Irrelevant since Aurora is not a PoS coin.

It is, on the contrary, the most vulnerable type of coin: plain scrypt.

(Every idiot with a GPU and meme/4chan sensibilities knows how to crap all over aka PWN scrypt coins and does so all day every day for LOLs and profits.)

-MarkM-

scrypt-n is no betterv than scrypt, the same attackers can attack it with the same gear.

Until ASICs come out, once there are ASICs for it defenders defending a merged familt of coins might well be able between them all to muster enough hashing power to secure a blockchain, and in fact multiple blockchains. But scrypt-n ASICs are far away yet, so scrypt is better for now since scrypt ASICs are actually on the horizon now.

So if you actually want to secure your coin, start ordering up and.or designing and manufacturing ASICs to defend it with.

Until then you are vulnerable to any bunch of kids armed with GPUs and susceptible to memes.

-MarkM-

It is insanely insecure, designed to fail, a total crapcoin from the get-go, probably a deliberate scam.

-MarkM-

Well then it is fortunate there are hundreds of scamcoins to test attacks on, eh.

-MarkM-

The kids who operated their toy mining operations too ineffectively to be able to afford ASICs will try to make more and more toy coins to play with, but there is no good reason for serious money to buy such toy garbage, rather the serious investors will want to invest in secure currencies, and that means families of merged mined coins secured by ASICs.

(Assuming they are going to invest in proof of work blockchain based currencies at all, of course.)

-MarkM-

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-

Exactly, that is why the time to buy is on the way down and at the bottom (on the way is so you definitely at least got some somewhat cheap even if you don't guess the exact bottom), not once they start going up. Once they start going up you want to already have your sell orders in place waiting to sell at a profit the coins you already bought back when it was going down. (And while it is going up, people buying your sell orders, place your buy orders ready for the next down-turn.)

The trick is to figure out which are the serial up-down-up-down coins and which are only going down because they are merely a dump not a blockchain with serious miners devoted to securing it.

A big clue there is that miners who do not have to abandon one coin to mine another can well afford to continue securing the coins they already mined while still being free to mine new coins. Thus the appeal of the merged mined coins. Look at DeVCoin for example, it has gone down many times but keeps on skyrocketing back up again too.

Basically those coins continue to have hashrate securing them even when they do go down in value, so are well positioned to go back up after each wave of useless garbage that lacks hashpower gets dumped into oblivion.

-MarkM-

Or buy old ones that are cheap. Some have patiently worked for years preparing themselves to be secure before going onto an exchange; miners with that kind of patience seem less likely to just dump all those years of work for a pittance, whereas miners who simply instamined for a day a coin whose starting difficulty was way too low or that had extra-high block rewards on its first blocks (often alongside having ridiculously low starting diffculty so those superblocks could be instamined) have proven to be almost unable to resist the temptation to insta-dump the moment they hit an exchange and instamine another such scamcoin abandoning the one that got onto an exchange.

-MarkM-

It has nothing to do with centralisation, it has to do with securing multiple chains with the same hashpower so that mining one chain does not require abandoning the other(s).

The current tendency is "divide and conquer": dividing up the miners so that no coin has enough miners to be secure.

Defenders need to defend all targets, attackers only need to attack one at a time. The only way to feasibly defend is thus not to divide up the defense force between targets but to defend them all at once with the same force.

-MarkM-

I see you are fans of Martian Accounting.

-MarkM-

I kind of hope it does not get onto an exchange for some time yet, because even though it is way higher difficulty its difficulty could go up even more once it is on an exchange, due to more miners merging it or pressuring their merged mining pool operators into adding it to their merge.

Maybe though it is already difficult enough that the time has come to stop quietly building up a stash at low difficulty, bite the bullet and live with it being hard to mine...

Afterall there are still CoiLedCoin and GeistGeld for the merged miners who like to build up a stash before a coin gets onto any exchanges and into large public pool merges.

-MarkM-

Why is that scam thread of interest?

Are you the scammer or something?

-MarkM-

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-

Have those others you mention refused to even try to fix the time warp vulnerability?

Also, hopefully observers will notice they are just like this scam thus figure out that they too are scams?

Thus even if they do get onto an exchange, not buy them?

-MarkM-

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-

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-

Its blockchain is insanely insecure, utterly pathetic amount of hash-power. It needs to blow a few megabucks or more on hardware with which to secure itself before it is worth even a glance, as right now it is just a train wreck / 51% attack waiting to happen.

-MarkM-

Search for the technical threads on proof of stake, especially the ones in the technical section of the forum.

-MarkM-

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-

Are deposits not working there though or something? As I still see nothing in the I0Coin order-books there?

-MarkM-