Quote from: BitQuark on July 11, 2014, 11:05:58 PM

Quote from: mkimid on July 10, 2014, 06:00:28 PM

Quote from: BitQuark on July 04, 2014, 05:58:34 PM

BitQuark may go Anonymous! I'm currently in talks with another dev about adding the 'zerocoin' feature to BTQ. I'll keep you guys posted on the progress.

Should be good, actually, nobody success to implement it.
I guess, it will makes huge improvements for this coin,

But, questions are
   (1) even in theoretical stage and no active development in ZeroCoin
   (2) almost doubled data base size
   (3) huge network usage

Anyway, I wish BTQ is the first successful implementation

Yeah I've been reading up on zerocoin and the database size could be a problem in the future. So as an alternative, I've been looking into another anonymous feature that sends coin anonymously and this is done by ghosting an address in the senders RAM so there is no additional increase in database size

The main advantage is there is no connection between sender and receiver, except in a memory-based lookup table. The connection is never saved in the blockchain noror on a hard disk.

Yes, the removing of linkage between, it is a way. Only issue is how can prevent the double spending.
At Zerocoin, they tranfer to Zerocoin,
And, some coins has a spent key image,
Or reconstruction of block after fully confirmed ?
Maybe it is a way, last 60 blocks are in memory only,
And merge the older block with some factor such as every 10 or 100 blocks.
And recontruct chain
It looks as two chain (disk and ram)
Reconstruct block will merge all txin and out ~ and it will maks anon