Topic: [ANN] [QRK] Quark | Core 0.10 upgrade - page 45. (Read 1031025 times)

Yaamp difficulty is 0.9, everybody else's difficulty is 900. Yaamp probably hasn't upgraded to the latest version.

Hey, quick update, we have officially launched at Shopify www.ISG3D.com and the ShapeShift Button is now working to pay using QRK on the 3D printing webstore! We are releasing a new 3D printer in 1-2 weeks and more products will be uploaded soon!

@silvermetal


Silvermetal, sorry, I think you´re getting lost in conspiracy theories here. Point is, there are dozens of forums that called themself fancycoinametalk.org, because btctalk. Same with the silly cryptobullion stuff. If you want to criticise, you should better focus on facts that you can prove. What you present here are anything but correlations -  and they are very very loose.

@maok


I answered that question several times. I put some money and a lot of time into Quark, I helped building up the community, that´s why I am still related to it in a way. When I look back at what happened in this time, it is obvious that issues were silenced by a cheering fanboys and people were listening to charlatans like DigitalIndustry. This way newcomers like me had the impression that everything was fine when actually anything happened in terms of development and community building. With recreating the Foundation we tried to work against that. We used time, brain and money to bring stuff forward and to be honest with the weaknesses that Quark has due to is centralization and low hashrate. Unfortunately this endeavor failed for several reasons, including tricking the community with B9/Mimiccoin by DigitalIndustry, McPhervi but also the active and trustful developers MaxGuevara and Shakezula. This alone should be enough to be sceptical when it comes to Quark. I prefer to talk about those weaknesses, so newcomers will now what they are buying than not talking about any of this stuff at all. Anyway, same as you, I am a free human being and I am not spreading false information, so I should ask you in reverse, why are you bothering?



If the network is down e.g. because the pool went offline it is really easy to find the checkpointing node. Once you know which one it is, you can DDOS it and there you go automatic checkpointing. So, no, delaying is NOT the only thing that can be done - and there are many people outside who like to do this stuff just for fun. Just look at the Auroracoin fork. It doesn´t make sense at all, but yeah, someone did it.



Thousands of botnets? You don´t need thousands of botnets. Please check out the numbers, I also linked some on Reddit. The Top10 miners at coinmine.pl own more than 50% of the global hashrate. You can compare the daily Hashrate with the pool hashrate and will find that most of the time it is at 98-99%. Why do you think Max is asking Quarkers to spread their Hashrate to other pools?


That really doesn´t matter as long as it is centralised at one pool.


Yeah, sure...why? Even Bitcoin was centralized at GHash.io with over 50%. There is no incentive not to mine at GHash - there is only a high incentive in telling others not to mine there. Your mining results will always be better at the largest pool and that´s particularly why there is no reason to believe that real decentralization will ever take place, because solo-miners are always in large-slight disadvantage. Quark is not the only currency who deals with this issue. Most PoW coins do and there have been LOTs of discussion how this problem can be solved, but none as far as I can see with Quark but your mining contest (a fancy thing for the moment, but doesn´t solve the issue longterm).

C'mon, I know you can come up with better conspiracy theories than this, I've heard some of them before.

 

Wow those are some weak items even for you to try and build an argument around.  What even is your argument?  Looks like an attack on Maok but it is so weak it makes no sense.  You are going to get fired from your job as a paid troll soon with posts that useless. 

Considering we are at BitcoinTalk.org you might notice the general pattern of [coinname]Talk.org for forums...that is called a trend.  Also you might notice if you were not so busy trying to ATM yourself between antiQuark posts, that many coins including Litecoin and Bitcoin have physical bullion rounds of themselves...again that is called a trend.  What point is there in indicating that among the many coins that followed those trends that Maxcoin and Quark did as well? 

What's next for you silvermetal...discovering that both Bitcoin and Quark have a blockchain...therefore Satoshi is Adam who is DigitalIndustry who is Maok who is Me who is married to Coinmama who's midget 10ft tall lesbian son is Quarkfx...it all makes sense now!!!!!!!!!!!!1 

In this crazy world of unexpected things happening it is nice to know that we can all trust in one constant...that silvermetal gets stupider and stupider each day.

One player from this chat http://pastebin.com/jviD91wL is playing the main role in pricing the quark

bump

It's up and running, I know, I just bought some more.

Why is Quark wallet on Cryptsy still down

agreed a Mac / mobile support for would be greatly helpful -

indeed beautiful like a watch in fact -

so we can always tell the fake stuff from the real stuff, my only issue is ha ha the FBI running silkroad 2.0 ?

but hey if you know they aren't rock out, i have no info either way its really not any of my business.

also this means the continued support for Quark and neutral control in a real market place these natural forces are irresistible.

OK so apparently the windows wallet works, I have my Quarks on Mac though where there is no working wallet, much like the android wallet, who is able to update it?

the last one is just so cute though, he keeps repeating same story over and over again, hopefully someone will listen to him :-) almost makes me feel sorry for him  

LE: the only lunatic who made my ignore list was digitalindustry, now counting 2 

And suddenly all the FUDers re-appear.

I bought back in the day and still hold my QRK, but im still on a loss.
What is the situation with Bill Still, does he still support this or he has sold? He never talks about cryptos anymore in his program.

I'm afraid to talk about it and yet I responded every time to those concerns, heck I even created the jackpot to try to find small but in time feasible solutions. The points in low hashrate has been the subject from as long as I found out about Quark, back in June last year people were worried, now again you are worried(why I wonder as you're not involved in anything anymore), as I said in my last sentece if you bother to read I said I am concerned but thing is that, the coin pool or anyone who gathers sufficient mining power can only do as much harm as delay transactions. Of course for a big crypto currency like Bitcoin that would be devastating but for a crypto currency like Quark which doesn't handle alot of business transactions it really wouldn't matter if an army of thousands of botnets or that pool would refuse to relay the legit transactions for a few hours or days. Once quark or any crypto currency gathers more adopters you will see or have seen in other crypto currencies that the hashrate will also raise because the value will raise and so on. Thing is once Quark is a worthy currency for real use, if ever, will be strongly protected by the decentralization in mining power.

The alternative options like the contest was exactly to educate people about these sort of problems but not spread FUD because there are people even with 1-2 pages behind that think someone could steal their quarks if there's a fork or something among those lines.. so basic line is this.. that pool has a solid majority, more than 50% which is enough (not 99% like you exagerate ) its not good but its not harmful in this stage of Quark adoption because the only harm they can possibly do is delay transactions which would be unpleasant but survivable ;-)

Yay there you go, the FUD accuse. Look maok, I know you think you are the (only) one who looks  rationally on things, but you obviously don't know what FUD is. I am pointing out facts that YOU and other Quark reminiscence prefer not to talk about.

"The pool controls a solid majority of hashing power but of course you fail to see that once more users join in with hashing power on other pools or solo mining, the numbers will even out among many other miners, but that will only happen in time. "

Give me a break....the pool has a "solid majority"? Dude it's 99% if you like it or not and that's not a solid majority but "basically everything".
And what's that strange theory? People with more hashing power will come and solo mine? Why would they? I asked  you this question before: what makes you think that people will start solo mining long term? The only incentive is a tiny jackpot that is not permanent but based on donations. The reason why people gather at coinmine is the same why Bitcoin minera are gathering at Ghash. You can of course assume that people will act irrationally, but to me that's a strange (or rather pathetic) way to deal with facts.

I am not bashing, I am delivering facts that you prefer not to talk about (or have you? I couldn't fibe one thread about it). You probably know that, but I have dozens of mails that proof that even Max and Adam were aware of the issues with the centralization at coinmine.pl and the decreasing hashrate. That was one of the reason why we seeked to find more incentives.  If you prefer to argue against the developer that invented the whole thing then you must have a surprisingly negative image of Quarks development. You can go claiming that there is no problem whatsoever. I'll come back to remwmver you of your posts when things fall to an all new low.

No I didn't argued that, you must've read someone else posts. I said that anyone who controls the majority of mining is not capable of doing any harm without tricking themselves as well. Its irrelevant what anyone attacks if they can't harm it then no one needs to be worried. Of course your behaviour of FUD is quite similar to former quakers who had the same attitude when they've sold out, its totally normal I guess. You sold at a loss and now you're fuming out on everyone connected with Quark.

No, technically no. If you meant hypothetically, yes they could be the same person but based on the entries and IPs I highly doubt  someone would go to such length when every single entry counts only as one.
And yes thats much considering how much attack the forum got from either side of fences, on one hand Digi's followers were lied that we want to destroy Quark, and now the former quarkers with which I've started are getting back at with their own way of bashing. Its hard to get across the alternative current of which both impulses are on the negative side, but there you go 40 solo miners willing to participate in a contest in which they may win money; not much only about 150 dollars the big prize but still not hard to say yes for those with an idle PC at home :-)


`Factual centralization` proves nothing bad about Quark only that the current state is being controlled by a majority pool who cannot double spend, but only withdraw their power. Due to the fork we recently had that pool on 11th Jan was down and quark hashrate was still maintained above 150MH/s, now we're back at around 400MH/s. The pool controls a solid majority of hashing power but of course you fail to see that once more users join in with hashing power on other pools or solo mining, the numbers will even out among many other miners, but that will only happen in time. Bitcoin never faced with this in its first 2-3 years because the pools weren't invented yet so of course things will progress a bit differently nowadays with a young currency.

If someone really wanted to attack Quark they wouldn't need a fucking public pool to do it thats what you forget when you talk about mining centralization. The attackers at the current hashrate would need more than 1000 botnets to have control over Quark's block emission power and the only thing that they would accomplish would be to delay transactions for other legit users, nothing more.
If you think that delaying transactions in Quark which is a 2 year old crypto currency is worthwhile for a group of hackers then you must be mad. Once Quark becomes more popular the mining power will increase accordingly and the delaying of transactions attack will get harder and harder.


Glad you cleared that up, but like I dealt before with bitcoin disappointed-turned-into-fudsters types,  I don't mind dealing with quark-them as well.. Oh and yes everything could be fine or very wrong depending from which perspective you look from.. politicians turn literally everything into the worst or best thing every day.. so of course you can continue to look at Quark from the worst possible angle while others like me will prefer to look from a concerned but constructive side instead from the sidelines.

Sorry for you to not get the reference. You were the one arguing that noone would attack Quark because it won´t make sense - I simply argued that damage is done no matter if it makes sense.

Wow, 40 (in letters: fourty - CRAZY!) entries in one round (how long was that again). And now what? Do you think that´s many? That´s nothing. Beside that, how would you possibly know they are individuals? Technically it could be even one person.

I am coming back every now and then to see the "progress" that the few lasting Quarkers evangelize. I am glad to see that there are less and less people falling for the "keep smiling and forget about every criticism" attitude. In my first post I addressed the factual centralization of Quark and you come up with a pathetic "Hey, but we are protected against everything", which is either a lie or plain lack of understanding crypto. btw.

And don´t worry, I am not talking to you, since I know there is no way to keep you from believing that everything is fine - I am writing so people who think about getting into Quark think again.