|
Title: delete Post by: BitcoinEXpress on October 15, 2011, 10:14:13 PM delete
Title: Re: delete Post by: MaGNeT on October 15, 2011, 10:15:32 PM This is what CuntHunter can do:
http://www.shtfplan.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/red_button1.jpg It's the only chain that can be stopped by it's creator. Title: Re: delete Post by: MaGNeT on October 15, 2011, 10:17:55 PM And this could be a big problem for CuntHunter:
I think so. Any mod want to comment on bitcointalk policy on advertising & promoting pirated software? BTW here is the Berkeley DB License. Quote /* * Copyright (c) 1990-2009 * Oracle Corporation. All rights reserved. * * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions * are met: * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the * documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. * 3. Redistributions in any form must be accompanied by information on * how to obtain complete source code for the DB software and any * accompanying software that uses the DB software. The source code * must either be included in the distribution or be available for no * more than the cost of distribution plus a nominal fee, and must be * freely redistributable under reasonable conditions. For an * executable file, complete source code means the source code for all * modules it contains. It does not include source code for modules or * files that typically accompany the major components of the operating * system on which the executable file runs. * * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY ORACLE CORPORATION ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS * OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED * WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR * NON-INFRINGEMENT, ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL ORACLE CORPORATION * BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR * CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF * SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS * INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN * CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) * ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF * THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. */ SolidCoin 2.0 is in violation of both provisions 2 & 3 and thus is not licensed to use the Berkeley DB, property owned by the Oracle Corporation. As SolidCoin 2.0 does use and distribute this software without a valid license those involved in SolidCoin project (Coin Hunter et al) are engaging in software piracy which is a crime in some jurisdictions and subject to financial damages by Oracle in many jurisdictions where it is not a crime. Title: Re: delete Post by: sd on October 15, 2011, 10:18:34 PM Can we get this stickied?
Title: Re: delete Post by: MaGNeT on October 15, 2011, 10:20:44 PM Can we get this stickied? It should be. The SolidCoin client is a risk to our community. If it has a walletstealer that goes active on a certain date and CoinHunter walks away with thousands of BTC, who's to blame? Or what about a keylogger? Unless the SolidCoin source is revealed, we must consider it to be dangerous. If CH reveales the source, people like ArtForz, BCE, etc. can take a look at it, compile it, test it and if they say it's safe, it's safe. Until then, you should not use it. There's to much at stake. But some people are willing risk everything to earn 3 BTC... To them, I say: use common sense. Title: Re: delete Post by: DeathAndTaxes on October 16, 2011, 12:36:09 AM Interesting nobody from pro-ScamCoin camp has responded to the fact that ScamCoin unlawfully redistributes software that does not belong to Solidcoin or Coinhunter namely Berkeley DB w/o valid license.
Coihunter claims he doesn't want to release the source code (which is 99% Bitcoin) because someone might steal his hard work? Maybe he feels that way because he sees the world through his own actions. Coinhunter is STEALING the work of the people who developed Berkeley DB but unlawfully distributing it without a license. Honestly if they need to pirate software in order to keep the network running they should at least be honest and rename it PiracyCoins. Title: Re: delete Post by: BitcoinPorn on October 16, 2011, 02:13:08 AM "There have been reported instances where this interception of transactions have occurred. Releasing the code would 100% either prove this false or prove it true. There is no legitimate reason to withhold the source." I like open source, I hate that it is forced upon people though that don't want to do it, but I do wonder, with a claim like this or any others, is it possible for SolidCoin to be checked thoroughly without the need for him to release the code he obviously does not want to, at least at this time?
Title: Re: delete Post by: BitcoinPorn on October 16, 2011, 03:03:07 AM I wonder if someone else were to do the hard work to actually set it up, possibly have to pay for it, make sure Real Solid approves of the third party being used, would he be okay with this? Or this has been specifically brought up with him in which he said no?
For the sake of him being able to keep his code and everyone else at the least trust nothing is shady going on in regards to known ways to harm our computers, I do not see why he wouldn't be down for this. The more I think of it though, would it matter that much if they wouldn't know what to look for in with these digital currency clients and how they operate. Or is the malware, virus, etc check at least a start. Title: Re: delete Post by: FlipPro on October 16, 2011, 04:11:34 AM I wonder if someone else were to do the hard work to actually set it up, possibly have to pay for it, make sure Real Solid approves of the third party being used, would he be okay with this? Or this has been specifically brought up with him in which he said no? For the sake of him being able to keep his code and everyone else at the least trust nothing is shady going on in regards to known ways to harm our computers, I do not see why he wouldn't be down for this. The more I think of it though, would it matter that much if they wouldn't know what to look for in with these digital currency clients and how they operate. Or is the malware, virus, etc check at least a start. The pros know what to look for, you cannot get Trojans, central control, backdoors etc., past these guys. The same way if he released the code it would not get past the people of this community. What this moron failed to understand is that ANY serious exchange WILL BE REQUIRED by their INSURERS to perform an outside code audit on all software that is run on their production servers if it is nor obtained from a certified vendor. They don't care how user friendly the UI is LOL. I am almost positive that Cryptoxchange can verify this? Hopefully then people will finally stop listening to you. Title: Re: delete Post by: DeathAndTaxes on October 16, 2011, 04:31:33 AM When that source code is released soon (as said a million times by RS) how stupid will you look? Define "soon". If CH has said he will release SC "a million times" why not just release it. Also if you are running SC 2.0 and he releases the source code to 2.0.1 it means nothing about the code you are actually running. You knew that right? Title: Re: delete Post by: MaGNeT on October 16, 2011, 06:42:11 AM The SolidCoin client is a risk to our community. Any non-Bitcoin blockchain is a risk to "our" community if in fact "our" community is "bitcointalk.org". If you're talking about the greater digital currency community, then there is no need to fuss because nobody knows anything about that or any other scam coin you guys post about on a regular basis. It's hard enough getting Bitcoin to get noticed. I don't fully agree on the risk of non-Bitcoin blockchains to our community. They are a perfect way to try and test new features/adjustments without disturbing the main chain. If they work, they can be implemented in a (mandatory) update and improve Bitcoin. But if software is closed source, there's no way to recycle the code, no way to check it for errors or malware. Title: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on October 16, 2011, 06:46:27 AM Also if you are running SC 2.0 and he releases the source code to 2.0.1 it means nothing about the code you are actually running. You knew that right? That's the problem of EVERY binary, doesn't matter which virtual version numbers you write there ;D I think CH is happy to get all that free advertising. The people on this board are not stupid. They read all this stuff and make their own decisions. They are asking themselves "Why is there soo much hate and bashing of SC2?" Maybe because the haters are so nice people who just want to protect their loved fellows from scam? Or because their are some haters with lots of BTC (or some Mio TBX that where donated to hack/fud competitors) who want to protect their profits and they know that every succeeding altchain eats a little bit from their cake? The network attacks didn't work as with the other altchains, so they try to attack on another level. Why does SC2 need such an enourmous amount of bashing and hate? Maybe because this IS a real alternative? Title: Re: delete Post by: DeathAndTaxes on October 16, 2011, 07:02:30 AM Real alternatives aren't built on pirated software.
SolidCoin is reckless and damaging to entire crypto-currency community. People burned by this scam may decide to never trust any crypto-currency again and likely will tell a dozen people about this scam which cost them time, money, and electricity. Title: Re: delete Post by: DeathAndTaxes on October 16, 2011, 07:05:42 AM .... That was dumb. I agree it is dumb to pirate database software from Oracle and then distribute it to thousands of users. Real dumb. Title: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on October 16, 2011, 07:14:56 AM Well there is information at the beginning of this thread. but more info starting here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=47467.msg576794#msg576794 Clutching at straws ;D Source will be released, then your arguments are gone... Title: Re: delete Post by: kano on October 20, 2011, 09:50:03 AM Coinhunter has stated over on the SolidcoinTalk.org site that he believes he is complying with the BDB and if not he is so small they do not care. He also states the source is available if they ask for it. I contacted a friend over at Oracle today who is going to contact the right people to request the source. LOL no what it means is as long as SC is useless crap that nobody cares about - Oracle certainly wont care about it either.We'll see what happens. If in the future it becomes something big then Oracle may be interested in the license violation then. Of course CH knows SC will never amount to anything and that's why he doesn't care. Title: Re: delete Post by: Vod on February 26, 2012, 04:58:28 AM It's not my fault SolidCoin is "over your head" when it comes to understanding it. It's obviously more complicated than Bitcoin and few people understand how Bitcoin works... but the source code is there, hire a C++ programmer if it bothers you that much to know the truth. Put your faith in the SolidCoin developers if you don't know C++, they are experienced C++ developers and also now some of the most experienced cryptocurrency developers going around. Title: Re: delete Post by: smoothie on February 27, 2012, 05:32:48 AM Hmm 4 months and no rebuttal to these claims by CH. lol disappointing
Title: Re: delete Post by: markm on February 27, 2012, 05:58:37 AM Hmm 4 months and no rebuttal to these claims by CH. lol disappointing There are what, six billion or more people on the planet, any of which can develop a cryptocurrency simply by telling some code-monkey what name they want it to have, how many coins total, how many per block, how long a time between blocks and such? So even if these monkeys are last among the top billion or so they qualify as among some of the best... -MarkM- Title: Re: delete Post by: AaronM on February 27, 2012, 10:22:48 PM Is there a SolidCoin 1.0? Is that essentially the same as 2.0?
Also, this should definitely be stickied IMO. Title: Re: delete Post by: bitlane on May 17, 2012, 03:21:29 AM I suggest you simply Google "Microcash Scam" or search popular consumer protection sites like Ripoffreport.com, PissedCustomer, etc... Why would anyone even bother ? 99% of the results that come up are your rants and tirades. I can save myself a step and just read them here first hand, rather than under your assumed alias' as anti-Microcash sockpuppets that you have created to submit all of these so-called 'reports'....LOL Considering your handle is BitcoinExpress, you sure as shit spend alot of your time (as can be seen in your post history) in here (Alt Cryptocurrencies) as the Solidcoin/Microcash PR person. As much as you would like to believe that there is a shit-ton of bad press out there on the web.....IT WAS ALL CREATED BY YOU. Your post in regards to Solidcoin/Microcash MORE than anyone else on either this forum or the internet combined (adding up your split-personality-sockpuppet accounts from everywhere). Are you REALLY that bored ? |
