Topic: XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation - page 18. (Read 20923 times)

Maybe it is designed to take out all the other CN clones except the market leader to clear out the system to two coins both controlled by "trusted leadership"?

Does sort of make one wonder if smooth was trying to prove that cryptocurrency is dead because it can be cloned and siphon value.

But it could also be that Monero may be planning to change its anonymity algorithm from CN to this new thing that mixes all the transactions in the block, so maybe AEON will retain the CN functionality and so he can invest on both technologies.

And then he needs to invest in mine too  

Hey what is the problem with competition?

I do think you have a point though that it is better to invest in a coin where the lead developer is totally committed. And that lead dev is committed to improving only his ecosystem to stay ahead of the competition. I find that to be a valid point. Who is that developer for Monero? fluffypony?

I think the main issue you had with him is whether he is excessively expending time repeating criticisms over and over in other coins' threads. Again that is a subjective criticism.

My suspicion is that AEON represents nice upside - it has only ~2% of Monero's market cap, but 99% of it's released features.  Using his reputation and position as a Monero core dev, quite easy for Smooth to start building up AEON, and with the lack of any real difference to the feature set from Monero, and with Moneo's own dev working 5x more on Aeon than Monero, AEON suddenly becomes an attractive buy and up goes the market cap....and Smooth was in, quietly (until I started pointing out), at the start.  Of course, just my opinion.

But I never said they are wrong. So why did you tell me to stop with "they are wrong"?

P.S. Masternodes have a complex description and I am not sure any of us entirely understand them. Last time I checked they were things you could buy. That changes the economics. They are not nodes paid with proof-of-work shares. I don't even have time to go analyze such an adhoc design (with copious tweaks to their meaning and functionality along the way I assume) and try to characterize what they really are formally.

In computer science we understand adhoc design = no design or flying blind.

I would REALLY ask myself, why two different coins?

Why wouldn't I just focus my efforts on one coin and make it the best out there?

blobafett2 claims (quite rightly) that masternodes are simply incentivized full nodes that provide extra functionality.  One of these functions is mixing.  Nowhere did he say that masternodes ARE autonomous anonymity.

Please identify the posts you claim to exist "every day" between August 2 and August 6, as well as between May (!) 19 and July 20.

None have been deleted by me, nor do I recall many if any relevant forum mod deletions.

These time periods are not intended to be a full accounting of counterexamples to your claim within the period of "many months."

I still do not know, lie or error.

Who is wrong?

Masternodes are not autonomous anonymity. I have no comment about other bells and whistles implemented with masternodes. Haven't studied those new features.

I stand by my comment that there is absolutely no details in the white paper for VanillaCoin. The claimed methodology is documented by research not to achieve Byzantine consensus.

I stand by my comments today about ShadowCoin that is appears to be a Cryptonote clone with some claimed extra features which don't have documented anonymity Edit: apparently ShadowChat appears to be a Bitmessage-like clone but doesn't document anti-spam and scaling issues.


Could you please clarify which of my statements is opinion and not fact?

Edit: I have just been sent the full white paper on VNL's zerotime. So I will need to read that now.

Here is a simple research tool.



It's on every page of this forum.  If you type in the word "smooth" on that thread, I think you'll validate my assertion.

I wasn't trying to insinuate that is your motive. I mean that is the way you may be perceived.

And to me, that is not worth the gain in educating a few of their readers with my logic because of how it will cause them to never, ever, ever invest in my work in the future. I mean it will create an animosity for very little gain.

I'd much rather be off trying to figure out how to tap some new market.

I realize I did create some animosity in the past most against "Bitards" but this was because they were attacking me every time I tried to interject some doubts about the true nature of Bitcoin, etc.. But by now, I realized better to go do my own thing and make action. I stopped commenting in those Bitcoin threads.

Seriously?  New features bad and new features good?


Then stop with your "they are wrong" stuff.

sheesh.

This is a lie or an error, I do not know which. Therefore, of course, your conclusions can not follow from a false premise.

You assume motive: persuasion.


And again,  you assume motive: dividing spoils.


On this and the most if not all of the snipped portions, we agree.

These forums can become quite addictive. Look at me. Didn't I say I was going to code today 

Of course you are free to continue expressing your opinion. And I wasn't faulting you for wanting to help educate or clarify.

But it I think carries a heavy price to try to persuade in a thread where a lot of the community there is already enamored with the feature set or the vision for the coin.

Humans are much more likely to associate you with being some authoritarian force than a force of reason and help.

Our goal needs to be how to spread cryptocurrency out to more people, not how to divide the spoils of those few people who land on bitcointalk.org.

With anonymity, our goal should be about preparing for the coming stampede into private assets starting next summer or so.

Let me give you an example. Right now if you want to communicate anonymously there is only one app that can maybe do it correctly. Bitmessage. Nothing and nothing else out there can even get close to giving you anonymity (which is not the same as encryption). And Bitmessage sucks! Sucks! Sucks!

That is a huge untapped market. And I very, very, very much doubt ShadowCoin has cracked that nut correctly or even with a well documented open protocol that many people can create clients for. Edit: apparently ShadowChat appears to be a Bitmessage-like clone but doesn't document anti-spam and scaling issues.

We need to get busy. There is so much coding and work to do.

Okay I end here. I consider smooth to be an upstanding person. I hope he can help to push us forward on innovations. Dash is small potatoes. Let's shoot big.

This point is obviously misleading or wrong or both.  Smooth has been posting sometimes dozens, sometimes only a few posts every day on that thread.  For many months.  That is not a casual "oh, let's see what's happening on another thread".  That is a dedicated, full time mischief maker gone amok.

Policing implies authority, of which none is claimed, so that meme is quite irrelevant. Stating an opinion is something else. While there will always be a vocal subset of the audience who aggressively oppose an opinion contrary to their interests, they are not the audience of interest.

I have not looked at that feature.

It will be very counter productive to try to convince Dash supporters who believe in such features that they are wrong.

I'd rather expend the effort trying to grow some new features and markets.

Attacking each other won't reach our goal of spreading cryptocurrency.

I believe smooth was very focused on how scams can detract from altcoins. But also we have to balance that against no one here was anointed the "altcoin police". In the case of VanillaCoin, there wasn't yet a large community and so I felt safe to point out that its main feature doesn't seem to be backed by the white paper. I am done commenting about VanillaCoin. People are free to make their own decisions with their money. I am making some comments today about ShadowCoin vs. Monero, because that is Cryptonote which is very relevant to the work I am doing, so I wanted to express my expertise in that area.

You Dash supporters go do what you like. If ever you like something I am working on, then great. If not, we'll just see what the market decides after all.

Peace.

$100,000 is chump change. I earned that in 2 months (inflation-adjusted) in 2001.

I believe these guys have a lot more money than that and they are dabbling with small amounts of their money in projects they think might have large potential.

They are trying to find the next home run, while holding a core, large position in BTC. Their Monero holdings are even smaller than their BTC holdings (or at least it was before Gavincoin was on the threat horizon).

I believe if they see superior technology and market momentum, they will quickly be joining that camp.

These guys are trying to figure out how to expand the pie beyond the limited scope of bitcointalk.org. They are experimenting and trying to find the killer combination.

I am also experimenting.

Personally I am not interested in attacking Dash. The masternode concept is fundamentally flawed because it is not autonomous. It violates the end-to-end principle. But if people want an inferior system for speculative frenzy reasons (or what ever reasons they have), then who I am to tell them what to do?

Smooth already created a thread which details the alleged instamine for Darkcoin. He provided a disclaimer there acknowledging his conflict-of-interest. I wasn't even aware of that until I read smooth's thread.

Again I would suggest to smooth to back off of attacking Dash. Nothing more will be gained from that and it is counter productive. The way you help is by educating n00bs in your own site and threads. And that doesn't need to be an attack on Dash. Simply explaining why autonomy is important and why CoinJoin (and other off chain anonymity such as CoinShuffle) is not autonomous and can never be.

To your credit, I ack that the vote here should indicate to smooth the counter vailing forces to excessive attacking. You don't go against a large community. That is like shooting yourself in the foot.

Also I hear you guys about being more about coding than talking. Hear here. I will definitely internalize that wisdom.



One of the reasons I liked Evan was he was (as far as I knew) a non-anonymous guy coding and creating his own coin while being very chatty with the forum. I figured he was sincere. I am surprised to read about the alleged instamine.