Amazon has nvidia teslas in it's cloud somewhere, see if you can use those  |
|
|
|
will there come a point where the difficulty becomes to high for cpu miners?
No Elaborate please why that is. One shouldn't accept an absolute answer without explanation. I'm for LTC succeeding but will not accept what people say blindly. Thanks!  If the LTC difficulty rises to 12 billion, many people might say that is too high! Others might say it is too far! But if LTC are worth $12 Billion each...is the difficulty too far or too high? Keep in mind the question was not asked in terms of price but in terms of difficulty and feasibility for CPU miners to attain any LTC for their efforts. If LTC have no price, then all difficulties are too far and too high. The only thing that determines whether or not you should mine anything is the price of electricity used vs the price of the coin mined. If BTC were $12 billion each, and difficulty was 1, then I would be mining them with my CPUs as well as my GPUs(regardless of how much better it might be if each CPU was a GPU). |
|
|
|
will there come a point where the difficulty becomes to high for cpu miners?
No Elaborate please why that is. One shouldn't accept an absolute answer without explanation. I'm for LTC succeeding but will not accept what people say blindly. Thanks! If the LTC difficulty rises to 12 billion, many people might say that is too high! Others might say it is too far! But if LTC are worth $12 Billion each...is the difficulty too far or too high? |
|
|
|
Why does ShitCoin not get banned for trolling?
If you want to get banned, go post on the Soiledcoin "forums". Here, the mods are more tolerant of those who have a radically different world view than their own. They prefer that we ridicule them for being less awesome than "a monkey wearing a tuxedo made out of bacon riding a cyborg unicorn with a lightsaber for the horn on the tip of a space shuttle closing in on Mars, while engulfed in flames". |
|
|
|
Can we just leave one thread untainted by this ridiculous SolidCoin feud? Seriously.
What is ridiculous about it? |
|
|
|
Might want to mention how the founders of SoiledCoin mined LTC by GPU.
Yeah, because who would want to mine SoiledCoins right? Even their own pool won't mine SoiledCoins. |
|
|
|
Notice how the SoiledCoin sockpuppets revert to name calling after they can no longer dispute the facts. I wonder if the rumor that a tyrant node private key was stolen is true. It would be interesting to see the SoiledCoin blockchain fight with itself. |
|
|
|
Exactly. Who decides what is malicious and what is not? Coinhunter does. So if you label use of Helvetica font in a client malicous, you can revoke the license of anyone using Helvetica font. You could cite it dilutes the SoiledCoin trademark(not that you need to cite anything at all). You certainly could revoke someone's license to fork if it prevented you from spending the pre-mine to "protect" SoiledCoin. One of the clauses should specifically state adding new coins or adding code to spend those 10 trust accounts *IS* malicious otherwise what is the point of it? Perhaps what is malicious will be more clearly defined too, instead of actually helping improve that definition that you'd rather just spend hours of your life criticizing it. You must value your time. The point of the tyrant nodes and the proprietary license is for you to maintain complete control of the block chain. You are the only person who can define what you consider to be "malicious" at any given point in time. Since you cannot even take responsibility for your posts on these boards (nor will you sign them with a tyrant node key) who actually cares what "malicious" means to you today? Tomorrow you will have a different name and sing a different tune. Releasing a client that prevented you from spending the pre-mine to "protect" SoiledCoin would be both "malicious" and competing coin activity. You wouldn't even need to revoke the license, you could just use the tyrant nodes to force all those clients off the network. You wouldn't even need to spend the pre-mine, you could double spend the CPF with the tyrant nodes blessing your double-spend transactions and rejecting others. Like I said before, the license should be changed so that adding new spendable coins is malicious and then releases the project from that license so others can fork it. They would just need to create new trust account keys and they could have their own SolidCoin network that all existing exchanges and businesses would accept. I've offered that suggestion to RealSolid and he seemed to think it was good but we will have to wait and see on what happens to it as it is mostly his code. Again, talking about yourself in the third person is bizarre. The first thing that should stop is you lying about your identity. I can dredge these boards for dozens of posts where you refer to yourself as the founder of Solidcoin in the first person. Transparency starts with the founder. If you are indeed not RealSolid, then why were you claiming to be the founder of Solidcoin? If you were lying then, why should we trust anything you say now? If RealSolid was posting as you, why did he stop? Why can't he do what Gavin does and sign his messages so we know they are authentic. The Coinhunter account has had more actors than Dr. Who. Almost as much fantasy and as many bizarre plots too. Edit: fixed quotes |
|
|
|
No, making the trusted accounts spendable is considered malicious activity, in which case RealSolid would have broken his own license, I believe in the future there's going to be a clause to move all SolidCoin code to public domain in certain instances, that would be one of them. So if there was a new client which made those coins spendable, the source is now public domain and anyone can fork it to fix it. Talking about yourself in the third person is creepy. It does little to engender trust. Right now, you consider making the accounts spendable "malicious" and since you are the ultimate arbiter of what is and is not "malicious" to SoiledCoin that statement is true. If in the future you consider it necessary to spend the pre-mine, then it is not malicious. Regarding any clauses that you "believe" will exist "in the future": you disavow your own past posts, why should we have any confidence in anything you say? This post could be disavowed if it proves inconvenient to you in the future. But, at least you admit that nobody can currently fork the SoiledCoin project without your permission. Geez you criticize disinformation and then post some more of it yourself!
