Topic: A new way to scam newbies (Read 5194 times)
I don't know about DAC's but I think the cow's are up to something.... I don't have proof so I wont say more....
Document proof via spycam.
No one forces me. I just tend to pay attention when intelligent people are speaking.
OMG, why didn't u hit [Ignore]??
(don't answer this question)
Well what you've said is only partially true. Most people ignore you because you are tirelessly vague, and its really hard to debate with you when we have no idea what the hell you're talking about. It's not that i hate you, but i get tired of clicking on your threads and beign let down time and time again.
Hm, I didn't know that u were reading my threads. Who does force u?
No one forces me. I just tend to pay attention when intelligent people are speaking.
Well what you've said is only partially true. Most people ignore you because you are tirelessly vague, and its really hard to debate with you when we have no idea what the hell you're talking about. It's not that i hate you, but i get tired of clicking on your threads and beign let down time and time again.
Hm, I didn't know that u were reading my threads. Who does force u?
he's one of the most ignored members on the board. just hit the ignore button.
Very true. Coz when trolls don't have counter-arguments they hit [Ignore] button.
Well what you've said is only partially true. Most people ignore you because you are tirelessly vague, and its really hard to debate with you when we have no idea what the hell you're talking about. It's not that i hate you, but i get tired of clicking on your threads and beign let down time and time again.
he's one of the most ignored members on the board. just hit the ignore button.
Very true. Coz when trolls don't have counter-arguments they hit [Ignore] button.
wow, what a waste of a thread. 3 pages later and still know one knows what exactly the OP is trying to say
he's one of the most ignored members on the board. just hit the ignore button.
wow, what a waste of a thread. 3 pages later and still know one knows what exactly the OP is trying to say
This site wants to "check my Browser" on access... Bailed out fast as I could.
https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/3181-daycoin-dac-information/
https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/3181-daycoin-dac-information/
Distributed Autonomous Corporation is becoming a popular trend. I predict we'll see at least one major scam related to DAC within next 6 months. Be careful.
Do u mean Ripple Exchange and ButterCoin Exchange ?
Your analogy was pure rubbish though...
These words proved my suspicion about the aliens.
Alice can normalise the decimals, i.e. to 250 and 372, add recursively, then adjust the decimal point back afterwards. As all numbers in computers are Hex or ultimately binary numbers, and they have no decimal points, that's how it works anyway. That was an analogy...
I really dont understand what you are going on about with your claim of a DAC and Turing complete languages. You can create a language targeted to perform a specialised function and not be Turing complete. The whole point of that term is that the language can do any logical function. Either you your deliberately confusing the subject or you're very poorly made your case. possibly both.
U can create a language with only 1 function - launchDAC(). Sorry, but ur point doesn't make much sense and looks like an attempt to argue for the sake of demagogy.
Your analogy was pure rubbish though, and as for arguing, i was asking you to restate your point more clearly. Apparently you cant. You may have a point, you may not, I cant tell because of the evasive reaction to questions. Hows that for demagogy?
Where i'm coming from...
Isn't the Bitcoin protocol a DAC? It's not Turing-complete. Only a genius is able to create a DAC using a Turing-incomplete language.
You've made a bold statement then backed it up with a poor example that doesn't explain the point anyway. I see no reason why Bitcoin isn't a DAC, unless you are defining DAC as something other than a basic understanding of "Distributed Autonomous Corporations". Why even say Bitcoin protocol isn't Turing complete when it isn't a language?
eh, doesn't matter, seems like there is a storm brewing between ethereum and protoshares (or bitshare angleshare??) don't know what the hell those mean but you are right, I actually didn't see the date I assumed bc it was DAC related it couldn't be that old of a thread
angleshare??) don't know what the hell those mean but you are right, I actually didn't see the date I assumed bc it was DAC related it couldn't be that old of a thread ^^^^I kid I kid, LOL the OP is talking about Ethereum, but even though he is apart of nxt I am beginning to respect his opinion
I bet u didn't pay attention to the date of the OP.
^^^^I kid I kid, LOL the OP is talking about Ethereum, but even though he is apart of nxt I am beginning to respect his opinion. Read this article and make your own opinion, https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2014/01/17/ethereum-dagger-pow-is-flawed/ , If I'm wrong ill edit this post
Alice can normalise the decimals, i.e. to 250 and 372, add recursively, then adjust the decimal point back afterwards. As all numbers in computers are Hex or ultimately binary numbers, and they have no decimal points, that's how it works anyway. That was an analogy...
I really dont understand what you are going on about with your claim of a DAC and Turing complete languages. You can create a language targeted to perform a specialised function and not be Turing complete. The whole point of that term is that the language can do any logical function. Either you your deliberately confusing the subject or you're very poorly made your case. possibly both.
U can create a language with only 1 function - launchDAC(). Sorry, but ur point doesn't make much sense and looks like an attempt to argue for the sake of demagogy.
Maybe you can elaborate on that, just from a technical standpoint. What makes Turing-complete language essential to create a DAC?
Well... In plain English I would explain it in such a way:
Imagine 2 people, Alice and Bob. Alice knows only how to add and subtract numbers, but Bob knows how to add, subtract and multiply them.
If u ask Alice to calculate 2*3, she will do it in such a way: 2 + 2 + 2. Or 3 + 3 if she is smart enough. Obviously, Bob would just multiply these numbers.
Now let's ask them to calculate 2.5 * 3.72. Alice won't be able to do it, but Bob will do the same without any problems.
U see there is a difference between Alice and Bob, coz Alice, unlike Bob, is Turing-incomplete.
Alice can normalise the decimals, i.e. to 250 and 372, add recursively, then adjust the decimal point back afterwards. As all numbers in computers are Hex or ultimately binary numbers, and they have no decimal points, that's how it works anyway. I really dont understand what you are going on about with your claim of a DAC and Turing complete languages. You can create a language targeted to perform a specialised function and not be Turing complete. The whole point of that term is that the language can do any logical function. Either you your deliberately confusing the subject or you're very poorly made your case. possibly both.
I disagree. Bitcoin is written is C.
The other stuff you've stated (about DACs) is correct but Bitcoin is *not* written in C - it is written in C++ (there is a *huge* difference).
Ah, right. Sometimes I confuse these 2 languages.
Jump to: