Topic: [ANN][PASL]-[PASCAL Lite]-[The Future is Almost Here] - page 98. (Read 164899 times)

Bullshit.

Sending transactions will not forbid to you to mine block with previous block timestamp. It is obvious. I don't know how mmcmc coded his pool but it is pretty easy to take timestamp from preious block header, but not from getwork RPC reply from daemon. It is pretty easy and not a problem for network.

Nothing to say to you. You misunderstanding how any decentralized system works, essentially cryptocurrencies.
It seems to me that you have plans to confuse readers about how the coin is functioning. Or maybe you are failed with starting your own coin and now you are trying to stop PascalLite? 

All "problems" that you are "flooding" about is totally bullshit. Nothing to explain here. "Cheating" in a such way how you are talking about in your posts is not exists.

One problem that coin have right now it - is having very small amount of miners. So a guy with 10 GH/s can mine all blocks and build his own blockchain faster than all other miners can build together. I explained it very clear but you don't understand that. But it is not PascalLite problem. As network will grow this would not be an issue.

Anyway, don't know why you want to bring that disinformation here and don't want to know.
You are just a troll.

The difficult retargets based on the last 100 blocks but it should retarget much quicker. Because you can easily pool hop.  Mine when the difficulty is low and mine another coin when the difficulty is higher.

How exactly can you exploit this difficulty retargeting? Why is it stupid?

Thanks.

This is like dancing but the dancers have different tunes. Its fun right xiphon?

@adaseb if somebody is going to create block explorer, get it only on uncorruptable masternode.

Its 1 way to battling miner "mmcmc" timestamp attack but futile on miner "Beta    ?x----------"

As you know, other miner cannot solve blocks if previous block time is tampered. Now, this micro amounts tx is *to make* them waste time.

Yes I saw a case where miner " Beta     ?x------ " rejected 4 tx and only include 7 tx of all 11 on queue. gbt already implemented? good job. funny it got accepted network wide. how many nodes you hosted? 30? 50? this coin has no value yet. Is it that easy to hack the daemon?

I think somebody is already doing this. They keep sending micro amounts to 0-10 account. Seems like its coming from different source addresses.

I have stopped reading at that point. This won't work.

sorry, it seems here is no support 4 the upstream, otherwise this wouldn´t exist

 

how about pascal sir ? is there good news from here?

Seems somebody on PascalCoin Github opened a similar ticket

https://github.com/PascalCoin/PascalCoin/issues/25

That's the big misconception on crypto of not actually stress testing it. many have that number of rigs nowadays.

For testing purposes we will most likely just launch a testnet version, we won't need 200 GPUs to test. We can also for testing purposes start with a lower diff and you can do the testing with multiple GPUs.

Sorry I dont trust github now. Here is the scenario:

a. bug 1 can be fix by bug 3.
b. bug 2 can be fix by coding the existing getblocktemplate (there are many)
c. bug 3 if will be coded, you'll need at least 40 rigs to run a test so you'll need a big miner whos willing to lend his services
  1. run scenario at even (18 honest and 18 evil) and see how will the sbh protection will react
  2. run 1 big evil (1 miner and 1 evil supernode) with more than 51% hashrate on the network. less 49 percent honest and record how sbh protection          react
  3. run 2 big evil (2 miner and 2 evil supernode) with at least 66% hashrate and see how sbh protection reacts.
  4. run majority evil but smaller hashrate and how see sbh will react.
*if in all scenarios, honest masternode is not corrupted then your good to go.

c. set a hardfork block number
  1. after the hardfork block previous wallet version cannot connect
  2. (my banning and lock down proposal) after hardfork block, disallow transactions until let say 250 blocks forward, only block rewards will be accepted. the wallet will take a snapshot of all accounts and track all movement of all cheater accounts and store those banaccounts.db(encrypt it, superencrypt).
  3. after 250 blocks tx can now proceed normally.

d. after a week or two release a new wallet as hardfork wallet is code heavy.
e. smile.

The problem with this approach is that the cheaters won't come forward and admit that they actually cheated and let alone forfeit all their coins for nothing in return.

So it would benefit some but not everybody.

Yes I tried to be as honest as possible however it probably wasn't a good idea for myself to get involved with this coin with having very little programming knowledge. There are issues with this coin but I can't get them fixed myself, I need to rely on others but nobody has volunteered so far.

One developer PM me and said he will try and fix the most critical issues with this coin and we'll see how it will go.

If you want to help and get some of these bugs fixed here is the place where you can post instead of this forum
https://github.com/adaseb/PascalLite/issues/1

Ok I'll compromise. How about we allow them to do transaction to only 1 account, to account 0-10 for project developments. Surely you will need funds for this chain? They can either send it to that account only and help you or hold on to something they cant touch. how about that?

I can grep the blocks and the account they mine.

and 1 more thing. I like when you are on front, you are an honest level-headed fellow.

My advice to you then is to fix the code yourself and then just launch a brand new coin. Since it seems that 90% of the entire blockchain was mined under false pretenses.

Because it seems whichever way I go, it will leave alot of hate either way.

I "ban" these accounts and they will send me threatening PM like before.
I "don't" ban these accounts and the smaller miners will send me threatening PM's.

oh old sebastian sebastian! of course they will deny that. but its conclusive enough. Ray is using a pool but setting a few seconds to minutes offset. but mmcmc aka mcmcmc aka lanla is using the time altering ninja technique. Yes they have much GPU's but still cheating. The types of ray and those with pool are rewriting the blocks from the start. Thats is what I am against. I pity Slava_K "OLORIN". he is an honest fellow but cannot find anything because you say code is law. let's amend the law.

Ban them. Lock down the accounts. A bank would never release money if there is a court order to freeze the accounts of criminals. Now we release that court order on next wallet. Bye bye many days of cheating!!

EDIT: the time altering ninja technique finally revealed by our great "xiphon the revelear" on https://github.com/adaseb/PascalLite/issues/2 

Seems i know one guy that can help you.

Contact him through blockchain