Search content
Sort by

Showing 15 of 15 results by JamesBond009
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN][SEM] Semux - Official Thread - Free Airdrop
by
JamesBond009
on 27/10/2017, 04:03:16 UTC
I didn't receive any airdrops today?
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN][SEM] Semux - Official Thread - Free Airdrop
by
JamesBond009
on 24/10/2017, 14:45:33 UTC
Are the validators like the witnesses in steem ?

Yes that is correct. Validators mint blocks.

And that's the only ones who are able to mine blocks ?

How to join the mine blocks ?
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant
by
JamesBond009
on 06/06/2014, 06:35:40 UTC
Here is some words  from a bitcoin core dev

http://img03.taobaocdn.com/imgextra/i3/888367355/TB2po2SXXXXXXbWXFXXXXXXXXXX_!!888367355.png

Ozziecoin, Your pump and dump dance would probably be more effective if you were less transparently dishonest in your approach.  I'm normally happy to ignore the nonsense in the altcoin subform, but since you saw fit to go distrupt the coinjoin thread with some offtopic insult hurling I thought I'd bring the extensive response back here where its topical.

CoinJoin is trustless— which is orthogonal with centralized or decentralized, it could be implemented several ways (though trustlessness is usually a prerequisite to a decenteralized implementation). Post 5 in the CoinJoin thread writes in depth about implementing it in a decenteralized way, none of which appears to have been implemented by the darkcoin developers as far as I can tell— from what I've heard it seems that they're not even able to understand it. (This is a disappointment to me, since I was trying to describe these ideas clearly so others could understand them.)

More amusingly, what DarkCoin does is highly centralized because the software is closed— you can't get more centralized than closed source. What the actual behavior is, is anyone's guess— it's impossible to review due to it being closed— though "masternodes" does not sound like something decenteralized, it sounds like something that creates a small chokepoint which could be used to deanonymize its users, like a server based CoinJoin but worse since you have to hold a huge pile of coins to run a server.

As I've said before CoinJoin is interesting because it's inherently part of Bitcoin already— it just needed better tools (and now there are some, e.g. darkwallet) to make it available to people.  It's a privacy improvement over not having it, but it isn't perfect, but it also didn't require any changes to Bitcoin (much less a whole altcoin) to deploy it.  In an incompatible system much better is possible as is proposed by ZeroCash and much better is actually _realized_ by Bytecoin (and its forks... Monero, Fantomcoin, etc.), the later are actually working (if immature, due reinventing many wheels) implementations of much stronger privacy, decenteralized in their implementation, all released under a good open source license.

From what I can tell the only purpose DarkCoin serves is to depress me about the state of humanity.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: 【Truth or FUD???】 DarkCoin – The Next Big Thing, or Just Another Pump and Dump?
by
JamesBond009
on 06/06/2014, 05:22:58 UTC
I think gmaxwell is wrong on Darkcoin because the coinjoin model is centralised whereas Darkcoin has decentralised coinjoin. So, I can't see that it is pointless. His support for ring signatures is academic in the sense of "nice in theory but frankly not workable in real life". Those that have experience ring sigs know how buggy and alpha the software. Therefore, for those of us living in the real world - go the darkcoin.  Gmaxwell and his bitcoin devs should realise that the IRS has already mapped out all significant bitcoin addresses to social security numbers, whilst they talk debate the alpha tech of ring sigs but yet are doing NOTHING to fix. The bitcoin dev team are looking more pathetic to me everyday.

so something wrong with bitcoin core dev?

gmaxwell  implies that darkcoin can not achieve totally Anon features through coinjoin technology???


 Huh


extremely interesting thread...what struck my eye was the slow validations which can cause a major clog with transactions when Dark Coin (based off of CoinJoin) gets bigger, right? The more coins transacted the slower the confirmations am I right in saying that?
No, not in a meaningful sense. Validation is very cheap. You do run into block size limits if you're trying to transact too much at once, but any privacy system is limited in its privacy by transaction volume.

"Dark Coin" really strikes me as pointless. The whole idea in coinjoin is that coinjoin is already part of the design of Bitcoin. There is no advantage in having a new and different system. If you're going to do something incompatible, losing Bitcoin's network effect in the process, then you can do something much stronger.

It also depresses me somewhat to see people talking about darkcoin (or even zerocoin/zerocash) when bytecoin has a privacy system with much better properties than CoinJoin (it's similar to CJ except you safely join with offline coin holders, and all users are participants), something made possible by the fact that it doesn't have to fit within the existing Bitcoin network, and it's completely practical, reasonably performant and deployed for some time now. But strangely, it's virtually unheard of...  Bytecoin's privacy properties are in some sense weaker than zerocoin's— since its like a supercharged coinjoin— but the cryptography is much stronger and much more efficient, so in practice I'd expect it to have better anonymity just due to it being much more practical (also as evidence to it existing as a deployed system).  ... so yea, if you actually are interested in privacy technology in a non-bitcoin system, Bytecoin seems to have pretty much nailed it.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: 【Truth or FUD???】 DarkCoin – The Next Big Thing, or Just Another Pump and Dump?
by
JamesBond009
on 06/06/2014, 03:15:54 UTC
it seems somebody want to delete this post.....

 Huh
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN][XC][OFFICIAL] >> Mandatory Wallet Update (01/06) - X11/PoS/Anon
by
JamesBond009
on 06/06/2014, 02:57:09 UTC
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=641178.0
【Truth or FUD???】 DarkCoin – The Next Big Thing, or Just Another Pump and Dump?
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: 【Truth or FUD???】 DarkCoin – The Next Big Thing, or Just Another Pump and Dump?
by
JamesBond009
on 06/06/2014, 02:49:14 UTC
It doesn't explain why 50% of the coins are not held by Dev.

It doesn't explain why 250% of the coins are not held by Dev either Tongue

Premine = the dev creates a coin where a number of coins (from 0.0001% to 100% of the coins) goes straight to a certain address and is then used/distributed etc.

Instamine = fast mining (where many are mining). Example = PoW/PoS coins which the entire monetary based is instamined within a week. Now, just because something is mined fast doesn't mean the dev has 100% hashpower. Go to the Darkcoin thread and look at the miners and their WTS 10.000 DRK for 0.25 BTC.


First 15 hours, 1.75 million dark coin were mined.

Darkcoin is currently at 80,000 blocks, but there’s only 4.3m DRK out there. Five months later, the 1.75m generated during those first 4200 blocks still represents 40% of all DRK in existence.

 Huh

Huge instamine and subsidy reduction

Since I’m writing about it, it should come as no surprise that this coin has an instamine associated with it. This one went unnoticed for quite some time, but by taking a quick look at blockchain data we can see what went on. During the first 15 hours, between block 1  http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?000007d91d1254d60e2dd1ae580383070a4ddffa4c64c2eeb4a2f9ecc0414343.htm and block 4000 http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?00000000fc0ee07e47609bae8d5fe5d774193c71d518c56dfe8faaf7d780a03f.htm   , approximately 1.75m darkcoins were generated.

Immediately after this period, Duffield claimed that there was a ‘bug’ in the block reward calculations, and issued a hardfork to address it. After this fork, the block reward quickly dwindled down to an insignificant amount. Right now, it sits at a pitiful 5 DRK. A farcry from the 500 that it used to be.

The result? Darkcoin is currently at 80,000 blocks, but there’s only 4.3m DRK out there. Five months later, the 1.75m generated during those first 4200 blocks still represents 40% of all DRK in existence.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: DarkCoin – The Next Big Thing, or Just Another Pump and Dump?
by
JamesBond009
on 06/06/2014, 02:11:44 UTC
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant
by
JamesBond009
on 06/06/2014, 01:50:43 UTC
 Shocked  Huh  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=641178.0

Here is a article:

http://cryptolife.net/darkcoin-the-next-big-thing-or-just-another-pump-and-dump/

DarkCoin – The Next Big Thing, or Just Another Pump and Dump?

Released just shy of 5 months ago, darkcoin has quickly ascended the ranks of the cryptocurrency world, securing the #4 spot on coinmarketcap. Boasting what appears to be an impressive suite of anonymity features, darkcoin has successfully marketed itself as the rare breed of substantive altcoin. Is it, though? Peer beyond the surface, and you’ll quickly discover that darkcoin is not dark in name only.

Darksend Drama


Overhyped and misunderstood, darksend is touted as the killer feature that’ll send darkcoin’s price to the moon. What is darksend? In short, a protocol that groups transactions in such a way that the source and destination of the coins are muddied. As previously mentioned http://cryptolife.net/breakdown-anonymizing-cryptocurrencies/, darksend is not a comprehensive anonymity solution. At best, it provides pseudonymity. In spite of that, the people promoting this coin still use misleading buzzwords like anonymous payments and hailing the feature as something totally unique and groundbreaking, and perhaps the greatest thing since bitcoin itself. The reality of it all couldn’t be farther from that.

Darksend itself is not even a unique feature, nor was it created by Evan Duffield, Darkcoin’s lead developer. Darksend is merely an implementation of the CoinJoin specification https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=279249.0  originally created by Greg Maxwell, one of the bitcoin core developers. Still, Duffield does his best to avoid giving any credit to Maxwell. Take a look through his posts, you’ll not see a mention of CoinJoin or Maxwell.

To make matters worse, darksend is closed source. Take a moment to reflect upon how ridiculous it is to take open source software (bitcoin), layer an open source specification on top of it (coinjoin), and then keep the result (darksend) closed source. It goes against the fundamental principles of the cryptocurrency movement, and is reflective of the motives of the developer.

Amusingly enough, Maxwell himself is on the record  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=279249.msg6804719#msg6804719  stating that CoinJoin is inferior to other anonymizing protocols that are already available. Put simply, Darksend does not live up to the hype that surrounds it. It can not ensure anonymization of payments.

Darkcoin makes use of so-called ‘masternodes’ that assist with darksend transactions. Last week, a bug in the code unleashed havoc upon the network, causing it to continually fork and putting the coin into a nonfunctional state. A hardfork had to be issued to fix the issue.

Having said all that, Duffield is no idiot. He knows the limitations of darksend. But he’s not concerned about it. Why, you ask? Darksend is very good at generating hype. Hype leads to price apprecation. And who benefits from price appreciation? Coin holders, of course. Which brings me to my next point…

Huge instamine and subsidy reduction

Since I’m writing about it, it should come as no surprise that this coin has an instamine associated with it. This one went unnoticed for quite some time, but by taking a quick look at blockchain data we can see what went on. During the first 15 hours, between block 1  http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?000007d91d1254d60e2dd1ae580383070a4ddffa4c64c2eeb4a2f9ecc0414343.htm and block 4000 http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?00000000fc0ee07e47609bae8d5fe5d774193c71d518c56dfe8faaf7d780a03f.htm   , approximately 1.75m darkcoins were generated.

Immediately after this period, Duffield claimed that there was a ‘bug’ in the block reward calculations, and issued a hardfork to address it. After this fork, the block reward quickly dwindled down to an insignificant amount. Right now, it sits at a pitiful 5 DRK. A farcry from the 500 that it used to be.

The result? Darkcoin is currently at 80,000 blocks, but there’s only 4.3m DRK out there. Five months later, the 1.75m generated during those first 4200 blocks still represents 40% of all DRK in existence.

Dark beginnings

Darkcoin was initially released as XCoin, and didn’t attract much fanfare. This is partially because it was released without a working windows client, one of the obvious marks of a scam,  http://cryptolife.net/the-anatomy-of-a-scamcoin-7-things-to-know-before-investing-in-an-altcoin/   making mining it very difficult.

Who, then, was in the best position to mine the initial 4200 blocks? None other than Duffield and his buddies. The truth of the matter is that the aforementioned block reward ‘bug’ was intentional and allowed him to mine a large number of coins for himself, in an attempt to avoid the negative stigma associated with obvious premining/instamining… and it seems to have worked.

With a current market cap of just over $50m, Duffield has no doubt profited quite handsomely off of this scam. The real question is, how many of these coins have been dumped on the market? How many are in the process of being dumped? Hard to say without deep blockchain analysis, but it’s irrelevant either way. The price of altcoins are held up largely by people’s reluctance to sell. When one person, or a group of people, control a majority of coins, this creates a situation where the price of the coin is either artificially inflated, or gets pounded into the ground. A poor investment to be sure, made even poorer when you take a look at the 30 day price history. If you think growth like this is sustainable, history would like to have a word with you.

http://img01.taobaocdn.com/imgextra/i1/888367355/TB2uodDXpXXXXXFXFXXXXXXXXXX_!!888367355.png

Conclusion

All hype and no substance, darkcoin is far from a serious contender in the altcoin world. Its suite of ‘anonymity’ features are falsely advertised, offering pseudonymity at best. At the end of the day, darkcoin offers nothing of true value over other coins. Couple this with shady release tactics, a sizable instamine, and unsustainable price increases, only a fool would dare ‘invest’ in this coin right now.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: DarkCoin – The Next Big Thing, or Just Another Pump and Dump?
by
JamesBond009
on 06/06/2014, 01:35:33 UTC
 Shocked  Truth or FUD ??
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Merits 1 from 1 user
Topic OP
【Truth or FUD???】DarkCoin – The Next Big Thing, or Just Another Pump and Dump?
by
JamesBond009
on 06/06/2014, 01:24:06 UTC
⭐ Merited by iCEBREAKER (1)
Here is a article:

http://cryptolife.net/darkcoin-the-next-big-thing-or-just-another-pump-and-dump/

DarkCoin – The Next Big Thing, or Just Another Pump and Dump?

Released just shy of 5 months ago, darkcoin has quickly ascended the ranks of the cryptocurrency world, securing the #4 spot on coinmarketcap. Boasting what appears to be an impressive suite of anonymity features, darkcoin has successfully marketed itself as the rare breed of substantive altcoin. Is it, though? Peer beyond the surface, and you’ll quickly discover that darkcoin is not dark in name only.

Darksend Drama


Overhyped and misunderstood, darksend is touted as the killer feature that’ll send darkcoin’s price to the moon. What is darksend? In short, a protocol that groups transactions in such a way that the source and destination of the coins are muddied. As previously mentioned http://cryptolife.net/breakdown-anonymizing-cryptocurrencies/, darksend is not a comprehensive anonymity solution. At best, it provides pseudonymity. In spite of that, the people promoting this coin still use misleading buzzwords like anonymous payments and hailing the feature as something totally unique and groundbreaking, and perhaps the greatest thing since bitcoin itself. The reality of it all couldn’t be farther from that.

Darksend itself is not even a unique feature, nor was it created by Evan Duffield, Darkcoin’s lead developer. Darksend is merely an implementation of the CoinJoin specification https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=279249.0  originally created by Greg Maxwell, one of the bitcoin core developers. Still, Duffield does his best to avoid giving any credit to Maxwell. Take a look through his posts, you’ll not see a mention of CoinJoin or Maxwell.

To make matters worse, darksend is closed source. Take a moment to reflect upon how ridiculous it is to take open source software (bitcoin), layer an open source specification on top of it (coinjoin), and then keep the result (darksend) closed source. It goes against the fundamental principles of the cryptocurrency movement, and is reflective of the motives of the developer.

Amusingly enough, Maxwell himself is on the record  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=279249.msg6804719#msg6804719  stating that CoinJoin is inferior to other anonymizing protocols that are already available. Put simply, Darksend does not live up to the hype that surrounds it. It can not ensure anonymization of payments.

