Quote from: machico on August 18, 2017, 08:13:39 PM

Quote from: HPt on August 18, 2017, 07:39:02 PM

Quote from: K1773R on August 18, 2017, 02:25:57 PM

Quote from: GREEDYJOHN on August 18, 2017, 11:43:02 AM

Quote from: machico on August 17, 2017, 10:29:06 PM

Quote from: GREEDYJOHN on August 17, 2017, 09:10:06 PM

Cryptoslave has not been active on this thread since July 10, 2017, 09:48:55 PM.

Is he the main developer of this project?

If this coin needs MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, then it is better to leave it alone at NOVAEXCHANGE, because too many exchanges at this premature stage will only make it difficult to upgrade the Network in the future.

PLEASE STAY WELL AWAY FROM YOBIT !!! Wink

The only major development ANC needs at the moment is the integration of the zerocoin protocol. Cryptoslave has updated the desktop and portable wallets and the network explorer. I2P is also working well, therefore, if zerocoin works, we could have one of the best anonymous coins in the market.

Let the zerocoin protocol developers come around, so that we can all reach an agreement.

There was discussion with them. They preferred the insecure and centralized variant...

Could you please specify when the discussion took place, who participated with the discussion and what variants have been discussed. Thanks.

I personally can only remember a member of the community having spoken to some developers on the i2p chatroom and being told how much it would cost to integrate the zerocoin protocol. That is the reason we came up with the idea of doing a crowdfunding project to raise the money. He was quoted $20k and some members of the community pledged some of their anoncoins to help fund the project. However, the price of ANC was much higher then than it is today.

I think we need first for Cryptoslave to post again so we can find out what we need next. When I return to the UK, I will try to go to the chatroom and ask some questions about zerocoin to the developers there. Maybe Cryptoslave will be there. I think they might be able to help. However, the community needs to discuss here what our goals are and suggest how we can move forward as a community.

Here is the message he sent me with the discussion he had with the developers.

There were other developers that chatted but only one person would throw out a figure. That figure was $20k . This would not encourage existing developers as $300k is a walk in the park for these guys. So this $20k figure would attract new blood looking to make a name for themselves. They wanted to know more about Crowd funding, so if you could come up with a proposal, I will run it past them and copy the whole conversation. Please do not quote individuals as this was a private chat and I think it goes against the i2p terms to copy and paste, not sure as noone reads the T&C's?

I'll get back to you with more info but the guys appreciated the work we're putting in. They were only aware of ICO's bringing in devlopers, they didn't thinnk of crowdfunding. I think it's genious thinking of this investment method.

I've told them I would want to make the first updates based on the crowdfunding. Giving frequent updates on crowdfunding figures.

Going to Bed now as too tired to carry on the chat. Annoying that most devlopers are active at rediculous hours.

Thanks

Just the last window of our chat:

also C dont you remember meiers said gnosis idea with several smalller RSAUFO was not good
W're probably looking at new blood trying to make a name for themselves?
meiers say it is unsecure
ah
B, yep
that is true
being an underdog is difficult
well I cannot judge, although the idea makes sense, the gnosis asumption
if meiers say it is not good then maybe it is true
so the dev has to be cryptographer
gnosis just clearified
again orignal invented stuff for i2p that people tried for years so I do not think gnosis was wrong
cryptographers are hard to come by
I think a crowdfund may bring various developers into the ANC arena. All of which may contribute, but may not all lead to zerocoin implenation. It's a win win
B, how would you do a crowdfunder
it makes sense if number are big enough to resist both factoring method and you use several and according to the paper it is y probabilit one fail and several is y^x and then probability all fail is inversely proportional it all makes sense
That's Y's remit. We've delegated jobs. I'm the i2p guy who does the info gathering so he can do his bit
but again meiers said no and I cannot prove it as I am no cryptographer
only some cryptographer can say idea of gnosis was valid and decide to code it