Topic: Give me a logical reason why Vanilla coin is not a top ten coin? - page 2. (Read 4356 times)

I hope we will never hear these crippled EGO's again when the whitepaper gets released. The proof is in the pudding.

~ An idea not coupled with action will never get any bigger than the brain cell it occupied.

If I produce a physical safe which I claim is unbreakable, but it appears to be made from paper, would you not want proof from me in advance that it is in fact, actually unbreakable before you buy it, and then store your valuables in it?

Enough proof to buy a lot of it right now. Thanks.

I tentatively disagree and at the risk of garnering his wrath further I would like to present the context for my snide comment (yes, it was kind of snide and if I could take it back I would.  I don't understand computer science like he does but I am also not illiterate.)

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12118600

He is claiming to doom Monero and Bitcoin and if that is the case (he is dotting his eyes in a proper manner so props) than there is a personal bias - meaning I don't blame him for not wanting to spend his time with an (apparently) underwhelming bounty (how does one simulate a global context?). So I acquiesce to an extent...it was a snide comment but based on his own posts and my own bias.  Fair enough.  I admit to being aware of the issues presented but not versed enough to actually debate it...

I understand that this post is probably going to be crunched and so be it...I have a job and am not only working with PhD's in my respective field (cognitive neuropsychology; cue laughter, it is fine) but think that this is more of a hobby than my livelihood.  That said, we do pick up our interests and focuses as we do...especially in a diluted communicative base that is this forum.


Again, not sure how to simulate a global interest for a bounty to be large enough. 


My goals are very different and they roughly mesh with crypto currencies.  More social than economic and I won't suffer a rats cheese if BTC fails..or any other crypto.  I find it interesting though...

Which leads me to a short response to 'The Powers That Be Need War'...Of course they do.  That's the point.  Fuck it up if you can.

I'm going back to topics I know more about...

Wow! You start an Ethereum thread filled with BS, and when I replied to your ignorant analysis, you start throwing rocks like a spoiled child. Now AnonyMint, Paul (monsterer), and smooth who are more knowledgeable than 99.99% of you turds, tells you there are red flags...  you resort once again by ACTING LIKE A CHILD?

You are officially a joke! Well done! Take a bow IDIOT!

i don't see anything especial about Vanilla coin
correct me if i am wrong

Not being out and open to scrutiny and peer review before launch is yet another red flag.

The thread subject asks the question why it isn't a top ten coin. One reason is the amount of shady stuff that is going on here. That is not "Proof of Scam" but it is enough to keep smart investors away.

That's also not to say there aren't any scam coins in the top ten, because there certainly are.

Dude, go take some medication and lie down, the white paper which I expect covers all your questions is coming out in a short time.

Personal bias is not a factor in his dismissal of the technology. He gave his opinion based on precise and valid technical arguments, which can be evaluated on their own merit.

What is a factor in his unwillingness to do pentesting (if the current testnet even counts as valid pentesting) for VNL is the fact that $2100 is not even close to enough to pay for his time, much less acquiring other resources for an attack.

Increase the bounty a lot and (again assuming the testnet is a valid test) you may have qualified people interested. You should also of course not be paying such a bounty in VNL, as was pointed out earlier on this thread. Otherwise it is little more than cheap trash talk, which only makes the coin look even more like a scam.

People do not understand that the goal here is not to make something it secure against attackers with <$2100 of resources. It is to make something secure against attackers with large to enormous resources, in the case where the coin is highly successful (which is the only case that really matters). At least that should be the goal. If you are instead trying to orchestrate a pump-and-dump (even a relatively slow and elaborate one, where perhaps you feel even if you aren't the ringleader, you can ride his coattails and dump at a profit to a greater fool), then your goals are quite different.

Are you an idiot? I think so.

You deserve your fate, because you can't understand basic computer science.

We've already told you that John Conner can not possibly achieve what he claims, because there is no way for a P2P network game theory to converge on consensus. Even Wikipedia documents that fact about virtual synchrony does not provide Byzantine consensus.

Go ahead and masturbate yourself idiot. Smart money will go where the truth is.

I try to help you understand then you try to turn it into me needing to play politics. I don't need to play politics. I can kick ass with my actual abilities, which very few people can do.

I am tired of this political bullshit. You will learn the hard way.

I regret now informing the community about VNL. Just let the idiots lose their money.

So personal bias is a factor in your dismissal?

Noted and good luck with your ventures...

so you're giving up, well thanks for coming

Why would I waste my time with $2100 (denominted in VNL which means it would shrink towards $0 before the bounty would be received) when I have this:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12118600

People who can't think deserve to lose their money.

That is the last I will say on this matter. It is up you the reader to be a fool or not.

I guess the American court system is a scam too because it's on the burden of the accuser to prove the claim!

You are right, virtual synchrony does not provide Byzantine agreements, indeed. The white paper and the explanations in the Vanilla coin topics are also a bit sketchy without too many details. Some more details about the locking mechanism would be nice.

If zero-time is as advertised, then why is there still POW and POS on top of this? Surely, such a strong and fool proof consensus would be able to operate without the need for two other different consensus mechanisms?

How about we stop with the dick measuring contest bullshit and try and double spend it, come back with proof and you get not just the $$$ but also kudos and respect

I am not sure what is vanilla coin features?
I think it is hyped and will go back to below 30k soon.

first it's my first time hearing about Vanilla coin maybe this is reason lake of advertising
second there is lots of altcoin ,people use it ,already top ten coin & give them what they need

It is not a bug. It is complete lack of Byzantine fault tolerance. A bug is an implementation error. This is a holistic design error. There is no design. Virtual synchrony is his claimed method. Virtual synchrony does not provide Byzantine fault tolerance.

What more is there for me prove? You are asking me to prove a dog isn't a cat. Isn't it obvious a dog is not a cat.