Can not refund?
Ask C-cex! this scammer is "verified" with C-cex! |
|
|
|
|
What happened to NWO? It is a complete scam!
C-cex sent all the BTCs of ICO to nWoCrypto, as he is the one who "verified" with C-Cex. Now he gets so greedy and refuses to pay his partner his parts, nWoCrypto took all the 30+ BTCs with him. So his partner - who did all the coding, decided to leave, and he deleted the code repository and client download.
Shame on you, nWoCrypto! You said partnership, but now you grab all the 30+ BTCs. Can't believe there are people like this.
|
|
|
|
|
WHat happened to NWO? It is a complete scam!
C-cex sent the BTCs nWoCrypto, as he is the one who "verified" with C-cex. Now he gets so greedy and refuse to pay his partner his parts, nWoCrypto took all the 30+ BTCs with him. So his partner - who did all the code, left, and deleted the code repository and download.
Shame on you, nWoCrypto! You said partnership, now you grab all the 30+ BTCs. Can't believe there are people like this.
|
|
|
|
So the 200k are used to mix coins being sent across the network?
Can you explain the mechanism a little bit more?
I think they use typical coinjoin techniques. There are many details in the forum, such as in darkcoin thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.0or supercoin phase-1: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=618552.msg7282648#msg7282648several other coins have it, with some variations, but the ideas are to mix the coin you send to a pool (or many pools), and forward coins to destination using a different pool so the source-destination can not be traced. This way to achieve the anonymous send. What i don't understand is that somebody else instead of the Dev has to come with an idea where they might use those 200k coins for. The dev is just posting here ignoring this question and only talking about the ICO phase 1 has sold out. 200k coins in hands of the dev. Why not explaining this to us why and how you are going to use those 200k coins for anonymous transactions. Till that im not touching this coin. Isn't that just explained? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=757082.msg8559651#msg8559651do you understand anything how coinjoin work?? |
|
|
|
So the 200k are used to mix coins being sent across the network?
Can you explain the mechanism a little bit more?
I think they use typical coinjoin techniques. There are many details in the forum, such as in darkcoin thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.0or supercoin phase-1: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=618552.msg7282648#msg7282648several other coins have it, with some variations, but the ideas are to mix the coin you send to a pool (or many pools), and forward coins to destination using a different pool so the source-destination can not be traced. This way to achieve the anonymous send. |
|
|
|
IPo sells very fast on c-cex
amazing, it's gone fast |
|
|
|
sounds like a hazard service  |
|
|
|
BTW, I read other posts, why not you show people an example of m-of-m address in the block explorer.
This is a complete joke.
By being disposed against XC you're making it hard for you to come to understand. The block explorer links I posted above are transactions in which - multiple addresses sign - all participating addresses sign or else the transaction fails. Multiple addresses signing = "multisig". Or perhaps you're mistaking XC's protocol for Bitcoin's and thereby expecting the address to start with a "4"? This shows you have no knowledge on the multisig. In order to create multisig tx, like m-of-m you mentioned, you need to create a multisig address first. Then you can create multisig tx there. If you did this in XC, then it is extremely easy to point to people this address in the block explorer, then people can see this. I am not mistaken at all. Some138 already showed you how to create a multisig address. You seem at complete lost on the multisig address. Maybe some138 did not tell you the details. Let me show you here: - open XC client - find some pairs of public-private keys (you can use those posted by Some138) - open console window - type help addmultisigaddress - follow the format, and use the public keys above, you will create a multisig address now tell me, what's the starting letter of this address? A 'X'? You never saw a XC multisig address before, not to say you understand anything about it! |
|
|
|
hahaha, m-of-m multisig, this is the first time I see this, very entertaining... used in mix transactions trustlessly?? This is even more a joke, by trustless you mean the m members doing mixing are not trusted, so if there is one bad guy, you all screwed, because m-of-m address in order to spend, you need everyone to sign, if one bad guy not sign, your fund is locked forever. This seems written by a guy who has zero knowledge about multisig, except the word "multisig". That's why the altcoin there are so many scam coins. No: 3) Supplementary information:
- XC's multipath technology, used for obfuscating the amount sent in a transaction and the identity of sender and receiver, makes use of m-of-m transactions in order to achieve trustless mixing.
- Trustless mixing is a world-first. Nobody's ever done it before. Hence my prior request that you ask questions before coming to conclusions.
