Topic: [BCN] Bytecoin. Secure, private, untraceable since 2012 - page 194. (Read 1070171 times)

What can be inferred from this:

VOLUME(24h) / MARKETCAP
LTC:  0.0407
XPM:  0.0384
BLK:  0.0371
DOGE: 0.0190
PPC:  0.0109
XMR:  0.0059
DASH: 0.0058
NXT:  0.0045
BCN:  0.0007

This guy respond to your question, try to talk to him.

And then they blew it all away by premining 82%.

my research points to it appearing out of nowhere in early 2014. It may have taken since 2011 to develop but BCN was not launched in 2012.

I really wanted to believe this is running since 2012 but my efforts have been frustrated by lack of evidence and transparency.

when was that cryptonote TOR site set-up?

*waits for 1 week-old account out of nowhere raise the hands*

You may have found Bytecoin last week but some of us are months on this, there is no proof Bytecoin existed anywhere before 2014, here's how the Cryptonote TOR website looks like: http://s18.postimg.org/3nwlgoz5l/Crypto_Note.png Again no proof of BCN existence before 2014... So much time passed and the stakes are so high that even if a proof appeared out of nowhere it would have to be a 10/10 proof.

I'll lower the bar. Will anybody raise a hand to say they knew of BCN pre-2014?

[BCN] Bytecoin. Secure, private, untraceable since 1812. Hashing transactions before the discovery of electron interactions.

Agreed that BCT is not the center of the universe. So can you show me an archive.org link that mentions bcn/cryptonote anywhere on the web prior to 2014?

It's the simplest thing.

lets say people didn't buy because of the premine and if there is no more Bytecoin. Bytecoin devs can move to dashcoin, buy the cheap coins and take over the project. no premine issue or whatever, problem solved   

Yeah I agree with that, about it being an investment I disagree as much as I respect your opinion, not trying to convince anyone here its important that ALL the history is public and so people can decide, I like the fact Monero did not tried to hide its a fork of Bytecoin but I cannot see myself investing in Bytecoin for said reasons above... its a good tech, but if one to like it need to buy it then I'm afraid I cannot "like" Bytecoin, for the same reason I dislike Darkcoin.

There's the other side, the tech side:

1) Even though I like Dashcoin as an experiment, I highly doubt it to be a valid long-term investment. Something that is cloned cannot lead the market. Let's say, there's no more Bytecoin, which would make Dashcoin hault and degrade.

2) Monero is fun, it has a nice community. However, I haven't seen any achievements that could indicate that its technology is going anywhere. Please, do not start bombarding me here with each and every random feature you know was implemented. What's more, intended plans is not what I'm talking about.

3) Bytecoin is the Innovator. Invented/implemented CryptoNote technology, released awesome GUI, highload wallet for businesses (just to name a few significant achievements). Bytecoin possesses this technology and the expertise to move it further, whether you like it or not.

That's why my investment is Bytecoin.

And once again, the world doesn't start and end with bitcointalk. What you are saying is that you were able to discover Bytecoin when the info was first posted on this forum.

this should put things in perspective:

Hi lxxtikk. Nice to meet you in Bytecoin Community! Check the official Bytecoin website to get more info about BCN http://bytecoin.org/
If you have any questions, you could ask them on Bytecoin forum: http://bytecointalk.org/

I suggest you do your own research, and then decide where you gonna put your money, after all we are dealing with money.

If you think the team behind this coin is capable of great things... or not.

Look at the road map, compare the development and the ease to use with others Bytecoin forks, and make you call.

hi,what is with this coin,?
Good coin to invest now?
and why?

It isn't that difficult to have "lots of activity" when you and your cronies scam-mined ~80% of all the billions of coins that will ever exist.

Of course these people want to see the coin rise in value. Scammers gonna scam.

I'm not stranger to this conclusion, there is definitely fake dates in the whitepaper, as it has been proved, but it does not discard the technology that has been "saved" through Monero, moreover it continues being developed this means another clean fork could take place in the future, I think the problem with this history is how deeply ignored it is outside Bytecoin/Cryptonote/Monero circles, like you said, you don't see a single interview with the "Bytecoin team" where the guy asks what the fucking is wrong with the timestamps and why there is not proof that it has been mined since 2012, one of the few mainstream publications that tried to explain with a honest approach all these issue was Lets Talk Bitcoin back September, 2014: http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/mind-to-matter/lets-talk-bitcoin/e/lets-talk-bitcoin-144-news-talk-35387986 I continue to observe Bytecoin and I have to confess the level of activity around this coin is surprisingly large which makes me wonder if they are planning something in the future, but so far the only move that could save it from eternal scrutiny would be a reset of the blockchain or a at least of all that mined before it was made public (March 2014 I think) even making it permanently inflationary would not excuses the massive amount mined in secret, if this was a darknet coin so why did it was made public after 80%+ mined? Why not let it being a "darknet coin" and launch clean ones with verifiable honest launch on the clearnet... oh wait that was already been done: Monero and others.

Given what we're discussing I'd have thought accusing me of playing games is rather far-fetched, no?

OK. This is the weirdest , most bizzarro thing in crypto, save perhaps the true identity of Nakamoto.

Clearly there's is a very disturbing gap in info between mid-2012 and early 2013 by which time a large amount of BCN had been mined. However it seems just as likely that the coin was mined in closed private circles as it does the blockchain was entirely faked. There is no way of knowing if the entire BCN Team or just a part of it is responsible for this mystery.

What is curious to me is how BCN retains such a high market cap and has any active community at all, which it does. If the Monero assumptions (and they are assumptions albeit educated ones) about the BCN story are true it is hard to imagine how it has survived so long. And yet it has and development continues. Also twitter shows a decent amount of activity with a few interesting accounts (some associated to darkmarkets) going back and forth about bytecoin.

Aslo mysterious is how no interview with Harry (of which there have been at least 2 iirc) raises the question of the 2012-2013 period.

whitepapers dates being forged is of concern too. the thesis is that they were made retroactively in 2013. while this kind of deception is hard to stomach I do wonder how long the minds behind CN were working on the concepts and code before 2013. almost certainly a lot. almost certainly CN was in development in 2012 and maybe before. so while the dates were perhaps deliberatley faked it is not to say that CN research was not happening in 2012 - it seems highly likely it was.

One final thought, and question. How long was BTC mined in private or very small circles before a larger audience joined. How long after BTC was bitcointalk set up and how much BTC had been mined at this point?

smooth readily admits CN is a crypto tour de force and yet undermines their devs' credibility since the CN authors are most likely the devs of bytecoin. indeed great minds can do stupid things (like try to scam people after making a brilliant work of crytpo ) but then we get into the tricky game of resolving who turns a cypherpunk triumph (CN) into an elaborate scam, assuming BCN is such a scam.

I repeat: It seems just as likely that the coin was mined in closed private circles as it does the blockchain was entirely faked. There is no way of knowing if the entire BCN Team or just a part of it is responsible for this mystery. also despite the "fake dates" on the paper it seems very likely that CN was being developed in 2012.

I can also understand why Monero did what it did and started their own fork, there are a great deal of unanswered questions.

cypherpunks and scammers have a shared interest in protecting their anonymity. either way the BCN devs have (to the best of my knowledge) successfully protected their anonymity, as did satoshi. the publication of Team member bio's on the website seems to me could have been a prank. BCN has always been clear that its devs value their anonymity, as well they might. they have at least in this regard remained consistent.

Absence of evidence despite sufficient incentives to search for such evidence, and diligent efforts to do so (including my own) is evidence of absence. It only takes one tiny little example to disprove the claim of fakery. If that can't be found despite diligent efforts, that is strong evidence in support of it being faked.

I agree with Johnny Mnemonic though, it is silly to keep playing this game.