Could you provide more details as to "cryptotransfer money exchange" aspect ?
|
|
|
Yeah, Geist Geld now has a huge competitor for "damn fastest coin"
|
|
|
Or maybe CH should rip off Geist and claim the newfound turbo-charged blockrate as a feature ?
|
|
|
Oh, any bets as to whether the guy who did it will wow to never release the rapidmined FlaccidCoins on the market?
|
|
|
It appears that CoinHunter decided to rip off Geist...or perhaps even top it in terms of block speed
|
|
|
Then you should bow before my botnet might, little one.
|
|
|
Trying to do a doublespend/history overwrite is of limited economic utility to the botnet op due to risk of failing to get money before stuff goes down and effort needed, especially when compared to simplistic "mine coins, sell less than 30% of mined coins, rinse repeat" which is the best modus operandi for an economically motivated 51-er.
Botnet ops are likely to be economically motivated.
Also, only the first botnet poses a 51-threat. If the first botnet decides not to destroy the net, the threat of 51 will disappear naturally as more botnets swarm in.
NOW. When the economic value is next to nothing. What is someday this altcoin handles Paypal sized transactions (~$200M per day). I mean your only defense is to remain so small and pathetic that no botnet would feel the need to destroy you. Not that they can't at any point (both now and far into the future) just that they feel no reason to because the network is insignificant. Excuse me, but even now "mine coins, sell less than 30% of mined coins, rinse repeat" is more economically sound for someone who has 51 percent, simply because effort is minimal, revenue is guaranteed, there are no electricity and other such costs (for the bnop), and by virtue of having 51+ of coin production, the botnet can drive price up by simply selling off a tiny fraction of what it mines. Then explain the double spend on i0coin 1) Sophisticated technological prank. The point wasn't so much to rob doublec (If we assume that perp was a botnet, that is, had no electricity, maintenance, and other such costs, the perp could have simply taken over and hogged i0c supply, driven the price up by selling off only a fraction, then made quite a sum by sustaining this scheme for extended period of time). The point was to show off, to demonstrate capacity to "pwn" the defenses in place 2) Was not perpetrated by a botnet (the perp paid electricity and other costs), thus followed different cost/benefit analysis in regards to possibility of price manipulation 3) Combination of the above
|
|
|
Trying to do a doublespend/history overwrite is of limited economic utility to the botnet op due to risk of failing to get money before stuff goes down and effort needed, especially when compared to simplistic "mine coins, sell less than 30% of mined coins, rinse repeat" which is the best modus operandi for an economically motivated 51-er.
Botnet ops are likely to be economically motivated.
Also, only the first botnet poses a 51-threat. If the first botnet decides not to destroy the net, the threat of 51 will disappear naturally as more botnets swarm in.
NOW. When the economic value is next to nothing. What is someday this altcoin handles Paypal sized transactions (~$200M per day). I mean your only defense is to remain so small and pathetic that no botnet would feel the need to destroy you. Not that they can't at any point (both now and far into the future) just that they feel no reason to because the network is insignificant. Excuse me, but even now "mine coins, sell less than 30% of mined coins, rinse repeat" is more economically sound for someone who has 51 percent, simply because effort is minimal, revenue is guaranteed, there are no electricity and other such costs (for the bnop), and by virtue of having 51+ of coin production, the botnet can drive price up by simply selling off no more than a tiny fraction of what it mines. I find the assumption that the first desire of a botnet op would be to engage in a comparatively tricky and risky (as in, might fail) quest to doublespend instead of just mining (and hogging the majority of stuff mined) and selling (a very small fraction) to be rather peculiar. People with small-time back-alley mugger mentality rarely drive around large botnets. Or large anything for that matter.
|
|
|
Trying to do a doublespend/history overwrite is of limited economic utility to the botnet op due to risk of failing to get money before stuff goes down and effort needed, especially when compared to simplistic and "success guaranteed" scheme of "mine coins, sell less than 30% of mined coins, rinse repeat" which is the best modus operandi for an economically motivated 51-er.
Botnet ops are likely to be economically motivated.
Also, only the first botnet poses a 51-threat. If the first botnet decides not to destroy the net, the threat of 51 will disappear naturally as more botnets swarm in.
|
|
|
Okay, the bounty entry on the new site is glitchy, so I will just post here. I place a 500 TBX bounty on making and maintaining a collection of windows minerds for various platforms (intel, AMD, 32 and 64 bits, with several optimization tricks). First person to upload the collection and link here wins (links and filenames must, of course, be descriptive) Static builds will be preferred (so as to ensure that there won't be a dll hell to deal with ) Gotta run now.
|
|
|
He was fun while he tried
|
|
|
However, deflationists pinged and poked me with so much effort and zeal that I will introduce deflationary influences in TBX (don't worry though, no subsidy cuts and no "demurrage" reaching into user's pocket)
Watch out for next TBX bounty
TBX is pretty much dead by now. Litecoin is the next popular scamchain mate. Go with the flow LOL *Yawn* You're not even trying anymore, are you ?
|
|
|
However, deflationists pinged and poked me with so much effort and zeal that I will introduce deflationary influences in TBX (don't worry though, no subsidy cuts and no "demurrage" reaching into user's pocket)
Watch out for next TBX bounty
|
|
|
No, once again your "humor" shows utter lack of refinement
|
|
|
I like the "unfeasible economics" part a lot.
In b4 "zomgflation" argument ?
Also, for the love of Lukashenko, GG never had asymmetrical adjust (I haz Github to be my witness), y people no get fact straight ?
Well the question then is... did you cash out yet? 1.2.3.... chance over So, I see you won't support your peculiar notion that economics are somehow infeasible ? Well, sad. This thread could use some pointless Aurstrian/Keynes clash (pointless because neither applies to exotic non-autonomous non-state economies fueled by a quasi-monetary system based upon infinitely divisible and re-nominable products eldritch mathematications) Right a debate would be pretty pointless. But my point is: The current Zeitgeist works against you... Zeitgeist...that's bad .... I mean, the movie was pretty terrible all around.
|
|
|
*must resist desire to make an obvious yet ill-mannered joke*
|
|
|
I like the "unfeasible economics" part a lot.
In b4 "zomgflation" argument ?
Also, for the love of Lukashenko, GG never had asymmetrical adjust (I haz Github to be my witness), y people no get fact straight ?
Well the question then is... did you cash out yet? 1.2.3.... chance over So, I see you won't support your peculiar notion that economics are somehow infeasible ? Well, sad. This thread could use some pointless Aurstrian/Keynesian clash (pointless because neither applies to exotic non-autonomous non-state economies fueled by a quasi-monetary system based upon infinitely divisible and re-nominable products eldritch mathematications)
|
|
|
I like the "unfeasible economics" part a lot.
In b4 "zomgflation" argument ?
Also, for the love of Lukashenko, GG never had asymmetrical adjust (I haz Github to be my witness), y people no get fact straight ?
|
|
|
You probably compiled the master branch instead of the cpumine branch (which has the scrypt algorithm implemented).
How do you compile the cpumine branch, please? It's the default branch.
|
|
|
I am a little curious about this currency? Why have you opted to make it GPU 'hostile'? What do you mean by this? I'm a little lost as I'm used to mining with GPU for everything else.Can GPU mining work but with limitations or is it all blocked from GPU? How can Tenebrix tell if CPU/APU/GPU/FPGA is used to mine it rather than being CPU mined like intended? Theoretically some guy can just point his GPU to a named worker set to mine this currency?
LOL. Read up mate. The algo is scrypt shit. Cannot be accelerated on GPUs. Only Linux 64 bit AMD plastic shit CPUs. No love for Intel on Linux 64 or even Windblows. Ok thanks.I don't get much of a chance to go on these forums much anymore due to constant work I have to do elsewhere so I can't really read up on much these days.Most of us have jobs including me and sometimes those jobs can get in the way of having a social life (I know,it's annoying but that's life I guess) Anyways thank you for giving me an idea of why GPUs will be useless with mining this currency.Motto is if you want to mine with GPU,look elsewhere. You can mine this with CPU while mining something else with GPU.
|
|
|
|