It's sad when you have to convince a company not to be complicit in fraud
"we were not doing it for any sort of profit" You know, because Cryptsy is a charity, not a for profit company.  Please stop trying to play everyone for fools, Mullick. Im not. Look at the addresses we provided the second we announced the node. No coins have moved. How has the benefitted cryptsy in any way? Is this not exactly like auroracoin? Huge premine being sold off onto holders and exchanges profiting on the way down, doesn't matter if you can sell into holders. |
|
|
|
PAYCOIN CARES TO INSTALL WORLD’S FIRST XPY ATM IN AFRICA, AIMS TO FUEL DIGITAL CURRENCY WITH HUMANITARIAN PROJECTS
PHASE 1. Project Funding by Raising Awareness
Adam and his team plan to generate funding for the PAYTM Remittance Project by sharing a Zimbabwe man’s story. A group from Team PayCoin will travel to Africa to help tell his story and how it costs him almost 50% in fees to send money to his family in Zimbabwe.
PHASE 2. Finalize and Deploy Paytms
Currently, Paycoin Cares is at work researching the optimal locations to install the first Paycoin ATMs. Their goal is to make the biggest impact as possible! Once they have generated funding and located the optimal regions, they will begin the installation of PAYTMs
im pretty sure this is magical thinking again and nice words on a paper. of course there is no road-map. no technical information about this ATM terminal. is it produced inhouse or btc terminal transformed. how many are planned. is it xpy only no names of partners. no name of the person whos story is being told. i guess its planned that there is no information that could be confirmed by a third party. its sick to leverage something like this Meanwhile... https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xpy/address.dws?P9HwdnKRZD5niS7ua9pSV4DnjKxRPHw73Y.htmhas been fed with 38,000 XPY in the last 24 hours, and that's only from the 100% hashstakers The 350% hashstakers aren't even being used at the moment according to the PayCoin Block Explorer and Coins are being pulled out of the Stakers once an hour in order to limit the amount of hyperinflation, otherwise XPY would be generating at 1 million+ Coins a week.Edit: I found a 350% hashstaker https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xpy/address.dws?PQ6PJmpSVqiNZZZKbYxccQzFVoUzebqUS3.htmand the 38,000 XPY generated and sent to this address is the same amount of total XPY generated in the last 24 hours. During a previous week, Feb 1st-8th 400k new Coins were added to the currency supply or approximately 60k a day, the reason for the drop is because now they have Coins being sent out of the hashstakers into a collection address. If GAW were to have 50k XPY in all their hashstakers and left them there, there would be more than 1 million Coins generated in one week. 38,000 Coins for me, and 20 Coins for everyone else. Happy dumps for everyone!!! Can I requote this? Maybe this is relevant now? |
|
|
|
That is correct, and it gets worse as that is just one of the many flaws.
Keys were not rotated, Compound stake was not fixed, Stake rates are all 100% compounding, No single prime protection was developed, there is no "soft fork" or easy way to disable one or more primes, What else is there? There is also a possible time exploit in the block acceptance, or timedrift. spam attacks |
|
|
|
Were not the primenode rates changed in which the primenode 10 and 20's also got 100%?
Were the keys changed with the stake rate change or was it just a change to the stake rate associated with each key? New keys were not issued, it was a change in the stake rate associated with the keys https://github.com/PaycoinFoundation/paycoin/commit/cf1eaf6a485281a9150e0b21e6232c0830d8697bShouldn't there be built in protection to prevent more than one wallet from staking with the same prime key?
Yes, it's called decentralization, having the same stake rate for everyone. So, Prime Node managers have agreed and are currently NOT compounding their stake. If these keys are legit and the coin is not forked anyone else can compound stake at  ? ridiculous percent? That is correct, and it gets worse as that is just one of the many flaws. |
|
|
|
Were not the primenode rates changed in which the primenode 10 and 20's also got 100%?
Were the keys changed with the stake rate change or was it just a change to the stake rate associated with each key? New keys were not issued, it was a change in the stake rate associated with the keys https://github.com/PaycoinFoundation/paycoin/commit/cf1eaf6a485281a9150e0b21e6232c0830d8697bShouldn't there be built in protection to prevent more than one wallet from staking with the same prime key?
Yes, it's called decentralization, having the same stake rate for everyone. |
|
|
|
This is really funny. You don't need to own any paycoin, just import the private key in the wallet. This private key is a number you saw on the internet, and a number cannot be patented. You can write them into the coinbase string of a block in some shitcoin and many people will have a copy of it stored.
Don't let them intimidate you, if I write my gmail password in my github repo then its my fault if people look into my emails. That's not different here.
If you don't have any coins what would your shiny new prime controller do? How would you know if it's doing anything? How would you know if the key is even still valid? I don't know. Why are you trying to discourage people from experimenting to figure it out? A question: I was under the impression that a minimum of 125,000 XPY was required to get the insane stake rate in "Prime Controllers". Would that be the same when using these private keys? Also, an observation from a post about Gara's recent new "Josh" account on Hashtalk: He is using a @.GAWminers.com Email. That would no longer be valid, correct? Signing up to his own forum with a spoof Email....  Were not the primenode rates changed in which the primenode 10 and 20's also got 100%? |
|
|
|
Should I point out that PYC and XPY is two different Coins? |
|
|
|
ROFL This is from paycoin slack. info@naturalbornclickers.co.zadodo [3:09 AM] Is it true the crypto nazis at btctalk are now under investigation for criminal acts of industrial sabotage just saw at cryptsy dodo [3:10 AM] who made these people the crypto nazi police that decide whats right or wrong and all the time they wish to dictate to others what to do (edited) dodo [3:12 AM] for their sakes I hope buttcream stays cheap wuahahaa dodo [3:44 AM] just saw it on cryptsy chat a while ago, no link its gone already, but when I google industrial sabotage any attempt to derail or meddle in another's business is likely to be classified as industrial sabotage and a criminal act with definite jail time due dodo [4:11 AM] Thanks for the link but not seen that before , what I saw was on cryptsy I think more likely referring to the peeps attacking paycoin and now cryptsy and acting like they are the self appointed judge, jury and executioner of what they consider as right or wrong, rather silly engaging in criminal behaviour with all the authorities watching already dumb dumb dumb, more likely that a few others might make the big time hit parade before JG or BV specially if they don't have the same kind of financial and legal backing to fight industrial sabotage claims, not my butt on the line so I think i leave and stay away dodo [4:53 AM] lots of folks neck deep in the shit already if you look at this, even more likely knowing that investigations are already ongoing and the eyes are already on it http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/sabotage/dodo [5:47 AM] ^^^ Breaking rocks in the hot sun mwhuahaha (1) Whoever, with intent that his or her act shall, or with reason to believe that it may, injure, interfere with, interrupt, supplant, nullify, impair, or obstruct the owner's or operator's management, operation, or control of any agricultural, stockraising, lumbering, mining, quarrying, fishing, manufacturing, transportation, mercantile, or building enterprise, or any other public or private business or commercial enterprise, wherein any person is employed for wage, shall willfully damage or destroy, or attempt or threaten to damage or destroy, any property whatsoever, or shall unlawfully take or retain, or attempt or threaten unlawfully to take or retain, possession or control of any property, instrumentality, machine, mechanism, or appliance used in such business or enterprise, shall be guilty of criminal sabotage." Unauthorized access to a computer Unauthorized access with intent to commit an offence Unauthorized modification of data https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsS0cvTxU-8dodo [5:52 AM] The man is watching think before you post unless you think that you can outwit the 3 letter acronyms. The agents of descent are busy busy busy, they hate crypto; divided we stand? ... (edited) Shit, if your are already in court you could ask about the 9/11 hashlets. |
|
|
|
EXCL will not be an rabbit tester of 20mb blocks.
we will let BTC do that first, then we will decide moving into that or not.
EXCL project is too big and too important to be a tester of such grounds.
EXCL is bigger and more important than BTC? I think what kingscrown meant by this is that we should wait for BTC to fix the block size problem first before we jump into it head on. They have a much larger core development team after all, and they are presently still working on possible solutions to the block size problem. I think it does make sense that we only adopt such new technologies once they become the standard in the crypto industry. There are pros and cons to this of course but overall I do think this is the best strategy for this coin. The Block size at 1mb at 1 minute would then make it the same as 10mb for Btc as they have 10 minute Blocks. If you want to guage what you might need you just have to look at how much volume BTC does, Coins like EXCL might get maybe a couple hundred a day? Would have to be as big as BTC is today for it to be an issue but then you can just let BTC solve the issue whether it is just as simple as increasing the Block Size or something else. |
|
|
|
|
I normally check up about once a day, sadly I don't have any HYP but I am a big fan!
|
|
|
|
The new wallet I saw was really basic, didn't even have Coin Control. If your going to clone then why not use better source?
Marketcap estimations are out of the window, the base marketcap value of a basic cloned source with a small number of participants is 2-8k USD
It cannot be said where every Coin can be a 300 million marketcap, if not marketed and developed a Coin can achieve $0 marketcap.
You no like spurdocoin? Did you see where the 1440 blocks a day is contradicted with 144 a day in the code? Edit: the original was much better. I know you did not find the source, but, as I said before, the front end was certainly silkcoin or an iteration thereof. Yeah the old one looked nicer and had more features, it would be like downgrading. If you have time, because you are much more knowledgeable than me, I assure you, regarding wallet code, would you look at the difficulty adjustment, please? It seems fairly basic, but what do you make of it? In layman's terms. Looks like just one division to me? Edit: Also, did you see the 1440 blocks/day vs 144 blocks/day issue I mentioned? And would that create a clash of some kind? Whish source is it? What file? and What line? You know you could just clone PayCon.... It has theme's, litestake, multi-send, stake for charity, statistics, irc chat, links to social media and forums, and lots of extra handy RPC calls and that. You would just take out the couple Forks, change the links and data in the statistics, maybe an afternoon of work. Or we could just correct the original wallet, no? and then not have to deal with an exchange of coins. Seems easier to me. https://github.com/MaryjanecoinDev/MaryJane2.0What file? either main.h or main.cpp, right? in or around nsubsidy or dpriority. Should be 1440 static bool AllowFree(double dPriority)
617 {
618 // Large (in bytes) low-priority (new, small-coin) transactions
619 // need a fee.
620 return dPriority > COIN * 144 / 250;
621 }
Also if having problems with the mining you might want to check out the targettimespan in main.cpp and see if that needs tweaking, currently set at 6 hours. |
|
|
|
Damn, I wonder if he just erased himself from Hashtalk.  |
|
|
|
The new wallet I saw was really basic, didn't even have Coin Control. If your going to clone then why not use better source?
Marketcap estimations are out of the window, the base marketcap value of a basic cloned source with a small number of participants is 2-8k USD
It cannot be said where every Coin can be a 300 million marketcap, if not marketed and developed a Coin can achieve $0 marketcap.
You no like spurdocoin? Did you see where the 1440 blocks a day is contradicted with 144 a day in the code? Edit: the original was much better. I know you did not find the source, but, as I said before, the front end was certainly silkcoin or an iteration thereof. Yeah the old one looked nicer and had more features, it would be like downgrading. If you have time, because you are much more knowledgeable than me, I assure you, regarding wallet code, would you look at the difficulty adjustment, please? It seems fairly basic, but what do you make of it? In layman's terms. Looks like just one division to me? Edit: Also, did you see the 1440 blocks/day vs 144 blocks/day issue I mentioned? And would that create a clash of some kind? Whish source is it? What file? and What line? You know you could just clone PayCon.... It has theme's, litestake, multi-send, stake for charity, statistics, irc chat, links to social media and forums, and lots of extra handy RPC calls and that. You would just take out the couple Forks, change the links and data in the statistics, maybe an afternoon of work. |
|
|
|
The new wallet I saw was really basic, didn't even have Coin Control. If your going to clone then why not use better source?
Marketcap estimations are out of the window, the base marketcap value of a basic cloned source with a small number of participants is 2-8k USD
It cannot be said where every Coin can be a 300 million marketcap, if not marketed and developed a Coin can achieve $0 marketcap.
You no like spurdocoin? Did you see where the 1440 blocks a day is contradicted with 144 a day in the code? Edit: the original was much better. I know you did not find the source, but, as I said before, the front end was certainly silkcoin or an iteration thereof. Yeah the old one looked nicer and had more features, it would be like downgrading. |
|
|
|
|
The new wallet I saw was really basic, didn't even have Coin Control. If your going to clone then why not use better source?
Marketcap estimations are out of the window, the base marketcap value of a basic cloned source with a small number of participants is 2-8k USD
It cannot be said where every Coin can be a 300 million marketcap, if not marketed and developed a Coin can achieve $0 marketcap.
|
|
|
|
Even if that was true, which it is not, isn't losing tens of millions of dollars kind of a sign that you're really shitty at what you do? Like, epic levels of shittiness? Yet he wears this (lie) like a badge of courage. What a fucking retard.
Industry Innovator, folks ! He's saying he owes people 10's of millions through all past debt, that's why it needs to go to $20. PayCoin is the payment of his debts from future holders except that if that debt was actually paid off, that amount would have funded anything else to be worth 100's of Millions of dollars. |
|
|
|
Hello! Hashtards! Your GAWD has spoken, why won't you answer me! Seriously he had to bump his own thread for attention.   |
|
|
|
Outside of paycoin completely, this is a topic worthy of extensive writing. As time permits, I think I will write a paper on it (although it may take a bit of time). This is a great philosophical discussion that I think should be addressed now rather then later because of the nature of cryptos. And it should be a discussion where many of the leaders of the crypto community should interject and give opinions on all sides. This should be a major topic of discussion for all communities, because it could influence future laws on how cryptos should be regulated (ignoring the fact that there will be people here stating that cryptos shouldnt be regulated, but we all know it will happen, starting with BitLicence).
As a matter of fact, this should be moved to the general section instead of the alts section (even though it was derived from the Paycoin discussions).
It's always interested me how little discussion this topic has received over the years. So many people completely dismiss it, but in many cases it could be the rational decision for the majority to support such measures. I think some people think that it means immediate death of the currency and or loss of confidence if such actions were to be taken. Well I think this topic is taboo along with a few others, hence why people dont talk about it that much. I don't see why there shouldn't be in depth research into this, probably come up with some good safeguards or stop possible exploits. |
|
|
|
Sorry guys, but can I have a summarized explanation concerning the stuff about Prime Controllers, Cryptsy, and the supposed fork? It's really hard to keep up right now, and I really don't get what is going on.
Paycoin is going down because of even more inflation added as all 10% and 20% primes are now 100% but the 350% primes became 100% and Cryptsy now has one of these primes. In general, more bad news if you hold PayCoin. |
|
|
|
Instead of destroying ALL useless high staking wallets ("Primecontrollers") and premined coins to at least give the coin a little chance to not go totally worthless they give an EXCHANGE ,which should not even stake at all imaho, an high staking wallet for 1$.
AMAZING.
Wonder how many customers Cryptsy losing today...
This is ethically reprehensible. Cryptsy breaks checks and balances. They are acting like a central bank AND and exchange. They can print the coins and since they have ownership of them do what ever they like with them. Donate them, burn them, dump them. The people do not have a say in what happens, the people cant vote against what Cryptsy does with the coin. As an exchange Cryptsy should know full and well that their sole purpose and means of earning an income should only be trading and listing fees. If they invest in the coins they trade then then are complicit, they have crossed an ethical line where now they can control the liquidity and circulation of a coin in and to the market. They are both the market and market maker. Why the SEC is NOT investigating Cryptsy outside of this GarzaGAW debacle I do not know. And if Cryptsy has no problems with doing this, then what else have they been involved in? Naked shorting coins using customer deposits?? This would be especially easy to do with Paycoin, since 90% of all XPY trades are done on Cryptsy. The fact that there are imbeciles in the Paycoin Cult that are sitting around in their Spiderman unperpants clapping like retards about this happening is shocking. HT is down, so the Paycoin Cultists are all active here right now: http://talk.paycoin.com/discussion/830/cryptsy-received-a-prime-node/p1 "YaaaaH! Now Cryptsy can pull even more shenanigans with "The People's Money". It has been known for quite some time that Cryptsy will Stake their customers Coins and sell them into the market for higher gains. iGotSpots calls it double dipping but essentially they are taking customers funds. Customers have challenged this quite a few times in which Cryptsy ultimately dodges the issue in which they say they "may be Staking Coins but often just hold on to them", in reality they are Staking most or all of customers deposits without their knowledge. People will just leave Coins on the exchange so it becomes the excuse that if Coins are left on the exchange that they are entitled to Stake the Coins in their wallet. It is not alright however to Stake on customers deposits because the rest of the network that IS Staking will then receive less and their Coins are also worth less on the exchange because of the naked shorting of the market. There is no notice to say that if customers Coins are left on the exchange that Stakes generated becomes the property of the exchange, ignorance is bliss. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
