Bitcoin Forum

I've heard many people say that Bytecoin (BCN) was 82 percent premined. Technically it wasn't a premine but something called a "ninjamine". A premine would be visible in the blockchain and the code. You would see something like "Initial block = 100,000 coins". Instead, it's a ninjamine because very few people knew about it during its initial mining phase when most of the coins were created in 2012 and 2013. Bitcoin was arguably also ninjamined because most of the initial mining took place within a small group that was shielded from the outside world. Bitcoin became known to the wider public in 2011. Bytecoin in 2014. Hence why Satoshi has almost 1 million coins. Bitcoin's small group was a cryptography mailing list frequented by geeks. Bytecoin's small group was the deep web.

If Satoshi was a scammer who was intent on destroying the reputation of his coin, then he could have dumped all his coins on an exchange and made a lot of fiat in the process. But Satoshi wasn't a scammer, and Bitcoin wasn't a pump and dump scheme. Six years have passed since the creation of Bitcoin and Satoshi could have dumped his coins at anytime during this period but he didn't. Thus those 1 million coins are still untouched to this day.

If the Bytecoin devs were scammers, then wouldn't we have witnessed large dumping of the coin by now? Does anyone know if the 82 percent ninjamine was left untouched just like Satoshi's stash is still untouched today or have the coins moved? We know that the value of Bitcoin won't come crashing down to zero because we know that Satoshi is a benevolent character who won't destroy his creation for a quick buck. And six years of blockchain data proves this. After 10 months has passed with no evidence of a scam, perhaps we can begin to say that the same is also true for the Bytecoin devs?

Disclaimer: I own both BCN and XMR and a few other CryptoNote coins. I decided to post this because I saw that BCN has recently overtaken XMR in the coin rankings which is a bit surprising although I guess the ninjamine probably helps. IMO competition is good for all coins.

That may be true. It certainly seems that no one on BCT forums knew about Bytecoin. It may have been a few people but if many of them were like me, they didn't know the Bytecoin devs and didn't have an account with BCT. I only knew of two others on the 4chan thread where I got my binaries and they were both English and also, as far as I could tell, like me, not really into crypto at the time. You can't say it was 'shielded' from the world - someone at the IPExpo in London showed me the link with the binaries!

I am guessing that a hell of a lot of coins mined early are either lost or forgotten about. I only recovered mine after I joined BCT and got help with my wallet.

Anyway, thanks for an interesting and measured (for Bytecoin topics!) post.  ;D

You're approaching this from the assumption that the story of their release date is true. Let us take a look at why we should not approach it from that perspective:

1. At this juncture there are no known entities who have stepped forward and provided any reasonable claim that Bytecoin existed prior to March, 2014. I'm not talking about purchased accounts on Bitcointalk, I'm talking about individuals who have a reputation they can stake on such a claim.

2. At the very least, one would expect (were their "deep web" release claims to be true) that there would be darknet market operators who would have been approached by users in the early days. It is inconceivable that with their claims of "mining teams", claimed usage on Tor sites, and many alleged users, that not a single one bothered to say "hey I wonder if the Silk Road will be interested in this untraceable and unlinkable cryptocurrency". By the time Bytecoin allegedly launched in July 2012, the Silk Road was very well known (at least since Gawker's article in June of 2011 (http://gawker.com/5805928/the-underground-website-where-you-can-buy-any-drug-imaginable), and even before that when it was mentioned by altoid on Bitcointalk in January of 2011 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=175.msg42670#msg42670)). The original Silk Road forums (the complete contents of which can be found in the StExo backup (http://antilop.cc/sr/download/stexo_sr_forum.zip) or searched via The Hub on Tor (http://hubsrf3plqrbuf4i.onion/)) contain absolutely no mention of Bytecoin.

3. In deference to the previous poster's claim, a search of 4chandata.org, 4chanarchive.net, or any other 4chan archive site unsurprisingly reveals no mention of Bytecoin.

As to whether or not they've dumped their premine, given the unbelievably low Bytecoin exchange volume I simply think they haven't been able to. In order to dump a premine you have to have buyers, otherwise who are you selling it to? Leaving aside HitBTC, which is known to be untrustworthy and filled with fake trades (1 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=194708) 2 (http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/2m6rp7/hitbtc_about_to_go_mt_gox/) 3 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=378827.msg6851253#msg6851253)), Bytecoin does about $2/day in volume (http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bytecoin-bcn/#markets). The most heavily traded day was June 21 when they did around 1.5 BTC in volume at a price of around 10 satoshi per Bytecoin. In the 245 days it has been listed on Poloniex, even if they were at peak every single day they would only have been able to dump 3 675 000 000 Bytecoins of their stash of 147 882 114 539 Bytecoins (http://chainradar.com/bcn/block/432500), which is 2.49%. Given that they're not at peak, the best they could have achieved over the past 245 days is a couple of hundred USD.

Edit: forgot to add, the only coin "rankings" worth looking at are CoinGecko (https://www.coingecko.com). If you're merely looking at market capitalisation then you also need to use CoinMarketCap's non-mineable/premine filter (http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/views/filter-non-mineable-and-premined/#BTC), but frankly there's not much value in market capitalisation metrics without taking other things into account (eg. market momentum, trade volume, etc.)

Oh! Here we go!  ;D

The second that a reasonable thread about Bytecoin appears in the Alts section, the Monero crew jump in with their tired propaganda.

I wonder why they don't just get on and develop their own clone of Bytecoin instead of wasting folks time on BCT with their endless inane threads and topics.

If you hadn't noticed, Fluffy, the market values Bytecoin higher than Monero. Like OP I have a XMR and BCN bag but I am sick and tired of the Monero crew damaging cryptonote.

It was definitely an onion site. I was a network engineer at the time. Just playing around with Tor. I had heard of Bitcoin but was not particularly into crypto at all. The guy I met at the expo was also interested in Tor and during our session he gave me the onion link to the forum thread as an aside, really. At the time Bitcoin was over 10$ and so I thought 'What the hell!' and gave the coin a good run - mining it on my laptop up to around December 2012. Around that time I got a new contract and completely forgot about cryptocurrencies and Bytecoin for a long time after until I hit on Bitcointalk.

Btw - from my time on BCT and ALT - I can see why people get upset easily! Since I started exploring Alts more closely it is easy to see how the conspiracy theorists get a hold. Mainly because if it looks suspicious it usually is!  ;D

There's no propaganda in the facts above. They are not skewed nor twisted, and replicating my searches of the Silk Road 1 forum or of the various 4chan archive sites is a trivial exercise for the reader.

You'll note that in what I wrote I never mentioned CryptoNote nor did I mention Monero. I spoke only of Bytecoin.

We absolutely do give kudos to the mathematician(s) behind the CryptoNote cryptography (and who we'd love to have on the Monero Research Lab panel), and credit does also have to go to the developer(s) who produces the CryptoNote reference code in the 7 months at the end of 2013 / beginning of 2014. If the original Bytecoin developers were involved in the creation of the reference code, then those kudos and credit extend to them up to that point, but we absolutely do not give credit for their attempt to fleece the cryptocurrency community.

On a more personal note, I think we've already demonstrated that there have been big flaws in both the cryptography (see: MRL-0001 (https://lab.monero.cc/pubs/MRL-0001.pdf)) and in the code (see: MRL-0002 (https://lab.monero.cc/pubs/MRL-0002.pdf)), so how about YOU stop trying to push the agenda of a failed scam and give credit where credit is due? I thought as much.

This is possible. Many of the bitcoins that were mined during its early days are now lost forever.


Strange to see that HitBTC has 99% of the volume while Poloniex has so little. Didn't realize their numbers were inaccurate.

I understand that the Bytecoin and CryptoNote teams had a very close relationship with the other until there was a split. Supposedly the BCN team wanted to focus on implementing the technology via Bytecoin while the CryptoNote team just wanted to focus on the core technology itself. The fact that the early adopters of BCN have profited so little suggests that this is something other than your typical scam. After all, who would go through all the trouble of helping to develop and implement an entirely new and truly innovative protocol just for a couple of hundred USD? Very odd.


I remember BCN used to have double stars (and so did NXT) suggesting a premine but it was taken off after a couple of weeks. Thus BCN still shows up when you use the non-mineable/premine filter.


Most threads on 4chan don't make it to the archives. If the thread was posted on /g/ then it would stay up for a week or so and then disappear forever.


I've read the CryptoNote whitepaper and it seems likely that the devs had some academic background. Or perhaps they were one of the cypherpunks that were involved in the early days of Bitcoin. If they were academics, then it's also possible that they weren't too concerned about profit and just kept their miners running while testing the code. Then perhaps word got out and a few people in the deep web found out but it failed to form a substantial community.

I'm not too familiar with Monero development these days. Is most of the development done by the CryptoNote/Bytecoin devs with the Monero team merging these changes into the code as required (such as in the case with Linux Mint being based on the latest Ubuntu release) or have the codebases completely diverged? And to what extent do the Monero devs understand the code behind CryptoNote? (I realize this is a tricky question to answer). Since the Monero devs didn't actually write the code behind their coin, I wonder if the task of maintaining it is beyond their technical capabilities. I know there is another CryptoNote coin called Dashcoin (http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=678232) which tries to be a 1:1 mirror image of Bytecoin and thus circumvents the risk of inexperienced coders messing up while still avoiding that pesky 82 percent ninjamine.

If you're not too familiar with it, then our year-end report (https://forum.monero.cc/1/news-and-announcements/134/monday-monero-missives-22-year-in-review-january-5th-2015) is a good start.


An excellent question. Let's take a look at our respective github summaries:

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

https://i.imgur.com/m8xwPXf.png

Our first blockchainDB LMDB implementation is in testing, and that cements the picture:

https://i.imgur.com/dTD71mk.png

I think it's safe to say that most of the development is being done by Monero, Bytecoin hasn't had a commit since September 15. If anything, Bytecoin would have to merge our work to their code, but practically speaking our codebases have diverged way too much.


You've read our research bulletin, MRL-0003, "Monero is Not That Mysterious" (https://lab.monero.cc/pubs/MRL-0003.pdf), right? Not only do we go into detail explaining the Monero cryptography in layman's terms, but we also released a reimplementation in Python: http://github.com/monero-project/mininero

Whilst you're at it, why don't you check out MyMonero (https://mymonero.com), the Monero web wallet. It reimplements a lot of functionality in Javascript, which also points to our very deep understanding of the CryptoNote code.


This is an excellent question. So let me ask you this: since the Bitcoin core devs didn't actually write the original Bitcoin code, do you think the their task of maintaining Bitcoin is beyond their technical capabilities? Not only have they "maintained" it since Satoshi's departure, but they have improved on it.

The question remains: are the Monero devs similarly capable? Well, if you checkout git commit 1a8f5ce (the initial Monero fork) and you do a cloc (count lines of code) of the src folder (so excluding external libraries or copy-paste code), you get a total of 20 305 lines of code. Step up to the current commit, and that folder jumps to 32 322 lines of code written by the Monero core team and contributors. With our blockchainDB implementation that count jumps even further to 35 829. That means that the we've written 15 524 lines of code beyond the initial 20 305, and that completely ignores changes to existing lines of code (of which there have been many), as well as comments (of which there have been many), as well as external projects. We've done way, way more work than the initial project.


It's a little insulting to call all 23 contributors to Monero (https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/graphs/contributors) (that's besides amjuarez, Bytecoin's sole developer) "inexperienced". Most notable among that esteemed group are Ben Boeckel (https://github.com/mathstuf), a Fedora and KDE contributor as well as a CMake core developer, and Dave Andersen (http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dga/), an associate professor at Carnegie Mellon University. Many of the other contributors, myself included, have many, many years of experience. You'd do well to choose your words more carefully next time.

That was quite a post. 

Also, isn't it true that if Bytecoin was actually mined since 2012, that only about 10 computers were mining it?

I am really starting to like Monero. Monero seemly can walk the walk. I see nothing but hater posts from the Bytecoin camp.

Dare I say Monero has a future?

 

I think this can be explained by the fact that Bytecoin is an older and more "established" coin similar to Litecoin so there isn't really a strong incentive for the devs to make drastic changes to it. Before the reference implementation was released, BCN functioned as the "vanilla" version and all the other CryptoNote coins were built on top of its design. Each coin has its own unique identity, feature set, and niche (here (http://cryptonote.org/coins/) is a link to a list of them). For example, Fantomcoin supports merged mining, duckNote/DarkNote employs unique marketing, Dashcoin uses self-mutating code, Boolberry uses Wild Keccak for its hashing function, MonetaVerde is environmentally friendly, etc. Hence you would expect to see a lot more development happening with these newer coins compared to a three year old coin that has probably already accomplished most of its original design goals.

I'm guessing that the workload for Monero and most other CN coins is spread out over many individuals too so that updates will probably be more frequent and the development of the coin will happen at a faster pace.

That being said, I'm fairly certain that Bytecoin will be releasing a GUI wallet very soon. The devs alluded to it in a recent blog post. Monero seems to be working on one as well and Boolberry already has one.


I've skimmed through the PDF but haven't read it fully. As for the other links, well I'll check them out.


Is this including the list of mnemonic phrases and their translations? The main additions on top of BCN seems to be the addition of Electrum-style passphrases, aliases, and the new per-kb fee structure.


Agreed, as per reasons above.


OK, I see. Point taken. I didn't realize you were a XMR contributor so perhaps I should have chosen my words more carefully. After Bytecoin was discovered and announced on these forums, it seemed as though there were tons of forks appearing all at once and BitMonero happened to be the biggest one of these. However, kicking the original dev out of the project and changing the coin's name mid-development didn't inspire too much confidence personally IMHO. Usually the quality of altcoin devs around here isn't very high but after seeing those links that you posted, it looks like Monero has some bright people working on it now who seem to know what they're doing. That's definitely good to see.

My main concern was that there's a big difference between being a good programmer and being a good computer scientist. Suffice to say, most altcoin devs are neither. And it's usually the case that good programmers don't make good computer scientists and vice versa. Oh, and computer scientists are much harder to find too. Most hold post-graduate degrees and many work in research/academia. After reading the CryptoNote whitepaper, it's obvious to me that a.) Nicolas van Saberhagen is a bloody genius, and b.) a proper in-depth understanding of the protocol requires a rigorous knowledge of mathematics and cryptography. My first impression with Monero was that it was just a community fork of Bytecoin designed solely to avoid the poor distribution that plagued BCN while leaving the original coders to take care of the core protocol. Perhaps I was wrong.

But Monero is a fork of Bytecoin built on the Cryptonote technology? Kudos is definatly due. Would Monero be anywhere without it? Or would Bitmonero be anywhere without it?

But Monero is almost 3 years old itself.  I personally mined Monero in 2012. 

People have called me a liar for saying that, but they couldn't come up with any objections that don't apply equally to Bytecoin. 

Nope, Monero is a fork of the CryptoNote reference code. Yes, this was originally done under the "Bytecoin" name, but if you take a look at the files in the very earliest Monero commit by thankful_for_today (eg. https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/blob/1a8f5ce89a990e54ec757affff01f27d449640bc/src/cryptonote_config.h) you will see that it says "Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers" and not "Copyright the Bytecoin developers". Unsurprisingly, the official repo of the CryptoNote reference code (https://github.com/cryptonotefoundation/cryptonote) isn't particularly diverged from that first commit.

Umm... I always thought XMR was forked off BCN? Here (http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563821) is the link to the original BitMonero [ANN] thread. It says:

The link he posted to the commit is no different than any other altcoin that is copyrighted under Bitcoin and Bitcoin developers. Its just information for those who may not know any better.

I think someone did analysis of the hash rate a while back and came to the conclusion that the number of people mining it was very small for quite a while. Perhaps it was mined by universities during its first few months or something. The whole thing is extremely mysterious.

(Then again, a lot of things in the crypto world are shrouded in mystery. Nobody knows the identities of Satoshi or BCNext. Or the Truecrypt developers. Bytecoin seems to fit the trend.)


Umm... The evidence would be in the code and the blockchain, no?

I think he was being facetious

Like I said, doesn't the evidence in the code and in the blockchain show that Bytecoin didn't exist until 2014?

Not sure why thats how you present your comment, and its typical when it comes to Monero fan boys. I hold more monero than I do Bytecoin, which tells you something, so economically I am for the rise of Monero. But I dont understand how the devs and the so called "community" such as your self post in such a negative manner and offer nothing substantial but a quick snide comment and on about your day.

P.S - I wish I would of sold when Monero was at 0.009

The thing is, Satoshi didn't cripple Bitcoin with unoptimized code, nor did he have a 82 %(around 80) premine/ninjamine/w.e. Read that again, 80 percent of all Bytecoins are owned by a handful of people. 80%.

Enough said.

 Satoshi holds around 1million bitcoins(we can estimate), but that's less than 10% of all Bitcoin's that would ever exist. That amount can be considered by some negligible, coupled with the fact that it hasn't been touched.

Bytecoin is a whole other story. Over 80% of all Bytecoins that would ever exist, are already in the hands of a few unknown people. 80%.

You cannot compare Satoshi's less than 10% stash of Bitcoins, to Bytecoin's 80% ninjamine/premine. Even comparing the two is an insult to Bitcoin.

The one thing that is often missed with Bytecoin is that, by implication, a very small group of people own at least 82% of the utxoset (in fact, since Bytecoin emission isn't approaching 100% just yet they own significantly more than 82% of the utxoset). There simply hasn't been enough ongoing volume for that situation to have changed (eg. via them selling their stash). Even if there was enough volume, the fact that they have that much on tap means that they can cycle coins to continue to own the utxoset.

Why is this important? Well, if you've ever had a chance to read the Monero Research Lab's research bulletin MRL-0002 (https://lab.monero.cc/pubs/MRL-0001.pdf) you'll know about the chain reaction attack we discovered that affects all CryptoNote-derived coins. Basically, it doesn't matter what mixin a Bytecoin user sets for their transaction, this small group of people (or maybe even an individual) can completely deanonymise the transaction by revealing which signatures in the ring signature set are controlled by the preminers, thus revealing which signature(s) are "real". This basically means that ring signatures in Bytecoin are pointless due to the vast majority of the utxoset being owned by unknown individuals.

I'm sure it isn't. Premines are pretty obvious things that would stand out and be easily noticeable in both the code and the blockchain. You would see a method such as the following in the code:


Even if you don't understand C++, the comments make it pretty straightforward. The above coin would have an initial premine of 1 million coins. It would then have 200 coins per block for the next 4,999 blocks and then revert to the default block reward of 100 coins per block after that. The block reward would halve every 500,000 blocks.

As for the block explorer, well the timestamps certainly match up. Below is the link for block height 1. Note the part which says "2012-07-04 05:00:00":

http://minergate.com/blockchain/bcn/block/1

The original premise of my thread proposed the possibility that those coins may never be dumped at all. Perhaps those who mined them did so while testing the coin and never bothered to save the private keys. Or perhaps they wanted to "do a Satoshi" and mine a ton of coins and then leave them permanently untouched as a keepsake or for reasons unknown. Satoshi initially mined to keep the network running when there were very few other miners and nodes. From reading his earliest posts, the potential for profit seems to have been more of an afterthought.

Yes, the BCN distribution is horrible and a huge impediment to its success. 10 percent? Fine. 50 percent? OK if it's innovative then sure. But like you, the fact that it's 82 percent does leave me wondering if it is a fatal flaw. Then again, NXT was able to survive despite 73 people owning 100 percent of the currency in its early days. If BCN has just 50 people owning 82 percent then it could survive too. However, I suspect the bulk of this 82 percent is owned by the devs. While a mass-scale dumping of the coin would be disastrous, if they had chosen to follow Satoshi's example then it also means that we'd be missing out on a good, high-quality coin. :(

A third and IMO better long-term scenario would be if the early adopters who control the 82 percent sold off their coins slowly to the market. The demand for BCN would have to rise significantly for the market to absorb this and it would probably take many months or even years for the distribution to improve but at least it would remove the permanent uncertainty of a massive and catastrophic dev-initiated dump that's currently hanging over the community.

The issue is not knowing who owns 80% of all Bytecoins. It could be 10 people or just 1 person who owns all of them. We don't know since they've purposely hid all that information. This isn't a NXT style situation, and frankly it wouldn't matter. Bytecoin has long been forgotten as a contender in the anonymity market. Just Darkcoin and Monero are the ones left standing now.

how, when and why has this become a Monero thread?

The problem is that we don't know what the Bytecoin code looked like prior to March 2014, and there's no trust-chain for us to verify the story.

Given that the Bytecoin code publicly released in March had a purposely crippled slow_hash function (recalculating the value of a constant in every iteration of the loop is not accidental, and I hope we are not so foolish to believe that in 2 years nobody noticed such a simple optimisation) we cannot take the blockchain data at face value.

Using ChainRadar's charts (http://chainradar.com/bcn/chart) we can get an overview of Bytecoin's difficulty change over the alleged period (July 2012 to April 2014) we see that difficulty averaged around the 145 000 mark -

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

From difficulty we normally estimate the network hashrate by dividing by 120 (BCN has 120 second block times), so we can estimate an average network hash rate of 1 208h/s. This is backed up by ChainRadar's network hashrate chart, where you can see the average is a little below my hover -

https://i.imgur.com/99huOAV.png

If we are terribly generous and round it off to 1 350h/s we can ascertain that if we wanted to fake the whole 21 months of blockchain data in, say, 3 months, we would need 1 350h/s x 7 = 9 450h/s.

Is that achievable in practical terms? Well, my MacBook Pro solo mines at an average hashrate of around 46h/s. ClayMore's GPU miner (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=638915.0) will comfortably do 400h/s on an entry-level GPU. An Amazon EC2 c3.8xlarge instance does 1 000h/s. So we could reach our target of 9 450h/s with 206 MacBook Pros, a 24-GPU mining farm, or a mere 10 EC2 instances. A c3.8xlarge instance has a regular price of $1.68/hour (http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/), but a typical spot price of $0.45/hour (http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=1752.msg13854#msg13854). Spot instances are great, because it would have created seemingly "natural" fluctuations in difficulty if you spread them out across regions, as spot instances come on and offline when your spot price is outbid. Presenting fake dates/times to the miner is trivial (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/624137/simulating-faster-time-in-linux), and reducing the block time to 17 (actual) seconds within a closed network of 10 AWS instances is equally trivial.

So bottom line is the entire blockchain could easily have been faked in a 3 month period at a total cost of $9 720.

The market has decided otherwise. Nothing you can say in your self-moderated threads will change that.

But from my experience it wasn't. My coins were (eventually) validated on all the subsequent daemons and wallets.

I hope you'll forgive my candour, but you are lying to us.

Your account was only registered on September 11, 2014, and we have no evidence that it wasn't sold in the meantime.

You are a completely unknown person in cryptocurrency and cryptography circles.

You have no foothold in the Bitcoin-OTC Web of Trust, nor do I suspect you are in the GPG Web of Trust.

You have done nothing noteworthy or notable that anyone can say "oh yes, rough, he's the guy that created Facebucks, I trust him".

You are a pointless illusion trying to convince us that a completely fictitious story is true, but for what? So that a handful of morons too stupid to see through your ruse go and spend the 3 bitcents they haven't lost on some harebrained get-rich-quick scheme buying an ill-named cryptocurrency? You're no better than a Nigerian 419 scammer, hoping that someone will be dumb enough to believe you.

Stop with the lies.

I am not a liar and your weasel words do not make me so.
I am not, nor ever was, into Bitcoin.
I have forgotten about 'more notworthy' things that I have done than you have done in a lifetime.

Once again, Monero devs jump on a non-Monero thread and attempt to pervert a perfectly reasonable discussion.
Btw - selling my Monero pot - I wouldn't want to have any association with your type whatsoever. You are a real piece of work.

Can you prove unequivocally that Satoshi hasn't sold his coin. I saw a thread in 2013 which did hard statistical analysis on the Blockchain and estimated that Satoshi had indeed sold at least 38% of his holdings. That is at least a whole year ago now so who is to say he hasn't sold more. I think more analysis in this field has to be done before claims such as Satoshi hasn't sold his coins are made.   

I fail to see the point of this post fluffy? This is absolutely un-called for and really low for someone like yourself. You base a date on someones account as a symbol of knowledge or trust? What really are you here to imply and assume that someone will see you a hero member and think that you have something to offer? Well to be honest I have had plenty of conversation with smooth but never yourself and from what I see, you are no person I would ever put my faith into.

You hijack a thread for what reason? To spread the truth? Or what you consider to be true? Right now from what I see, you and your shills are no different that what can be observed over at hashtalk.

And who are you call anyone a moron, regardless of how silly a decision they choose to make, this decision is their own and you have no right to alter it. But you are a hero member with an aged account, so I suppose that this must be true?

An expert in what is best to buy on exchange? You have failed to bring anything of use to the table when it comes to Monero. Boolberry and Darknote have rose to become something different and do something new with the code and right now you have done nothing but take and take from a blinded community or what you call morons too stupid to see through a ruse. I have been in the mix of all this crap for sometime now and remember the early days of Monero and its sad to see this is how the devs and followers have turned into. You bring a little money to the table and suddenly you open a new door to madness.

Look, I get that your feelings are hurt and you're clearly offended.

Nobody cares.

Not one single part of what you've said addressed any of the tough to answer questions that were laid flat out in front of your face.

You don't want to debate facts, it seems that you just want some tissues.

Stop crying about 'oh well poor me got picked on on the internet'

Nobody cares.

You deserve it if all you come back with are tears instead of cold hard facts.

Not a day goes by that you, or anyone you're seemingly defending, don't deserve to be asked these questions.

The questions are much more important than the tears.

This isn't some asshole picking on you. This is some asshole asking you for the cold hard truth in front of the entire audience of bitcointalk, or at least those who still get strung along by this insanity.

The fact that people are being assholes to you and these people won't ever eclipse the massive amount of readily apparent lack of information.

This lack has caused a gap so wide.

Nobody cares that asking these questions damage their reputation, make them look like asses, turn people off to cryptonote .. or whatever social nonsense is shoved in their faces when they're asking what started out as very simple questions.

This shit has a history.

Someone knows it, and someone can prove it, but damn if I have to uningore you for one more post of nothing but sobbing I'm just gonna put every single mention of cryptonote on ignore for a few weeks.

Nobody wants to get fucked here, and all the whining and crying in front of the audience in the world isn't going to make right what's clearly wrong.

Facts will.

Only facts.

It's been almost an entire year, and this isn't fucken scooby doo and a band of goofy go-getters hunting for a ghost in some imaginary world.

This is a cryptocurrency, with real people owning it right here in real life, vying for many millions of real-world dollars.

If you think you deserve even a penny for any amount of tears because someone's asking really tough questions, or making accusations based on the best story that he can possibly put together after 8 months of searching, you're waaaaay off base here.

Now facts, those are gladly traded for pennies.

So where are they?

Seeing as how so many are apathetic to the entire story, logically because they don't have facts .. I'm left only to surmise that you do have facts, because you're far from apathetic.

So tell us, what is it that you know and can prove that we don't? What is the source of your frustration and tears?

Certainly it isn't some random angry developer who's spent entirely too much time trying to get shit done.

So, what do you know that we don't?

Have you read anything in this thread? No one is hurt at all. Feelings on the internet? How naive you must be. Dont just hop into a conversation you know nothing about. Take a moment and look at what is posted and who has posted and who has responded to posts. You are embarrassing yourself kid.

Rough claims that Bytecoin existed before 2014, but Rough didn't exist before 2014.

So I think that was the point.  

I bought a few million BCN at 1 satoshi, and I still have some of them.  Is there any reason why I shouldn't sell them now for 4 satoshis?  Any reason that existed before 2014?  

If there was any other evidence that Bytecoin existed before 2014, then Rough's join date wouldn't matter.  But is there anyone in the world who mined Bytecoin in 2012 and was also a member of bitcointalk in 2012?  I can show you people who posted on bitcointalk in 2012 - can you show me people who mined Bytecoin in 2012?  Not just tell me about them and expect me to trust you, but show me?

Rough says he got Bytecoin from a Tor onion.  Of all the people in the world who used both Tor and Bitcoin in 2012, I think a significant percentage of them were aware of bitcointalk.  So how is it that no Bytecoin users were aware of Bitcointalk, and vice versa?  

Every other coin in the world has people hyping it and fudding it vigorously, but all those Bytecoin miners kept it a secret?  Why?  What were they doing with their Bytecoins, if nobody in the world accepted them, traded them, or even mentioned it once on the internet?  If it was a better-kept secret than Silk Road, for some unknown reasons that even the people using Bytecoin were completely silent about it for so long, then why did they all suddenly change their minds and come to bitcointalk?  Did they have some blockchain consensus protocol and take a vote on it?    

What good are ring signatures and trustless networking, if the entire concept requires us to be so trusting that we have to swallow heaps of blatant lies?  

There is a significant discussion on the Bytecoin (BCN) ninjamine issue in this thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0;all (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0;all)

Not sure where those numbers came from. A lot of BCN traded on polo in the first month. Here's is the daily graph. The first scale line on the vertical axis is 20 BTC.

https://i.imgur.com/9QA1uJE.png

There were several days above that (most notably the first two days), and many more days in the 10-20 BTC range. You also have to consider the OTC trading, and the pre-poloniex trading on cryptonote.exchange.to.

My guess based on this data is a few hundred BTC of the premine was likely dumped (BTC was worth around 600 USD at the time) in the first month or two, but obviously nowhere near all of it. 300 BTC at 8 satoshi is still under 4 billion BCN. I have no idea how much was dumped in the later months, but once the volume dried up your numbers are pretty much right so no more than a few more billion.

Kudos for the cryptonote design is due for sure. The problem is there has been so much blatant deception, shilling, and scamming that went on with the bytecoin launch and the launch of the scam clones that it is almost impossible to know who in particular deserves it and who is a thieving scumbag.

I think you misinterpret slightly. The real issue is that there is no basis for trust. Nobody knows the guy, he can't prove anything he has said. Scammers and liars will always claim to not be scammers and liars so that means nothing. To have any value, you need verifiable sources to authenticate these types of claims, preferably multiple ones that can be cross checked for discrepancies and contradictions. Instead there are none at all.

It's a shame though, that many people are naturally trusting and if some anonymous account on a forum says that he mined bytecoin in 2012, a few people will probably believe it, and throw a a little money at a "good" project. That's why these scams persist.


There was no hijack here. THE THREAD WAS ABOUT THE BCN NINJAMINE.

Yes, or less than ten for high end desktop/servers, possibly far less than 10. Fluffypony showed that 10 servers could mine the whole thing in three months. Spread that out over two years and its just one or two servers. A reasonable hash rate for a desktop is 200-300 H/s so that's 4-5 computers. With a mix of smaller computers it might be as much as 10.

So these alleged "mining teams" all over the world had a grand total of <10 computers?

Sorry but no.

The story is a complete fabrication.

Ah I see my mistake - I forgot to change my candlesticks scale to 1-day, thanks for catching that.


They could be done with a significant degree of randomness, I have no idea how easy it would be to tell if it was statistically random or had a patter in it. Worth some investigating at some stage, no doubt.

At least have some sense of responsibility when replying is it only Nigeria that have scammers . Why should you bring the entire country into your argument now i see why people call you fool.