[ANNOUNCE] New Solidcoin Client Fully Open-Source! - page 6.

wolftaur

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: sd on September 05, 2011, 09:20:31 PM

It's a dead cert the closed source client will die if we keep a open source and honest version available. We totally have to do this. If he still has the power to add blocks he can flood the exchanges now or at any time in the future. It's bad enough we can't revoke coins he already pre-mined.

Yes we can.

Simply tell the client to reject as an input any transaction whos output is a generation in the relevant blocks, starting at block now.

simonk83

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: sd on September 05, 2011, 08:33:29 PM

Quote from: CoinHunter on September 05, 2011, 06:45:45 PM

Yeah the only problem with that is I have solved the 51% problem and that is also coming out very soon. Oops, did SolidCoin just protect itself a lot better than Bitcoin?

Furthermore when anyone new to SolidCoin google searches for it, guess which site they'll be getting? So yes please go convince the mining pools to abandon the official version in favour of some featureless fork of SolidCoin from an earlier version because they'll be removed off the site, no longer get new visitors and earn the distrust of the whole SC community. ie They'll die like SCGuild and Bitparking.

We are the SolidCoin community and we no longer trust your so called 'official' version due to the bugs you keep introducing, your unacceptable license change, and your erratic, insulting manner.

You think you can make changes to keep things incompatible with open source? You will exhaust yourself trying, fail, and still end up with an implementation that no-one is going to use. Everyone will forget you even exist when the next IOCoin comes out.

Let's not forget that the people seemingly involved with the new "fork" are much, much smarter than Coinhunter is (if the mess he's made of things so far are anything to go by).

johnj

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

Quote from: CoinHunter on September 05, 2011, 09:39:33 PM

So someone pathetic created something which isn't poor? Nice.

You created bitcoin? Oh wow, I didn't know you were....

Oh. You adjusted a few variables. *pats on head*

BitcoinPorn

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Posts: 69

Oh my, CoinHunter and ArtForz in civil 'tech' conversation. Surely I am in Bizzaro world :p

CoinHunter

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: ArtForz on September 05, 2011, 07:22:02 PM

Oh, and if you think the orphan block handling "improvements" (aka completely disabling it) in 1.031 doesn't hurt anything (well, other than nodes not catching up to the current block under certain circumstances)...

Under certain circumstances. Heh. You could say this with many things currently in Bitcoin.

I'm adding orphan storage to 1.10 but doing it properly, ie will only store a certain amount on a rotating buffer to get around attacks people like you have created. The same issue you're talking about exists if you're flooding a node with shit, so it's not a complete solution is it? The reason I didn't implement a more thorough solution is I wanted to protect the users from the attacks you and others have created immediately, which it has done to this point.

Quote from: ArtForz on September 05, 2011, 07:22:02 PM

grep your debug.log for "getblocks".
Notice some nodes appear to be sending a GetBlocks for *every single block they get* while downloading the chain?
Notice the block #s are nowhere near the "bad evil hacker" blocks?
You got 3 guesses which versions are exhibiting that broken behaviour.

Broken behaviour? A few extra getblock requests isn't going to hurt anything and in a lot of instances increases the speed of initial block downloading. Your FUD about chain forks is ridiculous. The people who are on the latest block (most of the network outside initial downloaders) won't be affected by orphan storage removal. In instances where multiple blocks are generated fast they still get the blocks quickly, it's just not as entirely efficient as 1.10 will be with it.

sd

hero member

Activity: 730

Merit: 500

Quote from: CoinHunter on September 05, 2011, 09:39:33 PM

Quote from: wolftaur on September 05, 2011, 09:34:54 PM

SolidCoin isn't poor. You're just pathetic.

So someone pathetic created something which isn't poor? Nice.

Your meds are wearing off dude. Take another handful of lithium before your next post.

CoinHunter

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: wolftaur on September 05, 2011, 09:34:54 PM

SolidCoin isn't poor. You're just pathetic.

So someone pathetic created something which isn't poor? Nice.

wolftaur

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: CoinHunter on September 05, 2011, 09:26:51 PM

Isn't it funny how "poor" SolidCoin is yet we have people writing open source clients for it, wanting to try to take control of it. If it was worthless they wouldn't want to, something to consider for the sane minds reading this thread.

SolidCoin isn't poor. You're just pathetic.

sd

hero member

Activity: 730

Merit: 500

Quote from: CoinHunter on September 05, 2011, 09:26:51 PM

Isn't it funny how "poor" SolidCoin is yet we have people writing open source clients for it, wanting to try to take control of it. If it was worthless they wouldn't want to, something to consider for the sane minds reading this thread.

It's the blockchain I want to see keep running, the client is only a means to do that. And I totally don't trust your changes to BitCoin, you made too many too fast and introduced many bugs doing it.

EDIT: I should add you told WAY too many lies and that destroyed any trust we had in you personally.

wallet.dat

sr. member

Activity: 253

Merit: 250

Quote from: CoinHunter on September 05, 2011, 09:26:51 PM

Isn't it funny how "poor" SolidCoin is yet we have people writing open source clients for it, wanting to try to take control of it. If it was worthless they wouldn't want to, something to consider for the sane minds reading this thread.

I don't think anybody has any real issue with the concept of SolidCoin itself. In fact I like it the most of all alt *coins and would like to see it succeed.

CoinHunter

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Isn't it funny how "poor" SolidCoin is yet we have people writing open source clients for it, wanting to try to take control of it. If it was worthless they wouldn't want to, something to consider for the sane minds reading this thread.

sd

hero member

Activity: 730

Merit: 500

Quote from: wolftaur on September 05, 2011, 08:38:20 PM

Specifically, modify the client to reject his closed-source software's blocks. He wants incompatibility, let him have it. Odds are the closed-source block chain will be the one to die.

It's a dead cert the closed source client will die if we keep a open source and honest version available. We totally have to do this. If he still has the power to add blocks he can flood the exchanges now or at any time in the future. It's bad enough we can't revoke coins he already pre-mined.

I may be wrong but this looks like coinhunter:
https://twitter.com/#!/feydr

You can see from the twitter photos he is a quick buck/blag artist type, or at least that's the impression I get.

smoothie

legendary

Activity: 2492

Merit: 1473

LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper

Quote from: BitcoinPorn on September 05, 2011, 08:55:18 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

I can put 60 GH/s on creating a new fork.

I am going to personally attempt to just let you guys play without judgement. I can see that nearly all hate toward SolidCoin advancement is almost desired, it is hard to see things otherwise. This is not saying that it will fail, in fact, going through some of your guys' tests may make it the strongest coin ever. Doubt it, but I am not fully convinced SC is such the failure people make it out to be.

You are right. It is the founder who was the failure. We all can agree on that.

wallet.dat

sr. member

Activity: 253

Merit: 250

Thanks jackjack for your efforts. Hopefully it's enough to get SC back on track since I really like some of the concepts and features behind it.

wolftaur

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: BitcoinPorn on September 05, 2011, 08:55:18 PM

I am going to personally attempt to just let you guys play without judgement. I can see that nearly all hate toward SolidCoin advancement is almost desired, it is hard to see things otherwise. This is not saying that it will fail, in fact, going through some of your guys' tests may make it the strongest coin ever. Doubt it, but I am not fully convinced SC is such the failure people make it out to be.

Because a still-open copy is being worked on, I didn't liquidate my SC. Having a non-closed client gives the currency some chance of succeeding despite the problems its original creator brought to the table. I won't take much of a loss if it crashes to zero, either.

BitcoinPorn

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Posts: 69

Quote from: ?? on ??

I can put 60 GH/s on creating a new fork.

I am going to personally attempt to just let you guys play without judgement. I can see that nearly all hate toward SolidCoin advancement is almost desired, it is hard to see things otherwise. This is not saying that it will fail, in fact, going through some of your guys' tests may make it the strongest coin ever. Doubt it, but I am not fully convinced SC is such the failure people make it out to be.

julz

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001

Quote from: smoothie on September 05, 2011, 08:39:51 PM

Quote from: wolftaur on September 05, 2011, 08:38:20 PM

Quote from: sd on September 05, 2011, 08:33:29 PM

We are the SolidCoin community and we no longer trust your so called 'official' version due to the bugs you keep introducing, your unacceptable license change, and your erratic, insulting manner.

You think you can make changes to keep things incompatible with open source? You will exhaust yourself trying, fail, and still end up with an implementation that no-one is going to use. Everyone will forget you even exist when the next IOCoin comes out.

If he tries, do the usual 'net response.

Treat his censorship as damage and route around it.

Specifically, modify the client to reject his closed-source software's blocks. He wants incompatibility, let him have it. Odds are the closed-source block chain will be the one to die.

In the name of all that is sane, don't ever let CoinHunter have commit access to the git repository of the fork...

Should be interesting for those who choose not to update to his new release that adds 1000 blocks to the chain. I'm not updating.

Even though that's just a joke - he attempts to wield so much control over the direction of the thing, that the chain is untrustworthy simply because he *could* do this if people actually used his system.

smoothie

legendary

Activity: 2492

Merit: 1473

LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper

Quote from: wolftaur on September 05, 2011, 08:38:20 PM

Quote from: sd on September 05, 2011, 08:33:29 PM

We are the SolidCoin community and we no longer trust your so called 'official' version due to the bugs you keep introducing, your unacceptable license change, and your erratic, insulting manner.

You think you can make changes to keep things incompatible with open source? You will exhaust yourself trying, fail, and still end up with an implementation that no-one is going to use. Everyone will forget you even exist when the next IOCoin comes out.

If he tries, do the usual 'net response.

Treat his censorship as damage and route around it.

Specifically, modify the client to reject his closed-source software's blocks. He wants incompatibility, let him have it. Odds are the closed-source block chain will be the one to die.

In the name of all that is sane, don't ever let CoinHunter have commit access to the git repository of the fork...

Should be interesting for those who choose not to update to his new release that adds 1000 blocks to the chain. I'm not updating.

wolftaur

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: sd on September 05, 2011, 08:33:29 PM

We are the SolidCoin community and we no longer trust your so called 'official' version due to the bugs you keep introducing, your unacceptable license change, and your erratic, insulting manner.

You think you can make changes to keep things incompatible with open source? You will exhaust yourself trying, fail, and still end up with an implementation that no-one is going to use. Everyone will forget you even exist when the next IOCoin comes out.

If he tries, do the usual 'net response.

Treat his censorship as damage and route around it.

Specifically, modify the client to reject his closed-source software's blocks. He wants incompatibility, let him have it. Odds are the closed-source block chain will be the one to die.

In the name of all that is sane, don't ever let CoinHunter have commit access to the git repository of the fork...

sd

hero member

Activity: 730

Merit: 500

Quote from: CoinHunter on September 05, 2011, 06:45:45 PM

Yeah the only problem with that is I have solved the 51% problem and that is also coming out very soon. Oops, did SolidCoin just protect itself a lot better than Bitcoin?

Furthermore when anyone new to SolidCoin google searches for it, guess which site they'll be getting? So yes please go convince the mining pools to abandon the official version in favour of some featureless fork of SolidCoin from an earlier version because they'll be removed off the site, no longer get new visitors and earn the distrust of the whole SC community. ie They'll die like SCGuild and Bitparking.

We are the SolidCoin community and we no longer trust your so called 'official' version due to the bugs you keep introducing, your unacceptable license change, and your erratic, insulting manner.

You think you can make changes to keep things incompatible with open source? You will exhaust yourself trying, fail, and still end up with an implementation that no-one is going to use. Everyone will forget you even exist when the next IOCoin comes out.

Topic: [ANNOUNCE] New Solidcoin Client Fully Open-Source! - page 6. (Read 23817 times)