Pages:
Author

Topic: Feathercoin Advanced Checkpointing released today - page 3. (Read 11139 times)

legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1014
In Satoshi I Trust
Congratulations to Feathercoin for now adding extreme legal hazard to its already amazing record of technical failure.  By becoming a centralized virtual currency, Feathercoin has now become de facto controlled by a single entity and is thus at risk of government crackdown like what happened to Liberty Reserve.  The owner of the checkpoint key also puts themselves enormous personal risk.

The track record of technical incompetence of Feathercoin development is clear and quite humorous.

* Despite claiming that Feathercoin is about innovation, Feathercoin hasn't fixed ANY OF THE BUGS since copying the old Litecoin 0.6.3 source.  They have had months of opportunity to copy critical bug and security fixes from Litecoin 0.6 or to upgrade to 0.8.

* To add to this further, when Bushstar copied Litecoin, he failed to change the alert private key (which was seriously bad), but the way Bushstar responded made it even worse.  Instead of replacing the alert key with his own, he disabled alerts entirely making it impossible to alert all users that they need to upgrade in the event of a future emergency.

* Also the way that Feathercoin modified its difficulty formula without understanding what he is doing and without modifying the pool software created that breathtakingly awesome time-travelling exploit.
 
Feathercoin has managed to fix no bugs, added more bugs, make themselves a regulatory hazard that is highly likely illegal as a centralized virtual currency, and has failed to upgrade to 0.8 despite months of source code access to litecoin.  Amazing.

The excuse against centralization being bad where individual users can remove or disable checkpoint enforcement is a meaningless lie.  If the major pools enforce checkpoints, then it doesn't matter if the users are enforcing broadcast checkpoints.




of course this scam coin is dead and there are good reasons for it. so R.I.P  Grin
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 1000
‘Try to be nice’
The fact is that people against checkpoints can cry all you like , the community has decided , checkpoints are accepted politically because they secure the individual investors investment .

And the arguments against are vauge retarded like statments about hostile takeovers , and images of crack teams storming server complexes or possible drone attack .

Points for creativity , but the retarded statments against centralized checkpoints are vacant as the community clearly has decided , Nova is trading number 2 and PPC could be called a successful endeavor , so ...

Look at the scoreboard.

FTC has clawed back credibilty in my books , for protecting investors or taking action to do so at least .
if checkpoints secure ftc, it does not deserve to call it self a cryptocurrency, as its no longer decentralized.

also think of it this way: if checkpoints was secure there would be no need for a block chain. and the invention of satoshi would be a very very small one(and i think we agree thats its not.). if checkpointing was a good solution bitcoin and any other cryptocurency would have been possible for over 60 years.

that's essentially a distortion of the truth and you know it, i really don't care , you can talk to Anonymint about it if you like , I'll go tell him you want to chat about it ?

you are trying (and failing) to exaggerate the importance of checkpoints in the overall system and structure and its dumb.
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
You are WRONG!
The fact is that people against checkpoints can cry all you like , the community has decided , checkpoints are accepted politically because they secure the individual investors investment .

And the arguments against are vauge retarded like statments about hostile takeovers , and images of crack teams storming server complexes or possible drone attack .

Points for creativity , but the retarded statments against centralized checkpoints are vacant as the community clearly has decided , Nova is trading number 2 and PPC could be called a successful endeavor , so ...

Look at the scoreboard.

FTC has clawed back credibilty in my books , for protecting investors or taking action to do so at least .
if checkpoints secure ftc, it does not deserve to call it self a cryptocurrency, as its no longer decentralized.

also think of it this way: if checkpoints was secure there would be no need for a block chain. and the invention of satoshi would be a very very small one(and i think we agree thats its not.). if checkpointing was a good solution bitcoin and any other cryptocurency would have been possible for over 60 years.
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 1000
‘Try to be nice’
The fact is that people against checkpoints can cry all you like , the community has decided , checkpoints are accepted politically because they secure the individual investors investment .

And the arguments against are vauge retarded like statments about hostile takeovers , and images of crack teams storming server complexes or possible drone attack .

Points for creativity , but the retarded statments against centralized checkpoints are vacant as the community clearly has decided , Nova is trading number 2 and PPC could be called a successful endeavor , so ...

Look at the scoreboard.

FTC has clawed back credibilty in my books , for protecting investors or taking action to do so at least .
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
Congratulations to Feathercoin for now adding extreme legal hazard to its already amazing record of technical failure.  By becoming a centralized virtual currency, Feathercoin has now become de facto controlled by a single entity and is thus at risk of government crackdown like what happened to Liberty Reserve.  The owner of the checkpoint key also puts themselves enormous personal risk.

The track record of technical incompetence of Feathercoin development is clear and quite humorous.

* Despite claiming that Feathercoin is about innovation, Feathercoin hasn't fixed ANY OF THE BUGS since copying the old Litecoin 0.6.3 source.  They have had months of opportunity to copy critical bug and security fixes from Litecoin 0.6 or to upgrade to 0.8.

* To add to this further, when Bushstar copied Litecoin, he failed to change the alert private key (which was seriously bad), but the way Bushstar responded made it even worse.  Instead of replacing the alert key with his own, he disabled alerts entirely making it impossible to alert all users that they need to upgrade in the event of a future emergency.

* Also the way that Feathercoin modified its difficulty formula without understanding what he is doing and without modifying the pool software created that breathtakingly awesome time-travelling exploit.
 
Feathercoin has managed to fix no bugs, added more bugs, make themselves a regulatory hazard that is highly likely illegal as a centralized virtual currency, and has failed to upgrade to 0.8 despite months of source code access to litecoin.  Amazing.

The excuse against centralization being bad where individual users can remove or disable checkpoint enforcement is a meaningless lie.  If the major pools enforce checkpoints, then it doesn't matter if the users are enforcing broadcast checkpoints.

hero member
Activity: 617
Merit: 531
You had your chance for a say but as you can imagine we never had these debates on BitcoinTalk as there are more people throwing stones than trying to be constructive.

You don't learn from those that agree with everything you do, you learn from those that don't.

I know what you mean but I used to find the altcoin forum very useful but it is now very confined as there are so many 'alts' here and there is often a lot of hostility that is counter productive. I like to think that everyone on the Feathercoin forum wants to see it survive and succeed Smiley

I do not think that anyone was over joyed with this solution but eventually found that this was the most viable short term protection against the 51% attacks. What every crypto coin needs is protection from 51% attacks through decentralisation and that is where we hope to be. I believe alternative crypto currencies is where the real progress in cryptos will now be made. It has been said in this post that Bitcoin could never do ACP, that is correct, they have to maintain the status quo now and lack agility.  It is up to the 'alts' to do the work that no else wants to, we would hope that the end result is a solution for everyone to use.
legendary
Activity: 3108
Merit: 1359
Maybe it's better to use coinbase property values for voting, just like Bitcoin did with P2SH...
hero member
Activity: 630
Merit: 500
The general consensus was that ACP was the lesser of two evils, the other being simply leaving ourselves unprotected against attackers.
By whom? The developers and main holders? Of course this would be attractive to them. In the same reason the US implemented the Patriot Act under the guise of protecting the country.

atomicchoas, Feathercoin still loves you Smiley

And I love Feathercoin, although that gave me a slightly creepy cult vibe... Anything that keeps LTC difficulty down is great to me, plus the propping up of the market has been nice for mining.

That said, what is the formal plan to notify people when the central console is utilized? What can you provide besides "trust me", that the central console is not used or accessed for any other purpose?

You had your chance for a say but as you can imagine we never had these debates on BitcoinTalk as there are more people throwing stones than trying to be constructive.

You don't learn from those that agree with everything you do, you learn from those that don't.
legendary
Activity: 3108
Merit: 1359
atomicchoas, Feathercoin still loves you Smiley

Are you claiming to be Feathercoin now? I won't stand for this kind of centralisation  Angry

Tongue
He is the Avatar of Feathercoin.

http://andromeda.wikia.com/wiki/Celestial_Avatar

 Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 3108
Merit: 1359
To do that people need to go into the debug console in the Qt GUI. Are you saying that an option needs to be made available in the GUI as that is very doable?
Nope, I mean command line key. In NVC you are able to start client with the -nosynccheckpoints option, and this will disable checkpoints enforcement... User can add this option into shortcut or conf file and forget about checkpoints.

I'll make a patch soon, maybe.
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
atomicchoas, Feathercoin still loves you Smiley

Are you claiming to be Feathercoin now? I won't stand for this kind of centralisation  Angry

Tongue
hero member
Activity: 617
Merit: 531
Quick note. You can enable and disable the checkpointing with enforcecheckpoint true and enforcecheckpoint false Smiley
That isn't enough, command line option is required.

To do that people need to go into the debug console in the Qt GUI. Are you saying that an option needs to be made available in the GUI as that is very doable?

In fact we would welcome you to make a commit for such a thing if you are willing Smiley
legendary
Activity: 3108
Merit: 1359
Was FTC premined? No.
Do you still believe in Santa? Cheesy Like any 0-startup-diff coin, it was instamined by early-adopters.

so they would accept NVC into their exchange
Sherlock, I don't need to bribe btc-e owner for anything.

