Author

Topic: [SDC] ShadowCash | Welcome to the UMBRA - page 438. (Read 1289636 times)

hero member
Activity: 821
Merit: 1000
December 23, 2014, 12:13:38 PM
So... this isn't the Darkcoin thread why's everyone talking about it?


Back to SDC.

QT does not compile whatsoever on Linux. I've switched branches from master to anon --both don't compile-- I've checked out tags, yet everything is a no go. I can however compile the daemon just fine.

Any advice?

Here's my output just from doing only qmake:
Note: Same on both master branch & anon branch.

Quote from: bash
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadowgui.cpp
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadow.cpp
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadowbridge.cpp
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadowgui.h
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadowbridge.h
WARNING: Failure to find: shadow.qrc
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt4/bin/rcc: File does not exist 'shadow.qrc'

Hmm, I compiled QT from source on linux this morning without any issues.
IIRC you need QT5 and not QT4
hero member
Activity: 658
Merit: 500
The Buck Stops Here.
December 23, 2014, 12:07:27 PM
So... this isn't the Darkcoin thread why's everyone talking about it?


Back to SDC.

QT does not compile whatsoever on Linux. I've switched branches from master to anon --both don't compile-- I've checked out tags, yet everything is a no go. I can however compile the daemon just fine.

Any advice?

Here's my output just from doing only qmake:
Note: Same on both master branch & anon branch.

Quote from: bash
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadowgui.cpp
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadow.cpp
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadowbridge.cpp
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadowgui.h
WARNING: Failure to find: src/qt/shadowbridge.h
WARNING: Failure to find: shadow.qrc
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt4/bin/rcc: File does not exist 'shadow.qrc'
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
December 23, 2014, 12:01:59 PM
LOL so the only way to anonymize your coins for dark is broken? WOW Roll Eyes
edit: only reason why i bought these coins was to use darksend.... epic fail

This is a very superficial comment, Darksend is a very serious project in constant evolution. We've had several versions and each improves over the previous one, when a bug is found it is openly posted to Jira and you can track it on Github too. If you think there will never be any issues with your implementation you are delusional.  We've been able to add 3 additional first class programmers including Pratrick Mchardy of linux core netfilter fame. Right now, they are working on hardening and refinement of the code.

I wish you the best of luck with your project, I personally don't like proof of stake, but the notion that there will be a "winner", is silly.  If a coin wants to be succesful the developers and community need to develop an economy around it, if you think you will just hold your stash and sell  later on at a much higher price just because your devs are releasing something you are up for a rude awakening.

Darkcoin is somewhat successful because there is an extended development team that goes way beyond coders and also a foundation that promotes it. So lets see where we all are in 6 months. In my opinion the biggest hurdle Proof of Stake coins with a short Proof of Work phase will face is lack of coin distribution and thus a small unattractive market but I guess time will tell.
hero member
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
Avatars are overrated.
December 23, 2014, 11:54:32 AM
LOL so the only way to anonymize your coins for dark is broken? WOW Roll Eyes
edit: only reason why i bought these coins was to use darksend.... epic fail

Considering a lot of attention has been on rebuilding the coin on the new 0.9.3 bitcoin codebase and the fix has already been merged into it, I'd say it isn't the end of the world. Shouldn't be a shocker that things get broken at times (not saying it's fine or ideal, but it can, and does, happen). I'm actually surprised the fix itself hasn't been merged into master but at the same time I'm sure the reason is a full push to the new tree sooner rather than later (then instantx testing on testnet).

Since this is the SDC thread, I wish to respect that and end the discussion on another coin as is. You are more than welcome to continue this discussion in our thread if you like.
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 500
December 23, 2014, 11:42:21 AM
LOL so the only way to anonymize your coins for dark is broken? WOW Roll Eyes
edit: only reason why i bought these coins was to use darksend.... epic fail

Considering a lot of attention has been on rebuilding the coin on the new 0.9.3 bitcoin codebase and the fix has already been merged into it, I'd say it isn't the end of the world. Shouldn't be a shocker that things get broken at times (not saying it's fine or ideal, but it can, and does, happen). I'm actually surprised the fix itself hasn't been merged into master but at the same time I'm sure the reason is a full push to the new tree sooner rather than later (then instantx testing on testnet).

Since this is the SDC thread, I wish to respect that and end the discussion on another coin as is. You are more than welcome to continue this discussion in our thread if you like.

Cool... thanks for the level headed answer and non trollish tone  Grin I can see i might have sounded a bit trollish myself...maybe I will wait and see or maybe ill convert these drks to SDCs..time will tell
legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1018
December 23, 2014, 11:40:00 AM
LOL so the only way to anonymize your coins for dark is broken? WOW Roll Eyes
edit: only reason why i bought these coins was to use darksend.... epic fail

Considering a lot of attention has been on rebuilding the coin on the new 0.9.3 bitcoin codebase and the fix has already been merged into it, I'd say it isn't the end of the world. Shouldn't be a shocker that things get broken at times (not saying it's fine or ideal, but it can, and does, happen). I'm actually surprised the fix itself hasn't been merged into master but at the same time I'm sure the reason is a full push to the new tree sooner rather than later (then instantx testing on testnet).

Since this is the SDC thread, I wish to respect that and end the discussion on another coin as is. You are more than welcome to continue this discussion in our thread if you like.
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 500
December 23, 2014, 11:32:38 AM
LOL so the only way to anonymize your coins for dark is broken? WOW Roll Eyes
edit: only reason why i bought these coins was to use darksend.... epic fail
legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1018
December 23, 2014, 11:15:41 AM
To coins101 or whoever that Dark troll was in here pushing his agenda........dark send blows  Roll Eyes Ive been sitting here waiting well over 2 hours waiting for 434 drk coins to go through 2 rounds of mixing. And it just keeps trying to "submitted to masternode, waiting in queue" and then goes idle. Been stuck at 0% for the whole 2 hours. So yea...darksend is pretty clunky and slow.. that is if it even can mix these coins which isnt even a big amount!!  Wink



https://darkcointalk.org/threads/cannot-use-darksend-mixing.3269/
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 500
December 23, 2014, 10:58:15 AM
To coins101 or whoever that Dark troll was in here pushing his agenda........dark send blows  Roll Eyes Ive been sitting here waiting well over 2 hours waiting for 434 drk coins to go through 2 rounds of mixing. And it just keeps trying to "submitted to masternode, waiting in queue" and then goes idle. Been stuck at 0% for the whole 2 hours. So yea...darksend is pretty clunky and slow.. that is if it even can mix these coins which isnt even a big amount!!  Wink

sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
December 23, 2014, 10:24:29 AM


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.

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

Nice point, Battbott.

It's not the same. Why would had our devs bother to spend thousands hours of coding if so...  the way you say this is a bit misleading IMHO.
]

I never said it was the same. I said the anonymity uses the same underlying approach as cryptonote so the resulting anonymity is the same (or worse, if minting/destroy is used too much, but that is up to the users I suppose). I acknowledged some minor differences, but I don't believe they are particularly significant in the area of anonymity.

As for why thousands of hours were spent on it, you would have to ask them. Presumably they thought that reimplementing it all was a good idea for whatever collection of reasons. I guess the market will decide.



There are also chances that you missed some things...

I like the fact that you are tech savvy, but I cannot help myself to think your method is starting to be a bit socially inappropriate in term of behavior. You've made your point several time, and it's normal that the community is defending the work (and the thread!). Now perhaps ask SDCdev directly your questions and/or come back later maybe?

I guess he's the best one to talk with, after all, the community is only the community and the dev is the dev Smiley.

If you still wanna discuss with the community otherwise maybe  #shadowcash  would be better?
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
December 23, 2014, 10:16:58 AM


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.

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
sr. member
Activity: 630
Merit: 253
December 23, 2014, 10:07:20 AM

.......................................

Yes ShadowCash uses both, the Shadow token can only be used with stealth addresses (thus the untraceable and unlink-able transaction). And you are right, if Cryptonote first combined this logic into a crypto system then yes, give credit where credit is due.

I think it's important for everyone to see this is how vetting and improvements happen in the real world. You don't see any Bitcoin purists coming into this topic saying, "ShadowCash uses a blockchain? Satoshi invented that, you're just a clone of Bitcoin..." We all give credit to SN for figuring out the public ledger, solving double spend, etc. If CN first applied ring sigs & stealth addresses in it's system then we need to acknowledge that. That's what Shadow is doing too. Now, the SDC devs have innovated that idea with implementation of Shadow tokens, but the original working system (just like the blockchain system, we too are using) is another project's innovation.

This should also clarify to everyone why the XMR supporters are saying it's a clone of Cryptonote. See where they get that from? Since April 2014 they've been doing it. Bitcoin supporters would be saying the same thing if it wasn't a complete waste of time to write the sentence on the BITCOIN Talk forum.

i really like to read what you are writing, thanks again...keep on writing

it is objective ideas, not kiddish, not fuddish ideas like others has

smooth....my friend, you made your point...go and write at your own topic now...because you are not objective
legendary
Activity: 1190
Merit: 1002
Pecvniate obedivnt omnia.
December 23, 2014, 10:06:00 AM
Dude, I'm not sure why you are obsessed with Monero and Bytecoin. That ship sailed a long time ago. But the point is that the true credit for the cryptography used by all of these coins lies with the developers of the cryptonote design, whoever they are.

Monero has rewritten significant parts of the Bytecoin code from scratch by now, and extensively refactored other parts, and will likely do far more of this. Monero does not, however, claim to be the inventor of the cryptonote design, or the original writer of the code. We always credit cryptonote for their work. Credit where credit is due.

Bytecoin devs developed cryptonote bro that's why it's relevant?

According to them, they didn't. The cryptonote team developed the cryptography and design and the bytecoin team did the reference implementation for them. The bytecoin team then wanted to focus on the actual currency so the group split. Perhaps the original designers weren't real interested in running an 82% premine pump-and-dump scam. I have no idea how much of that is true, but I know for certain that we don't actually know who developed or invented any of it.

Quote
it's a clone unlike SDC.

What?  SDC is a clone of bitcoin, unless I'm mistaken.


The difference is XMR is a direct clone of Bytecoin the only difference the premine and the devs, I see a few differences between SDC and BTC hahaha ridicules comparison.

SDC is a fork of BTC

XMR is a fork of BCN

None of this coins are clone, there is a lot of developments added to the original code
BRO there is like no difference between Bytecoin and XMR BIG BIG BIG difference between BTC and SDC seriously WTF.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
December 23, 2014, 10:04:44 AM
The difference is XMR is a direct clone of Bytecoin the only difference the premine and the devs, I see a few differences between SDC and BTC hahaha ridicules comparison.

That's totally false now. The code has diverged a lot. It was true at the very start of the Monero project. Just as there was a day when the original SDC was just identical to Bitcoin (or Peercoin or whatever it directly forked from).

I still don't get why you think that matters. Maybe if you just feel like you want to trash talk Monero for whatever reason, you should come over to the Monero thread and do it, instead of derailing the conversation here about cryptonote-based cryptography in SDC?



legendary
Activity: 868
Merit: 1006
December 23, 2014, 10:00:14 AM
Dude, I'm not sure why you are obsessed with Monero and Bytecoin. That ship sailed a long time ago. But the point is that the true credit for the cryptography used by all of these coins lies with the developers of the cryptonote design, whoever they are.

Monero has rewritten significant parts of the Bytecoin code from scratch by now, and extensively refactored other parts, and will likely do far more of this. Monero does not, however, claim to be the inventor of the cryptonote design, or the original writer of the code. We always credit cryptonote for their work. Credit where credit is due.

Bytecoin devs developed cryptonote bro that's why it's relevant?

According to them, they didn't. The cryptonote team developed the cryptography and design and the bytecoin team did the reference implementation for them. The bytecoin team then wanted to focus on the actual currency so the group split. Perhaps the original designers weren't real interested in running an 82% premine pump-and-dump scam. I have no idea how much of that is true, but I know for certain that we don't actually know who developed or invented any of it.

Quote
it's a clone unlike SDC.

What?  SDC is a clone of bitcoin, unless I'm mistaken.


The difference is XMR is a direct clone of Bytecoin the only difference the premine and the devs, I see a few differences between SDC and BTC hahaha ridicules comparison.

