A little birdie told me he's still hard at work on his project. Good for him.

That's a nice suggestion. Applied consistently each coin would have its own independent forum, the Alternate cryptocurrencies section here would be shut down, traffic to this site would plummet and revenue to the operator would plummet along with it. I don't think that lead balloon is going to fly very far.

Porn sites (assuming they follow some basic rules on age of talent, etc.) are not illegal, at least not everywhere.

It is a good example though, of something that is often legal but still considered high risk and can cause problems with regulated entities, and also something that many people want to do but not be identified as doing.

That is false. Only one of the code segments that was identified has anything to do with openssl, and john-connor is not the copyright holder of it anyway. Other relevant code from Bitcoin that he copied without permission does not come from openssl. It does not help you to add new lies on top of the original ones.

I and others have pointed this out already months ago, so you are probably just repeating it as continued obfuscation, though I don't remember if you specifically were on the thread where it was discussed. Other Vcash advocates certainly were.

@ceti, hypocrisy much? You obviously have no interest in this matter at all except your "few little issues" with me and Monero.

This attempted deflection is invalid as I have explained before. John-connor is not the copyright holder of the relevant openssl code that was clearly copied, nor is he the copyright holder of all of the relevant Bitcoin code that was clearly copied. As such he is still required to comply with the attribution requirements of the license, both as a matter of copyright, and as a matter of not misleading investors about the origin of the code he falsely claimed to have written from scratch. Also, that copyright holders have not, so far, taken other action does not mean that they won't decide take other action some time in the next 50+ years.

Yes that's right. All of the cryptonote coins, regardless of their coin supplies, use the same 64 bit integers to represent "atomic units" internally. The various differences all have to do with how those units are represented in terms of moving the decimal point and so forth.

gmaxwell apparently reported it to the vanillacoin/vcash developers themselves via a github issue, assuming good faith which would have meant the lack of the required Bitcoin attributions was an honest error. Instead of correcting the error (which it clearly wasn't), the vanillacoin/vcash developers hid the issue.

As far as I know,no Bitcoin developer has, so far, reported the issue to github itself nor made a takedown request with github on the basis of the license violation and copyright infringement, but they would be within their rights to do so, and will be for the next 50+ years (unless the repo is deleted first).

This did not happen and you are making false accusations. It is reasonable to ask questions and distrust, but when it rises to the level of false accusations that you can not back up and which are untrue, you are the one lying and scamming.

David made his apologies for his own reasons that had no involvement (meaning with either the apology itself or the previous actions) of any part of the Monero core team nor, to my knowledge, any other party of the Monero community at all.

As far as I know he is still in control of his account, but if not then it isn't something that happened with the involvement of any part of the Monero core team nor to my knowledge any other part of the Monero community.

Having an unmoderated thread when the original self-moderated thread has seen controversial moderation (such as moderating my on topic posts critical of the viability of their business strategy "by mistake") is very useful.

As far as whether the thread should exist at all now that the company is in liquidation, there is probably some precedent for that? What happened to threads about other miner manufacturers after they failed?

There was no lie, because denial of service attack is exactly what it was:


By injecting a block that not handled properly by some nodes, it was an attempt to make the Monero payment network (and various services depending on it) unavailable to its intended users. In fact it did (at least indirectly) successfully do this when exchanges and possibly other services (maybe MoneroDice; I'm not sure) responded to the act by shutting down wallet transactions as a precaution.

DoS is also a common term used when describing application level vulnerabilities which cause a component or system to become unavailable (usually via a crash, resource exhaustion, or application-level state failure) but do not allow remote access (remote code execution) or access beyond intended limits (privilege escalation). Here is one recent example: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-4951

Perhaps you are confusing DoS, a general term, with DDoS, a specific form of a attack that did not apply here. I don't really or care, nor can I help with your stupidity or dishonesty; only you can try to improve yourself if you so choose.

Anyway, what Monero did or did not do is irrelevant to this thread and you are not helping your case by bringing it up. If you think Monero defrauded investors by calling a denial-of-service attack a denial-of-service attack, then you should open a thread to make that accusation. GLWT.

@Wolf0 I'm not in a beauty or popularity contest. I don't care whether I "look bad" to you. If you have another argument to make as to why john-connor and the rest of the Vcash scammers should get pass on their well-documented dishonest and harmful conduct (particularly when I ask for no such special treatment myself), particularly when we are discussing it on a Scam Accusation thread, please let me know, because that one is uninteresting to me.

What means 2w?

Maybe RingCT or other high level cryptography? Or maybe some of this other stuff.

Why don't you give that RingCT paper I just linked for you a read in your spare time? There is going to be a quiz.


Kindly, and in your own words, summarize the important sections of the above paper and point out some logical extensions and directions for further research in order to verify your qualifications to make that assessment.


What is your obsession with gambling websites? I'm actually quite curious about this because you and the other anti-Monero socks bring it up a lot, Is it a biblical thing for you or what?

I'm pretty sure I explained this earlier.

"General user" as I used it above does not mean "mainstream consumer" or anything of the sort (at least not short term, as such people are far, far away from wanting any crypto at all right now). It means proving an acceptable, usable solution for a wide variety of user types, including people who want to be their own bank, and also those who want to actually benefit from the financial privacy that Monero can give them. That means, almost if not absolutely unavoidably, running their own node. If they don't want a private store or value, private medium of exchange, etc. they likely not be interested in Monero and will just go with Bitcoin (or cc/Paypal/etc.)

I'll send you PMs to set it up. Since you are both high rank the accounts will be free.

Yes that is right

#fail

That was not a web wallet, it is a screen shot of the native UI that Monero developed in 2014 (can be downloaded and compiled and it does work but back end functions are stubbed out). Work to integrate it with the rest of the code was put on hold for a while to focus on other priorities and is ongoing now.

You act like the fact that many independent people who have examined the code state that he did exactly that makes no difference here. WTF?


I never said that he didn't know how to code, so you are lying again. Especially considering that the code I (and others) looked at that he claimed to have written was actually not written by him, I would have no fucking idea.

As for not delivering "what was promised", that is absolutely the case. He promised a coin written "entirely from scratch", and some investors have said they bought into the coin when it was launched on that basis.

So he indeed failed to deliver what he promised, misrepresented what he did deliver, and is a lying scammer. You can't change that by implementing a few more features. Oh, you implemented SPV wallets? Your code-stealing, misrepresenting, unsupported FUD, and other scamming are now hereby forgiven. Again, WTFF?!!

The lies and scams continue with his unsupported claims of Monero exploits and further of his lies (documented above in pictures for those you Vcash idiots who may be too stupid to read) about twitter timestamps proving his claims.


Unless you or john-conner can back up his claims of twitter timestamps proving that had and has Monero exploits, then Monero is irrelevant here. So far you have not and fluffypony's accusation of lying and scamming appears validated. Your constant walls of text about Monero appears to be another form of forum sliding in order to obfuscate the well-documented charges against Vcash, john-conner, and yourself. It is making you look even worse. Don't do it.

@ArticMine to be clear you are disagreeing only with my first sentence. The rest about third party solutions specializing for different markets applies equally to the older segment given what you have suggested about their preferences. For example, they might like Trezor or other hardware wallets.

My point is that even now (with few grandmas involved) MyMonero does not serve as a good baseline solution, it is specialized to those who want convenience and don't care much about security or avoiding reliance on third parties. I could also say that about a GUI based on the earlier (pre-LMDB) implementation. Since the current version can cold sync in a lot of cases (not all -- older or slower computers or very slow net connections can't be avoided) in an hour or so, uses minimal memory and acceptable amounts of storage, it is more suitable for more segments of users (if not numerically more users), though still not everyone.

Based on that I'd guess "what will happen" (with respect to price) will depend more on what large Chinese exchanges do than on what versions are launched.

EDIT: To be clear this is not meant to demean the work that I'm sure is going into 1.0, just a reflection on how the things that move markets are not always the things we think "should" move markets.

In case the context is unclear, that indicates he was mining during the PoW phase.