Quote from: pbremen01 on July 28, 2014, 01:09:33 PM

Quote from: Djinou94 on July 28, 2014, 11:53:16 AM

Quote from: pr0m3theus2013 on July 28, 2014, 01:08:28 AM

Hopefully none of you fell to that reddit fud, they left out one key thing, it's the fact that the nodes communicate with eachother through encryption AFTER mixing and then have a node that was not used to receive the coins from the sending address to process the transaction using fresh coins. This is the reason why our anonymous system works so incredibly well. This fact was left out in it's entirety from the reddit fud, which was just a bold attempt from competitors to get their volume and value back. There is no direct link between any of the nodes as the transaction is being processed. Really, to sum it up the reddit article was just technical jargon used to make them seem knowledgeable when fud attacking our coin, the reality is to anyone one the dev team including myself it's just pure BS.

These swings however have been prevalent over the last few days and are often a great re entry point for the run up back to 100k.

Oh, and were working on a decentralized market and exchange platform.

Cannot wait to see that
Bravo dev team

Well, decentralized system by itself won't affect the first point (labelled "1)") in this FUD post:

http://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/2btj6m/reasons_why_keycoin_anonymity_doesnt_work/

This argument takes into account only blockchain and doesn't depend on the way the mixers are implemented (centralized/decentralized system, the way the mixers communicate etc.).

If someone anonymously sends you Y KEY, then you can find two transactions in the blockchain:
a) the first that has one output with X KEYs,
b) the second one that has one output with R KEYs

which satisfy the following equation:

X = Y + R

(a little bit generalized version of this equation holds for every mixer that is not stealing coins, but in the case of KeyCoin it seems that this simple equation holds).

Then the inputs of the first transaction (one that has one output with X KEYs) are from the address(es) that sent coins to the mixer. This is the original sender.

As you can see, even if the mixer implementation is changed from centralized to decentralized, ceteris paribus, you can still find two transactions that satisfy equation X=Y+R.

I hope once the XC dev comes back to talk about the anon system in use you will finally stop trying to push your mixers stealing coins FUD.
You seem hell bent on pursuing your point without any sort of proof or even time to do your own analysis, as I mentioned before in a previous response.
Take the 1-2hr you spend writing your "technically based post and rigorous mathematical equations" and actually do something about it.

First though, follow the guide again and get your anon working like everyone else has.
If you want to take your first baby steps and need a bit of hand holding, I'm sure someone technical in here can talk in laymens terms for you to grasp.