[SDC] ShadowCash | Welcome to the UMBRA - page 453.

fluffypony

donator

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1060

GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com

Quote from: pookielax31 on December 18, 2014, 11:09:56 AM

Quote from: solid12345 on December 18, 2014, 11:07:08 AM

Quote from: Longenecker on December 18, 2014, 10:52:52 AM

If you look at the timestamps, Fluffy pony made those comments before shadowsend v2 was open source...

Busted...

Fudders gonna fud...Great chance to snatch up more SDC at these levels Wink

Not sure if I'm misunderstanding Longenecker or everyone else is. My initial comments were made after reviewing 1 of the 2 commits to the "anon" branch, the 2nd commit didn't exist at the time. It would be impossible for me to have foreknowledge as to what would be contained in the commit, and any idiot can look at the first commit and also observe that it didn't contain generateRingSignature(), nor were the verification functions wired up. I'm certainly not "busted" or "fudding", and if that's anyone's takeaway from me making a clear observation then they need to seriously revisit that persecution complex of theirs.

fluffypony

donator

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1060

GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com

Quote from: Longenecker on December 18, 2014, 10:52:52 AM

If you look at the timestamps, Fluffy pony made those comments before shadowsend v2 was open source...

Yep, that's correct. I made the first two comments with respect to commit 94bfb03. Thereafter (the following day) commit 317b9b1 was made and pushed to the repo, and subsequently pointed out to me. I reviewed that, and thus updated that thread with the additional comment.

Honestly, I don't really care to get into a this-coin-that-coin debate. Kudos to the dev(s) for actually putting in effort to implement a very simplified ring signature system. If they add bad utxo blacklisting and also provide a suitable fix for the chain reaction privacy reveal outlined in Monero Research Lab's MRL-0001 research bulletin they are well on their way to implementing one half of the two core privacy principles espoused in Monero's cryptography (that is to say, they would then be able to provide a measure of cryptographic untraceability, but not cryptographic unlinkability).

pookielax31

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 500

Quote from: solid12345 on December 18, 2014, 11:07:08 AM

Quote from: Longenecker on December 18, 2014, 10:52:52 AM

If you look at the timestamps, Fluffy pony made those comments before shadowsend v2 was open source...

Busted...

Fudders gonna fud...Great chance to snatch up more SDC at these levels Wink

solid12345

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Longenecker on December 18, 2014, 10:52:52 AM

If you look at the timestamps, Fluffy pony made those comments before shadowsend v2 was open source...

Busted...

Longenecker

full member

Activity: 226

Merit: 100

Quote from: ffmad on December 18, 2014, 06:34:56 AM

Quote from: LucyLovesCrypto on December 18, 2014, 06:22:15 AM

Any comment on the fluffyponyza SDC code review (XMR Core Team) on Reddit?

http://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/2pfmds/shadowcash_ring_signature_whitepaper_released_any/

"There's little substance in the code, the verifyRingSignature() method is trivially simple and isn't called anywhere else in that commit. Their proposed function, generateRingSignature(), doesn't exist and thus it's impossible to determine whether they've actually done anything of substance. The whitepaper is purposely vague in many of the important parts, and a review in conjunction with code is impossible, so we have to take it on the face of it...which is that NIZK + ring signatures + security + low space utilisation = impossible right now."

"That's the commit I'm referring to - it does some trivial ring signature verification and creates key images, but it doesn't actually use them in transaction, nor does the code exist to create a ring signature."

For the record I support both SDC and XMR. It would be great if SDC dev team could respond on the Reddit thread. Thanks!

His first comments have no substance, he said that without having checked https://github.com/SDCDev/shadowcoin/commit/317b9b1f5121ecde162fd8d37fbd587182c45fef?diff=unified

The only interesting comment is this one :

Quote

There's no NIZK stuff in there, at least not anything beyond what Monero's keyimages use (which is a very simple ZKP). I'm unfortunately failing to see what they've done beyond what is already in the CryptoNote whitepaper and implemented in Monero.

Even if what he says was true (nothing unique compared to CryptoNote), it would not be fair, because i don't remember any CryptoNote implementation on Bitcoin base Tongue

If you look at the timestamps, Fluffy pony made those comments before shadowsend v2 was open source...

erok

hero member

Activity: 896

Merit: 1000

Avatars are overrated.

The review: "I don't understand it, so I don't like it."

Why don't people just go into IRC when they have a question? Trolls just post randomly and it turns into wack-a-mole by the dev hitting different sites. Anyone that reviews and has questions and doesn't go into IRC while dev is on for answers, loses all credibility IMO.

What really sucks here is that it seems like devs are trolling devs most likely to grab cheap shadow.

ffmad

legendary

Activity: 868

Merit: 1006

Quote from: LucyLovesCrypto on December 18, 2014, 08:25:45 AM

Quote from: ffmad on December 18, 2014, 06:34:56 AM

Quote from: LucyLovesCrypto on December 18, 2014, 06:22:15 AM

Any comment on the fluffyponyza SDC code review (XMR Core Team) on Reddit?

http://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/2pfmds/shadowcash_ring_signature_whitepaper_released_any/

"There's little substance in the code, the verifyRingSignature() method is trivially simple and isn't called anywhere else in that commit. Their proposed function, generateRingSignature(), doesn't exist and thus it's impossible to determine whether they've actually done anything of substance. The whitepaper is purposely vague in many of the important parts, and a review in conjunction with code is impossible, so we have to take it on the face of it...which is that NIZK + ring signatures + security + low space utilisation = impossible right now."

"That's the commit I'm referring to - it does some trivial ring signature verification and creates key images, but it doesn't actually use them in transaction, nor does the code exist to create a ring signature."

For the record I support both SDC and XMR. It would be great if SDC dev team could respond on the Reddit thread. Thanks!

His first comments have no substance, he said that without having checked https://github.com/SDCDev/shadowcoin/commit/317b9b1f5121ecde162fd8d37fbd587182c45fef?diff=unified

The only interesting comment is this one :

Quote

There's no NIZK stuff in there, at least not anything beyond what Monero's keyimages use (which is a very simple ZKP). I'm unfortunately failing to see what they've done beyond what is already in the CryptoNote whitepaper and implemented in Monero.

Even if what he says was true (nothing unique compared to CryptoNote), it would not be fair, because i don't remember any CryptoNote implementation on Bitcoin base Tongue

Great point ffmad! nobody else has used elements of ring signatures on bitcoin based coins.

He seems to be willing to debate exactly how much ring sig tech is used, but wont debate you on your point that it is the 1st in crypto for this codebase

Also it's the first POS coin using this tech (no cryptonote coins are POS)

Crypto_zoidberg (from BBR) is making a new project to create a POS CryptoNote ... https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/louisdorcodename-first-anonymous-pos-cn-based-currency-technical-review-887482. But SDC have already this

(and it's a Full POS coin)

I think relationship between SDC and XMR should not be as rival but as partners. Both coins use RingSign tech but are really different (diff codebase, implementation and POW vs POS)

zuyfg888

sr. member

Activity: 490

Merit: 250

Quote from: andreibi on December 18, 2014, 08:41:30 AM

Besides....we only have three days and a half (about 5,000 blocks) to find out if these implementations work. I'm sure months of work would finally pay off. Or all a hoax.

We have a deadline for the truth. But I often wonder why so much fud is spread whenever something possibly monumental is about to happen. The order books had large sell walls. It could have dumped, but it didn't. It must be a scare wall.

There are so important? Let's wait what will happen next.

andreibi

legendary

Activity: 1647

Merit: 1012

Practising Hebrew before visiting Israel

Besides....we only have three days and a half (about 5,000 blocks) to find out if these implementations work. I'm sure months of work would finally pay off. Or all a hoax.

We have a deadline for the truth. But I often wonder why so much fud is spread whenever something possibly monumental is about to happen. The order books had large sell walls. It could have dumped, but it didn't. It must be a scare wall.

LucyLovesCrypto

sr. member

Activity: 414

Merit: 251

Quote from: ffmad on December 18, 2014, 06:34:56 AM

Quote from: LucyLovesCrypto on December 18, 2014, 06:22:15 AM

Any comment on the fluffyponyza SDC code review (XMR Core Team) on Reddit?

http://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/2pfmds/shadowcash_ring_signature_whitepaper_released_any/

"There's little substance in the code, the verifyRingSignature() method is trivially simple and isn't called anywhere else in that commit. Their proposed function, generateRingSignature(), doesn't exist and thus it's impossible to determine whether they've actually done anything of substance. The whitepaper is purposely vague in many of the important parts, and a review in conjunction with code is impossible, so we have to take it on the face of it...which is that NIZK + ring signatures + security + low space utilisation = impossible right now."

"That's the commit I'm referring to - it does some trivial ring signature verification and creates key images, but it doesn't actually use them in transaction, nor does the code exist to create a ring signature."

For the record I support both SDC and XMR. It would be great if SDC dev team could respond on the Reddit thread. Thanks!

His first comments have no substance, he said that without having checked https://github.com/SDCDev/shadowcoin/commit/317b9b1f5121ecde162fd8d37fbd587182c45fef?diff=unified

The only interesting comment is this one :

Quote

There's no NIZK stuff in there, at least not anything beyond what Monero's keyimages use (which is a very simple ZKP). I'm unfortunately failing to see what they've done beyond what is already in the CryptoNote whitepaper and implemented in Monero.

Even if what he says was true (nothing unique compared to CryptoNote), it would not be fair, because i don't remember any CryptoNote implementation on Bitcoin base Tongue

Great point ffmad! nobody else has used elements of ring signatures on bitcoin based coins.

He seems to be willing to debate exactly how much ring sig tech is used, but wont debate you on your point that it is the 1st in crypto for this codebase

sdcoin

full member

Activity: 129

Merit: 100

Leave nothing but a shadow.

Quote from: rustynailer on December 18, 2014, 07:09:47 AM

Quote from: Razkin on December 18, 2014, 06:55:08 AM

Quote from: rustynailer on December 18, 2014, 04:30:48 AM

Quote from: zuyfg888 on December 18, 2014, 04:02:05 AM

Quote from: yourstruly on December 17, 2014, 09:18:06 AM

If you haven't seen it yet, yesterday we opened a SDC Exchange at Excoin:
https://exco.in/exchange/BTC/SDC

We should transfer to EXCOIN deal, Bittrex is a bad choice.

Who owns exco.in? I think I read somewhere its owned by bc foundation or something.

Exco.in is not owned by the BC foundation, but from an independent development team that is BC centered.

An independent dev team that is BC centered... ok glad you cleared that up.

They are: https://blackwavelabs.com/

rustynailer

hero member

Activity: 725

Merit: 501

Boycott Qatar 2022

Quote from: Razkin on December 18, 2014, 06:55:08 AM

Quote from: rustynailer on December 18, 2014, 04:30:48 AM

Quote from: zuyfg888 on December 18, 2014, 04:02:05 AM

Quote from: yourstruly on December 17, 2014, 09:18:06 AM

If you haven't seen it yet, yesterday we opened a SDC Exchange at Excoin:
https://exco.in/exchange/BTC/SDC

We should transfer to EXCOIN deal, Bittrex is a bad choice.

Who owns exco.in? I think I read somewhere its owned by bc foundation or something.

Exco.in is not owned by the BC foundation, but from an independent development team that is BC centered.

An independent dev team that is BC centered... ok glad you cleared that up.

Razkin

newbie

Activity: 48

Merit: 0

Quote from: rustynailer on December 18, 2014, 04:30:48 AM

Quote from: zuyfg888 on December 18, 2014, 04:02:05 AM

Quote from: yourstruly on December 17, 2014, 09:18:06 AM

If you haven't seen it yet, yesterday we opened a SDC Exchange at Excoin:
https://exco.in/exchange/BTC/SDC

We should transfer to EXCOIN deal, Bittrex is a bad choice.

Who owns exco.in? I think I read somewhere its owned by bc foundation or something.

