 Will do! And beef too. |
|
|
|
Brain diarrhea.
I think he's a troll from the beef council. I am seriously turned off to the whole cow hugging movement by shitheads like hippytech. Anyone feeling hungry?  |
|
|
|
I'm legit interested in this project, just do something cool and I'm here. I love proof of stake (definitely an improvement over proof of work in theory) and i love cryptonote. What do you guys have to prove that you are making advances in the space of bringing proof of stake to cyrptonote. I see a lot of promises and very little in the way of concrete advancement. Sorry for not doing exhaustive research, there are so many people promising so many things everywhere that i could never research all of the claims. A distillation in this respect would be greatly appreciated.
I'm usually here lurking and looking for ways to bash this coin, but to answer your question and to be fair, the devs have already done it to an extent. They have put one part of cryptonote on top of the PoS SDC blockchain. The difference from a true cryptonote+PoS hybrid is that the cryptonote layer runs on top of the PoS block chain much like zerocoin would run on top of bitcoin. Here they substitute cryptonote-type ring signatures for the zkSNARKs of zerocoin. It's a good idea, actually, from a purely theoretical perspective. Now here is the bashing part: cryptonote ring signatures cause a lot of blockchain bloat. The SDC implementation compounds this problem with the clunkiness of a zero-coin type token system. It's a great proof-of-concept, but in my opinion, it's not going to be practical. I could be wrong. Time will tell if it gets adopted, used, and is maintainable. |
|
|
|
Is this coin is dead?
Dead and buried. Nooo00000000000000ooooooooooooooooooo0o0oo0o0o0ooooooo0000000000ooo!!!!!!!!!! I was about to put my ASICS on it. I just found it by browsing all the shitcoins on cryptopia. Someone bring this baby back to life. |
|
|
|
An updated timeline is long overdue.
The problem with timelines is that they are taken as promises. And altcoiners in particular confuse them with binding contracts. Even rough estimates get confused for promises. I don't blame the team for not giving dates. If they gave a date and missed it, the same crew of posters would be crying bloody murder. |
|
|
|
SCAM
also, he made it instamine on purpose.
this is the code that he left in it to cause the instamine
if(nHeight > 4500 || TestNet()) dDiff = ConvertBitsToDouble(nBits);
this makes the difficulty not calculated correctly before block 4500.
that is why all the blocks to 4500 were instamined.
You realize you have to have some shred of competence to scam people don't you? I see no competence here. |
|
|
|
Why new thread?
Question of the day. Is this a hype thread? |
|
|
|
Something wrong is going on, I understand the amount of work, the website and demo looks amazing, but You could find few minutes to update the timeline to not worry the investors anymore. The plans are outdated right now.
The BRO team just doesn't update investors when they have nothing to update. The platform has been tested by ICO buyers and is exceptional, so it's best to relax. This coin isn't a typical pump and dump where you buy your ICO and try to dump before the fud storm and scam accusations start flying. ICO buyers were the seed money for this enterprise. It's very early money, so it will take a while before you can dump your coins. From the terms of the sale and the stated plans it was obvious what to expect, especially when the ICO failed to get close to the target. I'm glad they still have my money and didn't issue me a refund. It means they found a way to move forward, and evidence abounds that they have indeed made a lot of progress. |
|
|
|
So your friend saw the light... And the same group in control of this... funny, funny, funny. No "credit", to Julian the joker? None wanted either ah?
Impressive indeed...
Jose de Barabaras, you never answered my question.Are you an out of work no-talent assclown actor who can't get a job? I think I saw your demos. They were pretty bad. But you had to have some pretty good co-actors to keep from laughing their asses off at your lack of ability. |
|
|
|
It has been 30 crypto years since the ico launch. Timelines. Updates. Something solid. Thanks
I think you would have seen something solid if you had taken the team up on their offer to test the platform. The invitation went to all who participated in the ICO. You did participate in the ICO didn't you (and aren't just trolling)?  |
|
|
|
i cannot sync with network.
Any nodes fore me to sync?
Thanks for help:)
Try these: addnode=209.188.7.191
addnode=188.4.246.6
addnode=108.180.155.72
|
|
|
|
Just go and get a regular job Jose.
Why would anyone hire you for acting jobs at your age? The best you'll get is a short part and hope for re-runs. But can you really live off those meagre royalties? This is why you do what you do.
Are your parents "proud"?
I'm doing you a favor by telling you this. You need to get a job. This forum. This thing you call "life". This so called "power". It's nothing. Face facts.
Sell whatever you have in crypto and go and get a job. Wake up.
