The debacle shows how surprisingly low level an exchange (or its "owner") is. Such ignorance by an exchange owner on the alt coin codebase. He even brave enough to pretend to be an expert of the domain and to make such ridiculous/false claims, and show how stupid he is before the whole community. What an idiot!
GUYS: It's time to stop bashing poloniex now. They have issued a public apology and clarification (of sorts). It will be better to advertise this fact.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652351.msg7319548#msg7319548I agree we should move forward, but this fiasco caused many people to lose their investment, and the above apology is not enough. They need to give a conclusion of their investigation: is Supercoin good or bad, do they find any issues, if at all? If no issues or no major issues, and since Supercoin was the first in voting list, they should add it to Poloniex, this way they cleared all their mistakes. But now I don't see conclusions, they have kept the title of this thread, in a very misleading way. This title is translated to "We have rejected a bad coin", but what is bad? Theydid not or can not say anything.
Before this is done, I can't see Busoni's apology is sincere at all. We demand Poloniex give a clear explanation on it! |
|
|
|
|
The debacle shows how surprisingly low level an exchange (or its "owner") is. Such ignorance by an exchange owner on the alt coin codebase. He even brave enough to pretend to be an expert of the domain and to make such ridiculous/false claims, and show how stupid he is before the whole community. What an idiot!
|
|
|
|
lmao, this is a complete joke, if this is done by poloniex tech staff, I feel really sorry to them  Here is a reply from a forum member (timerland) to that accusation: Is this an amateur or a 10-years-old? The max coin limits the maximum coin, but does it mean the maximum coin will be generated?? Not at all. The generated coin depends on the formula in 3functions: - GetProofOfWorkReward() - GetProofOfStakeReward() and - GetProofOfWorkBonusRewardFactor() These functions define how many coins will be generated. Moreover, even the system generates more coins than the MAX_MONEY defined above, there will be no problem at all, go look at the code. If Poloniex tech staff is that dumb, I feel very sorry for them, it is a joke! This member stated the fact. These 3 functions determined how many coins will be generated. The MAX_MONEY is largely irrelavent. All it does (and the dAmount), is to check each transaction if this limit exceeded. I can't believe this, it's like a circus Yes, and also you can set the upper limit to be 10000000000000000000 trillion, but only generate 15 millions, is there a problem there? someone is completely idiot. If you want to know how many coins will be generated, look at the functions generating them, not the limit. Idiot! bool CTransaction::CheckTransaction() const
{
...
if (txout.nValue > MAX_MONEY)
return DoS(100, error("CTransaction::CheckTransaction() : txout.nValue too high"));
What does it mean? It mean if this *transaction* amount exceeds the MAX_MONEY, return error.
Does it check how much money you have? Not at all. You can have 10 times MAX_MONEY in your wallet!
Does it check how many coins the system generated? Not at all.
So MAX_MONEY does not limit the system generated total coin at all!
Idoits, follow and learn... you'll never get it!Maryvale, nice dive into the code, it is really the very simple part of the coin code, yet... well there are stupid people everywhere |
|
|
|
lmao, this is a complete joke, if this is done by poloniex tech staff, I feel really sorry to them Here is a reply from a forum member (timerland) to that accusation: Is this an amateur or a 10-years-old? The max coin limits the maximum coin, but does it mean the maximum coin will be generated?? Not at all. The generated coin depends on the formula in 3functions: - GetProofOfWorkReward() - GetProofOfStakeReward() and - GetProofOfWorkBonusRewardFactor() These functions define how many coins will be generated. Moreover, even the system generates more coins than the MAX_MONEY defined above, there will be no problem at all, go look at the code. If Poloniex tech staff is that dumb, I feel very sorry for them, it is a joke! This member stated the fact. These 3 functions determined how many coins will be generated. The MAX_MONEY is largely irrelavent. All it does (and the dAmount), is to check each transaction if this limit exceeded. I can't believe this, it's like a circus Yes, and also you can set the upper limit to be 10000000000000000000 trillion, but only generate 15 millions, is there a problem there? someone is completely idiot. If you want to know how many coins will be generated, look at the functions generating them, not the limit. Idiot! Again on this MAX_MONEY, for those who does not understand the code, here is where it used: bool CTransaction::CheckTransaction() const
{
...
