|
Title: delete Post by: BitcoinEXpress on November 03, 2011, 04:02:57 AM delete
Title: Re: delete Post by: FlipPro on November 03, 2011, 04:17:39 AM So I'm RS now? :D
Hey guys I think we have our own little Glen Beck in our forums. http://agitprop.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c691053ef0120a58a74e2970c-800wi Title: Re: delete Post by: Snapman on November 03, 2011, 04:27:11 AM Even if all of what BCX is saying is bullshit (and that's not what im saying), it still doesnt change the fact that sc allows for centralized control, control that includes wallet/client disabling abilities; and that trusted nodes are godlike in their abilities to validate/invalidate blocks.
BTW bcx, the link you have in your post leads to example.com Title: Re: delete Post by: LoupGaroux on November 03, 2011, 04:50:35 AM And that's a really old screen cap of Beck, he doesn't even work at Fox any more.
If you want a truly epic fail, check out the ShortBus Coin 2.01 code that was released today! Title: Re: delete Post by: FlipPro on November 03, 2011, 04:52:30 AM And that's a really old screen cap of Beck, he doesn't even work at Fox any more. The "shortbus" code that you can't even read. :D Moron. If you want a truly epic fail, check out the ShortBus Coin 2.01 code that was released today! Title: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on November 03, 2011, 06:45:25 AM CH's ability to kill clients and wallets at will, a hidden ftp server (possibly removed before the public beta) If you please could provide some proof? No? Then it's just one more of your desperate lies ;D Title: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on November 03, 2011, 07:03:05 AM CH's ability to kill clients and wallets at will, a hidden ftp server (possibly removed before the public beta) If you please could provide some proof? No? Then it's just one more of your desperate lies ;D Give it up Spacy, seriously. The argument is dead. No arguments => avoidance... Title: Re: delete Post by: Syke on November 03, 2011, 07:04:02 AM CH's ability to kill clients and wallets at will, a hidden ftp server (possibly removed before the public beta) If you please could provide some proof? No? Then it's just one more of your desperate lies ;DTitle: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on November 03, 2011, 07:25:34 AM @Spacy, CH has admitted he omitted the proprietary parts of the source from the release that gave him control to the network. In IRC he has admitted he can do what he wants, when he wants. Play all the the little technical word games you want, it's still fact. Grand example of a Coinhunter word game. The 12 million were not a "Pre-Mine", they were part of the genesis block.... (His exact words) Like there's a difference......... Okay, he doesn't kill them, he blocks them, suspends them, intercepts them....whatever, it's all the same. Ok now we are from "killing wallets and clients" to "blocking invalid blocks", what all valid nodes do? ;D Thx for correcting yourself and coming back once to the truth... Title: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on November 03, 2011, 08:06:11 AM Ok now we are from "killing wallets and clients" to "blocking invalid blocks", what all valid nodes do? ;D Thx for correcting yourself and coming back once to the truth... Like I said, you enjoy words games, hallmark of 13 year old Jr Highschool mentality. I'm sure to the deceased it doesn't matter if the are executed, murdered, euthanized....it's all the same. No matter how you want to spin it, CH has total, one person central control. BTW, I never said "Blocking Invalid blocks:, I said "Blocks Them"...misquote to support your lame response. No arguments, avoidance, insults, oversimplification, that's the BCX we all know ;D What should nodes block if not invalid blocks/transactions? The "total, one person central control" was maybe before he released SC2. Now different people have the different trusted wallets and now also the source to build there node themselves. The only thing a malicious trusted node can do is rejecting certain blocks, but the other trusted nodes will approve it. This really doesn't look like "total control" ;D Title: Re: delete Post by: cereal7802 on November 03, 2011, 08:27:05 AM Now different people have the different trusted wallets and now also the source to build there node themselves. The only thing a malicious trusted node can do is rejecting certain blocks, but the other trusted nodes will approve it. This really doesn't look like "total control" ;D The problem with this concept is, as stated in multiple locations, trusted nodes can share the same wallets. this means that RS(or indeed anyone who has a trusted node wallet) can setup multiple nodes and validate or invalidate as much as they want. by simply having more nodes you can control the entire network. since the trusted nodes are few and with low diff to deal with for even blocks, it doesn't take much to fork the chain.the only way to prevent this is to make sure that every single client on the chain is able to validate all blocks on the network using the same rules. if the trusted nodes have all the say, then derailing the network would be significantly easier in SC than any other altcoin to date. now i could be wrong , but based on what i have seen said, this makes sense. if not, please point out why and "you are a troll" is not a valid argument. Title: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on November 03, 2011, 08:44:28 AM You for 100% confirming Trusted Nodes have to all approve blocks. That's what ALL the nodes in every cryptocurrency are doing... accepting and with that approving valid blocks... Maybe you should get back to your cryptocurrency class ??? Title: Re: delete Post by: johnj on November 03, 2011, 08:50:18 PM @ D&T Wouldn't that be the practical working definition of total central control? Yup it is just earily Orwellian to call them "trust nodes" when in reality no trust has been earned. They are absolute control nodes but then again that doesn't sound as nice does it. I wonder how long before King RealScam starts calling decentralized networks "double plus ungood"? Hah, which brings me to my next idea: SC is built by RS so he can sell control of it to some nefarious corp or government, should Cryptocurrencies ever 'hit the bigtime', he has an entire network to sell. Title: Re: delete Post by: Spacy on November 08, 2011, 07:27:19 PM After looking at the source now for a few days everything I warned people about early has panned out and proven by the partial source code release. 1) Centralization 2) Possible to spend the pre-mine 3) The ability to block transactions at will, regardless if valid or not 4) 100% control by Coinhunter Back from holiday? It was so quiet here the last days ;D Would be nice if you could past the most important source lines which enforce your claims. Title: Re: delete Post by: makomk on November 11, 2011, 01:38:51 AM Yup it is just earily Orwellian to call them "trust nodes" when in reality no trust has been earned. They are absolute control nodes but then again that doesn't sound as nice does it. They're "trusted" in the security sense - you have to trust them because they have the ability to compromise the security of the entire system. |