Topic: PROOF that XSPEC is a SCAM - page 6. (Read 2581 times)

Which other serious competitors? Those serious competitors are much worse, just for the fact they invest incredible amount of resource to mislead the people, instead of using the resources properly. That smells on high class professional scam, they understand human psychology an know what will bring amounts of money, in much shorter period of time.

Besides obvious scam projects there are also projects with serious issues. These are maybe not scam, but what you said about hope applies here. All Z* coins implemented zero knowledge proof and are now waiting on solution which won't require trusted setup.

Verge, DO? Give me a break.

I am aware of Monero, and can assume there is a project or two I somehow missed, so no the real competition almost don't exist.

XSPEC is the only project I am aware of with proper Tor implementation! No other project with optional Tor cannot provide this, because they are depended on exit nodes.

@mandica,

you have paid some nice amount of coins to the first group of developers for not really impressive amount of work. They forked code, changed name, disabled a feature or two in the GUI of the wallet. If we consider time needed to study the code, I would estimate one person, average developer didn't need more than 5 days (Time to squash a bug or two, and to fix some configurations issues with development tools included.). I have heard that approximate value of coins they received was around 20 000 $. Is this true? That are four - five excelent month salaries for a senior software eng. in western EU, for only  few days of work. Are developers in this branch of work so scarse (real question, no sarcasm.)?

This what i have been waiting for a good debate to clear things up,the founder of the xspec has spoke,will this post be the reason why would the people who are holding XSPEC to dump this coin?we need some solid evidences in each sides so the community will learn something new about the coin we are debating to,i have bookmarked this thread so that there will some action in this forum.

Do you have anything to show us as evidence that two full time developers have actually implemented something besides those few lines of code? I would really love to see it because I stil hold my xspec.
 
Why have we been told that xspec wallet automatically checks for the Tor connection, and if doesn't find it it tries to use obfs4 obfuscation? One doesn't have to be C or C++ genius to implement this. It is very simple actually.
I could even accept KISS method here, but this would understand transparency, openness, documentation which  explains people how should they use the wallet and obfs4.

Even something in the lines of 'Guys try first if the Tor is working, if not, drop the obfs4 exe to that folder, copy this configuration file to another, restart the wallet and check again.' or even admitting,  telling people 'some issues have appeared, it doesn't work like we expected, and we are busy with implementation of 1.4 wallet.'

So:
obfs4 doesn't work as we have been told.
Automatically adjusted ring size was promised for 1.3.5 and on official site it is stayed that it has been implemented with 1.3.5.
1.4 code was supposed to be uploaded to github month ago.

I would be 100% ok with the project if jbg or someone address and fix these issues.

Under assumption 1.4 is far away from being implemented (bugs don't matter), I would stil be ok, but in this case you have to explain to the community why did you collect donations, and claimed two devs are working full time, because we don't see the results of this work? Please refer to the code they implemented?

Glad you exumed a BTC account that wasn't active since December. And joined discord asking what's happening and then an hour later write an informed post here. You now only miss a brand new Bryce account and we can start the party.

It's so obvious that this is a coordinated FUD-Campaign by some silly kids, my 98 old grandmother would twig it.
But thanks anyway, I bought much more XSPEC.

Special thanks to @mandica for everything.

Your scam evidences is very weak. It looks like a dirty fight with competitors. It seems to me that Xspec is one of the most powerful projects in 2018. But ofc I could be wrong.

I am not a developer but consider this: this is open source. If the devs really work on particularly valuable features it would make sense for them, to NOT put it on github unless finished.

When it is on Github, even in unfinished/early version, every other competitor could steal it and complete it themselves. If I was workign on a project like that, I would keep everything local until completely finished, e.g. delay uploading into Github until the last possible moment.

This still not explains why so little code work was published until now (according to OP), though.

I am not concerned about the SC copy, but the relatively modest changes are. I wish you would address all the points OP makes, not just the SC fork (e.g. ring size, starting but not using obfs4.exe and so on).


That is extremely bullish if true.

Just to clear up a few things. (I'm @mandica, the founder of XSPEC and still here for anyone new to this)

All the discussions about code snippets and code cloning and implementation of protocols is a bit stagnate. This is the nature of open source development. There is no secret (and never was) that XSPEC was build on SDC. XSPEC never claimed to be proprietary code and is based on Bitcoin in the end as many others are. This point has been laboured ad nauseam and if your objection to a crypto is based on it's Bitcoin / SDC / Monero code provenance then you will seek out other projects. The fact that XSPEC is open source and based on other open source code is not a basis on which to claim a scam if you are a thinking person.

@jbg and Bryce are working on the code and as you all know, not every update is shown on GitHub immediately. GitHub is a not a live window to follow updates. Nobody as forced anyone out and in fact Spectre has very dedicated community and in fact, I would suggest that a dedicated community is what will succeed in driving this forward. XSPEC now also have steady development funding and will hire. The community will make sure that XSPEC will last for years to come and with a solid dev fund we will have the resources to develop the project. The team is together and strong and nobody has left for anything else. I am working on something auxiliary that will benefit XSPEC in the long run but can't say anything right now.

XSPEC is not a scam, we are just trying to provide a quality functional privacy focused cryptocurrency against a tide of FUD and shit and we will succeed. I have nothing more to say and there is nothing to discuss. Adversity brings out the best in us. Discard XSPEC at your peril.

Why do they ask for money feom spectre.ai investor? If its true no matter what the reason and i am sure that they are scam.
So people who read this hope you can find out by yourself the real news and take action as you need based on your research. This specially for xpec investor.

I am so glad that some idiot bought all my XSPEC last month for 0,00040 BTC at livecoin.

Like I've said to others, this is the smallest nitpicking that could be done on my post.
The whole idea of this thread is to show over 1 year near no work has been done, also the lies about the developer are more important things to take in.

I knew when I wrote about the forking side people would focus on this and not the actual fact findings in my posts.. I almost left it out, but it was needed to explain the code changes.

I understand the idea of forking a coin well, been successful projects from forks but this is not one.

If my memory serve me right, Spectre project was a fork of Shadow cash, I don't think the team denied this and there is no wrong having a fork of another project, but what gives me concern is the noise around the project this year because I know Shadow cash project has been allowed to die and the team has moved on to particle project, there must be a reason for this

How do you guys excpect something BIG from a project what has 1 anonymous developer , no white paper,no progress,no community(only some fanboyz), no marketing,no direction, don't keep promises and have no funds to move forward ?  

How do you think this project ever get some REAL and big partneships to grow somewhere with these features?

Spectrecoin is a scam joke, we are not in 2016 or 2017 where all the projects with ''good tech'' just grow to 1 billion market cap like 2 years ago,theres a HUGE COMPETITION and spectre doesn't have anything else but promises and hope,it's invisible

Go and check some other competitors/ projects community's and you'll see how fast things are moving  ,trustful teams who's not anonymous and you can talk with them like with your friends,, always get answer very fast from team etc. If you go to spectre discord there's like a rainyday everyday.

I think XSPEC will fail very soon if these things are not changing now, if someone says only tech matters , then it shouldn't be there where it is at the moment.

Perhaps you can't read, I didn't question your time on the forum, just the nature of your posts, I didn't defend a member, I actually stated I'm not sure how he could know such details about the dev announcing he's leaving, I did back up his comment on version 1.4 though.

What's funny is we constantly see 1 day old accounts being made to shill XSPEC, now you're trying to bring down this thread from 1 single person doing the opposite of shilling from a new account? pretty funny isn't it.

And if you are trying to state for 1 second that this person is me, why would it be when on my real account I've got more credibility and have provided much better evidence? Not very logical..

It's fine if you only want to address areas of knowledge, but what you're doing above is taking a post from 1 new member and trying to discredit my findings with this, so expect me to defend myself in this case.

I totally don't care what you think about my account. I've been a member since 2014, but my name was Doge related so I dropped it. Who cares? I'm not trying to score points to get Deep Onion airdrops and shill points for bounties so I don't care how old my current "name" is or if I have Bitcointalk Emperor Wizard Cowboy status or whatever. I don't hang out here that much anymore, as you pointed out.  And absolutely YES, the new member thing for just today for just one post is suspicious as hell, of course. I mean, of course, my man.

Please re-read my previous posts where I clearly state I will address only what I know, which I clearly state is not your code assessment, but there are other, glaring untruths happening in this thread that should be addressed. If you can't back up claims other than yours, simply do not defend them. Then you won't look like you are trying to be deceitful.

As far as the code, I have seen the Slack and Discord channels busy for a year with discussions including the dev about all kinds of aspects of the code I have no understanding of, so I'm hoping someone from those discussions will shed some light on it from another perspective.

 

So a new member can discredit my post now can they? I'm not sure how he would know about the developer leaving, but his first comment is right, Code 1.4 doesn't exist.

Now lets take a look at your CommunityWhale, 38 posts, 37 relating to XSPEC, you have a couple relating to Spectre.ai but that is more complaining about their choice of name, so I'll consider these XSPEC posts too, you are 100% an XSPEC shill.

This is no FUD campaign, if you want to know why I did this, you guys pushed the shilling too far causing me to look in to things, now that I have the answers, I'm doing what most other people would, share it with the community!

Sorry if that's too hard for you to understand.

New member. Literally joined today. Posted this single message, which is complete made up bullshit. Please no more pretending there isn't a calculated FUD campaign in play.

When I said people will try and pick at the most tiny detail in my post I wasn't wrong, the main argument now is "We knew it was a Shadow Cash fork!" changes nothing at all, this is your desperate attempt to save a coin, regardless of knowing if it was Shadow Cash, it changes absolutely nothing to the whole main point of my findings, it's had pretty well no work at all done on it and it's full of BS.

To people saying that they've done their research there for it's good, share your research with us or why bother?

And this..


Finally managed to get some one related in to this thread and look at his response, for starters the spectre.ai comment DID NOT come from me, it was the first reply to this thread, I quoted him saying I'll look in to it, view page 1 yourself to see this.

This should prove my point more, look at the fuel they're using to try defend these findings, it's terrible really.. sums the whole thing up nicely.


Thanks for sharing your findings? But perhaps you should just take an open mind, read the thread again, confirmation bias is not a good thing to have in the trading world.


This is pure optimism with no basis other than reading lies, you shouldn't trade this way, here's a more simple example to remove the whole magical fairy dust around crypto market beliefs:

1 year ago, I bought an old car, with this car I promoted a technology that would allow it to fly, I'm now marketing that the technology is just around the corner yet all I've done in the past year is paint the car yellow.

Would you believe me?