Does anyone know why LTC seems to be on such a downtrend lately?
It's only on a down tend if you've recently came into LTC. I still have every Litecoin I have ever mined and majority of the "few" I have are from when LTC was valued in pennies. LTC could drop to $0.25 and I would still be way ahead. It's also just not Litecoin, it's all alts that are dropping in price due to BTC rising. ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
|
Verse 101 of the same song started in early 2011....
~BCX~
|
|
|
|
|
If brand confusion or personal dislike is taken into consideration, it will be banned.
If the decision is truly based on whether or not BTC2 will harm BTC wallets, then it will be allowed.
~BCX~
|
|
|
|
@SaltySpitoonFor the record I 100% believe you in the original reason for the ban. You went on the most up to date information at the time. Even the coin dev thought so before it was thoroughly researched. My only reason in debating this was to prevent the circulation of ulterior motive rumors once it was disproved. I also do not think for a second that any Bitcoin Staff fears this catching on in any way and competing with Bitcoin SHA even on a 1/100,000 scale. Now that all being said, I think "The Ban", subsequent stickied thread and the deleting of all post related to it has done factorial more to keep it alive than anything the coin or the coin dev has done to date. If I were Staff on this forum, I would go with a disclaimer placed by a mod on every thread Bitcoin Scrypt related and let this thing die like the other 150 scrypt clones launched in the past few months. If you ban it, it will become stronger as it will be the small guy verses the giant and in ways become what Bitcoin SHA256 was created to be in the first place, the stand against central control.
~BCX~ Added later: Proof that this thread has done more to promote Bitcoin Scrypt than the original [ANN] Thread. -This thread 4734 views with 120 replies -Original [ANN] Thread 641 views with 7 replies https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=291021.0
|
|
|
|
I myself have no interest in this coin (think I have a grand total of 7 and no desire for more or even to run the client again), and personally I feel btt has full right to ban all alts.
However if you allow alts don't be inconsistant in picking and chosing at a whim. Also seriously I don't think things should be banned purely to protect idiots.
If its for the naming, btc is opensource and p2p, let people use whatever part of it they wish (whether that be code or the name) and let the people/or market decide if its acceptible. If its not acceptible it'll die without btt forums help.
True, if the powers that be ban BTC2 based on name, then are they violating the open source concept of Bitcoin? I'm willing to bet they will ban ALL alt coins here before just banning BTC2 and becoming the very thing this forum and BTC rails against, censorship and central control. ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
I'll open the staff discussion back up and see how people feel. I'm still guessing BTC2 still won't be allowed for the other reasons. Others felt the name was fraudulent etc etc, however that risk of wallet damage is the main factor that changed our opinions from allowing it with a disclaimer, to banning it all together, so we shall see.
My goal is not get BTC2 "unbanned" I just wanted a legit reason to the basis. ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
Now that the official reason of BTC-Scrypt being banned for over writing Bitcoin-SHA256 wallets has been debunked can we at least switch the reason to banning based on similar name and brand confusion?
Bitcoin Scrypt will not over write or destroy any Bitcoin SHA256 wallet even without switching directories. I have tested this on Windows XP, Win 7, Win 8 and Linux.
It would definitely lend a lot more credibility for the latter reasons.
~BCX~
Think you're forgetting the forum rule; 'never let the facts get in the way of a good story'. No I didn't forget it, just curious if they would come out an ban it for the proper reason now that overwriting wallets has been debunked. ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
I have a theory that there are many sockpuppets on this forum of Megacoin developers
Seriously, people don't do that here! ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
|
No reason to delist it, they're still making money off it.
Besides it's humorous to watch it spiral down.
~BCX~
|
|
|
|
|
Now that the official reason of BTC-Scrypt being banned for over writing Bitcoin-SHA256 wallets has been debunked can we at least switch the reason to banning based on similar name and brand confusion?
Bitcoin Scrypt will not over write or destroy any Bitcoin SHA256 wallet even without switching directories. I have tested this on Windows XP, Win 7, Win 8 and Linux.
It would definitely lend a lot more credibility for the latter reasons.
~BCX~
|
|
|
|
I looked around and could't find a relevant thread so here goes: What alt-coins can be mined using USB BE's? Please also give examples on pools, mining software, proper drivers and flags. I run W7 64bit. At the moment i mine BTC with CGMiner 3.1.1 edit; this is most likley posted in the wrong area. Can mod please move it to where it belongs?  Here's a good start. PPCoin Teracoin Freicoin i0coin iXcoin Devcoin ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
@1: They do not need to.. however most attacks do have this done, as they need to outrace the main blockchain to be successful! As I said before, it is possible to slow boat the system but a "slow-boat" style attack is much more noticeable.
@2: Plenty of "What ifs" in life, yes this doesn't protect us from every conceivable scenario, but it does stop some, you have to give it that.
@3: That will only be the case in the event of a multipronged 51% attack, which I'm fairly certain would be fatal if those "legit miners" were not cut off for 4 hours anyways. IMO It's like saying why wear a bulletproof vest when it cant protect you from an RPG?
Attention is good for our market right now.. I realize the optimal solution is to do things quietly, however right now there is plenty of attention on genuinely shitcoins that could be on GoldCoin.
Why do keep fixating on "longest chain"? ? ? The longest chain does not determine the accepted chain. With no disrespect intended it is clear that you do not even have a basic fundamental understanding of 51% attacks or any other for that matter. Everything proposed as "protection" in this thread is flawed to say the least. ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
Remember even when submitting with multiple nodes there will be a convergence point to a legitimate peer, and then that legitimate peer will be banned for transmitting too quickly, thereby segmenting the network for 4 hours but keeping many legitimate users safe.
Why do you assume that someone with more than 51% needs to submit blocks faster than the 5 in ten minutes? Very bad assumption. How are you going to deal with that when a number of legit users get banned. Miners will not take to that too well. What happens when someone hits you with a diff attack and causes about half your network to exceed the limit and gets banned therefore opening up the entire block chain to an attacker remaining within the defined limits? Stop arguing over semantics, this was designed to stop some double spending attacks, basic difficulty attacks, and multipools(and it does that very well). When I say "virtual immunity" - I don't mean total immunity, I mean immunity from pretty much anyone out there who realizes that the cost of the attack would be greater than the gain.
Another bad assumption on your part. What if an attacker is paid to attack a chain and has zero intention to trade the coins? What if an attacker does it just because they're bored or just to do it? The system is designed to cut off an affected portion of the network in the event of a multi-pronged attack, they will simply reconnect in 4 hours and continue on the main chain.
Again start cutting off legit miners and see how fast your chain dies. Also in banning "legit" peers, what are you going to do when someone builds a list of lets say a 1000 peers, connects and starts sending "bad blocks" to them, ban them all? That in itself is an exploit I could build in only the time needed to scan for peers. I applaud you guys for trying to find a solution to attacks but the smart thing to do is develop them, keep them quiet to keep and don't invite public ridicule with some posted half baked ideas that were obviously never tested ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
actually I agree with bcx on something, i tested it and also found the fear unfounded.
Strange things can happen at the one, two point!Yeah Kelsey us agreeing is definitely weird but I got tired of the repeated lame reasoning behind banning it. Sounds like someone stated this was possibility and everyone ran with it as fact without any shred of proof or testing. From the moment I first read it, it didn't sound like over writing would be the case at all and calling it malware is absurd. Like I said before I have no interest in BTC-Scrypt and whole lot of interest in protecting Bitcoin-SHA256. The 100% absolute legit reason to ban Bitcoin-Scrypt on Bitcointalk is due to the exact same name, symbol, specs and brand confusion. There is absolutely nothing wrong with protecting Bitcoin this way, just be straight up about it. ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
|
I personally don't care either way if Bitcoin Scrypt threads are allowed or not.
BUT
If it is banned for some irrational fear of over writing BitcoinSHA256 wallets, the fear is unfounded and simply not true.
I guess nobody bothered to actually test the theory. All that happens is that if running Bitcoin Scrypt, Bitcoin SHA256 transactions are unconfirmed, when running Bitcoin SHA256 the reverse happens. No coins are lost, everything is reconfirmed when running the desire Bitcoin version.
If you want to try it, setup a virtual machine and see for yourself.
Now if the reason is that the name is confusing, you have a point.
~BCX~
|
|
|
|
Where exactly did they mention Litecoin? ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
|
The only way this guy is going to serve 30 years in prison if he dies at 59 in prison.
~BCX~
|
|
|
|
one fatal flaw , the investments will pull out & the confidence will be gone, no one will return to a previously ruined system. Once something looses its shine its gone people are fickle im afraid. ive been reserching bitcoin indepth for a while now reading everything i possible can whist running a small rig to monitor changes, the last Diff jump has halved the rewards and theres another one in 10 days. the depretiation of this system is turning into a KILLER a suicide of its self its like miners are killing the very system we are trying to keep alive , Mining is unsustainable theres no ROI. already theres new 4.5ghash plug and play miner on ebay for a couple hundred so why buy BFL or KnC , they will be out of business by next year and again people with pre orders or have paid top dollar will be out of pocket with a machine thats worthless. tell me im wrong in detail and i will continue this conversation
cheers
There's more than one fatal flaw here. 1) ROI - You're assuming everyone computes ROI on today's value and not some speculative point int he future. When I was mining full force after Bitcoin had crashed to just below $2.00 from a high of $33.00+ in June 2011 people told me I was crazy to keep mining at 70GHS. Funny thing in April 2013 I had the last laugh as those negative ROI Bitcoins I mined were 100x worth more than what they were valued at when I mined them. The same thing can be said about the Bitcoins mined after supposed ROI is non profitable today in 2013. What if in two years from now they are worth $10K each??? Yeah, Yeah, I heard the same thing back in late 2011, Bitcoin will never see a price like that. ~BCX~ |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
