Pages:
Author

Topic: [POLL] Does EVAN DUFFIELD regret instamining DRK/DASH at 100x emission? - page 25. (Read 31425 times)

member
Activity: 490
Merit: 14

Your trolling is illogical. Why would someone restart the blockchain when it's already been used by countless people since it's release? Restarting it at that point would be scam-like.

Unlike Dash, where it had more than enough time to restart the blockchain during it's 2 day instamine scam.
Countless people? In what, 2 weeks? Please  Roll Eyes

You're joking right? Within 2 weeks a OTC-thread came out where users bought/sold plus the new flux of users mining with cpu's. Mining was available on Windows unlike Dash, so it was accessible to a large amount of people fortunately.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500

Your trolling is illogical. Why would someone restart the blockchain when it's already been used by countless people since it's release? Restarting it at that point would be scam-like.

Unlike Dash, where it had more than enough time to restart the blockchain during it's 2 day instamine scam.
Countless people? In what, 2 weeks? Please  Roll Eyes
member
Activity: 490
Merit: 14

Do you regret releasing a scam miner for the monero launch? Do you regret not taking more time to actually evaluate the code of the coin you took over or did you profit greatly from the scam as well? I wonder if you regret those actions.

Your upset because you dev a coin that is not doing well compared to its competitors. Instead of actually competing, you decide to sling mud.

Smooth, why didn't you re-release Monero once you found out about the scam miner? Also, do you regret the scam miner? I'ts just a simple question, as simple as the one asked in this OP.

He can say that he doesn't regret it, because officially it was TFT who started Monero. By having his confederate (or alter ego?) do the deed, Smooth has removed himself from overt blame.

But he still took over the coin. Does he regret not starting with a fresh blockchain after "discovering" the embedded scam?

Your trolling is illogical. Why would someone restart the blockchain when it's already been used by countless people since it's release? Restarting it at that point would be scam-like.

Unlike Dash, where it had more than enough time to restart the blockchain during it's 2 day instamine scam.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
This thread is about smearing Evan.

There is no smear unless the statements are untrue.

Which statements are untrue? Did he release code (after he was asked to take his time and fix it) that had bugs creating extra coins, and then keep those coins? Did he post misleading statements about the launch time? Did he mine himself during the first hours of the instamine? Did he cut the supply by 75% later?

The answers are all yes, and all of these are well documented.

You're just upset because you don't like the reality of it and for whatever reason you have committed yourself emotionally to a coin regardless of the horribly shady behavior of its developer (described above), so you lash out at Monero.

It doesn't help justify Evan's actions. I wonder if he regrets those actions.

Do you regret releasing a scam miner for the monero launch?

I didn't, this statement is untrue.

Quote
Do you regret not taking more time to actually evaluate the code of the coin you took over

No. We worked as quickly as we could under the circumstances and had no reason to believe any more was needed, but in any case as volunteers with no premine/instamine/ICO we weren't going to put even more time into the project than we did.

Quote
or did you profit greatly from the scam as well? I wonder if you regret those actions.

No, I didn't profit greatly (or at all) from the (Bytecoin, and possibly Monero) miner scam. If TFT scammed me and others, that's unfortunate, but not something I can reasonably regret. More likely I'd be angry with him for ripping me off, if I thought it was actually significant in magnitude (it wasn't).

If you want to know about regret for releasing it or from using it to scam (if he even did), you would you would have to ask him.

Quote
Smooth, why didn't you re-release Monero once you found out about the scam miner?

Many reasons including that it was already being widely mined and used, and because we didn't really understand the that it was crippled it at the time, just slower than necessary  (and NoodleDoodle speed it up -- we and everyone were grateful to him for doing it). The full understanding, including its connection to the Bytecoin premine, only came later (largely it was rethink-your-strategy who put all the pieces together, and his post wasn't until August -- 3-4 months later).

Quote
Also, do you regret the scam miner?

No I had nothing to do with it. I can't regret something I didn't do.

