I don't want bitcoin to be associated with flaming gayness.
Die in a fire. |
|
|
|
Hey, I'm just taking your arguments to their logical conclusions. "Users want fast confirmations", and I0coin has the fastest confirmations, so that means I0coin is the best network. Soon everyone will join it.
I think you have a higher post count in this thread than me. Thanks for your SolidCoin support.  Really? Better check your math. You've been in damage-control mode since I started posting here, and you can't seem to resist replying to nearly every one of my posts. Makes sense though. Your claims about SolidCoin don't stand up to scrutiny, so you have to put a lot of effort into spin-doctoring in order to reassure your suckers investors. Remind me again, how many people own solidcoins? |
|
|
|
By the way CoinHunter, I0coin was recently revived with a 90 second block rate. You'd better switch to 30 second blocks before it eats your lunch.
The mere fact you think lower = better with no end shows your ignorance. BTW the 90 second block thing was a troll done by artforz to guarantee more blocks on his FPGA miners. By copying SolidCoin and just changing that he has now ensured i0coin won't go beyond a pump-n-dump. But you probably knew that already with your big brain there... Hey, I'm just taking your arguments to their logical conclusions. "Users want fast confirmations", and I0coin has the fastest confirmations, so that means I0coin is the best network. Soon everyone will join it. |
|
|
|
I think this thread is an important and healthy. Bruce's salacious, gay lifestyle spills onto these pages like a smelly, heap of entrails, and we are revolted. We condemn the acts and in so doing we distance ourselves from the man and thus purge our system from something unhealthy.
It's certainly better that these facts emerge here instead of a banker rag.
You think the situation would be any better if he were straight? |
|
|
|
|
By the way CoinHunter, I0coin was recently revived with a 90 second block rate. You'd better switch to 30 second blocks before it eats your lunch.
|
|
|
|
People can see the data from SolidCoin's release and see how well it is working to this stage.
You mean those adoption rate numbers that you made up and refuse to provide any evidence for? |
|
|
|
O.o are you agreeing with me or what are you doing exactly? XD
I don't dislike Bruce at all, though I don't think it was beneficial to him mentioning his sexual preference in the mybitcoin apology episode. As an observer I am led to assert that was the root of all of this, and the Thailand thing a negligible direction. I too believe thats the problem. All the attacks started when Bruce said publicy that he was gay. That doesn't sound right. Are you talking about people attacking Bruce for being gay? I've only seen one instance of that, a few days ago. The general response was "Bruce is gay, so what? NanaimoGold is just a bigot who's trying to distract people from his association with MyBitcoin". If you mean people attacking Bruce in general, that's nothing new. Lots of people have said that he comes off as a con artist and isn't a good spokesperson for Bitcoin, well before the MyBitcoin thing went down. |
|
|
|
Agreed. In my opinion, Bruce has gone from being mostly neutral for Bitcoin's image to being an enormous liability. The community should distance itself from him and not allow him to act as a spokesperson anymore.
After seeying the first posts by Bruce about... ALL THE... TRULY... AWESOME THING HIS... bitoin... CONFERENCE... would have, I already felt Bruce was stepping way across some boundaries by pretending to be anything "official" to bitcoin. The problem is... this is all open source, so it's kinda hard to prevent. Tomorrow, Muammar Khadaffi might flee to Algeria, and proclaim he is now the official Bitcoin spokesman and he will host awesome conferences in his big tent. And there's nothing we could do about it. I mostly mean that members of the Bitcoin community shouldn't sponsor his show or attend his conferences, and that we should ask him to step back from the position that he's taken. |
|
|
|
I don't agree with some of the conclusions of this post, but the facts and arguments seem reasonable (i.e., non-insane) to me. It's something that should be discussed on the forum so it can be straightened out.
Agreed. In my opinion, Bruce has gone from being mostly neutral for Bitcoin's image to being an enormous liability. The community should distance itself from him and not allow him to act as a spokesperson anymore. |
|
|
|
It's not someone's opinions. It's Bruce's own words. If you Google the "punlman" username all of that sick, abusive crap was posted with, you get Bruce posts and nothing but Bruce posts from all over the Internet, many of which he signed off on by posting his real name and URL. With his picture as the avatar. And all from several years ago, so unless trolls were able to go back in time to before Bitcoins existed to crucify the Bitcoin Messiah, this looks legit. Shame on Bruce.
Hurry, though - he's deleting everything! Nothing suspicious at all about that, of course... I noticed the same. In response to the "smear and character blahblah" thread I wanted to post some of that "hard evidence" that the topicstarter couldn't find, only to see that some of the stuff that was linked to no longer exists. Also, all the topics on this forum pointing to the material have been deleted. If you go back through the Bitcoin thread on Something Awful, there are links to cached versions and screen captures. |
|
|
|
As for thinking girls who prance around as sluts getting raped deserve it, deserve is a strong word, but pretty much all guys think that don't they?
No. There is something deeply wrong with people who think that. |
|
|
|
And if you got the chip off your shoulder hopefully you can also be a part of it.
I think investing in these trivially-modified clone currencies is a bad idea, and I think your promotional tactics are dishonest at best. That means I have a chip on my shoulder? Alright then. By the way, you never told us where you got that "10,000 owners of solidcoins" number from. One would think that if it were true, you'd be more than eager to provide evidence for such a claim. Was it just a lie? |
|
|
|
I've moved all my BTC and USD into SolidCoins (not that much anyhow, only about $10,000) simply because I'm unsure about Bitcoin's future and don't want to be left with worthless coins in a few weeks. The sites I have generating BTC go straight into SolidCoins. If I lose it all it doesn't impact me financially as this is more like a hobby, especially given the insecurity surrounding Bitcoin and p2p currencies recently. I'm not investing any more into it besides what I generate from the sites themselves.
So everyone who wants to mine and dump SC for relatively low amounts they are welcome to on the exchanges, I appreciate it. They are supporting SolidCoin by allowing me to continue giving funds to real businesses in SolidCoins. It's a nice circle.
Gee, it's awful nice of you to hold the bag for everyone. |
|
|
|
It's been almost 10 days and the site is still "preparing for launch". Does anyone know what is going on? The title was also changed from "Bitcoin and cryptocurrency" to Bitcoin. Why was that? I opened up the forums today and I saw lots of threads related to sex so I remembered this...  The sooner we get a reasonable alternative forum to this cesspit, the better. ("this cesspit" being bitcointalk.org, of course) The scams, the trolls, the wild accusations. This place sucks. I used to come read all the time, mostly the gambling forum, but the new rules there have killed it. The Stack Exchange forum can't come soon enough. Yeah, they left us to sit for longer than I expected. I did some digging around in the Area 51 discussions, and apparently they try to launch new sites on Tuesdays or Wednesdays. Last week they launched the Christianity Stack Exchange, which was the only other 100% committed proposal. We're still the only proposal at 100%, so it should launch either tomorrow or Wednesday. One of the staff members changed the name of the proposal (to just "Bitcoin") today, so it looks like they're working on it. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the link. Does that have wallet encryption? It hasn't been released yet, but presumably it will. He's got a dev blog here: http://bitco.tumblr.com/ |
|
|
|
And before long you'll have that nice fast network all to yourself. Chris buddy, even though you seem to be a rather bitter and annoyed person, good luck with whatever you're doing. Just wanted to make sure I get this in quote for later in case you edit. Here, I'll sign it for you: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
And before long you'll have that nice fast network all to yourself.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)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=eEiI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Seriously though, back this claim up: It's bullshit is it? Considering we can number the guys who mined the first million Bitcoins on a single hand how is it bullshit when SolidCoin has over 10000 individual owners of coin already?
Your victims investors deserve to know how you came up with that "10000 solidcoin owners" number. |
|
|
|
Do you realise how ironic this is?
Shh, don't ruin it.  |
|
|
|
...are all irrelevant to Bitcoin. Only the more frequent difficulty retargeting actually defends SolidCoin from anything, and it's an attack that Bitcoin isn't even vulnerable to. In order to get Bitcoin stuck in the same difficulty trap that Namecoin and Ixcoin are currently in, you'd have to destroy miners' faith in the future value of the currency in a very short amount of time. If you can pull that off, Bitcoin would be pretty much dead anyway, so whatever. Just wow, if you read this back and don't understand the hilarity of what you're saying then ..... "Bitcoin isn't even vulnerable to that" - "But if you can pull that off it will die" Haha. Wow. It's glaringly obvious that you're running on pure rhetoric. You either aren't bothering to think through what I'm saying, or don't care. I know you're desperate to stop SolidCoin from sinking, but letting it show is a bad idea. No matter how often you retarget difficulty, the magnitude of such an attack would kill any blockchain-based currency. Getting stuck with high difficulty and a low hashrate is an afterthought. The scenario where SolidCoin price starts to rise and rise , encouraging more and more miners away from Bitcoin is a likely one, and it will destroy the Bitcoin network as it has no defense against such things. Unlike SolidCoin.
In order to get the price to rise that quickly, you need to win over pretty much everyone who's invested in Bitcoin. In that case, congrats, you've already won and difficulty retargeting is irrelevant. Bitcoin owners could wake up in 3 days and find that their confirmations are now taking 12 hours, nearly every site supporting them is taking 3 days to confirm any transfers they make. If you do not see how very vulnerable Bitcoin is then you are not worth continuing a debate with, as it is obvious to anyone with a passing understanding of the protocol.
12 hours? So you think Bitcoin's hashrate is going to drop by a factor of 72 overnight, but it would all be fine if only difficulty retargeted more often? ಠ_ಠ Bullshit. Bitcoin was publicly announced when the blockchain was started. It took two years to reach a price of $1. There was ample time to buy/mine plenty of bitcoins if you thought it was going to take off. Most people (myself included) didn't think it would and didn't bother. If SolidCoin were to ever take off, it'll be the same situation. It's bullshit is it? Considering we can number the guys who mined the first million Bitcoins on a single hand how is it bullshit when SolidCoin has over 10000 individual owners of coin already? You're just making shit up now. Care to provide citations for those claims? I suspect SolidCoin wil also be deemed unfair to "X" once it has global acceptance, simply because we didn't get millions of people making that first coin.
And right now, we have you making the same claim about Bitcoin. Though I doubt you'd care so much if you weren't pimping SolidCoin. From the price and hashrate charts, it looks more like people are jumping overboard. LOL, yeah except did you notice we can survive a drop in half of hashrate and the network is still 3 times faster than Bitcoins? What other chain can do that? None. And before long you'll have that nice fast network all to yourself. |
|
|
|
if half of what I have read in this topic as logs from Luke Jr are not falsified
Logs from #bitcoin and #bitcoin-dev are available here: http://bitcoinstats.com/Logs from #eligius are available here: http://eligius.searchonirc.com/You can use google to find the specific conversations you want to verify. |
|
|
|
You are wrong. The developers aren't going to change some core things in Bitcoin, I already discussed this with some of them prior to making SolidCoin. The consensus from them was it was never going to change, and there was no purpose to it.
Maybe you should have taken the peer review seriously. You sound like them, are you one?
Nope. What these "developers" don't understand however is that people that use Bitcoin, actually want fast confirmations. They want a fast network. This is why SolidCoin is successful, it's fast and always will be. My other protocol changes are intelligently designed to protect SolidCoin from a variety of attacks that Bitcoin cannot. This isn't subjective, it's something that Bitcoin doesn't do that SC does. Your argument that "it's easy to make those changes" is irrelevant because no one before me made those changes and Bitcoin is still vulnerable to them regardless of your banter.
3 minute blocks are the only thing that SolidCoin has going for it. Your other protocol changes: - Difficulty retargets more often
- Difficulty increases limited to +10% per retarget
- Block reward changed from 50 to 32
- (Again, anything else? Seriously, if I missing anything, I'd like to hear specifics from you, instead of hand-waving)
...are all irrelevant to Bitcoin. Only the more frequent difficulty retargeting actually defends SolidCoin from anything, and it's an attack that Bitcoin isn't even vulnerable to. In order to get Bitcoin stuck in the same difficulty trap that Namecoin and Ixcoin are currently in, you'd have to destroy miners' faith in the future value of the currency in a very short amount of time. If you can pull that off, Bitcoin would be pretty much dead anyway, so whatever. If Bitcoin was to adopt them it's going to be a major PITA getting people to accept it.
And it would be a major PITA to get any significant number of people to switch over to SolidCoin too. On top of the protocol improvements SolidCoin's start has been many times more fair than Bitcoins.
Bullshit. Bitcoin was publicly announced when the blockchain was started. It took two years to reach a price of $1. There was ample time to buy/mine plenty of bitcoins if you thought it was going to take off. Most people (myself included) didn't think it would and didn't bother. If SolidCoin were to ever take off, it'll be the same situation. and see why people are jumping aboard.
From the price and hashrate charts, it looks more like people are jumping overboard. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
