Topic: delete - page 10. (Read 27689 times)

I like you am too busy to pursue this. And if my hunch is correct, one needs significant hashing power to exploit it, which I don't have. Plus I don't want to create animosity with the developers, because I am hoping they will work with me in the future. I do appreciate your efforts and hope to be the beneficiary of your audit in the future.

Note he didn't confirm my hunch. There is also a possible antithetical meaning to the above post.


I intended to leave the forum for a while to get some work done, so the AnonyMint account was closed and I am happy for that. Because talk is cheap. And the silly arguing we were doing wasn't productive or had reached diminishing returns, especially compared to possible value I could create by coding and not talking. Or at least I wanted to not throw my reputation around because I am in support of the notion that the best code should win, not the best control over public opinion (yeah I wee bit annoyed that Monero tries to win with control over public opinion rather than not bashing the other CN coins and simply out innovating them and let their code speak for itself. And also a little bit annoyed that animorex and rpietila annoint the winner of altcoin innovation without seeing all the innovation and also with their limited understanding of the detailed issues involved. I am also guilty somewhat which is another reason to terminate AnonyMint. At the end of the day, we all need any innovations any one can do, and simply buying or earning bounties on that coin which is the most innovative will make us all rich so we don't need to get too overly aggressive on the public opinion battles.). I am in full support of any innovation that any altcoins can accomplish because I believe there are ominous threats to our human freedom on the near-term horizon which outweigh any of my personal desires for gain. For example, I am very interested in any exploit against one-time ring signatures, since I contemplated using them in an anonymity toolset. Notwithstanding though I would also like to make some money in this space and I trust myself to bring about the necessary innovations more than I trust any other developer or group of developers that I am aware of in this space. But if another development group leaps forward and proves me wrong, I might just have to join them. However, honestly I don't know too well TacoTime's (at al) capabilities or what they have in mind for the near-term future.  I am enticed back to this thread because some people who I think would be my angel investors (even if they don't know it) are also investors in XMR and BBR, thus I don't want them to lose the money that I am hoping they will invest on my efforts if ever I get there. Thus I want to try to ascertain whether there is any risk here on BCX's allegation. In short, if something is really important for the future of altcoins, I am drawn back to post.

Note I continue to get further evidence that jl777 doesn't have a deep grasp of the technology. Or at least some areas are not within his realm of expertise. I haven't looked at his code, and prolific coders can be extremely helpful if you keep them away from core things they don't understand well. Note I don't claim to be omniscient or to not make mistakes. And I don't claim to be better at cryptography than gmaxell and other core Bitcoin developers. I am a recent autodidact on cryptography and I am a generalist. So I have some distinct disadvantages, but I also have some creative freedom they may not have.

I learned in this thread that gmaxell (and Adam Beck?) semi-regularly communicate with the Monero developers. Well he thinks I am an idiot, so you have a strong ally I would probably never attain. Closing AnonyMint and stop fighting with the smart developers is a wise step on my part.

BlackCoin.

I think there are other coins with foundations or similar groups? (I don't really know.)

Isn't that a bit arrogant. Bitcoin = "some coin" 

@BCX (and or AnonyMint)

Regarding #1 and #3, is the BBR code base with its different PoW and other core changes already resistant to the same exploit?

Edit: https://github.com/cryptozoidberg/boolberry

Your dependence on those you fear is a touching example of human weakness.

BCX, most people that are interested in crypto know absolutely nothing about the underlying technology. We can read white papers and nod our heads in agreement.... feigning a sliver of understanding, then those tiny bits of knowledge are deleted from all thought almost immediately. We are fundamentally helpless to evaluate the true stability and safety of any coin we own.

The reason I say this, is because it is a waste of time for the crypto community and for individual investors to bother with coins that are flawed. They should be exploited and destroyed the moment they are proven vulnerable. Coins would be much more careful about launching, there would be a cost to launching a coin that is weak, today there is no such cost and the investor is left to simply gamble.

I would call upon you and your similarly capable friends to take it upon yourself to ALWAYS destroy a coin that is vulnerable, this includes low-hash coins, because 51% is a vulnerability that cannot be ignored. Someone has to be the police, we have police for a reason, to protect the innocent.

Please destroy Monero and any other coin that cannot withstand the force of your hashing resources, a two week notice should be all you provide, then execution, quick and painless. Slowly you can change this landscape full of scamming and thievery and lies.

Just out of curiosity, why the change of name to TheFascistMind?

In a way there is. He could write up a description (or use some existing one he probably already has) and post a hash of it. After it is discovered by someone else, he can disclose his original writeup, and the hash can be verified.

Is there anyway for you to post some proof of these issues without giving them away?  I bet there isn't but it would be great if you could.

I agree with you, and I'm not being misquoted here.

But let's be real here, the entire market cap is like 5.5 million USD. That just isn't "large sums of money" when divided among a large number of participants. Its a very low speculative value fairly consistent with the risks involved balanced against what might be significant upside if the risks can be overcome.

Of course what is large to one person is small to another. Certainly no one should invest more than he or she can afford to lose in any speculative investment, and that includes not only any altcoin but any cryptocoin at all, in my view.

If he is not bluffing, my hunch is probably correct. CN was never analyzed from the standpoint of the mathematical correlation of multiple intersecting rings. Rather the proof of security was for one ring in isolation.

I bet you will quickly find his exploit if you pursue my hunch.

This thread is hilarious, thanks guys haha. Especially that Moneroman guy LOL, what a twat.  

Anyway yeah I've never been sure about CN coins and haven't invested in them. Purely because of the fact that ByteCoin first popped up claiming to have been being used on the Darknet for years prior to it's BitcoinTalk announcement. Which, let me tell you is absolute trollop. I always just assumed the creators were mining it themselves and sending it around wallets to make it seem plausible so everyone here thinks they're investing in an already established "oooh top secret" coin or some shit. Then all the clones like Monero and whatnot I haven't even bothered checking out.

Happy I made the right decision to stay away from these tbh.

Let's keep this simple. If David is working with Risto and living in his castle I couldn't care less. If you think that being the case is going to make any real difference to people thinking critically about the value of the coin and the success of the project, then we will simply have to agree to disagree.

If we do indeed disagree, I'd suggest you should get out of this FUD echo chamber a bit more and talk to some real people. Find out what they really think is important or not important about open source projects when they aren't obsessed with playing "shit on the other altcoin" game that is so popular here.

I've talked to a lot of people about Monero who cared enough to examine it in detail and ask me critical questions, sometimes many such questions. Some decided they didn't like it at all, some decided they did. Not once can I think of did the question of Risto's (non) involvement come up, except in public posts on this forum. Obviously those are playing to an audience. Whether you are doing that deliberately or just caught up in the "shit on other altcoins" game, I have no idea, but either way you are doing it.

I am too sleepy to work through the math of my intuitive hunch. But looking again at the NIZKP in the CN whitepaper, I am suspecting that when the same rings are used by all or some of the members in the ring, then maybe 'x' the private key can be determined from a system of equations.  Then if one had sufficient hashrate to fork (rewind) the blockchain, they could double-spend these wallets to other destination addresses.

Perhaps have your cryptanalysis guy look at this, if I don't get a change to come back to it.

I guess I could of worded that a bit differently.  I was only trying to show Nekomata that David and Risto working together is not common knowledge for everyone.  I didn't know it until he said that in the trollbox.

David may be intelligent and independent-minded person.  Never said he wasn't.  But having no doubt about what he can and cannot do carries very little weight here.  You have no control over the situation and in no way can you speak to the certainty of this.  Neither can I.  I'm only expressing my concern about the control he tries to put on the monero market and having someone closely tied to monero working for you is not a good situation.

I never really said he was a bad guy either but he does more than simply try to support a coin.  You have no idea what I believe therefore you have no room to comment on my beliefs of sincere supporters.

Welcome. What do you think of today's candles?

I can't believe you guys have managed to turn this into another Monero speculation thread! 

Obviously it could be a complete coincidence as well.

Maybe you are correct and you should buy these dips. Or just maybe BCX loves to play on overconfidence and figures those who should be harmed most will be. I dunno. This is bizarre.