Topic: Mooncoin - Solidcoin/Namecoin to BTC Exchange - page 6. (Read 18327 times)

ah.ok.yes.hmm. isn't it ~like 0.0005 dollars?

503 Service Temporarily Unavailable

The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.

That works for Bitcoins if you dont pay a transaction fee, but that makes no sense if you are trying to withdraw solidcoins. you would be paying a 0.01 transaction fee to deposit the 1.763422 so you can get 0.006578... its thievery dude.

I didn't help with that, I was just relaying the info

And we are back!

Thanks @wolftaur

 

I was just speaking to MrMoon on AIM, primarily to ask how he made out with documentation I gave him last night.

Exchange is apparently being DDoSed, he's trying to handle it.

Me too. Maybe an update?

Mr Moon?

how about depositing 1.763422 first and then withdraw 5.0? thats what i did when i wanted to withdraw completely BTC or NMC from bitparking and britcoin and my remaining funds there were below withdrawal limit

I call that user stupidity not moonco.in's thievery

Site is down for me too

Cheers,
Kermee

@ Mr. Moon - The above quote states a fair fix in your exchange site. Users should be able to withdraw all coins to every decimal place. 

Site seems to be down right now

MrMoon has already stated earlier in this thread he will be fixing that. I discovered another flaw in his exchange code which I discussed with him at length last night and he is working on handling that, so I would suggest giving him a bit of slack and waiting to see if he lives up to his word on fixing the reported issues -- my impression of him last night is that he genuinely intends to improve on anything that needs work.

And if you've read enough threads to see how vocal I am about people who screw up, you should take it pretty seriously that _I_ am saying give the guy a fair shot to fix the mistake.

for anyone who does not know mooncoin skims coins when you do withdrawals... you can only withdraw 2 digits after the decimal place. so if you balance is 3.236578... you can only withdraw 3.23, the 0.006578 stays in your account with them... once you close your account.... its theirs... I call that thievery.

I just registered on Moonco.in.  It looks a lot different now than it did a few days ago when I first visited it (that's a good thing).  Thanks for building this service, MM!

MrMoon was just yanked into the gravity well of the black hole that is CoinHunter's egomaniacal singularity. (And honestly, some of the blame for that rests squarely on those of us who were angry with CoinHunter.) The discussion we had on AIM was extremely civil and polite and I have to say I think it was very obvious to me that MrMoon's main goal was to improve upon the work he is doing.


I cut out the chat log because it won't be relevant to the point I'll need to make.

I strongly suspect MrMoon would give due consideration to using the open-source fork instead of the official release if it is viable when things settle down a little bit. But if MrMoon is attempting to run a viable exchange he does not actually have completely free choice of which block chain fork to support: from a business perspective, he's going to need to support the one the users want.

MrMoon, I think you might want to consider a poll on your site. Let your registered, trading users who support your business weigh in on which chain you should use. If 90% of them want the official chain, then even though I personally would be against it... You can't have a business with no customers. Or you could just see which chain is even viable down the road -- if 90% of them want the official chain but the official chain is 100% broken it may not matter what they want. And of course if 90% of them want the fork but the fork isn't usable then that's just the same thing. On this point you don't have to be in the politics if you don't want to: you can either leave it to the users or just go with whichever gains the majority use and hash rate assuming the chains are split.

MrMoon, how many confirmations do you wait for for deposits? Your site says one but one confirmation seems pretty dangerous since it makes it much easier for a double spend to occur. Note that this is not intended as an attack on your site, it's a genuine question and suggestion to make it safer.

You should think before you type.

CoinHunter did not preserve the original copyright notices. He changed notices to claim full ownership and specifically denied any rights to the Bitcoin team.

He's also using a third-party library illegally. The BDB library is dual-licensed. The owner of the library demands payment for use in the library of any software which is distributed publicly but is not free open source on an OSI-approved license, and SolidCoin is thus in violation. CoinHunter can scream "Hey bitcoin is MIT/X11" all he wants, but BDB is not MIT/X11, and its owner has every right to indicate the use of BDB under a BSD license is _only_ authorized for projects with an open license, otherwise, pay money.

CoinHunter had the right to relicense his code if and only if he retained original copyright notices (he didn't) and only if he remained in compliance with the licenses of code he used which was NOT extended under the MIT/X11 license.

The issue I identified isn't any sort of scam or "convenient math" or some crap like that -- it's a peculiarity of computer science that isn't actually explained in most textbooks for some ridiculous reason. As I told Moon when we spoke on AIM about it in detail, I have run into examples of this class of bug many, many, many times in my more than 20 years as a programmer. And moonco.in also isn't the first Bitcoin-or-friends exchange to have this same class of bug when it was new, either. I am aware of one other that acknowledged it, and one more where it could be proven but they quietly fixed it without admitting the mistake.

I'm a computer geek. I like teaching solutions to computer science problems and things like that. Honestly, the thing about SolidCoin that had pretty much gotten me really ticked off was that when ArtForz first described issues in SolidCoin I went to CoinHunter privately and tried to volunteer to help, and he flipped out on me. And for a bit I had sort of lumped Mr.Moon in as being the same type because of a few posts going around when everyone was pissed about CoinHunter trying to make SolidCoin closed-source in direct violation of the rights of the original developers. (Seriously, as a programmer, I'm really pissed when someone like CoinHunter steals someone else's code. Yes, steals, he changed the license, removed copyrights crediting the actual creators, specifically denied rights to the Bitcoin developers...)

But when Mr.Moon made a serious comment about wanting to improve the exchange? Well, I'm a computer geek first, an opinionated forum member second. And if the result is some interesting bugs that are from an obscure and neglected part of computer science get fixed I'm happy!

And this, right here, is what community is supposed to be about in software development. I'm not even a user of the moonco.in exchange, and I suspect Mr.Moon knew that, but I was still completely willing to offer help when she was willing to ask for it. Everyone who uses the exchange will get to benefit, and by extension, everyone with an interest in the currency, and the whole concept of cryptocurrency in general gets to be legitimized when two people who started the evening at each others throats can toss that aside to go fix an interesting geek problem.

I believe that MrMoon is running a trustworthy site.

@wolftaur helping to fix problems and bugs that you find is really fantastic. I am so pleased to see the community working together to make a better *coin system. 

When *coin (whatever the flavour) goes mainstream the people who actually helped perfect the system will be remembered.

Naysayers, trolls & bluffers ... Who?