Quote from: mattmct on July 10, 2014, 08:06:20 PM

Quote from: shojayxt on July 10, 2014, 07:57:27 PM

Quote from: coins101 on July 10, 2014, 07:14:05 PM

Quote from: shojayxt on July 10, 2014, 06:45:32 PM

Quote from: fernando on July 10, 2014, 05:11:10 PM

We're almost at 80% masternode payments compliance!! I'll admit I didn't think we could do so well without enforcement, but I didn't knew people like GhostPlayer were going to work so hard on this

Enjoy the graph.

Yeah, the masternode compliance police have been out in full force making sure people are paying their masternode tax.

You obviously didn't read the first 300 pages. Without master nodes there is no anonymity. Without payments to master nodes any dick with an internet connection could start hundreds of master nodes and there would be no anonymity. Without payments there is no incentive to buy 1000 DRK and tie them up in Master Nodes. Without Master Nodes there is no mining, because there would be no point.

Pointless.

Rather like you.

I guess you would rather user your internet connection to launch hundreds of free to use master nodes.

Without master nodes there is no anonymity.

Exactly! Darkcoins anonymity exists only with a masternode cluster fuck. There are better anonymity solutions being developed.

You actually confirm some of what I posted "buy 1000 DRK and tie them up in Master Nodes.". Masternodes require people to invest in 1000 DRK and then keep them off the market therefore driving up the price. How convenient.

Darkcoin was being mined for months without masternodes.

Bottom line is that other solutions already provide at least the same a level of anonymity as Darkcoin without the need to tax one user to pay another for running a masternode. Everyone knows that Bitcoin isn't anonymous. Darkcoin is a Bitcoin clone. Darkcoin is trying to be something it was never intended to be. A truly anonymous coin will be designed with anonymity from the beginning. There are some right now. The masternode network is basically a hack that will prove to be problematic and suffer from issue after issue due to the fact that it's trying to make something into something it was never intended to be. Already two failed rollout attempts. It also creates an image of unfairness by taxing miners to pay masternode operators. A better solution would have been to charge enough of a fee from the users sending anonymously to pay masternode operators an amount that still made it profitable to run a masternode. But then you wouldn't have people wanting to use the network.

Darkcoin suffers from a bad methodology to achieve anonymity and it's put everything into this one basket.

I'd like to direct you to this post by propultion: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/the-genius-behind-masternodes.1764/
Bitcoin is currently suffering from a decreasing number of nodes ... http://www.bitcoinpulse.com/chart/bitnodes/num_nodes/total ... because there is no incentive to run them..

That's why Dark's masternodes are so clever. You think we would have over 600 of them if people we'ren't getting rewarded?

Lets try, one last time.

Bitcoin is way, way, way ahead. Millions are being poured into start-ups.

If Bitcoin doesn't invest in change to create credible anonymity, there will be a price to pay. Chances are Bitcoin will have to do something at some point, but it would be such a gigantic undertaking that they may risk not doing anything.

In that event, everyone would need a plan B, to prevent privacy issues from becoming, er, issues.

So regardless of which xyz coin does anonymity, it needs to be a hybrid of Bitcoin to stand a chance of being introduced as the plan B next to Bitcoin because of incompatibility costs to add a new layer. E.g, DRK becomes the second credit card introduced next to the most popular credit card.

Will Bitcoin face privacy problems? Who knows? Well, these guys have one insight into the potential problems, amongst the many other issues:

A research paper published in May 2014, highlighted the approach that could be taken to reveal IP addresses of those using Bitcoin: Deanonymisation of clients in Bitcoin P2P network,

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.7418.pdf

Quote from: eduffield on July 10, 2014, 08:18:18 PM

Quote from: shojayxt on July 10, 2014, 07:57:27 PM

...

Darkcoin suffers from a bad methodology to achieve anonymity and it's put everything into this one basket.

Sorry to hear you lost faith in the project. Also, sorry you're going to be getting out at a horrible time (right before I announce I have EVERYTHING figured out to make Darkcoin mainstream?).

Over the past couple of days, I've made huge leaps in the Darksend technology. In fact, RC4 will be the final solution to Darkcoin's anonymity. The client will automatically look at all of your funds and it will be able to tell which funds are not anonymized, if it finds non-anonymous outputs it will run them through a darksend with other clients. After that process, users can send without Darksend using the anonymous outputs for instant transactions without waiting for other nodes (with no upper limit on transaction sizes).

The other thing you're missing is that there is a reason I forked Bitcoin. Adoption for Darkcoin will be MUCH faster and easier for vendors, because all of the APIs are the same.

Expect more news in a few days. I have lots of work to do, but soon we can start testing all of this new functionality.

Great timing!