Topic: Pool Ops are now the Alt Currency Police - page 2. (Read 13951 times)

Just because I own the copyright is irrelevant. Someone owns the major bitcoin domains which control the code most people run on. Someone owns the sites and content we are posting here. It isn't us. It's already stated that I will pass all my code ownership to the NPO when it is setup. Including any SolidCoin wallets, code, domains, etc used. If you want to get into this "well RealSolid owns this so blah blah" we can go on all day with Bitcoin too. It's a strawman

However, the attack occurred within an hour of you posting about it in the forum ...

Well you came in blablah about coiledcoin, it was trolling as far as I could tell.   I'm not very active in #eligius but luke wasn't around at the time.   I got a talking to as a result of that kick— he's a lot more tolerant of casual trolling than I am, and I wasn't aware that he'd been hanging out in your channel.  Sorry about that.

Let us presume that enforcer node X is compromised and beings attacking the Solidcoin2 network. Coinhunter issues a code update to strip that node of its enforcer status. Some portion of the user base implements this code update, most critically exchanges and pools. Solidcoin has enough enforcer nodes under his direct control to continue the protocol processing until the other enforcers update. The remaining enforcer nodes now have a choice; they can run the old "insecure" client that allows them to be "attacked" by node X, or they can update to the newer more "secure" version.

If they don't update, they will be left behind and eventually become a liability themselves. They can't write their own source to fork because of the following line in license.txt:

"We reserve the right to cancel this open source license to any project which has a negative impact on the SolidCoin network or SolidCoin users."

Of course "negative impact" is defined by Realsolid, and he owns the copyrights to all the code.

Fingers crossed that you're correct.

I had nothing to do with the litecoin dustspam attack, except for potentially forseeing part of it as a consequence of the anti-dos rules being unchanged from bitcoin and totally out of wack with the low currency value and fast chain speed (though the fact that the attacker would send to pre-existing addresses in order to slow down wallets wasn't even something I'd guessed would happen), and I posted patches to correct it ahead of the attack.

I'd appreciate it if you edited your message to retract this claim, as well as any other places where you've made it.

Thanks.

This is nothing but slander.

I congratulate people like gmaxwell ( responsible for the LTC TX spam attack ) and Luke-Jr.

you may be a programmer, but basic arithmetics are not your favorite ability:

total btc-hashrate: ~ 9,000 GH / atm
deepbit + btc-guild + slush: ~ 6,000 GH / atm

now we calculate the hashing-percentage of the big three: ~ 66.67 % / atm  

Edit: it's much, but far away from 90+%

you were banned from #solidcoin for being a liar and thief.

Like the fact that #SolidCoin operators (in this case, yourself) kickban people for no reason whatsoever?

* You were kicked from #eligius by gmaxwell (pretty sure luke would have wanted this: sorry, no scamcoins, please.)

My prediction for 2012:

Peer-to-peer pool technology will mature (will get easier to install and run), and p2pool's will be more than 25% of bitcoin hashing power by the end of the year.

you may be a programmer, but basic arithmetics are not your favorite ability:

total btc-hashrate: ~ 9,000 GH / atm
deepbit + btc-guild + slush: ~ 6,000 GH / atm

now we calculate the hashing-percentage of the big three: ~ 66.67 % / atm  

Edit: it's much, but far away from 90+%

total btc-hashrate: ~ 9,000 GH / atm
deepbit + btc-guild + slush: ~ 6,000 GH / atm

now we calculate the hashing-percentage of the big three: ~ 66.67 % / atm 

Edit: it's much, but far away from 90+%

There's a slight error in your logic here. Nodes can only be forced to adopt an update if CodeHunter's "enforcer nodes" go along with it, and they've got no reason to do this for an update that takes away their power. Assuming that those nodes are genuinely independent of CoinHunter, he doesn't actually have much more control over SolidCoin than the Bitcoin developers have over Bitcoin - if they release a major change and the mining pools go along with it, users pretty much have to go along too.

Since you're not a programmer or network engineer you probably don't realize a few things.

If you think SolidCoin is centralized then Bitcoin is even more centralized. Bitcoin has 3 pools which create 90+% of the blocks. SolidCoin has nowhere near this distribution of block creation being centralized.

Game, set, match. I guess.

Your blockchain isn't fixed, it is whatever you want it to be, whenever you want it to be. Users are forced to upgrade by your enforcer nodes, and your enforcer nodes can be decertified by a code update (which your users must adopt or they will be cast out of the blockchain).

And what do you base this claim on? I can do the same thing, Bitcoin is controlled by one person. Does it make it true? Usually you need to give the evidence for such bold claims.

SolidCoin's trust nodes aren't operated only by me, others have wallets now that cannot be taken away from them. They are forever out there to be used to sign blocks.

On top of that we have multiple pools creating half the blocks. So if we do the maths :-

SolidCoin . Upto 10 trust nodes can currently operate and create half the blocks (which contain no SC). The other half of the blocks are solved by everyone, and the current breakdown you'd say about 4 big pools or solo operators are there. That's 14 "nodes" solving the majority of SolidCoin blocks.

Bitcoin. Upto 3 nodes creating 90% of the blocks. Everyone else fights over 10% scraps. Since bitcoin security revolves around at least 51% of the power being in "good hands" and 3 people have 90% of the power it puts bitcoins security in a precarious position. Only 2 people in Bitcoin need to decide or have it decided for them (hacked) and bitcoins security is no more.

Bitcoin is so much more centralized than SolidCoin it isn't funny. You have some incorrect belief there is only one person mining or that has control of SolidCoin. Hopefully this shows it's more than one, and less centralization than Bitcoin. Finally there are now 4 developers working on the source code and able to work on it without needing "permission". Everyone else is able to submit pull requests.

https://github.com/solidcoin/solidcoin

If you want to have an opinion on SolidCoin at least make sure it's based in reality and factual eh.