Bitcoin Forum

https://i.imgur.com/bTGmi.png

A few highlights

"Why can you trust someone with a million dollar account? Simply because if they have that many coins they are well invested into the SolidCoin system, if they tried to attack the network they would obviously devalue a great amount of their assets. But it's not just this simple, multiple people can have million dollar accounts so how do we sort out who is "more right" if they submit blocks at the same time? We trust the person with the most money, as they have the most to lose."

"One initial problem with this p2p security feature is SolidCoin only had 1.112 million coins prior to this security feature being implemented. To solve this, 10 accounts of 1.2 million were created in the genesis block. These are special accounts that cannot be spent on the network, effectively making them "Null accounts used for special purposes", until SolidCoin does have real millionaires."

Wait, we're supposed to 'trust' the super nodes because they have 1m SC, but these SC are worthless (can't be spent). On top of which the more-than-obvious fallacy of money=trust.  Also, nice mentioning now that you actually premined 13m coins.

And the kickers

"With this new 51% protection feature there is a finally p2p cryptocurrency large businesses and users can rely on."

Right.  13m premined, 1m mined per day, a borked difficulty... don't all you merchants get up at once ;)

Edit: I'm going to go ahead and press that CH recieve the forum 'Scammer' label due to gross bait-and-switch.

1) CH first said that there would only be 1m premined  Now there are 13m which he had to of known was going to be the case while lieing about the initial 1.2m. A premine is a premine regardless of when the coins become 'active'.
2) SC 2.0beta reported grossly false hashrates at the time TBX was on the up-n-up. This was clearly done on purpose to falsely demonstrate a 'superior' CPU algorithm.
3) SC 1.0 -> 2.0 protocol changed dramatically, coupled with the gross inflation SC 1.0 coins have endured due to an apparent borked difficulty (24hrs into launch, 20k blocks, 53 diff. adjustments, and still at <10s blocks)
4) CH has intentionally misled people with paid spam


The scam lies in miners must invest electricity into this chain - and this investment has been manipulated and consolidated by CH. His bait-and-switch technique has landed him in control of millions of coins on top of an unending supply via the tax.


How many more instances of CH outright lieing and deceiving bitcointalk forum members does he need to give before he gets the label?

Right now it's a peer-RS/CH-peer currency :D

That's about the shortest whitepaper ever.

Ah, good times :D

http://solidcoin.info/solidcoin-most-secure-currency.php

A million SC account that can't be spent is worthless, and thus not invested at all. Typical CH double-speak.

Wrong again. 51% makes double-spends of your own coins possible. A 51% attack on Bitcoin cannot make my coins disappear.

It's an interesting take on proof-of-stake, but it's far to centralized. For more information about proof-of-stake, read the following threads before you implement it in your next alternative cryptocurrency:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=27787.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=37194.0

He has to know this, right? All of those "articles" on his site merely make false claims about Bitcoin in order to try to scare people into using SolidCoin. How is CoinHunter/BitcoinMedia not in violation of forum rules?

Quite funny, considering that even if what he's saying is partly true, the amount is still irrelevant -- It would be the percentage invested compared to the person's overall net worth that counts.

I probably care a lot more about my $1000, than some billionaire cares about his $10,000.

So he made the "unhackable" digital coin at the cost of the reasoning why most people use it?

Did he win those bets about BitcoinExpress breaking it or is there still the rest of the week for that?

http://solidcoin.info/solidcoin-most-secure-currency.php
There, fixed it for you.

Well there's a few obvious questions that spring to mind from it:

1.  How does the network "know" that a node has more than 1 million SCs in a wallet?  Are all generated blocks somehow signed with the address of the largest wallet you own?
2.  How are these wallets with the 1 million coins not able to be used for transactions?  Are we suppsoed to just take SC's word for it - or is there some special functionailty about those accounts?
3.  With any reasonable answers to the above two questions it seems likely to me that the same could have been achieved without pre-genning the 1 mill coins in the wallet.  IF those 'special' accounts ARE somehow different to normal ones then surely the test could be that EITHER the node must hold 1 million coins OR it must own one of the special wallets (without them needing to actually hold 1 million coins).

Doubt we'll get straight answers to the above - but:

A.  If the answer to 2 is "we have to take his word" then obviously his white-paper is intentionally misleading due to him claiming the money "can't" be used rather than that he "won't" use it.
B.  If the answer to 2 is that those accounts are in some way different to other accounts then obviously it follows that there was no need to generate the coins - the special 'status' of those accounts could have been detected instead.  And any such special status HAS to be detectable - or the network wouldn't be able to tell to disallow any attempts to use the content of them.

If he's either lied about the status of those accounts OR has generated millions of coins where there's no reason to (unles he wants to pump and dump with them ofc) then seems like it's just a get rich quick scheme at the exense of anyone gullible enough to buy SC2s (though I find it hard to have any sympathy for anyone that stupid).

Let me speak it out clearly: This looks to me as yet another (while more sophisticated) attempt to sell the presence of premined coins and now 'taxes'

Now since it is clear nobody wants that he has gone into the vindication phase.

Please Coinhunter, go back to making HYIPs or whatever you done before.

This is why I'm asking for the scammer label.

If this is what had been propsed with SC 1.0, in full disclosure before launch, the chain would have gone nowhere.  Instead, he proposed a BitcoinLite (3 minute blocks), paid spammers to spread FUD, and gained some traction.  That was the bait.  The switch is what we have now.  This has 'scam' written all over it.

This is correct, think of trusted nodes spending money to protect their investment, just like rich people do in real life with safes, etc.



The CPF currently has 32354, though it will be obtaining some more as the old bounty wallet is moved into it (2500SC) and the leftover from the genesis block (about 80000 coins). Sorry if you think this is a secret it's not.

SC1 had 30000 premined for bounties, currently the CPF has ~115000 SC, and you think this is a big deal? GG/TBX has 7 million premined coins, do you have threads pointing out the scam factor of this? You should have about 70x more posts about it if you're being fair. Please link me to them.

All the dealings with CPF will be written on the website as part of public policy, there is a block chain remember, everything is recorded.

You may not like what SC2.0 does to solve the security problem, or you may like that part and dislike other parts (CPF). Either way, it's the most advanced cryptochain out there, and will only get better.

I'm pretty certain he's lieing at least on one thing:

His "white-paper" basically says the premined wallets are place-holders "until Solid-Coin does have real millionaires".

But elsewhere he's said that every other block has to be mined by a super-node/trusted-node - which get to mine at difficulty 1.

Unless super-node/trusted-node = SC2 millionaire then rather obviously one of those statements is a lie.

IF super-node/trusted-node DOES = SC2 millionaire then that would make another statement of his a lie - that there were multiple criteria to be met to become a trusted node (I suspect there's only two criteria - that your nick rhymes with loinmunter and that you're a scammer).

This is the same reasoning Lolcust used for why we should trust him with 7.7 mil premined. I can't trust Lolcust with that, and I can't trust these million sc holders. Sure, they don't want the coin to fail, but why can't they use their power to make more coins slowly? It won't kill the coin, but it will build their wealth. So now tell me why I should trust them.


So what happens after many years of this and all the trusted million dollar accounts are now less than a million dollar because they've transfered enough of their wealth to you and your CPF? Will you then become the sole trusted user and get to control everything? Nice! I'm looking forward to that.

By your design, the 12m trickles to Coin Hunter.  Your claim of 'Oh I only have 32k' is only after one day.  Your previous mention was that only 5% of 'actual' blocks mined, you made no mention of even/odd differences, super nodes, 13m premined, etc.

Lolcust has been consistent from the beginning.  Both of his chains have a 'gimmick' which is the 'laundry'. Lolcust hasn't paid others to spread FUD about other chains.  Lolcust hasn't shut down one chain only to have it re-emerge under completely different parameters. Having premined blocks isn't defacto scam.  What is scammy is the way you've purposefully lied about critical information.

Haha yeah what a scammer I am. Spending weeks and working 12+ hour days to make a better product, implementing CPU mining so more people can generate SC, improving security and performance.

If I was a scammer you know what I would do? I'd release a slightly modified chain which does barely anything different (TBX/GG) premine 7 million coins and not really tell anyone about it until some days later. That requires only maybe an hour of my life vs the 1000+ hours I've invested already.

Please get some perspective.

What a joke.   Never mind, it'll die (again) soon enough when people cotton on.  It's only being mined now as people are greedy and want to make sure they're "in", just in case.   The decline has already begun.

Did you really create the next crypto-anarchist currency of the future by saying, "All everyone has to do is trust the rich!" Really?

Except I don't have 7 million coins, and I've already stated that it isn't "my coins" , it's every SC supporters. Just because I have the wallet doesn't mean much at all in my eyes. You can not believe that, it's your right.


CPF can obviously fund the account holders back to positive territory if needed. It's also one way to stop an attacker getting grip of one of the trusted wallets, if they do they can't spend it any other way than protecting the network.

By the time we have real millionaires we will have some very tight guidelines and recommendations for them to increase their security. Running on multiple nodes, block proxying, etc. The attacks I'm looking to defend against are government (the biggest) related ones. If we can defeat them everyone else will have no hope.

Now that SC2.0 is secure from this perspective I'll be able to argue with businesses that they can adopt SolidCoin as it's secure from all viable threats unlike all the other alternatives. I wasn't able to do this with BTC or SC1.

Your deffering to the actions of Lolcust is irrelevent.  If you want to press that Lolcust is a scammer - go ahead lay out your case of his consistent, deliberate deceit.

Going by your history though - it's now clear this is an actual scam.  Others need to be warned about your deceitful activities with you receiving the appropriate scammer label.

How can he be richer if all you guys say his coins are worthless?
what you're saying doesn't make any sense...

I think you mean your version of reality, so let me correct that for you. As of right now I've safely handed out 33000 in bounties personally, I have a history of not scamming people to this point. That said I don't think anything will change your mindset and that's ok. I suppose you'll want to educate as many people as possible about the imminent SC scam threat, you can do that too I guess, just don't try to pass off lies or mistruths as fact and I don't mind.

I think everyone has a right to question whether or not I can safely handle the CPF and also the other "Trust" factors that have been added to SC2.0. I don't have a problem with those questions being raised and people pointing it out to others. What I do have a problem with is lies such like that I *am* a scammer, which is bs, until I have scammed you cannot say that. If you find the truth gets in the way of your message perhaps you'll realize your message isn't a good one.

I have never been hacked, I'm an advanced programmer and know much about I.T.  So if I do come out saying "I've been hacked" I wouldn't even believe it if it was me personally. :) Like I don't believe most people that say that to cover up their fraud.

as i see it, the coins are worthless while held by the trusted nodes (10 x 1.2m premined). but when they bleed coins to CH's wallet (every even block, 3.2SC) then he's free to spend them on whatever he wants. nice.

Question, for CoinHunter. Who runs the trusted peers? Are they all yours?

You're scamming via bait-and-switch. There are more ways to scam than outright theft. The rationale has already been outlined. You've intentionally misled people with your FUD articles - care to defend those, and your previous statements that you purposefully tailored them to mislead?  You've lied about the premine.  You said it was only 1.2 - when in fact it is 1.2 + 12m trickle.  A premine is a premine - regardless of when it becomes 'active'. All of which has personally benefited you.

How many more instances of CH outright lieing and deceiving bitcointalk forum members does he need to give before he gets the label?

1000+ hours eh?
You do realize how long that is, right?  That's 41 days of 24 hours a day coding.


Some people put a lot of hours into scams.

What does have to do with my remark?
Are you really that blind with anger?
Why?
Every one of these threads is better than the thread before...

Let me ask you something: Are SolidCoins worth anything to you?

I have control of one of the accounts currently, I'm not sure if I will end up with any, just for now it's easier this way. I won't say how many are in the wild yet but we are increasing the presence on the network of them.

The people I'm giving them to are ardent SC supporters, who have families, assets and things to lose if they do anything inappropriate with it, combined with having excellent knowledge about system running.

you're going to do WHAT to their families and assets for misbehaving??

fuck you

Do people realize how diabolical this is  >:(

Good to know. But the only way to build real trust is through non-anonymity.
Anonymous trust is a bit of an oxymoron.

I believe if others scam or harm others in some way then justice should be served. It's quite simple. What else should happen to fraudsters and scammers?

I'm quite big on punishing those that hurt others, if someone finds it HARD not to hurt others I don't think they should be alive. Just my own life philosophy.

I got to ask. How do you plan to hurt them if they misbehave?

Vague threats on peoples families is not the best way to inspire confidence that you're not a scammer.

Found a great quote on the 5 reasons to own SolidCoin page:

"Unlike Bitcoin's startup which ensured nearly all the currency ended up with only a handful of people. These people have since vanished and cashed out, to leave the project to stagnate with little support from early adopters."

SolidCoin solves this problem by putting nearly all the coins in the hands of one person (plus everyone who mined in the first week).

Wait why would you need to do that.  I thought the coins CAN'T be spent from trusted nodes.  Or is this more "trust".  Can an owner of trusted node spend or transfer coins from the trusted node?  I am not asking about trust, or should they .... CAN THEY.  Is it technically possible to remove funds from trusted nodes.

Will you share source code that proves this claim?  Will you share any of the source code?

Indeed, I agree the initial startup isn't as optimal as if we had million dollar account holders from the get-go, where they can stay anonymous. However there's not like there is much alternative.

If people want a secure network (which I and others believe many do) then some compromises have to be made. If they don't then SC will not do well and something else will pass it.

The market also said Bitcoins were worth $30, and $20 and $10, and $0.001 even...

That's all subjective. Why didn't you defend also those folks who bought bitcoins at $30 and lost money?
I suppose that was OK with you... Like they say: A fool and his money are soon parted. Just be happy YOU are not one of those fools. Or maybe you are: JUST ASK THE DUDES FROM SOMETHINGAWFUL!

PS: At first i was completely against the alt currencies in this forums, but OH BOY, they sure are entertaining.

CPF fund will be used to hire lawyers and other things to prosecute criminals. Regardless of who they are. If any one of the initial trust holders scam anyone then I've failed in my job to select good characters, so therefore anyone I select I think has an excellent character.

How they would potentially scam people depends. It's not a traditional scam in that they have coins to spend, as they can't spend the trust accounts. But in theory they could prefer some nodes blocks, or give the wallet to hackers who may have a valid millionaire account and together they can disrupt network performance. (Double spends are nearly impossible even with trust accounts due to manual shutdown on large reorgs).

I've tried to limit the effects of the initial trust holders as much as possible because I like most people don't want to see them abused.

I have to admit I thought the trusted nodes as vector clock idea was clever.
Did you build in any additional logic to help resolve chain forking due to network partitioning?


I really have to disagree here though. You system would have been trivial to implement without the million SC accounts. All you need is a dozen people to say, "Hi, I'm Fred. I'm watching the system. If something goes wrong. Sue me at this address." That is basically what you did by giving out million plus SC accounts. Except you're not telling anyone who the account holders are. So if they collaboratively misbehave, there is no one to sue.

So a mixture of licensed mining and money? I'm not sure a more complicated approach is better. This is simple for general people to understand "money = security" . The amount of time it would take those trusted nodes to pass out their money is massive, and they stop passing money out when they go under a million dollars. So think of it more like 200K*10 going back to CPF over a very long period of time.

There have been large changes to handle reorgs and whatnot, and more to come.

I wonder who those people might be!   You're so transparent  ::)

Do you know the deepbit (owners) ? If you want to talk about centralization let's look at how one group has nearly 50% control of BTC network.

That is more centralization than 10x trusted accounts equally having control (for now).

Not really. People could leave Deepbit tomorrow for some other pool, were he to misbehave. What recourse do SC users have against misbehaving trusted accounts. The answer of course is "your promise".

Why do you constantly defer to other peoples actions to justify your own.
Fact is, deepbit can lose hashpower.  Or other pools can grow and compete.  That's far more decentralized than 10 hand-picked, only-known-to-you nodes to receive 1.2m coins each, and control every other block.

Oh right, why aren't people leaving him now when they know it's a flaw in BTC that the network can be attacked in that manner?

Can BTC recover if deepbit doublespends in multiple exchanges, businesses, etc ? That's an interesting theory, sure they may stop mining at deepbit after it comes out the attacks are carried out but by then the damage is done isn't it?

Exactly. Anyone who believes BTC is decentralized is an idiot. Gavin, MtGox, Deepbit, "the manipulator" etc. pull all the shots in this closed system.

Because it's highly relevant to this discussion of centralization.

Currently BTC is nearly 50% controlled by a single entity. Please tell me how decentralized this is, 50% > 10%.

It's duplicitous.  Seems clear now why these few weirdos that float around these threads blindly defending you, do so.   Pretty decent incentive.  You've already proved in the past you're not against getting people to spam positive comments to drum up support of SC.  

Whatever, enjoy it while it lasts.

And in the meantime you are expecting the guy not to misbehave... And take action when he does misbehave lol

yet, here you are, giving the benefit of the doubt to deepbit but not to coinhunter lol

oops, there went your argument... fool

Your super nodes are constantly, forever 50%.  You hand picked those, you designed your bait-and-switch around it.

Deepbit is not. Deepbit is big right now because miners have chosen to mine there.  Your scamchain has pre-dictated who the chosen 'trust' nodes are.

Your 'deepbit' angle is shallow, and your deferment to every other chain but your own tells of the scam you're performing.

No, I mean simpler than that. You have a rule that says, "only accounts with one million plus SC, can sign these even blocks."
You might just as well said, only humans with real name validated verisign certificates could sign. It's the non-anonymity that makes the trust. Not the money.


Which makes this a very ironic statement. Since at this very moment, people are camping in the streets protesting the anonymous rich! I dare you to go down to wall street and tell everyone, "Those with the most money should be in charge of your security!" :)

Isn't the whole argument for SC 2.0's trust model that those with significant investment will not misbehave? Operating the largest mining pool seems like a more significant investment than being handed a 1.2 million SC wallet...

Logic'd

The owner of deepbit makes a lot of money each day if he does not cheat the system. If he cheats the system, he might make a lot of money at once. So would he kill his golden goose?

And CoinHunter, you are using the same logic to bootstrap SC2, where million sc owners have incentives to behave. So you can't go and attack deepbit. You can't have the cake and eat it too. So which is it?

Well I understand your view. However being "anti bank" and "anti system" my hope is that similar people rise to power within the SC network. Not the traditional "rich types" if you know what I mean. Since we are starting fresh and most people with money couldn't care less right now we have a good chance of that happening I think. You have people who can create SolidCoin businesses and compete with the bigger businesses who are afraid of such things.

I want SolidCoin to defeat the current system, destroy the banks, and have something that everyone can use rather cheaply around the world. Mixed with something like precious metals for currency when "real life" doesn't have the internet.

The ideal people who rise to power and have the most SC will hopefully be those type of people too, and hopefully the world may become a better place to live without so much emphasis on greed.

Not really sure about that. There are entities that have large investments made just to scam others. Who tells you that deepbit, or even mtgox, isn't one of those cases?

Take Bruce Wagner, for instance, everybody said he was incorporated, so, not anonymous, and yet all that was made to scam.

A little consensus on the way you guys think would work wonders.

And take notice: I'm not defending Solidcoin or anything like it. I just find amusing that almost nobody liked when the goons came to tell us that bitcoin is a big scam, and now we have this...

The SC2 system places trust in 10 accounts currently, over time this will grow. So we have at maximum, 10% centralization with these nodes, over time that will decrease.

Alternatively with the BTC system deepbit seems to get bigger everyday , maybe soon they will be 80%  of the network.

Furthermore it's not like deepbit makes "that much money" doing what they do, they take a small percentage and give most to its users. There is certainly more in it for them in the medium term to take millions of dollars.

That being said I don't know deepbit owners and am not implying they are untrustworthy. Just personally I don't understand how people can criticize something like SC for having a little centralization when BTC already has significant amounts. It's not the glory land of decentralization people make it out to be.

Why do you think that is? Maybe because we actually think solidcoin IS a scam and bitcoin is not.

Yes, you think... The goons also THINK! Now, which one thinks the right thing, care to say?

I think
You think
He/She thinks
We all think
Different stuff, and without SOLID(pun intended) evidence, thoughts are just thoughts, nothing more

I guess we can all agree that "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks."

I'm not even sure what you are arguing here...

Do you even understand the threat of a 51% attack? How can they "take millions of dollars"? Please elaborate.

Your attempt to switch-gears is noted again. The traditional "rich types" that you talk about is what you've modeled SC around:


The OWS movement isn't 'anti bank'.  It's anti-government-aided-corporate-corruption.  And any 'system' talked about has to do with government - how in the heck is SC an attempt to 'defeat the current system'?

"without so much emphasis on greed"... SC 2.0 is focused on greed.  13m premined, 12m distributed to your 'best friends', of which you eventually gain sole control over all the premined?

This is a scam, with your personal greed as the engine.

Hey BitcoinExpress, have you heard?
Make this EC2 farm run a bit longer until you are sure you collected 1.2M+ coins, and the whole network will be relying entirely on your good will.
No need to attack it. Isn't it sweet?

Let's make a cartel of coin holders, and use our power to double spend at will.

I guess I'm just cynical. I think the only thing that makes rich people different from me is...

...they have more money.

He probably already has half a mil. I can't wait when he becomes a "trusted" node. But CoinHunter probably has code in there that says a million coin owner only becomes trusted when he (CoinHunter) says so.

Looking forward to the source code...

CH, don't tell me you gave an account to this phony troll.
That would be the most hilarious thing I have ever heard.

Don't hold your breath. I wouldn't be surprised if the source was withheld for the sake of "security".

