Topic: [ANNOUNCE] SolidCoin - new and improved block chain. Secure from pools - page 5. (Read 85528 times)

Same.  I was hoping I could deposit some BTC and then pull the full amount (minus the fees of course).  I realize that the amount I have in there is less than the fee amount to withdraw, so I would actually be losing BTC by doing this.  It's just the "It's mine and I want them" mentality I guess.   I suppose I don't mind if it's made into a "donation" rather than just being lost into the great big bit bucket in the sky.

wallet.dat  did you update to 1.04?

Well this sux.  On top of my missing SolidCoins, I keep getting .log files added to my \database directory every few seconds and each one is nearly 10Mb.  WTF mate?

Where did all my SolidCoins go?  I just withdrew from Bitparking earlier this morning and they just disappeared.  There's no trace of them in my SC client at all and it's been about 50 blocks.

Latest release of SolidCoin source posted in IRC contains a 'readme' document with the following text:

As a solidcoin supporter, I like to ask you all to stop this pointless flame war.

Before that, I'll like to set the record straight. 

Do you really believe that if you keep repeating "it was a malicious attack, we at SC are clean, BTC guys are idiots", it will make problems go away and everybody forgets why and how this simple attack actually got started?

RealCoin (in IRC) was told that he has a problem in SC code after "fixing" something he did not fully understood. RealSolid told ArtForz, the evil attacker who found the problem, to just fuck off. (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.501363)
(BTW, if I remember correctly, in #solidcoin IRC, someone else told that ArtForz is really good at finding problems)

I am not defending or saying what ArtForz did was correct, but I am actually more pissed off at this pompous RealSolid than ArtForz.
Why? Not because RealSolid fucked up by "fixing" something he did not fully understood (shit happens) but for ignoring a warning from a more experienced developer.

 
Sorry to say but CoinHunters (noagendamarket in IRC) desperate attempt at damage control wave turned in to a Freshly Squeezed Kool-Aid Super Sale.
 
I, as a SC supported hope that someone is going to tell this little bitter joker RealCoin to get off he's donkey and start listen to other developers. Especially those people, who have order of magnitude more experience than SC "team of computer scientist" (BS from your own web page!).

RealCoin, Bitcoin is not your enemy! Bitcoin code is the core of your fork. If you do not understand it, go and ask btc developers! No one will think less of you.

I believe, that SC has a future. Yes there is a "but". But if this bull shit and Kool-Aid selling goes on too long, YOU  will kill the SC before it even takes off.

CoinHunter and you minions, before you type up your next pile of solidcoin damaging bull shit, let it simmer there for 10 min, read it again, rewrite it and  then publish.

(sorry, I can not resist, I had to)   
PS! Smoothie, I am going to call your mom and she is going to whip your pimple covered ass to a real smoothie... and probably stick a banana in to it too... if you do not start playing nice.

Can we now please stop this crap war and move on?

Yes, the samples I looked at reused the 0.01 coins.

It's not really costing anything because he could just sell them back for BTC after he's done. The only cost is the transaction fees that he has to pay for this attack. Of course, if SC dies due to his attack, he may be left with a bunch of worthless SC. That's probably still not a lot of money, if that's all it takes to kill SC. 2000 times 0.01 SC? That's only 20 SC (or $2). He can reuse the same coins for the next large transactions, right? Even if not, I can't imagine he needed more than $20 in SC to perform this attack.

Yeah, because SC transactions are fixed at .01 SC, this attack cost about 1 SC in total fees, which is about $0.10. lol

There's a reason why Bitcoin has variable fees, which makes it expensive for DDoS attacks like these. You don't just go about changing Bitcoin without truly understanding why things are the way they are. And then CoinHunter goes ahead and criticizes the Bitcoin developers for being slow. Well with so much at stake, I'm glad the Bitcoin developers spend a lot of time testing their changes before releasing them. Look what happened when CoinHunter tried to fix this "0.1 SC fixed transaction fee" feature/bug in a hurry. He broke SC even more. Look who's laughing now.

Can you cite a source for this assertion?  It looks to me as if the attack cost less than 1SC in transaction fees and exchange fees.  A transaction (2cd9782cc39ab8b55...) took a 50sc input and divided it into 2,000 0.01sc and one 29.99sc outputs plus a 0.01 fee.  Later, a few dozen transactions moved about 2,000 inputs to 2,000 outputs, each of 0.01sc, and a 0.01 fee per transaction.  Am I missing something?  Abe query for large transactions: http://john-edwin-tobey.org/scbig.txt

Be fair - It was delisted for usability and reliability issues. It appears to have the same security as BitCoin although the threshold for 51% attacks is far lower.

The attack would be infeasible on BitCoin due to the expense involved. All it would do it bloat up the blockchain and make mining more profitable due to transaction fees.

What you call a 'obvious malicious attack' happens to all peer to peer networks and the networks are expected to handle it. I used the example of bittorrent networks before, they handle all kinds of well funded attacks and the only one that half works is tracing IPs and sending lawyer letters. Fixed transaction fees don't solve any problems but they introduce new ones. SolidCoin was broken, BitCoin less so.

It was only a matter of time until someone abused the brokenness.

LOL speculation is a byproduct not a feature. But anyway since there is some issues with the latest update and bitparking has a disable on moving solidcoins, I still say having these issues with the solidcoin network is reason enough for the market to tank.

As did i0coins, so too will solidcoins.

Get ready for the crash of solidcoins as bitcoin lives on!

lol

Yes, that's a feature not a bug. The network was meant to be unstable hence the crazy difficulty adjustment code. It's a get rich quick scheme.

Looks very solid 

What will likely follow is a crash of solidcoins once again. BOOOM!

The new update was a rushed and poorly thought though change that broke just as much as it fixed.

You know the right way to fix this? Copy the transaction code from BitCoin. They got it right first time and it's been proven stable.

HAHAHA holy shit I had no idea you were the one on this thread I made that comment to until I came back and looked.

Dude, I work in a hospital.

Later.

Wow. So does that mean that the update was basically a bandaid?