Darkcoin makes use of so-called ‘masternodes’ that assist with darksend transactions. Last week, a bug in the code unleashed havoc upon the network, causing it to continually fork and putting the coin into a nonfunctional state. A hardfork had to be issued to fix the issue.

Having said all that, Duffield is no idiot. He knows the limitations of darksend. But he’s not concerned about it. Why, you ask? Darksend is very good at generating hype. Hype leads to price apprecation. And who benefits from price appreciation? Coin holders, of course. Which brings me to my next point…

Huge instamine and subsidy reduction

Since I’m writing about it, it should come as no surprise that this coin has an instamine associated with it. This one went unnoticed for quite some time, but by taking a quick look at blockchain data we can see what went on. During the first 15 hours, between block 1  http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?000007d91d1254d60e2dd1ae580383070a4ddffa4c64c2eeb4a2f9ecc0414343.htm and block 4000 http://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/block.dws?00000000fc0ee07e47609bae8d5fe5d774193c71d518c56dfe8faaf7d780a03f.htm   , approximately 1.75m darkcoins were generated.

Immediately after this period, Duffield claimed that there was a ‘bug’ in the block reward calculations, and issued a hardfork to address it. After this fork, the block reward quickly dwindled down to an insignificant amount. Right now, it sits at a pitiful 5 DRK. A farcry from the 500 that it used to be.

The result? Darkcoin is currently at 80,000 blocks, but there’s only 4.3m DRK out there. Five months later, the 1.75m generated during those first 4200 blocks still represents 40% of all DRK in existence.

Dark beginnings

Darkcoin was initially released as XCoin, and didn’t attract much fanfare. This is partially because it was released without a working windows client, one of the obvious marks of a scam,  http://cryptolife.net/the-anatomy-of-a-scamcoin-7-things-to-know-before-investing-in-an-altcoin/   making mining it very difficult.

Who, then, was in the best position to mine the initial 4200 blocks? None other than Duffield and his buddies. The truth of the matter is that the aforementioned block reward ‘bug’ was intentional and allowed him to mine a large number of coins for himself, in an attempt to avoid the negative stigma associated with obvious premining/instamining… and it seems to have worked.

With a current market cap of just over $50m, Duffield has no doubt profited quite handsomely off of this scam. The real question is, how many of these coins have been dumped on the market? How many are in the process of being dumped? Hard to say without deep blockchain analysis, but it’s irrelevant either way. The price of altcoins are held up largely by people’s reluctance to sell. When one person, or a group of people, control a majority of coins, this creates a situation where the price of the coin is either artificially inflated, or gets pounded into the ground. A poor investment to be sure, made even poorer when you take a look at the 30 day price history. If you think growth like this is sustainable, history would like to have a word with you.

http://img01.taobaocdn.com/imgextra/i1/888367355/TB2uodDXpXXXXXFXFXXXXXXXXXX_!!888367355.png

Conclusion

All hype and no substance, darkcoin is far from a serious contender in the altcoin world. Its suite of ‘anonymity’ features are falsely advertised, offering pseudonymity at best. At the end of the day, darkcoin offers nothing of true value over other coins. Couple this with shady release tactics, a sizable instamine, and unsustainable price increases, only a fool would dare ‘invest’ in this coin right now.


Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] [NTXcoin]NTXCoin - 20%+75%IPO Next Exchange System Announcement
by
JamesBond009
on 04/06/2014, 08:55:06 UTC
NTX has anything to do with NXT? 75% IPO? man this is brave and greedy...

Brother, you did not know was that it took 75% of the IPO is not the author, but the follow-up maintenance team and intermittent development funds, according to NTX team, NTX will do the follow-up development.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] GameleagueCoin ( GLC ) | Pure PoS || No IPO | 3 exchanges now
by
JamesBond009
on 15/05/2014, 12:36:44 UTC
Come on, GLC! I support you.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] GameleagueCoin ( GLC ) | Pure PoS || No IPO | 3 exchanges now
by
JamesBond009
on 12/05/2014, 08:28:32 UTC
Game with a combination of coins, my favorite!