Pages:
Author

Topic: [ANNOUNCE] Tenebrix, a CPU-friendly, GPU-hostile cryptocurrency - page 23. (Read 127234 times)

donator
Activity: 1654
Merit: 1351
Creator of Litecoin. Cryptocurrency enthusiast.
Fairbrix => Attacked by Artforz/lolcust as too much competition to tenecrap

Now given that I was helping out with FBX, this is plain outright lie.

bulanula, please stop spreading FUD. Stop accusing people of attacking a chain when you don't know for sure. Lolcust is the main reason why Fairbrix exists in the first place.
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 11
Hillariously voracious
Whatever you say, that 7.7 MILLION premine just screams at me whenever I mine Tenebrix.

If abstract mathematical constructs scream at you, you should really see a doc.


Also strange that 5% of stuff mined with your electricity doesn't scream at you. Glass houses are so glassy.

Fairbrix => Attacked by Artforz/lolcust as too much competition to tenecrap


Now given that I was helping out with FBX, this is plain outright lie.

Also, the only thing that really keeps you from making a fork of your own is insufficient imagination
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
Whatever you say, that 7.7 MILLION premine just screams at me whenever I mine Tenebrix. Too bad I cannot make my own CPU chain because ATM :

Tenebrix => 7.7 million premine pump and dump fail idea
Fairbrix => Attacked by Artforz/lolcust as too much competition to tenecrap
Solidcoin 2 => Not out yet

Hopefully SC2 cannot be attacked and I will mine that.
newbie
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
cd src
make -f makefile.unix bitcoind
Duh.
Thanks. I had to install a few more packages before it'd compile, but it's now functional. Whoo. Smiley
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 11
Hillariously voracious

The two orders on GG/TBX at btc-e that look like 200 @ 0.0001 are actually artforz orders.  

So, you have magical clairvoyance power now, Coin King ?
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
Anyone planning to share the risk by running a mining operation and looking for investments? I'd be interested in investing.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 257
That 2M @ 0.0001 buy order ... not me.
So, please dump enough coins... whoops, there's only 774K GG total in existence.
Aka "more completely baseless FUD from mr. egomaniac to keep propping up vaporcoin".
Or how did the "SC2.0 Public Beta Testnet this weekend" work out? Oh, right.
Oh, and as a thanks for this nice personal attack, I'll gladly donate my expertise and if required a few days on my personal 5970s and/or LX150 cluster to break your chain to hell and back.

Haha, the amateur has his feelings hurt. The order on btc-e is yours. And yes, donate everything to the "attack". You might want to get some help with the programming of it though. I don't think there is some source for you to copy for this kind of thing.
Everyone got this? CoinHunter officially invited the attack, so no pre-warning this time, and no crying "EVIL BLACKHAT TERRRRRIST!!!" after.
sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 251
That 2M @ 0.0001 buy order ... not me.
So, please dump enough coins... whoops, there's only 774K GG total in existence.
Aka "more completely baseless FUD from mr. egomaniac to keep propping up vaporcoin".
Or how did the "SC2.0 Public Beta Testnet this weekend" work out? Oh, right.
Oh, and as a thanks for this nice personal attack, I'll gladly donate my expertise and if required a few days on my personal 5970s and/or LX150 cluster to break your chain to hell and back.

Haha, the amateur has his feelings hurt. The order on btc-e is yours. And yes, donate everything to the "attack". You might want to get some help with the programming of it though. I don't think there is some source for you to copy for this kind of thing.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 257
Mostly because tenebrix is a bitch and a half to get working in the first place.   Took me an hour of looking at code, windows batch files, etc to see why it's dumping core or failing assertions before I got it running.  EC2 boxes don't have GUIs.

You've fixed the headless problem, so the major hurdle to running the miners remotely has been cleared.  It's easy enough to do, but as you pointed out with a grand total of 230 BTCs available to cash out (and only 30 of that above .0001BTC) it's definitely not worth the price of admission.

The two orders on GG/TBX at btc-e that look like 200 @ 0.0001 are actually artforz orders. So try and pump-n-dump down to that level if you want to start costing Artforz some btc. Smiley
That 2M @ 0.0001 buy order ... not me.
So, please dump enough coins... whoops, there's only 774K GG total in existence.
Aka "more completely baseless FUD from mr. egomaniac to keep propping up vaporcoin".
Or how did the "SC2.0 Public Beta Testnet this weekend" work out? Oh, right.
Oh, and as a thanks for this nice personal attack, I'll gladly donate my expertise and if required a few days on my personal 5970s and/or LX150 cluster to break your chain to hell and back.
hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
Wat
Mostly because tenebrix is a bitch and a half to get working in the first place.   Took me an hour of looking at code, windows batch files, etc to see why it's dumping core or failing assertions before I got it running.  EC2 boxes don't have GUIs.

You've fixed the headless problem, so the major hurdle to running the miners remotely has been cleared.  It's easy enough to do, but as you pointed out with a grand total of 230 BTCs available to cash out (and only 30 of that above .0001BTC) it's definitely not worth the price of admission.

The two orders on GG/TBX at btc-e that look like 200 @ 0.0001 are actually artforz orders. So try and pump-n-dump down to that level if you want to start costing Artforz some btc. Smiley



You probably wouldnt put that much btc there unless youre the guy who owns 7 million and you know someone isnt going to dump them  Smiley
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
The two orders on GG/TBX at btc-e that look like 200 @ 0.0001 are actually artforz orders. So try and pump-n-dump down to that level if you want to start costing Artforz some btc. Smiley

I have nothing against ArtForz, he's contributed an amazing amount to the bitcoin community.  But yeah, he'll probably wind up with a relatively huge amount of brix as we all edge ever closer to the exit.  I think this may be the first alt chain where I didn't eject in time.

sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 251
Mostly because tenebrix is a bitch and a half to get working in the first place.   Took me an hour of looking at code, windows batch files, etc to see why it's dumping core or failing assertions before I got it running.  EC2 boxes don't have GUIs.

You've fixed the headless problem, so the major hurdle to running the miners remotely has been cleared.  It's easy enough to do, but as you pointed out with a grand total of 230 BTCs available to cash out (and only 30 of that above .0001BTC) it's definitely not worth the price of admission.

The two orders on GG/TBX at btc-e that look like 200 @ 0.0001 are actually artforz orders. So try and pump-n-dump down to that level if you want to start costing Artforz some btc. Smiley
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100

Actually, I think someone in the thread tried to get TBX work correctly with EC, with fairly unimpressive results. Not that I mean to say you couldn't do that effectively, I do recall the rule of not saying that to people (though I doubt that the money and effort you would spend doing that would be worth meek sums of BTC you might hypothetically get out of the exchange before it all falls to pieces)

Mostly because tenebrix is a bitch and a half to get working in the first place.   Took me an hour of looking at code, windows batch files, etc to see why it's dumping core or failing assertions before I got it running.  EC2 boxes don't have GUIs.

You've fixed the headless problem, so the major hurdle to running the miners remotely has been cleared.  It's easy enough to do, but as you pointed out with a grand total of 230 BTCs available to cash out (and only 30 of that above .0001BTC) it's definitely not worth the price of admission.

Still, if you want to see it on EC2 post a big enough bounty in BTC and I'll get it running.  Having a hard enough time selling my tiny amount of brix, so not really willing to do it for that.


sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 257
cd src
make -f makefile.unix bitcoind
Duh.
newbie
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
Okay dudes, Gui-less daemon is good on all platforms (Win, Lin Ubuntu LTS, Lin CentOS, Lin Fedora specifically compiled and tested)

https://github.com/Lolcust/Tenebrix-daemon-exp/commit/a9c5887f3572259376ac0dbfaabe6232288375eb

I guess that means that it's faucet time, then exchange time, then pool time.

Any pushpool gurus here? It needs tweaking due to "unusual" PoW...
So stupid question here, but how do you compile this? Today's project was to be getting a Ubuntu machine mining headless, but I didn't exactly get very far. :p
... in the source directory type "make bitcoind"
Yeah name changing seems to be a major difficult thing for Lolcust Tongue
I assume source = /src? Either way, 'make bitcoind' doesn't work in either directory, I just get: "make: *** No rule to make target 'bitcoind'. Stop."
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 11
Hillariously voracious
So true.  It won't be hard to inject a transaction from the address containing 7.7M to another address.

Care to outline the process of evading automatic thingamabobble monitoring an address in blockexplorer for updates ? ^__~

 
IIRC it only took 20% (not 51%) of the network capacity to attack NMC because of the way the network does time synchronization.  I don't believe that vulnerability was ever addressed,

You believe wrong - vulnerability was initially discovered in GG (that other chain I made) and I make it a little tradition to ensure that relevant fixes make it to chains I create Cheesy
 
Could probably get more than enough to implode tenebrix with EC2 for a few hundred $, a few thousand "trial" accounts or a tiny botnet.

Actually, I think someone in the thread tried to get TBX work correctly with EC, with fairly unimpressive results. Not that I mean to say you couldn't do that effectively, I do recall the rule of not saying that to people (though I doubt that the money and effort you would spend doing that would be worth meek sums of BTC you might hypothetically get out of the exchange before it all falls to pieces)
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
So true.  It won't be hard to inject a transaction from the address containing 7.7M to another address.  But considering how SLOOOW the tenebrix network suddenly got at confirming I'm guessing spending those 7.7M would be a whole different matter.

Been trying to get my last tenebrix to btce while they still have some value.   Go go gadget network!  But still quite hopeful re: maintaining my 100% eject success record.

IIRC it only took 20% (not 51%) of the network capacity to attack NMC because of the way the network does time synchronization.  I don't believe that vulnerability was ever addressed, so for fairbrix that works out to... 30 Mhash or so?  I've got about half that online right now.  Could probably get more than enough to implode tenebrix with EC2 for a few hundred $, a few thousand "trial" accounts or a tiny botnet.

member
Activity: 112
Merit: 11
Hillariously voracious
At the current point, yeah. tbx seems to have about 1200kH/s on it, fbx looks like about 150.
So a potential attacker only needs something like 60 high end cpus or about 1000 really crappy ones to have a good chance at forking and overtaking the tbx chain, about 1/8 that for fbx.

good information and this is why I am planning to stay away from CPU coins for a while Smiley
All you need is a some asshole with a botnet and you can say bye-bye to all your mined coins.
 

Well, only time will tell.

Though I think that the fbx incident is more likely than not to be accidental (I wonder what would blockchain analysis by more competent peers reveal, though)

Well with 7.7 million coins I think you will be safe Smiley

If only premining coins made chains more resistant to 51-ing and, more importantly, users who don't bother to update.

Maybe I should offer tiny-tiny bounties for downloading updates ?
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
At the current point, yeah. tbx seems to have about 1200kH/s on it, fbx looks like about 150.
So a potential attacker only needs something like 60 high end cpus or about 1000 really crappy ones to have a good chance at forking and overtaking the tbx chain, about 1/8 that for fbx.

good information and this is why I am planning to stay away from CPU coins for a while Smiley
All you need is a some asshole with a botnet and you can say bye-bye to all your mined coins.
 

Well, only time will tell.

Though I think that the fbx incident is more likely than not to be accidental (I wonder what would blockchain analysis by more competent peers reveal, though)

Well with 7.7 million coins I think you will be safe Smiley
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 11
Hillariously voracious
At the current point, yeah. tbx seems to have about 1200kH/s on it, fbx looks like about 150.
So a potential attacker only needs something like 60 high end cpus or about 1000 really crappy ones to have a good chance at forking and overtaking the tbx chain, about 1/8 that for fbx.

good information and this is why I am planning to stay away from CPU coins for a while Smiley
All you need is a some asshole with a botnet and you can say bye-bye to all your mined coins.
 

Well, only time will tell.

Though I think that the fbx incident is more likely than not to be accidental (I wonder what would blockchain analysis by more competent peers reveal, though)
Pages:
Jump to: