Not convinced about this project. Looks to another scam what wants to get the money from the people.
Oh goody, it's another single-purpose throwaway newb account sent forth to attack XDC. How nice to have flak confirming we are over the target. Every PoS coin's market share/cap is threatened by the creation of a more innovative, fairly-launched alternative to Peercoin, Dash, etc. Especially Dash, given all the hype the DashHoles make about their Masternode HYIP based voting (which is entirely controlled by Otoh and Evan-the-Instaminer).  |
|
|
|
Interesting comment from Shen about multisig yep - very likely will be implemented in conjunction with the ring ct stuff
Following the "written up" link in the Ring CT post, section 4.4 of the paper describes how to implement "Ring multisignature". Some of the other CryptoNote coins have multisig, but only with 0 mixin. Very nice work being done on the crypto front. Great news! Multisig is a requirement for use by Open/FreeBazaar, DNM, etc.  I look forward to struggling to comprehend the crypto magic involved in "ring multisignature."  |
|
|
|
What a fantastic start of 2016! Dev-team legends!
 2016 Year of the Mustang |
|
|
|
I can't wait to start generating 16MB blocks construed so as to take 128 minutes to verify. Once your derp forks' chain(s?) cannot be verified in real time (and it becomes impossible to bootstrap new full nodes) it's game over. Unless Mikey "Final Call" Hearn wants to sit around forever checkpointing out troll blocks....  This assumes miners are idiots and will sit there for 128 min trying to verify a block rather than build on a longer chain of smaller, shorter blocks. Also, you're being absolutist here, many would be satisfied with 2MB to study the effects on nodes, gain time to carefully and methodically roll out segwit, and time to plan a more permanent solution. Big pool/miner nodes use 15 or 18 core Xeons, and given competitive tx fees (and/or out-of-band arrangements) will be happy to quickly construe 16MB XT/BU blocks which take hours to verify on a normal laptop. Core may change to 2MB eventually, if and only if the 1MB control variable in the Bitcoin experiment proves to be a threat to the antifragility of the entire system. We must know if or exactly when 1MB causes Bitcoin to fail, and for what reasons. Magic numbers picked before such an informative event (ie teachable moment) are worse than useless. Premature increases retard development of fee markets critical for weaning Bitcoin off block subsidies and onto self-sufficient tx provision utility. |
|
|
|
((165,000+250,000+415,000)÷(21,000,000×0.08)) = USD 0.494047619 per coin. Anything less than that on a free market and the devs lose.
Arbitrarily attaching value to things. Solid. Arbitrarily calling non-arbitrary things arbitrary. Solid. (The $0.494047619 value isn't arbitrary, as the post you quoted but failed to comprehend clearly explained.) Only an idiot like Icebreaker (How are those Hashfast rigs doing?) would consider completely made up numbers some form of financial reality. Developers paying themselves for their own work in their own project isn't any damn basis of valuation. The numbers aren't "completely made up." The $0.494047619 value isn't arbitrary, it's precisely the point where C0 breaks even. What would it take to convince you XDC isn't a scam? |
|
|
|
iCE, have you had enough time to decide if segwit is an attack on Bitcoin Classic?
I'm very happy to finally have a decent plan (besides Dr. Back's extension blocks) on the shelf for use in the (potentially disastrous) event of Actual Widespread Adoption. Segwit seems to kill 10 birds with one stone, so I don't have a problem with it continuing to percolate through the BIP process. No firm opinion yet on doing it as a hard or soft fork. Soft seems better if done electively (because fight features), hard if done in crisis mode. Have the Gavinistas decided on whether or not segwit is a good thing or a tool of Blockstream Satan? Is there a schism between the pro-segwit XTurds and anti-segwit Unlimiturds? Nah, my impression is that most in favor of moving past 1MB soon(er than 2017) think segwit can be quite beneficial, but probably better/cleaner as a hard fork. The only one going to war with segwit seems to be MP and his toadies. I'm not the only one who instinctively fights features, and brg (one of MP's best toadies) seems generally fine with segwit. To reiterate/clarify, I don't support elective segwit implementation nearly as strongly as a ready-to-go 'break glass in case of fire' backup plan. Bitcoin may not need segwit to get the list of goodies (malleability prevention, etc.) associated with it, just as it may not need (transaction) blocks >1MB to scale. There may be better ways to prevent malleability, etc. so we don't want to risk ossification with the wrong (but good enough) solution. I trust the BIP process and the socioeconomic majority's marketplace of ideas will figure it out. Are XTurd and Unlimiturd both going to add segwit? I can't wait to start generating 16MB blocks construed so as to take 128 minutes to verify. Once your derp forks' chain(s?) cannot be verified in real time (and it becomes impossible to bootstrap new full nodes) it's game over. Unless Mikey "Final Call" Hearn wants to sit around forever checkpointing out troll blocks.... |
|
|
|
The trivial, mostly harmless "National" strain is not what is meant or implied 99% of the time by the unadorned term you originally used. That nearly obsolete reference doesn't fit your (typically overdramatic) metaphor about authoritarianism, which compares Bitcoin.org's blacklisting of Coinbase ("small block terrorism") with the Russian Revolution's violent destruction of one of the world's greatest empires and resulting Stalinist dictatorship. Thanks for the opportunity to point out Bitcoin.org is not in any way accurately described as Bolshevik, because not giving Coinbase free advertising isn't the same thing as the war/terror/famine of the world revolution's first dominoes. |
|
|
|
Antisocial degenerate reveling in destructive hackery? Color me shocked. Too bad the attack is ineffectual. No problems logging in here. Someone gullible enough to run Bitcoin Unlimited thinks ddos is hacking? Color me shocked. No, not someone running BU, someone open minded enough to look into it. If you don't want to include DDoS in your definition of hacking, fine. Either way, it is nefarious and destructive in nature. It reflects a callous disregard for the work of others. And, it is one of the few courses of action available to a desperate loser. Ineffectual? Every minute of downtime costs Coinbase's reputation, plus money in the forms of lost business and attack mitigation.
Yes, ineffectual. Perhaps you missed the part where I was able to log in with no issue. Rather the actual _definition_ of an ineffectual attempt at DDoS, that. Just wait until the real hackers/whistleblowers get inside Coinbase and disclose the true extent of their jackboot-kissing, user-tracking, PanoptiCoin shitlording....
Such may or may not come to pass. Yet until it does, your statement reflects merely your idle speculation. Frankly, I don't see the problem. Don't like Coinbase? Don't deal with them. 'Problem' solved. If you are counting on physical destruction to win intellectual arguments, you are ceding that you are already the underdog. Since the attack reportedly took the (main) Coinbase.com page down, it was not "ineffectual." I didn't miss the part where users could still log in to their subdomain, but thanks for entertaining us by grasping for that straw. I did miss the part where the reasons for calling ddos "hacking" and "physical destruction" are elucidated. Please, don't keep us waiting for the logical and semantic gymnastics! I don't deal with Coinbase. I don't count on ddos or other forums of "physical destruction" Now proceed to discuss how many UDP packets can dance on a pinhead. Yes, there's a good lulcow....  |
|
|
|
Why would anyone reputable want to get involved in this?
If you care to read the friendly manual, you'll find this question is addressed in a direct, substantial manner. |
|
|
|
iCE, have you had enough time to decide if segwit is an attack on Bitcoin Classic?
I'm very happy to finally have a decent plan (besides Dr. Back's extension blocks) on the shelf for use in the (potentially disastrous) event of Actual Widespread Adoption. Segwit seems to kill 10 birds with one stone, so I don't have a problem with it continuing to percolate through the BIP process. No firm opinion yet on doing it as a hard or soft fork. Soft seems better if done electively (because fight features), hard if done in crisis mode. Have the Gavinistas decided on whether or not segwit is a good thing or a tool of Blockstream Satan? Is there a schism between the pro-segwit XTurds and anti-segwit Unlimiturds? |
|
|
|
Antisocial degenerate reveling in destructive hackery? Color me shocked. Too bad the attack is ineffectual. No problems logging in here. Someone gullible enough to run Bitcoin Unlimited thinks ddos is hacking? Color me shocked. Ineffectual? Every minute of downtime costs Coinbase's reputation, plus money in the forms of lost business and attack mitigation. Just wait until the real hackers/whistleblowers get inside Coinbase and disclose the true extent of their jackboot-kissing, user-tracking, PanoptiCoin shitlording....  |
|
|
|
Nobody ever claimed FN is libertarian. It says "nationalist" right on the box. Bitcoin needs adversity to grow stronger. In that regard, FN/EU opposition is as useful as Hearn's subversion and sabotage. Have you decided how to justify your inexplicable, baffling conjunction of Bolshevism and Nationalism? Is that footnote of an edge case actually your final answer? You really can't do a better job of 'clarifying' than that? Every time I think my opinion of you can't get any lower, you exceed yourself in your ability to disappoint. Without the technical/economic/political background needed to understand the Bitcoin medium, you will never understand Bitcoin's message. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ydpd2/roger_ver_thank_you_brian_armstrong_coinbase_for/cycxtnc?context=3LOL REKT XD |
|
|
|
Thanks, I have skimmed through this table, it is not immediately clear what time will the block and how many coins will be in the block. As I said block time is 5 mins & there is no halving, its a smooth curve for reward reduction & table lists approx. coin at end of each year starting from premine amount to 21 million coins. So there is no exact amount of coins in a block but they decrease slightly over time from starting reward. You can click the MC2 link to see details about how that curve is calculated & other details of mining/staking. I was in a bad mood, sorry for being rude but still i will say please do read old post & links. Go to point iii in that pdf that is linked. ^^^Bump to the OP. |
|
|
|
bolshevik Front National
Bolshevism was the Soviet branch of the explicitly internationalist workers' movement. Cite: The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1979) Bolshevism - a consistently revolutionary Marxist current of political thought within the international workers’ movement. Pro tip: internationalist != nationalist. Your knowledge of humanities is as appallingly poor as your technical background. How can you claim to have studied the humanities, yet be so stupendously ignorant of the basic tenets/history of Marxism and Leninism? Do you just randomly use words with a vaguely negative connotation, or can you actually defend your absurd description of FN as "bolshevik?" I'd wager it's the former, because compared to you Jon Snow knows just about everything. LOL Educate yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bolshevik_Fronthttp://anton-shekhovtsov.blogspot.ch/2014/09/the-national-bolshevik-alliance-is.htmlYes, I've seen the entry on that obscure radial case, which as part of the Third Position is absolutely distinct from the plain old "bolshevism" you used (for some unfathomable and still unclarified reason) to modify NF. https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/builds/98931235 Commit 91e6c75
