Bitcoin Forum

Alternate cryptocurrencies => Altcoin Discussion => Topic started by: torbank on July 27, 2013, 08:20:44 AM



Title: Neocoin Status
Post by: torbank on July 27, 2013, 08:20:44 AM
  • No source, yet.
  • Lead developer unresponsive.
  • Windows file appears to be infected according to several users.

 8)


Title: Re: Neocoin Status
Post by: Fablio2 on July 28, 2013, 03:00:04 PM
  • No source, yet.
  • Lead developer unresponsive.
  • Windows file appears to be infected according to several users.

 8)

No infection's in windows file.


Title: Re: Neocoin Status
Post by: fluffypony on July 28, 2013, 03:04:11 PM
No infection's in windows file.

Well that really puts us all at ease - thanks for clearing that up user-that-nobody-has-ever-heard-of-and-only-has-23-posts!


Title: Re: Neocoin Status
Post by: Fablio2 on July 28, 2013, 03:17:21 PM
No infection's in windows file.

Well that really puts us all at ease - thanks for clearing that up user-that-nobody-has-ever-heard-of-and-only-has-23-posts!
And how can you trust someone who writes "Windows file appears to be infected according to several users." , but did not check himself?


Title: Re: Neocoin Status
Post by: fluffypony on July 28, 2013, 03:20:10 PM
And how can you trust someone who writes "Windows file appears to be infected according to several users." , but did not check himself?

I don't - I trust that the lack of source code is dodgy. That is not to say it is malicious, but providing source code is a legal requirement in this instance - it is forked from a project governed by a GPL 3 license.


Title: Re: Neocoin Status
Post by: jonoiv on July 28, 2013, 03:23:32 PM
  • No source, yet.
  • Lead developer unresponsive.
  • Windows file appears to be infected according to several users.

 8)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=263595.0

Neocoin is dead .  the developer told us all to stop mining and it will be relaunched later.  +50% of coins already mined. 


Title: Re: Neocoin Status
Post by: Fablio2 on July 28, 2013, 03:24:00 PM
And how can you trust someone who writes "Windows file appears to be infected according to several users." , but did not check himself?

I don't - I trust that the lack of source code is dodgy. That is not to say it is malicious, but providing source code is a legal requirement in this instance - it is forked from a project governed by a GPL 3 license.
I don't like this coin too, but no viruses detected in windows file:

https://www.virustotal.com/file/0e0a2c5038035d5ee6adb010c55526918dc92f13f7a7f6950d0e800b09c41cb7/analysis/1375024979/