Quote from: BlockaFett on March 29, 2015, 10:46:00 PM

Quote from: Joshuar on March 29, 2015, 10:44:23 PM

Quote from: BlockaFett on March 29, 2015, 10:40:46 PM

Quote from: Joshuar on March 29, 2015, 10:38:04 PM

Quote from: BlockaFett on March 29, 2015, 10:31:14 PM

Quote from: DeboraMeeks on March 29, 2015, 10:23:53 PM

majamina I'm going to play devil's advocate with you, so bear with me here.

Quote from: majamina on March 29, 2015, 10:03:15 PM

No, because your transaction is easily traceable through the blockchain.

Easily? If all I want is to obfuscate I can send it to myself 1000 times through various transaction splitting and recombining, and I can send it it and out of exchanges. I can even setup a BitPay account and pay myself for fake goods. If every step in my self-mixing path has a 50/50 chance of being mine then a mix of 1000 steps plus some exchanges and BitPay is 1010 steps for example. So the chance of figuring out its me is 2 to the power of 1010. Google says that your chance of deanonymising me is 1 in 10 to the power of 304. I saw some 10 to the power of 40 numbers thrown around earlier, so are we safe in saying that Bitcoin can easily be made 7 times more private than Dash?

Quote from: majamina on March 29, 2015, 10:03:15 PM

Well, if you get away with it, then that transaction is 'funged' yes. But 'BitcoinFog' is a trusted mixing service that could be keeping logs, reporting up to your adversary or creating some other shitstorm that you might not care to weather.

MasterNodes are also a trusted mixing service. How do you as a user prove that the MasterNodes you use not keep logs or aren't reporting to some adversary?

Quote from: majamina on March 29, 2015, 10:03:15 PM

yes it does, that is the critical point. If you can mix the coins at will, in a trustless and sufficiently secure manner then there's your fungibility.

Security I'm less worried about, but how are MasterNodes trustless? I know, I know, there's a 1 in 10 to the power of something chance, but then why not just use Bitcoin? If you think that a 35 year old neck-beard living in his mother's basement can secure his MasterNode that is quite worrying. I never thought about it in those terms until a few hours ago. Read this and then tell me if you think that even an advanced MasterNode operator can keep it secure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surveillance_disclosures_(2013present)

I do respect what Evan is trying to achieve but this thread has opened my eyes. Just in the past 24 hours I have read about how British Airways got hacked and Slack got hacked for days, and Nigeria's Electoral Commission website got hacked. If powerful organisations can't secure their servers what makes you think that 2,000 MasterNode operators will be any different?

If powerful organisations can't secure their servers what makes you think that 2,000 MasterNode operators will be any different?

Debora its the same as Bitcoin's fullnodes. Masternodes are just people's wallets running with masternode=1 in the config. Plus you need 1000 coins in there to make it work so a lot easier to attack fullnodes than masternodes. Plus taking over masternode network you couldn't actually make any $, takover BTC nodes and you can. There is zero merit to all this crap about masternodes being 'easy to compromise' or being 'centralized', it only works if you have 20 butthurt XMR drones who try to make it true by posting it 2000 times - it's just a lie.

Most if not all masternodes are hosted on centralized servers, therefore making them easy to take down or get controlled by the government without the masternode owners ever knowing. It's as simple as that.

take down by 'the government' lol

Masternodes are in 30+ countries, which government you think is going to take them down exactly?

VPS hosting websites/companies can host those nodes wherever, but it's still under the control or superivison of that one website or company. You're interpreting it wrong as if each country has a different VPS company or website for those nodes when it could be one VPS with the ability to host in 30 different countries.

you said ' therefore making them easy to take down or get controlled by the government without the masternode owners ever knowing'

i said 'Masternodes are in 30+ countries, which government you think is going to take them down exactly?'

so which government were you talking about? or now you are saying there is one VPS company running them all? What are you saying?

I'm saying that you need to get the statistics for the websites these nodes are hosted on. Just saying it's in 30 different countries is meaningless, as I can go to one VPS hosting company and host a node in 3 different countries If I'd like, itd still be centralized and under "superivison" of that hosting provider however.