Рад видеть вашу активность здесь. Обет молчания здесь по юридическим соображениям снят?
Тема вроде опять начала проявлять активность, но как-то хило. Вот - решил чуть помочь Крипту. |
|
|
|
отшутиться: Dominik Schiener [1:31 PM]
between 2017 - 2020 Тут одна птичка прощебетала, что CFB и Yassin запустили нелегальную биржу в Слэке и дерут три шкуры с трейдеров, а Dominik имеет с этого откат и не заинтересован в быстром запуске на других биржах. |
|
|
|
How is that even possible I wonder...if tne number of confirmations can do a reversal what is considered save?
Maybe a glitch of BlockChain.Info wallet? |
|
|
|
It disappeared and it took with it the gadgets that were generated with the coin which frankly was the coin's sole purpose. Roughly correct?
No idea, just asking because I haven't heard anything from them for long time and their social media activity is at zero level. |
|
|
|
Does anyone know if GadgetCoin is still being developed? After altcoinUK disappeared I lost the last link to it. |
|
|
|
What IoT platforms do you know, if any?
Laughable response,  Hm, I wanted to make sure you understood what you were talking about. Judging by your reply, you have no clue at all and are just trolling. So I'm banning you from this thread. All further posts will be deleted. |
|
|
|
If the user waits that the transaction is final, he cannot be defrauded.
In your example, you isolate the merchant from the real network and feed him with a fake branch. The merchant will accept your units and add them to his version of the DAG, but since there are no witness-authored units on your branch, it will not move the stability point forward and your double-spent payment will stay unconfirmed for as long as your attack continues. Number of nodes is totally irrelevant, it is the presence of witnesses what makes a branch real.
Great, I hope now SatoNatomato sees why IOTA couldn't use the same method of peer discovery. |
|
|
|
This explains why there is no a protection against an eclipse attack, which can be conducted if a naive peer discovery is used (which is the case of Byteball, I noticed this trying to recover byteballs of my friend). In IOTA necessity to talk to people is an anti-Sybil measure. Poor SatoNatomato doesn't understand all these nuances, I suggest to forgive his childishness.
For the record, peer discovery is irrelevant to consensus in Byteball. Even if Sybiled, a node cannot select a wrong branch, by design. The worst that can happen to a node while it is Sybiled, is that the node will stay stuck at some old point on the DAG, as if it were offline. CfB if you want to reply, IOTA thread is not the best place for in-depth discussion of Byteball, post to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.0. This is an attack that came to my mind while I was reading the source code trying to get what "device ID" was for: The whitepaper says: There is no partial order between them. In this case, we accept both. We establish a total order between the units later on, when they are buried deep enough under newer units (see below how we do it). The one that appears earlier on the total order is deemed valid, while the other is deemed invalid. In normal use, people mostly link their new units to slightly less recent units, meaning that the DAG grows only in one direction. The former allows to trick a user into believing that he received coins (if we can censor the traffic). The latter allows to make the others extend a branch we need (if we can (to some extent) censor the global traffic). Imagine that I have poisoned the network and 90% of the nodes (not physical machines, just IPs) are controlled by me. What stops me from scamming a merchant in such way: 1. Issue a payment to the merchant and a payment to myself with "no partial order between them" 2. Make the others to prioritize the payment to myself (the branch with the payment to merchants will be extend too and this is the only transactions the merchant will see) 3. Get the purchased item delivered 4. Stop the attack, my payment is already considered as a part of the main chain, let the merchant to see that his payment is not. |
|
|
|
Please do tell, which IoT platforms does Iota currently run on?
What IoT platforms do you know, if any? |
|
|
|
And byteball has, just like most other cryptocurrencies...
You know that Byteball is not marketed as a decentralized cryptocurrency, don't you? |
|
|
|
May be he is Satoshi Nakamoto  We have a lot of suspects. Maybe |
|
|
|
Good point Come-from-Beyond. An other Topic: You know BCNext as well and at the very beginning I was thinking, after reading the Byteball Whitepaper, it could be him (Tony declined this later)
What do you think?
I think tonych is not BCNext. |
|
|
|
I’m not a very good technical expert, but I think at the moment there are running 12 „Witness-Nodes“ and they are saving the Network. At the moment they are hosted by developer Tony in the Future it should be de-centralized and you can chose them in your wallet.
So at the moment the Network is not fully decentralized.
This explains why there is no a protection against an eclipse attack, which can be conducted if a naive peer discovery is used (which is the case of Byteball, I noticed this trying to recover byteballs of my friend). In IOTA necessity to talk to people is an anti-Sybil measure. Poor SatoNatomato doesn't understand all these nuances, I suggest to forgive his childishness. |
|
|
|
BYTEBALL https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859 doesnt have the dumb problem of finding other nodes by using proprietary slack service to talk to people and then a month later fail to have a working node because people shut off their "nodes" for a while. How did Byteball solve this dumb problem? |
|
|
|
That is how most alt-coins work, its just that "premine them all", or at least 16million would take you 9 years or more.
If you have 1 BTC we could bet that I can generate 16M clone-bitcoins much faster... |
|
|
|
Just 2 questions: - Where did you get your Master of Jurisprudence degree? - Was it legal advice? |
|
|
|
Sucessful companies that are worth hundreds of millions of dollars and have proven temselves over time, not some experimental niche token. And usually these companies are seen as future major competitors so they buy them out to get rid of the future competiton.
Time to fly back down to earth and realize the business world runs on a different level.
You were banned from this thread for trolling long time ago. I have deleted your post, nothing personal, just business. |
|
|
|
You guys claimed, that BMW only sells cars. But its not...
Accessories are sold because it's a part of marketing, often they are sold with a loss, to compensate the loss main products have higher prices. |
|
|
|
No, it doesn't prove your point. Start from addressing "There is a reason why companies prefer to buy other companies instead of running their own competing departments". |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
