Quote from: MasterMined710 on May 15, 2016, 11:27:18 PM

this may be something. could someone from the core team please reach out and see what this is all about, thanks.......

Quote from: sockpuppet1 on May 15, 2016, 08:33:25 PM

Quote from: dEBRUYNE on May 14, 2016, 05:49:23 PM

Quote from: ArticMine on May 14, 2016, 05:37:53 PM

Quote from: noobtrader on May 14, 2016, 04:59:31 PM

Quote from: sockpuppet1 on May 14, 2016, 04:51:09 PM

FYI on potential competition to Monero:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1290263.msg14848587#msg14848587

wow... this is new development Cheesy

im preparing popcorn now... LOL Cheesy

... and the post has now being removed. Frankly fixing Darksend could be worth a lot of money so no hard feelings towards TPTB_need_war for trying. If TPTB_need_war actually has a solution, I am sure the Dash community will pay him for it and it will be money well earned. Does the Monero community have to be concerned about all of this. I doubt it.

All mixing that is active requires, obviously, activity. If you don't get activity up you won't ever significantly increase transaction speed of CoinJoin / DarkSend transactions. Fortunately, Monero mixes passively and therefore doesn't require activity of other participants on the network.

Actually there is only an activity threshold above which offchain mixing can be just as fast as onchain. Actually to do ring mixing correctly so that rings never can overlap in ways that allow combinatorial unmasking, Monero should require activity, but I was apparently never able to get Shen-Noether to understand this during our Reddit discussions last year (because he is a condescending prick in the same mold as Gregory Maxwell who thinks he is too smart, actually they appear to hobknob together sometimes), so afaik Monero remains "broken" (suboptimal). The advantage of adopting my idea for preventing combinatorial unmasking, is it would also make the block chain entirely prunable, not just compressable (which afaik is what Monero and BBR erroneously label "pruning").

The key breakthrough is to remove the simultaneity requirement (lol, I am the one who fixes Gregory Maxwell's broken CoinJoin in 10 minutes of my spare time while my head is deep in designing a programming language), and on further thought I've decided I want to embarrass noobtrader (to show my appreciation for his disrepect) so I went ahead and I think figured out how to eliminate the simultaneity requirement in CoinJoin! I figured out how to eliminate the short-term trust aspect! Another advantage is it can radically improve the robustness of decentralized exchange as well.

It will reduce the block chain size considerably. I also see how to put a viewkey in it. And the mix anonymity sets can be huge, say 50 or 100 transactions per mix (or more!). The disadvantage is the masternode can see the correlation of inputs to outputs. But just like any mixing method, if mix over and over, the probability of your anonymity set being known to any one party diminishes in probability.

You'd still need stealth addresses to achieve the delinking from the recipient's public key.

Another potential advantage may be that this technique I've just invented gives you IP address obfuscation inherently, which is one of the big weakness of Monero. Monero adds I2P integration to attempt to overcome this weakness.

My apologies to ArticMine. I am rushing so much, that I mistakenly (cross-eyed) attributed the above quoted disrespect to him.

Adding this for clarity:

Quote from: Macrochip on May 16, 2016, 01:13:21 AM

Quote from: sockpuppet1 on May 15, 2016, 11:34:02 PM

Dash contacted me.

For the record: Dash did not contact you, rather it was vice versa. And I have your PM to prove it.

Your self-congratulatory attitude and arrogant drivel are baffling and mind-boggling considering you're sitting atop an achievement-mountain of nothingness.
I also find the timing of your 180° quite fascinating, as it was right before a major breakout in Dash's price. Suspicious as fuck.