@markm
you are battering these noobs that just registered here mouthing you off like they are somebody lol
they have just shown to valid response to common sense on the last few pages and just resort to diversionary tactics and name calling etc.
rather than addressing the technical aspects of the issue at hand..
hey nubs go create some more dummy shell accounts lol ..kind funny the vocal one created their accounts often 5 days ago
and they think they have earned the right to spout of to guys doing this all for YEARS.. nooooope
and i think it goes waaay beyond securing the coin too and i have to admit i am not an expert on coins networking
but markm you have done a great job i think explaining what BCX said and what he said i understood also.. it made sense to me, not sure why these 'experts' are playing dumb.
i see one guy here as always saying he doesn't get why it's a scam (clone coins) and his excuse for clone coins is "that's why we're here"
well uhhh no lol
We're not here to support some shadowy corrupt deceitful scammer with nothing better to do that hang out at Bitcointalk's forums
posting clone coins non stop that demonstrate in ever way shape and form that they have no intention of supporting them long term. etc
and i said "etc" because it's what markm said and i just said and much much more and what is it we get in return ? games, diversion tactics and dodging the real issues.
it's explained to you guys endlessly and you hide and come back with a weak argument.. time after time.
in the process getting a response digging your hole deeper and deeper..
let me guess the two points i addressed here above will be replied with "rabble rabble rabble" and or "shut up"
ya debate won.. lol
i always feel like i am wailing on toddlers in here lol
Topic: delete - page 9. (Read 113461 times)
I am not specialised in ASICs nor even in proof of work mining. My interest is securing distributed ledgers and financial networks.
Thanks.
The scam is simply the fraudulent pretense that an totally insecure financial system is secure enough for actual use.
That simple, really, It is deliberately designed to be insecure, It deliberately avoids simple precautions that could help it be secure.
It is gross negligence, irresponsibility, to perpetrate such an insanely insecure thing for actual use.
The problem IS the insecurity of the blockchain.
It is INTENDED BY DESIGN to be insecure and to make it as hard as possible to secure.
-MarkM-
That simple, really, It is deliberately designed to be insecure, It deliberately avoids simple precautions that could help it be secure.
It is gross negligence, irresponsibility, to perpetrate such an insanely insecure thing for actual use.
The problem IS the insecurity of the blockchain.
It is INTENDED BY DESIGN to be insecure and to make it as hard as possible to secure.
-MarkM-
I think you forgot to mention that the network wasn't sufficiently secured and that the coin is therefore a scam.
(Buying)
Why sell 50%? Why not just give away the code (for a no work secure system) so anyone can make a secure currency without need for masses of hardware and electricity consumption?
-MarkM-
-MarkM-
I am not specialised in ASICs nor even in proof of work mining. My interest is securing distributed ledgers and financial networks.
If that can truly be done without proof of work mining that would be great.
All this proliferation of insecure not-enough-work proof of work chains can stop and people can clone whatever actually works to secure currencies / ledgers/ financial networks of people unwilling or unable to work.
-MarkM-
If that can truly be done without proof of work mining that would be great.
All this proliferation of insecure not-enough-work proof of work chains can stop and people can clone whatever actually works to secure currencies / ledgers/ financial networks of people unwilling or unable to work.
-MarkM-
Haha, how easy is that?
Make it 100% premine.
Give away 50% for free.
Sell the other 50%.
Theres your ledger. Your nightmare.
An independent closed currency cycle you can't control.
What you claim you are is just the opposite of what you really are.
You try to prevent just distribution in every way you can. Thats your game.
I am not specialised in ASICs nor even in proof of work mining. My interest is securing distributed ledgers and financial networks.
If that can truly be done without proof of work mining that would be great.
All this proliferation of insecure not-enough-work proof of work chains can stop and people can clone whatever actually works to secure currencies / ledgers/ financial networks of people unwilling or unable to work.
-MarkM-
If that can truly be done without proof of work mining that would be great.
All this proliferation of insecure not-enough-work proof of work chains can stop and people can clone whatever actually works to secure currencies / ledgers/ financial networks of people unwilling or unable to work.
-MarkM-
I think MarcM is a bot. Spreading the same FUD on every thread. Blunt fear mongering.
In old-fashioned lingo, markm is known as an "axe-grinder." Bzzzzzzzzzzt, bzzzzzzzzzzt, bzzzzzzzzzzt, bzzzzzzzzzzt.....
But on the other hand, the kind of axe he grinds does show that he's the go-to guy to ask about ASICs and their role in securing the blockchain. Just because he likes to bzzzzzzzzzzt on a regular basis doesn't change the fact that he does have real knowledge in a specialized area.
As a matter of habit, I tend to let people like that bzzzzzzzzzzt as they please because some day I might need and informed and intelligent answer from them to a question inside their specialty.
Just line up merged mining pools ahead of launch, so you can have massive hashing power right from launch. And of course launch with commensurely high difficulty so there is no instamining caused by the massive hashpower such pools can provide.
Remember currency is all about secure money for the users, not a welfare state make-work program for kids who somehow can afford a GPU but not a block eruptor.
Also, more and more botnets have more and more GPUs so along with a welfare state for kids with gaming rigs would come a welfare state for botnet operators.
-MarkM-
Remember currency is all about secure money for the users, not a welfare state make-work program for kids who somehow can afford a GPU but not a block eruptor.
Also, more and more botnets have more and more GPUs so along with a welfare state for kids with gaming rigs would come a welfare state for botnet operators.
-MarkM-
These attacks show why small coins need automatic checkpointing to prevent these attacks. If you are Bitcoin or Litecoin you can probably wing it and assume your hashpower if large enough not to be attacked. I launched Hirocoin with automatic checkpointing to secure the blockchain, otherwise you could end up a chew toy of an attacker like Auroracoin!
Totally agree with flipme.
So let me explain the scam here:
50% premined and distributed without any mining.
That takes 50% out of your scam game in the first place.
Then mining starts. But you still can't run your scam, because there are too many coins out there to make a market against, with your usual scam scheme.
And the nightmare fulfills for you once a real currency cycle starts working, without anything in the middle you can control.
50% premined and distributed without any mining.
That takes 50% out of your scam game in the first place.
Then mining starts. But you still can't run your scam, because there are too many coins out there to make a market against, with your usual scam scheme.
And the nightmare fulfills for you once a real currency cycle starts working, without anything in the middle you can control.
It's so obvious. Any coin about to make a real market, to become a full cycle working currency, a real success, is under attack by them.
That is bullshit.
Scams that try to pretend that patheticly insecure amounts of hash power suffice to secure a chain are what is being attacked.
If the scam has any chance of scamming lots of money out of people then that jsut makes it all the more important to put a stop to it before lots of people lose lots of money.
Your claim basically seems to be that the bigger the scam the more important it is NOT to prevent it, because big scams are successful scams so should be permitted or even encouraged.
These scams are deliberately trying to prevent blockchains from being secured. They refuse to enable merged mining even. They are designed not only to scam their own users but also to weaken all the other blockchains that also are trying to fool people into thinking that some puny tiny amount of hash power, so puny even a stupid meme can come up with more hash power, is enough to secure a blockchain.
Basically they are trying to make scrypt untenable as a way of securing a blockchain by totally fragmenting the world's available scrypt hash power so that no chain has enough to be secure.
-MarkM-
Yadda yadda scam, yadda yadda bullshit....
It isn't a scam. Why you call it a scam?
YOU are the scam part of the game, YOU are the scammers.
Are you hired by AUR team? The so-called country coin is totally a scam.
Should be dead totally. And you, scammers, should be killed.
It's a scam, to scam the scammers. YOU.
I'm glad to see you're running out of facts.
Now comes "Merged Mining". Bwahahaha.
Secondary Chain.
Again, BWAHAHAHA.
Now comes "Merged Mining". Bwahahaha.
Secondary Chain.
Again, BWAHAHAHA.
It's so obvious. Any coin about to make a real market, to become a full cycle working currency, a real success, is under attack by them.
That is bullshit.
Scams that try to pretend that patheticly insecure amounts of hash power suffice to secure a chain are what is being attacked.
If the scam has any chance of scamming lots of money out of people then that jsut makes it all the more important to put a stop to it before lots of people lose lots of money.
Your claim basically seems to be that the bigger the scam the more important it is NOT to prevent it, because big scams are successful scams so should be permitted or even encouraged.
These scams are deliberately trying to prevent blockchains from being secured. They refuse to enable merged mining even. They are designed not only to scam their own users but also to weaken all the other blockchains that also are trying to fool people into thinking that some puny tiny amount of hash power, so puny even a stupid meme can come up with more hash power, is enough to secure a blockchain.
Basically they are trying to make scrypt untenable as a way of securing a blockchain by totally fragmenting the world's available scrypt hash power so that no chain has enough to be secure.
-MarkM-
Yadda yadda scam, yadda yadda bullshit....
It isn't a scam. Why you call it a scam?
YOU are the scam part of the game, YOU are the scammers.
Are you hired by AUR team? The so-called country coin is totally a scam.
Should be dead totally. And you, scammers, should be killed.
I am not actually bothering to use any of my GPUs, let alone for scrypt mining. I probably will not even bother with scrypt ASICs if litecoin and DOGE continue to fragment the scrypt space by failing to enable themselves to be merged mined together.
Unless maybe one of them becomes such a trivial fragment of the space that the other, merged alongside all the coins that do implement the ability to be merged mined as a secondary chain, is clearly far and away greater in hash power thus maybe potentially possible to secure.
Litecoin was already dubious even before DOGE showed that just a stupid meme could conjure up more hash power almost overnight. That demonstration by DOGE basically made it clear that neither DOGE nor litecoin is convincingly secure yet and probably will not be at least until they are merged mined together, and maybe even then only if kids of meme/4chan sensibilities do not divert enough of the scrypt hashing power from that merged family to make it weak enough that a meme appealing to such types could come up with enough hashing power to PWN them.
-MarkM-
Unless maybe one of them becomes such a trivial fragment of the space that the other, merged alongside all the coins that do implement the ability to be merged mined as a secondary chain, is clearly far and away greater in hash power thus maybe potentially possible to secure.
Litecoin was already dubious even before DOGE showed that just a stupid meme could conjure up more hash power almost overnight. That demonstration by DOGE basically made it clear that neither DOGE nor litecoin is convincingly secure yet and probably will not be at least until they are merged mined together, and maybe even then only if kids of meme/4chan sensibilities do not divert enough of the scrypt hashing power from that merged family to make it weak enough that a meme appealing to such types could come up with enough hashing power to PWN them.
-MarkM-
Why would I shudder? Is X11 just another pathetically vulnerable amount of hash power thus just another scam waiting for a meme to conjure up more hash power and PWN it or something?
Oh wait, are you imagining I am against methods of viably and sufficiently securing ledgers that my existing CPU, GPU, FPGA and ASIC collections cannot "mine"? As that is not the case. What I am against is insecure ledgers, such as proof of work blockchains that do not do or have (e.g. via merged mining) enough work to actually secure themselves.
If Ripple, NXT, eMunie or whatnot are actually secure that will be great. No more need for vulnerable not-enough-work blockchains...
-MarkM-
Oh wait, are you imagining I am against methods of viably and sufficiently securing ledgers that my existing CPU, GPU, FPGA and ASIC collections cannot "mine"? As that is not the case. What I am against is insecure ledgers, such as proof of work blockchains that do not do or have (e.g. via merged mining) enough work to actually secure themselves.
If Ripple, NXT, eMunie or whatnot are actually secure that will be great. No more need for vulnerable not-enough-work blockchains...
-MarkM-
You, with your pathetical amount of ancient Scrypt hash power, will mine Flappycoin and the like, and thats about it.
You can really secure that chain then, really. It'll be all yours.
You will be holding the bag this time, don't you already realize that?
The scam is simply the fraudulent pretense that an totally insecure financial system is secure enough for actual use.
That simple, really, It is deliberately designed to be insecure, It deliberately avoids simple precautions that could help it be secure.
It is gross negligence, irresponsibility, to perpetrate such an insanely insecure thing for actual use.
The problem IS the insecurity of the blockchain.
It is INTENDED BY DESIGN to be insecure and to make it as hard as possible to secure.
-MarkM-
That simple, really, It is deliberately designed to be insecure, It deliberately avoids simple precautions that could help it be secure.
It is gross negligence, irresponsibility, to perpetrate such an insanely insecure thing for actual use.
The problem IS the insecurity of the blockchain.
It is INTENDED BY DESIGN to be insecure and to make it as hard as possible to secure.
-MarkM-
I have read all this topic (and the other ones) and now I just want to give my point of view.
I know that you will use the fact that I'm an Auroracoin pool owner, but forget this. I'm not Icelander, I've got coins on other crypto currencies just 6 AUR, I have no interest with my 6 AUR.
I think AUR is a good idea. That's a premined currency ? So what ? Who are you BCX to say that it is a scam ? Are you an Icelander ? No ! What is your problem if Icelanders want to use this crypto currency ? Foreigners are not required to invest and believe in that currency. So what is your interest to kill this crypto coin ? I think you have more intersts than me. Or perhaps, the truth is out of there...
I know that you will use the fact that I'm a new user of this forum. You know (as I read a lot of time on this topic), we can follow crypto currencies and not be registered on bitcointalk. We can read only and don't want to be an active user especially to write shit.
Unlike you, I think the AUR is a good idea even if it's a premined coin even if it was risky to trust on ONE person. That's why I have created supernode and I have translate the main website in french.
Ok, there was/is some technical problems, but why have you created 1,2,3...5... topics to explain that you hate this coin. WE KNOW !!! You have a lot of time to spend for something you hate !!! That's very funny and pathetic.
The danger is not on the security of block chain of AUR, it's not on riskly altcoins, the danger is you and people like you. You (and your fans) want to make the weather (the rain and the good weather as we said here). The danger is that persons like you find sheeps to follow them. You are a cancer !
I know that you have a lot of knowledge on crypto currencies. And with this knowledge you think you are god : you've got the power !! Pathetic (again) !
We have a lot of chance, the internet has not been developed by people like you, we still communicate with smoke signals.
I know that with my reply I will see your extrem power. I know that it's not possible to say the truth on big forums like this without paying the consequences because we have a lot of very powerful people. You know what, I'm free to think, I'm free to write and I don't need a forum or crypto currencies to be someone !
I know that you will use the fact that I'm an Auroracoin pool owner, but forget this. I'm not Icelander, I've got coins on other crypto currencies just 6 AUR, I have no interest with my 6 AUR.
I think AUR is a good idea. That's a premined currency ? So what ? Who are you BCX to say that it is a scam ? Are you an Icelander ? No ! What is your problem if Icelanders want to use this crypto currency ? Foreigners are not required to invest and believe in that currency. So what is your interest to kill this crypto coin ? I think you have more intersts than me. Or perhaps, the truth is out of there...
I know that you will use the fact that I'm a new user of this forum. You know (as I read a lot of time on this topic), we can follow crypto currencies and not be registered on bitcointalk. We can read only and don't want to be an active user especially to write shit.
Unlike you, I think the AUR is a good idea even if it's a premined coin even if it was risky to trust on ONE person. That's why I have created supernode and I have translate the main website in french.
Ok, there was/is some technical problems, but why have you created 1,2,3...5... topics to explain that you hate this coin. WE KNOW !!! You have a lot of time to spend for something you hate !!! That's very funny and pathetic.
The danger is not on the security of block chain of AUR, it's not on riskly altcoins, the danger is you and people like you. You (and your fans) want to make the weather (the rain and the good weather as we said here). The danger is that persons like you find sheeps to follow them. You are a cancer !
I know that you have a lot of knowledge on crypto currencies. And with this knowledge you think you are god : you've got the power !! Pathetic (again) !
We have a lot of chance, the internet has not been developed by people like you, we still communicate with smoke signals.
I know that with my reply I will see your extrem power. I know that it's not possible to say the truth on big forums like this without paying the consequences because we have a lot of very powerful people. You know what, I'm free to think, I'm free to write and I don't need a forum or crypto currencies to be someone !
Why would I shudder? Is X11 just another pathetically vulnerable amount of hash power thus just another scam waiting for a meme to conjure up more hash power and PWN it or something?
Oh wait, are you imagining I am against methods of viably and sufficiently securing ledgers that my existing CPU, GPU, FPGA and ASIC collections cannot "mine"? As that is not the case. What I am against is insecure ledgers, such as proof of work blockchains that do not do or have (e.g. via merged mining) enough work to actually secure themselves.
If Ripple, NXT, eMunie or whatnot are actually secure that will be great. No more need for vulnerable not-enough-work blockchains...
-MarkM-
Oh wait, are you imagining I am against methods of viably and sufficiently securing ledgers that my existing CPU, GPU, FPGA and ASIC collections cannot "mine"? As that is not the case. What I am against is insecure ledgers, such as proof of work blockchains that do not do or have (e.g. via merged mining) enough work to actually secure themselves.
If Ripple, NXT, eMunie or whatnot are actually secure that will be great. No more need for vulnerable not-enough-work blockchains...
-MarkM-
Well I guess we won't know unless BCX's attack does in fact take place and does in fact work.
So we are reduced to awaiting the empirical evidence.
I guess we have to hope that BCX was not bullshitting but is in fact doing the attack and does in fact have enough hashpower to make it work.
-MarkM-
So we are reduced to awaiting the empirical evidence.
I guess we have to hope that BCX was not bullshitting but is in fact doing the attack and does in fact have enough hashpower to make it work.
-MarkM-
I'm genuinely interested. Has BCX or someone else explained the variant of the attack somewhere? I remember him writing about, but not in detail. I'd like to take a look. Thanks.
Maybe if the attack works that might generate enough interest and credibility that (s)he will display the code used to do it?
Meanwhile, maybe ask for more info?
Such attacks have been done before, BCX has orchestrated or perpetrated successful attacks in the past apparently, or if not then was permitted by who-ever did so to claim the credit in this forum.
The post above this one makes clear yet again that it is necessary to actually perform the attack, and successfully, in order for the claims that these scams are vulnerable to it to be believed.
Maybe though the original discussion of the ancient attempted fix against timewarp contains explications of how the fix fails. Presumably after the fixers had already scheduled their fix and maybe not until bitcoin and litecoin had enough hashing power that it was no longer believed feasible for anyone to muster enough hashing power to succeed with the modified attack against those major hashpower chains?
That the perpetrators of new coins lacking that much hash power have not continued research and pursued it to a real fix before deploying their scams simply adds more weight to the claim they were not intending to create secure blockchains, merely to make quick and easy make-a-fast-buck scams.
They even actually go out of their way to ensure their chain cannot be secured, as if maybe planning ahead to the crash of their chain when they move on to the next so they can buy up all the coins of it at firesale prices then potentially some day go back to it, maybe when they run out of feasible names for new scams or something.
-MarkM-
Hey wanker, have a look at this thread.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/poll-would-you-support-a-litecoin-ltc-to-x11-algorithm-hardfork-549592
Makes you shudder much?
We are the Litecoin X11 hardfork team.
Jump to: