Topic: [ANNOUNCE] SolidCoin - new and improved block chain. Secure from pools - page 16. (Read 85528 times)

Um...you're on bitcointalk.org.  Bitcoin is Run DMC and you're 50 cent.

Edit:  I dislike rap.

That wasn't the reasoning.  You made that reasoning up.

Artforz has "suggested" code be put into i0coin which was designed to ensure his FPGA miners got more of the blocks than others. Someone incompetent then added the code. So this is what I mean by fleece, he has willfully decided to fleece BTC from the ignorant people who don't understand it. Perhaps people think that he's a champion for using his intelligence in such a manner but to me it comes across as deceitful.

The other BTC trolls here taking joy in the potential misery of others is also quite a sad indictment on the human race.

Dude, do you permanently reside in nerdland?  And when I said buy stuff, I meant good stuff.

Normal businessmen do not consider accepting SolidCoin, let alone Bitcoin, easy.   You remind me of those guys screaming, "Guys! Guys!  Encrypting your wallet is NOT that hard.  All you need to do is download x operating system onto a bootable disc and blah blah blah blah blah....."

You took Bitcoin and changed a few things.  Whoopdie doo.  

Firstly no it's not really a problem LOSING 80% of the network hash, it's a good test of how resilient the code is. Without that happening I won't be able to point to it in the future as evidence. It's an issue all new chains will face gaining support from miners. They come and go when it's "immediately profitable" or "immediately not profitable".

I also don't think it's wise to publicly out yourself as a troll but nevertheless I can't stop you.

Hey dude you can buy stuff with SolidCoin too!

And BTW, vendors only need to take 5 minutes switching to SolidCoin, it's not hard. One of the advantages of me still supporting the archaic bitcoin API.

What you are missing is that there needs to be a short run before a long run.  And even if you take the current BTC economy and add all these other little currencies as mediums of exchange, all that does is inhibit the growth of any single one and cryptocurrencies will remain underground forever.  This will limit overall economic growth and the true and potential advantages of using crypotcurrencies will never be fully realized.

And, you will get empirical data that you can't generalize to the population at large.  It will be applicable to the nerd crew only.

You don't understand that loosing over 80% of your miners in a matter of days as indicative of a larger problem? The SC network is already down to 200G. A little more and a single miner like ArtForz could wipe out your chain. Hell, in a couple days I might be able to. I better dump my SC asap.

Dude.  You're incredibly dense.  Right now, it doesn't matter how good SC theory is.  Bitcoin is still better in virtually every way because you can BUY STUFF WITH IT.

Ever think of something else?  Bitcoin has had 2 years, and so far, it still has a very small economy.  The very few who were willing to risk setting up businesses and such have put time and money on the line based upon the expectation that Bitcoin would/will be a success.  Guess what happens if Bitcoin collapses?  Do you really think they'll be like, "Oh!  Wait a minute!  I mean, I know I lost huge on the whole Bitcoin thing, but this SolidCoin thing is great!  I mean, it's been around for like...weeks!  This seems like a really really good idea!  I'm gonna do a new business!"

In 2 years, Bitcoin has garnished the attention of the people that would really care about digital currency-related businesses.  If they give up because Bitcoin fails (and they will give up on digital currencies if they lose big), good luck trying to find a new breed of digital currency entrepreneurs to take on SolidCoin let alone one of the dozens of other cryptocurrencies that will likely spring up between now and then.  I think if you really want SolidCoin to succeed, you should really act more kindly with your potential future investors.

For such a smart guy like yourself, you seem to do a poor job at parching the situation.  And really...work on your communication.  A little antagonizing and we've seen bits of your true nature emerge.  Don't blame you though.  It's a natural response given the situation.

Okay then, sorry for any misunderstanding. I do believe that solidcoin is an improvement over bitcoin most definitely, but that is the same thing with namecoin, yet people have not "fleeced" there from bitcoin.

No, they're not. Do the math.

CoinHunter, the SolidCoin creator, does not host an ixcoin order table for bitparking. The ixcoin order table is run by the solidcoins.info owner by using the bitparking API, as announced in this thread.

Similar things are possible with BTC so not sure of the relevance to only SC? Things need to be done to ensure network balance, both SC and BTC are powerless in that regard. Howeer like I said SCGuild is concerned with such things and I'm sure he would realize he would face consequences if he attacked peoples investments. Other pools, who knows, there has been open talk from people like LukeJR (elegius owner) to run malicious attacks on IXCoin. So obviously this kind of behaviour isn't unheard of when it comes to pools.

They don't even have to turn off mining
1. Pull a mining cartel attack and fork the chain when another miner finds a block.
2. Start fucking with block timestamps.
3. .
4. Near-infinite number of blocks!

It's not actually too big a problem if they do that, faster blocks is fine. SolidCoin is only a week and a half old, once it starts gaining more traction due to my development changes there will be more stability in the mining power. What we do know is that in under a week we have gone from 1.2 THash, or 11% of the BTC network to 300GHash and SolidCoin is still flying. BTC would be dead, as we saw with NMC, Ixcoin and I0coin.

So yes SC may not be "perfect" in every way but those trying to suggest it's not better than BTC are living in lala land.

That is correct. Firstly I didn't expect quite the amount of success SolidCoin has had to this point, I thought I would have more time to fix such things. However it was also important to start testing my network protocol changes in a "Live environment". As can be seen with the data available, SolidCoin is the fastest and most reliable cryptocurrency network out there.

I am working on fixing this issue with the wallet.dat storing unneeded junk, and also automatically backing up wallets, along with multiwallet support for businesses and users.


Well I am laughing at the code more than "them", as a serious programmer that is the joy I get in life. But if people want to actually DEFEND the code, especially when they are ignorant, then of course I will show them examples of the poorly written and designed code they seem to be supporting. At least I am trying to do something about it, whereas people like artforz just "agree" with me, do nothing to the code because they'd rather spend their time fleecing BTC from people supporting new coin chains.

Too late. SCGuild already has way more than 51% power. All they would have to do is turn off hashing for one day, difficulty will plummet, then we can get back to getting several blocks a minute.

SCGuild, what do you say? Will you turn off the pool for a day?

Just because you can exchange USD for SC, bitcoins will die? What kind of SC koolaid have you been drinking? lol

Well, in a few days Ruxum will start a USD/SC exchange. Let's see what you mean by "game over for Bitcoin", ok?

Sure, but the goal is never to be in the situation where someone has 51% power, worrying about "attacks" that happen in that scenario when you can fork the chain is kinda irrelevant no? Better than doing a namecoin/i0/ixcoin and dying, thus leaving an "80 million dollar economy" in shambles. Obviously with deepbit on BTC and SCGuild with SC it is a concern, however the SCGuild owner seems honest.

I'm trying to solve some of these bigger issues, so we will see what I can produce.

Where did I say that?
Which pretty much describes the "development" style of Satoshi and other early devs.
I'd have to check the commit logs, but I noticed that long ago and just shrugged, as compared to other *cough* "tiny issues" that's a pretty trivial one.
No, I'm pretty sure the core devs never noticed there was one. Or was that a rhetoric question?
./bitcoind backupwallet filename_to_save_backup_as.
If your system corrupts a transactional BDB database on power loss, it is broken. And no amount of trickery gets you 100% around OSes/ddisks lying about flushing buffers.
Actually, yes. Backing up a live journalled DB properly is not trivial (the current backupwallet cheats by waiting for all accesses to stop, then flushing the logs and backing up the main datastore).
Wow, really? *rollseyes*
Yep, as you addressed only current user-visible issues but ZERO of the major issues in the core.
Agreed.
Agreed on the part about satoshi, but there's been pretty constant improvement
Yep.
What false worship? Stop making shit up. I'm saying the current devs are doing pretty well at trying to sort out the mess and get a maintainable codebase instead of adding cosmetic changes and calling them "great improvements".

BTW, have you figured out the tiny problem that SCs (and i0s, and soon IXs) difficulty adjustment algo creates when faced with a attacker with majority hashpower yet?