v0.10.13.x RC5 Testing

stonehedge · Sep 8, 2014

AjM said:
BCT GUI critics: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg8733530#msg8733530

Its a well written post. I guess it comes back to trying to imagine using Darkcoin as a complete newcomer.

kryptofoo · Sep 8, 2014

stonehedge said:
Its a well written post. I guess it comes back to trying to imagine using Darkcoin as a complete newcomer.

It's a good idea he suggests. If we do end up getting a start button I think there should also be a stop button.

innergy · Sep 8, 2014

Just put some hash on NOMP

Diirk · Sep 8, 2014

Evan Duffield,
I want to point out some flaws in the user flows of Darkcoin RC5 client. Please note that I work with user interfaces on a daily basis.

Current:
1) User can enable or disable anonimization, disabled by default.
2) If enabled, every time you start the client, it starts anomimizing any non-anonimized funds automatically.

Issues with Current:
1) It takes some effort to figure out how to enable anonimzation (Darksend). It's quite hidden.
2) When enabled, the client simply starts anonimizing all your funds automatically, without user request. To me, as a user, this feels very intrusive. What if I started the client to quickly check my funds, not to have my funds anonimized. The task is to start the client, not to start the client and anonimize funds at the same time. This is a very poor user experience. Usually in user flow design, flows are split per task type. In Darkcoin, tasks that are totally different are merged as one. Things even become worse if my wallet has a password: I get the password prompt shortly after enabling the client. My first reaction is, why the hell does the password prompt show, I didn't do anything? It looks like a bug. At the very least, the password prompt should explain why it is showing automatically.

Proposed:
The anonimization process absolutely needs to be user initiated, it should never happen automatically (although there could be advanced options for that). I'd like to compare the Darkcoin client to virus scanning software, since I feel that both software types share similarities in terms of task architecture.

Does virus scanning software start scanning your computer once you start the virus scanner? No, it doesn't. Why not? Because that would be intrusive. The user requests to start the program, not to perform any type of action in addition. Instead, virus scanning software simply has a big green 'Quick Scan' button in their home screen. The Darkcoin client should have the equivalent of this: A big green 'Anonimize Funds' button (do not call it "Darksend" please as this name is misleading). Clicking it would start the anonimizing process. If your wallet has a password, then you would see a prompt at this stage to enter your password. 'Anonimize Funds' button would be disabled if all your funds have already been anonimized.

Evan Duffield, can I get your opinion on this? I feel this would be a considerable improvement to RC5 as current implementation is very likely to scare off new users since the anonimization user flow is far from optimal at the moment..

flare · Sep 8, 2014

flare said:
Maybe atavacron could give us some insight how he managed his 50 testnet nodes using SaltStack back in the days of RC3 - or even get him back joining testnet

Got in contact with atavacron and he will generously add some testnet masternodes

TaoOfSatoshi · Sep 8, 2014

Diirk said:
Evan Duffield,
I want to point out some flaws in the user flows of Darkcoin RC5 client. Please note that I work with user interfaces on a daily basis.

Current:
1) User can enable or disable anonimization, disabled by default.
2) If enabled, every time you start the client, it starts anomimizing any non-anonimized funds automatically.

Issues with Current:
1) It takes some effort to figure out how to enable anonimzation (Darksend). It's quite hidden.
2) When enabled, the client simply starts anonimizing all your funds automatically, without user request. To me, as a user, this feels very intrusive. What if I started the client to quickly check my funds, not to have my funds anonimized. The task is to start the client, not to start the client and anonimize funds at the same time. This is a very poor user experience. Usually in user flow design, flows are split per task type. In Darkcoin, tasks that are totally different are merged as one. Things even become worse if my wallet has a password: I get the password prompt shortly after enabling the client. My first reaction is, why the hell does the password prompt show, I didn't do anything? It looks like a bug. At the very least, the password prompt should explain why it is showing automatically.

Proposed:
The anonimization process absolutely needs to be user initiated, it should never happen automatically (although there could be advanced options for that). I'd like to compare the Darkcoin client to virus scanning software, since I feel that both software types share similarities in terms of task architecture.

Does virus scanning software start scanning your computer once you start the virus scanner? No, it doesn't. Why not? Because that would be intrusive. The user requests to start the program, not to perform any type of action in addition. Instead, virus scanning software simply has a big green 'Quick Scan' button in their home screen. The Darkcoin client should have the equivalent of this: A big green 'Anonimize Funds' button (do not call it "Darksend" please as this name is misleading). Clicking it would start the anonimizing process. If your wallet has a password, then you would see a prompt at this stage to enter your password. 'Anonimize Funds' button would be disabled if all your funds have already been anonimized.

Evan Duffield, can I get your opinion on this? I feel this would be a considerable improvement to RC5 as current implementation is very likely to scare off new users since the anonimization user flow is far from optimal at the moment..

I have created a report in Jira which deals with this issue as well as adding on optional feature of a estimated transaction fee before proceeding:

http://jira.darkcoin.qa/browse/DRK-59

Tao

eduffield · Sep 8, 2014

****** PLEASE UPDATE TO v9.13.4 (Stable) OR 10.13.4 (RC) *******

It looks like development should start slowing down here soon and we can prep for a full release of RC5 on mainnet. If anyone else has anything they'd like to see in RC5, now would be the time to get it into Jira.

I'm planning on doing two or three more versions, then after that we'll do a final test to make sure Darksend works properly with three participants. Currently Darksend is setup to use 2 clients per Darksend transaction. This is not an ideal amount of participants to use for Darksend but it's been very convenient for testing purposes. Changing this setting to three participants alone adds another layer of anonymity and increased protection from a sybil attacks.

- Fixed issue with denominating small amounts of DRK in large wallet (http://jira.darkcoin.qa/browse/DRK-46)
- Made splitting up initial inputs much more efficient. Now when splitting up, it will use powers of two from 4096 DRK in reverse to get the best possible mix of inputs for the next phase without any bloat to the blockchain or to the users wallet.
- Fixed "transaction too large" due to the initial splitting function
- Stopeed collateral/fee creation when it should have been doing a full split instead
- Sometimes the client would denominate less than the intended amount, then do small denominations to make up the difference. This slowed down the transactions and created extra transactions that weren't needed.
- Darksend should anonymize very close to the intended amount now
- Added Amount/Rounds to overview screen so you can see current settings
- Overview darksend cache is cleared on settings change (will instantly update)
- Fixed issue with completed amount jumping around (http://jira.darkcoin.qa/browse/DRK-46)
- Made messages less threatening (http://jira.darkcoin.qa/browse/DRK-60)

PS : Please move testing funds to a new wallet. This version has massive optimizations for the way inputs are stored and split up. This will make everything much more efficient.

Stable Binaries
http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/master-rc5/darkcoin-qt
http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/master-rc5/darkcoind

RC5 Binaries
http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/rc5/darkcoin-qt
http://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/rc5/darkcoind

flare · Sep 8, 2014

qwizzie · Sep 8, 2014

soooo close at getting my 20.000 tDRK's anonymized to 19.500 tDRK's with 8 rounds (i actually got to 98% this time).
oh well, awaiting version 4 to start all over again

eduffield · Sep 8, 2014

Diirk said:
Evan Duffield,
I want to point out some flaws in the user flows of Darkcoin RC5 client. Please note that I work with user interfaces on a daily basis.

Current:
1) User can enable or disable anonimization, disabled by default.
2) If enabled, every time you start the client, it starts anomimizing any non-anonimized funds automatically.

Issues with Current:
1) It takes some effort to figure out how to enable anonimzation (Darksend). It's quite hidden.
2) When enabled, the client simply starts anonimizing all your funds automatically, without user request. To me, as a user, this feels very intrusive. What if I started the client to quickly check my funds, not to have my funds anonimized. The task is to start the client, not to start the client and anonimize funds at the same time. This is a very poor user experience. Usually in user flow design, flows are split per task type. In Darkcoin, tasks that are totally different are merged as one. Things even become worse if my wallet has a password: I get the password prompt shortly after enabling the client. My first reaction is, why the hell does the password prompt show, I didn't do anything? It looks like a bug. At the very least, the password prompt should explain why it is showing automatically.

Proposed:
The anonimization process absolutely needs to be user initiated, it should never happen automatically (although there could be advanced options for that). I'd like to compare the Darkcoin client to virus scanning software, since I feel that both software types share similarities in terms of task architecture.

Does virus scanning software start scanning your computer once you start the virus scanner? No, it doesn't. Why not? Because that would be intrusive. The user requests to start the program, not to perform any type of action in addition. Instead, virus scanning software simply has a big green 'Quick Scan' button in their home screen. The Darkcoin client should have the equivalent of this: A big green 'Anonimize Funds' button (do not call it "Darksend" please as this name is misleading). Clicking it would start the anonimizing process. If your wallet has a password, then you would see a prompt at this stage to enter your password. 'Anonimize Funds' button would be disabled if all your funds have already been anonimized.

Evan Duffield, can I get your opinion on this? I feel this would be a considerable improvement to RC5 as current implementation is very likely to scare off new users since the anonimization user flow is far from optimal at the moment..

I think you bring up some great points. Is it better to make a "Anonymize Funds" popup (seems kind of annoying) or what if I added a button to the overview screen that said "Begin Anonymization", when you clicked that button it would ask "This operation requires your password, etc" and enable Darksend.

qwizzie · Sep 8, 2014

eduffield said:
I think you bring up some great points. Is it better to make a "Anonymize Funds" popup (seems kind of annoying) or what if I added a button to the overview screen that said "Begin Anonymization", when you clicked that button it would ask "This operation requires you password etc" and enable Darksend.

''Begin Anonymization'' or ''Start Anonymization'' button in overview would be great .. but then we likely need a "Stop Anonymization" button in the overview as well....

Edit : maybe we can put extra buttons for this in there somewhere between the Overview, Send, Receive, Transactions and Addresses buttons ?

Edit 2 : maybe you can even keep it with one button .. pressed once it starts.. pressed again it stops.
(with changing descriptions... start / stops)

TaoOfSatoshi · Sep 8, 2014

eduffield said:
I think you bring up some great points. Is it better to make a "Anonymize Funds" popup (seems kind of annoying) or what if I added a button to the overview screen that said "Begin Anonymization", when you clicked that button it would ask "This operation requires your password, etc" and enable Darksend.

Yes, the button followed by the password prompt would be ideal.

Tao

Diirk · Sep 8, 2014

If we could do this for RC5 it would be a massive win in my opinion. It would make the wallet so much more user friendly and less scary. It would also make anonimization more accessible by default, since it is currently disabled by default and the option to enable it is kind of hidden right now. For power users, we could still have an advanced option to have same functionality as currently.

HinnomTX · Sep 8, 2014

Code:

ubuntu2@108:~$ darkcoind getinfo
{
  "version" : 101304,
  "protocolversion" : 70037,
  "walletversion" : 60000,
  "balance" : 14124.44090011,
  "anonymized_balance" : 0.00000000,
  "blocks" : 28337,
  "timeoffset" : 0,
  "connections" : 15,
  "proxy" : "",
  "difficulty" : 0.95208694,
  "testnet" : true,
  "keypoololdest" : 1406001326,
  "keypoolsize" : 1001,
  "paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
  "mininput" : 0.00001000,
  "errors" : ""
}


ubuntu2@108:~$ darkcoind masternode list
{
  "54.68.102.109:19999" : 1,
  "54.68.80.151:19999" : 1,
  "54.206.23.188:19999" : 1,
  "198.50.148.87:19999" : 1,
  "92.222.10.179:19999" : 1,
  "211.99.224.162:19999" : 1,
  "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
  "188.226.223.5:19999" : 1,
  "54.68.81.45:19999" : 1,
  "54.68.84.193:19999" : 1,
  "54.68.88.75:19999" : 1,
  "202.171.65.13:19999" : 1,
  "202.171.65.14:19999" : 1,
  "108.61.199.31:19999" : 1,
  "176.31.109.97:19999" : 1,
  "108.61.198.220:19999" : 1,
  "54.189.217.57:19999" : 1
}

DrkMiner · Sep 9, 2014

Just an idea to simplify the GUI.

Remove the current "Main" tab from "Options" and add the above to the main page of the wallet.

1) No anonymization will start by default. User will decide the amount (no need to keep DRK level to anonymization).
2) Drop box with levels basic, medium, strong.
3) Estimated fee for the transaction.
4) Start button
5) Progress bar would be nice.

Diirk · Sep 9, 2014

DrkMiner said:
Just an idea to simplify the GUI.

Remove the current "Main" tab from "Options" and add the above to the main page of the wallet.

1) No anonymization will start by default. User will decide the amount (no need to keep DRK level to anonymization).
2) Drop box with levels basic, medium, strong.
3) Estimated fee for the transaction.
4) Start button
5) Progress bar would be nice.

It needs to show the bare minimum. Amount to be anonymized is not important (just anonimize until user presses button again). Anonimization level is not important (use default). Transaction fee is not important. It needs to be one big green button, that's all. When enabled, pressing again would stop anonimization. What you are suggesting should be there as well, but in a separate tab ('Anonymize' tab?) for users who want more control.

JGCMiner · Sep 9, 2014

Diirk said:
If we could do this for RC5 it would be a massive win in my opinion. It would make the wallet so much more user friendly and less scary. It would also make anonimization more accessible by default, since it is currently disabled by default and the option to enable it is kind of hidden right now. For power users, we could still have an advanced option to have same functionality as currently.

I agree. Actually, I would take it a little further for the purposes of clarity. Here are my suggestions:

Evan,

1) There should be a "start" and a "stop" button on the overview page. The first time you hit start there should be a pop up allowing you to set rounds and amount to anonymized. Then user should then be told that the settings can be adjusted in the future in the menu options.

2)I would set the default send type to "non-anonymous" funds and automatically move it to "anonymous" funds the first time the user hits start. "No preference" is dangerous (in terms of lost anonymity) by your own admission but currently this is the default (most normal users will never change default settings).

3) Everything time a user hits start (including the first time after initial customization) there should be a popup with the estimated fees for anonymization along with a "do you wish to continue?" confirmation message.

4) Finally, set a time limit before the user has to hit "start" again. In other words if you hit start all funds added to your wallet will be autodenom'ed up to the set value for 24 hours (or maybe a bit shorter). After that the user has to hit "start" again.

Just my 2cents. I will add a feature request to Jira.

coingun · Sep 9, 2014

Diirk said:
It needs to show the bare minimum. Amount to be anonymized is not important (just anonimize until user presses button again). Anonimization level is not important (use default). Transaction fee is not important. It needs to be one big green button, that's all. When enabled, pressing again would stop anonimization. What you are suggesting should be there as well, but in a separate tab ('Anonymize' tab?) for users who want more control.

I would argue some noobies might think the amount it's going to cost might be very important. Not sure how easy it is to guess the transaction fee but i think it would be very useful if that was shown.

moli · Sep 9, 2014

eduffield said:
I think you bring up some great points. Is it better to make a "Anonymize Funds" popup (seems kind of annoying) or what if I added a button to the overview screen that said "Begin Anonymization", when you clicked that button it would ask "This operation requires your password, etc" and enable Darksend.

There have been talks that we can have more anonymity by going through 8 rounds several times. Can we do it yet? So far I haven't seen the wallet do it. Could we have a feature that when we use it, the client knows it's supposed to anonymize the anonymized fund again? Thank you!

mbilker · Sep 9, 2014

David said:
Guys, I'm very, very sad that our testnet has so few masternodes. IMO, creating a larger and more robust testnet is vital.

To that end, I'm offering a bounty of 1.5 DRK (real ones =D) to anyone who will set up an MN on testnet. Maximum of 4.5 DRK will be paid out. Will y'all accept my challenge? Will others join in and offer additional bounties?

*Hosting on VULTR costs $5 per month, so 1.5 DRK at current prices should get you roughly one month of hosting.

I host mine (176.31.109.97) on OVH SAS (Kimsufi in France) for roughly 5 euros a month. I live in the US but OVH is good since it is fast where I live still. I run a masternode on testnet. I check on it every few days. I just noticed that darkcoin was not responding today. Luckily it did not cause corruption when I killed it.

EDIT: I use that server for other purposes too. So it isn't a total waste of money on only one low usage thing.

v0.10.13.x RC5 Testing

Well-known member

Active member

Member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Core Developer

Well-known member

Well-known member

Core Developer

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Active member

Active member

Member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member