I like both ideas, although the domain aliasing seems like a (minor) PITA.  The Namecoins I spend landgrabbing and squatting on .bit domains never turned a profit, but human-friendly vanity addresses are still very popular with the kids nowadays.   

Since Namecoin is merge-mined with BTC and thus very secure and more decentralized than (higher barrier to entry) ICANN DNS, perhaps we should just register one .bit address to store/resolve all of our various coin addresses?  EG [btc/ltc/xpm/xmr/bbr/xdn/via/xcn]:bitfreak.bit

The land-grab (but not cybersquatting) may be curtailed by only allowing block solvers to register aliases.  BBR uses this constraint and limits alias creation to one per block, which also creates an additional incentive to solo mine.  OTOH, pools could create an additional revenue (and dev donation) stream by offering alias registration services via flat-rate, priority, or auction based pricing mechanisms.

Lol yeah I was expecting him to edit out that first part of the convo but I'm glad he didn't, everyone should read Principia Discordia.

I did mention "community checkpoints" some where near the end of the discussion. Where can I read more about this Monero checkpointing?

Well I'm not sure what they mean when they say "a loosely distributed checkpoint alert system" but I'm guessing it's some sort of decentralized checkpoint system, which might be a plausible solution to the Secret Chain Attack. We could release a new checkpoint hash each week but then users would have to trust our decision about which chain is the right one and that could introduce an unwanted level of centralization, which is why a decentralized or "distributed checkpoint alert system" could be an interesting solution. But when they say "loosely distributed" it gives me the impression there's still some level of centralization in the Monero checkpoint alert system. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of technical information on how it works.

Tweeted this -

https://twitter.com/Kolin_Quark/status/522714382812196864

- I think you left out a key opportunity to educate the interviewer around the economics and how your m7 algo should inspire a better distribution due to a resistance against monopoly -

awesome educational pod cast

- also lol at interviewer saying "anon" is "popular" if you take into account a rigged market sure, this  freshly done dog turd is both popular and anon as well -

lets see a "Popular" Anon crypto that is distributed with a known , common CPoW algo - ha ha.  

this market is very "talking candy from baby" like, sometimes.

Was promoting Cryptonite in an Alt-coin forum I share with some friends the other day. Some interest though I got a fairly quick comment about the README.md file on the github page being just stock Bitcoin's.

Perhaps this is a small thing would could be fixed easily to convey more relevant information to newcomers and lend extra credibility as well.

I'm sure there are people better suited to this but I can have a go of it as I have more time.

I let my Bitcoin wallet and Cryptonite wallet get out of sync by eight days. I then started them both at the same time to see which would finish syncing first.
I was expecting Bitcoin to lose badly.
Bitcoin won by six minutes. 

Well in that case there isn't much difference between what they need to do. If you wait like a few weeks then Cryptonite should definitely win, because Cryptonite will only attempt to download the last 10k blocks, but Bitcoin will attempt to download every block it has missed. Bitcoin may have been faster in your test simply because there are more bitcoin seed nodes or because Cryptonite lost a few minutes downloading the trie.

EDIT: actually it's also very important to remember that Cryptonite has a block rate of 1 per minute where as Bitcoin is 1 every 10 minutes, and that's probably why Bitcoin won in your test, because there were less blocks to download. But like I said Cryptonite will still win if you wait a few weeks and run the same test because Cryptonite only needs to download the last 10k blocks regardless of how long you stay offline.

the features are very good, so all we need is an experienced promoter for this coin. XCN looks so nice with the mini-blockchain, it would even work perfectly on a mobile device because of that.

TYVM for the link.  This looks very interesting, like SuperNet and XC's Blocknet/XBridge, but without all their disconcerting Ponziesque shuck and jive.

Now we may combine the smart contract services available in Clearinghouse (XCH) with the zero confirmation abilities of XCN to create killer Holy Grail applications like decentralized, trustless online casinos/poker tournaments and prediction markets!

XCH might not even be required, if this AT example is applicable:

http://ciyam.org/at/at_lottery.html

This stuff is largely over my head, but I think the point of AT is to create the glue that can bind the features of XCN to script-capable coins like XCH.