Strange answers - not a word on the issue. Shouldn't fixing it be top priority? How about making the people whole that suffered because of your mistakes? Some would say we fix things too fast Wow. People are saying that? Links? I could swear I've read about this bug more than a month ago. And I'm no insider "constantly reviewing how the system works". you have not responded to the issue Chairman Larimer |
|
|
|
You can imagine how much we hate to see something like this happen to a loyal supporter. We are constantly reviewing how the system works and planning updates to optimize our selected parameters and policies as issues are identified. Unfortunately, there is no substitute for field testing a new system. That's why we publish warnings everywhere that this is still beta software and you should not invest more than you can afford to lose if something unexpected goes wrong. For example, this has been stickied at BitSharesTalk.org since last August: *GENERAL WARNING*As for the OPs list of disappointments, up until last fall, our policy had been to post everything we were working on, including partnerships we were pursuing and every other promising development (and setback). These were not "lies" or "broken promises", these were open insights into our hopes, dreams, visions, and ongoing pursuits. Everything that made us hopeful we shared, usually as soon as it happened. Sometimes promising leads don't pan out. We have pictures of our many hours of interactions with Kevin Harrington and our posts at the time made it clear that he was gracious, attentive and complementary but no commitments of any kind were made. Needless to say, because of the tendency of people to read our openly expressed reasons for optimism as "promises", we have stopped doing that. Since then our policy has been not to discuss things we are working on until they are near certainties. This, of course, drives other people nuts who complain that we are not as "open" as we used to be. You can certainly see what happens to the share price when we stop talking about all the exciting things that make us hopeful. <sigh> We continue to assure our supporters that we've got tons of great stuff in the near term pipeline. Unfortunately, because of painful results like this, that's all we can say (for now). You haven't said much of import for the OP. How do you intend to address this glaring problem with the system? |
|
|
|
|
I wonder if you even believe half the shit you post.
|
|
|
|
Dear Barwiti,
I am a shareholder of NRS fund, what happen to it? i was away for a while and I don't know what happened in between. I also have a backup of my wallet where I had NRS from april last year, can I use this backup with the latest wallet and what actually is the last wallet.
Please answer by questions!
Best Regards
Mirko
Here is the short of what happened, a few 1) one team member got grumpy after not getting rich quick and decided that they would hound and harass me and ruin my reputation. 2) i was the only one focused on the project meaning that we were paying people who weren't really into it. And some of you act oblivious, yet you ran head long investing into their side projects( ALL OF THEM PUMP AND DUMPS) yet you knew that was the same people meant to be leading development for NRS. 3) After the update, ALL the exchanges refused to update or just kept quiet until the network died 4) i got called away again 5) i came back again and tried to partner up with other groups, so we could share infrastructure and get off to a running start and guess what? Two *new (the accounts are new) developers went through this thread and others and decided that associating with me would not be the best thing. What is surprising is that your "Fund" had a lot of investors yet none really speak out for or against you with fact, while your explanation makes sense, i think i'll keep my distance until you can clear your name. So you tell me, why should i work alone on such a huge project, with a crowd that only wants to get rich quick without even considering what it is they are asking? Why should i now take time to re-build something that it's investors were unwilling to protect? Hell, if 5 of you had sent an email each to the exchanges supporting the switch to a new chain, it would have been done. But you didn't, basically this became a community of one with a ton of bag holders. You forget that i am the one who made the largest losses from this project. I lost a ton of BTC in that failed mining project, i lost a lot of time and my reputation was ruined. As if that is not enough, i have to post something like this to make you open your eyes. NRS was killed by these main factors :- exchanges not updating, a bad get rich now attitude and being reliant on one person (who we allow to be systematically trolled and buried in false accusations) and literally being trolled out of existence. Great work everyone!! Tell me, after having my name sullied like that , even if i created the altcoin of the century, would it gain any traction? I see many of you in your many adventures in crypto land and how you vehemently fight and protect clone coins with no ideas and obvious scams, yet you could not be bothered to help protect NRS something that had a tangible, attainable future. How do you feel when you see the ideas i expressed being used by other platforms now, how do you think i feel as the originator of some of the base code and general structures ? I'll admit , i dropped the ball a couple of times, but i was always, and still am willing to work, but i think it's also time that you people took stock of how you allowed this to happen and left me to deal with everything alone. I'm not even going to bother answering that absurd suggestion that i create altcoins and pup and dump. If that was really my style, would i have tried to keep NRB in the loop? Would i have bothered to respond here? Here's a tip, my NRS 2.0 node is still up yet it has zero connections, that tells me that your complaints are hollow. Keep your NRS wallet. |
|
|
|
|
This thread is now hard to follow
|
|
|
|
|
Soehow i think it's bad news for the little guy.
|
|
|
|
It’s significant to this debate that Darkcoin had ring signatures on its roadmap and decided against implementing them (for now) because of adverse practical issues associated with their use - in particular the bloat problem. DRK's solution is also O(n) in size and thus has the same relative amount of bloat, as I stated earlier in the thread... The only real reason I can see that DRK stuck to their CoinJoin model was because so much effort had already been made into writing a method of trying to decentralize CoinJoins, and because implementing ring signatures is a giant pain in the ass (you need to keep track of a whole separate database where you keep outputs of the same age in order of their incidence in the blockchain, for one). Hmm, but the question is can a transaction be traced? I have heard that SDC tried to apply ring signatures, how does their bloat compare? |
|
|
|
You cannot argue logic with people that have an agenda, they are bag holders and will argue with every fallacy they can squirm into. I can't believe you guys have the patience to deal with these fools, let them sink when their ship does. It makes no difference in the end anyway.  Maybe if your dev wasn't in here arguing about petty things XMR might see some progress. If you haven't noticed, Evan hasn't been in here arguing. I think that shows the work ethic of both of them.  NOW this is amusing! EVAN is the ONE person who should be in this thread! He did address the claimed issue. You mean where he posted It's random this and random that and you can never unravel it so go ahead and do it? Let me let you in on a little secret, IT is IMPOSSIBLE for a computer to generate anything random except a fire maybe.  What he should be doing is answering posts like this. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10683089#msg10683089AND especially this! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10684983#msg10684983You are intentionally using misleading statements and it's no surprise that you would refer to posts by an open supporter of XMR, and we alll know the disgusting habits of XMR supporters. Let me correct you before you think you can get away with what is tantamount to a lie IT is IMPOSSIBLE for a computer to generate anything random except a fire maybe. Several computational methods for random number generation exist. Many fall short of the goal of true randomness — though they may meet, with varying success, some of the statistical tests for randomness intended to measure how unpredictable their results are (that is, to what degree their patterns are discernible). In response to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10683089#msg10683089let me pose you an interesting concept-- "The proof is in the pudding" Many a so called developer have written proofs and whitepapers, yet very few came through with an actual product. The OP conceded defeat in his original hypothesis and has returned to the drawing board. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=978447.msg10684983#msg10684983Now that is sheer desperation. This thread was made buy a guy who jumped the gun, and was proven wrong. Leave it to XMR fanboys to turn it into a discussion about difficulty and emissions.  |
|
|
|
Less than 30% of crypto users are subject to american law. Then consider the massive exodus of crypto- related business to more viable nations. Do keep in mind that America is pretty high on the majority of the globe's shit list on digital matters at the moment. They'll either meet very little compliance, or outright resistance. |
|
|
|
|
BTS is in trouble, and unless something radical happens it's going to keep taking hits and die.
Lucky we sold out early
|
|
|
|
I normally stay well clear of these debates, for obvious reasons, but I do get frustrated when I see well-articulated responses from people who are clearly intelligent advocating this obviously broken architecture, mostly through much hand-waving and placating each other.
Masternodes have to be available and connected to in real time in order to be used. Mixing is based entirely on their availability. Thus, in order to control a substantial number of masternodes one merely has to own a handful, and make the rest of the masternode network unreachable.
For even a script-kiddie-level attacker these techniques and funds are easily found.
Need to render 1100 masternodes unreachable? No problem - SNMP amplification attacks will let you use a handful of boxes to amplify the bandwidth under your control. When a datacenter sees a clear flood of traffic for a particular IP address at the datacenter their response is always automatic and the same - their upstream data provider blackholes that IP address at the upstream bordergate. This means that you can use SNMP or DNS amplification attacks to render a dedicated machine (never mind a VPS) inoperable and unreachable to the outside world.
The most critical take away for you today is that this problem is unsolvable at the userland level. In other words, no matter how much dev worship there is there isn't a magical line of code that can be written that can prevent amplification attacks from devices and servers that are unrelated to and unconnected to the Darkcoin network. It is something that cannot be controlled or influenced.
The solution would literally be for Darkcoin to scrap masternodes and go back to the proverbial drawing board to find an architecture that uses passive blockchain mixing or similar, but I suspect it is too late and there are too many stubborn heads for that.
The problem I see with this is. Say there are 1,240 master nodes on the network. Lets say they are each feeding off a 1Gb pipe In order to take out 1,240 masternodes you would need at least 1,240Gbps sustained ddos attack. Pretty hard to pull off You would also have to own a few masternodes to pull off the attack. Therefore making an sizeable investment. And then attempting to destory the value of that investment Your essentially saying the bitcoin network is just as vulnerable. If thats the case you could ddos 1,240 pools and gain 51% hashing power. Its just not as easy as your making it seem I dont think do you really think so? If someone wanted to destroy darkcoin's anonymity to say, catch someone whos engaging in illegal activity, then they(law enforcement) would probably have no issue ddosing all the masternodes, and what makes it even easier is that all the masternode's ip's are in the open. There are currently too many barriers for this kind of attack to even make sense. Even governments have spending oversight (lax as it is) I'd like to see the agent in charge try to explain expenditure in the 10 million range , just to catch one or three traders of 50k worth of DRK. |
|
|
|
|
Working with the BCR dev, it is not a trivial thing to overhaul the entire PoS codebase. All other PoS coins are still using 2012-2013 code. Based off ~ 0.7- 0.8 bitcoin source. We've done ost of the work, but some parts require auditing by an experienced outsider. If anyone wishes to see the code i can give you a link to the copy. (it's got dirty hacks though)
|
|
|
|
|
Quite simply, unless the BTC price falls to 0.0001 and the cost of spinning up enough fire power to destroy the network becomes negligible, this simply wont happen.
The cost currently and probably alway will outweigh the benefits. If you wish to argue anonymity and some of the bad decisions , then yeah maybe you could prove something. The rest is just nonsense.
|
|
|
|
You are planning to use the original September snapshot, correct?
Yes, I am. Every coin has PoS and i am trying to make things interesting How come there is always an anticlimax after your promises? Promises, promises... and so another week of waiting in vain on the spectacular outcome of all these promises has faded away in a slowly fading echo: promises... promises... promises... I'm sorry and ya'll probably tired of waiting but since i started talking to bitcreditscc we've been flip flopping around on a few items. The most pressing issue was a codebase for NRS that was more than just a coin. but due to pressure we are just releasing as is. then later on we can add more to it. It's not so easy to come up with something useable nowadays and i am especially disappointing that we won't be porting PoS to the latest Bitcoin source, but BCR has been having problems with it that i think would be more pronounced in a PoS structure. So for now, we have NRS with messaging and all the stuff from before. I already have a working copy, just re-writing how i add your balances. |
|
|
|
You are planning to use the original September snapshot, correct?
Yes, I am. Every coin has PoS and i am trying to make things interesting |
|
|
|
|
Among the so called 2.0 projects, only BTS has gone that far, so yeah props for that. The rest of the arguments are pretty much political and based on opinions not fact..
|
|
|
|
My coins are still stuck on polo.....none of the wallet links are working for me either. Are my coins lost? Is there a functioning wallet I can download?  I am going to pressure the exchanges to follow new developments as they occur. We will find a way to get your coins so long as it does not upset the balance of the snapshot. |
|
|
|
I came to this thread by searching for current NRB status. What is with NRB now? Is it dead? Is it somehow part of NRS?
Yes, NRS and NRB have been merged into one. We had a failed launch in september and are now looking into a relaunch. So why is it possible to buy NRB and NRS on Cryptsy? It is useless right? That was one of the key failing points, they did not update to new version. as a result any trades made there are unsupported by me . |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
