We are the SolidCoin community and we no longer trust your so called 'official' version due to the bugs you keep introducing, your unacceptable license change, and your erratic, insulting manner.
You think you can make changes to keep things incompatible with open source? You will exhaust yourself trying, fail, and still end up with an implementation that no-one is going to use. Everyone will forget you even exist when the next IOCoin comes out.
If he tries, do the usual 'net response. Treat his censorship as damage and route around it. Specifically, modify the client to reject his closed-source software's blocks. He wants incompatibility, let him have it. Odds are the closed-source block chain will be the one to die. In the name of all that is sane, don't ever let CoinHunter have commit access to the git repository of the fork... Should be interesting for those who choose not to update to his new release that adds 1000 blocks to the chain. I'm not updating. |
|
|
|
This is 100% Bullshit, nothing of that is true at all.
I'm running a 1.04 Solidcoin Program, so i should know.
Dont tell me about "unauthorized sources", in fact you pulled that out of your own ass.
You should probably read this... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SarcasmI have to admit, it was the 1000 premined blocks to be inserted in the blockchain that made me twig that it was a joke. You'd think it would have been "improved troll resilience"! Scary thing is - the SC dev comes across as so unbalanced that this release notice doesn't seem so 'out there'  I guess inflating the currency is the only way out? Inserting 1000 blocks? wow! EDIT: this is much worse than Thomas premining 580k ixcoins. Now after the fact coinhunter/realsolid is going to "premine" blocks and shove them into the block chain thus devaluing current holders of solidcoins? Who gets the 32000 solidcoins? Coinhunter? What's to stop him from dumping that on the exchange to cut his losses as this project spirals down to hell? This is what the future holds for solid coin: Constant updates and constant changes to the project initial design because of poor planning and foresight. Anyone who decides to stay holding solidcoins after coinhunter shoves 30,000 newly minted coins into the block chain is asking for trouble. Just look at how he has handled himself. Do you still trust he will not be that way when it comes to those extra 30,000 solidcoins? Think again... EDIT: On second thought why just 1000 blocks? Why not 10,000 or 100,000 blocks? What is so special about having just another 32,000 solidcoins? Make it 320,000 or more! Since you dont have to mine them just add them into the block chain! WHAT AN IDEA! lol |
|
|
|
This is 100% Bullshit, nothing of that is true at all.
I'm running a 1.04 Solidcoin Program, so i should know.
Dont tell me about "unauthorized sources", in fact you pulled that out of your own ass.
You should probably read this... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SarcasmI have to admit, it was the 1000 premined blocks to be inserted in the blockchain that made me twig that it was a joke. You'd think it would have been "improved troll resilience"! Scary thing is - the SC dev comes across as so unbalanced that this release notice doesn't seem so 'out there' I guess inflating the currency is the only way out? Inserting 1000 blocks? wow! EDIT: this is much worse than Thomas premining 580k ixcoins. Now after the fact coinhunter/realsolid is going to "premine" blocks and shove them into the block chain thus devaluing current holders of solidcoins? Who gets the 32000 solidcoins? Coinhunter? What's to stop him from dumping that on the exchange to cut his losses as this project spirals down to hell? |
|
|
|
I picked up on it in IRC, it's another block chain inflation that exploits a feature in 1.04. If you will notice the block chain is increasing size a lot faster than normal.
I guess then coinhunter/realsolid just put another bandaid on the problem and someone found a way to get around it huh. Interesting. Please don't tell me you're actually surprised.  I'm not. lol |
|
|
|
Anybody else stuck on block 28364? I've wiped my entire SolidCoin directory, including the AppData (saved my .conf and wallet.dat though) and started from scratch with 1.04 and it still gets stuck on that block.
That's when the hacker artforz began attacking the network, it will take a little time to get over his "spam" blocks. I have a feeling that 1.05 MANDATORY update will be coming in the next few days. Another major exploit has been found and is currently being executed. What exploit is that? I picked up on it in IRC, it's another block chain inflation that exploits a feature in 1.04. If you will notice the block chain is increasing size a lot faster than normal. I guess then coinhunter/realsolid just put another bandaid on the problem and someone found a way to get around it huh. Interesting. |
|
|
|
Anybody else stuck on block 28364? I've wiped my entire SolidCoin directory, including the AppData (saved my .conf and wallet.dat though) and started from scratch with 1.04 and it still gets stuck on that block.