if (txout.nValue > MAX_MONEY)
return DoS(100, error("CTransaction::CheckTransaction() : txout.nValue too high"));
What does it mean? It mean if this *transaction* amount exceeds the MAX_MONEY, return error.Does it check how much money you have? Not at all. You can have 10 times MAX_MONEY in your wallet! Does it check how many coins the system generated? Not at all. So MAX_MONEY does not limit the system generated total coin at all!Idoits, follow and learn... you'll never get it! I really hope this is not the real poloniex staff, I kinda like Poloniex and used it often. If it is, then Poloniex code needs some serious review, I don't want to lose money there |
|
|
|
Poloniex has decided not to list SuperCoin because of some disturbing things we turned up in our code review. I would like to draw your attention to this part of the ANN post: - Total PoW coins will be 18.2 millions.
- Total coins (including PoS) will be about 50,000,000.
And these parts of the source code: if (dAmount <= 0.0 || dAmount > 150000000.0)
static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 150000000 * COIN;
static const int64_t POW_MAX_MONEY = 50000000 * COIN;
MAX_MONEY is pretty much what it sounds like. This means that the actual maximum supply of SuperCoin is 150 million, not 50 million. Furthermore, the maximum PoW coins is 50 million, rather than the claimed 18.2 million. The 150 million number appears twice in the code, so it can hardly be considered an accident. We did not find evidence of an existing hidden premine, but extra coins could potentially be minted all at once at the end of the PoW phase, sent to exchanges via the "anon" feature, and dumped. We have other concerns about the coin, particularly concerning the proposed method of anonymity, but the shenanigans with the maximum supply is sufficient for us to reject this coin. Is this an amateur or a 10-years-old? The max coin limits the maximum coin, but does it mean the maximum coin will be generated?? Not at all. The generated coin depends on the formula in 3functions: - GetProofOfWorkReward() - GetProofOfStakeReward() and - GetProofOfWorkBonusRewardFactor() These functions define how many coins will be generated. Moreover, even the system generates more coins than the MAX_MONEY defined above, there will be no problem at all, go look at the code. If Poloniex tech staff is that dumb, I feel very sorry for them, it is a joke! |
|
|
|
|
Hope anon version will be soon released
|
|
|
|
Superman to the moon??? NO
Supercoin to the moon??? YES
lol, you are definitely right  |
|
|
|
Upgraded...thanks for reminding |
|
|
|
Some people asked for details of our plan and implementations, here are some information on it. I'll use question/answer format to give details. Please post more questions if you have, the dev team will do our best to answer them. Q: What is the overall plan for SUPER to support anonymous features?A: Our ultimate goal is to create a peer-to-peer and completely de-centralized anonymous system. This is shown in the following diagram. Any node can become an intermediate "mixing" node, if some minimum requirements are satisfied. There is no central control parts. Everything is peer-to-peer and de-centralized. Remember that this is a trustless system, any node may cheat if it can. In order to achieve this goal, we divide our work into 2 steps: - Phase-1. To achieve anonymous wallet with a simplified, and easy to implement system
- Phase-2. To implement a fully de-centralized peer-to-peer anonymous system
What is an anonymous system? Simply put, it is a system that people can not trace clearly the transactions from the blockchain, and see where the transaction really originated and where it is terminated. This protects people's privacy. So why we don't go directly to our end-goal? This is because from our surveys and investigations, it is very complex and difficult to achieve a completely decentralized anonymous system. The key here is the "trust". When you do A->X->B, where X is some sort of the middle "mixer" node, the send or sign or commit of A->X and X->B (or its equivalent, such as a double-signed address, mini-escrow, etc), can not completely happen simultaneously, the one side (sender or Mixer-node) that has the last act can always cheat, though sometimes the cheat does not give the cheater benefits, but it can cause damage to the other party. Therefore, a complete trustless system is more difficult to be implemented (though it is possible - we'll discuss some more below). For this reason, in phase-1 we decided to develop a system that will depend on some sort of the trust, it is much easier to implement, and will give people the anonymous feature. This trust will be done through the dev team, or a credible mining pool. Q: So what is your Phase-1 solution?A: Our initial anon solution will involve some middle trusted mixing pools. This is shown in the following diagram: The mixing pools will be hosted initially by dev team, and can also be hosted by credible mining pools. The anon send will be directed to these mixing pools by wallet and mixed and then send to its destination. Basically it is done like this: A (source) -> {Xi} (i = 1, ..., m), then {Yi} (i = 1, ..., n)->B (destination) where {Xi} and {Yi} are randomly chosen addresses from a large pool of addresses (belonging to a mixing pool, and these addresses are periodically refreshed, phased out, and created). The source amount from A is split randomly into m parts (for now we choose m = 2,3 or 4 randomly in the anon version we will release for testing, but it will be a configurable parameters later), they are sent to m random addresses in randomly chosen mixing pool. The pool, on confirming the amounts received, will send the same amount in n parts to the destination (for our testnet we choose n=1, again this can be changed and configured). The result transaction is not traceable (at least extremely difficult to trace, given the large number of addresses in the mixing pool and dynamism of the addresses). The main part of our phase-1 solution is implemented, and we will release a version for testnet shortly. Q: Sounds good, is mixing pool software and coin wallet client are two different software?A: Absolutely not. They are exactly the same. It is the SUPER coin wallet. Eventually this will be used for peer-to-peer system (in phase-2), so no reason to be different. Now we configure only a few special nodes as trusted nodes. Once we implement the trustless system in phase-2, no special config is needed. Q: What is a trust system, and what is a trustless system?A: A trust system will have at least one node that everyone trusts. This node will never cheat. Other nodes may or may not cheat. A trustless system is that any nodes will cheat if they can. So to implement a trustless system it is more difficult as you have to implement mechanisms to prevent or discourage a node to cheat. If a node cheats, it will lose much more than it gains. Q: Can you give some details on the mixing pool?A: OK, it is basically a wallet client, with a pool feature configured as shown below. A array of the incoming/outgoing addresses are created and refreshed dynamically, and randomly chosen for each transaction. Incoming and outgoing addresses balance their coins with predefined algorithms. Q: Looks good for Phase-1. What about Phase-2? Is it feasible?A: Phase-2 is absolutely feasible, albeit more difficult. We actually already defined a workable scheme, and work on details now. It involves a complex system with multi-signature (m-to-n signature) addresses and multi-signature transactions. We can not reveal more details now. We will publish the full scheme design details after we implement, test and release it. The Phase-2 will be built on top of the Phase-1 codebase. In phase-2, any node (wallet client) can become an intermediate mixing node if it satisfy some minimum requirements (e.g. minimum balance, network connectivity etc). Excellent description, very knowledgeable dev! |
|
|
|
 Supercoin Version 1.2 a mandatory upgrade,
mining pools and exchanges please upgrade as soon as possible
Download: http://www.super-coin.net/SuperCoin12.zip Download2: https://mega.co.nz/#!EoJAURQZ!Mn-vb1gXBNbdAQzYsqUKIcjq8PXGRsRu15_-L0riQFo updated source: https://github.com/supercoinproject/supercoinThis is a mandatory upgrade, please upgrade your wallet as soon as possible. The switch point is PoW block 17500 (not overall (PoW+PoS) block). This will be reached in 3-4 days from now. Initial PoW Payout 512 coins per block will last about 6 more block-days. Then the payout will be halved to 256 coins. From this point on, the payout will be halved every 10 block-days. Superblocks will remain the same as before. Once the payout reaches 1-2 coins per block, the PoW blocks will be cutoff and no PoW will be allowed. After it, the coin will become a pure PoS coin. The reason we decided to change this, is mainly for security reasons. As the very low PoW payout will cause very low hash rate, and the network is vulnerable to be attacked. PoS payout and super-PoS blocks will remain unchanged. With updated payout scheme, the total PoW coins will be about 18.2 millions and total coins (PoW + PoS) is estimated at about 50 millions. pls send emails to pools and exchange platform, ask them update the wallet and source code. thank you very much dev! +1 great work dev team! |
|
|
|
Sending with anonymous feature will become very easy, just click "anonymous send" checkbox before clicking the "send" button. It is the same user interface. Of course, you can also choose to use normal send if you want. No additional command-line command to use:  By the way, we will try to release the wallet with anon features for tests this weekend. Remember, for now we only allow the anon features in testnet for testing purpose. It will be the same client, so you can switch back and forth between formal SuperCoin network and testnet (just change the testnet=1 or 0 in config file and restart the qt client). Very nice! looking forward to the new client. wonderful news! Yes I like this coin nice! |
|
|
|
|
wonderful, I'd like to test the anon features
|
|
|
|
|
man, someone put a 42+BTC buy at 70 sat, what's going on??
|
|
|
|
Please use supercoin.conf in that directory where wallet.dat stays, you need to wait maybe 3-4 minutes before sync. If you have copy of wallet.dat in your hands, you should not worry about losing SUPERs. Have the wallet.dat put in usb or else backup place. You can recover later your wallet if you need with this wallet.dat file. Inorder to sync you need to use supercoin.conf the content should be like this testnet=0
listen=1
addnode=85.25.201.132
addnode=86.198.145.13
addnode=84.220.209.103
addnode=162.243.39.146
addnode=85.25.201.132
addnode=75.150.145.65
addnode=62.116.254.204
addnode=198.1.59.33
addnode=108.48.80.153
addnode=115.28.162.137
addnode=67.11.141.143
addnode=98.126.73.2
addnode=38.126.94.60
addnode=37.187.74.123
addnode=86.24.209.143
addnode=50.161.173.218
addnode=81.98.103.142
addnode=80.238.174.253
addnode=110.15.197.136
addnode=193.219.117.63
addnode=223.84.30.169
addnode=95.84.19.6
addnode=180.93.160.174
addnode=106.113.178.130
addnode=184.145.203.49
addnode=94.54.178.190
addnode=84.102.53.41
maxconnections=100
server=1
daemon=1
rpcuser=user
rpcpassword=pass
rpcport=19391
rpcconnect=127.0.0.1
I put the qt-client to another computer.Put in above conf and my backup wallet.The same error happens!what is the error? are you using some VPN? any other wallet (such as BTC/LTC) working? |
|
|
|
I hit my second ever SUPER POS block! (50 blocks confirmed)  wow, congratulations... hope I'll get one next time  |
|
|
|
Stop with this dead coin, Join the Globalcoin community.
It has a better name
It is actively developed
The two coins were both made in June of 2013
Globalcoin has 70 million total coin as opposed to 210 million with Alpha
They are almost the same price
This means how suck is Globalcoin... forget it |
|
|
|
When will the end of pos?
pos will not end. - Variable PoS payout:
- 1st year: 100%
- 2nd year: 50%
- 3rd and subsequent years: 1% |
|
|
|
Good coin, mining now... diff a bit high though
Bit high? bit high you say? Understatement of the year that one. Whats everyone know about this coin that I don't? Everyone wants some mammoth! your all like bloody cavemen! diff at 100... quite some interests in the coin. X13, yes! |
|
|
|
|
diff at 121, that's high...
|
|
|
|
|
smooth launch............. any pool functioning?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
