smooth teaching john-conner how to read twitter timestamps:




The earliest tweet I could find from you on the topic was late in the day on January 15. The attack was publicly disclosed and a fix released earlier that day. Your previous tweets earlier in the month demonstrating your ignorance about how disk storage functions prove nothing related to this at all.

Unless you can show a timestamp before the incident and its cause (and fix) was made public, your claim of twitter timestamps proving your knowledge or involvement is a lie, just as your launch of Vcash on the basis of having written it from scratch (when actually significant portions of the code, at a minimum, were copied, refactored, and obfuscated portions of Bitcoin as documented by me, gmaxwell, rnicoll, gjhiggins, Rick Storm, Luke-jr and others) was also a lie.

You can claim the above list plus fluffypony, plus others who have made similar accusations against your scamming are all conspiring against you, are scared of you, or being controlled behind the scenes by Nick Szabo or whatever other delusional crap you can come up with. Or you or your cronies can try to change the subject and start ranting about Monero or me or burned out disk drives or alien abductions or whatever you like, but you are still not fooling anyone.

EDIT: Let's add one more witness to your lying and scamming. Howard Chu, the developer of the LMDB database, responding to one of your earlier lies about Monero's use of disk storage. Click through for the context, if desired:

Grandma would probably use MyMonero over the core GUI (though maybe not for longer-term storage of value). That is a good example of third party solutions starting to specialize.

By "generic" user I didn't mean grandma but a wide base of all sorts of users without specialization, and that's where MyMonero fails to hold up. That includes people who see the primary use of crypto today and for the indefinite future as a store of value, medium- to long-term speculative investment, or perhaps as a medium of exchange that is somewhere between reasonably and very private. In all of those cases many won't want to use a web wallet.

Except that the market isn't there for it, so third parties aren't doing it effectively, yet. Since that is the case, we have to focus efforts on getting one easy-to-use, easy to obtain and install, and well-maintained GUI out there.

I'd say the same thing about exchanges or anything else if no one were providing the service (in fact I sort of did that with the OTC trading thread in the very early days of Monero).

With greater adoption and scale (including liquidity and market cap), more third parties will be able to effectively provide these products, and they will likely do it better because they will be able to specialize on different feature tradeoffs and particular market segments (including grandmas), but until then we have to fill the gap with something reasonably suitable for a generic "user" if we want to get anywhere.

Well done.

I did not mean to suggest anything about the expected timeframe for the core GUI. I did mean that it would be the one well-maintained GUI, since efforts would be focused on it in a manner that doesn't seem to happen for independent GUIs.

Except that is completely wrong. Poloniex can't offer a robust and intuitive crypto exchange for XMR unless users have the ability to
withdraw their coins in a manner consistent with the skill and comfort level. The same applies to all of the others more or less (less so for MyMonero).

It is also the case that spending coins left on an exchange, while possible, is inconvenient.

Part of the appeal of a private store of value is that you can actually store it yourself under your own control. Only then can you proceed to use it by spending it (which in turn makes it attractive to offer services to people using Monero as a private store of value), but not before. Without a GUI many potential users can't do either.

I'm afraid I can't agree. It will help facilitate that adoption by giving people (including people outside the cryptosphere) something to download that is easier to use. Without that such efforts face a very uphill battle. You could possibly reach beyond the cryptposhere to other sys admis, software developers, etc. who are comfortable with command line tool, but that's a narrow market with little obvious attraction to alternative monetary systems.


True for by itself but it is a necessary component of efforts to reach wider.


Nothing will, by itself. There are many pieces that need to fit together, GUI being one of them.

The point is somewhat valid for Monero though, since we do now have lightWallet, MyMonero and a few others.

Those solutions are not great though, given the issue of resources. I believe MyMonero still does not support integrated addresses for example (not positive, as I don't use it). It definitely doesn't support tx-keys (needed for proof of payment) meaning it can't be used with bitsquare.

I don't mean that to call out fluffypony for doing anything wrong, as I think MyMonero overall is basically great, but it is hard to for all third party projects to justify a lot of resources for development when the coin is small as are the revenue opportunities for such a product.

Well done.

No, this is a scam accusation thread. Getting all of the usual Vcash accounts to come and post on the thread does not change the scam accusations against EmilioMann, John Connor, & VanillaCoin/VCash.

"Woe is me" for being hated on so much does not substantively refute the allegations.

Let's summarize:

One the one side there is fluffypony, me, gmaxwell, rnicoll, gjhiggins, Rick Storm, Luke-jr and others making specific, well-documented accusations. What do these people have in common? Basically nothing. Some are Bitcoin core devs, some are Monero core team members, some are not affiliated with any coin at all as far as I can tell. I don't know most of them and they probably don't all know each other either (with some obvious exceptions of course). Some of them have no obvious interest in Vcash other than having reviewed the code themselves when they saw the issue discussed and reaching the same conclusions (this was originally the case for me, BTW). Trying to make this about Monero or "Vcash hate" does not support your case. At all.

On the other side there are a bunch of technically ignorant long-time coin pumpers for Vanlliacoin/Vcash not responding substantively at all, discussing other coins, attacking motives, claiming that clearly copying actual code and lying about it is the same as Tesla copying a Model T because it has four wheels, etc.

The conclusion is pretty clear.

You're not fooling anyone.

I agree with this because there aren't already a bunch of other GUIs like there are for Bitcoin.

We tried that approach early on with the GUI bounty which successfully produced four different products, all of which got a piece of the bounty. Most were not maintained. One became MoneroX which was maintained for a while but that too was abandoned. The coin is just too small to reliably support those sorts of products and independent efforts (not meant as any disrespect for jwinterm and his lightWallet GUI which is still maintained and used). While it isn't the idea long-term strategy, for now we need to focus efforts on getting one well-maintained GUI.

Another question:

Is Minergate the only pool for BCN? Are there other pools using the standard open source pool software for cryptonote coins?

If there are other pools then you can certainly use the open source miners, since it does use the same hashing algorithm as XMR.

EDIT: There are some other pools in the OP. If you want to mine BCN without minergate you might check those out.

No one claimed it was a clone. The statement was that significant portions of its code (dozens at least) are copied from Bitcoin, refactored, and obfuscated, with attributions removed, to launch the coin on the basis of false claims of it having been written from scratch (both with the intent and actual effect of misleading investors). And also that EmilioMann, John Connor, & VanillaCoin/VCash are lying about Monero exploits.

Please to not respond to those specific scamming accusations by attempting to make a straw man argument about whether Vcash is or is not a "clone". We're not going to fall for that.



I smell bullshit. Actually I see it right on your post. The subject of this thread is the scamming actions by EmilioMann, John Connor, & VanillaCoin/VCash in lying about Monero exploits, and by extension other scamming actions by the same group such as ripping off Bitcoin's code and lying about it.

Fear, whether or not actually present, is irrelevant.

Try to stay on topic. If you can refute the allegations of false claims about Monero or refute the specific analysis and conclusions of copied code by gmaxwell,  Luke-Jr, Rick Storm, and others (see links above) by providing similar credible third party analysis of the code base that reaches a different conclusion then please do so.



You would have to ask the original authors of the portions of code that have been copied. No one has an obligation to take legal action including but not limited to lawsuits, though not doing so now doesn't mean it won't happen in the future, nor does it in any way prove that the code was not copied. Your logic is faulty.


No that is not the (only) reason. A clear reason in the case of Monero is that no code that was copied from Bitcoin has been identified in Monero (much less dozens such instances), so the situation is not the same at all.


No it wouldn't. Luke-jr has already explained how this actually works, and it isn't doesn't support your argument at all.

No, but it means when you write something from scratch you don't end up with the same low level bugs and code organization line-by-line. You only end up with that when you copy the code.


Get it?


Wrong.

It's not nonsense. Get your head out of your bag and pay attention.

To my well-trained eye it is quite clear that the code was copied, refactored, and obfuscated, and not written from scratch. When you write code from scratch, even to perform the same or similar functions, you do not carry over low-level bugs as was the case here, nor do you carry over specific low-level structural similarities that are not required by the implemented functionality. In your example it would be as if Tesla suffered from a design flaw related to the voltage of the ignition system in the Model T engine (as could happen if someone actually copied the design). That's not the case, but with Bitcoin->Vcash it is exactly the case.

And if you think it isn't, take it up with the other people (some directly involved with no coin at all afaik) who identified the copied code. I just quoted them, but it is obvious to me they are correct, as it would be obvious to any qualified expert.


Some of the identified copied code does not originate with any of those authors.

The main issue is not who wrote the code, it is Vcash's false and misleading claim of being written from scratch, and aside from clear legal and reputational risks that result from these actions, there is proven scamming since there are actual victims who have stated that they were misled by it in buying into the coin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyaLZHiJJnE

More seriously, nobody knows. It's a lot like BTC back in 2010-2011 when there was a lot of discussion about how it might be banned altogether, etc.

You may be right. That is one of my major concerns about the system, but the developers seem to think they have it under control with the ability to run nodes that don't store all the data, etc. I guess we will see.

Nobody will listen to a damn thing he says unless he proves it for realz.

Him claiming that twitter timestamps prove he did something and then posting tweets dated after it was already public knowledge is Craig Wright-worthy. We're not that gullible here.

Different person.

On the topic of signature campaigns, I was mainly pointing out that not just showing the sigs is not a valid solution if one views signature campaigns as a problem. Reasonable people can disagree on the premise for sure though.

That's not sufficient. The problem is that sig campaign members are incentivized both directly and indirectly on the basis of posting volume so the result is a lot of low quality posts.

I really don't understand why the forum allows it based on the fact that it both degrades the value of the forum and competes with the forum's own ads.