[2014-09-18] Bitcoin Core Developer Jeff Garzik Believes NXT is a “Scamcoin” - page 3.

notthematrix

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1000

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

Quote from: devphp on October 02, 2014, 04:04:35 PM

Quote from: notthematrix on October 02, 2014, 03:59:02 PM

NXT is centraly controled

Do you have proof of that?

Sort of like this:

this never heppend!!!

https://blockchain.info/pools are the REAL stats.....

just one of the lies lagacy would come with!!! sorry!
LMAO..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LRRA1tBIS8
so please dont come up with a senario that is not feasible even with a 51% situation.
1 you need to control all the miners GHASH.io is just relaying.
2 if you want control to reverse transactions etc , its not very feasible because you can make more money with mining and blocking a evil chain is very easy.
things that cant be fixed in the centralized NXT protocol.....

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: notthematrix on October 02, 2014, 03:59:02 PM

NXT is centraly controled

Do you have proof of that?

Sort of like this:

notthematrix

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1000

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

Quote from: superresistant on September 30, 2014, 05:33:24 AM

Truth about Bitcoin is that it is highly centralized on many points :

- very few ASIC manufacturers
- very few pools owning 95 % of the network
- very few ASIC farms owned by few companies
- most giant ASIC farms are located in China
- very few developers on Bitcoin code stopping other people from adding modification
- very few nodes around the world (about 7K only)
- 40% of nodes are located in USA
- a Bitcoin foundation with selected members
- 1 Bitcoin forum owning most of discussions

All these points has been discussed for a long time and neglected for the only argument that "it should get better with time".
Sorry to wake you up but it is only getting worse.

So if you are saying that Nxt is centralized, you must admit that Bitcoin is centralized too and that's more a problem.

I'm not starting a kid fight Bitcoin vs Nxt, this is ridiculous but there is a kid on this thread pretending to be smart, repeating the recycled same crap on and on to get attention but I think that Bitcoin have some issues that are far more important at the moment.

Cebtralized means one agreeing party!
With bitcoin this is not the case ,, there is a concensis in running the bitcoin network , but the owners of asics can be in IRAN , ISRAEL , RUSSIA , USA so this means realdezentralized control , blocking any form of abuse by one single party...
https://blockchain.info/pools tels evrything , NXT is centraly controled , and is as "save" as fiat , witch has an everage of 27 years.....
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.nl/2011/08/average-life-expectancy-for-fiat.html
the power of bitcoin is in the fact that is is a concensus between enemys.....

, CHINA , islamtic state , and others...

nutildah

legendary

Activity: 3010

Merit: 8114

Quote from: cbeast on September 30, 2014, 09:56:26 PM

Quote from: nutildah on September 30, 2014, 02:13:32 PM

Maybe Jeff and Josh met at a bipolar disorder anonymous meeting.

Nobody in the Bitcoin community has impuned Jeff's character.

I have. His hatred towards NXT is blind and childish.

habraken

sr. member

Activity: 251

Merit: 250

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on October 02, 2014, 01:07:34 PM

OFFER OF UP TO 20 BTC FOR INFO ON JL777

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/offer-of-up-to-20-btc-for-info-on-jl777-806495

Hilarious popcorn-thread Grin

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

OFFER OF UP TO 20 BTC FOR INFO ON JL777

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/offer-of-up-to-20-btc-for-info-on-jl777-806495

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1014

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: nutildah on September 30, 2014, 02:13:32 PM

Maybe Jeff and Josh met at a bipolar disorder anonymous meeting.

Nobody in the Bitcoin community has impuned Jeff's character.

nutildah

legendary

Activity: 3010

Merit: 8114

Maybe Jeff and Josh met at a bipolar disorder anonymous meeting.

stereotype

legendary

Activity: 1554

Merit: 1000

http://cointelegraph.com/news/112643/the-mystery-of-the-missing-1000000-nxt

Any comment Jeff?

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1014

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: kodtycoon on September 30, 2014, 06:38:00 AM

Quote from: cbeast on September 30, 2014, 06:20:30 AM

Quote from: kodtycoon on September 30, 2014, 06:14:46 AM

Quote from: cbeast on September 30, 2014, 05:54:18 AM

Quote from: devphp on September 29, 2014, 11:08:28 PM

Quote from: cbeast on September 29, 2014, 09:03:23 PM

Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.

The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate.

Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds?

he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way.

you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth.

Wow. You played the "T" card so soon? I guess your hand is played out.

it seems you are the one who has played and lost every hand. Roll Eyes

Nice burn dood.

kodtycoon

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 1002

Quote from: cbeast on September 30, 2014, 06:20:30 AM

Quote from: kodtycoon on September 30, 2014, 06:14:46 AM

Quote from: cbeast on September 30, 2014, 05:54:18 AM

Quote from: devphp on September 29, 2014, 11:08:28 PM

Quote from: cbeast on September 29, 2014, 09:03:23 PM

Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.

The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate.

Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds?

he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way.

you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth.

Wow. You played the "T" card so soon? I guess your hand is played out.

it seems you are the one who has played and lost every hand. Roll Eyes

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1014

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: kodtycoon on September 30, 2014, 06:14:46 AM

Quote from: cbeast on September 30, 2014, 05:54:18 AM

Quote from: devphp on September 29, 2014, 11:08:28 PM

Quote from: cbeast on September 29, 2014, 09:03:23 PM

Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.

The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate.

Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds?

he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way.

you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth.

Wow. You played the "T" card so soon? I guess your hand is played out.

kodtycoon

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 1002

Quote from: cbeast on September 30, 2014, 05:54:18 AM

Quote from: devphp on September 29, 2014, 11:08:28 PM

Quote from: cbeast on September 29, 2014, 09:03:23 PM

Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.

The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate.

Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds?

he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way.

you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth.

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1014

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: devphp on September 29, 2014, 11:08:28 PM

Quote from: cbeast on September 29, 2014, 09:03:23 PM

Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.

The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate.

Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds?

superresistant

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1131

Truth about Bitcoin is that it is highly centralized on many points :

- very few ASIC manufacturers
- very few pools owning 95 % of the network
- very few ASIC farms owned by few companies
- most giant ASIC farms are located in China
- very few developers on Bitcoin code stopping other people from adding modification
- very few nodes around the world (about 7K only)
- 40% of nodes are located in USA
- a Bitcoin foundation with selected members
- 1 Bitcoin forum owning most of discussions

All these points has been discussed for a long time and neglected for the only argument that "it should get better with time".
Sorry to wake you up but it is only getting worse.

So if you are saying that Nxt is centralized, you must admit that Bitcoin is centralized too and that's more a problem.

I'm not starting a kid fight Bitcoin vs Nxt, this is ridiculous but there is a kid on this thread pretending to be smart, repeating the recycled same crap on and on to get attention but I think that Bitcoin have some issues that are far more important at the moment.

gmx95

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

I think ultimately every "coin" project has a right to exist and only the time can tell what is scam and what is not.

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: cbeast on September 29, 2014, 09:03:23 PM

Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.

The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate.

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1014

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: habraken on September 29, 2014, 12:16:48 PM

Quote from: cbeast on September 27, 2014, 08:01:15 AM

Quote from: devphp on September 27, 2014, 01:20:54 AM

On the contrary, it's hard to convince people that Bitcoin is decentralized now after Ghash owned 51%-53% of its hashrate back in June, and probably continues to own half or more of its hashrate now disguised at other mining addresses, or do you think they switched off part of their equipment and decided they should lose on their investment? Think again.

You don't seem to understand how mining pools operate. It's possible the 51% was a statistical artifact. You also seem to think that people have expensive capital intentionally sitting idle. That may work for paper investments, but Bitcoiners work for a living. If GHash.io is indeed a super miner, then they deserve the profits they make while the rest of the world drools over their hyperinflating paper notes. Hashrate is growing exponentially. Bitcoin is becoming competitive and you ain't seen nothing yet.

It's not about 'deserving the profits'. It's about the effects and possible risks of centralization.

And, if you want to make that point, about wasting energy and resources in a competition who can burn the most energy. Which also creates a fiat leak btw: miners háve to sell coins to pay the bills.

Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.

habraken

sr. member

Activity: 251

Merit: 250

Quote from: cbeast on September 27, 2014, 08:01:15 AM

Quote from: devphp on September 27, 2014, 01:20:54 AM

On the contrary, it's hard to convince people that Bitcoin is decentralized now after Ghash owned 51%-53% of its hashrate back in June, and probably continues to own half or more of its hashrate now disguised at other mining addresses, or do you think they switched off part of their equipment and decided they should lose on their investment? Think again.

You don't seem to understand how mining pools operate. It's possible the 51% was a statistical artifact. You also seem to think that people have expensive capital intentionally sitting idle. That may work for paper investments, but Bitcoiners work for a living. If GHash.io is indeed a super miner, then they deserve the profits they make while the rest of the world drools over their hyperinflating paper notes. Hashrate is growing exponentially. Bitcoin is becoming competitive and you ain't seen nothing yet.

It's not about 'deserving the profits'. It's about the effects and possible risks of centralization.

And, if you want to make that point, about wasting energy and resources in a competition who can burn the most energy. Which also creates a fiat leak btw: miners háve to sell coins to pay the bills.

devphp

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 260

Quote from: arnuschky on September 29, 2014, 11:44:25 AM

Quote from: cbeast on September 26, 2014, 07:38:46 AM

The entire premise behind PoS is false. PoW is used to solve the Byzantine Generals problem. The argument that checkpoints are required is false. They are a safety precaution while Bitcoin is young and vulnerable. The PoS folks go on to say that Bitcoin is centralized because a cabal of elite developers choose when to create a checkpoint. These are strawman arguments.

This. PoS doesn't "achieve consensus", simple as that. It's imposed by the devs fixing artificially a certain version of the blockchain as the correct one (these checkpoints). Note that this is a completely different concept than the checkpointing used in bitcoin.

You remove checkpointing from bitcoin, and it will still work.
You remove checkpointing from PoS, and it will be crashed.

NXT in its bootstrapping phase (which is now) uses rolling automatic checkpoints, 720 blocks deep. Meaning everything older than 720 blocks is set in stone and can't be reversed. Is that what you call artificial fixing? Once the bootstrapping phase is completed and Transparent Forging is implemented in a few months, the window will shorten from 720 to 10 blocks.

Topic: [2014-09-18] Bitcoin Core Developer Jeff Garzik Believes NXT is a “Scamcoin” - page 3. (Read 11030 times)