Agree but lets not pretend that cryptonote doesn't have some drawbacks as well.
Im very interested in hearing proposals to deal with blockchain bloat for instance?
I've heard estimates that say Monero will have a chain between 1 - 5 times the size of a corresponding conventional blockchain.
A 5 times cost for anonymity is well worth it in my opinion. Of course any advancements that improve that are welcome.
Also Evan's latest idea is to route transactions through 10 masternodes to overcome the issue of bad nodes.
If this is the case, then the bloat could be similar to Monero.
Remember you can send a Monero transaction with the minimum inputs and outputs and it'll be similar in size to a conventional transaction.
https://forum.cryptonote.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=70#p579Roughly speaking (very roughly!), if you intentionally make you Cryptonote transaction the same as in Bitcoin (2-3 inputs and outputs and no ambiguity) it's size and verification time will be very close to Bitcoin's parameters.
I definately don't care what Evan feels the solution is, masternodes are a terrible idea when the majority of them are hosted on Amazon Web Services lol
Great for a pump though, tell people they need 1000 dark and they're set for life, thats not a pump at all !
Back to monero, thanks for those estimates, I admit I haven't read up properly on how much bigger the chain could be it was just a thought after syncing an oldish wallet and it taking a few hours when Im sure most the tranfic on the network are coinbase coins still.
In physical terms storage isn't a problem and anyone who says it is are living under a rock its more syncing issues that concern me along with bandwith considerations for people not on even broadband for example.
Checkpoints are all well and good meaning you don't need the whole chain but we need to make sure its implemented properly. We already tried to implement it once and went back if I remember correctly.
Cheers.