The trusted nodes don't "send" any money to the CPF. They "lose" money by signing a trusted block, it's part of the protection mechanism.

The 10 initial trust accounts aren't designed to stick around forever, they lose money, most will be replaced by real millionaires, with perhaps one or two supported by the community.

People can see the source now, if you want 51% protection SolidCoin offers it. If you don't then stick with whatever you're on. SolidCoin features a number of improvements over all chains, cpu+gpu mining at watt for watt efficiencies, confirmed transactions within 3 minutes, massive increase in security, mining within the client and support for a proper p2p backbone. No one can deny these features. Everyone bickering about centralization doesn't really know what they are talking about, BitCoin features more centralization than SolidCoin. 3 Bitcoin pools own 80% of the network, so don't make me laugh.

So he says he hacked my files, where is the source?

I'm not really sure why you people believe anything this guy? says. But hey.

I haven't inferred coblee, that would be 'implied', only others can infer from my written words.

The algorithm is better because it brings equality to both CPU and GPU. Both are equally (close enough) efficient to mine SolidCoins, in essence we can take both GPU and CPU and neither loses the efficiency battle. If Bitcoin does collapse like many have predicted then some other p2p coin needs to take on the existing hardware infrastructure combined with making the "average joe" able to mine. That is where SolidCoin fits into the puzzle, offering the solution to all the existing mining problems and security issues of bitcoin.

It's fine that you believe in bitcoin technology, but I'm not really sure of the point of litecoin then, it's just an experiment to help Bitcoin? Doesn't really seem like something which will stick around a long time if that's the case. As an advanced and experienced programmmer I've looked at bitcoin technology and realized it needed a significant change if big business and average joe is to adopt a currency of this type. I raised these questions with some bitcoin developers initially prior to starting SolidCoin. Of course on a Bitcoin forum the people here will believe Bitcoin is good enough, so there isn't much I can say to those people who have that faith. It's my opinion it isn't good enough, with SolidCoin now secure from the threats that Bitcoin isn't we can go to businesses and finally sell them a solution they may now consider taking.

Any altchain that is tied to the Bitcoin technology is in essence saying "Bitcoin is the real thing, don't take any notice of me". I'm not really sure why we need Litecoin when Bitcoin already offers what it has for the most part. You can say you're offering CPU mining or faster transactions, which is fine, but when you're just as vulnerable to the same threats I can't really see the difference.

I also don't really understand why these new chains are starting up with non developers leading them. One of the biggest reasons SolidCoin has achieved the success it has is because I'm working for free on it when normally I would be paid $150+/hour. People with my experience rarely work for free on projects, I'm doing it simply because I want a solution to this global banking bullshit we've all had to put up with for the last 100 years. I like the enthusiasm people like yourself put into projects but without the skills and experience I can't really see them going anywhere.

The reason is when you send funds, a new address is created for you to send the "change" . This new address starts off as having "0 confirmations" as it's recently added to the client and SolidCoin 2 is currently only showing you funds you have with at least 1 confirmation. It will be fixed so that 0 confirmation transactions from yourself are also added to the balance.

Yeah I'm aware you obviously have pools and people just running mining clients, however only having 170 users running your client software would be a concern for me if I was overseeing your project. People still need to run the client to send funds and do other tasks like that right?

Tenebrix had 280 before LTC came along and killed it, and you haven't reached those heights yet. But anyways, I'm not sure why you released a coin with so few changes over TBX especially when you've had time to do things. You are a programmer right?

It's a bug that fixes itself once the sent amount has "1 confirmation"

It doesn't currently trust a 0 conf transaction from yourself when it should. If you had left the linux client get one confirmation you would have seen the balance restored.

viper is incorrect about me posting the full hashing code. I did post the initialization code for it which is what I think he may be referencing.

4 people have been given the full hash code at various times and the opencl version of it has now been released so anyone wanting to look at it can check there. Full source will be out soon anyhow. Thanks for taking an interest in the SolidCoin project.

I'm sorry if I've upset you with my opinion. When litecoin launched I was looking at their nodes on irc to see how much uptake it got, it started off at 180 nodes. A week? later it's now 170. So the number of people running your chain are shrinking, combined with it being based mostly on bitcoin technology and susceptible to attacks from individuals with limited investment is all reasons why I think litecoin will not succeed. I think LTC achieved one thing though, it killed off TBX which I think was a scam. So good work on that part.

To put it in comparison, SolidCoin peaked at 850 nodes on IRC and currently has 600. So yes we have also shrunk, but are currently 3.5 times larger than your chain and also have minipool features built into our client and thus have many non internet facing nodes (about double public visible, or around 1200-1300 in total).

I could be wrong about Litecoin only time well tell. Good luck anyhow.

Yes after discussions with a lot of people we realized there needed to be a way to help kickstart the economy and provide incentives for businesses. Combined with prosecuting fraud and other such things as they appear. We didn't want to get into the situation where private companies are funding core SolidCoin developers ala the situation with Bitcoin. Instead SolidCoin users will fund them, providing less incentive for corruption and things of this nature.

SolidCoin's network is fully decentralized. It would be too weak if it wasn't. Just because there is this concept of trusted nodes (which Bitcoin/Gavin said they want to move to eventually also) doesn't make it any less  secure or centralized.

However we do have 5% economic centralization (or a tax if you want to call it that), so that fact will not please everyone that is against any form of centralization. Economic centralization is a different thing than network centralization though. Worst case is the 5% centralization fund is abused or taken over by a malicious entity (government), it won't affect the network security that much at all. The 5% amount is also going to be lowered down to about 1% over time.

The Coin Protection/Promotion Fund is used to protect SolidCoin and it's users so *most* people shouldn't have a problem with it when they know it goes to help them, but I know some people will.

Satoshi developed a hashing algorithm in Bitcoin which saw GPUs dominate it, forcing CPU users to the dustbin and making it a lot more difficult for everyone to mine Bitcoin. Out of this grew the GPU farms and the Bitcoin mining community.

Prior to SolidCoin v2.0 I released some info saying we were going to a CPU algorithm for SC2, knowing that the trolls would attempt to copy the idea. The end result, tenebrix, a CPU miner, now a dead chain. (I won't mention fairbrix/litecoin since they are both also dying and just copied tenebrix).

In actuality the hashing algorithm I developed for SolidCoin v2.0 was designed to equalize CPU and GPU, to make them comparable watt for watt. Now SolidCoin would let anyone with a GPU (even NVIDIA ones) or CPU able to mine rather fairly.

Like all the core SolidCoin people know, we are the current technical leader of cryptocurrencies, with the most innovations and the most secure p2p currency, if you want an early alpha for GPU mining please visit our forum.

http://solidcointalk.org/topic/342-solidcoin-v20-gpu-miner/

Well it's difficulty for normal people to understand I guess. A reorg can happen currently where two trusted nodes both sign a block and send it out at the same time, so for 2 blocks the network is split. A 2 block split is OK provided anyone dealing with SolidCoin looks for 6 confirmations (which the two major exchanges do, and is what most default to). Considering our supernodes also will likely have the exactly same transactions in them (as they aren't malicious) it's really quite moot besides the efficiency factor.

We'll look to eliminate these reorgs to a bare minimum because it's an efficiency thing, you want the network working together on the same trusted block instead of having multiple and then finding the real winner one block later. Currently due to our layering of supernodes re-orgs only happen rarely, so network efficiency is rather high. That said we are implementing new methods to further reduce them.

It's really quite irrelevant if people want to attack SC2. With SC1 I couldn't sleep some nights thinking about how insecure it was, it's different with SolidCoin 2.0 , getting caught up on a lot of sleep now. If you want to think it's insecure then that's fine, up to you to decide what is secure or not given the information out there.

It depends how you look at it. If you look at this here :-

http://blockexplorer.ahimoth.com/Home/BlockDetails?hash=00005b3dbf940ba9df42b2d86fd055706d0eac22cd3f39235b3f0e793bee61b8

Which is a trusted block, you'll see there is only two transactions. The first is a generate, it's value goes to the CPF. The second is a transaction from the trusted node, which effectively removes value from its own account. The trusted node itself never sends money directly to the CPF, instead, it losing value is a sign of "yes I have a million dollar account before and after this transaction which costs me money".

So trusted nodes create a generate which goes to the CPF, and they add their own special transaction which "seals" the block as trusted, trusted nodes don't directly fund the CPF.

So when I say those funds cannot be spent on the network it means a trusted node, if it hacked its own client and tried to actually send any money out, would get rejected by every other client, no other client would even propagate the transaction. Every client on the network looks for these addresses and will not allow them to be used outside of the very strict manner of "Sealing" blocks and losing money doing it.

I posted some more info on this over here :-
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/1583/who-controls-solidcoins-special-millionaire-accounts/

Anyone calculating total coinage in SolidCoin should factor in CPF payments from the generates which is 5% per block. I haven't done total coinage calculations in a few days, but we should be around 1.6-1.8 million. I'm going to add a total coinage in the system information to http://solidcoin.info soon.

Except that 12M can't be spent, so it's not really worth counting it.

Looks nice. How are you calculating SolidCoin's coin base though? We have over 1.6 million coins out there now so it's a little off. But I like it anyway.

You're embarrassing yourself yet again. Why did you have to wait for our block explorer to be up before noticing these things in the chain? Wouldn't an uberleet hacker like you know how to look at the blockchain that is on every SolidCoin computer?  

So you use *our* graphical tools to figure out something and then want us all to believe yet another claim from you and what you can do? When you've done absolutely nothing to this point in time?  

I have a suggestion Dan, why don't you go pretend to be something you can actually pass yourself off as, because a hacker isn't it. Just because your wife left you and you're going through emotional problems right now doesn't mean you can invent some internet character to portray, especially when you do not have the intelligence for it.

Actually once Bitcoin technology is attacked over the coming months there is only going to be one chain standing. The non Bitcoin one, SolidCoin.

So if you want to get in circles and pray for your alt coins that are just as bad as Bitcoin then you can, anyone with a technical mind knows the superiority of the SC2 protocol and will move their investments to it.

Yah right, some Bitcoin people go to SA and ask for some help. Hilarity ensues. There's a reason people over at SA hate Bitcoin and don't really care about SC. It's people like you on this forum.

Multiple nodes can share wallets with SC2.0 so won't really matter. Even if an attacker wants to flood a node off the network there are backup ones waiting.

Only reason one wallet is mainly solving them at the moment (and no it's not mine) is because of a re-org issue we are trying to limit when too many trusted nodes are active at the moment. They're still there waiting for trusted block time to hit a certain level before they submit their work currently.

SC2.0 is hacker proof, wouldn't matter what the lonely bitcoinexpress does, we already asked him to destroy the public beta he didn't, we asked him to destroy SC2.0 when it was released he didn't. People still think this lonely 45yo man can do anything worthwhile? Pretty funny.

Does anyone think someone looking like this has many braincells active at once? Looks like an alcoholic too.

You do know regardless of source being out, 90+% of people will be running someones binaries. So even if you compile the source, if you can't trust me and others to not be nefarious the network will do whatever those binaries want. Just like with Bitcoin. It's quite a bs excuse , and you'll invent anything to fit your worldview of "SC = BAD". Source would be out and you'd cry about something else you don't like, the CPF, etc. Get the chip off your shoulder.

The only reason so many seriously have this problem with SolidCoin is because they are afraid of what it represents to Bitcoin. Think about it, if SC really was a stinking pile of crap like many here say it is, why would they waste 500 pages filling it with their anti SC propaganda? If I was a bad developer why would people create thread after thread discussing me. If the product was crap it would die out.

Yet here we stand, 3 months later, with a growing network, the most features of any cryptocurrency, multiwallet, mining in the client, minipooling, 51% protected, low block variance, list goes on.

These are all features EVERY SolidCoin user knows is in the client because they're using it right now. Fear is a funny thing isn't it.