Topic: XMR vs DRK - page 22. (Read 69785 times)

Wish there were more gentlemen.  

I only hope we have persuaded you to hedge. With the difference in market cap a very small percent of ones dark coin holdings can hedge them against monero taking its place.

ok one more post before sleep


Yeah but think general public. DASH is ramping up efforts on wallet development right now. The aim is to have a super-slick wallet that anyone can use, easily and simply, to get privacy, pay instantly and have serious confidence in their wallet security through 2FA. You just can't expect a wider-adopting public to pull all that together with BTC because it's not native to the coin - the services are disjointed and require too much geek knowledge to integrate.


Now I really don't like using this analogy, but Facebook users aren't isolated from Myspace users - are they? It's even more than that though...DASH uses BTC APIs so all the merchant services already built can work with DASH with trivial effort.

I know you and all the other XMR guys will laugh at the idea that DASH could in any way compete with bitcoin. All I can say is....stranger things have happened.

And they say there are no ladies in crypto!

Would you like me to quote all that was said again, where you lied about the liquidity of XMR and DRK, where you thought bitmonerod was a wallet, where you said that cryptography was hardly used by cryptocurrencies, and where you didnt even know what liquidity was by saying volume has nothing to with liquidity? Just please stop, you've made more incorrect statements today than I can count on both hands... You've been corrected by almost everyone in this thread. I honestly can't tell whether you're just trolling, plain lying, or just that misinformed on basic concepts.

No they're not.

Bitcoin or Monero full nodes are far more important to the integrity of their respective currency's blockchain than masternodes are to Dash's.

Thanks for calling me a "liar" - very noble of you. But I'm afraid that perception has more to do with your understanding (or lack therefore) of technical terms than my bad faith.

Hey, all I said was it's more dangerous to host a masternode than a regular node, for fear of centralization, getting compromised by gov or other authority, having large amounts of nodes shut down by an attacker which would "end" the anonymity, etc and yes I've seen this conversation before, I simply responded to what you said earlier. I wasn't talking about the chance of deanonymizing anything.

Here's how I see one scenario, you want to destroy a network? Taking out even a few Masternodes based on say, evidence of "facilitating illegal trade" (technically because all trade runs through Masternodes), might incite a system-wide panic amongst all masternode owners, quickly compromising network security, perhaps enough to reduce the amount of Masternodes to a more attainable amount to fully compromise. Monero nodes are a few steps away from this vulnerability because compromising nodes don't compromise anonymity because the anonymity is not dependent on third party mixers, probably even in the case of double-spend attack thresholds (idk for sure), so attacks will be more individualized. I think even compromising 100% of nodes won't compromise anonymity assuming other safe practices.

we covered this already too didn't we?  

even if you gained control of 51% of masternodes, you would have:

1) 0.000000000000000000000403286875% probability of deanonymizing a transaction

2) 0.0% of making any money

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10900308

so 'hosting it on a centralized server is much more "dangerous" than for a regular node' is just a crock and you know it because we already talked about it right?

right I should get some sleep, it's getting late.

I'll just quote a snippet from my earlier post again....come on XMR guys, persuade me to jump ship

This is not an insignificant point. One of gmaxwell's criticisms of darkcoin/dash using coinjoin (which he invented) is that you can use coinjoin on Bitcoin. There are several different ways of doing that today, and if you use a few of them you are protected from the weaknesses of any of them in the same way that using multiple masternodes protects you from the weaknesses of one. Apparently there is a significant amount of coinjoin going on with Bitcoin right now.

Sure, this is maybe more inconvenient than using darkcoin/dash with masternodes and support built into the wallet (though I don't really know what people are using for Bitcoin-based-coinjoin so I can't entirely say) but the trade off for that is being isolated from the enormously larger set of Bitcoin users, Bitcoin services, and Bitcoin liquidity.

The point being, if you are going to use an altcoin at all, it better be one that is at least fundamentally different from what you can accomplish with Bitcoin otherwise it is mostly just a speculative trading game (i.e. fantasy stock market).