The solidcoin license doesn't require RealSolid's permission. It's clearly outlined you can use SolidCoin code in a project that is solidcoin related AND not malicious. Exactly. Who decides what is malicious and what is not? Coinhunter does. So if you label use of Helvetica font in a client malicous, you can revoke the license of anyone using Helvetica font. You could cite it dilutes the SoiledCoin trademark(not that you need to cite anything at all). You certainly could revoke someone's license to fork if it prevented you from spending the pre-mine to "protect" SoiledCoin. You don't need to release the source even. So there are only 2 real requirements, no malicious activity, no competing coin activity. It's the latter which gets the bitcoin groupies panties up in a knot "You took from bitcoin now you're limiting them from using your code". Yes well, when you have the better product you don't want others taking it, Bitcoin allows people to do that and we don't. Move on with your life.
Releasing a client that prevented you from spending the pre-mine to "protect" SoiledCoin would be both "malicious" and competing coin activity. You wouldn't even need to revoke the license, you could just use the tyrant nodes to force all those clients off the network. You wouldn't even need to spend the pre-mine, you could double spend the CPF with the tyrant nodes blessing your double-spend transactions and rejecting others. |
|
|
|
a little correction - there was a little premine on sc1 for bounties. I remembered hurrying with a pal to bring up the third SC1 exchange, which would have gotten us some SC, I just pulled the log, at that time that bounty was worth like 800 USD in (tradable) SC. and with volume, I meant trading volume. Just ask doublec(the guy who runs bitparking and did the first sc1 exchange). First, you should quote what you are correcting or who you are responding to. Otherwise, your message is confused and imprecise. Not that we are unused to such things from the SoiledCoin folks. Like I said, the problem with SC1 was security. The SC1 premine was 30,080 coins. That is a big difference from 12 million. And just to be correct. Even though BitcoinEXpress claims otherwise, there wasnt any premine in SC2. The 12 million coins have been put into the generate transaction of the first solidcoin 2 block. And as it was stated before, everyone who can read the source can see that the clients will not accept transactions with any of their inputs being from one of those 12 1m coin addresses. the coins from these adresses have as much value as the coins stolen from bitcoinica lately: next to none.
When you come with such obvious disinformation, straight from soiledcointalk, you get flamed. First of all, many people here can read and understand source but there was none when SC2 was released. Big red flag. Second, giving coins to yourself before you release the blockchain is the textbook definition of pre-mined coins. Third, RealSolid transfers the coins from the pre-mine to the CPF which is spendable (in fact, it is double spendable since he controls the tyrant nodes). Fourth, the only place you can get client code is from RealSolid. If he were to change an if statement those coins would become directly spendable. The tyrant nodes enforce which versions of the client can be on the network. You cannot modify the SoiledCoin client without permission from RealSolid so you can't run your own private version of the client on the network. So when ever he wants to spend those coins, he can. Or he can double spend the CPF. Or just dump the CPF into btc-e whenever he feels like it. |
|
|
|
If realsolid had been a scammer, he'd cashed out within the first 3 weeks. When 1 SC was 0.03BTC, and there was a market volume > 200k on bitparking. Instead he sat down, reacted to threats, changed a lot in the networking of solidcoin, and released SC v2(and soon v3). Sorry, but putting much hard work into a scam after you missed the opportunity to cash out big just doesnt sound practical for a scammer.
There is a difference between the volume of bids and asks, and the volume of trades. The trade volume of SC2 was always thin, now it is non-existent. You can move the price by trading a few BTC or USD for SC2. Since miners get almost zero rewards for finding a bock, the only people with significant amounts of SC2 right now are the founders. If they don't sell, the market is not liquid and thus no price discovery takes place. Regarding RealSolid's "work": There was no pre-mine before SC2, so he could not have cashed out in SC1. Nobody here had an issue with SC1 being a scam. The only issue was that it had security flaws that required it be shut down. SC2 had the pre-mine and the tyrant nodes which guarantee double spending can happen as long as the tyrants bless the spend. Lots of people had an issue with that. RealSolid has not yet had an opportunity to cash out his 12 million SoiledCoins (or double spend the CPF into oblivion) because there have never been buyers out there for that sort of volume. So SC2 limps along. The brand is so toxic at this point, nobody is likely to dump serious cash into it. Even if it was part of a pump and dump. |
|
|
|
If RealSolid was the scammer you say he is, the he'd probably be pretty stupid, every serious scammer would have taken the coins and run a long time ago.
He can't. There is no liquidity in the SC market. Less than $100 changes hands a day and as soon as he spends the pre-mine, nobody is going to buy any SC ever again. There are no miners now that the rewards are gone. There are no merchants. Who exactly is going to buy 12 million pre-mined coins in a dead currency? I do however agree with you that Coinhunter is probably pretty stupid. |
|
|
|
care to prove that with a link, bitcoinexpress? Ask daniel maddox/bitcoinexpress to prove anything and you're pretty much preying to jesus here. Gavin signs his messages. Why won't you sign yours with the tyrant keys so we know its actually RealSolid? Oh, right. You work against transparency and trust not towards them. P.S. it's praying. |
|
|
|
#1 tactic: When in doubt, blame it all on SolidCoin. Note how you don't dispute the facts I present, you only dispute the conclusion. Right now all we have to go on is the SC folks "discovered" an LTC GPU miner and the SC folks "discovered" LTC being mined with GPUs. Everything else is theory (and in some cases fantasy). It's ok, we're thick skinned.
All evidence to the contrary. Just look at the post history of Coinhunter for how "thick skinned" you are. I would say look at the post history of ViperJBM (former PR director for Soiledcoin) except he deleted all of it because he couldn't stand the thought of it being associated with his real identity. Or did you typo and mean "thick-headed"? |
|
|
|
|
So far, the claims are as follows:
1.) The SC guys had the LTC GPU miner.
2.) The SC guys "found" the evidence of an LTC GPU miner.
3.) Somehow, its all Artforz fault.
One and two are fairly well established. Claim 3 was put forth by the SC folks after their LTC miner came to light.
|
|
|
|
Well, seeing as in another 3-4 months, people will be able to buy 7970s for $350-400, and ye average used 5970 is around $350-400, and you're not factoring in the cost of slots (ie, switching to two 5870s, which cost of slots would be 2x for 5870s than 5970s or 7970s), so 7970s still seem to win.
Why would people be able to buy 7970s for so cheap if they are such great cards? If they are indeed crafted out of unicorns and awesome sauce, they should fly out of the stores and be subject to the same sorts of availability issues as the 5970 was. Why would anyone pay such a high price for a used 5970? Just because they are offered at that price, does not mean they will ever sell for it. But yeah, 7970s are good mining cards. It will be interesting to see how the market reacts. |
|
|
|
Except you are supposedly a member of the SoiledCoin development team (at least you claimed to be such in #solidcoin IRC) and you made the claim earlier that RealSolid and Coinhunter were interchangeable. So now you claim you have no idea who RealSolid really is and thus have no idea who really is developing SoiledCoin. In fact, it could be anyone posting binaries of the SoiledCoin client right? Just like it could be anyone posting as RealSolid on solidcointalk.org.
At least you admit that there are multiple people using the CoinSchizo account and you have no idea who is saying what.
FYI, for people to claim to know so much about security you SoiledCoin folks demonstrate remarkably little in practice. RealSolid could sign something in IRC using a tyrant node key and Coinhunter could sign something on the forums using the same private key. Then we would know for sure the accounts were linked (or the tyrant node keys have been compromised). But of course, that is exactly what the SoiledCoin folks are trying to avoid, being accountable for their statements.
Again, your logic is flawed. Just because both accounts could provide a signed message in no way proves they are or are not the same person. Lets assume for a second that they are separate entities, now consider that CoinHunter could simply forward your message signing request on to RealSolid to have it signed and then CoinHunter proceeds post the reply on the forums. You would have the evidence you desired, yet it still does not prove anything. All that would prove is that CoinHunter knows how to talk to RealSolid (easy enough via IRC), and RealSolid was kind enough to sign a message with a key. Again, you completely miss the point. I am not surprised given your group's inability to foster any sort of trust. 1.) You made the claim that Coinhunter and Realsolid are the same person. 2.) Realsolid has taken credit on numerous occasions in IRC, on SoiledCointalk, and these forums for the Coinhunter account. 3.) Now that RealSolid (and his sockpuppets) have shit all over your reputation, you are backpedaling like a clown on a unicycle. 4.) If a tyrant key signed message appears from both RealSolid on IRC and Coinhunter on these forums, we know RealSolid is linked to the Coinhunter account. Whoever actually posted the message is irrelevant. The message itself is authentic and RealSolid is willing to be accountable for at least one Coinhunter post. 5.) If RealSolid signs all of his Coinhunter messages with the tyrant keys, the posts cannot be altered or forged. Whoever actually does the posting does not matter. Everyone will know what is and what is not authentic RealSolid drivel. 6.) This fails if the tyrant private keys become compromised (as I stated) but then SoiledCoin fails as well, so all is moot anyway. 7.) None of you would ever sign your posts because you are all about avoiding accountability, not providing it. Welcome to cryptographic signatures, enjoy your stay. |
|
|
|
Ahimoth if I were you I would seriously re-think the decision to jump into the fore front of being the head Solidcoin Scammer Spokes Person.
Spokesperson? I haven't mentioned SolidCoin on here once in the past 24 days. Looks like perhaps you might be the only one of the group with assemblence of common sense. So you are not part of the multi user "Coinhunter" account? No, I do not use that account, and I have no knowledge regarding the owner of that account or who may or may not be using it. Forgive me if I seem incredulous that you do not know what account Realsolid has been posting on these forums. Especially when I see this posted by you: "Coinhunter/RealSolid has no involvements with the pool. I run it with one other person. My partner handles the server and web UI. I handle the selling of the btc and the sc payouts to the miners." Now I have even less trust in you after your claim of no knowledge that Coinhunter is RealSolid the founder of Soiledcoin. How can I possibly know for certain that the CoinHunter account truly is RealSolid? There is no way for me to know that, and no way for you to know that unless one of us stands behind him while he logs into bitcoinTalk and IRC simultaneously. And even then, that is no proof that he is the only one using that account. Just like there is no way for me to know that you are not actually BitcoinExpress posting under a different account. Your logic is flawed. Except you are supposedly a member of the SoiledCoin development team (at least you claimed to be such in #solidcoin IRC) and you made the claim earlier that RealSolid and Coinhunter were interchangeable. So now you claim you have no idea who RealSolid really is and thus have no idea who really is developing SoiledCoin. In fact, it could be anyone posting binaries of the SoiledCoin client right? Just like it could be anyone posting as RealSolid on solidcointalk.org. At least you admit that there are multiple people using the CoinSchizo account and you have no idea who is saying what. FYI, for people to claim to know so much about security you SoiledCoin folks demonstrate remarkably little in practice. RealSolid could sign something in IRC using a tyrant node key and Coinhunter could sign something on the forums using the same private key. Then we would know for sure the accounts were linked (or the tyrant node keys have been compromised). But of course, that is exactly what the SoiledCoin folks are trying to avoid, being accountable for their statements. |
|
|
|
Is it just me or does this not seem profitable for 5870 series cards due to slow memory I/O  300 khash/s vs 440 mhash/s  Hashrate is irrelevant since you are mining with two different algorithms on Bitcoin and Litecoin. That is correct but I was referring to the profitability that each hashrate can bring. Just did some calculations right now. 400 khash/s for one 5870 mining LTC scrypt : 0.3 BTC / 24 hours 440 mhash/s for one 5870 mining BTC SHA256 : 0.3 BTC / 24 hours SO what to do now ? LTC or BTC ? Moar desimall plases |
|
|
|
Ahimoth if I were you I would seriously re-think the decision to jump into the fore front of being the head Solidcoin Scammer Spokes Person.
Spokesperson? I haven't mentioned SolidCoin on here once in the past 24 days. Looks like perhaps you might be the only one of the group with assemblence of common sense. So you are not part of the multi user "Coinhunter" account? No, I do not use that account, and I have no knowledge regarding the owner of that account or who may or may not be using it. Forgive me if I seem incredulous that you do not know what account Realsolid has been posting on these forums. Especially when I see this posted by you: "Coinhunter/RealSolid has no involvements with the pool. I run it with one other person. My partner handles the server and web UI. I handle the selling of the btc and the sc payouts to the miners." Now I have even less trust in you after your claim of no knowledge that Coinhunter is RealSolid the founder of Soiledcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
