BEX is by far the bigger c**t but he's got way more style than CH...
What style is that?
Comic Sans
Topic: Who is more arrogant? BitcoinEXpress or CoinHunter? (Read 5348 times)
What style is that?
Comic Sans
BEX is by far the bigger c**t but he's got way more style than CH...
What style is that?
BEX is by far the bigger c**t but he's got way more style than CH...
why isnt this guy hunted down and thrown in jail with all the other trash?
Well I suspect that as soon as someone loses a reasonable amount of money because of his actions - he will end up in such a predicament.But that's also assuming he can do what he touts himself able to do - which hasn't happened ... yet ...
Because "tunneling fists over TCP/IP" causes a crash ?
why isnt this guy hunted down and thrown in jail with all the other trash?
The guy initially thought that merged mining would occur at block 25,000. So much for his competence on being up and up on the current status of the namecoin network huh.
Come to think of it, we probably shouldn't have mentioned it.
I'd like to remind everyone that so far, bitcoin-police has not yet gained the ability to put people in jail
Lets wait 2 years, and I'll bet even now, on tor there are some goons you can hire to beat someone a little 
I have several Bitcoin exploit testnets
They're called NMC, SC, I0S, IXC and Now Geist Geld....
Why would I want to fool around with networks that has no risk and no real security?
Testing on a test net would be like a cosmetic developer testing on stuffed animals instead of the real thing!
Sometimes you have to sacrifice a few rabbits, monkeys and dogs to get the perfect product people will buy!
They're called NMC, SC, I0S, IXC and Now Geist Geld....
Why would I want to fool around with networks that has no risk and no real security?
Testing on a test net would be like a cosmetic developer testing on stuffed animals instead of the real thing!
Sometimes you have to sacrifice a few rabbits, monkeys and dogs to get the perfect product people will buy!
I take it you haven't checked the SA forums lately.
A lot of bickering going on in here.
More mining less complaining/bitching please.
More mining less complaining/bitching please.
for sure the bitcoin police dont have the power, but if this guy is in the us or pretty much any western nation, he can be prosecuted.
There is a reason for the testnets, he chooses to be a douche and really he should pray for prosecution, you start to screw with peoples money, well you could be looking for bigger problems than prosecution. But hey he aint bitcoinexpress aint scared. He doesnt care how many people he makes lose money.
There is a reason for the testnets, he chooses to be a douche and really he should pray for prosecution, you start to screw with peoples money, well you could be looking for bigger problems than prosecution. But hey he aint bitcoinexpress aint scared. He doesnt care how many people he makes lose money.
I'd like to remind everyone that so far, bitcoin-police has not yet gained the ability to put people in jail
LOL jail is the last thing I'd be worried about
I'd like to remind everyone that so far, bitcoin-police has not yet gained the ability to put people in jail
I dont know why you dont look to prosecute. There are rules to how you expose flaws. You dont steal from a bank just to say "hey their is a flaw here" or you will go to jail. These guys are trying to hang on the idea that this currency is virtual and therefore doesnt have real value, much like wow gold and wow items, but wow gold isnt used to buy real life items. wow gold isnt traded on an exchange. People like bitcoin express are prosecuted for this kind of shit every day and if yall let him play hacker with impunity, then btc deserves to die.
Hmm - well the flaw in bitcoin is obvious and the band-aid is well known also.
Simply: put hashes directly into the client thus you have a point that people using the client cannot go back before since the new chain will fail the hash tests.
Obviously anything after the last hard coded hash can be lost - but regular updates would help keep a lot of the chain safe.
Or you could break the unwritten law and centralise those hashes somewhere
Of course this can end up with two chains with the same root but of course everyone using the 'official' client will not take on the interloper unless they start after the last hard coded hash.
My only question about 51% is - only adding 51% of the current hash power?
I would have thought you would have had to have >50% of the total running hash power ... ... i.e. add >100% of current
Coz just adding 51% gives you ~33.8% of course
... ... and I guess I better not point out a post I made when IXCoin started ...
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.452501
meaning: go kill IXcoin - not namecoin
You are already restricting your test to something less than the real thing - make that restriction a bit more and see if you can really do it with IX
No need to kill a chain that actually does something (unlike IX, I0 or SC)
(Yes I also think the joined mining thing is a bad idea: if your hash-chain is failing - con people from the strongest one?
Seriously you don't think anyone will be unhappy about that?
Well I will say that solution deserves what hate it gets
... and I'm sure if IX, I0 or SC did it, way more people would be unhappy about it)
Simply: put hashes directly into the client thus you have a point that people using the client cannot go back before since the new chain will fail the hash tests.
Obviously anything after the last hard coded hash can be lost - but regular updates would help keep a lot of the chain safe.
Or you could break the unwritten law and centralise those hashes somewhere
Of course this can end up with two chains with the same root but of course everyone using the 'official' client will not take on the interloper unless they start after the last hard coded hash.
My only question about 51% is - only adding 51% of the current hash power?
I would have thought you would have had to have >50% of the total running hash power ... ... i.e. add >100% of current
Coz just adding 51% gives you ~33.8% of course
... ... and I guess I better not point out a post I made when IXCoin started ...
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.452501
meaning: go kill IXcoin - not namecoin
You are already restricting your test to something less than the real thing - make that restriction a bit more and see if you can really do it with IX
No need to kill a chain that actually does something (unlike IX, I0 or SC)
(Yes I also think the joined mining thing is a bad idea: if your hash-chain is failing - con people from the strongest one?
Seriously you don't think anyone will be unhappy about that?
Well I will say that solution deserves what hate it gets
... and I'm sure if IX, I0 or SC did it, way more people would be unhappy about it)
I think microsoft has a term for this. Its called stabbing the baby.
Most of the pledged pool will be from exactly that, from a pool operator with an axe to grind with Vinced, that has pledged to help.
You jest, vinced hardly ever talks to anyone and waits weeks before sending responses. It'd take years to build up enough of a conversation to get a decent grudge going."Nearly 1Th/s" you said this pool's capacity was? Only ArsBitcoin fits that description at currently 700 Gh/s. All other pools are either smaller or much larger. Unless it is a private pool...
Quote
Not me, but I do work for Apple in Cupertino LOL...
BitcoinX, I'm sure your employer would approve. First thing about public relations is not to represent the people you're not allowed to represent.
I like the term "poison namecoins"
Reminds me of those pesky poison critters from Half-Life games.
Reminds me of those pesky poison critters from Half-Life games.
Jump to: