but you chose to bail out mintpal.
The devs chose to not have early users of Vericoin have their coin stolen. 
Topic: [ANN][VRC] VeriCoin Proof of Stake-Time Currency | New Roadmap Released - page 491. (Read 1356154 times)
July 15, 2014, 12:38:06 AM
July 15, 2014, 12:37:33 AM
Rollback is necessary to build the trust among the community.
HAHAHA... I never thought of it that way before!
/sarcasm
July 15, 2014, 12:36:00 AM
Rollback is necessary to build the trust among the community.
July 15, 2014, 12:35:07 AM
For all the Vericoin holders that are ok with the "rollback", we would like to introduce a new exciting investment option.
"RollbackCoin"
Have your coins stolen?
Make a bad trade?
Sold all your coins and want them back?
Just want to fuck with other holders?
Just use our veri innovative "rollback" button. One push of the rollback button removes the last 25 blocks.*
*This option is only available to the devs (you can trust us)
.**We will use as often as we like.
I want more info.
PoS?
PoW
PoSA???
Coin count?
I love it
July 15, 2014, 12:34:44 AM
cannot stop laughing.
This is true, right, because it's on the internet? Or do you believe it cause you really really wanted to make some money?
VeriSend (privacy but you have to trust us hahaha since it's centeralized.. perfect example right there. So what if a government by way of coercion takes over that service?
if the government gets involved...
Fippy:
"Actually, as someone who has a long standing background in the financial world and has personally worked extensively with FinCEN, Vericoin's features in that regard are under very low risk. What is at very high risk of catching unwanted attention is the recent batch of alts that have anonymity woven into them.
By centralizing certain aspects of Verisend, they technically have the ability to comply with US Federal regulations. Coins that have built in decentralized anonymity quite literally have a target painted on their collective asses, and will be the first hammered into the dirt by the Feds should they ever start looking in that general direction."
July 15, 2014, 12:34:05 AM
I agree what you described there is decentralization. That is distributed consensus which the rollback is controversial but enough chose to be on that particular fork.
that being said,when the likely outcomes of inaction are carefully weighed against each other, the powers that be really didn't have a choice either.
July 15, 2014, 12:32:32 AM
Wow, Patrick, you really did it. You did a rollback of the blockchain and wrote history with it. Everyone with knowledge about cryptos knows that their were a couple of other options to save the coin (e.g. removing the stolen coins from the supply), but you chose to bail out mintpal. You even were offered support for fixing the issue in a reasonable way, but still you used your honorable achieved credibility to break a fundamental rule. Its a sad day in crypto, especially since this wasn't a scam coin but a serious crypto project.
This move will never be forgotten. To the community, if you all trust a single dev so much, here is the perfect solution for you: Fork again and increase the supply such that pnosker owns 50% of all coins which he should never spend on anything and only use for staking. You will be save, forever! Have a good life.
This move will never be forgotten. To the community, if you all trust a single dev so much, here is the perfect solution for you: Fork again and increase the supply such that pnosker owns 50% of all coins which he should never spend on anything and only use for staking. You will be save, forever! Have a good life.
July 15, 2014, 12:32:23 AM
I agree what you described there is decentralization. That is distributed consensus which the rollback is controversial but enough chose to be on that particular fork.
there is no consensus... you either use the new wallet or you get shut out of any future updates and shutout of the exchanges and any other vericoin services. That is the reality of the situation.
Even if you completely disagreed with the rollback the choice was already made for you.
In order to save the coin a precedent was set... now it only remains to be seen how many more times choices will be made for the community instead of by the community.
that being said,
when the likely outcomes of inaction are carefully weighed against each other, the powers that be really didn't have a choice either.
Extremely well put. I think your approach to the matter is way better then mine! :p
July 15, 2014, 12:31:44 AM
good god these idiot fud spewers are still here basically saying that fucking over the hacker and saving VRC was the wrong choice my only questions for you morons spewing this nonsense are:
1. how much is the hacker paying you to fud
2. how many of you are scammers/hackers
and 3. If you are not invested in VRC, then why the fuck are you here spewing your BS? nobody cares what bullshit lies and idiocy you have to spread so go back to whatever shitcoin you came from and let the REAL men do the work of advancing crypto
P.s. Don't bother replying because all of you fucking morons are now Ignored, have a nice day
1. how much is the hacker paying you to fud
2. how many of you are scammers/hackers
and 3. If you are not invested in VRC, then why the fuck are you here spewing your BS? nobody cares what bullshit lies and idiocy you have to spread so go back to whatever shitcoin you came from and let the REAL men do the work of advancing crypto
P.s. Don't bother replying because all of you fucking morons are now Ignored, have a nice day
And Vericoin has a market cap of only $6,352,040 yet they're acting like Vericoin is the biggest playa in town and a threat to all other alts.
These fudsters make VRC look like the most interesting upstart since Bitcoin itself which was so hated when it started.
July 15, 2014, 12:29:05 AM
good god these idiot fud spewers are still here basically saying that fucking over the hacker and saving VRC was the wrong choice my only questions for you morons spewing this nonsense are:
1. how much is the hacker paying you to fud
2. how many of you are scammers/hackers
and 3. If you are not invested in VRC, then why the fuck are you here spewing your BS? nobody cares what bullshit lies and idiocy you have to spread so go back to whatever shitcoin you came from and let the REAL men do the work of advancing crypto
P.s. Don't bother replying because all of you fucking morons are now Ignored, have a nice day
1. how much is the hacker paying you to fud
2. how many of you are scammers/hackers
and 3. If you are not invested in VRC, then why the fuck are you here spewing your BS? nobody cares what bullshit lies and idiocy you have to spread so go back to whatever shitcoin you came from and let the REAL men do the work of advancing crypto
P.s. Don't bother replying because all of you fucking morons are now Ignored, have a nice day
+100000.. I think that's enough zeros..
July 15, 2014, 12:27:37 AM
Mintpal drop the ball, bottom line, it should be on them to fix it or compensate.
There was no ability for or from them to fix the issue or compensate. With one user holding the amount of VRC that they stole, they had the ability to destroy the coin overall. Mintpal dropped the ball, however without them in control of the ball, the coin had to be reverted back to a state where one user was no longer controlling that much VRC.
At this point I am hoping the lesson users will learn with some PoS based coins, is not to leave them in exchanges, or at least spread them out, as no one exchange should have that many coin, especially not in cold storage.
Mintpal was not in a position to do anything except alert the Vericoin devs that they done fucked up and basically allowed the ability for someone to destroy a coin, the devs at this early in Vericoin's life, had the ability to fix this issue by creating a new chain for users to continue on.
Issues like this and the ability to fork the chain happened with Bitcoin as well, it was early enough on in BTC's life where people could do something about this, and even luckier they did not have to do a rollback ( see https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/value-overflow-incident-august-15-2010-6290 )
July 15, 2014, 12:25:54 AM
good god these idiot fud spewers are still here basically saying that fucking over the hacker and saving VRC was the wrong choice my only questions for you morons spewing this nonsense are:
1. how much is the hacker paying you to fud
2. how many of you are scammers/hackers
and 3. If you are not invested in VRC, then why the fuck are you here spewing your BS? nobody cares what bullshit lies and idiocy you have to spread so go back to whatever shitcoin you came from and let the REAL men do the work of advancing crypto
P.s. Don't bother replying because all of you fucking morons are now Ignored, have a nice day
EDIT:
LOL Ignoring all of the retarded, lying, scamming, fudding, (add unsavory adjective here) morons just muted most of the thread lololololol glad to see that these idiots are so scared of us succeeding and innovating and trailblazing ways to counteract their scams, all while having one of THE best altcoins out there, that they have to come here to try and drag us down. TOO BAD IT WONT WORK ( looking at YOU smoothie, IconicExpert, bobsurplus, neuroit, portice, Alphi, and all you other sockpuppet retards)
1. how much is the hacker paying you to fud
2. how many of you are scammers/hackers
and 3. If you are not invested in VRC, then why the fuck are you here spewing your BS? nobody cares what bullshit lies and idiocy you have to spread so go back to whatever shitcoin you came from and let the REAL men do the work of advancing crypto
P.s. Don't bother replying because all of you fucking morons are now Ignored, have a nice day
EDIT:
LOL Ignoring all of the retarded, lying, scamming, fudding, (add unsavory adjective here) morons just muted most of the thread lololololol glad to see that these idiots are so scared of us succeeding and innovating and trailblazing ways to counteract their scams, all while having one of THE best altcoins out there, that they have to come here to try and drag us down. TOO BAD IT WONT WORK ( looking at YOU smoothie, IconicExpert, bobsurplus, neuroit, portice, Alphi, and all you other sockpuppet retards)
July 15, 2014, 12:25:42 AM
VeriSend (privacy but you have to trust us hahaha since it's centeralized.. perfect example right there. So what if a government by way of coercion takes over that service?
if the government gets involved...
Fippy:
"Actually, as someone who has a long standing background in the financial world and has personally worked extensively with FinCEN, Vericoin's features in that regard are under very low risk. What is at very high risk of catching unwanted attention is the recent batch of alts that have anonymity woven into them.
By centralizing certain aspects of Verisend, they technically have the ability to comply with US Federal regulations. Coins that have built in decentralized anonymity quite literally have a target painted on their collective asses, and will be the first hammered into the dirt by the Feds should they ever start looking in that general direction."
July 15, 2014, 12:16:51 AM
I agree what you described there is decentralization. That is distributed consensus which the rollback is controversial but enough chose to be on that particular fork.
there is no consensus... you either use the new wallet or you get shut out of any future updates and shutout of the exchanges and any other vericoin services. That is the reality of the situation.
Even if you completely disagreed with the rollback the choice was already made for you.
In order to save the coin a precedent was set... now it only remains to be seen how many more times choices will be made for the community instead of by the community.
Finally, someone who gets it.
July 15, 2014, 12:10:51 AM
I agree what you described there is decentralization. That is distributed consensus which the rollback is controversial but enough chose to be on that particular fork.
there is no consensus... you either use the new wallet or you get shut out of any future updates and shutout of the exchanges and any other vericoin services. That is the reality of the situation.
Even if you completely disagreed with the rollback the choice was already made for you.
In order to save the coin a precedent was set... now it only remains to be seen how many more times choices will be made for the community instead of by the community.
that being said,
when the likely outcomes of inaction are carefully weighed against each other, the powers that be really didn't have a choice either.
July 15, 2014, 12:06:25 AM
Not invested in VRC at all, 0% stake. This shit makes me sick though. Your supporting an exchanges's incompetence and should be ashamed of yourselves. I mean I get it, you guys are vested in it and want to support a coin you believe in, but this is certainly not the way you go about it. Some positives will come out of this though as Mint will surely not keep those hot wallets so ripe. And no, I am not "fudding", I'm not "trying to get coins cheap", I just believe in my opinion that this was the totally improper way to go about fixing an exchanges total fuck up and as a community, you took the easy way out.
What are you blathering on about? Mintpal was saved as a side effect of Vericoin needing to protect itself from the coin itself seeing death. Mintpal got lucky, saving them was not the goal what so ever. The end result is volume on that exchange can and should go down until better details on how this fuck up on their part was allowed to happen. I won't say your post is FUD, just spouting ignorance without understanding the entirety of the situation.
I can respect your opinion about me spouting ignorance. I think my point was missed when I was trying to say I really could give a damn if Mint went belly up, someone else will step up to the plate and replace them like has happened the past couple years and this is not a precedent I am comfortable with. From my understanding, VRC was not stored in proper cold storage like they advertise and placed in a hot wallet which then got hacked causing this mess. Please tell me if I am incorrect.
https://support.mintpal.com/index.php?module=announce&sec=view&id=17
I am sure you have read it.
Mintpal drop the ball, bottom line, it should be on them to fix it or compensate. Now, I appreciate the community's zest to defuse a nuclear bomb, I just do not agree with it, we are all entitled to our opinions and I hope you respect that.
July 15, 2014, 12:00:44 AM
Hush ! grown men are talking !
Yes we trust the DEVS !
they have proven time and time again they are legit. Where the hell does it say everything has to be open source ? Since you are in crypto, do you like all the scams and P&D non sense that goes on, For once you get 3 talented devs whom by the way, have shown their faces in public, have done all they could to salvage investors from a robbery and continue to deliver day in and day out. Yet you have the nerves to come here and talk shit.
Now back in your hole !
hehe
You're funny. There's always a guy just like in every rip off scamcoin thread I read.
I can't feel sorry for you when something goes wrong cause you want to trust them. They've been doing this how long? If you're into this coin for its functionality why not use paypal? I'm pretty sure any sane person would trust Paypal to some random 3 tard devs who constantly overuse and misuse the word decentralization so often when this coin is one of the least decentralized alts out. Overcompensating perhaps?
And I'm not talking just shit about the rollback. The entire coin is shit. VeriSend (privacy but you have to trust us hahaha since it's centeralized.. perfect example right there. So what if a government by way of coercion takes over that service? hmmm that's why you don't have a central point of failure!!! you obviously don't get it. And either your devs don't get it or they're scammers. Either one is pretty likely in my book.
lol.. I think it's time you take your "education" to another thread.. It's fallen on deaf ears here.. go and buy VRCs whilst it's still cheap..
さようなら 再見 adeus..
July 14, 2014, 11:55:50 PM
get ready to see vrc skyrocketing fudders, lol don't forget to panic buy
July 14, 2014, 11:53:54 PM
I agree what you described there is decentralization. That is distributed consensus which the rollback is controversial but enough chose to be on that particular fork.
What I'm talking about as far as them being a company and not a decentralized currency is centralized services. VeriBit, the wallet they're rolling out that you can load directly with fiat. Those should be done as an company otherwise your putting way too much trust into a few people. Central point failure, etc.
Also the example I made with verisend. You can't have a privacy service that's centralized. What if a government compromises it, it would defeat the entire purpose which is why we don't want a central point of failure, it's supposed to be distributed and trustless.
The forking believe it or not is the most decentralized thing about this coin because it was distributed consensus.
So I'm just saying these devs really like the word decentralized, it's ever where, and when you look into it's not really. Even the network wasn't very decentralized. So it just seems suspect to see the dev use that word so often/.
I like it done as a decentralized currency, as all the current Vericoin users are able to vote with their wallets on what fork they are able to use (as stated in previous posts, other coins have forked as well). It comes down to then what fork the miners and exchanges wish to use (which P2Pool and decentralized exchanges *should* be the way, people have voted with their wallets to continue to use Mining Pools and centralized exchanges). People who are Vericoin users are choosing to upgrade rather than allow the coin to fail, the developers did not force this on any person, people can choose to stay on the stolen coin blockchain, things are still decentralized by that definition.
What I'm talking about as far as them being a company and not a decentralized currency is centralized services. VeriBit, the wallet they're rolling out that you can load directly with fiat. Those should be done as an company otherwise your putting way too much trust into a few people. Central point failure, etc.
Also the example I made with verisend. You can't have a privacy service that's centralized. What if a government compromises it, it would defeat the entire purpose which is why we don't want a central point of failure, it's supposed to be distributed and trustless.
The forking believe it or not is the most decentralized thing about this coin because it was distributed consensus.
So I'm just saying these devs really like the word decentralized, it's ever where, and when you look into it's not really. Even the network wasn't very decentralized. So it just seems suspect to see the dev use that word so often/.
I don't have a problem with what they're adding or how they're doing it. But they should be doing it as a company not a decentralized currency.
I like it done as a decentralized currency, as all the current Vericoin users are able to vote with their wallets on what fork they are able to use (as stated in previous posts, other coins have forked as well). It comes down to then what fork the miners and exchanges wish to use (which P2Pool and decentralized exchanges *should* be the way, people have voted with their wallets to continue to use Mining Pools and centralized exchanges). People who are Vericoin users are choosing to upgrade rather than allow the coin to fail, the developers did not force this on any person, people can choose to stay on the stolen coin blockchain, things are still decentralized by that definition.
July 14, 2014, 11:53:02 PM
In a darwinian sense I would expect those coins with devs willing to do things like roll back in extreme situations might propagate faster because they don't commit suicide. Unless of course this mass ideaological backlash some are predicting against vrc occurs.
Backlash is better than suicide, the devs were put in a shit situation and did what they had to do as hard as it is to deal with users of other coins trying to push their ideals on what is right or wrong in this thread.
Jump to: