Quote from: sharkbyte093 on July 15, 2014, 07:08:04 PM

You're asking if a coin that is being built for anonymity can be easily traced?

Quote from: Minotaur26 on July 15, 2014, 07:07:24 PM

I respectfully disagree with you, the final transaction the person to person transaction occurs directly so that you can see the coins leave your wallet directly to the recipient's address and you can see the address getting the coins in the blockchain. So you can verify any transaction between buyer and seller just like you do now, but you are using previously mixed and denominated coins so that it is really a fog for everyone else! It is just brilliant, basically ecash! Great for business applications and way better than Bitcoin for B2B.

Thanks for your responses. I'm probably not conveying my concern very well.

I'm a big fan of Darkcoin's anonymity features and I agree with Minotaur26 that even after RC4, a blockchain explorer can still be used to confirm a specific payment took place. My worry is that, if there is no way to shield certain coins in your wallet from automatic premixing, RC4 will actually go a step too far in removing the benefits of a public accounting ledger from the coin's features. There are many common everyday uses of the blockchain explorer to prove to others the history of coins that you currently control, and these are sometimes quite useful in the real world. Pre-RC4 (if I am not mistaken) these were all available to Darkcoin, since using Darksend was just an optional choice -- as an individual user you COULD mix your coins, but you didn't HAVE to.

Thus, pre-RC4, Darkcoin let you keep certain coins entirely outside the mixing process, and you could use a blockchain explorer to, say, prove the date you mined or acquired your coins for tax purposes (e.g. U.S. long-term capital gains), or prove that you haven't moved or spent coins you are holding on behalf of someone else (e.g., escrow), or prove how coins sent to a donation address were spent (i.e., allow an audit). My concern is that, if RC4 forces pre-mixing of all coins, these uses of the blockchain as an accounting ledger become harder, and the paths to Darkcoin adoption narrow. I see this as a bad outcome -- while I want Darkcoin to be a form of anonymous ecash, I also want it to be able to function as a full-fledged cryptocurrency. Perhaps your vision is different.

TLDR: Should background mixing be opt-out so Darkcoin can still function as a full-fledged cryptocurrency even while providing anonymous transactions?

Kyune

Posts

Merits