoin's one (which is essentially the tech of drk, even if eddufield don't want to credit gmaxwell)
And we shouldn't forget, that through CoinJoin the blockchain of drk and co will also meet the same problem, though not as big. following moore's law, disc space is the least of our problems, only internet speed could potentially be a problem, but that's increasing too

First off, it won't be 90%, but 80% with a long-term inflation not being implemented, but, as drawing the sun said, this is planned

Just to remind you Alex, Bitcoin is still mined and has an inflation much higher than 2%, als, as stated, nobody wants a inflation of 2%, but one of 1%. Even then, a currency can still be a store of value

Not trying to be unfriendly, but you should really read first the either the whitepaper or atleast get some basic understanding from the cryptonote website
The problems drawingthesun has described also occur also with the centralized mixing drk is using, while still having a flawed anonymity


And how are they seemingly more active? As far as I can tell, they are far more commits on Monero's repos


You could argue the same with Litecoin/Bitcoin. Of course, neither dev teams, would try to destroy drk, but maybe there is a bug in the wallet, which then get's fixed, but a user is then exploiting it in drk's codebase


The BCN code was widely obfuscated and the miner deliberately slow and the only mining pool closed source. This clean start is offeringa way better "floor" for investors and coders. Since then the Monero team has developed open-source pools, tx-auto-split, determistic wallets, 50x times faster miner, and many, many bugs

Trollbox Polo:

"TrueCryptonaire: But also btc can go to up to 7k by the end of this year if I have read rpietila correct.
TrueCryptonaire: I wonder if rpietila is reading as we are talking about him here.
rpietila: TrueCryptonaire, Nobody can escape me.
TrueCryptonaire: rpietila, lol"

If bitcoin use becomes more widespread (and is not banned outright), I imagine that the police authorities (FBI, CIA, and their brethren in other countries, Interpol, etc.) will create public databases of "bad" coins, which in their view are associated with tax evasion, crime, terrorism, unfriendly governments, etc.  Citizens of a country would be required to look up any bitcoins they receive in their government's database, and immediately transfer any "bad" coins to a government account, under pain of being suspected accessories to those crimes.  All outputs of any transaction with any "bad" input will presumably be "bad" by definition. 

Such a database, even if it worked only imperfectly, would pretty much end fungibility.  There will be "clean bitcoins", "child porn bitcoins", "drug bitcoins", "Iran Guard bitcoins", "Israeli bitcoins", "Ross Ullbricht's bitcoins", "Wikileaks supporters' bitcoins", and so on.  In particular, that database would allow governments to block bitcoin funds, for practical purposes, and virtually seize them, even if they don't have access to the keys.  If certain bitcoins are officially declared government property, moving them or knowingly accepting them without their permission would be theft of government property.

Note that this schema is viable with bitcoin, which assumes online internet access at every transaction; but not with cash, since it would be impractical to require the database check for every cash transaction.  Note also that the schema does not require control of the bitcoin network or changes to the protocol, and transactions with "bad" coins can be monitored by any government no matter where the parties are located in the world.
[/quote]

It required over an hour by my skilled friend to get the printer to work. I can use BTC quite fine. XMR not so.

The printer has not become any easier over the years. Hopefully crypto will...

This post of Alex's ended up here so I am replying here, not in the dark thread...


The vision was to bring CryptoNote to the masses without the two year ninja mine.


The main focus at the moment is to make the software usable. At the moment the memory usage, transaction dust and blockchain size must be focused on. At the moment CryptoNote is private enough. They will work on adding I2P at some point, but core usability is the focus right now.

Alex, they are not going to add fluff to pump and dump, this isn't dark. The anonymity in CryptoNote is working as it should, it doesn't need more features for features sake.


Actually the timing is a reaction to the public release of Bytecoin, not Dark.


At the moment the aim is to get the Monero blockchain scaling at a linear function to Bitcoin. I personally think that an anonymous chain can be about five times larger. The extra size is worth the anonymity, just like Bitcoin requires several million times the space on your PC as mastercard requires, the extra function of bitcoin makes it worth it. The same goes for monero. If the monero chain can scale in a linear fashion albertly being larger we'll be fine.

We're talking about real anonymity here, the chain is going to be larger.


Actually it's not 90% Monero will have an immortal coin release, coins will never stop being minted.

I argue we need a release of about 1% a year, some others think a lower amount. This discussion is ongoing and not set in stone.


No currency in it's first few years will be a good store of value, so many uncertainties. Even Bitcoin is not a good store of value at the moment. There has been no evidence of a nation state trying to attack Bitcoin, so we are in the dark as to how secure crypto currencies really are.

Alex, if you're truly looking for store of value, diversify into bonds, property and gold.

Cryptocurrencies will one day be a good store of value, but it's too early days to call it case closed. You make it sound like one crypto offers store of value whilst another doesn't.


Monero is still very experimental, so don't buy if you're afraid to lose it. I haven't seen 10 bitcoins destroy monero yet, let someone try, 10 bitcoin isn't a lot.

At the moment many Governments could easily take down bitcoin, let alone monero or darkcoin.

Also by the time it's commonplace to have a multi million dollar investment in Monero, many bugs and attack vectors will be ironed out.


Monero makes the transactions from the perspective of a third party doing blockchain analysis anonymous.

However at the moment IP sniffing could render some information leakage for analysis of real time transactions. That is why using TOR like with Dark and Bitcoin is advised for now.



The specifications are superior? How so?


It might be, who knows. I heard the team split up, who knows how good the leftovers are?


The monero team have identified many areas that need improvement and are working on them, as the monero project goes forward, one can hope more people will join the core team as more people get skin in the game.

As far as I can tell the team are working on many issues and I have confidence in what they are doing. I don't have confidence in the Bytecoin team due to their deceptive past.


Normally with white papers and code, you look into it yourself, if you can't then perhaps leave of investing for a few years.

Did you invest in Dark just because of "assurances"?


Right now no, no and no. Although please don't forget that even Bitcoin is a pain to use by average people. In fact average people can barely get a printer to work.

Will this fungibility issue be world wide or rather US Based?
Will they be able to get at the code?

There are a lot of things to consider here.

For sure Wall St. wants them some Bitcoin. Perhaps as a hedge against the dollar, to hide money and not to mention just for all round profit.
If fungibility issues arise, I imagine it will be from regulators but I think we are years from that right now.
A lot can happen between now and then, and as I've said elsewhere, the event horizon of this technology is VERY short.
What is to come is probably going to knock our socks off. There is a cumulative affect of disruption that is upon us, though just starting, and
it is going to shock the system. It will be difficult when it really gets going for governments to do a whole lot, but
it depends on if they get their one world government in time and barring a huge event (another 911) I don't see it happening.
Plan on governments losing much more power and corporations gaining more (heck, I think that is actually their plan, sure looks like it.)
But greater hearts and more intelligent minds will probably prevail.

Spreading the peace,
IAS

Thanks Celestio and Sharing, both good posts. 

I am a complete noob when it comes to alt coins.

Does anyone have a link to a thread which discusses the difference in hashing types - their advantages and disadvantages? I cant seem to get my head around which are better and why.

Also, where is everyone holding their alt coins? Do you just trust them on the exchanges you buy them on? Or if mining does one typically leave it all on a computer? I am guessing its not so easy to make paper wallets for alt coins...

Yeah it's kinda disheartening, but zoidberg is working hard on the issue as well as many others.  It's so early in development there's bound to be a few flaws.

Ok, I'll update that. It's still a instamine as we don't know the full amount of BBR that person has made/has, but we do know he's been making an overly unfair amount of coins per day compared to all other miners.

For BBR they are working on public stratum for GPU and there is a bounty out.  He was at one point making 7k BBR but that was at much lower prices, since the difficulty increases he only makes about 1-2k a day.  Considering how ~5% of total coins have been mined and he doesn't hold many, I wouldn't consider it an instamine.