OK, I'm going to do a beta test of the forum: http://107.170.135.207/
Looks good my manThe theme will be adjusted when our new logo has been chosen.
Topic: [XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos - page 1440. (Read 1484248 times)
June 03, 2014, 01:59:08 PM
The theme will be adjusted when our new logo has been chosen.
June 03, 2014, 01:58:34 PM
I guess you guys mean split up over a period of time. I thought Bitcoin can only handle 10 transactions per second or something low (at the moment)...
No I mean simultaneously in a few blocks maximum. You want to check the network for scaling issues that might occur later, both in terms of size + transaction capacity. If the coin isn't futureproof / can't scale => DOA.
Can you stop implying XC might be "dead on arrival".
Bitcoin is the gold standard for transactions per second.
It's the nature of coin mixing: Anonymous coins that do mixing have to strike a balance between proper mixing and becoming problematic to scale (=DOA).
Bytecoin and clones have DOA characteristics when used with higher-end mixing settings. The anonymity has to be reduced (less mixing) in order for the implementation to scale.
Darkcoin - if used with something like cascading mixing in >10 nodes - would be DOA itself.
XC, if it uses a lot of blockchain size for small transaction, will be DOA.
Only non-mixing anonymity can avoid it, but still even zerocoin in its first implementation wouldn't scale / was DOA.
June 03, 2014, 01:52:43 PM
OK, I'm going to do a beta test of the forum: http://107.170.135.207/
June 03, 2014, 01:45:54 PM
June 03, 2014, 01:44:38 PM
I guess you guys mean split up over a period of time. I thought Bitcoin can only handle 10 transactions per second or something low (at the moment)...
No I mean simultaneously in a few blocks maximum. You want to check the network for scaling issues that might occur later, both in terms of size + transaction capacity. If the coin isn't futureproof / can't scale => DOA.
I fully understand and have not done a full blown "load test" yet... it is in the project plan to scale out and test with REV2,
with this release, pushing 1000 transactions through a mixer in 1 block from the same client could result an issue, however 100-1000 separate clients should work based on the code, but I have not tested that yet either.
I would also imagine not every user in the network will always do the private transactions.Especially as private transactions cost more. For example buying a pair of jeans they won't care. But sending a relative a large sum of money, they might.
It might only be the case that 5% of transactions are private. Meaning 1000 private transactions corresponds to 20,000 transactions in total.
June 03, 2014, 01:40:33 PM
I guess you guys mean split up over a period of time. I thought Bitcoin can only handle 10 transactions per second or something low (at the moment)...
No I mean simultaneously in a few blocks maximum. You want to check the network for scaling issues that might occur later, both in terms of size + transaction capacity. If the coin isn't futureproof / can't scale => DOA.
I fully understand and have not done a full blown "load test" yet... it is in the project plan to scale out and test with REV2,
with this release, pushing 1000 transactions through a mixer in 1 block from the same client could result an issue, however 100-1000 separate clients should work based on the code, but I have not tested that yet either.
June 03, 2014, 01:40:15 PM
I guess you guys mean split up over a period of time. I thought Bitcoin can only handle 10 transactions per second or something low (at the moment)...
No I mean simultaneously in a few blocks maximum. You want to check the network for scaling issues that might occur later, both in terms of size + transaction capacity. If the coin isn't futureproof / can't scale => DOA.
Can you stop implying XC might be "dead on arrival".
Bitcoin is the gold standard for transactions per second.
Agreed
June 03, 2014, 01:38:59 PM
Has anyone else been watching the charts at Mintpal? There is some strange activity going on with the XC prices and the buys and sells. I kinda get the feeling that a lot are being bought up and the guy doing it is trying to be discreet. It's like the price just flatlined but very carefully, kinda like the calm before the storm.
Its almost been WAY too predictable.......
June 03, 2014, 01:38:33 PM
I guess you guys mean split up over a period of time. I thought Bitcoin can only handle 10 transactions per second or something low (at the moment)...
No I mean simultaneously in a few blocks maximum. You want to check the network for scaling issues that might occur later, both in terms of size + transaction capacity. If the coin isn't futureproof / can't scale => DOA.
Can you stop implying XC might be "dead on arrival".
Bitcoin is the gold standard for transactions per second.
June 03, 2014, 01:35:05 PM
I guess you guys mean split up over a period of time. I thought Bitcoin can only handle 10 transactions per second or something low (at the moment)...
No I mean simultaneously in a few blocks maximum. You want to check the network for scaling issues that might occur later, both in terms of size + transaction capacity. If the coin isn't futureproof / can't scale => DOA.
June 03, 2014, 01:34:11 PM
I saw this message when I point to the icon "Expected time to earn reward is 5mins" but I haven't received any coin for 2 days 
Staking can take anywhere from 8 hours to 30 days. It is luck of the draw. That time is not guaranteed time for reward, why it even says that I don't know as I think it causes more confusion.
June 03, 2014, 01:31:50 PM
I saw this message when I point to the icon "Expected time to earn reward is 5mins" but I haven't received any coin for 2 days
June 03, 2014, 01:30:02 PM
Can somebody make a test and report back:
Use a script / .bat and perform 1000 mixes of 0.1-1 XC each back to a single address of yours.
- Report how many of these 1000 transactions got back (to check the reliability of the network in conducting transactions in terms of %) and what's the total amount back in your single address. For example, I got back 995 out of 1000 and the amount is 995 instead of 1000.
- Report the block # you initiated the transfers (so that we can check consequent numbers in terms of blockchain bloat / megabytes) to calculate the spam attack vector vs the blockchain
- Report any unusual stuff
If anyone is going to do that, state that "I'm doing it" so that no two people are doing it at the same time.
Use a script / .bat and perform 1000 mixes of 0.1-1 XC each back to a single address of yours.
- Report how many of these 1000 transactions got back (to check the reliability of the network in conducting transactions in terms of %) and what's the total amount back in your single address. For example, I got back 995 out of 1000 and the amount is 995 instead of 1000.
- Report the block # you initiated the transfers (so that we can check consequent numbers in terms of blockchain bloat / megabytes) to calculate the spam attack vector vs the blockchain
- Report any unusual stuff
If anyone is going to do that, state that "I'm doing it" so that no two people are doing it at the same time.
I can do that possibly
Ok, to others: cancel that
I guess you guys mean split up over a period of time. I thought Bitcoin can only handle 10 transactions per second or something low (at the moment)...
June 03, 2014, 01:28:49 PM
Can somebody make a test and report back:
Use a script / .bat and perform 1000 mixes of 0.1-1 XC each back to a single address of yours.
- Report how many of these 1000 transactions got back (to check the reliability of the network in conducting transactions in terms of %) and what's the total amount back in your single address. For example, I got back 995 out of 1000 and the amount is 995 instead of 1000.
- Report the block # you initiated the transfers (so that we can check consequent numbers in terms of blockchain bloat / megabytes) to calculate the spam attack vector vs the blockchain
- Report any unusual stuff
If anyone is going to do that, state that "I'm doing it" so that no two people are doing it at the same time.
Use a script / .bat and perform 1000 mixes of 0.1-1 XC each back to a single address of yours.
- Report how many of these 1000 transactions got back (to check the reliability of the network in conducting transactions in terms of %) and what's the total amount back in your single address. For example, I got back 995 out of 1000 and the amount is 995 instead of 1000.
- Report the block # you initiated the transfers (so that we can check consequent numbers in terms of blockchain bloat / megabytes) to calculate the spam attack vector vs the blockchain
- Report any unusual stuff
If anyone is going to do that, state that "I'm doing it" so that no two people are doing it at the same time.
I can do that possibly
Ok, to others: cancel that
June 03, 2014, 01:28:03 PM
Can somebody make a test and report back:
Use a script / .bat and perform 1000 mixes of 0.1-1 XC each back to a single address of yours.
- Report how many of these 1000 transactions got back (to check the reliability of the network in conducting transactions in terms of %) and what's the total amount back in your single address. For example, I got back 995 out of 1000 and the amount is 995 instead of 1000.
- Report the block # you initiated the transfers (so that we can check consequent numbers in terms of blockchain bloat / megabytes) to calculate the spam attack vector vs the blockchain
- Report any unusual stuff
If anyone is going to do that, state that "I'm doing it" so that no two people are doing it at the same time.
Use a script / .bat and perform 1000 mixes of 0.1-1 XC each back to a single address of yours.
- Report how many of these 1000 transactions got back (to check the reliability of the network in conducting transactions in terms of %) and what's the total amount back in your single address. For example, I got back 995 out of 1000 and the amount is 995 instead of 1000.
- Report the block # you initiated the transfers (so that we can check consequent numbers in terms of blockchain bloat / megabytes) to calculate the spam attack vector vs the blockchain
- Report any unusual stuff
If anyone is going to do that, state that "I'm doing it" so that no two people are doing it at the same time.
I can do that possibly
June 03, 2014, 01:27:35 PM
Anyway.....
so after all of that Chaeplin was using the mixing pattern to trace the transactions back to their original destination.
Good to know and easy to fix.
After all that..... he wasn't trying to be a dick its just his English isn't that good.
so after all of that Chaeplin was using the mixing pattern to trace the transactions back to their original destination.
Good to know and easy to fix.
After all that..... he wasn't trying to be a dick its just his English isn't that good.
June 03, 2014, 01:26:26 PM
Can somebody make a test and report back:
Use a script / .bat and perform 1000 mixes of 0.1-1 XC each back to a single address of yours.
- Report how many of these 1000 transactions got back (to check the reliability of the network in conducting transactions in terms of %) and what's the total amount back in your single address. For example, I got back 995 out of 1000 and the amount is 995 instead of 1000.
- Report the block # you initiated the transfers (so that we can check consequent numbers in terms of blockchain bloat / megabytes) to calculate the spam attack vector vs the blockchain
- Report any unusual stuff
If anyone is going to do that, state that "I'm doing it" so that no two people are doing it at the same time.
Use a script / .bat and perform 1000 mixes of 0.1-1 XC each back to a single address of yours.
- Report how many of these 1000 transactions got back (to check the reliability of the network in conducting transactions in terms of %) and what's the total amount back in your single address. For example, I got back 995 out of 1000 and the amount is 995 instead of 1000.
- Report the block # you initiated the transfers (so that we can check consequent numbers in terms of blockchain bloat / megabytes) to calculate the spam attack vector vs the blockchain
- Report any unusual stuff
If anyone is going to do that, state that "I'm doing it" so that no two people are doing it at the same time.
June 03, 2014, 01:26:21 PM
I also think that first there needs to be a series of smaller tests, like the one we had. So the dev can clear and fix any problems that might occur. After that when he thinks he is ready, we can go with a big challenge and a significant reward.
i am talking about something really really big, something that will bring all eyes on XC, something that will get articles written and a lot of sharing/tweeting etc.
Lets say at least 2500 XC coins or something really big like that.
When the dev team says they are ready. Then clear rules for the challenge can be written ( like REALLY clear, so no confusions at the end ).
I for one will donate 100XC myself towards something like that and i am sure that the community will back something like that up.
i am talking about something really really big, something that will bring all eyes on XC, something that will get articles written and a lot of sharing/tweeting etc.
Lets say at least 2500 XC coins or something really big like that.
When the dev team says they are ready. Then clear rules for the challenge can be written ( like REALLY clear, so no confusions at the end ).
I for one will donate 100XC myself towards something like that and i am sure that the community will back something like that up.
June 03, 2014, 01:25:37 PM
Has anyone else been watching the charts at Mintpal? There is some strange activity going on with the XC prices and the buys and sells. I kinda get the feeling that a lot are being bought up and the guy doing it is trying to be discreet. It's like the price just flatlined but very carefully, kinda like the calm before the storm.
Some would say that what's been going on is price discovery. Of course there's no basis to differentiate from price discovery and the skilful simulation of price discovery, but fortunately the effect will be the same (that is, breakout), since market participants perceive the same price action and act accordingly.
June 03, 2014, 01:20:37 PM
Hi,
I've been lurking in this thread since just before the peak when i bought about 500 XC. I have high hopes for this coin and have been constantly refreshing both this thread, the uncensorred thread all day and night and following constantly.
May I suggest that after the next release there is a bounty for finding the sending address and showing a link between sending and receiving adresses. Maybe send out a few other transactions for the same amount to other addresses at the same time to make guesswork harder.
This test was just "find the sending address". As it stands I think chaeplin deserves the bountry.
I've been lurking in this thread since just before the peak when i bought about 500 XC. I have high hopes for this coin and have been constantly refreshing both this thread, the uncensorred thread all day and night and following constantly.
May I suggest that after the next release there is a bounty for finding the sending address and showing a link between sending and receiving adresses. Maybe send out a few other transactions for the same amount to other addresses at the same time to make guesswork harder.
This test was just "find the sending address". As it stands I think chaeplin deserves the bountry.
ah, so this is a good point, basically chaeplin guess'd the address's but could not document the link on blockchain (as it doesn't exist), so its a win-win in my book
I think that the bounty for documenting the link on the blockchain still exists..
I think it would be good advertising aswell as a good testing oportinity if the bounty was fairly large and it was advertised in lots of places including reddit etc so it gets more exposure. If no one can crack it then we are laughing! And if they can crack it... well, you know what needs fixing next.
I think you're doing a great job so far by the way. Nice one.
I suggest we wait until more testing and development has taken place before we issue a large bounty and advertise it... could backfire if we do that prematurely.
Thats a fair point, but if no one has any success at first, we will need more people to test it to make sure its truly anonymous. perhaps increase exposure and bounty if no one has cracked it in, say, a week for example.
Jump to: