somebody's just making a funny.
For real? I bought some SDC tonight as the Darkcoin to Dash rebrand might get some people to abandon ship. Is this Shadowdash now? People are fucking with me I think? Darkcash was a Carsen coin, but a good name.
Topic: [SDC] ShadowCash | Welcome to the UMBRA - page 365. (Read 1289636 times)
No Sir. This is Shadow. The Shadow Project. ShadowCash
somebody's just making a funny.
somebody's just making a funny.
is it just me or does the topic title say ShadowDash instead of cash lmao
lol, who did that
lol, no the real rebrand is changing shadow over to Darkcash. lol
For real? I bought some SDC tonight as the Darkcoin to Dash rebrand might get some people to abandon ship. Is this Shadowdash now? People are fucking with me I think? Darkcash was a Carsen coin, but a good name.
is it just me or does the topic title say ShadowDash instead of cash lmao
lol, who did that
lol, no the real rebrand is changing shadow over to Darkcash. lol
or DarkCrash ?
Now here is the bashing part: cryptonote ring signatures cause a lot of blockchain bloat. The SDC implementation compounds this problem with the clunkiness of a zero-coin type token system. It's a great proof-of-concept, but in my opinion, it's not going to be practical. I could be wrong. Time will tell if it gets adopted, used, and is maintainable.
I posted a set of questions regarding possible "bloat".
iirc they have done something clever about this.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10721642
XMR/Monero uses very small ring sizes (default 3) to shadow (default 16!) because of "bloat". The question is have the dev team found a way to minimize bloat?
Awaiting a reply.
I'm legit interested in this project, just do something cool and I'm here. I love proof of stake (definitely an improvement over proof of work in theory) and i love cryptonote. What do you guys have to prove that you are making advances in the space of bringing proof of stake to cyrptonote. I see a lot of promises and very little in the way of concrete advancement. Sorry for not doing exhaustive research, there are so many people promising so many things everywhere that i could never research all of the claims. A distillation in this respect would be greatly appreciated.
I'm usually here lurking and looking for ways to bash this coin, but to answer your question and to be fair, the devs have already done it to an extent.
They have put one part of cryptonote on top of the PoS SDC blockchain. The difference from a true cryptonote+PoS hybrid is that the cryptonote layer runs on top of the PoS block chain much like zerocoin would run on top of bitcoin. Here they substitute cryptonote-type ring signatures for the zkSNARKs of zerocoin. It's a good idea, actually, from a purely theoretical perspective.
Now here is the bashing part: cryptonote ring signatures cause a lot of blockchain bloat. The SDC implementation compounds this problem with the clunkiness of a zero-coin type token system. It's a great proof-of-concept, but in my opinion, it's not going to be practical. I could be wrong. Time will tell if it gets adopted, used, and is maintainable.
Appreciate the acknowledgement, eventually you might buy some sdc.
is it just me or does the topic title say ShadowDash instead of cash lmao
lol, who did that
lol, no the real rebrand is changing shadow over to Darkcash. lol
is it just me or does the topic title say ShadowDash instead of cash lmao
lol, who did that
Guess since we're all renaming things to Dash I'll be MrDashKing
Just remember to consult your community first!
is it just me or does the topic title say ShadowDash instead of cash lmao
I don't see what you're talking about
I don't think we would make fun of a
I'm legit interested in this project, just do something cool and I'm here. I love proof of stake (definitely an improvement over proof of work in theory) and i love cryptonote. What do you guys have to prove that you are making advances in the space of bringing proof of stake to cyrptonote. I see a lot of promises and very little in the way of concrete advancement. Sorry for not doing exhaustive research, there are so many people promising so many things everywhere that i could never research all of the claims. A distillation in this respect would be greatly appreciated.
I'm usually here lurking and looking for ways to bash this coin, but to answer your question and to be fair, the devs have already done it to an extent.
They have put one part of cryptonote on top of the PoS SDC blockchain. The difference from a true cryptonote+PoS hybrid is that the cryptonote layer runs on top of the PoS block chain much like zerocoin would run on top of bitcoin. Here they substitute cryptonote-type ring signatures for the zkSNARKs of zerocoin. It's a good idea, actually, from a purely theoretical perspective.
Now here is the bashing part: cryptonote ring signatures cause a lot of blockchain bloat. The SDC implementation compounds this problem with the clunkiness of a zero-coin type token system. It's a great proof-of-concept, but in my opinion, it's not going to be practical. I could be wrong. Time will tell if it gets adopted, used, and is maintainable.
Good point. Every coin will eventually face blockchain bloat. It already takes the better part of a week to load a full BTC wallet, I can't even imagine what it will be like as use increases.
The solution at least for the medium term might be just light wallets being the default, with the full nodes being run by l33t users who are willing to devote a few large hard drives to the blockchain. How that will work with ZK privacy and a PoS coin I'm not sure, there are probably several ways it can work. It might detract from the privacy in some ways, and enhance it in others.
For the long term it will probably require truncating the blockchain so that the full ledger from day 1 is no longer necessary. But that's a crypto-wide problem, guarantee you some other coin will have to figure out how to do that before SDC does.
I think Boolberry already does some kind of blockchain pruning, but I'm not sure how it works or if it'd be easy to implement something like that here. There'll probably be a solution before it becomes a real problem though (think ryno has some ideas about how to tackle it).
I'm legit interested in this project, just do something cool and I'm here. I love proof of stake (definitely an improvement over proof of work in theory) and i love cryptonote. What do you guys have to prove that you are making advances in the space of bringing proof of stake to cyrptonote. I see a lot of promises and very little in the way of concrete advancement. Sorry for not doing exhaustive research, there are so many people promising so many things everywhere that i could never research all of the claims. A distillation in this respect would be greatly appreciated.
I would say the opposite : "ShadowCash advances in bringing cryptonote tech to Proof of Stake"
ShadowCash has already a working anon with a (really) good wallet, and soon Mobile applications (they are being upgraded to be used with anon)
I don't think there is any other anon coin with a mobile wallet, it will be a first
I'm legit interested in this project, just do something cool and I'm here. I love proof of stake (definitely an improvement over proof of work in theory) and i love cryptonote. What do you guys have to prove that you are making advances in the space of bringing proof of stake to cyrptonote. I see a lot of promises and very little in the way of concrete advancement. Sorry for not doing exhaustive research, there are so many people promising so many things everywhere that i could never research all of the claims. A distillation in this respect would be greatly appreciated.
I'm usually here lurking and looking for ways to bash this coin, but to answer your question and to be fair, the devs have already done it to an extent.
They have put one part of cryptonote on top of the PoS SDC blockchain. The difference from a true cryptonote+PoS hybrid is that the cryptonote layer runs on top of the PoS block chain much like zerocoin would run on top of bitcoin. Here they substitute cryptonote-type ring signatures for the zkSNARKs of zerocoin. It's a good idea, actually, from a purely theoretical perspective.
Now here is the bashing part: cryptonote ring signatures cause a lot of blockchain bloat. The SDC implementation compounds this problem with the clunkiness of a zero-coin type token system. It's a great proof-of-concept, but in my opinion, it's not going to be practical. I could be wrong. Time will tell if it gets adopted, used, and is maintainable.
Good point. Every coin will eventually face blockchain bloat. It already takes the better part of a week to load a full BTC wallet, I can't even imagine what it will be like as use increases.
The solution at least for the medium term might be just light wallets being the default, with the full nodes being run by l33t users who are willing to devote a few large hard drives to the blockchain. How that will work with ZK privacy and a PoS coin I'm not sure, there are probably several ways it can work. It might detract from the privacy in some ways, and enhance it in others.
For the long term it will probably require truncating the blockchain so that the full ledger from day 1 is no longer necessary. But that's a crypto-wide problem, guarantee you some other coin will have to figure out how to do that before SDC does.
Technical Question - Ring Sizes
The Shadow wallet has a "Suggest Ring Size" button I usually hit before sending SDT>SDT or SDT>SDC
The default number before clicking the button is 16 rings. After clicking the button the number can go up to 60 rings in my experience, altho 24 is more common. Values less than 16 can sometimes be "suggested" although ive never sent with anything under 12. TX fees remain low at around 0.005 to 0.01.
In Monero they typically use a MIXIN of 3 which is the equivalent to only 3 rings!
Whilst I feel proud we have so many more rings I wonder if there is a law of diminishing returns regarding ringsize/potential bloat. The comment from the person I dialogued with came through as:
He then pointed me to our own WP:
Since the above numbers are pretty meaningless to me maybe a dev can clarify the following:
1) Do we risk bloating up the blockchain using high ringsize values?
2) Is there a diminishing return for ringsizes? (in terms of anonymity/bloat ratio)
3) How does "Suggest Ring Size" choose?
4) Why is there no ring-size picker when sending SDC to SDT?
EDIT:
5) How much "stronger" is 16 rings compared to 3 in terms of anonymity? Or cracking difficulty?
thanks
The Shadow wallet has a "Suggest Ring Size" button I usually hit before sending SDT>SDT or SDT>SDC
The default number before clicking the button is 16 rings. After clicking the button the number can go up to 60 rings in my experience, altho 24 is more common. Values less than 16 can sometimes be "suggested" although ive never sent with anything under 12. TX fees remain low at around 0.005 to 0.01.
In Monero they typically use a MIXIN of 3 which is the equivalent to only 3 rings!
Whilst I feel proud we have so many more rings I wonder if there is a law of diminishing returns regarding ringsize/potential bloat. The comment from the person I dialogued with came through as:
Quote
SDC developers seem more inclined to bloat up their blockchain by defaulting to massive (imo unnecessarily so) ring signatures.
He then pointed me to our own WP:
Since the above numbers are pretty meaningless to me maybe a dev can clarify the following:
1) Do we risk bloating up the blockchain using high ringsize values?
2) Is there a diminishing return for ringsizes? (in terms of anonymity/bloat ratio)
3) How does "Suggest Ring Size" choose?
4) Why is there no ring-size picker when sending SDC to SDT?
EDIT:
5) How much "stronger" is 16 rings compared to 3 in terms of anonymity? Or cracking difficulty?
thanks
bump since answers/discussion for 4+5 (thx smooth) moved the thread pretty quick. Below is the fillet:
4) Why is there no ring-size picker when sending SDC to SDT?
This one I can answer for you. The ring size applies to the input of a tranasction. Since the input here is SDC and that has regular (Bitcoin-style) sigs and not ring sigs it doesn't have a ring size.On the topic of actual size, 16 isn't all that terrible. In the earlier conversation you mentioned 60, which just seems very high to use routinely.
5) How much "stronger" is 16 rings compared to 3 in terms of anonymity? Or cracking difficulty (assuming cracking is even the word here)?
Obviously ambiguity of 16 is "better" than ambiguity of 3, but is it "better" enough to justify for the larger use of blockchain space? Very hard to say. It seems the huge gains come from going from 0 (not untraceable at all) or 1 (quite problematic) to 2 (minimum acceptable), 3 (getting better), etc. Beyond that the gains are smaller while space used continues to increase.
BUMP.
I really think a Dev Team member should address these questions.
Thank you.
I'm legit interested in this project, just do something cool and I'm here. I love proof of stake (definitely an improvement over proof of work in theory) and i love cryptonote. What do you guys have to prove that you are making advances in the space of bringing proof of stake to cyrptonote. I see a lot of promises and very little in the way of concrete advancement. Sorry for not doing exhaustive research, there are so many people promising so many things everywhere that i could never research all of the claims. A distillation in this respect would be greatly appreciated.
I'm usually here lurking and looking for ways to bash this coin, but to answer your question and to be fair, the devs have already done it to an extent.
They have put one part of cryptonote on top of the PoS SDC blockchain. The difference from a true cryptonote+PoS hybrid is that the cryptonote layer runs on top of the PoS block chain much like zerocoin would run on top of bitcoin. Here they substitute cryptonote-type ring signatures for the zkSNARKs of zerocoin. It's a good idea, actually, from a purely theoretical perspective.
Now here is the bashing part: cryptonote ring signatures cause a lot of blockchain bloat. The SDC implementation compounds this problem with the clunkiness of a zero-coin type token system. It's a great proof-of-concept, but in my opinion, it's not going to be practical. I could be wrong. Time will tell if it gets adopted, used, and is maintainable.
For what its worth, it seems like the plan is to slot in SNARKs in the future once they are fully ready and trustless. The lead dev rynomster said the reason they used anonymous tokens instead of direct anonymous outputs to ring sigs is because they are building toward that direction. Quote here:
Quote
Unfortunately I can't get to in Monero Research Lab's MRL-0001 research bulletin, but I am certainly looking forward to reading it
Our scheme was never going to be perfect, and we have said on a few occasions that we will only be utilising a basic nizkp until zk-snarks is fully out and trustless.
I have also told people that I'm not an academic, nor a grad student.. Just your average Joe, who dropped out of school, and wants to help move things along
If this was about money, we definitely would not work as we do on a single project, and we definitely would not have open sourced on our first opportunity to do so..
The reason we opted for anonymous tokens, instead of direct anonymous outputs to ringsigs, is because we're building towards direction we're heading in. What we're striving for... Encrypted values, with perfect nizkps, proving all values of inputs are real, without revealing any information about where they come from.
We're looking at many things, like homomorphic encryption, snarks, etc...
http://eprint.iacr.org/2014/976
snarks are advancing, along with many other ideas... We are not for limiting ourselves, but for bettering our [collective] future
Our scheme was never going to be perfect, and we have said on a few occasions that we will only be utilising a basic nizkp until zk-snarks is fully out and trustless.
I have also told people that I'm not an academic, nor a grad student.. Just your average Joe, who dropped out of school, and wants to help move things along
If this was about money, we definitely would not work as we do on a single project, and we definitely would not have open sourced on our first opportunity to do so..
The reason we opted for anonymous tokens, instead of direct anonymous outputs to ringsigs, is because we're building towards direction we're heading in. What we're striving for... Encrypted values, with perfect nizkps, proving all values of inputs are real, without revealing any information about where they come from.
We're looking at many things, like homomorphic encryption, snarks, etc...
http://eprint.iacr.org/2014/976
snarks are advancing, along with many other ideas... We are not for limiting ourselves, but for bettering our [collective] future
I'm legit interested in this project, just do something cool and I'm here. I love proof of stake (definitely an improvement over proof of work in theory) and i love cryptonote. What do you guys have to prove that you are making advances in the space of bringing proof of stake to cyrptonote. I see a lot of promises and very little in the way of concrete advancement. Sorry for not doing exhaustive research, there are so many people promising so many things everywhere that i could never research all of the claims. A distillation in this respect would be greatly appreciated.
I'm usually here lurking and looking for ways to bash this coin, but to answer your question and to be fair, the devs have already done it to an extent.
They have put one part of cryptonote on top of the PoS SDC blockchain. The difference from a true cryptonote+PoS hybrid is that the cryptonote layer runs on top of the PoS block chain much like zerocoin would run on top of bitcoin. Here they substitute cryptonote-type ring signatures for the zkSNARKs of zerocoin. It's a good idea, actually, from a purely theoretical perspective.
Now here is the bashing part: cryptonote ring signatures cause a lot of blockchain bloat. The SDC implementation compounds this problem with the clunkiness of a zero-coin type token system. It's a great proof-of-concept, but in my opinion, it's not going to be practical. I could be wrong. Time will tell if it gets adopted, used, and is maintainable.
