Topic: EmilioMann, John Connor, & VanillaCoin/VCash are lying about Monero exploits (Read 5831 times)

Nope, you fail to realize I might care about something else other than that - which is trying to get you to stop making it look like the XMR community is a bunch of vindictive asshats. Whether or not it's true is irrelevant - that's what it looks like, and that's why I'm posting. But - unlike you, it seems - I know when to give up. Since anything I say will be ineffective, carry on. Peace.

I smell fear..  

Sorry guys but john connor has proved himself as one of the most competent coders and developers in this space.

I can taste their tears lol. So much butthurt here.

Well, all fud from monero community last year, was to destroy Vcash, claiming that the dev stole the bitcoin's code, so he didn't know to code and never would deliver what was promised.

You and your gang called him scammer and Vcash a scam.

Well a year has passed, John Connor proved not only know how to code but also is one of the best dev in the crypto universe today.
He discovered faults and presented the solution on bitcoin's code, solved a failure on peercoin that affected all currencies with POS mining and found exploits in various currencies including the monero, so ...

He delivered everything promised in his roadmaps, on time and also implemented several other features that were not in the plans.
A year has passed and Vcash became the best crypto on market, with all the features listed in my other post running smoothly and without bugs.

And your monero? What has changed this year? Remains the same crapcoin ever and now with 12 zeroday exploits.

What matters to the market if JC would used a few bitcoin lines in your code (he didn't) but created a technically perfect currency that is close to being discovered and goes to the moon?

The only pathetic here are you, a crap coder that needs to stay all day in bctalk spreading fud against rival currencies, the thief Eduardo icebreaker and littleponey

Looks like smooth is to afraid of comitting ghe crime of slander to respond.

It is not a lie, I never said code audit, I said independent people have looked at the code and all concluded it is an obfuscated copy. For example:


BTW, you can't know "no one has done a code audit except ...", since the code is public. Someone else may have audited it and not told you about it.

"The above code from vanillacoin is based on bitcoin, albeit renamed, refactored, reformatted and re-commented at almost every possible occasion ... The algorithm is the same line by line and even the esoteric identifier name "IsTerrible"/"is_terrible" is used in both." -- Rick Storm

                 * If true the the address is terrible.
197	                 */
198	                bool is_terrible(
199	                    std::uint64_t now = time::instance().get_adjusted()

    //! Determine whether the statistics about this entry are bad enough so that it can just be deleted
101	    bool IsTerrible(int64_t nNow = GetAdjustedTime()) const;

"That code is essentially identical, but reformatted, and far beyond an occasional duplicated line or two. Even the variable names are the same, same sentinel values used, etc. It is clearly a copy." -- rnicoll

"That's a lot more than just a structural similarity. ... It’s hard for me to see this as anything other than incontrovertible evidence of the author having a naively self-centred perspective on intellectual property rights, broadly translatable as "what’s yours is mine and what’s mine’s my own''." -- gjhiggins

That's a lie smooth.  No one has done a code audit of Vcash other than Poloniex and they were impressed.

"The above code from vanillacoin is based on bitcoin, albeit renamed, refactored, reformatted and re-commented at almost every possible occasion ... The algorithm is the same line by line and even the esoteric identifier name "IsTerrible"/"is_terrible" is used in both." -- Rick Storm
"There are many places where Vanillacoin copied Bitcoin code. I have pointed out a good example previously, it won't be hard to find dozens more." -- Rick Storm

"That code is essentially identical, but reformatted, and far beyond an occasional duplicated line or two. Even the variable names are the same, same sentinel values used, etc. It is clearly a copy." -- rnicoll
"Oh, he'll want to fix some of the inherited bugs" -- rnicoll

"That's a lot more than just a structural similarity. ... It’s hard for me to see this as anything other than incontrovertible evidence of the author having a naively self-centred perspective on intellectual property rights, broadly translatable as "what’s yours is mine and what’s mine’s my own''." -- gjhiggins

"the code being a copy of Bitcoin Core run through an auto-formatter with all the attribution removed" -- gmaxwell
"he copied the code he was complaining about into his own codebase ... and then lied about the functionality being in his forware all along" -- gmaxwell

Huh? There are statements by a half dozen or so people who have examined the code and concluded that it is an obfuscated copy, not "this semi-bitcoin dev". These are independent people who have looked independently, and given independent opinions, all reaching the same conclusion. The weight of that evidence is quite compelling.

I gave the list of names above, and it is probably a partial list, because I haven't tried that hard to collect every single name.


Peercoin is a Bitcoin fork and contains a Bitcoin copyright notice and MIT license. To credit peercoin he would also have to credit Bitcoin, include the copyright notices in his code, and not falsely claim to have written it entirely from scratch, when several independent people have examined the code and concluded it is an obfuscated copy. https://github.com/ppcoin/ppcoin/blob/master/COPYING


It doesn't get any more off topic than that.

claiming scam accusations with no evidences other than this semi-bitcoin dev said this and that.

John credit peercoin for is work ... whats the problem?

Are you jealous

I'm just a guy posting on a Scam Accusation thread. If you think Scam Accusation threads are all about "crypto cops" and shouldn't exist, take it up with the forum admin.


That's off topic, but the main difference is that AEON is explicitly described as a Monero fork, contains all of the upstream copyright notices, and gives credit whenever others' work is used (with permission). There is some new code in there, for example pruning, tweaks to PoW, privacy, P2P, etc. but that's exactly how it was and is presented: Monero with different branding and community, experimental changes, and potential improvements. Unlike Vcash, no one claimed or claims it to be anything other than what it is.

contains all of the upstream copyright notices, and gives credit whenever others' work is used

What is your background? What makes you the crypto cop you are ?

Other than a Copy paste of cryptonote code to make AEON coin i see nothing else

Don't act naive. People look for coins that are not Bitcoin forks and consider that as a potential advantage as an investment. There was an obvious reason he said it was written from scratch and that is exactly to set it apart from the crowd of other coins that were also forks of Bitcoin. In fact, when he launched it he was explicitly asked whether it was a Bitcoin fork because people care about that in choosing coins and instead of admitting it, he decided to lie and claim it was written entirely from scratch (but then that was likely his plan all along, otherwise why obfuscate by reformatting the code and removing the comments?)

If, as you claim, it no longer matters that it was actually in large part an obfuscated Bitcoin fork, then he should just admit it, and put the his past mistakes behind him, which would indeed help settle the matter. He would no longer need to be pissed of at me for accurately calling him out on his lies and his continued denials, and therefore he would also no longer feel compelled to lash out in retaliation by lying about Monero exploits as fluffypony originally accused him (correctly) of doing, writing "full of shit" posts about Monero's data storage, etc.

Development Team:
Lead developer: smooth
Release engineering, Q/A, support: Arux
Other roles: open (PM smooth)
Original developer (as Monero fork): anonymous