I think you have confused MSC with MST. The one worth $180 is MSC, and what you have on the pool is MST. MSC is never mined and cannot be in a pool.

The last login of Kate on Litecointalk was 16 Dec, and Deprived was 26 Nov. Therefore, it does not support the claim that the disappearance of Deprived relates to the one of Kate. Kate could not contact Deprived in his first disappearance, so I am not sure she could help us even we could contact her. However, the loss of contact of Kate makes the situation worse than last time. This time not only the 150 BTC on that public address is not accessible,  but also more than 260 BTC on the CipherMine.B1 is at danger now.

Really wish they all turn out to be fine when the new trade platform goes live on February. Anyway, this will be my last time to put my BTC on any fund/bond/stock managed by a single person, I think.

If you want to make profit, just buy bitcoin with the budget for buying ASIC. If you love mining, then go for the ASIC and considering it as a game cost money but there's some subsidy.


No altcoin is more profitable than BTC if you are using ASIC.

Quantum computer cannot be really useful until 20 years later. I am very optimistic by saying 20 years. That's something will dramasticly change the world, and I think bitcoin is the last thing for us to worry in that case.

My 2 cents on this issue.

No matter what inbox did on that exchange was proper or not, the point is do we think the exchange has the right to forfeit his 262 MSC.

Now from the transaction history, http://mastercoin-explorer.com/addresses/1GBB5KeN4z1Tu9tUgPLQS5z9zdpqvNKjPb, we could clearly see that inbox did send 262 MSC to the exchange and not get credited to his account. Maybe he did something not proper later, but I still don't think the exchange has the right to keep that 262 MSC to themselves. Maybe they can delete his account or even ban his IP, but they have to refund the 262 MSC, which equals to more than $40K now.

Disclaimer: I personally bought 20 MSC from inbox before without escrow. He sent me 8 MSC first and I sent him the BTC later. I appreciated his trust on me so I want to say something for him on this issue.

Yes, you are right. It's still safer to check it every time, but the point is if we downloaded a fake client from the official website, we know where to complain and who needs to be blamed. Now the file is scattered everywhere and no one can be trusted.

As a currency with cap more than 1 million, I don't think setting up a dedicate server for downloading is too expensive to be feasible.

To be honest, if the quality of software and all the ecosystem does not improve significantly, people will go away very soon. Now I guess most people here are attracted by the insanely fast growing price. Once it is stabilized, we will see more and more complains about the user experience.

For example, could you imagine an organization having millions of dollars does not have a reliable downloading service for frequent software upgrading? Is it so expensive to get a reliable VPS and setup a downloading server, or simply as a temporary solution just pay dropbox to get an official account with larger bandwidth?

Why the users of inputs.io are greedy? Is it fair to say so. Did you know inputs.io was a blatant scam before that 'hacking'?

After installing 0.4.8, there's no block except the block 0, no peer list. What's happened? There's no even bootstrap peer list? The two well know peers both went to blacklist even after I moved them to known peers.

Previous versions have correct block files included, but it seems 0.4.8 is empty.

I think you will learn more by spending the time on reading the white paper rather than try to arguing here again and again, based on your imagination what mastercoin is.

We could have a better discussion if you could quote some text from the white paper with your understanding.

Even if you have 51% hash rate, it only means you can be a little bit faster than others. You cannot revert the block chain too much. Otherwise, you need a long time to catch up with the normal chain, and by that time you may already lose the 51% advantage because of the difficulty adjustment.

For example, if you have 60% network hash rate, and you decide to quit the main chain and create a new chain. At the current difficulty, you can generate 1.5 times faster than all other miners. Say you begin this exactly in the beginning of the difficulty change cycle, and you have to get more blocks than the original chain before the difficulty changes. Otherwise, the difficulty of main chain adjusts and you lose your advantage. That means you have to generate more blocks before next 2016 blocks. In this period, you can generate 2016 * 1.5 = 3024 blocks. So you can only revert the blockchain by around 1000 blocks if you have 60% network hashing rate.

If you have only 51%, then you are only 1.04 times faster. You can only generate 2096 blocks in this period, so you can only revert 80 blocks back at most.

Moreover, each new release of bitcoin client will hardcode the recent block hash, so no one can revert beyond this point. Therefore, if you cannot catch up before a new official client release, you lose all your efforts.

Finally, all this reverting only causes one result: bitcoin becomes zero value and will not bring any profit to the attacker, because everyone will notice if you revert the blockchain by only a couple of blocks. So the attacker lose all the value of bitcoins they have, and moreover they have lost the chance to earn more than 2000 BTC (>1 million dolloar)  per day forever. Therefore, 51 attack is only meaningful to the organizations who want to destroy bitcoin at any cost.


Besides, what you described has nothing to do with spending others' coins.

Any transaction has to be signed by the owner's private key, so no matter how powerful your miner is, you cannot spend anyone's bitcoin without get the private key first.

I don't think any government staff works on Sundays.

So you can easily get mining chips at $40/TH, or $0.04/GH. That's great, I bet you will be billionaire soon. Meanwhile, at the time you get 10 PH, the network hashing rate will definitely already 100 PH.

First, even with 1TH per chip, thousands of chips still are only several PH. You still need to build tens of thousands of chips overnight to get 51% hash rate.
Second, not anyone can have the ability to have the technology, fund, product lines, and meanwhile keep confident for several months.
Third, only countries like USA and China have the ability to do that, but even they really want to kill bitcoin they have much simpler ways.

No any reliable source mentioned about this. I think it's not possible to forbid withdrawal via direct bank accounts.

I think it's necessary to highlight here: no miner can change the blockchain history or steal anyone's bitcoin even he has more than 51% of the hash rate. What he can do is only make several blocks mined recently become orphan. It means 1) he can try double spending, but not easy after enough number of confirmations. If there're too many confirmations, it takes long time for his fork to catch up. 2) he can block some accounts to make any transactions, but at a very high price. He has to make every block including that transaction orphan.

That's almost all he could do with more than 51% of hash rate.

How could CPU mining be botnet resistent? What's different between a computer in botnet and a normal computer?

You can directly withdraw to your bank accounts, but not through 3rd party payment services any more.