Search Posts

If you look at the timestamps, Fluffy pony made those comments before shadowsend v2 was open source...

Yep, that's correct. I made the first two comments with respect to commit 94bfb03. Thereafter (the following day) commit 317b9b1 was made and pushed to the repo, and subsequently pointed out to me. I reviewed that, and thus updated that thread with the additional comment.

Honestly, I don't really care to get into a this-coin-that-coin debate. Kudos to the dev(s) for actually putting in effort to implement a very simplified ring signature system. If they add bad utxo blacklisting and also provide a suitable fix for the chain reaction privacy reveal outlined in Monero Research Lab's MRL-0001 research bulletin they are well on their way to implementing one half of the two core privacy principles espoused in Monero's cryptography (that is to say, they would then be able to provide a measure of cryptographic untraceability, but not cryptographic unlinkability).

Unfortunately I can't get to in Monero Research Lab's MRL-0001 research bulletin, but I am certainly looking forward to reading it

Our scheme was never going to be perfect, and we have said on a few occasions that we will only be utilising a basic nizkp until zk-snarks is fully out and trustless.

I have also told people that I'm not an academic, nor a grad student.. Just your average Joe, who dropped out of school, and wants to help move things along

If this was about money, we definitely would not work as we do on a single project, and we definitely would not have open sourced on our first opportunity to do so..

The reason we opted for anonymous tokens, instead of direct anonymous outputs to ringsigs, is because we're building towards direction we're heading in. What we're striving for... Encrypted values, with perfect nizkps, proving all values of inputs are real, without revealing any information about where they come from.

We're looking at many things, like homomorphic encryption, snarks, etc...
http://eprint.iacr.org/2014/976
snarks are advancing, along with many other ideas... We are not for limiting ourselves, but for bettering our [collective] future

You have the trust of this community whatever you decide is best we will support thanks for all your hard work and merry Christmas.

Thank you and thanks for your patience
@fluffypony, ek sien uit na die dop in Plett... Ek sal iewers tussen die 10de en die 20ste daar wees vir 'n paar dae

Thanks for the response and the hard work! By chance would you be able to point Fluffy to the NIZKP in the codebase?

Quote from: fluffypony on December 18, 2014, 04:32:03 PM

Quote from: erok on December 18, 2014, 04:26:41 PM

Why wouldn't you just delete the line "when clearly there is no more NIZKP in the source than exists in Monero's keyimage system." instead of striking through since it is obvious fud? Advertising, that's why.

Because anyone that gets email notifications has the full text of what I said anyway. If you'd prefer, I'll gladly remove the strikethrough, since the point is valid. Also, if there's a miraculous advancement in NIZKP implementation in the source please do point it out to me and I will absolutely publicly admit my gross inability to notice it.