Topic: Why Poloniex Has Rejected SuperCoin - page 29. (Read 43236 times)
to list super coin or delist sc and cinni ,that is the question ? crypto Hamlet
In any event, the code/daemon was not ready for the exchange.
Fix the code, submit it again, then it may make it. Obviously, it didn't have any actual support if it dumped. Obviously, that supporting price was a false illusion. Does that when people buy and sell their own coins to make it look like volume is high. Sell the same coin 100 times, it looks like 100 units of volume. Reality was, it was 1 unit of volume, which cost a small fraction in trade-fees, to make it look 100x bigger than it actually was.
Seems we need to have a "Formula", which is locked within the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED, so it can't be altered and can easily be identified. Even if only a representation, like hard-coding the MAX-BLOCK-COINS and MAX-STAKE-COINS, or other limits. (Even if unlimited. For those coins without limits.)
Then it will not matter what code is used, as long as it fits within the hard-coded limits, which have to check against the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED. (That only requires "digging for a genesis block seed", with a corresponding value.)
However, the old trick of just generating a "valid" seed, would no-longer be acceptable, since it has to be valid, and with a specific corresponding output comparison.
In any event, that code is essentially useless, if it is beyond the range of possible coins. Like 0.00000000 isn't even possible anyways. While checking to see if it is below 150,000,000 when the max total will only be 50,000,000 is equally as redundantly stupid. The only reason for it, would be so someone can do a massive double-spend attack, or other block-altering, which will not harm the network as a whole, just those who are on the same altered chain as them. Which, the program we ALL USE would say... Sure, a spend of 100,000,000 is OK, it's under 150,000,000.
However, I would review some of the other coins now, for that same issue. Time for someone to update their instant-auto-coin-maker programs.
P.S. The price of SUPER was falling before they said anything. You are getting mad because the crash just happened to continue, after the news. (News which few people read. Not that moving a coin to another exchange actually adds value, it decreases it anyways. You expose it to more people who want to dump.) Don't get your causality construed.
Fix the code, submit it again, then it may make it. Obviously, it didn't have any actual support if it dumped. Obviously, that supporting price was a false illusion. Does that when people buy and sell their own coins to make it look like volume is high. Sell the same coin 100 times, it looks like 100 units of volume. Reality was, it was 1 unit of volume, which cost a small fraction in trade-fees, to make it look 100x bigger than it actually was.
Seems we need to have a "Formula", which is locked within the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED, so it can't be altered and can easily be identified. Even if only a representation, like hard-coding the MAX-BLOCK-COINS and MAX-STAKE-COINS, or other limits. (Even if unlimited. For those coins without limits.)
Then it will not matter what code is used, as long as it fits within the hard-coded limits, which have to check against the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED. (That only requires "digging for a genesis block seed", with a corresponding value.)
However, the old trick of just generating a "valid" seed, would no-longer be acceptable, since it has to be valid, and with a specific corresponding output comparison.
In any event, that code is essentially useless, if it is beyond the range of possible coins. Like 0.00000000 isn't even possible anyways. While checking to see if it is below 150,000,000 when the max total will only be 50,000,000 is equally as redundantly stupid. The only reason for it, would be so someone can do a massive double-spend attack, or other block-altering, which will not harm the network as a whole, just those who are on the same altered chain as them. Which, the program we ALL USE would say... Sure, a spend of 100,000,000 is OK, it's under 150,000,000.
However, I would review some of the other coins now, for that same issue. Time for someone to update their instant-auto-coin-maker programs.
P.S. The price of SUPER was falling before they said anything. You are getting mad because the crash just happened to continue, after the news. (News which few people read. Not that moving a coin to another exchange actually adds value, it decreases it anyways. You expose it to more people who want to dump.) Don't get your causality construed.
Not it wasn't. Dev released the testnet anon wallet few hours ago and it was clearly on ts way up as it rose nearly 50% before this thread.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7311847
I do agree that it's good that busoni is checking the code thoroughly. That's is actually reassuring.
But he shouldn't publicly call out a coin as a scam when it's currently harmless and without speaking to the dev first.
His initial reasoning was also debunked as 150 million was valid before the recent hard fork. So it wasn't new.
I agree. The price fell because Polo admins falsely claimed Supercoin is a scam crashing the price to 800. Super traded inbetween 4000-7000 because of the new coins being introduced into the market. Admins should PM dev's privately before making public accusations in how to move forward and if they didn't comply they should go public. Now you have the community attacking and defending super because of his lack of competence. Busoni should step down from his role and have someone with a better PR take over.
no.
the coin dev can post correct info about the coin in the ANN topic.. don't blame Busoni for this he didn't write it..
he was doing his job by reading what the ANN page said and looking in the source code.. NO amount of talking to the dev could substitute this action.
how is this hard to understand for so many of you out there ?
Spoetnik
Trust: 0: -0 / +1(1)
Unignore
Today at 10:50:48 PM
Show/Hide
This user is currently ignored.
Is this guy trolling again?
Trust: 0: -0 / +1(1)
Unignore
Today at 10:50:48 PM
Show/Hide
This user is currently ignored.
Is this guy trolling again?
sorry to keep hitting this topic so fast guys but Zack wow man good to see you it's been a while 
I was wondering what happened to you lately eh
and i guess we can carry on with the damage control now right guys ? lol
..caught red handed.. ohhh ohhhh we meant to do that ..on purpose hhahaa suuuuuuuure
I was wondering what happened to you lately eh
and i guess we can carry on with the damage control now right guys ? lol
..caught red handed.. ohhh ohhhh we meant to do that ..on purpose hhahaa suuuuuuuure
In any event, the code/daemon was not ready for the exchange.
Fix the code, submit it again, then it may make it. Obviously, it didn't have any actual support if it dumped. Obviously, that supporting price was a false illusion. Does that when people buy and sell their own coins to make it look like volume is high. Sell the same coin 100 times, it looks like 100 units of volume. Reality was, it was 1 unit of volume, which cost a small fraction in trade-fees, to make it look 100x bigger than it actually was.
Seems we need to have a "Formula", which is locked within the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED, so it can't be altered and can easily be identified. Even if only a representation, like hard-coding the MAX-BLOCK-COINS and MAX-STAKE-COINS, or other limits. (Even if unlimited. For those coins without limits.)
Then it will not matter what code is used, as long as it fits within the hard-coded limits, which have to check against the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED. (That only requires "digging for a genesis block seed", with a corresponding value.)
However, the old trick of just generating a "valid" seed, would no-longer be acceptable, since it has to be valid, and with a specific corresponding output comparison.
In any event, that code is essentially useless, if it is beyond the range of possible coins. Like 0.00000000 isn't even possible anyways. While checking to see if it is below 150,000,000 when the max total will only be 50,000,000 is equally as redundantly stupid. The only reason for it, would be so someone can do a massive double-spend attack, or other block-altering, which will not harm the network as a whole, just those who are on the same altered chain as them. Which, the program we ALL USE would say... Sure, a spend of 100,000,000 is OK, it's under 150,000,000.
However, I would review some of the other coins now, for that same issue. Time for someone to update their instant-auto-coin-maker programs.
P.S. The price of SUPER was falling before they said anything. You are getting mad because the crash just happened to continue, after the news. (News which few people read. Not that moving a coin to another exchange actually adds value, it decreases it anyways. You expose it to more people who want to dump.) Don't get your causality construed.
Fix the code, submit it again, then it may make it. Obviously, it didn't have any actual support if it dumped. Obviously, that supporting price was a false illusion. Does that when people buy and sell their own coins to make it look like volume is high. Sell the same coin 100 times, it looks like 100 units of volume. Reality was, it was 1 unit of volume, which cost a small fraction in trade-fees, to make it look 100x bigger than it actually was.
Seems we need to have a "Formula", which is locked within the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED, so it can't be altered and can easily be identified. Even if only a representation, like hard-coding the MAX-BLOCK-COINS and MAX-STAKE-COINS, or other limits. (Even if unlimited. For those coins without limits.)
Then it will not matter what code is used, as long as it fits within the hard-coded limits, which have to check against the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED. (That only requires "digging for a genesis block seed", with a corresponding value.)
However, the old trick of just generating a "valid" seed, would no-longer be acceptable, since it has to be valid, and with a specific corresponding output comparison.
In any event, that code is essentially useless, if it is beyond the range of possible coins. Like 0.00000000 isn't even possible anyways. While checking to see if it is below 150,000,000 when the max total will only be 50,000,000 is equally as redundantly stupid. The only reason for it, would be so someone can do a massive double-spend attack, or other block-altering, which will not harm the network as a whole, just those who are on the same altered chain as them. Which, the program we ALL USE would say... Sure, a spend of 100,000,000 is OK, it's under 150,000,000.
However, I would review some of the other coins now, for that same issue. Time for someone to update their instant-auto-coin-maker programs.
P.S. The price of SUPER was falling before they said anything. You are getting mad because the crash just happened to continue, after the news. (News which few people read. Not that moving a coin to another exchange actually adds value, it decreases it anyways. You expose it to more people who want to dump.) Don't get your causality construed.
Not it wasn't. Dev released the testnet anon wallet few hours ago and it was clearly on ts way up as it rose nearly 50% before this thread.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7311847
I do agree that it's good that busoni is checking the code thoroughly. That's is actually reassuring.
But he shouldn't publicly call out a coin as a scam when it's currently harmless and without speaking to the dev first.
His initial reasoning was also debunked as 150 million was valid before the recent hard fork. So it wasn't new.
I agree. The price fell because Polo admins falsely claimed Supercoin is a scam crashing the price to 800. Super traded inbetween 4000-7000 because of the new coins being introduced into the market. Admins should PM dev's privately before making public accusations in how to move forward and if they didn't comply they should go public. Now you have the community attacking and defending super because of his lack of competence. Busoni should step down from his role and have someone with a better PR take over.
Polo tech staff made dumping...
They manipulated price of super...
They manipulated price of super...
You know Spoetnik, every time I read one of your posts I wonder if you are compensating for something you dare not admit to yourself in your private life.......
I tried.. i really tried to understand your gibberish but sorry i don't get it lol
was that some kind of insult ?
you have a vendetta against me or something ? or are you just mad and trying to attack me because i agreed with the OP ?
Am i not allowed ? Who is ? show me the list of forum user names allowed to agree with Busoni please.
oh and by the way, if you have any questions for me about my personal life then go for it.. i have always been far more transparent than most guys
what is you want to know ?
although in this specific context i will have to request people keep their personal inquiries about my private life to Crypto-Related questions.
simply because i think it's obvious i would be opening the door to a lot of trolling.
I may be willing to divulge more detailed personal info if some of you want to start creating topics about Spoetnik's private life.
I'd feel more comfortable releasing my private information on other topics than i do on this one considering i seem to be a target here with attacks for defending Poloniex staff.
I love all my fans and i appreciate your all clamoring for more info about me and my fantastic private life.
Sorry but being a legend in Crypto is time consuming and i have a lot of elite superior work to do in the scene daily so i am a busy Spoetnik
I always knew i was a white hot comet of awesome but wow looks like i might seriously have to start charging people for autographs.
i think my fans would like more than just personal info but some memento's of their time here with the living Legend Spoetnik.
Been thinking of setting up a clinic too.. a Pro Spoetnik Traders Clinic.. where i can school all the noobs on how it's done right.
HEY, pimpin' ain't easy but i make it look that way
Poloniex = Spoetnik Approved™
So you agree with me?
meme.jpeg status = uploading
You know Spoetnik, every time I read one of your posts I wonder if you are compensating for something you dare not admit to yourself in your private life.......
I tried.. i really tried to understand your gibberish but sorry i don't get it lol
was that some kind of insult ?
you have a vendetta against me or something ? or are you just mad and trying to attack me because i agreed with the OP ?
Am i not allowed ? Who is ? show me the list of forum user names allowed to agree with Busoni please.
oh and by the way, if you have any questions for me about my personal life then go for it.. i have always been far more transparent than most guys
what is it you want to know ?
although in this specific context i will have to request people keep their personal inquiries about my private life to Crypto-Related questions.
simply because i think it's obvious i would be opening the door to a lot of trolling.
I may be willing to divulge more detailed personal info if some of you want to start creating topics about Spoetnik's private life.
I'd feel more comfortable releasing my private information on other topics than i do on this one considering i seem to be a target here with attacks for defending Poloniex staff.
I love all my fans and i appreciate your all clamoring for more info about me and my fantastic private life.
Sorry but being a legend in Crypto is time consuming and i have a lot of elite superior work to do in the scene daily so i am a busy Spoetnik
I always knew i was a white hot comet of awesome but wow looks like i might seriously have to start charging people for autographs.
i think my fans would like more than just personal info but some memento's of their time here with the living Legend Spoetnik.
Been thinking of setting up a clinic too.. a Pro Spoetnik Traders Clinic.. where i can school all the noobs on how it's done right.
HEY, pimpin' ain't easy but i make it look that way
Poloniex = Spoetnik Approved™
another good post as always
Let's take a look at some other popular coins on Poloniex:
Silkcoin
Maximum POW supply: ~45 million
Great, let's check the code:
Uh oh, 2 billion is a lot more than 45 million! Better de-list SC right away!
Cinni
Total Coins: 15,000,000
Hmm...
I'm not very good at math but I think 100 million may be slightly more than 15 million.
Strange that you never gave a shit about things like this before?
Silkcoin
Maximum POW supply: ~45 million
Great, let's check the code:
Code:
static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 2000000000 * COIN;
Uh oh, 2 billion is a lot more than 45 million! Better de-list SC right away!
Cinni
Total Coins: 15,000,000
Hmm...
Code:
static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 100000000 * COIN;
I'm not very good at math but I think 100 million may be slightly more than 15 million.
Strange that you never gave a shit about things like this before?
Arent Cinni and Silkcoin supposed to be unlimited POS with 15 million and 45 million POW coins respectively ?
While SuperCoin 50million total POW-POS coins ?
Technically SUPER has unlimited PoS as well. From their ANN thread:
Variable PoS payout:
- 1st year: 100%
- 2nd year: 50%
- 3rd and subsequent years: 1%
So from the third year onward the stake reward will be 1% annually.
Edit: Just to be clear the MAX_MONEY variable is set higher than the total number of coins to account for what is technically "unlimited" inflation via Proof of Stake reward. In reality it would take many, many years for the total number of coins to reach that figure.
You know Spoetnik, every time I read one of your posts I wonder if you are compensating for something you dare not admit to yourself in your private life.......
I tried.. i really tried to understand your gibberish but sorry i don't get it lol
was that some kind of insult ?
you have a vendetta against me or something ? or are you just mad and trying to attack me because i agreed with the OP ?
Am i not allowed ? Who is ? show me the list of forum user names allowed to agree with Busoni please.
oh and by the way, if you have any questions for me about my personal life then go for it.. i have always been far more transparent than most guys
what is you want to know ?
although in this specific context i will have to request people keep their personal inquiries about my private life to Crypto-Related questions.
simply because i think it's obvious i would be opening the door to a lot of trolling.
I may be willing to divulge more detailed personal info if some of you want to start creating topics about Spoetnik's private life.
I'd feel more comfortable releasing my private information on other topics than i do on this one considering i seem to be a target here with attacks for defending Poloniex staff.
I love all my fans and i appreciate your all clamoring for more info about me and my fantastic private life.
Sorry but being a legend in Crypto is time consuming and i have a lot of elite superior work to do in the scene daily so i am a busy Spoetnik
I always knew i was a white hot comet of awesome but wow looks like i might seriously have to start charging people for autographs.
i think my fans would like more than just personal info but some memento's of their time here with the living Legend Spoetnik.
Been thinking of setting up a clinic too.. a Pro Spoetnik Traders Clinic.. where i can school all the noobs on how it's done right.
HEY, pimpin' ain't easy but i make it look that way
Poloniex = Spoetnik Approved Rant™
So you agree with me?
POLO is going to review CINNI and SC.
You know Spoetnik, every time I read one of your posts I wonder if you are compensating for something you dare not admit to yourself in your private life.......
I tried.. i really tried to understand your gibberish but sorry i don't get it lol
was that some kind of insult ?
you have a vendetta against me or something ? or are you just mad and trying to attack me because i agreed with the OP ?
Am i not allowed ? Who is ? show me the list of forum user names allowed to agree with Busoni please.
oh and by the way, if you have any questions for me about my personal life then go for it.. i have always been far more transparent than most guys
what is it you want to know ?
although in this specific context i will have to request people keep their personal inquiries about my private life to Crypto-Related questions.
simply because i think it's obvious i would be opening the door to a lot of trolling.
I may be willing to divulge more detailed personal info if some of you want to start creating topics about Spoetnik's private life.
I'd feel more comfortable releasing my private information on other topics than i do on this one considering i seem to be a target here with attacks for defending Poloniex staff.
I love all my fans and i appreciate your all clamoring for more info about me and my fantastic private life.
Sorry but being a legend in Crypto is time consuming and i have a lot of elite superior work to do in the scene daily so i am a busy Spoetnik
I always knew i was a white hot comet of awesome but wow looks like i might seriously have to start charging people for autographs.
i think my fans would like more than just personal info but some memento's of their time here with the living Legend Spoetnik.
Been thinking of setting up a clinic too.. a Pro Spoetnik Traders Clinic.. where i can school all the noobs on how it's done right.
HEY, pimpin' ain't easy but i make it look that way
Poloniex = Spoetnik Approved™
We have recently raised our reviewing standards to look for more than just trojans and security exploits. SC and CINNI were not subjected to that kind of scrutiny. We will investigate them, though. And if it turns out that they are like SuperCoin and deliberately inserted those values, then we might have a problem. I cannot comment on them at this point, since we have not looked over the code yet for things like this.
We are attempting to raise the bar on the quality of the coins we list. We are well aware that this stance will be met with some opposition, particularly when a popular coin is rejected, but we are willing to take the heat for that. The idle pursuit of volume was never the intention behind Poloniex.
We are attempting to raise the bar on the quality of the coins we list. We are well aware that this stance will be met with some opposition, particularly when a popular coin is rejected, but we are willing to take the heat for that. The idle pursuit of volume was never the intention behind Poloniex.
Why don't you create a new thread first saying you will de-list CINNI & SILKCOIN also before doing a full investigation like you did with supercoin?
I actually find it good to know that you guys check the code. That's great. But at least admit that maybe you jumped the gun a little for this one.
Let's take a look at some other popular coins on Poloniex:
Silkcoin
Maximum POW supply: ~45 million
Great, let's check the code:
Uh oh, 2 billion is a lot more than 45 million! Better de-list SC right away!
Cinni
Total Coins: 15,000,000
Hmm...
I'm not very good at math but I think 100 million may be slightly more than 15 million.
Strange that you never gave a shit about things like this before?
Silkcoin
Maximum POW supply: ~45 million
Great, let's check the code:
Code:
static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 2000000000 * COIN;
Uh oh, 2 billion is a lot more than 45 million! Better de-list SC right away!
Cinni
Total Coins: 15,000,000
Hmm...
Code:
static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 100000000 * COIN;
I'm not very good at math but I think 100 million may be slightly more than 15 million.
Strange that you never gave a shit about things like this before?
Arent Cinni and Silkcoin supposed to be unlimited POS with 15 million and 45 million POW coins respectively ?
While SuperCoin 50million total POW-POS coins ?
In any event, the code/daemon was not ready for the exchange.
Fix the code, submit it again, then it may make it. Obviously, it didn't have any actual support if it dumped. Obviously, that supporting price was a false illusion. Does that when people buy and sell their own coins to make it look like volume is high. Sell the same coin 100 times, it looks like 100 units of volume. Reality was, it was 1 unit of volume, which cost a small fraction in trade-fees, to make it look 100x bigger than it actually was.
Seems we need to have a "Formula", which is locked within the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED, so it can't be altered and can easily be identified. Even if only a representation, like hard-coding the MAX-BLOCK-COINS and MAX-STAKE-COINS, or other limits. (Even if unlimited. For those coins without limits.)
Then it will not matter what code is used, as long as it fits within the hard-coded limits, which have to check against the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED. (That only requires "digging for a genesis block seed", with a corresponding value.)
However, the old trick of just generating a "valid" seed, would no-longer be acceptable, since it has to be valid, and with a specific corresponding output comparison.
In any event, that code is essentially useless, if it is beyond the range of possible coins. Like 0.00000000 isn't even possible anyways. While checking to see if it is below 150,000,000 when the max total will only be 50,000,000 is equally as redundantly stupid. The only reason for it, would be so someone can do a massive double-spend attack, or other block-altering, which will not harm the network as a whole, just those who are on the same altered chain as them. Which, the program we ALL USE would say... Sure, a spend of 100,000,000 is OK, it's under 150,000,000.
However, I would review some of the other coins now, for that same issue. Time for someone to update their instant-auto-coin-maker programs.
P.S. The price of SUPER was falling before they said anything. You are getting mad because the crash just happened to continue, after the news. (News which few people read. Not that moving a coin to another exchange actually adds value, it decreases it anyways. You expose it to more people who want to dump.) Don't get your causality construed.
Fix the code, submit it again, then it may make it. Obviously, it didn't have any actual support if it dumped. Obviously, that supporting price was a false illusion. Does that when people buy and sell their own coins to make it look like volume is high. Sell the same coin 100 times, it looks like 100 units of volume. Reality was, it was 1 unit of volume, which cost a small fraction in trade-fees, to make it look 100x bigger than it actually was.
Seems we need to have a "Formula", which is locked within the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED, so it can't be altered and can easily be identified. Even if only a representation, like hard-coding the MAX-BLOCK-COINS and MAX-STAKE-COINS, or other limits. (Even if unlimited. For those coins without limits.)
Then it will not matter what code is used, as long as it fits within the hard-coded limits, which have to check against the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED. (That only requires "digging for a genesis block seed", with a corresponding value.)
However, the old trick of just generating a "valid" seed, would no-longer be acceptable, since it has to be valid, and with a specific corresponding output comparison.
In any event, that code is essentially useless, if it is beyond the range of possible coins. Like 0.00000000 isn't even possible anyways. While checking to see if it is below 150,000,000 when the max total will only be 50,000,000 is equally as redundantly stupid. The only reason for it, would be so someone can do a massive double-spend attack, or other block-altering, which will not harm the network as a whole, just those who are on the same altered chain as them. Which, the program we ALL USE would say... Sure, a spend of 100,000,000 is OK, it's under 150,000,000.
However, I would review some of the other coins now, for that same issue. Time for someone to update their instant-auto-coin-maker programs.
P.S. The price of SUPER was falling before they said anything. You are getting mad because the crash just happened to continue, after the news. (News which few people read. Not that moving a coin to another exchange actually adds value, it decreases it anyways. You expose it to more people who want to dump.) Don't get your causality construed.
Not it wasn't. Dev released the testnet anon wallet few hours ago and it was clearly on ts way up as it rose nearly 50% before this thread.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7311847
I do agree that it's good that busoni is checking the code thoroughly. That's is actually reassuring.
But he shouldn't publicly call out a coin as a scam when it's currently harmless and without speaking to the dev first.
His initial reasoning was also debunked as 150 million was valid before the recent hard fork. So it wasn't new.
+1
Poloniex has decided not to list SuperCoin because of some disturbing things we turned up in our code review. I would like to draw your attention to this part of the ANN post:
And these parts of the source code:
MAX_MONEY is pretty much what it sounds like. This means that the actual maximum supply of SuperCoin is 150 million, not 50 million. Furthermore, the maximum PoW coins is 50 million, rather than the claimed 18.2 million. The 150 million number appears twice in the code, so it can hardly be considered an accident.
We did not find evidence of an existing hidden premine, but extra coins could potentially be minted all at once at the end of the PoW phase, sent to exchanges via the "anon" feature, and dumped.
We have other concerns about the coin, particularly concerning the proposed method of anonymity, but the shenanigans with the maximum supply is sufficient for us to reject this coin.
Quote
- Total PoW coins will be 18.2 millions.
- Total coins (including PoS) will be about 50,000,000.
- Total coins (including PoS) will be about 50,000,000.
And these parts of the source code:
Code:
if (dAmount <= 0.0 || dAmount > 150000000.0)
Code:
static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 150000000 * COIN;
static const int64_t POW_MAX_MONEY = 50000000 * COIN;
static const int64_t POW_MAX_MONEY = 50000000 * COIN;
MAX_MONEY is pretty much what it sounds like. This means that the actual maximum supply of SuperCoin is 150 million, not 50 million. Furthermore, the maximum PoW coins is 50 million, rather than the claimed 18.2 million. The 150 million number appears twice in the code, so it can hardly be considered an accident.
We did not find evidence of an existing hidden premine, but extra coins could potentially be minted all at once at the end of the PoW phase, sent to exchanges via the "anon" feature, and dumped.
We have other concerns about the coin, particularly concerning the proposed method of anonymity, but the shenanigans with the maximum supply is sufficient for us to reject this coin.
Is this an amateur or a 10-years-old? The max coin limits the maximum coin, but does it mean the maximum coin will be generated?? Not at all. The generated coin depends on the formula in 3functions:
- GetProofOfWorkReward()
- GetProofOfStakeReward()
and
- GetProofOfWorkBonusRewardFactor()
These functions define how many coins will be generated. Moreover, even the system generates more coins than the MAX_MONEY defined above, there will be no problem at all, go look at the code. If Poloniex tech staff is that dumb, I feel very sorry for them, it is a joke!
Let's take a look at some other popular coins on Poloniex:
Silkcoin
Maximum POW supply: ~45 million
Great, let's check the code:
Uh oh, 2 billion is a lot more than 45 million! Better de-list SC right away!
Cinni
Total Coins: 15,000,000
Hmm...
I'm not very good at math but I think 100 million may be slightly more than 15 million.
Strange that you never gave a shit about things like this before?
Silkcoin
Maximum POW supply: ~45 million
Great, let's check the code:
Code:
static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 2000000000 * COIN;
Uh oh, 2 billion is a lot more than 45 million! Better de-list SC right away!
Cinni
Total Coins: 15,000,000
Hmm...
Code:
static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 100000000 * COIN;
I'm not very good at math but I think 100 million may be slightly more than 15 million.
Strange that you never gave a shit about things like this before?
We have recently raised our reviewing standards to look for more than just trojans and security exploits. SC and CINNI were not subjected to that kind of scrutiny. We will investigate them, though. And if it turns out that they are like SuperCoin and deliberately inserted those values, then we might have a problem. I cannot comment on them at this point, since we have not looked over the code yet for things like this.
We are attempting to raise the bar on the quality of the coins we list. We are well aware that this stance will be met with some opposition, particularly when a popular coin is rejected, but we are willing to take the heat for that. The idle pursuit of volume was never the intention behind Poloniex.
Time to delist 60% of your coins
Let's take a look at some other popular coins on Poloniex:
Silkcoin
Maximum POW supply: ~45 million
Great, let's check the code:
Uh oh, 2 billion is a lot more than 45 million! Better de-list SC right away!
Cinni
Total Coins: 15,000,000
Hmm...
I'm not very good at math but I think 100 million may be slightly more than 15 million.
Strange that you never gave a shit about things like this before?
Silkcoin
Maximum POW supply: ~45 million
Great, let's check the code:
Code:
static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 2000000000 * COIN;
Uh oh, 2 billion is a lot more than 45 million! Better de-list SC right away!
Cinni
Total Coins: 15,000,000
Hmm...
Code:
static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 100000000 * COIN;
I'm not very good at math but I think 100 million may be slightly more than 15 million.
Strange that you never gave a shit about things like this before?
We have recently raised our reviewing standards to look for more than just trojans and security exploits. SC and CINNI were not subjected to that kind of scrutiny. We will investigate them, though. And if it turns out that they are like SuperCoin and deliberately inserted those values, then we might have a problem. I cannot comment on them at this point, since we have not looked over the code yet for things like this.
We are attempting to raise the bar on the quality of the coins we list. We are well aware that this stance will be met with some opposition, particularly when a popular coin is rejected, but we are willing to take the heat for that. The idle pursuit of volume was never the intention behind Poloniex.
Stfu noob
In any event, the code/daemon was not ready for the exchange.
Fix the code, submit it again, then it may make it. Obviously, it didn't have any actual support if it dumped. Obviously, that supporting price was a false illusion. Does that when people buy and sell their own coins to make it look like volume is high. Sell the same coin 100 times, it looks like 100 units of volume. Reality was, it was 1 unit of volume, which cost a small fraction in trade-fees, to make it look 100x bigger than it actually was.
Seems we need to have a "Formula", which is locked within the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED, so it can't be altered and can easily be identified. Even if only a representation, like hard-coding the MAX-BLOCK-COINS and MAX-STAKE-COINS, or other limits. (Even if unlimited. For those coins without limits.)
Then it will not matter what code is used, as long as it fits within the hard-coded limits, which have to check against the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED. (That only requires "digging for a genesis block seed", with a corresponding value.)
However, the old trick of just generating a "valid" seed, would no-longer be acceptable, since it has to be valid, and with a specific corresponding output comparison.
In any event, that code is essentially useless, if it is beyond the range of possible coins. Like 0.00000000 isn't even possible anyways. While checking to see if it is below 150,000,000 when the max total will only be 50,000,000 is equally as redundantly stupid. The only reason for it, would be so someone can do a massive double-spend attack, or other block-altering, which will not harm the network as a whole, just those who are on the same altered chain as them. Which, the program we ALL USE would say... Sure, a spend of 100,000,000 is OK, it's under 150,000,000.
However, I would review some of the other coins now, for that same issue. Time for someone to update their instant-auto-coin-maker programs.
P.S. The price of SUPER was falling before they said anything. You are getting mad because the crash just happened to continue, after the news. (News which few people read. Not that moving a coin to another exchange actually adds value, it decreases it anyways. You expose it to more people who want to dump.) Don't get your causality construed.
Fix the code, submit it again, then it may make it. Obviously, it didn't have any actual support if it dumped. Obviously, that supporting price was a false illusion. Does that when people buy and sell their own coins to make it look like volume is high. Sell the same coin 100 times, it looks like 100 units of volume. Reality was, it was 1 unit of volume, which cost a small fraction in trade-fees, to make it look 100x bigger than it actually was.
Seems we need to have a "Formula", which is locked within the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED, so it can't be altered and can easily be identified. Even if only a representation, like hard-coding the MAX-BLOCK-COINS and MAX-STAKE-COINS, or other limits. (Even if unlimited. For those coins without limits.)
Then it will not matter what code is used, as long as it fits within the hard-coded limits, which have to check against the GENESIS-BLOCK-SEED. (That only requires "digging for a genesis block seed", with a corresponding value.)
However, the old trick of just generating a "valid" seed, would no-longer be acceptable, since it has to be valid, and with a specific corresponding output comparison.
In any event, that code is essentially useless, if it is beyond the range of possible coins. Like 0.00000000 isn't even possible anyways. While checking to see if it is below 150,000,000 when the max total will only be 50,000,000 is equally as redundantly stupid. The only reason for it, would be so someone can do a massive double-spend attack, or other block-altering, which will not harm the network as a whole, just those who are on the same altered chain as them. Which, the program we ALL USE would say... Sure, a spend of 100,000,000 is OK, it's under 150,000,000.
However, I would review some of the other coins now, for that same issue. Time for someone to update their instant-auto-coin-maker programs.
P.S. The price of SUPER was falling before they said anything. You are getting mad because the crash just happened to continue, after the news. (News which few people read. Not that moving a coin to another exchange actually adds value, it decreases it anyways. You expose it to more people who want to dump.) Don't get your causality construed.
Not it wasn't. Dev released the testnet anon wallet few hours ago and it was clearly on ts way up as it rose nearly 50% before this thread.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7311847
I do agree that it's good that busoni is checking the code thoroughly. That's is actually reassuring.
But he shouldn't publicly call out a coin as a scam when it's currently harmless and without speaking to the dev first.
His initial reasoning was also debunked as 150 million was valid before the recent hard fork. So it wasn't new.
Jump to: