I find it hard to believe that if he honestly feels that he did nothing wrong, why did he remove all personal information from his personal websites including his family blog etc ?
If people were making threats against my actions, whether they were right or wrong, I would remove my personal information from my websites as well. If you really feel he did something wrong/illegal, please call up law enforcement.
Here are the facts as I see them:
1) Mining for blocks isn't against the rules of bitcoin/its clones.
2) There are no rules regarding how much hash power you may contribute to any of the bitcoin/clone networks.
3) There are no rules mandating which transactions miners have to include in the blocks they mine.
4) As far as I know, he didn't reassign any coins that were mined before he started mining.
5) Luke never made fake transactions to take coins that weren't his.
6) Luke generated a bunch of blocks that became the longest chain and orphaned shorter chains.
Please let me know if any of those 6 facts are wrong.
Edit: and if those 6 facts are indeed correct, then how is what he did wrong?
1) correct
2) correct
3) correct
4) he is "reassigning" all new mined blocks by orphaning them and rejecting them from what I understand - this is mallicious and his intent even in a 51% scenario other blocks can go into the chain, with what he is doing now they can't
5) can't verify
6) See 4
It all boils down to the fact that these chains should live and die by their own merit not have asshats attacking them in childish vendetta wars. So far none of the alts have truly "lived" very long as compared to bitcoin and are not getting adoption widely as of yet, but each one brings us closer to a better variant of bitcoin... maybe that's why Bitcoin zealots are getting afraid?
CoiledCoin as I see it was an effort to see OP_Eval in action but due to the misuse of eligius hash power it has been set back possibly months or more.
First, thank you for actually responding with something besides
Praise Jebus !
Now on to the discussion:
4) It was my understanding he was simply mining new blocks that built off his previous blocks. Essentially there was a race condition.. chain1 which included blocks from eligius and chain2 which included blocks from everywhere else. He/Eligius wasn't reassigning anything, the clients were simply using the chain selection algorithm that picks the longest/most difficult chain which happens to be chain1. As a result, any work on chain2 keeps getting orphaned. To combat it, more blocks would need to be found that build on chain2 to overcome chain1's length.
5) What I meant is that if you had sent coins to address1 in block10, eligius started mining in block11. Essentially, all coin transactions were preserved, only the coin generation coins were lost because the original assigning blocks were orphaned.
6) I think I described this in 4.
It all boils down to the fact that these chains should live and die by their own merit not have asshats attacking them in childish vendetta wars. So far none of the alts have truly "lived" very long as compared to bitcoin and are not getting adoption widely as of yet, but each one brings us closer to a better variant of bitcoin... maybe that's why Bitcoin zealots are getting afraid?
CoiledCoin as I see it was an effort to see OP_Eval in action but due to the misuse of eligius hash power it has been set back possibly months or more.
I appreciate the alt coins, they show reasons why bitcoin has done well and also illustrate where it can be improved. I do not like them when all they do is change some vars, uncomment/comment out some code and release. That isn't innovation.
I realize that part of the point of coiledcoin was to use op_eval, but I also believe there are ongoing discussions to roll this out to testnet, which means setting up a brand new network isn't needed/warranted.
