Author

Topic: [ANN][XEL] Elastic Project - The Decentralized Supercomputer - page 310. (Read 450524 times)

sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
It seems like we trolls are causing some problems for those who donated to Elastic project as well as those who are reciving these donations. It was a simple question and most of you decided to ignore it and call me and panda trolls instead of thinking it through and wait for a logical answer from the developers. You guys might think those transactions are normal, I don`t.

if they are not normal transactions what by their abnormal nature do they suggest to you?
legendary
Activity: 1582
Merit: 1268
It seems like we trolls are causing some problems for those who donated to Elastic project as well as those who are reciving these donations. It was a simple question and most of you decided to ignore it and call me and panda trolls instead of thinking it through and wait for a logical answer from the developers. You guys might think those transactions are normal, I don`t.
sr. member
Activity: 432
Merit: 251
––Δ͘҉̀░░
Hey,

I got a possibly stupid question which is probably already answered, I'm gonna ask it anyways: How exactly is the success of certain operations measured? In case of finding prime numbers, it is relatively simple, but what about, let's say, finding the smallest possible amount of steps to fulfill a certain task? Provided, you can't determine the amount of steps beforehand, how do you measure success?
I think that the creator of the job has to make it well-defined, and the network mitigates the possible attack vectors.
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 513
Hey,

I got a possibly stupid question which is probably already answered, I'm gonna ask it anyways: How exactly is the success of certain operations measured? In case of finding prime numbers, it is relatively simple, but what about, let's say, finding the smallest possible amount of steps to fulfill a certain task? Provided, you can't determine the amount of steps beforehand, how do you measure success?
newbie
Activity: 10
Merit: 0

Quote from: Nomad88
Simple enough, all donations above 0,5btc are untraceable due to mixing. Is it just a coincidence? I have a feeling that those donations are made by the project owners. Do i need to be more clear?

Yet another group of trolls who posts deliberately inflammatory messages which cause a lot of confusion in the community. Or is this just another iceberg of misinterpretation and misconception? I'm irritated. To bring this discussion to an end, as far as I'm concerned of, there is no reliable way to distinguish a mixed transaction from a regular transaction (unless it's coin join).

Now, that you claim that you have found a magic algorithm which consistently identifies mixed transactions, would you mind sharing it with us? This would help us all to verify your allegations. I give you 3 BTC if you can do so within the next 24 hours.


Hello World,

This mentalpanda guy is writing bullshit.
These are all normal looking and entirely different compared to each other.

In 1BeyK8UPBAuvKahaeLbdDBwuqu1WJRdnca and 1C1ZXeQUJQGi8GL7iyjoi6zfGd4EC25981 for example, the user aggregates many unspent outputs into one address and donates the entire amount from there. This is the recommended procedure in the howto desciption.

1K4iZ9FFDx5CyAWKgfTH3hSCnVRtrmm1eS does it differently. He does not aggregation at all because he already has an unspent output of 2 BTC of which he donates 1.5 BTC and sends 0.5 BTC change to one of his change addresses.

1Gx4nmEt8VyNeSjn675o3bHZ7VSaZjS5yk is a totally different case. Here he either mixed or he withdrew 2.22 BTC to his address of which he donated 2 BTC and sent 0.22 BTC as change to one of his change addresses. It is impossible to tell if the btc came from a mixer, from an exchange or from somewhere else.

The quoted addresses which mentalpanda quoted are ALL DIFFERENT. Some of them 100% have not used a mixer, for others we can't tell.

I would say, mental panda is a full troll and went from HERO TO ZERO in just one post.

Jonas
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 500
I'm blocking all private messages. Use Bitmessage!

Quote from: Nomad88
Simple enough, all donations above 0,5btc are untraceable due to mixing. Is it just a coincidence? I have a feeling that those donations are made by the project owners. Do i need to be more clear?

Yet another group of trolls who posts deliberately inflammatory messages which cause a lot of confusion in the community. Or is this just another iceberg of misinterpretation and misconception? I'm irritated. To bring this discussion to an end, as far as I'm concerned of, there is no reliable way to distinguish a mixed transaction from a regular transaction (unless it's coin join).

Now, that you claim that you have found a magic algorithm which consistently identifies mixed transactions, would you mind sharing it with us? This would help us all to verify your allegations. I give you 3 BTC if you can do so within the next 24 hours.
hero member
Activity: 1036
Merit: 501
To receive XEL at no cost.

That makes sense.
But, wouldn't the XELs go to the public key of the address the payment is going to be received from?

If they use a mixer, how are they going to get the XELs?  Roll Eyes
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
To receive XEL at no cost.
ImI
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1019
Well, you really don't know where the BTCs that have been donated come from. They might come from illegal activities.
I can see what Lannister's doing: somehow, being in charge with the funds, he might be associated with some tainted BTC. I see no problem in mixing the funds.


but it seems statistically odd that EVERY donation greater in value than 0.5 btc (not a huge sum) went through a mixer BEFORE being donated. that's not a random pattern. that behaviour.

Oh it went through a mixer before not after, sorry, I misunderstood that.
Anyway what's the problem if a creator wants to get a stash in his own project?


is it technically possible to send donations through a mixer to be resubmitted as 'new' coin to an ICO?

and why should you do that?

English modal verbs can be a bit tricky to master

i see your point, but you would only fake donations to your own ICO. but for what? so that others feel more inclined to donate? the effect is so small thats not worth it.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1015
I like the idea of the Elastic supercomputer. It is a great way of making the blockchain even more useful than before. Can't wait for its official release. I have the feeling that this is going to be huge.  Cheesy

Invested in this project already, considering to invest more now Smiley

Completely agree, have high hopes for Elastic. Slow and steady, devs you are doing a fantastic job!
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
Well, you really don't know where the BTCs that have been donated come from. They might come from illegal activities.
I can see what Lannister's doing: somehow, being in charge with the funds, he might be associated with some tainted BTC. I see no problem in mixing the funds.


but it seems statistically odd that EVERY donation greater in value than 0.5 btc (not a huge sum) went through a mixer BEFORE being donated. that's not a random pattern. that behaviour.

Oh it went through a mixer before not after, sorry, I misunderstood that.
Anyway what's the problem if a creator wants to get a stash in his own project?


is it technically possible to send donations through a mixer to be resubmitted as 'new' coin to an ICO?

and why should you do that?

English modal verbs can be a bit tricky to master
ImI
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1019
Well, you really don't know where the BTCs that have been donated come from. They might come from illegal activities.
I can see what Lannister's doing: somehow, being in charge with the funds, he might be associated with some tainted BTC. I see no problem in mixing the funds.


but it seems statistically odd that EVERY donation greater in value than 0.5 btc (not a huge sum) went through a mixer BEFORE being donated. that's not a random pattern. that behaviour.

Oh it went through a mixer before not after, sorry, I misunderstood that.
Anyway what's the problem if a creator wants to get a stash in his own project?


is it technically possible to send donations through a mixer to be resubmitted as 'new' coin to an ICO?

and why should you do that?
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
i'm sure the devs will be along soon enough to clear up the confusion.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
How could they have been sent through a mixer if the XEL will be sent to the address from which the send originated?  Or you're saying they were mixed prior to sending?  Either way, I sent more than .5btc and I didn't use a mixer.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
Well, you really don't know where the BTCs that have been donated come from. They might come from illegal activities.
I can see what Lannister's doing: somehow, being in charge with the funds, he might be associated with some tainted BTC. I see no problem in mixing the funds.


but it seems statistically odd that EVERY donation greater in value than 0.5 btc (not a huge sum) went through a mixer BEFORE being donated. that's not a random pattern. that behaviour.

Oh it went through a mixer before not after, sorry, I misunderstood that.
Anyway what's the problem if a creator wants to get a stash in his own project?


is it technically possible to send donations through a mixer to be resubmitted as 'new' coin to an ICO?
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
Well, you really don't know where the BTCs that have been donated come from. They might come from illegal activities.
I can see what Lannister's doing: somehow, being in charge with the funds, he might be associated with some tainted BTC. I see no problem in mixing the funds.


but it seems statistically odd that EVERY donation greater in value than 0.5 btc (not a huge sum) went through a mixer BEFORE being donated. that's not a random pattern. that behaviour.

Oh it went through a mixer before not after, sorry, I misunderstood that.
Anyway what's the problem if a creator wants to get a stash in his own project?
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
Well, you really don't know where the BTCs that have been donated come from. They might come from illegal activities.
I can see what Lannister's doing: somehow, being in charge with the funds, he might be associated with some tainted BTC. I see no problem in mixing the funds.


but it seems statistically odd that EVERY donation greater in value than 0.5 btc (not a huge sum) went through a mixer BEFORE being donated. that's not a random pattern. that's behaviour.
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
Well, you really don't know where the BTCs that have been donated come from. They might come from illegal activities.
I can see what Lannister's doing: somehow, being in charge with the funds, he might be associated with some tainted BTC. I see no problem in mixing the funds.
legendary
Activity: 1582
Merit: 1268
There is one think i am trying to understand, there is a mixer involved for every donation above 0,5btc which makes them very suspicious. Am i missing something here or is it just a coincides?

What do you mean?


Simple enough, all donations above 0,5btc are untraceable due to mixing. Is it just a coincidence? I have a feeling that those donations are made by the project owners. Do i need to be more clear?

to be clear, you are saying that every donation that has been made that is greater in value than 0.5 btc went through a mixer before being donated?

That`s correct. Is there an explanation for that?
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
There is one think i am trying to understand, there is a mixer involved for every donation above 0,5btc which makes them very suspicious. Am i missing something here or is it just a coincides?

What do you mean?


Simple enough, all donations above 0,5btc are untraceable due to mixing. Is it just a coincidence? I have a feeling that those donations are made by the project owners. Do i need to be more clear?

to be clear, you are saying that every donation that has been made that is greater in value than 0.5 btc went through a mixer before being donated?
Jump to: