Bitcoin Forum

Who in the right mind takes a closed-sourced cryptocurrency seriously in the first place? I am lost to why this monstrosity isn't in the funny papers by now and why it's still worth discussing.

It wasn't closed source when it first started. I know they closed the source for a while, but I believe it's open source again now. Correct me if I'm wrong. I haven't been hanging out in #solidcoin lately.

It's open-source...

Heh, even if it was closed-source for a period of time... that's just a testament to how irrationally narcissistic the development team is.

Only you can be the narcisist around here?

It is not open-source.

http://www.opensource.org/

Source code =/= Open Source.  Microsoft routinely release source code under restrictive licenses.  Would you also consider that open source?

Because it is controllable, manageable. The thing is to make it be ruled by people by the means of electronic democracy. Not by some individuals. There must be absolute freedom of information and new governement principles. And that is a step forward. Bitcoin was just free uncontrolled money, bits flying over the internet, made cryptoanarchists happy. Solidcoin may become one of the first implementations of e-democracy, it may start new wonderful projects, such as Solidcoin Space Program (I love the idea). Such things are discussed on Solidcoin forums and I see nobody who's against.

E-democracy? Go on. I would love to see you ride this train to the ground.

If you mean just the system with voting and referendums then yes, it's not perfect. We are discussing what it should be. For example, it may be a p2p social network with Solidcoin fund wallets stored in it and controlled by pools, that are responsible for economics, law, promotion, business, Space program and so on. Well, we began to discuss it. It may not work, but it is interesting and it is not a betrayal of some bright ideas of p2p cryptocurrency, it is a step forward bringing to life more bright ideas.
Bitcoin has no owner and proud of it. But is this really good? Solidcoin is an attempt to make a currency owned and governed by people and build some good things using this currency. It wasn't planned from the start, but this philosophy is becoming clear now.

I suppose those ideas might be grounds to support solidcoin in the first place.

But then why are people still supporting it now, after all this unsavory business with RS?

From the start it was just another fork, though improved. But after all these events it became partly "centralized", with protection/promotion fund. You think that it is "scamcoin", I think that it is a chance to build something new. As I said, it obtains new philosophy, which is not invented by me. Many people are exited with the ideas of e-democracy.They work on it, develop programs, some parties propagate it.
I think with Solidcoin people can do things.

Fixed for you.

So has the "protection/promotion fund" done anything but line RS's wallet so far in any way related to how BIG it is?

How much governing have you done?
What was the vote on reducing block reward from 32 SC to 5 SC?
How did the elections for trusted nodes go?
How are you going to force these democratic decisions if the person who has the control node private keys decides he doesn't want them?

I love the latest spin.
First it was: "ScamCoin isn't centrally controlled"
Now it has become: "Ok, it is centrally controlled but it is a democracy so no worries".



"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." - Mao Zedong
"Network power grows out of ownership of the control node private keys" - King RealScam

I see. RealSolid just TEMPORARILY needs emergency powers.

I don't support it.

And no term limits. Which is a problem since he owns all the trusted nodes. ;)

I originally gave it a shot, but quickly lost interest after I personally experienced how untrustworthy the lead developer is. Solidcoin 2 is an abomination. I hope that it just dies out quickly and silently.

Only the trusted nodes have any real power. If that is democracy, it's like when voting had property ownership requirements. It might be "democracy", but I don't like it.