Do you sign off every SolidCoin message with "it's a scam" . Haha.

10 accounts were created with 1.2 million. That's 12 million total generated. However once those accounts go under 1 million they can no longer be used, so it's like a "dead one million" until life is brought back into them (donations, cpf, or whatever).

Some people take a while to develop trust in something, it's why I don't mind that you think it's a scam johnj . But you'll be made out the fool as the weeks/months/years go on and everyone else is jumping onboard whilst you sit there on your "I still think it's a scam" pedestal. You have too much ego involved in this decision, and you won't back down on it now I'm guessing.

The type of personality you and a few others have here is quite stubborn in nature, mistrust of others combined with a false sense of pride. I don't expect you to stop educating people about your beliefs but yeah, hopefully you'll do it in a better manner going forward and not have to rely on lies and whatnot to pass on your beliefs.

Re-read my post. I edited it so the persons with slower brains can understand what i said.

But I'll resume it here anyway: What you think is the truth about Solidcoin or Bitcoin is just your opinion, and several other people around the world agree or disagree with you, so tell me again, what are you guys trying to achieve with this shit?

If you are not willing to change your opinion about things you take as facts, altho they are just your opinion, why should others change theirs?

The folowing applies:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

You probably don't care what I say, even though I'm the developer and have quite the SC connections (obviously).

I can gaurantee you that bitcoinexpress is lying about his SC holdings because of the people who have told me what they made mining on the first day. All the biggest miners I know of made more than 60% of it. Leaving the smaller miners to take their share and then possibly whatever this guy thinks he got.

He doesn't have a significant holding of SC, ask him to prove it and he'll be unable to. Simply ask him to move SC around on the network so we can see it's under his control. Won't happen, like I've said.

Bumping this on the (very) unlikely chance that he overlooked what (I believe to be) serious questions addressing the very basis of the "trusted nodes" and pre-mined coins.

If you have a problem with the scammer accusation, feel free to address the points i've outlined.  So far you defer to Lolcust and Deepbit as your inspiration, while ignoring every pressing question regarding your scam. And now a thinly veiled attempt to get the focus onto my ego (you're one to talk).

On the OP there are several points listed.  Feel free to go through them and demonstrate how they're in error.

The longer you ignore the opportunity to address my (and other peoples) accusations of your consistent deceitful patterns, the more apparent your scam is coming to light.

Are you sure those numbers are correct? Who audited them? Who tells you that they aren't hiding 10% of their hashrate to give you all the warm feeling of them being trustworthy?

If you guys want to be paranoid, please wear your tinfoilhat at all times, not just when it suits your own personal agendas...

At the end i don't want nobody to be scammed. And like you are warning everybody about solidcoin being a possible scam, you were also all warned that bitcoin is a possible scam by others, yet you all keep insisting on using it(i use it also).

You can keep this dialog with coinhunter for 2 more years and it will lead none of you to nowhere except to more publicity to his solidcoin.
Both parts are stubborn and choose to believe what ever they want to believe.

EDIT: Serious question --> Are you guys just trolling him for the fun of it? If that's so forget all that I said, and... good job!

Sorry I thought this was a troll as it's obvious.

In answer to 1) the blockchain has a set of rules for creation of money. These rules are well known (generates, and now cpf). No one can create money out of nowhere except under the conditions all the clients accept. It's not one million in a wallet, it's one million in an ADDRESS. So hopefully that clears it up for you.

The source code will verify that all clients will not accept the initial trusted accounts in any normal transaction. I could even show you in a live demonstration by attempting to send it right now and watching your client spit out "block failed trusted fund trying to be spent" in debug.log . You can analyse the EXE to find this string in there now if you want.

In regards to 3) Yes this could have been done in a split system whereby "some licenses" say this guy can create a trusted block. However this is quite limited and doesn't get around the fact these accounts will forever be accepted by clients. I think we should let the initial trust funds go under one million and then become "completely null" once we have some real millionaires.

So now the biggest miners hold 60% of the coins, eh? I guess throw that fairness right out the window. Weren't we promised that unlike bitcoin, solidcoin distribution will be more fair?

And what's up with you attacking Lolcust for 7.7 mil premine when YOU premined 13 mil? Sure you claimed it's locked up in the code. Where's the source code?

With no source code available, CH could remove the client's restriction on trusted address spending, get everyone to upgrade, and go to town. Unlike with Bitcoin, users would have no recourse as they can't build their own version with that restriction in place.

Honestly, I've changed opinions about SolidCoin quite a few times. CoinHunter initially seemed was very intelligent and knew what he was doing and created quite an innovate coin. Then I got banned from his IRC channel because I asked one too many questions about some of the technicalities of SolidCoin. I was pissed, but then people convinced me that he was just stressed out from the launch so I gave him another chance. And then the whole solidcoin will destroy bitcoin article, gavin trashtalking, and closing open source happened. And the whole community turned on him except for a select few that I can count on one hand. You guys probably run his trusted nodes.

With the 10% tax, CH is sure that he will always remain the most trusted node on the network.
A nice single point of failure.
He could as well have hardcoded his key in the code. That would have spared everybody a lot of time trying to figure wtf.

CH's home is now the one-stop shop to take over the SolidCoin network.
Terrorists, goverments, mafia, and burglars welcome.
CH, I really hope for you and your family that SC2.0 doesn't end up being a success against the odds.

And for the 9 other (un)lucky guys who got a control account, I am sorry for you.
On top of having a contract on your head, you'll have CH's lawyer on your back if you hand over your private key in an attempt to save your life.
I wouldn't like to be at your position.

But anyway, thanks for doing this experiment.
When you figure out why Satoshi decided to keep a low profile, please make sure to share your experience with the community.

Kill switches always help trust.  Always.

Also, the banks have a tremendous amount of money, yet they still gambled both their money and our money.
Clearly money alone does not make one trustworthy.

13 million premine, 10% tax, flood of coins during the first few days?   Constant lies (amount of pre-mine less than GG and Tenebrix?  Really?  In what world is 13 odd million < 7.7?), half-truths and misdirection?  Are you KIDDING me?  Why is anyone even debating whether this is in any way shape or form a scam or not?  There are no doubt even more pleasant surprises to be found when (or if?) the source is ever released.

You would have to be braindamaged to support this centralized, crony-driven cryptopyramid clusterfuck.  Why it's even allowed to advertise for free on a forum devoted to an open source, non-commercial, distributed crypto currency is beyond me.

Bring on Litecoin.  I'm support a scammer tag for CH 100%.

Which once established, the scammer label would save lots of newcomers time,energy,and effort from getting scammed by this guy.

He still has an open offer to go through and address each of the many grievous accusations.

So to be clear on this, the sole criteria to generate the alternate blocks (at difficulty 1) is that you have control of an address with a balance of 1 million+ SC2s.

And when clients verify the block they check the address signing it and scan the whole block-chain to make sure they have a balance of 1 million+ SC2?

That leads to two questions:

1. Isn't calculating the balance of addresses signing those blocks rather computation intensive?  Is there some short-cut to work out the bal;ance of an address that doesn't involve reading the whole block-chain?  If that's really what happens then isn't the network vulnerable to someone spamming 1 difficulty blocks signed with loads of different addresses - the time to parse the whole block-chain for an address is gonna be longer than the time to generate a 1 difficulty block.
2. If the client knows the addresses of the 1 million-holding accounts (to block spends from them) then I still don't see why yo udidn't have the criteria for generating the alternate blocks being "either it's one of these known addresses OR it holds 1 million+ SC2".  Down the line you could remove that code if you chose (meaning only the 'real' millionaires could make them) and there wouldn't be all this controversy about the pre-generated coins.

On an aside, I assume you still have the private keys for the super-node wallets (or we have to take your word for it that you deleted them)?  So saying you don't have control ofthem is misleading - as you have access to them and the ability to remove the hard-coded spend-block on them from the source-code.

I'm by no means totally opposed to the PRINCIPLE of how you're stopping 51% attacks - but the pre-genned coins seems needless and hence LOOKS like scam.  And there's a fair bit of hypocrisy in your comments elsewhere about exchanges providing RL info on their operators (to reduce the likelihood of them scamming), but you (with the ability - and a past record - of rewriting the block-chain) give no information at all on yourself and fail to identify who the trusted nodes are.

But he's more trustworthy than Visa, which is why he and his cronies deserve 10% of the network revenue in perpetuity, and a 13 million coin head start.  On top of whatever pittance the rest of the peasants propping up his scam get.

Unfortunately I cannot control the mining nodes, who mines, who prepares etc. The SC1 launch was a lot fairer but since SC2 was public it was hard to "Surprise" people. Only about 320K coins have been generated and I'd say 60% of that went to about 15-20 people. That breaks down to about 9600 per person. Not exactly rich by any standard measure. My I7 found 10 blocks in the first 90 minutes then nothing for 3 hours. So personally I didn't mine very much either. To put that in perspective, I'm the one who did all the work and because I'm coding up to the last minute I didn't have time to setup servers for mining, etc. Do I really care that much? Not really, if people are happy with SC I'm sure they'll donate some SC to me.

I don't really understand how it's my fault such things happen, if I was to place some sort of ID on everyone who mined I'd then be criticized for doing that, so I'd never win regardless. People who have a lot of mining power, whether GPU or CPU make the most money. Happens in BTC will happen in SC. However unlike BTC at least we can have more people making _something_ due to use of CPU. There was an interesting theory about using human work instead of CPU work on our forum, I may investigate this at some point and see if it's feasible.

That's only IF you use solidcoin... ;)

And the part about secure commerce without trust is also lacking on Bitcoin. A LOT! One doesn't even need to step out of this forums to know that commerce is in no way secure with Bitcoin in it's current state. But maybe that's a problem with the way commercial transactions should be made and not with bitcoin. If money or any other good is changing hands there must be trust between the 2 parties that conduct the business, and honnestly i don't see Bitcoin or any other p2p crypto-currency solving that problem.
I understand that some of you might have thought that Solidcoin would be the one to resolve that problem, or at least to contribute some solutions to the problem.

But you can control what you falsely advertise.  This reinforces the bait-and-switch accusation: Your original bait, in your own words, was designed to be a 'fair distribution'.  Now it turns out the distribution of a gross 330k coins (in one day) went to ~15 people.  Which isn't taking into account the 13m+ premined.

Scam.

You ask some good questions. However if I may address your last point first. Do you know how many coins were pregenned and I have in control? It's 80000 leftover from the genesis. That is *it*. Now the CPF funds are a different matter, they aren't premined they are part of the network protocol, so perhaps a bit of terminology use there would make it easier to follow. If you think 80000 coins to setup the CPF is "a lot of coin" then that is your own subjective value I guess. There was 30000 generated in SC1, 80000 in SC2, in the scheme of things quite low.

1) You don't have to verify the whole block chain, you verify the last transaction it was used in. It's quite quick and done for every transaction.
2) That can be changed going forward. I don't think many people will complain if those accounts are removed provided we have some real millionaires. Like I said though, if they drop below 1 million they're useless anyhow.

As an aside yes I still have all the wallets created. Mostly as a safe keeping thing right now and they are heavily secured. The people who end up with these wallets will know if anyone else is using them so if "I went rogue" they would know. Not that there is any point in going rogue with these wallets generally speaking, unless you want to cause some temporary network issues. SC2.0 cannot be rewritten in the same manner as Bitcoin can so users and businesses are rather safe in that way.

If you can't trust me to be honest with the CPF you won't trust that I've got the other wallets either so it's kinda a moot point. All of them will be given to control of the NPO when started, and they'll have the capacity to analyze them to verify everything has been done "above board" so to speak. And at that point I will remove them, and they can create new addresses and whatnot for these funds to finalize all of my involvement.

If the nodes run <1m that means each one has sent 200k coins to the CPF, 10 x 200,000 = 2,000,000 coins premined with delayed delivery.

It's actually 200K * 10, or 2 million total that can be "Funneled" back into CPF. Like I said, once they drop past 1 million they are useless and cannot be used. Have you worked out how long that 2 million would take to be completely funneled to CPF? Perhaps you should.

You've already stated you've receieved 32k today alone.  2m/32k = 62.5 days.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? 5% every second block is from a trusted node, not 10%. 5% is created like a normal generate, 5% is from trusted node.

So that's 1.6SC currently every other block, or 16K at the moment. As difficulty increases block generation will decrease and we are seeing that now. Trying to use the "low diff" situation to formulate your ratio is quite stupid.

Managed to get out at .0085 BTC/SC on btce while everyone was discussing the magnitude of this scam.  Thanks for the free BTC.  There's still 70 BTC up for grabs if people are fast.

Your scam has readjusted difficulty 60x already, yet is still only at 1/7th of target block generation.

Trying to use 'the difficulty will adjust' when clearly it isn't to formulate your ratio is "quite stupid."

It's 2 minute blocks ideally (I'd say 90 second average will likely happen due to the retarget algorithm). So that's 960 blocks per day if the trusted blocks take 0 time (they don't but let's forget it for this calc) and the normal blocks take 90s.

960 blocks per day * 1.6 = 1536SC a day, which would give us 1302 days or 3.5 years until they are completely funneled back into CPF. That's if trusted blocks took no amount of time, and with lower than maximum retargets. So fairly on the side of caution.

What a snail way to get 2 million coins, I must have failed my scamming classes.

Wait, you're receiving 1.5k SC a day, off the electricity of other miners. Whilst repeatedly deceiving them.  Looks like you aced your scam classes.

Um, i wish i make 2 million bitcoins every 3.5 years. You are trying to replace bitcoins, right? Imagine if every 3.5 years, Satoshi gets 2 million bitcoins funneled into his SPF (Satoshi Personal Fund)...

Haha ok, well close minded people are going to be close minded what can I say. Anyone that is reasonable will read this thread and see my intentions.

20k blocks mined first day.  Assuming adoption picks up (and it would have without such bombshells) the generation rate would never "catch up" to difficulty rising.  We saw this early on.  The higher the difficulty went, the faster the block generation went.

Looks like the retarget rate was designed for this behavior.  

So instead of 3.5 years steady state you're probably expecting more like 6 months at call it a modest 8000 blocks/day average.

You've again sidestepped the multiple grevioius accusations of your deceitful intentions.

If any mods have been keeping up, it's obvious you're dismissing critical questions and allegations.

I believe you'll receive your due scammer label soon enough

I think your intentions are good. I really do believe you wanted to create the perfect coin to replace bitcoin, which you think is seriously flawed. I give you credit for that. And I think you have superior coding skills. But I think you need to work on your economics and your communications a bit more.

It seems to me you are just turning solidcoin into a centralized fiat currency where you are the Fed. You may not agree, but a lof of people on this board feel the same way as I. You should ask yourself why. Maybe you are able to convince a hoard of people to follow your lead. I've seen worse things. I mean just look at how many people actually think the Fed is doing a good job.

My advice is if you really wanted to create a bitcoin killer, have an open mind and design your new coin WITH the smart people on this board. Keeping it closed source and a secret is not the way to go.

Prove that I am CoinHunter or withdraw your comment.

The fact BitcoinExpress was banned from the forum says everything really about the quality of the accusations some forum members like to bandy around.

I am CoinHunter in the same way kangaroos jump down the main street of Sydney.

Not so much:

You did say you are RealSolid here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=47303.msg562956#msg562956
Isn't RealSolid the same as CoinHunter?

BitcoinMedia is RealSolid, what?!

Banks mostly spend others money! :)

I also have a suspicion (no more than that) that he may actually be well-intentioned rather than trying to scam - just unfortunate he manages to do everything in a way which screams "scammer!".

There's two big things which turn off a lot of people here:

1.  Concealing information (most obviously closed-source).
2.  Central control of pregenerated funds.

SC is obviously not the only one guilty of 2 - and, in at least one respect, SC2 is better than Tenebric for that.  SC has the OPTION of fully detailing all wallet activity relating to the pregenned coins (and has stated he intends to do so).  Tenebrix can never do that with a stated intent of the pregenned wallet being used for laundering purposes: if all transactions are described then laundering can't work, whilst if all aren't detailed then it can never be proven that the pregenned funds haven't been dumped on exchanges.

End of the day it's pretty obvious to everyone that there was no need to generate and funnel funds to defend against 51% attacks.  And if a fund was needed for something then it could have just been openly generated up front.  All of the obfuscation just LOOKS like an attempt to do it under the radar.

Bottom line (for me) is that "you have to trust me - my intentions are good" has never been a good selling point to me.  If someone's intentions are good then I tend to expect them to go out of their way to demonstrate it by removing their own ability to scam the system.  Talk of future oversight committees (or whatever they're called) is just that - talk.  If I trusted talk then there wouldn't need to be a committee.

With all due respect, this is untrue. Not only public monitoring of the laundry is possible without destroying its functionality, Coblee here has proposed a very elegant "laundry super-hardening" security mechanism that, upon laundry's creation, will be eventually deployed in a voluntary manner (since I don't want to force anyone to contribute to hardening the laundry).

I think you can go to the main TBX thread to read up both on laundry monitoring and Coblee's proposal.

P.S.:

Having said that, "I give my buddeh's a millyoon but they can only pay me with it" seems like an awfully contrived scheme.

Wow. 13 million coins "post-premined". New records:
- ccurrency with the most premined coins
- ccurrency with the most unannounced premined coins (by unannounced I mean announced after launch)
- first ccurrency with post-premined coins

You forgot "ccurrency that places extortion right in the blockchain" and "first ccurrency to openly engage in blatant electricity theft"

Woops, sorry, I can't believe I forgot that one. ...Too ...many...records ...at the same time ... Does ...not ...compute :D

Well, getting to a million SC coins would give you the privilege of mining at a super low difficulty. Over time, more people will become part of that club.

The 32 coins alternating between members every alternate block just pay for the interest of having the coins parked in Solidcoin instead of any other crypto currency.

No, you only generate the blocks with no coins in it for you. The real blocks with 32 SC2 will use the normal difficulty.

 Well, this satisfies me, folks.

 He's a self-professed advanced programmer who knows much about I.T.

 We should all rally behind this man.

Not quite—  You generate a normal block, then use your trust account to mine a trusted block right after it (especially easy since it's a minimal difficulty computation).  If someone else had beat you to the punch on the normal block it doesn't matter— the chain with the trusted block is the longest one.  So while the trusted block itself costs you coins it gives you a veto over the identity of the generator of the prior block.

It's even super extra special if you're the operator of this system— because the fee in the trusted blocks goes to to operator, so once he's extracted out the few hundred thousand in surplus coin those pre-mined accounts were equipped with he can simply recycle their fee and maintain them (and their ability to control the winning chain, and thus who the normal block coin goes to) indefinitely.

+1

Not only do we know the deepbit owner (Tycho (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=7603)), but I would trust him more than any "trusted SolidCoin millionaires account". And nothing in SolidCoin prevents a "trusted account" from setting up a pool and performing a majority attack. True, there are only 10 trusted accounts, but the same is true for Bitcoin (less than 10 large pools). In fact, have you ever considered the following viewpoint:

You present trusted SolidCoin millionaire accounts as people who have a lot invested in SolidCoin, therefore are unlikely to cheat the system and can be trusted to solve all even blocks. A large Bitcoin pool owner, in effect, fills the same role. He has invested a lot in Bitcoin (time developing and maintaining his pool), has a lot to lose (pool revenues), had to work on gaining very public trust from the users over time, and his pool effectively solves a good fraction of the blocks. I would argue that the Bitcoin model is superior to the SolidCoin model whose "trusted accounts" are unknown and anonymous and chosen by someone other than the users. Bitcoin gives power to the users by letting them dynamically vote who they trust by choosing where they mine. SolidCoin dangerously set the trusted accounts in stone with arbitrary static rules.

What do you think?

That said, Bitcoin and SolidCoin are different:

• On one hand, for Bitcoin, majority attacks ("51% attacks") are a non-problem. The hashrate is too high to attack, no one will spend $10M to attack it today. Pools have too much to lose to attempt the attack themselves. And Bitcoin has a long-term solution easily implementable anyway, by giving pool users control of the blocks: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=9137.0 For all these reasons, your criticism of majority attacks being possible against Bitcoin is unfounded.
  
• On the other hand, majority attacks are a real problem for (and only for) startup cryptocurrencies, like SolidCoin, who have to start the hashrate from zero. So, in a way, I understand why you have to come up with a non-optimal mechanism to try to protect your network from attacks.

What I like more is that initially, only a single million was supposed to be premined.

I am also still enamored with the "take 5% of miner's electricity" shtick - for the love of everything good in the world, what's the point of stealing from miners when you ALREADY HAVE A PREMINE IN THE MILLIONS?

I can't resist, the problem of how to bootstrap a new chain in the face of massive, hostile hashing power fascinates me.

CoinHunter, what will happen to SolidCoin if, God forbid, you get hit by a bus? What are the plans for the trusted CPF wallets? Do your heirs get control of them?

And what if SolidCoin is wildly successful-- so successful that each SC is worth 1,000 euros? Will somebody still need 1 million of them (so have to be a euro billionaire) to be trusted?

Where did you go, BitcoinMedia? Did you forget that you claimed to be RealSolid in that thread?

I'll quote it for posterity.

I was wonder about this too. I asked CH in an earlier post but I think that section of the post got derailed.

I seems implausible that they would go to all the trouble of adding in interleaving blocks (What I called a vector clock) without realizing they could be used in fork detection. Basically this would supplement or override "the longest chain" rule in cases where a long fork appears out of the blue. Otherwise, anyone who could isolate a single trusted peer could run wild.

However, I didn't think it was plausible to invent ten 1.2 MSC accounts to make interleave feature work either.

Why should he care? It won't be his problem.

We should empirically test this. Anyone have the number of a bus hire company in Australia?

And what if the blocks get "accepted" by one of the other supernodes?

I dont like where that train of thought is headed. Considering many people have accused me of being coinhunter its not out of the realm of possibility a mistake could occur and the wrong person gets run over by a bus. This is getting rather threatening and distasteful.

Agreed.  Threatening the lives of people involved with SC *is* in poor taste.

However, CH opened up this door himself when he made threats upon the SC 'super-node' holders.  "They're people with families, assets, things to lose...."

I am also Satoshi.

It only seems fair that if BTX was banned from here, we should give the same honor to RS/CH.

Not sure who the bigger troll is, quite honestly.

LOL. cold.

Since you cant tell sarcasm from reality I wont bother explaining the reference to you.

You have totally the wrong idea. I wasn't seriously suggesting I wanted to kill CoinHuter with a bus. I was only going to tap him gently with it to make a point. Maybe give him a few bruises, nothing more.

It was a joke, and I did see CoinHunters comment you quoted above in the original context. I'm pretty sure he was talking about legal action, not some kind of criminal punishment! He is a scammer not a mobster.

Legal action?  Really?  Legal action?

I'd love to see the contracts CH has with his 9 buddies.  What kind of compensation was exchanged in return for entering into those contracts?  Internet funbucks are great and all (especially if it's 1.2 million internet fun bucks that the guy issuing later claims can't be redeemed), but I wonder if those contracts would ever be enforceable.  For a contract to be valid a reasonable person must be capable of understanding the terms.  Any half-competent lawyer could spin the byzantine SC "architecture" into verbal spew complex enough to make it look like the scam it is.  If one of the 9 destroys what little value SC has there won't be enough money in the ecosystem to pay the kind of ninja lawyer that could make what looks like a scam contract stand up.

Then there's the whole jurisdiction thing.  What I said is valid in the US, international law may be different.

From what CH/RS said, it's not the longest chain but the richest trusted node. So I guess if someone manages to grab more coin than anyone else they'll be in charge?

That was the impression I got. I'm not trying to defend him and I never said he wasn't a delusional nutcase. If he can't pay lawyers he can't pay contract killers either so don't worry about his threats, legal or otherwise.

Jeez... you guys have too much imagination :D I think all he meant was that the super-node holders with a million of SC couldn't afford to lose them. I'm not sure this is right though...
On a side note, where are you quoting the sentence I underlined from? Can't find it as is in this thread nor in the whitepaper.

Here

Mkay... maybe forget what I said then... Although my main concern about this is that he's saying he already gave away millions of coins to SC fanboys. This leaves me with a tough choice about how to call this ccurrency: TaxCoin? RSFriendsCoin? RSClubCoin? FanCoin? GiveawayCoin? So many things to choose from...

ScamCoin is my favorite, I'm pushing for CH to receive the scammer label after this obvious bait-and-switch.

https://i.imgur.com/BtMUV.jpg

The Invisible Hand, flipping off CoinHunter

So what I want to know is, if only supernodes can do even numbered blocks and they're always difficulty 1, why were even numbered blocks taking less time during the low difficulty minefest?

Yeah but that's too generic and overused IMO.

Tenebrix are roughly at partity with SC on btce for both price and volume.  Lots of flipping off to go around for both massively premined scamchains.

Meh, Tenebrix is doing well given zero blawg and twitter support, zero prelaunch hype, and a "competitor" that has both.

For the love of Cthulhu, what is it about some certain people and pre-mines?
 it's like some kind of deep affront to you guys, on a level that seems to go beyond economic reasoning.

The problems with SC2 are not "premine".

The problems are, in no particular order:

• weird chicanery happening to the diff
• the "peer to pig" architecture itself
• absolutely insane obfuscation going on in the "pig node" part of things
• blatant electricity theft
• and, perhaps, most of all, the amazing invisible source code.

In fact, given the above, SC2 is probably doing better than it should according to "strong efficient market" kind of reasoning.

You say that, but the shit really didn't start hitting the fan until the 13+ million coin premine was disclosed.  That's when SC instantly took a 50% haircut on the exchanges while TBX rallied.  At the moment your pig at the through exhibition is less offensive than that of a demonstrated liar, but only $2000 dollars is buying into both combined.  Congratulations!

Actually, shit started hitting the fan when BTCEx posted his pwnage thread and the fan really spun up when a forum mod reversed his judgment on validity of BTCEx's claims and acknowledged the attack as real.

But I guess we're running into some kind of "subjectivity in sorta-kinda ill-formalized fundamental analysis of exotic neither-money-nor-asset cryptothingie markets" problem at this point ;)

P.S.:
Perhaps a bit of a touchy subject, so feel free to decline answer, but are you currently a resident of the United States?
Just a bit of less-than-scientific statistics gathering on my part...

Well, a big problem with SC2 is that it was premined to a much larger extent than previously disclosed. At least all the previous premines (that I know of) have been honest from the beginning (had to be, they disclosed source codes).

I don't like premined block chains, but I don't think there's anything wrong with in as long as it's disclosed.

I forgot to add to the above:

SC2 has huge communication issues.

They keep going on "everything is fine, situation is UNDER CONTROL, nothing to see here" when it is pretty obvious that their diff got horribly borked early on and they have weird "chain hiccups" which have so far received zero public technical comment from anyone.

That's not "communication issues", that's propaganda.

Just an update

SC 2.0 has been released for ~40 hours.  It's on block 23000.  The current block generation is ~25s, only 27% of the target.  This is after 66 difficulty adjustments.  For a total of 41k funneld into CH's personal wallet.

This is really the first time I've read up on SolidCoin so apologies for the daft questions but:

1) How does CoinHunter get SC1.2M every year forever? Does it not stop when the 'security wallets' have released all their coins?

2) Does each of the 12 or so Trusted Nodes pay CoinHunter money? (I.e. he gets this 12 times over)

3) Can the Trusted Nodes money be spent like ordinary SolidCoins once transferred over to CoinHunter's wallet?

4) Does he really get 10% of everything that's mined (SC1.9M)?

5) If the Trusted Nodes monies can be transferred to CoinHunter's wallet, doesn't this mean the SolidCoin economy is massively larger than SC18.9M?

Yup, been living in various parts of the US forever.

1) I don't think the security wallets release any coins more than what they generate.
2) no
3) probably - I think they can just spend money by themselves indeed
4) I'm sure he gets 5% (that's what I read a while ago on solidcointalk). Not too sure about the other 5%, that's new for me too.
5) Yeah, the 18.9M limit was in SC 1. In SC 2 there's no limit on the total amount of coins.

My understanding is that the security wallets can't spend money without first going through CoinHunter's wallet first.

Ah, right - with no limit on SC2 then I guess that's why CoinHunter will get paid forever.

Not sure a 5%-10% on the system would fly but I guess for others, that's an acceptable cost for the benefits of SC.

Fascinating.

Too bad I'm no sociologist, but still fascinating.

Thank you for answering.

I think he's talking about the 18.9m from SC 1.0

https://i.imgur.com/suToq.png

Bait and switch

I'm curious as to why you find this fascinating. Would you care to share?

Thanks for the excellent explanation.


I read that the Trusted Nodes each have 13 million pre-mined.

If these funds can be transferred to CoinHunter's wallet then there would be an additional 13 million available to spend. If there are a dozen of these nodes then there would be 12 * 13 = 156 million more SolidCoin to spend.

Also there doesn't seem to be anything preventing more Trusted Nodes being set up unless that too is hard coded into the client (which can be changed at any time by CoinHunter).

Yep, I am referring to the 18.9m from SC1.

I'm inferring that SC1 and SC2 are not the same thing?

Is SC2 not SC1 with a few tweaks or are they two completely separate entities? (E.g. coins mined in SC1 are not the same as those mined in SC2)

Of those who are upset strongly about by the premine and strongly believe it has market effects even when coins are "dormant", and agreed to tell me their rough geographical whereabouts, more than 50% are from US.

Of course, without controls and proper sample size this is low quality data of no particular scientific validity, but still...

Coins from SC 1.0 -can- be uploaded to SC 2.0.  But that's their only overlap.

I believe there have been more coins mined in 1 day of 2.0, than the entirety of 1.0.  Thus, the people who put their electricity into 1.0 have been scammed out of their value.

I guess its a nice lesson in inflation. Im guessing people wont be looking for inflatacoins anytime soon will they ?

If what happened to SC2 was "inflation", then it's value would have been below 1 satoshi already.

Market doesn't give a fuck about how many coins the Great Leader is hiding.

But it does care when a forum mod reverses his judgment and acknowledges a vast attack as "true"

Meanwhile, SC2 diff is still all fucked up, with no recovery in sight.

The block rate is slowing down quite significantly..

I think people are confused about what trust coins are and the rules under which they can be spent.

On paper, no

In reality, I think the market does care about how many coins the Great Leader is hiding. Due to the market is made up of people, and people have an issue with trust.

For you, it seems the market 'trusts' your intentions, at least enough.  You've worked well with others, embraced an attack on GG of which helped BTC - and you seemed genuinely glad.  The -only- hiccup I'm aware of is your failure to announce your laundry intentions (and premine) with TBX.  AFAIK that's the only isolated incident, and is easily written off.  The only consistent thing about CH is arrogance.

Your right that the premine itself isn't an issue.  If someone wanted to create PremineCoin, launch it with a genisis block of eleventy gillion, and video tape himself burning the USB with the only private keys to the premine - no one cares.  It's what is going to be done with the premine, and who are we trusting to carry out those intentions, and what (if any) history do they have of which reasonable character observations can be made inorder to come to a human-based conclusion of 'is this a good investment'.  CH loses that battle.

True, but after 66 difficulty adjustments, the block generation is still only at 25s, 80% off from the target of 120s

I don't understand why this would be so.

Curious discussion.  I'm not being pro or anti SC or the different camps of people on either side - time will determine if it succeeds or not.

I was intrigued to see the claim that 1000+ hours at 12 hours/day have gone into this development, and the nice observation that might take a few weeks to accumulate.  I was also wondering how an advanced programmer might have that much time available unless they were unemployed, and why their skills were not in demand in employment.  Is it that SC is designed to earn them revenue?  I would find it hard to believe an aulturistic approach having spent 100k+ of valuable coder time would be a gift to humanity, but then I'm a cynic.

Declaration of interest = 70 or so solid coin (version 1 something).  no plan to mine SC, not mining much BTC either at the moment (and Locust - for your survey, I'm not USA based, but that's not hard to work out)

Doublec hasn't seen the code, he only knows what he has been told, just like the rest of us.

Plus, the code can be changed for "updates" and unlocking those coins slipped in.

Bitcoincharts has the network at ~10 th/s, and bitcoinmoniter has 3 blocks within the last 30 minutes.

Yes and someone was on the forum saying that. Maybe BTCeX in a  pique of madness at being banned has taken the tools he perfected attacking alt chains and is now attacking bitcoin  :)

Or not.

I don't dispute people donate time (and other stuff).  Was just curious about this particular case.

Not sure if you're exasperated at my confusion or if you've got my username mixed up ;)



Ah, right - I did have that mixed up, thinking there were 12 nodes of 1m.


Thus there are another 8.9m coins available to mine? So when people talk about a '10% tax', they don't mean the miner loses that but instead (as you previously explained), an additional 5% of what was mined comes from the Trust Node and an additional 5% from magic?

The magical amount - will this increase the total mineable SC or is this part of the 18.9m?

Sorry for all these questions but it's very interesting to find out how it's all working and your answers are very easy to understand.

What is 'SC2 diff'?

Difficulty

Do you know if they're still unspendable if transferred to CoinHunter's wallet?

DeathAndTaxes didn't say there would be inflation/deflation. That was from a question I asked but I can now see that inflation/deflation isn't an issue from his answers.

From my reading, he's not spread any lies but given factual answers.

People don't have issue downloading and running binaries from internet strangers EVEN with ABSOLUTELY no legal recourse and NO SOURCE CODES in sight, for the love of everything.

"Joe Shmoe premined" is meek in comparison because binaries from internet stranger  can fuck one's very personal shit up right now, not fuck up market in some possible future.


TBH I announced the laundry and the fund, but, regrettably not the size of the fund, an error I later corrected.


Again, CH has personality issues on record, and people thoughtlessly run his binaries even when he blatantly refused to release source, even after SC launch.

In a more "cautious" environment, he would have got exactly zero nodes after refusal to show what the hell is inside his beast.

This is where the bilderburgers come in.

Not so much money laundering as "making your premine fund evade public scrutiny" diagram.

Basically, he learned from "how do we oversee Lolcustfund" discussions and made a scheme that would make overseeing his fund much harder.

The only way to win the game is to not play. Unlike fiat I dont have to use any *coins. The ultimate laundry is moving to a separate blockchain.

I thought 1.6 SC is generated as CPF (not sure which block) AND the trusted nodes pays CPF 1.6 SC for each even numbered blocks. So that adds up to 3.2 SC for every 2 blocks.

Listen, monitoring is done by people or relatively trivial code usually. No one is going to write a neural net to monitor coinhunter's shit, he doesn't have to invent perfect obfuscation, just one good enough to confuse majority of observers.

You need a virtual ass ?

I'm not clear on your position here.

Do you agree that there is taxation/inflation going on here or are you saying that this isn't happening?

I'm sure if his personal cut is dropping he'll fix that bug quickly.  Either that or halt the chain and then relase SC3 with even more premined coins, a higher tax and everything mined by super-nodes with random rewards given out to miners based on connection time (unless blocked by a super-node).  That would totally solve the 51% problem.

Actually, lottery based (re?)distribution seems like a fun idea.

This is what my next ScamCoin is all about mate. I will file for intellectual property theft.

I will pay 1 BTC to anyone who can give me a drawing of this.

For reference, here is the last piece of art I had commissioned:
NeedyPoo's amazing rendition of RealSolid (NSFW) (https://i.imgur.com/5a9sJ.png)

As requested, someone confused as to how to wipe their virtual ass with Solidcoins

https://i.imgur.com/6elfN.png

I have a minor modification request. Please add a cleaver caption so that people will know what this picture is about.

1 BTC being sent to 1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym!

Updated with a cleaver caption

https://i.imgur.com/QXBs3.png

Have an extra .5 BTC for cleverly adding a cleaver!

Haha, I almost (almost) feel guilty for accepting that, but it was too much fun!