FACT is that if ghash.io did not confirm the transaction oher miner would had done!
so it does not make any sense to do this as ghash.io .
They did it. if they block a transaction some other miner will handle it and will be the fastest. If they solve a block including the second transaction, the first transaction will never be confirmed by anyone, because the shared inputs will have already been spent. And the more %age of hashing power they control, the more chance they have of doing this. |
|
|
|
IF YOU ARE AS STUPID TO ACCEPT UNCONFIRIMED TRANSACTIONS EVRYBODY CAN DO EVIL IF THEY WANT.
As I asked above: But it is ok because they only attacked stupid people? Seems like the answer is yes. Yes if you take unconfirmed transactions as transactios , you ask for it. I dont need to be ghash.io to do dubble spend a 0 confirmation anybody can do this. the netwrk wil simply confirm the fastest transaction , so yes only stupid users will do this. when a transaction is confirmed 6 it is save. as I explained mutiple time's. And you don't think that makes GHash dishonest? the question is was it ghash.io it self or a individual miner mining at that pool , you dont need a lot of hasing power to respend a unconfirmed transaction. It was (the previous owners of) GHash itself. It is the pool which decides which transactions to include in a block, not the individual miners at the pool. Before lecturing people on fact vs fud, shouldn't you find out what the facts are? |
|
|
|
In short, Argentina doesn't actually owe the US anything other than the cost of printing those dollars, and seeing as they were more than likely only computer credits anyway, then (going by bitcoin payment fees), they perhaps need to add $1 to cover their costs.  Argentina doesn't owe the US anything. They owe the private holders of Argentinian government bonds. The fact that the bondholders sued and won in the US courts doesn't mean Argentina owe anything to the US government. Private bondholders of foreign debt are also private owners of USA Incorporated. Remember, the political elite, the financial elite, the corporate elite - all these are the SAME people, members of the SAME caste in the USA. Blah blah blah. This is not a government-government conflict, it is private citizens suing a government. |
|
|
|
I think now there is an opportunity to deal with it, but I don't think just beating old bullshit into the dirt is very useful. But it isn't just old bullshit, is it? The same bullshit is being repeated here right now. |
|
|
|
In short, Argentina doesn't actually owe the US anything other than the cost of printing those dollars, and seeing as they were more than likely only computer credits anyway, then (going by bitcoin payment fees), they perhaps need to add $1 to cover their costs. Argentina doesn't owe the US anything. They owe the private holders of Argentinian government bonds. The fact that the bondholders sued and won in the US courts doesn't mean Argentina owe anything to the US government. |
|
|
|
If China makes this move the US does on Argentinia, the US gouvernment will be bankrupt instant. China cannot to this to the US because the US has not defaulted on its debt. Argentina has. |
|
|
|
IF YOU ARE AS STUPID TO ACCEPT UNCONFIRIMED TRANSACTIONS EVRYBODY CAN DO EVIL IF THEY WANT.
As I asked above: But it is ok because they only attacked stupid people? Seems like the answer is yes. Yes if you take unconfirmed transactions as transactios , you ask for it. I dont need to be ghash.io to do dubble spend a 0 confirmation anybody can do this. the netwrk wil simply confirm the fastest transaction , so yes only stupid users will do this. when a transaction is confirmed 6 it is save. as I explained mutiple time's. And you don't think that makes GHash dishonest? |
|
|
|
IF YOU ARE AS STUPID TO ACCEPT UNCONFIRIMED TRANSACTIONS EVRYBODY CAN DO EVIL IF THEY WANT.
As I asked above: But it is ok because they only attacked stupid people? Seems like the answer is yes. |
|
|
|
however we also know that the tribal Council - which is a traditional authority, but not governmental has approved of it. No we don't. We know that has been claimed (by AP), we do not know it is true. |
|
|
|
this is why there must be 6 CONFIRMATIONS to have a transaction! Rubbish. A pool that is doing evil will in time lose hashing capacity as those mining there discover that the pool is harming Bitcoin and take their hashing capacity elsewhere. It is known that GHash has previously done evil. They are currently the biggest pool. Most people don't seem to give a crap, and will mine wherever pays them the most. |
|
|
|
Let's have some FUD vs. FACT now.
FUD: Double-spends: GHash actually engaged in such an attack before it reached the 51% mark, and it could do so again
FACT: Ghash.io has never committed double spending against a CONFIRMED transaction. Apparently at one time Ghash.io had committed fraud against an online gambling site by performing a Finney attack to cancel their non-winning bet transactions. This was possible because the casino recognized payment on 0/unconfirmed transactions -- something that NOBODY would recommend a merchant do for an anonymous, online service.
So you've just agreed that they did engage in a double-spend attack? Not really FUD then, is it? But it is ok because they only attacked stupid people? Not quite. (snip unrelated information) Quite. You've just said that they did perform a double spend attack. |
|
|
|
But lies? Probably exagerations, promising things too early, etc... Seriously, you need to go back and read the threads. It was loudly and frequently claimed that the coin had been adopted as the official currency of the tribe. That was a lie. Itīs not there are 2 councils over Lakota one of them approved it and second one is "long-term looking" A claim which has been made several times, and never backed up. The council linked from the MazaCoin page was exactly the same one which said plainly that MazaCoin was not an official currency. I've documented that. The original source for this mythical second council claim seems to have been AP, at a time when he was also saying that Payu would soon be the next head of the Lakota. (Despite not actually being one.) I don't see any reason to trust anything AP says. Provide a statement from someone representing the Lakota which says a tribal council has adopted it, or stop posting hype. I canīt tell you it exact you have to ask Payu ....Iīm not from Lakota So you should choose option B: Stop posting hype. |
|
|
|
The document used to arrest or charge the defendant is available online. It states that Hser Ner Moo, the victim, was clutching short black hairs when her body was found and had similar hairs on her abdomen, and then goes on to state that the accused has short black hair. "Additionally, Hser Ner Moo had short black hairs clutched in her right hand ... The defendant has short black hair" This information is from immediately after the body was found and its weight would be pending dna tests. That information is not used again by the prosecution, so it is fair to assume this evidence did not point to mr Met In which case the prosecution are required to hand that information over to the defence, who can use it at trial. Was it used at trial by the defence? Was it used by the prosecution, for that matter? You don't know, because you haven't read the transcript, and don't know what actually happened. |
|
|
|
Let's have some FUD vs. FACT now.
------------------
FUD: Double-spends: GHash actually engaged in such an attack before it reached the 51% mark, and it could do so again
FACT: Ghash.io has never committed double spending against a CONFIRMED transaction. Apparently at one time Ghash.io had committed fraud against an online gambling site by performing a Finney attack to cancel their non-winning bet transactions. This was possible because the casino recognized payment on 0/unconfirmed transactions -- something that NOBODY would recommend a merchant do for an anonymous, online service.
So you've just agreed that they did engage in a double-spend attack? Not really FUD then, is it? But it is ok because they only attacked stupid people? |
|
|
|
But lies? Probably exagerations, promising things too early, etc... Seriously, you need to go back and read the threads. It was loudly and frequently claimed that the coin had been adopted as the official currency of the tribe. That was a lie. Itīs not there are 2 councils over Lakota one of them approved it and second one is "long-term looking" A claim which has been made several times, and never backed up. The council linked from the MazaCoin page was exactly the same one which said plainly that MazaCoin was not an official currency. I've documented that. The original source for this mythical second council claim seems to have been AP, at a time when he was also saying that Payu would soon be the next head of the Lakota. (Despite not actually being one.) I don't see any reason to trust anything AP says. Provide a statement from someone representing the Lakota which says a tribal council has adopted it, or stop posting hype. |
|
|
|
do you really think someone can control 50% of "full nodes" ?
Yes, and for less cost than controlling 51% of the hashpower. If that's true ( i dont know cost behind it so i cant really argue againts it) than you win by this argument. suggests there are under 8000 full Bitcoin nodes. So to get 50% would require adding 8000 nodes, at a cost of ~$160,000 per year. [In practice you could do it much much cheaper than buying them singly!] I'm not going to work out the cost of adding enough hashpower to get 50% of the network, but it is an awful lot more than that. |
|
|
|
But lies? Probably exagerations, promising things too early, etc... Seriously, you need to go back and read the threads. It was loudly and frequently claimed that the coin had been adopted as the official currency of the tribe. That was a lie. |
|
|
|
Mazacoin never had a "hype time". Seriously? Go back and read over all the threads surrounding the coin launch, and all the lies and hype that was being spread. lol, but that was just the birth of the coin. Every coins birth is a spectacle. What you call "hype" was nothing else then "joy of fatherhood", the father being happy about the newborn child. It was outright lies and pumping. |
|
|
|
Rapid growth of GHash.IO mining pool, seen over the past few months, has been driven by our determination to offer innovative solutions within the Bitcoin ecosystem combined with significant investment in resource. Our investment, participation and highly motivated staff confirm it is our intention to help protect and grow the broad acceptance of Bitcoin and categorically in no way harm or damage it. We never have and never will participate in any 51% attack or double spend against Bitcoin. That is either a downright lie, or a shading of the truth, depending on how kindly you look upon them, and whether you view Cex and GHash as one entity. Cex have admitted to previously being involved in a double-spend attack. |
|
|
|
Mazacoin never had a "hype time". Seriously? Go back and read over all the threads surrounding the coin launch, and all the lies and hype that was being spread. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
