Official Anoncoin chat thread (including history)

[mullick]

Why is cryptsy sending invalid transactions? are they using an old client or something?

I made two transactions from cryptsy recently (2500 ANC + 2500 ANC) both unconfirmed for a long time. Invalid?

PS: I'm looking to buy 10-20k ANC, please contact me if interested in doing a deal outside of cryptsy.

Can you give me the tx? or ask craptsy to rebroadcast the tx. once i see it, il include it in a block.
No, it seems they have patched/adjusted their anoncoind to allow bigger than allowed txs with too few fee too.

This is unacceptable.

We really need a listing on Bittrex or Mintpal so we can stop trading on Cryptsy. This problem has been occurring for far too long!

We have not modified our daemon at all. Anoncoind is allowing us to send theses transactions. We are doing nothing wrong here

There is an issue with the code somewhere as we are not the only ones experiencing the issue

That being said I did merge close to 100k inputs to reduce our tx sizes ( in kb )

[Gnosis-]

Can someone respond to this:

http://zerocash-project.org/

"Zerocash improves on an earlier protocol, Zerocoin, developed by some of the same authors, both in functionality (Zerocoin only hides a payment's origin, but not its destination or amount) and in efficiency (Zerocash transactions are less than 1KB and take less than 6ms to verify)."

What will the size of our Zerocoin transactions be?

If the transactions are large and blockchain bloat is an issue, is there a way we can develop a "lite" wallet such as used by Shadowcoin (who is also working on zk-snarks btw). Spending Zerocoins from mobile devices (without a ton of storage space) would be a great feature!

Besides RSA UFO generation (to ensure Zerocoin can be minted in a trust free manner) does Zerocoin have any other advantages over Zerocash?

Zerocoin mint transactions will be only slightly larger than normal transactions, with about 128 bytes per minted coin.
Zerocoin spend transactions will have a small part that lives in the blockchain, and then about 125 KB that does not get stored in the blockchain.

Using 8 cores on a 2.4GHz Core i7, Zerocoin spends would take about 3 seconds to generate, and 0.5 s to verify. It's not completely out of the question that a modern smartphone with an optimized libzerocoin could do this, with some battery drain.

Minting zerocoins, storing them, and using Anoncoin balances that were previously received from zerocoins could all be handled easily by a mobile app.

I don't think anybody knows a procedure for generating the zk-SNARK parameters in a manner that doesn't require trust from the users. There's no way for an outside party to prove that they destroyed the sensitive data used to generate the parameters; anybody who has access to this data would be able to create unlimited currency units, completely destroying the currency. Worse, it would go undetected until it hits the exchanges and the value plummets. This is why it's so important to have trustless parameter generation!

[TheKoziTwo]

Thanks for the update! How much funding is needed for you to work full time through the month of October also? Perhaps people here would be interested in pooling some funds together.

Well, the cost of living is high where I live... it would take about US$2750.

[...]
Also, gnosis, post your BTC, ANC addresses please

BTC: 14QnfqVG3CqLGBYHgD8tPYJVLxQ2AfvPEx
ANC: AU4hFCFZLhB2gTyG4VbaEurXGrTMNW2nu6

To get the ball rolling, I will match every 1 ANC donated with 1 ANC. My limit is 2000 ANC and offer lasts until 1st October, e.g if people donate 2000 ANC I will donate 2000 ANC which makes the total 4000 ANC.

At current price 4000*0.0015= 6 BTC * $460 = $2760

Gnosis has stated that he needs $2750 to work full time on anoncoin/zerocoin for the month of October.

Let's do it!

I'll donate 100ANC
TXID: edaa1c77a30df11f0913caba5feecc99b64201eacd361e6eb02ba84182d2907f

Excellent! 105 ANC so far, I just sent 105 from exchange (TrxID: b05e46271b949242952fa9b2ab0ba67e05078def69f9f5d5bb01deffb189a484).

That leaves 2000-105= 1895 ANC

Matched another 54.97 ANC

That leaves 1895-54.97 = 1840.03 ANC left for me to donate

Total so far: 319.94 ANC and 1 BTC

1 + (319.94 * 0.0015) = 1.47991 BTC = 1.48 * 460 = $680.80/$2750 = 25% of goal donated so far!

Another 210 matched.

1840.03-210 = 1630.03 ANC left for me to donate

Matched 37.42550588 ANC
1630.03-37.42550588 ANC = 1592.60449412 ANC left for me to donate

[LucyLovesCrypto]

Can someone respond to this:

http://zerocash-project.org/

"Zerocash improves on an earlier protocol, Zerocoin, developed by some of the same authors, both in functionality (Zerocoin only hides a payment's origin, but not its destination or amount) and in efficiency (Zerocash transactions are less than 1KB and take less than 6ms to verify)."

What will the size of our Zerocoin transactions be?

If the transactions are large and blockchain bloat is an issue, is there a way we can develop a "lite" wallet such as used by Shadowcoin (who is also working on zk-snarks btw). Spending Zerocoins from mobile devices (without a ton of storage space) would be a great feature!

Besides RSA UFO generation (to ensure Zerocoin can be minted in a trust free manner) does Zerocoin have any other advantages over Zerocash?

Zerocoin mint transactions will be only slightly larger than normal transactions, with about 128 bytes per minted coin.
Zerocoin spend transactions will have a small part that lives in the blockchain, and then about 125 KB that does not get stored in the blockchain.

Using 8 cores on a 2.4GHz Core i7, Zerocoin spends would take about 3 seconds to generate, and 0.5 s to verify. It's not completely out of the question that a modern smartphone with an optimized libzerocoin could do this, with some battery drain.

Minting zerocoins, storing them, and using Anoncoin balances that were previously received from zerocoins could all be handled easily by a mobile app.

I don't think anybody knows a procedure for generating the zk-SNARK parameters in a manner that doesn't require trust from the users. There's no way for an outside party to prove that they destroyed the sensitive data used to generate the parameters; anybody who has access to this data would be able to create unlimited currency units, completely destroying the currency. Worse, it would go undetected until it hits the exchanges and the value plummets. This is why it's so important to have trustless parameter generation!

Great explanation. Clear and concise. Thank you Gnosis! 

[newb4now]

Why is cryptsy sending invalid transactions? are they using an old client or something?

I made two transactions from cryptsy recently (2500 ANC + 2500 ANC) both unconfirmed for a long time. Invalid?

PS: I'm looking to buy 10-20k ANC, please contact me if interested in doing a deal outside of cryptsy.

Can you give me the tx? or ask craptsy to rebroadcast the tx. once i see it, il include it in a block.
No, it seems they have patched/adjusted their anoncoind to allow bigger than allowed txs with too few fee too.

This is unacceptable.

We really need a listing on Bittrex or Mintpal so we can stop trading on Cryptsy. This problem has been occurring for far too long!

We have not modified our daemon at all. Anoncoind is allowing us to send theses transactions. We are doing nothing wrong here

There is an issue with the code somewhere as we are not the only ones experiencing the issue

That being said I did merge close to 100k inputs to reduce our tx sizes ( in kb )

So Cryptsy is blaming the problem on our code? Meeh can you address this? Are others (besides Cryptsy) experiencing this problem like they claim?

[newb4now]

This is unacceptable.

We really need a listing on Bittrex or Mintpal so we can stop trading on Cryptsy. This problem has been occurring for far too long!

Stop spreading bullshit about Cryptsy. If they stop ANC, people will panic sell on bleutrade? This is what you want?

See my post above (in response to the post from the Cryptsy rep, mullick). Cryptsy stated they have done everything correctly and there is a problem with ANC code.

This is why I asked meeh to address the code issue.  I agree that Cryptsy is important for us. It sounds like I may have been wrong about the cause of the problem

[mannie]

Can someone respond to this:
http://zerocash-project.org/

"Zerocash improves on an earlier protocol, Zerocoin, developed by some of the same authors, both in functionality (Zerocoin only hides a payment's origin, but not its destination or amount) and in efficiency (Zerocash transactions are less than 1KB and take less than 6ms to verify)."

Besides RSA UFO generation (to ensure Zerocoin can be minted in a trust free manner) does Zerocoin have any other advantages over Zerocash?

Zerocoin will be slower (+ higher fees) than Zerocash and not truly anonymous as zerocoin doesn't hide coin destination and amount.
Then if the number of people who contributed to the zerocoin pool for denomination is small, it will be very easy to analyze the blockchain and find where they come from.

Another point, I heard that Zerocash devs intend to choose Zerocash security parameters in a trustless manner. If they do that, Zerocash will have years ahead of any crypto.

VERSUS...

Can someone respond to this:

http://zerocash-project.org/

"Zerocash improves on an earlier protocol, Zerocoin, developed by some of the same authors, both in functionality (Zerocoin only hides a payment's origin, but not its destination or amount) and in efficiency (Zerocash transactions are less than 1KB and take less than 6ms to verify)."

What will the size of our Zerocoin transactions be?

If the transactions are large and blockchain bloat is an issue, is there a way we can develop a "lite" wallet such as used by Shadowcoin (who is also working on zk-snarks btw). Spending Zerocoins from mobile devices (without a ton of storage space) would be a great feature!

Besides RSA UFO generation (to ensure Zerocoin can be minted in a trust free manner) does Zerocoin have any other advantages over Zerocash?

Zerocoin mint transactions will be only slightly larger than normal transactions, with about 128 bytes per minted coin.
Zerocoin spend transactions will have a small part that lives in the blockchain, and then about 125 KB that does not get stored in the blockchain.

Using 8 cores on a 2.4GHz Core i7, Zerocoin spends would take about 3 seconds to generate, and 0.5 s to verify. It's not completely out of the question that a modern smartphone with an optimized libzerocoin could do this, with some battery drain.

Minting zerocoins, storing them, and using Anoncoin balances that were previously received from zerocoins could all be handled easily by a mobile app.

I don't think anybody knows a procedure for generating the zk-SNARK parameters in a manner that doesn't require trust from the users. There's no way for an outside party to prove that they destroyed the sensitive data used to generate the parameters; anybody who has access to this data would be able to create unlimited currency units, completely destroying the currency. Worse, it would go undetected until it hits the exchanges and the value plummets. This is why it's so important to have trustless parameter generation!

Gnosis responded a few posts earlier.

[mannie]

So, to carry the idea into practical terms, you are saying that engineers who use calculus to solve
problems shouldn't be trusted because they haven't created their owns mathematical tools for solving
engineering problems, right?

If Calculus properly solves a problem then it should be used.

The tool being used by gnosis is not appropriate to the 'problem'he is working on.

In broader terms my point was that he is basically doing the job of a mechanic. Almost anyone with some knowledge of math and coding could do it.

A proper solution will come from someone in the field of math who does not necessarily understand the mechanics, then they would hand the project to a mechanic like gnosis.

For example. And I am not a coder or a mathematician, this is an example of the process.
A mathematician looks generally at a coin and says 'The nature of the private keys lets you generate transactions with varying degrees of uncertainty. That would allow each wallet to have two balances, a real balance and a possible balance. Wallet A has 10 coins for sure and it might have 5 more. The pool of people who agree to have 'possible balances' could be used to create anonymity in both sending and receiving for just them.' etc
The mathematics person then tells the mechanic, the coder "get to work, no food til your done" or however they do it.

In the case of zerocoin you have bypassed the first step and thus necessitate copying material desperately to find a bunch of things that can be jumblefucked into seeming to work.

The whole zerocoin thing is halfassed. I won't even get into some very serious red flags that suggest worse.

People should do what they want but my advice is be cautious. Anc is a good solid coin. Still fairly cheap. Meeh and k117er and the others seems sincere if also naive. The price might run up if zc is completed but it will be on a speculative bubble, not because of any cryptographic step with zerocoin.

The problem with metaphors is they don't address any specific issues, rather they just amplify fears that understandably exist for all new systems. I suggest metaphor is a poor tool for your argument.

People should do what they want but some additional advice you might offer is to be cautious of people (such as yourself) who are obviously not newbies writing criticisms on one coin page under newbie accounts.

Fair?

[newb4now]

I am not a coder or a mathematician......

This is why I prefer to listen to gnosis or meeh on the subject.

Its okay to ask a question if you are not sure about something (I do that often). However please don't make up an answer if you really have no clue what you are talking about.

Zerocoin is groundbreaking cryptography. Of course things need to be coded carefully but I think the ANC team has the skill to deliver

[Simcom]

I was graphing the coin supply vs. time today (for fun  ) and noticed something odd.

I used this description in the wiki to make the graph:

Coin details
Anoncoin was originally a fork of the Litecoin source code. The creation of new coins is by the reward to miners for processing transactions into blocks that are added to the block chain, where mining is performed by proof of work using the scrypt hashing function. A total of 4.2 million coins can be mined into existence, which is 5 times less than the maximum supply of Bitcoin, and transactions are processed, on average, every 3 minutes. The current block reward is 5 ANC, and this will be halved to 2.5 on approximately January 22, 2015. The block reward distribution schedule is the following: 4.2 ANC for blocks until 42,000; 7 ANC until block 77,777; 5 ANC until block 384,377; and then halving of block rewards every 306,600 blocks (which is approximately every two years).

block   coins   block reward
1           4           4.2
42,000   176,400   4.2
77,777   426,839   7
384,377   1,959,839   5
690,977   2,726,339   2.5
997,577   3,109,589   1.25
1,304,177   3,301,214   0.625
1,610,777   3,397,027   0.3125
1,917,377   3,444,933   0.15625
2,223,977   3,468,886   0.078125
2,530,577   3,480,862   0.0390625
2,837,177   3,486,851   0.01953125
3,143,777   3,489,845   0.009765625
3,450,377   3,491,342   0.004882813
3,756,977   3,492,090   0.002441406

As you can see the max supply converges on 3.492 million not 4.2 million.  Where did I go wrong here?



The red dot is where we are currently.

Can we get one of the devs to weigh in on this?  I'm pretty sure the math is right, so either the wiki is wrong when it describes the emission curve OR the actual max # of coins is 700k lower than what is quoted everywhere.

[mullick]

Ok lets clear this up once and for all.

I have NOT modified our daemon in anyway. We have built directly from source with no changes. Anoncoind is creating these transaction and paying the large fee required. yet they are not being accepted into the chain. As you can see by my previous post.

Hello everyone,

Im currently investigating an issue with our ANC wallet where the blockchain isnt picking up the majority of our send transactions. We apologize it took us so long to spot the issue. But we are working hard on correcting it and getting the unconfirmed transactions pushed to the blockchain

Some of them get confirmed after a simple restart of the daemon but others do not/ Ill keep everyone informed when I find the solution

Thank you for your patience

UPDATE:

I think it comes down to transaction sizes. Our daemon is sending transactions that are too large to be accpeted into the chain. Im basing this on the fact that all unconfirmed send transactions have unusually high fees paid. Our default Txfee is .01 ANC and the mean over the last 1000 transactions is 0.10169169169169 which is why our withdrawal fee is set to .1 ANC

Code:

anoncoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A 1 -B 4 '"confirmations" : 0,' | grep fee
        "fee" : -0.82000000,
        "fee" : -0.90000000,
        "fee" : -0.98000000,
        "fee" : -0.65000000,
        "fee" : -0.69000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.81000000,
        "fee" : -1.00000000,
        "fee" : -0.68000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.73000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.78000000,
        "fee" : -0.79000000,
        "fee" : -0.85000000,
        "fee" : -0.96000000,
        "fee" : -0.64000000,
        "fee" : -0.66000000,
        "fee" : -0.67000000,
        "fee" : -0.69000000,
        "fee" : -0.71000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.73000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.79000000,
        "fee" : -0.84000000,
        "fee" : -0.87000000,
        "fee" : -0.92000000,
        "fee" : -0.95000000,
        "fee" : -0.98000000,
        "fee" : -0.63000000,
        "fee" : -0.64000000,
        "fee" : -0.65000000,
        "fee" : -0.66000000,
        "fee" : -0.68000000,
        "fee" : -0.68000000,
        "fee" : -0.69000000,
        "fee" : -0.70000000,
        "fee" : -0.71000000,
        "fee" : -0.71000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.73000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.78000000,
        "fee" : -0.80000000,
        "fee" : -0.83000000,
        "fee" : -0.88000000,
        "fee" : -0.92000000,
        "fee" : -0.99000000,
        "fee" : -0.98000000,
        "fee" : -0.97000000,
        "fee" : -0.87000000,
        "fee" : -0.81000000,
        "fee" : -0.86000000,

Our daemon is up to date so ill be going over the source to see if I can find anything that would cause this

As you can see from my request to the daemon:

Code:

anoncoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A 1 -B 4 '"confirmations" : 0,' | grep fee

I grabbed the last 1000 transactions and searched for any with "confirmations" : 0, and grabbed the fee for the transaction.

All of the unconfirmed transactions in our wallet paid a high fee suggesting its due to block size.

To counteract this until the issue is resolved by the developers i have merged any input in our wallet less than .1 anc ( about 50k of them ) into inputs over 1 ANC. These may have broken down to some smaller ones now so ill likely have to run it again

Here are some others with the same problem

Same Problem.

It makes me mad all the time 

And It's not good at all for beginners who want to buy into ANC when there are problems with Buying and Withdrawing.

Same problem. Tried to withdraw from bleutrade 2 days ago and the transaction still havent gone trough. To fix this should be highest priority.

Anyone else with the following problems with ANC?  My multipool operator sent earned ANC to me on August 18 at 2:01AM CDT, was not received and posted to my wallet until August 21 at 13:58 CDT.  The multipool operator states:  "The transaction hasn't been included in a block yet.  It should make it into a block eventually and be confirmed.  I have no control over this.  It's been an ongoing issue with the ANC network for a few weeks now."  That would seem to be a very strong negative against this coin.

Yes, I am on the anonmining.com pool and it took a couple of days for an autotransfer to actually post to my wallet.

It was only 5 ANCs.

What gives?

In conclusion this is not a problem with cryptsy or "craptsy" as it is being called. It seems meeh and k1773R are aware and getting these transactions to confirm eventually so i see no reason to suspend the wallet as suggested above

[gunzeon]

gee, is there a good fairy out there that can fix mine ?

opened a Cryptsy ticket but from what i just read they mightn't do anything about it ...

ie:
 {
        "account" : "",
        "address" : "AWxGtEJitS5CCkKEvvgfjFbEmUxJdk1XS4",
        "category" : "receive",
        "amount" : 1589.97000000,
        "confirmations" : 0,
        "txid" : "f615e8772e65dcf1da14154a9926df7e07f30b534745ce980760ff0b3a17aee6",
        "time" : 1410990406,
        "timereceived" : 1410990406
    }

[gunzeon]

just a clue to this,

 - first i did a 1ANC withdrawal and that worked
 - so, 5 minutes later thinking all was good, did that ~1589 to the same address and it flunked

what gives

[K1773R]

gee, is there a good fairy out there that can fix mine ?

opened a Cryptsy ticket but from what i just read they mightn't do anything about it ...

ie:
 {
        "account" : "",
        "address" : "AWxGtEJitS5CCkKEvvgfjFbEmUxJdk1XS4",
        "category" : "receive",
        "amount" : 1589.97000000,
        "confirmations" : 0,
        "txid" : "f615e8772e65dcf1da14154a9926df7e07f30b534745ce980760ff0b3a17aee6",
        "time" : 1410990406,
        "timereceived" : 1410990406
    }

Yes there is

Another one seem to be stuck, this one is only ~1250 ANC
d6b868e340e9b151df4c99f72a2f4151486f8e0a74eb57c75b82c6c9a5f809bc

Thanks to K1773R for mining these transactions. I have notified cryptsy support as well of this bug.

Here we go, faster than i expected
http://abe.darkgamex.ch:2751/block/1e851af58a0a4068cc96f220dd391c4bf6a69fb7cff77beeaa2138de20b45b4f

[lunokhod2]

.... TO CLARIFY

Zerocoin and Zerocash
-https://wiki.anoncoin.net/Zerocoin
-https://wiki.anoncoin.net/Zerocash
-https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=279249.msg2983902#msg2983902 (scroll down a little further to read about Zerocoin)

Everybody asked about how big Transactions are going to be, no real answer has been given yet. Gnosis estimated it would cost more than 50x fees. However, why do you think this needs to be tested first?

Way too much Concerned
Most of you guys are too much concerned whether it might work or find more and more disadvantages. Why don't you invest a little and wait for a while. There is no way for you to find out much more about this tech if you are not a programmer or don't have a simple understanding of it.

As far as I understand it, the transaction size is exactly the same size as a normal ANC transcation. The only thing that differs is that when you spend a zerocoin, there is extra information that is added to a temporary database, which eventually gets deleted.

[gunzeon]

gee, is there a good fairy out there that can fix mine ?

opened a Cryptsy ticket but from what i just read they mightn't do anything about it ...

ie:
 {
        "account" : "",
        "address" : "AWxGtEJitS5CCkKEvvgfjFbEmUxJdk1XS4",
        "category" : "receive",
        "amount" : 1589.97000000,
        "confirmations" : 0,
        "txid" : "f615e8772e65dcf1da14154a9926df7e07f30b534745ce980760ff0b3a17aee6",
        "time" : 1410990406,
        "timereceived" : 1410990406
    }

Yes there is

Another one seem to be stuck, this one is only ~1250 ANC
d6b868e340e9b151df4c99f72a2f4151486f8e0a74eb57c75b82c6c9a5f809bc

Thanks to K1773R for mining these transactions. I have notified cryptsy support as well of this bug.

Here we go, faster than i expected
http://abe.darkgamex.ch:2751/block/1e851af58a0a4068cc96f220dd391c4bf6a69fb7cff77beeaa2138de20b45b4f

Many thanks K1773R, you truly are a champion!!!

I saw that there is 404 inputs to that transaction; does that mean that miners pass on it or something ?

Does all that small change mean so much more work ? Dam work's gotta get done anyway, why isn't it just queued in a sequence and they do it like it or not, rather than cherry pick ..

Maybe a 1500 ANC xfer equals whale status :-)

[Simcom]

My posts on /r/anoncoin are getting stuck in the spam filter - Meeh or Gnosis could you check the modmail?  I'll help mod the subreddit if you guys are interested.

Also there was some good press today - http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/09/18/can-anoncoin-be-the-currency-of-the-deep-web/

[Simcom]

trending on /r/darknetmarkets

https://www.reddit.com/r/DarkNetMarkets/comments/2gs3de/can_anoncoin_be_the_currency_of_the_deep_web/

[SmokingSkull]

My posts on /r/anoncoin are getting stuck in the spam filter - Meeh or Gnosis could you check the modmail?  I'll help mod the subreddit if you guys are interested.

Also there was some good press today - http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/09/18/can-anoncoin-be-the-currency-of-the-deep-web/

Anoncoin doesn't use Zerocash?!

It's Anoncoin - Zerocoin; not Anoncoin - Zerocash
I'd rewrite this article...
I like it though, except this confusion with Zerocash,

[Gnosis-]

My posts on /r/anoncoin are getting stuck in the spam filter - Meeh or Gnosis could you check the modmail?  I'll help mod the subreddit if you guys are interested.

Also there was some good press today - http://www.deepdotweb.com/2014/09/18/can-anoncoin-be-the-currency-of-the-deep-web/

Anoncoin doesn't use Zerocash?!

It's Anoncoin - Zerocoin; not Anoncoin - Zerocash
I'd rewrite this article...
I like it though, except this confusion with Zerocash,

Yeah, the author mixed up Zerocoin and Zerocash, Proof-of-Stake and Proof-of-Work (not talking about Anoncoin in this case), and probably other details...