Topic: [MOON] Mooncoin 🌙 move to a new thread - page 9. (Read 317736 times)

Thank you.

I repeat again and again here, that in blockchain development previous works and level of knowledge matter.
It is necessary to listen to experts, and if you don't know ChekaZ, listen at least to Peter, Feathercoin founder. If you don't know, Feathercoin is one of the first altcoins, very famous one.

About 62B, if 0.17 removed protection, they removed not only protection for 62 B which did not work, but also the protection for 12B from Dec, 2014 thefts, and this protection worked, at least a hacker never moved these coins, and in 0.17 they are free and ready to be dumped. You can just make a research and find this and other information in transparent posts in this ANN thread and in the old ANN thread, created by original dev in 2013, or ask members who know or remember Mooncoin history.

Hi Peter, thanks a lot for your precious help!

who buy still this mooncoin guys_
so many  project failed and that one might be also one of them

Thank you for your work and your help in this case.

Hi everybody,

I'm the developer who was commissioned to create the 0.18 client by Chekaz.

I've put my suggestions on the Telegram channel. We want a single chain after all the dust has settled, 0.17 has already broken consensus with 0.13, which is why you do not restore consensus breaking validation without doing so at a set height so everyone can upgrade in good time.

My suggestion is to update 0.17 to follow the 0.13 chain and release it after the validation restoration height in 0.18, then 0.17 and 0.18 will exist on the same chain and as long as the majority of miners are on 0.17 and 0.18 then 0.13 will follow it. The only concern is if someone tries to spend the 62B stolen coins, moving these funds on 0.18 is now blocked on a consensus level, 0.13 only protected the mempool which is why they moved and 0.17 has no protection against this at all. A new 0.17 version should also block spending of those stolen funds on a consensus level, I can send create the pull request on their 0.17 repo to add this feature.

I've also recommended to to Chekaz that historical validation be restored in the 0.18 release once validation has been restored, then 0.18 will be a fully validating release as it should be, this could not be done from the outset or consensus would break at some point as demonstrated by 0.17.

Side note, all this talk of a 51% attack is incorrect and there's a lot of other misinformation going round. This sort of thing is counterproductive, this is a purely technical issue that can be resolved by dialog.

Peter

We are here to discuss democratically, ChecaZ has been banned and all our info censored in Telegram Channel.

I read the conversation in this forum and Telegram. With all estimate about all teams and devs, I ask a communication and a dialogue between them because we need one solution, one chain and unison of course. In my opinion, we can do Moon one of the most useful coins only with this way.   

To put it simple, we need only one chain, and technically it could be only 0.18 now.

Edit:  after the block 1,801,000 we can discuss the situation in detail, step by step,
all biases and misunderstanding, now we just need to securely update to 0.18.

Many thanks 😊 for your great job Chekaz 🙏🏻

Thank you for your answer and I appreciate your job . Also, I know that the 2 other devs (Michi and Mebagger) have worked serious about issues on Mooncoin blockchain. I have asked this dialogue from both the 2 teams. I want you to know it.

51% of the network is on 0.13, that should be considered the main chain as it has consensus. 0.18 follows 0.13 so it is still valid. 0.17 does not follow 0.13 and is on its own chain. 0.13 and 0.18 combined make up 85% of the network, 0.17 is currently the minority with 15%, they need to update to be compatible with 0.13 again. Cannot even get 0.17 to connect at the moment.

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/moon/#!network

I think either the 0.17 team wanted this to happen or screwed up as within a day of launch their client can no longer connect to 0.13. If they fix their client to work with 0.13 then I'd assume an honest mistake.

I also consider the new innovations as positive, but in this moment a collaboration between the two teams seems impossible, due to accuses and suspects from the Telegram group. In any case, I hope that in a near future administrators and devs here and there could re-start with a constructive dialogue 🤞🏻

I got contacted because there was 2 years of nearly no progress on Mooncoin, as you maybe saw the last 0.13.9 release already featured the MoonWord, this time the upgrade was even bigger, SmartLikes is included and a new codebase got introduced and the fork got planned carefully. I tried to work with the old devs, but they refused at some point and said that they were working for such a long time now on the 0.17 release.

I did share the codebase ( 0.18.1.L ) beforehand with them, they could review it and leave comments/suggestions. They on their end, never shared the 0.17 code. As they stopped answering DMs, we decided to move ahead, lay out the plans and plan the fork accordingly. ( Yes you have to notify all Pools, Exchanges and Services that they are upgrading to a new Version which introduces a set height update). It got planned that they have about 14 days time to upgrade to it.

Most of the services were happy that they got notified and upgraded accordingly.

Now 1-2 days before the HardFork takes place, the old devs release a Version without ANY commit history. The Repository has 20 commits, the commits aren't labeld or easily reviewable. Changes werent commited properly, so the commits are just a cluster of old and new code.

Now the 0.17 version does  introduces new consensus rules, the problem is they didnt do it via a set block height, which you would normally do if you introduce something new regarding the consensus ( HardFork ). - The Problem here is that the 0.17 version instantly refuses the 0.13 & 0.18 clients which lead to a split of the Blockchain. So now there are 2 chains, the ( 0.13 + 0.18 Chain ) & the ( 0.17 ) Chain.

"Mebagger" said that his "0.17" version doesnt require a HardFork and here we go, as soon as they released it and took the clients online, the chain did split.

Good afternoon. The new innovations are positive. I think that there isn't anyone to disagree with it. However, the investors (included me) need a clear path. So, we need an agreement between the different developers and teams (new wallets 0.17 and 0.18, the fork etc). Then Mooncoin will see much better days.

It is not possible to burn coins, which would be indeed a completely irreversible step.
We would need private keys for that. Other solutions to burn coins are untested and obviously they are very risky and could lead to blockchain collapse. And even if a safe way would be found, obviously it could be done in the future with another fork.
Moreover, some users reported that there could be legal issues with coin burn. Thus, it is necessary to protect coins as much as possible against unauthorised move, at the same time with no legal risks for a dev, and with no possible negative impact on blockchain.

To avoid 51 we need to raise network hashrate, now it is very low due to 2 years of stagnation. SmartLikes will attract investors, and hashrate will increase. That is one of reasons why we need innovations. They aim to deliver a new mindblowing crypto idea and solution, and also to increase price and hashrate, that will make MOON more secure.

I would like to write into the Telegram channel, but seems like they dont like other opinions than their own. They banned me out of there. Their argument is that 0.18.1 did split the chain is kinda funny, as 0.13 and 0.18 are going along great. They released Version 0.17.1 and it instantly forked due to introducing new consensus rules without doing so via a set block height. There is no 51% attack ongoing, the chain just split cause of their 0.17.1 release as it declines all 0.13 and 0.18 nodes.

Many thanks 😊

Look at what the lead dev Michi is saying in Telegram group, it’s a little bit hard to accept:

The statement I'm going to make is this.  With 0.17.1, I know what my motivations were. Along with @Mebagger . Our intention was to fix what was wrong with the chain. Meanwhile, ChekaZ is running around trying VERY HARD to urgently get people to upgrade to 0.18, and suddenly it gets 51%.  The block on the 62b in 0.18 is "soft", it's not an irreversible transaction like we had planned.  So if consensus wants to go with ChekaZ and 0.18 — I'll just say that maybe he's done a great job of convincing people, but in the long run, the underhanded actions to try to split things off and gain 51% — these aren't the purest of intentions. Ask yourself why.

Also https://chainz.cryptoid.info/moon is on 0.18.1.


Yes, 0.18.1 was audited by Peter Bushnell, Feathercoin founder.

What about Altilly’s position?

Comment on the Code of 0.17:

- They didnt drag over the commit history of the version they have forked from.
- No clean commit history, changes can't be reviewed easily, as well as no naming of commits has been done

After looking deeper into it:

0.17 has forked from the 0.13/0.18 Blockchain and is running its own. They introduced new consensus rules without doing so via a set block height which had an instant split of the Blockchain as a consequence. 0.17 refuses connections to 0.13 & 0.18.

0.17 also completely removed the "forbidden TX" protection."


Update on 0.18.1.L

Services and pools that have upgraded to 0.18.1.L by now: ( Confirmed by them )

Exchanges:

unnamed.exchange
folgory.com

Pools:

aikapool.com
mining-dutch.nl
zpool.ca
prohashing.com

Services:

Cointopay.com