There IS an upward push on pricing from miners. And most miners DO still turn a profit on their rigs. So...  You've got me here - how can miners push up when all they do is producing bitcoins? Or do you say that today all miners are automatically also buyers now because the prices are so low that buying is cheaper then mining. No, I'm saying that some miners hold, so it *helps* with upward pricing on bitcoins. We have a relatively steady price right now. If all miners sold their bitcoins after mining them, the price would be lower. If no miners sold their bitcoins after mining them, the price would be higher. BECAUSE we have SOME miners who don't sell their bitcoins, it keeps the price where it is at, by maintaining some upward pressure on the price. And yes, holding bitcoins DOES put upward pressure on the price. If everyone held, there would still be buyers, so the buyers would start offering higher prices. The holders would be contributing to the upward pressure on the price. This is the same thing as saying "not buying" puts downward pressure on the price. So most holders are, in reality contributing to both upward and downward pressure. |
|
|
|
You can also look at it this way: if it costs you $3.00 in energy to generate a bitcoin, you can always mine them now and sell them later when the price goes higher (unless you are pessimistic it never will). If two months from now, the price goes up to even $5, you be sad you didn't mine two months' worth of bitcoins to sell.
This is a waste of money. It's better to buy them now, which has the further advantage of placing upward pressure on the price. |
|
|
|
RS may still has a backup, so the distribution of control nodes is just an illusion.
If the control nodes can't be spent, am I correct in saying that RS's backup cannot remove control power from anyone? Of course he can. No, you do not. You can take your current holdings of SC and transfer them into a currency in which you do NOT have to trust one person. My current SC holdings are worth less than 16 bucks. I can afford to lose something if a) I learn a lesson from this or b) you do  . |
|
|
|
Regardless of who and how many people control the inital control nodes, RS may still has a backup, so the distribution of control nodes is just an illusion.
If the control nodes can't be spent, am I correct in saying that RS's backup cannot remove control power from anyone? Of course he can. The even blocks can transfer any amount of money to the CDF which is also controlled by RealScam. There is only a limit on the minimum amount required to sign the block. If a control node gets out of line since King RealScam has the private keys he can simply create an even block transaction transferring complete balance of control node to the CDF signed by the private key he will always have. The king says otherwise. I won't infringe on copyright by posting his exact words, but he said that the amount transferred is capped. I don't understand the mess that is the source though, so I'm forced to trust him for now. |
|
|
|
I believe control nodes should be solidcoin supporters, rather than RealSolid supporters. While I would nominate myself, I do not have the time or resources to run a full node.
If the control nodes can't be spent, am I correct in saying that RS's backup cannot remove control power from anyone?
There is only 1 requirement to be considered a control node 1) Having a wallet with 1m+ SC So even if Joe, Bob, and Sue recieve these premade wallets from RS, RS can at any time use the backups. And if he wanted to invalidate Joe, Bob, and Sue, he could just use all the backups and regain majority trust node control. At any time. What I mean is that although RS can use them, he cannot remove coins from the addresses nor wipe Joe's memory of the private key, so both he and Joe can share the same address. |
|
|
|
Don't sell mined bitcoin, rather spend them at CIB or Spendbitcoins! Rather than running them maybe buy some bitcoin at Tradehill or another exchange. Consider using your rigs for distributed computing and advancing the state of science. |
|
|
|
While an interesting assortment of people, you still have major bias among those even if they aren't merchants. Regardless of who and how many people control the inital control nodes, RS may still has a backup, so the distribution of control nodes is just an illusion. I believe control nodes should be solidcoin supporters, rather than RealSolid supporters. While I would nominate myself, I do not have the time or resources to run a full node. If the control nodes can't be spent, am I correct in saying that RS's backup cannot remove control power from anyone? |
|
|
|
If you didn't accept I believe that the clients rejected your blocks. I don't think (I haven't read the source, so please correct me if I'm wrong) that the control nodes have the power to do that. What I mean is that the public has 50% of the "vote", which is enough to check the power of the control nodes. What if miners got 51% of the blocks? This may help relieve the ability for a malicious control node to 51% the network easily by requiring it to gain at least 2% of the miner blocks, while still preventing 51% attacks by miners. Going back to the example of 32 SC vs 5 SC block reward. You could redownload the old client and mine 32 SC blocks. Sure you can "vote" by using the client which allows you to do that. The "small" problem is that the control nodes will reject anything you do and as a result your block will never become part of the block chain. So you can mine for a decade and finds thousands of blocks but none of them will become part of the longest chain. I don't think you can mine at all because all even blocks must be mined by a control node. In this way Solidcoin is even worse than fiat currency. Don't solidcoin "insiders" control the control nodes? If they don't, they really should - one person owning them is bad. There is only one insider - King RealScam. He has the private keys to all 10 control nodes. Maybe in the future he may use a sockpuppet to claim someone else has a control node but a) how do you know maybe he just posts under another account "hey guys I am Joe ScamReal and I control control node 1"? b) if he chooses who gets gains access how likely are they to block him? c) the control nodes with 51% of the funds can veto others so he can pass out some control nodes but they would have no power d) he has the private keys to all 10 and ability to make code changes. He could simply regain control of them. You do bring up a point though. Centralized Control is a bad thing. In my opinion the control nodes should be distributed to people like CoinRich or Ahimoth or Coblee or Viper rather than concentrated. If this is not done, RealSolid can shut down the network by emptying the control nodes of all their money. A user on the solidcointalk forums proposed addresses controlling more than 0.3% of the total coins in existance being control addresses. I think this might be a better proof-of-stake (although I would still prefer weighting the blocks on money). Don't solidcoin "insiders" control the control nodes? If they don't, they really should - one person owning them is bad.
Now here is where it gets really sketchy: No one BUT RS has claimed to operate a trust node. Infact (I may be wrong on this point), he has specifically stated that he retains a backup of all trust node wallets. Until anyone steps up and verifies that they operate a 'trust node', we have only left to know that RS operates them all. If the trust node operators insist on 'being anonymous', then that isn't really an trust at all. I have posted a question on the solidcointalk forums about this. http://solidcointalk.org/topic/418-who-owns-the-control-nodes/ |
|
|
|
If King RealSolid enforces unpopular changes, wouldn't the control nodes choose not to support them however?
... who controls the control nodes? Realsolid. How do you become a control node? Get 1m SC Realsolid just made it ~86% harder to become a control node when he reduced the block subsidy. Convenient, huh? Don't solidcoin "insiders" control the control nodes? If they don't, they really should - one person owning them is bad. |
|
|
|
King RealSolid's trusted node idea has not garnered much support from me, but remember that the miners still have the power to check the trusted nodes (securing the "trusted" nodes).
No they don't. King RealScam cut wages to all the miners by 87%. If you didn't accept then the control nodes rejected your blocks. So what exactly could the miners do? The Control Nodes are complete and absolute control over the network both now and into the future. Any change King RealScam decides to impose on his subjects will be enforced by the ControlNodes. There is no way around them. If you didn't accept I believe that the clients rejected your blocks. I don't think (I haven't read the source, so please correct me if I'm wrong) that the control nodes have the power to do that. What I mean is that the public has 50% of the "vote", which is enough to check the power of the control nodes. What if miners got 51% of the blocks? This may help relieve the ability for a malicious control node to 51% the network easily by requiring it to gain at least 2% of the miner blocks, while still preventing 51% attacks by miners. Edit: Oh, I see what you mean by rejected (as in stop mining on the old blockchain). If King RealSolid enforces unpopular changes, wouldn't the control nodes choose not to support them however? |
|
|
|
Nah just a try to trigger another sellof. Anyway I'll be sitting on mine till I can use them for barter.  This is what I meant by "under attack". I'll keep my litecoin for as long as the threats from the solidcoin userbase fail to materialize (don't have much really). I kind of got busted from iXCoin and i0Coin though, so I won't mine any more. |
|
|
|
One last funny thing. King RealScam has dropped so low as to explain that miners leaving don't matter because they are "parasites" that the ScamCoin economy will somehow be better if there are less people mining it.
