|
Title: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 02:35:08 PM The title says it all. I'm curious, I read all the time how double spending is some big issue but there seems to be zero press attention to fact there is at the very least a credible claim its been solved by Vanilla Coin.
http://www.itproportal.com/2015/07/07/bitcoin-hit-with-double-spending-bug/ Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 02:40:49 PM It will never be 100% solved due to CAP theorem. There will always be a window of time where it could be applied, even if its short.
With our consensus and ledger, a double spend is very difficult to do due to the logistics of catching the available window, and the costs associated with being in a position to actually influence one. But, its still possible, just highly unlikely. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rnicoll on August 26, 2015, 02:53:18 PM The title says it all. I'm curious, I read all the time how double spending is some big issue but there seems to be zero press attention to fact there is at the very least a credible claim its been solved by Vanilla Coin. http://www.itproportal.com/2015/07/07/bitcoin-hit-with-double-spending-bug/ Try publishing in a peer reviewed journal, let the experts tear into the theory, and if it survives, generally that's the point the press will pick up on it. Also, in case you haven't spotted this yet, the press LOVE a disaster, successes not so much. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 02:54:46 PM It will never be 100% solved due to CAP theorem. There will always be a window of time where it could be applied, even if its short. With our consensus and ledger, a double spend is very difficult to do due to the logistics of catching the available window, and the costs associated with being in a position to actually influence one. But, its still possible, just highly unlikely. I'm not an expert by the language of John's Whitepaper he seems to think he has solved it.....not just made the likelihood of it happening negligible. Are you saying John is wrong or that he never really technically said its '100% solved' Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rnicoll on August 26, 2015, 03:00:23 PM It will never be 100% solved due to CAP theorem. There will always be a window of time where it could be applied, even if its short. With our consensus and ledger, a double spend is very difficult to do due to the logistics of catching the available window, and the costs associated with being in a position to actually influence one. But, its still possible, just highly unlikely. I'm not an expert by the language of John's Whitepaper he seems to think he has solved it.....not just made the likelihood of it happening negligible. Are you saying John is wrong or that he never really technically said its '100% solved' I'm saying I'm too tired of debating this and the next step for having it reviewed is to put it out in something more widely read. 30 seconds with Google suggests something like http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?reload=true&punumber=71 but there may well be better suited journals. That said, fairly certain a major netsplit (i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_submarine_cable_disruption (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_submarine_cable_disruption)) would render parts of the network unreachable from other parts, creating a fork there's no way of reconciling until the network is repaired. I didn't read it as he was claiming that's solved, but it's still a double-spend risk. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 03:00:53 PM The title says it all. I'm curious, I read all the time how double spending is some big issue but there seems to be zero press attention to fact there is at the very least a credible claim its been solved by Vanilla Coin. http://www.itproportal.com/2015/07/07/bitcoin-hit-with-double-spending-bug/ Try publishing in a peer reviewed journal, let the experts tear into the theory, and if it survives, generally that's the point the press will pick up on it. Also, in case you haven't spotted this yet, the press LOVE a disaster, successes not so much. I honestly think the Bitcoin casual community has plenty of experts...I'ts weird but I never saw another Altcoin come under this level of suspicion, scrutiny and generally have its innovations claims simply dismissed especially after they post the code, white paper and and have a working beta. When did NEM, NXT, etc get pulled apart by MIT? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rnicoll on August 26, 2015, 03:04:52 PM I honestly think the Bitcoin casual community has plenty of experts...I'ts weird but I never saw another Altcoin come under this level of suspicion, scrutiny and generally have its innovations claims simply dismissed especially after they post the code, white paper and and have a working beta. When did NEM, NXT, etc get pulled apart by MIT? You asked why no-one's talking of Vanillacoin's technology, I'm answering that question. Did take a quick look for anything on NXT, turns out it's all articles about Lego! What's NEM claiming it's fixed? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Wheatclove on August 26, 2015, 03:09:43 PM Nobody is going to take Vanillacoin seriously until it's peer reviewed, survived for a few years, and all the shills stopped hyping it as the next Bitcoin.
Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 03:10:51 PM The title says it all. I'm curious, I read all the time how double spending is some big issue but there seems to be zero press attention to fact there is at the very least a credible claim its been solved by Vanilla Coin. http://www.itproportal.com/2015/07/07/bitcoin-hit-with-double-spending-bug/ Try publishing in a peer reviewed journal, let the experts tear into the theory, and if it survives, generally that's the point the press will pick up on it. Also, in case you haven't spotted this yet, the press LOVE a disaster, successes not so much. I honestly think the Bitcoin casual community has plenty of experts...I'ts weird but I never saw another Altcoin come under this level of suspicion, scrutiny and generally have its innovations claims simply dismissed especially after they post the code, white paper and and have a working beta. When did NEM, NXT, etc get pulled apart by MIT? You obviously haven't seen the level of shit I've been put through over the past 2 years then haha :) It's simple, if he claims he has solved it 100%, he's either lying, or doesn't understand CAP theorem - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAP_theorem In brief CAP theorem:
You can never have a network that can provide all 3 all of the time, and it has been proven. Most distributed networks allow for failures in all of them, but prioritize 2 of them. For John to have 100% solved double-spends, he would have to support all 3, 100%, probably the most important being C. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 03:14:40 PM I honestly think the Bitcoin casual community has plenty of experts...I'ts weird but I never saw another Altcoin come under this level of suspicion, scrutiny and generally have its innovations claims simply dismissed especially after they post the code, white paper and and have a working beta. When did NEM, NXT, etc get pulled apart by MIT? You asked why no-one's talking of Vanillacoin's technology, I'm answering that question. Did take a quick look for anything on NXT, turns out it's all articles about Lego! What's NEM claiming it's fixed? Like I said everything is open source, John Conner is available on IRC. Ive seen a few challenge him with potential issues and he quickly shows they don't know what they are talking about and they sheepishly wander off. So IF you think there is a problem with the code then its you as a challenger to directly address them to the developer who has made himself completely available in a public place. Otherwise an indirect criticism is just FUD. https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#Vanillacoin Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 03:18:19 PM The title says it all. I'm curious, I read all the time how double spending is some big issue but there seems to be zero press attention to fact there is at the very least a credible claim its been solved by Vanilla Coin. http://www.itproportal.com/2015/07/07/bitcoin-hit-with-double-spending-bug/ Try publishing in a peer reviewed journal, let the experts tear into the theory, and if it survives, generally that's the point the press will pick up on it. Also, in case you haven't spotted this yet, the press LOVE a disaster, successes not so much. I honestly think the Bitcoin casual community has plenty of experts...I'ts weird but I never saw another Altcoin come under this level of suspicion, scrutiny and generally have its innovations claims simply dismissed especially after they post the code, white paper and and have a working beta. When did NEM, NXT, etc get pulled apart by MIT? You obviously haven't seen the level of shit I've been put through over the past 2 years then haha :) It's simple, if he claims he has solved it 100%, he's either lying, or doesn't understand CAP theorem - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAP_theorem In brief CAP theorem:
You can never have a network that can provide all 3 all of the time, and it has been proven. Most distributed networks allow for failures in all of them, but prioritize 2 of them. For John to have 100% solved double-spends, he would have to support all 3, 100%, probably the most important being C. Well as you've spent so much time on it I imagine you must be bursting to ask him how he at least claimed to of solved it. Tell us if you do go and ask your question. https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#Vanillacoin Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rnicoll on August 26, 2015, 03:21:35 PM Like I said everything is open source, John Conner is available on IRC. Ive seen a few challenge him with potential issues and he quickly shows they don't know what they are talking about and they sheepishly wander off. So IF you think there is a problem with the code then its you as a challenger to directly address them to the developer who has made himself completely available in a public place. Otherwise an indirect criticism is just FUD. https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#Vanillacoin So... you didn't actually want an answer to why it's not getting press attention? Edit: 'cos I'm not press, can't help you, I can only tell you how I'd get their attention. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 03:25:27 PM The title says it all. I'm curious, I read all the time how double spending is some big issue but there seems to be zero press attention to fact there is at the very least a credible claim its been solved by Vanilla Coin. http://www.itproportal.com/2015/07/07/bitcoin-hit-with-double-spending-bug/ Try publishing in a peer reviewed journal, let the experts tear into the theory, and if it survives, generally that's the point the press will pick up on it. Also, in case you haven't spotted this yet, the press LOVE a disaster, successes not so much. I honestly think the Bitcoin casual community has plenty of experts...I'ts weird but I never saw another Altcoin come under this level of suspicion, scrutiny and generally have its innovations claims simply dismissed especially after they post the code, white paper and and have a working beta. When did NEM, NXT, etc get pulled apart by MIT? You obviously haven't seen the level of shit I've been put through over the past 2 years then haha :) It's simple, if he claims he has solved it 100%, he's either lying, or doesn't understand CAP theorem - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAP_theorem In brief CAP theorem:
You can never have a network that can provide all 3 all of the time, and it has been proven. Most distributed networks allow for failures in all of them, but prioritize 2 of them. For John to have 100% solved double-spends, he would have to support all 3, 100%, probably the most important being C. Well as you've spent so much time on it I imagine you must be bursting to ask him how he at least claimed to of solved it. Tell us if you do go and ask your question. https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#Vanillacoin Actually I'm not bursting at all, as I know he can't have solved it as claimed, plus I have enough to do as it is. It's his responsibility to prove he is right, not ours. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 03:35:26 PM hahah still time to be here posting in detail the issue though.
I don't know what a developer can do to prove something works apart from white paper, open source code, and beta....he even gave a reward to anyone who could do a double spend when the transaction has 0 confirmations. So apart from answering peoples concerns there is nothing left. So I'll just put you down as someone who won't put their ideas (FUD) to the appropriate people to be openly challenged...ie Chicken. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 03:46:37 PM hahah still time to be here posting in detail the issue though. I don't know what a developer can do to prove something works apart from white paper, open source code, and beta....he even gave a reward to anyone who could do a double spend when the transaction has 0 confirmations. So apart from answering peoples concerns there is nothing left. So I'll just put you down as someone who won't put their ideas (FUD) to the appropriate people to be openly challenged...ie Chicken. If he can prove that the currently accepted CAP theorem is false, and that it is possible to provide all 3 100% of the time, then I'll accept it. There is no other way as it can not be done as he claims, it might seem like its solved, but it isn't. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rocoro on August 26, 2015, 03:54:56 PM CAP theorem itself is unproven..
Quote The first question to ask is: is the CAP theorem a real theorem? Alas it is not; it remains a "truism" or a hypothesis that is unprovable. Brewer's original conjecture has not been proven with mathematical rigour -- indeed, the formulation in terms of C, A and P is too imprecise for that to happen. So the status of CAP as a theorem is something of an urban myth, but read on. http://markburgess.org/blog_cap.html (http://markburgess.org/blog_cap.html) Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 04:00:42 PM CAP theorem itself is unproven.. Quote The first question to ask is: is the CAP theorem a real theorem? Alas it is not; it remains a "truism" or a hypothesis that is unprovable. Brewer's original conjecture has not been proven with mathematical rigour -- indeed, the formulation in terms of C, A and P is too imprecise for that to happen. So the status of CAP as a theorem is something of an urban myth, but read on. http://markburgess.org/blog_cap.html (http://markburgess.org/blog_cap.html) OK fair point a truism, that is close enough for me. Consistency alone is impossible, assume you have 2 machines connected over a distance and they are both synchronized. Lets call them A & B. Some event happens to A, and it wants to inform B of the change. Even if B accepts the change immediately, consistency in the literal sense can never be achieved due to the speed of light and the limit it places on information delivery. It always takes some amount of time for the information to travel from A -> B, so A and B can never be in the same state 100% of the time. Thus, there are always periods of time, no matter how short, where A and B are not consistent with each other. An attacker can take advantage of this window of time and cause disruption. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rnicoll on August 26, 2015, 04:05:15 PM OK fair point a truism, that is close enough for me. Consistency alone is impossible, assume you have 2 machines connected over a distance and they are both synchronized. Lets call them A & B. Some event happens to A, and it wants to inform B of the change. Even if B accepts the change immediately, consistency in the literal sense can never be achieved due to the speed of light and the limit it places on information delivery. It always takes some amount of time for the information to travel from A -> B, so A and B can never be in the same state 100% of the time. Thus, there are always periods of time, no matter how short, where A and B are not consistent with each other. An attacker can take advantage of this window of time and cause disruption. I thought the point was A goes "Hangon, need to talk to B"; which sure, that depends on A trusting B, and being able to know that B is gone? This doesn't work for a peer to peer network as you don't inherently know all of the network, so a major netsplit is hard to detect and impossible to be certain of, but is presumably what organisations such as Visa do? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rocoro on August 26, 2015, 04:07:31 PM Thus, there are always periods of time, no matter how short, where A and B are not consistent with each other. An attacker can take advantage of this window of time and cause disruption. Then why are people not exploiting that and double spending? Please prove by doing a double spend. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 04:26:56 PM OK fair point a truism, that is close enough for me. Consistency alone is impossible, assume you have 2 machines connected over a distance and they are both synchronized. Lets call them A & B. Some event happens to A, and it wants to inform B of the change. Even if B accepts the change immediately, consistency in the literal sense can never be achieved due to the speed of light and the limit it places on information delivery. It always takes some amount of time for the information to travel from A -> B, so A and B can never be in the same state 100% of the time. Thus, there are always periods of time, no matter how short, where A and B are not consistent with each other. An attacker can take advantage of this window of time and cause disruption. I thought the point was A goes "Hangon, need to talk to B"; which sure, that depends on A trusting B, and being able to know that B is gone? This doesn't work for a peer to peer network as you don't inherently know all of the network, so a major netsplit is hard to detect and impossible to be certain of, but is presumably what organisations such as Visa do? In a trusted or centralized network it is easier to provide high levels of consistency (and the other 2) because there is a governed control over the network, the connections between them can be faster, etc etc You don't have that control over a P2P network, so the latency is generally longer, and consistency is further compromised. The same applies though with P2P networks, synchronous or asynchronous, you don't need to know or trust any of the network. A creates a transaction and broadcasts to all connected nodes, it still takes time for those nodes to receive that communication and apply it (if they agree with it and are honest) so that they are in the same state as A. In the mean time another node C can create a transaction that conflicts with A's at the exact same time (measured in planck time) and broadcast it too, then you have an issue. Even if C is honest, it is impossible for it to be in the same state as A at the same time if as state has changed. As far as C is concerned A is still in the same state it was before A made that transaction for a duration of time after the event. Thus, there are always periods of time, no matter how short, where A and B are not consistent with each other. An attacker can take advantage of this window of time and cause disruption. Then why are people not exploiting that and double spending? Please prove by doing a double spend. Because it isn't easy to do even with a moderate duration of attack window, and so is not worth the time and effort to prove something is false that can not be true in the first place due to accepted laws of physics. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: x0rcist on August 26, 2015, 04:27:21 PM Like I said everything is open source, John Conner is available on IRC. Ive seen a few challenge him with potential issues and he quickly shows they don't know what they are talking about and they sheepishly wander off. So IF you think there is a problem with the code then its you as a challenger to directly address them to the developer who has made himself completely available in a public place. Otherwise an indirect criticism is just FUD. https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#Vanillacoin So... you didn't actually want an answer to why it's not getting press attention? Edit: 'cos I'm not press, can't help you, I can only tell you how I'd get their attention. It's called vanilla for a reason, when its feature complete more attention will be spend towards the proper channels (press, peer reviews etc). Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rocoro on August 26, 2015, 04:39:27 PM Because it isn't easy to do even with a moderate duration of attack window, and so is not worth the time and effort to prove something is false that can not be true in the first place due to accepted laws of physics. You make it sound as if nobody is going to try and to this due to the difficulty, and not being "worth it". So why is this even really an issue? :-\ Maybe it isn't solved per se, but it may be that its even *more* difficult to do with this coin. I'm guessing people are looking for evidence of that? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 04:53:28 PM Because it isn't easy to do even with a moderate duration of attack window, and so is not worth the time and effort to prove something is false that can not be true in the first place due to accepted laws of physics. You make it sound as if nobody is going to try and to this due to the difficulty, and not being "worth it". So why is this even really an issue? :-\ Maybe it isn't solved per se, but it may be that its even *more* difficult to do with this coin. I'm guessing people are looking for evidence of that? Its an issue because by claiming these things shows a lack of understanding of information theory at its most basic, or highlights some potential dishonesty. If its the former, then what other hidden gotchas are present in the platform? You would rather that nobody challenged these wild claims and just took a developers word for it, then at some later point in time non-technical individuals invest because they trust the word of the developer and lose money? I think there is already enough of that going on that is having a massive negative impact overall. I get endless challenges from others on my research when it doesnt contradict proven theories or "truisms", so why should it be any different for more grandiose claims. Should someone turn up here claiming to have found a way to exceed the speed of light, everyone would have a problem with it because it is common knowledge that current theories, proven or not, have shown that it cant be. What he is claiming is the same thing with regard to information theory, the issue is that these topics are not as common knowledge as the speed of light limit, so its easier to pass them off as fact. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: thefunkybits on August 26, 2015, 05:00:06 PM lol double spending isnt an issue, if it was you would be getting "the press" :D
Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rocoro on August 26, 2015, 05:08:35 PM Its an issue because by claiming these things shows a lack of understanding of information theory at its most basic, or highlights some potential dishonesty. Ah this whole thing is a fud attempt. I found out that he didn't claim to have solved it! Uggh trolls. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 05:10:42 PM Its an issue because by claiming these things shows a lack of understanding of information theory at its most basic, or highlights some potential dishonesty. Ah this whole thing is a fud attempt. I found out that he didn't claim to have solved it! Uggh trolls. As the OP I'm not attempting FUD my understanding is Double spend was solved......so should we see it more as so difficult the possibility is negligible? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 05:11:56 PM lol double spending isnt an issue, if it was you would be getting "the press" :D WOW Thats great it isn't an issue. Can you please tell all the exchanges, no more confirmations needed!!!! Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rocoro on August 26, 2015, 05:16:28 PM As the OP I'm not attempting FUD my understanding is Double spend was solved......so should we see it more as so difficult the possibility is negligible? Do you have any proof or anything that JC claimed that? I'm hearing from people who talk with him, and he never claimed that. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 05:31:16 PM As the OP I'm not attempting FUD my understanding is Double spend was solved......so should we see it more as so difficult the possibility is negligible? Do you have any proof or anything that JC claimed that? I'm hearing from people who talk with him, and he never claimed that. Really??? This guy has been going around for weeks saying that he has! Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 05:32:37 PM As the OP I'm not attempting FUD my understanding is Double spend was solved......so should we see it more as so difficult the possibility is negligible? Do you have any proof or anything that JC claimed that? I'm hearing from people who talk with him, and he never claimed that. Well I mean we could get into semantics of what it means by solving a problem but the whole point of the bounty was a challenge anyone to double spend I assume whoch was done having full confidence it couldn't be done. ie the risk was negated. So no I might not be able to find him actually saying its solved 100% but the basics idea is that the problem isn't an issue anymore right? plus there has been reddit threads that stated its solved with no real correction form vanilla coin community. I'm sorry if I misunderstood things, but like I said I don't need to be insane to assume it was for in all sense and purposes 'solved' Plus I would still like to hear from JC or his work quoted cause I still have a nagging idea I read him say the system wouldn't allow a double spend somewhere. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 05:35:41 PM As the OP I'm not attempting FUD my understanding is Double spend was solved......so should we see it more as so difficult the possibility is negligible? Do you have any proof or anything that JC claimed that? I'm hearing from people who talk with him, and he never claimed that. Well I mean we could get into semantics of what it means by solving a problem but the whole point of the bounty was a challenge anyone to double spend I assume whoch was done having full confidence it couldn't be done. ie the risk was negated. So no I might not be able to find him actually saying its solved 100% but the basics idea is that the problem isn't an issue anymore right? plus there has been reddit threads that stated its solved with no real correction form vanilla coin community. I'm sorry if I misunderstood things, but like I said I don't need to be insane to assume it was for in all sense and purposes 'solved' Plus I would still like to hear from JC or his work quoted cause I still have a nagging idea I read him say the system wouldn't allow a double spend somewhere. Id suggest you find out for sure before claiming it again, as you aren't doing the guy any favors otherwise. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 05:41:47 PM As the OP I'm not attempting FUD my understanding is Double spend was solved......so should we see it more as so difficult the possibility is negligible? Do you have any proof or anything that JC claimed that? I'm hearing from people who talk with him, and he never claimed that. Well I mean we could get into semantics of what it means by solving a problem but the whole point of the bounty was a challenge anyone to double spend I assume whoch was done having full confidence it couldn't be done. ie the risk was negated. So no I might not be able to find him actually saying its solved 100% but the basics idea is that the problem isn't an issue anymore right? plus there has been reddit threads that stated its solved with no real correction form vanilla coin community. I'm sorry if I misunderstood things, but like I said I don't need to be insane to assume it was for in all sense and purposes 'solved' Plus I would still like to hear from JC or his work quoted cause I still have a nagging idea I read him say the system wouldn't allow a double spend somewhere. Id suggest you find out for sure before claiming it again, as you aren't doing the guy any favors otherwise. Here John says he has resolved the problem. Yes that's not solved but a past problem is taken away so in my book it's 'solved' BS to the theoretical posturing, John says he has stopped a problem then I say he's solved it. And I also should of given more detail but it was a given that the risk of a double spend had been solved with zero confirmations....but I assumed that was a given....my question was actually more about the lack of media interest in the issue at the very least being negated. Having a theoretical on what means for something to be 'solved' isn't my bag. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1148745.msg12118317#msg12118317 Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Levole11 on August 26, 2015, 05:42:51 PM Well I was the one in the irc chan, remembering John never claimed that.. I will ask him again when he's in the chan; to my remembrance he said something like: " timeframe in which the double spend being way too small for anybody to achieve and the costs of it would be to high".. iam a 420 er and my memory sometimes fails me :), i'll ask again when he's in the chan..
Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 05:45:34 PM "...timeframe in which the double spend being way too small for anybody to achieve and the costs of it would be to high..." *puts on smug hat* exactly what I have been saying as we have the same thing in our ledger tech Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Levole11 on August 26, 2015, 05:49:41 PM "...timeframe in which the double spend being way too small for anybody to achieve and the costs of it would be to high..." *puts on smug hat* exactly what I have been saying Don't disregard my comment on the effects of 420 on my memory just yet though :) Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 26, 2015, 06:04:52 PM "...timeframe in which the double spend being way too small for anybody to achieve and the costs of it would be to high..." *puts on smug hat* exactly what I have been saying as we have the same thing in our ledger tech Yeeeeeeah I'd probably keep that hat off for now.... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=411366.0 Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: rocoro on August 26, 2015, 06:33:00 PM The title of this thread is simply false. Its' not 100% solved, nor will it ever be.
To say something is simply so difficult, it might as well be "solved" is just a pseudo assumption. Press usually likes to report on facts, that is why imo.. there is no press release saying its solved. This thread is pointless and OP talks in circles. :-\ Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 07:21:06 PM "...timeframe in which the double spend being way too small for anybody to achieve and the costs of it would be to high..." *puts on smug hat* exactly what I have been saying as we have the same thing in our ledger tech Yeeeeeeah I'd probably keep that hat off for now.... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=411366.0 *yawn* Ive been nothing but reasonable, curteous and attempted to inject some humour. Yet you have to resort to dragging up past affairs of which there was not any proof of some nut jobs claim, never has been, and never will be. Ignored. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: traumschiff on August 26, 2015, 07:21:41 PM Yet another thread with the same people. Only need smooth and TPTB.
@Fuserleer again advertising his own currency in a different thread and @rnicoll again just casually commenting on the 56th VNL BTT/Reddit thread. How about you guys review the ZT/Vanilla code finally, your casual commenting is getting boring since you are running around in circles stating the same things again and again without pointing at specific lines of code. Don't tell me you don't have enough time on your hands, because that is obviously not the case. Currently as it stands, I have never seen anyone pointing out a single line of code while talking about ZeroTime vulnerabilities sadly meaning that no one here on on any other thread has any clue on what they are talking about (regarding the specific solution). Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: monsterer on August 26, 2015, 08:08:05 PM The paper reads like it was written in 5 minutes, contains nothing novel at all and hasn't 'solved double spend' because:
A) the presented technique is susceptible to sybil attack B) double spend was already (and actually) solved by satoshi C) double spend was also not solved by instant-x which this is an almost carbon copy of (slightly worse without the collateral), making it a truly zero cost attack Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: traumschiff on August 26, 2015, 08:17:46 PM The paper reads like it was written in 5 minutes, contains nothing novel at all and hasn't 'solved double spend' because: A) the presented technique is susceptible to sybil attack B) double spend was already (and actually) solved by satoshi C) double spend was also not solved by instant-x which this is an almost carbon copy of (slightly worse without the collateral), making it a truly zero cost attack John already adressed sybil attacks on IRC, here are some quotes: https://talk.vanillacoin.net/topic/193/john-connor-irc-quotes (post was deleted, but I have already posted this several times and I'm pretty sure you have read them aswell) This is not a carbon copy of instant-x. Please review the full ZT code on github and point out the exact lines that are susceptible to the mentioned attacks. You clearly have an agenda, this is like the 5th thread in which you are posting the exact same things without a proper explanation. You are starting to seem like a troll. Forget the paper and review the code, see my previous response to some of the posters here. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: monsterer on August 26, 2015, 08:22:58 PM You clearly have an agenda, this is like the 5th thread in which you are posting the exact same things without a proper explanation. You are starting to seem like a troll. Forget the paper and review the code, see my previous response to some of the posters here. When I stop seeing new threads stating the same thing about VNL, I will not feel the need to set the record straight by posting in them. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 08:26:08 PM You clearly have an agenda, this is like the 5th thread in which you are posting the exact same things without a proper explanation. You are starting to seem like a troll. Forget the paper and review the code, see my previous response to some of the posters here. When I stop seeing new threads stating the same thing about VNL, I will not feel the need to set the record straight by posting in them. I wouldnt bother, getting your opinion across on this forum most of the time is like having an opinion on religion. If you don't believe in the same god, you're an infidel, end of story. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: traumschiff on August 26, 2015, 08:28:55 PM You clearly have an agenda, this is like the 5th thread in which you are posting the exact same things without a proper explanation. You are starting to seem like a troll. Forget the paper and review the code, see my previous response to some of the posters here. When I stop seeing new threads stating the same thing about VNL, I will not feel the need to set the record straight by posting in them. I wouldnt bother, getting your opinion across on this forum most of the time is like having an opinion on religion. If you don't believe in the same god, you're an infidel, end of story. Most of your entries in threads like this started with you advertising your project. I guess I don't need to repost those since you probably know what I am talking about. My issue with you is the same with everyone else here, you attack the project from a theoretical vector while the code is 100% open source. Why aren't you pointing out a single line of code? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: monsterer on August 26, 2015, 08:37:28 PM My issue with you is the same with everyone else here, you attack the project from a theoretical vector while the code is 100% open source. Why aren't you pointing out a single line of code? Since you are so familiar with the code, why don't you point out the place in the code where he solved the double spend issue? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 26, 2015, 08:38:25 PM You clearly have an agenda, this is like the 5th thread in which you are posting the exact same things without a proper explanation. You are starting to seem like a troll. Forget the paper and review the code, see my previous response to some of the posters here. When I stop seeing new threads stating the same thing about VNL, I will not feel the need to set the record straight by posting in them. I wouldnt bother, getting your opinion across on this forum most of the time is like having an opinion on religion. If you don't believe in the same god, you're an infidel, end of story. Most of your entries in threads like this started with you advertising your project. I guess I don't need to repost those since you probably know what I am talking about. My issue with you is the same with everyone else here, you attack the project from a theoretical vector while the code is 100% open source. Why aren't you pointing out a single line of code? I don't need to, because I knew it wasn't possible, and now other 3rd parties have stepped in and pretty much confirmed that there was miscommunication between what John said and what is being reported here. My intention was not to advertise, but to provide an example that mirrors what I know is possible. I made plenty of other statements without referencing mine or any other projects. The majority of people on this forum think they know more than they do, thats not a criticism of them personally, nor is it generally their fault, and its due to 3rd hand knowledge being presented and taken as fact even when the real facts are presented. If you would rather informed people such as myself and others not step in, and allow people that are duped into believe false statements, to dig themselves an early grave then..well... I guess eventually we'll get frustrated enough and all leave you to it. For some reason though, despite all the shit I receive, I still have a hard time turning my back on these poor people when most would have long ago! Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: x0rcist on August 26, 2015, 09:36:06 PM Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: traumschiff on August 26, 2015, 09:55:57 PM You clearly have an agenda, this is like the 5th thread in which you are posting the exact same things without a proper explanation. You are starting to seem like a troll. Forget the paper and review the code, see my previous response to some of the posters here. When I stop seeing new threads stating the same thing about VNL, I will not feel the need to set the record straight by posting in them. I wouldnt bother, getting your opinion across on this forum most of the time is like having an opinion on religion. If you don't believe in the same god, you're an infidel, end of story. Most of your entries in threads like this started with you advertising your project. I guess I don't need to repost those since you probably know what I am talking about. My issue with you is the same with everyone else here, you attack the project from a theoretical vector while the code is 100% open source. Why aren't you pointing out a single line of code? I don't need to, because I knew it wasn't possible, and now other 3rd parties have stepped in and pretty much confirmed that there was miscommunication between what John said and what is being reported here. My intention was not to advertise, but to provide an example that mirrors what I know is possible. I made plenty of other statements without referencing mine or any other projects. The majority of people on this forum think they know more than they do, thats not a criticism of them personally, nor is it generally their fault, and its due to 3rd hand knowledge being presented and taken as fact even when the real facts are presented. If you would rather informed people such as myself and others not step in, and allow people that are duped into believe false statements, to dig themselves an early grave then..well... I guess eventually we'll get frustrated enough and all leave you to it. For some reason though, despite all the shit I receive, I still have a hard time turning my back on these poor people when most would have long ago! I wouldn't call people informed who can't back their claims with the adherent line of code. I only see people attack it from a theoretical side (as already mentioned in my last comment) without reviewing the code. Sad that I had to state the same thing again, seems you didn't even bother on reading the comment you responded to. The above mentioned issue wouldn't be a problem (people who discuss attack theories, since those help building bulletproof solutions), the problem is when they keep thread hopping with the same comments as if that makes their claims legit. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: I am the guy on August 27, 2015, 12:02:49 AM I suppose most people file VNL under "just another shitcoin" like I did. Bored one day, I checked out the ANN thread and I was pleasantly surprised how unnoticed VNL was.
For anyone out there, Vanillacoin may surprise you too. Check it out. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: pitaluga on August 27, 2015, 12:32:24 AM let the people stay on btc forked alts, when they realize the vnl tech will be too late
Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 01:12:41 AM Like I said I'm sorry for using the term 100% solved if it's more 99.999999999999999999999999% 'solved' as in not a credible risk.....which obviously isn't the case for Bitcoin with no confirmations. This is clearly what VNL has done where no other coin has. Which is why it's news worthy particularly to the Bitcoin community and media IMO.
I'll let the pedantic argue over the term 'solved'. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 01:19:51 AM It will never be 100% solved due to CAP theorem. Correct. And note that none of the solutions I've seen published are tolerant to partitioning (a.k.a. network fragmentation). That means Bitcoin is toast if the network fragments, because there can be a spend of every output on every network partition. Nevertheless, there is a way to absolutely solve the issue and make it provable. But it does require an adjustment to the security model assumptions, but I think the change in those assumptions is superior to the assumptions we make now with existing "subjectivity" for consensus models. The security model of Bitcoin is that everybody will leave the coin if it is 51% attacked and misbehaves. Is everyone leaving the dollar? Duh! The masses don't switch. They use Coinbase, Blockchain.com, Paypal.com, etc.. Any way, I don't want to blabber on, because of course I haven't published anything yet. I just want to note that VanillaCoin has not solved anything w.r.t. to 0-confirmation double-spend attacks and we peers have already explained to them why in other threads. If they believe otherwise and want to rise above the peer review they've already received, then let them publish to a place where academics will take notice and peer review their white paper. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 01:21:48 AM I suppose most people file VNL under "just another shitcoin" like I did. Bored one day, I checked out the ANN thread and I was pleasantly surprised how unnoticed VNL was. For anyone out there, Vanillacoin may surprise you too. Check it out. The name has given accumulators and those who actually look into stuff rather than listen to FUD to have an early advantage. I say good, the amount of time VNL is mentioned it's dissmissed for complete junk like JC can't be trusted, the code is fake etc. Seems that combined with the name has really given VNL a delay reaction. Instead of moaning I suggest taking advantage of it......once the coins abilities are known the name will start sounding great to people. ;D Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 01:23:24 AM It will never be 100% solved due to CAP theorem. Correct. And note that none of the solutions I've seen published are tolerate to partitioning (a.k.a. network fragmentation). That means Bitcoin is toast if the network fragments, because there can be a spend of every output on every network partition. Nevertheless, there is way to absolutely solve the issue and make it provable. But it does require an adjustment to the security model assumptions, but I think the change those assumptions is superior to the assumptions we make now with existing "subjectivity" for consensus models. Any way, I don't want to blabber on, because of course I haven't published anything yet. I just want to note that VanillaCoin has not solved anything w.r.t. to 0-confirmation double-spend attacks and we peers have already explained to them why in other threads. If they believe otherwise and want to rise above the peer review they've already received, then let them publish to a place where academics will take notice and peer review their white paper. You should start stealing coins then cause it's so easy, wow wow. ;D Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 01:26:01 AM You should start stealing coins then cause it's so easy, wow wow. ;D If we steal coins via double spending, then coins will be worthless because we will have proven the vulnerability and the last remaining bag holding fools will even be induced to sell. I am sorry you got caught holding the bag after "john conner" lied to you (also lied to everyone about his code being written from scratch when in fact he reused Bitcoin code and tried to obscure that he was doing so), but that is not our problem. Your incessant pumping of a shitcoin is not helping your reputation. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 01:36:48 AM You clearly have an agenda, this is like the 5th thread in which you are posting the exact same things without a proper explanation. You are starting to seem like a troll. Forget the paper and review the code, see my previous response to some of the posters here. When I stop seeing new threads stating the same thing about VNL, I will not feel the need to set the record straight by posting in them. I wouldnt bother, getting your opinion across on this forum most of the time is like having an opinion on religion. If you don't believe in the same god, you're an infidel, end of story. Most of your entries in threads like this started with you advertising your project. I guess I don't need to repost those since you probably know what I am talking about. My issue with you is the same with everyone else here, you attack the project from a theoretical vector while the code is 100% open source. Why aren't you pointing out a single line of code? I don't need to, because I knew it wasn't possible, and now other 3rd parties have stepped in and pretty much confirmed that there was miscommunication between what John said and what is being reported here. My intention was not to advertise, but to provide an example that mirrors what I know is possible. I made plenty of other statements without referencing mine or any other projects. The majority of people on this forum think they know more than they do, thats not a criticism of them personally, nor is it generally their fault, and its due to 3rd hand knowledge being presented and taken as fact even when the real facts are presented. If you would rather informed people such as myself and others not step in, and allow people that are duped into believe false statements, to dig themselves an early grave then..well... I guess eventually we'll get frustrated enough and all leave you to it. For some reason though, despite all the shit I receive, I still have a hard time turning my back on these poor people when most would have long ago! Dude that's so insulting to 95% of Bitcoin followers who love the abilities of Bitcoin but don't have the first clue how to code a coin like clearly you spend your entire time doing. Some of us do other specialised jobs which involve various skills many of which are not tech based. Half the world uses phones and computers but a tiny amount actually understand deeply the technology. We depend therefore on people to tell us what tech works great and what doesn't.....sadly the crypto community is so riddled with scammers or due to self interests (many have said like yourself) you can't get a straight opinion on anything. That's a problem and so as a user in the 95% group I want to ask questions and so far JC seems the credible one not his detractors. This thread is another good example.....what you should of said if neutral would be oh great the risk with zero confirmations is not an issue now, so solved instead you wanted to strain on a gnat for your own self interests. That's what I see as one of the poor people you hope to help... ;D Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 01:43:07 AM You should start stealing coins then cause it's so easy, wow wow. ;D If we steal coins via double spending, then coins will be worthless because we will have proven the vulnerability and the last remaining bag holding fools will even be induced to sell. I am sorry you got caught holding the bag after "john conner" lied to you (also lied to everyone about his code being written from scratch when in fact he reused Bitcoin code and tried to obscure that he was doing so), but that is not our problem. Your incessant pumping of a shitcoin is not helping your reputation. I never pumped a coin in my life. I like to ask questions, discuss potentials of coins and yes am positive about ones I find to be special or have some merit. What else would you do on a forum about altcoins? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 01:54:18 AM I don't need to, because I knew it wasn't possible, and now other 3rd parties have stepped in and pretty much confirmed that there was miscommunication between what John said and what is being reported here. My intention was not to advertise, but to provide an example that mirrors what I know is possible. I made plenty of other statements without referencing mine or any other projects. The majority of people on this forum think they know more than they do, thats not a criticism of them personally, nor is it generally their fault, and its due to 3rd hand knowledge being presented and taken as fact even when the real facts are presented. If you would rather informed people such as myself and others not step in, and allow people that are duped into believe false statements, to dig themselves an early grave then..well... I guess eventually we'll get frustrated enough and all leave you to it. For some reason though, despite all the shit I receive, I still have a hard time turning my back on these poor people when most would have long ago! Dude that's so insulting to 95% of Bitcoin followers who love the abilities of Bitcoin but don't have the first clue how to code a coin like clearly you spend your entire time doing. Some of us do other specialised jobs which involve various skills many of which are not tech based. Half the world uses phones and computers but a tiny amount actually understand deeply the technology. We depend therefore on people to tell us what tech works great and what doesn't.....sadly the crypto community is so riddled with scammers or due to self interests (many have said like yourself) you can't get a straight opinion on anything. That's a problem and so as a user in the 95% group I want to ask questions and so far JC seems the credible one not his detractors. This thread is another good example.....what you should of said if neutral would be oh great the risk with zero confirmations is not an issue now, so solved instead you wanted to strain on a gnat for your own self interests. That's what I see as one of the poor people you hope to help... ;D That was an excellent post by Fuserleer. And your reply was very revealing. Now I understand that you are not intentionally pumping a I will try to summarize to you why we think VNL's zerotime algorithm doesn't work. 1. We don't strongly think it will enable double spend attacks that don't already exist. It may eliminate the Finney attack, because the attacker would need to force the zerotime algorithm to become inconclusive (per the methods of attack we outlined in the other prior thread of discussion) thus waiting for 1-confirmation. Note a 1-confirmation double-spend attack would still be applicable but not a Finney attack. 2. The problem is the algorithm will essentially always be forced to 1-confirmation when ever it is successfully attacked. That is good, but that is not a 0-confirmation (a.k.a. zerotime) attack-free algorithm. 3. You may ask why would anyone bother to attack the algorithm and force it to 1-confirmation, if they can't gain a double spend? The reason is to disrupt its 0-confirmation claim. This also explains why we can't steal coins, yet the algorithm remains unsuitable for a reliable 0-confirmation proposal. 4. As for refuting the claims we made in a prior thread about the attack vectors that can force the algorithm to become inconclusive, "john conner" has not given us his justifications. The link to his justifications upthread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162605.msg12251422#msg12251422) links to a deleted post. I have never seen his reasons. He is the one hiding, not us. I apologize for not making clear sooner why we can't steal coins, but that doesn't matter. Our complaint remains valid. Now if you are asking me why we don't want to prove we can attack the testnet and force 1-confirmations, in my case it is because I have much more robust and perfected solution and I am too busy developing it to mess around with VNL (as well 6 days into a water only fasting to try to cure my Multiple Sclerosis). Sorry to advertise, but you asked. Also I will add that "john conner" may not be intentionally fooling you (but the lie about the source code is quite worrisome), and he may sincerely believe he has a solution in hand. If so, he should not fear peer review. Why is he hiding? I do not think we have been unreasonable. Hopefully "john conner" can be more social. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: solid12345 on August 27, 2015, 01:59:52 AM B) double spend was already (and actually) solved by satoshi Except he didn't really as Bitcoin has had histories of double spends. How can it be solved if it's happened before? Yeah you can give me jargon about how its solved if you don't rely on 0 confirmations or it's expensive to do or many other excuses and IFs, yadayada but in the real business world where we're used to IT guys bulllshitting us about how secure their network or software package is, in my book if can be done then it can be done, end of story. NOTHING IS SECURE. I repeat, NOTHING is secure. I wish people would get it thru their thick heads that anything with 0s and 1s is always vulnerable in some form or another, even if it is theoretical attacks that require millions of dollars or the greatest geniuses in the worlds to crack, I believe anything can be broken. The best you can hope for is to patch it up quick before more damage is done. Instead of all these pseudo-academic discussions on whether something is 100% whatever bullshit I wish people would more debate what is the fastest and most secure software AS IT STANDS and debate whether it increases economic efficiency or can improve commerce? That is the one thing people overlook in this whole crypto sphere, is this actually stuff society wants or needs to use? Novelties and science projects wear off quick. Why is he hiding? I do not think we have been unreasonable. Hopefully "john conner" can be more social. He is in the IRC seemingly everyday, how is he hiding? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:05:10 AM Why is he hiding? I do not think we have been unreasonable. Hopefully "john conner" can be more social. He is in the IRC seemingly everyday, how is he hiding? As the link to the deleted post upthread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162605.msg12251422#msg12251422) apparently reveals, IRC is not a permanent record. We communicate here in the public view where (normally) information doesn't disappear and is also available for all Bitcoin interested folks to view now and as an archive. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: solid12345 on August 27, 2015, 02:07:41 AM As the link to the deleted post above apparently reveals, IRC is not a permanent record. We communicate here in the public view where (normally) information doesn't disappear and is also available for all Bitcoin interested folks to view now and as an archive. May I suggest irccloud.com, it keeps 3rd party logs quite nicely. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:16:46 AM As the link to the deleted post above apparently reveals, IRC is not a permanent record. We communicate here in the public view where (normally) information doesn't disappear and is also available for all Bitcoin interested folks to view now and as an archive. May I suggest irccloud.com, it keeps 3rd party logs quite nicely. Feel free to point me to a link of all his justifications against our claims of attacks. I will review if you do. I am not a dishonest person. If he teaches me something, I will admit it. I will not go searching for it, if you do not provide it. This forum is very convenient for me. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:20:08 AM B) double spend was already (and actually) solved by satoshi Except he didn't really as Bitcoin has had histories of double spends. How can it be solved if it's happened before? NOTHING IS SECURE. I repeat, NOTHING is secure. Actually it can be made provably and 100% secure. Again I don't want to advertise. Why do you think I am not interested in expending too much effort attacking a dubious claim when it can be solved with a stronger claim. As Fuserleer said, we just want to warn readers that VNL's claims are challenged by peers who have been working on solving these issues for the past 2 years. Who ever has the correct solution is going to end up generating a $billion+ market cap. All the developers will migrate to it. So we surely wouldn't trash that which is the perfected solution. None of us are that irrational. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 02:26:01 AM As the link to the deleted post above apparently reveals, IRC is not a permanent record. We communicate here in the public view where (normally) information doesn't disappear and is also available for all Bitcoin interested folks to view now and as an archive. May I suggest irccloud.com, it keeps 3rd party logs quite nicely. Feel free to point me to a link of all his justifications against our claims of attacks. I will review if you do. I am not a dishonest person. If he teaches me something, I will admit it. I will not go searching for it, if you do not provide it. This forum is very convenient for me. Here's the thing, of people really cared for the answer they would go to IRC, spend all of 3 seconds to log in, doesnt even ask for a password and ask the damn question directly to JC. Until then you just look like you are full of shit. If you genuinely think you aren't then go ask and look like the smarter guy, it's not like you dont spend hours and hours on here so don't pull the I'm too busy line, as soon as I post you pop up, you must be on here around the clock. So anything you make will be tarnished by the fact you seem full of shit from the gecko. For your benefit AND if you are correct you better go question what is by your endeavour your major competitor you are happy to FUd but not actually question. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:26:35 AM I'm not an expert And Fuserleer and I are more expert than you. So why do you think we are acting irrationally? You think we would trash the perfected technological solution so we could go work on an inferior one. That would be illogical. We'd be wasting our effort and time. We looked at his white paper with great interest. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:28:40 AM Stop telling me I need to chase the anonymous "john conner" around to his preferred hiding places, after he has already lied to the entire community and he produced a white paper that afaics did not do what he claimed it would do. He can come here where we are. If not, then stop advertising here. Go advertise in IRC. Are you paying me to waste my time? I made a judgment that he is not worthy based on the above. It is up to him to repair his reputation here. He seems not to care. Come on man, stop acting like an imbecile. I think you are grown up already. My rate is $455k + stock options annually. Can you pay that? Do you realize you are talking to top developers! Be a bit more respectful of our time please. It is a finite resource. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 02:34:50 AM Stop telling me I need to chase the anonymous "john conner" around to his preferred hiding places, after he has already lied to the entire community and he produced a white paper that did not do what he claimed it would do. He can come here where we are. If not, then stop advertising here. Go advertise in IRC. Are you paying me to waste my time? I made a judgment that he is not worthy based on the above. It is up to him to repair his reputation here. He seems not to care. But it's you who have criticised VNL in a public place, it is you that has spread FUD, it's is you who should be the man to go directly to the one you have decided to criticise. JC doesn't care what you think, but owners of the coin are being damaged by your FUD. Your clearly a bullshitter. Even more hilarious that you say you solved double spend just after looking into VNL. ::) I'll be on you like a rash if you start advertising your tech, it's the least you deserve for your cowardice. Your best option as is Fuseleers is to go and challenge JC otherwise don't even bother trying to plug your tech on this forum......you will be labelled as copiers of VNL ideas. It's in your interest to show in some detail you have a better solution directly to JC or you guys will always be second to solve something........no prizes for second. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:40:18 AM This also explains why we can't steal coins, yet the algorithm remains unsuitable for a reliable 0-confirmation proposal. There is the proof right there that either "john conner" is a liar or he is not expert. Why would he tell you that stealing coins is the test of veracity when in fact it can not be the test. That is another incriminating evidence that he is duping the community. Add that to the lies about the source code. You have enough signals already. If you continue to be duped, that is your own problem. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:42:28 AM But it's you who have criticised VNL in a public place, it is you that has spread FUD, it's is you who should be the man to go directly to the one you have decided to criticise. JC doesn't care what you think... I'll be on you like a rash if you start advertising your tech, it's the least you deserve for your cowardice... Loser. You will be a loser your entire life. Disrespecting a top developer isn't smart. Have fun attacking it. You'll be resoundingly ignored. I tried to help you, but you are determined to be duped. Go ahead. You'll get exactly what you deserve. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 02:48:07 AM But it's you who have criticised VNL in a public place, it is you that has spread FUD, it's is you who should be the man to go directly to the one you have decided to criticise. JC doesn't care what you think... I'll be on you like a rash if you start advertising your tech, it's the least you deserve for your cowardice... Loser. You will be a loser your entire life. Have fun attacking it. You'll be resoundingly ignored. I tried to help you, but you are determined to be duped. Go ahead. You'll get exactly what you deserve. Trust me if you thought JC had a rough ride with his no nonsense direct personality you haven't even tasted how bad it's gonna be for someone like you who has spent so much effort to FUD a project and is clearly not diplomatic.......You got a world of pain ahead of you. like I said you best bet is to look like a straight guy and go to JC. How do you expect not to have your tech ripped apart among claims of plagiarism in this situation....you are more of a wackjob than I thought if so. Dude you discovered your ideas after you read his white paper and code....what hope do you have? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: generalizethis on August 27, 2015, 02:49:05 AM Stop telling me I need to chase the anonymous "john conner" around to his preferred hiding places, after he has already lied to the entire community and he produced a white paper that did not do what he claimed it would do. He can come here where we are. If not, then stop advertising here. Go advertise in IRC. Are you paying me to waste my time? I made a judgment that he is not worthy based on the above. It is up to him to repair his reputation here. He seems not to care. But it's you who have criticised VNL in a public place, it is you that has spread FUD, it's is you who should be the man to go directly to the one you have decided to criticise. JC doesn't care what you think, but owners of the coin are being damaged by your FUD. Your clearly a bullshitter. Even more hilarious that you say you solved double spend just after looking into VNL. ::) I'll be on you like a rash if you start advertising your tech, it's the least you deserve for your cowardice. Your best option as is Fuseleers is to go and challenge JC otherwise don't even bother trying to plug your tech on this forum......you will be labelled as copiers of VNL ideas. It's in your interest to show in some detail you have a better solution directly to JC or you guys will always be second to solve something........no prizes for second. You posted this thread here to get an answer here from the people here. You got it. Now accept it or go to IRC and hide with JC. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:49:09 AM I'm saying I'm too tired of debating this and the next step for having it reviewed is to put it out in something more widely read. 30 seconds with Google suggests something like http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?reload=true&punumber=71 but there may well be better suited journals. That said, fairly certain a major netsplit (i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_submarine_cable_disruption (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_submarine_cable_disruption)) would render parts of the network unreachable from other parts, creating a fork there's no way of reconciling until the network is repaired. I didn't read it as he was claiming that's solved, but it's still a double-spend risk. I honestly think the Bitcoin casual community has plenty of experts... Yet you say all of them are FUD. And you say we have to leave here and go to IRC to get the anonymous, liar "john conner" on record here. ::) :'( Losers just have it in their genes I guess. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 02:50:54 AM I'm saying I'm too tired of debating this and the next step for having it reviewed is to put it out in something more widely read. 30 seconds with Google suggests something like http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?reload=true&punumber=71 but there may well be better suited journals. That said, fairly certain a major netsplit (i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_submarine_cable_disruption (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_submarine_cable_disruption)) would render parts of the network unreachable from other parts, creating a fork there's no way of reconciling until the network is repaired. I didn't read it as he was claiming that's solved, but it's still a double-spend risk. I honestly think the Bitcoin casual community has plenty of experts... Yet you say all of them are FUD. And you say we have to leave here and go to IRC to get the anonymous, liar "john conner" on record here. ::) :'( Losers just have it in their genes I guess. Dude you are going to get slaughtered on here.... You know JC has his own thread on here , right. Why don't you post in detail your points against VNL? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:54:09 AM your tech ripped apart among claims of plagiarism in this situation....Dude you discovered your ideas after you read his white paper and code....what hope do you have? Haha, my tech is so far removed from his. You are digging your grave. Just keep posting. Again sorry you got holding a bag of worthless coins. Charge it to experience. If you don't blame yourself, you'll never learn to be more discerning and stop being a loser. Everyone makes mistakes. After you stop blowing smoke out of your ears, calm down and realize that attacking the best developers won't help you, rather you'll just waste your time and sustain your loser life. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 02:57:15 AM your tech ripped apart among claims of plagiarism in this situation....Dude you discovered your ideas after you read his white paper and code....what hope do you have? Haha, my tech is so far removed from his. You are digging your grave. Just keep posting. Again sorry you got holding a bag of worthless coins. Charge it to experience. Dude FUD doesn't work like facts, you of all people should know that. If people make serious accusations that the code has been copied in part from VNL......the. For 99% of people it's a clone, whether it's true or not. That's how VNL has been attacked and it's shows how easy it is to attack a great project. Like I will say one last time, post on JC personal thread or forget you ever made a coin.......you will always be a cloner, nothing more otherwise. Honestly if you really had something great you wouldn't talk the way you do.....you're low level clearly. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 02:58:28 AM If people make serious accusations that the code has been copied in part from I'll alert smooth so he can come here and battle you on that issue. He was the one who pushed that recently not me. Gregory Maxwell apparently first discovered it in January. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 03:00:22 AM If people make serious accusations that the code has been copied in part from VNL... I'll alert smooth so he can come here and battle you on that issue. He was the one who pushed that recently not me. Gregory Maxwell apparently first discovered it in January. Take it to JC thread, why are you telling me, I'm not an expert. Seems like you don't want to ask someone who will make you look stupid. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 03:09:18 AM "...timeframe in which the double spend being way too small for anybody to achieve and the costs of it would be to high..." *puts on smug hat* exactly what I have been saying as we have the same thing in our ledger tech And that is not simply provable. Thus not good enough for me. I want something that can not be attacked because it is irrefutable as is the math in Satoshi's paper for the probabilities on confirmations given the Poisson distribution approximation assumption. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 03:14:48 AM I'm on the VanillaCoin IRC now. Where is "john conner"?
Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 03:16:07 AM I'm on the VanillaCoin IRC now. Where is "john conner"? Some people sleep. There are others who understand the tech, so ask you questions on there. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1064326.0 Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 03:19:51 AM And so now you know why IRC is inappropriate. If the man (or woman?) is serious, he will come to a forum where we can all post during our waking time and have an ongoing conversation that isn't buried by the noise of 1 post per
Stop your FUD. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: smooth on August 27, 2015, 03:37:09 AM If people make serious accusations that the code has been copied in part from I'll alert smooth so he can come here and battle you on that issue. He was the one who pushed that recently not me. Gregory Maxwell apparently first discovered it in January. The links to some of the evidence are in the john-connor forum Trust rating (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=402318) (click on Reference), where I put them. Greg Maxwell was the first, as far as I know, to raise the issue back in January (I think), but not the only one, and the evidence linked in trust which clearly demonstrates the plagarism does not come directly from Greg Maxwell, nor does it date to January. There are significant pieces of code which are essentially identical with the exception of formatting or meaningless changes like using the literal constant "0" instead of the defined constant "NULL", to the point where they probably would compile to identical binary code. There is another instance where the original code contains a bug (fixed in a later Bitcoin release) and VNL's code, in addition to being very much structurally similar as above, contains the same bug. That stuff just does not happen without copying. The plagarism does not relate directly to the correct functionality (or lack thereof) of ZeroTime, but it does demonstrate a clear willingness on the part of john-connor to misrepresent in order to promote his project. His claims should be treated with skepticism. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 03:53:55 AM Got tired of the noise in the VanillaCoin IRC:
Quote TPTB_need_war He is onlline now? So I want to hear his justifications for why attackers can't force his zerotime algorithm to inconclusive and thus to 1-confirmation? ThaHandyman lmao TPTB_need_war that was swaggish +etoque Well BCarp what i liked was looking at thier chart and seeing the trend line +etoque He don't spend alot of time on vnl and was pretty hesitant at the end lovepool TPTB_need_war you can PM John connor. He is "john-connor" / "john-connor-afk" ( when hes away from keyboard ) → Crueljz has joined ← vanillafan has quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client) BCarp what i saw was a clearly linear pattern moving the price upward, with a small break towards becoming exponential near the end of sept beginning of october.... I also love that he promoted waht I need, investors having cool heads so we can keep accumulating from the moners for a month or so nonproprietary I loved using coinigy until they started charging for it +etoque oh they charging → SovereignBits has joined +etoque I just create account lol BCarp: Yeah pretty much leftovers_ !vnl @VNLBOT VNL: 1 | USD: 0.06458485 | EUR: 0.05699413 | GBP: 0.04168364 | CAD: 0.08578554 | AUD: 0.09053220 | CNY: 0.41391978 | BTC: 0.00028776 +etoque miss 10 cent ;( acoin ！vnl ← pinkice has quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client) acoin The price was cut nonproprietary wow, they are chargin 0.099 a month now... i thought i remember them having a period where pricing was a one time fee ← ShadowBits has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) BCarp if past experience has anything to say about it, price will stay somewhat stable though repressed until volume becomes about 2x what the daily miner sells are...(no idea what this actually is) then in fear of people losing interest the walls will fall and the bump will begin. → pinkice has joined ⓘ ChanServ set mode +v pinkice BCarp I think Im gonna paper wallet 5k or so and lock em away for 2 years. otherwise im gonna sell out at the wrong time lol Qzzn !c vnl @VNLBOT POLONIEX | BTC-VNL | LAST: 0.00028931 | LASK: 0.00028931 | HBID: 0.00028408 | C: 0.37% | VBTC: 19.708 | QVNL: 69408.76 | L24H: 0.00027401 | H24H: 0.00030190 BITTREX | BTC-VNL | LAST: 0.00029145 | LASK: 0.00030999 | HBID: 0.00029145 | C: 1.63% | VBTC: 4.280 | VVNL: 14495.83 | L24H: 0.00027814 | H24H: 0.00031000 → ShadowBits has joined WildBilla if anyone is interested, we discussed it earlier, but if anyone wants to generate a "VNL community" fund via FREE referral fees, I will compile all fees via this link https://www.coinbase.com/join/52b624a93ec584082e000082 if you are planning on buying btc for any reason (and not in Canada) the first $100 in btc buys gets $75 in referral bonus t o me... up from 25% pre-crash.. this is a limited offer, but I plan to not use it personally and compile it for whatever consensus suggestions/whatver people would want to use free btc for to benefit VNL WildBilla free money as coinbase probably panic bought the fall, just throwing it out there... its free btc.. might as well take it +pinkice .bal BCarp hey wildbilla do you sleep at all? everytime i come on your here :\ → bigdoge has joined +etoque haha WildBilla I dont sleep Bcarp I wait BCarp !bon WildBilla leftovers_ WildBilla: robot WildBilla I just smoked a lot BCarp !bong WildBilla * BayMax gives WildBilla the bong bigdoge vanilla bud leftovers_ Nilla buds BCarp tweeked my neck today, time to pull out the cannaboids WildBilla but honestly that referral bonus is a good idea IMO to get FREE BTC and I can put it wherever anyone wants.. hell, maybe rain fund. IDK but I am not selfish and love free shit +etoque WildBilla: :) ← SovereignBits has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) +etoque That's the spirit man ! :) WildBilla etoque you still buy btc ? +etoque Right now nan BCarp man I love you WildBilla.... what a guy WildBilla isnt $75 per first $100 a solid deal though? I was blown away bigdoge did i miss megastorm? WildBilla yes well, katrina if we get to 35K bigdoge el nino ← EmilioMann has quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client) → cryptocurrent_ has joined bigdoge got any 'nilla? BCarp cheap rain..... been suffering from a drought here lately, and i live beside a rainforest. If money comes in before price goes way down ill be buying me some rainfall → Guest84523 has joined ← Crueljz has quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client) bigdoge bcarp u live 'next to' rainforest! ← WildBilla has quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client) → WildBilla has joined BCarp well beside, in.... i guess its all about perspective Roepert .rain .1 @VNLBOT rain: Roepert rained .1 VNL on 18 account(s) (0.00555556 each) ! w00t ! full list @ #vanillatips Qzzn thx bigdoge yes yes yes BCarp is anyone creating a marketpace? bigdoge bcarp i live next to marketplace +gaagaa !net @VNLBOT Network: 968.38 GH/s | PoW: 39,908.03 | PoS: 1.25 | Blocks: 191,408 PooledTX: 0 | Blocktime: 1440646475 (1m 50s) | Type: proof-of-stake pool.vanillaco.in | 864.77 MH/s | 6 workers | Last: 188,910 (2d 19h 59m 38s) vnl.suprnova.cc | 285.11 GH/s | 87 workers | Last: 191,405 (4m 2s) vnl.idcray.com | 806.80 GH/s | 18 workers | Last: 191,406 (3m 37s) pool.mn/vnl | 381.8 MH/s | 1 workers | Last: 188,271 (3d 12h 59m 11s) WildBilla id sell/buy so much. I have some crazy shit lovepool with everyones vast supply of VNL, don't forget to pickup a VNL keychain or VNL coin! :) http://www.cryptomemorabilia.com/product-category/vnl/ BCarp I want to sell percebes for VNL maybe a testacle or two...... shit I drank to much wine tonight sorry about the rambling idiocy lovepool lol WildBilla I will get one soon lovepool can I get a coin for ever VNL? lovepool what do you mean by the last line you said? I'm confused ahha . WildBilla can I get a vnl coin for every vnl I have BCarp dont worry we will all buy keychains and minted coin when the price hits one VNL per coin → sonomoro has joined WildBilla so I can rain at titty bar BCarp lol WildBilla put some stripppers eyes out.. tell them dont worry, your rich bitch leftovers_ !rain .1 @VNLBOT rain: leftovers_ rained .1 VNL on 20 account(s) (0.00500000 each) ! w00t ! full list @ #vanillatips BCarp ....... your fucked up Qzzn thx ThaHandyman ty leftovers WildBilla I am joking bro.. haha !rain .1 @VNLBOT rain: WildBilla rained .1 VNL on 20 account(s) (0.00500000 each) ! w00t ! full list @ #vanillatips ThaHandyman lovepool is back ]o] WildBilla Night nillas! ThaHandyman \o\ Qzzn good night +UroCEO night ThaHandyman night my nilla +UroCEO !c vnl @VNLBOT POLONIEX | BTC-VNL | LAST: 0.00028751 | LASK: 0.00028737 | HBID: 0.00027799 | C: -0.25% | VBTC: 23.269 | QVNL: 81908.68 | L24H: 0.00027401 | H24H: 0.00030190 BITTREX | BTC-VNL | LAST: 0.00029101 | LASK: 0.00030995 | HBID: 0.00029101 | C: 1.48% | VBTC: 4.338 | VVNL: 14690.69 | L24H: 0.00027814 | H24H: 0.00031000 lovepool WildBilla LOL. I could get you one coin for everyone of your VNLs. having them for strippers would be fun! ahha night WildBilla gotta get my 2 hours of sleep in.. be back before china has lunch BCarp so where are we having the party when VNL hits $100 dollars per coin? WildBilla yep, thats my master plan love I WILL HOST EVERYONE I swear +UroCEO BCarp: lets try $1 first lol leftovers_ Later nilla BCarp lol ok how about a ski trip in chile when we go to $1 WildBilla I have noir in vegas and can get a massive suite.. we would have all the nillas there.. raining on my nillas VNL coins leftovers_ !rain .1 @VNLBOT rain: leftovers_ rained .1 VNL on 21 account(s) (0.00476190 each) ! w00t ! full list @ #vanillatips +UroCEO hookers and blow WildBilla !rain .1 +UroCEO lol @VNLBOT rain: WildBilla rained .1 VNL on 21 account(s) (0.00476190 each) ! w00t ! full list @ #vanillatips Qzzn thx WildBilla BUY THAT TINY SELL WALL and have a good night. later nilla s BCarp ok ok boring and all, but lets do vegas at $1 WildBilla I will 100% pay for Vegas at 1% since I can get a 10K/night suite for free (and im not rich I had one amazing trip and now am noir status... )luck later BCarp sweet ill give you 500 VNL for the party at $1 /vnl when we do WildBilla spread word on the coinbase referral.. I am serious I will protect it' ← WildBilla has quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client) BCarp honestly though Vegas is for wannabes....... though fun, real fun doesnt happen there im drunk I can say what I want ← Jimlite has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) → Jimlite has joined nonproprietary BCarp, I approve ⓘ ChanServ set mode +v Jimlite +Jimlite freenode sucks ← acoin has quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client) +Jimlite !net @VNLBOT Network: 1.56 TH/s | PoW: 61,334.71 | PoS: 1.72 | Blocks: 191,418 PooledTX: 3 | Blocktime: 1440647263 (2m 58s) | Type: proof-of-stake pool.vanillaco.in | 2.32 GH/s | 6 workers | Last: 188,910 (2d 20h 13m 55s) vnl.suprnova.cc | 281.85 GH/s | 91 workers | Last: 191,405 (18m 18s) vnl.idcray.com | 746.76 GH/s | 19 workers | Last: 191,417 (3m 32s) pool.mn/vnl | 167.0 MH/s | 1 workers | Last: 188,271 (3d 13h 13m 27s) imine.xyz | 3.12 GH/s | 1 workers | Last: 189,958 (1d 15h 49m 14s) → Wildbilla has joined Wildbilla I'm back for second. Is btc falling again. +Jimlite !c btc @VNLBOT BTC-USD | BITFINEX: 225.26 | BITSTAMP: 224.64 | BTC-E: 223.44 | OKCOIN: 224.10 Wildbilla Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 27, 2015, 06:15:02 AM i hope you PM'ed JC like someone told you to.....no one can be at a keyboard 24/7....hence AFK. Away From Keyboard.
Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: monsterer on August 27, 2015, 08:15:20 AM Except he didn't really as Bitcoin has had histories of double spends. How can it be solved if it's happened before? The thing bitcoin and satoshi are most famous for, is for solving the double spending problem. The solution was this thing called a 'blockchain'. You might want to look it up. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: solid12345 on August 27, 2015, 01:21:52 PM Except he didn't really as Bitcoin has had histories of double spends. How can it be solved if it's happened before? The thing bitcoin and satoshi are most famous for, is for solving the double spending problem. The solution was this thing called a 'blockchain'. You might want to look it up. If it's solved, then why has double spending occurred before with Bitcoin? If it's solved why is a 51% attack a real very real risk? Aren't quantum computers a real risk in the near future to the security of its algorithm? Why can it occur with accepting 0 confirmation transactions? This is like saying you found a cure for cancer BUT it comes with an *asterisk (cancer may only be cured as long as you eat a well-balanced diet afterwards!) Everyone will snidely declare, "well everything is fine if you wait 10 minutes for a few confirmations", well going by that logic I can just as much say Visa could "solve" double spending problems too if everyone just waited a few days or weeks for transactions to sort themselves out with no chargeback issues before they release their merchandise, of course naturally this is not economically or socially practical hence companies accept the risk and eat the loss from the 1% of scammers out there. But if they did do it they could say they "solved" the DS issue too. The main strength of Bitcoin is handles finding transanctional consensus faster and more efficiently hence why it is a technical progress but it's not the monumental achievement people really think it is. I mean at the end of the day it's just a glorified decentralized excel spreadsheet for christ's sake, it's not like the invention of the computer or the internal combustion engine. This is why I don't like claims of absolutes, whether it comes from the Bitcoin community or Vanillacoin community. But I do care which coin is the superior tech advancement and can significantly enhance the realm of commerce or get us off the back of the stinking federal reserve (even though in the end none of this may not matter as 1st mover advantage of a slower and inferior tech often wins out in the end). Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: monsterer on August 27, 2015, 01:56:50 PM If it's solved, then why has double spending occurred before with Bitcoin? If it's solved why is a 51% attack a real very real risk? Aren't quantum computers a real risk in the near future to the security of its algorithm? Why can it occur with accepting 0 confirmation transactions? This is like saying you found a cure for cancer BUT it comes with an *asterisk (cancer may only be cured as long as you eat a well-balanced diet afterwards!) https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf Quote Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending. We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network... Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: solid12345 on August 27, 2015, 02:02:34 PM So basically you read nothing I said.
A "secure solution" isn't a real solution if it is theoretically possible to break and can be attacked in some form. The invention of indoor plumbing "solved" human society's waste disposal issue but it can still be undone by jamming something large down the hole that clogs up the drain. If the waste is too big then it can't be disposed of! So in essence waste disposal is only solved up to a point. It is by far an improvement over an outhouse though. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: terman45x on August 27, 2015, 02:12:41 PM So basically you read nothing I said. A "secure solution" isn't a real solution if it is theoretically possible to break and can be attacked in some form. The invention of indoor plumbing "solved" human society's waste disposal issue but it can still be undone by jamming something large down the hole that clogs up the drain. If the waste is too big then it can't be disposed of! So in essence waste disposal is only solved up to a point. It is by far an improvement over an outhouse though. Not necessarily. Now we are mixing urine with the water table - a completely unnecessary process which is leading to widespread ecological damage, especially in the States. Research why biodiversity is plunging across the states in all creek based ecosystems. Its all the pharmaceuticals, hormones etc which are being flushed down the toilet instead of peed onto the earth. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: solid12345 on August 27, 2015, 02:18:26 PM So basically you read nothing I said. A "secure solution" isn't a real solution if it is theoretically possible to break and can be attacked in some form. The invention of indoor plumbing "solved" human society's waste disposal issue but it can still be undone by jamming something large down the hole that clogs up the drain. If the waste is too big then it can't be disposed of! So in essence waste disposal is only solved up to a point. It is by far an improvement over an outhouse though. Not necessarily. Now we are mixing urine with the water table - a completely unnecessary process which is leading to widespread ecological damage, especially in the States. Research why biodiversity is plunging across the states in all creek based ecosystems. Its all the pharmaceuticals, hormones etc which are being flushed down the toilet instead of peed onto the earth. Good point. The road to hell is sometimes paved with good intentions. One of the unintended consequences for Bitcoin and blockchains may be that instead of liberating us from the shackles of human exploitation by big government is it may one day usher in an even more Orwellian and oppressive future where every transaction is digitally tracked and not anonymous and no way to "opt out" of the system. Such a high price to pay just for the comfort of stopping a little more financial fraud every year. I am still on the fence about digital currencies whether they are truly good or not, but that is another debate :) Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: monsterer on August 27, 2015, 02:21:17 PM So basically you read nothing I said. A "secure solution" isn't a real solution if it is theoretically possible to break and can be attacked in some form. You said the double spending problem wasn't solved, I just provided you with the paper which proves that it is solved. Now, if you had asked if the 0 confirmation double spend problem was solved, I would answer: no. edit: your idea of a 100% secure solution is infeasible in a trustless, peer to peer environment. The best you can hope for is that the chance of an attack succeeding is statistically insignificant. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: solid12345 on August 27, 2015, 02:30:53 PM So basically you read nothing I said. A "secure solution" isn't a real solution if it is theoretically possible to break and can be attacked in some form. You said the double spending problem wasn't solved, I just provided you with the paper which proves that it is solved. Now, if you had asked if the 0 confirmation double spend problem was solved, I would answer: no. It's solved until/if someone 51% attacks Bitcoin or SHA256 is cracked. I guess my definition of the word solved is different. If I run a business and put the security of my company in a piece of software, I'd like to know if there is ANY potential risk, and let's be honest, Bitcoin DOES have risks even if the chances of said risks are extraordinarily low. Don't think I am taking away from what Satoshi did, he is clearly a genius but I don't believe it is the end-all for fintech and believe newer and better technologies will surpass it. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: monsterer on August 27, 2015, 02:39:15 PM It's solved until/if someone 51% attacks Bitcoin or SHA256 is cracked. I guess my definition of the word solved is different. If I run a business and put the security of my company in a piece of software, I'd like to know if there is ANY potential risk, and let's be honest, Bitcoin DOES have risks even if the chances of said risks are extraordinarily low. Don't think I am taking away from what Satoshi did, he is clearly a genius but I don't believe it is the end-all for fintech and believe newer and better technologies will surpass it. All peer to peer currency carries risks, now and forever, so you might as well get used to the idea.... as does banking / business. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: traumschiff on August 27, 2015, 02:56:54 PM Nice to see that the team is complete with the same people as in every other thread. Still not a single line of code pointed out in ZeroTime's source which could be a vulnerability.
I'm enjoying the theorycrafting so far :D Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: monsterer on August 27, 2015, 03:11:07 PM Nice to see that the team is complete with the same people as in every other thread. Still not a single line of code pointed out in ZeroTime's source which could be a vulnerability. I'm enjoying the theorycrafting so far :D Point out the line of code where it was solved, and I'll point out the line where it wasn't solved. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: traumschiff on August 27, 2015, 03:18:32 PM Nice to see that the team is complete with the same people as in every other thread. Still not a single line of code pointed out in ZeroTime's source which could be a vulnerability. I'm enjoying the theorycrafting so far :D Point out the line of code where it was solved, and I'll point out the line where it wasn't solved. That's not how it works, you are here attacking a solution. It is open source, live and already being used. No one who attacked reviewed the code and pointed out flaws in it so far. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: ol92 on August 27, 2015, 03:56:45 PM Nice to see that the team is complete with the same people as in every other thread. Still not a single line of code pointed out in ZeroTime's source which could be a vulnerability. I'm enjoying the theorycrafting so far :D Point out the line of code where it was solved, and I'll point out the line where it wasn't solved. That's not how it works, you are here attacking a solution. It is live already and being used. Double spending is an algorithmic /mathematic problem : the burden of the proof is on the one claiming having a solution! The white paper already sent by John doesn't provide proofs (maybe there is another version more complete ?) On the other hand, there are many aspect of vanillacoin I appreciate : the rewrite of the network part, the O(1) routing, the android wallet staking ... These features are enough to qualify vnl above a lots of altcoins. The instant transaction system seems a good + too: even with some eventual limits. But I believe John made somewhat excessive claims in regards of the facts : "complete rewrite of the code" and "solving the double spending problem". Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Wheatclove on August 27, 2015, 04:09:39 PM Nice to see that the team is complete with the same people as in every other thread. Still not a single line of code pointed out in ZeroTime's source which could be a vulnerability. I'm enjoying the theorycrafting so far :D Point out the line of code where it was solved, and I'll point out the line where it wasn't solved. That's not how it works, you are here attacking a solution. It is open source, live and already being used. No one who attacked reviewed the code and pointed out flaws in it so far. You have to first prove it secure. This isn't a court of law where you are "innoncent until proven guilty." The burden of proof is on the creator of the software. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Wheatclove on August 27, 2015, 04:12:19 PM The title says it all. I'm curious, I read all the time how double spending is some big issue but there seems to be zero press attention to fact there is at the very least a credible claim its been solved by Vanilla Coin. http://www.itproportal.com/2015/07/07/bitcoin-hit-with-double-spending-bug/ The Bitcoin fork was due to miner's not verifying the block version. Nothing to do with a weakness in Bitcoin itself. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 05:10:17 PM edit: your idea of a 100% secure solution is infeasible in a trustless, peer to peer environment. The best you can hope for is that the chance of an attack succeeding is statistically insignificant. Again I believe this is not true. Never say never. The devil is in the details. Edit: Nothing is absolutely secure beyond any probability. But when probabilities shrink to that of winning the Lotto, I consider that to be "100%" unlikely to occur in most people's lives. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 05:16:41 PM On the other hand, there are many aspect of vanillacoin I appreciate : the rewrite of the network part, the O(1) routing, the android wallet staking ... These features are enough to qualify vnl above a lots of altcoins. I don't think anyone has taken a stance against those being potential improvements, although I haven't analyzed them so they may or may not be significant in the holistic sense of effects that matter. From my perspective, the entire network design will change, so all that will become irrelevant any way. (there might still be something important there that might even apply to my design for example, noting I am not a networking expert and he apparently is) I think people haven't focused on those because they are probably not significant enough to make the case for adoption and investing. But that is up to each person to decide. I don't have a well formed opinion on that and frankly don't care because I don't have the time and because I think it will all be soon irrelevant. I took a brief look at it and I wasn't convinced it was Sybil and DoS resistant (but that doesn't mean it isn't). I didn't have time to really study it well. I think it is dangerous when experts from the Bittorrent realm (my best guess of where "john conner" comes from) think they can apply the principles the same way to crypto-currency. There are fundamental differences in the Byzantine fault tolerance. The instant transaction system seems a good + too: even with some eventual limits. I can't see this at all. What feature does it add? No zero confirmation ability has been proven yet. But I believe John made somewhat excessive claims in regards of the facts : "complete rewrite of the code" and "solving the double spending problem". Apologizing to the community could go a long way towards repairing his reputation. Apparently he is a loner who doesn't know how to work with others. Can't even participate in a forum where he doesn't have complete control. Brilliant control freaks don't win. Gregory Maxwell is going to get a lesson on that too soon. Embracing the community with open arms is very important. Maybe he is just busy coding. No problem. We didn't force the issue here, nextgencoin did. He has been trying to push this coin before it is ready to be pushed. John hasn't even completed the zerotime white paper. He was forced to rush a more complete paper which is lacking proofs and sufficient justifications. Maybe John is caught between over anxious supporters and the realities of what one man can accomplish by himself in finite time. Maybe he simply doesn't have time to deal with the community in this forum at this time. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: smooth on August 27, 2015, 05:43:39 PM Nice to see that the team is complete with the same people as in every other thread. Still not a single line of code pointed out in ZeroTime's source which could be a vulnerability. I'm enjoying the theorycrafting so far :D Point out the line of code where it was solved, and I'll point out the line where it wasn't solved. That's not how it works, you are here attacking a solution. It is open source, live and already being used. No one who attacked reviewed the code and pointed out flaws in it so far. You have to first prove it secure. This isn't a court of law where you are "innoncent until proven guilty." The burden of proof is on the creator of the software. Not really, in a marketing sense (especially an unregulated one), you can claim whatever the hell you want. People don't have to believe you though. That's where providing solid support for your claims comes in. If you want to rise above the noise of 1000 coins, many of them making various claims, you have to back it up with more than a vague non-proofs if you want to be taken seriously. Any piece of shit can always get some fan base though. I'm not even saying VNL is a piece of shit, just making an observation about human nature. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 05:45:00 PM (especially an unregulated one) Thank the gods for that. I hope it remains unregulated. I am sure you agree that another name for "unregulated" is a "free market". As Fuserleer wrote upthread, we will grow weary and fanboys can pump something that doesn't have solid proofs and we will eventually be too busy on other things. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Fuserleer on August 27, 2015, 05:52:15 PM (especially an unregulated one) Thank the gods for that. I hope it remains unregulated. I am sure you agree that another name for "unregulated" is a "free market". As Fuserleer wrote upthread, we will grow weary and you can pump something that doesn't have solid proofs and we will eventually be too busy on other things. Then it'll be our fault! User - "Why didn't you warn us so called experts????" Expert - "*provides endless list of historical threads where we did*" User - "Oh...I see" Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: TPTB_need_war on August 27, 2015, 05:54:45 PM Then it'll be our fault! There will never be a market without greater fools (not an allusion to VNL, just a general statement). Accept the universe as it is. Make your statements so the wise investors can do their research. And then let it be. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: smooth on August 27, 2015, 06:24:12 PM (especially an unregulated one) Thank the gods for that. I hope it remains unregulated. I am sure you agree that another name for "unregulated" is a "free market". Just making an observation, not a value judgement. A consequence of that free market is that people are naturally going to be (and should be) more skeptical. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 28, 2015, 03:08:12 AM (especially an unregulated one) Thank the gods for that. I hope it remains unregulated. I am sure you agree that another name for "unregulated" is a "free market". Just making an observation, not a value judgement. A consequence of that free market is that people are naturally going to be (and should be) more skeptical. I'm skeptical why you need to discuss that general issue all over this thread. As you and your buddies have shown nothing more than general vague criticism this is the definition of FUD. You can't double spend VNL even though it has zero confirmations. ie awesome. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: smooth on August 28, 2015, 04:08:59 AM (especially an unregulated one) Thank the gods for that. I hope it remains unregulated. I am sure you agree that another name for "unregulated" is a "free market". Just making an observation, not a value judgement. A consequence of that free market is that people are naturally going to be (and should be) more skeptical. I'm skeptical why you need to discuss that general issue all over this thread. Because it answers the question "Where is the press?" You know the actual subject of this thread. Mathematical proof of security or GTFO. There is none in his white paper. 1. No proof of security + 2. Proven lying scumbag plagiarist as lead developer making these unproven claims of security. = 3. Legitimate press is going to ignore (though I bet you could pay for some, and probably will). Investors grab your wallet and run the other way. <= good advice Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 28, 2015, 05:12:31 AM (especially an unregulated one) Thank the gods for that. I hope it remains unregulated. I am sure you agree that another name for "unregulated" is a "free market". Just making an observation, not a value judgement. A consequence of that free market is that people are naturally going to be (and should be) more skeptical. I'm skeptical why you need to discuss that general issue all over this thread. Because it answers the question "Where is the press?" You know the actual subject of this thread. Mathematical proof of security or GTFO. There is none in his white paper. 1. No proof of security + 2. Proven lying scumbag plagiarist as lead developer making these unproven claims of security. = 3. Legitimate press is going to ignore (though I bet you could pay for some, and probably will). Investors grab your wallet and run the other way. <= good advice Dude explain how VNL is any different to any other ALT in the last two years but they get press with their innovations. Its open source for fucks sake, most coins don't even go open source for months...Open source means if you have a problem you got to highlight it, specifics.....you are no better than a sock puppet one post account saying this coin is shit. Yeah you are going to have to prove copy paste that JC copied any major elements of Bitcoin.....thats FUD, plus JC has said its a completely new rewrite......he never said he reinvented how crypto worked. You are really have an agenda to find tiny details and making them look like lies. it makes you the twat if you don't back up statements like that....makes you a lier and worthy of losing your precious trust rating. ;).......ill give you by the end of the day to do so. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: smooth on August 28, 2015, 05:39:00 AM (especially an unregulated one) Thank the gods for that. I hope it remains unregulated. I am sure you agree that another name for "unregulated" is a "free market". Just making an observation, not a value judgement. A consequence of that free market is that people are naturally going to be (and should be) more skeptical. I'm skeptical why you need to discuss that general issue all over this thread. Because it answers the question "Where is the press?" You know the actual subject of this thread. Mathematical proof of security or GTFO. There is none in his white paper. 1. No proof of security + 2. Proven lying scumbag plagiarist as lead developer making these unproven claims of security. = 3. Legitimate press is going to ignore (though I bet you could pay for some, and probably will). Investors grab your wallet and run the other way. <= good advice Dude explain how VNL is any different to any other ALT in the last two years but they get press with their innovations. Its open source for fucks sake, most coins don't even go open source for months...Open source means if you have a problem you got to highlight it, specifics.....you are no better than a sock puppet one post account saying this coin is shit. I'm skeptical why you need to discuss "other ALT" on this thread. And yes, some small portions of the plagiarized code have been highlighted, as specifics, but by no means all of it. Quote Yeah you are going to have to prove copy paste that JC copied any major elements of Bitcoin.....thats FUD It's already proven, multiple times by multiple people, as I quoted (some of) earlier on this very thread. Quote plus JC has said its a completely new rewrite That's exactly the point. He's a liar, certainly on that point, and well documented. What else is he lying about? Quote ......he never said he reinvented how crypto worked. You are really have an agenda to find tiny details and making them look like lies. Copying Bitcoin's code and claiming it to be a completely new rewrite are not tiny details. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 28, 2015, 06:04:08 AM another semantic theoretical based FUD. I don't know exactly how much of the code if it resembles some of Bitcoins ideas then how is he a liar saying its a completely new 'rewrite'. You know if I rewrite the script to Batman.....Batman still gonna be in it right?
The fact is.....which is THE WHOLE point is JC work does something other coins can't......history won't care about your intellectual hissy fits. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rewrite So far all I see JC said was this in the official ANN. "What is VanillaCoin? Vanillacoin is not a clone of Bitcoin or Peercoin, it was engineered from the ground up and is designed to be innovative and forward-thinking. It prevents eavesdropping and censorship and has security in mind." And this comment which basically makes clear he isn't reinventing the concept of Crypto when accused of copying some fundamental ideas of Bitcoin. "Is a Honda car a clone of a Ford car? Cool Thank you for your support." Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: smooth on August 28, 2015, 06:10:36 AM another semantic theoretical based FUD. I don't know exactly how much of the code if it resembles some of Bitcoins ideas then how is he a liar saying its a completely new 'rewrite'. You know if I rewrite the script to Batman.....Batman still gonna be in it right? Is your script going to have the same grammatical errors and typos (i.e. bugs, in the case of software) as the original Batman script? Are you going to include entire pages of the original Batman script word-for-word and then reformat them and change a few words like NULL to 0? Because VNL's alleged "completely new rewrite" does both of those things. But hey, you have a job do to, so continue your likely paid shilling. I know you will anyway. When does traumschiff's shift start? Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: generalizethis on August 28, 2015, 06:12:26 AM another semantic theoretical based FUD. I don't know exactly how much of the code if it resembles some of Bitcoins ideas then how is he a liar saying its a completely new 'rewrite'. You know if I rewrite the script to Batman.....Batman still gonna be in it right? The fact is.....which is THE WHOLE point is JC work does something other coins can't......history won't care about your intellectual hissy fits. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rewrite Ask Vanilla Ice about rewrites that aren't that rewritten. At least he completely changed most of the lyrics. Your boy switched a few words around, stole the beat and said he changed the game--all we need is Satoshi to sue this poser (better yet, hang him from a balcony as the legend goes) and he'll do the same favor for cryptocurrency that Suge did for rap. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: nextgencoin on August 28, 2015, 06:19:23 AM JC is making something great and you two idle dicks who seem to think you know more than him are forum dickheads.....have a nice day.
Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: shitaifan2013 on August 28, 2015, 06:59:14 AM the funniest thing is that all the guys defending vanillacoin seem to be completely code illiterate ;D
which pretty much explains their behaviour. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: YarkoL on August 28, 2015, 07:20:22 AM Reading this, it looks like that the zerotime/0-confirmation has been
discussed alreadyin some other thread. Could someone please give me a link, because it's hard to search for anything here. Couple of months ago I looked into this and thought it was very promising idea, if I understood correctly PoS timestamps were used to filter transactions that were not eligible for block inclusion. I'm very interested to know what you expert devs found to criticize about john-connor's code (apart from the copyright issue, which is not the point here) Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: ol92 on August 28, 2015, 07:59:17 AM the funniest thing is that all the guys defending vanillacoin seem to be completely code illiterate ;D which pretty much explains their behaviour. Studying the whole set of code take a huge amount of time for people not so familiar with crypto. But the copying of bitcoin code is easy to verify once pointed by smooth and others. (by the way, thank you smooth and TPTB for your contributions). Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: ol92 on August 28, 2015, 08:04:04 AM Reading this, it looks like that the zerotime/0-confirmation has been discussed alreadyin some other thread. Could someone please give me a link, because it's hard to search for anything here. Couple of months ago I looked into this and thought it was very promising idea, if I understood correctly PoS timestamps were used to filter transactions that were not eligible for block inclusion. I'm very interested to know what you expert devs found to criticize about john-connor's code (apart from the copyright issue, which is not the point here) Analysing the code to find the weakness in the 0 confirmation transactions implementation or the resolution of double spending is a time consuming work. For others coins, the communauty/dev team have paid for expert review. Even trying to do a double spending take a lot of ressources. At least, to motivate experts to review the code, vnl team should provide substantial elements to back-up the claims. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: traumschiff on August 28, 2015, 08:12:44 AM Reading this, it looks like that the zerotime/0-confirmation has been discussed alreadyin some other thread. Could someone please give me a link, because it's hard to search for anything here. Couple of months ago I looked into this and thought it was very promising idea, if I understood correctly PoS timestamps were used to filter transactions that were not eligible for block inclusion. I'm very interested to know what you expert devs found to criticize about john-connor's code (apart from the copyright issue, which is not the point here) Analysing the code to find the weakness in the 0 confirmation transactions implementation or the resolution of double spending is a time consuming work. For others coins, the communauty/dev team have paid for expert review. Even trying to do a double spending take a lot of ressources. At least, to motivate experts to review the code, vnl team should provide substantial elements to back-up the claims. I'm eager to hear who XMR paid for their review. Oh they didn't have to... they just forked BCN/CN and called it a day. Edit: They did pay for a review as pointed out on the next page. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: monsterer on August 28, 2015, 08:16:12 AM JC is making something great and you two idle dicks who seem to think you know more than him are forum dickheads.....have a nice day. Make that three. Always a shame when the absence of anything valuable, or intelligent to say in defence of a thing leads to childish name calling. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: ol92 on August 28, 2015, 08:34:42 AM Reading this, it looks like that the zerotime/0-confirmation has been discussed alreadyin some other thread. Could someone please give me a link, because it's hard to search for anything here. Couple of months ago I looked into this and thought it was very promising idea, if I understood correctly PoS timestamps were used to filter transactions that were not eligible for block inclusion. I'm very interested to know what you expert devs found to criticize about john-connor's code (apart from the copyright issue, which is not the point here) Analysing the code to find the weakness in the 0 confirmation transactions implementation or the resolution of double spending is a time consuming work. For others coins, the communauty/dev team have paid for expert review. Even trying to do a double spending take a lot of ressources. At least, to motivate experts to review the code, vnl team should provide substantial elements to back-up the claims. I'm eager to hear who XMR paid for their review. Oh they didn't have to... they just forked BCN/CN and called it a day. https://twitter.com/kristovatlas/status/489075106388246528 and probably this too : https://cryptonote.org/news/2014/7/15/cryptonote-whitepaper-review-by-monero Even if they forked the bytecoin code, this the monero team which have paid for review, beside publishing an academic review on the subject. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: traumschiff on August 28, 2015, 08:52:31 AM Reading this, it looks like that the zerotime/0-confirmation has been discussed alreadyin some other thread. Could someone please give me a link, because it's hard to search for anything here. Couple of months ago I looked into this and thought it was very promising idea, if I understood correctly PoS timestamps were used to filter transactions that were not eligible for block inclusion. I'm very interested to know what you expert devs found to criticize about john-connor's code (apart from the copyright issue, which is not the point here) Analysing the code to find the weakness in the 0 confirmation transactions implementation or the resolution of double spending is a time consuming work. For others coins, the communauty/dev team have paid for expert review. Even trying to do a double spending take a lot of ressources. At least, to motivate experts to review the code, vnl team should provide substantial elements to back-up the claims. I'm eager to hear who XMR paid for their review. Oh they didn't have to... they just forked BCN/CN and called it a day. https://twitter.com/kristovatlas/status/489075106388246528 and probably this too : https://cryptonote.org/news/2014/7/15/cryptonote-whitepaper-review-by-monero Even if they forked the bytecoin code, this the monero team which have paid for review, beside publishing an academic review on the subject. Thank you for clarification, I'll take back what I wrote :) Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Nxtblg on August 29, 2015, 07:07:01 PM Just making an observation, not a value judgement. A consequence of that free market is that people are naturally going to be (and should be) more skeptical. Oh yes - and that shines a different light on the regulatory State! When I was younger and stupider ;) , one of the mysteries I wrestled with was: why did the financial industry become so complaisant with being regulated to the extent to which it has? Chalk my confusion up to naïveté: it's pretty obvious that, ceteris paribus, any industry would prefer less regulation (aimed at them) to more. Those stories about clever industry-employed securities lawyers engaging in a kind of arms race with the regulators by finding loopholes in the still-very-voluminous regs, of course, fed my naïveté. The answer didn't click in until well after I read up on the history of the American stock market. In the 1960s, there was a big push to call listed stocks "The People's Capitalism." Long after I read that, the answer clicked. A well-regulated industry is much easier to market as trustworthy. It's a powerful inducement for otherwise-skeptical people to drop their skepticism. "You see something fishy? Just call the regulators! If they see a crook, they'll crack down. Now as for us..." Evidently I was "overtheoried"; I needed an intervention from Captain Obvious. As John Ralson Saul put it a long time ago, most-to-all businesspeople want one thing from the government: a stable market for their goods. If accepting regulation means more stabilization through disarming healthy skepticism, they'll accept it. The ceteris really ain't paribus. Title: Re: If double spending is such an issue and VNL solved it, where is the press? Post by: Monopoly on August 29, 2015, 07:46:02 PM Could some one show me a unconfirmed transaction for long time ago ?
|