To be fair I think instantx, for all of its potential flaws, is a better case for this than darksend, and I (believe it or not) mostly agree with BlockaFett when he says that darkcoin/dash is abandoning the anonymity problem (or at least should be) and focusing on being a fast payment rail like Ripple. The reason is not even Monero it all, it is Bitcoin. When it comes to anon, darkcoin/dash just isn't differentiated enough from what systems (current and future) layered right on top of Bitcoin can accomplish, and never wlll be with the existing architecture.

Thank you darling:)


I started buying Dash because I read much more than 1,000 posts on the Dash thread. I have taken the time to read many threads on the Monero thread although I don't think I've read nearly as many Dash threads. Don't think that this thread was my first stop!


My research has demonstrated that is incorrect. Monero was launched by thankful_for_today and it was based on the cryptonote reference code. That is note dubious that is fact. You can verify this easily by going on github (when it isn't under attack) and checking old Monero commits when it was forked versus the cryptonote reference code they have. It is the same and it is not dubious.

Cryptonote was new and exciting so of course there were forks. You say that there were 13 forks like its a bad thing but Dash has 40 or 50 forks. And isn't Dash a clone of Bitcoin? When I look at the code it looks that way, and MapofCoins says it is just a clone of Quark that is a clone of Bitcoin.


That is revisionist history. The cryptonote whitepaper is from October 2013, long before Evan even imagined Darkcoin. Also Evan said he was going to add ring signatures to Dash but never did, so even Evan would admit that the 'best tech available at the time' was cryptonote.


You are oversimplifying things, blockafett. I have looked at Monero and cryptonote and you have to crack a 256 bit key to remove the anonymity. If you read the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brute-force_attack it says "Breaking a symmetric 256-bit key by brute force requires 2¹²⁸ times more computational power than a 128-bit key. 50 supercomputers that could check a billion billion (10¹⁸) AES keys per second (if such a device could ever be made) would, in theory, require about 3×10⁵¹ years to exhaust the 256-bit key space."

With Dash you are trusting 1 in 2,000 MasterNodes which is only 2¹¹. I don't think you can imagine how big 2²⁵⁶ is.


Greenaddress solved it before Evan even thought about it. From what I have read InstantX is the same as the greenaddress system except you have to trust the MasterNodes. I also think that every Dash investor needs to read this article: http://cointelegraph.com/news/113482/jeff-garzik-on-instant-confirmations-hope-is-the-denial-of-reality - "Jeff Garzik on Instant Confirmations: 'Hope is the Denial of Reality'"


I'm a Bitcoin holder. I've seen my holdings crash from over $1,000 per Bitcoin to the $240 it is at now. The market is stupid and irrational. I can't trust them to make a decision for me.


I don't think they have to develop 'features'. I think they have to build on their solid foundation, and maybe in 6 months or a year when I want to get back into this space I'll buy in to Monero. From what I can see the tech is serious and long-term, but I want to give it time to mature.


The instamine is real but I take what Evan says as fact. I do believe that there are others besides Evan that mined hundreds of thousands of Dash in the first day. Maybe it will kill Dash when they cash out, I don't know. I also know that MasterNodes are centralised and I bought Dash in spite of it. I'm getting out of Dash partly because of it. Let's not pretend MasterNodes are somehow decentralised as all we are doing is insulting the cryptographers and computer scientists that are smarter than we are and who actually design decentralised systems.

You're a troll, and the worst type(Liars). You've already lied once and said a ton of plain wrong comments showing your misunderstanding of basic concepts.

Masternodes on Dash/DRK and Regular Nodes, such as with Monero, are much different(Masternodes for Dash provide much functions than a regular node, and thus centralization or hosting it on a centralized server is much more "dangerous" than for a regular node)

Ok yes this is boring for me as well, hopefully some third reputable party that's not really involved with the altcoin community with no financial stake in either coins could give a review on the code etc.

https://getmonero.org/getting-started/running

I do apologise. I've been very level headed on here, for the most part.

It's just that when you regurgitate these arguments that we've covered several times before it's somewhat exasperating.

because we had this convo 2 days ago already?

(masternode distribution)