Where's the miner?
We're currently "testing it"  . mtrlt is on his own when it comes to releasing it publicly, v13 of Reaper also includes many other benefits many people have been waiting for (makes SC hash about 60% faster on CPU). He may never release it publicly, keep an eye on the SC forum or wiki, if it does get released it will be mentioned there first. Given how easy it is to actually do it if you're a good programmer I'm sure others will attempt it regardless. It's funny some accusations here are flying about the claims. Despite the rumors we are very honest people who develop SolidCoin and I'm sure all the "facts" will be coming out soon. What is disappointing is the fact artforz and coblee have been misleading their users as to the viability of CPU mining on Litecoin. I originally paid mtrlt in SolidCoins to get his SolidCoin GPU miner out to the public so everyone could mine on equal terms. I'm sure he would have done it eventually regardless because that's the sort of person he is but it shows my dedication to having an equal playfield for every SolidCoin user compared to coblee and artforz. |
|
|
|
Recently one of our developers mtrlt spent about 4 hours adding scrypt support to Reaper, the SolidCoin GPU miner. http://solidcoin.info/reaper.htmlIt currently gets ~720KH/s on a 6990 . Is it possible the "botnet" or "darkpool" mining Litecoin is actually artforz and coblee who have been mining LiteCoin using an unfair advantage since the start? Conning litecoin users into thinking it's a CPU mining chain when in fact the GPU dominates it? Artforz publicly admitted to creating a GPU miner for litecoin numerous times, however he also said his GPU miner of scrypt (the algorithm used in Litecoin and which he selected) only got 9KH/s on a 6870 GPU. This is suspicious when our developer can get massive improvements over CPU with only 4 hours of effort, on the order of 150 times faster than artforz. Either artforz is terrible at creating GPU miners or he lied to litecoin users. Coblee, the "creator" of Litecoin, copy- pasted Artforz's code from Tenebrix and was communicating with him around the time of previous coin fairbrix and his latest attempt Litecoin. He went around giving the exact speech artforz did, so they both were involved in spreading the "GPU Hostile" mistruth . The fact that that it is found that the coin is far from GPU Hostile should lead to questions being asked of both coblee and artforz as to how and why they misled the public. |
|
|
|
So it seems like you know a lot about this attack, huh? I wonder why.
Sure, because unlike you who doesn't pay attention to their chain this stuff interests me. I like making SolidCoin better, and even changed our max block size after seeing LiteCoin abused. Once that attack became public I looked at when it started and was surprised it was a relatively long time before it was announced, which made me realize you weren't "on the job". It's the truth right? Want to make up some more FUD ? |
|
|
|
Where did you get this information from? You might want to double check your sources before you spread more FUD. I saw the Litecoin dust spam transactions immediately. It was very soon after gmaxwell's post.
Yah, you know a lot about FUD don't you. I'll have to submit to your excellent knowledge on the subject.  Can you please confirm the date between the first spam attack and that post so the proof is out there? |
|
|
|
Not under the law. The infringement still occurred. Just becoming complaint doesn't undo the actions of the past. Becoming compliant is a good thing it prevents further infringement from occurring but the bad action this exists and always will exist.
And even if in your delusion there was an offense you need to be able to say there was clear damage caused by it. And in this case what is that? Do you ever go on to the next stage of your thinking or do you just stop at "he committed an offense". "Yes judge, the free SolidCoin caused damages to me by.... by... um.... yeah.... it's the vibe of it really". Secondly even if an infringement "occurred" in the delusion there is nothing stopping me from giving my permission for my source to a different group, and them claiming my code along with their new license of whatever MIT project they want. In this case "the solidcoin developers". "RealSolid" the fictionary character may have committed some $0 damage offense in your mind but nothing is stopping him from easily allowing his code to be used by someone else, bundling that with Bitcoin and therefore boom, new licenses all around for everyone to have fun with. Keep checking your mail lukey, btw. |
|
|
|
Lets look at the two scenarios shall we?
Pool bad, people are free to leave the pool. Plus P2Pool is gaining ground so this issue is diminishing not growing.
Enforcer node bad, people are free to make forum posts about how they are trapped in a cryptocurrency controlled by one guy. There's no difference to rogue trust nodes than Bitcoins rogue pools or rogue miners, except a rogue SC trust node CANNOT DOUBLE SPEED. The other difference is that to be a trust node you need a lot of investment in SolidCoins, to be a pool operator you need to pay $50 a month. The current people with trust nodes have invested a lot into SolidCoin, whether time, money, development, etc. Several splinter groups have split off the forums and made their own place to discuss cryptocurrencies (yourself included).
Gavin can't shut down bitcoin with the alert key. He can only suggest that the network be shutdown by using the alert key. Furthermore I have just modded a bitcoin clone that completely ignores alerts. Gavin is now powerless to stop me with alerts. Welcome to free software. Haha you really are bitter about how SolidCoin is more secure. Firstly why would I want to "shut down SolidCoin" ? I created it and I want it to prosper because it solves many problems facing the human species. The worst I could do is take the CPF money amounting ~130K, I cannot stop the network on my own because others operate nodes and will have to be "in on it" too. I cannot (or any other trust node) double spend because no client will accept it. SolidCoin actually is a good solution unlike Bitcoin, as it's protected against Banks and Governments just walking into a PC shop, buying 10000 GPUs and raping it. "But they can just take out one guy" . Firstly the keys are encrypted, the trust node ones in operation may not be but they don't know where the trust nodes are and who is running them. It's not just me. And to capture me , torture me, threaten me, to get the keys and locations is way beyond buying some hardware online. Secondly I have a layer between who they will think is "me" and the real me, I will have a small amount of time upon which I realize I am in danger and take precautions (ie get the F out of dodge). My hope is the NPO is running this risk soon instead of me though, don't get me wrong.  It is so much harder to "order a hit" and torture someone than it is to just spend fiat money they have created out of thin air and buy some GPUs/FPGA. If you can't understand that then there is nothing more to say. Keep living in your delusion where a little bit of money created out of thin air can't just collapse Bitcoin in a minute. |
|
|
|
Miners actually give the pools their trust when they mine on that pool. If the pool misplaces that trust, miners will leave the pool. This is similar to voting a politician into office to represent the people in a democracy. Just look at the miners that left Eligius when Luke-Jr used it to attack CoiledCoin. Granted since this wasn't an attack on Bitcoin, most of the miners didn't care and stayed with Eligius. If deepbit, or any other pool tries to attack Bitcoin, you can bet that they will lose their hashrate immediately. Yes because miners are that mobile. Let me give you an example, SolidCoin block 180000 info was made public a week ago, and today we still have people unaware about the changes and wondering why their mining earnings are less than usual. Many miners do not check forums or "isbitcoinbeingattacked.com" People will still be mining deepbit/whatever as it attacks for some length of time. You also won't be able to easily pinpoint which pool is attacking, deepbit could just be having some "maintenance issues" . So try proving that to someone. You must really live in some fantasy land where you think as soon as one bad block hits the network alarm bells will be going off! We know the attacker immediately! All miners will stop immediately! This sounds like 9/11 or something. Oh and after all this goes down with one bad pool what happens? Well Bitcoin loses a lot of faith, but maybe it continues on like a zombie, just to have another pool claim the #1 throne and there we go again same problem. "But but we have p2poooool" Yeah watch that scale to about 500 clients before it bursts. You didn't even notice LiteCoin was being "attacked" for 2 days, before criticizing the #2 cryptochain on how it's security works you should make sure your own bases are covered. |
|
|
|
Its dangerous to let Luke-Jr have anything to do with code for bitcoin. His recent behaviour of sending a DMCA notice to an alt coin dev shows what he really believes. Which is sending men with guns to your house if you do something he doesnt like.
This sort of action makes it too risky to allow him access to insert code in bitcoin that will allow him to take it down or worse threaten companies. Using your mining pool to bully alt chain devs then if hat doesnt work using the gun in the room is enough to disqualify him imo.
'
Well as a competitor to Bitcoin I would actually very much like Luke-JR to get more power within the leadership group or even just stick around doing what he does...... People think when it comes to software development and protocol improvement the best thing is this massive debate over every small change... I disagree. Bitcoin isn't really at the stage where it just needs a few minor tweaks here and there as it sails off to its magical 21 million coin sunset. If Microsoft had this same "development model" we'd be on Windows 3.11 instead of Windows 7 or 8. We'll see with SolidCoin in the next month or so, a complete rewrite, thin clients the default transaction method for users and out of the box ease for developers to integrate with their sites. All because we agree on what needs to be done and work towards that goal. Few disputes and if they are people are reasonable and decide what's best for the project. |
|
|
|
Yeah it's the old tasty argument of "SolidCoin is centralized Bitcoin isn't" . Like the trust nodes in SolidCoin somehow make it sooooo much different than deepbit and btcguild controlling Bitcoin. Might as well call deepbit trust node 1 and btcguild trust node 2. Because you are trusting them to not attack Bitcoin.. Not that I'm saying deepbit or btcguild will do an attack but if you can't see Bitcoin users are TRUSTING these two pools not to then you can't argue any centralization aspect against SolidCoin with a clear conscience. There are plenty of things in Bitcoin that are centralized that are essential to its future success. A main website, a main source, main developers, a main forum. Oh and the alert key in Bitcoin too is rather centralized is it not? Who has control of that? One person? Oh nooo King Gavin may shut down Bitcoin ... argggg Bitcoin trolls will have a field day! Oh they won't because when it comes to Bitcoin they are like blind mice following the pied piper or something. |
|
|
|
I've read many of the developer logs from Bitcoin and I must say I'm surprised this hasn't really come to a head earlier. If you read luke-jrs response to pretty much anything he disagrees with he does the "you do that and I'm not going to mine it" approach. "If you do that I'm going to fork the chain" . Basically turning every minor problem into a major one and using his pool as his body guard. Does anyone actually think Luke-Jr is a positive presence? Attacking other currencies, filing false claims to hosts, inserting religious text into Bitcoin and finally holding Bitcoin development team to ransom to stall development? With that sort of positive presence I'm glad he's over here rather than focusing on SolidCoin. |
|
|
|
And neither does ScamCoin. There is nothing decentralized about ScamCoin. The miners are token and provide nothing of value to the network.
You're wrong. The sad thing is you know it but just like to spread FUD. |
|
|
|
That's like saying PayPal has 51% protection. You might as well run a single enforcer node that processes all transactions. Or is that the plan for SC3 next month? Paypal doesn't have a decentralized P2P network, it also doesn't let everyone with a PC create "paypal dollars". As much as you may hate some things in SolidCoin compared to government/central bank controlled money it's leaps and bounds better, and that's good enough for most people. I think you'll find your values are extremely niche, but I can understand that people like yourself will never accept SC due to them and you can continue to use whatever it is you want. We aren't going to force you. |
|
|
|
All existing SC owners prior to the change can now bail out at a price which is 5 times higher than a week ago. If they want to bail they can do so at a nice profit.
And it's what, 10 times, 100 times harder to mine (I've heard both .7 sc per block and .07 sc per block, so I'm not sure the correct figure)? Seems like the change only benefited early adapters. But then, that was probably the point to the chain all along. Edit: Looks like it's about .08 per block, plus a few tx fees, let's say it's .1 sc per block, down from about 7 sc per block. Difficulty goes up 70x, price goes up 5x. I expect network hashrate to plummet once miners figure out they can't get anything anymore from mining. Good thing SC is designed for plummeting hashrate. In a couple weeks it's going to just be the enforcer nodes hashing away. I guess that's why SolidCoin is so "Lucky" to be protected against mining attacks eh? We now aren't flooding the economy with coins. Like you said, I personally don't think price will increase 70x immediately, because it was dropping previously , which indicates too much mining for the amount of investors we had. That's what the change addresses. It's our luxury with 51% protection that we can have a coin flow based on actual investment and development instead of "heres a fixed coin rate, let the value fluctuate like a wild beast". If you want a currency to work you can't have massive value fluctuations in my opinion. I guess we'll see how this goes over the coming months. I suspect few people here have actually tried to argue Bitcoins to a business because if you did they would ask things like "What are they worth?" and the answer you give is "depends, $2 a month ago, $5 now, 6 months ago it was $30, 1 year ago it was $1" . We had the same problem with SolidCoin so we are fixing it. Personally I don't think Bitcoin is a currency and it never will be due to issues like this. But it could continue as some sort of "commodity" for a little while longer. And I think you'll find very few of our investors are going "short solidcoin" we've been at this for 7 months and we want a working, secure currency. Most of the key people aren't profit motivated, we are motivated to get rid of the shitty systems in place like banks and governments having their fingers in each pie. That said I'm sure there are plenty of people in the SC community which are 100% profit driven, that's life I guess. |
|
|
|
It will be the death of SC2. As soon as the currency is worth something it will be shredded by more talented programmers who can find security holes in the trusted node system, or by a simpler sybil attack. You do know SolidCoin has many more nodes than Litecoin right? Sybil attack is much easier on Litecoin. Either way, the top end SC guys are aware of the risks and have a "backbone" of nodes which will always connect to each other. Are Litecoin developers aware ? It took them 2 days to even notice their network was being spammed. Sounds real proven. The reason all my money is in LTC is because the system is proven robust as it does not strongly deviate from the original protocol -- with SC2, you're trusting a single person's programming skills with your money. The fact that the trusted node system has already been attacked successfully should be an ominous sign to anyone who wants to invest their money into SC2. I think a lot of people in the end are going to get shafted and one person is going to walk away with a lot of everyone else's cash.
Well we have 4 developers now so unfortunately we can't just blame me for all the good (or bad) things . SolidCoin is the most "Wanting to be attacked" chain out there and has survived everything people have thrown at it. Luke-Jr, artforz, large botnets. Maybe we need satoshi to hit it hard? Just get Gavin to give him a call. All existing SC owners prior to the change can now bail out at a price which is 5 times higher than a week ago. If they want to bail they can do so at a nice profit. |
|
|
|
Seriously CoinHunter, it takes a lot less than 10 million for a government to find your true identity. They will then force you (maybe even torture you) to give up the identity of the trusted nodes and shut Solidcoin down. And I'm sure there are technical ways to take Solidcoin down by isolating the IPs of the trusted nodes and taking them down that way. I can't believe you are so naive as to think that your solution (centralizing the creation of every other block to trusted nodes and hiding the trusted nodes) is safer than bitcoin's decentralized solution. For your sake, I hope that Solidcoin never takes off. At least Satoshi would not need to fear for his safety when Bitcoin becomes a threat to the current monetary system.
Naive? That is why the plan was for the NPO to take control of everything and be protected in appropriate ways. The government wouldn't see SolidCoin as a threat yet, it's a minnow compared to Bitcoin, and by the time Bitcoin dies and SolidCoin is very successful there will be a NPO and "proper precautions" taken. If you don't know how to do the latter it is probably why you don't understand the security inherent in the SolidCoin system. It is why there is a CPF, coin PROTECTION fund. It's going to protect the network and its users. We will do our best to survive government and large corporation attacks, that is what we are charged with doing over here. No one can guarantee you security but the bitcoin system is wide open for an attack. Your assumptions they actually have to get their hands dirty in kidnapping, torturing and etc shows you it's one step beyond "buy FPGA, kill bitcoin" . I never started SolidCoin thinking at one stage it wouldn't get violent, that's what will happen, at some point, if we are successful. And we need to be ready for it. |
|
|
|
http://solidcoinmafia.com/ SolidCoin MafiaWhat is SolidCoin Mafia?SolidCoin Mafia is a Bitcoin merged mining pool that pays out in SolidCoins. When a Bitcoin/NMC/I0C/IXC/DEVC block is won those coins are taken to various exchanges and used to buy SolidCoins using a variety of algorithms. What is the aim of the pool?To provide more liquidity for SolidCoin trading and always ensuring there is at least one large buyer available. Why should I mine here? Can't I just mine SolidCoins if I want them?Yes you could mine SolidCoins, though often buying them with Bitcoins allows you to get more SolidCoins. Also by mining at SolidCoin Mafia you are economically supporting SolidCoin and helping to provide some stability to the value. How are payouts handled?We calculate a pay per share that is roughly 50% of the current market price. So you get your SolidCoins upfront prior to any block being found, though roughly only 50% what you could if you had that in BTC. When the automatic trading takes place users are then proportionally paid out any bonuses. Sometimes no bonuses may occur due to SolidCoin price increasing a lot between the the sale of the Bitcoins and the giving of SolidCoins for each share. You can withdraw as soon as you have submitted enough shares to get 5 SolidCoins Big Thanks to Karmaon and Ahimoth for working a lot on this concept. They Run the pool so if you have any questions PM them on the SolidCoinTalk forum or on IRC, freenode #solidcoin http://solidcointalk.org/topic/534-solidcoin-mafia-bitcoin-merged-mining-pool/
|
|
|
|
You do realize the price only went up because you changed it so you only have something like 5 coins in a block now and you are buying these coins?
number of nodes lol!
Also I thought you would have used biggest as most adapted, or most used, or most mined. namecoin and litecoin have you there. How much of your own money have you pumped into this to keep up the price? I guess it is not hard to do now that there is no volume due to no one mining it but you. No one can sell into your rise as you cut off the supply. (Give me great idea for TyGrr coin, lol)
And yeah, there is no need for you to take me seriously, and I wont be stopping the lulz.
Hah, if you think you're so smart and this is what is happening you could have so easily made so much money! How unfortunate for you. |
|
|
|
How did you measure that because I would have guessed namecoin or LTC. I'm pretty sure name coin and LTC are "bigger" than ShitCoin but please tell me how I am wrong. It's hard to take you serious when you are so intentionally offensive. SolidCoin is the biggest "alt chain" or second biggest cryptochain (currently behind Bitcoin) because of the following :- 1) Number of nodes 2) Market cap. 2.8 million coins in circulation at $0.05 USD ($140000) I'm not sure what metrics you would use but if you want to compare some other chains in market cap NMC: 2017300 coins * $0.028 = $56585 LTC: 3702750 coins * $0.0064 = $23697 So we are nearly 3 times bigger than namecoin and 6 times bigger than LiteCoin. |
|
|
|
Dude, You have your own ENTIRE FORUMS, go post that the new client is out ver there, Not in multiple threads within Alt Cur. on the bitcoinforums
You do know SolidCoin is the second biggest cryptochain, the biggest "alt chain" . It certainly deserves mention on this segment of the forum given that. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