I'm legit interested in this project, just do something cool and I'm here. I love proof of stake (definitely an improvement over proof of work in theory) and i love cryptonote. What do you guys have to prove that you are making advances in the space of bringing proof of stake to cyrptonote. I see a lot of promises and very little in the way of concrete advancement. Sorry for not doing exhaustive research, there are so many people promising so many things everywhere that i could never research all of the claims. A distillation in this respect would be greatly appreciated.
Trace Mayer gave ShadowCash a shoutout in a recent video (18:40 mark): http://youtu.be/50_NfitNTkI?t=18m40s
I think this is really good. Trace is a really cool guy and into privacy and anonymity. He has the website howtovanish.com and runtogold.com. He was one of Bitcoin's earliest adopters and evangelists ever since bitcoin was 5 cents to 25 cents. He has like a bazillion bitcoins probably. Its really good early Bitcoiners are learning about Shadow.
I think this is really good. Trace is a really cool guy and into privacy and anonymity. He has the website howtovanish.com and runtogold.com. He was one of Bitcoin's earliest adopters and evangelists ever since bitcoin was 5 cents to 25 cents. He has like a bazillion bitcoins probably. Its really good early Bitcoiners are learning about Shadow.
well-spotted Pline!
@TraceMayer https://twitter.com/streamuse1/status/575078474823696385
SDC can really use the support of more people like this. Someone should put the link to our website in his YouTube video and ask him if he (or someone he knows) would be willing to review the code and discuss SDC in greater detail. His audience is perfect for SDC
So what is the big deal with PoS coins with like 2% APR which is crap getting so popular?
Like, unless you have a shit ton, that's not a lot to get a stake and get profit off.
0.0054% daily IF your coins stake every single day.....
Not trying to mean any offense to it, because it does seem like a good coin, but I just don't get it. I saw a 0.5% APR PoS coin earlier that was up to like 10k satoshi that had nothing new except it was just "a coin"
Like, unless you have a shit ton, that's not a lot to get a stake and get profit off.
0.0054% daily IF your coins stake every single day.....
Not trying to mean any offense to it, because it does seem like a good coin, but I just don't get it. I saw a 0.5% APR PoS coin earlier that was up to like 10k satoshi that had nothing new except it was just "a coin"
Being it's inflation and not interest, it doesn't generate a profit. One thing it does is replace lost coins. Some coins are always going to be lost due to hardware failure, deceased users and careless handling, and a small PoS helps ensure the loss of those coins doesn't affect the money supply much. Another, more important thing it does is keeps the wallets open and the network solving blocks without any mining rewards. We get 2% plus transaction fees.
So what is the big deal with PoS coins with like 2% APR which is crap getting so popular?
Like, unless you have a shit ton, that's not a lot to get a stake and get profit off.
0.0054% daily IF your coins stake every single day.....
Not trying to mean any offense to it, because it does seem like a good coin, but I just don't get it. I saw a 0.5% APR PoS coin earlier that was up to like 10k satoshi that had nothing new except it was just "a coin"
Like, unless you have a shit ton, that's not a lot to get a stake and get profit off.
0.0054% daily IF your coins stake every single day.....
Not trying to mean any offense to it, because it does seem like a good coin, but I just don't get it. I saw a 0.5% APR PoS coin earlier that was up to like 10k satoshi that had nothing new except it was just "a coin"
I think over time that low 2% inflation rate will help drive the value of Shadow higher.
So what is the big deal with PoS coins with like 2% APR which is crap getting so popular?
Like, unless you have a shit ton, that's not a lot to get a stake and get profit off.
0.0054% daily IF your coins stake every single day.....
Not trying to mean any offense to it, because it does seem like a good coin, but I just don't get it. I saw a 0.5% APR PoS coin earlier that was up to like 10k satoshi that had nothing new except it was just "a coin"
Like, unless you have a shit ton, that's not a lot to get a stake and get profit off.
0.0054% daily IF your coins stake every single day.....
Not trying to mean any offense to it, because it does seem like a good coin, but I just don't get it. I saw a 0.5% APR PoS coin earlier that was up to like 10k satoshi that had nothing new except it was just "a coin"
Jump to: