Topic: [ANN][VRC] VeriCoin Proof of Stake-Time Currency | New Roadmap Released - page 460. (Read 1356146 times)

I have to admit, after all the blackcoin bagholders trolling this thread, I now hate blackcoin, which is a coin I didn't care about before. If blackcoin loses more value than it already has, I would be okay with that. Whereas before I would not.

Well, they worked hard and they deserve it more than the thief.

There is no new supply being introduced into the blockchain and stolen coins are returned to their rightful owners.

Isn't that enough for you?

If you are so against the fork. Why don't you all fork vericoin github, setup supernodes and runs the original blockchain? So you can preserve your purist ego at the expense of other people.

I bet you don't care. Most of you don't care. Most people here only care about profits and the coin they baghold.

Ok so it will be easy task for you to link me to some of these neutral non vrc holding ppl that think the rollback was a good idea?

Thank you

Click "Display coin control features"



Select before the send which coins send from.

Yes, you don't have to look back very far. A lot of sensible people agree with the thought, THEFT SHOULD NOT BE REWARDED to anyone in a civilized society.

Can anyone provide an explanation for this ^^^

I first posted it yesterday, but didn't get much of an answer

You spam the thread so hard that you dont take time to read.

Well... Satoshi can answer that for you

"June 17, 2010: The nature of Bitcoin is such that once version 0.1 was released, the core design was set in stone for the rest of its lifetime."

"July 16, 2010: SHA256 is not going to be broken by Moore’s law computational improvements in our lifetimes. If it’s going to get broken, it’ll be by some breakthrough cracking method. An attack that could so thoroughly vanquish SHA256 to bring it within computationally tractable range has a good chance of clobbering SHA512 too. If we see a weakness in SHA256 coming gradually, we can transition to a new hash function after a certain block number. Everyone would have to upgrade their software by that block number. The new software would keep a new hash of all the old blocks to make sure they’re not replaced with another block with the same old hash."

If vericoin holders didn't like it, you think you'd see a little more volume and panic?

No, I think you're finding aside from the few that are vocally mad, the majority of normal folks will look at this as a huge step forward.

centralized exchanger are so 2013  

decentralized exchanger like http://blackhalo.info/, http://bithalo.org/ is the new shit!!

and thats why only bitcoin and blackcoin will go todamoon

Maybe you should ask the devs how much vrc they hold? You might be surprised I don't have more facts than pnosker showed some screenshot of his 500k+ wallet some weeks ago.
That might blur how objective they were just a "tad"

This was of course the true reason to do the rollback, not to lose any profits they have made. This is also the reason why most of VRC holders cheer the rollback. Or have you seen anyone not holding vrc, that would defend the rollback?

I had VRC on mintpal, but I would rather have lost my coins, tried to get MP to reimburse me than having a rollback that goes against everything in crypto

You know the thief attempted to steal again after the first hack.

So, it wasn't "lost" as it wouldn't have been able to be transferred again after the first fork.

Additional forks where needed and implemented after to get back to a safe point due to the thieves attempt shortly after the fix, while other miners had yet to switch to new wallet.

Very little doubt that someone had 30% of the network and could have got them staked if it wasn't for the devs acting when they did. If they pulled off staking the 30% before the network switched to a new fork then VeriCoin would be dead and the whole crypto universe right now would be in a Mintgox situation. The developers did a amazing job in the days after the event. Very impressed with the team and how it reacted to such adversity.

This is the vision of what the blockchain can become. It can have integrity and prevent theft like we found out in the past few days. Now its up to crypto to kill the idea, or to champion it and find out a proper way to deal with major fraud, and theft. LIKE ANY CIVIL SOCIETY.

Just got them, after 2 hours of waiting. Now requested a lot more to withdraw. I will leave some VRC on mintpal but I want most of them in my wallet for now.

I moved some of my assets out of MintPal, among them, the VRCs, which took the most time to get to destination.

Opened a ticket but in around 1.5 hours I got the VRCs in the destination wallet.

If it has been several hours, I suggest you to open a ticket.

Eth.

"centralized checkpoints servers"

Same as bitcoin and another other altcoin. They are call supernode. They are centralized.

What is stopping opposition from setting up checkpoints server if they decided not to follow the fork?

What is so difficult to change p2port of the wallet so each individual fork doesn't connect?

Yes i am excited for Bithalo and other decentralized exchange, as we are moving away from centralised exchange this would greatly reduce the risk of such problems for PoS coins.

Suffer? Or we have a chance as crypto community to debate this and get it right?

Surely there is a better way than allowing theft, you would agree right? The technology allowed that to happen right? The community voted for the change in the end correct? This was the best thing to happen to the adoption of crypto in its history IMO.

While 10,000 coders, hackers, thieves, market manipulators, PnD crews, hardcore computer geeks will be upset, you will open the doors for billions of people who wish to know that it isn't the wild wild west anymore. And coins like vericoin are pushing the limits of the technology to where centralized / decentralized services can find harmony to work together with real world applications.

A purely decentralized form of crypto has never existed, and may never exist. You will need centralized services at some point if you wish to participate in crypto currency. Why not work on bringing these 2 together sensibly, instead of keeping them apart.

It really would be nice for a statement from mintpal sometime VERY soon.

They are keeping uncertainty in the market by the silence on the situation.

We are owed some answers, and we would like them NOW Mintpal!

You don't think its just as easy to hack the people who already control 51% mining share?

Another scenario in which POW is NOT very safe. What if a new technology comes out with incredible hashing ability in the future and a nefarious party gets larger than ghash.io? What if a country decides to make a large bitcoin mining operation and take significant control of the minining network. BITCOIN and POW is not as secure as all those pointing the finger at POS would like to believe.


With POS you can see the money trail coming. You are supposed to buy coin so that way it would not make much practical sense for someone to be motivated to ruin there own investment.

This is a learning experience, just like all others. I feel it was a 1 off in VRC, and the devs said so to. We cannot determine if it was right / wrong yet without speculating. We need to hear from Mintpal on how they could let so much of a POS be vulnerable when it has the ability to severely impact there exchange, and your communities.

The conversation should be on mintpal, and other exchanges and how they should store/secure funds, or we need to find a way to trade securely without large centralized exchanges. Not about if what vericoin did was right it wrong. It did the only thing it could do in the face of extreme negligence by a trusted third party to the ENTIRE crypto community.

ok tnx, I set only few VRC to withdraw because I need to see is it working at all.

It is not like the developer team decided to hardfork the blockchain for personal gain.

Let's imagine a scenario when the developer team or a government did it for personal gain or political reasons. What would be the consequence?

What would you do if you own that coin?

Would the majority refuse to update the wallet?

Would a group of people to come forth and take over the development of the coin?

This is the nature and beauty of decentralised & open source network.

If you try to dictate and insist what a coin should do or not do, isn't that contradicting?