Topic: delete - page 54. (Read 165547 times)

If only Richard Feynman was around, he could figure out all of this.

I can't be the only person to have figured this out surely.

Why's no-one talking about the elephant in the room?

The evidence is pretty damning

. BCX in trollbox posts a link to bitcointalk where he posts with his username "This is to confirm I'm BCX"
. BCX with same username says "I'm about to take poloniex down for 5 min in 5 min".  That happens.
. BCX username is banned from trollbox when poloniex comes back up.
. Another username claims to be BCX - tries to extort poloniex.  People start talking about how BCX committed an official US crime since poloniex is in Montana I think.
. BCX denies it.

BCX denied this

disclaimer: reality my indeed be different.  Do not operate heavy machinery. 

 

I'd classify ddos @ Poleniex as "input"  

No.  I'm like the people who want to know if a solution is safe from the NSA.  So I welcome the input from characters like BCX & TFM.

You are like ...

No one is burned in my book.
In my experience, sometimes the strongest critics can become good allies, and even if they never do, their criticisms and attention to the problems remains useful to me.

I really don't think you get what the idea of "security of money/blockchain" is all about.  It's not about ignoring threats - it's about pushing them as hard as possible and hoping there is a hole to find & fix.  

BCX - if you're more than a loadass of hot air and actually found something.  Thanks.  You did every Monero holder a favor by finding it sooner rather than leaving it to be discovered later.  

TFM - thanks for looking.  Some of your logic goes over my head, some of it comes across very much like the guy said upthread "My mom met my dad so the universe is amiss".  HOWEVER a second set of very interested, competent eyes from outside the project to probe for possible weaknesses is always appreciated.

You've both done us a service and I'm looking forward to seeing action on the blockchain, seeing what BCX can do.  Or seeing if he's full of hot air.  Either way - we move forward in getting closer to understanding a secure solution for anonymous financial transactions on the blockchain.  Both of you have contributed to this & Monero holders are in your debt.

Nekomata - Feel free to look at my post history.  I've sent 5% of my funds to the devs, I have a thread trying to fix the dev funding problem & I also have a high quality FUD thread.  

You might want to check out dogecoin.  I think it might be more up your alley.  

I am unsure how you wound up not on my ignore list.  But he isn't thread banned because

1 - This is not a moderated thread.

2 - It is not intended to shill for Monero.

3 - Discussion is open to anyone and the goal of TFM is not to make the public feel reassured against possible attacks.  Those are not his motivations & as someone who's interested in a secure coin these discussions bother me absolutely not at all.

4 - Your insecurity about Monero's security being discussed in public is pathetic.

5 - This public discussion, BCX and TFM probing for weaknesses (although I get it - I agree that he shakes lots of sticks at possibilities ... kinda along the lines of "my mom met my dad - that was a 1 in 2 billion chance so something is wrong with the universe).  BOTH of them do more good for Monero than constant meaningless shilling does (IE YOU).

Indeed it means that the fact "several instances of 4 blocks in one minute" is no evidence for anything.

Surely you know the difference between  "X is not evidence of attack"  and "X is evidence that there is no attack".

I saw the lengthy discussion, and I did not see the point of it.

If someone is causing the block rate to be higher than one per minute, that should be detected by counting blocks in some long interval (say, 10 hours) .

If the block rate is OK but the suspicion is that the timing of blocks is being manipulated, that should be detected by plotting a histogram of block-to-block gaps, or of number of blocks in successive 2 minute intervals, again over a long enough period.

Computing the probability of a certain complicated pattern occurring, after seeing it occur, is a tricky business.  The chance of my mother marrying my father was one in two billions or so; that does not mean that my mere existence is a sign that something fishy is going one with the universe...

 

Applying the decentralised checkpoints isn't based on consensus though.  It is a decision each miner may make on their own.
They can also be delivered out of band, so DDoS pfft.
It allows each miner to select which chain they like.  

So if BCX forks with TW or other method, that fork ends up back where it started, back in the sandbox along with the little shovels, buckets, and Stoli empties.

There are certain further improvements to this innovation that may yet come, but the rapid response to the only plausible indicated threat (which isn't even all that plausible IMHO) remains an underrated achievement.  BCX shares some of the thanks/blame for this forced evolution.

0.2/0.8 = 0.25


0.2/0.8 = 0.25



Afaics, ignoring decentralized checkpoints should be plausible since the attacker would control the decentralized consensus.

Ignoring centralized checkpoints seems not so sustainable, since you've got to convince others not to run the reference client.

Good to see you're able to transcend the ambiguity and self-identify.

Trolls will show up every time deceiving politicians show up. Just the nature of the game.

Ah I see. Sorry, I am not trying to put my point across to these type of arguments.

My point was specifically to Risto anyways.

Good luck.

This actually was an illuminating dialogue up until the point where the troll showed up.

Youre joking right?  You are comparing blockchain size?  You know that the blockchain size is based on the amount of transactions dont you?

Are you not aware or was this intentionally low key innocence? Normally I check post history, but I have no time ....

Just an example    https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/xmr-vs-bbr-fight-cryptonote-war-797738

There are others if you search. Perhaps there needs to be a good concise summary.