By the way, I suggested him to add FTC & CNC. So, we made for FTC more than your "cocksuckers" (c) team ever would be able to do. It's humiliating for you, isn't it? Smiley

but half of the premined coins
Is there any proof for that? It is easy to guess that you have none. I have published proofs of mined volume (~65500 coins), and also we have a proof of 110k coins destruction. On the other hand, your buddies has nothing except "AAA SCAM 200K PREMINED"... That's pretty mature behavior Smiley Especially funny it looks at the background of fact that 200,000 coins at that time simply didn't existed in the network. Yep, pre-mined 200+k coins from 160k, LOL. Oh well, trolls are using the own arithmetics. Thanks for the portion of pleasure, now I'll let you get back to your normal occupation. Grin

Quick note. You can enable and disable the checkpointing with enforcecheckpoint true and enforcecheckpoint false Smiley
That isn't enough, command line option is still required.  ::)Because only a few users will run commands in the RPC console.
hero member
Activity: 617
Merit: 531
Quick note. You can enable and disable the checkpointing with enforcecheckpoint true and enforcecheckpoint false Smiley

Quote
./feathercoind enforcecheckpoint false


, this discussions over the attacks came up on the forum many times and this solution was discussed there. The general consensus was that ACP was the lesser of two evils, the other being simply leaving ourselves unprotected against attackers. This is not an easy call to make as Satoshi's original vision was one of complete decentralisation. However we should not regard his paper as some religious text with which to limit our abilities.

Also we have been talking about this solution for months now. You had your chance for a say but as you can imagine we never had these debates on BitcoinTalk as there are more people throwing stones than trying to be constructive. A vote was never taken, just general consensus. If you are really interested in how Feathercoin is being developed then please spend time on the Feathercoin forum. The feedback system is not some form of democratic system Cheesy

Balthazar, thanks for sticking around even though not being a great fan of Feathercoin. We could always use someone with your ability over in the Feathercoin forum. We are a friendly lot and you would not to spend so much time shouting at people. I think that NVC is in a good position to disable checkpointing as you have PoS which will give you more and more protection over time. I do believe that crypto coin is going to be a revolution and not a quiet one either. Bitcoin should be looking to get some kind of protection not less. People are ignoring the issue of attacks on Bitcoin because they cannot imagine such a thing and let's hope it never happens, however people should not be complacent on the issue of attacks.

atomicchoas, Feathercoin still loves you Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1000
Centralisation can only be temporary, for resisting attacks at the beginning. I have found no hint anywhere, how and when to temper this interim solution. This is a bad sign to me.
hero member
Activity: 630
Merit: 500
It's a shame more people aren't voicing their concern about this. I would not put this level of control into any of the developers. They say it's a good solution, but yes, gaining control under the guise of security sounds vaguely familiar, doesn't it?

I held little trust for FTC, but this seals the deal.

full member
Activity: 120
Merit: 100
On why checkpointing is not there, my guess would be it was pretty much decided long back.
It could be true, but it looks like it was not there, because if it was put to vote, nobody would vote for it. If you are honest about your idea, and honestly expect people to like it, then you would not mind putting it to a vote. The mere fact, that this was done secretly, and never put to a vote (that's why feedback section exists), is a huge red flag for me.
full member
Activity: 120
Merit: 100
If the attacked gained control of this "master node", then he could scam the network, without even doing the 51% attack. Is this true or false?

Again, if this is so important, why were people not given a chance to know about it and vote for it?
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
It seems you are just trolling. Normally, if I get to learn something (and I learnt a lot from Balthazar's posts in this thread), I would be a bit respectful at the very least.

This was one of the later threads https://forum.feathercoin.com/index.php?topic=1878.0
There were threads earlier than this around the time of the first attacks when the suggestions cropped up. The thread titles were differently named so you can do some digging to find out.
No, I am not trolling. All new features are discussed and voted upon in feedback.feathercoin.com. It is the way to do it publicly. Discussing it in the forums is doing it privately. Besides, discussion doesn't mean that people want it. Voting for it in feedback section means that people want it. And how many votes did it get? ZERO. It didn't even get on the feedback ideas list.

I followed the ideas on feedback.feathercoin.com everyday, and there was no mention of any checkpointing, ever. This is completely out-of-the-blue for me (and I was the one who followed feathercoin progress), so what about people who were not following at all?

Fair enough.

I have never been to feedback.feathercoin.com, oddly enough. I usually stay in the main board and occasionally visit others. On why checkpointing is not there, my guess would be it was pretty much decided long back. As I said, the thread I posted earlier was one of the later ones, and there were quite a few discussions in the earlier ones. The decision to go with it was taken quite a long time back (during the first attack), and I recall by and large most were in favour of it as a short term solution.
full member
Activity: 120
Merit: 100
NVC isn't more scamcoin than FTC or LTC. And you have nothing against this sentence.
Was FTC premined? No.
Was LTC premined? No.
Was NVC premined? Yes. Not just premined, but half of the premined coins were given to an exchange so they would accept NVC into their exchange.
Pages:
Jump to: