Topic: Vanillacoin's Chainblender: Technical analyse (Read 1791 times)

Much like a revolutionary who stomps on folks he considers insurrectionist.

Dang it smooth, beat me to it.

But a dev accused of plagiarism who is afraid of being plagarized is quite funny.

Does theymos pay you 300$/hr to use spam bitcointalk? Sign me up.

Why should I bother? Are you paying me?

I will be trying to earn the $300+ per hour that smooth can earn instead of wasting my time on fools.

Irony meter just exploded

Show me how you would deanonymize ChainBlender. It might not be the most advanced sollution in your eyes (compared to something like zerocash - which is still vapor), but if it works and if its fast and if it doesn't do bloat, it's good enough for real world use.

Proof? Oh, it's a guess? Nothing but bias here.



You 2 seem to have way more free time on your hands than anyone on this forum. Nothing proves it better than you advertising your vaporware ion since months, doing hundreds of comments with it and coming out with nothing, not even a half whitepaper for it. You simply hijack random threads to advertise it.


Code is on the github, whitepaper is up, please point out the flaws instead of going full rage mode with bias and playing the name/shame game since your very first comment in the thread. You obviously have a personal problem with John and that clouds every single one of your comments. The OP asked for a technical discussion here, no respect from your side.

This isn't about whether to trust John Connor or not, but about you guys making accusations, based on nothing but pure speculation...
I was hoping to see some on topic, technical discussions here,...

When did the cryptoscene became such a hostile environment?

regards

Goldmaxx

So let's just assume it works and potentially jeopardize privacy / money instead of the author writing a proper whitepaper ? Sounds like a plan.

I honestly don't care about the project and I don't mean to offend anyone but the attitude to just trust john connor when he says it works is just absurd.

How about this...



How easy it is to accuse someone, but how hard it is to prove you are right...

With kind regards

Goldmaxx

Did you ever think that that might be because noone has tried ? You can't claim something is impossible just because it hasn't happend yet.
The reason noone has tried is prob because few have the knowledge to do so and those few have better things todo than crack a platform where the author isn't willing to at least put out a decent paper on how stuff is supposed to work.

Could it be John doesn't put all the technical details in his whitepaper because people would just shameless copy-paste his technology?
I saw the same accusations when zerotime was released...but 5 months after zerotime's release, we haven't seen one single double spent, and the accusators all went silent, because they can't prove what they were claiming (zerotime would fail)...

regards

Goldmaxx

Anything less than 100% is worthless IMO. It only takes one crack in the design and suddenly everything is onymous again.

These really doesn't matter here as all he did was trolling with that comment. So far he didn't release a single thing, everything recently is vapor.

On a sidenote people need to understand that not only 100% anonimity sollution can be viable as ringsigs for example, anything coming close to the 99% range is good enough if it can solve bloat and speed issues for real world use compatibility. Numbers are examples obv.

Clarification. I didn't release the white paper. But since it is no longer of proprietary value to hide it since I am no longer going to implement Zero Knowledge Transactions, then I will endeavor to clean up the white paper and release it sometime this year. Hopefully I can find time within the next couple of months.

ZKT combines Cryptonote with Mixles' Compact Confidential Transactions. Shen-noether accomplished a similar design but combining with Blockstream's Confidential Transactions.

So these are End-to-End Principled anonymity that hide both sender and value. No simultaneity crap like Dash and this new crap from the infamous plagiarist John Conner.

The reason I am not implementing it because it requires obscuring your IP address and all other metadata, which is impractical. Apparently Monero is implementing it (at least they are toying with implementing it) and so no need for me to duplicate their effort.

Only Zerocash can give us reliable anonymity that is immune to metadata. So for now I put anonymity on the back burner and we will come back to Zerocash if we first solve the SUSTAINABLE, DECENTRALIZED, PERMISSIONLESS block chain issue, since that is more important. No design yet can truly claim those properties.

As for resource issues, reliable anonymity will not be cheap. Thus it probably can't be for every transaction. It will probably need to be an optional set of coins. In Zerocash they name the anonymous set of coins 'zerocoins' (not to be confused with Zerocoin).

My main grip with John Conner is he doesn't put all the technical details in a white paper, because he is apparently wants to avoid peer review. Smooth doesn't have time to reverse engineer his half-assed white papers either. So we can't entirely explain the flaws without wasting a lot of our valuable time. But I can already tell you this chainblender is flawed at least in that it has a simultaneity requirement which thus violates the End-to-End Principle. Looks like there are other flaws similar to the masternode concept of mixing (which Evan of Dash has apparently finally admitted).

He is also one of the most qualified people on this forum to review anonymity solutions, having written his own white paper on the subject, so even a cursory glance is valuable.

evidence: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13211623

Let's hear why this solution is different to Dash's and then we'll take it from there.

He is making 100% offtopic accusations that are based on exactly nothing to back them up, nothing even slightly relevant. Also he is raging obviously for no reason in the very first reply on the topic.

People like him should get moderated out, this would be a thread that should be focused on discussing a single feature. Else you know that I am against most forms of moderation, I kept the unmoderated VNL thread open as long as I could.

I am against moderated topics...Although I find TPTB_need_war's accusations lame and not sufficiently well explained, he still has the right to think and say what he likes to say...

Regards

Goldmaxx

BTC0.010/VNL already?
Is Anonymint mad because I disclosed his inner circle bullshit? To me he sounds quite exactly like jl777.
10000 promises, nice graphs and all and 0 code, inner trading hype. My bet is that these are the same person.

Your comment was worthless and just showcases your lack of ability to make proper human interaction. Please move over to one of your ion threads.

Edit: I also noticed how you replied within the 4 minute range. Did you find some time?