This is not even an option. Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD. There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts. There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here. Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen. Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock. Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent. You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now? So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?
You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?" Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something. How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete? Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here. Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange. So... what the fuck are you talking about? I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts. I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain? Uhh, because it would result in the needless destruction of an exchange and a currency and the enrichment of a thieving party for no reason other than the preservation of the blockchain, and forking would address that. Where is the flaw in my logic? And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover. What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering. So we're back to my original original question that you never answered: So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?
We are not "back" to your original question. Now that I have destroyed every woefully prepared argument you have put my way, which you conveniently ignore, you have fallen back onto something else. If someone gained 51% of the network hash of the Bitcoin network, they can change the hash mechanism without violating decentralisation or irreversibility. And other such arguments. |
|
|
|
This is not even an option. Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD. There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts. There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here. Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen. Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock. Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent. You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now? So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?
You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?" Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something. How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete? Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here. Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange. So... what the fuck are you talking about? I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts. I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain? Uhh, because it would result in the needless destruction of an exchange and a currency and the enrichment of a thieving party for no reason other than the preservation of the blockchain, and forking would address that. Where is the flaw in my logic? And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover. What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering. |
|
|
|
This is not even an option. Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD. There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts. There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here. Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen. Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock. Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent. You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now? So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?
You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?" Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something. How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete? Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here. Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange. So... what the fuck are you talking about? I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts. I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain? |
|
|
|
This is not even an option. Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD. There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts. There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here. Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen. Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock. Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent. You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now? So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?
You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?" Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something. How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete? Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here. |
|
|
|
This is not even an option. Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD. There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts. There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here. Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen. Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock. Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent. You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now? So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?
You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?" Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something. |
|
|
|
This is not even an option. Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD. There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts. There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here. Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen. Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock. Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent. |
|
|
|
Did you guys see Mintpal was hacked for VRC? All the more reason to keep your coins off exchange  when ? Yeah, also they only attacked vrc balances? Probably rather stupidly I have my XC spread over several exchanges....but the windows walletr is fine and working isn't it? Can I download from official XC website? Is there a step by step guide for dumb people like me  Same here, I've had all my XC on Mintpal for the past couple months... time to get it outta there. I would get it out right now if I was you. For all we know, the Vericoin hacker is trying to target other hot wallets. Even if Mintpal patched the original security hole, doesn't mean there aren't more holes a pro hacker can't find. Additionally, the less XC there is on Mintpal, the less damage it will do to XC if a hacker gets all of the XC on there. I would rather they get 5% of all XC than 35% of all XC. |
|
|
|
This is not even an option. Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD. There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts. There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here. |
|
|
|
No, its why exchanges need to be held to a higher standard, a& be registered, so they are by law bound to 3rd party auditing. This is why I trade sizable qty only on cryptsy. Any centralised exchange can be hacked. Decentralized exchanges like bithalo which are trustless by design, are safer by definition. They are the future. |
|
|
|
Woah, saw the big drop on bitcoinwisdom charts and loaded up Mintpal to buy up cheap. It's delisted! Come here to see if fundamentals brought it down, seems all hell is breaking loose.   I normally hate FUDders. But this was a pretty funny one I have to admit. |
|
|
|
1) We lost a considerable amount of VeriCoin in the attack, however we have been working with the VRC developers and all major exchanges to hard fork the coin at a position before the attack. This will allow us to retrieve the stolen coins and facilitate all withdrawals. We are also working with various exchanges to accommodate any losses they may encouter as a result of the required fork.
This is a problem right here. Just because it's stolen does not mean they should be able to arbitrarily reverse the hack. If they're successful at hard forking, this will set precedence that any time there is a theft reported, devs can just hard fork again. This will eventually be abused, and corruption happens. Proves that VRC is completely centralized crypto. Proves you are a troll. IT WAS AN EXCAHNGE ISSUE, Such a troll, BC will have the same issue, as it did in the past. Did the other communities help you or troll you like you do? So awesome of you, such a COMMUNITY oriented person For the good of crypto you do everything right? What a Joke. BC never hard forked to arbitrarily undo a "dirty" transaction. The stolen BC were gone. Big difference. |
|
|
|
IMHO: Don't make things too complicated.
New users will not understand what "XCend" means.. "Enable Private Transaction" makes much more sense as EVERYONE will know what it means...
Yes I totally agree, orginally were going to go with enable privacy mode but that seemed more confusing as new features are added. So I suggested enable privacy transaction and we discussed it. However, we are open to ideas. Not to rock the boat but I like the "XCend" idea. Not necessarily the name "XCend", but the fact we have a branded name for that function (think Darkcoin with Darksend!). Perhaps on the UI itself have "Enable Private Transaction (XCend)" next to the checkbox, so it's clear and intuitive what the function does to someone who doesn't even know what XCend is. Just my 0.2 XC. |
|
|
|
[perception that we don't emphasise marketing]
Yes we have a marketing strategy. Of course we do. I mean, just this week we launched a website, rebranded Twitter, launched a Facebook page, recruited a digital and social marketing guy from Microsoft and Adidas... I mean, do you expect more? Don't worry about it. Trust me when I say that the public will hear about XC. I am aware of those, I was referring to advertising in the sense of paying money and getting exposure for XC That too is on the cards. However the general public is not ready for XC. A beta client without a slick UI that you can't buy XC with in two clicks isn't mainstream-ready. We'll start paying for advertising around Rev 3, and it'll just keep ramping up as XC's capabilities grow. Sweet. There is going to be so many people kicking themselves for not buying XC at this price range (or not buying more). Short term, any kind of fluctuations can happen. But a simple "Buy and hold" strategy here is going to pay massive dividends in the medium/long term range. Btw, is practico still paying for the rev 2 press release? I vaguely remember reading something about it a while back, perhaps it was for rev 2.5. |
|
|
|
[perception that we don't emphasise marketing]
Yes we have a marketing strategy. Of course we do. I mean, just this week we launched a website, rebranded Twitter, launched a Facebook page, recruited a digital and social marketing guy from Microsoft and Adidas... I mean, do you expect more? Don't worry about it. Trust me when I say that the public will hear about XC. I am aware of those, I was referring to advertising in the sense of paying money and getting exposure for XC |
|
|
|
"XC releases revolutionary secured privacy technology... price falls."
"VRC releases veribit feature to dump VRC for BTC... price rises."
Needless to say, the world is full of idiots. But idiots can only suppress true innovation in the short-term. Soon, global attention and crowdfunding will come pouring into XC. And it will no longer be ignored or suppressed by shitcoins & idiots.
I already told this: XC only lives in this thread. To bring here global attention its needed to invest in PR campaign globally  . Large investors don't mind about XC, whales took profits and got out on vacation, summer is in full swing, look at polo volume, as example; everyone bought enough when XC was in solid 100k accumulation stage, and now just dumping to turn some in fiat for holiday at the seaside. I agree. Advertising is key. I just posted this to synec a couple of pages back: "The development is going from strength to strength at astonishing speed. Countless encouraging announcements and things to look forward to in the future (exceeding my expectations greatly). And you of course, do a great job eloquently explaining XC to the masses. However, the one thing I would like to see more focus on is advertising. If you have something great, advertising works. IMO we shouldn't just hope to "go viral". I believe Practico donated towards a press release and there have been other donations collected. Do we have a strategy in place for marketing and what time line will that be adhering to? If not, I think it's as important as the technical developments that we work on a robust marketing strategy." I honestly think we should make marketing as equally as important as development. That's not meant as a criticism of what's being done so far, everything is amazing. But I think without marketing, it's like trying to bake a cake without all the necessary ingredients. We'll make nice progress just on sheer technical developments alone, but we can magnify that times 10 if we promote it correctly. |
|
|
|
All i'm gonna say is if a completed version of REV2 in not released this weekend then expect everyone to start dumping.
Really? every single holder is w8ing like VULTURES to get their hands on frustrated 5 year olds' dumped coins. Please, PLZ do dump. Dump in the thousands if you can. I will go convert freaking FIAT to purchase your dump. I can see XC easily going under 90k again. It can be wiser to dump now and rebuy sub 90k. People are losing patience, they've been holding for 1.5 months, some bought in for 300k sat. Losing patience for what though? XC has delivered trustless decentralised mixing. I mean, what more could you possibly want? I'm also unaware of anything that could've led people to believe that some sort of Rev 2 milestone was happening this weekend. Where are you getting your expectations from? To my mind the price will just continue to raise its floor gradually until Rev 2.5. All's well in XC land, and is just getting better. The development is going from strength to strength at astonishing speed. Countless encouraging announcements and things to look forward to in the future (exceeding my expectations greatly). And you of course, do a great job eloquently explaining XC to the masses. However, the one thing I would like to see more focus on is advertising. If you have something great, advertising works. IMO we shouldn't just hope to "go viral". I believe Practico donated towards a press release and there have been other donations collected. Do we have a strategy in place for marketing and what time line will that be adhering to? If not, I think it's as important as the technical developments that we work on a robust marketing strategy. |
|
|
|
dont know i know theyre IRC and BTCtalk but i have followed this whole way and they are very interactive and have turned out a quality product so far.
' Wow, you don't know the Dev team? Sounds like you made some money on it, but that's not very sound investing from my research of Alt currency. I just looked and no one knows who they are... maybe you should sell. First dont need trading advice from you, 2nd they have their reasons theyre making a more darknet blackmarket geared coin which is why i understand they want to remain hidden, they are very professional video logging coding sessions etc.. just want to know what the fuck is the deal if there is a flaw in the POS... they could just be bullshitting i am following it close..but what if Anything is possible and I am more than confident if there is an issue our MORE than competent development team will be able to implement a fix. Remember, XCurrency is just about PoS, there is SOOOOO much more. If Cloak team does have a fix for this supposedly PoS "vunerability" and they hide it from everyone while they go fix it themselves and then expose it so everyone else suffers? I think that exposes the Cloak dev team's morality more than anything PoS vunerability can possibly expose and you should really be worried. The Cloak team have probably just copied the PoS 2.0 from Blackcoin's recent whitepaper. PoS 2.0 for Blackcoin is supposedly much more secure. BC PoS 2.0 is open source. I know. I read the white paper. Bear in mind I am not well read on these Cloak claim so perhaps I am missing something. But since PoS 2.0 fixes security issues, it seems a coincidence a very short time afterwards Cloak is talking about PoS flaw (probably the flaw hinted at in the BC whitepaper?) |
|
|
|
|
I believe the key thing we need to do side by side these amazing announcements and developments is advertising. It will magnify our results times 5. If you have something good, advertising works. It just costs money.
We should target adverts at people interested in Bitcoin e.g. the Bitcoin subreddit, facebook pages. They already know about crypto and the amazing gains people made from buying in v cheap. It's less of a sell.
|
|
|
|
dont know i know theyre IRC and BTCtalk but i have followed this whole way and they are very interactive and have turned out a quality product so far.
' Wow, you don't know the Dev team? Sounds like you made some money on it, but that's not very sound investing from my research of Alt currency. I just looked and no one knows who they are... maybe you should sell. First dont need trading advice from you, 2nd they have their reasons theyre making a more darknet blackmarket geared coin which is why i understand they want to remain hidden, they are very professional video logging coding sessions etc.. just want to know what the fuck is the deal if there is a flaw in the POS... they could just be bullshitting i am following it close..but what if Anything is possible and I am more than confident if there is an issue our MORE than competent development team will be able to implement a fix. Remember, XCurrency is just about PoS, there is SOOOOO much more. If Cloak team does have a fix for this supposedly PoS "vunerability" and they hide it from everyone while they go fix it themselves and then expose it so everyone else suffers? I think that exposes the Cloak dev team's morality more than anything PoS vunerability can possibly expose and you should really be worried. The Cloak team have probably just copied the PoS 2.0 from Blackcoin's recent whitepaper. PoS 2.0 for Blackcoin is supposedly much more secure. |
|
|
|
|
Price swings always brings the trolls posts.
When the price rises it's jealously or fear from competing coins. When the price falls it's from people who have sold who hope their trolls will lower the price further.
Fact is, anyone can do their research and the XC platform is looking v solid.
I would rather things were done at a slower pace, with TESTING, than botched releases put out there.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
