Couple that with default stealth addresses and stealth staking to come in Q2 of this year, and you've got a speculative winner.
Ya, got any proof for that, like a white paper?
No. I only have the word of the dev team. That's why I said SPECULATIVE winner.
If I'm wrong, then its all for not, and I look like a fool. That's the nature of the beast.
Much easier to look the fool with a noob account--some of us have a body of work to protect and can't shill every shitcoin that comes down the pipe with claims of, "We have magical powers and #1 privacy!"
Spectrecoin has one of the worst prospects of success--no known cryptographer is actively proposing an anonymous staking system, so the idea that an unknown dev is pulling it out of his ass is pretty unconvincing.
If you look at ring-signatures, mimble wimble, zsnarks, zstarks, SPECTRE (not Xspec)--these were all well known and reviewed (at least in cryptography circles) before any team decided to attempt them. There's a great deal of research that goes ahead of implementation, so absent that, it looks like fool's gold.
I don't care what people do with their money, just don't push unknown cryptography on the rest of us and act like it's a foregone conclusion, or even a legitimate bet.
Generalizethis is a Monero die-hard thats been attacking competitors to Monero for years. This is what he said about Dash back when he was FUD'ing it a few years ago:
A loosing campaign? Loosing the truth from the grasps of dashtards, maybe. This revolution hasn't started or won't start anytime soon (or won't start ever). It's really premature to count a few million in market cap as significant when real success will be counted in multiples of billions above the current Bitcoin market cap. And last time I checked dash's market cap had stagnated, so I'm not sure where you see the success or the winning campaign. It even seems that Dash has declined with the Evolution and the parallel marketing push. I think a reality check is in order.
He was saying Dash had HORRIBLE prospects of success as well. Where is Dash comparatively to Monero in market cap at this moment? He can claim Dash is still a shitcoin/scam as well but denying its current market cap success (by HIS standards in the quoted post), is also laughable. In reality, XSPEC implementing Stealth Staking is a very real possibility. The developer is still working on a white paper explaining it and still has a plan for a rough Q2 2018 release. Ask yourself why Generalizethis is so invested in calling XSPEC a scam? The only reason he is fudding the prospect of Stealth Staking is because he sees it as a threat to the market share of Monero. Stealth Staking would change the game for privacy coins, and rightfully so.
Come back to this post at the end of the year and see who had it right. Anyone claiming Stealth Staking is IMPOSSIBLE is just as bad as the kids believing 100% that it WILL be implemented. Wait and see.
Regarding the topic of this thread, I definitely see Monero staying as the top dog for privacy coins. It basically has first-mover advantage and is already a solid, working privacy coin. I do think if XSPEC successfully implements all of its planned features it will eat up a lot of the market share of privacy coins, and could be seen as a good alternative of Monero.
If you want to cherry pick quotations that's fine. The market proved that I was right about dash as a privacy coin--or does anyone,who isn't a dashtard or a noob, still considered it a privacy coin? Also, dash had an innovation, unlike spectrecoin, masternodes, which happen to be great at keeping coins off the market and the price artificially high. Sooner or later dash will be exploited (13 algos is 12 too many), but I am patient and don't need coinmraketcap to validate my opinion week to week. As for spectrecoin, it has an unknown dev claiming something that no cryptographer has even ventured to posit as a possible design, so not really going out on a limb to say, "Come on, really?"
I was also buying Monero at .25 so I can see potential as well as flaws--it's just that the majority of privacy coins are vaporware or a terrible implementation of a potentially good solution (like I'll more than gladly use Zcash after sapling's implemented, but still won't hodl any as no one can audit the coin supply ).
I have nothing against spectrecoin and it would be great if anonymous staking is a thing, but there is no good reason to believe it other than gambler's logic. The real competition will be SPECTRE (the one Monero may implement), mimble wimble, Zcash after sapling, and a Zstark implementation that seems, at least theoretically, an upgrade to Zsnarks.
Its just so hard because there are tons of applicable quotes of you spreading FUD and it eventually coming back to bite you:
As far as markets go, given Monero's volume compared to Dash's, I think we are doing just fine--imagine if we had 3,700,000 coins locked up in a masternode scheme?
Seems odd that you're so intent on calling Masternodes an innovation now, when before, you were calling it a scheme. I'm noticing a pattern.
You have the word FUD in your profile, yet you spread it so handily. You have no basis for disproving Stealth Staking is possible other than "no one has even thought about implementing it" and "the devs are unknown" as your argument. From someone that uses privacy coins so often, it seems a bit hypocritical. It seems your basis for FUD'ing XSPEC is something that you have ZERO evidence to back up. You spread FUD on the basis of what other projects haven't done. The developers of XSPEC have followed their roadmap and successfully developed so far, so there isn't a reason to distrust them yet. You buying ONE coin that has had success doesn't make you an expert in cryptocurrency my friend. I'm sure someone's opinion that bought in at Dash at 0.25 wouldn't hold the same weight as yours, eh?
Saying "its never been done before therefore it is impossible that this could be achieved" is a dishonest argument. You cant prove that its NOT possible and no one can prove that it IS possible, so spreading FUD about stealth staking is senseless.