[snip]
great summary, given the fact that he backed out of the newest challange for the multipath beta i think his intentions are clear now. but that doesn'T metter after all, the whole process helped XC finally but since that wasn't his personal intention (rather the opposite) there is no need for a thank you or any kind of forgiving gesture either.
the status quo is this: the only guy who could find the sender with a method that wasn 100% fair play anyway can no longer find it now with REV1.5 !!!
the test is still running so i don't celebrate before the final wistle
Chaeplin's stated reason for not testing the new release is that he believes ATCSECURE did not acknowledge the hard link Chaeplin provided.
I think that we are obliged to give Chaeplin the benefit of the doubt here regarding his beliefs, since we have no proof of the contrary. If I were in his position and genuinely believed that I'd been hard done by, I'd also be unwilling to continue.
It's just unfortunate that he's mistaken in his belief. That's all it comes down to, in my opinion.
As an aside, I think it's a good idea to be gracious to one's opponents. It makes one a good sport. We gain nothing by being victorious and mean.
Does Xnode use coinjoin or coinjoin variant ?
As far as I know, not yet.
If multiple inputs are spend in single tx as of input, I can assure address are belong to single entity.
Xnode will not reuse output from previous used address for mixing in normal circumstance.
Because Xnode issue a new address to xnode user, and spend it once later.
Anyway I have spammed all the suspicious address, 0.00001, 0.003, 0.03~~
When xnode send a real payee those inputs are used as multiple input.
Nomaly will not happen.
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?97294.htmhttp://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?97299.htmhttp://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?99154.htmThose 0.00* are my spam.
My addresses are here.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=631052.msg7299828#msg7299828