SDC is a fork of BTC

XMR is a fork of BCN

None of this coins are clone, there is a lot of developments added to the original code
legendary
Activity: 1190
Merit: 1002
Pecvniate obedivnt omnia.
December 23, 2014, 09:53:38 AM
Dude, I'm not sure why you are obsessed with Monero and Bytecoin. That ship sailed a long time ago. But the point is that the true credit for the cryptography used by all of these coins lies with the developers of the cryptonote design, whoever they are.

Monero has rewritten significant parts of the Bytecoin code from scratch by now, and extensively refactored other parts, and will likely do far more of this. Monero does not, however, claim to be the inventor of the cryptonote design, or the original writer of the code. We always credit cryptonote for their work. Credit where credit is due.

Bytecoin devs developed cryptonote bro that's why it's relevant?

According to them, they didn't. The cryptonote team developed the cryptography and design and the bytecoin team did the reference implementation for them. The bytecoin team then wanted to focus on the actual currency so the group split. Perhaps the original designers weren't real interested in running an 82% premine pump-and-dump scam. I have no idea how much of that is true, but I know for certain that we don't actually know who developed or invented any of it.

Quote
it's a clone unlike SDC.

What?  SDC is a clone of bitcoin, unless I'm mistaken.


The difference is XMR is a direct clone of Bytecoin the only difference the premine and the devs, I see a few differences between SDC and BTC hahaha ridicules comparison, but all the best for XMR hope it does well no reason why it can't, best of luck to you also, hope you get rich no matter your investment  SDC or XMR, Merry christmas.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
December 23, 2014, 09:52:17 AM
So would Shadow Tokens (SDT) be considered a sidechain on top of SDC?  Or no?

No, they are on the same chain. Sidechains are something different.
full member
Activity: 448
Merit: 100
December 23, 2014, 09:51:56 AM
So would Shadow Tokens (SDT) be considered a sidechain on top of SDC?  Or no?
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
December 23, 2014, 09:50:10 AM
Dude, I'm not sure why you are obsessed with Monero and Bytecoin. That ship sailed a long time ago. But the point is that the true credit for the cryptography used by all of these coins lies with the developers of the cryptonote design, whoever they are.

Monero has rewritten significant parts of the Bytecoin code from scratch by now, and extensively refactored other parts, and will likely do far more of this. Monero does not, however, claim to be the inventor of the cryptonote design, or the original writer of the code. We always credit cryptonote for their work. Credit where credit is due.

Bytecoin devs developed cryptonote bro that's why it's relevant?

According to them, they didn't. The cryptonote team developed the cryptography and design and the bytecoin team did the reference implementation for them. The bytecoin team then wanted to focus on the actual currency so the group split. Perhaps the original designers weren't real interested in running an 82% premine pump-and-dump scam? Who knows. I have no idea how much of that is true, but I know for certain that we don't actually know who developed or invented any of it. The are all fake names and and largely fake stories behind them.

Quote
it's a clone unlike SDC.

What?  SDC is a clone of bitcoin, unless I'm mistaken. That's the normal and intelligent way to develop open source cryptocurrencies (or open source anything for that matter). Rarely does it make sense to write the whole damn thing from scratch. Even your darling bytecoin for example, includes big pieces of existing cryptography libraries. All par for the course.

legendary
Activity: 1190
Merit: 1002
Pecvniate obedivnt omnia.
December 23, 2014, 09:39:39 AM
Dude, I'm not sure why you are obsessed with Monero and Bytecoin. That ship sailed a long time ago. But the point is that the true credit for the cryptography used by all of these coins lies with the developers of the cryptonote design, whoever they are.

Monero has rewritten significant parts of the Bytecoin code from scratch by now, and extensively refactored other parts, and will likely do far more of this. Monero does not, however, claim to be the inventor of the cryptonote design, or the original writer of the code. We always credit cryptonote for their work. Credit where credit is due.



Bytecoin devs developed cryptonote bro that's why it's relevant? as i said i was invested in all the annoncoins from the start because that's were the money will soon be at, i have profited off all of them, so im not obsessed it's just a fact that bytecoin devs developed the tech XMR copied.And this is the SDC thread i dumped my XMC for XC like 6 months ago you were the one who brought XMR up, not me, I'm just telling you it's a clone unlike SDC.
Jump to: