/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>54589513
>snark itself is not that complex.

Zcash literally comes with a USE AT YOUR OWN RISK warning label. Insufficiently battle-tested tech = experimental tech.

>>51569967
>Monero doesn't even compare.

In the sense that Monero's tech doesn't come with disclaimers warning about the risks of using it, absolutely.

>>50619900

lol zk-SNARKs are still so complex and experimental they gotta add a disclaimer to warn users about the risk involved

>>50482494
>I know they are retarded but can someone spoonfeed me why?

Several reasons:

As long as Bitcoin's transparent blockchain is part of the equation it will never be taken seriously by actual OPSEC experts.

Why? Because a privacy solution *without* a transparent blockchain e.g. Monero doesn't have to engineer solutions around such a glaring vulnerability, and when it comes to security increasing systemic complexity is a BIG and I mean BIIIIIG no-no.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_surface

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overengineering


Furthermore, Spinner uses zk-SNARKs, which is still experimental and largely unproven tech that could still end up causing a catastrophic systemic failure, ergo all the disclaimers.

Finally, none of the gurus on darknet OPSEC/NETSEC forums are even talking about Spinner, Railgun, Lightning Network, whateverthefuck, which pretty much tells you everything.

>>50432190
>superior next-gen tech.

That still comes with disclaimers warning about the risks involved with using it lolololol

>>50343692
>when are we getting zero knowledge proofs in xmr? it's time

Monero already uses ZKPs in RingCT, specifically Pedersen commitments & Bulletproofs+.

Or did you mean zk-SNARKs? Because that shit is still experimental and requires further beta-testing to mitigate the risks that come with using it.

>>50171367
>Trusted setup is history. You no longer have any excuses to keep using Monero.

lol getting rid of the trusted setup doesn't change the fact that zk-SNARKs is still unproven experimental tech that requires warning labels. You seriously expect people to put their money into something that unpredictable?

Nice try but ZEC is DOA, fella.

>>49831454
>the fact that zkp's aren't as 'battle tested',

That's a pretty big deal, prolonged battle-testing under adversarial conditions is where you prove that your tech and its implementation actually work reliably. Until then, you're still at the "I assume it all works" stage.

And when it comes to my money, I ain't storing shit in experimental technology that still comes with disclaimers.

>>49341959
>BTC doesn’t have infinite supply

Infinite over an infinite timescale, genius. Fixed and predictable emission forever.


>also XMR tech has been obsoleted by zcash.

You mean the tech that is still so new and unproven that they have to warn users about the risks of using it?

>>49342217
>what tech does monero use?

The kind that doesn't come with disclaimers .