That's when the hacker artforz began attacking the network, it will take a little time to get over his "spam" blocks. I have a feeling that 1.05 MANDATORY update will be coming in the next few days. Another major exploit has been found and is currently being executed. What exploit is that? |
|
|
|
I also forgot to add, make sure your new client is compatible with the API changes that exchanges and businesses will be using soon. I'm not sure how you can get those specs until I've released them, but nevertheless you can probably try! Have fun getting those to become relevant if the open-source client has more than 51% of the mining user base. Which is likely since pools often apply patches that didn't come from you. Yeah the only problem with that is I have solved the 51% problem and that is also coming out very soon. Oops, did SolidCoin just protect itself a lot better than Bitcoin? Furthermore when anyone new to SolidCoin google searches for it, guess which site they'll be getting? So yes please go convince the mining pools to abandon the official version in favour of some featureless fork of SolidCoin from an earlier version because they'll be removed off the site, no longer get new visitors and earn the distrust of the whole SC community. ie They'll die like SCGuild and Bitparking. Yeah bitparking is dying with its 3 other exchanges and three other pools. So is btcguild with their giant bitcoin mining pool. They are definitely dying. |
|
|
|
I'd re-enable handling orphan blocks (add a size limit on the orphan blocks list if you are afraid of orphan floods), or the SC network will soon be quite dead (it's already starting to fork ...).
"It's already starting to fork" . Haha, what a laugh. I was wondering why you had never really helped out the Bitcoin project but it's becoming obvious. You don't know C++ well. To the OP it is fine if you want to develop a "open source" alternative to my "open source" program. Good luck with outpacing my development though. Just wondering when you are going to add more vuln. fixes, network improvements and multiwallet support like that which is due out in SolidCoin in a few days? Thanks for the support of SolidCoin, and good luck with your project. I think this is funny because now Coinhunter is thanking Artforz for his support of solidcoin. |
|
|
|
Without the Bitparking Exchange and Ruxum, especially Bitparking, Solid Coin is terminal. Yes except now mooncoin has all of bitparkings volume and the other pools are taking SCGuilds share. Strange how people keep wanting to mine and buy SolidCoin. If people want to make business decisions based on their religious like values that is fine, they'll just lose money and let other people take over. Your version 1.04 makes some very good changes, but the world will never see it if you don't update your license agreement. Plenty of people are using it, thousands of downloads have been made since 1.04 was released. And just a FYI, people have been saying SolidCoin was dead/terminal/dying since the very first day I released it. It's not exactly shocking to here someone else think/say it. I've got my popcorn and am watching... |
|
|
|
@MrMoon
I love how you cut and pasted from this forum and started whining on the Solidcoin forum about me calling the remaining exchanges pathetic after Bitparking and Ruxum closed. You wanted reasons as to why I said the remaining three were pathetic. Here is my response and it definitely outlines things beyond your .in TLD
1. You will accept deposits up 8 decimal places but will only allow 2 decimal place withdrawal. Nice little underhanded Indian ripoff.
2. Site is very clunky to use. Better have a calculator handy.
3. BTC withdraws are manual and slow to receive. 24+ hours for 2BTC to get to my wallet
4. You say "No Transaction Fees" but indeed do charge them
5. You are running a straight up gambling site in conjunction with your exchange. Illegal in the USA and invites authorities to come after you. Adds to the chance of you just disappearing. Probably explains your .in domain as you know .com can be handled better by the US authorities.
6. Your support is a Gmail address, are you serious?
7. You're skimming micro amounts off the conversion transactions (didn't think people would notice). Let me guess, they're rounding errors LOL
8. The whole site is a SQL injection nightmare or dream come true, depending on who you are.
9.Phony Whois - Partial phony California USA address. FYI Complaint filed with ICAAN and Net4India.
I have quite a few more, but this should get you started.
+1 Which is why I haven't wanted to touch this site with even a 1000' pole. Bitparking was worlds ahead of this site in terms of reliability, support, and functionality. |
|
|
|
Funny thread is funny.
I agree.  |
|
|
|
|
Anyone notice that the solidcoin blockchain appears to be growing by about 1 MB every few hours.
|
|
|
|
I think it is beyond obvious that CoinHunter isn't going to budge and in fact has managed to become a bigger dick than yesterday with his current post on the SC site forum.
This idiot actually believes that Bitparking and Ruxum had no effect whatsoever on Solidcoin and that Moonco.in's tenfold increase in volume was due to people adopting SC rather than dumping it at the only place left to do so LOL...
+1 Yeah he did not even acknowledge the huge price drop. He keeps saying that he would like the big pools to stay away because the difficulty is dropping so the true supporters can mine SC. |
|
|
|
I think him and smoothie just need to fuck and get it over with. That is going to be some passionate angry sex.
Wtf does this have to do with me? |
|
|
|
|
Bruce's message in the last show was that this forum lacks what he calls quality in content for bitcoin discussion. But I say that quality has nothing to do with it if you are bias to what people have to say about you or to you. Bruce obviously believes in censorship. If you try to add a comment to his youtube videos you will get a "comment pending approval" message.
At first I liked the show but after a while the promises Bruce kept making and some of the things he would say were flat out lies. He would flip flop on topics and views.
In one episode with Mark from mt. gox he asked Mark if it were possible that when they reopened the exchange after the hack if mechanisms could be put in place to keep the price of bitcoins from dropping below a certain dollar value. Now how surprising of a question is that given that his whole view on bitcoins was "up up up" when in the real world markets move up down up down.
Creating 50 more bitcoin conferences to end up partying with "free" alcohol will not give bitcoin any credence but may in fact take away from what bitcoin has and make bitcoin look bad.
I dont see the point of these conferences just to hang out and drink and have a good time is going to give bitcoin any more value than it already has.
Bruce needs to rethink his initial goals (if they were sound) when he created the bitcoin show. If what he wanted back then has changed then he may as well stop the show altogether and find something else to do.
|
|
|
|
Can you say "Oh Shit"50% drop in value when the buyer ran out of BTC LOL  Next stop: ZERO |
|
|
|
@CoinHunter
As someone who was one of the very first people to mine SC and have had a lot of fun doing so I say the following as a SC supporter.
The license change you made will KILL Solid Coin a 100 times faster than anything a few idiots here in this forum could ever do. You are reacting EXACTLY the way they wanted you to and even better.
Without the Bitparking Exchange and Ruxum, especially Bitparking, Solid Coin is terminal.
The remaining three exchanges are pathetic. Mooncoin and Solidcoin24, are you serious???
Your version 1.04 makes some very good changes, but the world will never see it if you don't update your license agreement.
~BCX~
Bitparking looked like a middle school students website project, it was very clunky to use and not very professional looking for it's purpose. The only thing it had going for it was the amount of users on it. I will miss the Ruxum exchange though. Looks are not everything. DoubleC has been reliable and kept the exchanges up and has great support for all of its users. It can look better but I rather it work correctly first. |
|
|
|
Well if his newest post on the Solidcoin forum is any indication, he is very unapologetic, thinks everyone over here is an idiot and will not budge on the license.
Berkeley is owned by _ORACLE_. Report CoinHunter to Oracle's legal department. They just love suing people. Ask SAP. Oracle charges money for any non-FOSS use of Berkeley DB. CoinHunter owes them a large sum now. Seems this whole debacle keeps getting better and deeper. Almost like instead of being 6 feet under its more like 60 feet under. |
|
|
|
+1
totally agree with you decision.
+1 Let it rest in peace. |
|
|
|
I miss hearing about it, the only good natured blockchian since namecoin (imo).
I like it. Sounds like it might be worth mining. What does it offer? A short-term high from mining then a complete hang over after difficulty increases like crazy? Sounds fun! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
