Many people have known bitcoin lately and many of the world's policymakers already know about digital currencies like Bitcoin, but many of them have not made laws or legal rules about digital currencies because of the complexity of digital currencies like Bitcoin.
Therefore, from late 2013 to 2014 many warnings and directives from central banks and financial policy-making authorities in various countries have warned that Bitcoin has not been recognized by the state as an investment asset, instrument of payment, or a legitimate currency. Some of the institutions are anxious about the stability of the country's financial system, if large-scale adoption of Bitcoin occurs.
But as time passes, some countries begin to look at Bitcoin and digital currencies with different perspectives, and try to impose rules on the digital currency. Typically, regulation is not something that all parties support. But in the case of Bitcoin, regulation is a gift. Bitcoin regulation is something that the Bitcoin community has around the world.

and for those who said it is not an anonymous system, do a transaction and try to figure out the source, it is not difficult. The system uses random nodes to create multisig address, so when there are enough participating nodes, you will not be able to pinpoint the source. Also it is easy to use a random address from each party to create the multisig address, I did not implement it due to time constraint, but it is trivial to do so. All explaned in the whitepapers.

Anyway, no more jokes, I won't have time to answer them.

Most likely what transpired in Supercoindev's mind is this.  "So they actually found a DEV team not just a single inexperience wannabe DEV. " I did say I will not release source code into the public but I'll release it to a DEV that the Supercoin community finds only after we have a one on one chat.  The DEV just needs to understand coin code."  I will change my mind with consulting with the supercoin community and release the source code to everyone!  "No private chat in irc or on the bitcointalk forum."  I should mention something that can help define exactly what qualifications for a qualified DEV for Supercoin but I simply won't since no one but me can understand it HAHAHAHA!!"  I think a ceratin part of the Supercoindev's mind wants Supercoin to fail because he won't get the sole credit for it anymore.  Remember both Supercointeam and Supercoindev blamed the Supercoin community!  Ever since the fork issue the Supercoindev and Supercointeam lost interest.  Things get tough and they were willing to let the fork continue and to let all the exchanges drop Supercoin and maybe look into the Chinese exchanges!  I appreciate everything technical that Supercoindev and supercointeam provide us.  They did plenty of bad as well.  Like vindictive teenagers!  

They may have created the best cryptocurrency since Satoshi created Bitcoin but their mindsets would have destroyed Supercoin before it was even 6 months old!  I am glad we don't have to depend on them as our solely DEV and management again.

I have my supercoin wallet working correctly. I have my wallet.dat backed up. I replace the wallet.dat that is newly created with my backup and run the wallet. When it loads it still shows a balance of zero coins.Can somebody help me figure out how to get my coins back? 1,000 supercoin to the first person to help me. Thank you!

I,m quite sure the main reason for the resent drop in the price of Supercoin was directly caused by the thread started labelled -
supercoin is fundamentally broken


Stated in the thread is
"this thread was started because you have idiots in your community that picked a stupid fight against the XC community (which is 10x larger than Super's) and spread FUD about our coin and  this thread was more of a retaliation."

When this thread was most active, the price started dropping hard, which shows that some people believed instantly what was said there. Which shows how easily people can be caused to sell off through being scared that something was wrong.

For others it has been a great buying opportunity.

There is no need to be insecure about this coin. Just look at what is being accomplished. And as with any altcoin only put into it what you can afford to lose as all altcoins are a high risk. And with high risk, it can also equal high reward.

Supercoin has much to offer, and like I have said before I expect all this trading to look like a flat line on future exchange graphs.

The anonymous decentralization, and the speed is of great importance, as the tech becomes more understood, and if all goes well as it seems to be then the sky is literally the limit.

I mean this coin is trading for 1 or 2 cents each. Think about it.

Hello there again,
Here are some more
http://www.cryptoarticles.com/press-releases/supercoin-a-x11-crypto-coin-launching-new-wallet-with-supersend-trustless


http://bitcoinist.net/supercoin-a-x11-crypto-coin-launching-new-wallet-with-supersend-trustless/


i hope they reach a lot of people

This is not batman, this is a bullet-proof SUPERMAN lol.

Yes it is possible, there can be no limits in the future QTs, because we are in test period, we limited it as 1000 SUPERs.

I added some Q&As in the Dev's Corner (2nd post after OP). As I heard there are some fuds on the Supercoin recently, some people who have no knowledge at all on multisig are attacking Supercoin's multisig technology.

By looking at all questions, I found some are good questions (like some from fluffypony), so while ignoring all fuds, I try to answer these questions in Q&A, and we welcome all reasonable questions and I am willing to discuss all details with other qualified devs.

The multisig tech we are using is 100% sound. Other projects such as Open Bazaar (creating a p2p decentralized trustless marketplace) uses the same tech. Unfortunately I see some attacks on Supercoin are completely out of rack. These people with zero knowledge on multisig better find some basic tutorials to understand it before posting nonsense in some threads.

Our purpose is to advance the technologies for cryptocoin. The cryptocoin domain is very new, there will be inevitably mistakes here and there. Our goal is not to say our coin is the best, but to do our best with best technologies and advance our understanding onthe cryptocoin.

With this, here are the Q&As (I added it to Dev's Corner too).


Q1: Since in normal case, Guarantor does not participate in transaction, why we still need it?
A: Guarantor is needed in case of dispute. For example, Mixer claims he sent the coins to destination, while Sender claims he does not see it. At this time, Guarantor is the one to decide whether to distribute the escrow fund as if the transaction completed, or the transaction cancelled.

Q2: Is Supersend with trustless system going to be slower than SuperSend Mixer (phase-1)?
A: In our testing it is pretty fast, the anonymous p2p trustless transaction usually takes 20-40 seconds to complete. But since there are several transactions during the process, it will be a little slower than the SuperSend with centralized mixers.

Q3: Is there a fee to use trustless anonymous system?
A: Yes. The service fee is 1% or 0.5 SUPER, whichever is bigger. The service fee will be shared equally by Mixer and Guarantor.

Q4: If you only use 1 mixer and 1 guarantor, what if I have so many nodes that I can send you a modified multisig transactions that actually sends the coin to another address instead?  
A: First of all, another node will have no idea on what is the escrow multisig address. It is not a public address. It is created on the fly with randomly selected public keys from each of the participating nodes. Other nodes will not receive any info on the public keys. Also, the system does broadcast any messages. Messages are point-2-point and not broadcasted.
Second, all communicated private messages are signed with each party's private key, and verified on arriving by the public key of that party. So another node can not forge a message from a participating party, not to say he has any way to get the message and know the id of transactions etc at all. So other nodes can can not forge messages.

Q5: If sender is only sending it to the mixer and then to the receiver, I can just analyze within X blocks for the same amount of coins and I will have a pretty high confidence level that the transaction belongs to the sender/receiver, especially if the amount is pretty unique?
A: You can't analysis these for sure. The first step we send as one amount, the amount can easily be splitted into multiple amounts as we did in our phase-1 mixer scenario (amount splitted into random 2-4 parts). Moreover, there are many similar amount sent around. All escrow amounts are similar amounts, all you see is that 3-4 similar amounts sent around and you can't trace them as in/out addresses are not linked at all. It is also easy to split the sending amount (and all fund transfer in the transaction) into "canonical" values (meaning standard like 100, 50, 25, 10, 5, 2, 1 etc). These enhancements are very easy to do and we probably will do it in the next few releases.

Q6: The Guarantor is being trusted to do arbitration between the Sender and the Mixer. Therefore, given the nature of 2-of-3 multisig transactions, the Guarantor and the Mixer can sign the transaction, and then refuse to sign the cancellation transaction, leaving the Sender out of luck and out of funds?
A: Yes this is true. However, the system assumes most people are good people. In any system, if majority are bad, then you can't do much, except to have a centralized trust system. This is similar to cryptocoin, if >50% are bad, then they will take over.
This is the same as in trustless distributed marketplace OpenBazaar (https://openbazaar.org/) did. In this system, there are Buyer, Seller and Arbitrator. If both Buyer and Arbitrator are bad (and coordinated), then you can't do much. They published a nice paper to describe this system (https://gist.github.com/dionyziz/e3b296861175e0ebea4b)

Q7: SuperSend Tustless uses TxIDs? With malleability what if the TxID changed?
A: Malleability mainly caused by multiple possible signature format that is in the TxID. This issue mostly fixed in Bitcoin 0.9.0 by restrict to one "standard" format and not replaying any mutated transactions. This basically fixed the problem.
Moreover, we don't need to transfer TxID per se. Our purpose in the algorithm is to verify whether all deposits made correctly, and whether Mixer actually sent the amount to the distinations. There are ways to do this without using TxIDs. strasboug in this thread proposed some solutions:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=734578.0
Since escrow is on the multisig address, and multisig address is broadcasted to all the related parties. Each party can verify the deposits by looking at the input on that address. For Mixer's sent tx it is also easy to verify based on the transaction after a given timestamp, and with Mixer's send wallet address. The solution is does not depend on TxIDs.
Last point I want to make on this is, even if in some very rare case (0.1%?, 0.01%? 0.001%?) the TxID changed, the worst is that the send transaction fails, all fund will be refunded to each party, there will be nothing lost.

Q8: Not all possible malleability vectors are "fixed" in 0.9.0, so transactions are still quite malleable and the transaction ID can still change. What do you do?
A: As said above, TxIDs are not mandatory in the solution. There are other ways to do it. In the first release we use TxIDs, we will possibly switch to non-TxID solutions.
BTW, if you are telling me that Bitcoin is still very vulnerable, I agree. However, we here do not try to beat Bitcoin. If people can still steal Bitcoin with malleability, then they can steal any cryptocoins, SUPER included. I won't feel bad on that at all. This is not related to trustless system, even with rare malleability not yet fixed by Bitcoin, all parties participating trustless transaction will not lose anything.

I want to give a quick update on our status.

We have started alpha testing with Mammothcoin main network 2 days ago, we had 2 sessions, most trustless anonymous tx worked fine, we also have identified some bugs and are in the process of fixing them. Alpha test will last a few more days. Then we will switch to Supercoin's main network for beta testing. Dev team sync'd the code with SuperCoin codebase, and is in the process of testing with SuperCoin. In beta tests, we will invite community members to participate. Stay tuned.

The multisig addresses for SuperCoin starts with "C" as opposed to the normal SuperCoin address which starts with "S" (the multisig address of MammothCoin starts with "b"), you can easily identify them in the blockchain explorer. I will post some screenshots later for the SuperCoin real network testing.

Please post any questions you may have, we'll try our best to answer them.