Exco.in is not owned by the BC foundation, but from an independent development team that is BC centered.

ffmad

legendary

Activity: 868

Merit: 1006

Quote from: LucyLovesCrypto on December 18, 2014, 06:22:15 AM

Any comment on the fluffyponyza SDC code review (XMR Core Team) on Reddit?

http://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/2pfmds/shadowcash_ring_signature_whitepaper_released_any/

"There's little substance in the code, the verifyRingSignature() method is trivially simple and isn't called anywhere else in that commit. Their proposed function, generateRingSignature(), doesn't exist and thus it's impossible to determine whether they've actually done anything of substance. The whitepaper is purposely vague in many of the important parts, and a review in conjunction with code is impossible, so we have to take it on the face of it...which is that NIZK + ring signatures + security + low space utilisation = impossible right now."

"That's the commit I'm referring to - it does some trivial ring signature verification and creates key images, but it doesn't actually use them in transaction, nor does the code exist to create a ring signature."

For the record I support both SDC and XMR. It would be great if SDC dev team could respond on the Reddit thread. Thanks!

His first comments have no substance, he said that without having checked https://github.com/SDCDev/shadowcoin/commit/317b9b1f5121ecde162fd8d37fbd587182c45fef?diff=unified

The only interesting comment is this one :

Quote

There's no NIZK stuff in there, at least not anything beyond what Monero's keyimages use (which is a very simple ZKP). I'm unfortunately failing to see what they've done beyond what is already in the CryptoNote whitepaper and implemented in Monero.

Even if what he says was true (nothing unique compared to CryptoNote), it would not be fair, because i don't remember any CryptoNote implementation on Bitcoin base Tongue

LucyLovesCrypto

sr. member

Activity: 414

Merit: 251

Any comment on the fluffyponyza SDC code review (XMR Core Team) on Reddit?

http://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/2pfmds/shadowcash_ring_signature_whitepaper_released_any/

"There's little substance in the code, the verifyRingSignature() method is trivially simple and isn't called anywhere else in that commit. Their proposed function, generateRingSignature(), doesn't exist and thus it's impossible to determine whether they've actually done anything of substance. The whitepaper is purposely vague in many of the important parts, and a review in conjunction with code is impossible, so we have to take it on the face of it...which is that NIZK + ring signatures + security + low space utilisation = impossible right now."

"That's the commit I'm referring to - it does some trivial ring signature verification and creates key images, but it doesn't actually use them in transaction, nor does the code exist to create a ring signature."

For the record I support both SDC and XMR. It would be great if SDC dev team could respond on the Reddit thread. Thanks!

rustynailer

hero member

Activity: 725

Merit: 501

Boycott Qatar 2022

Quote from: zuyfg888 on December 18, 2014, 04:02:05 AM

Quote from: yourstruly on December 17, 2014, 09:18:06 AM

If you haven't seen it yet, yesterday we opened a SDC Exchange at Excoin:
https://exco.in/exchange/BTC/SDC

We should transfer to EXCOIN deal, Bittrex is a bad choice.

Who owns exco.in? I think I read somewhere its owned by bc foundation or something.

zuyfg888

sr. member

Activity: 490

Merit: 250

Quote from: yourstruly on December 17, 2014, 09:18:06 AM

If you haven't seen it yet, yesterday we opened a SDC Exchange at Excoin:
https://exco.in/exchange/BTC/SDC

We should transfer to EXCOIN deal, Bittrex is a bad choice.

dadon

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1002

Pecvniate obedivnt omnia.

Quote from: rossr1 on December 17, 2014, 10:43:40 PM

hi guys, when upgrading wallet, do i need to saving dat file from old wallet then pasting it into new one, or will new one just overwrite old one?

I just downloaded new wallet and it all rolled over should not be a problem just wait until its fully synced and if your coins are not there after that then do what you mentioned before. you should always save your wallet DAT anyways put it on a few usb's and stash them different places one at your parents one at your grandparents etc no excuses if you loose it that way.

rossr1

sr. member

Activity: 363

Merit: 250