EDIT: another reason that i support this is that original devs bitch about it
Topic: FreiCoin (FRC) Fork WITHOUT 80% Of Coins Given To FreiCoin Foundation - page 3. (Read 20795 times)
January 04, 2013, 10:15:28 AM
Good job TF, i support too, but we need win & linux bins, so we can use it. Not everybody is an expert
EDIT: another reason that i support this is that original devs bitch about it
EDIT: another reason that i support this is that original devs bitch about it
January 04, 2013, 09:42:51 AM
Thats the power of open source! :-)
I did say you should merge mine. There are other threats out there after all.
I did say you should merge mine. There are other threats out there after all.
January 04, 2013, 09:40:23 AM
This went better than I expected 
Thanks TradeFortress for doing it, you are awesome!
Thanks TradeFortress for doing it, you are awesome!
January 04, 2013, 09:36:21 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong but If someone modifies the fork to generate a block without any foundation percentage then the existing forked clients will accept this and the original freicoin clients won't. This would result in a hard fork of the blockchain and isolate the forked clients from the existing network.
January 04, 2013, 09:31:56 AM
Do you have any way to tell how much hashing power your fork is getting?
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
I doubt there is anyway to tell how much hashing power the fork is getting. I imagine it could be cruising along stealthy for quite awhile waiting to get far enough along.
If the fork was modified to include a "flag" in the coinbase field ([FAIR]) then it would be possible to see what % of the recent blocks have the flag.
January 04, 2013, 09:25:46 AM
Do you have any way to tell how much hashing power your fork is getting?
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
It's getting 0 hash power. I doubt a compiled binary of this exists anywhere. It's not even a fork yet. It just removes one check from the code.
I've compiled it just for fun
January 04, 2013, 09:06:19 AM
Oh, even better! Maybe the hashin power that the MaakuCoiners celebrate already is FortressCoin hashing power. We wouldn't know until somebody spent some MaakuFoundation coins.
This code doesn't actually do anything to the Foundation coins even if someone ran it.
I'm just saying this for the benefit of people that don't really understand what they are looking at.
January 04, 2013, 09:01:32 AM
Do you have any way to tell how much hashing power your fork is getting?
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
It's getting 0 hash power. I doubt a compiled binary of this exists anywhere. It's not even a fork yet. It just removes one check from the code.
January 04, 2013, 08:59:15 AM
Do you have any way to tell how much hashing power your fork is getting?
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
I doubt there is anyway to tell how much hashing power the fork is getting. I imagine it could be cruising along stealthy for quite awhile waiting to get far enough along.
January 04, 2013, 08:57:28 AM
Do you have any way to tell how much hashing power your fork is getting?
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
By the way if this succeeds I expect you will ruin FRC for all.
January 04, 2013, 08:39:44 AM
I have no idea why anyone cares about this coin.
January 04, 2013, 08:03:57 AM
can somebody build binaries for windows, please?
TradeFortress is being pretty deceptive, here. This announcement is kind of a "developer troll."
The changes he made here took about 5 minutes, literally. If you don't believe my claim, check the post times on the Freicoin discussion thread.
He doesn't intend to keep this up to date.
He doesn't intend to distribute windows binaries.
None of the pools will be changing to this fork.
TradeFortress is lying about what his code does. It doesn't do what he says it does.
Ultimately, TradeFortress is intimidated by Freicoin's success and he's trying to dilute, confuse, and distort our message. He's not tricking us, but he is tricking you. He will fail and we're not really worried about it.
I'd just like to note that nobody cares if other coins have a Foundation, because nobody expects to be using them in 5 years. Everyone who reads about Freicoin knows they'll be using it even if you don't like the entire idea.
January 04, 2013, 07:28:21 AM
can somebody build binaries for windows, please?
January 04, 2013, 07:25:05 AM
this is great! 
January 04, 2013, 07:14:58 AM
the intent of this fork isn't to destroy or attack freicoin. As of now it just makes printing money for the Foundation optional, by accepting all otherwise valid blocks. I'm not sure if you understand this part 
Well, I'm not sure I understand what you want neither.
I am also not against creating a currency blockchain by the way, maybe with some other differences decided on a voting based approach.
I think that would be better than your current approach for everyone.
January 04, 2013, 06:50:29 AM
@ hanzac
You should check our public forum at http://www.freicoin.org/ (linked from the main page)
Specifically this public thread http://www.freicoin.org/freicoin-foundation-development-thread-t81.html
We would update the main page when the granting process is more formally defined (I'm not saying again that you can contribute to define the process as fair as possible because obviously you're not interested).
@ TradeFortress
Whatever, then Luke-jr has never attacked a chain, he was only voting with his hashing...
Still, if you take over the network the supply graph will be completely flawed and we would have to start from scratch (also people that like demurrage but not the 80% fund if they like to have a fixed supply this century).
If effectively destroying a chain is not an attack, I don't know what is it.
You should check our public forum at http://www.freicoin.org/ (linked from the main page)
Specifically this public thread http://www.freicoin.org/freicoin-foundation-development-thread-t81.html
We would update the main page when the granting process is more formally defined (I'm not saying again that you can contribute to define the process as fair as possible because obviously you're not interested).
@ TradeFortress
Whatever, then Luke-jr has never attacked a chain, he was only voting with his hashing...
Still, if you take over the network the supply graph will be completely flawed and we would have to start from scratch (also people that like demurrage but not the 80% fund if they like to have a fixed supply this century).
If effectively destroying a chain is not an attack, I don't know what is it.
Intent.
is occupying a park against city ordinances attacking the city?
the intent of this fork isn't to destroy or attack freicoin. As of now it just makes printing money for the Foundation optional, by accepting all otherwise valid blocks. I'm not sure if you understand this part
Either way I'm going to go to bed now, will be back tomorrow.
I am also not against creating a currency blockchain by the way, maybe with some other differences decided on a voting based approach.
January 04, 2013, 06:38:58 AM
@ hanzac
You should check our public forum at http://www.freicoin.org/ (linked from the main page)
Specifically this public thread http://www.freicoin.org/freicoin-foundation-development-thread-t81.html
We would update the main page when the granting process is more formally defined (I'm not saying again that you can contribute to define the process as fair as possible because obviously you're not interested).
@ TradeFortress
Whatever, then Luke-jr has never attacked a chain, he was only voting with his hashing...
Still, if you take over the network the supply graph will be completely flawed and we would have to start from scratch (also people that like demurrage but not the 80% fund if they like to have a fixed supply this century).
If effectively destroying a chain is not an attack, I don't know what is it.
You should check our public forum at http://www.freicoin.org/ (linked from the main page)
Specifically this public thread http://www.freicoin.org/freicoin-foundation-development-thread-t81.html
We would update the main page when the granting process is more formally defined (I'm not saying again that you can contribute to define the process as fair as possible because obviously you're not interested).
@ TradeFortress
Whatever, then Luke-jr has never attacked a chain, he was only voting with his hashing...
Still, if you take over the network the supply graph will be completely flawed and we would have to start from scratch (also people that like demurrage but not the 80% fund if they like to have a fixed supply this century).
If effectively destroying a chain is not an attack, I don't know what is it.
January 04, 2013, 06:28:55 AM
@hanzac
It's a one-time-only initial distribution of coins that (unfortunately for greedy miners) doesn't go to miners.
A tax needs a State or another coercion source to enforce it. This is a voluntary currency, if you don't like the initial distribution rules just don't use it. If you like demurrage but not this distribution rule, just fork it instead of planning a hard-fork attack.
If miners colluded through a hard fork to change initial bitcoin rules to their benefit (for example, issuing 100 M instead of 21) wouldn't that be considered an attack? The honest (in the same meaning it has in Satoshi's bitcoin whitepaper) nodes would just reject those block and the real bitcoin network would continue, just with less hashing power.
It's a one-time-only initial distribution of coins that (unfortunately for greedy miners) doesn't go to miners.
A tax needs a State or another coercion source to enforce it. This is a voluntary currency, if you don't like the initial distribution rules just don't use it. If you like demurrage but not this distribution rule, just fork it instead of planning a hard-fork attack.
If miners colluded through a hard fork to change initial bitcoin rules to their benefit (for example, issuing 100 M instead of 21) wouldn't that be considered an attack? The honest (in the same meaning it has in Satoshi's bitcoin whitepaper) nodes would just reject those block and the real bitcoin network would continue, just with less hashing power.
According to your definitions, the "honest nodes" that are still running v 0.0.1 or v 0.1 are running the network. Honest nodes will reject things with new features like multisig, TXes without really high fees for that time, etc etc etc. Everyone who has updated, we are attacking the network!
It's entirely voluntary to use this fork. In fact, right now all you are doing is making the money printing for the foundation optional.
I also like how the website has no mention of this.. except maybe in tiny print or something.
January 04, 2013, 06:24:02 AM
@hanzac
It's a one-time-only initial distribution of coins that (unfortunately for greedy miners) doesn't go to miners.
A tax needs a State or another coercion source to enforce it. This is a voluntary currency, if you don't like the initial distribution rules just don't use it. If you like demurrage but not this distribution rule, just fork it instead of planning a hard-fork attack.
If miners colluded through a hard fork to change initial bitcoin rules to their benefit (for example, issuing 100 M instead of 21) wouldn't that be considered an attack? The honest (in the same meaning it has in Satoshi's bitcoin whitepaper) nodes would just reject those block and the real bitcoin network would continue, just with less hashing power.
It's a one-time-only initial distribution of coins that (unfortunately for greedy miners) doesn't go to miners.
A tax needs a State or another coercion source to enforce it. This is a voluntary currency, if you don't like the initial distribution rules just don't use it. If you like demurrage but not this distribution rule, just fork it instead of planning a hard-fork attack.
If miners colluded through a hard fork to change initial bitcoin rules to their benefit (for example, issuing 100 M instead of 21) wouldn't that be considered an attack? The honest (in the same meaning it has in Satoshi's bitcoin whitepaper) nodes would just reject those block and the real bitcoin network would continue, just with less hashing power.
I think mining is one important part to a crypto currency, but on the freicoin website, there's no words about 80% tax on miners, only the 5% fee every year. This is unfair & hiding important affair to the person who devote their hashpower (which is electricity & hardware investment). If you're open & clear about the 80% TAX & other important issues, there won't be people questioning because you're honest.
If you're not honest, in which base you claim these nodes are honest?
Please do be honest when you take public affairs.
January 04, 2013, 06:13:30 AM
>initial rules
Alright. Freeze your code base please, rule changes are not allowed even if the majority agrees to it. Currently Bitcoin contributors are planning to change the coin dust constants and the transaction fees, but if they do they're not honest according to your definition!!
Alright. Freeze your code base please, rule changes are not allowed even if the majority agrees to it. Currently Bitcoin contributors are planning to change the coin dust constants and the transaction fees, but if they do they're not honest according to your definition!!
It's not the same thing. P2SH had community and mining consensus, your hard fork clearly hasn't it. You want to completely (not only destroying the not-to-miners distribution part but also making the currency monetary inflationary for much longer) change the dynamics of the currency. This would be an attack. Just like trying to impose demurrage on bitcoin's chain through mining force.
Mining isn't the best method for distributing coins. But it's the a method for rewarding people to keep the network secure. There's a difference. Welfare might be the best way to distribute money, but getting a job would be a method to be productive towards society.
We think we have enough rewards for miners to keep the network secure perpetually. Working for a non-profit (say the fsf or eff, which could perfectly get some initial freicoins) is also a productive job. It's called private charity. The difference is that here the generous people isn't the freicoin foundation (which is just a tool to distribute the donation) but the people who accept the currency knowing that its initial distribution is going to these projects.
Jump to: