Author

Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1216. (Read 4670643 times)

legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
I would like usage of Monero privacy...
Is there any index where can we see all what we can buy or pay online with Monero?

I don't know if there is actually something you can buy with Monero that is listed anywhere.


which is why we should make an app to buy with monero, exchange for bitcoin, and plug that bitcoin into the vendors bitpay infrastructure. Then everyplace that accepts bitcoin can accept monero. No fancy whatsits and legal fandingos necessary.

(edited to add)
and i already came up with a name for this a couple pages up... Payero.
legendary
Activity: 930
Merit: 1010
I would like usage of Monero privacy...
Is there any index where can we see all what we can buy or pay online with Monero?

I don't know if there is actually something you can buy with Monero that is listed anywhere.
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
I'm a Firestarter!
I would like usage of Monero privacy...
Is there any index where can we see all what we can buy or pay online with Monero?
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
hrm, whattaya think of this:

we approach sites that should obviously be using monero.

arrange so that for (X) months, they list their products at 1/2 price in monero, and monero "investors" cover the other half as a sort of promotion. (investors being us, or more specifically, whoever's capable of a 10k monero buy wall)

This came to me because I went out of my way to buy primecoin when I registered a domain name on dotbit.me (also emailed the dude and asked him if he'd take monero), because it cost me like 1$ in primecoin and the bitcoin price was 7$.

and we could just design the backend software to automatically pull from the promotion wallet.

benefit for the business: seemingly cheaper products increase sales
benefit for consumer: cheaper products
benefit for monero: 1. demand on the markets 2. businesses and users become aware of monero 3. once in place, its not like the business will take down the monero payment system

unfortunately, we'd probably have to design into this backend an immediate monero -> bitcoin exchange, so that these websites could use their existing bitpay setup. Hrm, actually, in general, that would be the killer app - a payment thingy that automatically exchanges for bitcoin, and then routes it through the bitpay system (or whatever the website is currently using)

and again, the "we" i am using is the queenly we, because "i can't code, I can't script, the only thing about me is the way I think....."

or this could all possibly exist in some fashion and I look like a total idiot.

legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
I'm definitely getting my family members a card with a mymonero word salad on em!  Grin
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1000
AEON will be delisted from Poloniex very soon. BCN will be the same
donator
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1060
GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com

I already responded on that thread -

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).

and -


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.
full member
Activity: 158
Merit: 100
Any comments on this?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9878702

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...
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
The easiest way to find out about the forks:
https://github.com/amjuarez/bytecoin/network/members

That is not accurate. It shows forks that were done automatically, but not others. For example AEON is clearly a Monero fork, as it includes features that originated in Monero such as the mnemonic seeds (also the AEON source has Monero Project copyright notices), but it doesn't show on the above list at all. Likewise Monero isn't shown, only the abandoned predecessor bitmonero.



sr. member
Activity: 414
Merit: 251
slb
hero member
Activity: 598
Merit: 501
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
I like the discussion, especially fluffypony's thoughts on the utility of XMR being more important than mere speculation.
I have this thought:
Monero will be a seriously formidable currency when there are Monero forks (clones).
There are already two. They went nowhere

You thought they were just two ?

No, there are at least 8 clones :

QCN/FCN/Aeon/Duck/Dash/OEC/MCN/ORION

All DEAD in a matter of few weeks.

Two were cloned (well forked with minimal changes -- just parameters) off from XMR: QCN and AEON. The rest were cloned from other cryptonote coins, as far as I know. Dash certainly was (BCN). MCN was forked from FCN. It is possible some of the others were forks of XMR, but I'm not sure.
legendary
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1131
I like the discussion, especially fluffypony's thoughts on the utility of XMR being more important than mere speculation.
I have this thought:
Monero will be a seriously formidable currency when there are Monero forks (clones).
There are already two. They went nowhere

You thought they were just two ?

No, there are at least 8 clones :

QCN/FCN/Aeon/Duck/Dash/OEC/MCN/ORION

All DEAD in a matter of few weeks.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 502
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
I like the discussion, especially fluffypony's thoughts on the utility of XMR being more important than mere speculation.

I have this thought:

Monero will be a seriously formidable currency when there are Monero forks (clones).

There are already two. They went nowhere
 
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 502
I like the discussion, especially fluffypony's thoughts on the utility of XMR being more important than mere speculation.

I have this thought:

Monero will be a seriously formidable currency when there are Monero forks (clones).
legendary
Activity: 3570
Merit: 1959
Nothing changed. There was some discussion about changing the emission curve but there was no decision to change anything, nor any changes made.

Thank you sir, as always! it's all about the future to me. Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
The total is 2^64-1. For the base supply, it is 86% after 4 years. If you have 0.5% tail emission after that, it will take roughly 28 years to reach 2^64-1. Then do you need to increase the digit again to 128 bit?

Maybe but not necessarily.

It will be sufficient for a very long time that simply no single transaction can include more than 2^64-1 (this was already implemented in the original code, although I'm not really sure why -- extra defensiveness I guess). The total money supply figure is never used in the code except to calculate the declining block rewards, but that won't apply any more after the minimum is reached.

In theory a wallet would require some modification for presentation purposes if the balance (consisting of outputs from multiple transactions) of the wallet is >2^64-1 but this wouldn't affect the core code.




hi, any TL;DR for us who don't have time due to life issues? did something change? Help, i can't dig through these pages! Sad

Nothing changed. There was some discussion about changing the emission curve but there was no decision to change anything, nor any changes made.

member
Activity: 106
Merit: 10
I think trend is the only thing that changed, going north slowly.



The total is 2^64-1. For the base supply, it is 86% after 4 years. If you have 0.5% tail emission after that, it will take roughly 28 years to reach 2^64-1. Then do you need to increase the digit again to 128 bit?

Maybe but not necessarily.

It will be sufficient for a very long time that simply no single transaction can include more than 2^64-1 (this was already implemented in the original code, although I'm not really sure why -- extra defensiveness I guess). The total money supply figure is never used in the code except to calculate the declining block rewards, but that won't apply any more after the minimum is reached.

In theory a wallet would require some modification for presentation purposes if the balance (consisting of outputs from multiple transactions) of the wallet is >2^64-1 but this wouldn't affect the core code.




hi, any TL;DR for us who don't have time due to life issues? did something change? Help, i can't dig through these pages! Sad

Thanks in advance! Smiley
legendary
Activity: 3570
Merit: 1959
The total is 2^64-1. For the base supply, it is 86% after 4 years. If you have 0.5% tail emission after that, it will take roughly 28 years to reach 2^64-1. Then do you need to increase the digit again to 128 bit?

Maybe but not necessarily.

It will be sufficient for a very long time that simply no single transaction can include more than 2^64-1 (this was already implemented in the original code, although I'm not really sure why -- extra defensiveness I guess). The total money supply figure is never used in the code except to calculate the declining block rewards, but that won't apply any more after the minimum is reached.

In theory a wallet would require some modification for presentation purposes if the balance (consisting of outputs from multiple transactions) of the wallet is >2^64-1 but this wouldn't affect the core code.




hi, any TL;DR for us who don't have time due to life issues? did something change? Help, i can't dig through these pages! Sad

Thanks in advance! Smiley
Jump to: