[XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos - page 547.

dadon

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1002

Pecvniate obedivnt omnia.

Quote from: btcsup on Today at 07:11:27 PM

XC facts
FACT 1 XC dev is proven to be lier!
FACT 2 XC dev cheated people on website about XC technology.
FACT 3 XC dev tried to fud with army of fudster on mammothcoin.
FACT 4 XC dev selling something else with different package.[/b]

Angry

Now they going too far..... Angry

dadon

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1002

Pecvniate obedivnt omnia.

Quote from: timerland on Today at 07:15:13 PM

Again, please don't waste time here. I can use a simple mixer and you don't be able to trace my transaction. But here we talk about multisig, and let me repeat this simple question for the last time:

provide us a multisig address that has tx associated with it, in the blockchain, so we can inspect and see what is there. This can prove you actually have the capability of multisig.

I have no idea what he is talking about i'm just having fun taken the piss, can anyone provide what he is asking for?

SushiChef

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

i'm going to take a bath! Take care Tongue

policymaker

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Crypto Currency Supporter

We need that de-FUD post/thread/topic whatever that will de-FUD shit like that, I think synechist was putting the info together? We need this thing in order not to waste any more time, when new FUD appears, we link to that topic where there are definite answers and be done with shitscams.

Dan protect your work and our nerves from these idiots plz :/

BrewCrewFan

hero member

Activity: 672

Merit: 501

Quote from: dadon on August 16, 2014, 02:57:27 PM

someone should post that on the thread now or Alt Secure should just go explain it to him if he has the time ofc i know your busy and this stuff is beneath you but someone needs to put these fools in there place.

It was and then got deleted. So that means they have no interests except fud. Case closed.

Edit, guess he kept one part of it. They still deny that it is really what it is.

biskyb33

full member

Activity: 121

Merit: 100

Quote from: atcsecure on August 16, 2014, 02:47:23 PM

Quote from: G-Bert on August 16, 2014, 02:10:11 PM

Quote from: some138 on August 16, 2014, 02:05:45 PM

lol, XC supporters, you try to use my example of XC multisig addresses to support your argument??

I created them to SHOW YOU what is a XC multisig address, since you never saw them before Grin

Now please show me in your **blockchain** a multisig address with transactions associated with it, so people can see how it worked. You don't create a multisig address for fun, you use it for some transactions.

Can someone with the technical knowledge answer this as soon as possible please.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741018.new#new

They are mixing apples and oranges, XC is trustless based on the signatures of all parties during the private transaction. Its not using MULTI_SIG N OF M Address's.

The transactions are SIGNED BY ALL PARTIES, if any of the outputs are missing, then it is not signed by all parties.

Here is an example of a private decentralized distributed multi-path transaction consisting of 4 parties. >>> http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?229236.htm

^^^this explanation and link should be posted on the website (if it isn't already) as we will most likely be referring people to it continuously.

The-C-Word

member

Activity: 100

Merit: 10

What added benefit do multisig addresses provide?

dadon

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1002

Pecvniate obedivnt omnia.

someone should post that on the thread now or Alt Secure should just go explain it to him if he has the time ofc i know your busy and this stuff is beneath you but someone needs to put these fools in there place.

G-Bert

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: atcsecure on August 16, 2014, 02:47:23 PM

Quote from: G-Bert on August 16, 2014, 02:10:11 PM

Quote from: some138 on August 16, 2014, 02:05:45 PM

lol, XC supporters, you try to use my example of XC multisig addresses to support your argument??

I created them to SHOW YOU what is a XC multisig address, since you never saw them before Grin

Now please show me in your **blockchain** a multisig address with transactions associated with it, so people can see how it worked. You don't create a multisig address for fun, you use it for some transactions.

Can someone with the technical knowledge answer this as soon as possible please.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741018.new#new

They are mixing apples and oranges, XC is trustless based on the signatures of all parties during the private transaction. Its not using MULTI_SIG N OF M Address's.

The transactions are SIGNED BY ALL PARTIES, if any of the outputs are missing, then it is not signed by all parties.

Here is an example of a private decentralized distributed multi-path transaction consisting of 4 parties. >>> http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?229236.htm

cheers Dan.

braxx

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

ATC... is my thought correct?

Quote from: braxx on August 16, 2014, 01:44:50 PM

I think they don't read the entire transaction detail...
a multisig is set up between Xnodes (just to verify Xnode ok) (I guess off-blockchain)... just like Xchat (how they find each other)
as you know... every wallet is an Xnode

does it say it does a multisig transaction?

I think they are mixing that up...

I don't see their problem

cyberhacker

legendary

Activity: 1330

Merit: 1000

Quote from: BrewCrewFan on August 16, 2014, 02:49:29 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on August 16, 2014, 02:47:23 PM

Quote from: G-Bert on August 16, 2014, 02:10:11 PM

Quote from: some138 on August 16, 2014, 02:05:45 PM

lol, XC supporters, you try to use my example of XC multisig addresses to support your argument??

I created them to SHOW YOU what is a XC multisig address, since you never saw them before Grin

Now please show me in your **blockchain** a multisig address with transactions associated with it, so people can see how it worked. You don't create a multisig address for fun, you use it for some transactions.

Can someone with the technical knowledge answer this as soon as possible please.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741018.new#new

They are mixing apples and oranges, XC is trustless based on the signatures of all parties during the private transaction. Its not using MULTI_SIG N OF M Address's.

The transactions are SIGNED BY ALL PARTIES, if any of the outputs are missing, then it is not signed by all parties.

Here is an example of a private decentralized distributed multi-path transaction consisting of 4 parties. >>> http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?229236.htm

So in other words it is indeed working as intended but the fools can not wrap their heads around understanding it, or just do not want to.

I am thinking. these dumbass do not understand and will bite again.

BrewCrewFan

hero member

Activity: 672

Merit: 501

Quote from: atcsecure on August 16, 2014, 02:47:23 PM

Quote from: G-Bert on August 16, 2014, 02:10:11 PM

Quote from: some138 on August 16, 2014, 02:05:45 PM

lol, XC supporters, you try to use my example of XC multisig addresses to support your argument??

I created them to SHOW YOU what is a XC multisig address, since you never saw them before Grin

Now please show me in your **blockchain** a multisig address with transactions associated with it, so people can see how it worked. You don't create a multisig address for fun, you use it for some transactions.

Can someone with the technical knowledge answer this as soon as possible please.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741018.new#new

They are mixing apples and oranges, XC is trustless based on the signatures of all parties during the private transaction. Its not using MULTI_SIG N OF M Address's.

The transactions are SIGNED BY ALL PARTIES, if any of the outputs are missing, then it is not signed by all parties.

Here is an example of a private decentralized distributed multi-path transaction consisting of 4 parties. >>> http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?229236.htm

So in other words it is indeed working as intended but the fools can not wrap their heads around understanding it, or just do not want to.

braxx

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

28 seconds it took to delete my post there lol

atcsecure

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

Quote from: G-Bert on August 16, 2014, 02:10:11 PM

Quote from: some138 on August 16, 2014, 02:05:45 PM

lol, XC supporters, you try to use my example of XC multisig addresses to support your argument??

I created them to SHOW YOU what is a XC multisig address, since you never saw them before Grin

Now please show me in your **blockchain** a multisig address with transactions associated with it, so people can see how it worked. You don't create a multisig address for fun, you use it for some transactions.

Can someone with the technical knowledge answer this as soon as possible please.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741018.new#new

They are mixing apples and oranges, XC is trustless based on the signatures of all parties during the private transaction. Its not using MULTI_SIG N OF M Address's.

The transactions are SIGNED BY ALL PARTIES, if any of the outputs are missing, then it is not signed by all parties.

Here is an example of a private decentralized distributed multi-path transaction consisting of 4 parties. >>> http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?229236.htm

BrewCrewFan

hero member

Activity: 672

Merit: 501

Quote from: SushiChef on August 16, 2014, 02:44:36 PM

he re-opened it and made a new one

Took no time either for him to delete your post.

I stand by my fist thought that it wont matter if it is proven because he will just delete whatever posts that would otherwise be posted there proving otherwise.

G-Bert

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: battbot on August 16, 2014, 02:41:41 PM

Quote from: braxx on August 16, 2014, 02:40:48 PM

Quote from: battbot on August 16, 2014, 02:39:13 PM

Quote from: SushiChef on August 16, 2014, 02:36:23 PM

HAHA they closed the thread

OMG

They opened a new, self-mod one: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/delete-742018

deleted ?

and original still open for me?

He forgot to make that one self-mod, lol. Here is the new, new thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/xc-uses-multisig-address-and-transaction-the-answer-is-no-look-at-facts-here-742025

Ok, to anyone who understands the tech and is saying "I could make a transaction myself and show you, but why dont you do it yourself." While a agree they should, can one of us just make a transaction to shut them up? Or tell me how to do it and ill do it myself. ta.

SushiChef

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100