Quote from: smooth on March 07, 2015, 07:50:58 AM

Quote from: Kuriso on March 07, 2015, 07:14:35 AM

Quote from: smooth on March 07, 2015, 04:57:04 AM

No, I simply disagree with the math and find that number implausible. I believe that most masternodes will ultimately be compromised, either directly or via VPS or other back doors.

You simply disagree? Really? You are sitting here arguing about something that you 'simply disagree' on? Sounds like a waste and a feeble attempt at spreading the on going FUD. Have you done any calculations that can plausibly prove/support why you simply disagree? If so, I'd like to see it. If you can't, beyond a reasonable doubt, prove that the math is wrong then you're just spreading FUD.

I'll tell you right now that I haven't looked at the math. I aint gots no time for that.

In other news... Google and your ISP is monitoring everything you do already. Nothing you do is safe. AAHHH!!!!

That's exactly why if you want anonymity or even some modest degree of privacy on the Internet you better be doing it with strong cryptography and not trusting "nodes"

Look I get that DRK was created before the cryptonote technology was released and arguably at the time it was the best we had to try to make Bitcoin more anonymous. Building that out was an admirable goal. It isn't any more.

And yes, I do have some idea of the math. It works against a few bad apples but falls apart if many of the masternodes are dishonest or compromised (with or without their knowledge). I'll take a closer look at blinding when it is release but from what I've seen so far I expect much the same.

Whats 'many'? 5 nodes, 10 nodes, 1%, 10%, 20% of the nodes, more? Based on your calculations, how many dishonest masternodes does it take for transactions to becomes less than 'even some modest degree of privacy'?