- m-of-m requires that all parties sign or else the transaction is invalidated.
- As such, m-of-m prevents bad nodes stealing coins instead of forwarding them.
- if a transaction is invalidated, the participating nodes resync the session-based network they form for the transaction in question, and proceed.
Then why you need m-of-m at all, you can just process with the assumption m-of-m will fail. The m-of-m there is absolutely of no use. You're actually quite close to the truth here. The assumption that m-of-m will fail is exactly what is needed for a bad node to fail at stealing coins. If a node doesn't sign, if gets kicked out of the ad-hoc network formed for the transaction in question, and then the network resyncs and signs again. no in this case m-of-m transaction is no use, and if you remove it the system should just function as before. That's why no one is using m-of-m multisig in this kind of trustless system. m-of-m is virtually of no use. |
|
|
|
hahaha, m-of-m multisig, this is the first time I see this, very entertaining... used in mix transactions trustlessly?? This is even more a joke, by trustless you mean the m members doing mixing are not trusted, so if there is one bad guy, you all screwed, because m-of-m address in order to spend, you need everyone to sign, if one bad guy not sign, your fund is locked forever. This seems written by a guy who has zero knowledge about multisig, except the word "multisig". That's why the altcoin there are so many scam coins. No: 3) Supplementary information:
- XC's multipath technology, used for obfuscating the amount sent in a transaction and the identity of sender and receiver, makes use of m-of-m transactions in order to achieve trustless mixing.
- Trustless mixing is a world-first. Nobody's ever done it before. Hence my prior request that you ask questions before coming to conclusions.
- m-of-m requires that all parties sign or else the transaction is invalidated.
- As such, m-of-m prevents bad nodes stealing coins instead of forwarding them.
- if a transaction is invalidated, the participating nodes resync the session-based network they form for the transaction in question, and proceed.
Then why you need m-of-m at all, you can just process with the assumption m-of-m will fail. The m-of-m there is absolutely of no use. BTW, I read other posts, why not you show people an example of m-of-m address in the block explorer. This is a complete joke. |
|
|
|
moreover, now I see you changed m-of-m multisig to n-of-m multisig, lol, learned something new?
No I didn't. Even in my prior post - which you quoted above - I use the term "m-of-m". Where are you getting this from? lol, m-of-m? check the screenshot at OP? is it not clear enough? OK I think XC people agreed finally they did not use the multisig, so please do not claim it, thanks. Also I downloaded your client, I see the privacy mode, it uses tor network, this is completely different from multisig, it is apple to orange, lol. Umm... what? I have consistently stated that XC uses m-of-m multisig. Even in the OP of this thread your screenshots display the phrase "m-of-m". I have ONLY used this phrase from the beginning. - except where I assert that XC does not use m-of-n. And no, TOR is optional. XC's Privacy Mode uses m-of-m to mix transactions trustlessly. huh? show me a m-of-m multisig address and tx then, and explain what's the use of m-of-m? m-of-m and m-of-n is the same multisig tech, show us then the address + tx? hahaha, m-of-m multisig, this is the first time I see this, very entertaining... used in mix transactions trustlessly?? This is even more a joke, by trustless you mean the m members doing mixing are not trusted, so if there is one bad guy, you all screwed, because m-of-m address in order to spend, you need everyone to sign, if one bad guy not sign, your fund is locked forever. This seems written by a guy who has zero knowledge about multisig, except the word "multisig". That's why the altcoin there are so many scam coins. |
|
|
|
no scam coin pls lol, no scam coin |
|
|
|
|
To develop a new state-of-art coin, with latest new coin techniques and anonymous wallet. No copy-paste coins, no pump-and-dump.
Looking for a partner excellent at communication/marketing, if you are good at graphics and branding, it will be good too. PM me if you are interested.
|
|
|
|
lol, if you claimed you were 7, it might be more credible |
|
|
|
|
too many shitcoins... to easy to create a copy-paste one, that is the problem.
|
|
|
|
What the heck, what's your qualifications? copy-paste coins? I offer to do altcoins for free, if you are a good marketing guy and can promo the coin - X11, X13, SHA-256, script, etc etc, with anonymous wallet and many other advanced features |
|
|
|
COMM is a good choice  Impressive votes for COMM |
|
|
|
WC... nice name, I will try to think it while in WC. What a funny world |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
