I am hoping it is positive. Everyone has won, except for those investors who sold (maybe to BCX, or to Risto further concentrating ownership). Afaics, XMR has gained stature for becoming yet again stronger with further analysis of its potential weaknesses.
If MEW would be changed to CEW, my opinion is we would have made really great strides on seeing a proliferation of innovation and community spirit.
Topic: delete - page 80. (Read 165547 times)
We are not enemies.
I rather fancy the idea of publishing the sender of (most) every ring signature on the block chain instead at a future date of my choosing.
I warned you don't fuck with me.
I will make sure BBR has the mitigation ready assuming they are still cooperative with me and they don't give my mitigation to XMR.
You are not dealing with BCX any more. You are dealing with me. Capice.
I warned you don't fuck with me.
I will make sure BBR has the mitigation ready assuming they are still cooperative with me and they don't give my mitigation to XMR.
You are not dealing with BCX any more. You are dealing with me. Capice.
This is not how friends operate, "friend." Please do not piss on our legs and then infer something about the weather.
Go further back and see fluffypony instigated that reaction from me, as it seemed he was trying to not show appreciation for any outsider helping. See jl777 imploring him to show appreciation and fluffypony rejecting it. And it was aided by my interpretation of Risto's 4 - 8% proclamation meaning I wouldn't find anything. Risto clarified that his random variable was just whether BCX would attack, but when I blew up above I didn't know that is what he meant.
Your work on the analysis of the whitepaper is not being criticized. If the MEW or anyone expects you to be omniscient, then they are unrealistic. Lack of omniscience is precisely why open source bazaars kickass on well organized top-down cathedrals.
I feel now a sense of duty to attempt to help jl777 with his anonymity design (which I will be going in PMs), because he has shown that he appreciates the gift culture of open source. It is all about showing respect and appreciation to each other. Some are more talented than others in specific areas (e.g. yourself I am sure more knowledgeable than me about the math of cryptography) and others have other attributes to contribute such as their work ethic and their great attitude.
fluffypony and aminorex are the biggest reasons for fueling the negative energy between the two projects. Do not let them get to you. They will cause lasting and maybe permanent damage to one camp because their target is to get rich quick and nothing to do with advancements in software.
snip
Actually you are detrimental to both Monero and Boolberry projects. I think without you, both would have had substantial progress by now. How are you a lead dev of anything without knowing how to code is beyond shocking. Can you point to any lines of code of significance that you have authored till date to the project? or any open source projects of significance?
The actual coders and contributors of Monero are the ones who should be driving the project forward. You are just a poison everyone has to deal with. If you were fired from the position, both projects would move forward with great pace and no one is going to miss you and we don't have to withstand the army of the gullible that feed off of your negative energy.
Your posts are always vitriolic and you have smeared zoidberg countless number of times. This was an occasion where you could have shown professionalism, but I think the biggest compliment for you is that someone even mentions your name. You are a delusional piece of insignificant garbage.
We are not enemies.
I rather fancy the idea of publishing the sender of (most) every ring signature on the block chain instead at a future date of my choosing.
I warned you don't fuck with me.
I will make sure BBR has the mitigation ready assuming they are still cooperative with me and they don't give my mitigation to XMR.
You are not dealing with BCX any more. You are dealing with me. Capice.
I warned you don't fuck with me.
I will make sure BBR has the mitigation ready assuming they are still cooperative with me and they don't give my mitigation to XMR.
You are not dealing with BCX any more. You are dealing with me. Capice.
This is not how friends operate, "friend." Please do not piss on our legs and then infer something about the weather.
Go further back and see fluffypony instigated that reaction from me, as it seemed he was trying to not show appreciation for any outsider helping. See jl777 imploring him to show appreciation and afaics fluffypony rejecting it. And I felt further spurned by my interpretation of Risto's 4 - 8% proclamation meaning I wouldn't find anything. Risto clarified that his random variable was just whether BCX would attack, but when I blew up above I didn't know that is what he meant.
Your work on the analysis of the whitepaper is not being criticized. If the MEW or anyone expects you to be omniscient, then they are unrealistic. Lack of omniscience is precisely why open source bazaars kickass on well organized top-down cathedrals.
I feel now a sense of duty to attempt to help jl777 with his anonymity design (which I will be going in PMs), because he has shown that he appreciates the gift culture of open source. It is all about showing respect and appreciation to each other. Some are more talented than others in specific areas (e.g. yourself I am sure more knowledgeable than me about the math of cryptography) and others have other attributes to contribute such as their work ethic and their great attitude.
We are not enemies.
I rather fancy the idea of publishing the sender of (most) every ring signature on the block chain instead at a future date of my choosing.
I warned you don't fuck with me.
I will make sure BBR has the mitigation ready assuming they are still cooperative with me and they don't give my mitigation to XMR.
You are not dealing with BCX any more. You are dealing with me. Capice.
I warned you don't fuck with me.
I will make sure BBR has the mitigation ready assuming they are still cooperative with me and they don't give my mitigation to XMR.
You are not dealing with BCX any more. You are dealing with me. Capice.
This is not how friends operate, "friend." Please do not piss on our legs and then infer something about the weather.
Edited to add:
Quote
What is inflaming the emotions is the sense whether correct or not that some (not all) in the XMR camp are arrogant (or insecure and defensive thus perceived as arrogance).
Please see above quote for irony.
The community-at-large wants to see more "working together" and "building things" and less "turf battles" and "yo moma is a ho".
I sent a PM to rpietila thanking the MEW for paying me a bounty. I lamented the dirty tactics by the opposition that digs up dubious (there is always at least 2 sides to any story...I don't want to discuss it or dig it up) skeletons in Risto's past life. I have suggested to the MEW via Risto that they consider not being monogamously aligned with XMR and spread some token love (in the form of investment holdings) around to synergistic altcoins such as BBR. I think this would go a long way to diffusing the war attitude around here, and fostering goodwill. When pooling capital, you are a political target whether you like it not. I am suggesting how to diffuse that phenomenon and for best results on our mutual goals.
To frame the goal of crypto-currency conquering fiat as divide-and-conquer war amongst the innovators seems to be less astute.
We are not enemies. The only justification for such an attitude is wanting to be richer than the next guy, for bragging rights. Even if that desire remains, it can be done with gentleman's mutual respect and good will. The potential for crypto-currency appreciation is enough to make us all rich, and especially if we stop tearing each other down. The other justification would have been to not proliferate dilution of the money supply of crypto-currency, but this will happen organically if one altcoin can rise up.
While Apple Pay and Paypal are off conquering the world of electronic currency adoption, we are dividing-and-conquering ourselves. We need many small fish making experiments. The big fish can swallow the best innovations, or the small fish can out race the big fish until it is bigger. The innovation and then the market's digestion of the innovation will decide any way, no amount of verbal posturing can decide it.
I have no qualms with MEW making XMR its #1 focus and investment. Seems rational. Should it also have a #2, #3, etc.? Monogamy has the cost that the community-at-large will always resist helping efforts that anoint themselves. I prefer a larger community of gentleman's competition, thus arriving at a greater result faster. When the winning inertia accumulates organically rather than forced from the top-down, it is accepted by the community as fair play and good will.
I have a new insight into my algorithm which I think obviates that comment smooth made in private about the P=NP question.
Assuming the algorithm works then if CN implements the mitigation, thus it will be removing input address from contention as they are found to be in "spent" groups (i.e. yes my algorithm is also a form of pruning) from a rolling history thus the algorithm will not consider the entire history but rather incrementally, thus it is not an NP search. Also I provided some ideas for locality of the search.
An attitude of selfishness is the source of most of the trolling. I would never have gotten inflamed in this thread had I not felt that there was defiance behind the scenes to "anything not invented by us" or at least "if not invented by us, it better be 100% implemented attack or there is no urgency, I can still go to the beach".
What is inflaming the emotions is the sense whether correct or not that some (not all) in the XMR camp are arrogant (or insecure and defensive thus perceived as arrogance). I don't think anyone is seriously doubting the level of talent. But no talented group can see and do everything. Not even Microsoft with 10,000 employees. The entire point of open source bazaars is they kickass on large cathedrals[1].
Open source is not just about source code being shared. It is a gift culture of sharing[2].
[1] http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/
[2] The Bibles about open source from Eric Raymond (the man who invented the term open source), specifically the Magic Cauldron.
Get used to it. All crypto will always be under threat. You can enjoy the comfort of knowing that the team managing the process has some quite respectable skill at doing so, thus differentiating it from the various one-man shows.
I sent a PM to rpietila thanking the MEW for paying me a bounty. I lamented the dirty tactics by the opposition that digs up dubious (there is always at least 2 sides to any story...I don't want to discuss it or dig it up) skeletons in Risto's past life. I have suggested to the MEW via Risto that they consider not being monogamously aligned with XMR and spread some token love (in the form of investment holdings) around to synergistic altcoins such as BBR. I think this would go a long way to diffusing the war attitude around here, and fostering goodwill. When pooling capital, you are a political target whether you like it not. I am suggesting how to diffuse that phenomenon and for best results on our mutual goals.
To frame the goal of crypto-currency conquering fiat as divide-and-conquer war amongst the innovators seems to be less astute.
We are not enemies. The only justification for such an attitude is wanting to be richer than the next guy, for bragging rights. Even if that desire remains, it can be done with gentleman's mutual respect and good will. The potential for crypto-currency appreciation is enough to make us all rich, and especially if we stop tearing each other down. The other justification would have been to not proliferate dilution of the money supply of crypto-currency, but this will happen organically if one altcoin can rise up.
While Apple Pay and Paypal are off conquering the world of electronic currency adoption, we are dividing-and-conquering ourselves. We need many small fish making experiments. The big fish can swallow the best innovations, or the small fish can out race the big fish until it is bigger. The innovation and then the market's digestion of the innovation will decide any way, no amount of verbal posturing can decide it.
XMR is way ahead of where bitcoin was at this age, in every reasonable metric of merit that I have considered - and I have considered many.
Selling would be foolish in my opinion.
Selling would be foolish in my opinion.
I have no qualms with MEW making XMR its #1 focus and investment. Seems rational. Should it also have a #2, #3, etc.? Monogamy has the cost that the community-at-large will always resist helping efforts that anoint themselves. I prefer a larger community of gentleman's competition, thus arriving at a greater result faster. When the winning inertia accumulates organically rather than forced from the top-down, it is accepted by the community as fair play and good will.
I could do without anonymint's "if P=NP then there are many vulnerabilities" posts. He's pretty accurate and insightful, but he completely misleads most readers, and quite recklessly. Arguing math in a troll thread is asinine. I doubt that he's done more good than harm at this point.
I have a new insight into my algorithm which I think obviates that comment smooth made in private about the P=NP question.
Assuming the algorithm works then if CN implements the mitigation, thus it will be removing input address from contention as they are found to be in "spent" groups (i.e. yes my algorithm is also a form of pruning) from a rolling history thus the algorithm will not consider the entire history but rather incrementally, thus it is not an NP search. Also I provided some ideas for locality of the search.
All the posturing and threats and chest thumping are just pathetic. I have been there and done that, and I hope I've grown past it. Not much I can do to wean these wet-nappied wailers, though. Pearls would just be trodden anyhow.
An attitude of selfishness is the source of most of the trolling. I would never have gotten inflamed in this thread had I not felt that there was defiance behind the scenes to "anything not invented by us" or at least "if not invented by us, it better be 100% implemented attack or there is no urgency, I can still go to the beach".
What is inflaming the emotions is the sense whether correct or not that some (not all) in the XMR camp are arrogant (or insecure and defensive thus perceived as arrogance). I don't think anyone is seriously doubting the level of talent. But no talented group can see and do everything. Not even Microsoft with 10,000 employees. The entire point of open source bazaars is they kickass on large cathedrals[1].
Open source is not just about source code being shared. It is a gift culture of sharing[2].
[1] http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/
[2] The Bibles about open source from Eric Raymond (the man who invented the term open source), specifically the Magic Cauldron.
are not English
I'm using google translator
easier the translation
if I divide
phrases
Potete tradurre le frasi avanti e indietro con google un paio di volte fino a che non viene fuori proprio nella traduzione per la lingua?I'm using google translator
easier the translation
if I divide
phrases
you made my day
("hai fatto la mia giornata")
It will be up to individual nodes to decide what sources to use for these checkpoints (if any). If they rely a source that provides useful checkpoints, the effect will only be to prevent malicious chain reorganization. If they rely on some other source (or their own bad judgement) then yes they may fork their node, just as they almost certainly would if they went messing around the source code without knowing what they are doing.
You imply that the checkpoint json files will have multiple sources.
I imply no such thing, only that in distributed open source environment it is impossible to control what software people use nor what data they feed into it. I most certainly suggest people be careful where they get their checkpoint files just as they are careful where they get their software.
Quote
But if the means of deployment is just user downloading a "good" checkpoint list from official site,
well why not implement the automatic checkpointing that Peercoin has?
well why not implement the automatic checkpointing that Peercoin has?
We considered Peercoins approach but found it unsuitable in some ways. In fact I think there are a lot of good ideas in Peercoin and often look to its solutions. I will decline to comment further at this time.
It will be up to individual nodes to decide what sources to use for these checkpoints (if any). If they rely a source that provides useful checkpoints, the effect will only be to prevent malicious chain reorganization. If they rely on some other source (or their own bad judgement) then yes they may fork their node, just as they almost certainly would if they went messing around the source code without knowing what they are doing.
You imply that the checkpoint json files will have multiple sources.
Will the clients be able to deploy them in the future? That would be closer
to decentralization but then it would run against the problems with forking.
But if the means of deployment is just user downloading a "good" checkpoint list from official site,
well why not implement the automatic checkpointing that Peercoin has?
XMR Dev team rose to the challenge of forced evolution in the time available.
They have crafted a polymorphic bitmonerod+client that adds checkpoints at will and with no dev team intervention needed. Its a decentralized self-maintainable solution that scales as needed. Even if you DDoS github, checkpoints can still be deployed.
That's not the case according to the post that you linked
Quote
We will be distributing updated checkpoint files that will continue to protect the blockchain without the need for a full update of the daemon.
If the clients had ability to add checkpoints at will, I believe that would
lead to forking, unless the reorg procedure is fundamentally different from
bitcoin-based coins.
It is no different (other than convenience) from people modifying the code and compiling it. In an open source environment you can't prevent that, nor would attempting to prevent it provide any useful security model in any case.
It will be up to individual nodes to decide what sources to use for these checkpoints (if any). If they rely a source that provides useful checkpoints, the effect will only be to prevent malicious chain reorganization. If they rely on some other source (or their own bad judgement) then yes they may fork their node, just as they almost certainly would if they went messing around the source code without knowing what they are doing.
Well I gotta say that was pretty disappointing. From an entertainment standpoint.
I kept tricking myself into thinking the monero hashrate was going down (and it is down right now but I'm sure its not BCX) but nothing ever _really_ happened. So you guys got lucky, and I got played selling 1 XMR downward in .05 increments at critical times, at an overall loss.
Now there's more monero threads than ever, and I'm also bumping a monero thread right now, so, you guys won. Congrats.
I kept tricking myself into thinking the monero hashrate was going down (and it is down right now but I'm sure its not BCX) but nothing ever _really_ happened. So you guys got lucky, and I got played selling 1 XMR downward in .05 increments at critical times, at an overall loss.
Now there's more monero threads than ever, and I'm also bumping a monero thread right now, so, you guys won. Congrats.
uh, next time there is a bet, do consider me as escrow.
XMR Dev team rose to the challenge of forced evolution in the time available.
They have crafted a polymorphic bitmonerod+client that adds checkpoints at will and with no dev team intervention needed. Its a decentralized self-maintainable solution that scales as needed. Even if you DDoS github, checkpoints can still be deployed.
That's not the case according to the post that you linked
Quote
We will be distributing updated checkpoint files that will continue to protect the blockchain without the need for a full update of the daemon.
If the clients had ability to add checkpoints at will, I believe that would
lead to forking, unless the reorg procedure is fundamentally different from
bitcoin-based coins.
So..where are we at with this? Is the 72 hours up?
I thought so, but now there is a new 72 hours? I think we just got cheap coins, but then again the TW takes 2 days... errr, a week. No, scratch that, 2 weeks that starts at the beginning of next month. Just ask BCX.
So..where are we at with this? Is the 72 hours up?
bobby i see you're here to lick our balls again... 
how generous of you but you should slow down otherwise you might get addicted just like the other trolls...
how generous of you but you should slow down otherwise you might get addicted just like the other trolls... it wont ever be safe and sound.. this coin has been dying since BCX spoke its name.
Buttercoin economist's view of the Monero attack (scroll down to see the section on Monero): http://buttercoinmarketupdate.posthaven.com/bitcoin-price-dips-17-percent
"...a supposedly fatal exploit in it's anonymity mechanism discovered by a reputable hacker:"
Did Zhou actually type the phrase "reputable hacker" without being facetious? Oxymoronic much?
In related news, a law-abiding criminal was indicted on conspiracy charges and a kind-hearted murderer smashed a kitten barehanded.
Buttercoin economist's view of the Monero attack (scroll down to see the section on Monero): http://buttercoinmarketupdate.posthaven.com/bitcoin-price-dips-17-percent
Does any one know how long it would take for a TW attack to start to manifest itself?
I don't know when the clock started, some time yesterday?
Yeah, I think it's been 24+ hours now so was wondering at which point, roughly, people could start believing all is safe and sound.
TL;DR
Its over. TW attacks will never again work against XMR.
If you read the last commit on github, you'll know the whole answer.
ANN here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8961211
XMR Dev team rose to the challenge of forced evolution in the time available.
They have crafted a polymorphic bitmonerod+client that adds checkpoints at will and with no dev team intervention needed. Its a decentralized self-maintainable solution that scales as needed. Even if you DDoS github, checkpoints can still be deployed.
Thanks are due to BCX for initiating the game. I hope it was rewarding, even though he was outplayed, this time.
If there are also some other anon-busters, but that don't rely on defanged TW, they're probably rested and ready for a rematch by now.
Does any one know how long it would take for a TW attack to start to manifest itself?
I don't know when the clock started, some time yesterday?
Yeah, I think it's been 24+ hours now so was wondering at which point, roughly, people could start believing all is safe and sound.
it wont ever be safe and sound.. this coin has been dying since BCX spoke its name.
Does any one know how long it would take for a TW attack to start to manifest itself?
I don't know when the clock started, some time yesterday?
Yeah, I think it's been 24+ hours now so was wondering at which point, roughly, people could start believing all is safe and sound.
Jump to: