|
Title: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Gillette on September 20, 2015, 07:45:14 AM Smooth - the dev of XMR has made serious accusations against Vanilla coin:
john-conner's project, Vanillacoin (VNL), includes a significant amount of reformatted and, at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code which has illegally and unethically had its attribution and copyright notices removed. In addition, he describes Vanillacoin as written "from scratch in its entirety", a false, misleading, and fraudulent claim that is being used to promote his coin. Given that this shows dishonesty, low credibility, and willingness to engage in unethical conduct, extreme caution is advised. What do you guys think? Is this accusation grounded? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: monsterer on September 20, 2015, 09:13:15 AM Smooth - the dev of XMR has made serious accusations against Vanilla coin: john-conner's project, Vanillacoin (VNL), includes a significant amount of reformatted and, at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code which has illegally and unethically had its attribution and copyright notices removed. In addition, he describes Vanillacoin as written "from scratch in its entirety", a false, misleading, and fraudulent claim that is being used to promote his coin. Given that this shows dishonesty, low credibility, and willingness to engage in unethical conduct, extreme caution is advised. What do you guys think? Is this accusation grounded? Yes, this 100% fact. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: ol92 on September 20, 2015, 01:02:01 PM Smooth - the dev of XMR has made serious accusations against Vanilla coin: john-conner's project, Vanillacoin (VNL), includes a significant amount of reformatted and, at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code which has illegally and unethically had its attribution and copyright notices removed. In addition, he describes Vanillacoin as written "from scratch in its entirety", a false, misleading, and fraudulent claim that is being used to promote his coin. Given that this shows dishonesty, low credibility, and willingness to engage in unethical conduct, extreme caution is advised. What do you guys think? Is this accusation grounded? Yes, this 100% fact. For me the expression "written from scratch" is more a borderline overstatement. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Marlo Stanfield on September 20, 2015, 05:02:48 PM Wasn't most of it just run through an automatic refactorer? That's what I remember reading. Not sure on the specifics though. Bitcoin Core dev Greg Maxwell called him out though and questioned his knowledge, which is pretty damning as one of the most trusted people in the community as well as one of the top experts.
I certainly wouldn't be too happy being told that it was completely written from scratch though. That appears to be quite deceptive. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: generalizethis on September 20, 2015, 05:10:41 PM I remember in elementary school this kid took apart a watch, taped it back together and told everyone, "I made this watch."
John, is that you? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Gillette on September 20, 2015, 08:04:43 PM So, as of now, the dev of vnl remains a fraudster?
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: bigfryguy on September 20, 2015, 08:41:16 PM isnt smooth vs everyone these days?
why doesnt he post a link of side by side code so everyone can see what he is talking about? dev of VNL is on irc everyday working on the code, building his project, and generally getting things done. over the last month He instituted zerotime an instant transfer which no one has been able to double spend yet He instituted a masterpeer incentive system he patched and released like 10 updated wallets he has been answerring questions for hours each day... Where have you seen a dev work so hard in crypto space. isnt Smooth a dev, shouldnt he be releasing things for his own projects? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: pseudonymdude on September 20, 2015, 08:45:39 PM So, as of now, the dev of vnl remains a fraudster? No. Vanillacoin is the ONLY coin that: - Has random ports and encrypted connections so your ISP won't notice anything unusual while monitoring your ports. No other coin does this - Has full, staking mobile wallets that allow you to move your wallet.dat to your PC from your Android and iOS wallets. No other coin does this - Requires only 1 confirmation on Poloniex (other than BTC, which also requires 1 confirmation) - Only coin to have near-instant 0 confirmation transactions without master nodes. No other coin has done this None of that is fraud and all of that is testable. He did use some of the tried and trusted methods from Bitcoin and Peercoin. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jimlite on September 20, 2015, 08:49:38 PM The fact that gmaxwell would even acknowledge and talk about john-connor shows that vnl dev is the real deal.
Do you think gmaxwell would even converse with Karsen or shitcoin #968 dev? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of clown clone devs. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: bitcoin carpenter on September 20, 2015, 08:54:38 PM Whatever people want to say about VNL
You have to admit... It works better than all the other clone/shitcoins out there. Sorry but I traded all my xmr to vnl weeks ago. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: maccaspacca on September 20, 2015, 08:54:53 PM Going back to the question - no the accusation is not grounded. I can see the concern but VNL was written to be familiar and compatible with other cryptocurrencies, pools and services etc. This means that the code calls similar functions to other currencies and uses common terminology, file locations etc.
This coin continues to diverge from all other currencies at an incredible rate. John is the real deal and has proven his skills time and time again. This weekend node incentives were implemented..... another feature unique to VNL. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jwinterm on September 20, 2015, 08:57:12 PM The fact that gmaxwell would even acknowledge and talk about john-connor shows that vnl dev is the real deal. Do you think gmaxwell would even converse with Karsen or shitcoin #968 dev? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of clown clone devs. It wasn't really a conversation, more of a quiet word of warning: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=920344.10 Quote Greeting, this evening john-connor showed up on the Bitcoin Core github with some rather aggressively ignorant minunderstandings of basic cryptographic consensus concepts: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5634#issuecomment-69481908 Having no clue who he was I looked at his github account and googled a bit and found that he is the, seemingly pseudonymous, author of "Vanillacoin". Vanillacoin was previously discussed on this forum, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=890388.0 but he locked the threads in order to shuffle the users (victims?) off to someplace out of the light of day-- never a good sign, (nor is his BCT newbie account, for that matter). The "vanillacoin" software has no source code available, it is binaries only (very much not a good sign, and usually severe malware concern; and an ultimate form of centralization), there are source links but they go to a basically empty github repository. There is a whitepaper, which like the comments on github show some general software development background they show no real sign of sophisticated understanding around decenteralized systems for adversarial networks or cryptocurrencies. I don't know anything more about it, but I figure sunlight tends to be a good disinfectant; and with the threads locked it probably wasn't fair of me to say nothing while I was privately thinking "hm, that all smells pretty fishy". Of course, the guy was a bit rude to me and also wasted my time-- so feel free to factor that bias in however you like. I'm just reporting my impression as a regular community member. You now know what I know. [I'm the last person to play altcoin-cops... I mostly avoid this stuff except for the rare cases that are technically interesting: The drama can sink unbounded time and usually, when it comes to the more misguided altcoin cryptography, the only sane policy seems to be "If you see something,say nothing and drink to forget": there is too much crazyness and risk of being attacked for being critical of someones latest scheme. But if it shows up in my face, I can't quite stomach saying nothing at all.] Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: americanpegasus on September 20, 2015, 08:57:55 PM I think that red text is reserved for smooth to use only, and you're in danger of this entire topic being deleted. ;D
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: bitcoin carpenter on September 20, 2015, 09:04:20 PM I remember in elementary school this kid took apart a watch, taped it back together and told everyone, "I made this watch." John, is that you? It's more like he took apart a watch, then gave him back a SPACESHIP!!!! Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: generalizethis on September 20, 2015, 09:11:07 PM The fact that gmaxwell would even acknowledge and talk about john-connor shows that vnl dev is the real deal. Do you think gmaxwell would even converse with Karsen or shitcoin #968 dev? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of clown clone devs. "The fact that Michael Jordan would even acknowledge and talk about Gerald Wilkins shows that "The Jordan Stopper" is the real deal. Do you think Jordan would even converse with Allan Houston or bench player #53? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of other clown players." --stuff idiot fan says Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: hughbt on September 20, 2015, 09:15:51 PM ohhh I have seen it all... This is the textbook situation when people at the top positions in the community(or company) are trying to destroy someone who can threaten their authority and who achieved something that they were unable to do.
Even if some part of the one insignificant method is rewritten or looks similar it doesn't matter. Every programmer understands that sometimes it just doesn't make sense to try to reinvent the wheel. If someone claims that John can't code, or doesn't have the knowledge he is just useful idiot. John did something that no one else could. He is the one who won and Smooth is the loser. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: pseudonymdude on September 20, 2015, 09:16:34 PM The fact that gmaxwell would even acknowledge and talk about john-connor shows that vnl dev is the real deal. Do you think gmaxwell would even converse with Karsen or shitcoin #968 dev? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of clown clone devs. "The fact that Michael Jordan would even acknowledge and talk about Gerald Wilkins shows that "The Jordan Stopper" is the real deal. Do you think Jordan would even converse with Allan Houston or bench player #53? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of other clown players." --stuff idiot fan says Address these points: Vanillacoin is the ONLY coin that: - Has random ports and encrypted connections so your ISP won't notice anything unusual while monitoring your ports. No other coin does this - Has full, staking mobile wallets that allow you to move your wallet.dat to your PC from your Android and iOS wallets. No other coin does this - Requires only 1 confirmation on Poloniex (other than BTC, which also requires 1 confirmation) - Only coin to have near-instant 0 confirmation transactions without master nodes. No other coin has done this None of that is fraud and all of that is testable. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 20, 2015, 09:17:27 PM why doesnt he post a link of side by side code so everyone can see what he is talking about? That was done. Follow the reference link in j-c's trust rating, that's what it's for (duh) BTW, I have no opinion on the merits of VNL's added features, etc. nor on his skills as a coder, so all those comments about how great the features are or how great a coder he is are entirely non-responsive on the point that he ripped off Bitcoin's code, stripped out the attributions (which are required by the original license) and misrepresented it as written entirely from scratch. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: YAdaminer on September 20, 2015, 09:18:00 PM What desperation is required to launch a new haters thread?
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: proletariat on September 20, 2015, 09:20:39 PM Connor has a lot more miles to his name in the p2p and cryptography world... more so in the p2p field years before bitcoin was invented. Try doing some research, googling and connecting the dots. The guy has been part of huge projects.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jimlite on September 20, 2015, 09:34:37 PM The fact that gmaxwell would even acknowledge and talk about john-connor shows that vnl dev is the real deal. Do you think gmaxwell would even converse with Karsen or shitcoin #968 dev? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of clown clone devs. "The fact that Michael Jordan would even acknowledge and talk about Gerald Wilkins shows that "The Jordan Stopper" is the real deal. Do you think Jordan would even converse with Allan Houston or bench player #53? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of other clown players." --stuff idiot fan says No, but I play basketball, and there is no way in hell Michael Jordan would talk to me about basketball strategy. And I used to code a bit, but there is no way in hell gmaxwell or smooth are going to debate code with me. I am insignificant in basketball or coding, john connor is not (well maybe in basketball). All I am saying is obviously if gmaxwell and smooth find points to debate with john connor, then VNL is a worthy coin. Whether it is the ZeroTime instant transfers without master nodes, security, or super peer code, there are real improvements or innovations that they see and that bitcoin or other alts lack. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 20, 2015, 09:39:45 PM All I am saying is obviously if gmaxwell and smooth find points to debate with john connor I can't speak for gmaxwell but I'm not debating anything with j-c. I saw someone else's allegations (not gmaxwell's, someone else's on an alt thread) of misappropriation of the code, looked into it and found it to be a correct accusation. That is the sole extent of my "involvement" here. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: ocminer on September 20, 2015, 09:43:18 PM I've been coding the RPC side of the coin with John "on-the-fly" in IRC .. I was coding the pools side, while he integrated the calls into the daemon.
We did that over several hours/days and also latter anti-ddos mechanisms and other stuff were/was integrated while "talking" in IRC to each other, he's certainly no "copy&paste" coder like many, many others, I can vouch for his skills, I've worked with him together several times already, he knows what he's doing. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: generalizethis on September 20, 2015, 09:53:30 PM The fact that gmaxwell would even acknowledge and talk about john-connor shows that vnl dev is the real deal. Do you think gmaxwell would even converse with Karsen or shitcoin #968 dev? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of clown clone devs. "The fact that Michael Jordan would even acknowledge and talk about Gerald Wilkins shows that "The Jordan Stopper" is the real deal. Do you think Jordan would even converse with Allan Houston or bench player #53? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of other clown players." --stuff idiot fan says No, but I play basketball, and there is no way in hell Michael Jordan would talk to me about basketball strategy. And I used to code a bit, but there is no way in hell gmaxwell or smooth are going to debate code with me. I am insignificant in basketball or coding, john connor is not (well maybe in basketball). All I am saying is obviously if gmaxwell and smooth find points to debate with john connor, then VNL is a worthy coin. Whether it is the ZeroTime instant transfers without master nodes, security, or super peer code, there are real improvements or innovations that they see and that bitcoin or other alts lack. Get your comparisons straight: --dev equals dev --professional bb player equals professional bb player --random fan boy on bct does not equal dev anymore than a guy playing at a YMCA equals a professional bb player. Like a professional bb player who gets some undeserved hype, a dev (especially a dev who seeks out the confrontation) who isn't what he claims deserves to be put in his place by his betters. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on September 20, 2015, 09:57:57 PM Connor has a lot more miles to his name in the p2p and cryptography world... more so in the p2p field years before bitcoin was invented. Try doing some research, googling and connecting the dots. The guy has been part of huge projects. Bernie Madoff was also part of huge projects. Ditto John Corzine and Ken Lay. Your faulty logic is intentionally misleading. VanillaCoin is a scam based on stolen (using FOSS without attribution is theft) code. They got caught red-handed. Gmax and smooth have done the community a great favor by busting this scam before more people are hurt by it. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: bigfryguy on September 20, 2015, 09:59:38 PM ok, so only devs in here so far, are smooth and ocminer...... smooth says he has no idea whether John is or is not good at what he does
ocminer says John does know what hes doing fan boys... blah blah blah blah entertainment.... I guess that means John-Conner knows what he is doing. useless thread, it just let us all know what we already knew. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: john-connor on September 20, 2015, 10:01:51 PM https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8)
Thank you for your support. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 20, 2015, 10:02:56 PM Connor has a lot more miles to his name in the p2p and cryptography world... more so in the p2p field years before bitcoin was invented. Try doing some research, googling and connecting the dots. The guy has been part of huge projects. Bernie Madoff was also part of huge projects. Didn't he (or at least his business) play a large role in inventing and developing NASDAQ? I'm not even kidding. Accomplishments and ability have no particular negative correlation with scamming. If anything the correlation might be positive because it makes the scams more convincing. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: bigfryguy on September 20, 2015, 10:09:10 PM always amazed that it is the same three crusaders that show up to every FUDD thread based around competitors coins on poloniex...
bet Karma has given you guys some nasty Carpel tunnel by now. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: BagHolder010 on September 20, 2015, 10:16:02 PM https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Smooth dares to call out people for copy pasting now? LOOOOOOOOOL....I Guess he is jealous of anyone with coding skills something not only Smooth can't comprehend but all the 30 Monero developers who can't do shit for a year and half alrdy. This is is just full of Monero haters hating everywhere as always. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: proletariat on September 20, 2015, 10:16:56 PM Connor has a lot more miles to his name in the p2p and cryptography world... more so in the p2p field years before bitcoin was invented. Try doing some research, googling and connecting the dots. The guy has been part of huge projects. Bernie Madoff was also part of huge projects. Didn't he (or at least his business) play a large role in inventing and developing NASDAQ? I'm not even kidding. Accomplishments and ability have no particular negative correlation with scamming. If anything the correlation might be positive because it makes the scams more convincing. wow you guys using the Bernie Madoff ammo in your replies eh? :o .... his involvement was not in the business side of things but in the coding innovation part of things - that's what I got from google anyhow. could be wrong though, but multiple google hits pointed in that direction..... Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: solid12345 on September 20, 2015, 10:17:03 PM Personally I don't care if a coin is cobbled together by a dozen children in a sweatshop if it works better and does more than all the others.
Crypto is one of the few subcultures where people get more wound up over the origins of something then the actual end use case. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: EmilioMann on September 20, 2015, 10:18:31 PM WOW
Vanilla is getting hot. Suffering fud attack from bitcoin coredev, xmr dev and one of the masters fuddsters of bctalk: icebreaker Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 20, 2015, 10:19:23 PM This is is just full of Monero haters hating everywhere as always. And now the usual Monero-hater suspects from Dash. Welcome. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 20, 2015, 10:21:03 PM WOW Vanilla is getting hot. Suffering fud attack from bitcoin coredev, xmr dev and one of the masters fuddsters of bctalk: icebreaker gmaxwell's post was from January. Mine was over a month ago. None of this has to do with anything "getting" hot or getting anything else but sure you can try to twist it to shill your favorite coin. Wouldn't expect anything less from shillmyfavcointalk.org. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on September 20, 2015, 10:22:15 PM Vanilla suffering fud attack from bitcoin coredev, xmr dev and one of the masters fuddsters of bctalk: icebreaker How is bringing public attention to Vanilla's stolen (ie refactored/unattributed) code a "fud attack?" gmaxwell's post was from January. Mine was over a month ago. None of this has to do with anything "getting hot" lol rekt Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: EmilioMann on September 20, 2015, 10:28:43 PM WOW Vanilla is getting hot. Suffering fud attack from bitcoin coredev, xmr dev and one of the masters fuddsters of bctalk: icebreaker gmaxwell's post was from January. Mine was over a month ago. None of this has to do with anything "getting" hot or anything else but sure you can twist it to shill your coin. Wouldn't expect anything less from shillcointalk.org. c'mon man, what are you doing here acting like a kid? Go take care of "your" coin and leave the others in peace. Vanilla suffering fud attack from bitcoin coredev, xmr dev and one of the masters fuddsters of bctalk: icebreaker How is bringing public attention to Vanilla's stolen (ie refactored/unattributed) code a "fud attack?" stolen? an open source? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 20, 2015, 10:30:47 PM WOW Vanilla is getting hot. Suffering fud attack from bitcoin coredev, xmr dev and one of the masters fuddsters of bctalk: icebreaker gmaxwell's post was from January. Mine was over a month ago. None of this has to do with anything "getting" hot or anything else but sure you can twist it to shill your coin. Wouldn't expect anything less from shillcointalk.org. c'mon man, what are you doing here acting like a kid? Go take care of "your" coin and leave the others in peace. Maybe it has something to do with name being mentioned in the thread title? Other than that I have no recent involvement or interest in any of this. If you are wondering why this is being brought up again now, ask the thread starter. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 20, 2015, 10:33:07 PM stolen? an open source? Open source licenses have conditions. Bitcoin's license has very few conditions indeed -- you can do almost any damn thing you want with it legitimately -- but one of few it does have is retaining the attribution. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: bigfryguy on September 20, 2015, 10:35:15 PM its funny, seeing the fud attacks is almost starting to become an indicator of when to buy
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: BagHolder010 on September 20, 2015, 10:37:50 PM This is is just full of Monero haters hating everywhere as always. And now the usual Monero-hater suspects from Dash. Welcome. You misqouted again.... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Smooth dares to call out people for copy pasting now? LOOOOOOOOOL....I Guess he is jealous of anyone with coding skills something not only Smooth can't comprehend but all the 30 Monero developers who can't do shit for a year and half alrdy. This is is just full of Monero haters hating everywhere as always. Also get out of DASH ANN thread you're a nuisance over there with all the Monero group who always seems to come to Dash Ann thread. If you guys have nothing but speculations and attacking others why don't all of you meet up and maybe just maybe start a true PR for Monero? this is how you get ppl involved with you not by attacking since you don't know how to code. P.S - Cry*p*to about it into forums type of developers are the worse man grow up and start coding! perhaps some lessons from Evan haha Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Liquid71 on September 20, 2015, 11:05:03 PM Smooth doing the community a solid, cheers smooth
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Liquid71 on September 20, 2015, 11:05:59 PM This is is just full of Monero haters hating everywhere as always. And now the usual Monero-hater suspects from Dash. Welcome. You misqouted again.... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Smooth dares to call out people for copy pasting now? LOOOOOOOOOL....I Guess he is jealous of anyone with coding skills something not only Smooth can't comprehend but all the 30 Monero developers who can't do shit for a year and half alrdy. This is is just full of Monero haters hating everywhere as always. Also get out of DASH ANN thread you're a nuisance over there with all the Monero group who always seems to come to Dash Ann thread. If you guys have nothing but speculations and attacking others why don't all of you meet up and maybe just maybe start a true PR for Monero? this is how you get ppl involved with you not by attacking since you don't know how to code. P.S - Cry*p*to about it into forums type of developers are the worse man grow up and start coding! perhaps some lessons from Evan haha Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jimlite on September 20, 2015, 11:14:24 PM Use common sense. NO dev codes non stop 24/7/365 for a year constantly pushing code to github to make a scam coin. The 500 scam coins you see pop up here every year are from no talent "devs" that spend a few hours cloning a coin, putting up an ANN, and doing a 1 week pump and dump Yobit coin and then disappear. I think even with all our disagreements, we can surely agree that VNL is NOT a Karsen or clown dev. few hour clone job from a serial shit coin dev. that just pumps out shit coin after shitcoin with pre-mines and ICOs that all fail. Whether you like John Connor and Vanilla coin or not, he definately deserves to be held in high regards with similiar devs from XMR, DASH, DOGE, LTC, and other top coins. He has nothing in common with bottom barrel Yobit or C-Cex coin devs that pump out crap coin after crap coin, and Ocminer has attested to that, and he has seen more crap coins than anyone here, LOL.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 20, 2015, 11:15:05 PM stolen? an open source? Open source licenses have conditions. Bitcoin's license has very few conditions indeed -- you can do almost any damn thing you want with it legitimately -- but one of few it does have is retaining the attribution. I wouldn't waste your keystrokes on EmilioMann if I were you. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jwinterm on September 20, 2015, 11:18:34 PM Use common sense. NO dev codes non stop 24/7/365 for a year constantly pushing code to github to make a scam coin. The 500 scam coins you see pop up here every year are from no talent "devs" that spend a few hours cloning a coin, putting up an ANN, and doing a 1 week pump and dump Yobit coin and then disappear. I think even with all our disagreements, we can surely agree that VNL is NOT a Karsen or clown dev. few hour clone job from a serial shit coin dev. that just pumps out shit coin after shitcoin with pre-mines and ICOs that all fail. Whether you like John Connor and Vanilla coin or not, he definately deserves to be held in high regards with similiar devs from XMR, DASH, DOGE, LTC, and other top coins. He has nothing in common with bottom barrel Yobit or C-Cex coin devs that pump out crap coin after crap coin, and Ocminer has attested to that, and he has seen more crap coins than anyone here, LOL. Did you read the OP: Quote john-conner's project, Vanillacoin (VNL), includes a significant amount of reformatted and, at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code which has illegally and unethically had its attribution and copyright notices removed. In addition, he describes Vanillacoin as written "from scratch in its entirety", a false, misleading, and fraudulent claim that is being used to promote his coin. Given that this shows dishonesty, low credibility, and willingness to engage in unethical conduct, extreme caution is advised. The issue is whether he illegally and unethically used Bitcoin code without attribution. The answer is 'yes'. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on September 20, 2015, 11:19:47 PM The issue is whether he illegally and unethically used Bitcoin code without attribution. The answer is 'yes'. [/thread] Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: john-connor on September 20, 2015, 11:21:04 PM https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8)
Thank you for your support. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on September 20, 2015, 11:23:36 PM https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Attacking smooth for his excellent work on XMR and AEON does nothing to change this fact: The issue is whether [VanillaCoin] illegally and unethically used Bitcoin code without attribution. The answer is 'yes'. The more you deflect, the more it confirms you are a scammer. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: john-connor on September 20, 2015, 11:24:35 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 20, 2015, 11:32:55 PM https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Attacking smooth for his excellent work on XMR and AEON does nothing to change this fact: The issue is whether [VanillaCoin] illegally and unethically used Bitcoin code without attribution. The answer is 'yes'. The more you deflect, the more it confirms you are a scammer. Smooth was not the first person to show evidence that the code was simply reformatted from Bitcoin, either. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: john-connor on September 20, 2015, 11:34:00 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on September 20, 2015, 11:35:08 PM https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Attacking smooth for his excellent work on XMR and AEON does nothing to change this fact: The issue is whether [VanillaCoin] illegally and unethically used Bitcoin code without attribution. The answer is 'yes'. The more you deflect, the more it confirms you are a scammer. Smooth was not the first person to show evidence that the code was simply reformatted from Bitcoin, either. Yes, it's adorable how the VanillaScammers attack gmax for (of all things) being a BTC core dev. As if that disqualifes his findings of fact w.r.t. other cryptocoins... ;D Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: alphacenturion on September 20, 2015, 11:35:27 PM Yawn. So much FUD on these forums its ridiculous. It would seem the more FUD, the more legit the project.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 20, 2015, 11:36:19 PM Smooth - the dev of XMR has made serious accusations against Vanilla coin: john-conner's project, Vanillacoin (VNL), includes a significant amount of reformatted and, at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code which has illegally and unethically had its attribution and copyright notices removed. In addition, he describes Vanillacoin as written "from scratch in its entirety", a false, misleading, and fraudulent claim that is being used to promote his coin. Given that this shows dishonesty, low credibility, and willingness to engage in unethical conduct, extreme caution is advised. What do you guys think? Is this accusation grounded? This is not an accusation made solely by smooth. Anyone with even a novice eye for C++ (like myself) can check out both source codes and prove it. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Liquid71 on September 20, 2015, 11:37:25 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation when skynet becomes self aware will VNL coin owners be spared on doomsday or are they going to become a pile of dead organic matter like the rest of humanity ???https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. hint: market VNL as a way to avoid the hell of Armageddon and be spared by skynet on doomsday and you will open up a new market. Reynolds Aluminum generates millions every year off tin foil hats, so while a small segment of society they can still 100x VNL market cap. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: john-connor on September 20, 2015, 11:37:33 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: BagHolder010 on September 20, 2015, 11:42:02 PM You know this is a screwed up forum when you see Monero developers attacking Conner while they did not give any credit to Bytecoin but guess what they attacked Bytecoin instead! LOL
I sure hope Fluffypony doesn't come here and copy paste here as well...they have developed an amazing copy paste skills within last 1.5 years so far. Last I heard they managed to move around some codes as well and called it *theirs* :P Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on September 21, 2015, 12:00:35 AM Smooth - the dev of XMR has made serious accusations against Vanilla coin: john-conner's project, Vanillacoin (VNL), includes a significant amount of reformatted and, at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code which has illegally and unethically had its attribution and copyright notices removed. In addition, he describes Vanillacoin as written "from scratch in its entirety", a false, misleading, and fraudulent claim that is being used to promote his coin. Given that this shows dishonesty, low credibility, and willingness to engage in unethical conduct, extreme caution is advised. What do you guys think? Is this accusation grounded? Yes, this 100% fact. Scam confirmed. Citation: github http://vanillacoin.net/forums/viewtopic.php?id=420 Hah. Looks like poking here had some effect.So... this code is substantially an older copy of Bitcoin Core (maybe copied from the ppcoin codebase? I see some fragments of that) with the attribution removed (in violation of the software license for Bitcoin core) and run through an ugly auto-formatter. It also doesn't agree with the binary on the site (linux64 sha256sum b07f40515ee75b768424189942d44af8c68b816bfc3018da65f4af273a283183): E.g. ECDSA verification in the binary on the site gives this disassembly: Quote 000000000054bc00 <_ZN4coin3key6verifyERKNS_6sha256ERKSt6vectorIhSaIhEE>: 54bc00: 48 89 5c 24 e8 mov %rbx,-0x18(%rsp) 54bc05: 48 89 6c 24 f0 mov %rbp,-0x10(%rsp) 54bc0a: 4c 89 64 24 f8 mov %r12,-0x8(%rsp) 54bc0f: 48 83 ec 18 sub $0x18,%rsp 54bc13: 48 8b 2a mov (%rdx),%rbp 54bc16: 48 8b 5a 08 mov 0x8(%rdx),%rbx 54bc1a: 4c 8b 27 mov (%rdi),%r12 54bc1d: 48 89 f7 mov %rsi,%rdi 54bc20: e8 bb a1 03 00 callq 585de0 <_ZNK4coin6sha2566digestEv> 54bc25: 48 89 e9 mov %rbp,%rcx 54bc28: 31 ff xor %edi,%edi 54bc2a: ba 20 00 00 00 mov $0x20,%edx 54bc2f: 48 29 eb sub %rbp,%rbx 54bc32: 4d 89 e1 mov %r12,%r9 54bc35: 48 89 c6 mov %rax,%rsi 54bc38: 41 89 d8 mov %ebx,%r8d 54bc3b: e8 d0 59 1e 00 callq 731610 <ECDSA_verify> 54bc40: 83 f8 01 cmp $0x1,%eax 54bc43: 48 8b 1c 24 mov (%rsp),%rbx 54bc47: 48 8b 6c 24 08 mov 0x8(%rsp),%rbp 54bc4c: 0f 94 c0 sete %al 54bc4f: 4c 8b 64 24 10 mov 0x10(%rsp),%r12 54bc54: 48 83 c4 18 add $0x18,%rsp 54bc58: c3 retq 54bc59: 90 nop 54bc5a: 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 nopw 0x0(%rax,%rax,1) compared to this source code: Quote bool key::verify( const sha256 & h, const std::vector<std::uint8_t> & signature ) { bool ret = false; if (signature.size() > 0) { auto ptr_signature = &signature[0]; ECDSA_SIG * ecdsa_sig = 0; /** * Make sure that the signature looks like a valid signature before * sending it to OpenSSL (like in the test cases). */ if ( (ecdsa_sig = d2i_ECDSA_SIG( 0, &ptr_signature, signature.size())) != 0 ) { std::uint8_t * pp = 0; auto len = i2d_ECDSA_SIG(ecdsa_sig, &pp); ECDSA_SIG_free(ecdsa_sig), ecdsa_sig = 0; if (pp && len > 0) { ret = ECDSA_verify( 0, h.digest(), sha256::digest_length, pp, len, m_EC_KEY ) == 1; OPENSSL_free(pp), pp = 0; } } } return ret; } Which contains a workaround for the change in OpenSSL behavior that the john-connor was so busily insulting us about. The disassembly shows no calls to d2i_ECDSA_SIG in that function-- the only one in the whole binary is the one inside OpenSSL that was there all along. Extra fun is the fact that this change appears to have been deceptively backdated in the git repository to December 9th. Doesn't appear to have any of the GUI code either; I wonder what other ways the source doesn't agree with the binary? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: flipme on September 21, 2015, 12:04:35 AM Smooth - the dev of XMR has made serious accusations against Vanilla coin: john-conner's project, Vanillacoin (VNL), includes a significant amount of reformatted and, at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code which has illegally and unethically had its attribution and copyright notices removed. In addition, he describes Vanillacoin as written "from scratch in its entirety", a false, misleading, and fraudulent claim that is being used to promote his coin. Given that this shows dishonesty, low credibility, and willingness to engage in unethical conduct, extreme caution is advised. What do you guys think? Is this accusation grounded? Yes, this 100% fact. Scam confirmed. Citation: github http://vanillacoin.net/forums/viewtopic.php?id=420 Hah. Looks like poking here had some effect.So... this code is substantially an older copy of Bitcoin Core (maybe copied from the ppcoin codebase? I see some fragments of that) with the attribution removed (in violation of the software license for Bitcoin core) and run through an ugly auto-formatter. It also doesn't agree with the binary on the site (linux64 sha256sum b07f40515ee75b768424189942d44af8c68b816bfc3018da65f4af273a283183): E.g. ECDSA verification in the binary on the site gives this disassembly: Quote 000000000054bc00 <_ZN4coin3key6verifyERKNS_6sha256ERKSt6vectorIhSaIhEE>: 54bc00: 48 89 5c 24 e8 mov %rbx,-0x18(%rsp) 54bc05: 48 89 6c 24 f0 mov %rbp,-0x10(%rsp) 54bc0a: 4c 89 64 24 f8 mov %r12,-0x8(%rsp) 54bc0f: 48 83 ec 18 sub $0x18,%rsp 54bc13: 48 8b 2a mov (%rdx),%rbp 54bc16: 48 8b 5a 08 mov 0x8(%rdx),%rbx 54bc1a: 4c 8b 27 mov (%rdi),%r12 54bc1d: 48 89 f7 mov %rsi,%rdi 54bc20: e8 bb a1 03 00 callq 585de0 <_ZNK4coin6sha2566digestEv> 54bc25: 48 89 e9 mov %rbp,%rcx 54bc28: 31 ff xor %edi,%edi 54bc2a: ba 20 00 00 00 mov $0x20,%edx 54bc2f: 48 29 eb sub %rbp,%rbx 54bc32: 4d 89 e1 mov %r12,%r9 54bc35: 48 89 c6 mov %rax,%rsi 54bc38: 41 89 d8 mov %ebx,%r8d 54bc3b: e8 d0 59 1e 00 callq 731610 <ECDSA_verify> 54bc40: 83 f8 01 cmp $0x1,%eax 54bc43: 48 8b 1c 24 mov (%rsp),%rbx 54bc47: 48 8b 6c 24 08 mov 0x8(%rsp),%rbp 54bc4c: 0f 94 c0 sete %al 54bc4f: 4c 8b 64 24 10 mov 0x10(%rsp),%r12 54bc54: 48 83 c4 18 add $0x18,%rsp 54bc58: c3 retq 54bc59: 90 nop 54bc5a: 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 nopw 0x0(%rax,%rax,1) compared to this source code: Quote bool key::verify( const sha256 & h, const std::vector<std::uint8_t> & signature ) { bool ret = false; if (signature.size() > 0) { auto ptr_signature = &signature[0]; ECDSA_SIG * ecdsa_sig = 0; /** * Make sure that the signature looks like a valid signature before * sending it to OpenSSL (like in the test cases). */ if ( (ecdsa_sig = d2i_ECDSA_SIG( 0, &ptr_signature, signature.size())) != 0 ) { std::uint8_t * pp = 0; auto len = i2d_ECDSA_SIG(ecdsa_sig, &pp); ECDSA_SIG_free(ecdsa_sig), ecdsa_sig = 0; if (pp && len > 0) { ret = ECDSA_verify( 0, h.digest(), sha256::digest_length, pp, len, m_EC_KEY ) == 1; OPENSSL_free(pp), pp = 0; } } } return ret; } Which contains a workaround for the change in OpenSSL behavior that the john-connor was so busily insulting us about. The disassembly shows no calls to d2i_ECDSA_SIG in that function-- the only one in the whole binary is the one inside OpenSSL that was there all along. Extra fun is the fact that this change appears to have been deceptively backdated in the git repository to December 9th. Doesn't appear to have any of the GUI code either; I wonder what other ways the source doesn't agree with the binary? Haha. I remember Monero didn't even have a GUI for months to come. HAHAHAHA Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on September 21, 2015, 12:06:36 AM You have no defense of your well-documented scumbag code theft (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=920344.msg10122209#msg10122209), so you just keep crapflooding the forum with repetitive links to the DashHole's We-Hate-Smooth thread. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: john-connor on September 21, 2015, 12:10:53 AM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: BagHolder010 on September 21, 2015, 12:13:30 AM I think you got it all wrong, it was Smooth who created the thread of why he hates Evan and Dash. THEN blockfett CREATED that thread, remember we were in peace in the DASH ANN thread until we started seeing you/Smooth and probably the entire Monero people showing up day after day there. Not sure if that's how you think PR should look like or what lol.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jimlite on September 21, 2015, 12:26:04 AM All I see is stupid accusations on what tiny part of code might be similiar to previous code. Code will have similiarities to older code that works. When you guys play Batman, Star Wars Battlefront, Metal Gear Solid, and Halo 5 this holiday season are you going to bitch that the devs of those games used DirectX and didn't re-code their own directx? Directx is what, 500MB and those games are about 30-50GB, so these games are all using .01% of the same code, who cares? I am sure they use far more of the same code for their graphics, sound, a.i. routines, artwork, etc. Hell John should have wrote his own operating system and computer language as well, right? So if he said it was coded from scratch it would satisfy you guys.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 21, 2015, 12:30:19 AM You know this is a screwed up forum when you see Monero developers attacking Conner while they did not give any credit to Bytecoin but guess what they attacked Bytecoin instead! LOL Copyright attributions from the Bytecoin->Monero fork were retained, are still there, and appear in virtually every file (a few files that are brand new work don't have it, but even some that are brand new work probably do, since it is easier to just include the same copyright notices everywhere). For example: Parts of this file are originally copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers Those copyright notices in the Bytecoin code attributed authorship to "the Cryptonote developers" not "Bytecoin" even well after Monero had already been forked, and that is easily verified in github. Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers (May 9, 2014, when Monero had been forked in mid April) As for why Bytecoin had authorship attributed that way can't say. I imagine some sort of internal decision within their group might be responsible but that is just a guess. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jimlite on September 21, 2015, 12:32:24 AM This is like if Beethoven was FUDding Bach for using C# and 4/4 tempo, wtf? Like he isn't allowed to use notes because Beethoven did it first?
You guys are getting way too technical and upset over nothing. I get mad at these "Rap" artists that sample 2 seconds of a good old rock song and somehow have a hit song when they clearly just scammed the hook or riff, but it isn't illegal (for a certain size sample or notes), and the new audience may all like the rap song better, even if I like the original. Think EMINEM, Puff Daddy, hell just about all rappers. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: john-connor on September 21, 2015, 12:34:56 AM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: john-connor on September 21, 2015, 12:40:12 AM You know this is a screwed up forum when you see Monero developers attacking Conner while they did not give any credit to Bytecoin but guess what they attacked Bytecoin instead! LOL Copyright attributions from the Bytecoin->Monero fork were retained, are still there, and appear in virtually every file (a few files that are brand new work don't have it, but even some that are brand new work probably do, since it is easier to just include the same copyright notices everywhere). For example: Parts of this file are originally copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers Those copyright notices in the Bytecoin code attributed authorship to "the Cryptonote developers" not "Bytecoin" even well after Monero had already been forked, and that is easily verified in github. Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers (May 9, 2014, when Monero had been forked in mid April) As for why Bytecoin had authorship attributed that way can't say. I imagine some sort of internal decision within their group might be responsible but that is just a guess. XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 Thank you for your support. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 21, 2015, 12:46:36 AM You know this is a screwed up forum when you see Monero developers attacking Conner while they did not give any credit to Bytecoin but guess what they attacked Bytecoin instead! LOL Copyright attributions from the Bytecoin->Monero fork were retained, are still there, and appear in virtually every file (a few files that are brand new work don't have it, but even some that are brand new work probably do, since it is easier to just include the same copyright notices everywhere). For example: Parts of this file are originally copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers Those copyright notices in the Bytecoin code attributed authorship to "the Cryptonote developers" not "Bytecoin" even well after Monero had already been forked, and that is easily verified in github. Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers (May 9, 2014, when Monero had been forked in mid April) As for why Bytecoin had authorship attributed that way can't say. I imagine some sort of internal decision within their group might be responsible but that is just a guess. Thank you for your support. Nah. You're suggesting that bytecoin might not have had the right to distribute it under those terms. But that doesn't fly because same code was also posted directly by cryptonote as well, on their own repo https://github.com/cryptonotefoundation/cryptonote with the same attribution and license. For example: Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers But to get back on topic here, Vanillacoin apparently violating Bitcoin's license on substantial portions of the code (as documented in the Reference link and gmaxwells post and elsewhere) is another matter entirely. Or can you point to some source documenting you were given permission to reformat the Bitcoin code and redistribute it without the attribution? If you can do that I will remove the negative trust and add positive trust correcting my earlier error. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jimlite on September 21, 2015, 01:04:35 AM https://youtu.be/b7cy-3f3sc8?t=90
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: john-connor on September 21, 2015, 01:06:14 AM You know this is a screwed up forum when you see Monero developers attacking Conner while they did not give any credit to Bytecoin but guess what they attacked Bytecoin instead! LOL Copyright attributions from the Bytecoin->Monero fork were retained, are still there, and appear in virtually every file (a few files that are brand new work don't have it, but even some that are brand new work probably do, since it is easier to just include the same copyright notices everywhere). For example: Parts of this file are originally copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers Those copyright notices in the Bytecoin code attributed authorship to "the Cryptonote developers" not "Bytecoin" even well after Monero had already been forked, and that is easily verified in github. Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers (May 9, 2014, when Monero had been forked in mid April) As for why Bytecoin had authorship attributed that way can't say. I imagine some sort of internal decision within their group might be responsible but that is just a guess. Thank you for your support. Thank you for your support. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 21, 2015, 01:08:31 AM You know this is a screwed up forum when you see Monero developers attacking Conner while they did not give any credit to Bytecoin but guess what they attacked Bytecoin instead! LOL Copyright attributions from the Bytecoin->Monero fork were retained, are still there, and appear in virtually every file (a few files that are brand new work don't have it, but even some that are brand new work probably do, since it is easier to just include the same copyright notices everywhere). For example: Parts of this file are originally copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers Those copyright notices in the Bytecoin code attributed authorship to "the Cryptonote developers" not "Bytecoin" even well after Monero had already been forked, and that is easily verified in github. Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers (May 9, 2014, when Monero had been forked in mid April) As for why Bytecoin had authorship attributed that way can't say. I imagine some sort of internal decision within their group might be responsible but that is just a guess. Thank you for your support. Better to have your attorney look into the situation with your reformatting of the Bitcoin code, redistributing with attributions removed (in violation of its license), and then passing it off as built from scratch But who are we kidding here. If you actually had a qualified attorney and paid any attention to the advice from said attorney, you wouldn't be doing that in the first place. Since you seem to have missed this the first time, I'll bold it for you: Or can you point to some source documenting you were given permission to reformat the Bitcoin code and redistribute it without the attribution? If you can do that I will remove the negative trust and add positive trust correcting my earlier error. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Gillette on September 21, 2015, 01:28:43 AM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: asepticskeptic on September 21, 2015, 01:49:28 AM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? Note the tactical use of A true master. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on September 21, 2015, 02:04:45 AM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? Just report the crapflood to the mods, he's basically begging to get teh almighty ban-hammar. ;D Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: bigfryguy on September 21, 2015, 02:18:26 AM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? thats idiotic, yes he spams, but the normal John-Conner spams are to github with constant updates and that is more than enough for followers of this project to be happy about. this coming from a guy who created a thread to restart an argument that people stopped caring about months ago. John is just spamming you for trolling Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: EmilioMann on September 21, 2015, 02:35:45 AM hey we have also SDC shadowtrash trolls here.
They reminded me of this thread "The full truth behind ShadowCash trolls and Their attacks on other coins." https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=818939.0 Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: EmilioMann on September 21, 2015, 02:51:07 AM I really dont care if someone took a line of an open source and not written where it came from or if another took a whole code and instead of putting it was copied and pasted from a scam called bytecoin, put "cryptonote creators" to make people think that the creators are themselves.
What really matters to me is that vanilla coin will soon be a perfect currency, much better technically than btc, xmr (timebomb) and dash. I just hope vnl changes its name Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 02:56:48 AM hey we have also SDC shadowtrash trolls here. They reminded me of this thread "The full truth behind ShadowCash trolls and Their attacks on other coins." https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=818939.0 Why are you still so salty of people in the Shadowcash community going out of their ways to try and protect your dumb ass from being scammed? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: EmilioMann on September 21, 2015, 03:03:57 AM hey we have also SDC shadowtrash trolls here. They reminded me of this thread "The full truth behind ShadowCash trolls and Their attacks on other coins." https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=818939.0 Why are you still so salty of people in the Shadowcash community going out of their ways to try and protect your dumb ass from being scammed? Shut up kid or I'm going to ask to ICM dump more hundreds of thousands of SDC that he got through the shadowtrash exploit Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 03:06:44 AM hey we have also SDC shadowtrash trolls here. They reminded me of this thread "The full truth behind ShadowCash trolls and Their attacks on other coins." https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=818939.0 Why are you still so salty of people in the Shadowcash community going out of their ways to try and protect your dumb ass from being scammed? Shut up kid or I'm going to ask to ICM dump more hundreds of thousands of SDC that he got through the shadowtrash exploit Go for it dumbass Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smoothie on September 21, 2015, 06:16:15 AM Why does it appear that the shady characters always ignore or deflect away from a request that is made that gets to the point of certain issues?
It must be in their DNA...kinda like how scammers that operate ponzi schemes on large scales only care about self image and luxury and could care less about actually running a business to turn a profit. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: hughbt on September 21, 2015, 07:30:50 AM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? I don't believe that false accusations are the only thing other devs can do... They can't code zero time that's for sure. :D :D You can accuse anyone for anything. That's why we have courts to prove that someone is guilty. If you are certain that he broke the law then go and inform the police... What are you waiting for... oh wait Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: maccaspacca on September 21, 2015, 12:26:31 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? I don't believe that false accusations are the only thing other devs can do... They can't code zero time that's for sure. :D :D You can accuse anyone for anything. That's why we have courts to prove that someone is guilty. If you are certain that he broke the law then go and inform the police... What are you waiting for... oh wait I agree - if a law has been broken (you haven't even established in which jurisdiction yet?) then you should report it to the police or engage a lawyer for a professional opinion. In fact I will report it to the bitcoin police on reddit for you :) Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: solid12345 on September 21, 2015, 01:43:12 PM Regardless of what JC did or didn't do, from a legal standpoint the Monero team had no right to take what is copyrighted software and slap their own copyright on top of it. Now of course the bytecoin guys are anonymous hackers who will probably never come out of hiding to sue him and the horse is out of the barn already but the point is they don't really understand what the word "copyright" really means.
Also I LOL at this statement "Parts of the project are originally copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers" I guess 90-95% of code is only "parts" :D Btw I actually support Monero and forking Bytecoin for the obvious shady premine aspect of the original, but i'm not going to pretend it's anything more than a warez/pirated version of it. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 01:44:06 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? I don't believe that false accusations are the only thing other devs can do... They can't code zero time that's for sure. :D :D You can accuse anyone for anything. That's why we have courts to prove that someone is guilty. If you are certain that he broke the law then go and inform the police... What are you waiting for... oh wait I agree - if a law has been broken (you haven't even established in which jurisdiction yet?) then you should report it to the police or engage a lawyer for a professional opinion. In fact I will report it to the bitcoin police on reddit for you :) The legality of it doesn't really matter. In the open source, free software community, this type of behavior is incredibly immoral. It's not a fucking free for all, there are community standards to be upheld from an ethics standpoint. The simple fact that john-connor claimed to have written the entire Vanillacoin source from scratch means he has committed fraud. Why you would trust a developer like this is beyond me. Regardless of his ability to develop software, his inability to engage in ethical practices is a huge red flag. Yet he has already built a following of sheep trying to ride his coattail to monetary gain. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 01:48:05 PM Regardless of what JC did or didn't do, from a legal standpoint Smooth had no right to take what is copyrighted software and slap his own copyright on top of it. Now of course the bytecoin guys are anonymous hackers who will probably never come out of hiding to sue him and the horse is out of the barn already but the point is he doesn't really understand what the word "copyright" really means. Also I LOL at this statement "Parts of the project are originally copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers" I guess 90-95% of code is only "parts" :D Btw I actually support Monero and forking Bytecoin for the obvious shady premine aspect of the original, but i'm not going to pretend it's anything more than a warez/pirated version of it. Red herring & ad hominem at the same time? Impressive. I'm not sure you understand copyright licenses. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: solid12345 on September 21, 2015, 02:02:06 PM I'm not sure you understand copyright licenses. Copyright is a party asserting their ownership of an intellectual property. This includes "rights frequently include reproduction, control over derivative works, distribution, public performance, and "moral rights" such as attribution." If the Bytecoin guys wanted to sue Monero for infringement, they'd have full legal authority and would more than likely win in court if they can prove they are the original content creators. The difference with Bitcoin is it is granted under the MIT license which is a euphemism for permissive licensed software, however in reality the thing is a joke. MIT is not a lawmaking body, they are not patent clerks and using them as some authority for what is and isn't legal copyright is absurd. Sure there is a big debate about what is polite in open source communities but I challenge any of this crap to hold up in a REAL court of law not governed by utopian nerds. Personally I follow common sense, if you don't want your stuff copied and hacked, don't put it out there or assert strict legal ownership of it because the only thing that can put a stop to bad behavior is the threat of a court order. You should see how much stock photo and font theft goes on in the graphic design community, but if no one is going to challenge it or assert their rights then it's the wild west. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: hughbt on September 21, 2015, 02:08:03 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? I don't believe that false accusations are the only thing other devs can do... They can't code zero time that's for sure. :D :D You can accuse anyone for anything. That's why we have courts to prove that someone is guilty. If you are certain that he broke the law then go and inform the police... What are you waiting for... oh wait I agree - if a law has been broken (you haven't even established in which jurisdiction yet?) then you should report it to the police or engage a lawyer for a professional opinion. In fact I will report it to the bitcoin police on reddit for you :) The legality of it doesn't really matter. In the open source, free software community, this type of behavior is incredibly immoral. It's not a fucking free for all, there are community standards to be upheld from an ethics standpoint. The simple fact that john-connor claimed to have written the entire Vanillacoin source from scratch means he has committed fraud. Why you would trust a developer like this is beyond me. Regardless of his ability to develop software, his inability to engage in ethical practices is a huge red flag. Yet he has already built a following of sheep trying to ride his coattail to monetary gain. Yeaah, now legality doesn't matter. So what matters more? If he commited a fraud(fraud is illegal, but it doesn't matter?) as you claim, you should report it. If my competitors would stole intellectual property and took my market share I would fight against it. But not by hanging a large banner "company x is stealing intellectual property" on my own company's headquarters like xmr and other devs are doing(you can go to jail for something like this). It's plain stupid, trolling, or unfair competition what you are doing. You can't prove shit, but you are still attacking. Someone is stealing money from the bank, I'm going to post on his facebook that he is a thief but I'm not going to call the police because he wasn't stealing. Fuck logic Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 02:14:51 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? I don't believe that false accusations are the only thing other devs can do... They can't code zero time that's for sure. :D :D You can accuse anyone for anything. That's why we have courts to prove that someone is guilty. If you are certain that he broke the law then go and inform the police... What are you waiting for... oh wait I agree - if a law has been broken (you haven't even established in which jurisdiction yet?) then you should report it to the police or engage a lawyer for a professional opinion. In fact I will report it to the bitcoin police on reddit for you :) The legality of it doesn't really matter. In the open source, free software community, this type of behavior is incredibly immoral. It's not a fucking free for all, there are community standards to be upheld from an ethics standpoint. The simple fact that john-connor claimed to have written the entire Vanillacoin source from scratch means he has committed fraud. Why you would trust a developer like this is beyond me. Regardless of his ability to develop software, his inability to engage in ethical practices is a huge red flag. Yet he has already built a following of sheep trying to ride his coattail to monetary gain. Yeaah, now legality doesn't matter. So what matters more? If he commited a fraud(fraud is illegal, but it doesn't matter?) as you claim, you should report it. If my competitors would stole intellectual property and took my market share I would fight against it. But not by hanging a large banner "company x is stealing intellectual property" on my own company's headquarters like xmr and other devs are doing(you can go to jail for something like this). It's plain stupid, trolling, or unfair competition what you are doing. You can't prove shit, but you are still attacking. Someone is stealing money from the bank, I'm going to post on his facebook that he is a thief but I'm not going to call the police because he wasn't stealing. Fuck logic What I am doing? I'm arguing my opinion which has factual merit. I don't need to report any activity to any authority in order for my arguments to be valid and strong. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 02:19:42 PM I'm not sure you understand copyright licenses. Copyright is a party asserting their ownership of an intellectual property. This includes "rights frequently include reproduction, control over derivative works, distribution, public performance, and "moral rights" such as attribution." If the Bytecoin guys wanted to sue Monero for infringement, they'd have full legal authority and would more than likely win in court if they can prove they are the original content creators. The difference with Bitcoin is it is granted under the MIT license which is a euphemism for permissive licensed software, however in reality the thing is a joke. MIT is not a lawmaking body, they are not patent clerks and using them as some authority for what is and isn't legal copyright is absurd. Sure there is a big debate about what is polite in open source communities but I challenge any of this crap to hold up in a REAL court of law not governed by utopian nerds. Personally I follow common sense, if you don't want your stuff copied and hacked, don't put it out there or assert strict legal ownership of it because the only thing that can put a stop to bad behavior is the threat of a court order. You should see how much stock photo and font theft goes on in the graphic design community, but if no one is going to challenge it or assert their rights then it's the wild west. The MIT license is a copyright framework for open source software, much like the GNU GPL. You don't have to be a patent lawyer to put this shit in your software in order to communicate the terms in which your software can be used, copied, and modified. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: hughbt on September 21, 2015, 02:21:15 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? I don't believe that false accusations are the only thing other devs can do... They can't code zero time that's for sure. :D :D You can accuse anyone for anything. That's why we have courts to prove that someone is guilty. If you are certain that he broke the law then go and inform the police... What are you waiting for... oh wait I agree - if a law has been broken (you haven't even established in which jurisdiction yet?) then you should report it to the police or engage a lawyer for a professional opinion. In fact I will report it to the bitcoin police on reddit for you :) The legality of it doesn't really matter. In the open source, free software community, this type of behavior is incredibly immoral. It's not a fucking free for all, there are community standards to be upheld from an ethics standpoint. The simple fact that john-connor claimed to have written the entire Vanillacoin source from scratch means he has committed fraud. Why you would trust a developer like this is beyond me. Regardless of his ability to develop software, his inability to engage in ethical practices is a huge red flag. Yet he has already built a following of sheep trying to ride his coattail to monetary gain. Yeaah, now legality doesn't matter. So what matters more? If he commited a fraud(fraud is illegal, but it doesn't matter?) as you claim, you should report it. If my competitors would stole intellectual property and took my market share I would fight against it. But not by hanging a large banner "company x is stealing intellectual property" on my own company's headquarters like xmr and other devs are doing(you can go to jail for something like this). It's plain stupid, trolling, or unfair competition what you are doing. You can't prove shit, but you are still attacking. Someone is stealing money from the bank, I'm going to post on his facebook that he is a thief but I'm not going to call the police because he wasn't stealing. Fuck logic What I am doing? I'm arguing my opinion which has factual merit. I don't need to report any activity to any authority in order for my arguments to be valid and strong. I can write here that you are a liar, my opinion has factual merit, because you are lying that John stole bitcoin's code. You are wrong, your arguments are not strong and valid. Anyone can write whatever he wants. It really takes a lot more to prove that someone stole code than stupid post on bitcointalk... You seem to not understand that simple fact. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 02:29:29 PM XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 8) Thank you for your support. Don`t make me believe that spamming is the only thing VNL dev can do. Instead of producing substantial arguments in your coin`s favor, you begin spamming? I don't believe that false accusations are the only thing other devs can do... They can't code zero time that's for sure. :D :D You can accuse anyone for anything. That's why we have courts to prove that someone is guilty. If you are certain that he broke the law then go and inform the police... What are you waiting for... oh wait I agree - if a law has been broken (you haven't even established in which jurisdiction yet?) then you should report it to the police or engage a lawyer for a professional opinion. In fact I will report it to the bitcoin police on reddit for you :) The legality of it doesn't really matter. In the open source, free software community, this type of behavior is incredibly immoral. It's not a fucking free for all, there are community standards to be upheld from an ethics standpoint. The simple fact that john-connor claimed to have written the entire Vanillacoin source from scratch means he has committed fraud. Why you would trust a developer like this is beyond me. Regardless of his ability to develop software, his inability to engage in ethical practices is a huge red flag. Yet he has already built a following of sheep trying to ride his coattail to monetary gain. Yeaah, now legality doesn't matter. So what matters more? If he commited a fraud(fraud is illegal, but it doesn't matter?) as you claim, you should report it. If my competitors would stole intellectual property and took my market share I would fight against it. But not by hanging a large banner "company x is stealing intellectual property" on my own company's headquarters like xmr and other devs are doing(you can go to jail for something like this). It's plain stupid, trolling, or unfair competition what you are doing. You can't prove shit, but you are still attacking. Someone is stealing money from the bank, I'm going to post on his facebook that he is a thief but I'm not going to call the police because he wasn't stealing. Fuck logic What I am doing? I'm arguing my opinion which has factual merit. I don't need to report any activity to any authority in order for my arguments to be valid and strong. I can write here that you are a liar, my opinion has factual merit, because you are lying that John stole bitcoin's code. You are wrong, your arguments are not strong and valid. Anyone can write whatever he wants. It really takes a lot more to prove that someone stole code than stupid post on bitcointalk... You seem to not understand that simple fact. Okay trolling confirmed. For the record (directed at third party observers seeking information), I have very little coding experience but I am in my second C++ class at University. Simply looking at both codebases, it's very easy to see that everything borrowed from the Bitcoin source code was simply rewritten with different variable and constant names. This refactoring is not against the copyright license that the Bitcoin devs maintain in their code - but since the Vanillacoin dev removed the copyright attribution to Bitcoin from the Vanillacoin code and claimed to have written everything from scratch, he is guilty fraudulent and unethical behavior. See the below quote for evidence: Comparing a sample piece of code it is clear that at least some of it is based on Bitcoin code: From vanillacoin - https://github.com/john-connor/vanillacoin/blob/master/src/address_manager.cpp#L1315 Code: * Try to find an entry that can be erased. From Bitcoin 0.9.2 in addrman.cpp: Code: // first look for deletable items The above code from vanillacoin is based on bitcoin, albeit renamed, refactored, reformatted and re-commented at almost every possible occasion. The algorithm is the same line by line and even the esoteric identifier name "IsTerrible"/"is_terrible" is used in both. My guess is John started with a old bitcoin code base and refactored, renamed and recommented the code to a huge degree. There has also been additions like the zerotime stuff which is not like anything in Bitcoin: https://github.com/john-connor/vanillacoin/blob/master/src/zerotime.cpp Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: traumschiff on September 21, 2015, 02:58:31 PM It is a POW/POS hybrid crypto-currency, obviously it is based on already existing ideas/solutions, but it has been redesigned in C++ and has been complemented with several unique features. Vanillacoin is way more advanced than bitcoin or it's forks in the way it handles the network and transactions.
Yeah, you will find similarities and you will also find that it uses blockchain files and a wallet.dat, but please review the source code for yourself and tell me that it's anything like Bitcoin afterwards. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: hughbt on September 21, 2015, 03:02:51 PM WheatClove
There is just no point in writing this method in any other way. What would be your code to achieve this desirable functionality? I remember apple's patent war, when they tried to patent slide to unlock. That's the court's verdict: "This user-friendly display was already suggested by the state of the art." Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 03:23:51 PM It is a POW/POS hybrid crypto-currency, obviously it is based on already existing ideas/solutions, but it has been redesigned in C++ and has been complemented with several unique features. Vanillacoin is way more advanced than bitcoin or it's forks in the way it handles the network and transactions. Yeah, you will find similarities and you will also find that it uses blockchain files and a wallet.dat, but please review the source code for yourself and tell me that it's anything like Bitcoin afterwards. "Redesigned in C++" Bitcoin is written in C++. So, by your words, Bitcoin code was restructured and complimented with several unique features. This still requires the copyright attribution to Bitcoin. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: EmilioMann on September 21, 2015, 03:50:22 PM Hey wheatcove, what you have to say about the morality of you and other gangsters from shadowtrash devteam being scouring the bctalk hunting new ideas and when you find make believe to contribute to the creators for access to studies and one day before the release be done by the feature creators, you guys release a crap SDC version and say that you were the first and then start a fud campaign against the currency which you guys stole the feature?
In the shadowtrash whitepaper, you put some credit to Hondo for having been "inspired" in his ideas and even copied and pasted entire sentences of stealthsend white paper brief? "The full truth behind ShadowCash trolls and Their attacks on other coins." - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=818939.0 You and your gangsters are a bunch of hypocrites trolls made of shit. I really dont care if someone took a line of an open source and not written where it came from or if another took a whole code and instead of putting it was copied and pasted from a scam called bytecoin, put "cryptonote creators" to make people think that the creators are themselves as monero devs did. What really matters to me is that vanilla coin will soon be a perfect currency, much better technically than btc, xmr (timebomb) and dash. I just hope vnl changes its name Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 04:19:57 PM Hey wheatcove, what you have to say about the morality of you and other gangsters from shadowtrash devteam being scouring the bctalk hunting new ideas and when you find make believe to contribute to the creators for access to studies and one day before the release be done by the feature creators, you guys release a crap SDC version and say that you were the first and then start a fud campaign against the currency which you guys stole the feature? In the shadowtrash whitepaper, you put some credit to Hondo for having been "inspired" in his ideas and even copied and pasted entire sentences of stealthsend white paper brief? "The full truth behind ShadowCash trolls and Their attacks on other coins." - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=818939.0 You and your gangsters are a bunch of hypocrites trolls made of shit. I really dont care if someone took a line of an open source and not written where it came from or if another took a whole code and instead of putting it was copied and pasted from a scam called bytecoin, put "cryptonote creators" to make people think that the creators are themselves as monero devs did. What really matters to me is that vanilla coin will soon be a perfect currency, much better technically than btc, xmr (timebomb) and dash. I just hope vnl changes its name Me and my gangsters? Contrary to your delusions, I have never colluded with anyone to cause any harm to any serious development in the crypto community. I am my own entity and I do not belong to a specific, malicious group of people as you claim. I have only expressed my opinions of potential scams based on any red flags that stand out due to the behaviors of developers. I am active in multiple communities, learning from everyone and everything I can. I've made zero money from anything to do with Shadowcash and I am not a developer - rather a student. There are members of the Shadowcash dev teams that are kind enough to share knowledge from time to time and help me learn. Longandshort (not a member of the SDC dev team) raised legitimate questions about StealthSend's concept, causing the entire non-technical StealthCoin community (you included) to retaliate. The claims you made in regards to the ShadowSend and StealthSend whitepapers are previously unknown to me - if you could present me with more evidence I would take your claims seriously. That troll thread is the biggest joke on these forums, and I took the time to explain that entire situation on page 2, with links and a timeline of events. I don't think anyone takes you seriously, as you've only been involved with a majority of Bobsurplus's pump and dumps. Here you are, detracting from the original subject matter of this thread. Like you do with all of your threads. Your logical fallacies are out of control. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 21, 2015, 04:24:30 PM If the Bytecoin guys wanted to sue Monero for infringement, they'd have full legal authority and would more than likely win in court if they can prove they are the original content creators. The difference with Bitcoin is it is granted under the MIT license ... Uh, no. The cryptonote code also grants permission under the exact same MIT license. So no difference. The difference is that Monero retained the original attribution, as required by the license, and as do most of the 1000+ coins that use or adapt code from Bitcoin, Litecoin, etc. (I posted proof of this above.) Vanillacoin did not. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jimlite on September 21, 2015, 04:58:54 PM Where was it stated in stone that John Connor said Vanilla coin was 100% coded without a single byte or line of code ever used in the history of crypto? Obviously he has to use ones and zeros, but bitcoin used ones and zeros, oh my! The fact is if you look at ANY alt coin ever created, VNL uses less of the same code than any of the 5000 alt coins ever made. Do I know the exact % of code that is similiar to bitcoin, no, but it is a very tiny %, and it is a helluva lot smaller than Monero or Bytecoin, that is for sure. So stop bothering John because he didn't footnote or acknowledge a tiny part of his coin has similiar code to bitcoin. Fact is he did build it from scratch, it has less similar code than any other alt, and it improves on every crypto coin technically. Once again I will give an analogy, DICE is making a game called Star Wars Battlefront and Microsoft Studios is making a game called Halo 5. They both will be over 50GB, millions of lines of code, and they will both be written from scratch, yet will use Directx. They are not going to rewrite directx, they will also use many of the same graphics routines, sound coding, a.i. logic routines, etc. And NEITHER of those games are going to acknowledge a license from Space Invaders or Pong. WELL WAIT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN, EVERY VIDEO GAME MADE SINCE PONG SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE PONG WAS FIRST AND THAT EVERY SUBSEQUENT VIDEO GAME USES GRAPHICS AND USER INPUT!
You guys really need to relax and not argue over stupid technicalities in language. You alt devs and fanbois argue more than bitcoin core devs, LOLZ Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 21, 2015, 05:40:47 PM Where was it stated in stone that John Connor said Vanilla coin was 100% coded without a single byte or line of code ever used in the history of crypto? Obviously he has to use ones and zeros, but bitcoin used ones and zeros, oh my! The fact is if you look at ANY alt coin ever created, VNL uses less of the same code than any of the 5000 alt coins ever made. Do I know the exact % of code that is similiar to bitcoin, no, but it is a very tiny %, and it is a helluva lot smaller than Monero or Bytecoin, that is for sure. So stop bothering John because he didn't footnote or acknowledge a tiny part of his coin has similiar code to bitcoin. Fact is he did build it from scratch, it has less similar code than any other alt, and it improves on every crypto coin technically. Once again I will give an analogy, DICE is making a game called Star Wars Battlefront and Microsoft Studios is making a game called Halo 5. They both will be over 50GB, millions of lines of code, and they will both be written from scratch, yet will use Directx. They are not going to rewrite directx, they will also use many of the same graphics routines, sound coding, a.i. logic routines, etc. And NEITHER of those games are going to acknowledge a license from Space Invaders or Pong. WELL WAIT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN, EVERY VIDEO GAME MADE SINCE PONG SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE PONG WAS FIRST AND THAT EVERY SUBSEQUENT VIDEO GAME USES GRAPHICS AND USER INPUT! You guys really need to relax and not argue over stupid technicalities in language. You alt devs and fanbois argue more than bitcoin core devs, LOLZ Lol I was taking you seriously before this post. Shame on me. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: onemorexmr on September 21, 2015, 06:10:20 PM ROFL @thread...
MIT License is extremly easy to follow... if you copy code just put that damn line telling from whom you copied... here it is https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT (https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT) (it is EXTREMLY short...so please read it) i am a developer myself. in our company we made closedsource apps. but we used GPL and MIT libs so we had to bundle that license (and sourcecoude for some libs) and deliver it to our customers. the only way around it is by contacting the original devs and ask them for a different lic. no excuses. isnt it simple? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: traumschiff on September 21, 2015, 06:49:52 PM Everything here was already over discussed in several threads already, what you guys fail to notice is that the OP is actually enjoying that people from the XMR, VNL and other communities taunt each other here. Proof for this is that the guy is randomly throwing in irrelevant troll comments in the VNL community thread, check his history.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 21, 2015, 08:08:23 PM Where was it stated in stone that John Connor said Vanilla coin was 100% coded without a single byte or line of code ever used in the history of crypto? Right here (emphasis added) No, this is not a fork. It was built from scratch in it's entirety. Note: quoted date is incorrect; correct date is 2014-12-15, 00:19:37 Are you going to keep asking stupid questions to try to obscure reality with a bunch of confusion and doubt over the (well documented) accusations against him, or are you going to quit digging a deeper hole? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: traumschiff on September 21, 2015, 08:40:06 PM Where was it stated in stone that John Connor said Vanilla coin was 100% coded without a single byte or line of code ever used in the history of crypto? Right here (emphasis added) No, this is not a fork. It was built from scratch in it's entirety. Note: quoted date is incorrect; correct date is 2014-12-15, 00:19:37 Are you going to keep asking stupid questions to try to obscure reality with a bunch of confusion and doubt over the (well documented) accusations against him, or are you going to quit digging a deeper hole? Let's be honest here, he put a lot more effort, work, code and innovation in Vanillacoin than you put into XMR and Aeon together. Problem is, people here love to pull back legit projects. As we all know every coin had its early flaws and statements, XMR with the early miner issue, Dash with the instamine, BTS has it's past also. Difference is, you don't see me ranting about those in the respective threads while people like you and half of the XMR community actually enjoy this behavior. Sit down for a minute and give this a thought. Starting to agree with some people that bitcointalk is pure cancer for the alt community, read back on the OPs posting history and you actually jumped on his thread, the 33rd thread to explain the very same thing you already did in the past ones. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 21, 2015, 08:44:23 PM Where was it stated in stone that John Connor said Vanilla coin was 100% coded without a single byte or line of code ever used in the history of crypto? Right here (emphasis added) No, this is not a fork. It was built from scratch in it's entirety. Note: quoted date is incorrect; correct date is 2014-12-15, 00:19:37 Are you going to keep asking stupid questions to try to obscure reality with a bunch of confusion and doubt over the (well documented) accusations against him, or are you going to quit digging a deeper hole? Let's be honest here, he put a lot more effort, work, code and innovation in Vanillacoin than you put into XMR and Aeon together. That's not relevant in the slightest to whether Bitcoin code has been misappropriated without attribution, and misrepresented as "from scratch in it's entirety", which it has. You're basically conceding the question when you can only respond to it by changing the subject, spamming, thread bombing, etc. If your argument is, "Yes, we're lying thieving scumbags. Too bad, our coin is so damn good it's going to take over the world anyway" then I guess you're entitled to take that approach. 100% for sure there are people who will buy in on such a coin. Quote Sit down for a minute and give this a thought. Starting to agree with some people that bitcointalk is pure cancer for the alt community, read back on the OPs posting history and you actually jumped on his thread, the 33rd thread to explain the very same thing you already did in the past ones. Oh I agree with you there. Free speech really is an ugly vile thing in a lot of ways (though I still support it) IMO the usefulness of this thread ended with post #2. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: traumschiff on September 21, 2015, 08:58:06 PM You only failed to answer this, probably because you know this is true:
Quote Problem is, people here love to pull back legit projects. As we all know every coin had its early flaws and statements, XMR with the early miner issue, Dash with the instamine, BTS has it's past also. Difference is, you don't see me ranting about those in the respective threads while people like you and half of the XMR community actually enjoy this behavior. I'm all for free speech, I started an unmoderated discussion thread, but this is getting heavy from your side. Look back at your very own projects history or almost any top 10 coins. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 21, 2015, 09:21:25 PM You only failed to answer this, probably because you know this is true: Quote Problem is, people here love to pull back legit projects. As we all know every coin had its early flaws and statements, XMR with the early miner issue, Dash with the instamine, BTS has it's past also. Difference is, you don't see me ranting about those in the respective threads while people like you and half of the XMR community actually enjoy this behavior. I'm all for free speech, I started an unmoderated discussion thread, but this is getting heavy from your side. Look back at your very own projects history or almost any top 10 coins. I agree with you that this environment is a mess (and that was the context of the comments in my previous message). I also think that in a competitive somewhat anarchistic environment it inevitable that people will scrutinize the behavior of others and challenge it when they think there is something wrong with it (or even just purely competitive reasons on the basis of little or no merit). That applies to XMR being scrutinized and criticized as much as anything else. (I'll agree you don't seem to be one of the people who go out of their way to criticize XMR, but I do remember a bunch of trolling against me on AEON thread -- not sure if that included you.) However, I really don't know that there is a better way. You can certainly take your coin and discussion and go communicate in nicely "controlled" walled garden forum as many coins try to do (XMR has one of these too so I'm not pointing fingers). That seems not to be how the wider community wants to communicate. If anything this forum is somewhat tame compared to some of the trollbox discussion. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on September 21, 2015, 11:32:24 PM Everything here was already over discussed in several threads already OMG, it's the hand-waving 'old news is old' defense! Are you Hillary Fucking Clinton's (http://humanevents.com/2014/06/20/hillarys-rapist-defense-problem/) understudy or what? The fact VanillaScam's main dev is a proven code thief is still extremely relevant. The importance of that revelation does not expire or diminish in some kind of media half-life equation. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Snowykingdom on September 22, 2015, 04:38:03 AM Ahhh, come on guysss....smooth is the best developer ever!!!!
He developed many stupid comments/ speculations at many threads, that's what made him a great one.....doing nothing but talks. ;) Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: generalizethis on September 22, 2015, 05:02:03 AM Ahhh, come on guysss....smooth is the best developer ever!!!! He developed many stupid comments/ speculations at many threads, that's what made him a great one.....doing nothing but talks. ;) Newb account stalking all things Monero. That's a first. ;D Can anyone guess which socktard this one is? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Snowykingdom on September 22, 2015, 11:12:30 AM Ahhh, come on guysss....smooth is the best developer ever!!!! He developed many stupid comments/ speculations at many threads, that's what made him a great one.....doing nothing but talks. ;) Newb account stalking all things Monero. That's a first. ;D Can anyone guess which socktard this one is? You don't have to, came from nowhere...an ordinary observer ;) It is really hurt to admit the truth....sometimes. Cheers. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: YAdaminer on September 22, 2015, 11:40:24 AM Everything here was already over discussed in several threads already OMG, it's the hand-waving 'old news is old' defense! Are you Hillary Fucking Clinton's (http://humanevents.com/2014/06/20/hillarys-rapist-defense-problem/) understudy or what? The fact VanillaScam's main dev is a proven code thief is still extremely relevant. The importance of that revelation does not expire or diminish in some kind of media half-life equation. What traumshiff said is all this is over discussed on more than few threads and not one shit what you, smooth and your alter ego accounts said hasn't been proven. Even gmaxwell was only fishing with his 'quiet words of warning' and that was after john-connor warned him and other BTC devs about problem and proposed solution... so, go prove that john-connor stole the code and don't take only 50 lines of code, check all the code on github. Check it and prove it. You know what percentage of code must be the same not similar that you can claim something is stolen. VNL code is different. If you think otherwise PROVE IT or GTFO together with your vicious XMR don't know how to code frends. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: jwinterm on September 22, 2015, 12:06:54 PM Everything here was already over discussed in several threads already OMG, it's the hand-waving 'old news is old' defense! Are you Hillary Fucking Clinton's (http://humanevents.com/2014/06/20/hillarys-rapist-defense-problem/) understudy or what? The fact VanillaScam's main dev is a proven code thief is still extremely relevant. The importance of that revelation does not expire or diminish in some kind of media half-life equation. What traumshiff said is all this is over discussed on more than few threads and not one shit what you, smooth and your alter ego accounts said hasn't been proven. Even gmaxwell was only fishing with his 'quiet words of warning' and that was after john-connor warned him and other BTC devs about problem and proposed solution... so, go prove that john-connor stole the code and don't take only 50 lines of code, check all the code on github. Check it and prove it. You know what percentage of code must be the same not similar that you can claim something is stolen. VNL code is different. If you think otherwise PROVE IT or GTFO together with your vicious XMR don't know how to code frends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity Quote In U.S. copyright law, substantial similarity is the standard used to determine whether a defendant has infringed the reproduction right of a copyright. The standard arises out of the recognition that the exclusive right to make copies of a work would be meaningless if infringement was limited to making only exact and complete reproductions of a work. ... Courts have relied on several factors to aid in a striking similarity analysis. Among these are: 1. Uniqueness, intricacy, or complexity of the similar sections. 2. If the plaintiff's work contains an unexpected or idiosyncratic element that is repeated in the alleged infringing work. 3. The appearance of the same errors or mistakes in both works. 4. Fictitious entries placed by the plaintiff that appear in the defendant's work. For example, fake names or places are often inserted in factual works like maps or directories to serve as proof of copying in a later infringement case since their appearance in a defendant's work cannot be explained away by innocent causes. 5. Obvious or crude attempts to give the appearance of dissimilarity. I think the bolded entry is particularly relevant in this case, based on the copied errors pointed out by rnicoll earlier in the thread. As for how much needs to be copied in order for it to amount to copyright infringement, that seems a bit more complex: http://www.scottandscottllp.com/main/software_ip_legal_considerations.aspx Quote Substantial similarity between competing software works is the third element of the copyright infringement claim. In assessing whether a computer program has been infringed, the Fifth Circuit has adopted the “abstraction-filtration” method proposed by the Tenth Circuit in Gates Rubber Company v. Bando Chemical Industries. ... The goal of the analysis should be to determine whether any copied elements constitute “matter that is significant in the plaintiff's program.” This is a qualitative, rather than quantitative analysis, the outcome of which will depend heavily on the unique facts of each case. It can certainly be far less than 50% to qualify as copyright infringement. http://www.alankorn.com/article-copyright-infringe.html Quote One of the more famous U.S music infringement cases involved ex-Beatle George Harrison, who was found by a jury to have “unconsciously” copied the Shirelle’s composition “He’s So Fine” in his 1971 hit “My Sweet Lord.” Although George Harrison’s hit was found to be strikingly similar to the Shirelle’s song, it is even possible to infringe another song if only just a few notes are “borrowed.” Because the most memorable part of a song may be quite brief, infringement of a musical composition may be found even where only a small portion of a song was copied. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: h1gh1s6 on September 22, 2015, 01:18:15 PM You guys are taking the from scratch thing way too literally. When you make mashed potatoes from scratch, do you grow the potatoes and churn the butter yourself, too?
John spent 9 months rewriting peercoin from scratch. He did not start with a fork. He started with an empty project. So he had peercoin code up on one side, and his own project's code on the other side and he went through and rewrote each section of peercoin in his own project. This is why some of the code looks like it's been run through a reformatter. This was him rewriting it, improving on the parts that needed improvement and keeping some parts structurally similar to maintain backwards compatibility and to give other cryptocurrencies the opportunity to integrate his updated code (see coinpp - https://github.com/john-connor/coinpp (https://github.com/john-connor/coinpp)). Bitch about the copyright thing as much as you want - John feels that the bitcoin code itself is stolen and any any legal action is completely unenforceable due to SN's anonymity, so why bother? John's code free and available for anyone to use, so who cares about a meaningless legal shout out at the top? He has always freely admitted that VNL was a full rewrite of peercoin. John has put in honest, full-time hard work over at least the past 18 months on VNL and the technology surpasses existing coins. Nobody has been able to poke holes in Zerotime or any of his work, so they cling to this nonsense. Not a huge Obama fan, but this is like the crypto-version of the situation with his birth certificate. Even when it be came clear that he was going to become president, political groups still just would not let go of their stupid notion that Obama wasn't a US citizen. Obama still became president. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Levole11 on September 22, 2015, 01:22:37 PM Everything here was already over discussed in several threads already OMG, it's the hand-waving 'old news is old' defense! Are you Hillary Fucking Clinton's (http://humanevents.com/2014/06/20/hillarys-rapist-defense-problem/) understudy or what? The fact VanillaScam's main dev is a proven code thief is still extremely relevant. The importance of that revelation does not expire or diminish in some kind of media half-life equation. What traumshiff said is all this is over discussed on more than few threads and not one shit what you, smooth and your alter ego accounts said hasn't been proven. Even gmaxwell was only fishing with his 'quiet words of warning' and that was after john-connor warned him and other BTC devs about problem and proposed solution... so, go prove that john-connor stole the code and don't take only 50 lines of code, check all the code on github. Check it and prove it. You know what percentage of code must be the same not similar that you can claim something is stolen. VNL code is different. If you think otherwise PROVE IT or GTFO together with your vicious XMR don't know how to code frends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity Quote In U.S. copyright law, substantial similarity is the standard used to determine whether a defendant has infringed the reproduction right of a copyright. The standard arises out of the recognition that the exclusive right to make copies of a work would be meaningless if infringement was limited to making only exact and complete reproductions of a work. ... Courts have relied on several factors to aid in a striking similarity analysis. Among these are: 1. Uniqueness, intricacy, or complexity of the similar sections. 2. If the plaintiff's work contains an unexpected or idiosyncratic element that is repeated in the alleged infringing work. 3. The appearance of the same errors or mistakes in both works. 4. Fictitious entries placed by the plaintiff that appear in the defendant's work. For example, fake names or places are often inserted in factual works like maps or directories to serve as proof of copying in a later infringement case since their appearance in a defendant's work cannot be explained away by innocent causes. 5. Obvious or crude attempts to give the appearance of dissimilarity. I think the bolded entry is particularly relevant in this case, based on the copied errors pointed out by rnicoll earlier in the thread. As for how much needs to be copied in order for it to amount to copyright infringement, that seems a bit more complex: http://www.scottandscottllp.com/main/software_ip_legal_considerations.aspx Quote Substantial similarity between competing software works is the third element of the copyright infringement claim. In assessing whether a computer program has been infringed, the Fifth Circuit has adopted the “abstraction-filtration” method proposed by the Tenth Circuit in Gates Rubber Company v. Bando Chemical Industries. ... The goal of the analysis should be to determine whether any copied elements constitute “matter that is significant in the plaintiff's program.” This is a qualitative, rather than quantitative analysis, the outcome of which will depend heavily on the unique facts of each case. It can certainly be far less than 50% to qualify as copyright infringement. http://www.alankorn.com/article-copyright-infringe.html Quote One of the more famous U.S music infringement cases involved ex-Beatle George Harrison, who was found by a jury to have “unconsciously” copied the Shirelle’s composition “He’s So Fine” in his 1971 hit “My Sweet Lord.” Although George Harrison’s hit was found to be strikingly similar to the Shirelle’s song, it is even possible to infringe another song if only just a few notes are “borrowed.” Because the most memorable part of a song may be quite brief, infringement of a musical composition may be found even where only a small portion of a song was copied. So, why doesn't anybody from xmr look through the whole code on github, to verify if it can be named as 'stolen', rather than the standard xmr troll games..This is just a tiny part of the tens of thousands lines of code in there.. VNL is superior to xmr, those few lines of code you guys keep reposting isn't changing that.. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 22, 2015, 01:28:04 PM Everything here was already over discussed in several threads already OMG, it's the hand-waving 'old news is old' defense! Are you Hillary Fucking Clinton's (http://humanevents.com/2014/06/20/hillarys-rapist-defense-problem/) understudy or what? The fact VanillaScam's main dev is a proven code thief is still extremely relevant. The importance of that revelation does not expire or diminish in some kind of media half-life equation. What traumshiff said is all this is over discussed on more than few threads and not one shit what you, smooth and your alter ego accounts said hasn't been proven. Even gmaxwell was only fishing with his 'quiet words of warning' and that was after john-connor warned him and other BTC devs about problem and proposed solution... so, go prove that john-connor stole the code and don't take only 50 lines of code, check all the code on github. Check it and prove it. You know what percentage of code must be the same not similar that you can claim something is stolen. VNL code is different. If you think otherwise PROVE IT or GTFO together with your vicious XMR don't know how to code frends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity Quote In U.S. copyright law, substantial similarity is the standard used to determine whether a defendant has infringed the reproduction right of a copyright. The standard arises out of the recognition that the exclusive right to make copies of a work would be meaningless if infringement was limited to making only exact and complete reproductions of a work. ... Courts have relied on several factors to aid in a striking similarity analysis. Among these are: 1. Uniqueness, intricacy, or complexity of the similar sections. 2. If the plaintiff's work contains an unexpected or idiosyncratic element that is repeated in the alleged infringing work. 3. The appearance of the same errors or mistakes in both works. 4. Fictitious entries placed by the plaintiff that appear in the defendant's work. For example, fake names or places are often inserted in factual works like maps or directories to serve as proof of copying in a later infringement case since their appearance in a defendant's work cannot be explained away by innocent causes. 5. Obvious or crude attempts to give the appearance of dissimilarity. I think the bolded entry is particularly relevant in this case, based on the copied errors pointed out by rnicoll earlier in the thread. As for how much needs to be copied in order for it to amount to copyright infringement, that seems a bit more complex: http://www.scottandscottllp.com/main/software_ip_legal_considerations.aspx Quote Substantial similarity between competing software works is the third element of the copyright infringement claim. In assessing whether a computer program has been infringed, the Fifth Circuit has adopted the “abstraction-filtration” method proposed by the Tenth Circuit in Gates Rubber Company v. Bando Chemical Industries. ... The goal of the analysis should be to determine whether any copied elements constitute “matter that is significant in the plaintiff's program.” This is a qualitative, rather than quantitative analysis, the outcome of which will depend heavily on the unique facts of each case. It can certainly be far less than 50% to qualify as copyright infringement. http://www.alankorn.com/article-copyright-infringe.html Quote One of the more famous U.S music infringement cases involved ex-Beatle George Harrison, who was found by a jury to have “unconsciously” copied the Shirelle’s composition “He’s So Fine” in his 1971 hit “My Sweet Lord.” Although George Harrison’s hit was found to be strikingly similar to the Shirelle’s song, it is even possible to infringe another song if only just a few notes are “borrowed.” Because the most memorable part of a song may be quite brief, infringement of a musical composition may be found even where only a small portion of a song was copied. So, why doesn't anybody from xmr look through the whole code on github, to verify if it can be named as 'stolen', rather than the standard xmr troll games..This is just a tiny part of the tens of thousands lines of code in there.. VNL is superior to xmr, those few lines of code you guys keep reposting isn't changing that.. Here's an easier solution: john-connor adds the correct copyright attribution to his code. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: traumschiff on September 22, 2015, 01:29:26 PM You guys are taking the from scratch thing way too literally. When you make mashed potatoes from scratch, do you grow the potatoes and churn the butter yourself, too? John spent 9 months rewriting peercoin from scratch. He did not start with a fork. He started with an empty project. So he had peercoin code up on one side, and his own project's code on the other side and he went through and rewrote each section of peercoin in his own project. This is why some of the code looks like it's been run through a reformatter. This was him rewriting it, improving on the parts that needed improvement and keeping some parts structurally similar to maintain backwards compatibility and to give other cryptocurrencies the opportunity to integrate his updated code (see coinpp - https://github.com/john-connor/coinpp (https://github.com/john-connor/coinpp)). Bitch about the copyright thing as much as you want - John feels that the bitcoin code itself is stolen and any any legal action is completely unenforceable due to SN's anonymity, so why bother? John's code free and available for anyone to use, so who cares about a meaningless legal shout out at the top? He has always freely admitted that VNL was a full rewrite of peercoin. John has put in honest, full-time hard work over at least the past 18 months on VNL and the technology surpasses existing coins. Nobody has been able to poke holes in Zerotime or any of his work, so they cling to this nonsense. Not a huge Obama fan, but this is like the crypto-version of the situation with his birth certificate. Even when it be came clear that he was going to become president, political groups still just would not let go of their stupid notion that Obama wasn't a US citizen. Obama still became president. In case they are too lazy to open the link: "CoinPP is a C++11 cryptographic currency library. This library is backwards compatible with Peercoin or any Peercoin derived cryptographic-currency." John actually made it possible here, to any peercoin derived crypto, to upgrade their codebase. He even stated on the official forums that he will give personal help to any developer wanting to do it. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: hughbt on September 22, 2015, 01:31:54 PM These few lines of code which they are claiming are stolen - this is a common knowledge for every dev who has any idea about programming cryptocurrencies. There is no point in rewriting it. You don't have to be a genius to make those methods, for god's sake. It will always look similar.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: YAdaminer on September 22, 2015, 02:33:04 PM Everything here was already over discussed in several threads already OMG, it's the hand-waving 'old news is old' defense! Are you Hillary Fucking Clinton's (http://humanevents.com/2014/06/20/hillarys-rapist-defense-problem/) understudy or what? The fact VanillaScam's main dev is a proven code thief is still extremely relevant. The importance of that revelation does not expire or diminish in some kind of media half-life equation. What traumshiff said is all this is over discussed on more than few threads and not one shit what you, smooth and your alter ego accounts said hasn't been proven. Even gmaxwell was only fishing with his 'quiet words of warning' and that was after john-connor warned him and other BTC devs about problem and proposed solution... so, go prove that john-connor stole the code and don't take only 50 lines of code, check all the code on github. Check it and prove it. You know what percentage of code must be the same not similar that you can claim something is stolen. VNL code is different. If you think otherwise PROVE IT or GTFO together with your vicious XMR don't know how to code frends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity Quote In U.S. copyright law, substantial similarity is the standard used to determine whether a defendant has infringed the reproduction right of a copyright. The standard arises out of the recognition that the exclusive right to make copies of a work would be meaningless if infringement was limited to making only exact and complete reproductions of a work. ... Courts have relied on several factors to aid in a striking similarity analysis. Among these are: 1. Uniqueness, intricacy, or complexity of the similar sections. 2. If the plaintiff's work contains an unexpected or idiosyncratic element that is repeated in the alleged infringing work. 3. The appearance of the same errors or mistakes in both works. 4. Fictitious entries placed by the plaintiff that appear in the defendant's work. For example, fake names or places are often inserted in factual works like maps or directories to serve as proof of copying in a later infringement case since their appearance in a defendant's work cannot be explained away by innocent causes. 5. Obvious or crude attempts to give the appearance of dissimilarity. I think the bolded entry is particularly relevant in this case, based on the copied errors pointed out by rnicoll earlier in the thread. As for how much needs to be copied in order for it to amount to copyright infringement, that seems a bit more complex: http://www.scottandscottllp.com/main/software_ip_legal_considerations.aspx Quote Substantial similarity between competing software works is the third element of the copyright infringement claim. In assessing whether a computer program has been infringed, the Fifth Circuit has adopted the “abstraction-filtration” method proposed by the Tenth Circuit in Gates Rubber Company v. Bando Chemical Industries. ... The goal of the analysis should be to determine whether any copied elements constitute “matter that is significant in the plaintiff's program.” This is a qualitative, rather than quantitative analysis, the outcome of which will depend heavily on the unique facts of each case. It can certainly be far less than 50% to qualify as copyright infringement. http://www.alankorn.com/article-copyright-infringe.html Quote One of the more famous U.S music infringement cases involved ex-Beatle George Harrison, who was found by a jury to have “unconsciously” copied the Shirelle’s composition “He’s So Fine” in his 1971 hit “My Sweet Lord.” Although George Harrison’s hit was found to be strikingly similar to the Shirelle’s song, it is even possible to infringe another song if only just a few notes are “borrowed.” Because the most memorable part of a song may be quite brief, infringement of a musical composition may be found even where only a small portion of a song was copied. Still no one proved anything. Go check code and prove that code is stolen. I didnt find any post from rnicoll in the thread so I can say that you are trying to imply that some alleged post should prove something. You only proved that you have fine copy paste skills from articles on wikipedia. Regarding links I'll make my contribution with one question folowed by the link. What was base for the bitcoin code? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: YAdaminer on September 22, 2015, 02:40:06 PM It seems that all those guys from XMR have excellent copy/paste skills almost identical to their famous dev smooth... or maybe they are all just smooth alter ego accounts.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: onemorexmr on September 22, 2015, 02:41:27 PM And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. even if john-conor would be satoshi he would need to place that license as others have contributed code to bitcoin too. but its unlikely as john-conner obviosly prefers another code-style than bitcoin (thats why he auto-refactored that whole thing) Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: onemorexmr on September 22, 2015, 02:42:11 PM It seems that all those guys from XMR have excellent copy/paste skills almost identical to their famous dev smooth... or maybe they are all just smooth alter ego accounts. nothing wrong with copy-paste as long as you honor the original license Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: traumschiff on September 22, 2015, 02:45:51 PM And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. even if john-conor would be satoshi he would need to place that license as others have contributed code to bitcoin too. but its unlikely as john-conner obviosly prefers another code-style than bitcoin (thats why he auto-refactored that whole thing) Auto-refactor? You obviously never looked at what the man is capable of in terms of coding, go look it up. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: onemorexmr on September 22, 2015, 02:47:29 PM And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. even if john-conor would be satoshi he would need to place that license as others have contributed code to bitcoin too. but its unlikely as john-conner obviosly prefers another code-style than bitcoin (thats why he auto-refactored that whole thing) Auto-refactor? You obviously never looked at what the man is capable of in terms of coding, go look it up. i didnt say anything about his coding skills... but any good coder uses auto refactoring tools this days (otherwise he would waste too much time: and i wouldnt call someone who wastes time a good coder) Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: traumschiff on September 22, 2015, 02:49:31 PM And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. even if john-conor would be satoshi he would need to place that license as others have contributed code to bitcoin too. but its unlikely as john-conner obviosly prefers another code-style than bitcoin (thats why he auto-refactored that whole thing) Auto-refactor? You obviously never looked at what the man is capable of in terms of coding, go look it up. i didnt say anything about his coding skills... but any good coder uses auto refactoring tools this days (otherwise he would waste too much time: and i wouldnt call someone who wastes time a good coder) And how do you call people who can't code a gui for a crypto-currency? Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: onemorexmr on September 22, 2015, 02:52:42 PM And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. even if john-conor would be satoshi he would need to place that license as others have contributed code to bitcoin too. but its unlikely as john-conner obviosly prefers another code-style than bitcoin (thats why he auto-refactored that whole thing) Auto-refactor? You obviously never looked at what the man is capable of in terms of coding, go look it up. i didnt say anything about his coding skills... but any good coder uses auto refactoring tools this days (otherwise he would waste too much time: and i wouldnt call someone who wastes time a good coder) And how do you call people who can't code a gui for a crypto-currency? focused on important stuff and not a get rich quick scheme.. but if you want to discuss monero: please open a new thread. this thread is about stealing code yes it is stealing: some people demand payment for their code others just want to see their name on products using some of their work (thats the spirit of OSS licenses) Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: YAdaminer on September 22, 2015, 02:54:31 PM And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. even if john-conor would be satoshi he would need to place that license as others have contributed code to bitcoin too. but its unlikely as john-conner obviosly prefers another code-style than bitcoin (thats why he auto-refactored that whole thing) ROFL to your coding skills. It seems that you guys from XMR can only copy/paste because when you need to write something on your own you cant even write the dev name correctly. 2 mistakes in 2 sentences. LOL Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: onemorexmr on September 22, 2015, 02:59:21 PM And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. even if john-conor would be satoshi he would need to place that license as others have contributed code to bitcoin too. but its unlikely as john-conner obviosly prefers another code-style than bitcoin (thats why he auto-refactored that whole thing) ROFL to your coding skills. It seems that you guys from XMR can only copy/paste because when you need to write something on your own you cant even write the dev name correctly. 2 mistakes in 2 sentences. LOL ROFL... no arguments left ::) Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: h1gh1s6 on September 22, 2015, 03:00:04 PM And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. even if john-conor would be satoshi he would need to place that license as others have contributed code to bitcoin too. but its unlikely as john-conner obviosly prefers another code-style than bitcoin (thats why he auto-refactored that whole thing) ROFL to your coding skills. It seems that you guys from XMR can only copy/paste because when you need to write something on your own you cant even write the dev name correctly. 2 mistakes in 2 sentences. LOL Syntax error! Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: YAdaminer on September 22, 2015, 03:04:24 PM And to all that john-connor could be Adam Back, or even Satoshi Nakamoto so again, prove it, bring it to court or STFU. even if john-conor would be satoshi he would need to place that license as others have contributed code to bitcoin too. but its unlikely as john-conner obviosly prefers another code-style than bitcoin (thats why he auto-refactored that whole thing) ROFL to your coding skills. It seems that you guys from XMR can only copy/paste because when you need to write something on your own you cant even write the dev name correctly. 2 mistakes in 2 sentences. LOL ROFL... no arguments left ::) What argument do you need to fact that in 2 sentences you made 2 mistakes with dev name. Yet you have something important to say about his work. edit if you cant type name right, use you skills with dev name... or dont Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: onemorexmr on September 22, 2015, 03:06:44 PM What argument do you need to fact that in 2 sentences you made 2 mistakes with dev name. Yet you have something important to say about his work. again i dont say anything about his work. i just want him to honor the license as its is obvious he copied parts of his product (which btw is not bad - anyone does that - even big companies and closed source products) btw thanks for bumping this thread to raise awareness of his behavior... Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: flipme on September 22, 2015, 03:16:15 PM What argument do you need to fact that in 2 sentences you made 2 mistakes with dev name. Yet you have something important to say about his work. again i dont say anything about his work. i just want him to honor the license as its is obvious he copied parts of his product (which btw is not bad - anyone does that - even big companies and closed source products) btw thanks for bumping this thread to raise awareness of his behavior... Good to see that I'm not alone calling out this MONERO mob for their criminal activities. You seem to be another sockpuppet of that gang. Smooth committed like 8 changes on GitHub, all one liners. Thats about it concerning being a "dev". The code in question is the only block you could fing, eh? Its just one piece of about 500.000 lines rewritten. And how you come to the conclusion its been auto reformatted? Have you ever written a single line of code doing something you haven't copied and pasted in your life? Monero on the opposite is copied and pasted completely, only the coin parameters where changed. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: kazuki49 on September 22, 2015, 03:18:43 PM I just hope smooth keeps pissing off these shitcoin scammers on his spare time, world is in dire need of people like him.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: onemorexmr on September 22, 2015, 03:21:11 PM Good to see that I'm not alone calling out this MONERO mob for their criminal activities. You seem to be another sockpuppet of that gang. nope Smooth committed like 8 changes on GitHub, all one liners. i dont care and that has nothing to do with this threadThats about it concerning being a "dev". The code in question is the only block you could fing, eh? Its just one piece of about 500.000 lines rewritten. iCEBREAKER posted more... but it is not important how much it isAnd how you come to the conclusion its been auto reformatted? it looks like. if he really rewrote it himself he would use other variable names and another order.Have you ever written a single line of code doing something you haven't copied and pasted in your life? Monero on the opposite is copied and pasted completely, only the coin parameters where changed. nothis thread is not about monero. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: YAdaminer on September 22, 2015, 03:25:42 PM What argument do you need to fact that in 2 sentences you made 2 mistakes with dev name. Yet you have something important to say about his work. again i dont say anything about his work. i just want him to honor the license as its is obvious he copied parts of his product (which btw is not bad - anyone does that - even big companies and closed source products) btw thanks for bumping this thread to raise awareness of his behavior... Again, what argument do you need to fact that in 2 sentences you made 2 mistakes with dev name. Do you really think that anyone cares what do you want? What is obvious? What john-connor copied? Parts of his product!?! Where did he copied parts of his product? Why would he copy parts of his product? And this thread is named Smooth VS VNL not john-connor and XMR lies about VNL code. So what Smooth have against VNL or VS VNL? Is he so pissed that VNL getting new features almost every day yet XMR cant even get proper GUI wallet? I really don't get what is going on with Smooth and his XMR buddies? I think it's related to thread XMR/AEON Developer Smooth Investigation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151565.0 Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: bitcoin carpenter on September 22, 2015, 03:49:55 PM VNL 400 Githup commits
vs smooth ????. VNL solves every major currency problem in crypto vs smooth solves .... nothing TKO VNL wins Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 22, 2015, 05:22:12 PM The code in question is the only block you could fing, eh? Its just one piece of about 500.000 lines rewritten. There are several more blocks showing the copying/reformatting I've added to the collection of evidence in the Reference link. I'll continue to add them as people point them out, since this is a task well suited to crowdsourcing. all just smooth alter ego accounts. No smooth alter ego accounts, sock puppets, etc. ever exist or have ever existed. ('aeon' account that was transferred to me by the original developer does not count as that is disclosed and only used to edit the OP.) Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: flipme on September 22, 2015, 05:46:38 PM VNL 400 Githup commits vs smooth ????. VNL solves every major currency problem in crypto vs smooth solves .... nothing TKO VNL wins Thats quite telling regarding "dev" reputation, isn't it? And nevertheless these people start an "investigation", cheering up each others sockpuppet accounts to sound credible. Then they regurgitate their findings and false accusations as the truth, over and over again. Pretending they want to save the community from a scam. Lets wait for some real investigation, then we get to know some faces and names of the loudmouths. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: YAdaminer on September 22, 2015, 05:56:17 PM all just smooth alter ego accounts. No smooth alter ego accounts, sock puppets, etc. ever exist or have ever existed. ('aeon' account that was transferred to me by the original developer does not count as that is disclosed and only used to edit the OP.) I can agree with this only because smooth is account not real person so smooth can't have other accounts but you as real person on the other hand can have them as many as you like. Do I beleive you? Not a single word you say. Do you have, control and use other accounts, it seems as you do but than again who really cares. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: smooth on September 22, 2015, 06:28:13 PM Do you have, control and use other accounts No, and I never have (other than 'aeon' account already described). Just never been into the sock puppet thing. It's some people's cup of tea, not mine. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: I am the guy on September 22, 2015, 06:43:47 PM 24 hour troll.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: DickSwagger on September 22, 2015, 07:12:54 PM Got no problem with reusing working code ,we all do it adding our own spin on it, but taking credit for writing it all is not cool. Licence is free , but credits are due.
Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: bigfryguy on September 22, 2015, 07:26:38 PM VNL 400 Githup commits vs smooth ????. VNL solves every major currency problem in crypto vs smooth solves .... nothing TKO VNL wins +1 when it comes to VNL vs smooth VNL wins hands down. In fact there is more code written per week in VNL than Smooth has ever written. whether or not John should post aknowledgement of Bitcoin in the wallet is between John, and those that hold the licensing of Bitcoin.... smooth has nothing to do with the licensing of Bitcoin, and his evidence should be directed towards the original coders of Bitcoin to have them review his allegations. although I highly doubt that any of the original coders are going to come on here and make a stink about it, going public with who they are. so the licensing is pretty much just smoke and mirrors at this point, you need a legal body to be able to chase someone around about licensing issues. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: DickSwagger on September 22, 2015, 07:44:33 PM VNL 400 Githup commits vs smooth ????. VNL solves every major currency problem in crypto vs smooth solves .... nothing TKO VNL wins +1 when it comes to VNL vs smooth VNL wins hands down. In fact there is more code written per week in VNL than Smooth has ever written. whether or not John should post aknowledgement of Bitcoin in the wallet is between John, and those that hold the licensing of Bitcoin.... smooth has nothing to do with the licensing of Bitcoin, and his evidence should be directed towards the original coders of Bitcoin to have them review his allegations. although I highly doubt that any of the original coders are going to come on here and make a stink about it, going public with who they are. so the licensing is pretty much just smoke and mirrors at this point, you need a legal body to be able to chase someone around about licensing issues. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: obit33 on September 22, 2015, 08:26:56 PM VNL 400 Githup commits vs smooth ????. VNL solves every major currency problem in crypto vs smooth solves .... nothing TKO VNL wins +1 when it comes to VNL vs smooth VNL wins hands down. In fact there is more code written per week in VNL than Smooth has ever written. whether or not John should post aknowledgement of Bitcoin in the wallet is between John, and those that hold the licensing of Bitcoin.... smooth has nothing to do with the licensing of Bitcoin, and his evidence should be directed towards the original coders of Bitcoin to have them review his allegations. although I highly doubt that any of the original coders are going to come on here and make a stink about it, going public with who they are. so the licensing is pretty much just smoke and mirrors at this point, you need a legal body to be able to chase someone around about licensing issues. how much do you want this reposted? Greeting, this evening john-connor (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=402318) showed up on the Bitcoin Core github with some rather aggressively ignorant minunderstandings of basic cryptographic consensus concepts: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5634#issuecomment-69481908 Having no clue who he was I looked at his github account and googled a bit and found that he is the, seemingly pseudonymous, author of "Vanillacoin". Vanillacoin was previously discussed on this forum, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=890388.0 but he locked the threads in order to shuffle the users (victims?) off to someplace out of the light of day-- never a good sign, (nor is his BCT newbie account, for that matter). The "vanillacoin" software has no source code available, it is binaries only (very much not a good sign, and usually severe malware concern; and an ultimate form of centralization), there are source links but they go to a basically empty github repository. There is a whitepaper, which like the comments on github show some general software development background they show no real sign of sophisticated understanding around decenteralized systems for adversarial networks or cryptocurrencies. I don't know anything more about it, but I figure sunlight tends to be a good disinfectant; and with the threads locked it probably wasn't fair of me to say nothing while I was privately thinking "hm, that all smells pretty fishy". Of course, the guy was a bit rude to me and also wasted my time-- so feel free to factor that bias in however you like. I'm just reporting my impression as a regular community member. You now know what I know. [I'm the last person to play altcoin-cops... I mostly avoid this stuff except for the rare cases that are technically interesting: The drama can sink unbounded time and usually, when it comes to the more misguided altcoin cryptography, the only sane policy seems to be "If you see something,say nothing and drink to forget": there is too much crazyness and risk of being attacked for being critical of someones latest scheme. But if it shows up in my face, I can't quite stomach saying nothing at all.] Cheers, Since you're only here for about 4 days and already know how much smooth and john coded, and already know everything about licensing I suppose you'll also know who gmaxwell is... Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: hughbt on September 22, 2015, 08:39:49 PM VNL 400 Githup commits vs smooth ????. VNL solves every major currency problem in crypto vs smooth solves .... nothing TKO VNL wins +1 when it comes to VNL vs smooth VNL wins hands down. In fact there is more code written per week in VNL than Smooth has ever written. whether or not John should post aknowledgement of Bitcoin in the wallet is between John, and those that hold the licensing of Bitcoin.... smooth has nothing to do with the licensing of Bitcoin, and his evidence should be directed towards the original coders of Bitcoin to have them review his allegations. although I highly doubt that any of the original coders are going to come on here and make a stink about it, going public with who they are. so the licensing is pretty much just smoke and mirrors at this point, you need a legal body to be able to chase someone around about licensing issues. He is in no position to accuse John for unethical behaviour or theft. He obviously has his own agenda(against vnl). With that in mind his judgement just can't be taken seriously. I replied earlier that it's common knowledge. It doesn't take any special skills to write those methods. Smooth knows I'm right. I dare him to rewrite those methods. Guess what's going to happen... You'll see very similar outcome to John's. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: Wheatclove on September 22, 2015, 08:47:23 PM VNL 400 Githup commits vs smooth ????. VNL solves every major currency problem in crypto vs smooth solves .... nothing TKO VNL wins +1 when it comes to VNL vs smooth VNL wins hands down. In fact there is more code written per week in VNL than Smooth has ever written. whether or not John should post aknowledgement of Bitcoin in the wallet is between John, and those that hold the licensing of Bitcoin.... smooth has nothing to do with the licensing of Bitcoin, and his evidence should be directed towards the original coders of Bitcoin to have them review his allegations. although I highly doubt that any of the original coders are going to come on here and make a stink about it, going public with who they are. so the licensing is pretty much just smoke and mirrors at this point, you need a legal body to be able to chase someone around about licensing issues. He is in no position to accuse John for unethical behaviour or theft. He obviously has his own agenda(against vnl). With that in mind his judgement just can't be taken seriously. I replied earlier that it's common knowledge. It doesn't take any special skills to write those methods. Smooth knows I'm right. I dare him to rewrite those methods. Guess what's going to happen... You'll see very similar outcome to John's. Logical fallacies. Smooth's perceived character/behavior does not invalidate his argument. Seriously, all of the counterarguments of the OP have been logical fallacies and completely irrelevant. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: hughbt on September 22, 2015, 08:56:19 PM VNL 400 Githup commits vs smooth ????. VNL solves every major currency problem in crypto vs smooth solves .... nothing TKO VNL wins +1 when it comes to VNL vs smooth VNL wins hands down. In fact there is more code written per week in VNL than Smooth has ever written. whether or not John should post aknowledgement of Bitcoin in the wallet is between John, and those that hold the licensing of Bitcoin.... smooth has nothing to do with the licensing of Bitcoin, and his evidence should be directed towards the original coders of Bitcoin to have them review his allegations. although I highly doubt that any of the original coders are going to come on here and make a stink about it, going public with who they are. so the licensing is pretty much just smoke and mirrors at this point, you need a legal body to be able to chase someone around about licensing issues. He is in no position to accuse John for unethical behaviour or theft. He obviously has his own agenda(against vnl). With that in mind his judgement just can't be taken seriously. I replied earlier that it's common knowledge. It doesn't take any special skills to write those methods. Smooth knows I'm right. I dare him to rewrite those methods. Guess what's going to happen... You'll see very similar outcome to John's. Logical fallacies. Smooth's perceived character/behavior does not invalidate his argument. Seriously, all of the counterarguments of the OP have been logical fallacies and completely irrelevant. No, you just can't prove that the license has been broken. Or I should say that any license APPLIES here. The way he behaves should be treated as a sign for every user to not take his words seriously. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: indri123 on September 24, 2015, 07:00:10 PM The fact that gmaxwell would even acknowledge and talk about john-connor shows that vnl dev is the real deal. Do you think gmaxwell would even converse with Karsen or shitcoin #968 dev? I highly doubt he converses with the hundreds of clown clone devs. This really hits the nail on the head. VNL is the real deal. Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: flipme on November 25, 2016, 02:53:34 AM "Um," she says, satisfied, and turns over into deep sleep again.
;D Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iCEBREAKER on November 25, 2016, 03:17:37 AM VNL (40%)
Smooth 1 Vcrash 0 Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iamnotback on November 25, 2016, 03:27:22 AM VNL (40%) Smooth 1 Vcrash 0 Sorry I think I did that, not smooth. Whoops. Sorry about that: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1442193.msg16970803#msg16970803 Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: papa_lazzarou on November 25, 2016, 10:50:26 AM VNL (40%) Smooth 1 Vcrash 0 Sorry I think I did that, not smooth. Whoops. Sorry about that: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1442193.msg16970803#msg16970803 Or maybe, just maybe, it was because of this: https://v.cash/forum/threads/12-month-timeline.349/page-4#post-8038 Title: Re: Smooth VS VNL Post by: iamnotback on November 25, 2016, 11:39:29 PM VNL (40%) Smooth 1 Vcrash 0 Sorry I think I did that, not smooth. Whoops. Sorry about that: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1442193.msg16970803#msg16970803 Or maybe, just maybe, it was because of this: https://v.cash/forum/threads/12-month-timeline.349/page-4#post-8038 Did those posts occur before or after my post (my post which basically pointed out that Zerotime is a lie)? I am thinking he saw my post and realized he had no more upside and decide to call it a day, and head off into the sunset on his anonymous horse (carrying the bag of bagholders' BTC that they foolishly gave him). |
