i'm suspicious he does this because someone is close being a trusted node, and unwilling to give up the sole power in the currency.
hmm.
No, the biggest reasons were businesses I spoke to wanted a stable value for the currency, that's what basing it on kilowatt hours attempts to do. Businesses also said they preferred if a SolidCoin was worth about $1 so that their prices could be similar across the board instead of "unknown" things like 500 microsoft points. That said because there's 2+ million SolidCoins don't expect the price to be $1+ overnight, it will take some time, basically it depends on which coins hit the market and the average cost to produce + some other variables. The largest account holder I'm aware of has about 120K, one of the exchanges has a bit more than that in their "use" wallet. If someone did have close to a million they are hiding it rather well. |
|
|
|
No, the SolidCoin license is non-free. Free software means the freedom to run, study, modify, and distribute (even for a fee). No Bitcoin is not free because it doesn't allow me to not include a copyright text and because I say so. So there mr smarty pants! I can certainly argue there are damages for running a business built on my code without proper attribution. Haha, tell the judge this. No, the DMCA takedowns were successful in the case of both GitHub and Linode (your former webhost). You've just managed to run away from the law by moving to German servers outside the DMCA jurisdiction. No we did that for the lols and because we dislike the DMCA. People wanted to file a counterclaim and take you to court already out of their own pocket... but there's better ways to do this and we are still collecting information on you and your business dealings with MtGox/Tibanne and what participation they had in this. No, my DMCA takedown notice is 100% factual. Any attempt to go after me will be your own undoing (as in, you'll probably end up with real jail time). No it's you facing serious jail time for using the DMCA on something you do not own and have no claim over. Shouldn't have perjured yourself there bro. Thanks for generally being an unlikeable person too because we are getting plenty of support for this. |
|
|
|
Wait a second here... wasn't CH/RS banned from this forum? Didn't we have to wade through pages of the sorrowful tale of this copyright infringing, piss-poor code stealing, mouth-breathing troglodyte whining about how unfair that was?
Listen up you sniveling little bitch...
You broke the rules. Whether or not you changed it back, or shifted your code repository to another country what you did violated the terms of the license and was theft. That repulsive little slug luke-jr. has the right to bring a DMCA action against you, he did, you lost and got spanked.
Crying horseshit little tunes about perjury, libel or slander is just about the most infantile form of online discourse imaginable. You are fucking half-wit rip-off artist living in Australia. Luke the cunt got your US based site pulled down under US law. You shifted your site to Germany, and changed the offending sections of the code after the fact. Where are going to bring a cause of action against luke? Outer Fucking Mongolia? Stop acting the fool, and just go back to playing with your ShortBusCoin, and scamming your adoring throng of four or five love slaves. Nobody here gives a damn about your trials and troubles, nobody here would care if Soviet space debris fell on your mom's house and crushed you in the basement.
Could you be even more emotional? Control yourself.  In regards to Luke-Jr, please take a look here :- http://solidcoin.info/faq.phpThe CPF stands for Coin Protection/Promotion Fund . It was devised after realizing that a small amount of centralization can actually be good for a decentralized currency. Currently 5% of the value a normal block is given to the CPF in every trusted block. So in essence SolidCoin has 5% *economic* centralization.
At this point you may be asking how centralization is good at all, especially when we are talking about a decentralized currency. And that is a good question. Firstly, any centralization relating to the network itself we strongly disagree with. Decentralized networking is important for security reasons, it makes it almost impossible to shutdown the currency. The centralization in SolidCoin is merely an economic one, whereby a central agent is given funds to look after the interests of all SolidCoin users. SolidCoin people realized that we would not only need to solve problems relating to technical aspects (51% attacks etc) but we need protection against people like Luke-Jr legally. So the CPF can hire a US lawyer and prosecute him with no cost to any individual user. |
|
|
|
I have copies of solidcoin code (downloaded from GitHub) that have had the MIT licenses removed. I have copies of the bitcoin code with the MIT licenses in place. The former occurred after the latter. The courts can obtain the same thing I have via subpoena.
Yeah it doesn't really matter about "what you think the truth is" . We have the DMCA claims from Luke-Jr and he has perjured himself. You should really see the way he tries to beg people in countries where DMCA isn't relevant to "listen to him" . It's quite sad how he wants DMCA/SOPA installed around the world. People like him are the reason for the increasingly sad state of the world. |
|
|
|
|
It's just funny how ironic the whole situation is with some of these people supporting draconian laws to try to censor a free project they don't like. Isn't the Bitcoin ethos against this? Or am I in the wrong place?
"Dude you didn't put a text file exactly the way I like!!! OMFG I'm going to DMCA you!! Yeah that will teach you!!"
Bitcoin can have supporters like this, we only want people against these types of institutions working with and investing in SolidCoin at the moment.
|
|
|
|
There was nothing fake about your copyright infringement. Infringement you were made aware of the day you released the source code.
You pirated software. Period. You might consider removing copyright and license notification trivial but it isn't. Had you not pirated software your github wouldn't have been taken down. Take some personal responsibility for your actions.
Firstly the source code to SolidCoin was released and it's a free project. There are no damages to be rewarded for misplacing an updated license.txt on a free open source project. Secondly Github was taken down with NO investigation. That is the DMCA some of you idiots here are acting like a good thing. The only way to "Shut github up" would be to file a counterclaim but given their 10 day lack of reply to emails and unprofessional "just take it down without care" attitude we decided to move onto a different repository. There is no successful DMCA against SolidCoin, the source code and binaries are being distributed. So let's just get that fact straight. This censoring troll Luke-Jr only managed to get this claim on Github in the state it is because he knows the people there and also the unprofessional way Github act. Luke-Jr is going to be prosecuted soon enough for his fake DMCA claims as he has perjured himself. |
|
|
|
SolidCoin ripped off the open source Bitcoin code to make it proprietary (okay, that's allowed by the MIT license but that's still ugly). Heh that's pretty funny . You say "SolidCoin ripped off Bitcoin" then immediately follow with "Ok the license allows what SolidCoin did but it's still ripping it off! Guys! Come on...." Many people took this stand against SOPA yet they make a hero of a guy who :- 1) robbed many people of Bitcoins and CoiledCoins 2) Has 51% attacked a chain using mtgox/eligius resources. 3) Filed fake DMCA claims to try to silence/censor something they don't like. 4) Likely culprit in other attacks on other coins Well, with those sorts of morals I'm not sure what else to expect from some here. Flip... flop. Can't have it both ways you heroes. It doesn't even matter if you don't like SolidCoin, to step down to the filthy level of Luke-Jr is telling how desperate some have become. If anyone wonders how some awful crap gets passed by our governments look no further than the behaviour shown by a few here to get their "Revenge" on something they don't like. |
|
|
|
About a dozen people mined the first 2 million coins in Bitcoin, of which only 21 million will ever be created. The later you become aware of Bitcoin the worse off you are.
Regardless of the "top dozen guys" benefiting greatly it's obvious that Bitcoin is the definition of a pyramid. The earlier you get on the better ride you get. We have addressed these issues with SolidCoin so if you want a coin that is always going to be :- Please... It's you who are building a pyramid and a trying to make a quick buck. Sorry, if you knew the code in SolidCoin you would know how ridiculous this sounds. As more miners join, more coins are created. This is the exact opposite of a pyramid. In Bitcoin as more miners join the blocks get harder to make but they are still worth the same number of Bitcoins. It means that Satoshi generating them on his CPU (and who made about a million or so) did so at a cost of only a cent a coin vs about 50c a coin now. You think this is fair? And unlike Bitcoin we use real metrics like electricity to determine how much a block is worth. The original bitcoin is the innovation and is worth something. It has actual beneficial properties that are making it valueable. Solidcoin on the other hand is just an attempt to make money off the same concept, off the people that don't know any better. You didn't invent anything, you didn't give the world anything, you've just tried to become an "early adopter" of a new thing, because you were too late to be that for the old thing, and seem to have missed, or chose to miss the fact that "early adopters" phenomenon is not the point of Bitcoin, nor an important part of Bitcoin, it's just a side-effect of the fact that coins have to be generated somehow and that blocks have to be generated somehow. Bitcoin has innovated over its competitors (which were none) more than SolidCoin has over Bitcoin, no one can deny that. However SolidCoin is a better product than Bitcoin technically speaking. Banks and governments cannot take us down by mining SolidCoin like they can Bitcoin. If a bank can spend 5 million dollars and shut down Bitcoin do you think Bitcoin is that secure? You may argue that it's 10 million or 20 million, but 3 years ago banks were given over 5 trillion dollars just to keep running. 20 million is nothing if it means shutting down a true competitor to their system. Zimbabwe could should shut down Bitcoin if they wanted. It isn't hard and it's entirely legal. Put as much faith into such a system as you want but we offer people a safer solution at SolidCoin. I make no secret I am against banks, governments and the "elite" from messing with SolidCoin. Our supporters know this. Meanwhile check the video below to see Gavin (the leader of bitcoin) admitting he wouldn't care if Bank of America was running Bitcoin. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=0ljx4bbJrYE#t=1894s |
|
|
|
it makes it less clear that the code it free for all and does not belong to you like the rest of it - which you allow to be used only for solid coin
and i think it is on purpose
nobody is going to sue you, but it is bad manners. you got the bitcoin code for free, just do what they ask. is it so hard to copy paste it?
Our code does not belong to the world with no conditions. Unlike Bitcoin we put disclaimers in there to protect us legally from malicious activity. If people want to use SolidCoin code for "Good" then there is no problem, they don't even need to release the source. A malicious Bitcoin developer could release something that attacks the network and the Bitcoin developers could do absolutely nothing to remove it. If someone writes a virus for Windows on the other hand Microsoft slap the turkey on them. In regards to your continued ridiculous claims about MIT, it is obvious as day to anyone that reads the license.txt that there is Bitcoin code used and it is licensed under MIT and copyrighted by them. Perhaps your bad manners is subjective? Perhaps another person believes its bad manners to criticize Bitcoin because some of your code is still using it. Maybe others believe it is bad manners to criticize Bitcoin at all. Some others in a dark region think it's even bad manners to use Bitcoin code at all! What you "feel" and "think" isn't necessarily reality and the quicker you realize this the better off you'll be. Satoshi, unlike the current developers, released his code under MIT because he realized Bitcoin would be overtaken by <insert the boogey man>... and a real fork like SolidCoin would be needed. |
|
|
|
I was listening to Bruce Wagner interview Gavin after the CIA conference and just wondered why not much had been made about Satoshi and the real reason he gave up all Bitcoin contact? According to Gavin himself the CIA visit itself could have been the reason he quit? Of course, it is bad that Satoshi gave up all bitcoin contact. I have always wondered why? Worse than that however he can't already prove he is Satoshi! Switching from CPU to GPU mining is a mistake with critical consequences. That will be seen more clearly when incentives for miners begin to go down. If I may borrow Lincoln's phrase - "Currency of the people, by the people, for the people" - should entirely depend on ordinary people using it every day, not on a few mining pool operators. Keep up the good work, CoinHunter. SolidCoin definitely has a brain wave. There are a lot of plausible reasons Satoshi might want to keep his identity secret: - Satoshi was an introvert and simply didn't want the attention that he would surely have received (Occam's Razor) - Satoshi was fearful about backlash from those in power in the legacy financial system - Satoshi had a day job, and perhaps a reputation, that would have been threatened by being associated with bitcoin - Satoshi was actually a few people working in secret at a large corporation that needs bitcoin I sometimes ponder this last possibility. Imagine that you're Amazon, Apple, or Google and you dealing with money all the time and all the hassle involved with collecting payment through the legacy financial system. So, you put a small team of bright people on the task to find ways to make it better. That team arrives at the bitcoin solution which is obvious to everyone, including the executives. Then they start thinking about how to roll it out. They quickly come to realize that simply announcing a brand new currency isn't viable given the existing interests and politics. It would be too controversial for them to be involved in such an effort. So they find an alternatively. Open source it while being very careful not to reveal their connection to the project. Help it along until they can safely back away without the project failing due to a lack of critical mass. Wait a few until it becomes commonplace, then start adopting it and reaping the obvious benefits (i.e. Amazon being able to sell to anyone in the world with no risk of chargeback). I can tell you first hand that some of the largest retailers are struggling within the existing financial system. Payment solutions really touches a raw nerve with many of them. It certainly doesn't seem like a far fetched idea that many of them would have teams of people trying to find better and cheaper ways of transacting business. Innovation and cost savings in that area could have an enormous impact to their bottom lines. No one can truly know except Satoshi and Gavin about their "details". It's just if you look at everything that is now public record then what Gavin says is quite misleading about Satoshi and his departure. I don't think bitcoin achieves anything that those large organizations actually desire, if credit card is faster and more secure than Bitcoin why would they be interested? I think you'll find any large organization is quite happy with the status quo when it comes to financials. They bend over backwards to interface with the existing banking systems as these banking systems are heavily invested into them. Bitcoin was invented by a creative guy that pulled together various known ideas into a relatively nice working system. Many of those unknown variables are now taken as law within the Bitcoin community, the pyramid system, etc, when really they should be questioned. Any normal person looks at it and sees that the earlier they get in the more they get , it seems like a scam. I liked Bitcoin when I first heard about it, it excited me because of its anonymous nature. It was only when I started to learn the details that I realized this was never going to be anything serious. When a bank with a few million dollars can shut you down do you seriously think you are "in their world" ? As soon as bitcoin is a threat, or a perceived threat, these banks will throw money at it and shut it down with a 51% attack. 5 million dollars is nothing to these people. Let alone governments. The only answer Bitcoin supporters have is things like "p2pool" or "one day we'll be so powerful they'll need 50 million dollars" . This isn't a real answer to that question. |
|
|
|
include is not loose, its quite clear. include means that it needs to follow the stuff its gets included with.