#1178: Remove Coinbase from the "Choose your Wallet" page
comitter Cøbra authored and committed LOL REKT XD |
|
|
|
bolshevik Front National
Bolshevism was the Soviet branch of the explicitly internationalist workers' movement. Cite: The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1979) Bolshevism - a consistently revolutionary Marxist current of political thought within the international workers’ movement. Pro tip: internationalist != nationalist. Your knowledge of humanities is as appallingly poor as your technical background. How can you claim to have studied the humanities, yet be so stupendously ignorant of the basic tenets/history of Marxism and Leninism? Do you just randomly use words with a vaguely negative connotation, or can you actually defend your absurd description of FN as "bolshevik?" I'd wager it's the former, because compared to you Jon Snow knows just about everything. |
|
|
|
small block terrorists
Yes Mayor Giuliani, taking down Coinbase for a few minutes is exactly like 9/11.  When you resort to conflating UDP packets with mass murder, it's obvious you have lost the debate. Please continue to sell XT by using the victims of political violence as a reason to hate Core. Your shameful, trashy histrionics do more damage to the Gavinista putsch than NotXT and LOIC ever could.  get back to dogecoin already. unlimited wow.
#R3KT |
|
|
|
That coin trades nowhere, so its ticker is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Saw that earlier. Pretty saddened by the fact that the article is generally positive but all the quotes are quite hateful. ETH, NXT, and BitNation (Swarm too) with so much fire from out of nowhere. Very surprising since Decred isn't taking any money from anyone, but all those projects did before code was even written - and yet Decred is the scam. Really don't want to be a dick about it, but that was quite harsh, especially without talking to anyone involved in the project or the community forming here for example. You must understand CoinTelegraph is a scam pushing outfit affiliated with DASH and Bytecoin type shitcoins. CT hates and fears the possibility of a legitimate POS coin emerging to compete with the trash they advertise via sponsored content. When CoinMarketCap (CT's main traffic generator) lists XDC, they will annotate it with the **premined mark of shame, something they refuse to do for Darkcoin despite it having a much higher percentage generated in the first 48 hours of its earlier-than-announced ninja launch. |
|
|
|
I do not need to have a technical background to answer questions like "who decides" or what the economic policy and governance structure of Bitcoin should be.
Your wishful thinking is wrong. Because the medium is the message, you do need a technical background to produce valid opinions about what Bitcoin "should be." Bitcoin is in fact a reaction to soft-science/humanities people like you operating beyond their level of competence and presuming to set parameters of systems that would in an ideal world be completely removed from their control. http://www.techworm.net/2015/12/hacker-ddos-coinbase-website-down.html (lol rekt) Coinbase is discovering that if you try to destroy Bitcoin, Bitcoin destroys you. https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/3ya0f4/remember_how_segwit_was_presented_as_this_genius/cycaifu?context=1The issue with BU is that nodes can't actually process an infinitely sized block, so you could end up splitting the network by making a block big enough that some nodes can't process it but others can.
I don't think making it a command line flag makes sense. Mike.Hearn@sigint.google.mil is discovering what happens when you call up full-retard levels of stupidity too profound to be controlled. The funniest thing about "Bitcoin Unlimited" is that it's LIMITED to 16MB blocks, which is 20% below Gavin's original 20MB proposal. |
|
|
|
Hi there,
You are using the same ticker as DeltaCredits, which was launched in August. Please change your ticker.
All the best,
Adam
They won't.They consider Delta Credits a 'dead' coin.Read a few pages back! Good luck to both DCRs !!!! Please show the exact post where someone belonging to Decred project told they consider Delta Credit to be 'dead' coin and refused to change the ticker. I read this thread and did not notice such statement from the Decred officials. Decred developers seem to be smart guys with legit project and I would not expect them to make such aggressive moves and unnecessarily create enemies for their young project. Would appreciate a clear statement on this topic from the Decred developers. I wish the Decred team the best of luck with the experiment but I do think it was a mistake to take the three letter code being used by another group of people in the crypto community (assuming what's here is accurate). It can't be that hard to come up with an original three letter code. It's not too late to change it We're using XDC. The Delta necro-coiners may calm down now. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
