[XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos - page 690.

GameStarter

full member

Activity: 214

Merit: 100

Quote from: synechist on August 01, 2014, 07:43:42 AM

Quote from: holyprofit on August 01, 2014, 07:33:51 AM

Quote from: GameStarter on August 01, 2014, 07:17:34 AM

Next PR campaign will attract a lot of attention with our EM working and our new futur project of anonymous voice call (and maybe video).
I can't wait to see the undisclosed anonymous feature!
Could it be possible to have an XC mail adress being able to communicate outside the XC network? For exemple sending a mail from XCwallet to [email protected] adress.

Is it possible to do something like that? Or even better have xchat communicate to a Skype address? In terms of anonymity it would be a huge deal because you can remain anonymous
to all parties including the party you are communicating with.

I see the usefulness of this. It makes a lot of sense.

It should be easy to code, but it partly defeats the point. It'll involve trusting some server to send your message on to the recipient.

So although you might remain anonymous, your message will become vulnerable once it enters a centralised email/Skype system.

But hey, building an imap/smtp server and whatever Skype uses into the XC app doesn't sound impossible.

Thanks.
Even if the message could be compromise circulating through servers, sender identity would stay anonymous,ip adress would stay anonymous, no relationship proof could be find.
Next point, i would imagine a tag that show the origin source of the message or voice call, for exemple our XCpseudo + @XCplatform or xxx@XCmail.
Basically each communication from xc wallet to outside wallet would be an advertising moove.
Non XC users receiving a mail or voice call would ask where does your adress come from...how is it working...Anonymous really? free really? ho but it's also a currency...
Best way to show real application to the mass and create the first and most important feeling of confidence that XC technology is working for real.

It would spread around the world XC existence really quick.

holyprofit

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: synechist on August 01, 2014, 07:43:42 AM

Quote from: holyprofit on August 01, 2014, 07:33:51 AM

Quote from: GameStarter on August 01, 2014, 07:17:34 AM

Next PR campaign will attract a lot of attention with our EM working and our new futur project of anonymous voice call (and maybe video).
I can't wait to see the undisclosed anonymous feature!
Could it be possible to have an XC mail adress being able to communicate outside the XC network? For exemple sending a mail from XCwallet to [email protected] adress.

Is it possible to do something like that? Or even better have xchat communicate to a Skype address? In terms of anonymity it would be a huge deal because you can remain anonymous
to all parties including the party you are communicating with.

I see the usefulness of this. It makes a lot of sense.

It should be easy to code, but it partly defeats the point. It'll involve trusting some server to send your message on to the recipient.

So although you might remain anonymous, your message will become vulnerable once it enters a centralised email/Skype system.

But hey, building an imap/smtp server and whatever Skype uses into the XC app doesn't sound impossible.

Yes I see that. But what everyone is addressing is how to prevent third parties from intercepting messages between two senders who know
each others identities - since they arranged to go on xchat to communicate in the first place. The other aspect of anonymity is for the next Edward Snowden to be able to send a "hello" message to the Guardian without revealing his identity to them. It guarantees that sources remain protected as the Guardian need never know their identity. I think xchat -> Skype communication would achieve that wouldn't it? (Of course the guardian could decide to get xchat and advertise the address but until xchat is widely used this is unlikely.)

getmining.info

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: Herbix on August 01, 2014, 07:38:33 AM

Synechist might want to reply to this: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8120876.

Quote

I think XC is the first such coin, along a now growing list of anon wannabe coins.

Yes, please do.

KimmyF

sr. member

Activity: 978

Merit: 250

Quote from: synechist on August 01, 2014, 07:35:43 AM

Quote from: KimmyF on August 01, 2014, 07:26:35 AM

Also hope XC stays on track, the little detour from anon to Xchat is nice, the future extention to voice & video great but hope this team first finishes the anon part, including public bounty then focusses on the next thing.
A lot of teams are working on the same 'holy grail', lets be the first with unbreakable & stable anon, build from there

I can confirm that we're well on track with private payments. In fact there are some significant developments that I can't reveal yet.

The reason that we're focusing on XChat for the moment is because chat is a huge market, and messaging is necessary for Bitcoin 2.0-type apps.

Also, XC's anonymity is both stable and unbroken. Post-Rev 3 third party and public testing will give it "bulletproof" status. :-)

Lastly, I think the holy grail is scalable bulletproof privacy. For example cryptonote coins have strong (though not particularly flexible, afaik) anonymity, but they can't scale.

Scalability is absolutely critical for mobile markets. And mobile is the future (and present) of computing.

Thanks for your reply (as always), just cant wait for the 'bullet proof' status to end all current discussions & start building from there

Having 'only' xc at the moment should tell you enough about my trust in your team Wink

synechist

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

To commodify ethicality is to ethicise the market

Quote from: holyprofit on August 01, 2014, 07:33:51 AM

Quote from: GameStarter on August 01, 2014, 07:17:34 AM

Next PR campaign will attract a lot of attention with our EM working and our new futur project of anonymous voice call (and maybe video).
I can't wait to see the undisclosed anonymous feature!
Could it be possible to have an XC mail adress being able to communicate outside the XC network? For exemple sending a mail from XCwallet to [email protected] adress.

Is it possible to do something like that? Or even better have xchat communicate to a Skype address? In terms of anonymity it would be a huge deal because you can remain anonymous
to all parties including the party you are communicating with.

I see the usefulness of this. It makes a lot of sense.

It should be easy to code, but it partly defeats the point. It'll involve trusting some server to send your message on to the recipient.

So although you might remain anonymous, your message will become vulnerable once it enters a centralised email/Skype system.

But hey, building an imap/smtp server and whatever Skype uses into the XC app doesn't sound impossible.

KimmyF

sr. member

Activity: 978

Merit: 250

btw, am busy with an android app that requires running my own blockchain explorer. Basically the app will just show graphics & value about my own XC holdings (yes, i check every min also & want it on my phone)
For this to work the app needs to know your XC addresses, which can be a pain to enter (just look at your own inputs) i got a lot of addresses already and spend/trade a little as possible.
To help the entry of those addresses i can use my sql version of the blockchain based on the assumption that if two addresses are used on the same input they must belong to the same wallet, eg: my end user will only have to enter one for the app to suggest the other. Just to make entry more userfriendly.

Are some members willing to help/confirm my wallet guesses (in pm) while im debugging this part of the code?

Herbix

member

Activity: 97

Merit: 10

Synechist might want to reply to this: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8120876.

Quote

I think XC is the first such coin, along a now growing list of anon wannabe coins.

synechist

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

To commodify ethicality is to ethicise the market

Quote from: KimmyF on August 01, 2014, 07:26:35 AM

Also hope XC stays on track, the little detour from anon to Xchat is nice, the future extention to voice & video great but hope this team first finishes the anon part, including public bounty then focusses on the next thing.
A lot of teams are working on the same 'holy grail', lets be the first with unbreakable & stable anon, build from there

I can confirm that we're well on track with private payments. In fact there are some significant developments that I can't reveal yet.

The reason that we're focusing on XChat for the moment is because chat is a huge market, and messaging is necessary for Bitcoin 2.0-type apps.

Also, XC's anonymity is both stable and unbroken. Post-Rev 3 third party and public testing will give it "bulletproof" status. :-)

Lastly, I think the holy grail is scalable bulletproof privacy. For example cryptonote coins have strong (though not particularly flexible, afaik) anonymity, but they can't scale.

Scalability is absolutely critical for mobile markets. And mobile is the future (and present) of computing.

holyprofit

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: GameStarter on August 01, 2014, 07:17:34 AM

Next PR campaign will attract a lot of attention with our EM working and our new futur project of anonymous voice call (and maybe video).
I can't wait to see the undisclosed anonymous feature!
Could it be possible to have an XC mail adress being able to communicate outside the XC network? For exemple sending a mail from XCwallet to [email protected] adress.

Is it possible to do something like that? Or even better have xchat communicate to a Skype address? In terms of anonymity it would be a huge deal because you can remain anonymous
to all parties including the party you are communicating with.

KimmyF

sr. member

Activity: 978

Merit: 250

Quote from: qawzsx on August 01, 2014, 07:29:39 AM

Quote from: battbot on August 01, 2014, 07:25:32 AM

Quote from: qawzsx on August 01, 2014, 07:23:41 AM

THAT'S NOT A FREAKING REVIEW OF THE CODE...
TESTING THE SOFTWARE MEANS NOTHING.

SO...STOP THAT NONSENSE WITH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE...

first of all, he cannot give a negative feedback about it, because the software have hes basic functions working.

it's not a review of the code, and it is pointless...

Says cloak bagholder.

Dude, are you idiot?

)) seems you are...
Read what I'm saying again, without reading only one sentence and shooting a reply...

I own lots of coins, and I own around 30 BTC in XC, but I dumped cloakcoin as soon as I saw that the dev used a freaking php script to hype their shit up...

"look, we have some imba feature... CloakSend and shit..."

Big hype for nothing, even a freaking coindesk page talking about that...in the end that was a freaking script...

Lets move this discussion to the right thread where we can talk some more about the difference between rev1 and the current developments

qawzsx

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

NOT FUD! FACTS!

Quote from: battbot on August 01, 2014, 07:25:32 AM

Quote from: qawzsx on August 01, 2014, 07:23:41 AM

THAT'S NOT A FREAKING REVIEW OF THE CODE...
TESTING THE SOFTWARE MEANS NOTHING.

SO...STOP THAT NONSENSE WITH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE...

first of all, he cannot give a negative feedback about it, because the software have hes basic functions working.

it's not a review of the code, and it is pointless...

Says cloak bagholder.

Dude, are you idiot?

)) seems you are...
Read what I'm saying again, without reading only one sentence and shooting a reply...

I own lots of coins, and I own around 30 BTC in XC, but I dumped cloakcoin as soon as I saw that the dev used a freaking php script to hype their shit up...

"look, we have some imba feature... CloakSend and shit..."

Big hype for nothing, even a freaking coindesk page talking about that...in the end that was a freaking script...

G-Bert

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: synechist on August 01, 2014, 07:04:14 AM

Quote from: G-Bert on August 01, 2014, 06:43:45 AM

Didn't Dan accept and say he will review this weekend? Perhaps I misunderstood...?

Well, he didn't "accept" because he wasn't offered a review. He just expressed an interest in being allowed to download the software and test it out (i.e. not to look at the source code).

OK, so I partly misunderstood. He's not getting the sourcecode, but is still doing a review.

I just don't understand why. Huh

Quote from: atcsecure on July 31, 2014, 08:04:14 PM

Quote from: zing96 on July 31, 2014, 08:02:02 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on July 31, 2014, 07:57:10 PM

please lets end this cloak discussion, I was just responding to numerous posts and pm's....until I do my own review, I have no official statement on cloak

Thank You,

Dan

Here's your PoSA Qt wallet. Delivered from TheDagger.

https://mega.co.nz/#!JMV1gQDC!Nm_b59BYUgNee9OKqXhw2VOHBY8jHQGVfjJsMFvpllo

Got it... will do up a review this weekend

qawzsx

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

NOT FUD! FACTS!

Quote from: battbot on August 01, 2014, 07:23:07 AM

Quote from: SpringfieldM1A on August 01, 2014, 06:59:12 AM

In my opinion reviewing other coins without their developer's explicit request will cause trouble. If the review is bad the angry mobs of other coins will come in here and start to spread massive unwarranted FUD and cause other problems. A good review might have a positive effect, but what if something crucial is overlooked ? or what if the other coin devs decide to alter the coin's specifications after the review? If the other coin turns out to be flawed or even a scam, it will still have the "XC dev stamp of approval", remember that after the review the coin is out of your control, it's a dangerous situation to be in because any (percieved) connection to another coin can be a base for FUD, should the other coin be in trouble.

Reviewing other coins can be a good strategy, as we have learned ATC's opinion is highly valued by the market. But we should stick to our own business in these early stages in development. I understand the reasoning behind a self initiated review of another coin, but without a fully established market reputation and matured technology it is a high risk endeavour, because the market is still highly dominated by emotions.

Take a look at Digibyte for example, they are the good guy Greg's of the altcoin world. They have helped numerous coins implementing Digishield, have a dedicated following and excellent developers. But all that altruism didn't help them in attaining (warranted) market recognition so far.

We are gradually establishing ourselves by superior technological advantages over our competition. We should remain focused at that, a positive market response should be due to our technical advantage itself and not because of a developer initiated comparison to other coins. Let investors do their own due diligence, they will come to the same conclusion without having to put XC's reputation on the line.

I am not saying we should stick our head in the sand and retreat to our ivory tower, but in these early stages of development we should focus on solidifying our own reputation and fundamentals. We should take the defensive instead of offensive role, after Rev 3 and after we are escaping this crazy crypto realm we could consider a more aggressive marketing approach.

Well said. I agree 100%

If the review is bad?
Do you at least understand that he is reviewing the wallet itself, not the code.
If the review is bad, on a freaking wallet, that's a freaking public thing, which anybody can see...than anybody should dump that freaking coin...

As much as the wallet its working, it cannot be negative feedback.

On the other hand, a good review it shows nothing special either, it's just an wallet who can work...big deal.
That does not shows the code and if the code really does what the devs says.

KimmyF

sr. member

Activity: 978

Merit: 250

Quote from: hoertest on August 01, 2014, 06:21:27 AM

Quote from: G-Bert on August 01, 2014, 06:05:39 AM

I think this review is to counteract that screeshot of Dan saying cloak is a scam. If he checks code and its not, its fair for him to take what he said back (give a good review)

he could just say he was talking about the old appraoch and he stands by that. there would be nothing wrong with that since he was talking in a private chat room, he wasn spamming their thread or even in here. it wasn't public.
There is no reason for apologetic feelings or actions, he has done nothing wrong.

Standing by your words about the cloaksend 1.0 and do no more until asked for. that would be the right thing to do.

Counteract a screenshot? We are not 14 year old school girls in here

Anybody can make that screenshot, forgot the link but its somewhere in the cloak thread, a quick 'Viral.com website to make a log like that. Hope Dan just stays quiet on this, say nothing, do nothing and keep working on XC. If they ask, just say you are busy with your own coin. Have to agree with Hoertest on this one, stay away from other coins! He, lets all do that, at least in this thread.
Also hope XC stays on track, the little detour from anon to Xchat is nice, the future extention to voice & video great but hope this team first finishes the anon part, including public bounty then focusses on the next thing.
A lot of teams are working on the same 'holy grail', lets be the first with unbreakable & stable anon, build from there

battbot

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Quote from: qawzsx on August 01, 2014, 07:23:41 AM

THAT'S NOT A FREAKING REVIEW OF THE CODE...
TESTING THE SOFTWARE MEANS NOTHING.

SO...STOP THAT NONSENSE WITH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE...

first of all, he cannot give a negative feedback about it, because the software have hes basic functions working.

it's not a review of the code, and it is pointless...

Says cloak bagholder.

qawzsx

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

NOT FUD! FACTS!

THAT'S NOT A FREAKING REVIEW OF THE CODE...
TESTING THE SOFTWARE MEANS NOTHING.

SO...STOP THAT NONSENSE WITH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE...

first of all, he cannot give a negative feedback about it, because the software have hes basic functions working.

it's not a review of the code, and it is pointless...

battbot

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Quote from: SpringfieldM1A on August 01, 2014, 06:59:12 AM

In my opinion reviewing other coins without their developer's explicit request will cause trouble. If the review is bad the angry mobs of other coins will come in here and start to spread massive unwarranted FUD and cause other problems. A good review might have a positive effect, but what if something crucial is overlooked ? or what if the other coin devs decide to alter the coin's specifications after the review? If the other coin turns out to be flawed or even a scam, it will still have the "XC dev stamp of approval", remember that after the review the coin is out of your control, it's a dangerous situation to be in because any (percieved) connection to another coin can be a base for FUD, should the other coin be in trouble.

Reviewing other coins can be a good strategy, as we have learned ATC's opinion is highly valued by the market. But we should stick to our own business in these early stages in development. I understand the reasoning behind a self initiated review of another coin, but without a fully established market reputation and matured technology it is a high risk endeavour, because the market is still highly dominated by emotions.

Take a look at Digibyte for example, they are the good guy Greg's of the altcoin world. They have helped numerous coins implementing Digishield, have a dedicated following and excellent developers. But all that altruism didn't help them in attaining (warranted) market recognition so far.

We are gradually establishing ourselves by superior technological advantages over our competition. We should remain focused at that, a positive market response should be due to our technical advantage itself and not because of a developer initiated comparison to other coins. Let investors do their own due diligence, they will come to the same conclusion without having to put XC's reputation on the line.

I am not saying we should stick our head in the sand and retreat to our ivory tower, but in these early stages of development we should focus on solidifying our own reputation and fundamentals. We should take the defensive instead of offensive role, after Rev 3 and after we are escaping this crazy crypto realm we could consider a more aggressive marketing approach.

Well said. I agree 100%

GameStarter

full member

Activity: 214

Merit: 100

Next PR campaign will attract a lot of attention with our EM working and our new futur project of anonymous voice call (and maybe video).
I can't wait to see the undisclosed anonymous feature!
Could it be possible to have an XC mail adress being able to communicate outside the XC network? For exemple sending a mail from XCwallet to [email protected] adress.

battbot

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

How about Dan reviews XC code and publishes his findings... Hello?

If Dan publishes a review of cloak, I am speechless...

synechist

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

To commodify ethicality is to ethicise the market

Quote from: G-Bert on August 01, 2014, 06:43:45 AM

Didn't Dan accept and say he will review this weekend? Perhaps I misunderstood...?

Well, he didn't "accept" because he wasn't offered a review. He just expressed an interest in being allowed to download the software and test it out (i.e. not to look at the source code).

Topic: [XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos - page 690. (Read 1484192 times)