Synechist, are we still on for the 100 XC giveaway to a random user when we reach 500 Facebook likes?
Yeah. This is Pizpie's initiative. Check in with him for updates. |
|
|
|
arguing with PR people and Bagholders is like beating a dead horse.
Perhaps. On the other hand, arguing with paranoiacs and conspiracy theorists is like reasoning with an Escher drawing. |
|
|
|
rdnkjdi... I think at this point, you are just a pure fudder. You have had your 15 mins. Now go back to your troll cave. You have zero credibility left.
Actually, provided he stops posting about XC, I'd be interested to hear some counter views from or with regards to JL. If he make a new thread to just discuss about JL, it will actually help his case. Right now, his fud on XC really is a disservice to his case against JL. His post title is just pure misleading fud which really makes most of what he has to say not trustworthy. I tend to agree. It looks like things are getting legal anyway: https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=21742.msg201802#msg201802OP, IMO, better off just sticking to JL and being careful not to step on any legal issues. I would be more than happy to let this die. These are the facts wildly subjectively informed statements in regards to Jasinlee's attachment to XC. 1 - Jasinlee was listed as a developer for months. 2 - Jasinlee was taken OFF the XC website that listed him as an XC developer 3 - Jasinlee took the ASIC website and used it to promote XC (I let this go and figured it was a 1 sided relationship) 4 - XC people started bringing up Jasinlee asking about the status of his development projects for XC. I asked about it in the XC thread, brought up my accusations. Jasinlee was defended - I was told to go away. I started this thread. 5 - I was told Jasinlee was a team member, is still a team member, is no longer a team member, I shouldn't care because there is a different lead developer. Jasinlee was defended. 6 - I was told Jasinlee was never a developer for XC ever. He was just listed as a developer because he is a developer in real life and paid their Bitcoin to the Beltway. I believe this was probably paid out of our pre-order money (which he can no longer afford to refund) Or perhaps the money made pumping Cachecoin. He "ran out of money" for his ASIC project while providing money (if I understand correctly) for XC to attend BTC on the Beltway? FUD or no FUD. If the XC people had not confirmed Jasinlee's continued involvement in their coin on their chat thread. And then come over here and defended him while trying to discredit me until it looked bad. Then made claims he was "never a developer" I would be more inclined to believe I wasn't being fed a pure line of bullshit. Thread stays. People can draw their own conclusions. If I look like I've presented a horrible case and I'm embarrassing myself. Then the XC loyal should happy. Drop the issue. There's nothing further to be said. You've repeated yourself enough now. |
|
|
|
[refused to drop an issue] You've had your say and XC has made its statement on this issue. It's over. Please leave. |
|
|
|
I too think the title should be changed by now or a new thread be opened.
would be the grown up thing to do,
rdnkjdi i understand your anger but i also understand how XC side didn't jump on your accusations right away. So to me both sides have some arguments, but as it stands right now as an XC investor i politely ask you to change the title and take XC out now.
i can't force you and you probably want to "punish" some people for approaching your concerns in a way you think was inapropriate. But i don't think this applies to all XC community even from your point of view.
the current title implies that you have an agenda beyond personal justice.
thank you
+1. Well said sir. |
|
|
|
Now you say he was never a developer on any of your technologies. As I said - most people only list people as "Developers" on their project if they are developers.
You guys seem to be a unique approach though. Proven fraud (using the Cache pump example I've listed) you seem to prefer attacking the messengers who've lost thousands of dollars.
If you were less negatively disposed toward XC then the obvious would not have eluded you here: - When Jasin was on the XC Team, the expectation was that his work would become XC tech in the longer term future. - Hence "XC Developer". - Nobody could've anticipated what happened with Fibonacci, and so we couldn't plan for that by titling him, prospectively, "Future-XC-developer-yet-already-on-the-team". So we just called him an XC developer. - Then, of course, he stepped down at a point at which he'd not developed any of XC's code. - And this entails that he never was, in actual fact, an XC developer. - It is, however, entirely true that he was on the XC team and was listed as a developer. It's pretty simple for those who aren't looking for every opportunity to confirm their conspiracy-theorism about, well, nothing at all. "Proven fraud": - do not make assertions about a disputable matter. In doing so, you both weaken your position and disrespect the views of other participants in the discussion. - It's phrases like this that cause people to conclude that you're a "pure fudder". Finally: - we're not "attacking" those who've lost money, we're objecting to people like you, who've lost money and also act in damagingly and deceitfully unethical ways. |
|
|
|
I'm not sure why he was listed as a dev on their website for months with the lead dev saying "He was never a developer. "
Jasinlee was listed as a dev on XC's website because he is a developer. Jasinlee did not, however, write any code for XC or have access to XC's code. Thus he was never an XC developer. Jasinlee only developed his own technologies, which could've potentially been used in XC in the longer-term future. I've already said this more than three times while you were online. Are you wilfully ignoring it so that you still have some FUD to spread about XC? |
|
|
|
Is there any plans for a future audit of the XCcode? I trust that Dan didn't include a keylogger or anything but I would be willing to pay my share of a pool to validate that the tech we have invested in is top-notch, preferably by a professional 3rd party company.
I would chip in as much as 200 XC for such a review.
I don't think so, but that's a fair idea. |
|
|
|
Synechist have we announced what these new features are of are they a surprise?
They'll be made known in progressive press releases as we approach the final Rev 2 release. |
|
|
|
Hey people, come and join me on the XC Multipool! I'm mining scrypt and all seems to be working smoothly. One of my favourite aspects of it is that there's no centralised database that stores your login details. Just enter an XC address (instead of a username/worker name) into your miner and off you go. #privacy is it now official or stay testing / beta phase ? Thanks The site seems to say its in the last shift of its beta phase.. Be good to see it finally up and running... Yeah I can't wait. |
|
|
|
Hey people, come and join me on the XC Multipool! I'm mining scrypt and all seems to be working smoothly. One of my favourite aspects of it is that there's no centralised database that stores your login details. Just enter an XC address (instead of a username/worker name) into your miner and off you go. #privacy Wait is this the old one or the new one that Dan was working on?? Still says "It has been determined that this will be the last shift for this beta. The pool will be taken down for important works to be carried out on the front and backend. We would like to thank you for your support during the beta test and hope to see you again soon when we're fully operational. Payouts for this last shift will be later than normal, while we wait for any immature blocks to confirm." The new one. |
|
|
|
Hey people, come and join me on the XC Multipool! I'm mining scrypt and all seems to be working smoothly. One of my favourite aspects of it is that there's no centralised database that stores your login details. Just enter an XC address (instead of a username/worker name) into your miner and off you go. #privacy is it now official or stay testing / beta phase ? Thanks It's still in beta, but pretty near the end as far as I can tell. |
|
|
|
Hey people, come and join me on the XC Multipool! I'm mining scrypt and all seems to be working smoothly. One of my favourite aspects of it is that there's no centralised database that stores your login details. Just enter an XC address (instead of a username/worker name) into your miner and off you go. #privacy I've never mined before but I'd like to start. How do you determine which algorithm and which miner to use? I'm renting a scrypt miner so it's pretty simple. Just pick a rig, pay for it, and enter the details given on the xcpool page. |
|
|
|
Hey people, come and join me on the XC Multipool! I'm mining scrypt and all seems to be working smoothly. One of my favourite aspects of it is that there's no centralised database that stores your login details. Just enter an XC address (instead of a username/worker name) into your miner and off you go. #privacy |
|
|
|
what would be great with the rev2 release is as small sneek peek at the UI. just a screen shot would be enough. some eyecandy for those programming illiterates like me.  Yep - I agree. A nice shiny bit of eye candy would be a good idea. It's the red paint on the Ferrari. Guys, the new UI is for Rev 2.5, not for the final Rev 2. What's coming up are new features for XC's anonymity. They're pretty awesome. Once we have REV 2 synechist, how long do you think for 2.5? Are we talking quite a short wait? It's a bit hard to tell at this stage. Since XChat is already here, things are somewhat simpler from a developement perspective. However the UI is something we really want to get right. The XC app must be top notch. Since we're not at a stage to tell how long that'll take, we can't give an ETA on it. But all is on track. |
|
|
|
what would be great with the rev2 release is as small sneek peek at the UI. just a screen shot would be enough. some eyecandy for those programming illiterates like me. Yep - I agree. A nice shiny bit of eye candy would be a good idea. It's the red paint on the Ferrari. Guys, the new UI is for Rev 2.5, not for the final Rev 2. What's coming up are new features for XC's anonymity. They're pretty awesome. |
|
|
|
Wasn't made an announcement by you synechist that all the code reviews were going to be announced here as well as in the other coins thread at the same time??
Is it still going on like this or not? Did not see it happen for librex and stealth...
I'm keen to let you guys know about these reviews every single time. However there are two factors that may (and sometimes will) prevent this: - The other coin blurts out the news despite Dan asking them to co-ordinate with me first. - I'm not around to hear from Dan about a review when the coin blurts it out. That said, I hope you've had a good time with Halcyon so far. I certainly have. :-) Thank you for your reply. I certainly had a good time with halcyon..now im already out. By the way my suggestion would be just for Dan to ask for the news to do not be leaked out until the announcement in our thread or otherwise the review will not be made anymore. I don't want to dictate how Dan need to behave in this situation but since he agreed with the community knowing at the same time of the other coin about the review this will be the best and simple solution IMO. Well, Dan agreed that other coins blurting out news can spark backlashes, misinterpretations, and all kinds of bollocks. I'm the one whose job it is to stay on this forum and keep in touch with you all, and so it's me who made the commitment to keep the XC community in the loop. Dan's commitment is simply to include me so that PR muckups are prevented with code reviews and anything else involving other coins. |
|
|
|
Seems like Dan fixed the naming a bit - Latest version is 0.9.2.48b_RC1.XCurrency-REV2, thanks for that.
I'm still interested what version is Final REV 2.0 called as current version is near 2.5?
That's an open question. It depends on how many revisions Dan releases before we move on from Rev 2. Someone should put bets on it. |
|
|
|
Could XCMixers also store XChat messages encrypted of cause and at a fee? Currently both sender and receiver has to be online and that's fine, but at a fee it could be saved for offline deliverance. XCMixers will be most likely to have a lot of uptime but the message should of cause be split up and spread across several mixers with redundancy for safety and security. Just a suggestion Bump, Teka Synechist? That's an interesting suggestion. Thanks. On the face of it it's conceivable that mixers could forward messages trustlessly, or perhaps store them once XC gets its content delivery system done. However my guess is that XChat will be for online-online communication only, and that we'll introduce some sort of XC email service for online-offline communication with persistent messaging history. |
|
|
|
What is the developers opinion on scripting on the blockchain (Turing complete a la Ethereum)?
I would appreciate some feedback on this... Good question. Maybe someone should answer this? While I'm not a developer, this actually came up in conversation with devs last night, and the opinion voiced then was that no-one (not even Ethereum) appears to have got around the Halting Problem. We think we've got a far better way to do blockchain 2.0, but you'll have to wait and see what that'll be. ;-) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
