Calling out someone for lying is now harassing? Do you know what a premine is? You know you've gone off the reservation when you have to put in "this is not a thread, it just sounds like one" disclaimers in your clearly threatening posts. As if a "this is not a threat it just sounds like one" disclaimer is going to impress a judge (or probation officer).  What that has to do with lying about DASH having a premine? DASH clearly had a premine because the dev mined millions of coins before releasing the software to the public, in contradiction of his earlier statements. Coin was released, mining started. Not the other way around. Do you know what a premine is? If that's your best argument you should sell into the ongoing collapse before you lose it all. All this discussion started from whether DASH had a premine or not. Which it didn't (unless you're ready to redefine certain well established terms and their meanings). I'm not trying to argue anything else. Words change all the time, but niggling over whether dash was premined or fastmined without the knowledge of the community is like arguing over if Justin Beiber is terrible or mediocre--the result is the same--history will forget the argument. You can call the launch ninjamine, fastmine, or instamine, and I won't complain as those terms are broad enough to be considered. There are terms you can already use, so why do you insist on using a specific non-fitting term then unless it's for your agenda? None of those words clearly describe launching -- with an extreme instamine, which makes the exact launch time rather important -- before the promised launch time. Maybe there isn't an established term for it. |
|
|
|
nice volume on trex
Indeed it is. Seems to be some interest building on this coin. Incremental tagged release with IP banning will go up soon. I'm still at work on pruning. have full faith in you, great plans. best to use donations when the price is much higher. Thank you for the words of support and yes the project donations fund are being held long term (and continue to grow from mining and new donations) except a small amount that has been used for bounties. |
|
|
|
But I do think he is in the pocket of the Industrial Military Complex from his comments. I wouldn't assume that. Virtually every policy position has an interest group behind it. Just because he takes a policy position doesn't mean he's in anyone's pocket, though they very well may support him because of his policy. This doesn't mean he isn't in someone's pocket, or being manipulated even without his knowledge. But logically, that his (or anyone's) policies favor some powerful group means nothing at all. |
|
|
|
I will leave this thread to DIE. I'm guessing not. Page 22 out of 881 on all time views and climbing. People apparently do think that the darkcoin/dash instamine matters after all. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin trading pairs listed in coinmarketcap 52
Litecoin trading pairs listed in coinmarketcap 51
Dogecoin trading pairs listed in coinmarketcap 47
Dash trading pairs listed in coinmarketcap 31
Monero trading pairs listed in coinmarketcap 6
Let's play a little game. Which four of these do not belong on a thread about Dash? I'm going to go with Bitcoin, Litecoin, Dogecoin, and Monero. Did I win? The important question is, why is Dash's trading volume not growing sufficiently to meet the expectations of Bitfinex? Answer: because Dash has saturated the market of true believers willing overlook "mistakes" |
|
|
|
why should it be there? I was talking about new coins getting listed. My mistake. I thought you were suggesting that Dash was able to meet the standards of exchanges such as btc-e (not listed) and bitfinex (delisted). Obviously it is not. And I repeat this again, so we are all clear on this. One example again, where money talks and nothing else, pure and simple. There's no conspiracy behind there. This is pointless, we will see the results in the future as I mentioned earlier. What the hell are you even talking about? The money is not going into Dash, that's exactly why bitfinex is pulling it. persistently low demand for trading Darkcoin There is little interest for something with that kind of ugly history and repetitional risk outside of a few existing true believers. The true believers are for the most part incapable of making this analysis and saving themselves from a total loss because they are blind to how most people actually operate in the real world. They're mostly self-selected to not care about the issues of integrity and repetitional risk that actually matter to long term success. "Golden donkey? Sure, sign me up!" What is important is to keep this information highly visible so that other people don't get sucked into involvement with something they would regret. |
|
|
|
When you think about it, it's impossible to justify the instamine with the statement that it gives "incentive to developer". Yea, that's awesome for the developer, but basically ruins the point of crypocurrencies in the first place where you're not supposed to have things like that happening. It's outright dishonest.
Yet Satoshi has 300mn worth in bitcoins. He didnt change Bitcoins block reward or coin supply at all like what happened to darkcoin. So he mined those bitcoins fairly. Also bitcoin is the first cryptocoin and kind of immune from that, even if you consider Satoshi mining bitcoin a mistake, you shouldve learned from that mistake, not do the same thing and make it 10x worse. How can it be 10x worse, when Satoshi's coins alone are worth 10x the entire DRK marketcap? Anyway. ? I'm not talking about prices of the coins, Marketcap is irrelevant in this discussion. It's absoletely not irrelevant in this discussion, people are talking about fraud, Satoshi did exactly the same, and his coins alone are more than the TOTAL market cap of dash, how is that not relevant!? Satoshi misled people about the launch time, mined >40% of the current outstanding coins in <2 days, withheld development plans until after the instamine, and then later cut the coin supply after launch? That's very interesting news. Thank you for revealing it, I had no idea. |
|
|
|
why should it be there? I was talking about new coins getting listed. My mistake. I thought you were suggesting that Dash was able to meet the standards of exchanges such as btc-e (not listed) and bitfinex (delisted). Obviously it is not. |
|
|
|
This is the best one I know of. There used to be a site called Monerochain that I thought was better for charts but it died quite awhile ago. http://chainradar.com/xmr/chartSee, this is what we need to be working on increasing, not the price specifically. I know they are tied together: the more profitable, the more hash power assigned to the network. Perhaps I'll take some extra money and rent out some cloud power for mining. I'm not happy that the hash-rate of the network hasn't increased in a year, but the price has fluctuated in the same order of magnitude so it makes sense. Price stable, emission decreasing = not a good time for miners. With sustained price increases, miners will follow. |
|
|
|
New minor release (0.9.1.1)Fix diff command showing incorrect hash rate after hard fork 1 Small improvement to performance of daemon miner (1-2%) Added backup seed node Lower mining priority for anon-impairing (<2 mixins) tx Various portability fixes (mostly from Monero) Small reduction to memory usage (tens of MB) Add IP blocking for misbehaving nodes (adapted from Boolberry) Update checkpoint table Download (binaries will be added once Arux creates them): https://github.com/aeonix/aeon/releases/tag/v0.9.1.1Most of these are self-explanatory, except for the reduced mining priority for <2 mixin (< mix 3) transactions. These transactions impair the anonymity of other transactions on the network by chain reaction effects as discussed in Monero Research Lab's report MRL-0001. As such they are dangerous, but sometimes useful (for example to spend unmixable outputs, or to combine a large number of small outputs) Instead of banning them entirely, as Monero proposes to do, I have modified the mining code to include at most one such transaction per block, which means approximately 360 per day. As a result, once usage on the network increases, these transactions will only represent a small percentage of the total, and uncontrolled chain reaction effects can not occur. As a consequence, if you send a transactions with mixin less than 2, and the network is busy, your transaction may take longer to confirm. Once we have variable transaction fees, you may need to pay a higher fee. To ensure your transaction confirms as quickly as possible, use mixin 2 or higher. This restriction is not fully enforced currently. My plan is to see whether any issues arise, and then fully enforce it later. aka "AEON Solves Cryptonote Flaws" (inside joke for the Cryptonote old timers here).
|
|
|
|
nice volume on trex
Indeed it is. Seems to be some interest building on this coin. Incremental tagged release with IP banning will go up soon. I'm still at work on pruning. |
|
|
|
Need multisig before this is even plausible. Too many shady DMNs...
Every time this comes up it is claimed that DNMs hardly use multisig in practice. I don't know whether that is true. |
|
|
|
That's why some new coins get listed on exchanges that previously were bitcoin and litecoin only.
Such as? |
|
|
|
I have no desire to run a computer at 100c for a week just to earn 10 or 20 Monero, but I will happily go toss some money into an exchange for them. Without anyone 'dumping' I wouldn't have that opportunity, so I've never been bothered by this behavior.
I know you were just making a point, but: I think you underestimate the hashpower required under current block reward/difficulty XMR mining conditions. You would need a VERY serious rig to mine 10, let alone 20, Monero in one week. Yes but imagine you manage to mine just 1 XMR, and then decide to hold it for 10 years. Wow! |
|
|
|
my synchr is go more 5 days (~75%) very slow...
what me do, what my synchr go quick?
and how pre-mine end?
I used the bootstrap. Process took around 10 hours on an older machine. Once everything is synced the wallet works very smoothly. and how use bootstrap? here u go https://bytecoin.org/docs/blockchain/ Hey fool.. have a look at the two threads below and let me know how you feel about your beloved Bytecoin trying to discredit CN competitors by funding Coin Telegraph and dictating artciles published. It turns out the same scammers are behind most of the failed CN coin launches.You mean my "coin mill" hypothesis was actually correct? Who knew  |
|
|
|
this has been raised before, and Saltyspoons response was for people to use the naming convention [LTC] at the start of the thread title.
The big problem with this is there is not even an ignore thread feature, nor a saved search feature. So not only can't you focus in on just the topics you want, you can't ignore the others. Given that this forum is seems to be locked in a time capsule when it comes to feature development, it seems like using the capabilities it does have (creating subforms) as a workaround is the best possible. As far as Bitcointalk vs. Altcointalk if I'm not mistaken most of the traffic is in the altcoin section, i.e. that's where the bread is buttered and I don't see it going anywhere. Maybe to reduce confusion among people who don't understand what is going on they should just rename bitcointalk.org to altcointalk.org and move what little Bitcoin discussion is still here down to its own subforum. |
|
|
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3g1rpx/mad_bitcoins_on_twitter_the_truth_behind/ctu7e3uWHO ARE THOSE PEOPLE? [–]IanGameWoof 2 points 19 minutes ago
I may not have explained that correctly. They asked me to investigate into accusations that Monero was mined exclusively (or almost exclusively) with malware powered botnets.
Instead, I found evidence that it was mostly mined with cloud computing. You can tell because the difficulty (at least around summer 2014) would mirror the prices at Amazon. When it went up, the difficulty went down and when it went down the difficulty went up.
So, when I tried to write that story, they killed it, so it never got published.
LOL Pretty much what I said last year. Difficulty was way too low to be dominated by botnets. Still is to a lesser extent. (I'm mining profitably while paying for electricity right now. If botnets really dominated that would be impossible.) I think as many people have explained here many times mining is just not a good use for a botnet and has high costs in terms of bot attrition. So there is some of course, but it's self-limiting. |
|
|
|
Calling out someone for lying is now harassing? Do you know what a premine is? You know you've gone off the reservation when you have to put in "this is not a thread, it just sounds like one" disclaimers in your clearly threatening posts. As if a "this is not a threat it just sounds like one" disclaimer is going to impress a judge (or probation officer). What that has to do with lying about DASH having a premine? DASH clearly had a premine because the dev mined millions of coins before releasing the software to the public, in contradiction of his earlier statements. Coin was released, mining started. Not the other way around. Do you know what a premine is? If that's your best argument you should sell into the ongoing collapse before you lose it all. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
