Topic: Thoughts on Zcash? - page 63. (Read 123361 times)

Sure if they stuck to a pure Free Libre Open Source Software Funding model they could very well be in the driver’s seat on the technology, but they chose a proprietary funding model by creating a lockin between the currency and a private company in the form of an 11% premine. The leaves them open at least to:
1) A fork of the technology into a true FLOSS project. The "Litecoin/Monero" response.
2) Very significant regulatory non compliance issues. No longer a decentralized virtual currency as per FinCEN in the United States for example.
3) A combination of 1) and 2). For example regulatory enforcement by FinCEN triggering a true FLOSS fork.

Also just because they invented the technology, it does not mean that others cannot figure the technology out and improve on it.

Anyone here invested already as a founder?

Be careful with assuming anyone can apply the Zcash open source. Zcash has the zk-snarks inventors on their team and there may be not so trivial tweaks that need to be made over time.

Afaics, if they play their cards well (e.g. no 11% premine for private placement investors), they should be in the driver's seat on their technology.

Ok, now been to site..

For anyone else who's interested.

Yes.

Of course he can.

No. Also - doesn't the use of accumulators leave a trapdoor?


I think it brings up an interesting point though. If any technology appears that is truly 'cool' , won't bitcoin simply hard fork it in ?

Yes I am an ethereum shill.  I operate alone and my views do not represent the ethereum devs or ethereum community. 

I support ethereum because it's the most promising crypto yet invented and I want it to succeed.

I find honesty about ones objectives and agenda to be the best policy

You do understand that the second post on this thread is TPTB_need_war? He's mocking stoat. Who is stoat? An etheruem fanboy, shill, whatever. Shelby has a warped sense of humor like me. I enjoy being an idiot, while Shelby enjoys teaching idiots a lesson.

FWIW, I share that opinion but about privacy technologies in general, because after deep study of the technologies I am not sure if they work.

Zcash has issues as well, and we have to see how they work out the details. I've lost all hope in Cryptonote/RingCT because of the meta-data issue. I originally thought I would be able to come up with some magic for obscuring the meta-data, but eventually came to realize that the End-to-End Principle (and unrelated but analogously the CAP theorem) always wins and is paramount. I just hope that everyone who has invested their sweat and blood into CN coins, realizes that I don't relish coming to that conclusion. And of course they may have another perspective and think the technology still has value. I think I have already explained my thinking on the matter and so need to repeat myself.

I am just agreeing that I have not concluded that Zcash is the solution either. Devil is in the details (and I don't know about you, but I have other work to do and can't put all of my time into anonymity technology any more, not unless someone is offering me a good opportunity for that line of work and remember cryptography is not my formal area of expertise). I have much better opportunities within my career expertise of producing user facing products for mass adoption.

Enough said that I agree with you. And I am not sure there are any game changing technologies yet. I am not even sure if my attempt to refine Satoshi's design is bullet proof. I won't know until I dig into every detail, dot every 'i', and cross every 't'. I wish CoinHoarder appreciated the work that developers do and how pedantic it is. Broadstroking conclusions without deep understanding of details often leads to incorrect conclusions.

For example, everyone has been so enthusiastic about decentralized file systems (MaidSafe, Storj, Sia, IPFS, etc), but none of us had apparently realized they are not fighting tyranny but rather aiding tyranny as I explained to CoinHoarder upthread. Devil is in the details. DAC sounds so sexy, until one realizes that corporations are inherently not decentralized because otherwise the individuals don't need to share their labor with the parasite corporation if there is no top-down moat around the corporation per Coase's Theory of the Firm. The number of incorrect conceptualizations that Dan Larimer has spawned goes back to the discussions I used to have with him in 2013 on the forum. Actually his intentions are often spot on, e.g. he was focused on electricity consumption back in 2013 and I was not. But as a result he ended up with DPOS and arguing that top-down hierarchies are appropriate for crypto currency. Then he recently admitted they don't work well and has been proposing some basterdized concept of PoS that attempts to mimic PoW (which isn't an entirely accurate summary), which again will be another dead end. So then CoinHoarder gets angry at me for having formed an opinion over the past 3 years of the way those guys think and make choices. And obviously CoinHoarder has formed his opinion of me as well which he has every right to do.

I think the best is to say nothing in forums and share nothing. And then of course make numerous mistakes because no one person is omniscient.  

Has anyone else noticed an incredible amount of self coin hyping on these forums or is it just me looking into it a little much?
I don't honestly believe the best way to promote one's project is to needlessly spam about it, makes the thing look unprofessional as a whole.

(this is in reference to the second post on this thread, the etheruem fanboys are absolutely full of themselves, please stop spamming)

Zcash is interesting.. But not entirely sure if it's game changing.

Agreed, except that I think I hadn't made my thinking on the issues he raised clear enough, which I suppose is my fault. Frankly a lot of the thoughts weren't totally perfectly organized my mind because been battling a relapse the past 2 days which means my energy to think was limited (imagine head on the keyboard fighting sleep sort of lack of concentration). I had to grab the participation in Zooko's AMA and the early stage of the forum.z.cash while the opportunity was there, so my relapse condition could not be an excuse for the need to do work that had to be done this week. In short life isn't perfect. Even I read yesterday that Zooko's production dropped recently because he was separating from his wife. We humans do have other things going on sometimes. CoinHoarder has a full time load at the university and I respect that. I wish he would respect that I've studied some areas (given my 3 years full time in this area) that he hasn't. And try to work for aiding each other than fighting. I understand he is upset at me because I don't have a high opinion of Bitshares (and on that point I will be vindicated once again ... so he can fight all he wants but it won't help him because I can already see the traits of Dan & Stan Larimer ... and he resents that I could have any following on the forum because I do make such a judgement on the Bitshare's Brothers ahem I mean Father & Son ... smart guys, apparently prolific coders ... but incorrect conceptualization of technological uses and markets).

One could argue you are also wasting your own time by replying to "nonsense"...just putting that out there

A 'decryption' key is not a 'viewkey'.  Hmmm, then why have a viewkey in Cryptonote if the recipient also has a decryption key? Because in Cryptonote the private decryption key would also enable one to spend the coins. The decryption key in Zcash has other properties, but it is not necessarily consistent with what everyone else here is referring to when they say 'viewkey'.

CoinHoarder I don't know why you bother to try to write that long diatribe to further show everyone how you are all about ego and character assassination, instead of teamwork and production. Wasting time. And you should be studying since you claimed you have a full load this semester (and I should be coding), so you are wasting your time and my time with nonsense (as usual).

Sorry - not read paper.. Just a couple of questions..

Are the amounts hidden ? (As in confidential transactions)

Is this something gmax won't be able to crow bar into bitcoin ?

Is it quantum secure ?

Thanks.

Nice, so you ignore me on one account then switch accounts and talk to me? Lol.

It is not my fault you misused the term viewkey as it is usually used around here. You stated there would be no viewkey and I simply pointed out that wasn't the case. Then you called me an idiot because you misused the term viewkey, and directly caused my misunderstanding of what you were trying to convey.

Anyways, it is clear that we are debating semantics, and you (as always) remain delusional about how big of an a hole you come across as. I am very laid back, but not to people that are condescending assholes like you that are never wrong about anything.

You inject your subjective opinions as if they are objective facts, and lace it with enough truth so that sheep believe what you are saying. Then, you vicously defend the position as if you are handcuffed to a laptop 24x7 and have nothing better to do... ever. So, eventually people give up on debating your subjective opinions, if they didn't already because of your rudeness, and you feel like you "won" the argument. Therefore, you are the smartest person in the world and everyone else are incompetent sheep with brains the size of peas.

I've got you figured out pretty well, and I would prefer you just ignore me because you are the biggest waste of time ever. I wouldn't respond to you to save time, but then that would give the illusion to others that your subjective opinions are objective facts.

A payer's decryption key which compromises the recipient (because the power to reveal the recipient also rests with the payer) is not a viewkey in the sense of Cryptonote's correct implementation of viewkey. Either one or the other should be able to reveal, but not both because otherwise the implication is that no payer and no payee is ever in control of their viewings. Perhaps more importantly, it is not clear if the Zcash decryption key provides sufficient (or too much) information, because note with the Cryptonote viewkey all payments to that same address can be linked. It is possible that Zcash already implements a viewkey correctly and Zooko's articulation is misleading. That is why I emphasized they need a viewkey. Perhaps a per-transaction viewkey is sufficient and also provides more resistance against tyranny than a global viewkey or Cryptonote's viewkey with links multiple transactions. But I am not omniscient so I have mentioned both variants. Frankly I haven't yet had a spare moment to think about how Zcash's decryption key relates to Cryptonote's viewkey and the implications of the differences. That is why I have kept my statements general that they need a viewkey, what ever that ends up being contingent on full analysis of the implications.

But its quite understandable why a n00b like you would not recognize the distinction without being told so and would instead sling his character assassination mud all over the thread. I didn't start this animosity. You did. And you refuse to stop even after I tried to be cordial with you. Enjoy your Dunning-Kruger self-fucking fest.

You are either an idiot that lacks reading comprehension, or you areally bacracking in an atempt to avoid admitting that you were wrong by alluding that you were talking about a global viewkey (or backdoor.)

He clearly states several times that there is a view key per transaction, but not a global view key or back door. So I don't know why you keep saying therw is no viewkey, because there very clearly is.

If you really were using the term viewkey, as in them including a backdoor, then they have stated multiple times there will be none. That is a misuse of the word viewkey, at least in the way it's used around here referencing crypto note coins, and no one would know what exactly you were or are referencing by calling it such.

You are an even bigger idiot for suggesting they include a backdoor, effectively dealing a death blow to their company before it even gets started. For someone with as much business acumen as you claim, you are showing no to little business sense.

I know you will claim that the government will shut it down if they don't include a back door, but luckily not everyone is as willing to bend over for the government like you. It is fine if you want to be a pansy and give into the government's violations of human rights, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to.

One last time, before you go on permanent ignore...


You don't understand that Zook (the CEO) explained to me at his AMA that there is no viewkey:

What I've been saying since 2013, that Tor/I2P are useless against national security agencies, and now after so many people thought I was loony, I am vindicated:

Ignore me instead of admitting you are wrong about the viewkey. Or, maybe you are too stupid to realize you are wrong. Either way, you will find out eventually and feel like an idiot. The CEO of electric coin company stated there would be a view key in his AMA... an AMA in which you participated. Maybe you should practice reading comprehension.

Good day.

(Edit: or ninja edit your posts, backtrack, and ignore that you were wrong. That works too.  )

CoinHoarder has been added to my Ignore list. Instead of responding with technical justification of his claim, he only throws mud.

I tried my best to be cordial and have a productive discussion with CoinHoarder. I've given him numerous chances to keep his discussion on the facts and not on his persistent focus on slaying the reputation of those who disagree with his love of Bitshares. Facts versus personal vendettas. But he doesn't seem to be capable of recognizing the distinction.

Again I believe a viewkey is possible with Zcash and that is why I have asked Zcash in their public forum (and reiterated its importance during Zooko's AMA) whether they are implementing it. Until we have their clarification, then we can't assume that which is not explicitly stated in the white paper. Readers will also note that CoinHoarder has not done the mea culpa acknowledging that he was ignorant of the applicability of Coase's Theory of the Firm to the Bitshares DAC nonsense that he is shrilling.

And he will not also admit the following is why he incorrect about stealing content.

Governments are organizing now around controlling the internet. The illegal activity through Bittorrent (which also steals from ISPs which have higher upload bandwidth allowances) is helping the governments feel they are justified in regulating the internet via Net Neutrality and other measures. You young fellow feel free to pursue theft of music and other content which deprives the millions of artists of income to pay their rent. You are not going to create the new Knowledge Economy with your theft model. And by advocating theft, you are helping the NWO totalitarianism to take form by providing an economic incentive and political support from millions of artists who are violated by piracy. Dumb. But I expect that from you.

You are one to speak...


A self proclaimed genius ought to be able to figure out that there will be a view key in Zcash. If you had 3/4 the IQ I have you would know that too. Maybe try understanding the white paper instead of reading it.

Governments will enforce copyrights and trademarks just as successfully as they have enforced copyright laws.  

You lecturing me about ego... pot meet kettle.