Happy to answer any questions about this, initial validator launch is going very well and thank you to everyone who has participated thus far in growing our network

Thanks kindly and fantastic question, in our current implementation yes there is some slashing.   However it is less than what is in Solana.

Very open to your thoughts on how you'd like to see this work.    Definitely Proof of History and our TPS care about uptime.    How we achieve that, is up to us.    The slashing penalty is good for maintaining minimums.   Rewards are good for reaching maximums.

We are also looking forward to the DEX

Great question, we're looking at a 7-10 day rollout and we're looking for community feedback on what they want to see in the validators. 

Obviously, we're putting a lot of work into making them more accessible for people to run.    Initial testing has gone well

Both are correct

The new Safecoin is POS only, however due to its robust design with 100,000+ TPS at sub-second block times, it can utilise GPUs to process these transactions and those operators can earn SAFE for doing so.

You can look up Solana Validators for more information on this, we are completing testing and development of our implementation.   

Two distinct differences:

• The hardware requirements will be significantly less than Solana validators
• We have removed any KYC requirements to earn SAFE

reserved

Reserved

In progress.   Safecoin is swapping to a community optimised Solana-based chain


Original Thread:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2838370

"relaunch" might be the proper term.  It has existed for a long time, but not heavily advertised (yet)

Safecoin has launched!  

Cryptocurrency has come come to advance so quickly, that the concept behind this coin is now one of collaboration.

Safecoin starts off as a fork of Bytecoin.  However, this is done in a sustainable manner using forknote.  This ensures that the development of Safecoin constantly matches that of Bytecoin.

Will it always be a clone?  No.  Launching is just the first step on the roadmap.  I will be extending this coin past bytecoin, while still remaining compatible with their development, and updating the coin with their updates.   It will have everything bytecoin has, and more.

The economy around this coin is also safer, with a guarantee that one Safecoin will always have the value of one Bitcoin.

More to come...of course.

http://safecoin.org

http://safecoin.weebly.com/uploads/5/5/9/8/55989613/995168.png

Does it compile fine?

I can compile it, but the wallet crashes with this:

/cryptonote/src/cryptonote_core/Currency.cpp:91: uint64_t cryptonote::Currency::calculateInterest(uint64_t, uint32_t) const: Assertion `m_depositMinTerm <= term && term <= m_depositMaxTerm' failed.

Hey! 

Is there a version of Ubuntu or linux that the gui wallet is known to compile well on?

Seems to get pretty cranky on Ubuntu 14.04, and I did upgrade boost to 1.55.

wallet closes unexpectedly.  Error over minimum / maximum interest variable.


Time to upgrade to 14.10?  Obviously 14.04 won't work natively, as boost 1.54 is the default.

Maybe someone completely unbiased (or as unbiased as possible) needs to start that thread.

Unfortunately, that person isn't me.   Safecoin isn't just a username.  It's a coin (not yet released).

And it will be ......

well, let's just say I'd like to see someone start such a thread that has the most minimal bias. 

That may actually be the problem with this thread, to be honest.

Did this thread Really just ...die out?

Based on the discussions above I believe bytecoin should be added to this list of the most known anonymous coins.

The only logical alternative I see is removing Dash (very difficult to disqualify bytecoin, without disqualifying Dash on those some qualifiers).


I'm personally more interested in some of the lesser known anonymous coins (but, often, more anonymous).  

I hope it's okay if those can be discussed here too.

The code behind this coin is too good to abandon.

I liked this thread until the last two pages.

What about Bytecoin?  Does it not meet the requirements of most "known" anonymous coins?

Went dead for a year, but extremely active development in 2015 and extremely impressive feature list.   

Second-highest market cap of Any anonymous coin (other than Dash).

Yes, I am being polite, and I am sorry you see that is a red flag.   No, I do not have a vested interest in any of these coins at this point in time.  That includes cloak.  In fact, I would say that if a coin were to be added to the list at this time, the front-runner would probably be boolberry.   I am sorry you had a bad experience with cloak.  

Well I'll be gosh-darned, it compiled with the addition above, thank you!

After fresh 14.04, upgraded to liboost1.55:

then installed qt-creator,

then:


Small error at end, not sure if it should be a concern....should it?

/home/jj/pebblecoin-master/src/qtwallet/walletmodel.cpp: In member function ‘sendCoins’:
/usr/include/c++/4.8/ostream:202:29: warning: ‘registrationFee’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
       { return _M_insert(__n); }
                             ^
/home/jj/pebblecoin-master/src/qtwallet/walletmodel.cpp:375:12: note: ‘registrationFee’ was declared here
     qint64 registrationFee;
            ^
make[4]: Leaving directory `/home/jj/pebblecoin-master/build/release'
[100%] Built target qtwallet
make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/jj/pebblecoin-master/build/release'
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/jj/pebblecoin-master/build/release'
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/jj/pebblecoin-master/build/release'

I don't see anything wrong with it either, nor so I see a point to splitting the topic into tow threads.  I just wish that the most anonymous coins were more synonymous with the most known "anonymous" coins.

ffmad has also alluded to this.   I don't think there's much arguement there.    Whether some of the other anonymous coins make the "most known" list or not, I feel this is a good home for discussion on them and comparison of them.

True to your subject heading, then, the focus is on the most known, rather than the most anonymous.   Which is interesting, but unfortunate that the two are far from the same thing.

A couple questions:

1.
Have you looked at cloakcoin since their dpos3 implementation?   IMHO they have evolved far past the "shit coin" stage, but curious as to what impact others thinks this has.
http://cloakcoin.com/downloads/posa3wp.pdf

2. 
Is Monero truely anonymous?   I am not so sure.   More interesting still, some Monero Devs will Admit that the coin isn't fully anonymous, with known solutions, yet none have been implemented.
https://lab.getmonero.org/pubs/MRL-0004.pdf

Based on this, IMHO, the only Truly anonymous Cryptonote coin (other than the Digitalnote hybrid) is Boolberry.     

Granted:  Boolberry is far less popular, has less value, and there are big questions around future DEV involvement, as you've pointed out.

But unfortunately, "well-known" does not necessarily imply true anonymity.