why would you want to remove it anyway? its just stupid
Include is quite loose legally, it clearly states the MIT license applies to Bitcoin in the license.txt . What do you lose by having it your way vs having it the way it is now? You think stating something is licensed under MIT without including all of the mit license text makes it not so? It's quite laughable. |
|
|
|
2) Against government control of your money
I think I would prefer the government from what I've read of solidcoin. And, you didn't fix the "early adopter problem" with your alt chain. I've yet to see anyone that has. So I'm unconvinced it was a problem, and am still certain it was necessary for the bootstrapping of Bitcoin. Those early coins used to be worthless to people, and I'd bet the farm many of them have been lost forever. And many that weren't have been sold for a pittance. It's nice to say in hindsight that it's a pyramid, but from what I've read none of the early adopters ever dreamed Bitcoin would get as far as it already has. In my mind, it seems like Satoshi designed it correctly and this "problem" has much more to do with envy than anything else. You'd really prefer the government? I think this is where fanaticism comes into it. You are right that the first 2.7 million coins in SolidCoin weren't "fair" compared to the next coins created. However unlike Bitcoin those 2.7 million coins are owned by thousands of people. I've spent the most effort in SolidCoin and I only have 1.5% of the coins, so put that in perspective. If anyone tried starting what SolidCoin is "right now" it would fail. You need to do things in baby steps so that it is acceptable to the people using the system in the context of "what they know". An analogy would be like trying to get someone to understand algebra before addition. |
|
|
|
it doent say you have to mention it in your license , it says you have to include it The definition of "include" is quite loose. Like I said if you think you are right and want to win $0 because of some semantics then go ahead. SolidCoin is free software, it is open source software. If you're worrying about such semantics I wonder why you have no real problems in your life. |
|
|
|
|
About a dozen people mined the first 2 million coins in Bitcoin, of which only 21 million will ever be created. The later you become aware of Bitcoin the worse off you are.
Regardless of the "top dozen guys" benefiting greatly it's obvious that Bitcoin is the definition of a pyramid. The earlier you get on the better ride you get. We have addressed these issues with SolidCoin so if you want a coin that is always going to be :-
1) Against the existing banking system
2) Against government control of your money
3) For freedom
4) Decentralized currency creation based on real work instead of invented numbers
5) Isn't a pyramid scheme
You know where to go.
|
|
|
|
|
It clearly states the MIT license applies to original bitcoin code. People can easily determine what the MIT license is. If you have a problem with it take it to the courts to prove your claims and get damages of $0 . In the mean time keep crying a river, it's enjoyable.
|
|
|
|
SolidCoin complies with the MIT license, it's included in license.txt which is included with every download. Just because you want it to not comply doesn't change the fact it does. |
|
|
|
I was listening to Bruce Wagner interview Gavin after the CIA conference and just wondered why not much had been made about Satoshi and the real reason he gave up all Bitcoin contact? According to Gavin himself the CIA visit itself could have been the reason he quit? Bruce Wagner : When was the last time you chatted to satoshi? Gavin Andresen: Um... I haven't had email from satoshi in a couple months actually. The last email I sent him I actually told him I was going to talk at the CIA. So it's possible , that.... that may have um had something to with his deciding http://solidcointalk.org/topic/529-did-gavin-andresen-push-satoshi-out-of-bitcoin/ |
|
|
|
http://solidcoin.infoYou can just download it straight from the home page. Including the source code. Head on over to our forum to read about it, as this includes some new economic changes basing coin production on actual cost to produce in electricity rather than "nothing", which should eventually lead to stable prices needed for a working online currency. This will likely be the last release on the "bitcoin code" as we are moving to a nearly 100% new code base to spread SolidCoin to as many platforms as possible and rewarding nodes for handling transactions. If you are a business or use the RPC, please be aware that the bitcoin compatibility layer is now gone, you will have to use the new sc_ replacements which mean you need to specify amounts in integers and the wallet you want it to occur in. http://solidcointalk.org/topic/524-solidcoin-v204-released/http://solidcointalk.org/topic/523-new-economic-changes-in-solidcoin-v204/
|
|
|
|
Once I download the bitcoin code, I can do with it as I wish, as long as I include that notice at the top of the files.
Solidcoin code and all of its derivatives will always be under the control of Coinhunter (unless the license changes).
And what's the point of you being able to do anything with Bitcoin code? What do you want to do? If you want to do anything non malicious you have free right to use SolidCoin code provided it's a SolidCoin orientated project (ie not a chain fork). Revoking a source license for "no reason" wouldn't be very good PR would it. Revoking a malicious project would be what 99.999% of people want. That's democracy. The point remains someone controls the actual bitcoin code that MOST people download and use. Regardless of the license. It was the same with SolidCoin v1, anyone could have forked it but what is the point when every google search and whatnot just heads to solidcoin.info ? Just because that's stated a little more clearly in the new solidcoin license doesn't change the actual reality. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
