Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" - page 2.

funkenstein

legendary

Activity: 1066

Merit: 1050

Khazad ai-menu!

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 12:35:42 PM

Incorrect. The point is that no matter what proof-of-work algorithm an altcoin employs, those who are protecting Bitcoin will rent enough mining hash rate to fuck your coin forever. They only have to rent it for a short period of time, and your difficulty will be so high that it will never produce a block again. And all the money in the chain will be unspendable for a very, very, very long time.

The "attacker" has the resources to do that to any proof-of-work altcoin which doesn't have the level of hashrate of Bitcoin.

Of course the altcoin can then manually reset the difficulty lower using a fork, but then the attacker can repeat again. It will quickly become clear that the altcoin is fucked.

If Monero starts to approach $1 billion market cap (or perhaps much less if the liquidity is very high, which it is for Monero), this attacker will destroy Monero and profit by shorting.

Dude you need to read tardlema a little longer before reposting the derpage here. (I've been reading for years as you can tell by my fluent orcish).

Otherwise, go ahead and rent some SHA256 asics and attack litecoin and monero with them. I'll wait.

btcxyzzz

legendary

Activity: 888

Merit: 1000

Monero - secure, private and untraceable currency.

Quote from: bitcoinlitcoinbtcltc on June 19, 2016, 02:38:55 PM

Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP Cheesy

ETHEREUM IS FINISHED

Lost all of its credibility

Only valuable among IDIOTS

Someday... you will realize how pathetic you are. Please don't kill yourself then, everybody's got the right to second chance.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Since the start of this thread, my stance remains that Ethereum has its market and if their market wants forks, then so it is.

And that we who disagree with that, and disagree with the hype marketing, then we should compete, not complain.

I wrote that "Crypto is Not Politics" post not to tell them what to do, but to tell people what I would do and to give others the opportunity to consider my logic.

It should not be construed as an attempt to try to force Ethereum and its supporters to change their minds.

My point about Vitalk and Wood is not that I expect the Ethereum community to demote them (and I expect possibly the opposite post-DAO with them being lifted on even higher pedestals), rather to say that we should want to create a competitor which doesn't have personalities that serve as idols and CEOs of the ecosystem.

And of course we hopefully also want to create a competitor with technology that isn't FAIL.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 10:15:26 PM

Quote from: ArticMine on June 21, 2016, 08:57:28 PM

The question in my mind is will this prevent the fork proposed by the devs of Ethereum?

They may still need a soft fork to steal the attacker's 3.5M ETH:

Quote from: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4p7mhc/update_on_the_white_hat_attack/d4iplv9

This is being heavily debated, so keep in mind this is my opinion only. Roughly speaking, yes. A soft fork with a clever one way whitelisting mechanism + a draconian accounting system (which the Robin group has already mostly done) could recover nearly or up to 100% of the DAO funds (over many, many months of course).

That said, a hard fork still stays (IMHO) the simplest, fastest , safest way forward, in the sense that both the soft and hard fork share many of the same attributes (they both require a code upgrade, and the 'hard fork' only affects the relevant transactions). So one wonders the utility of going through all the trouble and risk when the application is nearly identical and it could be all over in the course of a couple of weeks.

I reserve the right to change my opinion on this of course, as I said, many different approaches are being debated at the moment Wink

Thus they establish the precedent of whitelists, blacklists and 666 brutality of the majority consensus (which we know is always ultimately a power vacuum controlled by TPTB).

Vitalik and Wood both showed their true colors as being against the ideals of decentralization and trustless block chain. Did you see this slide Wood put up denying the importance of decentralization:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbT-mKBU6bo#t=444

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 08:46:05 PM

The reason the ETH price rose is because the attacker fucked up by not entirely draining the DAO when he had the chance, and a white hat attack has instead drained the remaining tokens of the DAO into child split contracts which are controlled by whales who promise to not only perform a refund to DAO investors, but also try to infiltrate the attacker's child split contracts to disrupt his ability to cash out:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4p7mhc/update_on_the_white_hat_attack/

So we can see on the chart in my prior post that the price was about to drop like a rock as expected, but the white attack had started just in time to prevent the price drop.

I support the white hat attack, as it adheres to the code. This is a much better solution than forking.

Unfortunately this incident revealed the true attitudes of Vitalik and Gavid Wood, in that they don't respect decentralization. For Ethereum to be respected again, those two need to be banished from any leadership roles.

Edit: the attacker's website appears to be under attack by someone.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: AlexGR on June 21, 2016, 08:28:42 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

If you are talking about Monero the difficulty retargets at every block, such attack is not possible. Cryptonight isn't very ASIC-friendly so you'll have to spend in real GPUs and CPUs to attack.

Renting cpu power shouldn't be a problem.

It enormous quantities it is. I did some estimates here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15312985

AlexGR

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1049

Quote from: ?? on ??

If you are talking about Monero the difficulty retargets at every block, such attack is not possible. Cryptonight isn't very ASIC-friendly so you'll have to spend in real GPUs and CPUs to attack.

Renting cpu power shouldn't be a problem.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

I'll be going quiet.

I just have one more thing to say at this time.

No forks!

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 01:38:05 PM

Charles, I don't think you sufficiently emphasized Bruce Fenton's points. You provided a link that seems lost in a sea of the mix of historical storytelling with a smidgen of your self-aggrandizing verbiage, so I doubt most readers even read what Bruce wrote.

Crypto is Not Politics

I keep reading arguments about how The Will of The People should decide. And how this is the only fair and equitable way. And I am here to say this is 100% retarded bullshit and any one who repeats it (and nonchalantly dismisses this!), is retarded.

What distinguishes the intention of Satoshi's block chain invention from the world we had before it, is that it eliminates politics. The technical reason is because due to the Nash equilibrium, then no one (not even mining nodes) have any fucking control.

If we destroy the Nash equilibrium with a 51% attack (aka fork) by not honoring the decentralized protocol, then we fall into a no-man's land of ambiguous interpretation and the brutality of the majority.

It is as simple as that. Either we choose to honor the code and protocol, or we go back to the depressing clusterfucked world we have before Satoshi.

Now the other problem is that BitCON is also becoming centralized because of economies-of-scale in mining. We haven't yet perfected Satoshi's invention. But that should not deter us from our ideals.

If you support forks, you violate everything Satoshi tried to do for the world.

No forks! No Blockstream forks either! Offer proof-of-burn if you want to propose new features on a new block chain, so that people are autonomous with their money.

And any arguments about empathy and intent in contract law are up against moral hazard which leads to the aforementioned clusterfuck of brutality. Don't reward retarded speculators for not doing due diligence and their derelict incapable developer idols, because they carry the mental affliction of those who want the clusterfucked world that existed prior to Satoshi's invention.

Minecache

legendary

Activity: 2184

Merit: 1024

Vave.com - Crypto Casino

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 11:16:35 AM

Quote from: Auponef on June 21, 2016, 06:18:50 AM

Quote from: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 05:47:29 PM

If the "attacker" is successful at winning the majority hashrate to defeat the fork, I expect a dump down quickly to $7 out of the corner of currently closing wedge.

Might get a bounce from there as many might perceive this as a victory for a decentralized Ethereum, although then potentially start the lawsuits from all the DAO losers. So a bounce could later be followed with a series of declines, eventually taking it down < $1. But as you say, this might take a while.

There are other scenarios though.

That could happen. So why would the miners accept the bribe and destroy a long term business. i hope the miners will make a wise decision.

Forking Ethereum destroys their long-term prospects. The following linked poll only confirms 23% of the people here are retards (the other 77% might also be retarded but it isn't confirmed by the poll):

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/should-ethereum-be-forked-your-opinion-poll-1516799

The rest of us (those who aren't retards) will create a replacement for Ethereum which doesn't break the entire goal of crypto.

What's the goal of crypto? I didn't realise it had been published. Or are you rather trying to speak out of turn for the rest of us?

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

The DAO "attacker" has responded to me:

http://trilema.com/2014/the-woes-of-altcoin-or-why-there-is-no-such-thing-as-cryptocurrencies/#comment-117673

Quote from: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 03:15:08 PM

Quote from: RastMan on June 20, 2016, 03:10:21 PM

It seems 20% of the miners in the ethpool.org do not agree with that. They do not think taking 4% etherum out of circulation is a good idea.
http://ethpool.org/stats/votes

The "attacker" is winning. That was much less than 20% when I looked it a few hours ago.

Nobody in the DAO will ever get their tokens back.

Checkmate.

The "attacker" (aka noble crypto baron) has gained another 15% of support, now at 35% who won't vote for the fork. The baron will win. It is an economic certainty. Money talks, BS walks.

This bullshit about Ethereum will die if The DAO holders lose their funds is FUD. Ethereum will die if you fork it. Don't make the mistake of investing with retarded crowds, as you'll end up bankrupt and retarded.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: ?? on ??

You are not showing me how someone attacking will make impossible to produce Monero blocks again, also did you just quoted yourself as the true? lol

The "attacker's" blog is interesting but he is not god nor the bankers.

It is futile to repeat the logic I already linked you to. I can't argue with someone who doesn't comprehend math. Sorry. You'll just have to live in your fantasy world where you think you are correct.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 12:35:42 PM

Incorrect. The point is that no matter what proof-of-work algorithm an altcoin employs, those who are protecting Bitcoin will rent enough mining hash rate to fuck your coin forever. They only have to rent it for a short period of time, and your difficulty will be so high that it will never produce a block again. And all the money in the chain will be unspendable for a very, very, very long time.

If you are talking about Monero the difficulty retargets at every block, such attack is not possible. Cryptonight isn't very ASIC-friendly so you'll have to spend in real GPUs and CPUs to attack.

Incorrect.

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 12:35:42 PM

If Monero starts to approach $1 billion market cap (or perhaps much less if the liquidity is very high, which it is for Monero), this attacker will destroy Monero and profit by shorting.

Same logic could be applied at Bitcoin if the bankers decide to kill it as they are the "threatened group" and the only ones with enough resources to mount any kind of network attack.

Incorrect again. Try again to read the "attacker's" blog article.

NattyLiteCoin

hero member

Activity: 912

Merit: 1021

If you don’t believe, why are you here?

If anyone that's computer savvy (looks at imnotback) wants to implement the code from goldyloxx and make some coin, ill fund the project😀 Hit me up on PM!

AA loves crypto, I listen to him a lot and have huge respect for him. He cemented my love for this thing years ago. I think he's internally mortified by this event as it's the second biggest black eye in the history of crypto. he's idyllic, so he needs to be bullish on the only other crypto that eclipsed a 1B dollar market cap.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Understand that all your altcoins are either centralized clusterfucks (like Ethereum and include all PoS block chains) or they can be destroyed by an attacker very easily:

Quote from: ArticMine on June 21, 2016, 12:24:41 PM

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 10:31:12 AM

r0ach is full of shit babbling on about how great Monero is. Monero is insecure. The following is from the attacker who is draining the DAO and who did the Mt.Gox attack:

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 09:14:06 AM

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 08:33:12 AM

The "attacker" wrote:

Quote from: http://trilema.com/2016/to-the-dao-and-the-ethereum-community-fuck-you/#comment-117654

...

Nevertheless, Bitcoin (no, not "cryptocurrencies", there is not nor can ever be such a thing as "cryptocurrencies") has put an end to all that. So it dun work no more.

Regarding the linked blog article that the "attacker" provided in the quote in which he explains that altcoins which employ proof-of-work are impossible to secure...

This difficulty attack requires a much higher percentage of the hashpower than a 51% attack.

The article does make a valid point. If a coin uses the same mining algorithm as an "ASIC Goliath coin" that has gone through more than one generation of ASICs, then it can be attacked using the now obsolete first generation ASICs from "ASIC Goliath coin" that would be otherwise worthless junk. The example of Dogecoin in the article would only work if Litecoin goes through more than one generation of ASICs and Dogecoin were not merged mined with Litecoin. Extrapolating this attack to Monero fails because:
1) Monero uses CryptoNight not SHA 256, Ethash, Scrypt etc.
3) CryptoNight is ASIC resistant. There are no ASICs for CryptoNight let alone multiple generations of ASICs
2) Monero has by far the greatest hashrate of all the CryptoNight coins.

Incorrect. The point is that no matter what proof-of-work algorithm an altcoin employs, those who are protecting Bitcoin will rent enough mining hash rate to fuck your coin forever. They only have to rent it for a short period of time, and your difficulty will be so high that it will never produce a block again. And all the money in the chain will be unspendable for a very, very, very long time.

The "attacker" has the resources to do that to any proof-of-work altcoin which doesn't have the level of hashrate of Bitcoin.

Of course the altcoin can then manually reset the difficulty lower using a fork, but then the attacker can repeat again. It will quickly become clear that the altcoin is fucked.

If Monero starts to approach $1 billion market cap (or perhaps much less if the liquidity is very high, which it is for Monero), this attacker will destroy Monero and profit by shorting.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: Auponef on June 21, 2016, 06:18:50 AM

Quote from: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 05:47:29 PM

If the "attacker" is successful at winning the majority hashrate to defeat the fork, I expect a dump down quickly to $7 out of the corner of currently closing wedge.

Might get a bounce from there as many might perceive this as a victory for a decentralized Ethereum, although then potentially start the lawsuits from all the DAO losers. So a bounce could later be followed with a series of declines, eventually taking it down < $1. But as you say, this might take a while.

There are other scenarios though.

That could happen. So why would the miners accept the bribe and destroy a long term business. i hope the miners will make a wise decision.

Forking Ethereum destroys their long-term prospects. The following linked poll only confirms 23% of the people here are retards (the other 77% might also be retarded but it isn't confirmed by the poll):

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/should-ethereum-be-forked-your-opinion-poll-1516799

The rest of us (those who aren't retards) will create a replacement for Ethereum which doesn't break the entire goal of crypto.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 08:33:12 AM

The "attacker" wrote:

Quote from: http://trilema.com/2016/to-the-dao-and-the-ethereum-community-fuck-you/#comment-117654

...

Nevertheless, Bitcoin (no, not "cryptocurrencies", there is not nor can ever be such a thing as "cryptocurrencies") has put an end to all that. So it dun work no more.

Regarding the linked blog article that the "attacker" provided in the quote in which he explains that altcoins which employ proof-of-work are impossible to secure, he is not aware of my solution to that dilemma. And that is unprofitable proof-of-work as a matter of protocol forced on payers and changing the proof-of-work algorithm such that ASICs can't obtain orders-of-magnitude improved efficiency over CPUs. There are other details and advantages over the centralized clusterfuck BitCON.

If the "attacker" is really serious about changing the world, he should stop talking to Blockstream and start talking to me.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: Minecache on June 21, 2016, 08:55:36 AM

Gud to see AA backing ETH. He is a very eloquent, smart inebriation and one of the best trips in the crypto-lands. So very reassuring for all that he's an ETH hodler.

Alcoholics Anonymous is backing mETH? What a surprise.

Minecache

legendary

Activity: 2184

Merit: 1024

Vave.com - Crypto Casino

Gud to see AA backing ETH. He is a very eloquent, smart gentleman and one of the best brains in the crypto-lands. So very reassuring for all that he's an ETH hodler.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: RastoMan on June 21, 2016, 05:38:57 AM

Quote from: coinyard on June 21, 2016, 01:23:21 AM

Quote from: BitUsher on June 20, 2016, 08:04:02 AM

Quote from: Tacalt on June 20, 2016, 06:20:31 AM

I think the "hacker" or the DAO holders are trying their best to persuade the miners to work in their favour.

Indeed . The Daoattacker is playing with ethereum devs and staying one step ahead-

http://pastebin.com/9MRVDC9h

That could be a scam. You send bitcoin, DAO or Etheruem to them, but they might not send the in contracts.

Has anybody in the forum tried to contact the hacker and get 20x profit? It seems too good to be true. Why did not the hacker keep the 20x profit to themselves.

The game theory point is to share 70% of the spoils with other mutineers in order to ensure a fork (which voids the contract) is impossible to achieve.

Since the up to 15% of the money supply drained from the DAO is not sufficient to pay for mining hashrate forever, it is best to have others who have a vested interest in mining on the non-forked chain.

It also appears to be a test of whether anyone in crypto-currency really gives a shit about decentralization. Because if Ethereum forks, then it means it has been 51% attacked with arbitrary politics. Thus crypto-currency as a defense against the evils of Corporatism and the State is dead (if Ethereum's fork becomes the precedent for what people want).

Smooth and I discussed this in more detail, which I linked to upthread.

If Ethereum is able to fork and prosper after the fork, it is an sad outcome for those of us who wanted to change the world for the better. Angry

The "attacker" wrote:

Quote from: iamnotback on June 18, 2016, 09:04:19 PM

II. The WoT works by reducing the unknowns problem.i It allows the user - any user - to confidently identify the sources of information, both in the negative and in the positive. That is to say, if sources of information exist, the user may by the WoT find them, and safely assume that should no sources of information be thus found, no sources of information in fact exist. It further allows the user to judge the quality, reliability and precision of said sources, and this independent both of the direct source and of the counterparty he's examining.

His opinion on whether Ethereum will survive his "attack" (and remember he also did the Mt.Gox attack):

Quote from: http://trilema.com/2016/to-the-dao-and-the-ethereum-community-fuck-you/#comment-117619

Quote from: TheCon

The whole of ETH and DAO was a con to start with. Bunch of rich btc invectors wanted a new play toy. Don't worry folks the price will shoot back up because no one cares if there is security risks or a Ponzi that will never be used by ordinary citizens

DAO is a casino that just got robbed buy like all casinos they never fall because of human greed.

That [bolded] part is right.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Topic: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" - page 2. (Read 5989 times)