In reply to a concerned citizen gentleman,

UBERcoin ANNouncement
Launching the latest and last cryptomoney

Total emission: 1337 coins.

Emmision schedule: 72 hours of UBERPoW special hashing function (using special FDIV instruction that makes it 100MHz proof). After that, switch to DERPoS, or Distributed Entropic Regenerative Proof of Stake, the final generation in PoS staking technology. Staking interest is pegged to a basket of ECB and BoJ refi rates, adjusting programmatically as a linear combination of the two.

Launch: to be decided by an hourly D20 roll, with LAUNCH if the dice never stops spinning on a corner.

Moar tech: state of the art ANONOSITY, ultrafast synking, fast blocks, BCI capable wallet "spend with the power of your mind", Web 9000.1 ready, smart contracts, smarter DAC management, super-Turing complete block chain.

JOIN THE REVOLUCION NAO!!

You entirely miss the point that if the n00bs think they are protected, then later are attacked or told they are not, they will run the government's coin and good riddence to that horrible mistake they made to trust.

Don't go fucking around. This is why i am a developer of mass adopted software and you are not.

This could wipe out a lot of earths population if it isn't contained. WHO has said we have about a month or its game over.
Sure would ease up that global warming though.
Too many people.
Nature culls the heard

Millions of people will die, a huge swath cut through the nations of the world, a giant percentage of humanity laid to waste.
Yet, the real question still remains...
How will this affect the value of my bitcoins?

I am sure that there is one person that misused the software you developed for mass adoption.

he never said anything was shady about it. you admit you are reading between the lines. most likely the issue was they wanted cz to minimize bbr within the scope of the larger project and/or take too many liberties with cz's hard work. that is my "reading between the lines". i dont know much of windj but from what ive seen he is quite professional.

I don't consider it equivalent because when he was doing it Bitcoin was worth exactly zero, and its immediate prospects for ever being worth anything were remote. It was huge gamble to even bother paying for the equipment, setting it up (my recollection is that his setup was speculated to be more than a few PCs), keep it going, pay for electricity, etc. It is possible he "borrowed" resources from an academic lab or something, but still it took time to set it up. It literally took years before the coins could be monetized at all, even to buy pizzas. I don't even know if, without the benefit of hindsight, what he was doing was a good investment on his time and (maybe) money. If he was running a scam, it was a very, very long con, and a risky one.

Today, the situation is different. Pretty much any coin can expect to be listed on some exchanges relatively quickly (some right from the start) and have a clearly established and monetizable value, making easy for a pump-and-dumper to make a few big announcements and cash out, with no real intention to use the money to develop the coin. In fact businesses exist that do this on an industrial scale. Thus the entire model is horribly tainted by the market for lemons problem.

The other problem is that even with the above (or perhaps because of it), the amount you can cash out even with a premine is pretty small. Zoidberg said he is getting about 750 USD per month from his deferred premine, and that is after the price of BBR has been pumped. Before recent development it might have been 100 USD per month or something (not sure of the exact numbers).

He could have done a non-deferred premine instead. Assuming the liquidity to cash that out at current prices existed (which it doesn't), he could only raise about 27K USD that way. Hardly enough to fund a project. Even increasing his premine from 1% to 10% would only be 270K USD, with vastly greater liquidity issues, and still not really enough to soundly fund such a project.

So as far as I can tell premines are a magnet for pump-and-dump scams and don't work very well for funding legitimate projects anyway. A better approach is needed.

There are a few exceptions, if you have a very high profile and can generate huge hype before you even start, like Ethereum.

this is messed up man; oil going off the cliff after hours.  notice how we've slid off the mountain, breaking support and are in freefall essentially in the 3y daily chart:

Wow, they're essentially saying if bitcoin became the future reserve monetary asset globally, replacing all currencies and all gold, then it's valuation would be the sum total of all gold and worldwide M2 monetary supply, which comes to $4.2M per coin.

Even _if_ this happens (and that's a big if because there will always be holdout countries and gold bugs who refuse to join the bandwagon), their $4.2 valuation still probably greatly overshoots for a variety of reasons. For example in a true sound money system that lacks CB bailouts the total M2-to-RealGDP ratio would probably be much lower than today due to lower leverage and significantly lower fractionalization by whatever banks exist then.

Edit: where will you buy it from? what part of force ISP don't you understand ?

You can buy a static IP and have the port open on your host.

Nobody won or lost, merely a chance meeting of information.

No matter what answer BCX gave my response would have been the same.

He could have replied having used the definition of fortune being wealth.  He did give a good answer.

Another way to knowledge is not to take things for granted and to look at the world and everything you do with fresh eyes.  Children do this and most adults lose this.

Why did I even ask what seems like a meaningless question out of the blue?

Kudos. My understanding of TW was too immature back then. I am catching up.

If they are issued centrally, then it means the coin is not autonomously decentralized. It is antithetical to TacoTime's upthread paranoia about BBR's compression by discarding ring proofs, wherein the only known vulnerability if is the developers can't be trusted and would plant bugs in the open source.

If they are issued by each miner taking a snapshot independently, then as I wrote before, no miner knows if it is part of the majority thus the only way to find out is to attempt to publish a block and see if it stays in the longest fork. Thus independently captured checkpoints works if all clients independently reorganize (rewind) a fork and then vote using PoW. But that is not what you are talking about here. You are talking about the centralized developers issuing an instruction to rewind to a checkpoint and all miners following the instruction because they have copy of the checkpoint. Thus this is really paragraph #1 above.

Exactly, thus they are paragraph #1 above.

And remember my point was that if the transaction activity gets too mixed into a Gordian knot on the attacker's fork, then there might be considerable human political resistance to unwinding that bad fork.

Thus although checkpoints could aid a centralized recovery, we must note they may not always work in every scenario.

Given Monero's very low tx rate, the Gordian knot is unlikely.


The unpublished thing I mentioned to smooth is where I have worked through that logic about automation and I can assure you that reorganizing from longish forks (whether an attack or naturally induced) can not be automated. The only decision you can make is to let the longest fork win and destroy instantly all the conflicting value in the shorter fork, or you can put a maximum fork length rule so that the two forks live on simultaneously and the market decides how to value them.

That's bullshit.
Both the 1200 peak and the following lows were higher.

Hello to you all.

I wish I could say Monero is up and ready for trading at CCEDK, we have however, run into some technical issues, that need some attention prior to us adding Monero address of CCEDK etc.

We expect to be up Monday latest. Might also be earlier,, but we have been fighting all today and yesterday in order to be ready but did not make sorry for that.

I hope to see you during the weekend, maybe we are lucky and get it up.

Rgds

Ronny Boesing
CCEDK

No intention to spread FUD. And I put very low faith in anything BCX says. But a low probability of something awful, is still worthy of some concern surely. Either the guy is purely malicious, and is spouting what he knows to be nonsense, or he truly believes that he's stumbled onto something, and he doesn't seem to have been convinced by anything anyone else has said that it's nothing. That must leave some small chance that he has really found something. What is the cost to a few checkpoints between now and this time next week, just in case?

“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”

great graph

Except in this face TheFascistMind isn't a Monero supporter at all. So I don't think that theory really holds up.

That is a novel attack. Normally verifying each hash of a fork takes much less computational power than was consumed to generate each hash, because at normal difficulty levels it requires 1000s or more of hash computations before a block solution is found but only 1 hash computation to verify the block solution hash. But if you can lower the difficulty to the minimum then each block solution could consume only 1 hash computation and thus verifying would consume as much hash power as generating.

Thus the honest hashrate would be consumed for some duration verifying the extremely long fork of the attacker, while the attacker will be mining nearly exclusively on the honest fork during that delay, so the attacker can rewind some portion of the honest fork before the honest nodes finish verifying and rejecting the attackers diversionary long fork.

The attacker wouldn't necessarily need very much hashrate, rather a lot of time to generate a super long secret fork.

The simple mitigation is to not verify further newly presented forks for which the difficulty drops very significantly below the currently known fork. We assume we don't want to consider too long lived forks any way, so if difficulty drops that much it is very unlikely is rose back up again sufficiently to catch up.


I don't understand how decentralized checkpointing can work because if you don't put them on the block chain, then there is no decentralized record, and nodes don't know if they are part of the majority otherwise. If you put them on the block chain, they can be unwound by an attack.

Do you mean centrally issued checkpoints?

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russia-s-ebola-vaccine-ready-for-use-health-minister-says/506516.html

Preclinical trials were completed successfully. Vaccine is ready for use, but certification is in the progress yet.