Barrabaras, can you explain what all this means? Is your name Jose? Are you an out of work actor or something? |
|
|
|
$10M market cap is the current price of admission to the elite group of top 10 coins on Market Cap: http://coinmarketcap.comWith a Total Supply of 19.5M coins, 1 BRO has to reach $0.50 for this coin to join that elite club. I hope the BRO team prices the ICO accordingly to reach the top 10 rank fast, that will be huge for PR. The problem with this idea is that during the ICO, no BRO will actually be in circulation, so there will be no way for the ICO price to be reflected in the CMC rating. But if the BRO platform is as good as has been reported by some of the testers, it won't matter what the ICO price is. |
|
|
|
I have made a bunch of upgrades to the Blockchain for look, usability, security, and increased rewards for holding PayCon and have launched a new ANN thread since the Muddafudda has expressed that he will be unable to take the Coin any further.
Thanks for doing this. It's a shame that the original dev couldn't continue on with this project, but it looks to be in good hands now. |
|
|
|
That was an awesome second part of the ICO. Those prices were really rock bottom. Too bad bitcointalk was down the whole time. I've never spent so much BTC in one place.
Yea was a real flash ico, was waiting for my btc transfer to clear and missed, had only spare 5 or so btc to spend.  What second part of the ICO? You guys are scaring me  Ah, don't worry, only the Friday afternoon trolling  Having fun with the noobs. There was no 2nd part. |
|
|
|
|
That was an awesome second part of the ICO. Those prices were really rock bottom. Too bad bitcointalk was down the whole time. I've never spent so much BTC in one place.
|
|
|
|
Nice to feel this enthusiasm and be part of this whole thing, but it would be REALLY nice to get an approximate date of beta release at least. No words from any official since long long time. The term of 4th of January is way back now. This project needs a bit more transparency. We are part of this therefore we have the right to be informed regularly (at least once per week). Don't get me wrong, but it would be really a great thing. If you invested, you probably got an email for joining the test group. You have to sign an NDA. I haven't, but I think if you want to know more about the project, then you should go that route. |
|
|
|
Haven't read all the posts so it may be mentioned before. Current PoS implementations use some sort of wallet weight as a way to handle competitions for blocks. Wallet weight is basically the amount of coins in the wallet. So if I have a big wallet with very small coin blocks (i.e. I transfer the coins in thousands of small transactions), I have the chance of staking a lot of new blocks continuously with the full weight of my wallet each time. That's the problem.
I think the way to fix this is to change the wallet weight to the amount of the coins in the current block that's being split to stake, rather than the full weight of all coins in the wallet. That would mean that you need a lot of coins AND big coin blocks in the wallet to perform a potential blockchain rewrite attack.
Probably, the way to address this is to weight (verb) the weight (noun) based on the size of the stake as well as the total coins in the wallet. I'm not sure how this is handled in peercoin clones. But I'm going to look it up. |
|
|
|
Let's create a Hackcoin.
Everyone who is interested in POS security can download the wallet.
Everyone who is interested in hacking can play around with it.
The results could be useful for every honest coin.
We should never forget one thing: We are fighting against the system (banks and governments) - we are not fighting against decentralized digital currencies, am I right?
Some of us believe in what we are doing. The destruction of a random coin isn't the solution.
Cheers,
Ray
I disagree. Hackcoin is what you get on a testnet. Go after real coins. That's where you have the most to learn. There is more to learn here than whether the OP can achieve a double spend. There is also information in the responses from the devs and the code they produce to compensate. Also, what are the responses from the exchanges, etc. There are many questions that can only be addressed by attacking the live system. It's still early in crypto. It's better to do this now while it can be done. When regulators step in to protect the system, it will be too late to learn this much. |
|
|
|
Your first paragraph was my original response. But I read past the first 3 sentences and realized that this is a valid cause. The bad coins should be attacked. This is noble work. It's not done out of malice or a general hatred, but to cull the herd or at least toughen the coins that remain standing after the attacks.
Hopefully the OP will share his findings and we will learn more about PoS crypto. I'm very interested in the results.
Perhaps you read something that I missed then. In his OP he states his reasoning is because of the "quantity" of coins, not the "quality." Personally I see no reason to attack coins, especially ones that meet his own agenda and not the consensus of the entire crypto community. History has shown that most all shit coins will die natural deaths anyway. Let the herd cull itself instead of having some wannabe savior of the crypto world launch attacks on whatever coins he chooses. If these were fud attacks or something irrelevant to the quality of the code itself, I'd agree with you. But you may miss the point of what the OP intends to do. All coins should be attacked and the weak ones should die. I'd prefer they die because of an exploit (given they have one) than because of neglect by devs or community. Let's cheer this guy on and hope he delivers some data. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
