http://cointelegraph.com/news/112415/a-glimpse-into-xcurrencys-mission-to-decentralize-everything

 

I don't mind that they copy me, I mind that they don't have any ideas of their own

I was going to post in the XC thread that the term web 3.0 was mentioned here a few weeks ago, but I didn't want to waste my time on a self-moderated thread.

It's more than a little suspect that something gets posted here and a few weeks later something sounding remarkably similar finds its way into the press.

So, yeah - remind away.

BTW.

Didn't take you long  

Just bought a hard drive on newegg with bitcoin... would be awesome if they accept XC in a year or two.

If EVERY node has to sign(meaning multiple signers)  it is multi-sig.  It is a trustless version, unlike supers where coins can be stolen.

Funny... do you still use AOL for your email as well.  You are using bitcoin technology and open bazaar's rationale, both without anon....  therefore nodes can be more trusted, but they have to be trusted.  XC offers trustless mixing where every node signs off and can't steal coins, if it doesn't sign, it resyncs and sends the transaction to another set.   Highly likely most transactions will be very quick, but if there is an attempt to be a bad actor they are inhibited from gaining access to the coins.   Your old technology multi sig allows bad actors/nodes to steal coins.  THis has been know for a long time, with coins before yours that you stole to write your code.   In fact you deleted a 500 post thread because it primarily discussed the inadequacies of this design.

They are even deleting normal responses that don't agree with them and provide good arguments..

Man, I head out to enjoy my weekend and come back to this mess?

Again, you guys need to work on your civility.

Now, let's play join-the-dots:

1) I posted the following a little earlier:



2) ATCSECURE, XC's core dev, posted the following not too long ago:


3) Supplementary information:

- XC's multipath technology, used for obfuscating the amount sent in a transaction and the identity of sender and receiver, makes use of m-of-m transactions in order to achieve trustless mixing.

- Trustless mixing is a world-first. Nobody's ever done it before. Hence my prior request that you ask questions before coming to conclusions.

- m-of-m requires that all parties sign or else the transaction is invalidated.

- As such, m-of-m prevents bad nodes stealing coins instead of forwarding them.

- if a transaction is invalidated, the participating nodes resync the session-based network they form for the transaction in question, and proceed.


4) Conclusion:

- You might've guessed this before - though your intentions evidently have barricaded you from this surprisingly obvious conclusion - but XC DOES NOT USE MULTI_SIG M-OF-N.

- So you're looking for something that I've already stated (see above post) that XC does not use. All this talk of addresses beginning with a 4, condescending offers to explain multisig, etc. refer to the wrong thing.

- I refer you to the latter half of my previous post: timerland needs to ask questions before coming to conclusions about a technology he doesn't understand.

- If you don't get the point of m-of-m transactions, then stop talking and listen. Idiots.

- You can start listening this weekend. ATCSECURE releases a whitepaper explaining how all this works.


And if you speak again, kindly be civil, for heaven's sake.

For those who are still "confused", let me repeat again:

XC claimed to have implemented multisig. If this is true, then it is trivial to provide some multisig addresses with multisig tx associated with them, that we can see and inspect in the blockchain.

Saying implemented multisig but unable to provide even one multisig address? That dev provided some links deemed to be multisig transactions, but we don't even see one single multisig address there. He keep talking m-of-m (a joke for those who know what is multisig for), and provided regular addresses as multisig addresses, do you think he knows anything about multisig?

Some community members just show what a true XC multisig address look like. Now if you continue claim XC has it, show everyone the address and tx in the blockchain. Nothing is simpler, and let's not waste our (and everyone's) time by arguing. There's nothing to argue here, just show the facts! Experts know what you are talking about.

I would suggest you look at XC's Dev, Dan Metcalf's resume, and see that he is quite capable of what he says.   Also, you will have a nice shot at a very nice bounty very soon with the 3.0 release and a look at the whitepaper coming out soon.   

that's exactly the questions I asked in their thread, glad you posted a thread to discuss it. thanks.

Think bigger... The only way a coin is going to get beside bitcoin is to have mass adoption.  You can bring the masses with chat,voice and video that is annonymous and secure.  Think a better snapchat,instagram, skype... a better user friendly platform will bring folks and lots of nodes.    They then will also be introduced to Xcurrency for payment of goods and services.  This is why I invest in Xcurrency as a traditional non-crypto/tech investor.  

How can you have a ceo of a currency?