Topic: SolidCoin 2 - GPU mining and the future (Read 4552 times)

From the at least one perspective, mybitcoin.com was a stunning success. 

Coinhunter - Can you answer these questions please?

Is what DeathAndTaxes true?

Does 5 to 10% go to your personal wallet or a wallet you have control of when it comes to spending those coin?

What is the total collected thus far for the CPF?

I only ask because I want to know if DeathAndTaxes is being critical for good reason or if he's waging war for another blockchain.

Ahh yes, CH in all his lieing glory:





How do you explain this, CH?

From the SolidCoin Talk thread:

So when the CPU mining figures were obviously fishy, there turned out to be a bug making them appear too high, and now that it looks like they're going to be beaten by GPUs on a supposedly CPU-mining-only chain it turns out that they're instead too low and the original figures are supposedly closer to accurate. Right.

Remind we why we should believe any claims made about this closed-source client again?

Yeah, one allegedly unemployed guy working 12+hr days w/o oversight on a project which siphons coins every block into his wallet. Exchanges are dropping it before it's launched. All the 'supporters' seem to have been paid 1m+ coins. The coin operates under the premise that '$$$ = Trust'. No source code.

That word 'success', I do not think it means what you think it means.

Or looked at from another angle, four lines that sum up why SolidCoin is successful?

Ah the golden rule of programming - all code has bugs.
Yeah most people realise this ... though those who don't always fall hard.

That actually is most likely the reason why we will never see SC2.0 source since a gui programmer can have great difficulty with non-simple code and messing with the bitcoin code can be difficult for some - leaving a mess behind that is best hidden from the world rather than displaying their total lack of skill (like what happened when he screwed up and 'created' SC1.0)

Fine. English is not my first language. Are you really going to attack my English?


Well, I don't believe Bitcoin will collapse. And Litecoin will do well alongside Bitcoin. SolidCoin being equally GPU-friendly doesn't really make it a better algorithm in my opinion.


But you are just exchanging Bitcoin threats for new threats. I don't see how that's better. I guess time will tell.


Hmm, let's see. $150+/hr means you earn >$312,000 a year. Damn, where can I find a job that pays me that much?! And please stop spreading FUD again when you don't know any better. I work for one of top 5 biggest tech companies as a software engineer for 10+ years making $180k a year. I don't know anyone that would call me a "non developer" or someone "without skills and experience." I'm also working on this for free, but you know you, on the other hand, are not working on this for free. If SolidCoin becomes big, you will make a lot of money since you pretty much have absolute control of SolidCoin. Even if you don't directly pilfer from the CPF, you can still make a lot of money taking advantage of your position.

You may be "an advanced and experience programmer", but you really fail big time at PR. Like I've said before, your arrogant attitude is going to be the downfall of your project.
One of the feature of Litecoin is that it has a lead developer that:
- is not arrogant and works with and listens to advice from the community.
- does not ban people on IRC/forum when they disagree with me. (don't believe me? come and chat at #litecoin. that's the only place we can chat since i'm banned on #solidcoin for asking too many hard questions about SC1.0)
- believes in open source where others can help me spot bugs since no one (including an advanced and experience programmer like yourself) writes bug-free code.

I believe there's something you can learn there.

Are all those user numbers for the coins accurate though?   Aren't 90% of those people BitcoinExpress 

Four lines that sum up your pathetic, arrogant attitude which is why you are failing.

I haven't inferred coblee, that would be 'implied', only others can infer from my written words.

The algorithm is better because it brings equality to both CPU and GPU. Both are equally (close enough) efficient to mine SolidCoins, in essence we can take both GPU and CPU and neither loses the efficiency battle. If Bitcoin does collapse like many have predicted then some other p2p coin needs to take on the existing hardware infrastructure combined with making the "average joe" able to mine. That is where SolidCoin fits into the puzzle, offering the solution to all the existing mining problems and security issues of bitcoin.

It's fine that you believe in bitcoin technology, but I'm not really sure of the point of litecoin then, it's just an experiment to help Bitcoin? Doesn't really seem like something which will stick around a long time if that's the case. As an advanced and experienced programmmer I've looked at bitcoin technology and realized it needed a significant change if big business and average joe is to adopt a currency of this type. I raised these questions with some bitcoin developers initially prior to starting SolidCoin. Of course on a Bitcoin forum the people here will believe Bitcoin is good enough, so there isn't much I can say to those people who have that faith. It's my opinion it isn't good enough, with SolidCoin now secure from the threats that Bitcoin isn't we can go to businesses and finally sell them a solution they may now consider taking.

Any altchain that is tied to the Bitcoin technology is in essence saying "Bitcoin is the real thing, don't take any notice of me". I'm not really sure why we need Litecoin when Bitcoin already offers what it has for the most part. You can say you're offering CPU mining or faster transactions, which is fine, but when you're just as vulnerable to the same threats I can't really see the difference.

I also don't really understand why these new chains are starting up with non developers leading them. One of the biggest reasons SolidCoin has achieved the success it has is because I'm working for free on it when normally I would be paid $150+/hour. People with my experience rarely work for free on projects, I'm doing it simply because I want a solution to this global banking bullshit we've all had to put up with for the last 100 years. I like the enthusiasm people like yourself put into projects but without the skills and experience I can't really see them going anywhere.

CoinHunter, in your posts, you've inferred implied that SolidCoin's hashing algorithm is better than Scrypt and that's why coins based on Scrypt will likely die off. Can you tell me in what ways your algorithm is better?

EDITED: because CoinHunter felt like he needed to attack my English.

Yeah, it's only been a week. Obviously, Litecoin doesn't have many services yet. So there's less reason for people to keep the client running. I'm sure that number will grow. So right now, it doesn't concern me because the overall network hashrate has kept on growing steadily as you can see from this graph: http://litecoin.kicks-ass.org/graphs/graphs.html
When we launched, it quickly reach 2.5 Mhash/s and last I checked, it was at 6.8 Mhash/s. There's obviously a lot of room to grow, but it seems very healthy to me.

There's a good reason why Litecoin was released with just a few changes from Bitcoin. Unlike you, I actually believe in technology and economics behind Bitcoin. So I didn't want to change it too much and introduce issues like what Solidcoin 1.0 ran into. And I kept the Scrypt hashing algorithm because I didn't see a need to change it for the sake of changing it. Plus, being miner compatible with Tenebrix is a good thing for early adoption. If in the future there's a need to move away from Scrypt, I will consider it.

So, yet another closed-source curiosity.... hm....

The same place you can see the source for solidcoin itself ?

Where could one see the sources of the GPU miner ?

Yeah I'm aware you obviously have pools and people just running mining clients, however only having 170 users running your client software would be a concern for me if I was overseeing your project. People still need to run the client to send funds and do other tasks like that right?

Tenebrix had 280 before LTC came along and killed it, and you haven't reached those heights yet. But anyways, I'm not sure why you released a coin with so few changes over TBX especially when you've had time to do things. You are a programmer right?

Well, you did mention them.  And that must explain why I haven't been able to mine any Litecoin today.

Yeah, a lot of Litecoin miners started using pools almost right away. Litecoin already has 6 pools when it's only been around for a week. That's probably why you don't see an increase in the number of nodes. Unlike SolidCoin, people don't need to run the client to mine litecoins. (Let me know if I'm mistaken about that) And with 6 pools (looks like more than SolidCoin) supporting Litecoin in the first week, I'd say it's alive and kicking.


CoinHunter, no you did not upset me with your opinion. I just hope that in the future if you are going to make a bold claim like "Litecoin is dying", please support with some facts.

To be honest, I'm not as against SolidCoin as a lot of people here. You've put in a lot of work into SolidCoin. I might not agree with your decision to keep things closed source, to have the CPF, and to have trusted arbiter nodes to solve the 51% problem, but I give you credit for trying something different. If anything comes out of all these alt currencies, it's that we are trying stuff that Bitcoin cannot to see if there are ways to improve on Bitcoin. And I really can't be sure that a centralized closed source solution will absolutely not work. I mean, just look at Microsoft. Their closed source crappy OS owns >90% of the market. So who knows. Like you said, time will tell.

Lol, you idiot. Ever hear of pools?