Quote from: kaene on May 10, 2014, 07:14:41 AM

Quote from: ac2 on May 10, 2014, 01:16:19 AM

Firstly, this is not intended to be an act of trolling. I was quite heavily invested in Dark, and believed in it's cause.

However, I would like you to carefully consider your position.

The darksend option of anonymity could be smashed by the NSA quite easily.

The anonymity market share you own - on the assumption that darksend works flawlessly - is about to be overtaken by Monero, and similar clones.

Their anonymity solution is superior to yours, developed by hackers. A purely trustless solution.

Good luck to you all, but buyer beware.

https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

PS. Darkwallet also should not be underestimated, simply because you don't like it...

I think people still don't get it. This is not about Darksend, this is about having a qualified dev willing to spend full time in this coin. The ring signature thing, don't you think Evan has thought about it already? If it could help the coin, how long do you think it would take to implement it to a possible Darksend2.0? This or any other feature .... this is what other coins don't have.

Exactly. However there is the danger of being too "invested" in a particular technical solution to abandon it in favor of something better. This can happen even to F1 teams with 300mn budgets due to sticking with a suboptimal design and trying to make it work. In particular, masternodes will be obsolete in case of a ring solution switch - and that's a "problem" of such an "investment".

However, there can be a workaround if masternodes continue to get the 10% for performing a different beneficial functionality for the network, whether it is extra anonymity laundering, IP rerouting and obfuscation, hosting the blockchain for thin clients, or something else. In this way the masternode infastructure can be utilized in parallel.