Quote from: r3wt on June 29, 2014, 08:54:17 AM

Quote from: JGCMiner on June 29, 2014, 08:44:06 AM

First thing, whoever told you that POW was finished for this coin was LYING. Next time, you should go to a different source for your crypto info or do your own research. In the worse case, there is still about 70% (read that again -- 70%) of DRK that remains to be mined. Could be more available depending on hashrate. Miners will get 80% of these. Sorry this is not some early adopter scheme like the 1 week POW then 100% POS coins. If DRK is a early adopter scheme then so is Bitcoin. Roll Eyes

Well i'm glad that it isn't true. To be honest i read it in the trollbox, and didn't necessarily treat it as fact, as the poster was promoting BC at the time. Come release of Darksend i'll have a look at the source. Who knows, i might become a Darkcoin miner/enthusiast yet!!

Quote from: JGCMiner on June 29, 2014, 08:44:06 AM

As for the rest of your post, well.... you sound like one of the "Bitcoin is perfect and nothing can be to improve it" types. I don't know if Darksend will stand the test of time, but I do know that to call it a illusion before it's full release is very short-sighted.

Not at all. I love bitcoin, its the standard, but i also love and embrace all tech as whole. I'm also fairly adept with the inherent insecurity of the internet, so when i hear about things like "DarkSend" and "100% Anonymous Crypto" the bullshit alarm in my brain starts ringing.

Again, just to reiterate on the piece of my post you didn't address, I do not like the decentralized nature of the Masternode setup at Darkcoin, BUT , many coins have a centralized aspect, such as checkpointing servers in some POS coins. the way i see it, masternodes and checkpoint servers may be a necessary evil. So all in all i guess the Masternode setup isn't a big deal, so long as it offers no unfair disadvantage to common miners.

At this point, the only other thing i might complain about, is Darksend, but i don't know enough about it, and haven't read the code to make a reasonable quantification about the pros and cons. For now, i will "crawl back in my hole" and continue to observe from a distance. If i see something awesome, i'll be the first one here to praise it. if i see something wrong, i'll be the first one here to denounce its usefulness.

Fair?

That's fair. Admittedly my post was probably a bit harsh.

As for masternodes, I think it is going overboard to call them centralized as we already have nearly 500. Is it 500 different people? No, but it is also not a handful of parties having control. Masternodes where chosen as a "meeting halfway" type of solution between something like ring sigs (which have blockchain bloating among other technical challenges) and being at the mercy of DOS attacks which is a risk if you use blind signing. The purpose of masternodes is to moderate Darksend transactions and to punish any bad actors -- and I am sure you know that there is no shortage of bad actors in the crypto space. Masternodes can also be used for things like hosting the blockchain down the road. In short, I don't think they are as bad as they seem.

Briefly on checkpointing, there was a discussion about using an auto-checkpoint server for DRK, but that was scraped. Now the checkpoints will only be used if we have more forking issues as that will help the prevention of panic (exchanges on wrong blockchains,etc) we've had in the past.