Evan did instamine Dash. He did mislead people about the launch time. He did cut the coin supply by 75%. I wonder if he regrets that.

Please try to stay on topic though, and not engage in deflection. That would be the Dash instamine.

hero member
Activity: 507
Merit: 500

Do you regret releasing a scam miner for the monero launch? Do you regret not taking more time to actually evaluate the code of the coin you took over or did you profit greatly from the scam as well? I wonder if you regret those actions.

Your upset because you dev a coin that is not doing well compared to its competitors. Instead of actually competing, you decide to sling mud.

Smooth, why didn't you re-release Monero once you found out about the scam miner? Also, do you regret the scam miner? I'ts just a simple question, as simple as the one asked in this OP.

He can say that he doesn't regret it, because officially it was TFT who started Monero. By having his confederate (or alter ego?) do the deed, Smooth has removed himself from overt blame.

But he still took over the coin. Does he regret not starting with a fresh blockchain after "discovering" the embedded scam?
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500

Do you regret releasing a scam miner for the monero launch? Do you regret not taking more time to actually evaluate the code of the coin you took over or did you profit greatly from the scam as well? I wonder if you regret those actions.

Your upset because you dev a coin that is not doing well compared to its competitors. Instead of actually competing, you decide to sling mud.

Smooth, why didn't you re-release Monero once you found out about the scam miner? Also, do you regret the scam miner? I'ts just a simple question, as simple as the one asked in this OP.

He can say that he doesn't regret it, because officially it was TFT who started Monero. By having his confederate (or alter ego?) do the deed, Smooth has removed himself from overt blame. Relaunch it? No, because then all of his scammed coins would disappear.
hero member
Activity: 507
Merit: 500
This thread is about smearing Evan.

There is no smear unless the statements are untrue.

Which statements are untrue? Did he release code (after he was asked to take his time and fix it) that had bugs creating extra coins, and then keep those coins? Did he post misleading statements about the launch time? Did he mine himself during the first hours of the instamine? Did he cut the supply by 75% later?

The answers are all yes, and all of these are well documented.

You're just upset because you don't like the reality of it and for whatever reason you have committed yourself emotionally to a coin regardless of the horribly shady behavior of its developer (described above), so you lash out at Monero.

It doesn't help justify Evan's actions. I wonder if he regrets those actions.






Do you regret releasing a scam miner for the monero launch? Do you regret not taking more time to actually evaluate the code of the coin you took over or did you profit greatly from the scam as well? I wonder if you regret those actions.

Your upset because you dev a coin that is not doing well compared to its competitors. Instead of actually competing, you decide to sling mud.

Smooth, why didn't you re-release Monero once you found out about the scam miner? Also, do you regret the scam miner? I'ts just a simple question, as simple as the one asked in this OP.
member
Activity: 490
Merit: 14
Despite what the detractors on this thread say, I like Evan far more than any other coin dev. He has the balls to do what needs to be done to bring profits to investors. I'll take profits over whatever the Monero guys are selling, thanks.

Short term or 'long term'? If you believe crypto has any chance of succeeding post this bitcointalk forum, then your view on "doing what needs to be done to bring profits to investors" such as premining or instamining won't look good in the eyes of the average person, especially since the founder of cryptocurrencies, Satoshi Nakamoto, has publically stated in one of his posts about how things such as block reward, coin supply, and others that compromise the coins core parameters should never be changed i.e "set in stone"

Short term, near fraudulent actions such as instamining to one's benefit may help bolster a cryptocurrency and ensure easier profits(motivation to make the stash worth more), but long term such things will never work(assuming that in the "long term", cryptos would be used and available to a much larger audience, not just the few thousand people that frequent this small forum, and also assuming that crypto would be slightly regulated so things like the instamine that occured with Dash wouldn't happen).
full member
Activity: 124
Merit: 100
Is it really that hard to read the topic title and post ontopic stuff? There is a dedicated thread about the "Monero Scam" so please go there if you want to criticise monero.

This thread is about the "X11/DRK/DASH instamine".

I think we all can agree that the way this coin launched was at least questionable.

Does Evan regret it? I honestly don't think so.
Is he a scammer? I don't think so.
Was he greedy? How he handled the launch make it appear so.

What is done is done. It's his creation, so it was his decision how to handle the situation. If it was the right or wrong thing to do, doesn't really matter now. More important is, his actions reflect his personality. Some may say he acted in a devious way, some may say he was just incompetent,  some think it was acceptable that he gave himself an advantage.

Each of these views a equally valid.

If people want to support this coin, they generally inform themselves about the people behind it. If they deem the developer as support worthy, it's their rightful choice to make.

You cannot impose your believes of what is good and what is bad onto others. That will never work.  You can try to make people think about it by bringing arguments to the table, like some people did in the case of the DRK. Arguments which are supported by evidence everyone can see. It may help some people who are in the process of forming their opinion. But someone who already has decided, wont change their mind most of the time.

The point I am trying to bring across is, that people are drawn to the things which are compatible to their own mindset. What that exactly means in the case of the "X11/DRK/DASH instamine" is your guess.

Personally, I have a hard time to identify myself with Evans personality/behaviour/views, that's why I don't support him and his creation.


 

hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500
Despite what the detractors on this thread say, I like Evan far more than any other coin dev. He has the balls to do what needs to be done to bring profits to investors. I'll take profits over whatever the Monero guys are selling, thanks.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
This thread is about smearing Evan.

There is no smear unless the statements are untrue.

Which statements are untrue? Did he release code (after he was asked to take his time and fix it) that had bugs creating extra coins, and then keep those coins? Did he post misleading statements about the launch time? Did he mine himself during the first hours of the instamine? Did he cut the supply by 75% later?

The answers are all yes, and all of these are well documented.

You're just upset because you don't like the reality of it and for whatever reason you have committed yourself emotionally to a coin regardless of the horribly shady behavior of its developer (described above), so you lash out at Monero.

It doesn't help justify Evan's actions. I wonder if he regrets those actions.



legendary
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
This thread is about smearing Evan.

And as it turns out, its also about comparing the objective Monero scam launch package with a subjective attack.

Let's not hide the truth anymore about the Monero Scam Launch, so easily fixed by just stopping, fixing and relaunching.

Now, where have I heard that before?


legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
Here is the scam code, lets not try to hide it anymore:
Quote
Antonio Juarez on Mar 3, 2014 moved all stuff to github

Exactly, this is the Bytecoin developer. Last touched long before Monero was launched. There is no evidence that TFT (the original dev of Monero) ever looked at it or know about it. It is certainly proven (from that blame) that no one touched it since Bytecoin.

Since you apparently don't understand how git works, you just went ahead and presented evidence (not conclusive, of course) against your claim of involvement by Monero. Nice.

Same applies to anyone else besides TFT until NoodleDoodle found it, fixed it, and released the fix.

Please stop thread derailing though. This thread is about Evan instamining Dash.

To keep things on topic, I guess we should go ahead and pull up the code in dash's git that created 2 million extra coins in the first day or (500 coins per block, when the correct reward was far lower) and see who get the "blame" for that one?
legendary
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000


Here is the scam code, lets not try to hide it anymore:

Here we go loopty loo.

Code:
Skip to content
Sign up Sign in This repository
Explore
Features
Enterprise
Blog
 Watch 35  Star 66  Fork 80 monero-project/bitmonero
 tree: 1a8f5ce89a  bitmonero/src/crypto/slow-hash.c
Antonio Juarez on Mar 3, 2014 moved all stuff to github
0 contributors
RawBlameHistory    154 lines (135 sloc)  4.561 kb
// Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers
// Distributed under the MIT/X11 software license, see the accompanying
// file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.

#include
#include
#include
#include

#include "common/int-util.h"
#include "hash-ops.h"
#include "oaes_lib.h"

static void (*const extra_hashes[4])(const void *, size_t, char *) = {
  hash_extra_blake, hash_extra_groestl, hash_extra_jh, hash_extra_skein
};

#define MEMORY         (1 << 21) /* 2 MiB */
#define ITER           (1 << 20)
#define AES_BLOCK_SIZE  16
#define AES_KEY_SIZE    32 /*16*/
#define INIT_SIZE_BLK   8
#define INIT_SIZE_BYTE (INIT_SIZE_BLK * AES_BLOCK_SIZE)

static size_t e2i(const uint8_t* a, size_t count) { return (*((uint64_t*)a) / AES_BLOCK_SIZE) & (count - 1); }

static void mul(const uint8_t* a, const uint8_t* b, uint8_t* res) {
  uint64_t a0, b0;
  uint64_t hi, lo;

  a0 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)a)[0]);
  b0 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)b)[0]);
  lo = mul128(a0, b0, &hi);
  ((uint64_t*)res)[0] = SWAP64LE(hi);
  ((uint64_t*)res)[1] = SWAP64LE(lo);
}

static void sum_half_blocks(uint8_t* a, const uint8_t* b) {
  uint64_t a0, a1, b0, b1;

  a0 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)a)[0]);
  a1 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)a)[1]);
  b0 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)b)[0]);
  b1 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)b)[1]);
  a0 += b0;
  a1 += b1;
  ((uint64_t*)a)[0] = SWAP64LE(a0);
  ((uint64_t*)a)[1] = SWAP64LE(a1);
}

static void copy_block(uint8_t* dst, const uint8_t* src) {
  memcpy(dst, src, AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
}

static void swap_blocks(uint8_t* a, uint8_t* b) {
  size_t i;
  uint8_t t;
  for (i = 0; i < AES_BLOCK_SIZE; i++) {
    t = a[i];
    a[i] = b[i];
    b[i] = t;
  }
}

static void xor_blocks(uint8_t* a, const uint8_t* b) {
  size_t i;
  for (i = 0; i < AES_BLOCK_SIZE; i++) {
    a[i] ^= b[i];
  }
}

#pragma pack(push, 1)
union cn_slow_hash_state {
  union hash_state hs;
  struct {
    uint8_t k[64];
    uint8_t init[INIT_SIZE_BYTE];
  };
};
#pragma pack(pop)

void cn_slow_hash(const void *data, size_t length, char *hash) {
  uint8_t long_state[MEMORY];
  union cn_slow_hash_state state;
  uint8_t text[INIT_SIZE_BYTE];
  uint8_t a[AES_BLOCK_SIZE];
  uint8_t b[AES_BLOCK_SIZE];
  uint8_t c[AES_BLOCK_SIZE];
  uint8_t d[AES_BLOCK_SIZE];
  size_t i, j;
  uint8_t aes_key[AES_KEY_SIZE];
  OAES_CTX* aes_ctx;

  hash_process(&state.hs, data, length);
  memcpy(text, state.init, INIT_SIZE_BYTE);
  memcpy(aes_key, state.hs.b, AES_KEY_SIZE);
  aes_ctx = oaes_alloc();
  for (i = 0; i < MEMORY / INIT_SIZE_BYTE; i++) {
    for (j = 0; j < INIT_SIZE_BLK; j++) {
      oaes_key_import_data(aes_ctx, aes_key, AES_KEY_SIZE);
      oaes_pseudo_encrypt_ecb(aes_ctx, &text[AES_BLOCK_SIZE * j]);
      /*memcpy(aes_key, &text[AES_BLOCK_SIZE * j], AES_KEY_SIZE);*/
      memcpy(aes_key, state.hs.b, AES_KEY_SIZE);
    }
    memcpy(&long_state[i * INIT_SIZE_BYTE], text, INIT_SIZE_BYTE);
  }

  for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
    a[i] = state.k[     i] ^ state.k[32 + i];
    b[i] = state.k[16 + i] ^ state.k[48 + i];
  }

  for (i = 0; i < ITER / 2; i++) {
    /* Dependency chain: address -> read value ------+
     * written value <-+ hard function (AES or MUL) <+
     * next address  <-+
     */
    /* Iteration 1 */
    j = e2i(a, MEMORY / AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
    copy_block(c, &long_state[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE]);
    oaes_encryption_round(a, c);
    xor_blocks(b, c);
    swap_blocks(b, c);
    copy_block(&long_state[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE], c);
    assert(j == e2i(a, MEMORY / AES_BLOCK_SIZE));
    swap_blocks(a, b);
    /* Iteration 2 */
    j = e2i(a, MEMORY / AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
    copy_block(c, &long_state[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE]);
    mul(a, c, d);
    sum_half_blocks(b, d);
    swap_blocks(b, c);
    xor_blocks(b, c);
    copy_block(&long_state[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE], c);
    assert(j == e2i(a, MEMORY / AES_BLOCK_SIZE));
    swap_blocks(a, b);
  }

  memcpy(text, state.init, INIT_SIZE_BYTE);
  for (i = 0; i < MEMORY / INIT_SIZE_BYTE; i++) {
    for (j = 0; j < INIT_SIZE_BLK; j++) {
      /*oaes_key_import_data(aes_ctx, &long_state[i * INIT_SIZE_BYTE + j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE], AES_KEY_SIZE);*/
      oaes_key_import_data(aes_ctx, &state.hs.b[32], AES_KEY_SIZE);
      xor_blocks(&text[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE], &long_state[i * INIT_SIZE_BYTE + j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE]);
      oaes_pseudo_encrypt_ecb(aes_ctx, &text[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE]);
    }
  }
  memcpy(state.init, text, INIT_SIZE_BYTE);
  hash_permutation(&state.hs);
  /*memcpy(hash, &state, 32);*/
  extra_hashes[state.hs.b[0] & 3](&state, 200, hash);
  oaes_free(&aes_ctx);
}
Status API Training Shop Blog About
© 2015 GitHub, Inc. Terms Privacy Security Contact


So while those that could mine were pushing their cpu's at full throttle to get 1 or 2 blocks a day, one or more others effectively had ASICs style hashing by comparison.

'Here, use this miner everyone. Its the standard build.' 

But apparently, its no biggie. lol

legendary
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
.... had nothing to do with Monero's current dev team. It's not anything more than a deoptimized miner, that's all it was, a deoptimized miner, and your quote proves it.

There was a fraud, you all keep admitting it but somehow try to push it under the rug.



Monero devs didn't stop, fix, relaunch. Now you all have to own the provable Monero scam launch.

I'm going to put you on ignore now. I just remembered, I'm not trying to attack Monero investors or even the Monero trolls that are just following by example.

But thanks for owning up  Smiley
member
Activity: 490
Merit: 14

I continue to troll  Wink

Again, you've pointed out the only "flaw" that had nothing to do with Monero's current dev team. It's not anything more than a deoptimized miner, that's all it was, a deoptimized miner, and your quote proves it. So exactly where are you trying to go?

Are you seriously trying to compare a coin(Monero) that had a deoptimized miner by it's former developer, and of whom none of the current developers are associated with, to a coin(Dash/Darkcoin) that had all it's core parameters, block reward and max coin supply sliced and diced after an extreme, fraudelent instamine of 2million coins in 2 days on a Linux only release, and to which for a period of time only the then and current developer, Evan Duffield was able to mine at all?

I hope you're joking for your sake, or you dearly need a big glass of #logic. When/if crypto were to/will get regulated, scam currencies like Dash would be the first to get investigated.
 

Also, to further mention just how clueless you are. You've posted a link to a thread to which one of the big miners during that time admited to selling all his Moneros that he mined. You do realize that's an extremely good thing, don't you? It means that the effects of Monero's unoptimized miner has been negated since the miners who mined at that time sold all their coins i.e Monero's distribution is astroundingly good.

Your developer Evan Duffield likely still has his coins, and no account of any selling of any large magnitude was recorded by him. In fact, there are still addresses with 100,000s (hundreds of thousands) of coins that are connected to Dash's instamine: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/dash/wallet.dws?559582.htm

So it seems that one of the big instaminers/developers of Dash/Darkcoin still hold 11% of the coin supply. What a lovely distribution /s.

As I told you before, this will only lead to further investigation done on Dash's scam, instamined beginnings, all of which point to it being premeditated. The slicing of the block reward, obscure poll vote as shown by you to slice the coin supply, release on linux only, broken miner for a time where only the developer could have mined, and more show just how fraudelent Dash really is.
legendary
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
The reason why it wasn't relaunched was because a lot of users on this forum had already begun mining and buying/selling coins. I remember seeing the first OTC-thread where Moneros were being sold and bought for pennies. The worst thing that happened to Monero was an unoptimized miner, which has nothing to do with the coin's core code and has nothing to do with Monero's current dev team. Unlike Dash, where it's entire core code was sliced and diced to the enormous benefit of it's scam developer Evan Duffield and co.

If you want to rate the fishiness that happened in each coin.

Monero's "fishiness" level in a court of law would be maybe, at most, a 2/10 as everything(Only one thing and that's the unoptimized miner) is to blame on the Thankful-for-Today character. Dash's "fishiness" level would be a 10/10 and grounds for immediate investigation.

The reason why it wasn't relaunched was because a lot of users on this forum had already begun mining and buying/selling coins.

We know its a scam, but we're all part of it, so let's carry on. lol

The worst thing that happened to Monero was an unoptimized miner, which has nothing to do with the coin's core code

This sounds like it was a little more than just the miner that was crippled:

"My strong belief is that the skepticism was warranted: Here's the original slow-hash from bytecoin as it was copied into Bitmonero.  It has some doozies.  For example, on line 100, you might note that for every iteration through an inner loop repeated tens of thousands of times, the AES key is re-imported into the library.  The later loop, starting on line 113, is repeated half a million times, and is so abstracted through lots of memcpys and pointer manipulation it's hard to tell that all it really does is one round of AES encryption, a pointer dereference into a random scratchpad, a 64 bit multiplication, and another pointer dereference.  Phew.  This original code was roughly 50x slower than my final optimized code, and could have easily been used to fake two years of blockchain data on a single computer or a small cluster.  I'm pretty sure that's what happened.

Bitmonero was a fork of Bytecoin designed to not have the 80% premine.  But its initial developer either didn't know, didn't care, or wanted to profit from the de-optimized hashing. "

Source:
http://da-data.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/minting-money-with-monero-and-cpu.html

Reference to bitmonero (name since changed to Monero) github scam code:
https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/blob/1a8f5ce89a990e54ec757affff01f27d449640bc/src/crypto/slow-hash.c


Monero's "fishiness" level in a court of law would be maybe, at most, a 2/10

Another admission of guilt. Thanks for your honesty, Prosperityforall - indeed.
member
Activity: 490
Merit: 14
The reason why it wasn't relaunched was because a lot of users on this forum had already begun mining and buying/selling coins. I remember seeing the first OTC-thread where Moneros were being sold and bought for pennies. The worst thing that happened to Monero was an unoptimized miner, which has nothing to do with the coin's core code and has nothing to do with Monero's current dev team. Unlike Dash, where it's entire core code was sliced and diced to the enormous benefit of it's scam developer Evan Duffield and co.

If you want to rate the fishiness that happened in each coin.

Monero's "fishiness" level in a court of law would be maybe, at most, a 2/10 as everything(Only one thing and that's the unoptimized miner) is to blame on the Thankful-for-Today character. Dash's "fishiness" level would be a 10/10 and grounds for immediate investigation.
legendary
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
EDIT:  I got a new Monero value proposition:

Monero - Proven Scam Launch™

(don't worry Smooth, not like I would go around saying this like you do.  But handy to have to remind you of your own scams next time you are accusing Dash of being a scam Wink)

@OP, now the truth is starting to surface, please consider adding:

Does Monero regret not relaunching after a week of scam mining?


Pages:
Jump to: