Bitcoin Forum

Other => Archival => Topic started by: BitcoinEXpress on March 29, 2014, 03:10:37 AM



Title: delete
Post by: BitcoinEXpress on March 29, 2014, 03:10:37 AM
delete




Title: Re: delete
Post by: Zackgeno96 on March 29, 2014, 03:11:28 AM
lol  is this for real you finally fucked up aur?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Zackgeno96 on March 29, 2014, 03:17:01 AM
lol  is this for real you finally fucked up aur?


No actually this wasn't me, this is actually a straight up 51% attack due to the diff dropping so low.

This is a first, I just got scooped ROFL.

Timewarp is slow build attack, 51% is an explosion like this.



~BCX~

how many forks are there 3?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: ZeroBarrier on March 29, 2014, 03:17:41 AM
He says someone beat him to it. I believe him; we all know he would have proudly worn the AUR Destroyer badge had he done so himself.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoSteam on March 29, 2014, 03:18:30 AM
How many forks so far?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: barwizi on March 29, 2014, 03:23:12 AM
How many forks so far?

does it matter?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: ZeroBarrier on March 29, 2014, 03:32:05 AM
I guess in all the Air Drop maadness the dev and his team forgot to educate the Icelandic people on how to secure the blockchain for their own coin, classic. I can't stop giggling.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: slapper on March 29, 2014, 03:32:57 AM
The Bitcoin mafia will never let any altcoin succeed.

Let's brainwash them with naivettes like "Do you want NSA Coin, Fed Coin, fiat/goverment money?" No here, suck on my bitcoin tit and buy it for a grand. The others are not secure. If they were to become secure one day, we will make sure to unsecure it.

There is a reason Satoshi left the scene. He didn't want mining companies to produce bitcoins so laymen buy it like they buy gold. The idea was for a decentralized p2p currency. He saw greedy maggots take over in the name of being anti-establishment.

Maybe Dogecoin does need to win out.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on March 29, 2014, 03:37:28 AM
No here, suck on my bitcoin tit and buy it for a grand.

did you know bitcoin tits are divisible?  the smallest divisible unit is called an "A-cup".



Title: Re: delete
Post by: zackclark70 on March 29, 2014, 03:38:26 AM
I think we will be seeing more and more of this over the next few weeks as there are a huge amount of coins with near 0 hash power on them


Title: Re: delete
Post by: romang on March 29, 2014, 03:44:57 AM
He says someone beat him to it. I believe him; we all know he would have proudly worn the AUR Destroyer badge had he done so himself.


You got that right.

There are only a few I know of who could have done this.


Luke is that you?



~BCX~


One down a 1000 to go.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jnada on March 29, 2014, 03:45:53 AM
You know BCX, I like ideas behind AUR and trust Balduro, but if you really managed to do it I will be impressed.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoSteam on March 29, 2014, 03:48:27 AM
Well its weird. MintPal Aur price is actually going up.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Elitzer on March 29, 2014, 03:49:16 AM
Well its weird. MintPal Aur price is actually going up.

People pumping before the biggest dump?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solex on March 29, 2014, 03:56:33 AM
Nope

    Currency Name: AuroraCoin
Currency Code: AUR
Algorithm: Scrypt
Difficulty: 142.31149641
Network Hashrate: 32.4Gbps
USD Value: $2.84308878 per coin (Estimated)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: nagatlakshmi on March 29, 2014, 03:59:04 AM
Then, Why the Price is going up?   ???


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jnada on March 29, 2014, 04:01:46 AM
This wasn't me, this was a plain old 51% attack

I am deploying a Time Warp attack that will kick in on what ever chain I am on somewhere around block 5600.

I got scooped and that is funny as hell!!!


~BCX~
Would you briefly explain how time wrap attack affect AUR?
5600? 14 blocks left, will see


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jnada on March 29, 2014, 04:10:32 AM
Cryptsy says:

Quote
 AuroraCoin Information (AUR)
   Currency Name: AuroraCoin
Currency Code: AUR
Algorithm: Scrypt
Difficulty: 142.31149641
Network Hashrate: 32.4Gbps

USD Value: $2.84308878 per coin (Estimated)

they seem to be on the same chain?

And, as far I remeber there was a peak of about 50Ghs at the beginning of march...



Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on March 29, 2014, 04:18:15 AM
as far I remeber there was a peak of about 50Ghs at the beginning of march...

less than 30gh

http://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/hashrate-aur.html

they should have airdropped some video cards


Title: Re: delete
Post by: iGotSpots on March 29, 2014, 04:20:04 AM
I see at least 3 chains. I didn't look very hard either. There's more people with enough hash power to cover 30 ghs than you're making it sound like though


Title: Re: delete
Post by: iGotSpots on March 29, 2014, 04:24:05 AM
I see at least 3

There are three distinct chains, one monster chain and two smaller ones.


~BCX~

Yes. Two seem to be fairly close and I'm not sure if its a fork or just lag but then one is pulling away quickly. Damage is definitely done


Title: Re: delete
Post by: cryptohunter on March 29, 2014, 04:24:52 AM
hmm so how much hash did this person just dump on this coin ?

what was the hash before the jump to 32GH? .... so this attack had to be over 16GH min... or could have been way more?  Who has that much scrypt hash already? it essential means most scrypt coins are totally vulnerable really. That is rather scary. Only doge and ltc and perhaps a few others are safe.

If this coin had been POW+POS would that have stopped this attack?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on March 29, 2014, 04:29:26 AM
what was the hash before the jump to 32GH? .... so this attack had to be over 16GH min... or could have been way more?  Who has that much scrypt hash already? it essential means most scrypt coins are totally vulnerable really. That is rather scary. Only doge and ltc and perhaps a few others are safe.

just before block 5400

http://i.imgur.com/ucS0rq0.png

and fuck no, doge is not safe right now:

http://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/hashrate-doge.html


Title: Re: delete
Post by: iGotSpots on March 29, 2014, 04:30:55 AM
hmm so how much hash did this person just dump on this coin ?

what was the hash before the jump to 32GH? .... so this attack had to be over 16GH min... or could have been way more?  Who has that much scrypt hash already? it essential means most scrypt coins are totally vulnerable really. That is rather scary. Only doge and ltc and perhaps a few others are safe.

If this coin had been POW+POS would that have stopped this attack?

More than the total. Narrowing it down will be hard though unless you guys track it down which will be hard

You're all underestimating how many people have farms large enough to do it. Lots of money has been made by a lot of people


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jnada on March 29, 2014, 04:31:39 AM
I see at least 3 chains. I didn't look very hard either. There's more people with enough hash power to cover 30 ghs than you're making it sound like though

May I ask what tools (or commands in console) are using to determine number of chains?
Are you trying to connect with different nodes?
Or, where I should start learning on this subject?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: DemetriusAstroBlack on March 29, 2014, 04:32:34 AM
lol im mining AUR on multipool as it's the most profitable. LOLZ


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Starlightbreaker on March 29, 2014, 04:33:10 AM
51%?

top lel.

you were waiting for too long, BCX. i was expecting you to do some fun stuff lol.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: botolo86 on March 29, 2014, 04:37:22 AM
Can someone please explain to me what's the purpose of forking a coin? I am a newbie, just asking...


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jnada on March 29, 2014, 04:40:19 AM
Can someone please explain to me what's the purpose of forking a coin? I am a newbie, just asking...

to prove that coin is not secured by enough hashpower
and maybe to convince people who  will lose their money to stay with well backed coins - BTC, LTC DOGE
but if this attacks escalate to large scale - we maybe witnessing kind of 1st September 1939 tonight :)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: botolo86 on March 29, 2014, 04:41:59 AM
to prove that coin is not secured by enough hashpower
and maybe to convince people who  will lose their money to stay with well backed coins - BTC, LTC DOGE

Thanks, so it's just a way of killing a competing coin, not to gain financial benefits from this. Can the guy who just did the fork do the same right now with other weak coins?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: DemetriusAstroBlack on March 29, 2014, 04:43:04 AM
I always find it funny when people come on here and say the only real coins are BTC,LTC, and the shit coin I have money in.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Starlightbreaker on March 29, 2014, 04:45:59 AM
51%?

top lel.

you were waiting for too long, BCX. i was expecting you to do some fun stuff lol.


I got scooped! Somebody beat me to it.

Who ever this was standing by with hash waiting.

There are few with this hash power.


~BCX~

well, until next time then.

can't wait until scrypt asic miners are out. it's going to be fun.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jnada on March 29, 2014, 04:49:27 AM

Thanks, so it's just a way of killing a competing coin, not to gain financial benefits from this. Can the guy who just did the fork do the same right now with other weak coins?
I think expert in this subject is BCX, but as far I know it's basic purpose - to kill competitors.
Of course - all this coins with hashpower about few Ghash may be forked just for fun.
Some people say only one coin per algo will survive Coin Wars time. :)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jayman on March 29, 2014, 04:49:30 AM
Game Over.


I highly advise all exchanges to suspend trading.

There are now multiple forks.

I would also dump while the exchanges are still open if I were you guys.


~BCX~


Moderated to prevent stupidity only. Differing opinions will not be removed.

If true it's fairly obvious you had something to do with it and only will not admit because of the legal ramifications. So what of people who invested in it, had real money inside still you must be so proud & no i wasn't one of them as i don't like most these country coins but it doesn't mean you screw people over for fun because you don't like something.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: veebee on March 29, 2014, 04:52:22 AM
Price (BTC)   AUR   Total (BTC)
0.00544137   2253.76418774   12.26356484


buy order on cryptsy  apparently people dont give a shit lols




Title: Re: delete
Post by: cryptohunter on March 29, 2014, 04:53:23 AM
hmm so how much hash did this person just dump on this coin ?

what was the hash before the jump to 32GH? .... so this attack had to be over 16GH min... or could have been way more?  Who has that much scrypt hash already? it essential means most scrypt coins are totally vulnerable really. That is rather scary. Only doge and ltc and perhaps a few others are safe.

If this coin had been POW+POS would that have stopped this attack?

More than the total. Narrowing it down will be hard though unless you guys track it down which will be hard

You're all underestimating how many people have farms large enough to do it. Lots of money has been made by a lot of people

so 1.2 GH to over 32GH?  are we saying then someone has 30GH of scrypt available to them? i can not bare to believe there are many people with that much hash. It must be an alliance of some kind. A single farm of 30GH is kind of HUGE.  Must be a GIANT botnet or collaboration. Maybe knc testing out the new super titans?  everyone just got upgraded from 250MH to 1GH each perhaps.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: cryptohunter on March 29, 2014, 04:55:00 AM
Price (BTC)   AUR   Total (BTC)
0.00544137   2253.76418774   12.26356484


buy order on cryptsy  apparently people dont give a shit lols





will do though if they withdraw on the wrong chain.

hmm unless they forked it and are buying in cheap... will wait for cryptsy to get on the correct chain i guess before withdrawing.... wonder why the markets are still open.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: lphelps on March 29, 2014, 04:56:03 AM
ok BCX... now go attack other coins like Aphroditecoin and SiliconValleyCoin. Both are pre-mined and build pretty much the same as AUR..  Go scare as many investors as you can while you gain in the long run..



Title: Re: delete
Post by: jnada on March 29, 2014, 04:56:33 AM

so 1.2 GH to over 32GH?  are we saying then someone has 30GH of scrypt available to them? i can not bare to believe there are many people with that much hash. It must be an alliance of some kind. A single farm of 30GH is kind of HUGE.  Must be a GIANT botnet or collaboration. Maybe knc testing out the new super titans?  everyone just got upgraded from 250MH to 1GH each perhaps.
Yes, if this atack is credible that''s the question: where from this power come :)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: cryptohunter on March 29, 2014, 04:58:09 AM

so 1.2 GH to over 32GH?  are we saying then someone has 30GH of scrypt available to them? i can not bare to believe there are many people with that much hash. It must be an alliance of some kind. A single farm of 30GH is kind of HUGE.  Must be a GIANT botnet or collaboration. Maybe knc testing out the new super titans?  everyone just got upgraded from 250MH to 1GH each perhaps.
Yes, if this atack is credible that''s the question: where from this power come :)


maybe one of the large ltc pools or doge pools just got tired of that coin.. and swiched over for a few mins.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on March 29, 2014, 04:59:38 AM
maybe one of the large ltc pools or doge pools just got tired of that coin.. and swiched over for a few mins.
32gh/sec is about 50% of the entire dogecoin network hashrate.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: cryptohunter on March 29, 2014, 05:02:49 AM
maybe one of the large ltc pools or doge pools just got tired of that coin.. and swiched over for a few mins.
32gh/sec is about 50% of the entire dogecoin network hashrate.

that is exactly why it seems difficult to believe this is a single farm....  super size botnet or collaborated attack by multiple farm or pools.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kupan787 on March 29, 2014, 05:04:12 AM
There was a guy/group, sfire, that used to mine on middlecoin, and now flips between clevermining, wafflepool, and ghash.io. If you look through the middlecoin or wafflepool threads, you can see them talk about him from time to time.

He controls somewhere in the ballpark of 25GHs mining power.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: veebee on March 29, 2014, 05:05:25 AM
i know for a fact 7 ghs of that was multipool.us


and now it has 10ghs a on doge


Title: Re: delete
Post by: lphelps on March 29, 2014, 05:08:23 AM
https://www.aurorapool.info/index.php?page=statistics

Pool Hash Rate   26203.91424 KH/s
Current Total Miners   81
Current Block   5667
Current Difficulty 226.27535606


seems like they are moving along quite well...


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Zackgeno96 on March 29, 2014, 05:23:15 AM
BCX so you got your own new coin now xD https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=540308.0


Title: Re: delete
Post by: MegaHertz on March 29, 2014, 05:25:07 AM
it seems to be doing okay.    the developer denies there was a 51% attack.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: HinnomTX on March 29, 2014, 05:26:49 AM
BCX so you got your own new coin now xD https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=540308.0
let's fork it.
stick a fork in it.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: iGotSpots on March 29, 2014, 05:27:43 AM
it seems to be doing okay.    the developer denies there was a 51% attack.

Regardless if that's true or not, there's at least a few chains out there now


Title: Re: delete
Post by: lphelps on March 29, 2014, 05:28:48 AM
https://www.aurorapool.info

Pool Hash Rate   26,654.802 KH/s
Pool Efficiency   99.16%
Current Active Workers 97
Current Difficulty 252.1827228
Est. Next Difficulty 2,732.86514771 (Change in 1 Blocks)
Est. Avg. Time per Round (Network)   55 seconds
Est. Avg. Time per Round (Pool)   11 hours 17 minutes 14 seconds
Est. Shares this Round 16,527,047 (done: 17.68%)
Next Network Block 5,672    (Current: 5,671)
Last Block Found 5,533
Time Since Last Block 2 hours 2 minutes 52 seconds


Title: Re: delete
Post by: anonymousxx1503 on March 29, 2014, 05:33:30 AM
Does this really mean game over for them? As in not possible to fix it? Also would digishield have prevented this?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: startcoin568 on March 29, 2014, 05:35:09 AM
The developer denies there was a 51% attack. the truth is still unknown


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jnada on March 29, 2014, 05:41:32 AM
Does this really mean game over for them? As in not possible to fix it? Also would digishield have prevented this?

Luckily not, forked coin maybe always "repaired" if devs are arround - all this attacks are designed to make problems for average user when using coin, in fact it is vasting of hashpower and price manipulating effort.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: xstr8guy on March 29, 2014, 05:48:08 AM
He says someone beat him to it. I believe him; we all know he would have proudly worn the AUR Destroyer badge had he done so himself.


You got that right.

There are only a few I know of who could have done this.


Luke is that you?



~BCX~

That would explain the poor luck on Eligius then... if the pools hashing power was directed at Aurora instead of BTC.  If this is verifiably  true, this will destroy Eligius too.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: PopeFrancis on March 29, 2014, 06:25:51 AM
I declare this coin dead.  Last rites have just been given. 

The Pope has spoken.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Dabs on March 29, 2014, 06:26:52 AM
Does eligius work with scrypt? I thought it was bitcoin only.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nite69 on March 29, 2014, 06:41:48 AM
This was not an attack. Coin is fine.

Actually, KGW just did what it is designed to do; it adjusted the difficulty according to last 12 hours.. and it did a major drop, just as it had to after so long blocks before block 5400. Diff dropped from 1000 down to 3.. and then crawled back to 400. No single entity would keep it up with this.

Some miners got a lot of easy Auroras..


Title: Re: delete
Post by: iGotSpots on March 29, 2014, 06:47:09 AM
This was not an attack. Coin is fine.

Actually, KGW just did what it is designed to do; it adjusted the difficulty according to last 12 hours.. and it did a major drop, just as it had to after so long blocks before block 5400. Diff dropped from 1000 down to 3.. and then crawled back to 400. No single entity would keep it up with this.

Some miners got a lot of easy Auroras..

Looks like some continue to mine useless ones too


Title: Re: delete
Post by: mullick on March 29, 2014, 06:52:36 AM
I have fixed my block crawler and it is syncing to the correct chain. My wallets are kept neutral from the exchange wallets on purpose and I failed to update in time. I am currently out of town and failed to update before I left. It should be fully synced in a few minutes

Cryptsy was updated in time. There is nothing to worry about :) Sorry about that....



Title: Re: delete
Post by: TheFridge on March 29, 2014, 06:54:56 AM
I know that multipool started to mine AUR which would account for at least 15gh. If another major pool did the same that would explain the increase in hash rate.

Transactions are being confirmed too. I don't see the attack? I'm happy to be proven wrong.
Could it be that your precious BCX is spreading his shit again?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoSteam on March 29, 2014, 06:56:00 AM
This was a major BCX Fail LOL


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Astori7 on March 29, 2014, 06:56:24 AM
I have fixed my block crawler and it is syncing to the correct chain. My wallets are kept neutral from the exchange wallets on purpose and I failed to update in time. I am currently out of town and failed to update before I left. It should be fully synced in a few minutes

Cryptsy was updated in time. There is nothing to worry about :) Sorry about that....



Well... Quite interesting what BCX will reply


Title: Re: delete
Post by: pikuchato on March 29, 2014, 06:59:18 AM
BCX fail


Title: Re: delete
Post by: mullick on March 29, 2014, 07:03:01 AM
I have fixed my block crawler and it is syncing to the correct chain. My wallets are kept neutral from the exchange wallets on purpose and I failed to update in time. I am currently out of town and failed to update before I left. It should be fully synced in a few minutes

Cryptsy was updated in time. There is nothing to worry about :) Sorry about that....



Well... Quite interesting what BCX will reply

Also keep in mind the difficulty fluctuates up and down quickly and the hashrate reported on the info page of cryptsy is not updated more than once to a few times per hour in some cases


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nite69 on March 29, 2014, 07:09:13 AM
This was a major BCX Fail LOL

Well, BCX has not yet done anything, so he has not also failed.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: pikuchato on March 29, 2014, 07:11:02 AM
This was a major BCX Fail LOL

Well, BCX has not yet done anything, so he has not also failed.

Well... he came here to tell us how big his penis is... and failed after we discovered he has a tiny one :P


Title: Re: delete
Post by: andy10000 on March 29, 2014, 07:15:41 AM
I don't understand the vitriol and shadenfreuden going on over this.

Auroracoin had the potential to really help the Icelandic economy, and is a public shop window for the potential crypto currency as a whole. This undermines the prospects for every cryptocurrency.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Klacik on March 29, 2014, 07:18:17 AM
I don't understand the vitriol and shadenfreuden going on over this.

Auroracoin had the potential to really help the Icelandic economy, and is a public shop window for the potential crypto currency as a whole. This undermines the prospects for every cryptocurrency.

yeah.. but some people just want to have "fun" and they will undermine every good effort that's done and that can bring something new for the average person..

this is not the end of Auroracoin, even if it forked, it can be repaired, people just need to calm down and wait for the developers and the owner, to look into it..


Title: Re: delete
Post by: procrypto on March 29, 2014, 08:20:47 AM
they should have airdropped some video cards

LOL  ;D


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 08:29:46 AM
@BCX Why are you so interested in Auroracoin's failure? It seems to have a better use case and distribution as compared to BTC. Shouldn't as early crypto enthusiast, you should work with Auroracoin team and help them in solving these security and other issues?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: blubberli on March 29, 2014, 08:34:31 AM
they should have airdropped some video cards
LOL  ;D

Pre-mined video Coin? I am all in.  ;)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: smilecoin23 on March 29, 2014, 08:38:32 AM
I urge all of the exchange to suspend trading. Or I'll game over.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 08:49:21 AM
hard fork has been announced on block 5400 a month ago

and now poolwarz added AUR on list


Title: Re: delete
Post by: illpoet on March 29, 2014, 08:51:14 AM
oh man, this takes me back to the days when bcx was threatening to 51 litecoin.  good times.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: ZeroBarrier on March 29, 2014, 08:59:17 AM
I don't understand the vitriol and shadenfreuden going on over this.

Auroracoin had the potential to really help the Icelandic economy, and is a public shop window for the potential crypto currency as a whole. This undermines the prospects for every cryptocurrency.

OK, I mean no disrespect for the Icelandic people, but I'm fucking sick and tired of hearing this shit regurgitated over and over from the AUR fanbois. Neither I nor many other users here are from Iceland; and this may be shocking to you, but we don't really give a flying fuck about the Icelandic economy. If the Icelandic people don't give a fuck about their own economy enough to correct it themselves, then that's their fucking problem.

Cryptocurrencies are designed by nature to be universal. If they really want they can fight their government to use any of the other of the great cryptocurrencies disposable to them such as BTC, LTC, DOGE and so on. But hey, guess what, they fucking don't. Why? Perhaps they don't have the fucking nerve to stand up for themselves. We'll fine by me. No skin off my back.

It could be argued that the dev created this to scam BTC into his own pockets, it could also be argued he created this to try to get the rest of the world to financially support Iceland (as if any sane person would willingly give money to some poor saps in another country for free, hilarious); God knows there evidence pointing to both, but regardless of that national cryptocurrencies aren't fucking needed.

Let me repeat that for the reading impared, national cryptocurrencies are not fucking needed.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 09:09:41 AM
Cryptocurrencies are designed by nature to be universal. If they really want they can fight their government to use any of the other of the great cryptocurrencies disposable to them such as BTC, LTC, DOGE and so on.

Yeah, let's distribute 50% of these to them and they may. I am surprised by the negativity here for Auroracoin. BTC, LTC, DOGE are acceptable because they are already in circulation (and you and others here presumably hold them) but AUR is not because? These network attacks, negativity. It really only points to their success until now.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 09:13:05 AM
And I am not asking anyone here to believe in Auroracoin. But I do want to get your attention towards the parallels when people used to mock BTC. Long time members here were underdogs then and AUR is a new entrant now. I want to see Auroracoin to be hugely successful (even more than BTC, however stupid it sounds now) just so any new crypto in the future don't get treatment like this.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: ZeroBarrier on March 29, 2014, 09:32:24 AM
Cryptocurrencies are designed by nature to be universal. If they really want they can fight their government to use any of the other of the great cryptocurrencies disposable to them such as BTC, LTC, DOGE and so on.

Yeah, let's distribute 50% of these to them and they may. I am surprised by the negativity here for Auroracoin. BTC, LTC, DOGE are acceptable because they are already in circulation (and you and others here presumably hold them) but AUR is not because? These network attacks, negativity. It really only points to their success until now.

Again, why should anyone give them a free meal ticket? They don't even help secure the blockchain of AUR let alone any other; so why give them something for nothing? And for your information, I don't hold any BTC, LTC or DOGE. In fact I currently hold a modicum of Beecoin and nothing else just because I mined some and enjoyed their very fair and discreate launch.

And I am not asking anyone here to believe in Auroracoin. But I do want to get your attention towards the parallels when people used to mock BTC. Long time members here were underdogs then and AUR is a new entrant now. I want to see Auroracoin to be hugely successful (even more than BTC, however stupid it sounds now) just so any new crypto in the future don't get treatment like this.

You want a coin that was given away for free to people who don't help cryptocurrencies at all by even helping secure a blockchain to be successful; you either holding a bag or just completely certifiable.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 09:49:09 AM
@Zerobarrier

Quote
Again, why should anyone give them a free meal ticket?

What free meal ticket? No one is asking for associating any value to Auroracoin. So no free meal is being given to them but a cryptocurrency. Value associated is by other people. Why should anyone have problem with that?

Quote
You want a coin that was given away for free to people who don't help cryptocurrencies at all by even helping secure a blockchain to be successful

So if the population of Iceland had mined these coins on their laptop and had gotten 31.8 coins it had been okay? You are trapped into mining and one way of doing something. You are no different than people holding fiat. So, don't go about preaching BTC, LTC, DOGE.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: ZeroBarrier on March 29, 2014, 09:58:33 AM
What free meal ticket? No one is asking for associating any value to Auroracoin. So no free meal is being given to them but a cryptocurrency. Value associated is by other people. Why should anyone have problem with that?

Really now? Then why the big push to get AUR onto exchanges and getting it's marketcap (falsely) to $300,000,000? And how about all the inital talk from AUR supporters claiming $1000+ would be oh so helpful to these poor souls in Iceland?

Quote
So if the population of Iceland had mined these coins on their laptop and had gotten 31.8 coins it had been okay? You are trapped into mining and one way of doing something. You are no different than people holding fiat. So, don't go about preaching BTC, LTC, DOGE.

How else do you suppose they acquire coins from a POW cryptocurrency? Oh... Right... Handed to them for free... Gotcha... The why the fuck even make it POW?

Edit: tell you what, if the dev would have made it POS only and held an IPO only for the population of Iceland, I would have considered it way less of a bullshit scam and shenanigans than I do; but no, it just had to be POW, with no capital or even hash coming from Iceland itself. What a joke.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 10:12:38 AM
@ZeroBarrier

Your point about making it POS has merit. Playing devil's advocate here and not calling it scam. I presume, the developer wanted people from rest of the world to get involved as well. Isn't one of the premise is to free the currency flow. Also, I read on the Auroracoin forums where he (Baldur) very strongly supported flow of AUR with other currencies.

Looking at the evidence. The coins are being distributed and original team is trying to solve problems as they come across it. Also, they seem to be working on it full time; unlike other alts.
 
Don't know about the reason for the push to list on exchanges. But the premines were not sold even at that peak.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Coinmin on March 29, 2014, 10:25:01 AM
lol  is this for real you finally fucked up aur?


No actually this wasn't me, this is actually a straight up 51% attack due to the diff dropping so low.

This is a first, I just got scooped ROFL.

Timewarp is a slow build attack, 51% is an explosion like this.



~BCX~


Are You can call the coins that are protected from such attacks?

 I need to know in which coins can I invest.

Thanks in advance!


Title: Re: delete
Post by: JeffK on March 29, 2014, 10:49:12 AM
lol  is this for real you finally fucked up aur?


No actually this wasn't me, this is actually a straight up 51% attack due to the diff dropping so low.

This is a first, I just got scooped ROFL.

Timewarp is a slow build attack, 51% is an explosion like this.



~BCX~


Are You can call the coins that are protected from such attacks?

 I need to know in which coins can I invest.

Thanks in advance!

Bitcoin is safe, can only go up, and is infallible. Mortgage your house and bet all on Bitcoin


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Bimmerhead on March 29, 2014, 11:11:19 AM
I don't understand the vitriol and shadenfreuden going on over this.

Auroracoin had the potential to really help the Icelandic economy, and is a public shop window for the potential crypto currency as a whole. This undermines the prospects for every cryptocurrency.

OK, I mean no disrespect for the Icelandic people, but I'm fucking sick and tired of hearing this shit regurgitated over and over from the AUR fanbois. Neither I nor many other users here are from Iceland; and this may be shocking to you, but we don't really give a flying fuck about the Icelandic economy. If the Icelandic people don't give a fuck about their own economy enough to correct it themselves, then that's their fucking problem.

Cryptocurrencies are designed by nature to be universal. If they really want they can fight their government to use any of the other of the great cryptocurrencies disposable to them such as BTC, LTC, DOGE and so on. But hey, guess what, they fucking don't. Why? Perhaps they don't have the fucking nerve to stand up for themselves. We'll fine by me. No skin off my back.

It could be argued that the dev created this to scam BTC into his own pockets, it could also be argued he created this to try to get the rest of the world to financially support Iceland (as if any sane person would willingly give money to some poor saps in another country for free, hilarious); God knows there evidence pointing to both, but regardless of that national cryptocurrencies aren't fucking needed.

Let me repeat that for the reading impared, national cryptocurrencies are not fucking needed.

Please explain how Icelanders are to acquire BTC, LTC, or DOGE.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 11:14:49 AM
Please explain how Icelanders are to acquire BTC, LTC, or DOGE.

Isn't Iceland one of the best places in the world to mine?

Geothermal to generate electricity, cold climate to not need to waste electricity on air-conditioning, I thought it was one of the mining Meccas everyone wished they could relocate their mining operations to?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jcarl987 on March 29, 2014, 11:25:45 AM
Quote
as if any sane person would willingly give money to some poor saps in another country for free, hilarious

Are you serious? People give money to charities that help people in other countries all the time. Are you honestly saying that doing this is insane?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Come-from-Beyond on March 29, 2014, 11:35:18 AM
There are only a few I know of who could have done this.


Luke is that you?

Of coz it's him, no need to ask.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Bimmerhead on March 29, 2014, 11:36:14 AM
Please explain how Icelanders are to acquire BTC, LTC, or DOGE.

Isn't Iceland one of the best places in the world to mine?

Geothermal to generate electricity, cold climate to not need to waste electricity on air-conditioning, I thought it was one of the mining Meccas everyone wished they could relocate their mining operations to?

-MarkM-


Right. They can mine, they cannot buy.
Do we now expect that everyone must be a miner to participate in a meaningful way in the crypto economy?  Does ZeroBarrier never buy and sell bitcoin, LTC etc?
Is he such an objectivist hard ass that he feels he must destroy anything that smacks of charity?

The airdrop, which despite weeks if accusations has shown no sign of being a scam, is a terrific way to put a lot of crypto in the hands of a geographically concentrated group of people.  It is conceivable that this will lead to people actually using it to **gasp** transact, rather than merely speculate.  This isn't about charity, it's about moving cryptocurrency forward.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Francisdoge on March 29, 2014, 11:49:33 AM
Can somebody sum up this situation in layman's terms ? I don't get it how/why this coin got destroyed, or by whom interests.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoKiller on March 29, 2014, 11:55:05 AM
Congrats to bcx and his cronies for trying to rob thousands of people of their REAL investment's.

Mum would be proud now.


This isn't about moving crypto's forward or they would be presenting a solution not being apart of the problem.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 12:06:28 PM
Can somebody sum up this situation in layman's terms ? I don't get it how/why this coin got destroyed, or by whom interests.


It was destroyed from the start by the idiots or maybe more likely outright scammers who tried to con people into somehow imagining that scrypt is a viable method of securing a blockchain.

DOGE already showed how insanely vulnerable scrypt is, by conjuring up almost overnight so much hashpower that they could have totally screwed litecoin. It was lucky for litecoin that DOGE happened to be a "lets be yet another scamcoin" meme instead of being a "lets trash all the scrypt blockchains" meme.

Thus we already know that scrypt coins are just a meme away from being worthless.

Yet scammers keep on churning them out, since obviously they don't give a shit about other people's money except, of course, to steal it or scam people out of it.

Really what DOGE showed is not merely that scrypt is garbage but that CPU/GPU is not a viable way of securing a blockchain.

(Scrypt might actually be salvage-able, thanks to upcoming ASICs for scrypt, for one family of merged blockchains, all sharing the same massive hashing power, if that merged family controls more than half of the world's scrypt hashing power. Will that family be litecoin and friends or DOGE and friends, or will ltiecoin and DOGE adapt themselves to be merged mined together as one family so that litecoin and DOGE and friends could all be secured with the majority of the world's scrypt hashing power?)

The only reason bitcoin got away with using CPU then GPU then FPGA to secure its blockchain was that potential attackers were caught unprepared, they did not anticipate so much wealth being so easy to steal using mere raw brute computer-power.

Now they know well that blackchains can be attacked and how to attack them, and are loaded up with GPUs and CPUs and FPGAs.

Thus just a stupid meme can conjure up shitloads of raw brute computing power almost overnight.

Thus any serious attempt to secure a blockchain by proof of work needs to build ASICs before risking people's money on such a blockchain.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: samesstee on March 29, 2014, 12:10:53 PM
^ that is one POV the other is that there are a lot of scrypt miners and they used their GPUs to vote against aur


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 12:13:51 PM
^ that is one POV the other is that there are a lot of scrypt miners and they used their GPUs to vote against aur

So you think mercenary scrypt miners willing to screw any scrypt blockchain to grab a few coins on some new scam out-hash the actual dedicated scrypt miners who mine to protect (secure) their holdings of scrypt based coins?

Do you also think that mercenary SHA256 miners who have no SHA256 coin wealth to secure out-number SHA256 hashes that exist for the purpose of securing the SHA256 coin holdings they own?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: griffinriz on March 29, 2014, 12:22:16 PM
so NXT is more secure  ;D NXT to the Moon  :P


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nxtblg on March 29, 2014, 12:48:36 PM
so NXT is more secure  ;D NXT to the Moon  :P

Well, maybe it will...but we'll have to wait a long time.

That's actually better than a quick bubble. There's enough time to poke around with the nuts-and-bolts and see how it works.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: pajak666 on March 29, 2014, 12:49:30 PM
GG, which scam coin is next?

You can always rent shit ton of rigs on leaserig.net or betarigs.com and make 51% attack more succesfull.
Am I right?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 12:54:53 PM
lol  is this for real you finally fucked up aur?

no, naive  ;D


Title: Re: delete
Post by: samesstee on March 29, 2014, 12:57:56 PM
^ that is one POV the other is that there are a lot of scrypt miners and they used their GPUs to vote against aur

So you think mercenary scrypt miners willing to screw any scrypt blockchain to grab a few coins on some new scam out-hash the actual dedicated scrypt miners who mine to protect (secure) their holdings of scrypt based coins?

Do you also think that mercenary SHA256 miners who have no SHA256 coin wealth to secure out-number SHA256 hashes that exist for the purpose of securing the SHA256 coin holdings they own?

-MarkM-


Yes, the majority of miners have turned mercenary (sometimes unbeknown to them) and all they want is ROI .... they decided that AUR wasn't going to give them the security they want so they voted against it, through that process they allowed all you greedy bitcoin holders an opportunity to 51% attack AUR's BC.

as for your second sentence - care to rephrase?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: samesstee on March 29, 2014, 01:02:20 PM
so NXT is more secure  ;D NXT to the Moon  :P

Well, maybe it will...but we'll have to wait a long time.

That's actually better than a quick bubble. There's enough time to poke around with the nuts-and-bolts and see how it works.

Standalone POS coins have many advantages over NXT - plus they far less resemble a bullshit hyip pyramid scheme (which after the initial POS influence on other developers NXT had - that is all it deserves ever be)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 01:04:48 PM
Nothing has happened. This fork was planned beforehand. BCX you have lost credibility by spreading FUD. You probably gained through this by buying low?

On the matter of miners voting against it. If all you (miner) care about is people should buy from you because in theory you will always be the first ones to get the coin. Then, to be truthful, game is over for you. These are early days for cryptos. Everyone involved has some technical background. You will never see any one group holding power like this. And if they do, they will be removed from the equation.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: samesstee on March 29, 2014, 01:14:35 PM
Nothing has happened. This fork was planned beforehand. BCX you have lost credibility by spreading FUD. You probably gained through this by buying low?

On the matter of miners voting against it. If all you (miner) care about is people should buy from you because in theory you will always be the first ones to get the coin. Then, to be truthful, game is over for you. These are early days for cryptos. Everyone involved has some technical background. You will never see any one group holding power like this. And if they do, they will be removed from the equation.

I wish 'one group holding power' was 'removed from the equation' ....... LOL MONEY TALKS


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 01:22:29 PM
@samesstee

No idea what you are trying to say. Because I don't see anyone here putting money on the line but spreading misinformation. And ofcouse, if others want to attack the Auroracoin that's their choice. It's Auroracoin's fault to not be prepared for it. But saying that miners have voted against the coin collectively because they didn't got a large share is wrong as well.

Originally mining was intended to democratize (randomize?) the distribution. Now, it all about someone holding the best hardware, undermining the one of the original goals of decentralizing decision taking. How's miners creating a cartel like this is not against decentralization? (And I am not saying they shouldn't try as this or other alt grow more successful attacks will only increase)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 01:26:15 PM
Basically it seems that the majority of scrypt miners are scammers, they scam people into thinking a blockchain is viable by making it momentarily appear to have hash power securing it, but really the scamming miners actually plan to abandon the chain at any moment so really it is not actually secure at all, it is just a scam in which the miners are collaborating to try to create an illusionary security to lure people into putting money into it.

Fortunately they seldom put enough hash power into any one chain to make it look convincing, so most of the scrypt chains are clear at a glance obvious garbage/scams, with even litecoin and DOGE looking very borderline too after seeing how their hashing power changed since DOGE came along and showed us how useless the scrypt miners are as a way of securing a blockchain.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 29, 2014, 01:27:40 PM
Standalone POS coins have many advantages over NXT - plus they far less resemble a bullshit hyip pyramid scheme

LoL

I'd like to know of a single crypto that doesn't resemble a "bulshit pyramid scheme" by those definitions.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kingscrown on March 29, 2014, 01:43:14 PM
glad i dropped all my AUR on high spike long ago


Title: Re: delete
Post by: iGotAIDS on March 29, 2014, 01:45:05 PM
it seems to be doing okay.    the developer denies there was a 51% attack.

Regardless if that's true or not, there's at least a few chains out there now

One should listen here, iGotSpots knows all about forked coins (and stroking BCX's ego).


Title: Re: delete
Post by: berone on March 29, 2014, 01:51:24 PM
It is bad. Hope to fix it


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 29, 2014, 01:52:32 PM
Forked or not, this guy just sold a car for Auroracoin and it's national news.

I suppose he'd better hope his coins are on the "right" chain  ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_Egvl9VqgE


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 01:53:24 PM
I hope it was a lemon else the seller probably got screwed.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 01:54:34 PM
yep, aur is popular, so each piece of shit can ride on it, does not matter side


Title: Re: delete
Post by: bcxollo on March 29, 2014, 02:04:45 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Alteredcoins on March 29, 2014, 02:08:23 PM
I dont get whats cool about it. Hacking is a skill, but when used against the general public and normal, good people lose their investments for some sociopathic kid's little thrill, its not cool or impressive. There are viable things to hack and people that deserve to be hacked. This hack is a pussy move and a crime against innocent people. There is really simply nothing cool about it.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 02:08:43 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

agreed


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Ibistru on March 29, 2014, 02:09:06 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

These shitcoins like auroracoins are scam anyway. Better they die sooner than later, less damage is done and everybody is happy (except the scammers themselves and the noobs).


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 02:09:16 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

Nothing has happened. This is pure Anon kind of threats. Right response was (and from now on is) to not pay attention to these people.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 02:10:18 PM
@Everyone

This fork was planned since weeks. This is pure manipulation and misinformation. Stop paying attention.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: ElectricMucus on March 29, 2014, 02:15:30 PM
It can only go up from here amirite?

http://i.imgur.com/f7Jbd35.png


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoKiller on March 29, 2014, 02:21:46 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

agreed

+1

anyone that doesnt realise how this hurts the crypto scene as a whole is either retarded or made their money on btc and no longer gives a fuck what happens to anyone else.

Pathetic excuses for human beings.

--Anyone remember egold? That's what the outsider's will come to think of crypto if faggots like bcx are allowed to run rampant.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 29, 2014, 02:24:08 PM
I just bought some.

Didn't bet my house on it, but having to up my orders cos not getting them filled.

(I hope they sell me the right 'fork'  :D )

Whatever the technical merits of this "shitcoin" :) it seems that, amazingly, most Icelanders don't spend 15 hours a day oggling threads on bitcointalk. There's already a few businesses starting to spring up who are accepting it. http://www.aurcoin.is/

Also, each day there is more press - especially out in the country. http://eyjan.pressan.is/frettir/2014/03/27/markadur-hefur-myndast-fyrir-auroracoin-haegt-ad-kaupa-notada-bila-og-kronur/

Translation:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=is&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Feyjan.pressan.is%2Ffrettir%2F2014%2F03%2F27%2Fmarkadur-hefur-myndast-fyrir-auroracoin-haegt-ad-kaupa-notada-bila-og-kronur%2F

Maybe it'll crash again once all this FUD starts filtering through...or maybe it won't. All the same, must get in if you like the principle.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nxtblg on March 29, 2014, 02:27:08 PM
so NXT is more secure  ;D NXT to the Moon  :P

Well, maybe it will...but we'll have to wait a long time.

That's actually better than a quick bubble. There's enough time to poke around with the nuts-and-bolts and see how it works.

Standalone POS coins have many advantages over NXT - plus they far less resemble a bullshit hyip pyramid scheme (which after the initial POS influence on other developers NXT had - that is all it deserves ever be)

Your opinion, of course. Myself, I'm waiting until 2015 to see what Nxters have come up with innovation-wise. You may not know this, but it's already set a standard that's much better than the one set by (say) Dogecoin. It's the first new cyber that was coded from scratch to be a full 2.0 coin. NEM and eXocoin are both in development, and there's a new IPO, Numus, that hopes to produce the fourth. Next year, the joint's really going to be jumping in this area.

I hope all of them succeed hugely, for more than mercenary reasons. If they do, they'll set a standard for altcoins that'll be a huge relief for the crapcon-haters here: in order to make serious money, you have to do serious coding - from scratch. What could be better for the field?

[P.S.: I know about Mastercoin, but it's a protocoin because it depends on the Bitcoin blockchain. The ones I listed above are Bitcoin-independent.] 


Title: Re: delete
Post by: YYmeans on March 29, 2014, 02:28:11 PM
fork is not a too bad thing, but i hopt this shitcoin die . 50% premine, fuck .


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 02:29:30 PM
@Everyone

This fork was planned since weeks. This is pure manipulation and misinformation. Stop paying attention.

I do agree, but problem is there is dozen of uneducated people out there who dont know whats going on
and ofcourse including all who are not touched with any coins including Bitcoin, this selfish and envy "strategy" is going directly against any coin
and fiat money are laughing
i did not imagine that weak spot of coins are people, haters and jealous, what a shame


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 02:32:18 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

agreed

+1

anyone that doesnt realise how this hurts the crypto scene as a whole is either retarded or made their money on btc and no longer gives a fuck what happens to anyone else.

Pathetic excuses for human beings.

--Anyone remember egold? That's what the outsider's will come to think of crypto if faggots like bcx are allowed to run rampant.

That is why so many people object to the creation of insanely scammy garbage blockchains whose developers have no intention of securing the chain and not enough hardware and electricity to secure it even if they did pretend to themselves that their pathetic number of hashes could come anywhere close to securing it.

It is why so many people object to the deliberate scamming of investors by the creation of scrypt blockchains when scrypt has already been clearly shown to be garbage, a scammer's algorithm for scammers who plan to deliberately jump from chain to chain to chain, their only objective being to scam money from suckers; miners who have no intention to secure anything, just to scam money for themselves even if that means having other scammers keep making new scamcoins for these scam miners to mine.

So yeah, it is not cool to create worthless garbage scamcoins that you cannot secure.

It is perfectly cool to demonstrate that such scams are scams, because even despite such demonstrations (remember DOGE, which demonstrated that even litecoin was not secure because a stupid meme could conjure up enough hashing power to PWN it, for example) the scam miners keep co-operating with the scam coin-cloners to keep churning out more scams. Thus obviously not enough such demonstrations have been made, or they have not been made forcefully enough and publicly enough for "everyone" to clearly realise that it is not cool to create a blockchain you cannot secure.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: soulcity on March 29, 2014, 02:36:47 PM
Icelanders need to get of the teat and secure their currency.  



Title: Re: delete
Post by: slapper on March 29, 2014, 02:42:01 PM
Just bought some AUR!


Title: Re: delete
Post by: luv2drnkbr on March 29, 2014, 02:44:49 PM
Don't worry people, BitcoinEXpress is a troll with moderate hashing power who 51%'s all new altcoins because he's a sad little faggot and likes the attention.  Read Litecoin's ANN thread when it first started... you'll find him there 51%ing it and talking about it's death.  He just gets off on fear mongering.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoKiller on March 29, 2014, 02:47:04 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

agreed

+1

anyone that doesnt realise how this hurts the crypto scene as a whole is either retarded or made their money on btc and no longer gives a fuck what happens to anyone else.

Pathetic excuses for human beings.

--Anyone remember egold? That's what the outsider's will come to think of crypto if faggots like bcx are allowed to run rampant.

That is why so many people object to the creation of insanely scammy garbage blockchains whose developers have no intention of securing the chain and not enough hardware and electricity to secure it even if they did pretend to themselves that their pathetic number of hashes could come anywhere close to securing it.

It is why so many people object to the deliberate scamming of investors by the creation of scrypt blockchains when scrypt has already been clearly shown to be garbage, a scammer's algorithm for scammers who plan to deliberately jump from chain to chain to chain, their only objective being to scam money from suckers; miners who have no intention to secure anything, just to scam money for themselves even if that means having other scammers keep making new scamcoins for these scam miners to mine.

So yeah, it is not cool to create worthless garbage scamcoins that you cannot secure.

It is perfectly cool to demonstrate that such scams are scams, because even despite such demonstrations (remember DOGE, which demonstrated that even litecoin was not secure because a stupid meme could conjure up enough hashing power to PWN it, for example) the scam miners keep co-operating with the scam coin-cloners to keep churning out more scams. Thus obviously not enough such demonstrations have been made, or they have not been made forcefully enough and publicly enough for "everyone" to clearly realise that it is not cool to create a blockchain you cannot secure.

-MarkM-



What you describe is the free market at work. Not doge's fault it had some killer advertising and got alot of new guys involved in crypto. While I do agree with you about fracturing the community and the hashrate making many coins insecure thats a far cry from what bcx and others like him are trying to do which is to flat out take money from investors and miners alike.

Without a market like this innovation will not come. Sure the scene looks shitty now but over time more and more people will get into crypto and some of those will have the skills and motivation to help improve it...All shit like this does is ensure those people never enter the scene. Not only hurting alts but bitcoin at the same time.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 02:50:20 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

agreed

+1

anyone that doesnt realise how this hurts the crypto scene as a whole is either retarded or made their money on btc and no longer gives a fuck what happens to anyone else.

Pathetic excuses for human beings.

--Anyone remember egold? That's what the outsider's will come to think of crypto if faggots like bcx are allowed to run rampant.

That is why so many people object to the creation of insanely scammy garbage blockchains whose developers have no intention of securing the chain and not enough hardware and electricity to secure it even if they did pretend to themselves that their pathetic number of hashes could come anywhere close to securing it.

It is why so many people object to the deliberate scamming of investors by the creation of scrypt blockchains when scrypt has already been clearly shown to be garbage, a scammer's algorithm for scammers who plan to deliberately jump from chain to chain to chain, their only objective being to scam money from suckers; miners who have no intention to secure anything, just to scam money for themselves even if that means having other scammers keep making new scamcoins for these scam miners to mine.

So yeah, it is not cool to create worthless garbage scamcoins that you cannot secure.

It is perfectly cool to demonstrate that such scams are scams, because even despite such demonstrations (remember DOGE, which demonstrated that even litecoin was not secure because a stupid meme could conjure up enough hashing power to PWN it, for example) the scam miners keep co-operating with the scam coin-cloners to keep churning out more scams. Thus obviously not enough such demonstrations have been made, or they have not been made forcefully enough and publicly enough for "everyone" to clearly realise that it is not cool to create a blockchain you cannot secure.

-MarkM-



What you describe is the free market at work. Not doge's fault it had some killer advertising and got alot of new guys involved in crypto. While I do agree with you about fracturing the community and the hashrate making many coins insecure thats a far cry from what bcx and others like him are trying to do which is to flat out take money from investors and miners alike.

Without a market like this innovation will not come. Sure the scene looks shitty now but over time more and more people will get into crypto and some of those will have the skills and motivation to help improve it...All shit like this does is ensure those people never enter the scene.

Well if that is all it can do, rather than serving to help ensure they don't enter with garbage scams, maybe it is good to keep them out of the scene.

If they imagine that churning out more and more scams/ponzis is "innovation" we are probably better off without them.

New innovative scams, oh wow how awesome, not.

DOGE served to show that if general purpose hardware can attack a coin that coin is not secure.

You need to develop special purpose hardware, at minimum. Some claim even that will not work but failing to do it is even more certain not to work.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoKiller on March 29, 2014, 03:00:38 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

agreed

+1

anyone that doesnt realise how this hurts the crypto scene as a whole is either retarded or made their money on btc and no longer gives a fuck what happens to anyone else.

Pathetic excuses for human beings.

--Anyone remember egold? That's what the outsider's will come to think of crypto if faggots like bcx are allowed to run rampant.

That is why so many people object to the creation of insanely scammy garbage blockchains whose developers have no intention of securing the chain and not enough hardware and electricity to secure it even if they did pretend to themselves that their pathetic number of hashes could come anywhere close to securing it.

It is why so many people object to the deliberate scamming of investors by the creation of scrypt blockchains when scrypt has already been clearly shown to be garbage, a scammer's algorithm for scammers who plan to deliberately jump from chain to chain to chain, their only objective being to scam money from suckers; miners who have no intention to secure anything, just to scam money for themselves even if that means having other scammers keep making new scamcoins for these scam miners to mine.

So yeah, it is not cool to create worthless garbage scamcoins that you cannot secure.

It is perfectly cool to demonstrate that such scams are scams, because even despite such demonstrations (remember DOGE, which demonstrated that even litecoin was not secure because a stupid meme could conjure up enough hashing power to PWN it, for example) the scam miners keep co-operating with the scam coin-cloners to keep churning out more scams. Thus obviously not enough such demonstrations have been made, or they have not been made forcefully enough and publicly enough for "everyone" to clearly realise that it is not cool to create a blockchain you cannot secure.

-MarkM-



What you describe is the free market at work. Not doge's fault it had some killer advertising and got alot of new guys involved in crypto. While I do agree with you about fracturing the community and the hashrate making many coins insecure thats a far cry from what bcx and others like him are trying to do which is to flat out take money from investors and miners alike.

Without a market like this innovation will not come. Sure the scene looks shitty now but over time more and more people will get into crypto and some of those will have the skills and motivation to help improve it...All shit like this does is ensure those people never enter the scene.

Well if that is all it can do, rather than serving to help ensure they don't enter with garbage scams, maybe it is good to keep them out of the scene.

If they imagine that churning out more and more scams/ponzis is "innovation" we are probably better off without them.

New innovative scams, oh wow how awesome, not.

DOGE served to show that if general purpose hardware can attack a coin that coin is not secure.

You need to develop special purpose hardware, at minimum. Some claim even that will not work but failing to do it is even more certain not to work.

-MarkM-


You're that jaded that innovation means auroracoin to you? You keep regurgitating the same talking points and talking up theft as if its ever a good thing. bxc and his ilk offer no solutions other than to take money straight out of peoples hands. Nothing stand up about that.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 03:03:08 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

agreed

+1

anyone that doesnt realise how this hurts the crypto scene as a whole is either retarded or made their money on btc and no longer gives a fuck what happens to anyone else.

Pathetic excuses for human beings.

--Anyone remember egold? That's what the outsider's will come to think of crypto if faggots like bcx are allowed to run rampant.

...demonstrate that such scams are scams, because even despite such demonstrations (remember DOGE, which demonstrated that even litecoin was not secure because a stupid meme could conjure up enough hashing power to PWN it, for example) the scam miners keep co-operating with the scam coin-cloners to keep churning out more scams. Thus obviously not enough such demonstrations have been made, or they have not been made forcefully enough and publicly enough for "everyone" to clearly realise that it is not cool to create a blockchain you cannot secure.

-MarkM-


ok, there are coins and nobody is going to ask, if he can
does not matter who convinced himself he is savior
messages only demostrates hateness, jealousy and lack of competence, sent by loosers with life good-for-nothing,
depsite of the same haters got free gift of dosen coins based on opensource, they declared themself to be the ones who is only
eligible to decide what is clean race of coins
there is no public audience interested in repetition of scam word
a demonstration of weakness and jealousy based on impotence to enter competition


Title: Re: delete
Post by: BohemianStalker on March 29, 2014, 03:13:13 PM
You juvenile pricks think this is funny? Every time you harm an alt coin you drive more people away from crypto. This is just another nail in the bitcoiner coffin ... RIP

agreed

+1

anyone that doesnt realise how this hurts the crypto scene as a whole is either retarded or made their money on btc and no longer gives a fuck what happens to anyone else.

Pathetic excuses for human beings.

--Anyone remember egold? That's what the outsider's will come to think of crypto if faggots like bcx are allowed to run rampant.

That is why so many people object to the creation of insanely scammy garbage blockchains whose developers have no intention of securing the chain and not enough hardware and electricity to secure it even if they did pretend to themselves that their pathetic number of hashes could come anywhere close to securing it.

It is why so many people object to the deliberate scamming of investors by the creation of scrypt blockchains when scrypt has already been clearly shown to be garbage, a scammer's algorithm for scammers who plan to deliberately jump from chain to chain to chain, their only objective being to scam money from suckers; miners who have no intention to secure anything, just to scam money for themselves even if that means having other scammers keep making new scamcoins for these scam miners to mine.

So yeah, it is not cool to create worthless garbage scamcoins that you cannot secure.

It is perfectly cool to demonstrate that such scams are scams, because even despite such demonstrations (remember DOGE, which demonstrated that even litecoin was not secure because a stupid meme could conjure up enough hashing power to PWN it, for example) the scam miners keep co-operating with the scam coin-cloners to keep churning out more scams. Thus obviously not enough such demonstrations have been made, or they have not been made forcefully enough and publicly enough for "everyone" to clearly realise that it is not cool to create a blockchain you cannot secure.

-MarkM-


And yet you live in a world full of chaos and madness, brutality , psychopats and all that .

And all that stand between you and that world is 6 centimeters of your wooden door.

Your argument is flawed. Just because something is very vunerable does not mean it should not exist. The lack of internet laws and healthy amount of regulation promotes all of this. I wonder how many people would ddos and hack cryptocurrencies if it would be considered a 10+years offense.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoKiller on March 29, 2014, 03:21:30 PM

And yet you live in a world full of chaos and madness, brutality , psychopats and all that .

And all that stand between you and that world is 6 centimeters of your wooden door.

Your argument is flawed. Just because something is very vunerable does not mean it should not exist. The lack of internet laws and healthy amount of regulation promotes all of this. I wonder how many people would ddos and hack cryptocurrencies if it would be considered a 10+years offense.

haha yep. According to his logic if I'm able to gain access to his house I have free reign to enter his house and steal all his property..Not only that but he would consider it "cool", cos after all how secure can doors be if I can brake the lock?

We must expose the door scam for what it is before more people decide to create more doors!


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 03:22:52 PM
ok lets sort it out

hardfork on block 5400 has been announced a log time ago

im gonna buy some AUR, coz its cool


Title: Re: delete
Post by: alyssa85 on March 29, 2014, 03:31:17 PM
You're that jaded that innovation means auroracoin to you? You keep regurgitating the same talking points and talking up theft as if its ever a good thing. bxc and his ilk offer no solutions other than to take money straight out of peoples hands. Nothing stand up about that.

I don't think this is about "talking up theft" at all.

It's about pointing out that auroracoin was insecure and that the developers didn't give a toss about it's insecurity and neither did it's community (because they weren't bothering to mine it but were waiting for free air-drops instead!). As an aside, since when is money "free"? You either earn it through mining, or earn it through work and use earned money to buy more coins.

If it could be taken down so quickly and easily by some anonymous guy with a botnet, then the Icelandic govt could also have taken it down too. So what's the point of this coin (apart from making the developer rich on false hype)?

If people are serious about cryptos, they'll make them robust against all comers. If they're not serious and are looking for a quick pump and collapse - well at least be honest that you are not serious, and don't whine when it collapses.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoKiller on March 29, 2014, 03:44:00 PM
You're that jaded that innovation means auroracoin to you? You keep regurgitating the same talking points and talking up theft as if its ever a good thing. bxc and his ilk offer no solutions other than to take money straight out of peoples hands. Nothing stand up about that.

I don't think this is about "talking up theft" at all.

It's about pointing out that auroracoin was insecure and that the developers didn't give a toss about it's insecurity and neither did it's community (because they weren't bothering to mine it but were waiting for air-drops instead!). As an aside, since when is money "free"? You either earn it through mining, or earn it through work and use earned money to buy more coins.

If it could be taken down so quickly and easily by some anonymous guy with a botnet, then the Icelandic govt could also have taken it down too. So what's the point of this coin (apart from making the developer rich on false hype)?

If people are serious about cryptos, they'll make them robust against all comers. If they're not serious and are looking for a quick pump and collapse - well at least be honest that you are not serious, and don't whine when it collapses.

Don't get me wrong I fully agree with you but the way its being done is completly wrong. If I were to go out and hack someones bank accout exposing a security flaw in the banking system would I be looked at as some sort of hero? Nah..My ass would be locked up in gaol for a long time. The real "heroes" are the guys that see the problem and help fix it without fucking over thousands of people.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 03:46:40 PM
You're that jaded that innovation means auroracoin to you? You keep regurgitating the same talking points and talking up theft as if its ever a good thing. bxc and his ilk offer no solutions other than to take money straight out of peoples hands. Nothing stand up about that.

I don't think this is about "talking up theft" at all.

It's about pointing out that auroracoin was insecure and that the developers didn't give a toss about it's insecurity and neither did it's community (because they weren't bothering to mine it but were waiting for air-drops instead!). As an aside, since when is money "free"? You either earn it through mining, or earn it through work and use earned money to buy more coins.

If it could be taken down so quickly and easily by some anonymous guy with a botnet, then the Icelandic govt could also have taken it down too. So what's the point of this coin (apart from making the developer rich on false hype)?

If people are serious about cryptos, they'll make them robust against all comers. If they're not serious and are looking for a quick pump and collapse - well at least be honest that you are not serious, and don't whine when it collapses.

Based on your logic Satoshi Nakamoto has been first and bigest scammer
He pump and left the project and Bitcoin unsecure

I simply cant read provocations when one uses empty frases it only show he is ultimate fool, or ultimate demagogist

What is insecure, crypto experts?
There is mining community, they have been waiting for block 5400m becouse of difficulty
It cannot be taken down quickly, its only bullshit
If anybody will waste time to disabel for short time distributed system, once he will find its relativly easy to get it back
If someone cant see point of this coin, he can simply leave it
Robust coin? A rethorics from bulevard magazin?
What is it quick pump and collapse?
Most whining here are haters


Title: Re: delete
Post by: alyssa85 on March 29, 2014, 03:49:03 PM
You're that jaded that innovation means auroracoin to you? You keep regurgitating the same talking points and talking up theft as if its ever a good thing. bxc and his ilk offer no solutions other than to take money straight out of peoples hands. Nothing stand up about that.

I don't think this is about "talking up theft" at all.

It's about pointing out that auroracoin was insecure and that the developers didn't give a toss about it's insecurity and neither did it's community (because they weren't bothering to mine it but were waiting for air-drops instead!). As an aside, since when is money "free"? You either earn it through mining, or earn it through work and use earned money to buy more coins.

If it could be taken down so quickly and easily by some anonymous guy with a botnet, then the Icelandic govt could also have taken it down too. So what's the point of this coin (apart from making the developer rich on false hype)?

If people are serious about cryptos, they'll make them robust against all comers. If they're not serious and are looking for a quick pump and collapse - well at least be honest that you are not serious, and don't whine when it collapses.

Don't get me wrong I fully agree with you but the way its being done is completly wrong. If I were to go out and hack someones bank accout exposing a security flaw in the banking system would I be looked at as some sort of hero? Nah..My ass would be locked up in gaol for a long time. The real "heroes" are the guys that see the problem and help fix it without fucking over thousands of people.

And for how many weeks have people been pointing out that this coin is vulnerable? I've read dozens of threads and I only look into the forum a few times a week! People were given plenty of warning - and they didn't care enough to do a thing about it. If the Icelanders really wanted this coin they should have started mining it. If the speculators didn't want to see their investment go to zero, they too should have started mining it. But they didn't because at the end of the day they didn't care. This coin died because it's community didn't care.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoKiller on March 29, 2014, 03:58:18 PM
Was going to reply but it's become a little bit of a circle jerk.

Night guys  :-*


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 04:07:54 PM
Also bear in mind that what (s)he did to litecoin was simply pretend to plan a 51% attack, in order to rally the miners to defend it.

This coin not only did the miners not rally to defend it but it fell apart all by itself without even waiting for the purported planned attack.

Plus still no one has even bothered to fix the bug, have they?

Obviously it is a total scam, that is why they don't bother even trying to fix it: they don't care if it fails because they never intended it to last beyond their own quick-money cash-out.

How many other 50% pre-mine coins have they already moved on to?

Do they all have the same broken-ness?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Lloydie on March 29, 2014, 04:10:52 PM
You're that jaded that innovation means auroracoin to you? You keep regurgitating the same talking points and talking up theft as if its ever a good thing. bxc and his ilk offer no solutions other than to take money straight out of peoples hands. Nothing stand up about that.

I don't think this is about "talking up theft" at all.

It's about pointing out that auroracoin was insecure and that the developers didn't give a toss about it's insecurity and neither did it's community (because they weren't bothering to mine it but were waiting for free air-drops instead!). As an aside, since when is money "free"? You either earn it through mining, or earn it through work and use earned money to buy more coins.

If it could be taken down so quickly and easily by some anonymous guy with a botnet, then the Icelandic govt could also have taken it down too. So what's the point of this coin (apart from making the developer rich on false hype)?

If people are serious about cryptos, they'll make them robust against all comers. If they're not serious and are looking for a quick pump and collapse - well at least be honest that you are not serious, and don't whine when it collapses.
fuck off. The guy has a BOTNET, which means he is a criminal that does not respect people's privacy and property rights.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 04:11:44 PM

And for how many weeks have people been pointing out that this coin is vulnerable? I've read dozens of threads and I only look into the forum a few times a week! People were given plenty of warning - and they didn't care enough to do a thing about it. If the Icelanders really wanted this coin they should have started mining it. If the speculators didn't want to see their investment go to zero, they too should have started mining it. But they didn't because at the end of the day they didn't care. This coin died because it's community didn't care.

such clever prediction based on fundamental research with logic such a far from indefeasible reasons of deductive logic

if community and miners and investors do not care about this bullshits, fairytales and pointless whining so it results in continuity  ;D


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FilipZ on March 29, 2014, 04:13:22 PM
fuck off. The guy has a BOTNET, which means he is a criminal that does not respect people's privacy and property rights.

don't believe all fairytales posted here


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Lloydie on March 29, 2014, 04:15:46 PM
fuck off. The guy has a BOTNET, which means he is a criminal that does not respect people's privacy and property rights.

don't believe all fairytales posted here
In any event, may he meet his fate.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: BreakoutCoins on March 29, 2014, 04:31:47 PM
Don't worry people, BitcoinEXpress is a troll with moderate hashing power who 51%'s all new altcoins because he's a sad little faggot and likes the attention.  Read Litecoin's ANN thread when it first started... you'll find him there 51%ing it and talking about it's death.  He just gets off on fear mongering.

You sound like a troll under the bridge. If you don't like what's going on above your little bridge you should probably just leave your bridge. Attacking people above the bridge will prove fruitless.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 04:40:48 PM

You sound like a troll under the bridge. If you don't like what's going on above your little bridge you should probably just leave your bridge. Attacking people above the bridge will prove fruitless.

You should calmly sit down in a corner. Spreading misinformation and claiming I have this blah power and can exploit is as low as anyone can go for profit. Although, fault of people who sold on this misinformation is higher and to some extent they deserved it (just holding for gains). But try not to vouch for BTX. He totally came across as incompetent. Although, a good social engineering exploit.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 29, 2014, 05:00:38 PM
I think there may be some FUD here.. natural forks are fine it will get resolved, some miners will be out on coins, but network should resolve itself.  Natural forks and orphaned chains are just fine, doesn't mean game is over.  Not even if someone hashes 51%.. it's just fine.

Hard fork caused by the client updates could be detrimental on whoever didn't update clients.. those people are screwed.. hopefully no major exchange got caught up with that.  But that's not caused by any malicious attacker, just a roll out + deployment issue.

Nothing indicates to me, that this was a malicious 51% attack, that is holding up the transactions/network..

I'm still interested in seeing the timewarp attack though, if you can pull that off props to you, it will highlight a vulnerability that i'm sure will be fixable.  Everything is fixable with the will to do so....

But nothing that has been said so far has been true.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 05:15:27 PM
You need more than will, you need electricity.

Of course any blockchain is fixable given enough hashing power.

But even if the dev actually wanted to secure the chain the hashpower to do so is lacking.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: defaced on March 29, 2014, 05:20:38 PM
I have fixed my block crawler and it is syncing to the correct chain. My wallets are kept neutral from the exchange wallets on purpose and I failed to update in time. I am currently out of town and failed to update before I left. It should be fully synced in a few minutes

Cryptsy was updated in time. There is nothing to worry about :) Sorry about that....



...LOL


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 29, 2014, 05:24:28 PM
You need more than will, you need electricity.

Of course any blockchain is fixable given enough hashing power.

But even if the dev actually wanted to secure the chain the hashpower to do so is lacking.

-MarkM-


No, i actually mean will.  Hashpower doesn't fix anything, it just maintains and secures.  Keeps the system running smoothly.

But the will is: in writing and fixing through code, and the will of the people in the network to update the latest code.

All of crypto is made possible by smart devs and code.. not by hash power or miners.  Miners and hashpower are just a necessary evil to patch one security vulnerability, they are byproducts.. not the core of bitcoin.  Code & distribution power > hashpower.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoClub on March 29, 2014, 05:41:29 PM
You're that jaded that innovation means auroracoin to you? You keep regurgitating the same talking points and talking up theft as if its ever a good thing. bxc and his ilk offer no solutions other than to take money straight out of peoples hands. Nothing stand up about that.

I don't think this is about "talking up theft" at all.

It's about pointing out that auroracoin was insecure and that the developers didn't give a toss about it's insecurity and neither did it's community (because they weren't bothering to mine it but were waiting for air-drops instead!). As an aside, since when is money "free"? You either earn it through mining, or earn it through work and use earned money to buy more coins.

If it could be taken down so quickly and easily by some anonymous guy with a botnet, then the Icelandic govt could also have taken it down too. So what's the point of this coin (apart from making the developer rich on false hype)?

If people are serious about cryptos, they'll make them robust against all comers. If they're not serious and are looking for a quick pump and collapse - well at least be honest that you are not serious, and don't whine when it collapses.

Don't get me wrong I fully agree with you but the way its being done is completly wrong. If I were to go out and hack someones bank accout exposing a security flaw in the banking system would I be looked at as some sort of hero? Nah..My ass would be locked up in gaol for a long time. The real "heroes" are the guys that see the problem and help fix it without fucking over thousands of people.

Agreed. It is better to be constructive than to start knocking holes in the boat we are all on. Bitcoin and cryptos are about psychology in terms of widespread public adoption. If people think their Bitcoin can be "killed" by some government, they won't trust it or invest in it. Almost nobody will care or get what machines or algorithms secure anything, nor understand it, just more ammo to use against Bitcoin and all Alts.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jasemoney on March 29, 2014, 05:46:27 PM
Any country coin or airdrop receiver should be obligated to secure their own blockchain.  Every one of the what .05% now population of Iceland who have claimed coins could have loaded up a wallet qt and put the built in cpu miner towards it for a few hours.  Heck while they figure out how to import their keys and research what to do with the coins.  It should be required as part of the redemption process to recieve their coins.  
Side note +1 for a POS secured national sized airdrop.  
And thumbs up to BCX for making me nervous about my low haspower coin speculation.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: MegaHertz on March 29, 2014, 05:48:23 PM
I am an Icelander.  I have been watching all night because I KNEW that there was a HARD FORK coming.

Whether or not there was some hacking, which maybe there was, it seems that the coin is still operating.

Here is the thing, Icelanders have really gotten hit by the 2008 crash.  People lost homes and have seen mortgages go UP and principal down (in effect, because mortgages are tied to inflation)  and have had some reality biting them in the ass.

But it wasnt their fault, it was the banking system and some bankers that let them down.

That is why there was a 50% pre-mine.  To give the coins to Icelanders.  Just because they didnt know about protecting block-chains, this was a poor excuse (if true) for a hacker to try to mess up a valid idea, a grand experiment, to try to offer some help to fellow Icelanders.

I am in a friend of a friend connection to the Developer, Baldur, and have had some online discussions with him.

He is as honorable as I can tell, and has no intention of getting rich off of this coin, though obviously he has a financial stake in the coin as it has been his life for over 3 months now.  

Now maybe I will get some push-back from some member here, but that is okay.  

The human spirit will prevail over evil.... even if that evil is even coming from within the CryptoCommunity.

Auroracoin is not the end-all of what can be done, but here in Iceland it is the beginning for us....  

We are continuing to build our trade here in Iceland, and guess what, the coins are trading for 5 x the global exchange rate now.... reminds me of another coin that became the big kid on the block.  

We made it through Eyjafjallajökull, and we made it through WWII with more losses per capital than most nations, and we will make it through until the end, which of course will just be the beginning of a thousand years of peace.... when evil-hackers will be long gone and replaced by with hackers who do not hack code for destructive purposes, but will be developers of great ideas.  

Pray for those that purposefully try to destroy you.

-MegaHertz


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 29, 2014, 05:50:02 PM
Agreed. It is better to be constructive than to start knocking holes in the boat we are all on. Bitcoin and cryptos are about psychology in terms of widespread public adoption. If people think their Bitcoin can be "killed" by some government, they won't trust it or invest in it. Almost nobody will care or get what machines or algorithms secure anything, nor understand it, just more ammo to use against Bitcoin and all Alts.

Ditto. Auroracoin has gained so much attention that it will be everyone's loss to see it fail by some attack. Every government will get ammo to be against crypros. And normal people, who have only heard of these from nerdy friends will simply reject it. Failing the entire crypto currency movement.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: DemetriusAstroBlack on March 29, 2014, 05:54:43 PM
How many history lessons are we going to get from Icelanders over and over again about their economy?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 05:55:31 PM
These scams themselves are the evil that lowers confidence in cryptocurrencies.

The crap is crap because it is crap, not because people point out that it is crap nor demonstrate that it is crap.

Trying not to show people how much they have been scammed is not the answer to scams.

Avoid such scams in the first place.

If Icelanders like the chosen method of sharing out coins to them, great, create a secure ledger that does not require miners and go ahead and issue using that same method.

For example Icelanders could create a currency on Ripple and issue it to all Icelanders, and they will not need the insanely ridiculously crazy-huge expense of miners in order to secure their currency.

As it is not only do they now have an insanely insecure garbage crapcoin, they also have to pay 50% of it plus transaction fees to miners even though miners are not even actually securing the damn thing.

Use Ripple or a Ripple clone or a NXT clone or something.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 05:58:14 PM
Agreed. It is better to be constructive than to start knocking holes in the boat we are all on. Bitcoin and cryptos are about psychology in terms of widespread public adoption. If people think their Bitcoin can be "killed" by some government, they won't trust it or invest in it. Almost nobody will care or get what machines or algorithms secure anything, nor understand it, just more ammo to use against Bitcoin and all Alts.

Ditto. Auroracoin has gained so much attention that it will be everyone's loss to see it fail by some attack. Every government will get ammo to be against crypros. And normal people, who have only heard of these from nerdy friends will simply reject it. Failing the entire crypto currency movement.

Upholding scams, allowing scammers to profit by scams and so on is far far worse.

That people fell for the scam is sad, they they will be hurt is good as it will hopefully help them learn that it is not good to fall for scams.

Rewarding them for falling for scams and rewarding scammers for perpetuating scams will merely lead to more scams.

Basically you are arguing that criminals should profit from crime so that they can afford to pay damages to offset slightly some of the harm they caused to their victims, or maybe even that criminals should be allowed to profit so that everyone who helped them popularise and perpetrate the crime can also profit.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: alyssa85 on March 29, 2014, 06:10:46 PM
I am an Icelander.  I have been watching all night because I KNEW that there was a HARD FORK coming.

Whether or not there was some hacking, which maybe there was, it seems that the coin is still operating.

Here is the thing, Icelanders have really gotten hit by the 2008 crash.  People lost homes and have seen mortgages go UP and principal down (in effect, because mortgages are tied to inflation)  and have had some reality biting them in the ass.

But it wasnt their fault, it was the banking system and some bankers that let them down.

That is why there was a 50% pre-mine.  To give the coins to Icelanders.  Just because they didnt know about protecting block-chains, this was a poor excuse (if true) for a hacker to try to mess up a valid idea, a grand experiment, to try to offer some help to fellow Icelanders.



Everyone on the entire planet got screwed over by the banking crisis! Even goatherders in Africa felt it's effects. And many depositors in Britain and the Netherlands got screwed over by Icelandic banks essentially stealing their money and then they got screwed over again by the Icelandic govt refusing to honor the guarantee that they'd freely given for those deposits!

So the idea that Icelanders are poor things, worse victims than everywhere else is quite wrong. And the idea that they are a special case and should be given free money and it's not their fault for being too lazy to do some mining on an old computer... words fail. This is not like mining bitcoin, there was so little difficulty that anyone could have done it if they wanted to.

Look - if you don't want to trust your government to defend your currency, and want to create an alternative, you have to do the defending yourself. Just being passive and expecting everything to be done for you, foreign people to mine it for you, foreign people to develop it, foreign people to secure the blockchain, people in panama to do airdrops ... come on! This is not how the world works.

Also - auroracoin wasn't hacked, it was attacked. This is the crypto version of attacks that go on in the forex markets eg the attacks on the euro, the currrent forex attacks on the rouble and the brazilian real. This is how the world works, how it will always work. But you can defend yourself, if you can be bothered...


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 06:14:43 PM
Ripple is maybe ideal for this, actually.

Issue a new currency on Ripple, and hand it out to Icelanders.

Very cheap, no vast expense to pay miners who in any case aren't actually bothering to do their job, no need to give 50% of your currency to foreigners.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Ibistru on March 29, 2014, 06:15:59 PM
I am an Icelander.  I have been watching all night because I KNEW that there was a HARD FORK coming.

Whether or not there was some hacking, which maybe there was, it seems that the coin is still operating.

Here is the thing, Icelanders have really gotten hit by the 2008 crash.  People lost homes and have seen mortgages go UP and principal down (in effect, because mortgages are tied to inflation)  and have had some reality biting them in the ass.

If you need crypto-currencies in Iceland just use Bitcoin or Litecon.

Auroracoin is dead. Good riddance, since it was just another shitcoin scam.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: alyssa85 on March 29, 2014, 06:18:27 PM
Ripple is maybe ideal for this, actually.

Issue a new currency on Ripple, and hand it out to Icelanders.

Very cheap, no vast expense to pay miners who in any case aren't actually bothering to do their job, no need to give 50% of your currency to foreigners.

-MarkM-


And no expense probably means no value either... Better to keep the krona as at least that is backed by the Icelandic govt's tax raising powers!


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 06:24:54 PM
Low to no expense need not mean no value.

What makes a currency valuable is backing. Reserves.

If everyone who issued coins honoured them instead of just dumping them with no "money back guarantee" they would doubtless do much better.

The big problem with "mined" coins is that miners refuse to honour the coins they themselves are minting.

Even if they charged a 20% re-stocking fee when people "return" the coins they issued that would be better than the current total no-returns dumping.

Open Transactions is not expensive to operate, but that has not stopped many of the "national" and "corporate" coins currently using that platform (due to not being able or willing to afford the insanely high expense of so called "miners") from long long ago becoming more valuable than bitcoin, see

http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/digitalisassets.html

It was expected that bitcoin would always be more valuable than e.g. CDN, UKB, MBC, GMC, GRF, UNS, and especially NKL (since NKL issued twenty times as many coins instead of the same old 21 million coins), but the failure of bitcoin minters to honour the coins they minted seems to have massively suppressed bitcoin's value.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: r3wt on March 29, 2014, 06:29:59 PM
Anyone else find it hard to believe that a native of iceland speaks perfect english?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: YarkoL on March 29, 2014, 06:33:07 PM
Anyone else find it hard to believe that a native of iceland speaks perfect english?

You don't know much about Iceland or Scandinavia in general, do you?

Ever heard of EVE online?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: r3wt on March 29, 2014, 06:37:50 PM
Anyone else find it hard to believe that a native of iceland speaks perfect english?

You don't know much about Iceland or Scandinavia in general, do you?

Ever heard of EVE online?

Your argument is that an online role playing game is the reason "MegaHertz" speaks perfectly fluent english?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 06:40:48 PM
Scandinavians write better English than most Americans and such.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: s1gs3gv on March 29, 2014, 06:45:18 PM
According to his logic if I'm able to gain access to his house I have free reign to enter his house and steal all his property..Not only that but he would consider it "cool", cos after all how secure can doors be if I can brake the lock?

We must expose the door scam for what it is before more people decide to create more doors!

LOL. I couldn't say it better myself. ~BCX~ and his gang of thugs aren't interested in a world where rationality and the rule of just law prevail, they promote a lawless oligarchy of the bitcoin wealthy.

It never ceases to amaze me how surely serendipitous wealth turns grown men and women into arrogant bullies and taunts.

Creating malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: YarkoL on March 29, 2014, 06:53:36 PM
Anyone else find it hard to believe that a native of iceland speaks perfect english?

Ever heard of EVE online?

Your argument is that an online role playing game is the reason "MegaHertz" speaks perfectly fluent english?

It's more like the other way round..


Title: Re: delete
Post by: zeroday on March 29, 2014, 06:57:27 PM
Here is the thing, Icelanders have really gotten hit by the 2008 crash.  People lost homes and have seen mortgages go UP and principal down (in effect, because mortgages are tied to inflation)  and have had some reality biting them in the ass.

But it wasnt their fault, it was the banking system and some bankers that let them down.

That is why there was a 50% pre-mine.  To give the coins to Icelanders.  Just because they didnt know about protecting block-chains, this was a poor excuse (if true) for a hacker to try to mess up a valid idea, a grand experiment, to try to offer some help to fellow Icelanders.

-MegaHertz

So, instead of promoting bitcoin, the very first and strongest cryptocurrency that is intended to spread financial freedom around the world, someone is trying to push a utopian commie-coin 50% of which was pre-mined.
Instead of supporting international approach, they want to earn points with nationalism based currency. Good luck with that.

I really feel for those naive Icelanders who invested in this pseudo-national coin, that ended up as yet another pump and dump scheme.


http://i.imgur.com/yswZADF.png


Title: Re: delete
Post by: frnak on March 29, 2014, 07:01:13 PM
Anyone else find it hard to believe that a native of iceland speaks perfect english?

Yeah pretty unbelievable, learning another language?! On behalf of the Icelandic people I apologise, if it helps I can starting make badder grammar og maybe bara switch yfir to ķslensku…

We all speak good english, movies are subtitled, not dubbed, so we start learning from exposure when we're very young...


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jabo38 on March 29, 2014, 07:06:17 PM
I've seen Icelanders on TV.  They speak English well.

That doesn't mean that account wasn't a sock puppet.  This coin was always a scam to begin with.  If the developer was serious, he would have gone about it in a much better way. 


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Wipeout2097 on March 29, 2014, 07:09:29 PM
Here is the thing, Icelanders have really gotten hit by the 2008 crash.  People lost homes and have seen mortgages go UP and principal down (in effect, because mortgages are tied to inflation)  and have had some reality biting them in the ass.

But it wasnt their fault, it was the banking system and some bankers that let them down.

That is why there was a 50% pre-mine.  To give the coins to Icelanders.  Just because they didnt know about protecting block-chains, this was a poor excuse (if true) for a hacker to try to mess up a valid idea, a grand experiment, to try to offer some help to fellow Icelanders.

-MegaHertz

So, instead of promoting bitcoin, the very first and strongest cryptocurrency that is intended to spread financial freedom around the world, someone is trying to push a utopian commie-coin 50% of which was pre-mined.
Instead of supporting international approach, they want to earn points with nationalism based currency. Good luck with that.
Please make your point without resorting to ideology ...



Title: Re: delete
Post by: frnak on March 29, 2014, 07:13:04 PM
I've seen Icelanders on TV.  They speak English well.

That doesn't mean that account wasn't a sock puppet.  This coin was always a scam to begin with.  If the developer was serious, he would have gone about it in a much better way. 

I wish everyone here would stop begging the question, and present real arguments to back up their assumptions.

If the developer was serious, he would have done it in a better way?

No.

You are assuming that if he was serious he would somehow be a better developer/marketer/whatever it takes to do this in a better way.

This is not logic. I would love to read more posts here with actual facts and reasoning based on logic.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: alyssa85 on March 29, 2014, 07:19:49 PM
^^^^

There's nothing stopping a bunch of icelanders from launching their own coin and doing it properly. Call it a proper icelandic name too, you don't need to have English imposed on you.  :) All the code is open-source, all that's needed from you is a bit of effort. i.e. you'll have to mine it, and secure it, which means using your own electricity and buying your own ASICs. And doing your own marketing. And because you all collectively work to control it, you'll all own it and it should be a success.

The mistake you've made is trusting in some fairy god-father from panama, believing that they'll do everything for free - and you just sit there and collect your airdrops.

All currencies require effort, whether govt currencies paid for and backed by the taxpayer, or private currencies worked for by the community. There ain't no such thing as free.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: verdun2003 on March 29, 2014, 07:24:58 PM
Here is the thing, Icelanders have really gotten hit by the 2008 crash.  People lost homes and have seen mortgages go UP and principal down (in effect, because mortgages are tied to inflation)  and have had some reality biting them in the ass.

But it wasnt their fault, it was the banking system and some bankers that let them down.

That is why there was a 50% pre-mine.  To give the coins to Icelanders.  Just because they didnt know about protecting block-chains, this was a poor excuse (if true) for a hacker to try to mess up a valid idea, a grand experiment, to try to offer some help to fellow Icelanders.

-MegaHertz

So, instead of promoting bitcoin, the very first and strongest cryptocurrency that is intended to spread financial freedom around the world, someone is trying to push a utopian commie-coin 50% of which was pre-mined.
Instead of supporting international approach, they want to earn points with nationalism based currency. Good luck with that.

I really feel for those naive Icelanders who invested in this pseudo-national coin, that ended up as yet another pump and dump scheme.


http://i.imgur.com/yswZADF.png

It seems you do not like EU on one side and promote an "international" currency that is bitcoin. I can't find a link between communism and Aurora, I can just see free market forces working at its fullest - it's in the hands of the Icelanders to decide wether or not Auroracoin is a scam, pump and dump asset, a currency and what not. Most of the criticism that receives Aurora today remembers me of... bitcoin's early days.

If you follow closely AUR, you'll see that 20 stores already accept it over there, that a car has been sold for AUR and that the USD/AUR price is not the same as the one quoted in cryptsy or mintpal.

Let's wait and see what happens in the coming months, there may be some surprises..





Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on March 29, 2014, 07:26:14 PM

It was expected that bitcoin would always be more valuable than e.g. CDN, UKB, MBC, GMC, GRF, UNS, and especially NKL (since NKL issued twenty times as many coins instead of the same old 21 million coins), but the failure of bitcoin minters to honour the coins they minted seems to have massively suppressed bitcoin's value.

could you expand this thought some more?

for auroracoin specifically, the preminers aren't honouring the minted coins.  However, we all knew the market valuation for auroracoin was inaccurate due to the premine volume.

However, for If a bitcoin miner mints a blockchain currency and holds it, where do they fail to honour the coins they've minted?  If a miner trades his currency for fiat or cryptocurrency, hasn't utility and liquidity been increased?




Title: Re: delete
Post by: MegaHertz on March 29, 2014, 07:27:49 PM
Ripple is maybe ideal for this, actually.

Issue a new currency on Ripple, and hand it out to Icelanders.

Very cheap, no vast expense to pay miners who in any case aren't actually bothering to do their job, no need to give 50% of your currency to foreigners.

-MarkM-


Good points....  at this point though we need to follow this through, even for full experimental purposes.

Thanks for being civil.

MHz


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 07:35:47 PM
If a cartel of a few people can systematically destroy a coin, then crypto is NOT as secure as we think it is and all the good reason to consider getting your money out, now.

10-1 these snakes probably profited from it too before setting their sights on AUR. They are no better than the crooks they claim to be fighting.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 07:36:45 PM

It was expected that bitcoin would always be more valuable than e.g. CDN, UKB, MBC, GMC, GRF, UNS, and especially NKL (since NKL issued twenty times as many coins instead of the same old 21 million coins), but the failure of bitcoin minters to honour the coins they minted seems to have massively suppressed bitcoin's value.

could you expand this thought some more?

for auroracoin specifically, the preminers aren't honouring the minted coins.  However, we all knew the market valuation for auroracoin was inaccurate due to the premine volume.

However, for If a bitcoin miner mints a blockchain currency and holds it, where do they fail to honour the coins they've minted?  If a miner trades his currency for fiat or cryptocurrency, hasn't utility and liquidity been increased?


Until you issue it to someone else it is not yet issued.

Once you issue it, honour it.

For example if someone buys one from you using a car, and within a reasonable 90 day or 30 day or 120 day or one year or whatever warranty period comes back complaining that the coin you sold him is not satisfactory, he wants his money (the car) back, refund with a smile.

Basically you are a coin dealer. If you believe in your goods you should be happy to refund, albeit maybe with some token little cost to cover your trouble, such as a re-stocking fee.

Or, whenever you sell some on an exchange, put 99% or 98% or whatever of what someone bought it with back onto the order books at a slight little change in price, again to cover your time and trouble. That way they can always get back most of what they paid for the thing if they decide it does not afterall suit their purposes.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 07:40:20 PM
If a cartel of a few people can systematically destroy a coin, then crypto is NOT as secure as we think it is and all the good reason to consider getting your money out, now.

The coin that is so pathetically insecure that such can happen is not secure, and if you thought it was you were an idiot.

Bitcoin has more SHA256 hashing power than the whole rest of the world all put together, that is why bitcoin hopes maybe to be secure.

All these garbage crapcoins which have so little hashing power that just a stupid meme can drum up as much or more hashing power almost overnight were never secure, and by letting people imagine they were they were scamming.

It is insanely expensive to secure a proof of work blockchain.

Even bitcoin might not have spent enough / be spending enough, spending any less is just stupid, a total scam, just a deliberate criminal irresponsibility scam to scam money out of people because the scammers know most people do not understand the need for massive massive massive hashpower thus do not realise that even bitcoin might not manage to secure itself if the SHA256 hash power of the world fragments and that scrypt is already so fragmented even the highest hash power scrypt coins are pathetically vulnerable still.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 29, 2014, 07:42:29 PM
Jeez, I can't believe some of the idiotic remarks being made here. Now people are suspect because their english is too GOOD ?  ::)  ???

How many history lessons are we going to get from Icelanders over and over again about their economy?

Apparently as many as it takes to get it through the thick heads of some morally grandstanding retards that they don't have a problem with the way the coin was managed.

So the idea that Icelanders are poor things, worse victims than everywhere else is quite wrong. And the idea that they are a special case and should be given free money and it's not their fault for being too lazy to do some mining on an old computer... words fail. This is not like mining bitcoin, there was so little difficulty that anyone could have done it if they wanted to.

Look - if you don't want to trust your government to defend your currency, and want to create an alternative, you have to do the defending yourself. Just being passive and expecting everything to be done for you, foreign people to mine it for you, foreign people to develop it, foreign people to secure the blockchain, people in panama to do airdrops ... come on! This is not how the world works.

That's some peice of twisted logic you've got there by any standards. You make it sound like there was an altruistic element to the initial investment that went into Auroracoin.

Don't kid yourself.

People got rich off Aurora and it wasn't the ones who are getting it for free. If they ever make anything it will be because their economy did the hard work of giving it enough network effect to have some real value.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 07:44:26 PM

Bitcoin has more SHA256 hashing power than the whole rest of the world all put together, That is why bitcoin hopes maybe to be secure.




Talk about drinking the Kool-aid, if you have a broken front door and the only way to keep people from breaking in is to form a human chain around it, guess what, the front door is still broken.

But what do you expect from a guy whose avatar looks like 2 turds wrapped around each other, you guys are con artists like Karpeles.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: zeroday on March 29, 2014, 07:46:37 PM
It seems you do not like EU on one side and promote an "international" currency that is bitcoin. I can't find a link between communism and Aurora, I can just see free market forces working at its fullest - it's in the hands of the Icelanders to decide wether or not Auroracoin is a scam, pump and dump asset, a currency and what not. Most of the criticism that receives Aurora today remembers me of... bitcoin's early days.

If you follow closely AUR, you'll see that 20 stores already accept it over there, that a car has been sold for AUR and that the USD/AUR price is not the same as the one quoted in cryptsy or mintpal.

Let's wait and see what happens in the coming months, there may be some surprises..


Don't you think that distributing 50% of pre-mined coins among country population is socialistic or even communistic approach ?
I know several examples of similar asset distribution in post-commie countries in the past and every of these approaches was doomed to fail and lead to economic collapse. Most of the public assets ended up in pockets of a few oligarchs.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: MegaHertz on March 29, 2014, 07:47:18 PM
I am an Icelander.  I have been watching all night because I KNEW that there was a HARD FORK coming.

Whether or not there was some hacking, which maybe there was, it seems that the coin is still operating.

Here is the thing, Icelanders have really gotten hit by the 2008 crash.  People lost homes and have seen mortgages go UP and principal down (in effect, because mortgages are tied to inflation)  and have had some reality biting them in the ass.

But it wasnt their fault, it was the banking system and some bankers that let them down.

That is why there was a 50% pre-mine.  To give the coins to Icelanders.  Just because they didnt know about protecting block-chains, this was a poor excuse (if true) for a hacker to try to mess up a valid idea, a grand experiment, to try to offer some help to fellow Icelanders.



Everyone on the entire planet got screwed over by the banking crisis! Even goatherders in Africa felt it's effects. And many depositors in Britain and the Netherlands got screwed over by Icelandic banks essentially stealing their money and then they got screwed over again by the Icelandic govt refusing to honor the guarantee that they'd freely given for those deposits!

So the idea that Icelanders are poor things, worse victims than everywhere else is quite wrong. And the idea that they are a special case and should be given free money and it's not their fault for being too lazy to do some mining on an old computer... words fail. This is not like mining bitcoin, there was so little difficulty that anyone could have done it if they wanted to.

Look - if you don't want to trust your government to defend your currency, and want to create an alternative, you have to do the defending yourself. Just being passive and expecting everything to be done for you, foreign people to mine it for you, foreign people to develop it, foreign people to secure the blockchain, people in panama to do airdrops ... come on! This is not how the world works.

Also - auroracoin wasn't hacked, it was attacked. This is the crypto version of attacks that go on in the forex markets eg the attacks on the euro, the currrent forex attacks on the rouble and the brazilian real. This is how the world works, how it will always work. But you can defend yourself, if you can be bothered...


All good points. Thanks.  Unfortunately we only had a hundred people or so that were interested early on.   There is much more awareness now and some level of understanding.

I can tell you understand Crypto's quite well, and well, that is good for you... please be patient with us new comers.

MHz


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 07:49:07 PM
Talk about drinking the Kool-aid, if you have a broken front door and the only way to keep people from breaking in is to form a human chain around it, guess what, the front door is still broken.

Proof of work is broken, yes. It relies on brute force computation in order to trust raw brute force computation over human legal systems judges courts etc as arbiters of who owns how much of what.

Building more broken doors, even more broken, without anyone to protect them at all, is even worse, it is not helpful at all.

If your argument is that proof of work is a broken system, arguing in favour of more proof of work blockchains is idiotic.

Why use a brute force compution secured/arbitrated system if you do not find brute force computation to be a legitimate arbiter?

The whole point of the proof of work blockchain approach is that no one on the planet can muster more brute force computation of the required type than the people who are invested in the family of chains that all are secured by that one same mass of brute force computation.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 07:53:29 PM

If your argument is that proof of work is a broken system, arguing in favour of more proof of work blockchains is idiotic.

-MarkM-


But yet you want people to only invest in Bitcoin & Litecoin, just because it has more miners on it to protect their broken system, that makes no sense. This is nothing else but a turf war, end of story.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 07:57:42 PM

If your argument is that proof of work is a broken system, arguing in favour of more proof of work blockchains is idiotic.

-MarkM-


But yet you want people to only invest in Bitcoin & Litecoin, just because it has more miners on it to protect their broken system, that makes no sense. This is nothing else but a turf war, end of story.



Bullshit.

If you design a better coin, merged mining pools will happily add it to their merge, granting it the same massive security enjoyed by all the merged coins, to the extent that they have enough valid useful improvements to get added to the merge.

Even with only 8 coins so far merged, two of them have not yet convinced most miners to add them to their merge. If Aurora was a good idea it likely could have gotten a whole lot more hashing behind it than the two "least popular" of the current eight merged mined coins.

BCX already stated long ago that most of those coins have too much hashing for the propose time travel exploit planned for deployment against Aurora to work against them.

So even only getting as few pools as e.g. IXCoin has merging it, it could have been strong enough to resist that one potential attacker (who is maybe not really much of a threat really except to insanely pathetically weak blockchains that don't even bother to implement merged mining).

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: verdun2003 on March 29, 2014, 07:58:13 PM
It seems you do not like EU on one side and promote an "international" currency that is bitcoin. I can't find a link between communism and Aurora, I can just see free market forces working at its fullest - it's in the hands of the Icelanders to decide wether or not Auroracoin is a scam, pump and dump asset, a currency and what not. Most of the criticism that receives Aurora today remembers me of... bitcoin's early days.

If you follow closely AUR, you'll see that 20 stores already accept it over there, that a car has been sold for AUR and that the USD/AUR price is not the same as the one quoted in cryptsy or mintpal.

Let's wait and see what happens in the coming months, there may be some surprises..


Don't you think that distributing 50% of pre-mined coins among country population is socialistic or even communistic approach ?
I know several examples of similar asset distribution in post-commie countries in the past and every of these approaches was doomed to fail and lead to economic collapse. Most of the public assets ended up in pockets of a few oligarchs.


Not at all - for social/communist states, you need to steal, through force if necessary, from one set of people to transfer it to another set of people. Here, nobody was forced to buy AUR coins, it was people who used their free will to buy AUR coins for whatever reason (getting rich, supporting the cause, you name it) - this is capitalism at its best, where people exchange voluntarily.

You can't compare the AUR experiment to the post soviet era, where crony politicians sold to their friends the remains of state owned companies. Here, anybody could participate in buying AUR, knowing there was a 50% premine.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: Jherek on March 29, 2014, 07:58:20 PM
Here is the thing, Icelanders have really gotten hit by the 2008 crash.  People lost homes and have seen mortgages go UP and principal down (in effect, because mortgages are tied to inflation)  and have had some reality biting them in the ass.

But it wasnt their fault, it was the banking system and some bankers that let them down.

That is why there was a 50% pre-mine.  To give the coins to Icelanders.  Just because they didnt know about protecting block-chains, this was a poor excuse (if true) for a hacker to try to mess up a valid idea, a grand experiment, to try to offer some help to fellow Icelanders.

-MegaHertz

So, instead of promoting bitcoin, the very first and strongest cryptocurrency that is intended to spread financial freedom around the world, someone is trying to push a utopian commie-coin 50% of which was pre-mined.
Instead of supporting international approach, they want to earn points with nationalism based currency. Good luck with that.

I really feel for those naive Icelanders who invested in this pseudo-national coin, that ended up as yet another pump and dump scheme.

It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money. I wish some of you would just visit economy classes once.
Not saying AUR was better - in fact its worse. But Bitcoin is no solution.
Transactions are rather slow (not from client to client but from fiat to btc and from exchange to service)
Neuralgic point are the exchanges, that all together are not hacker proof. It is rather impossible to rob a bank and get away with it today but it is sort of easy to fuck up the bitcoin economy with actions like MtGox did.
Bitcoin is no currency, the hard cap makes it deflationary, but high deflation is as bad as inflation. Money need to be spend, deflation for gold is good, for a currency its poison.
Bitcoin is controlled by mining industry and exchanges, Satoshi's ideal of decentral anonymous money is spoiled.
A good investment coin should have PoS.
A good currency coin - there is none ATM.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 08:01:50 PM
Remember bitcoin is just one of a family of eight coins that all can be secured using the same hashing power.

If speed of transactions was a useful/valuable feature, I0Coin's 1.5 minutes or GeistGeld's what, ten seconds, fifteen seconds, or whatever, would surely be fast enough? Many claimed that GeistGeld is in fact TOO fast.

There is no need to sacrifice security for speed. If you think speed is important, how fast do you need? If 1.5 minutes is enough, use I0Coin. If you need almost-too-fast, use GeistGeld.

The main reason fewer merged mining pools merge I0Coin and/or GeistGeld than merge the slower-blocks coins is that consumers have not actually shown enough preference for higher speed, as indicated by the transaction fee volumes of the higher speed coins.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 08:03:07 PM

Bullshit.

If you design a better coin, merged mining pools will happily add it to their merge, granting it the same massive security enjoyed by all the merged coins, to the extent that they have enough valid useful improvements to get added to the merge.


Look this all goes over my head, I'm not a miner, nor am I a programmer, I barely understand the technological basics of Bitcoin as it is. But as an INVESTOR, stuff like this does not give me confidence in crypto in general. Knowing I could make an investment in a coin that could be wiped out overnight by petulant man children is scary to me, at least with the shitcoins I recognize the risk, can research the origins and make an educated decision on whether I want to put my money there. But stuff like this, all it takes is a day or two of some tribal conflict to make things go sour within hours.

Your crew says I should go invest in Bitcoin or LTC because they are "the first" and "the best", well sorry but if the future of Bitcoin is going to be run by you guys, i'll take the Jamie Dimons of the world over this sociopathic behavior.

This all feels more like a game of Quake with team red v.s team blue playing games with people's money and savings.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 08:06:05 PM

Bullshit.

If you design a better coin, merged mining pools will happily add it to their merge, granting it the same massive security enjoyed by all the merged coins, to the extent that they have enough valid useful improvements to get added to the merge.


Look this all goes over my head, I'm not a miner, nor am I a programmer, I barely understand the technological basics of Bitcoin as it is. But as an INVESTOR, stuff like this does not give me confidence in crypto in general. Knowing I could make an investment in a coin that could be wiped out overnight by petulant man children is scary to me, at least with the shitcoins I recognize the risk, can research the origins and make an educated decision on whether I want to put my money there. But stuff like this, all it takes is a day or two of some tribal conflict to make things go sour within hours.

Your crew says I should go invest in Bitcoin or LTC because they are "the first" and "the best", well sorry but if the future of Bitcoin is going to be run by you guys, i'll take the Jamie Dimons of the world over this sociopathic behavior.

The bitcoin developers are not sociopathic. They added merged mining to bitcoin fergoshsakes, so that altcoins can benefit from the security that bitcoin's massive hashing power can provide.

So far only Namecoin, Devcoin, Groupcoin, I0Coin, IXCoin, CoiLedCoin and GeistGeld have working implementations to actually take advantage of that extremely generous capability provided by the bitcoin developers but that seems mostly to do with scammers preferring not to make secure blockchains.

Be aware though that some bitcoin miners and pools are sociopathic to the extent of not actually merging all the merge-able coins, so even the highest hashrate merged coin (Namecoin) does not have the full hashing power that bitcoin has.

This seems to be partly because some bitcoiners think any co-operating coin is in some way actually a competing coin; somehow a detraction rather than an addition to the family and ecosystem.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Jherek on March 29, 2014, 08:09:13 PM
Remember bitcoin is just one of a family of eight coins that all can be secured using the same hashing power.

If speed of transactions was a useful/valuable feature, I0Coin's 1.5 minutes or GeistGeld's what, ten seconds, fifteen seconds, or whatever, would surely be fast enough? Many claimed that GeistGeld is in fact TOO fast.

There is no need to sacrifice security for speed. If you think speed is important, how fast do you need? If 1.5 minutes is enough, use I0Coin. If you need almost-too-fast, use GeistGeld.

The main reason fewer merged mining pools merge I0Coin and/or GeistGeld than merge the slower-blocks coins is that consumers have not actually shown enough preference for higher speed, as indicated by the transaction fee volumes of the higher speed coins.

-MarkM-


The most significant spot of why proof of work is broken lays in all coins from bitcoin over litecoin to the shittiest shitcoin. All of them have much value for the few that been in early enough but it's rather impossible for anyone who came later to earn the same wealth with the same hard work (means investing in miners) as for these that been in 3 months earlier. Difficulty makes it impossible for later people to get equal with early adopters.
That, in fact makes the whole system a total failure for everyone who was "not on the train" early enough.
Money should give equal possibilities for everyone who joins in with their hard work at any time. Crypto coins dont. Since the shitcoin flood, you will be too late already 3 days after launch.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 08:09:50 PM

The bitcoin developers are not sociopathic. They added merged mining to bitcoin fergoshsakes, so that altcoins can benefit from the security that bitcoin's massive hashing power can provide.

So far only Namecoin, Devcoin, Groupcoin, I0Coin, IXCoin, CoiLedCoin and GeistGeld have working implementations to actually take advantage of that extremely generous capability provided by the bitcoin developers but that seems mostly to do with scammers preferring not to make secure blockchains.

-MarkM-


This is all the same logic blackhat hackers use to justify their behaviors

"Well if you're security wasn't so poor, we wouldn't have stolen from you"

I guess if I leave my car unlocked I deserve to have things stolen from me. Gotcha.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: safeminer on March 29, 2014, 08:10:52 PM
No here, suck on my bitcoin tit and buy it for a grand.

did you know bitcoin tits are divisible?  the smallest divisible unit is called an "A-cup".



He probably knows just fine, but is bummed out that he is not a bitcoin millionaire, and now wants to convince the whole world that [copy]coin so much better and they should buy that. Which is never happening.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 08:11:46 PM

The most significant spot of why proof of work is broken lays in all coins from bitcoin over litecoin to the shittiest shitcoin. All of them have much value for the few that been in early enough but it's rather impossible for anyone who came later to earn the same wealth with the same hard work (means investing in miners) as for these that been in 3 months earlier. Difficulty makes it impossible for later people to get equal with early adopters.
That, in fact makes the whole system a total failure for everyone who was "not on the train" early enough.
Money should give equal possibilities for everyone who joins in with their hard work at any time. Crypto coins dont. Since the shitcoin flood, you will be too late already 3 days after launch.

Exactly, which is why more and more people are viewing Bitcoin as a commodity, not a currency. If it were a true currency, I shouldn't have to spend 50 grand in mining hardware and electricity just to get as many coins as what someone mined on their $300 computer 3 years ago.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: zeroday on March 29, 2014, 08:13:04 PM
I suppose this is the blueprint of Aurora coin

GUIDE: HOW TO SAVE FINANCIALLY TROUBLED COUNTRIES !!! (https://bitcointa.lk/threads/operation-shitcoin-cleanout-and-clean-up-has-begun.284579/#post-5505755)



Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 29, 2014, 08:13:09 PM
If you design a better coin, merged mining pools will happily add it to their merge, granting it the same massive security enjoyed by all the merged coins, to the extent that they have enough valid useful improvements to get added to the merge.

I do agree that new PoW coins are especially vulnerable to be targeted for a variety of attacks.  KGW itself was an attempt at closing one of those issues.  

For any new coins, and even for existing coins, I'm thinking of moving over to PoS personally.. i just don't feel safe with PoW @ low hashing powers.  Merging mining is another great idea, which any new coin needs to consider.

However, I also wouldn't consider it an impossibility to fix this in SW with existing PoW.  It may be a workaround upon a workaround, but gut feel anything is solvable in software.. nothing is impossible to fix.




Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 08:13:13 PM
Mining should not be profitable except for industries located where electricity is cheap, and even then only if they use the best most efficient mining gear.

Hashing is a commodity, it is designed to find the lowest possible price, the lowest possible wages for its workers, the cheapest most efficient circuits and electrical generators.

Working for a mining corporation is unlikely to be more profitable than working for an automobile manufacturer or any other large scale mass production industry.

For individuals there is likely better opportunity in becoming a unique individual with unique skills and/or services to offer than in becoming yet another generic replaceable unskilled plugger in of machines-that-make-stuff.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Jherek on March 29, 2014, 08:15:10 PM

The bitcoin developers are not sociopathic. They added merged mining to bitcoin fergoshsakes, so that altcoins can benefit from the security that bitcoin's massive hashing power can provide.

So far only Namecoin, Devcoin, Groupcoin, I0Coin, IXCoin, CoiLedCoin and GeistGeld have working implementations to actually take advantage of that extremely generous capability provided by the bitcoin developers but that seems mostly to do with scammers preferring not to make secure blockchains.

-MarkM-


This is all the same logic blackhat hackers use to justify their behaviors

"Well if you're security wasn't so poor, we wouldn't have stolen from you"

I guess if I leave my car unlocked I deserve to have things stolen from me. Gotcha.

Sadly, yes.

I mean, if some hackers can do it, what can big guys cause?

Everything that is possible WILL be done. That's why blackhat hackers do a serious job. If its not some stereotype blackhat hacker, then there will be state agencies doing it. If it is possible to fuck up bitcoin for instance, NSA for instance much likely has the power to do so. So, better some blackhats fuck you up and force you to fix your weak spots than some gov does it when it really thinks it has to.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 08:16:14 PM
If you design a better coin, merged mining pools will happily add it to their merge, granting it the same massive security enjoyed by all the merged coins, to the extent that they have enough valid useful improvements to get added to the merge.

I do agree that new PoW coins are especially vulnerable to be targeted for a variety of attacks.  KGW itself was an attempt at closing one of those issues.  

For any new coins, and even for existing coins, I'm thinking of moving over to PoS personally.. i just don't feel safe with PoW @ low hashing powers.  Merging mining is another great idea, which any new coin needs to consider.

However, I also wouldn't consider it an impossibility to fix this in SW with existing PoW.  It may be a workaround upon a workaround, but gut feel anything is solvable in software.. nothing is impossible to fix.


You can simply make a proof of stake coin or a Ripple clone or a NXT clone or whatever and issue in its first block(s) all the coins the Aurora chain shows the ownership of, or issue the coins onto Ripple or other "issue custom tokens" system similarly. So yes it is fixable, but in fixing it you might as well only issue to Icelanders, the whole garbage of having 50% go to foreigners is pointless wastefulness.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 08:18:07 PM
So, better some blackhats fuck you up and force you to fix your weak spots than some gov does it when it really thinks it has to.

Sorry but I don't believe in this logic. You can't go before a court of law and declare, "Your honor, I am entitled to this stolen property because John Doe left their front door unlocked", it doesn't excuse the criminal behavior in itself.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 08:20:17 PM
So, better some blackhats fuck you up and force you to fix your weak spots than some gov does it when it really thinks it has to.

Sorry but I don't believe in this logic. You can't go before a court of law and declare, "Your honor, I am entitled to this stolen property because John Doe left their front door unlocked", it doesn't excuse the criminal behavior in itself.

The whole point of the proof of work system is precisely to prevent judges arbitrating who owns what.

That who-ever has the most hash power aribtrates is exactly the entire point.

If you want judges in charge just use Open Transactions or MySQL or whatever for your ledger. Then it can be changed by court order no problem.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: ZeroBarrier on March 29, 2014, 08:20:24 PM
This is all the same logic blackhat hackers use to justify their behaviors

"Well if you're security wasn't so poor, we wouldn't have stolen from you"

I guess if I leave my car unlocked I deserve to have things stolen from me. Gotcha.

No, you don't deserve to have things stolen from you; but you also can't act like it wasn't your fault for leaving it unlocked in the first place. The blame rests on both shoulders, and to think that it's only the person doing the stealing's fault is just plain idiotic.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 29, 2014, 08:21:01 PM
You can simply make a proof of stake coin or a Ripple clone or a NXT clone or whatever and issue in its first block(s) all the coins the Aurora chain shows the ownership of, or issue the coins onto Ripple or other "issue custom tokens" system similarly. So yes it is fixable, but in fixing it you mgiht as well only issue to Icelanders, the whole garbage of having 50% go to foreigners is pointless wastefulness.

Yes.. i do agree with that.  

I'm not sure what value there was letting foreigners mine the other 50%, other than perhaps some initial support from mining community and making some headlines.  (but hey i ain't complaining.. i made a lot off mining it and sold at 150..)

Anyways should the developer chose to, he can always hard fork again to make it 100% PoS, and still use existing blockchain.  Would have to distribute a versioned client, but it's always possible to go that direction...

There's multiple options to pursue... not the end of the world for this coin, in any case.  Too much FUD being thrown around...

In any case, I really wish AUR and the Icelanders luck in this, It's a very important experiment for cryptos, and we should as a community support this effort.  


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 29, 2014, 08:22:04 PM
Don't you think that distributing 50% of pre-mined coins among country population is socialistic or even communistic approach ?
I know several examples of similar asset distribution in post-commie countries in the past and every of these approaches was doomed to fail and lead to economic collapse. Most of the public assets ended up in pockets of a few oligarchs.

That's because they never were in te hands of "the many" in the first place.

Make your mind up - either you want crypto to succeed and gain a foothold or not. Icelanders are being distributed with something that's next to worthless with the prospect that they will "give it value" through gradually increasing adoption by their economy.

It's got nothing to do with "socialism" or any other political philosophy nonsense.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 08:23:47 PM
It is not an important experiment, it is a total scam from the get-go.

A currency needs a secure ledger, so the very first step is to determine whether any ledgers at all can ever be secured and if so how, then having determined the most secure form of ledger start using it to account whatever currency you wish to account.

Cloning a scamcoin is so totally far from that that it is a totally insanely irresponsible thing to do.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: bradmurmz on March 29, 2014, 08:23:56 PM
Wow, there are some real pieces of work here in this thread... If you think Bitcoin is the only crypto of the future, you're delusional. Alt coins help distribute the wealth and help more people to get into the world of crypto-currencies. If you are a large holder of bitcoin and think that you deserve to be filthy rich just because you were lucky enough to hear about it early, then you are no different then the scumbags that currently control the money system. I got into BTC when it was a dollar, and I fully support alternate crypto-currencies. I think its very healthy for Bitcoin as a whole because it just brings more interest into the space. BTW, more coins do not negatively affect the price of BTC, in fact it generally helps because in order to enter the crypto-currency market you generally have to buy BTC first! Just like the dollar gets boosted by being priced in USD... This is the free market at its finest, no longer do we have to rely on central authority scumbags and beg for them to throw us a bone. If there is a community of people who require a currency specific to their needs, one will sprout up from the bottom, and nobody can stop them! It will find a value relative to their productivity and it's acceptance, allowing for the smooth transfer of value with no bottlenecks and would be controllers.  "Alt Coins" will continue to survive/spread/innovate whether you like it or not, and are an important part of the revolution that is P2P money...


Title: Re: delete
Post by: dewdeded on March 29, 2014, 08:24:29 PM
tl;dr

No fork? OP failed again?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 08:25:17 PM

Cloning a scamcoin is so totally far from that that it is a totally insanely irresponsible thing to do.

-MarkM-


Considering most of all these coins are clones of Litecoin can we safely call Litecoin a scamcoin then?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: s1gs3gv on March 29, 2014, 08:25:57 PM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

Quote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL

Price trending to the cost of mining it.

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: dewdeded on March 29, 2014, 08:26:22 PM
PLUS Litecoin team/community claims alot of untrue stuff nowdays.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: s1gs3gv on March 29, 2014, 08:27:32 PM
A currency needs a secure ledger, so the very first step is to determine whether any ledgers at all can ever be secured and if so how, then having determined the most secure form of ledger start using it to account whatever currency you wish to account


MarkM: was there ever a time when the bitcoin block chain was known-vulnerable ?

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 08:27:50 PM

Cloning a scamcoin is so totally far from that that it is a totally insanely irresponsible thing to do.

-MarkM-


Considering most of all these coins are clones of Litecoin can we safely call Litecoin a scamcoin then?

Basically, yes. It was a scam conceived to try to keep buggy-whip makers in business when automobiles were on the horizon.

Even if we get scrypt ASICs out in quantity fast it still might never be secure unless it and DOGE adapt so as to be able to be merged mined together. Otherwise one of the two will almost always have less than half of the scrypt hash-power.

-Markm-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 29, 2014, 08:29:31 PM
It is not an important experiment, it is a total scam from the get-go.

There's a difference between "scam" which implies intent vs. being irresponsible.  You need to make a lot of assumptions to conclude that it's a scam.. and there's not enough evidence of such.

It maybe not the best choice/design decision made at the get-go.. but rarely is anything is launched perfectly: you learn as you go.  This is evident even in bitcoins own history.

So, I would not consider that, "scam from the get-go".


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 08:29:51 PM

Cloning a scamcoin is so totally far from that that it is a totally insanely irresponsible thing to do.

-MarkM-


Considering most of all these coins are clones of Litecoin can we safely call Litecoin a scamcoin then?

Basically, yes. It was a scam conceived to try to keep buggy-whip makers in business when automobiles were on the horizon.

-Markm-


Well at least you are fair, because a lot of posters on here seem to define a scamcoin as anything that wasn't first out the gate to mimic Bitcoin.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 08:33:13 PM
It is not an important experiment, it is a total scam from the get-go.

There's a difference between "scam" which implies intent vs. being irresponsible.

It maybe not the best choice/design decision made at the get-go.. but rarely is anything is launched perfectly: you learn as you go.  This is evident even in bitcoins own history.

So, I would not consider that, "scam from the get-go".

You are not familiar with the history then.

It was known long ago that scrypt was not secure. Better approaches have long been known.

The ONLY reason to deliberately create yet another scamcoin is as a scam. Pretending not to know you are creating a scam is bullshit, it merely is deliberate ignorance pretended by scammers so as to pretend their scamming is not deliberate. They knew well ahead of time that such chains are basically scams, that even the highest hashrate examples are not really secure, that just some stupid meme conjured up more hashpower than Litecoin had almost overnight thus showing even litecoin, far and away the highest hashrate of the lot, was a long long way from having enough hashing power to be secure.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: anyone4u on March 29, 2014, 08:34:41 PM
No here, suck on my bitcoin tit and buy it for a grand.

did you know bitcoin tits are divisible?  the smallest divisible unit is called an "A-cup".

I <3 a cups. No need for big tits


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 08:38:56 PM


The ONLY reason to deliberately create yet another scamcoin is as a scam.

-MarkM-


I think it is just called being human. Why would people leave millions of dollars of Bitcoin lying around on an exchange like Mt Gox for instance? Humans think they are invincible or nothing bad could ever happen to them. Why do you think it is so difficult to force young people to go buy health insurance? Are they trying to scam society by getting by for free or is it because they think they are healthy and won't get majorly sick?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: TheDailyCrypto on March 29, 2014, 08:41:48 PM
Game Over.


I highly advise all exchanges to suspend trading.

There are now multiple forks.

I would also dump while the exchanges are still open if I were you guys.


~BCX~



http://i.imgur.com/UTLE90M.jpg



Moderated to prevent stupidity only. Differing opinions will not be removed.

http://thedailycrypto.com/post/auroracoin-is-done-for/

Auroracoin is fine.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 29, 2014, 08:43:11 PM
The Bitcoin mafia will never let any altcoin succeed.

Let's brainwash them with naivettes like "Do you want NSA Coin, Fed Coin, fiat/goverment money?" No here, suck on my bitcoin tit and buy it for a grand. The others are not secure. If they were to become secure one day, we will make sure to unsecure it.

There is a reason Satoshi left the scene. He didn't want mining companies to produce bitcoins so laymen buy it like they buy gold. The idea was for a decentralized p2p currency. He saw greedy maggots take over in the name of being anti-establishment.

Maybe Dogecoin does need to win out.

I think AUR was the biggest premine in history of ALT's and a new low for clone coins with it's scammy citizens coins angle..
So yeah lets MAFIA this bitch up lol
congrats to the forkerer :)
do more scummy shit coin scams please

Great News and Great day :)

Whiny brats cry abut their scam being taken down.. figures ahaha


oh and hey dicks.. remember posting about 50 times in the last week "How many coins have you guys taken down ? ..your all talk"
eat it scammers :)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: anyone4u on March 29, 2014, 08:44:57 PM
hmm so how much hash did this person just dump on this coin ?

what was the hash before the jump to 32GH? .... so this attack had to be over 16GH min... or could have been way more?  Who has that much scrypt hash already? it essential means most scrypt coins are totally vulnerable really. That is rather scary. Only doge and ltc and perhaps a few others are safe.

If this coin had been POW+POS would that have stopped this attack?

More than the total. Narrowing it down will be hard though unless you guys track it down which will be hard

You're all underestimating how many people have farms large enough to do it. Lots of money has been made by a lot of people

so 1.2 GH to over 32GH?  are we saying then someone has 30GH of scrypt available to them? i can not bare to believe there are many people with that much hash. It must be an alliance of some kind. A single farm of 30GH is kind of HUGE.  Must be a GIANT botnet or collaboration. Maybe knc testing out the new super titans?  everyone just got upgraded from 250MH to 1GH each perhaps.
whyle the

http://wafflepool.com/miner/14t8yB3PDGfZT3VppxMY4J9xiBaXUcZvKp
3/27 look @ btc payouts


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 29, 2014, 08:45:13 PM
It was known long ago that scrypt was not secure. Better approaches have long been known.

That's simply an incorrect statement.. scrypt algo itself is just fine.  Maybe you mean there's not enough hash power to secure it.. which I will also have to disagree with.

Quote
The ONLY reason to deliberately create yet another scamcoin is as a scam. Pretending not to know you are creating a scam is bullshit

Sorry, but .. logical leap. (http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1211705)



Title: Re: delete
Post by: dewdeded on March 29, 2014, 08:46:56 PM
Are you defending LTC?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Jherek on March 29, 2014, 08:52:20 PM
So, better some blackhats fuck you up and force you to fix your weak spots than some gov does it when it really thinks it has to.

Sorry but I don't believe in this logic. You can't go before a court of law and declare, "Your honor, I am entitled to this stolen property because John Doe left their front door unlocked", it doesn't excuse the criminal behavior in itself.

It doesnt excuse criminal behaviour. But the latest events have shown, that your gov. will not obey their own laws and use criminal behaviour to get what they want.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Jherek on March 29, 2014, 08:56:17 PM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

Quote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL

Price trending to the cost of mining it.

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.

Frystikken is an idiot.

But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment.
Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: molecular on March 29, 2014, 09:00:29 PM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

lol. that guy cracks me up!


Title: Re: delete
Post by: stormia on March 29, 2014, 09:06:26 PM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

Quote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL

Price trending to the cost of mining it.

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.

Frystikken is an idiot.

But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment.
Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money.

So gold is a ponzi scheme? I'm confused. I'm also confused about what happened here. Auroracoin is dead now? Was it actually a scam or did somebody just destroy it for kicks and giggles or for their own personal motives? Also, how was it so easy to kill the coin? Doesn't this mean every other low hashrate scrypt coin is vulnerable? What about scrypt-N and PoS coins? Thanks in advance for helpful replies, I'm just looking for information and trying to understand how things are shaping up in this dark world of cryptocurrencies.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: cypherdoc on March 29, 2014, 09:11:46 PM
oh man, this takes me back to the days when bcx was threatening to 51 litecoin.  good times.

it takes me back to when BCX, the man, was destroying SolidCoin.  that thing had to go too.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 09:12:19 PM
Any CPU, GPU or even FPGA coin is insanely vulnerable.

Even with scrypt ASICs the mentality of scrypt miners might be such that no scrypt coin will be secure, since scrypt miners seem mostly to be scammers looking not to secure any blockchains but, rather, to jump around in a kind of bait-and-switch scam, fooling investors into imagining this that or the other scrypt coin is secure (due to its seeming to have hashing power securing it) while really none of that hashing power actually intends to secure the chain at all, rather it is basically eliciting bribes "how much will you pay me to abandon this chain and go mine your latest scam" kind of thing...

Maybe though if litecoin and DOGE adapt so as to be able to be merged together, one or both might manage to retain enough of the scrypt hashing power to eventually become secure?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: barwizi on March 29, 2014, 09:14:02 PM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

Quote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL

Price trending to the cost of mining it.

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.

Frystikken is an idiot.

But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment.
Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money.

let me walk you through economics 101

1) what is money?
2) how do we define the value of money
3) why are Dollars not money?
4) why is bitcoin a better expression of value than dollars or any other gov controlled fiat currency?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 29, 2014, 09:20:46 PM
So, better some blackhats fuck you up and force you to fix your weak spots than some gov does it when it really thinks it has to.

Sorry but I don't believe in this logic. You can't go before a court of law and declare, "Your honor, I am entitled to this stolen property because John Doe left their front door unlocked", it doesn't excuse the criminal behavior in itself.

It doesnt excuse criminal behaviour. But the latest events have shown, that your gov. will not obey their own laws and use criminal behaviour to get what they want.

I heard back in about 2007 a Black Hat hackers conference in L.A. USA a seminar about how to hack routers using WEP for internet access..
Put on by the FBI lol
They posted a video presentation and showed how it was done and then provided links to the tools for reference.

Anyway is that a crime ?

Show me the section of criminal code corresponding to the country holding the forked block chain that shows forking is illegal.

Put up or shut up ? lol ..i'm going to sit here and wait holding my breath, i know any second you will have proof  ::)

edit:
PS: Ponzi schemes ARE illegal ask Berni Madoff

and by the way consider your ass owned ;)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: r3wt on March 29, 2014, 09:22:22 PM
So, better some blackhats fuck you up and force you to fix your weak spots than some gov does it when it really thinks it has to.

Sorry but I don't believe in this logic. You can't go before a court of law and declare, "Your honor, I am entitled to this stolen property because John Doe left their front door unlocked", it doesn't excuse the criminal behavior in itself.

It doesnt excuse criminal behaviour. But the latest events have shown, that your gov. will not obey their own laws and use criminal behaviour to get what they want.

I heard back in about 2007 a Black Hat hackers conference in L.A. USA a seminar about how to hack routers using WEP for internet access..
Put on by the FBI lol
They posted a video presentation and showe how it was done and then provided links to the tools for reference.

Anyway is that a crime ?

Show me the section of criminal code corresponding to the country holding the forked block chain that shows forking is illegal.

Put up or shut up ? lol ..i'm going to sit here and wait holding my breath, i know any second you will have proof  ::)

they built their entire house of cards on this one single argument. of course you'll get no response, but you're correct.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: BohemianStalker on March 29, 2014, 09:25:06 PM
So, better some blackhats fuck you up and force you to fix your weak spots than some gov does it when it really thinks it has to.

Sorry but I don't believe in this logic. You can't go before a court of law and declare, "Your honor, I am entitled to this stolen property because John Doe left their front door unlocked", it doesn't excuse the criminal behavior in itself.

It doesnt excuse criminal behaviour. But the latest events have shown, that your gov. will not obey their own laws and use criminal behaviour to get what they want.

I heard back in about 2007 a Black Hat hackers conference in L.A. USA a seminar about how to hack routers using WEP for internet access..
Put on by the FBI lol
They posted a video presentation and showed how it was done and then provided links to the tools for reference.

Anyway is that a crime ?

Show me the section of criminal code corresponding to the country holding the forked block chain that shows forking is illegal.

Put up or shut up ? lol ..i'm going to sit here and wait holding my breath, i know any second you will have proof  ::)

edit:
PS: Ponzi schemes ARE illegal ask Berni Madoff

and by the way consider your ass owned ;)

Spoetnik I wish you would have invested in AUR when I told you so. YOu might have been on different side of fence now.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 29, 2014, 09:51:32 PM

Show me the section of criminal code corresponding to the country holding the forked block chain that shows forking is illegal.


Show me the section of criminal code that making a lazy clone coin and trying to profit it off it is criminal either but it doesn't stop you all from calling them scammers or crooks.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 29, 2014, 09:52:02 PM
Understanding the actual issue with 51% attacks of PoW: The problem/solution is not "how much hash power the network has"...  But rather it is "how decentralized is the hash power".  Even if a network had 100 Th/s nethash.. if that's all controlled by 1 body/pool.. you are screwed anyways.  

So this has nothing to do with one algo or another, but rather how many independent solo mining operations are happening around the world that has adopted one protocol over another.  Bitcoins history itself was close at one point to having all the hash power centralized.  And through self moderation eliminated the risk.

The reason why people like GPU/and Scrypt (at least before these next round of ASICs is coming out) for the last year, is that it seemed harder to centralize Scrypt, than SHA256 ASIC farms.  Because of the decentralized nature of GPUs distributions.. and that theory is absolutely still true today..(ahead of ASICs that are just about to come out for Scrypt).

GPUs have limited supply, and more more distributed than any other type of processing available, whether it be ASIC or CPUs...

Please do not mistaken total nethash rate with distributed nethash rate.  Those are related, but different issues.

PoW part of bitcoin is just a lottery system.. so the question of security is not how much hash power any protocol can do.. but rather how decentralized a particular a PoW technology/algo.  In that sense GPUs will always win out (at least today), in terms of decentralization.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: stormia on March 29, 2014, 10:01:42 PM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

Quote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL

Price trending to the cost of mining it.

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.

Frystikken is an idiot.

But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment.
Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money.

So gold is a ponzi scheme? I'm confused. I'm also confused about what happened here. Auroracoin is dead now? Was it actually a scam or did somebody just destroy it for kicks and giggles or for their own personal motives? Also, how was it so easy to kill the coin? Doesn't this mean every other low hashrate scrypt coin is vulnerable? What about scrypt-N and PoS coins? Thanks in advance for helpful replies, I'm just looking for information and trying to understand how things are shaping up in this dark world of cryptocurrencies.

Reposting, hoping for a reply.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 10:14:49 PM
Understanding the actual issue with 51% attacks of PoW: The problem/solution is not "how much hash power the network has"...  But rather it is "how decentralized is the hash power".  Even if a network had 100 Th/s nethash.. if that's all controlled by 1 body/pool.. you are screwed anyways.  

So this has nothing to do with one algo or another, but rather how many independent solo mining operations are happening around the world that has adopted one protocol over another.  Bitcoins history itself was close at one point to having all the hash power centralized.  And through self moderation eliminated the risk.

The reason why people like GPU/and Scrypt (at least before these next round of ASICs is coming out) for the last year, is that it seemed harder to centralize Scrypt, than SHA256 ASIC farms.  Because of the decentralized nature of GPUs distributions.. and that theory is absolutely still true today..(ahead of ASICs that are just about to come out for Scrypt).

GPUs have limited supply, and more more distributed than any other type of processing available, whether it be ASIC or CPUs...

Please do not mistaken total nethash rate with distributed nethash rate.  Those are related, but different issues.

PoW part of bitcoin is just a lottery system.. so the question of security is not how much hash power any protocol can do.. but rather how decentralized a particular a PoW technology/algo.  In that sense GPUs will always win out (at least today), in terms of decentralization.

How many GPUs do you need to make solo mining of e.g. litecoin or DOGE worthwhile?

As everyone who has not enough tends to join a centralised pool.

So thousands of people who all have too few GPUs to feel solo mining to be worthwhile end up all flocking to a very few pools, often not even seeming to care that the pool they chose has dangerously high percentage of the hash power.

Do more GPU miners solo mine than ASIC miners who solo mine?

Maybe another way to compare would be how many litecoin p2pool nodes are there and how many bitcoin p2pool nodes are there?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: grizmoblust on March 29, 2014, 10:17:18 PM
You shouldve add PoS to your coin to prevent 51 percent attack.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: s1gs3gv on March 29, 2014, 11:01:29 PM
The reason why people like GPU/and Scrypt (at least before these next round of ASICs is coming out) for the last year, is that it seemed harder to centralize Scrypt, than SHA256 ASIC farms.  Because of the decentralized nature of GPUs distributions.. and that theory is absolutely still true today..(ahead of ASICs that are just about to come out for Scrypt).

In all discussions of GPUs/ASICS/decentralization remember that in a year or two ASICS will be the price of GPUS and everybody will have a few in their garage/basement.

GPUs will be the CPUs, ASICS will be the GPUs and quantum computing will solve the hard crypto-algo problems and render it all a pile of dodo overnight.

Use of malicious negative trust to suppress free speech brings discredit to the bitcoin community


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 29, 2014, 11:09:02 PM
So, better some blackhats fuck you up and force you to fix your weak spots than some gov does it when it really thinks it has to.

Sorry but I don't believe in this logic. You can't go before a court of law and declare, "Your honor, I am entitled to this stolen property because John Doe left their front door unlocked", it doesn't excuse the criminal behavior in itself.

It doesnt excuse criminal behaviour. But the latest events have shown, that your gov. will not obey their own laws and use criminal behaviour to get what they want.

I heard back in about 2007 a Black Hat hackers conference in L.A. USA a seminar about how to hack routers using WEP for internet access..
Put on by the FBI lol
They posted a video presentation and showed how it was done and then provided links to the tools for reference.

Anyway is that a crime ?

Show me the section of criminal code corresponding to the country holding the forked block chain that shows forking is illegal.

Put up or shut up ? lol ..i'm going to sit here and wait holding my breath, i know any second you will have proof  ::)

edit:
PS: Ponzi schemes ARE illegal ask Berni Madoff

and by the way consider your ass owned ;)

Spoetnik I wish you would have invested in AUR when I told you so. YOu might have been on different side of fence now.

In all honesty i would feel the same.. facts are facts.
I have trashed on CENT from day one and also traded it a lot too making some good money as i stated on IRC etc many times.
I have also repeatedly mentioned that i think once a coin gets thrown up on all the exchanges it's to late too try and stop it and it's fair game.
BUT, at what point to we try and stop some of these from getting supported ? (BEFORE they go on exchanges)

but ya you did give me a tip and had my finances not been tied up and on the tight side these days i might have acted on it.
I try though who else can say that ? How many guys have given in completely to supporting and defending any and all coins no matter what ?

It was the same routine for Max coin with me i knew damn well there was no conceivable way in hell i could stop it nor did i have the algo data.. yet.
It was leaked the day before launch pretty much.. when i posted online asap that it was a useless copy and paste clone.
Guys took Quark and removed the other algo's and more specifically it was copied from Blake coin. I posted the hashing algo specs etc on IRC
i traced back to Quark and it was literally copied and pasted (not rewritten) and i could show the exact Quark build it was taken from easily.
BUT.. who else cared ? i didn't see one guy make a comment in any way shape or form about all that on any of the dozen sites i was watching
 i was the only one and as usual i feel like pretty much the only guy standing by myself keeping these deceitful corrupt greedy scammers
accountable to their stunts and games and bs antics they pull all day every day.
The rest of you mostly scream "Take My Money" and brag about dem Lambo'z and fumble over each other double clicking wallet or miner .exe to flash mine asap.
and often get infected with malware because of it too. hahaaa

There is a clear distinction between a guy who mined some Doge to make some money vs the Doge tards that have roamed across the web
spamming every site they can posting nonsense, wild claims luring in people with outright false information usually to prop up the bags their holding.
This has become an epidemic across the globe i have seen thee scummy dirt bags on all kinds of web sites NOT crypto related in anyway.
The assertion that Doge coin is coin #3 of the Big three is spitting on every coin devs (REAL coin DEV's) face around the world that bent over backwards working on legit coins.
And we can say, oh well, uhh uhh, but but and mine these scams but sooner or later its going to catch up with us and i think it already has..
You guys will vanish accepting no responsibility at all for any of it.. just pass that buck as hard and as fast as you all can.

In the mean time we have rewarded the scammy asshole that made Doge etc and motivated them to make more, LOTS more !
(they seen their clone scam reach new levels of popularity i guarantee they did not expect) =  bad behavior rewarded in a pay out equivalent to winning the lottery.
Hand out a shit loads of free crack to the homeless and watch as they come back.. with a another scam coin and another and another.. it's ridiculous bs.

What is sad is i think i have yet AGAIN posted this info because of a response showing some of you still don't get it and must not have heard me say it all last time lol
And is what i just said crazy ? or is it all rather rational thinking and stuff that *should go with out saying ?
Why do i have to explain to kids why they shouldn't eat cake for breakfast lunch and dinner every day ? are we *overall mostly THAT dumb here ? really ?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: googlemaster1 on March 29, 2014, 11:23:37 PM
as far I remeber there was a peak of about 50Ghs at the beginning of march...



they should have airdropped some video cards

Hahahahahaah THIS.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: r0ach on March 29, 2014, 11:32:11 PM
Was that guy really trying to claim Dogecoin was created as a way to extract wealth from people's pockets?  I mined it on day 1 and literally nobody was interested in mining it, so the difficulty was absolutely nothing.  You'd think a "scam" designed to make as much money as possible would have a lot of hash power on it.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: peterlustig on March 29, 2014, 11:35:22 PM
Any CPU, GPU or even FPGA coin is insanely vulnerable.

Even with scrypt ASICs the mentality of scrypt miners might be such that no scrypt coin will be secure, since scrypt miners seem mostly to be scammers looking not to secure any blockchains but, rather, to jump around in a kind of bait-and-switch scam, fooling investors into imagining this that or the other scrypt coin is secure (due to its seeming to have hashing power securing it) while really none of that hashing power actually intends to secure the chain at all, rather it is basically eliciting bribes "how much will you pay me to abandon this chain and go mine your latest scam" kind of thing...

Maybe though if litecoin and DOGE adapt so as to be able to be merged together, one or both might manage to retain enough of the scrypt hashing power to eventually become secure?

-MarkM-

Every bigger government agency or bank is able to destroy Bitcoin by building a shitton of ASICs.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Lloydie on March 29, 2014, 11:38:10 PM
May BCX's children be born without assholes.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: dewdeded on March 29, 2014, 11:46:57 PM
I have a question. Some handicaped like this, does he feal embarassed after failing so hard once again or does he not realise this, in his dream world?

I am sorry for his family, who have to deal with him in RL.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CatalystCoin on March 29, 2014, 11:48:25 PM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

Quote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL

Price trending to the cost of mining it.

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.

Frystikken is an idiot.

But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment.
Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money.

So gold is a ponzi scheme? I'm confused. I'm also confused about what happened here. Auroracoin is dead now? Was it actually a scam or did somebody just destroy it for kicks and giggles or for their own personal motives? Also, how was it so easy to kill the coin? Doesn't this mean every other low hashrate scrypt coin is vulnerable? What about scrypt-N and PoS coins? Thanks in advance for helpful replies, I'm just looking for information and trying to understand how things are shaping up in this dark world of cryptocurrencies.

Since when was there a hard cap on gold?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 29, 2014, 11:55:13 PM
Any CPU, GPU or even FPGA coin is insanely vulnerable.

Even with scrypt ASICs the mentality of scrypt miners might be such that no scrypt coin will be secure, since scrypt miners seem mostly to be scammers looking not to secure any blockchains but, rather, to jump around in a kind of bait-and-switch scam, fooling investors into imagining this that or the other scrypt coin is secure (due to its seeming to have hashing power securing it) while really none of that hashing power actually intends to secure the chain at all, rather it is basically eliciting bribes "how much will you pay me to abandon this chain and go mine your latest scam" kind of thing...

Maybe though if litecoin and DOGE adapt so as to be able to be merged together, one or both might manage to retain enough of the scrypt hashing power to eventually become secure?

-MarkM-

Every bigger government agency or bank is able to destroy Bitcoin by building a shitton of ASICs.

Or any other coin, yes, even the purportedly ASIC-proof ones.

That is why it is so important to focus, to get such a massive amount of ASICs deployed that even a government would find it hard to deploy enough to attack it.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Zimbabwecoin on March 30, 2014, 12:04:30 AM
I am not sure about this, "Every bigger government agency or bank is able to destroy Bitcoin by building a shitton of ASICs." but, I would think that the Chinese government could pull it off easily.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 30, 2014, 12:24:23 AM
How many GPUs do you need to make solo mining of e.g. litecoin or DOGE worthwhile?

Sorry to clarify, when i say solo mining, i mean mining on an independent node.  Not necessarily literally solo mining.

So each pool would count as a separate "solo" node.  And thus the more distributed the pools are, the better protection there is.  And the more choice people have to distribute across these pools, instead of large ASIC farming operations (which we know exists), the better.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 12:26:27 AM
That is what p2pool is for.

Hence the wondering which coins have the most p2pool nodes running.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 30, 2014, 12:28:41 AM
Every bigger government agency or bank is able to destroy Bitcoin by building a shitton of ASICs.

Ultimately we will be constrained and limited by silicon wafer production and manufacturing capacity (TSMC/IBM/That AMD spinoff).  

However, the difference between SHA2 vs SCRYPT is that per square mm, you can produce WAY more hash power on SHA2 than on scrypt (or scrypt N).  

Which is why in theory it will be MUCH harder to do this with SCRYPT than on SHA2... of course someone would have to do a real back of the envelope calculation on what the wafer capacity is per year to really say for sure..



Title: Re: delete
Post by: marcelus on March 30, 2014, 12:28:50 AM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

Quote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL

Price trending to the cost of mining it.

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.

Frystikken is an idiot.

But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment.
Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money.

So gold is a ponzi scheme? I'm confused. I'm also confused about what happened here. Auroracoin is dead now? Was it actually a scam or did somebody just destroy it for kicks and giggles or for their own personal motives? Also, how was it so easy to kill the coin? Doesn't this mean every other low hashrate scrypt coin is vulnerable? What about scrypt-N and PoS coins? Thanks in advance for helpful replies, I'm just looking for information and trying to understand how things are shaping up in this dark world of cryptocurrencies.

Since when was there a hard cap on gold?

A hard cap coin could never be a currency back in the day when we didn't have blockchains and programmable money. But now we do.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: cryptohunter on March 30, 2014, 12:35:51 AM
I am not sure about this, "Every bigger government agency or bank is able to destroy Bitcoin by building a shitton of ASICs." but, I would think that the Chinese government could pull it off easily.

What about pow/pos coins simply having more hash is not enough to destroy the coin then is it?  Is the old chestnut that you need 51% of the coins also to attack it true?  i read something on another thread by someone who seemed to know what he was talking about saying that you do not need 51% of the coins at all to attack a pow+pos coin?

I know pos coins bring their own set of issues but do they add a layer of protection or not? 

How many ways are there to attack the chain... 51% forcing a fork of the chain,  timewarp ?,  what other weaknesses do these coins have?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: gerdab on March 30, 2014, 12:48:12 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Omnivion on March 30, 2014, 01:38:35 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 30, 2014, 01:55:43 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.

lol hilarious you are delusional.. your saying a coin that had pretty much the largest premine in all of Altcoin history "will be just fine" ?
in other words a lot of people will see the scam as what it is.. it's going no where. besides why should i care about supporting a premined clone for Iceland ?
coins get posted om exchanges the price starts out high then it tanks and mining profitability dies off and people wander away.

sorry but most of you don't know how this all works and have no clue what patterns repeat endlessly..
a lot of potential my god damn ass lol
gimme a break

dumb little contrarians deserve to lose their money and don't i say i never warned you gullible scammer puppets..

reality is far more profitable then bs propaganda ;)

so you registered 4 days ago and have made 4 comments ? hmmmm
new user scam pumper / ponzi defender ? shell account puppet no. 837465665628478278472874872487 here at Bitcointalk forums lol


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Omnivion on March 30, 2014, 02:04:32 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.

lol hilarious you are delusional.. your saying a coin that had pretty much the largest premine in all of Altcoin history "will be just fine" ?
in other words a lot of people will see the scam as what it is.. it's going no where. besides why should i care about supporting a premined clone for Iceland ?
coins get posted om exchanges the price starts out high then it tanks and mining profitability dies off and people wander away.

sorry but most of you don't know how this all works and have no clue what patterns repeat endlessly..
a lot of potential my god damn ass lol
gimme a break

dumb little contrarians deserve to lose their money and don't i say i never warned you gullible scammer puppets..

reality is far more profitable then bs propaganda ;)

so you registered 4 days ago and have made 4 comments ? hmmmm
new user scam pumper / ponzi defender ? shell account puppet no. 837465665628478278472874872487 here at Bitcointalk forums lol

I'm not sure this is even worth replying to.

Everyone was told it was 50% premine up front, that's the entire point of the coin.  I don't think you know what the word "scam" means.  It's only a scam if the developer is stealing coins from the premines, and most signs point to that not having happened to this point.  As it is, it's perfectly clear how the coin is set up.

No one is being forced to spend any money buying coins or mining this currency.  No one is forced to speculate, though they may choose to if they would like.  Personally, while it's possible the coin declines in value, as I said, I think the potential is worth it.  If you don't, then don't touch it, simple as that.

But like I said, this thread is one giant FUD-filled derail, so continue to so if you'd like.

So like I said, at this point in time, the coin is fine.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: andyatcrux on March 30, 2014, 02:07:37 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.

lol hilarious you are delusional.. your saying a coin that had pretty much the largest premine in all of Altcoin history "will be just fine" ?
in other words a lot of people will see the scam as what it is.. it's going no where. besides why should i care about supporting a premined clone for Iceland ?
coins get posted om exchanges the price starts out high then it tanks and mining profitability dies off and people wander away.

sorry but most of you don't know how this all works and have no clue what patterns repeat endlessly..
a lot of potential my god damn ass lol
gimme a break

dumb little contrarians deserve to lose their money and don't i say i never warned you gullible scammer puppets..

reality is far more profitable then bs propaganda ;)

so you registered 4 days ago and have made 4 comments ? hmmmm
new user scam pumper / ponzi defender ? shell account puppet no. 837465665628478278472874872487 here at Bitcointalk forums lol

I am not sure that this is the correct thread for you to be debating the merits/lack thereof of AUR. You can go to BCX's other thread for that. This is about whether or not a 51% attack occurred and was successful. Many pools did seem to be reporting various network diffs and the existing blocks but now all seem to be in sync. I am not sure what the hell that all means but it certainly looks better than it did. Is it possible we are looking at a failed attack? Even so is there actual damage done? Given that BCX has not chimed in I am starting to think there is now no news, but I await a post to see what is claimed next. The coin does appear to be fine right now. I wonder if a black hat tried to attack AUR I wonder if they would be too embarrassed to take credit.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: TheFridge on March 30, 2014, 02:28:40 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.


so you registered 4 days ago and have made 4 comments ? hmmmm
new user scam pumper / ponzi defender ? shell account puppet no. 837465665628478278472874872487 here at Bitcointalk forums lol

Not everybody feels the need to spend their life trolling a shitty message board mate.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoClub on March 30, 2014, 02:39:29 AM
I am not sure about this, "Every bigger government agency or bank is able to destroy Bitcoin by building a shitton of ASICs." but, I would think that the Chinese government could pull it off easily.

What about pow/pos coins simply having more hash is not enough to destroy the coin then is it?  Is the old chestnut that you need 51% of the coins also to attack it true?  i read something on another thread by someone who seemed to know what he was talking about saying that you do not need 51% of the coins at all to attack a pow+pos coin?

I know pos coins bring their own set of issues but do they add a layer of protection or not? 

How many ways are there to attack the chain... 51% forcing a fork of the chain,  timewarp ?,  what other weaknesses do these coins have?

I would be very curious about a clarification on that as well. My understanding is that you do need 51% of the coins, but I am not a coin coder and more of an enthusiast, so I could be wrong about that. The new coins like Blackcoin/Mintcoin seem really interesting if they are ASIC invincible and immune to 51% attacks, once in POS phase like they are now.. while oddly with Blackcoin, also having vast amounts of hashing power through indirect mining. (Not to protect Blackcoin, but the rumor is the beta tests for the Black Hole forked two coins some time ago, Netcoin and Reddcoin? Just what I heard, not positive if this is true or just made up) ...

 On a side note, the BC indirect mining pool did just come online for real this weekend with a lot of hashing power.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Erdogan on March 30, 2014, 02:52:07 AM
Not an expert, but basically chain splits are natural, it is a result of the randomness in the mining process. The main chain is well-defined, it is the longest chain, where the current difficuly is part of the computation of longest. That is where most of the hashing power is.

With a 51% attack you could double spend, that is only if someone received and accepted as payment a transaction on the abandoned chain, and this transaction is not replicated in the winning chain.

A hard fork, where the rules for the coin are changed, also needs the acceptance from the full node users. If the nodes don't follow the fork, it will not succeed.

And it is 51 % of the hashing power, not 51% of the coins.

Basically, a 51% attack is somewhat mythical.

It is quite interesting to see what is the challenges for coins with rather low mining capacity.
For Auroracoin, the most interesting thing is the Airdrop and how this pans out. It could possibly jumpstart the interest for the coin.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 02:56:41 AM
51% attacks are far from mythical.

Luke Jr did it to CoiLedCoin for a few days long long ago, albeit he did not attack in any of the most destructive ways, all he did was ignore transactions and ignore other people's solved blocks so that no transactions could happen and no one other than him minted any coins during the period of his attack.

Once he thought he had "killed" the coin he stopped the attack, and the coin has been chugging along fine ever since, mostly at a nice low difficulty rate because apparently a lot of folks thought he really had "killed" it.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoClub on March 30, 2014, 03:00:05 AM
Not an expert, but basically chain splits are natural, it is a result of the randomness in the mining process. The main chain is well-defined, it is the longest chain, where the current difficuly is part of the computation of longest. That is where most of the hashing power is.

With a 51% attack you could double spend, that is only if someone received and accepted as payment a transaction on the abandoned chain, and this transaction is not replicated in the winning chain.

A hard fork, where the rules for the coin are changed, also needs the acceptance from the full node users. If the nodes don't follow the fork, it will not succeed.

And it is 51 % of the hashing power, not 51% of the coins.

Basically, a 51% attack is somewhat mythical.

It is quite interesting to see what is the challenges for coins with rather low mining capacity.
For Auroracoin, the most interesting thing is the Airdrop and how this pans out. It could possibly jumpstart the interest for the coin.



So what is the hashing power of a hybrid POW/POS that is not in POW phase, it would only have maybe a couple computers trying to dig up the single coin blocks. Basically no hashing power. They all claim you need 51% of the stake (coins). I know for traditional POW coins you need the 51% of the hashing power, POW. Is the stake itself considered hashing power at that point?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 03:02:18 AM

\
So what is the hashing power of a hybrid POW/POS that is not in POW phase, it would only have maybe a couple computers trying to dig up the single coin blocks. Basically no hashing power. They all claim you need 51% of the stake (coins). I know for traditional POW coins you need the 51% of the hashing power, POW. Is the stake itself considered hashing power at that point?

Search for the technical threads on proof of stake, especially the ones in the technical section of the forum.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Erdogan on March 30, 2014, 03:04:40 AM
51% attacks are far from mythical.

Luke Jr did it to CoiLedCoin for a few days long long ago, albeit he did not attack in any of the most destructive ways, all he did was ignore transactions and ignore other people's solved blocks so that no transactions could happen and no one other than him minted any coins during the period of his attack.

Once he thought he had "killed" the coin he stopped the attack, and the coin has been chugging along fine ever since, mostly at a nice low difficulty rate because apparently a lot of folks thought he really had "killed" it.

-MarkM-


Which is the same as the attack didn't succeed. We have had miners ignoring transactions also in bitcoin. The attack you described is an annoyance. You also get this effect if some powerful miner suddenly abandons the chain. Block frequency goes down and stays down for a long time. This is not possible when the difficulty is higher, because removing hashpower renders the mining equipment unproductive. That is a loss for that miner, for no rational reason.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoClub on March 30, 2014, 03:06:05 AM

\
So what is the hashing power of a hybrid POW/POS that is not in POW phase, it would only have maybe a couple computers trying to dig up the single coin blocks. Basically no hashing power. They all claim you need 51% of the stake (coins). I know for traditional POW coins you need the 51% of the hashing power, POW. Is the stake itself considered hashing power at that point?

Search for the technical threads on proof of stake, especially the ones in the technical section of the forum.

-MarkM-


Thanks, will do. Trying to get the best information rather than spin. In your own opinion however, what are the most resistant alts?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 03:10:43 AM
51% attacks are far from mythical.

Luke Jr did it to CoiLedCoin for a few days long long ago, albeit he did not attack in any of the most destructive ways, all he did was ignore transactions and ignore other people's solved blocks so that no transactions could happen and no one other than him minted any coins during the period of his attack.

Once he thought he had "killed" the coin he stopped the attack, and the coin has been chugging along fine ever since, mostly at a nice low difficulty rate because apparently a lot of folks thought he really had "killed" it.

-MarkM-


Which is the same as the attack didn't succeed. We have had miners ignoring transactions also in bitcoin. The attack you described is an annoyance. You also get this effect if some powerful miner suddenly abandons the chain. Block frequency goes down and stays down for a long time. This is not possible when the difficulty is higher, because removing hashpower renders the mining equipment unproductive. That is a loss for that miner, for no rational reason.


The demonstration of attack did succeed.

It was purely Luke Jr's conscience that caused no double spends etc to happen, he simply did not choose to do the most damage he could have done.

Any attack would have succeeded; he chose to demonstrate that fact rather than to actually do the worst damage such an attacker could have done.

Thus is did succeed. It even sicceeded in his actual goal, which was to convince the ignorant masses that the coin was dead.

This in turn has made it one of the fairest coins of all, since it has allowed anyone even with very little hashing power to merged mine some of this coin or even to directly mine it if they for some reason could not be bothered to merge it to get it, though obviously it is better to merged mine so you get your bitcoins and namecoins and groupcoins and Ixcoins and I0coins and devcoins and geistgeld at the same time as your coiledcoins.

This coin is still an excellent opportunity for small miners, as most large public merged mining pools have still not picked it back up so it is still easy for even very small miners to mine it.

He did demonstrate though that a coin should not be traded until it does have massive hashing power. Basically exchanges should not list coins until they have massive massive hashing power. That in turn would lead to miners only spending months mining a coin to get it high enough hashing long enough to make it reasonably secure-looking if they seriously intended to invest heavily into the coin - hopefully to keep on securing it even after it gets onto an exchange.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 03:17:35 AM

\
So what is the hashing power of a hybrid POW/POS that is not in POW phase, it would only have maybe a couple computers trying to dig up the single coin blocks. Basically no hashing power. They all claim you need 51% of the stake (coins). I know for traditional POW coins you need the 51% of the hashing power, POW. Is the stake itself considered hashing power at that point?

Search for the technical threads on proof of stake, especially the ones in the technical section of the forum.

-MarkM-


Thanks, will do. Trying to get the best information rather than spin. In your own opinion however, what are the most resistant alts?

Once upon a time litecoin looked good, but DOGE showed how pathetically vulnerable even the amount of scrypt hashing power litecoin had and DOGE acquired actually is.

Whichever of litecoin or DOGE gets by far the massive majority of the scrypt ASICs securing it might look good someday, but more likely they will keep on undermining each other making both look bad, unless by some miracle they do adjust themselves to be merged mined together using the same hashing-power.

For Proof of stake, it would be nice if someone would actually implement one of the methods the researchers ended up thinking might work, until then proof of stake seems to be mostly based on bullshit and/or the realsolid method of centralisation, but more centralised even that realsolid's solidcoin was.

Thus should probably be rejected for the same reason solidcoin was.

Everything else is too far away from having ASICs, mostly due to deliberately trying not to get ASICs, thus are basically botnet coins, more and more so as more and more botnet zombie machines have some kind of GPU in them. (Motherboards apparently are starting to have GPUs on them by default lately?)

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: dewdeded on March 30, 2014, 03:29:23 AM
I respect your writing skills and fantasy.

Twice the last 3 weeks you convinced me for some time, that you may have some skills and I checked results after all your announcements and talking and acting like "yo i am gonna set 32 instances deflare-clients".

But now you lost me. I put you on ignore.

gg bro

Hope you get well soon. See a doctor.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 03:33:48 AM
You really don't know a thing about time warp attacks, do you?

Think of it like the rocky horror show album being played at 16 rpm or less instead of at 33.3333 rpm; it just will be slower to be noticed / to take effect.

Much less "instantly exciting", but in the long run much the same really.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: dewdeded on March 30, 2014, 03:54:43 AM
How can anyone take his postings seriously?

He already announced twice that the blockchain is forked and it wasn't.
He then announced 3 or 4 blocks, where "Aurora is dead" or "Game over".

Even if he has some crypto coin skills and understanding, his history is full of fail and his behavior is really ill. He should make a therapy against his conduct disorders.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoClub on March 30, 2014, 03:59:38 AM
So... SPA is next? (lol)

Is AUR just a one time thing, assuming whomever is behind it is participating in the thread, or are the country (scam) coins getting taken down one after the other? Any chance Iceland itself is behind it? (No, not an expert with time warps or 51% attacks.. but I find it fascinating)

I personally see Alts as experiments, and sure, most will fail and likely deserve to, but I suspect some will survive.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Jherek on March 30, 2014, 04:29:24 AM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

Quote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL

Price trending to the cost of mining it.

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.

Frystikken is an idiot.

But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment.
Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money.

let me walk you through economics 101

1) what is money?
2) how do we define the value of money
3) why are Dollars not money?
4) why is bitcoin a better expression of value than dollars or any other gov controlled fiat currency?

Maybe you should do your walk alone first. Especially point 1 and 2.
Or in other words: It is idiotic to think, that commodity with increasing difficulty to get it can be stable in a market.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Starlightbreaker on March 30, 2014, 04:31:15 AM
does he feal embarassed after failing so hard once again or does he not realise this, in his dream world?




You're a perfect example of when the ignorant attempt to sound intelligent.

Time Warp attacks are not instant attacks and they do not fork like a 51% attack.

Why don't you send a PM to Nite69, the dev the Auroracoin Team asked for help and ask if he thinks this can be called a failure just yet.


All the AUR devs did was reduce MTS from 11 to 3 and decrease time stamp diff from 120 minutes to 20 minutes which simply increases the time needed to catch up to current time once the TW begins. But I'm sure you have zero understanding of that. If I rained on your only time this year to sound intelligent, I sincerely apologize.

This isn't over, but if the price keeps falling it's going to pass Maxcoin on its way to visit Dogecoin in value.


~BCX~


                                                                                                                             




so when can we expect fireworks from you?

go fuck something up, need some entertainment here.  >:(


Title: Re: delete
Post by: shuaigejc on March 30, 2014, 04:33:09 AM
I still support the landlord way, have a look how development route.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: joiblumen on March 30, 2014, 05:23:31 AM
I think it's sad so many people support what BCX is doing. I hate premined scam coins just as much as the next guy, but BCX has prematurely decided that the 50% can not possibly go to the Icelandic population and a person holding all that money will surely cash it out himself.

There is still no evidence that Baldur is cashing out and we should give him and the project a chance until anything suspicious happens. In the meantime I will continue warning everyone in the media here in Iceland of the dangers of one man keeping such a large portion of the currency and how everything could fail because of a man like BCX.

A possible exploit is something that is good to talk about and test. I know about the security implication of retargeting on every block, but it was necessary for the coins survival so it needed to be deployed. A tweak was later implemented to try to mitigate a possible attack as we got worried about time-warps.

No one is able to buy Bitcoins because of capital controls here in Iceland and now we finally have a chance to participate.
Over 7.1% of the population have claimed their share of Auroracoin. Almost everyone is talking about crypto currencies and learning about this new technology. The media has been reporting about Auroracoin every single day and a large market has merged. Even if everything falls tomorrow the project is a huge success in introducing a country under capital controls to the powers of crypto currencies.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 30, 2014, 05:30:47 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.


so you registered 4 days ago and have made 4 comments ? hmmmm
new user scam pumper / ponzi defender ? shell account puppet no. 837465665628478278472874872487 here at Bitcointalk forums lol

Not everybody feels the need to spend their life trolling a shitty message board mate.

but many of the guys feel the need to post snotty garbage like what you just did here.

stick to the topic and lay off the insults, i laugh at you and i enjoy pointing out how you just made yourself look far worse than anything i could possibly say.
why do so many of you insist on bending over backwards to make yourselves look bad ?

did i attack anyone personally ? of course not.. why would i ? it's about ideals and concepts.. not about saying some kid is ugly and his mother dresses him funny.
grow up ..i have said it here lots before and i will do it again.. This is not your school kids. Act your age.
And if you disagree with something i said fine no problem feel free to disagree and argue against any assertion i have made. I enjoy real and mature talks from adults.
And i hate brats.. we have far too many mouthy kids here that do not posses the intellect to carry on a mature conversation..
so please just stick to posting meme.jpg's as your method of communication. The school yard childish antics are not helping your cause trust me.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: memecoin on March 30, 2014, 05:34:54 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.


so you registered 4 days ago and have made 4 comments ? hmmmm
new user scam pumper / ponzi defender ? shell account puppet no. 837465665628478278472874872487 here at Bitcointalk forums lol

Not everybody feels the need to spend their life trolling a shitty message board mate.

but many of the guys feel the need to post snotty garbage like what you just did here.

stick to the topic and lay off the insults, i laugh at you and i enjoy pointing out how you just made yourself look far worse than anything i could possibly say.
why do so many of you insist on bending over backwards to make yourselves look bad ?

did i attack anyone personally ? of course not.. why would i ? it's about ideals and concepts.. not about saying some kid is ugly and his mother dresses him funny.
grow up ..i have said it here lots before and i will do it again.. This is not your school kids. Act your age.
And if you disagree with something i said fine no problem feel free to disagree and argue against any assertion i have made. I enjoy real and mature talks from adults.
And i hate brats.. we have far too many mouthy kids here that do not posses the intellect to carry on a mature conversation..
so please just stick to posting meme.jpg's as your method of communication. The school yard childish antics are not helping your cause trust me.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/c1/c1bbb5e41197c3baebc7e03cea3ab0629aa9b6ea8d350841d40b03cfc4593804.jpg


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 30, 2014, 05:36:17 AM
I think it's sad so many people support what BCX is doing. I hate premined scam coins just as much as the next guy, but BCX has prematurely decided that the 50% can not possibly go to the Icelandic population and a person holding all that money will surely cash it out himself.

There is still no evidence that Baldur is cashing out and we should give him and the project a chance until anything suspicious happens. In the meantime I will continue warning everyone in the media here in Iceland of the dangers of one man keeping such a large portion of the currency and how everything could fail because of a man like BCX.

A possible exploit is something that is good to talk about and test. I know about the security implication of retargeting on every block, but it was necessary for the coins survival so it needed to be deployed. A tweak was later implemented to try to mitigate a possible attack as we got worried about time-warps.

No one is able to buy Bitcoins because of capital controls here in Iceland and now we finally have a chance to participate.
Over 7.1% of the population have claimed their share of Auroracoin. Almost everyone is talking about crypto currencies and learning about this new technology. The media has been reporting about Auroracoin every single day and a large market has merged. Even if everything falls tomorrow the project is a huge success in introducing a country under capital-controlls to the powers of crypto currencies.

the same thing has been said about every single other premined coin clone started EVER.. you think you just made up that retort ? lol
puuuuhleeze spare me lol

reality check here is the facts.. history has PROVEN these guys can and will dump allover us /the end.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 30, 2014, 05:37:43 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.


so you registered 4 days ago and have made 4 comments ? hmmmm
new user scam pumper / ponzi defender ? shell account puppet no. 837465665628478278472874872487 here at Bitcointalk forums lol

Not everybody feels the need to spend their life trolling a shitty message board mate.

but many of the guys feel the need to post snotty garbage like what you just did here.

stick to the topic and lay off the insults, i laugh at you and i enjoy pointing out how you just made yourself look far worse than anything i could possibly say.
why do so many of you insist on bending over backwards to make yourselves look bad ?

did i attack anyone personally ? of course not.. why would i ? it's about ideals and concepts.. not about saying some kid is ugly and his mother dresses him funny.
grow up ..i have said it here lots before and i will do it again.. This is not your school kids. Act your age.
And if you disagree with something i said fine no problem feel free to disagree and argue against any assertion i have made. I enjoy real and mature talks from adults.
And i hate brats.. we have far too many mouthy kids here that do not posses the intellect to carry on a mature conversation..
so please just stick to posting meme.jpg's as your method of communication. The school yard childish antics are not helping your cause trust me.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/c1/c1bbb5e41197c3baebc7e03cea3ab0629aa9b6ea8d350841d40b03cfc4593804.jpg

i just want quote what you said it's cute. lol
try mustering up some intelligent conversation next time maybe it would be more effective than your meme picture ;)
post more you sure showed me..


Title: Re: delete
Post by: memecoin on March 30, 2014, 05:43:15 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.


so you registered 4 days ago and have made 4 comments ? hmmmm
new user scam pumper / ponzi defender ? shell account puppet no. 837465665628478278472874872487 here at Bitcointalk forums lol

Not everybody feels the need to spend their life trolling a shitty message board mate.

but many of the guys feel the need to post snotty garbage like what you just did here.

stick to the topic and lay off the insults, i laugh at you and i enjoy pointing out how you just made yourself look far worse than anything i could possibly say.
why do so many of you insist on bending over backwards to make yourselves look bad ?

did i attack anyone personally ? of course not.. why would i ? it's about ideals and concepts.. not about saying some kid is ugly and his mother dresses him funny.
grow up ..i have said it here lots before and i will do it again.. This is not your school kids. Act your age.
And if you disagree with something i said fine no problem feel free to disagree and argue against any assertion i have made. I enjoy real and mature talks from adults.
And i hate brats.. we have far too many mouthy kids here that do not posses the intellect to carry on a mature conversation..
so please just stick to posting meme.jpg's as your method of communication. The school yard childish antics are not helping your cause trust me.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/c1/c1bbb5e41197c3baebc7e03cea3ab0629aa9b6ea8d350841d40b03cfc4593804.jpg

i just want quote what you said it's cute. lol
try mustering up some intelligent conversation next time maybe it would be more effective than your meme picture ;)
post more you sure showed me..

http://www.troll.me/images/xibit/yo-dawg-i-heard-you-like-memes-so-we-put-a-meme-on-your-meme-about-your-meme-while-we-meme.jpg
Just for you.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: digitalindustry on March 30, 2014, 05:46:41 AM
Here is the thing, Icelanders have really gotten hit by the 2008 crash.  People lost homes and have seen mortgages go UP and principal down (in effect, because mortgages are tied to inflation)  and have had some reality biting them in the ass.

But it wasnt their fault, it was the banking system and some bankers that let them down.

That is why there was a 50% pre-mine.  To give the coins to Icelanders.  Just because they didnt know about protecting block-chains, this was a poor excuse (if true) for a hacker to try to mess up a valid idea, a grand experiment, to try to offer some help to fellow Icelanders.

-MegaHertz

So, instead of promoting bitcoin, the very first and strongest cryptocurrency that is intended to spread financial freedom around the world, someone is trying to push a utopian commie-coin 50% of which was pre-mined.
Instead of supporting international approach, they want to earn points with nationalism based currency. Good luck with that.

I really feel for those naive Icelanders who invested in this pseudo-national coin, that ended up as yet another pump and dump scheme.


http://i.imgur.com/yswZADF.png

While i rightly believe that this was the designers own fault by not understanding the political environment in which monopoly capitalists work , and in that sense this is a normal aspect of the market.

But what i can say is you are pushing shit up a hill a cocksucker like you that wants to promote Bitcoin as a tool of freedom , Bitcoin is a great design for the protocol that was Co opted by USD bagholders of which such useful idiot like Jesus wierdos etc are frequent.

All you are doing is speeding up the evolution, Bitcoin is old and centralized, we can see all the propaganda mouth piece's coming out supporting it, how long do you think it will all last ?

You think simple Joe public is going to buy that? If you do your more stupid than you sound .

All you are doing is providing better opportunity, so to that degree this is a positive, however Bitcoin is still old slow and above all centralized, with CNN and the like on the long road to full Communist style propaganda status with about 5 people tuning in how does one manage to spam this turd off to the guy on the street lol.

Again don't take this the wrong way , i think this is a positive as these fools might learn and this speeds up the process, i offered help at the beginning for AUR , none of this hurt me i have no interest in it.

Now hopefully someone will create it correctly lol.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: joiblumen on March 30, 2014, 05:49:43 AM
I think it's sad so many people support what BCX is doing. I hate premined scam coins just as much as the next guy, but BCX has prematurely decided that the 50% can not possibly go to the Icelandic population and a person holding all that money will surely cash it out himself.

There is still no evidence that Baldur is cashing out and we should give him and the project a chance until anything suspicious happens. In the meantime I will continue warning everyone in the media here in Iceland of the dangers of one man keeping such a large portion of the currency and how everything could fail because of a man like BCX.

A possible exploit is something that is good to talk about and test. I know about the security implication of retargeting on every block, but it was necessary for the coins survival so it needed to be deployed. A tweak was later implemented to try to mitigate a possible attack as we got worried about time-warps.

No one is able to buy Bitcoins because of capital controls here in Iceland and now we finally have a chance to participate.
Over 7.1% of the population have claimed their share of Auroracoin. Almost everyone is talking about crypto currencies and learning about this new technology. The media has been reporting about Auroracoin every single day and a large market has merged. Even if everything falls tomorrow the project is a huge success in introducing a country under capital-controlls to the powers of crypto currencies.

the same thing has been said about every single other premined coin clone starter EVER.. you think you just made up that retort ? lol
puuuuhleeze spare me lol

reality check here is the facts.. history has PROVEN these guys can and will dump allover us /the end.

Well, I guess I will keep being ignorant and hope he has spent all this time constructing the airdrop and making it work for the benefit of Iceland, not just himself. Have other pre mined coins had a mission like this, make it work and then fail?  


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 30, 2014, 06:07:37 AM
you probably believe in the tooth fairy or Santa maybe too lol

naive or playing dumb.. rinse repeat.. it's altcoin 101

ya a 100 guys scam with a premine but guy #101 with a new scam angle is doing it for the benefit of Iceland ?
wanna buy a bridge ?

Seems a LOT of preminers are deeply concerned with getting just about every country a coin of there own (rather than promoting bitcoin etc as the guy said earlier)
i have never witnessed such a deep heart felt selfless concern for the people of Iceland and all these other countries that have their own scam country clone coin..
the masked shadowy coin cloners are like saints doing all this for the benefit of the common man..a Pre-miner Saint lol

really ? seriously ? are you guys that naive and gullable ?

and yeah altruism is a thing..

Took a long time for the industry to admit smoking causes cancer before that it was propaganda time non stop lol
money = lying scumbags


Title: Re: delete
Post by: joiblumen on March 30, 2014, 06:50:50 AM
How can anyone take his postings seriously?

He already announced twice that the blockchain is forked and it wasn't.
He then announced 3 or 4 blocks, where "Aurora is dead" or "Game over".

Even if he has some crypto coin skills and understanding, his history is full of fail and his behavior is really ill. He should make a therapy against his conduct disorders.


You are doing so excellent at proving just how much you haven't understood a thing that was posted or either you're a bag holder trying desperately to convince yourself it's all ok.

I made it clear, I did not fork the chain at 5400, but someone did. Multiple people who have the technical ability to positively tell also posted that they saw it.

And to all you bag holders who keep regurgitating "Baldur has proven himself".....please show me how?

Simply because the block chain is full of 31.8 AUR transfers?

You have no way of knowing who those wallets belong to and in the absence of a trusted third party handing out the "Air Drop" there will never be a way to know that Baldur did the right thing.

The last time someone kept solitary control of a premine this large was Realsolid with 12 Million Solidcoins in 2011.

Funny thing, all his minions said the exact same thing, till weeks later when it was proven he didn't exactly do the right thing.

As anonymous as Baldur is and as well as this Aurorascam has worked, for all we know, Baldur is Realsolid.

If you will simply disable your "inner bagholder" things might be a little clearer.


~BCX~

I understand what you are saying, and fully acknowledge the threat of Baldur doing this on his own. Although I do not have any bag of aur to hold (other than my 31.8 from the airdrop). I have exchanged over 80 emails with Baldur since 2 months ago and after a some consideration decided that the project can be worth my time and dignity as I stepped forward to speak for auroracoin and crypto in the Icelandic media.

Maybe it was all for nothing and I will be publicly shamed as the man who spoke for auroracoin, even though I tried to warn everyone of the dangers of the premine. Maybe I will even get prosecuted as an accomplice ( I have already received warnings because distributing the coins might be deemed illegal here in Iceland). But maybe my "naive" judgement was right and he is actually going to keep distributing the coins in a fair way. We will see what happens if the coin survives.

I don't like defending Baldur and trying to find proof he is doing the right thing, but might the jump in number of nodes in the network indicate people getting their aur http://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/nodes-aur.html even though many use the recommended paper wallet option.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: direction on March 30, 2014, 06:57:25 AM
I guess in all the Air Drop maadness the dev and his team forgot to educate the Icelandic people on how to secure the blockchain for their own coin, classic. I can't stop giggling.

What a beautiful view.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 07:01:07 AM
Warn your fellow Icelanders that the blockchain is insanely insecure thus that they should either put out massive investment in some method of securing a blockchain or use their Aurora coins to buy something that has a reasonable chance of being secure. (Like maybe bitcoin or namecoin for now until it is seen whether litecoin and DOGE are going to undermine each other to death or implement merged mining so that both can be secured.)

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: traumschiff on March 30, 2014, 09:02:41 AM
then? it died this bastard? or it still breathing? (i've lost 2 BTC on AUR)  ;D

At the moment, the coin is perfectly fine.  This thread is basically a train wreck.

It's main risk now is that the misinformation spread will lower it's value so that it will be susceptible to a real attack.  The coin simply needs to regain some confidence and it should be fine.  There's no guarantee, but assuming it recovers there is a lot of potential.


so you registered 4 days ago and have made 4 comments ? hmmmm
new user scam pumper / ponzi defender ? shell account puppet no. 837465665628478278472874872487 here at Bitcointalk forums lol

Not everybody feels the need to spend their life trolling a shitty message board mate.

but many of the guys feel the need to post snotty garbage like what you just did here.

stick to the topic and lay off the insults, i laugh at you and i enjoy pointing out how you just made yourself look far worse than anything i could possibly say.
why do so many of you insist on bending over backwards to make yourselves look bad ?

did i attack anyone personally ? of course not.. why would i ? it's about ideals and concepts.. not about saying some kid is ugly and his mother dresses him funny.
grow up ..i have said it here lots before and i will do it again.. This is not your school kids. Act your age.
And if you disagree with something i said fine no problem feel free to disagree and argue against any assertion i have made. I enjoy real and mature talks from adults.
And i hate brats.. we have far too many mouthy kids here that do not posses the intellect to carry on a mature conversation..
so please just stick to posting meme.jpg's as your method of communication. The school yard childish antics are not helping your cause trust me.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/c1/c1bbb5e41197c3baebc7e03cea3ab0629aa9b6ea8d350841d40b03cfc4593804.jpg

i just want quote what you said it's cute. lol
try mustering up some intelligent conversation next time maybe it would be more effective than your meme picture ;)
post more you sure showed me..

http://www.troll.me/images/xibit/yo-dawg-i-heard-you-like-memes-so-we-put-a-meme-on-your-meme-about-your-meme-while-we-meme.jpg
Just for you.

That guy has been trolling every 2nd altcoin thread I've been reading so far with the expression ability of a 12 year old.

He trolled the Darkcoin thread with calling it a scamcoin and dissed the dev for doing nothing new while finishing every single comment with "I could prove" and "I have proof", when asked for it by 10 readers he stopped writing in the topic.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: phelix on March 30, 2014, 09:10:29 AM
These shitcoins like auroracoins are scam anyway. Better they die sooner than later, less damage is done and everybody is happy (except the scammers themselves and the noobs).
This!

The earlier noobs learn shitcoins are unsafe the better. A lot of shitcoins would become easy prey with a possibility to short.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: Zarmung on March 30, 2014, 09:21:52 AM
2 BitcoinEXpress

You aren't trusted or objective in this thread becoz you are the henchman of Dogecoin and all know that Aurora almost broke the neck of this coin... I bet the situtaion on the market made by apologists of Dogecoin. There is nothing wrong with airdrop or something else. It's all about the money!



Title: Re: delete
Post by: molecular on March 30, 2014, 09:24:07 AM
These shitcoins like auroracoins are scam anyway. Better they die sooner than later, less damage is done and everybody is happy (except the scammers themselves and the noobs).
This!

The earlier noobs learn shitcoins are unsafe the better. A lot of shitcoins would become easy prey with a possibility to short.

Hmm. Doesn't sound too hard to pull off:

Make altcoin trading platform (or buy one), offer swaps and leveraged trading.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: molecular on March 30, 2014, 09:36:17 AM


I understand what you are saying, and fully acknowledge the threat of Baldur doing this on his own. Although I do not have any bag of aur to hold (other than my 31.8 from the airdrop). I have exchanged over 80 emails with Baldur since 2 months ago and after a some consideration decided that the project can be worth my time and dignity as I stepped forward to speak for auroracoin and crypto in the Icelandic media.

Maybe it was all for nothing and I will be publicly shamed as the man who spoke for auroracoin, even though I tried to warn everyone of the dangers of the premine. Maybe I will even get prosecuted as an accomplice ( I have already received warnings because distributing the coins might be deemed illegal here in Iceland). But maybe my "naive" judgement was right and he is actually going to keep distributing the coins in a fair way. We will see what happens if the coin survives


This is I can respect.

This guy has acknowledged a possibility that fraud could be happening but has chosen to move forward anyway.

The ones I have issue with are the fan boy bag holders who act like it is blasphemy to acknowledge the obvious.


~BCX~

As much as a despise your big-lettered announcement of the death of AUR, I can agree with what you said above (except I'm not sure what you mean by "the obious". If you mean to say that it's obvious Balduro is scamming us, I cannot agree).

Saying: "this is not a scam, I can guarantee it" is just plain stupid. None of us know and for all we know, Balduro might be honest now, but change his mind later.

I'm playing a (small) part in this because I think this is an awesome experiment and I'm eager to see the results.

If the airdrop numbers are even only half-honest, Auroracoin is already a huge success in bringing awareness of crypto in a non-negligible way.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 09:38:39 AM
If it also brings awareness that massive hashing power is needed to secure a proof of work blockchain that is good too, albeit maybe a costly lesson for some.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: MyDreamInHeart on March 30, 2014, 09:38:49 AM
what is this


Title: Re: delete
Post by: department on March 30, 2014, 09:40:08 AM
He says someone beat him to it. I believe him; we all know he would have proudly worn the AUR Destroyer badge had he done so himself.


You got that right.

There are only a few I know of who could have done this.


Luke is that you?



~BCX~

 
Don't know how.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 30, 2014, 10:05:38 AM
@BCX You are a really good manipulator. Still not accepting that fork at 5400 was planned since weeks. I hope you use some of this super sociopathic skill for some good as well. May be you are from your viewpoint. But you are wrong here. There's not enough evidence to call this a scam.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 10:16:07 AM
This is obviously another good reason for any coin to change algos NOW.
Any coin you decide is a scam is prone to a 51% attack now by some sick butt fucks like you.

YOU are the threat to the glory idea. We once again need to make people like YOU the bagholders.
All we need to do now is just change algos for those coins.
This will secure the blockchain, nothing else.

You scream SHIT all day, because so much market cap went into those coins you don't and won't control.
And if you can't control it, you try to destroy it.
And the 50% distribution scheme is just about your own personal ASIC nightmare.

Get lost you sick fucks and try your Blitzkrieg scheme somewhere else.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: CryptoAddict on March 30, 2014, 10:42:39 AM
What's the deal here, the fork at block 5400 was announced many weeks ago. How is Auroracoin Game Over?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 10:45:29 AM
You really insist on seeing for yourself just how over it is, eh?

Well as pointed out earlier, it will take some time to creep up on you, as one of the little changes that were put in place was a delaying action, a change that makes the timewarp take longer to creep up on you - to become visible in its effects.

Basically you go on thinking nothing is wrong, because your client does not yet know that it is not on the main chain, because it has not yet seen the real chain, which is the attacker's chain, which when your client sees it will be the chain with the most work thus the valid chain.

If the attack is underway then you are on a fork ever since the last hard-coded checkpoint or genesis block and just do not yet realise that you are so all looks fine so far.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 30, 2014, 10:59:09 AM
Damn I really want this FUD to keep going on to scoop up the cheap coins. But your uselessness is way too evident. And it's wasting everyone's time to pay you any attention

1. There was no fork due to 51% attack. Fork at 5400 was planned since weeks
2. Time warp attack was solved as it was there in the Litecoin as well. That fix is incorporated in Auroracoin source too

Here's the diff for that https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commit/b1be77210970a6ceb3680412cc3d2f0dd4ca8fb9

This is as low as I will go to name calling. But you all (the one's claiming attacks) are clearly losers.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 11:06:11 AM
Damn I really want this FUD to keep going on to scoop up the cheap coins. But your uselessness is way too evident. And it's wasting everyone's time to pay you any attention

1. There was no fork due to 51% attack. Fork at 5400 was planned since weeks
2. Time warp attack was solved as it was there in the Litecoin as well. That fix is incorporated in Auroracoin source too

Here's the diff for that https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commit/b1be77210970a6ceb3680412cc3d2f0dd4ca8fb9

This is as low as I will go to name calling. But you all (the one's claiming attacks) are clearly losers.

That so called fix of the timewarp is the ancient one, right? The one that this attack is not prevented by? The one litecoin never bothered to update to fix this attack because litecoin's hash rate seemed massive enough that the attack would take an inordinate amount of hashing power?

Litecoin is protected against this current proposed / planned / maybe-in-progress attack by its hashing power, as are most of the SHA256 merged mined coins that also do not have a better "fix" than that ancient "fix" that this current version of timewarp is not prevented by.

haven't you been following the thread(s) about this timewarp attack? All this was already explained, including BCX's assurance that most of the SHA256 merged mined coins have so much hashing power that (s)he cannot effectively use this attack against them despite their code being just as unfixed with regard to this variant of timewarp that the ancient fix you mention litecoin having deployed is no defense against this variant.

Basically coins like bitcoin and litecoin and, we are recently assured, even some of the SHA256 secondary chains, have so much hashing power they do not need a fix in code against this attack.

Nonetheless once you puny low hash power chains do come up with a code fix for it, it would probably make sense for even the high hash power chains to adopt the fix, even if doing so means waiting until their next schedule hard-fork in order to implement it.

It is possible, maybe even likely, that a need for a hard fork to implement such fixes might be a large part of why chains with enough hash power to deter attackers from trying this variant of timewarp have not yet implemented a fix for this variant of timewarp.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 11:07:52 AM
Damn I really want this FUD to keep going on to scoop up the cheap coins. But your uselessness is way too evident. And it's wasting everyone's time to pay you any attention

1. There was no fork due to 51% attack. Fork at 5400 was planned since weeks
2. Time warp attack was solved as it was there in the Litecoin as well. That fix is incorporated in Auroracoin source too

Here's the diff for that https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commit/b1be77210970a6ceb3680412cc3d2f0dd4ca8fb9

This is as low as I will go to name calling. But you all (the one's claiming attacks) are clearly losers.

They are very desperate, because they see their ASIC investments going down the drain.
They didn't expect any resistance in their plan. Let's prove them wrong.

It's so obvious. Any coin about to make a real market, to become a full cycle working currency, a real success, is under attack by them.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 11:11:00 AM
It's so obvious. Any coin about to make a real market, to become a full cycle working currency, a real success, is under attack by them.

That is bullshit.

Scams that try to pretend that patheticly insecure amounts of hash power suffice to secure a chain are what is being attacked.

If the scam has any chance of scamming lots of money out of people then that jsut makes it all the more important to put a stop to it before lots of people lose lots of money.

Your claim basically seems to be that the bigger the scam the more important it is NOT to prevent it, because big scams are successful scams so should be permitted or even encouraged.

These scams are deliberately trying to prevent blockchains from being secured. They refuse to enable merged mining even. They are designed not only to scam their own users but also to weaken all the other blockchains that also are trying to fool people into thinking that some puny tiny amount of hash power, so puny even a stupid meme can come up with more hash power, is enough to secure a blockchain.

Basically they are trying to make scrypt untenable as a way of securing a blockchain by totally fragmenting the world's available scrypt hash power so that no chain has enough to be secure.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 11:17:42 AM
It's so obvious. Any coin about to make a real market, to become a full cycle working currency, a real success, is under attack by them.

That is bullshit.

Scams that try to pretend that patheticly insecure amounts of hash power suffice to secure a chain are what is being attacked.

If the scam has any chance of scamming lots of money out of people then that jsut makes it all the more important to put a stop to it before lots of people lose lots of money.

Your claim basically seems to be that the bigger the scam the more important it is NOT to prevent it, because big scams are successful scams so should be permitted or even encouraged.

These scams are deliberately trying to prevent blockchains from being secured. They refuse to enable merged mining even. They are designed not only to scam their own users but also to weaken all the other blockchains that also are trying to fool people into thinking that some puny tiny amount of hash power, so puny even a stupid meme can come up with more hash power, is enough to secure a blockchain.

Basically they are trying to make scrypt untenable as a way of securing a blockchain by totally fragmenting the world's available scrypt hash power so that no chain has enough to be secure.

-MarkM-


Yadda yadda scam, yadda yadda bullshit....
It isn't a scam. Why you call it a scam?
YOU are the scam part of the game, YOU are the scammers.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 30, 2014, 11:22:45 AM
That so called fix of the timewarp is the ancient one, right? The one that this attack is not prevented by? The one litecoin never bothered to update to fix this attack because litecoin's hash rate seemed massive enough that the attack would take an inordinate amount of hashing power?

-MarkM-


What are you even talking about? Do you even know what a time warp attack it. You or BCX explain to me in layman terms, what is it and how it can be carried out. If all you can say is hash this, hash that. Then no, you have no idea what you are talking about.

You are like those anon script kiddies which ddos anything major for five minutes and claim victory. Good on you.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 11:22:54 AM
Well I guess we won't know unless BCX's attack does in fact take place and does in fact work.

So we are reduced to awaiting the empirical evidence.

I guess we have to hope that BCX was not bullshitting but is in fact doing the attack and does in fact have enough hashpower to make it work.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: BohemianStalker on March 30, 2014, 11:27:13 AM
Well I guess we won't know unless BCX's attack does in fact take place and does in fact work.

So we are reduced to awaiting the empirical evidence.

I guess we have to hope that BCX was not bullshitting but is in fact doing the attack and does in fact have enough hashpower to make it work.

-MarkM-


Why should we hope someone will be able to carry out a cyber crime? I for one, am not.

I hope auracoin will be fine because it gathered lot of attention from iceland, sweden, norway etc, basically rich northern countries that can invest to bitcoin.

To hope Aurora will be destroyed is to fundamentally not understand the nature why are we here on this forum.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 30, 2014, 11:27:46 AM
My question still stands. But let me tell you what message you are sending out. You are telling people on the street that cryptos are not safe. That only big corporations should be able to do this. You in your feeble money driven minds are completely missing the big picture and making way for private blockchains.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: thaaanos on March 30, 2014, 11:28:27 AM
So, better some blackhats fuck you up and force you to fix your weak spots than some gov does it when it really thinks it has to.

Sorry but I don't believe in this logic. You can't go before a court of law and declare, "Your honor, I am entitled to this stolen property because John Doe left their front door unlocked", it doesn't excuse the criminal behavior in itself.

As an investor I wonder what you think of speculators?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: dewon on March 30, 2014, 11:31:36 AM
Sorry I don't have enough time to read through the whole thread.
Is it real that AUR got multiple forked?
Is it dying?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 30, 2014, 11:32:37 AM
Sorry I don't have enough time to read through the whole thread.
Is it real that AUR got multiple forked?
Is it dying?


No, just read 5-10 posts back. I have posted link and logic to invalidate all the claims. This is FUD.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: dewon on March 30, 2014, 11:33:42 AM
To BCX:

Are you developing a new 2nd gen coin BCX as eightspaces post ?

Is it serious or just a April fool joke?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 11:34:27 AM
Proof of work blockchains are INSANELY EXPENSIVE to secure.

The only reason they are even remotely viable is bitcoin's massive massive investment in SHA256 hashing power combined with the support for merged mining that lets other chains piggyback on that hashing power so that more than one chain can maybe feasibly be secured.

To attempt to produce enough scrypt hashing power to make the family of merged mined coins that are mined using scrypt similarly potentially powerful enough to be possibly secured is going to cost a similarly vast amount of money.

It is only even remotely reasonable because so much is invested into bitcoin's hashing power that any backup in case SHA256 itself turns out to be fatally flawed ought to be similarly powerful so maybe, just maybe, the cost could be justified as a backup alternative hashing algorithm bitcoin can switch to if SHA256 turns out to be a fatally broken system.

Combined, the cost is so insanely huge that only even-more-insane things like the cost of vaults and paper money printing and regiments of government and banking clerks and armoured cars and endless inflationary printing of money and so on and so on and so on make it not totally batshit insane.

Compared to those it is actually hopefully a savings.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 30, 2014, 11:37:32 AM
@MarkM You again talking about hashing power? If that was the case, any new coin would have faced massive attacks. As kids like to break things. It is so completely evident neither you nor BCX has either skills or understanding to carry out any kind of meaningful attack. This thread is linked from multiple sources and forums. I want you guys to come clean about this. Enough misinformation. You are hurting the crypto scene in general.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 11:41:36 AM
I do not know if BCX can actually pull off the attack as I do not know exactly what code (s)he intends to execute nor with how much hashing power behind it.

Basically until we see it done it is obvious that scammers will go on pretending that pathetically vulnerable blockchains are actually fine.

All you need to do to launch a coin with a decent amount of hashing power is pre-arrange with several, or maybe even just a few if large enough, merged mining pools to add your coin to their merge at launch. There is no need to con people into imagining that a blockchain without massive hashpower is anywhere near secure enough to actually trade on/with.

Any new coin does face potential attacks.

Most seemingly were not worth bothering to attack.

But continued failure to attack has caused proliferation of so many scams so egregious that it is clear people need to actually see such an attack before they will even believe such things are possible.

I am pretty sure we did see a timewarp attack in action in the past. Maybe more than once? But people's memories and/or understanding are/is short plus scammers keep trying to convince newbies who do not know any better that their scam is different, their scam is fine and dandy, their scam is secure and so on.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: molecular on March 30, 2014, 11:49:59 AM
Well I guess we won't know unless BCX's attack does in fact take place and does in fact work.

So we are reduced to awaiting the empirical evidence.

I guess we have to hope that BCX was not bullshitting but is in fact doing the attack and does in fact have enough hashpower to make it work.

-MarkM-


I'm genuinely interested. Has BCX or someone else explained the variant of the attack somewhere? I remember him writing about, but not in detail. I'd like to take a look. Thanks.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 30, 2014, 11:52:20 AM
@MarkM You again talking about hashing power? If that was the case, any new coin would have faced massive attacks. As kids like to break things. It is so completely evident neither you nor BCX has either skills or understanding to carry out any kind of meaningful attack.

+1


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 11:54:00 AM
I think MarcM is a bot. Spreading the same FUD on every thread. Blunt fear mongering.
It's all so obvious. Just another Agent Smith.
Agents can only act within the boundaries of the Matrix, and as a result, they must obey the laws set within the world of the Matrix.

Here they are: ElDude, MarcM, BCX.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4b/Matrix_Agents.jpg


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 11:55:47 AM
Well I guess we won't know unless BCX's attack does in fact take place and does in fact work.

So we are reduced to awaiting the empirical evidence.

I guess we have to hope that BCX was not bullshitting but is in fact doing the attack and does in fact have enough hashpower to make it work.

-MarkM-


I'm genuinely interested. Has BCX or someone else explained the variant of the attack somewhere? I remember him writing about, but not in detail. I'd like to take a look. Thanks.


Maybe if the attack works that might generate enough interest and credibility that (s)he will display the code used to do it?

Meanwhile, maybe ask for more info?

Such attacks have been done before, BCX has orchestrated or perpetrated successful attacks in the past apparently, or if not then was permitted by who-ever did so to claim the credit in this forum.

The post above this one makes clear yet again that it is necessary to actually perform the attack, and successfully, in order for the claims that these scams are vulnerable to it to be believed.

Maybe though the original discussion of the ancient attempted fix against timewarp contains explications of how the fix fails. Presumably after the fixers had already scheduled their fix and maybe not until bitcoin and litecoin had enough hashing power that it was no longer believed feasible for anyone to muster enough hashing power to succeed with the modified attack against those major hashpower chains?

That the perpetrators of new coins lacking that much hash power have not continued research and pursued it to a real fix before deploying their scams simply adds more weight to the claim they were not intending to create secure blockchains, merely to make quick and easy make-a-fast-buck scams.

They even actually go out of their way to ensure their chain cannot be secured, as if maybe planning ahead to the crash of their chain when they move on to the next so they can buy up all the coins of it at firesale prices then potentially some day go back to it, maybe when they run out of feasible names for new scams or something.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 12:13:39 PM
Well I guess we won't know unless BCX's attack does in fact take place and does in fact work.

So we are reduced to awaiting the empirical evidence.

I guess we have to hope that BCX was not bullshitting but is in fact doing the attack and does in fact have enough hashpower to make it work.

-MarkM-


I'm genuinely interested. Has BCX or someone else explained the variant of the attack somewhere? I remember him writing about, but not in detail. I'd like to take a look. Thanks.


Maybe if the attack works that might generate enough interest and credibility that (s)he will display the code used to do it?

Meanwhile, maybe ask for more info?

Such attacks have been done before, BCX has orchestrated or perpetrated successful attacks in the past apparently, or if not then was permitted by who-ever did so to claim the credit in this forum.

The post above this one makes clear yet again that it is necessary to actually perform the attack, and successfully, in order for the claims that these scams are vulnerable to it to be believed.

Maybe though the original discussion of the ancient attempted fix against timewarp contains explications of how the fix fails. Presumably after the fixers had already scheduled their fix and maybe not until bitcoin and litecoin had enough hashing power that it was no longer believed feasible for anyone to muster enough hashing power to succeed with the modified attack against those major hashpower chains?

That the perpetrators of new coins lacking that much hash power have not continued research and pursued it to a real fix before deploying their scams simply adds more weight to the claim they were not intending to create secure blockchains, merely to make quick and easy make-a-fast-buck scams.

They even actually go out of their way to ensure their chain cannot be secured, as if maybe planning ahead to the crash of their chain when they move on to the next so they can buy up all the coins of it at firesale prices then potentially some day go back to it, maybe when they run out of feasible names for new scams or something.

-MarkM-


Hey wanker, have a look at this thread.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=549592.0
Makes you shudder much?

We are the Litecoin X11 hardfork team.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 12:17:58 PM
Why would I shudder? Is X11 just another pathetically vulnerable amount of hash power thus just another scam waiting for a meme to conjure up more hash power and PWN it or something?

Oh wait, are you imagining I am against methods of viably and sufficiently securing ledgers that my existing CPU, GPU, FPGA and ASIC collections cannot "mine"? As that is not the case. What I am against is insecure ledgers, such as proof of work blockchains that do not do or have (e.g. via merged mining) enough work to actually secure themselves.

If Ripple, NXT, eMunie or whatnot are actually secure that will be great. No more need for vulnerable not-enough-work blockchains...

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Peter2058 on March 30, 2014, 12:25:21 PM
I have read all this topic (and the other ones) and now I just want to give my point of view.

I know that you will use the fact that I'm an Auroracoin pool owner, but forget this. I'm not Icelander, I've got coins on other crypto currencies just 6 AUR, I have no interest with my 6 AUR.
I think AUR is a good idea. That's a premined currency ? So what ? Who are you BCX to say that it is a scam ? Are you an Icelander ? No ! What is your problem if Icelanders want to use this crypto currency ? Foreigners are not required to invest and believe in that currency. So what is your interest to kill this crypto coin ? I think you have more intersts than me. Or perhaps, the truth is out of there...

I know that you will use the fact that I'm a new user of this forum. You know (as I read a lot of time on this topic), we can follow crypto currencies and not be registered on bitcointalk. We can read only and don't want to be an active user especially to write shit.

Unlike you, I think the AUR is a good idea even if it's a premined coin even if it was risky to trust on ONE person. That's why I have created supernode and I have translate the main website in french.

Ok, there was/is some technical problems, but why have you created 1,2,3...5... topics to explain that you hate this coin. WE KNOW !!! You have a lot of time to spend for something you hate !!! That's very funny and pathetic.

The danger is not on the security of block chain of AUR, it's not on riskly altcoins, the danger is you and people like you. You (and your fans) want to make the weather (the rain and the good weather as we said here). The danger is that persons like you find sheeps to follow them. You are a cancer !
I know that you have a lot of knowledge on crypto currencies. And with this knowledge you think you are god : you've got the power !! Pathetic (again) !

We have a lot of chance, the internet has not been developed by people like you, we still communicate with smoke signals.

I know that with my reply I will see your extrem power. I know that it's not possible to say the truth on big forums like this without paying the consequences because we have a lot of very powerful people. You know what, I'm free to think, I'm free to write and I don't need a forum or crypto currencies to be someone !


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 12:29:09 PM
The scam is simply the fraudulent pretense that an totally insecure financial system is secure enough for actual use.

That simple, really, It is deliberately designed to be insecure, It deliberately avoids simple precautions that could help it be secure.

It is gross negligence, irresponsibility, to perpetrate such an insanely insecure thing for actual use.

The problem IS the insecurity of the blockchain.

It is INTENDED BY DESIGN to be insecure and to make it as hard as possible to secure.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 12:33:15 PM
Why would I shudder? Is X11 just another pathetically vulnerable amount of hash power thus just another scam waiting for a meme to conjure up more hash power and PWN it or something?

Oh wait, are you imagining I am against methods of viably and sufficiently securing ledgers that my existing CPU, GPU, FPGA and ASIC collections cannot "mine"? As that is not the case. What I am against is insecure ledgers, such as proof of work blockchains that do not do or have (e.g. via merged mining) enough work to actually secure themselves.

If Ripple, NXT, eMunie or whatnot are actually secure that will be great. No more need for vulnerable not-enough-work blockchains...

-MarkM-


You, with your pathetical amount of ancient Scrypt hash power, will mine Flappycoin and the like, and thats about it.
You can really secure that chain then, really. It'll be all yours.

You will be holding the bag this time, don't you already realize that?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 12:36:56 PM
I am not actually bothering to use any of my GPUs, let alone for scrypt mining. I probably will not even bother with scrypt ASICs if litecoin and DOGE continue to fragment the scrypt space by failing to enable themselves to be merged mined together.

Unless maybe one of them becomes such a trivial fragment of the space that the other, merged alongside all the coins that do implement the ability to be merged mined as a secondary chain, is clearly far and away greater in hash power thus maybe potentially possible to secure.

Litecoin was already dubious even before DOGE showed that just a stupid meme could conjure up more hash power almost overnight. That demonstration by DOGE basically made it clear that neither DOGE nor litecoin is convincingly secure yet and probably will not be at least until they are merged mined together, and maybe even then only if kids of meme/4chan sensibilities do not divert enough of the scrypt hashing power from that merged family to make it weak enough that a meme appealing to such types could come up with enough hashing power to PWN them.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: fpmk on March 30, 2014, 12:52:56 PM
It's so obvious. Any coin about to make a real market, to become a full cycle working currency, a real success, is under attack by them.

That is bullshit.

Scams that try to pretend that patheticly insecure amounts of hash power suffice to secure a chain are what is being attacked.

If the scam has any chance of scamming lots of money out of people then that jsut makes it all the more important to put a stop to it before lots of people lose lots of money.

Your claim basically seems to be that the bigger the scam the more important it is NOT to prevent it, because big scams are successful scams so should be permitted or even encouraged.

These scams are deliberately trying to prevent blockchains from being secured. They refuse to enable merged mining even. They are designed not only to scam their own users but also to weaken all the other blockchains that also are trying to fool people into thinking that some puny tiny amount of hash power, so puny even a stupid meme can come up with more hash power, is enough to secure a blockchain.

Basically they are trying to make scrypt untenable as a way of securing a blockchain by totally fragmenting the world's available scrypt hash power so that no chain has enough to be secure.

-MarkM-


Yadda yadda scam, yadda yadda bullshit....
It isn't a scam. Why you call it a scam?
YOU are the scam part of the game, YOU are the scammers.

Are you hired by AUR team?  The so-called country coin is totally a scam.
Should be dead totally. And you, scammers, should be killed.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 12:56:51 PM
I'm glad to see you're running out of facts.
Now comes "Merged Mining". Bwahahaha.
Secondary Chain.
Again, BWAHAHAHA.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 12:57:53 PM
It's so obvious. Any coin about to make a real market, to become a full cycle working currency, a real success, is under attack by them.

That is bullshit.

Scams that try to pretend that patheticly insecure amounts of hash power suffice to secure a chain are what is being attacked.

If the scam has any chance of scamming lots of money out of people then that jsut makes it all the more important to put a stop to it before lots of people lose lots of money.

Your claim basically seems to be that the bigger the scam the more important it is NOT to prevent it, because big scams are successful scams so should be permitted or even encouraged.

These scams are deliberately trying to prevent blockchains from being secured. They refuse to enable merged mining even. They are designed not only to scam their own users but also to weaken all the other blockchains that also are trying to fool people into thinking that some puny tiny amount of hash power, so puny even a stupid meme can come up with more hash power, is enough to secure a blockchain.

Basically they are trying to make scrypt untenable as a way of securing a blockchain by totally fragmenting the world's available scrypt hash power so that no chain has enough to be secure.

-MarkM-


Yadda yadda scam, yadda yadda bullshit....
It isn't a scam. Why you call it a scam?
YOU are the scam part of the game, YOU are the scammers.

Are you hired by AUR team?  The so-called country coin is totally a scam.
Should be dead totally. And you, scammers, should be killed.

It's a scam, to scam the scammers. YOU.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 01:04:54 PM
So let me explain the scam here:

50% premined and distributed without any mining.
That takes 50% out of your scam game in the first place.

Then mining starts. But you still can't run your scam, because there are too many coins out there to make a market against, with your usual scam scheme.
And the nightmare fulfills for you once a real currency cycle starts working, without anything in the middle you can control.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Peter2058 on March 30, 2014, 01:10:27 PM
Totally agree with flipme.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: HiroS on March 30, 2014, 01:13:44 PM
These attacks show why small coins need automatic checkpointing to prevent these attacks. If you are Bitcoin or Litecoin you can probably wing it and assume your hashpower if large enough not to be attacked. I launched Hirocoin with automatic checkpointing to secure the blockchain, otherwise you could end up a chew toy of an attacker like Auroracoin!


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 01:15:39 PM
Just line up merged mining pools ahead of launch, so you can have massive hashing power right from launch. And of course launch with commensurely high difficulty so there is no instamining caused by the massive hashpower such pools can provide.

Remember currency is all about secure money for the users, not a welfare state make-work program for kids who somehow can afford a GPU but not a block eruptor.

Also, more and more botnets have more and more GPUs so along with a welfare state for kids with gaming rigs would come a welfare state for botnet operators.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nxtblg on March 30, 2014, 01:33:04 PM
I think MarcM is a bot. Spreading the same FUD on every thread. Blunt fear mongering.

In old-fashioned lingo, markm is known as an "axe-grinder." Bzzzzzzzzzzt, bzzzzzzzzzzt, bzzzzzzzzzzt, bzzzzzzzzzzt.....

But on the other hand, the kind of axe he grinds does show that he's the go-to guy to ask about ASICs and their role in securing the blockchain. Just because he likes to bzzzzzzzzzzt on a regular basis doesn't change the fact that he does have real knowledge in a specialized area.

As a matter of habit, I tend to let people like that bzzzzzzzzzzt as they please because some day I might need and informed and intelligent answer from them to a question inside their specialty. 


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 01:38:36 PM
I am not specialised in ASICs nor even in proof of work mining. My interest is securing distributed ledgers and financial networks.

If that can truly be done without proof of work mining that would be great.

All this proliferation of insecure not-enough-work proof of work chains can stop and people can clone whatever actually works to secure currencies / ledgers/ financial networks of people unwilling or unable to work.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flipme on March 30, 2014, 01:50:40 PM
I am not specialised in ASICs nor even in proof of work mining. My interest is securing distributed ledgers and financial networks.

If that can truly be done without proof of work mining that would be great.

All this proliferation of insecure not-enough-work proof of work chains can stop and people can clone whatever actually works to secure currencies / ledgers/ financial networks of people unwilling or unable to work.

-MarkM-


Haha, how easy is that?
Make it 100% premine.
Give away 50% for free.
Sell the other 50%.

Theres your ledger. Your nightmare.
An independent closed currency cycle you can't control.

What you claim you are is just the opposite of what you really are.
You try to prevent just distribution in every way you can. Thats your game.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 01:52:48 PM
Why sell 50%? Why not just give away the code (for a no work secure system) so anyone can make a secure currency without need for masses of hardware and electricity consumption?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 30, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
The scam is simply the fraudulent pretense that an totally insecure financial system is secure enough for actual use.

That simple, really, It is deliberately designed to be insecure, It deliberately avoids simple precautions that could help it be secure.

It is gross negligence, irresponsibility, to perpetrate such an insanely insecure thing for actual use.

The problem IS the insecurity of the blockchain.

It is INTENDED BY DESIGN to be insecure and to make it as hard as possible to secure.

-MarkM-


I think you forgot to mention that the network wasn't sufficiently secured and that the coin is therefore a scam.

(Buying)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nxtblg on March 30, 2014, 04:23:00 PM
I am not specialised in ASICs nor even in proof of work mining. My interest is securing distributed ledgers and financial networks.


Thanks.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 30, 2014, 04:26:00 PM
@markm
you are battering these noobs that just registered here mouthing you off like they are somebody lol
they have just shown to valid response to common sense on the last few pages and just resort to diversionary tactics and name calling etc.
rather than addressing the technical aspects of the issue at hand..
hey nubs go create some more dummy shell accounts lol ..kind funny the vocal one created their accounts often 5 days ago
and they think they have earned the right to spout of to guys doing this all for YEARS.. nooooope

and i think it goes waaay beyond securing the coin too and i have to admit i am not an expert on coins networking
but markm you have done a great job i think explaining what BCX said and what he said i understood also.. it made sense to me, not sure why these 'experts' are playing dumb.

i see one guy here as always saying he doesn't get why it's a scam (clone coins) and his excuse for clone coins is "that's why we're here"
well uhhh no lol
We're not here to support some shadowy corrupt deceitful scammer with nothing better to do that hang out at Bitcointalk's forums
posting clone coins non stop that demonstrate in ever way shape and form that they have no intention of supporting them long term. etc
and i said "etc" because it's what markm said and i just said and much much more and what is it we get in return ? games, diversion tactics and dodging the real issues.
it's explained to you guys endlessly and you hide and come back with a weak argument.. time after time.
in the process getting a response digging your hole deeper and deeper..

let me guess the two points i addressed here above will be replied with "rabble rabble rabble" and or "shut up"
ya debate won.. lol

i always feel like i am wailing on toddlers in here lol


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 30, 2014, 05:14:30 PM
@markm
you are battering these noobs that just registered here mouthing you off like they are somebody lol
they have just shown to valid response to common sense on the last few pages and just resort to diversionary tactics and name calling etc.
rather than addressing the technical aspects of the issue at hand..

Whatever the merits or otherwise of his points, thankfully it isn't a couple of cryptocurrency naval-gazing anoraks - nor their 'hangers on' - who will decide the fate of this coin.

Nor will it be down to whether it's a "clone" or an "original".

Nobody who actually ends up using it is going to give 2 flying turkeys about network hash, source code, retargeting interval or what the F*ck a "premine" is. They're getting them for free anyway so it's not them who are being 'scammed'.

It will be down to commercial, political and social issues which most of the snarling cryptocoin trainspotters on here are clueless about and if it's successful on that basis then none of the technical FUD being thrown around here will matter.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 05:23:32 PM
i always feel like i am wailing on toddlers in here lol

Not sure about that because usually toddlers do not think that throwing away their toys/valuables or losing them is a good thing, so usually I don't think toddlers think letting any idiot who comes along cripple/break their toys, steal all their goodies and so on is a good idea, so I had the impression that even toddlers think that securing their stuff, as in trying to stop other toddlers or even non-toddlers from arbitrarily running off with it without recourse, is a good idea.

They might not like the chore of putting all their toys in their toybox but do seem to prefer that the toys still be there when they want them.

So this whole 'no one cares whether their stuff is thrown all over the street with "take this stuff" written all over it' spiel seems very disingenuous.

The masses might not realise that they care about whether their money/wealth is secure, but watch how they react when their determined refusal to secure it or even to allow it to be secured results in their losing it...

In fact I have seen claims posted in other sections of these forums - sections other than this "scamcoin section" - claiming that cryptocurrency is useless and un-useable for normal people precisely because it is not secure enough for normal people to use, they constantly keep losing coins due to their own carelessness, irresponsibility, ineptness, ignorance, laziness, inattention and so on. Demanding that blockchains themselves be insecure though seems a pinnacle of ineptness - well, more like idiocy really - not normally encountered outside this "scamcoin section" of the forums.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 30, 2014, 05:30:35 PM
Look, at the end of the day, the Aurora dev came through on his promise and started delivering the coins. I like how the goal post has been moved from, "The dev is going to run off with and dump the premine" to "The dev and his supporters didn't secure the block chain"

What will it be next week if AUR continues to hang on or rises? I don't own any AUR but I respect a man of his word, I bet not one single member of this Operation Scamcoin cleanup would have the integrity to sit on a valuable premine and not cash out.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 30, 2014, 05:33:48 PM
I like how the goal post has been moved from, "The dev is going to run off with and dump the premine" to "The dev and his supporters didn't secure the block chain"

What will it be next week if AUR continues to hang on or rises? I don't own any AUR but I respect a man of his word, I bet not one single member of this Operation Scamcoin cleanup would have the integrity to sit on a valuable premine and not cash out.

+1

In the absence of any substance we can expect a new all time high for the number of times the word "scam" can be crammed into a single post.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 05:35:25 PM
So it is your desire and intent that the coins remain insecure? Or is it that you have already dumped them or plan to dump them so soon/fast that it is unlikely anyone will steal them before you dump them?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 30, 2014, 05:39:07 PM
Sp it is your desire and intent that the coins remain insecure? Or is it that you have already dumped them or plan to dump them so soon/fast that it is unlikely anyone will steal them before you dump them?

-MarkM-


I have no desire for anything because I don't own any AUR, my only desire is to expose Operation Shitcoin as being a den of liars, cheats, hackers and sociopathic teenage boys that they are.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 30, 2014, 05:40:12 PM
Sp it is your desire and intent that the coins remain insecure?

It's my desire that somebody give this stuck record a nudge.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 05:43:29 PM
Fine, lets figure out a way to secure the blockchain or to get everyone out of it before it is PWNd, that would be constructive.

Unfortunately scamcoin devs seem chronically determined to prevent the blockchains from being able to be secured.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: thaaanos on March 30, 2014, 05:50:41 PM
since the coin is pretty much centralized, can't they interleave every one or so blocks a signed checkpoint blocks?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solid12345 on March 30, 2014, 05:50:50 PM
Fine, lets figure out a way to secure the blockchain or to get everyone out of it before it is PWNd, that would be constructive.

Unfortunately scamcoin devs seem chronically determined to prevent the blockchains from being able to be secured.

-MarkM-

You know the irony is if people like BCX didn't exist to attack security holes we wouldn't have to worry about it. Hackers are the bottom feeders of society and I wish more was done to round them up and put them away in federal prison for years. It's totally backwards thinking to suggest that if you want to trade in a coin, you should be mining to protect it as well. I guess if I want to use a Windows PC I should also be learning C++ and contributing daily to AVG or Norton on what viruses are out in the wild too?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 05:59:39 PM
Fine, lets figure out a way to secure the blockchain or to get everyone out of it before it is PWNd, that would be constructive.

Unfortunately scamcoin devs seem chronically determined to prevent the blockchains from being able to be secured.

-MarkM-

You know the irony is if people like BCX didn't exist to attack security holes we wouldn't have to worry about it. Hackers are the bottom feeders of society and I wish more was done to round them up and put them away in federal prison for years. It's totally backwards thinking to suggest that if you want to trade in a coin, you should be mining to protect it as well. I guess if I want to use a Windows PC I should also be learning C++ and contributing daily to AVG or Norton on what viruses are out in the wild too?

It is not just hackers. Plenty of coins have fallen apart into forks simply due to their hashing power being so tiny that one person or just a few people making some silly little mistake breaks the whole consensus.

Also there should be no need for the ignorant masses to mine. It is the even more ignorant quick buck scam crowd that insists not only on mining but upon having fresh new scams daily to mine. The masses should be able to just sit back and use the world's most secure blockchains without worrying themselves at all about how it is that those particular blockchains happen to be the only secure ones. That however is undermined by floods and floods of scammers promoting the most insecure garbage possible and mouthing off about how their scam is as good as or better than an, or maybe even any, actually secure currency.

The masses are maybe even left wondering what chains they should risk, whichever scam of the day is climbing fastest on the scam exchange that promotes the most new scams the fastest, or a carefully chosen one or few of the tiny selection of coins offered by an exchange that tries really hard to only offer secure/quality coins.

(Though even such an exchange kind of undermines itself when it turns out to not be throwing off the exchange blockchains that are no longer anywhere near secure, hence the part about choose carefully even among the ones on a careful exchange...)

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: thaaanos on March 30, 2014, 06:05:28 PM
Fine, lets figure out a way to secure the blockchain or to get everyone out of it before it is PWNd, that would be constructive.

Unfortunately scamcoin devs seem chronically determined to prevent the blockchains from being able to be secured.

-MarkM-

You know the irony is if people like BCX didn't exist to attack security holes we wouldn't have to worry about it. Hackers are the bottom feeders of society and I wish more was done to round them up and put them away in federal prison for years. It's totally backwards thinking to suggest that if you want to trade in a coin, you should be mining to protect it as well. I guess if I want to use a Windows PC I should also be learning C++ and contributing daily to AVG or Norton on what viruses are out in the wild too?

I will ask again, what do you think about the speculators in the Market should we round all of them up?
If you think they are essential in a market to protect it from runaway risk and moral hazard, then so do hackers, they protect IT infrastructure from runaway security holes, and make security risks into loss for those who are foolish.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 30, 2014, 06:12:31 PM
The masses should be able to just sit back and use the world's most secure blockchains without worrying themselves at all about how it is that those particular blockchains happen to be the only secure ones. That however is undermined by floods and floods of scammers promoting the most insecure garbage possible and mouthing off about how their scam is as good as or better than an, or maybe even any, actually secure currency

You've got this the wrong way around.

The "masses" decide what currency they're using and following that the network will be secured. They don't decide that on the basis of technical aspects of the coin. The criteria for the success of cryptocurrency have nothing to do with network hashrate or technical security. They are socio-economic. The mining community will make sure is secures whatever currency see the most adoption through the network effect of those socio-economic forces.

That's why all the technical FUD being banded around here is largely irrelevant at the moment because we don't yet know what its fortune will be.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 06:18:13 PM
In other words just keep churning out scams and whichever scam the public falls for will magically turn into a legitimate business enterprise, just like all those coke dealers who got rich selling cocaine to kids bought houses in nice neighborhoods had kids and now are legitimate businesspeople because they do not want cocaine being dealt to their kids in their neighborhoods.

A get rich quick scam is just the thing for launching legitimate enterprises...

Your argment is the same one the largest ponzi schemes use, they then blame the failure of their scheme on the interference by the police / law-enforcement / SEC, because the scheme would have worked fine if only it had been permitted to suck in enough money, because once enough money is sucked in any flaws in the scheme can easily be fixed by throwing money at them. Money is the "socioeconomic forces" you mention, that will magically make up for all the damage done by the broken scheme.

Even broken socioeconomic forces like the law, the law enforcement systems, the SEC and so on can be fixed if only they can be prevented from squashing the scheme before it is rich enough to "fix" such "problems" by buying lawmakers.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Ibistru on March 30, 2014, 06:32:30 PM
Also there should be no need for the ignorant masses to mine. It is the even more ignorant quick buck scam crowd that insists not only on mining but upon having fresh new scams daily to mine. The masses should be able to just sit back and use the world's most secure blockchains without worrying themselves at all about how it is that those particular blockchains happen to be the only secure ones. That however is undermined by floods and floods of scammers promoting the most insecure garbage possible and mouthing off about how their scam is as good as or better than an, or maybe even any, actually secure currency.

+1

Greedy noobs are the cancer of crypto-currencies.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jorneyflair on March 30, 2014, 06:32:46 PM
so what now? >:(


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 30, 2014, 06:46:13 PM
In other words just keep churning out scams and whichever scam the public falls for will magically turn into a legitimate business enterprise

Contrary to what you may like to think, you're no more of an authority on what is a scam and what isn't than any other market participant.

That's particularly true in this case where you're basically clueless about what your talking about when it comes to the real criteria that will give value to and "secure" this coin.

So why not just leave it to "market forces" for a while and stop whining on about network security till we see what genuine commercial and social basis there is for the initiative.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 06:49:42 PM
There is no reasonable basis for deliberately failing to secure it let alone to deliberately try to prevent its being secure.

Why the heck NOT secure it? How does leaving it insecure benefit anyone (and if it does, who and how)?

You are just repeating the same old "let the scam run, if it scams enough people to prove it is a scam then oh well it was a scam so what" and "if the scam scams enough out of enough people then in theory the scammers could turn over a new leaf and actually try to support the thing instead of just moving on to yet another scam".

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: elrugrim on March 30, 2014, 07:07:59 PM
You know, bitcoin didn't originally have enough hash power to secure itself.   We should have ignored that scam coin from the getgo. ;)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 07:13:39 PM
You know, bitcoin didn't originally have enough hash power to secure itself.   We should have ignored that scam coin from the getgo. ;)

No enough attackers with the know-how, not enough LOLs in it for them and so on.

But once bitcoin built its super hashpower and implemented merged mining new coins no longer need face that if they have even merely just enough of a good idea to get a merged mining pool set up ready to add them to its merge at launch.

Plus now, even better, supposedly proof of work is no longer even needed to secure a distributed p2p ledger so anyone can easily issue a new secure currency simply by cloning a secure no proof of work required system instead of the insanely expensive to secure, insanely hard to secure old proof of work concept. Maybe clone Ripple, or NXT, or whatever of those things does in fact work, if any of them do in fact work.

Either by merged mining or by some newfangled no proof of work needed system, launching a currency that is secure from the get-go is easily do-able nowadays.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: molecular on March 30, 2014, 07:41:14 PM
You know, bitcoin didn't originally have enough hash power to secure itself.   We should have ignored that scam coin from the getgo. ;)

No enough attackers with the know-how, not enough LOLs in it for them and so on.

But once bitcoin built its super hashpower and implemented merged mining new coins no longer need face that if they have even merely just enough of a good idea to get a merged mining pool set up ready to add them to its merge at launch.

Plus now, even better, supposedly proof of work is no longer even needed to secure a distributed p2p ledger so anyone can easily issue a new secure currency simply by cloning a secure no proof of work required system instead of the insanely expensive to secure, insanely hard to secure old proof of work concept. Maybe clone Ripple, or NXT, or whatever of those things does in fact work, if any of them do in fact work.

Either by merged mining or by some newfangled no proof of work needed system, launching a currency that is secure from the get-go is easily do-able nowadays.

and yet your explanation of how to do it cointains lot's of "maybe"s, "if"s and "whatever"s and finally a "if any of them work".



Title: Re: delete
Post by: Math on March 30, 2014, 07:46:02 PM
Damn I really want this FUD to keep going on to scoop up the cheap coins. But your uselessness is way too evident. And it's wasting everyone's time to pay you any attention

1. There was no fork due to 51% attack. Fork at 5400 was planned since weeks
2. Time warp attack was solved as it was there in the Litecoin as well. That fix is incorporated in Auroracoin source too

Here's the diff for that https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commit/b1be77210970a6ceb3680412cc3d2f0dd4ca8fb9

This is as low as I will go to name calling. But you all (the one's claiming attacks) are clearly losers.

The patch that you link to does nothing to solve the exploit in the KGW.  It does solve, however, a flaw in the linear difficulty re-targeting algorithms that were of common use prior to these past few months.  Bitcoin and Litecoin adjust difficulty in that manner.  For an understanding of what that patch fixes, read through the posts of the individual that wrote that patch.  ArtForz details the possible attack in the following thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=43692.msg521772#msg521772

I urge you to read through this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=505243.0)(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=504103.msg5573196#msg5573196) thread and pay specific attention to the posts belonging to Nite69.  Although BCX never comfirms that Nite69 is on the right track in uncovering the KGW flaw, he is.  If after reading through the two linked threads you still do not understand the flaw, I would be more than happy to try and explain it in greater detail.  

Edit: Although the original link provides some information, the meat of the discussion is in the new link I provide.

Any coin that implements the KGW is vulnerable to a time warp attack, and the only thing that can stop such an attack would be to have significantly more power than the attacker.  Then again, there is no way of knowing how much, if any, power would be needed until such an attack is attempted.  Furthermore, miners that do not have multiple pool or solo mining backups are doing the users of the coin a disservice.  Pools can be brought down, thus reducing the amount of power an attacker needs to fork a chain.  

This exploit is real, and it is only a matter of time before someone takes advantage of everyone's false sense of security.  People can hate on BCX or MarkM all they want, but I would urge those people to understand what they are truly trying to say.  MarkM consistently harps on the idea of hashing power, and for good reason.  If a PoW, blockchain based coin is to be taken seriously and used daily by people around the world, the chain needs to be secure.  The chain can only be secured with hashing.  If a chain is not secure, a malicious individual will attack it.  That is the reality of this world.  Honestly, each and every developer and user of a coin that implements the KGW should be thanking BCX for bringing to light the time warp flaw.  


Title: Re: delete
Post by: stormia on March 30, 2014, 07:47:36 PM
It will need some time for you evangelists to learn that bitcoin is digital gold and not digital money.

Fyrstikken (cryptorush) would call it a commodity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9DvydzAsY

Quote: "Bitcoin worshipers will never go to heaven " LOL

Price trending to the cost of mining it.

Use of malicious negative feedback to suppress free speech brings shame on the bitcoin community.

Frystikken is an idiot.

But that doesnt disprove my point. Its simply plain logic, that a hard cap coin can not be a currency. It IS a ponzi and risky investment.
Money works totally different from Bitcoins. As said, it is not wrong to invest in bitcoins, but what's wrong is to confuse gold and money.

So gold is a ponzi scheme? I'm confused. I'm also confused about what happened here. Auroracoin is dead now? Was it actually a scam or did somebody just destroy it for kicks and giggles or for their own personal motives? Also, how was it so easy to kill the coin? Doesn't this mean every other low hashrate scrypt coin is vulnerable? What about scrypt-N and PoS coins? Thanks in advance for helpful replies, I'm just looking for information and trying to understand how things are shaping up in this dark world of cryptocurrencies.

Since when was there a hard cap on gold?

LOL. Are you an alchemist from the 17th century? You do realize gold cannot be created from your urine, right? The only feasible way to make gold, and therefore exceed the natural "hard cap" on it, is through nuclear bombardment and beta-decay of other precious metals. This process would be insanely more expensive than what you would get out of it, and most of the gold you would get out of it would be radioactive  :D This is hilarious... So you think because more gold can still be minded it doesn't have a hard cap? So since bitcoin can still be minded it doesn't have a hard cap? Gold was formed during the earliest stages of the earth, and the majority of it and other precious metals sunk into the core. The current available supply of gold exists because of meteorites bombarding earth a long, long time ago- this "flung" gold out of the core of the earth and into accessible regions of the mantle. So, in theory there is another way to increase the accessible "hard cap"- just have to wait until the earth is completely screwed by a bunch of meteorites again... lol.

tl;dr there is no way to increase the amount of available gold i.e. it has a hard cap. once all the accessible gold is mined, there will be no other source- just like bitcoin...



Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 07:49:07 PM
and yet your explanation of how to do it cointains lot's of "maybe"s, "if"s and "whatever"s and finally a "if any of them work".

For the purported "security without work", yeah.

Simply making something innovative enough that merged mining pools will support it though will at least give you a predictable low tide mark for mining power thus let you set a starting difficulty high enough to minimise the chance of any "instamining" happening and if you convince the right pools your concept is good probably also enough to secure it against most "lets trash the newbie coin" attacks.

I0Coin and GRouPcoin are only on mmpool I think, yet even just mmpool gives them quite a hash rate compared to most non merged SHA256 coins.

Regarding specifically the modified time warp BCX mentions, (s)he admitted at least some, maybe most, of the merged mined SHA256 coins have enough hashing power to make them too powerful for hir to pull off the attack. I would expect that the exceptions include at least CoiLedCoin and GeistGeld, which are not on any public merged mining pools. Whether I0Coin and GRouPcoin, which are only on mmpool as far as I know, have enough hashing power did not seem totally clear to me. But in comparing their difficulties thus mining power bear in mind GRoupcoin's difficulty has to last 10 minutes on average between blocks whereas I0Coin's only has to target 1.5 minutes between blocks. I expect both CoiLedCoin and GeistGeld are trivially easy targets until they get on at least one public merged mining pool, as private merged miners are coasting along mining these at very very low difficulties thus evidently are not pouring much hashing power into them.

mmpool seems to be quite a low power pool though, as it goes hundreds of hours between findings of bitcoin blocks. Likely if there is any doubt whether just being on mmpool would suffice, I suspect there are far more powerful public merged mining pools that could instead or as well be approached.

I have noticed a lot of people creating hybrid PoS or pure PoS coins, have those been tested enough yet to determine whether they are actually secure? Especially the ones that do not rely upon a solidcoin system whereby one or more privileged nodes get to dictate checkpoints to the others? I do not know hence my personal lack of certainty so far as to which if any of the methods of securing a coin without relying upon proof of work actually are in fact secure.

Does anyone actually know or is everyone just blindly spamming out PPCoin clones / variants?

For something like Aurora, merged mining could be particularly suitable as giving 50% of the coins to miners might not be necessary; DeVCoin for example only gives 10% of the minted coins each block to the miners yet has quite high hashing power.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Lloydie on March 30, 2014, 08:08:41 PM
May BCX and MARKM never find peace. May they have many ugly WAGs.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Starlightbreaker on March 30, 2014, 08:38:47 PM
May BCX and MARKM never find peace. May they have many ugly WAGs.
you sound like a bagholder.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: YarkoL on March 30, 2014, 09:04:11 PM
  The chain can only be secured with hashing.  If a chain is not secure, a malicious individual will attack it.  That is the reality of this world. 

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts about Hiro's proposed fix i.e. automated checkpoints.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 30, 2014, 09:07:03 PM
By what consensus process is the choice of (automated) checkpoints decided?

Or is it nice and simple like each client writes itself a checkpoint each ten or six or whatever blocks?

(Too simple likely; just yelling at the operator if any fork becomes longer than X number of blocks might work just as well as such a simple approach.)

For "distressed nations relief" maybe just a DeVCoin clone would work for however many nations are "distressed", simply adding nations to the "receivers file" when they become "distressed" and removing them once their distress has been alleviated?

(The much vaunted "socioeconomic factors" touted as how national distress alleviation coins are to gain mucho value hopefully making such a clone far more valuable per coin than DeVCoin since DeVCoin is merely a free open source stuff funding coin not a massive international "nations in distress relief fund"...)

-MarkM-



Title: Re: delete
Post by: eddy937 on March 30, 2014, 09:09:47 PM
Einstein said keep things as simple as possible but no simpler.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 30, 2014, 09:21:10 PM
By what consensus process is the choice of (automated) checkpoints decided?

Read code (and description) right here: https://github.com/HiroSatou/Hirocoin/commit/dd5b8bec94b0694b365a4dabe5eeb9b78d025b6d

Actually developed by Sunny King.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: YarkoL on March 30, 2014, 09:24:47 PM
So it's actually Peercoin centralized checkpointing?... I thought automatic would mean pretty much what markm said, written automatically after N blocks. Is that kind of system flawed?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 30, 2014, 09:25:47 PM
This exploit is real, and it is only a matter of time before someone takes advantage of everyone's false sense of security. 

There is certainly a vulnerability.. however it's not as easy to execute as some people here believe.  There's a window and a "catch the running train" situation that must be overcome.  

I'd be interested in the proof of actually pull off a successful execution.  (not being sarcastic.. i really do want to see it done, and data/proof published so we can all have a look)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 30, 2014, 09:27:01 PM
So it's actually Peercoin centralized checkpointing?... I thought automatic would mean pretty much what markm said, written automatically after N blocks. Is that kind of system flawed?

It's a decentralized system.. nothing can both be automated and secure without some kind of peer agreement. 


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Tomatocage on March 30, 2014, 09:30:20 PM
WTT your 2 AUR 4 AUR coins for every 1 of my I0Coins.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 30, 2014, 10:25:23 PM
@Math

Thanks for trying to explain the problem. I quickly read through the links (I will revisit them). But don't you think an attack is only possible at the moment of fork and that too when attacker is extremely lucky. I noticed a huge jump in hashrate after the fork. To me it seems like an attack was attempted but it failed. Your thoughts?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: YarkoL on March 30, 2014, 10:29:28 PM
But don't you think an attack is only possible at the moment of fork

The attacker causes a fork, having built a longer chain in isolation and then broadcasting blocks.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 30, 2014, 10:45:46 PM
@YarkoL

We are going in circles. Caption of this thread is that Auroracoin is forked. As if, it was done by the attacker. But it was a planned fork (announced since weeks). So that fork isn't caused by the attack. Then instead of accepting the mistake BCX talks about timewarp and everyone is circlejerking, ignoring that

1. His initial claim is false
2. Timewarp as well is only possible at the time of fork


Title: Re: delete
Post by: FredOm on March 30, 2014, 10:58:11 PM
A technological AND socio-economical thought experiment  :)

After 20 these highly educating pages filled with division, separation, accusation, misunderstanding, and mutual celebration of intellectual high points ... I dare to ask a question to the "two sides" of this fruitful thread:

Could you describe in which aspect "the other side" is right, and could convince you?

Easier: Where do you see common ground now?



Title: Re: delete
Post by: YarkoL on March 30, 2014, 11:02:33 PM
_noname_
The fork we've just seen is benign and intended, done by the dev team. But they have now installed an algorithm (KGW) that allows someone to build "a private" blockchain that has fake timestamps and manipulated difficulty. Next, attacker will release his own chain into "official" Auroracoin network, where it will cause another fork to happen, this time a fork that Auroracoin users will not like.

That's the theory, but possibly the devs have some aces in their sleeve.

ps. and the name of this thread is misleading, it should be, game's afoot!


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on March 30, 2014, 11:41:17 PM
ps. and the name of this thread is misleading, it should be, game's afoot!
in a poker game, the losers don't know they're drawing dead until all the cards are shown.  for them, the game is also afoot.

it doesn't mean they're any less dead, though.  


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Math on March 30, 2014, 11:45:27 PM
  The chain can only be secured with hashing.  If a chain is not secure, a malicious individual will attack it.  That is the reality of this world. 

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts about Hiro's proposed fix i.e. automated checkpoints.

It appears the automated checkpoint system comes directly from Peercoins automated checkpoints.  Of that I am no expert, but I will give you my thoughts.  Automated checkpoints do provide an extra layer of security, but at the same time, implementing such a system requires some give and take.  The entire idea behind Bitcoin was to provide decentralization through a peer consensus, but automated checkpoints, in this sense, require centralization.  In order to take the benefit of additional security that automated checkpoints provide, I must give up some decentralization. 

As I said earlier, I am no expert, but it seems to me that centralized, automated checkpoints have a central point of failure - the master checkpoint node.  What were to happen if the master node is down?  In the instance of an attack, it could go down by means of a sustained DoS.  While the checkpoint node is down, an attacker can begin to focus on the chain.  One other thing to note is that automated checkpoints are opt-in/opt-out.  If a portion of the network refuses to partake in the automatic checkpoints, that portion relies on a herd immunity of sorts to stay with the rest of the network.

I like to think of it like this: Locking the doors and windows to my house may keep a majority of criminals out, but the determined and skilled criminal will just need more time.

@Math

Thanks for trying to explain the problem. I quickly read through the links (I will revisit them). But don't you think an attack is only possible at the moment of fork and that too when attacker is extremely lucky. I noticed a huge jump in hashrate after the fork. To me it seems like an attack was attempted but it failed. Your thoughts?

Try not to get yourself confused over the difference between a hard fork and a fork in the chain, or what you may call a soft fork.  A hard fork occurs by means of a protocol update.  Essentially, the old version will not be compatible with the new version.  This is what happened with Auroracoin at block 5400.  The old client still functions, but it will not be able to sync with the version of the chain the developer and community deem valid. 

When people like BCX talk about a fork in the chain, they are not referring to a hard fork.  I think this (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_chain) provides a simple explanation of what a blockchain is.  If you direct your attention to the picture, you'll notice that the blockchain looks like a tree of sorts.  If we think of the current chain as the trunk of a tree, BCX has threatened to create multiple branches from that trunk.  Some clients may choose to follow one branch while other clients choose to follow a separate branch.  When competing chains exist in the wild, it is up to the developer to decide which chain is valid.  The chain may be rolled back and a checkpoint instituted. 

Forks occur every day in most blockchains, and typically this is a none issue.  This is what causes an orphaned block.  Even Bitcoin forks daily.  The issue, however, is that an attacker can release multiple chains into the wild and nobody knows which is the valid chain.  A chain can can be forked from either the last hard fork or the last checkpoint.  Without enough hash power to secure the chain, it is free reign from that point forward. 


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Mk2vr6 on March 30, 2014, 11:46:20 PM
Just spent the last 20 minutes catching up with this thread and fuck me, MarkM has now made me never want to use the word secu... again!

Change the record man FFS!

You sound worse than Spunknik calling Scam on anything he doesn't like the look of.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on March 31, 2014, 12:05:17 AM

It was expected that bitcoin would always be more valuable than e.g. CDN, UKB, MBC, GMC, GRF, UNS, and especially NKL (since NKL issued twenty times as many coins instead of the same old 21 million coins), but the failure of bitcoin minters to honour the coins they minted seems to have massively suppressed bitcoin's value.

could you expand this thought some more?

for auroracoin specifically, the preminers aren't honouring the minted coins.  However, we all knew the market valuation for auroracoin was inaccurate due to the premine volume.

However, for If a bitcoin miner mints a blockchain currency and holds it, where do they fail to honour the coins they've minted?  If a miner trades his currency for fiat or cryptocurrency, hasn't utility and liquidity been increased?


Until you issue it to someone else it is not yet issued.

Once you issue it, honour it.

For example if someone buys one from you using a car, and within a reasonable 90 day or 30 day or 120 day or one year or whatever warranty period comes back complaining that the coin you sold him is not satisfactory, he wants his money (the car) back, refund with a smile.

Basically you are a coin dealer. If you believe in your goods you should be happy to refund, albeit maybe with some token little cost to cover your trouble, such as a re-stocking fee.

Or, whenever you sell some on an exchange, put 99% or 98% or whatever of what someone bought it with back onto the order books at a slight little change in price, again to cover your time and trouble. That way they can always get back most of what they paid for the thing if they decide it does not afterall suit their purposes.

thanks for this, and for your many other informative posts. 

regarding the idea of a miner's obligation, e.g. i've been mining litecoin since i got here, i've had machines for litecoin that only do litecoin blockchain, and i've never sold a single litecoin.  however, in the intervening few months i've been here, the difficulty has gone up from 1000 to about 5700.  would you suggest that a miner is also obligated to also increase his hashrate to keep up with the increasing network difficulty? 

i'm interested in your idea that mining should ultimately be a non-profitable industry.  in the scenario where mining is a commodity industry and will eventually gravitate to areas with the cheapest overhead and electricity, how does this solve the problem of either subsidized or stolen electricity?  if some country were to offer free or near-free power to incentivise miner relocation, or if someone was able to steal electricity i'd think it would favour illegal mining/national mining at some point in the future. 

you have previously recommended p2pool and a globally distributed blockchain would make a stronger currency.  However, wouldn't the commoditisation of mining power result in consolidation, rather than distribution, in mining power?  is an oligopoly of the largest leased mining pools the best we can do in this current situation? 



Title: Re: delete
Post by: Wipeout2097 on March 31, 2014, 12:13:26 AM
Just spent the last 20 minutes catching up with this thread and fuck me, MarkM has now made me never want to use the word secu... again!

Change the record man FFS!
Yes, it's becoming hard to understand if he is genuine, "just" biased (due to his KnC Saturn miner and being an old dev of merged mined coins), or a concern troll.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: murraypaul on March 31, 2014, 12:19:20 AM
So it's actually Peercoin centralized checkpointing?... I thought automatic would mean pretty much what markm said, written automatically after N blocks. Is that kind of system flawed?

It's a decentralized system.. nothing can both be automated and secure without some kind of peer agreement. 

Quote
+// Concepts
 +//
 +// In the network there can be a privileged node known as 'checkpoint master'.
 +// This node can send out checkpoint messages signed by the checkpoint master
 +// key. Each checkpoint is a block hash, representing a block on the blockchain
 +// that the network should reach consensus on.

That is not a decentralised system.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 31, 2014, 12:21:47 AM
So it's actually Peercoin centralized checkpointing?... I thought automatic would mean pretty much what markm said, written automatically after N blocks. Is that kind of system flawed?

It's a decentralized system.. nothing can both be automated and secure without some kind of peer agreement. 

Quote
+// Concepts
 +//
 +// In the network there can be a privileged node known as 'checkpoint master'.
 +// This node can send out checkpoint messages signed by the checkpoint master
 +// key. Each checkpoint is a block hash, representing a block on the blockchain
 +// that the network should reach consensus on.

That is not a decentralised system.

To clarify i wasn't saying the checkpoint sync system was decentralized but that the bitcoin (and all altcoin) protocol is decentralized. 

Thus trying to implement something that in a decentralized way do automatic checkpointing would be a flawed concept, because you need some way of peer agreement (and/or centralizing)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: maxsimgoratiev on March 31, 2014, 12:22:59 AM
This is fascinating, didn't even know mining can be consolidated from several currencies into one.
I don't want to call AUR a scam, because there are simpler ways to run a scam. They do seem to be putting in some genuine effort. All the data about Iceland is accurate, and they do seem to be distributing the currency. And this is a fun experiment, I love experiments.
Don't make things black and white people!

Is it probably the Dev will make some moneys of this? Probably
Are they actually distributing cash to Icelanders? Yeah, evidently so if you check twitter.
Is it a cool experiment? Hell yeah.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Omnivion on March 31, 2014, 01:02:14 AM
Wouldn't a simpler solution than a master checkpoint node just be to have the client limit the number of blocks overwritten when switching from a shorter fork?  Maybe 15 or so blocks, whatever number would provide the best balance between attack prevention and avoiding natural problems (if you have a natural fork that's 15 blocks long, you probably have some other problems anyway).

Or is there some reason this would be inadequate or problematic to implement?

You could also allow an option to manually choose or set a flag to override this limit to increase versatility.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 01:20:10 AM
Alright, I have read enough about the topic to understand that BCX knows nothing and is incapable of causing any harm.

So I kindly request him to shut up or put his money where his mouth is.

I challenge him to wager 50 AUR in bet. He should publicly announce a deadline by which he will invalidate the blockchain. If he does that, I will pay him 50 AUR in today's BTC (as AUR will be no more). If he fails, he should pay me 50 AUR then.

Fair?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Wipeout2097 on March 31, 2014, 01:22:37 AM
Alright, I have read enough about the topic to understand that BCX knows nothing and is incapable of causing any harm.

So I kindly request him to shut up or put his money where his mouth is.

I challenge him to wager 50 AUR in bet. He should publicly announce a deadline by which he will invalidate the blockchain. If he does that, I will pay him 50 AUR in today's BTC (as AUR will be no more). If he fails, he should pay me 50 AUR then.

Fair?
If you want to bet against BCX and not be ignored or be laughed at, I suggest 100 ~ 250 BTC.  :P


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 01:23:27 AM
If you want to bet with BCX and not be laughed at, I suggest 100 ~ 250 BTC.  :P

Sorry, I am not that rich. It should be free money to him. Why not take this bet? I think we all know.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on March 31, 2014, 01:26:01 AM
So I kindly request him to shut up or put his money where his mouth is.


this eventually happens in every bcx thread i've read.  

i think last time it was ltex.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 01:27:38 AM

this eventually happens in every bcx thread i've read.  

i think last time it was ltex.

Was the bet taken? Who won?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 01:32:40 AM
If you want to bet with BCX and not be laughed at, I suggest 100 ~ 250 BTC.  :P

Sorry, I am not that rich. It should be free money to him. Why not take this bet? I think we all know.

Yes,  we do. AUR is not money, 50 AUR is not worth the time it would take to compile a wallet to hold it or even to ask an exchange that lists it to provide a deposit address for it so as to use the exchange as a wallet to receive it.

Try 50 bitcoins, maybe? Or more even?

Basically though you are demanding that the attack take place. So, again, we see that fanbois will not believe their scam is vulnerable until it is proven by attacking it. Someone earlier even mentioned soem pathetic worthless crapcoin no one likely even heard of before let alone imagined might be worth attacking and claimed that the fact it had not been attacked was proof that it was invulnerable to attack.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Wipeout2097 on March 31, 2014, 01:34:48 AM
If you want to bet with BCX and not be laughed at, I suggest 100 ~ 250 BTC.  :P

Sorry, I am not that rich. It should be free money to him. Why not take this bet? I think we all know.
That's not even the point, honestly, I'm just bored.

tbh, the issue I have with this, IF (big if) AUR isn't a scam and really a cryptocurrency for Icelanders, then it's actually none of our business to meddle into those people's lifes. Why are non-Icelanders trolling, making threats, posting FUD or on the other side of the fence, shilling or showing "bag holder's" syndrome for a coin they shouldn't be speculating on, in the first place?

In other words, I saw Auroracoin and qualified it as a "laboratory rat experiment" in the very beginning and I still see signs of this. So, Icelanders were screwed by banks, now they would be by random people on the internet...


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 01:39:39 AM
@MarkM

My request for description in layman terms of the attack. Denied.

Public wager. Denied.

I tell you what's happening here. Neither you nor BCX knows a thing beyond mining hardware configuration. BCX throws some tech mumble as he has been in Bitcoin since long without even understanding what he is talking about. You, although trying to present case about mining, also know nothing about that.

So please guys, stop pretending. And threats about attack. Come on. It's looking more and more childish. I am not writing here to correct you or BCX. But to expose the likes of you. So people don't pay any attention to threats like this again.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 01:40:36 AM
It is a pump and dump scam, the pump done by pretending it would be a viable coin and of use/value to Icelanders. The pump and dump was already long done by the time the airdrop happened, the whole airdrop and everything after it only existing to "justify" the original scamming of money out of people mislead into buying the stuff before the airdrop even happened. The fact that people even had any available to exchange, let alone that it was on an exchange, prior to the airdrop was a massive red flag screaming scam. It was all about scamming investors prior to the airdrop by pretending the airdrop would not crash the value, or that the thing was actually intedned to be a viable, secure currency Icelanders could actually trust as a ecure store of value and transfer of value mechanism going forward.

This nation coin crap is just the latest greatest scam since the IPO wave of scams.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 01:41:22 AM
@MarkM

My request for description in layman terms of the attack. Denied.

Public wager. Denied.

I tell you what's happening here. Neither you nor BCX knows a thing beyond mining hardware configuration. BCX throws some tech mumble as he has been in Bitcoin since long without even understanding what he is talking about. You, although trying to present case about mining, also know nothing about that.

So please guys, stop pretending. And threats about attack. Come on. It's looking more and more childish. I am not writing here to correct you or BCX. But to expose the likes of you. So people don't pay any attention to threats like this again.

Math's detailed explications were unintelligible to laypeople? What grade are laypeople nowadays in your neigborhood?

Links to detailed discussions were given and so on, didn't you follow them and read the original threads they linked to?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on March 31, 2014, 01:41:32 AM

this eventually happens in every bcx thread i've read.  

i think last time it was ltex.

Was the bet taken? Who won?
not the 'bet', but eventually someone invariably steps up and asks bcx to "shut up or put his money where his mouth is."

as to what happened last time, why do you think we're posting in this thread right now?



Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 01:45:17 AM
@MarkM

I have already thanked Math. And only after reading through his link understand what timewarp is. But neither you nor BCX have any understanding about it.

Further, you are claiming this coin is a scam now. You are falling on ideology when nothing by your capability can be done? It's not a scam. Scam is when early miners get into a coin and people get it last. You are the scamsters. And have no skill apart from spreading lies.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 01:50:27 AM
The scam is the fiduciary irresponsibility / gross negligence of trying to pretend a totally insecure system is suitable for use in finance.

Just like all the "exchanges" that get "hacked" because they "turned out to not be secure". Those too are scams, they scam people into throwing their money away on the basis of lies claiming that this that or the other totally insecure software system is viable for real world use.

Deliberately going ahead and using such systems despite their insecurity or even their inability to be secured by the people promoting their real world use is deliberate fraud, scam, etcetera. The perps know full well  the system is not viable yet perpetrate its use regardless, to scam money out of fools and innocents.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 01:56:07 AM
@MarkM @BCX

Either take my bet. Prove to everyone that you are indeed capable of attacking the blockchain. Or please go away if all you can say is hash mumble hash. And saying it's too small a reward is completely missing the point.

The people who have created these systems are far more capable and intelligent than the likes of you. Intelligent response to a vulnerability is to find a solution for it. You are all but talk and no substance.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 01:57:56 AM
@MarkM @BCX

Either take my bet. Prove to everyone that you are indeed capable of attacking the blockchain. Or please go away if all you can say is hash mumble hash. And saying it's too small a reward is completely missing the point.

I too am still waiting to see BCX's attack in action. I do not know how much longer it is expected to take to catch up and take effect, nor even whether it was started yet nor, if so, when it was started.

Maybe the coin failed so hard all by itself BCX decided why bother to attack as it already died, or something like that. I do not know. BCX, what is going on with that?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 02:02:13 AM

I too am still waiting to see BCX's attack in action. I do not know how much longer it is expected to take to catch up and take effect, nor even whether it was started yet nor, if so, when it was started.

Maybe the coin failed so hard all by itself BCX decided why bother to attack as it already died, or something like that. I do not know. BCX, what is going on with that?

-MarkM-


You will be waiting forever. Because if your understanding of timewarp is that BCX will mine a long chain for days and replace it. You have no idea what you are talking about. That's obvious. But you also don't know what timewarp is. Like BCX you just read a tech jargon and think you understand it.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 02:11:13 AM
Math already explained how it works and how it is that Aurora is vulnerable to it, all that remains to be seen is whether Aurora's hash power is sufficiently greater than that of the attacker. If that is not what Math said please do translate what he was trying to explain, as it seemed a pretty clear explanation.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 02:14:15 AM
Math already explained how it works and how it is that Aurora is vulnerable to it, all that remains to be seen is whwther Aurora's hash power is sufficiently greater than that of the attacker. If that is not what Math said please do translate what he was trying to explain, as it seemed a pretty clear explanation.

-MarkM-


Before writing my description for this. I want BCX to either publicly deny or accept the challenge. I know his only option is that he won't be able to do this. But I want him to write this. If he accepts. He should publicly state that he will invalidate the blockchain. He should do it from either genesis block (I will double my wager to 100 AUR or BTC equivalent today) or from block 5400 whichever is easier for him.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 02:15:30 AM
Cool.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: illodin on March 31, 2014, 02:53:22 AM
so when can we expect fireworks from you?

go fuck something up, need some entertainment here.  >:(

You sound like you missed the best money making opportunity of the year so far.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 31, 2014, 03:24:43 AM
Look, at the end of the day, the Aurora dev came through on his promise and started delivering the coins. I like how the goal post has been moved from, "The dev is going to run off with and dump the premine" to "The dev and his supporters didn't secure the block chain"

What will it be next week if AUR continues to hang on or rises? I don't own any AUR but I respect a man of his word, I bet not one single member of this Operation Scamcoin cleanup would have the integrity to sit on a valuable premine and not cash out.


the question is CAN the guy cash out his premine and when ?
why give the cloner credit for holding them when he's stuck holding them ? and following a pattern of waiting until they are worth more too.. aka the usual.

and yeah our excuses will keep coming back because of one simple reason.. the COIN CLONERS put themselves in these positions ON PURPOSE for a reason.
if someone coincidentally always ends up sitting in front of my wallet time after time i have to consider maybe it's not a coincidence
and further more i have to remind myself that 100 guys before hand had done the same thing AND robbed me..
you wanna spin this it's different this time bullshit and i don't buy it.. scammer is scammer just like like 1,000 scammers that came before.
Premine + excuses for why a premine is needed = coin cloner makes money and you make a little and then do all the work defending it for him.. RINSE & REPEAT HOURLY

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

bs period .

AUR is a new level of scam. It was a ploy and a new angle for scammyness and an excuse to post another clone..
after all, how many other Country based coins have been made so far ?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 31, 2014, 03:29:17 AM
so when can we expect fireworks from you?

go fuck something up, need some entertainment here.  >:(

You sound like you missed the best money making opportunity of the year so far.

old retort.. we've heard that one before  ::)
maybe try your jealous or you have poor spelling or grammar.

and Free Market Facist Blah blah blah ..that is an ole' stand by too ;)

edit:
and the 4 coins in your sig really give what you say some credibility too lol
EarthCoin, AnimeCoin, DigiByte and Velocitycoin


Title: Re: delete
Post by: illodin on March 31, 2014, 03:31:20 AM
so when can we expect fireworks from you?

go fuck something up, need some entertainment here.  >:(

You sound like you missed the best money making opportunity of the year so far.

old retort.. we've heard that one before  ::)
maybe try your jealous or you have poor spelling or grammar.


And what do you make of this then?

May BCX and MARKM never find peace. May they have many ugly WAGs.
you sound like a bagholder.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: lphelps on March 31, 2014, 06:21:43 AM
Yawn!!!!

god damn 22 pages of this shit... I've never seen so many fucking losers with a hardon to see AUR fail..

looks like it hit the bottom and it's now going back up... probably a micro pump and dump..

wouldn't surprise me if BCX is secretly buying a shitload to pump it up so he can make some BTC off of it..


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Starlightbreaker on March 31, 2014, 06:33:42 AM
so when can we expect fireworks from you?

go fuck something up, need some entertainment here.  >:(

You sound like you missed the best money making opportunity of the year so far.

sorry, i rode AUR's pump and dump.

in at 0.03, out at 0.11, unlike idiots that end up as bagholders.

 ;D



Before writing my description for this. I want BCX to either publicly deny or accept the challenge. I know his only option is that he won't be able to do this. But I want him to write this. If he accepts. He should publicly state that he will invalidate the blockchain. He should do it from either genesis block (I will double my wager to 100 AUR or BTC equivalent today) or from block 5400 whichever is easier for him.


Geez, I actually partied a little hearty last night and had a killer hang over, so excuse me if I wasn't watching every post.

Sure thing, 50BTC is that all you can throw down LOL...

Let's find a trusted escrow, now it's on you.


The KGW TW exploit is catching up and will cross the median point toward catching up in the next few hours. It may take a couple of more days but you're definitely going to start feel it before then, already you are starting to see erratic block times.

~BCX~


aw yissssssss


Title: Re: delete
Post by: YarkoL on March 31, 2014, 07:12:32 AM

Thus trying to implement something that in a decentralized way do automatic checkpointing would be a flawed concept, because you need some way of peer agreement (and/or centralizing)

What about this kind of system:

Client monitors the network hashrate.
If the network hashrate climbs too rapidly, client asks the user if she would like to make a checkpoint (block at bestheight - N). The checkpoints go to a file in the data directory.

Users can adjust the tolerance for hashrate change, from "never make checkpoints" to "write checkpoint even when there's a tiny change".
While this sounds like recipe for chaos, in practice I think most of the users would just leave the tolerance to its default setting, thus ensuring consensus.

Perhaps peers could also send their tolerance parameter to each other, and the client calculates their average for informational purposes. That would make it completely decentralized.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 07:53:57 AM

Before writing my description for this. I want BCX to either publicly deny or accept the challenge. I know his only option is that he won't be able to do this. But I want him to write this. If he accepts. He should publicly state that he will invalidate the blockchain. He should do it from either genesis block (I will double my wager to 100 AUR or BTC equivalent today) or from block 5400 whichever is easier for him.


Geez, I actually partied a little hearty last night and had a killer hang over, so excuse me if I wasn't watching every post.

Sure thing, 50BTC is that all you can throw down LOL...

Let's find a trusted escrow, now it's on you.


The KGW TW exploit is catching up and will cross the median point toward catching up in the next few hours. It may take a couple of more days but you're definitely going to start feel it before then, already you are starting to see erratic block times.

~BCX~


With reading comprehension and writing skills like yours. I am surprised there are old members in this forum trying to give you any credibility. What a loser. And everyone who paid him any attention is an idiot.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 31, 2014, 08:20:01 AM

Sure thing, 50BTC is that all you can throw down LOL...

~BCX~


Are you this guy by any chance ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXuRvthgn4U


Title: Re: delete
Post by: SamWalters on March 31, 2014, 08:30:02 AM
what does it mean when it is forked and its game over now? I dont get this man! I live in country and should I redeem or wait?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kelsey on March 31, 2014, 08:31:38 AM
And everyone who paid him any attention is an idiot.

 ::)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 08:34:01 AM
And everyone who paid him any attention is an idiot.

 ::)

Haha. I know but you are referring to :). I meant everyone who sold at this FUD. I am trying to get and spread the facts.

Also,

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=551215.0


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Lloydie on March 31, 2014, 08:35:36 AM
May BCX and MARKM never find peace. May they have many ugly WAGs.
you sound like a bagholder.
May their tits be bigger than their asses.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 08:38:12 AM
what does it mean when it is forked and its game over now? I dont get this man! I live in country and should I redeem or wait?

Blockchains are insanely expensive to secure, and no one seems willing to pay the cost of securing this one.

Thus if you want to secure any value your coins in this one might have, you might be well advised to exchange them for something more secure, such as:

- Coins of a blockchain that is paying the massive cost involved in securing blockchains or that is merged mined, by many miners, alongside a family of merged mined coins that are between them all paying the massive cost and are all enjoying the resulting very expensive security in proportion to how many of the miners are including that particular coin's chain in their merged mining; or

- Coins of some system that does not rely upon proof of work (which is the horribly horribly massively expensive part of securing a proof of work blockchain); or

- Some other store of value, such as gold or education or belly-fat you can live on between meals or whatever; or

- Some depreciating thing that you know is going to lose value but that you might have some use for nonetheless, such as fiat currency.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Mk2vr6 on March 31, 2014, 08:58:21 AM
Why do people feel the need to police such matters, and be the voice on what is and isn't supposedly a scam.

How about vetting exchanges before allowing them to advertise there services on here?

I'd wager a bet that more people have lost money through dodgy exchanges over all of the 'Scam-Coins' combined.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Djinou94 on March 31, 2014, 09:01:50 AM
Aurora dead or not it's not depend on you and your attack

But it will depend of the icelander if they will adopt this crypto in their country


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 09:09:50 AM
Aurora dead or not it's not depend on you and your attack

But it will depend of the icelander if they will adopt this crypto in their country


But not only that, unfortunately.

It will also depend upon whether they are willing and able to outbid all the other scrypt coins for mining services to secure their blockchain, which is a losing proposition for all non merged mined coins since the more such coins there are the more leverage the miners have to extort higher and higher pay for picking any particular coin to momentarily mine - momentarily meaning until some other coin decides to pay even more to bribe them to come defend it instead.

Hiring mercenaries to secure national treasuries didn't historically work out well, did it? At least I recall reading one of the future-war type sci-fi authors such as maybe Pournelle or someone like that illustrating the problem with that, and implying it was a problem already seen in history, by transplanting into the future the basic strategy of how such mercenaries go about exploiting the nations foolish enough to fall into their trap. It began, of course, by having the nations all bid for the services of the alien mercenaries... That is, by "divide and conquer", getting the nations to bid against each other instead of to co-operate (in this analogy, to co-operate means to merged mine instead of letting the miners get them bidding against each other for the services of the miners).

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 31, 2014, 09:49:58 AM
It will also depend upon whether they are willing and able to outbid all the other scrypt coins for mining services to secure their blockchain, which is a losing proposition for all non merged mined coins since the more such coins there are the more leverage the miners have to extort higher and higher pay for picking any particular coin to momentarily mine - momentarily meaning until some other coin decides to fork out even more to pay them to come defend it instead.

I don't see it like this.

Although that's technically true, we are in the growth phase of all cryptocurrencies. As long as there's a reasonable amount of hashpower around to protect the ones that developed a significant level of socio-economic network effect during that growth period then the sector as a whole will grow.

The fact that there are theoretical (and in some cases practical) risks just has to be accepted because there are so many other priorities in play.

It's the "socio-economic" part that's significant here, not whatever technical specs the coin has. There are all kinds of 'anchors' for cryptocurrencies to gain a foothold into the world financial system. I agree that 'national coin' is possibly not a long term prospect, but it definitely is at the moment because it provides for an early-adopter scenario that's far more realistic that the global one. Watching Bitcoin try to gain a foothold in commerce is like watching paint dry. The global market is just far too huge to make that leap at once on a such a scale. On the other hand, micro-economies like Iceland with capital controls and a disaster of a fiat currency are much more fertile ground.

They also happen to be a highly educated population who are into new technology in a big way and may just take to this like ducks to water - especially if they see the value start to rise.

Look at it this way. They've now got 2 places to put their money instead of one:

[1] - a highly levered proxy money that gets devalued on a periodic basis by their government by up to 20% at a time

[2] - an unlevered base money with a limited supply who's value is likely to start accruing from here

The coin's only been out a few days and already it's seen casual use in more sectors than Bitcoin did in 3 years. There's huge potential for a virtuous cycle of commerce, value accrual and promotion being set up. Forget about talk of "dumping for bitcoin" or "dumping for dollars". Were talking about ordinary people here who don't wile away their lives on cryptocurrency exchanges or reading bitcointalk threads. It's easier for them either just to hold onto it or spend it on some gardening stuff that they can pick up from half a mile away.

Add to that the fact that the airdrop will be continuing for up to a year and EVERYONE's going to get some. This project isn't disappearing anytime soon - it's only just starting in my opinion and if it goes anywhere socially then it will attract all the hashing power it needs to "protect the network".

If you know anything at all about Icelandic people and economy, this is an extremely interesting situation. It should be supported instead of dismissed because if it works it will light a fire under Bitcoin and the whole viability of cryptocurrencies around the world.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nxtblg on March 31, 2014, 10:05:51 AM
By the way, everyone: AUR nearly doubled over the last day at Cryptsy. I'm just noting it, as I'm locked in elsewhere and couldn't do a thing about it even if I wanted to, but anyone who stepped up to the plate yesterday did pretty well.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 31, 2014, 10:18:19 AM
By the way, everyone: AUR nearly doubled over the last day at Cryptsy. I'm just noting it, as I'm locked in elsewhere and couldn't do a thing about it even if I wanted to, but anyone who stepped up to the plate yesterday did pretty well.

Žarna sjįiš žiš.




Title: Re: delete
Post by: smoothie on March 31, 2014, 10:19:43 AM
oh this is like the good ole days.

Not secure the network and get PWNED.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: smoothie on March 31, 2014, 10:20:42 AM
Aurora dead or not it's not depend on you and your attack

But it will depend of the icelander if they will adopt this crypto in their country


Adoption has a lot to do with SECURING the blockchain.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 31, 2014, 10:34:43 AM
Adoption has a lot to do with SECURING the blockchain.

I think you mean "securing the blockchain has everything to do with adoption".


Title: Re: delete
Post by: thaaanos on March 31, 2014, 10:42:37 AM
May BCX and MARKM never find peace. May they have many ugly WAGs.
you sound like a bagholder.
May their tits be bigger than their asses.

oh Lloydie! I missed you man!


Title: Re: delete
Post by: thaaanos on March 31, 2014, 10:52:30 AM
Aurora dead or not it's not depend on you and your attack

But it will depend of the icelander if they will adopt this crypto in their country


But not only that, unfortunately.

It will also depend upon whether they are willing and able to outbid all the other scrypt coins for mining services to secure their blockchain, which is a losing proposition for all non merged mined coins since the more such coins there are the more leverage the miners have to extort higher and higher pay for picking any particular coin to momentarily mine - momentarily meaning until some other coin decides to pay even more to bribe them to come defend it instead.

Maybe there is hope for Aurora?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=526757.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=526757.0)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: illodin on March 31, 2014, 11:15:01 AM
so when can we expect fireworks from you?

go fuck something up, need some entertainment here.  >:(

You sound like you missed the best money making opportunity of the year so far.

sorry, i rode AUR's pump and dump.

in at 0.03, out at 0.11, unlike idiots that end up as bagholders.

 ;D

Tempted to post a screenshot of my wallet solomining AUR at start but don't want anymore idiots crying realizing 3x profit wasn't actually the "opportunity of the year".

 ;D


Title: Re: delete
Post by: flinchy on March 31, 2014, 12:47:28 PM
GOLD

was wondering why it was like $3.80 a coin, was about to buy a few hundred

glad i googled why the price was low

51% attack and 3 forks?

i'll be shocked if it recovers.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Lloydie on March 31, 2014, 12:56:43 PM
May BCX and MARKM never find peace. May they have many ugly WAGs.
you sound like a bagholder.
May their tits be bigger than their asses.

oh Lloydie! I missed you man!
I missed you too man.  ;D


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 31, 2014, 12:58:08 PM
i'll be shocked if it recovers.

Better shout a bit louder.

I don't think the market heard you.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: DeeSome on March 31, 2014, 01:06:32 PM
I have an interest in Aurorcoin as I have a friend in Iceland who alerted me to it knowing of my interest in Bitcoin and have been watching this thread with a mixture of sadness and amusement.

First let me say I don't own any AUR, I have tried mining pretty unsuccesfully but I believe that the idea behind the coin is a good one, if only because Iceland is the only country that gave the EU the finger and tried to go it alone though it seems that their politicians have made the common Icelandic people take all the hurt.

Now to the point of this post, it seems there are 2 main antagonists who are constantly criticizing this coin as well as other coins.

BitcoinEXpress and markm, both longtime posters who joined in 2011.


BitcoinEXpress was in critical mode by his third post and warned by the mods for posting unsubstantiated accusations.

"[Mod]: BitcoinExpress either share the link so we can all see what you see or dont say anything. Stop the childish attitude. Dont thread to show, just show. If you mean well for the Bitcoin community, give us the information. Otherwise we will asume you are lying."
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=32604.msg410112#msg410112



markm was showing what appears to be disdain for anything that appears on this forum, especially anything altcoin related.

"I kind of envisioned some nations deliberately buying and selling their own currency among their own sock-puppets constantly deliberately to create high volumes at high prices precisely for the purpose of convincing speculators that there is money to be made with that currency..."
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1388.msg42738#msg42738

Looking through a few of their posts it is obvious that both are quite intelligent which begs the question
"why join the Bitcoin forum and community and stay for three years when right from the start you are posting negativity?"

My initial thoughts are these guys are possibly, along with others, employed by either government or financial institutions to spread FUD and discredit the idea of decentralised cryptocurrency as an alternative to the failed fiat system.

Sadly looking at Bitcoin's recent price drop their efforts are working.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: endlessred on March 31, 2014, 01:08:50 PM
GOLD

was wondering why it was like $3.80 a coin, was about to buy a few hundred

glad i googled why the price was low

51% attack and 3 forks?

i'll be shocked if it recovers.

i guess you are pretty shocked right now.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: helloweeed on March 31, 2014, 01:13:00 PM
why the prize is up and up and up and up and up......  :D


Title: Re: delete
Post by: dewdeded on March 31, 2014, 01:30:59 PM
Let's get status:

- Are there still forks?
- If yes, is balduro working on fixing them?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 31, 2014, 01:37:18 PM
My initial thoughts are these guys are possibly, along with others, employed by either government or financial institutions to spread FUD and discredit the idea of decentralised cryptocurrency as an alternative to the failed fiat system.

LoL. If only it were such grand a mission  :D

In fact they're employed by their own egos to grind out antagonistic monotone in each of the forum threads that might make a difference in order to mitigate polite, diverse and constructive contributions from posters with a range of backgrounds.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: illodin on March 31, 2014, 01:44:09 PM
My initial thoughts are these guys are possibly, along with others, employed by either government or financial institutions to spread FUD and discredit the idea of decentralised cryptocurrency as an alternative to the failed fiat system.

LoL. If only it were such grand a mission  :D

In fact they're employed by their own egos to grind out antagonistic monotone in each of the forum threads that might make a difference in order to mitigate polite, wide ranging and constructive contributions from posters with a range of backgrounds.

There are people who have been playing counter strike 15 hours a day and after reaching puberty browsing redtube 15 hours a day and have now found a new obsession. So do not ever doubt their stamina or dedication their only weakness is hungry and sleepy.  :D


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 01:46:56 PM
Is anyone working on setting up some kind of GPUs for Aurora shop or something so the folk being air-dropped the coins can buy GPUs to secure the blockchain?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: toknormal on March 31, 2014, 01:59:51 PM
- Are there still forks?
- If yes, is balduro working on fixing them?

He already made a statement about it.

http://forum.auroracoin.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=575

Take your pick about who you want to believe - the OP or the DEV  ;)



Title: Re: delete
Post by: Spoetnik on March 31, 2014, 02:00:23 PM
My initial thoughts are these guys are possibly, along with others, employed by either government or financial institutions to spread FUD and discredit the idea of decentralised cryptocurrency as an alternative to the failed fiat system.

LoL. If only it were such grand a mission  :D

In fact they're employed by their own egos to grind out antagonistic monotone in each of the forum threads that might make a difference in order to mitigate polite, wide ranging and constructive contributions from posters with a range of backgrounds.

There are people who have been playing counter strike 15 hours a day and after reaching puberty browsing redtube 15 hours a day and have now found a new obsession. So do not ever doubt their stamina or dedication their only weakness is hungry and sleepy.  :D

there will always be camping awp whores lol

i started back in cs 1.4 / 1.5 days roughly ..lost interest last few years though :(
played CS:GO cracked when it came out and worked on reverse engineering the DRM AKA: Steam CEG (custom executable generation) protection system
but i only got part way in cracking it full before someone else took over (i posted my research online in the OLD Russian cracking scene)
now since back in November i bought the game with Paypal and never turned it on one time lol PC gaming is boring pretty much :(
..far more fun cracking them (i was in more than one PC game cracking group almost 10 years ago)
and my point is crackers gonna crack ;)
so hackers gonna hack.. AUR's blockchain lol
especially when the hack results in a shit load of cash for the hacker.. people are highly motivated to come into this scene and rape it.. so secure your shit or suffer.
No i don't work for the NSA to discredit scam coins i just feel bad for noobs that get ripped off, i have a heart and you should too people.. what more needs to be said really ?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jtimon on March 31, 2014, 02:21:23 PM
It will also depend upon whether they are willing and able to outbid all the other scrypt coins for mining services to secure their blockchain, which is a losing proposition for all non merged mined coins since the more such coins there are the more leverage the miners have to extort higher and higher pay for picking any particular coin to momentarily mine - momentarily meaning until some other coin decides to pay even more to bribe them to come defend it instead.

Scrypt coins could merge mine too. But it seems like independent mining is a crucial part on the less-than-zero-sum speculation game most of the altcoins operate.
Freicoin itself is not being merged mined, but only because we want to make a last hardfork (freimarkets) that may be harder after it is merged mined, of course it won't merge mine scrypt but SHA256 which is were most of the proof of work is.

Hiring mercenaries to secure national treasuries didn't historically work out well, did it? At least I recall reading one of the future-war type sci-fi authors such as maybe Pournelle or someone like that illustrating the problem with that, and implying it was a problem already seen in history, by transplanting into the future the basic strategy of how such mercenaries go about exploiting the nations foolish enough to fall into their trap. It began, of course, by having the nations all bid for the services of the alien mercenaries... That is, by "divide and conquer", getting the nations to bid against each other instead of to co-operate (in this analogy, to co-operate means to merged mine instead of letting the miners get them bidding against each other for the services of the miners).

If it was the state it could just have launched a 100% "pre-mined" chain and not just 50%, throwing the other half of the seigniorage to mining subsidies.
That's wasteful and unnecessary, look at Freicoin, for example, only 20% of the seigniorage will be used for mining subsidies.
You mercenaries analogy is great, to secure the network you can just use signatures instead of proof of work (operate a private chain)
If the operators commit fraud, it will be detected by any full node validating blocks (auditor). Blocks could be faster and bigger with no risk of having forks, and many other advantages (like being able of atomically trade with other private chains AND public p2p chains).
A national currency does NOT need to be p2p, it's ridiculous. If you want the trust-less part you can get it much cheaply.

But this was not a national currency, probably just another pump and dump scheme.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Starlightbreaker on March 31, 2014, 02:56:16 PM
so when can we expect fireworks from you?

go fuck something up, need some entertainment here.  >:(

You sound like you missed the best money making opportunity of the year so far.

sorry, i rode AUR's pump and dump.

in at 0.03, out at 0.11, unlike idiots that end up as bagholders.

 ;D

Tempted to post a screenshot of my wallet solomining AUR at start but don't want anymore idiots crying realizing 3x profit wasn't actually the "opportunity of the year".

 ;D

hmm, i think i missed a zero somewhere...i'm pretty sure it was around 28-30x gain during that period.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: molecular on March 31, 2014, 05:56:57 PM
Damn I really want this FUD to keep going on to scoop up the cheap coins. But your uselessness is way too evident. And it's wasting everyone's time to pay you any attention

1. There was no fork due to 51% attack. Fork at 5400 was planned since weeks
2. Time warp attack was solved as it was there in the Litecoin as well. That fix is incorporated in Auroracoin source too

Here's the diff for that https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commit/b1be77210970a6ceb3680412cc3d2f0dd4ca8fb9

This is as low as I will go to name calling. But you all (the one's claiming attacks) are clearly losers.

The patch that you link to does nothing to solve the exploit in the KGW.  It does solve, however, a flaw in the linear difficulty re-targeting algorithms that were of common use prior to these past few months.  Bitcoin and Litecoin adjust difficulty in that manner.  For an understanding of what that patch fixes, read through the posts of the individual that wrote that patch.  ArtForz details the possible attack in the following thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=43692.msg521772#msg521772

I urge you to read through this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=505243.0)(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=504103.msg5573196#msg5573196) thread and pay specific attention to the posts belonging to Nite69.  Although BCX never comfirms that Nite60.000000009 is on the right track in uncovering the KGW flaw, he is.  If after reading through the two linked threads you still do not understand the flaw, I would be more than happy to try and explain it in greater detail.  

Edit: Although the original link provides some information, the meat of the discussion is in the new link I provide.

Any coin that implements the KGW is vulnerable to a time warp attack, and the only thing that can stop such an attack would be to have significantly more power than the attacker.  Then again, there is no way of knowing how much, if any, power would be needed until such an attack is attempted.  Furthermore, miners that do not have multiple pool or solo mining backups are doing the users of the coin a disservice.  Pools can be brought down, thus reducing the amount of power an attacker needs to fork a chain.  

This exploit is real, and it is only a matter of time before someone takes advantage of everyone's false sense of security.  People can hate on BCX or MarkM all they want, but I would urge those people to understand what they are truly trying to say.  MarkM consistently harps on the idea of hashing power, and for good reason.  If a PoW, blockchain based coin is to be taken seriously and used daily by people around the world, the chain needs to be secure.  The chain can only be secured with hashing.  If a chain is not secure, a malicious individual will attack it.  That is the reality of this world.  Honestly, each and every developer and user of a coin that implements the KGW should be thanking BCX for bringing to light the time warp flaw.  

thanks a lot for this post, Math


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 31, 2014, 06:10:26 PM
http://forum.auroracoin.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=575

Concur with dev's response..

There's been no proof of any successful attack on AUR.

Though I hope to see one successfully pulled off so we can really evaluate and address KGW's vulnerabilities.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 06:49:45 PM
Can something be done about to not get this kind of manipulation repeated? Bunch of noobs managed to create enough misinformation. All because their accounts are old.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: illodin on March 31, 2014, 06:53:21 PM
so when can we expect fireworks from you?

go fuck something up, need some entertainment here.  >:(

You sound like you missed the best money making opportunity of the year so far.

sorry, i rode AUR's pump and dump.

in at 0.03, out at 0.11, unlike idiots that end up as bagholders.

 ;D

Tempted to post a screenshot of my wallet solomining AUR at start but don't want anymore idiots crying realizing 3x profit wasn't actually the "opportunity of the year".

 ;D

hmm, i think i missed a zero somewhere...i'm pretty sure it was around 28-30x gain during that period.

Well don't be shy, let's just say 300x?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: poornamelessme on March 31, 2014, 06:56:37 PM
Apologies if I am asking stuff that has been spelled out, but I stopped reading this thread like 20 pages back. Is the following more or less a brief synopsis of what occurred?

BCX claimed the coin was attacked, and forked to death.
In reality, all that occurred what the planned fork took place at 5400, the one the dev announced previously?
BCX claims he is instituting a time warp attack, although there is no current evidence to support it.

Argument changed, so now the fault with the coin is no longer that the airdrop will fail, dev automatically will steal premine... to the coin is insecure since it's new and lack of miners... so let's try to kill the coin before they can secure it?



Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 07:02:13 PM
Apologies if I am asking stuff that has been spelled out, but I stopped reading this thread like 20 pages back. Is the following more or less a brief synopsis of what occurred?

BCX claimed the coin was attacked, and forked to death.
In reality, all that occurred what the planned fork took place at 5400, the one the dev announced previously?
BCX claims he is instituting a time warp attack, although there is no current evidence to support it.

Argument changed, so now the fault with the coin is no longer that the airdrop will fail, dev automatically will steal premine... to the coin is insecure since it's new and lack of miners... so let's try to kill the coin before they can secure it?



The problem is people here don't know what a 51% attack and timewarp attack is. Quoting/Linking to this thread was a mistake. And ofcourse, BCX knows nothing.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 07:04:05 PM
Also that the coin is supposedly more insecure than just the normal vulnerability to over-fifty-percent attacks, due to using the gravity well thing that supposedly creates extra vulnerability that causes the chain to need significantly more hashing power than the attacker to resist the attack that gravity well thing makes possible?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: poornamelessme on March 31, 2014, 07:10:39 PM
Also that the coin is supposedly more insecure than just the normal vulnerability to over-fifty-percent attacks, due to using the gravity well thing that supposedly creates extra vulnerability that causes the chain to need significantly more hashing power than the attacker to resist the attack that gravity well thing makes possible?

-MarkM-


Hmm... okay, again apologies in advance if I say something stupid, as I am hardly an expert on coin attacks.

But wouldn't this same vulnerability occur with most other coins using the gravity well? So why was AUR chosen as the one to attack, or the one to focus on?

Didn't DarkCoin's dev come up with sort of a solution to the gravity well exploit and opensource it? I assumed they did, or were working on it.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on March 31, 2014, 07:18:21 PM
AUR set out to scam a whole nation of innocents, using them as poster-children to motivate scamming money out of foreigners into this scam.

So I guess it is a particularly eggregious scam, not only targetting altcoin insiders like the members of forums such as this one who should know better thus maybe could be said to be deliberately participating in something they knew to be a scam, hoping to rake in some of the profits of the scam as fellow scammers promoting the scam (and thus maybe to have only themselves to blame if they made a loss instead of a profit) but also targetting a whole nation of innocents and heavily involving the press in promoting the scam and encouraging innocents to fall for it.

If the fact that the gravity well was broken was already established, and someone had already came up with a fix for it, going ahead and adding the gravity well to this coin seems a kind of weird move for a developer to make, doesn't it? Like huh why deliberately add broken-ness?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 07:18:46 PM
All

I just got a message that my following message was deleted by the *topic starter*

--
@Everyone

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=551215.0

I know nothing will happen. But I still want to draw attention of wider community here towards this thread and trust abuse of Bitcointalk forums.
--

BCX, you loser!


Title: Re: delete
Post by: _noname_ on March 31, 2014, 07:22:38 PM
Following the deletion of my message by the scammer (BCX)

I have created a scam accusation thread in corresponding forum

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=551875.0


Title: Re: delete
Post by: poornamelessme on March 31, 2014, 07:26:14 PM
AUR set out to scam a whole nation of innocents, using them as poster-children to motivate scamming money out of foreigners into this scam.

So I guess it is a particularly eggregious scam, not only targetting altcoin insiders like the members of forums such as this one who should know better thus maybe could be said to be deliberately participating in something they knew to be a scam, hoping to rake in some of the profits of the scam as fellow scammers promoting the scam (and thus maybe to have only themselves to blame if they made a loss instead of a profit) but also targetting a whole nation of innocents and heavily involving the press in promoting the scam and encouraging innocents to fall for it.

If the fact that the gravity well was broken was already established, and someone had already came up with a fix for it, going ahead and adding the gravity well to this coin seems a kind of weird move for a developer to make, doesn't it? Like huh why deliberately add broken-ness?

-MarkM-


I am not sure if I have read a post with the word 'scam' used so many times. Just repeating the same word over and over doesn't make it true. It's almost like these threads read like someone shorting stock.

I view the coin more as an experiment than a scam. Yeah, the dev could steal the premine (although no evidence shows he has), and the coin could fall apart and be worth nothing. Or they might actually adopt and support it. We shall see. Many of the same arguments against AUR could be used for BTC, when it was new -- well, besides the part about giving lots of it away.

I will also add that I own no AUR, never owned any, nor even think nation coins are a particularly great idea. It just seems weird to me to see how much FUD being spread about.

As for the gravity well, again, I am not an expert, nor know what the dev has actually done there. I just find it odd that other coins use it too, yet haven't been singled out like AUR has been.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: lasciv on March 31, 2014, 07:33:57 PM
All

I just got a message that my following message was deleted by the *topic starter*

@Everyone

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=551215.0

I know nothing will happen. But I still want to draw attention of wider community here towards this thread and trust abuse of Bitcointalk forums.

BCX, you loser!

What you posted is off-topic and should be therefore deleted.
People that read that section (Meta) would like to see Alt section gone from this forum, because this pit is the trash can of BCT. They don't care, including Mods.
If you don't like FUD maybe you should go elsewhere.
Maybe you should take a look at a similar thread in Meta, where OP was asking if it is legal to use this forum for illegal activities to get a general idea what will happen to your thread. You should also look at death threats made by some Aurora cheerleaders and state your opinion in Meta on that matter as well.

BCX should be more aggressive with deleting garbage posts as this is one of the better threads I've read in the last few weeks here in Alt section.

 :-*


Title: Re: delete
Post by: poornamelessme on March 31, 2014, 07:34:25 PM
Following the deletion of my message by the scammer (BCX)

I have created a scam accusation thread in corresponding forum

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=551875.0

One of my posts was deleted in one of his self-moderated threads, as well. Although BCX claimed he didn't delete it, and let me repost. He's actually been pretty good with allowing most comments in his threads ... although I guess he might draw the line at people calling him a scammer, I guess.

As for this forum, when I first started here, I assumed it was like any other forum. Quickly I found that not to be the case. Forum moderation is close to nil.

So we get tons of trolling, fud, false information, shill accounts, etc. And I expect it won't be fixed, as this little alt section is looked down upon by whomever owns this forum. It's a weird situation, especially for those new here. I just sort of take it for what it is... more or less a hunt for real info, while trying to ignore all the garbage.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: nbk on March 31, 2014, 07:34:55 PM
??? for weeks i red this timewarp shit...everyone is hating at aurora, kgw, kimoto & megacoin....
so has anyone of these professionals red the kimoto gravity well guide?
here you find it!!! http://imgur.com/a/z2AIw (http://imgur.com/a/z2AIw)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kewal on March 31, 2014, 08:15:05 PM
This is a great example of why alt-coins should be implemented on top of a system like Ethereum.  A small group can have a coin, and be protected by the overall use and mining power behind the much larger community.  I'm looking forward to the pre-sale of Ether.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: molecular on March 31, 2014, 08:16:19 PM
oh this is like the good ole days.

Not secure the network and get PWNED.

the good old times?

:) :) :)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 31, 2014, 08:28:21 PM
After integrating KGW into my own coins code.. I can see how KGW does open up an additional vulnerability of a preexisting timewarp attack/51% attack vector as described succinctly here: https://litecoin.info/Time_warp_attack

Essentially KGW just makes it easier to pull off a 51% attack, since it retargets every block using timestamps.

But it's not that easy to begin with to pull that off, and will require some special coding of a secret chain-client to do the private chain mining to be in perfect unison and publish blocks at the right time.  Not like anyone with 51% hash power just throwing at a pool will be able to pull it off... And for anyone to really bother, it has to really be worth their while... (or they are just really interested in an academic experiment)

So it's not as easy to execute the attack as people here think... and the "damage" is far less than what people think as well.  So it's not "game-over" even if it does happen, it can be repaired.

I took Hirocoin's change recently into my own coin to make it a bit harder to execute.. doesn't make it impossible.. but it's just more barriers: https://github.com/micryon/planetdollar/commit/0c3e5f2acefc77d34ac60e272ab662b6a3120366


Title: Re: delete
Post by: nbk on March 31, 2014, 08:48:56 PM
Quote
Essentially KGW just makes it easier to pull off a 51% attack, since it retargets every block using timestamps.

and what about KGWs longtime adjustment?

do you set different parameter to your KGW?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on March 31, 2014, 09:04:31 PM
Quote
Essentially KGW just makes it easier to pull off a 51% attack, since it retargets every block using timestamps.

and what about KGWs longtime adjustment?

do you set different parameter to your KGW?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by longtime adjustment, do you mean the adjustment ratio?

Code:
 PastRateAdjustmentRatio                        = double(PastRateTargetSeconds) / double(PastRateActualSeconds);


What I'm referring to the vulnerability is really just this:

Code:
 PastRateActualSeconds                        = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime() - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();

Which basically reads system clocks... and feeds into the ratio adjustment that is used to calc the next diff..


Hirocoin's code will basically just prevent acceptance of a publishing of a bad time-warped private chain, by checking against timestamps before accepting blocks, limiting the warping factor.

Code:
if (GetBlockTime() > GetAdjustedTime() + 15 * 60) {
           return error("AcceptBlock() : block's timestamp too far in the future");
        }


Title: Re: delete
Post by: nbk on March 31, 2014, 09:14:23 PM
part of the guide....

Quote
For large adjustment factors this happens earlier than for the ones closer to one. This is to have a quick adaptation if the hashrate changes a lot, and a slower one if not - then we want a longer period to get a better average. The parameters of the Kimoto formula are adjusted in such a way that one roughly adjusts in one day to a 10% change and in seven days to a 1.2% change. A minimum of 144 blocks determine the new difficulty and at most 4032 (0.25 days or 7 days for a 2.5 minute blocktime).

What happens when the minimum of 144 blocks isn't reached or the maximum of 4032 blocks is exceeded?

The minimum is 144 blocks. So if the adjustment factor is larger than 1+0.7084, then the factor for 144 blocks is taken. At 4032 the algo stops and the average for 4032 is taken no matter what. KGW gives an answer for both boundary cases.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on April 01, 2014, 12:46:20 AM
part of the guide....

Quote
For large adjustment factors this happens earlier than for the ones closer to one. This is to have a quick adaptation if the hashrate changes a lot, and a slower one if not - then we want a longer period to get a better average. The parameters of the Kimoto formula are adjusted in such a way that one roughly adjusts in one day to a 10% change and in seven days to a 1.2% change. A minimum of 144 blocks determine the new difficulty and at most 4032 (0.25 days or 7 days for a 2.5 minute blocktime).

What happens when the minimum of 144 blocks isn't reached or the maximum of 4032 blocks is exceeded?

The minimum is 144 blocks. So if the adjustment factor is larger than 1+0.7084, then the factor for 144 blocks is taken. At 4032 the algo stops and the average for 4032 is taken no matter what. KGW gives an answer for both boundary cases.

The adjustment ratio may do a little to curb it.. but fundamentally the problem is in this segment:

Code:
PastRateActualSeconds                        = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime() - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();

Code:
if (PastRateActualSeconds != 0 && PastRateTargetSeconds != 0) {
                bnNew *= PastRateActualSeconds;
                bnNew /= PastRateTargetSeconds;

bnNew being the current difficulty.

Because of this you can continually trick the algo to lower the difficulty down to:

Code:
bnProofOfWorkLimit(~uint256(0) >> 20);

You have to imagine just mining outside of real network, in your own intranet.. with just two computers.  and then flipping the system time to the future, making algo believe that more time has passed than actually has between blocks.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: digitalindustry on April 01, 2014, 02:25:56 AM
This is a great example of why alt-coins should be implemented on top of a system like Ethereum.  A small group can have a coin, and be protected by the overall use and mining power behind the much larger community.  I'm looking forward to the pre-sale of Ether.

Ha ha ha good one.

At least someone has a sense of humor in this circle jerk.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: digitalindustry on April 01, 2014, 02:28:30 AM
Looks like AUR is an unmitigated success. 

It only gets harder from here on in for the monopoly capitalists.  Think about it there is next to zero infustructure on ground right now, yet price is still sky high compared to take up.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Starlightbreaker on April 01, 2014, 03:14:00 AM
so when can we expect fireworks from you?

go fuck something up, need some entertainment here.  >:(

You sound like you missed the best money making opportunity of the year so far.

sorry, i rode AUR's pump and dump.

in at 0.03, out at 0.11, unlike idiots that end up as bagholders.

 ;D

Tempted to post a screenshot of my wallet solomining AUR at start but don't want anymore idiots crying realizing 3x profit wasn't actually the "opportunity of the year".

 ;D

hmm, i think i missed a zero somewhere...i'm pretty sure it was around 28-30x gain during that period.

Well don't be shy, let's just say 300x?

Hah, i wish it was 300x.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nite69 on April 01, 2014, 03:40:06 AM
Actually mikey you might want to ask Nite69, the developer brought on by the Auroracoin team to help prepare the KGW TW fix. Nite69 realizes there is a KGW TW underway and by extension so does the Auroracoin Team even though won't and can't admit it.

About the vulnerability BCX found; I'm quite sure this will fix it, like any time warp vulnerability. Shame us, we should have fixed this already earlier :-\
Code:
+ int64 LatestBlockTime = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime();
  for (unsigned int i = 1; BlockReading && BlockReading->nHeight > 0; i++) {
  if (PastBlocksMax > 0 && i > PastBlocksMax) { break; }
  PastBlocksMass++;
@@ -894,8 +895,10 @@ unsigned int static GravityWell(const CBlockIndex* pindexLast, const CBlock *pbl
  if (i == 1) { PastDifficultyAverage.SetCompact(BlockReading->nBits); }
  else { PastDifficultyAverage = ((CBigNum().SetCompact(BlockReading->nBits) - PastDifficultyAverage
Prev) / i) + PastDifficultyAveragePrev; }
  PastDifficultyAveragePrev = PastDifficultyAverage;
-
- PastRateActualSeconds = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime() - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
+ if (LatestBlockTime < BlockReading->GetBlockTime()) {
+ LatestBlockTime = BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
+ }
+ PastRateActualSeconds = LatestBlockTime - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
  PastRateTargetSeconds = TargetBlocksSpacingSeconds * PastBlocksMass;
  PastRateAdjustmentRatio = double(1);
  if (PastRateActualSeconds < 0) { PastRateActualSeconds = 0; }

Thank you for finding this and bringing this to general knowledge, however, I would prefer some other way to show it..


Title: Re: delete
Post by: micryon on April 01, 2014, 03:56:00 AM
Actually mikey you might want to ask Nite69, the developer brought on by the Auroracoin team to help prepare the KGW TW fix. Nite69 realizes there is a KGW TW underway and by extension so does the Auroracoin Team even though won't and can't admit it.

About the vulnerability BCX found; I'm quite sure this will fix it, like any time warp vulnerability. Shame us, we should have fixed this already earlier :-\
Code:
+ int64 LatestBlockTime = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime();
  for (unsigned int i = 1; BlockReading && BlockReading->nHeight > 0; i++) {
  if (PastBlocksMax > 0 && i > PastBlocksMax) { break; }
  PastBlocksMass++;
@@ -894,8 +895,10 @@ unsigned int static GravityWell(const CBlockIndex* pindexLast, const CBlock *pbl
  if (i == 1) { PastDifficultyAverage.SetCompact(BlockReading->nBits); }
  else { PastDifficultyAverage = ((CBigNum().SetCompact(BlockReading->nBits) - PastDifficultyAverage
Prev) / i) + PastDifficultyAveragePrev; }
  PastDifficultyAveragePrev = PastDifficultyAverage;
-
- PastRateActualSeconds = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime() - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
+ if (LatestBlockTime < BlockReading->GetBlockTime()) {
+ LatestBlockTime = BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
+ }
+ PastRateActualSeconds = LatestBlockTime - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
  PastRateTargetSeconds = TargetBlocksSpacingSeconds * PastBlocksMass;
  PastRateAdjustmentRatio = double(1);
  if (PastRateActualSeconds < 0) { PastRateActualSeconds = 0; }

Thank you for finding this and bringing this to general knowledge, however, I would prefer some other way to show it..


wow... well that's quite simple :)

btw looks like balduro has also been adding static checkpoints, as an additional countermeasure... https://github.com/baldurodinsson/auroracoin-project/commits/master


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on April 01, 2014, 04:38:41 AM
I just woke up, or maybe still mostly asleep, so maybe my orders of magnitude are off or something but... one gigahash? Isn't that kind of puny to even be considered an attack at all? How the heck is any chain so pathetic that one gigahash is even hardly noticed let alone a threat?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: molecular on April 01, 2014, 05:43:43 AM
Actually mikey you might want to ask Nite69, the developer brought on by the Auroracoin team to help prepare the KGW TW fix. Nite69 realizes there is a KGW TW underway and by extension so does the Auroracoin Team even though won't and can't admit it.

About the vulnerability BCX found; I'm quite sure this will fix it, like any time warp vulnerability. Shame us, we should have fixed this already earlier :-\
Code:
+ int64 LatestBlockTime = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime();
  for (unsigned int i = 1; BlockReading && BlockReading->nHeight > 0; i++) {
  if (PastBlocksMax > 0 && i > PastBlocksMax) { break; }
  PastBlocksMass++;
@@ -894,8 +895,10 @@ unsigned int static GravityWell(const CBlockIndex* pindexLast, const CBlock *pbl
  if (i == 1) { PastDifficultyAverage.SetCompact(BlockReading->nBits); }
  else { PastDifficultyAverage = ((CBigNum().SetCompact(BlockReading->nBits) - PastDifficultyAverage
Prev) / i) + PastDifficultyAveragePrev; }
  PastDifficultyAveragePrev = PastDifficultyAverage;
-
- PastRateActualSeconds = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime() - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
+ if (LatestBlockTime < BlockReading->GetBlockTime()) {
+ LatestBlockTime = BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
+ }
+ PastRateActualSeconds = LatestBlockTime - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
  PastRateTargetSeconds = TargetBlocksSpacingSeconds * PastBlocksMass;
  PastRateAdjustmentRatio = double(1);
  if (PastRateActualSeconds < 0) { PastRateActualSeconds = 0; }

Thank you for finding this and bringing this to general knowledge, however, I would prefer some other way to show it..


Thank you!

What would be potential drawbacks / sideeffects of this fix?

There's something I don't quite get... If the attacks works roughly like you explained (quoted here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=504103.msg5582049#msg5582049), then why would we see any effects (as BCX says: "increasingly uneven block times"). After all, BCX only publishes his secret chain at the end of the attack, not at this point, right?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: illodin on April 01, 2014, 05:52:13 AM
I just woke up

lol... your only weakness truly is hungry and sleepy.  :D


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on April 01, 2014, 05:57:46 AM
I just woke up, or maybe still mostly asleep, so maybe my orders of magnitude are off or something but... one gigahash? Isn't that kind of puny to even be considered an attack at all? How the heck is any chain so pathetic that one gigahash is even hardly noticed let alone a threat?

-MarkM-

wouldn't an attacker working on an attack chain be benefiting from low difficulty while mining future blocks?  i would have thought TW meant KGW coins could be forked with far less than 51%.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nite69 on April 01, 2014, 06:01:57 AM


Thank you!

What would be potential drawbacks / sideeffects of this fix?

There's something I don't quite get... If the attacks works roughly like you explained (quoted here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=504103.msg5582049#msg5582049), then why would we see any effects (as BCX says: "increasingly uneven block times"). After all, BCX only publishes his secret chain at the end of the attack, not at this point, right?

I would appreciate others to comment on this: does it fix the problem? Does it have any unwanted side-effects? I have not found, but that does not mean there are no.

I'm wondering the same; there should ne no side effects before the secret attack chain is published.

Not sure if I should publish this or not. However, I think if someone is anyway doing it, then publishing this should be just good on the long run. And you cannot know if my fix works or not, if you don't know what it should fix.

This is one way of using the TW vulnerability, which that code prevents (but not the earlier fix):

1. Use isolated mining environment, as you need at this kind of attack
2. First generate blocks with long timestamps to get low diff on your own chain. This takes time, but gets easier after every block.
3. When you have a low difficulty, start generating blocks with time differences (hours:minutes) : +12:00, -11.51, +12.00 -11.51... This is for 5 minute target times

at step 3, you can generate 2 blocks every 9 minutes with a very low difficulty. Eventually, your chain is longer than the official, and you can publish it.

Every time you generate a block with +12:00, you get -10% difficulty. Every time you generate -11:51, you get +10%, ie you stay at the low difficulty. The problem is that KGW difficulty calculation counts from the latest block's time, not the latest blocktime

But note; this is also prevented with automatic checkpoints. And you have to start over after every published checkpoint.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on April 01, 2014, 06:16:25 AM
I just woke up, or maybe still mostly asleep, so maybe my orders of magnitude are off or something but... one gigahash? Isn't that kind of puny to even be considered an attack at all? How the heck is any chain so pathetic that one gigahash is even hardly noticed let alone a threat?

-MarkM-

wouldn't an attacker working on an attack chain be benefiting from low difficulty while mining future blocks?  i would have thought TW meant KGW coins could be forked with far less than 51%.

That part puzzles me.

On the one hand, Math claimed that to defend takes significantly more hash power than the attacker.

On the other hand, I thought the "length" of a chain is the total work, so that regardless of whether the work was done in a TARDIS or not it still takes more work than any other fork in order to be the main/real fork?

If the defenders do more work than the attacker, how is the attacker winning with less work? Or do they somehow get more work out of less hashes?

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on April 01, 2014, 06:34:33 AM
Because I am mining at a much lower difficulty than they are.

Trust me 1 GH is plenty.

Less difficulty just lets less work make more blocks, doesn't it? The amount of work is no different? Or is work being calculated as the amount more than current difficulty or somesuch instead of just the amount actually done?

I had not thought (or realised?) that the same amount of work becomes more work when it happens to be applied to a lower difficulty block; I thought work is what you actually do and difficulty is whether that is enough for a block.

Does the fact that lower work hash-results don't get onto the chain at all at higher difficulty make the difference? So that more of the attacker's hashes (and thus their work) get onto the chain than do the defender's hashes (and thus their work)?

(The defender more often than the attacker doing work that isn't enough to get a block into the chain thus never gets counted?)

(Which maybe could also be part of why faster block chains get more security sooner out of the same amount of hashpower?)

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: solex on April 01, 2014, 06:46:55 AM
This puzzles me too.

Isn't cumulative difficulty normally the summed target difficulty? Does the TW make the target diff of each block appear higher than what was actually required in hashing power to mine it?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on April 01, 2014, 06:49:43 AM
There is no cumulation of difficulty, only of "work".

But, only chunks (hashes) of "work" that meet or beat the difficulty threshold that is their target get into the chain.

Low enough difficulty and every hash would get into the chain.

High difficulty hardly any hashes luck into enough of a "work" value result to get into the chain so most hashes aren't counted in the chain thus aren't part of the accumulated total "work" that determines which chain is "longest".

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: iopq on April 01, 2014, 07:20:06 AM
Shouldn't the coin then say that the chain with the most work "block * difficulty" is better than a chain with more blocks at a lower difficulty? As far as I understand every coin out there considers the highest blockchain to be the best. But wouldn't the highest sum of blocks * difficulty be more secure from time warp exploits?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on April 01, 2014, 07:26:06 AM
Shouldn't the coin then say that the chain with the most work "block * difficulty" is better than a chain with more blocks at a lower difficulty? As far as I understand every coin out there considers the highest blockchain to be the best. But wouldn't the highest sum of blocks * difficulty be more secure from time warp exploits?

On the contrary, it seems. The timewarp attacker spawns many more blocks than the defender, so if more blocks meant more length/height in the measure of which chain is the winner, the attacker would have even more of an advantage.

Maybe divide by the number of blocks instead of multiplying?

But likely that would lead instead to an attack by saving up a chain of few blocks that each took massive amounts of time/work to create.

So either way the current way of adding up the work is likely the best, it is just unfortunate that there is no record of how much work was actually done (how many hashes actually done) by hashers between hashes that got lucky (got enough work to meet their target and thus get into the chain and thus count at all toward total work).

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: iopq on April 01, 2014, 07:30:58 AM
Shouldn't the coin then say that the chain with the most work "block * difficulty" is better than a chain with more blocks at a lower difficulty? As far as I understand every coin out there considers the highest blockchain to be the best. But wouldn't the highest sum of blocks * difficulty be more secure from time warp exploits?

On the contrary, it seems. The timewarp attacker spawns many more blocks than the defender, so if more blocks meant more length/height in the measure of which chain is the winner, the attacker would have even more of an advantage.

Maybe divide by the number of blocks instead of multiplying?

But likely that would lead instead to an attack by sabing up a chain of few blocks that each took massive amounts of time/work to create.

So either way the current way of adding up the work is likely the best, it is just unfortunate that there is no record of how much work was actually done (how many hashes actually done) by hashers between hashes that got lucky (got enough work to meet their target and thus get into the chain and thus count at all toward total work).

-MarkM-

well he's mining at a difficulty several times lower so that's why he's generating more blocks

sum(block * the difficulty at the time of that block) = total chain
the exploit gives a lot of "cheap" blocks at which point the difficulty is low, so the total sum is low

if the height was calculated using the difficulty at the time the block was found, the real chain has fewer blocks but at a much higher difficulty
I postulate that hashpower * time = the height of the blockchain under my calculation which means the real chain wins every time


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Omnivion on April 01, 2014, 07:42:45 AM
What iopq is saying is the sum of each every block's difficulties, which should be very close to the total amount of work done in all but the short term.  (Basically the discrete version of an integral, not sure if there's a mathematical name for it or if you'd just call it a sum.)

That seems like a reasonable idea, although it may make it easier make very small forks.  (You can mine one block slower than the true chain, which causes your difficulty to go up, then you only need to catch up to the true chain rather than surpass it to gain preference - something along those lines.  You could probably fix this by making a minimum difficulty of at least the last 4 blocks or so greater to override an equal/longer block.)


Title: Re: delete
Post by: YarkoL on April 01, 2014, 07:44:01 AM

What would be potential drawbacks / sideeffects of this fix?


I'm wondering if there are any cases, where a "legit" block may have earlier timestamp than latest blocktime.
For instance because of different clock settings and daylight saving time adjustments.  

Has there been a lot of rejected blocks since the new fix?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: thaaanos on April 01, 2014, 09:08:47 AM
Actually mikey you might want to ask Nite69, the developer brought on by the Auroracoin team to help prepare the KGW TW fix. Nite69 realizes there is a KGW TW underway and by extension so does the Auroracoin Team even though won't and can't admit it.

About the vulnerability BCX found; I'm quite sure this will fix it, like any time warp vulnerability. Shame us, we should have fixed this already earlier :-\
Code:
+ int64 LatestBlockTime = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime();
  for (unsigned int i = 1; BlockReading && BlockReading->nHeight > 0; i++) {
  if (PastBlocksMax > 0 && i > PastBlocksMax) { break; }
  PastBlocksMass++;
@@ -894,8 +895,10 @@ unsigned int static GravityWell(const CBlockIndex* pindexLast, const CBlock *pbl
  if (i == 1) { PastDifficultyAverage.SetCompact(BlockReading->nBits); }
  else { PastDifficultyAverage = ((CBigNum().SetCompact(BlockReading->nBits) - PastDifficultyAverage
Prev) / i) + PastDifficultyAveragePrev; }
  PastDifficultyAveragePrev = PastDifficultyAverage;
-
- PastRateActualSeconds = BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime() - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
+ if (LatestBlockTime < BlockReading->GetBlockTime()) {
+ LatestBlockTime = BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
+ }
+ PastRateActualSeconds = LatestBlockTime - BlockReading->GetBlockTime();
  PastRateTargetSeconds = TargetBlocksSpacingSeconds * PastBlocksMass;
  PastRateAdjustmentRatio = double(1);
  if (PastRateActualSeconds < 0) { PastRateActualSeconds = 0; }
just quick look
int64 LatestBlockTime, shouldn't this be unsigned? do you store negative values in BlockTime?

I wonder if an attacker can start in the past move his way backwards in time until he appears in the future.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: iopq on April 01, 2014, 03:11:58 PM
What iopq is saying is the sum of each every block's difficulties, which should be very close to the total amount of work done in all but the short term.  (Basically the discrete version of an integral, not sure if there's a mathematical name for it or if you'd just call it a sum.)

That seems like a reasonable idea, although it may make it easier make very small forks.  (You can mine one block slower than the true chain, which causes your difficulty to go up, then you only need to catch up to the true chain rather than surpass it to gain preference - something along those lines.  You could probably fix this by making a minimum difficulty of at least the last 4 blocks or so greater to override an equal/longer block.)
well then you'd need to mine two blocks to orphan one
and one of them at higher difficulty

but any counter-measures would depend on the exact difficulty-adjustment algorithm and whether the difficulty adjusts every block or every x blocks
someone more knowledgeable than me could probably tell me why my idea is bad


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on April 01, 2014, 03:27:33 PM
The work is at least equal to the difficulty (well, actually, reciprocally equal; congruent, so to speak).

Adding up difficulty instead of work would make the lucky hashes that happen to be way the heck better than their target difficulty requires from counting as any better than would the worst possible hash that suffices to meet the target. If the attacker is getting way the heck more hashes into the blackchain (way the heck more blocks into the blockchain) thennot counting any work in excess of target on each block should statistically tend to lose the attacker more excess work than the defender, but if the attacker is using lower difficulty blocks then still more of the attacker's hashes will tend to meet the target so the attacker will be having more of their hashes count.

Maybe the attacker's advantage might be less but I suspect the attacker would still have the advantage.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: sudukkk on April 01, 2014, 03:31:27 PM
Is this a good time to buying some AUR?
The prize volatility is very large, maybe is a chance.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: xxzbeh on April 01, 2014, 03:36:57 PM
It's bound to be a shit coin.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on April 01, 2014, 03:37:37 PM
If the attack works the price might go down. How is their hashing power looking now? Does it seem like enough yet to counter such an attack? If not likely they'll be available cheap once the attack takes effect, if exchanges re-list them after some kind of damage control or recovery plan is done after the attack.

Realistically they ought not be listed on exchanges at all until they fix their hashing power, as being listed increases the number of people who will be hurt and the incentive for attackers to bother attacking.

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: kalus on April 01, 2014, 03:52:46 PM
auroracoin is ~5ghash/sec.  still v. vulnerable for a coin of this size and value.

http://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/hashrate-aur.html

this was up from the 1.2 ghash/sec when block 5400 rolled around.



Title: Re: delete
Post by: markm on April 01, 2014, 03:58:22 PM
Its a lot more than the ~1GH the (known) attacker is supposedly using, though. Can ~1GH beat ~5 using timewarp? I guess we will find out.

Agreed though that it is pathetically low. We know that just a stupid meme can conjure up 100+ gigahashes almost overnight, so any less is just asking for a "PWN the blockchain(s)!" meme to pop up and PWN it...

-MarkM-


Title: Re: delete
Post by: Nite69 on April 01, 2014, 04:14:40 PM

just quick look
int64 LatestBlockTime, shouldn't this be unsigned? do you store negative values in BlockTime?

I wonder if an attacker can start in the past move his way backwards in time until he appears in the future.

In principle, you are right. In practise it does not matter.
The origin of LatestBlockTime is from block timestamp which is unsigned 32 bit integer. Of course it would make sense to use unsigned integers, but BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime() also returns signed 64 bit integer. Don't know why, maybe using signed has made some calculations easier and since the origin is 32 bit there is no problem.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: jnada on April 01, 2014, 04:29:44 PM
@Nite69


I sent you a PM about your fix.


~BCX~

Wow, seems like there is a tint of cooperation at the end :) That's nice.


Title: Re: delete
Post by: marcotheminer on April 01, 2014, 04:32:03 PM
seems like aurora is still going strong?


Title: Re: delete
Post by: thaaanos on April 01, 2014, 06:32:27 PM

just quick look
int64 LatestBlockTime, shouldn't this be unsigned? do you store negative values in BlockTime?

I wonder if an attacker can start in the past move his way backwards in time until he appears in the future.

In principle, you are right. In practise it does not matter.
The origin of LatestBlockTime is from block timestamp which is unsigned 32 bit integer. Of course it would make sense to use unsigned integers, but BlockLastSolved->GetBlockTime() also returns signed 64 bit integer. Don't know why, maybe using signed has made some calculations easier and since the origin is 32 bit there is no problem.

I assume timestamp is Unix time?
So what happens after  06:28:15 UTC on Sun, 7 February 2106?
You will probably have fix it by then but lets say an attacker fast forward to this day and then wraps around 1970 to current day, are you safe?