CUTcoin - another privacy project

There is one more project making excellent progress in the privacy coin world, CUTcoin.
CUTcoin has POS and Privacy tokens (CNT) implemented on the Cryptonote protocol.




I’ll examine your project. Thanks for a sharing. I have a quick question. Is CNT just a coin like Monero, Dash and other private coins or an ecosystem like Incognito? @petter_wotsan Welcome to the club.

Btw, thanks to your links :slight_smile: , I noticed that PRV would be 20th privacy coin in terms of marketcap in this index: https://cryptoslate.com/cryptos/privacy/ . I think we should contact with cryptoslate. How dare can they ignore PRV? :joy:

1 Like

Just having an implementation of the cryptonote protocol in a POS system really isn’t that much different from others including this project itself. Forking and changing the project to include more private transactions now with the migration away from POW from the start is a good step forward. But it won’t really be enough to drive people to invest it in.

They hope to have a DEFI exchange but currently are transacting at just under 12 thousand US dollars in trading volume on the main token. Max supply of 200 million with 115.5 million already mined. There is a premine on it of 4 million coins. 2 minute block timings.

At the low level it’s basically a fork of the monero blockchain with modifications for the block reward system to use the widely popular NXT proof of stake consensus protocol. There is really nothing of note here and I think that is why people are not that interested in it. Overall I don’t think this will get much traction.

3 Likes

You are only looking at the consensus protocol. The project has privacy tokens which can be deployed on the native chain.

  1. NXT is not private, Whatever you do on the NXT chain is open.
  2. NXT assets are not private either.
  3. Do you know any project where one can deploy tokens which have all privacy features as Monero?
  4. NXT and all assets deployed on it do not have Bulletproof and RingCT implemented (Its CN features)
  5. There are a number of other projects with a lot worst Coin emission than Cutcoin (Look at NXT itself).
  6. have you ever thought of how difficult is it to implement RingCT with other assets on the same chain?
  7. Developers of the project never ask for any fundraising even initial distribution was done by POW.
  8. You sound like implementing the protocol of one project on the other is like a copy-paste, you should better try before judging one.
  9. Even Monero dev was impressed by the privacy asset tokens and you, “There is really nothing of note here and I think that is why people are not that interested in it.”
    No offense man.

Hi man,
The CNT is privacy asset tokens that are deployed on the CUTcoin chain (native chain).
But yes all assets (CNT-1) and native (CUT) tokens have all privacy properties as Monero.

Petter I also mean no offense to this but the truth is when you are comparing cryptocurrencies you don’t compare it to NXT. You compare it to other similar currencies which are going to attract similar people. Which would be monero and in turn this project too. There are ■■■■■■■ tons of cryptocurrencies made by a fork of another project which just changes the consensus protocol. I’m not saying that it is overall easy, but if that is all they got it is nothing to note in this space.

12 million market cap with a combined 1 million of volume on all exchanges for NXT. At least NXT has some traction. Cutcoin doesn’t have enough liquidity and it’s trying to go up against monero. While it is cool you can make other tokens on-top of it overall there is no defi which means the exchange of the tokens are peer to peer. Great for showing off to your friends that you got a coin and playing around with it but not so great for any kind of value systems. Ethereum has a full on virtual machine which kills pretty much any other token market just do to how much you can program on it. There is a reason why pretty much every token with the top cap is running on ethereum. It’s not just the programmability but the ability to easily exchange and provide liquidity. That is something these projects just do not have.

NTX proof of stake protocol is widely used but it has a major downfall. The staked cryptocurrency needs to have sizable enough liquidity (one to allow people to purchase so they can also stake) and overall value size in the staked amount. Which means that when you are looking at the pooling systems they have (currently 2697200 CUT) that has on current market rate of $0.03 an overall security provided by the pool of $80,916. That’s right if anyone wanted to attack this network they could do it with about a quarter of a million. Timing the buys over multiple months to not increase the price too much and then boom launch a ■■■■ ton of validators and grind the network to a halt by not accepting any transactions and ■■■■■■■ up all the checks with block delays. They would need to fork the network because they can’t slash the validators being that they are not hitting any of the slashing methods. They are not going against the protocol but using it to their advantage. While I highly doubt that will ever happen it’s more so not a testiment of their security but the lack of interest to attack. It’s not worth it to attack is two fold. The cost of disruption on it’s network would give pretty much 0 value.

When a project is running on POS and your coin doesn’t have a substantial enough market cap or volume at the time to counter a single whale just taking over your network it doesn’t have the required security for bigger players to put in money. That in turn stops it from ever getting off the ground. Ethereum’s POW to POS transition is a work of art. While it doesn’t have privacy it does have security which in a POS system is many times more important when you want people to transact sizable enough value on it.

Monero’s network is slow in comparison but it has substantial security with its anti-asic POW power. The changes they have made on it has also increased the throughput by reducing the transaction size while increasing privacy. When you are going up against that you got to have something more than POS, privacy, tokens! You got to have a vibrant community backing it, researchers looking at it as an interesting idea, and people wanting it’s downfall by attacking it proving their security. Your idea needs to be something someone else in these other communities can’t replicate easily. If monero just got up and decided one day to switch to POS cutcoin would be dead in the water with or without tokens.

That’s my food for thought on this. You can think that I’m wrong. I don’t see really any future for that coin unless it can bring interest. If you want to go up against the others you got to do something far better than the others to have people take their liquidity and put it in your project.

It’s not only about protocol, it is all about how things from one project have been implemented on the other.
Does NXT have privacy features like XMR?
Can you deploy the privacy tokens on NXT?
By the way, remember that many of the well-known projects are a fork from some other well know projects back then.

About supply, demand, price, and market cap, they all are dynamic. In the crypto world, one never knows when and how the project gets boosted.
If you look at the Tari project it’s also trying to achieve something CUTcoin dev has already developed but the only difference is that project is backed by some big investors and Monero devs. So it has a large community backup.

You need to understand the security of the network relies upon the protocols in which the network is built upon. When you have a proof of stake network which has minimal value and a privacy layer with ring signatures you go into a very risky senario. A person could reasonably have over 51% of the entire network’s value in their wallets and basically own all of it with people not knowing all the movements of those funds. It’s a problem because it’s absolutely critical to have a good foundation. While prices are dynamic in a proof of stake networks it represent the overall security against nefarious actors who seek to control the network. The less people involved, the less overall decentralized validators, the value for each token in perspective to the total market cap, all these things go into breaking the foundational security that is required to have a trusted blockchain which can hold a lot of value.

  1. Do you think the person who is holding 51% of the total supply is willing to destroy
    the chain by doing a 51% attack? Basically, he/she is destroying the value of their
    own holding by doing so.
  2. If one tries to cover/buy 51% of the total supply, how could one expect to the price
    will remain the same!
  3. For POS coins 51% attack does not seem practical and instead more theoretical,
    how many POS coins have been 51% attacked? However, I understand your
    concern about a person with malicious intention holding 51% of the supply and due
    to the private nature of the project, no one could notice the fund movement.

1: They won’t destroy the chain but control the chain. A big difference where any voting systems will at the core just a one person vote. To an outsider it won’t look like it though. It is very profitable to control a network like that. Don’t think tyrannical government think dark government. A person who doesn’t make a peep.

2: They can get it from staking a large portion of their funds to accumulate more and more of the coins and slowly buy up supply. You don’t need to buy it at once. You buy it over time to not cause the price to fluctuate greatly. Probably at the same time as you are staking and getting more and more rewards.