Topic: Should Monero run an ICO? - page 2. (Read 7680 times)

It's about the get allot worse for smooth.

Change "Monero" to "Bitcoin" and you'll instantly know how I feel about ButtCoiner types moaning about Core "stagnation."   

There is no difference and furthermore the official announcement posted prior to any tweets from him I can find, clearly stated there as an ommitted check error in the code (i.e. exploit) so you are still lying.

I'm still waiting for tweet timestamps proving his involvement (i.e. not after a public announcement) as he claimed and challenged us to debunk. Until he provides a link to such a tweet, he is debunked, but then let's face it, he was debunked as soon as it was discovered he ripped off the Bitcoin code and lied about writing it from scratch and claimed a lot of other delusional nonsense.

Seems like one of smooth's troll games got officially removed today:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/spamming-by-cross-posting-mods-1484321

LoL

Monero devs sold it as an attack at the time, John was the one pointing out it was an exploit. There's a difference.. anybody is free to look it up on Twitter themselves, so i really don't care for your troll games smooth

That tweet is the next day after the bug was already publicly known. I proves nothing about john-connor's claims.

I asked for a him to show a link to a tweet (not a screenshot) with a timestamp prior to the bug being publicly known, proving his knowledge as he claimed could be done via twitter, and got crickets. I'm still waiting.


Are you lying too or just incredibly retarded? Denial of service (DOS) is a type of attack that can, under the right circumstances, be performed using an exploit. They are two words for (or two aspects of) the exact same thing.

If the attack had progressed to the point where funds were lost, or information were improperly disclosed (not applicable in this case) then it could be called something other than a DoS. In reality the only impact of the attack was that some exchanges suspended service (i.e. denial of service) until it was patched. There was not even a persistent chain fork because hash rate accepting the invalid block was below 50%.

tldr: there was a bug that allowed someone to propagate an invalid block, indirectly denying service for a short time. The Monero team discovered the attack, diagnosed the cause (with no assistance from john-conner or anyone else outside the team, though genuine assistance is certainly always appreciated), and released a fix before any serious harm occurred, and john-connor tried to take credit for it with no verifiable evidence whatsoever.

I wouldn't. Threats are a cheap form of psychological warfare and Mr. Connor seemed quite in your face back then, but seems less than eager to do or prove anything today. Instead he hides behind a few shills (or possibly sock-puppet accounts) after running off. Either prove it or stfu.

I totally agree with an ICO, so they got money to buy the 12 exploits in darknet  

Well to put this argument into perspective, John-Connor was the first person on January 15th (check the twitter feed) to correctly point out that the flaw was in fact a zeroday exploit and not a DOS attack like the devs of monero were calling it on January 15th...  the fact that he outed himself out as the person who exploited the XMR code to force the event solidifies that he knows a lot about the cryptonote codebase.

whether or not he has 12 more that he can exploit as well is another question, but I would be careful how far you take this flame war.

Niggling over how to define an exploit after the exploit is known isn't discovering a bug no one knew about. So you can try again with one of the 12 Mr. Connor claims to have found all on his own--like a big boy.

LMAO... and the Monero gang was busted once again.

Never happened??



Who''s lying?

you mean like

12 + never happened, still equals 12.

But ATM he has a stage and an audience and a stated 1 of 12 exploits to pick from....any day now....

simple math here    13-1=12 

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14869453

You're as dumb as him if you don't get the situation.

--If he can't deliver at least one exploit, he looks like a liar.

--If he does deliver at least one exploit, he'll gain HUGE reputation and probably some market cap.

--So given that he has claimed 12, revealing at least one is the best option and an easy one to make at that--now, if he had only said one or two, then your argument makes more sense.

My guess is you and the rest of the V-cards will have to live with option A and try defend an unenviable position. As the saying goes, "It's better to have smart enemies than dumb friends."


My guess is he is praying someone who is smarter than him will give him an exploit so he can take credit for it--similar to what he did with his lack of attributions for Satoshi's code.

Ok can u plz link to escrow proof that the funds r secured?

~CfA~

I'm personally offering 500k XMR for all 12 of the exploits.

yes he didn`t .....and he shouldn`t ..at least not for free just my 2 Vcash...cheers

To keep you on your vcash sockpuppet words ...

Yours truly master john-connor DID NOT EVEN NAME ONE VULNERABILITY!!!