SolidCoin is not a cryptocurrency, or at least by most people's definition of cryptocurrency. There's really no need for miners. SC miners do not secure the chain. That is already done by the trusted nodes. So miners are basically wasting their electricity. Think about it this way... with Bitcoin, miners hash to secure the network and they get rewarded for the security that they are adding to the network. With SolidCoin, miners are just wasting electricity because RealSolid thinks that this is a fair way to handout SCs. It's similar to a King asking his peasants to run around in circles. The faster they run, the more coins they get. So of course, profit-driven peasants will run around in circles, which adds no value to anything. King RealSolid realized that he is passing out too many solidcoins this way, which will dilute his own holdings. So guess what, he decided to pass out only 5 SC (instead of 32 SC) to his loyal peasants for each circle they complete. Then what happens? Well there are less peasants running around in circles b/c it's not worth it anymore. But that doesn't matter to RealSolid, because peasants running around in circles doesn't add any value in the first place. Hmm... Also, since the trusted nodes controls 50% of the blocks, by definition, you cannot do a 51% attack unless you have control of a trusted node. It's great when you create all the rules for your own realm AND you actually find suckers willing to follow you. King RealSolid's trusted node idea has not garnered much support from me, but remember that the miners still have the power to check the trusted nodes (securing the "trusted" nodes). |
|
|
|
|
Is LTC under attack? The price has plummeted recently (like, past few hours).
|
|
|
|
A large amount of people do use pesos or yen. Only because it is the legal currency in their nation (an advantage no crypto-currency has). A more realistic oberservation would be how many Americans exchange dollars for Yen in order to purchase things in the US? How many japanese exchange dollars for Yen in order to purchase things in Japan? A nation here is comparable to a community in alt-currency world. |
|
|
|
With the current market, to use anything other than BTC would be about as pathetic as using Pesos or Yen.
The thought of paying millions of any bottom-end crypto-currency is just rediculous when when tens (or worst case scenario, hundreds) of BTCs could be used in their place.
Everyone wants to be an early adopter and continues to PRAY for a BTC-like 'Silk Road' summer 2011 'bubble'.......GIVE IT UP.
A large amount of people do use pesos or yen. I believe your hatred for alt currencies is comparable to hating the smaller currencies of the world. |
|
|
|
If the code is released non open source, I think his license might be invalid and you can use the source freely. I am not a lawyer though. If you use a gpl project, your project must be gpl too.
Bitcoin is MIT. |
|
|
|
He is supposedly going to release code open source. Dump your BTC.
He has released the code, but not open source and it doesn't seem he has the intention to. |
|
|
|
IIRC there was someone selling a 5970 for I0coins a while back, but beyond that I know of no shops or individuals taking alt coins.
A few shops currently take Solidcoin: [ul] [/ul And a few individuals as well. Other than that, however, it definately doesn't have a massive market. |
|
|
|
Hey guys! I didn't want to register on the SolidCoin forums, so here's my entry:  Features: "In RealSolid You Trust" - since you gotta. Awesome supply and demand icon with: Extremely elastic demand Wacky wild whatever supply! 32 yesterday, 5 today, tomorrow who knows! CPF deadweight loss of taxation You can keep the reward, since it's in SC.  I would totally have voted for this until I saw the explanation . |
|
|
|
I can't find things like: X- Shutdown Solidcoin for ever. Y- Improve Bitcoin and Litecoin. Cheers! If you weren't a staff member, I would report this post as off-topic. Anyways, I voted for the dragon design. I still believe common localized designs are important for solidcoin penetration, so if anybody can modify the designs to the localized names that would be great. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
