Topic: Why is Microcash a scam? (Read 6405 times)

Could be they compiled it without debug infos. 

Oh come on, think of all the politicians that no one votes for, the honest ones that no one can hear over the lying thieving scum

1% is optimistical, but in the end i still need someone to vote for.. though i dont know if 1% applies to Microcash or Solidcoin since its reigned by scammers..

I'm surprised that you were able to think of 1% who are not lying, thieving scum! Unless you include dead ones.

Fuck.. that applies to 99% of the world's politicians..

Oh and yes, that makes microcash a scam.

The most straightforward answer to this question is:

MicroCash is a scam because of the very people behind it. They are proven scammers, liars, sociopaths and delusional nutburgers. Any attempt to flog a new crypto-anything from these fools will be as tainted with scammishness as every other thing they have presented to the world.

Bitcoin is published under MIT-License
The important sentence is:

Nachtwind- you could add to your wonderful description "have your use of the misappropriated code blocked by the very entities whom you took it from after trying to apply your copyright to works already protected under license from the very people you took it from."

Grab the free available code, put it into a closed source projects and reject to give any credit to the original authors and in case you open source your program you remove all copyrights and references to the original owners. Thats stealing.

can someone explain to me how you can steal bitcoin's code?

Now come on! You aren´t going to suggest just because they have stolen something they might be untrustworthy, are you?

Wait... isn't it all brain trust guaranteed professional super-secret open source wonder-code just like ShortBusCoin? Why would they need to remove any references to bitcoin?

Oh, I get it, they stole that code too!

is that how it works? use someone else's name and then check if its protected?

wouldn't it be better to just have an original idea once in a while?

Really? A company that has been using that trade styling for 20 years and you want to split hairs about it? No, number 2 trumps ShortBusCoin and their Next Big Thing by a mile. The poker chip guy doesn't have it as a company name, he has it as a service mark, no different than what MicroCash the ShortBusCoin version intends, except he has them beat on first use, on trademark application, and on recognized service mark.

At the very least, and even if you are an RS cheerleader you have to admit that this was piss poor due diligence to pick a name and roll out the shill machine to promote it withour even looking at the first 5 lines of a google search!

The first one is not a business name.  The second one - how are you sure they have an international trademark?

Making accusations we can't back up makes us no better than him.

It's not a scam, its a very high risk investment that you can't get back

Sure: http://www.uniquepokerchips.net/Micro-Cash/ for the google-challenged, ranked as the seventh most popular hit.

Number one is the http://www.microcash.nl/ payment processing service based in the Netherlands, sorry I can't offer more details, Dutch is not one of the languages that I speak. But there is certainly some legal looking language concerning their business use of the name.

Naughty little ShortBus monkeys got caught stealing again!

Do you have a link?

Umm, how about the very name itself is stolen intellectual property? Yup, MicroCash is copyrighted and a registered trademark of another business.

This, of course, is par for the course for the same asswipes that stole the intellectual property to form their first group of poorly implemented clones, then tried to claim they owned the copyright, and then stole a 1992 graphical convention from AOL for all of the clients.

Just a few ideas on what is wrong with Microcash:

Immature untested code. BitCoin has been audited many times, Microcash is going from newly written to production.

Closed source. No-one can audit this or pay a security auditing company to do so.

Account tax. Robbing the poor to pay the rich. The fact that the taxes don't go to the nodes or the miners but to the wealthy shows this isn't meant to support the network but to make the rich richer.

The implications of tax means that people will be forced to use a single address instead of the very many addresses BitCoin gives people. This destroys anonymity.

As the tax system contains a fee per account there will be a strong incentive for end users to leave all coins in some kind of central repository. We saw how well that worked with moonco.in, bitcoinica, that polish exchange ( name? ), slush's pool, etc..

The long address scheme in BitCoin is by design. Although the address space looks crazy huge right now there is no reason to reduce it. No-one can know what the future will bring.

The 50%+1 protection system claims to be implemented by active nodes voting in a one coin one vote system. This implies that each node will regularly broadcast how many coins it holds, great for tracing wealth to IP addresses to plan robberies. As we have seen it's quite possible to trace BitCoin addresses to IP addresses unless special care is taken.

The 50%+1 protection scheme appears to be open to gaming. As wealth will be concentrated in few nodes and these nodes are findable it's possible to DDOS certain voting blocks in order to effectively control who does and doesn't get a vote at any given time.

Everything about the CPF is wrong. It's a personal wealth fund and has no need to exist.


I'm sure I missed some pretty big stuff but that's my contribution so far.