You left out the fact that CH fixed artfroz's exploit almost immediately.
You also forgot that that fix disabled DoubleC from opening his exchange. He released a broken update. Capping transactions sizes to 4KB was retarded. DoubleC refused to open the exchange because of the license change, and surrounding drama. There was nothing really "preventing" him from opening the exchange back up after the fix was put in place. This is considering that none of the other 4 exchanges had problems taking coins after the update. As for you thinking the cap was "retarded" is your opinion, which we can clearly see by the original post. Uhh no. When that update with the transaction cap was released it disabled DoubleC from allowing deposits and withdrawals. Get your facts straight. Whatever I am not here to argue. This community is dying because of peoples unwillingness to be civil to each other. Lets hope this piece of shit forum doesn't take Bitcoin and other crypto-currencys with it. Okay so you are not here to argue but you are here to spread misinformation and tweaked data that looks only at one side of the story. I have listed a whole slew of things that have happened as facts in the original post concerning solidcoin. What you have done is try to make things not look as bad as they are. I am just calling a spade a spade. Solidcoin is a mess and a failure not due to its own doing but the doing of its founder and his followers like yourself. EDIT: If my being truthful and opening up the facts about what has transpired around solidcoin and CH and its supporters is "uncivil" as you call it, then I am not sure what you would call "civil". Maybe someone that only has an optimistic and bias view on something in hopes that it will succeed despite its many failures is considered civil ya? |
|
|
|
You left out the fact that CH fixed artfroz's exploit almost immediately.
You also forgot that that fix disabled DoubleC from opening his exchange. He released a broken update. Capping transactions sizes to 4KB was retarded. DoubleC refused to open the exchange because of the license change, and surrounding drama. There was nothing really "preventing" him from opening the exchange back up after the fix was put in place. This is considering that none of the other 4 exchanges had problems taking coins after the update. As for you thinking the cap was "retarded" is your opinion, which we can clearly see by the original post. yes it was retarded because it disallowed the biggest exchange from allowing deposits and withdrawals. CH has a quick turn around with his "updates" yet when they are released they make the system that much usable. That is retarded. Anyone who writes software should test it it thoroughly before public launch. Obviously in that case he was rushing. |
|
|
|
You left out the fact that CH fixed artfroz's exploit almost immediately.
You also forgot that that fix disabled DoubleC from opening his exchange. He released a broken update. Capping transactions sizes to 4KB was retarded. DoubleC refused to open the exchange because of the license change, and surrounding drama. There was nothing really "preventing" him from opening the exchange back up after the fix was put in place. This is considering that none of the other 4 exchanges had problems taking coins after the update. As for you thinking the cap was "retarded" is your opinion, which we can clearly see by the original post. Uhh no. When that update with the transaction cap was released it disabled DoubleC from allowing deposits and withdrawals. Get your facts straight. |
|
|
|
You left out the fact that CH fixed artfroz's exploit almost immediately.
You also forgot that that fix disabled DoubleC from opening his exchange. He released a broken update. Capping transactions sizes to 4KB was retarded. |
|
|
|
I'm thinking based on how blocks are generated with large sums of GH that when a pool opens with enough firepower any solo mining with a few GH will likely be in vain. Small solo miners will be forced to use a pool to get a small cut of the already small GG pie.  Interesting I think. |
|
|
|
|
Anyone notice how when the info pushes SC supporters into a corner they turn a deaf ear? Just look at this thread and see how often FlipPro chooses not to respond.
|
|
|
|
1. Released with a promising future.
2. Solidcoin market bubble pops.
3. Multiple versions of SC are released and CH touts it in forums.
4. CH releases article "Solidcoin Ready For Bitcoin Collapse".
LINK: http://solidcoin.info/solidcoin-ready-for-bitcoin-collapse.php
5. ArtForz makes CH aware of a transaction spam exploit.
6. CH ignores it or tells ArtForz to take a hike.
7. ArtForz performs the exploit exposing SC and bloating the size of the blockchain.
8. CH is infuriated and calls ArtForz a hacker for exploiting the vunerability.
9. CH admits in IRC that the article he release was merely propaganda to get a certain "impression" put upon readers.
10. New SC version with a new "solidcoin" license put into the original bitcoin code has been released.
11. DoubleC notes new license and decides to shutdown the largest Solidcoin exchange at the time.
12. BTCguild operator shutsdown largest solidcoin pool.
10. CH speaks with Gavin Andresen in IRC and labels Gavin as a "hacker supporter".
11. Moonco.in soaks up majority of solidcoin trading volume on its exchange.
12. Moonco.in goes down for a few days with no notice.
13. Moonco.in comes back up. "power outage" blamed upon last downtime.
14. BitcoinEXpress makes comments to attack/exploit solidcoin with time-travel method.
15. CH moves to shutdown solidcoin network immediately.
16. Mooco.in goes AWOL taking its users deposits with it.
17. Announcements of new SC version that uses CPUs as opposed to GPUs will be released.
I am sure I may have missed something here. Feel free to add it in.  Note: All of this has happened in the short 4-5 week history of solidcoin. Lots of drama I'd say.
|
|
|
|
The entire community was behind it. It's either that, BitcoinEx's attack.
More propeganda. Infact, SolidCoin24 (the last SC exchange now?) wanted to let it's customers decide which fork to support. RealSolid threatened to remove SC24 from the main website if SC24 didn't comply. "The entire community"? There was a 5hr notice. For a project that is supposed to be global, how is 5hrs enough time to poll "the entire community"? So the statement "The entire community was behind it " is blatantly false. Interesting how most SC supporters think they can speak 'for the entire community'. Only if it's rule with an iron fist. So let BitcoinX attack, steal everyone's money, and have the PR mess be even 10x worse huh? He was in emergency mode as far as I am concerned, and as a Solidcoin holder I and many others supported the move... And judging by the graphs I posted, there has been little resistance from the community. Even after he has touted how great solidcoin is and safe and secure it is? That is BS. You are starting to believe your own misinformation as well as his. EDIT: Why would the mainstream or anyone with a head on their shoulders invest into something that is so vulnerable to attacks, needs constant updates band-aids, and shuts down on a whim when the first mere threat of an attack come to pass.
What happens the next time another attack threat should surface? Restart block chain? Fork chain? Shutdown? |
|
|
|
The entire community was behind it. It's either that, BitcoinEx's attack.
More propeganda. Infact, SolidCoin24 (the last SC exchange now?) wanted to let it's customers decide which fork to support. RealSolid threatened to remove SC24 from the main website if SC24 didn't comply. "The entire community"? There was a 5hr notice. For a project that is supposed to be global, how is 5hrs enough time to poll "the entire community"? So the statement "The entire community was behind it " is blatantly false. Interesting how most SC supporters think they can speak 'for the entire community'. Only if it's ruled with an iron fist. +1 I saw this too. How do you explain this "solidcoin supporter"? |
|
|
|
As a matter of fact, "shutdown of solidcoin" was not successful. Which, incidentally, disproves the thesis that all of the community was behind it  Maybe I should rephrase the statement, and say the VAST majority of the community signed off. There is about 4gh's (4x6990s) at the moment mining, and these people have already been told those coins are irrelevant and won't be counted by anyone in the community. Get more info on the "hash power" here... http://solidcoin.kicks-ass.org/graphs/graphs.htmlWell once again your statement is false. I'll count them solidcoins valid. |
|
|
|
RS has taken most of the suggestions that have been given to him by the "real" solid coin community pretty seriously. He's not taking this "one man" approach as this post would like to make it seem. We have been in discussion in the solidcoin forum on how to seriously improve the currency so that it's perfect, and he has been pretty receptive. As far as him working by himself, that's not really something he can control. He is always open for help from others, and has stated numerous times that he would like to have a team, which is part of the reason why the "tax" is going into effect. Programmers don't like working for free you know  . The entire community was behind it. It's either that, BitcoinEx's attack. But I thought solidcoin was basically unbreakable by CH's own words. Apparently it will in version 2.0. But we all have to wait and see don't we . No. Just looking at his track record of failing and having to put band-aid after band-aid on it tells me he will do the same. |
|
|
|
As a matter of fact, "shutdown of solidcoin" was not successful. Which, incidentally, disproves the thesis that all of the community was behind it Good point: I still see blocks being generated. |
|
|
|
RS has taken most of the suggestions that have been given to him by the "real" solid coin community pretty seriously. He's not taking this "one man" approach as this post would like to make it seem. We have been in discussion in the solidcoin forum on how to seriously improve the currency so that it's perfect, and he has been pretty receptive. As far as him working by himself, that's not really something he can control. He is always open for help from others, and has stated numerous times that he would like to have a team, which is part of the reason why the "tax" is going into effect. Programmers don't like working for free you know . The entire community was behind it. It's either that, BitcoinEx's attack. But I thought solidcoin was basically unbreakable by CH's own words. |
|
|
|
RS has taken most of the suggestions that have been given to him by the "real" solid coin community pretty seriously. He's not taking this "one man" approach as this post would like to make it seem. We have been in discussion in the solidcoin forum on how to seriously improve the currency so that it's perfect, and he has been pretty receptive. As far as him working by himself, that's not really something he can control. He is always open for help from others, and has stated numerous times that he would like to have a team, which is part of the reason why the "tax" is going into effect. Programmers don't like working for free you know . |
|
|
|
Goxxed
Is that all you ever say? Yes, out of my 313 posts it's all I've ever said.  U mad bro? Another favorite saying of yours. Good job! You must love Mark that much to make a banner with his face. lol |
|
|
|
I'm wondering what a parallel processor can't do that a linear processor can.
I'm not buying it until I see some technical explaination as to why GPUs would not be viable for mining with a particular algorithm.
Please spare us your nonsense talk and give us technical details.
It's closed source so no one will know what the algorithm is so no one will be able to write a GPU miner ... Of course that is a load of crap, it's not hard to reverse engineer what it is doing and it only takes one person with a grudge and a small amount time to do this and destroy the network ... My only question is: will it be possible with a single rig? I have to agree with you there. reverse engineering software doesn't take long. Should be fun to watch/participate. |
|
|
|
Okay guys please book a hotel room and just get it over with.
No one wants to hear your drama.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm wondering what a parallel processor can't do that a linear processor can.
I'm not buying it until I see some technical explaination as to why GPUs would not be viable for mining with a particular algorithm.
Please spare us your nonsense talk and give us technical details.
|
|
|
|
a stall means lower prices to me. it says i do not want to buy btc at less then 5 and more then likely even 4.50 is too expensive.
usually tends to be the case I would agree with you if you said a stall after a rally would mean prices would go lower. This case we have gone from $12 to $4 and it is stalling...think there could be a $1 rebound to say $5.50? I think it is in order. Wait and see. |
|
|
|
a stall means lower prices to me. it says i do not want to buy btc at less then 5 and more then likely even 4.50 is too expensive.
Or their not sure sellers want to sell at such a low price too. Your argument looks at only one side. Good job! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
