|
Title: delete Post by: BitcoinEXpress on October 16, 2011, 09:28:42 PM delete
Title: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on October 16, 2011, 09:30:22 PM This Solidcoin block explorer shows only 1 trusted node online, Trusted010. Gee I wonder who that is? http://blockexplorer.ahimoth.com/ Maybe this means "Trusted group of 10" ? ;D Title: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on October 16, 2011, 09:53:43 PM This Solidcoin block explorer shows only 1 trusted node online, Trusted010. Gee I wonder who that is? http://blockexplorer.ahimoth.com/ Maybe this means "Trusted group of 10" ? ;D No it doesn't, 1 block at a time from 1 node at a time. This was a mass critical mistake for Coinhunter to sign his blocks and list on a block explorer. This means knocking down Trusted010 will stop the chain. ETA for your hack? Title: Re: delete Post by: Roadhog2k5 on October 16, 2011, 10:43:55 PM Lots of cock blocks too.
Title: Re: delete Post by: sd on October 16, 2011, 11:20:06 PM No it doesn't, 1 block at a time from 1 node at a time. This was a mass critical mistake for Coinhunter to sign his blocks and list on a block explorer. This means knocking down Trusted010 will stop the chain. I think we could find this magic node by setting up a load of clients and seeing what IP sends the magic blocks to them first. Reset the clients so they connect to new peers and repeat a few times. One IP should turn up more often than any others. CH won't be using TOR, it would kill his network speed. Title: Re: delete Post by: BitcoinPorn on October 16, 2011, 11:33:41 PM Lots of cock blocks too. Close the thread, nothing will bring more to the table than this post lol Title: Re: delete Post by: CoinHunter on October 17, 2011, 12:25:35 AM Multiple nodes can share wallets with SC2.0 so won't really matter. Even if an attacker wants to flood a node off the network there are backup ones waiting.
Only reason one wallet is mainly solving them at the moment (and no it's not mine) is because of a re-org issue we are trying to limit when too many trusted nodes are active at the moment. They're still there waiting for trusted block time to hit a certain level before they submit their work currently. SC2.0 is hacker proof, wouldn't matter what the lonely bitcoinexpress does, we already asked him to destroy the public beta he didn't, we asked him to destroy SC2.0 when it was released he didn't. People still think this lonely 45yo man can do anything worthwhile? Pretty funny. Does anyone think someone looking like this has many braincells active at once? Looks like an alcoholic too. http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTVX0F_Z9jnOSxgjplqVHCf8FloDgjtQYIvZjzlS0mb4xr-UmFjBA Title: Re: delete Post by: Coinbuck @ BTCLot on October 17, 2011, 12:32:40 AM Multiple nodes can share wallets with SC2.0 so won't really matter. Even if an attacker wants to flood a node off the network there are backup ones waiting. Only reason one wallet is mainly solving them at the moment (and no it's not mine) is because of a re-org issue we are trying to limit when too many trusted nodes are active at the moment. They're still there waiting for trusted block time to hit a certain level before they submit their work currently. SC2.0 is hacker proof, wouldn't matter what the lonely bitcoinexpress does, we already asked him to destroy the public beta he didn't, we asked him to destroy SC2.0 when it was released he didn't. People still think this lonely 45yo man can do anything worthwhile? Pretty funny. Does anyone think someone looking like this has many braincells active at once? Looks like an alcoholic too. http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/5760/danmaddoxbitcoinexpress.jpg https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=48318.0 Title: Re: delete Post by: Bobnova on October 17, 2011, 12:38:18 AM Multiple nodes can share wallets with SC2.0 so won't really matter. Even if an attacker wants to flood a node off the network there are backup ones waiting. Only reason one wallet is mainly solving them at the moment (and no it's not mine) is because of a re-org issue we are trying to limit when too many trusted nodes are active at the moment. They're still there waiting for trusted block time to hit a certain level before they submit their work currently. SC2.0 is hacker proof, wouldn't matter what the lonely bitcoinexpress does, we already asked him to destroy the public beta he didn't, we asked him to destroy SC2.0 when it was released he didn't. People still think this lonely 45yo man can do anything worthwhile? Pretty funny. Does anyone think someone looking like this has many braincells active at once? Looks like an alcoholic too. http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/5760/danmaddoxbitcoinexpress.jpg Wait, "hacker proof"? Really? Someone post this on SA and where ever it is that anonymous hangs out. We'll see just how hackerproof it is... Title: Re: delete Post by: CoinHunter on October 17, 2011, 12:40:30 AM Wait, "hacker proof"? Really? Someone post this on SA and where ever it is that anonymous hangs out. We'll see just how hackerproof it is... Yah right, some Bitcoin people go to SA and ask for some help. Hilarity ensues. There's a reason people over at SA hate Bitcoin and don't really care about SC. It's people like you on this forum. Title: Re: delete Post by: ThiagoCMC on October 17, 2011, 12:48:16 AM Multiple nodes can share wallets with SC2.0 so won't really matter. Even if an attacker wants to flood a node off the network there are backup ones waiting. Only reason one wallet is mainly solving them at the moment (and no it's not mine) is because of a re-org issue we are trying to limit when too many trusted nodes are active at the moment. They're still there waiting for trusted block time to hit a certain level before they submit their work currently. SC2.0 is hacker proof, wouldn't matter what the lonely bitcoinexpress does, we already asked him to destroy the public beta he didn't, we asked him to destroy SC2.0 when it was released he didn't. People still think this lonely 45yo man can do anything worthwhile? Pretty funny. Does anyone think someone looking like this has many braincells active at once? Looks like an alcoholic too. http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTVX0F_Z9jnOSxgjplqVHCf8FloDgjtQYIvZjzlS0mb4xr-UmFjBA No matter what you say. SC2 isn't a cryptocurrency. You lame. Litecoin is FAR much more nice! ;-) Title: Re: delete Post by: CoinHunter on October 17, 2011, 12:58:19 AM Actually once Bitcoin technology is attacked over the coming months there is only going to be one chain standing. The non Bitcoin one, SolidCoin.
So if you want to get in circles and pray for your alt coins that are just as bad as Bitcoin then you can, anyone with a technical mind knows the superiority of the SC2 protocol and will move their investments to it. Title: Re: delete Post by: CoinHunter on October 17, 2011, 01:01:28 AM I can tell we hit a nerve, look how quick he responded and the level of BS. Hunt is on! You're embarrassing yourself yet again. Why did you have to wait for our block explorer to be up before noticing these things in the chain? Wouldn't an uberleet hacker like you know how to look at the blockchain that is on every SolidCoin computer? ;D So you use *our* graphical tools to figure out something and then want us all to believe yet another claim from you and what you can do? When you've done absolutely nothing to this point in time? ??? I have a suggestion Dan, why don't you go pretend to be something you can actually pass yourself off as, because a hacker isn't it. Just because your wife left you and you're going through emotional problems right now doesn't mean you can invent some internet character to portray, especially when you do not have the intelligence for it. Title: Re: delete Post by: Bobnova on October 17, 2011, 01:05:25 AM Oh no, don't ask them for help.
Just say SC2 is hackerproof. Title: Re: delete Post by: Lolcust on October 17, 2011, 01:09:47 AM Oh boy, the hunt for red pignoder begins
Title: Re: delete Post by: johnj on October 17, 2011, 01:12:09 AM I have a suggestion Dan, why don't you go pretend to be something you can actually pass yourself off as, because a hacker isn't it. Just because your wife left you and you're going through emotional problems right now doesn't mean you can invent some internet character to portray, especially when you do not have the intelligence for it. Oh gee, getting a bit personal aren't we? Stay classy Coinhunter ;) Title: Re: delete Post by: BitcoinPorn on October 17, 2011, 01:14:40 AM Oh gee, getting a bit personal aren't we? Stay classy Coinhunter ;) OMG PEOPLE ARE NOT BEING CORDIAL TO EACH OTHER HERE. This is the biggest news to hit the alt currency sub forums lol Title: Re: delete Post by: Raoul Duke on October 17, 2011, 01:35:54 AM I have a suggestion Dan, why don't you go pretend to be something you can actually pass yourself off as, because a hacker isn't it. Just because your wife left you and you're going through emotional problems right now doesn't mean you can invent some internet character to portray, especially when you do not have the intelligence for it. Oh gee, getting a bit personal aren't we? Stay classy Coinhunter ;) You mean personal like when BCX posted that thread talking about the supposed dying son of CoinHunter or less personal than that? Title: Re: delete Post by: johnj on October 17, 2011, 01:36:31 AM I have a suggestion Dan, why don't you go pretend to be something you can actually pass yourself off as, because a hacker isn't it. Just because your wife left you and you're going through emotional problems right now doesn't mean you can invent some internet character to portray, especially when you do not have the intelligence for it. Oh gee, getting a bit personal aren't we? Stay classy Coinhunter ;) You mean personal like when BCX posted that thread talking about the supposed dying son of CoinHunter or less personal than that? I didn't see that one. Source? Title: Re: delete Post by: Raoul Duke on October 17, 2011, 01:38:22 AM On this forum, search it and you'll find it if a moderator didn't delete it.
I saw it, I don't need the link to prove it. Title: Re: delete Post by: Bobnova on October 17, 2011, 01:40:43 AM Just like that, lol.
Here's how I figure it: They're both possibly lying definitely egotistical assholes (hell, BEX may even agree with me), but only one of them is trying to sell me a bridge. Title: Re: delete Post by: Raoul Duke on October 17, 2011, 01:48:11 AM You mean personal like when BCX posted that thread talking about the supposed dying son of CoinHunter or less personal than that? Yeah where he was basically calling a truce on the whole thing because he was feeling sorry for him and the CH asshole comes back and still acts like his douche bag self in it, so yep we seen it and what the scumbag did when offered the olive branch. Go away dog, don't bite me. BCX, please, control your dog... Title: Re: delete Post by: Raoul Duke on October 17, 2011, 02:41:57 AM Like I said, I hit a nerve, but since you want to make this personal and claim you are not Daniel Parnell then you have no problem with the fact That Susan parnell's FB was compromised and all those pics of her are going to become 4chan Photoshop porn with links being sent to every one of Daniel Parnell's friends and family? Admitting your criminal behaviour in public again? You really are a fool LOL Every time you write a post, you dig your hole deeper and deeper... Taking a screenshot . Now I'm going to look for that Susan Parnell and warn her about it and about who did it. I hope the forum admins are ready to release all the data they have on you to the competent authorities because what you just posted is indeed the description of a very serious offense. Title: Re: delete Post by: Raoul Duke on October 17, 2011, 02:45:02 AM That's what she said...
Now on another note: Are the moderators going to ban this piece of trash or this forum condones the criminal behaviour and threats of BitcoinEXpress? |
