Facts about ByteCoin [BCN] you should know
Bytecoin bitcointalk / Bitcoin transaction timestamp.
Topic: Blowing the lid off the Cryptonote scam post/Bytecoin disinformation campaign (Read 354 times)
January 19, 2018, 09:47:29 AM
https://www.onebitcoinbuy.com/bytecoin-bcn-cryptocurrency-buy-money-cash.php
Facts about ByteCoin [BCN] you should know
Bytecoin bitcointalk / Bitcoin transaction timestamp.
Facts about ByteCoin [BCN] you should know
Bytecoin bitcointalk / Bitcoin transaction timestamp.
October 15, 2017, 09:45:57 PM
Act 1: Disinformation regarding Bytecoin
Ever since the inception of this post on bitcointalk.org, it has started the downward spiral of Bytecoin’s, Cryptonote’s, and other Cryptonote based coins reputation. It also started a massive disinformation campaign specifically against Bytecoin, leading people to believe that Bytecoin was a premined scam coin. Evidence of this is very easily found, ask some people on bitcointalk what they think of Bytecoin, go to the Monero subreddit and ask them what they think of Bytecoin. Even in the Monero subreddit they claim that Bytecoin, among other tools and software are scams. I won’t refute that the tools and software they list are most likely scams, or at the very least disingenuous, but lumping Bytecoin in with these is absolutely ridiculous.
On the subreddit, they claim that Minergate is connected to Bytecoin, because Minergate was one of the first Cryptonote pools. They also say that Freewallet is associated with Bytecoin, but they give ABSOLUTELY no evidence to these claims.They say Minergate is associated with Bytecoin because “Due to their proven high familiarity with the complex CryptoNote protocol (at the time) nobody aside from the Bytecoin creators could be behind Minergate.” This is an absolutely ridiculous claim to make, there is no hard evidence that Bytecoin is associated with Minergate, with their only reasoning being that they were one of the first pools. Perhaps they got help from the Cryptonote developers? We don’t know, but what we do know is that there is no direct proof linking Minergate and Bytecoin. This is just one of the many fallacies paraded by people who were brainwashed from this large disinformation campaign.
They also mention that Bytecoin is connected to Freewallet, with their reasoning being that “Freewallet uses the Changelly API to facilitate cryptocurrency exchanges. They also introduce serious security risks typical of other Bytecoin and closed source Minergate affiliated services”.
Again, their only link to Bytecoin is that Freewallet uses a Changelly API (Which does not mean that Freewallet is associated with Changelly/Minergate), Therefore Freewallet is associated with Minergate/Changelly, meaning that Freewallet is associated with Bytecoin. However we already broke the link between Minergate and Bytecoin, as there is no solid proof. There is also no solid proof that Freewallet and Changelly/Minergate is connected. So no, Bytecoin is not connected to Minergate, Changelly, or Freewallet as there is no solid proof.
Act 2: The Cryptonote Scam Post
This is probably one of the most well known talking points against Bytecoin, and it’s what most likely started the huge disinformation campaign against Bytecoin. One of the first points against Bytecoin/Cryptonote is this paragraph:
“The first thing that is a red flag in all of this is that nobody, and I mean no-fucking-body, is a known entity. "Antonio Juarez" is not a known entity, "DStrange" is not a known entity, none of the made up names on the Bytecoin website exist (they've since removed their "team" page, see below), none of the made up names on the CryptoNote website exist (Johannes Meier, Maurice Planck, Max Jameson, Brandon Hawking, Catherine Erwin, Albert Werner, Marec Plíškov). If they're pseudonyms, then say so.”
This isn’t a valid point, and I’ll explain why. Satoshi Nakamoto, the pioneer of all cryptocurrency, most likely had a pseudonym. He never said he did, but there’s a general consensus that he very well did have one. Why does no one have a problem with this? Satoshi Nakamoto (at least prior to Bitcoin) was not a known entity. And of course they aren’t going to say that their names are a pseudonym, that would defeat the point of a pseudonym!
“The other immediate red flag is that nobody, and I mean no-fucking-body, had heard of Bytecoin. Those that had heard of it thought it was the crummy SHA-256 Bitcoin clone that was a flop in the market. Bytecoin's claim that it had existed "on the deep web" for 2 years was not well received, because not a single vendor, user, miner, drug addict, drug seller, porn broker, fake ID card manufacturer, student who bought a fake ID card to get into bars, libertarian, libertard, cryptographer, Tor developer, Freenet developer, i2p developer, pedophile, or anyone else that is a known person - even just known on the Internet - had ever encountered "Bytecoin" on Tor. Ever. Nobody.”
Again, this is something you simply cannot prove. You cannot prove that absolutely nobody had heard of Bytecoin at all. This is simply just another claim that cannot be verified, because due to the volatility of Tor, websites go up and down as we speak. Meaning that any Bytecoin related sites are probably long gone.
However, I cannot not dispute the claim that something is wrong with the Cryptonote whitepapers, however it does not mean that they were used to validate the claims that Bytecoin was made in 2012. Once again, there is simply just no proof that these two events are connected.
The rest of the post is simply just conjecture, he even states it himself in the post. I’m still going to cover it and show the fallacies, but as a PSA, he even said himself that the following stuff is just conjecture.
“At the same time as DStrange made his "fuck me accidental discovery", another Bitcointalk account flared up to also "accidentally discover this weird thing that has randomly been discovered": Rias. What's interesting about both the "Rias" and "DStrange" accounts are their late 2013 creation date (October 31, 2013, and December 23, 2013, respectively), and yet they lay dormant until suddenly, out of the blue, on January 20th/21st they started posting. If you look at their early posts side by side you can even see the clustering: Rias, DStrange.”
Again, he even said himself that this is just conjecture. There is no evidence that these accounts are both by same people and there is no evidence that his discovery of Bytecoin was fake.
He then labels the next section of his conjecture post as “Batshit insane”and rightfully so.
They once again continue the rhetoric of Bytecoin shill accounts, and Bytecoin attacking the Monero subreddit. While this may have happened, nearly 3 years of a large disinformation campaign is far worse than Reddit trolls.
“And let's not forget that most recently the sockpuppets claimed that multi-sig is "a new revolutionary technology, it was discovered a short time ago and Bytecoin already implemented it”
Well, multi sig technology may not be revolutionary, but it surely changed the crypto scene as a whole. In Fact it helped birth one of the top 25 and top 10 cryptocurrencies, including Bytecoin and Monero.
He also seems to forget how social interactions work, and parades a joke post about aliens to be a serious post.
“Coincidentally, and completely unrelated (hurr durr), Quazarcoin, Fantomcoin, and Monetaverde are all also on Sourceforge. This gives us a frame of reference and a common link between them - it's quite clear that at least these three are run by the same team as CryptoNote. There is further anecdotal evidence that can be gathered by looking at the shill posts in the threads (especially the way the Moneteverda shills praise merge mining, in a way that is nearly fucking indistinguishable from the Bytecoin praise for multi-sig technology).”
What? So these since these coins that are all forks of Cryptonote and on sourceforge, means that they are all made the same developers? What? This really shows how the rest of this post is simply conjecture, because this is a completely unverified claim, that is completely out of the blue and has no correlation with anything that he has talked about before! Again there is also no hard evidence proving ANY of this. And a little question, why has Monero been left out of this? It’s a cryptonote coin, so why isn’t it getting the same attacks as the other Cryptonote coins that just got lumped with Bytecoin?
“The other three are a little more interesting. Let's start with fuckNoteduckNote. It's hard to say if duckNote is a CryptoNote/Bytecoin project. The addition of the HTML based wallet is a one-trick pony, a common thread among most of the CryptoNote/Bytecoin controlled coins, but that could also be the result of a not-entirely-retarded developer. Given the shill posts in the duckNote thread I'm going to flag it as possibly-controlled-by-the-fuckface-brigade.”
It’s interesting how this coin just gets a pass than the other coins. It seems oddly arbitrary. Again, there is no proof that this coin is associated with Bytecoin, at all!
“We know from the copyright that Andrey N. Sabelnikov is the epee author, and we can say with reasonable certainty that he was involved in Bytecoin's creation and is the dev behind Boolberry. Sabelnikov is quite famous - he wrote the Kelihos botnet code and worked at two Russian security firms, Microsoft took him to court for his involvement (accusing him of operating the botnet as well), and then settled with him out of court on the basis of him not running the botnet but just having written the code. Kelihos is a botnet that pumped out online pharmacy spam (you know the fucking annoying "Y-ou Ne3D Vi-4Gra!?" emails? those.) so it's good to see he transitioned from that to a cryptocurrency scam. Regardless of BBR's claim to have "fixed" CryptoNote's privacy (and the fake fight on Bitcointalk between the "Bytecoin devs" and cryptozoidberg), it's clear that the link between them is not transparent. BBR is either the brainchild of a spam botnet author that worked on Bytecoin, or it's the CryptoNote developers trying to have one currency distanced from the rest so that they have a claim for legitimacy. I think it's the second one, and don't want to enter into a fucking debate about it. Make up your own mind.”
It seems like the rest of this paper is just going to be me disproving claims because NONE of them have any evidence whatsoever! There is no hard proof connecting this and Bytecoin!
“Which brings us to the oddest story of the bunch: Bitmonero. It's pretty clear, given its early launch date and how unfamiliar anyone was with creating a genesis block or working in completely undocumented code, that thankful_for_today is/was part of the CryptoNote developers. He made a fatal error, though: he thought (just like all the other cryptocurrencies) that being "the dev" made him infallible. Ya know what happened? He tried to force his ideas, the community politely said "fuck you", and Bitmonero was forked into Monero, which is leading the pack of CryptoNote-based coins today. Let me be perfectly fucking clear: it doesn't matter that the Bytecoin/CryptoNote developers know their code and can push stuff out, and it doesn't matter that Sabelnikov can shovel bullshit features into his poorly named cryptocurrency, and it doesn't matter that Monetaverde is "green" and has "merged mining". Nobody working behind these cryptocurrencies is known in the cryptocurrency community, and that alone should be a big fucking red flag. Monero is streets ahead, partly because of the way they're developing the currency, but mostly because the "core devs" or whatever they're called are made up of reasonably well-known people. That there are a bunch of them (6 or 7?) plus a bunch of other people contributing code means that they're sanity checking each other.”
So because Monero has their development teams not anonymous, that means they aren’t one of these “scamcoins”?
“Don't take the last section as any sort of push for Monero. I think it's got potential (certainly much more than the other retarded "anonymous" coins that "developers" are popping out like street children from a cheap ho), and I hold a bit of XMR for shits and giggles, so take that tacit endorsement with a pinch of fucking salt.”
So we aren’t supposed to take any of this as a push for Monero, even though you have accidentally left out Monero from any of these attacks, have defended Monero, and said “Monero is streets ahead, partly because of the way they're developing the currency, but mostly because the "core devs" or whatever they're called are made up of reasonably well-known people. That there are a bunch of them (6 or 7?) plus a bunch of other people contributing code means that they're sanity checking each other.”
“The point is this: Bytecoin's 82% premine was definitely the result of a faked blockchain. CryptoNote's whitepaper dates were purposely falsified to back up this bullshit claim. Both Bytecoin and CryptoNote have perpetuated this scam by making up fake website data and all sorts. They further perpetuate it using shill accounts, most notably "DStrange" and "Rias" among others.”
Once again, another unverified claim with no evidence, and its about that huge premine that everyone loves circlejerking about. No hard evidence proving this at all.
All of these unverified, and unproven claims, along with the lack of Monero being attacked, in fact being praised in the post, makes this all the more fishy. It’s pretty obvious that this entire post is heavily biased towards Monero.
Oh also, fluffypony (Part of Moneros dev team) was one of the first people to respond to this post, saying this among other things:
“OP, I'd like to thank you for confirming the suspicions many of us involved with Monero have held for quite some time. There are a handful of things I'd like to comment on”
But why would the Monero core devs even have any suspicions of Bytecoin/Cyptonote before this post? There wasn’t any massive claims like this beforehand. But this is just conjecture and I have no proof that this was an inside job, and I will admit that. But if I was like the author of this post, I would parade it as if it was a fact.
This may not even be even all of the Bytecoin/Cryptonote disinformation, but it’s one of the biggest pieces that started the whole Bytecoin disinformation campaign.
See you all soon, fellow enthusiasts.
Sources:
Links on the Monero subreddit about Bytecoin scam: https://www.reddit.com/r/monero/wiki/avoid#
Stackexchange post about Bytecoin/Cryptonote scam: https://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/2930/which-entities-are-related-to-bytecoin-and-minergate
Bytecoin/Cryptonote Scam post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/blowing-the-lid-off-the-cryptonotebytecoin-scam-with-the-exception-of-monero-740112
PDF version of this post available here:
https://www.docdroid.net/rEKgQUR/bytecoin-rebuttle.pdf
Ever since the inception of this post on bitcointalk.org, it has started the downward spiral of Bytecoin’s, Cryptonote’s, and other Cryptonote based coins reputation. It also started a massive disinformation campaign specifically against Bytecoin, leading people to believe that Bytecoin was a premined scam coin. Evidence of this is very easily found, ask some people on bitcointalk what they think of Bytecoin, go to the Monero subreddit and ask them what they think of Bytecoin. Even in the Monero subreddit they claim that Bytecoin, among other tools and software are scams. I won’t refute that the tools and software they list are most likely scams, or at the very least disingenuous, but lumping Bytecoin in with these is absolutely ridiculous.
On the subreddit, they claim that Minergate is connected to Bytecoin, because Minergate was one of the first Cryptonote pools. They also say that Freewallet is associated with Bytecoin, but they give ABSOLUTELY no evidence to these claims.They say Minergate is associated with Bytecoin because “Due to their proven high familiarity with the complex CryptoNote protocol (at the time) nobody aside from the Bytecoin creators could be behind Minergate.” This is an absolutely ridiculous claim to make, there is no hard evidence that Bytecoin is associated with Minergate, with their only reasoning being that they were one of the first pools. Perhaps they got help from the Cryptonote developers? We don’t know, but what we do know is that there is no direct proof linking Minergate and Bytecoin. This is just one of the many fallacies paraded by people who were brainwashed from this large disinformation campaign.
They also mention that Bytecoin is connected to Freewallet, with their reasoning being that “Freewallet uses the Changelly API to facilitate cryptocurrency exchanges. They also introduce serious security risks typical of other Bytecoin and closed source Minergate affiliated services”.
Again, their only link to Bytecoin is that Freewallet uses a Changelly API (Which does not mean that Freewallet is associated with Changelly/Minergate), Therefore Freewallet is associated with Minergate/Changelly, meaning that Freewallet is associated with Bytecoin. However we already broke the link between Minergate and Bytecoin, as there is no solid proof. There is also no solid proof that Freewallet and Changelly/Minergate is connected. So no, Bytecoin is not connected to Minergate, Changelly, or Freewallet as there is no solid proof.
Act 2: The Cryptonote Scam Post
This is probably one of the most well known talking points against Bytecoin, and it’s what most likely started the huge disinformation campaign against Bytecoin. One of the first points against Bytecoin/Cryptonote is this paragraph:
“The first thing that is a red flag in all of this is that nobody, and I mean no-fucking-body, is a known entity. "Antonio Juarez" is not a known entity, "DStrange" is not a known entity, none of the made up names on the Bytecoin website exist (they've since removed their "team" page, see below), none of the made up names on the CryptoNote website exist (Johannes Meier, Maurice Planck, Max Jameson, Brandon Hawking, Catherine Erwin, Albert Werner, Marec Plíškov). If they're pseudonyms, then say so.”
This isn’t a valid point, and I’ll explain why. Satoshi Nakamoto, the pioneer of all cryptocurrency, most likely had a pseudonym. He never said he did, but there’s a general consensus that he very well did have one. Why does no one have a problem with this? Satoshi Nakamoto (at least prior to Bitcoin) was not a known entity. And of course they aren’t going to say that their names are a pseudonym, that would defeat the point of a pseudonym!
“The other immediate red flag is that nobody, and I mean no-fucking-body, had heard of Bytecoin. Those that had heard of it thought it was the crummy SHA-256 Bitcoin clone that was a flop in the market. Bytecoin's claim that it had existed "on the deep web" for 2 years was not well received, because not a single vendor, user, miner, drug addict, drug seller, porn broker, fake ID card manufacturer, student who bought a fake ID card to get into bars, libertarian, libertard, cryptographer, Tor developer, Freenet developer, i2p developer, pedophile, or anyone else that is a known person - even just known on the Internet - had ever encountered "Bytecoin" on Tor. Ever. Nobody.”
Again, this is something you simply cannot prove. You cannot prove that absolutely nobody had heard of Bytecoin at all. This is simply just another claim that cannot be verified, because due to the volatility of Tor, websites go up and down as we speak. Meaning that any Bytecoin related sites are probably long gone.
However, I cannot not dispute the claim that something is wrong with the Cryptonote whitepapers, however it does not mean that they were used to validate the claims that Bytecoin was made in 2012. Once again, there is simply just no proof that these two events are connected.
The rest of the post is simply just conjecture, he even states it himself in the post. I’m still going to cover it and show the fallacies, but as a PSA, he even said himself that the following stuff is just conjecture.
“At the same time as DStrange made his "fuck me accidental discovery", another Bitcointalk account flared up to also "accidentally discover this weird thing that has randomly been discovered": Rias. What's interesting about both the "Rias" and "DStrange" accounts are their late 2013 creation date (October 31, 2013, and December 23, 2013, respectively), and yet they lay dormant until suddenly, out of the blue, on January 20th/21st they started posting. If you look at their early posts side by side you can even see the clustering: Rias, DStrange.”
Again, he even said himself that this is just conjecture. There is no evidence that these accounts are both by same people and there is no evidence that his discovery of Bytecoin was fake.
He then labels the next section of his conjecture post as “Batshit insane”and rightfully so.
They once again continue the rhetoric of Bytecoin shill accounts, and Bytecoin attacking the Monero subreddit. While this may have happened, nearly 3 years of a large disinformation campaign is far worse than Reddit trolls.
“And let's not forget that most recently the sockpuppets claimed that multi-sig is "a new revolutionary technology, it was discovered a short time ago and Bytecoin already implemented it”
Well, multi sig technology may not be revolutionary, but it surely changed the crypto scene as a whole. In Fact it helped birth one of the top 25 and top 10 cryptocurrencies, including Bytecoin and Monero.
He also seems to forget how social interactions work, and parades a joke post about aliens to be a serious post.
“Coincidentally, and completely unrelated (hurr durr), Quazarcoin, Fantomcoin, and Monetaverde are all also on Sourceforge. This gives us a frame of reference and a common link between them - it's quite clear that at least these three are run by the same team as CryptoNote. There is further anecdotal evidence that can be gathered by looking at the shill posts in the threads (especially the way the Moneteverda shills praise merge mining, in a way that is nearly fucking indistinguishable from the Bytecoin praise for multi-sig technology).”
What? So these since these coins that are all forks of Cryptonote and on sourceforge, means that they are all made the same developers? What? This really shows how the rest of this post is simply conjecture, because this is a completely unverified claim, that is completely out of the blue and has no correlation with anything that he has talked about before! Again there is also no hard evidence proving ANY of this. And a little question, why has Monero been left out of this? It’s a cryptonote coin, so why isn’t it getting the same attacks as the other Cryptonote coins that just got lumped with Bytecoin?
“The other three are a little more interesting. Let's start with fuckNoteduckNote. It's hard to say if duckNote is a CryptoNote/Bytecoin project. The addition of the HTML based wallet is a one-trick pony, a common thread among most of the CryptoNote/Bytecoin controlled coins, but that could also be the result of a not-entirely-retarded developer. Given the shill posts in the duckNote thread I'm going to flag it as possibly-controlled-by-the-fuckface-brigade.”
It’s interesting how this coin just gets a pass than the other coins. It seems oddly arbitrary. Again, there is no proof that this coin is associated with Bytecoin, at all!
“We know from the copyright that Andrey N. Sabelnikov is the epee author, and we can say with reasonable certainty that he was involved in Bytecoin's creation and is the dev behind Boolberry. Sabelnikov is quite famous - he wrote the Kelihos botnet code and worked at two Russian security firms, Microsoft took him to court for his involvement (accusing him of operating the botnet as well), and then settled with him out of court on the basis of him not running the botnet but just having written the code. Kelihos is a botnet that pumped out online pharmacy spam (you know the fucking annoying "Y-ou Ne3D Vi-4Gra!?" emails? those.) so it's good to see he transitioned from that to a cryptocurrency scam. Regardless of BBR's claim to have "fixed" CryptoNote's privacy (and the fake fight on Bitcointalk between the "Bytecoin devs" and cryptozoidberg), it's clear that the link between them is not transparent. BBR is either the brainchild of a spam botnet author that worked on Bytecoin, or it's the CryptoNote developers trying to have one currency distanced from the rest so that they have a claim for legitimacy. I think it's the second one, and don't want to enter into a fucking debate about it. Make up your own mind.”
It seems like the rest of this paper is just going to be me disproving claims because NONE of them have any evidence whatsoever! There is no hard proof connecting this and Bytecoin!
“Which brings us to the oddest story of the bunch: Bitmonero. It's pretty clear, given its early launch date and how unfamiliar anyone was with creating a genesis block or working in completely undocumented code, that thankful_for_today is/was part of the CryptoNote developers. He made a fatal error, though: he thought (just like all the other cryptocurrencies) that being "the dev" made him infallible. Ya know what happened? He tried to force his ideas, the community politely said "fuck you", and Bitmonero was forked into Monero, which is leading the pack of CryptoNote-based coins today. Let me be perfectly fucking clear: it doesn't matter that the Bytecoin/CryptoNote developers know their code and can push stuff out, and it doesn't matter that Sabelnikov can shovel bullshit features into his poorly named cryptocurrency, and it doesn't matter that Monetaverde is "green" and has "merged mining". Nobody working behind these cryptocurrencies is known in the cryptocurrency community, and that alone should be a big fucking red flag. Monero is streets ahead, partly because of the way they're developing the currency, but mostly because the "core devs" or whatever they're called are made up of reasonably well-known people. That there are a bunch of them (6 or 7?) plus a bunch of other people contributing code means that they're sanity checking each other.”
So because Monero has their development teams not anonymous, that means they aren’t one of these “scamcoins”?
“Don't take the last section as any sort of push for Monero. I think it's got potential (certainly much more than the other retarded "anonymous" coins that "developers" are popping out like street children from a cheap ho), and I hold a bit of XMR for shits and giggles, so take that tacit endorsement with a pinch of fucking salt.”
So we aren’t supposed to take any of this as a push for Monero, even though you have accidentally left out Monero from any of these attacks, have defended Monero, and said “Monero is streets ahead, partly because of the way they're developing the currency, but mostly because the "core devs" or whatever they're called are made up of reasonably well-known people. That there are a bunch of them (6 or 7?) plus a bunch of other people contributing code means that they're sanity checking each other.”
“The point is this: Bytecoin's 82% premine was definitely the result of a faked blockchain. CryptoNote's whitepaper dates were purposely falsified to back up this bullshit claim. Both Bytecoin and CryptoNote have perpetuated this scam by making up fake website data and all sorts. They further perpetuate it using shill accounts, most notably "DStrange" and "Rias" among others.”
Once again, another unverified claim with no evidence, and its about that huge premine that everyone loves circlejerking about. No hard evidence proving this at all.
All of these unverified, and unproven claims, along with the lack of Monero being attacked, in fact being praised in the post, makes this all the more fishy. It’s pretty obvious that this entire post is heavily biased towards Monero.
Oh also, fluffypony (Part of Moneros dev team) was one of the first people to respond to this post, saying this among other things:
“OP, I'd like to thank you for confirming the suspicions many of us involved with Monero have held for quite some time. There are a handful of things I'd like to comment on”
But why would the Monero core devs even have any suspicions of Bytecoin/Cyptonote before this post? There wasn’t any massive claims like this beforehand. But this is just conjecture and I have no proof that this was an inside job, and I will admit that. But if I was like the author of this post, I would parade it as if it was a fact.
This may not even be even all of the Bytecoin/Cryptonote disinformation, but it’s one of the biggest pieces that started the whole Bytecoin disinformation campaign.
See you all soon, fellow enthusiasts.
Sources:
Links on the Monero subreddit about Bytecoin scam: https://www.reddit.com/r/monero/wiki/avoid#
Stackexchange post about Bytecoin/Cryptonote scam: https://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/2930/which-entities-are-related-to-bytecoin-and-minergate
Bytecoin/Cryptonote Scam post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/blowing-the-lid-off-the-cryptonotebytecoin-scam-with-the-exception-of-monero-740112
PDF version of this post available here:
https://www.docdroid.net/rEKgQUR/bytecoin-rebuttle.pdf
Jump to: