[POLL] Does EVAN DUFFIELD regret instamining DRK/DASH at 100x emission?

[spatula]

Broke with convention ROFL. Is that code for deceitfully misled people about the launch time so he could get more for himself or what?

I guess you are voting for he doesnt regret it with a comment like that.

So your saying Evan should have done a more "conventional" launch like monero where you released a scam miner to public?

Smooth, I like monero, but you are doing it no favors by constantly throwing mud.

[BlockaFett]

just wow.  why the f*ck so many Monero threads accusing Dash of being an "instamine scam" when all this is coming out and Monero devs released a "funky" miner and then deny knowing about it which 'proves its not a scam!!!!' lol....

Smooth...

where can I find full explanation of this from your devs?  And where is a code review showing what the code was and how you took it out?

If it's true that you didn't know, surely you were thorough in handling it and explaining like the Dash dev was here: https://dashtalk.org/threads/the-birth-of-darkcoin.162/  where is the information?

^ and my on topic point is basically you have your own (proven!!!) scam and are attacking your competitor dev with same accusation constituting a massive conflict of interest and therefore negating any credibility in your involvement here.

EDIT:  I got a new Monero value proposition:

Monero - Proven Scam Launch™

(don't worry Smooth, not like I would go around saying this like you do.  But handy to have to remind you of your own scams next time you are accusing Dash of being a scam )

[Prosperityforall]

just wow.  why the f*ck so many Monero threads accusing Dash of being an "instamine scam" when all this is coming out and Monero devs released a "funky" miner and then deny knowing about it which 'proves its not a scam!!!!' lol....

Smooth...

where can I find full explanation of this from your devs?  And where is a code review showing what the code was and how you took it out?

If it's true that you didn't know, surely you were thorough in handling it and explaining like the Dash dev was here: https://dashtalk.org/threads/the-birth-of-darkcoin.162/  where is the information?

^ and my on topic point is basically you have your own (proven!!!) scam and are attacking your competitor dev with same accusation constituting a massive conflict of interest and therefore negating any credibility in your involvement here.

EDIT:  I got a new Monero value proposition:

Monero - Proven Scam Launch™

(don't worry Smooth, not like I would go around saying this like you do.  But handy to have to remind you of your own scams next time you are accusing Dash of being a scam )

What Evan Duffield said there goes against what actually happened, you expect anyone with a IQ over 10 to believe that paragraph of bullcrap?

When Dash/Darkcoin/Xcoin was originally launched a ton of hashpower was thrown at it, and this was during it's instamine. Coincidentally as soon as the instamine ended with over 2million coins being mined and at least 300k going to Evan himself, was when "Evan fixed the block reward glitch", or rather when he felt like he instamined enough coins Mind you, all of that mining was done when there were no Windows wallets, and Evan himself was the only one able to mine for a period of time as well. There goes any chance of you saying it was likely an accident, as if it was, then Evan would have relaunched the coin. But, he didn't because for a while he was the only one able to mine as the miner werent working for everyone else. That' what we call a instamine scam.

Then to make sure that he got the full value of that scam instamine, he make a obscure poll and decided to slice the max coin supply from 80million to 20million, therefore making his instamine coins instantly much more valuable.

No such thing or anything even remotely similar happened With Monero. The most Monero had was a unoptimized miner that was released by Thankful-for-Today who was kicked out of the now 7 member dev team. None of the Monero devs were devs at the time of Monero's release, so everything anyone is saying against Monero is false or blatant trolling. Monero never had a instamine where it's core features were changed, and definitely never displayed the fraudelent, scam-like behavior that Dash's developer did.


Comparing Dash and Monero in that regard is like comparing apples and oranges.
The end.

[coins101]

EDIT:  I got a new Monero value proposition:

Monero - Proven Scam Launch™

(don't worry Smooth, not like I would go around saying this like you do.  But handy to have to remind you of your own scams next time you are accusing Dash of being a scam )

@OP, now the truth is starting to surface, please consider adding:

Does Monero regret not relaunching after a week of scam mining?

[Prosperityforall]

The reason why it wasn't relaunched was because a lot of users on this forum had already begun mining and buying/selling coins. I remember seeing the first OTC-thread where Moneros were being sold and bought for pennies. The worst thing that happened to Monero was an unoptimized miner, which has nothing to do with the coin's core code and has nothing to do with Monero's current dev team. Unlike Dash, where it's entire core code was sliced and diced to the enormous benefit of it's scam developer Evan Duffield and co.

If you want to rate the fishiness that happened in each coin.

Monero's "fishiness" level in a court of law would be maybe, at most, a 2/10 as everything(Only one thing and that's the unoptimized miner) is to blame on the Thankful-for-Today character. Dash's "fishiness" level would be a 10/10 and grounds for immediate investigation.

[coins101]

The reason why it wasn't relaunched was because a lot of users on this forum had already begun mining and buying/selling coins. I remember seeing the first OTC-thread where Moneros were being sold and bought for pennies. The worst thing that happened to Monero was an unoptimized miner, which has nothing to do with the coin's core code and has nothing to do with Monero's current dev team. Unlike Dash, where it's entire core code was sliced and diced to the enormous benefit of it's scam developer Evan Duffield and co.

If you want to rate the fishiness that happened in each coin.

Monero's "fishiness" level in a court of law would be maybe, at most, a 2/10 as everything(Only one thing and that's the unoptimized miner) is to blame on the Thankful-for-Today character. Dash's "fishiness" level would be a 10/10 and grounds for immediate investigation.

The reason why it wasn't relaunched was because a lot of users on this forum had already begun mining and buying/selling coins.

We know its a scam, but we're all part of it, so let's carry on. lol

The worst thing that happened to Monero was an unoptimized miner, which has nothing to do with the coin's core code

This sounds like it was a little more than just the miner that was crippled:

"My strong belief is that the skepticism was warranted: Here's the original slow-hash from bytecoin as it was copied into Bitmonero.  It has some doozies.  For example, on line 100, you might note that for every iteration through an inner loop repeated tens of thousands of times, the AES key is re-imported into the library.  The later loop, starting on line 113, is repeated half a million times, and is so abstracted through lots of memcpys and pointer manipulation it's hard to tell that all it really does is one round of AES encryption, a pointer dereference into a random scratchpad, a 64 bit multiplication, and another pointer dereference.  Phew.  This original code was roughly 50x slower than my final optimized code, and could have easily been used to fake two years of blockchain data on a single computer or a small cluster.  I'm pretty sure that's what happened.

Bitmonero was a fork of Bytecoin designed to not have the 80% premine.  But its initial developer either didn't know, didn't care, or wanted to profit from the de-optimized hashing. "

Source:
http://da-data.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/minting-money-with-monero-and-cpu.html

Reference to bitmonero (name since changed to Monero) github scam code:
https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/blob/1a8f5ce89a990e54ec757affff01f27d449640bc/src/crypto/slow-hash.c


Monero's "fishiness" level in a court of law would be maybe, at most, a 2/10

Another admission of guilt. Thanks for your honesty, Prosperityforall - indeed.

[Prosperityforall]

I continue to troll  

Again, you've pointed out the only "flaw" that had nothing to do with Monero's current dev team. It's not anything more than a deoptimized miner, that's all it was, a deoptimized miner, and your quote proves it. So exactly where are you trying to go?

Are you seriously trying to compare a coin(Monero) that had a deoptimized miner by it's former developer, and of whom none of the current developers are associated with, to a coin(Dash/Darkcoin) that had all it's core parameters, block reward and max coin supply sliced and diced after an extreme, fraudelent instamine of 2million coins in 2 days on a Linux only release, and to which for a period of time only the then and current developer, Evan Duffield was able to mine at all?

I hope you're joking for your sake, or you dearly need a big glass of #logic. When/if crypto were to/will get regulated, scam currencies like Dash would be the first to get investigated.
 

Also, to further mention just how clueless you are. You've posted a link to a thread to which one of the big miners during that time admited to selling all his Moneros that he mined. You do realize that's an extremely good thing, don't you? It means that the effects of Monero's unoptimized miner has been negated since the miners who mined at that time sold all their coins i.e Monero's distribution is astroundingly good.

Your developer Evan Duffield likely still has his coins, and no account of any selling of any large magnitude was recorded by him. In fact, there are still addresses with 100,000s (hundreds of thousands) of coins that are connected to Dash's instamine: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/dash/wallet.dws?559582.htm

So it seems that one of the big instaminers/developers of Dash/Darkcoin still hold 11% of the coin supply. What a lovely distribution /s.

As I told you before, this will only lead to further investigation done on Dash's scam, instamined beginnings, all of which point to it being premeditated. The slicing of the block reward, obscure poll vote as shown by you to slice the coin supply, release on linux only, broken miner for a time where only the developer could have mined, and more show just how fraudelent Dash really is.

[coins101]

.... had nothing to do with Monero's current dev team. It's not anything more than a deoptimized miner, that's all it was, a deoptimized miner, and your quote proves it.

There was a fraud, you all keep admitting it but somehow try to push it under the rug.



Monero devs didn't stop, fix, relaunch. Now you all have to own the provable Monero scam launch.

I'm going to put you on ignore now. I just remembered, I'm not trying to attack Monero investors or even the Monero trolls that are just following by example.

But thanks for owning up 

[coins101]

Here is the scam code, lets not try to hide it anymore:

Here we go loopty loo.

Code:

Skip to content
Sign up Sign in This repository
Explore
Features
Enterprise
Blog
 Watch 35  Star 66  Fork 80 monero-project/bitmonero
 tree: 1a8f5ce89a  bitmonero/src/crypto/slow-hash.c
Antonio Juarez on Mar 3, 2014 moved all stuff to github
0 contributors
RawBlameHistory    154 lines (135 sloc)  4.561 kb
// Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The Cryptonote developers
// Distributed under the MIT/X11 software license, see the accompanying
// file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.

#include <assert.h>
#include <stddef.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <string.h>

#include "common/int-util.h"
#include "hash-ops.h"
#include "oaes_lib.h"

static void (*const extra_hashes[4])(const void *, size_t, char *) = {
  hash_extra_blake, hash_extra_groestl, hash_extra_jh, hash_extra_skein
};

#define MEMORY         (1 << 21) /* 2 MiB */
#define ITER           (1 << 20)
#define AES_BLOCK_SIZE  16
#define AES_KEY_SIZE    32 /*16*/
#define INIT_SIZE_BLK   8
#define INIT_SIZE_BYTE (INIT_SIZE_BLK * AES_BLOCK_SIZE)

static size_t e2i(const uint8_t* a, size_t count) { return (*((uint64_t*)a) / AES_BLOCK_SIZE) & (count - 1); }

static void mul(const uint8_t* a, const uint8_t* b, uint8_t* res) {
  uint64_t a0, b0;
  uint64_t hi, lo;

  a0 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)a)[0]);
  b0 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)b)[0]);
  lo = mul128(a0, b0, &hi);
  ((uint64_t*)res)[0] = SWAP64LE(hi);
  ((uint64_t*)res)[1] = SWAP64LE(lo);
}

static void sum_half_blocks(uint8_t* a, const uint8_t* b) {
  uint64_t a0, a1, b0, b1;

  a0 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)a)[0]);
  a1 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)a)[1]);
  b0 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)b)[0]);
  b1 = SWAP64LE(((uint64_t*)b)[1]);
  a0 += b0;
  a1 += b1;
  ((uint64_t*)a)[0] = SWAP64LE(a0);
  ((uint64_t*)a)[1] = SWAP64LE(a1);
}

static void copy_block(uint8_t* dst, const uint8_t* src) {
  memcpy(dst, src, AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
}

static void swap_blocks(uint8_t* a, uint8_t* b) {
  size_t i;
  uint8_t t;
  for (i = 0; i < AES_BLOCK_SIZE; i++) {
    t = a[i];
    a[i] = b[i];
    b[i] = t;
  }
}

static void xor_blocks(uint8_t* a, const uint8_t* b) {
  size_t i;
  for (i = 0; i < AES_BLOCK_SIZE; i++) {
    a[i] ^= b[i];
  }
}

#pragma pack(push, 1)
union cn_slow_hash_state {
  union hash_state hs;
  struct {
    uint8_t k[64];
    uint8_t init[INIT_SIZE_BYTE];
  };
};
#pragma pack(pop)

void cn_slow_hash(const void *data, size_t length, char *hash) {
  uint8_t long_state[MEMORY];
  union cn_slow_hash_state state;
  uint8_t text[INIT_SIZE_BYTE];
  uint8_t a[AES_BLOCK_SIZE];
  uint8_t b[AES_BLOCK_SIZE];
  uint8_t c[AES_BLOCK_SIZE];
  uint8_t d[AES_BLOCK_SIZE];
  size_t i, j;
  uint8_t aes_key[AES_KEY_SIZE];
  OAES_CTX* aes_ctx;

  hash_process(&state.hs, data, length);
  memcpy(text, state.init, INIT_SIZE_BYTE);
  memcpy(aes_key, state.hs.b, AES_KEY_SIZE);
  aes_ctx = oaes_alloc();
  for (i = 0; i < MEMORY / INIT_SIZE_BYTE; i++) {
    for (j = 0; j < INIT_SIZE_BLK; j++) {
      oaes_key_import_data(aes_ctx, aes_key, AES_KEY_SIZE);
      oaes_pseudo_encrypt_ecb(aes_ctx, &text[AES_BLOCK_SIZE * j]);
      /*memcpy(aes_key, &text[AES_BLOCK_SIZE * j], AES_KEY_SIZE);*/
      memcpy(aes_key, state.hs.b, AES_KEY_SIZE);
    }
    memcpy(&long_state[i * INIT_SIZE_BYTE], text, INIT_SIZE_BYTE);
  }

  for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
    a[i] = state.k[     i] ^ state.k[32 + i];
    b[i] = state.k[16 + i] ^ state.k[48 + i];
  }

  for (i = 0; i < ITER / 2; i++) {
    /* Dependency chain: address -> read value ------+
     * written value <-+ hard function (AES or MUL) <+
     * next address  <-+
     */
    /* Iteration 1 */
    j = e2i(a, MEMORY / AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
    copy_block(c, &long_state[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE]);
    oaes_encryption_round(a, c);
    xor_blocks(b, c);
    swap_blocks(b, c);
    copy_block(&long_state[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE], c);
    assert(j == e2i(a, MEMORY / AES_BLOCK_SIZE));
    swap_blocks(a, b);
    /* Iteration 2 */
    j = e2i(a, MEMORY / AES_BLOCK_SIZE);
    copy_block(c, &long_state[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE]);
    mul(a, c, d);
    sum_half_blocks(b, d);
    swap_blocks(b, c);
    xor_blocks(b, c);
    copy_block(&long_state[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE], c);
    assert(j == e2i(a, MEMORY / AES_BLOCK_SIZE));
    swap_blocks(a, b);
  }

  memcpy(text, state.init, INIT_SIZE_BYTE);
  for (i = 0; i < MEMORY / INIT_SIZE_BYTE; i++) {
    for (j = 0; j < INIT_SIZE_BLK; j++) {
      /*oaes_key_import_data(aes_ctx, &long_state[i * INIT_SIZE_BYTE + j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE], AES_KEY_SIZE);*/
      oaes_key_import_data(aes_ctx, &state.hs.b[32], AES_KEY_SIZE);
      xor_blocks(&text[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE], &long_state[i * INIT_SIZE_BYTE + j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE]);
      oaes_pseudo_encrypt_ecb(aes_ctx, &text[j * AES_BLOCK_SIZE]);
    }
  }
  memcpy(state.init, text, INIT_SIZE_BYTE);
  hash_permutation(&state.hs);
  /*memcpy(hash, &state, 32);*/
  extra_hashes[state.hs.b[0] & 3](&state, 200, hash);
  oaes_free(&aes_ctx);
}
Status API Training Shop Blog About
© 2015 GitHub, Inc. Terms Privacy Security Contact

So while those that could mine were pushing their cpu's at full throttle to get 1 or 2 blocks a day, one or more others effectively had ASICs style hashing by comparison.

'Here, use this miner everyone. Its the standard build.'  <Scam launch code>

But apparently, its no biggie. lol

[smooth]

Here is the scam code, lets not try to hide it anymore:

Antonio Juarez on Mar 3, 2014 moved all stuff to github

Exactly, this is the Bytecoin developer. Last touched long before Monero was launched. There is no evidence that TFT (the original dev of Monero) ever looked at it or know about it. It is certainly proven (from that blame) that no one touched it since Bytecoin.

Since you apparently don't understand how git works, you just went ahead and presented evidence (not conclusive, of course) against your claim of involvement by Monero. Nice.

Same applies to anyone else besides TFT until NoodleDoodle found it, fixed it, and released the fix.

Please stop thread derailing though. This thread is about Evan instamining Dash.

To keep things on topic, I guess we should go ahead and pull up the code in dash's git that created 2 million extra coins in the first day or (500 coins per block, when the correct reward was far lower) and see who get the "blame" for that one?

[coins101]

This thread is about smearing Evan.

And as it turns out, its also about comparing the objective Monero scam launch package with a subjective attack.

Let's not hide the truth anymore about the Monero Scam Launch, so easily fixed by just stopping, fixing and relaunching.

Now, where have I heard that before?

[Prosperityforall]

I do not know what Objective and Subjective means

Thankful-for-Today releasing an unoptimized miner is Subjective, there's a chance it may have been incompetance since it was forked code from Bytecoin(therefore all the things from Bytecoin including the unoptimized miner was transferred on). Since no direct changes were made to the coin's parameters that resulted in any obvious benefit to miners, then it isn't objective. Not to mention all the mining done there was considered negated since the big miners sold all their coins as shown by the link you've posted yourself. You seem extremely clueless on what actually happened in the beginning's of both coins, mr coins101.

Dash's instamine is objective, it's actual features were changed for no reason(especially the max coin supply) and the only explanation is that it was intended to further enrich the early instaminers.

If you haven't read this, go ahead. I hope you enjoy 11% of your coin supply being owned by one of those instaminers as well.

I am clueless thereofore I continue to troll

So you continue to resort to blatant trolling, also while Thankful-for-today releasing an unoptimized miner is a bad thing, it's not fraud. If you wish to get technical, the code was forked from Bytecoin and the subsequent miner was as well. The fork was performed by Thankful-for-today, who was kicked out of any leadership positions by now the 7 person Monero dev team. Having an unoptimized miner is immoral, but not fraudelent as though the probability is more likely that it was released on purpose, there is still a small chance it was Thankful-for-Today's incompetance that resulted in it as well. Then to get in even further, the effects of the Thankful-for-Today character releasing that miner was negatated, or proved worthless, as the biggest miners at the time sold all the coins that they mined.

There you have it, there is absolutely nothing that can be said against Monero's past withstanding at this moment. The early coins were all sold off as shown in that link you posted and the many many OTC trades and exchange trades.

Unlike Dash, where one of the original instaminers still own 11% of the entire coin supply as shown here: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/dash/wallet.dws?559582.htm . Your beloved Dash is a scam, I know it's hard to accept the truth. But you trolling and trying to downplay it isn't doing you any justice, it's just giving me the motive to continue digging deeper for more incriminating evidence in the Dash instamine scam.

So far as I've told you a 'million times'. Evan Duffield released Dash with Linux only miners, mined over 2million Dash with a few others, sliced and diced the block reward many times over, then released an obscure(Highly likely sockpuppet infested) poll, where they then proceeded to cut the max coin supply from 80million to 20million. And again, for a period of time, Evan Duffield was the only person able to mine Dash as the public miner wasnt working.

Comparing Monero and Dash is like comparing apples and oranges again. The math behind Dash(Block Reward and max coin supply) were manually changed by it's developer, Evan Duffield, resulting in an enormous benefit to instaminers/developer himself. That cannot be compared to Monero's unoptimized miner, which had no effect at all on Monero's core features and no obvious attempt to enrich early miners. In court TFT would probably be able to play the incompetance card, as he did no change to Monero's core features that would have resulted in an obvious attempt to enrich early miners, which is exactly what Evan Duffield did to Dash.

Dash is a scam, it is irrefutable. As I said before, if/when crypto becomes regulated currencies like Dash will be the absolute first to be investigated for extreme fraudelent actiivity, Good Luck.

EDIT: There's even more to the Dash instamine story, it seems Evan Duffield actually released Dash before it's intended release date, so Dash's instamine could be compared to a premine. Wow, this scam just keeps getting juicer.

[smooth]

This thread is about smearing Evan.

There is no smear unless the statements are untrue.

Which statements are untrue? Did he release code (after he was asked to take his time and fix it) that had bugs creating extra coins, and then keep those coins? Did he post misleading statements about the launch time? Did he mine himself during the first hours of the instamine? Did he cut the supply by 75% later?

The answers are all yes, and all of these are well documented.

You're just upset because you don't like the reality of it and for whatever reason you have committed yourself emotionally to a coin regardless of the horribly shady behavior of its developer (described above), so you lash out at Monero.

It doesn't help justify Evan's actions. I wonder if he regrets those actions.

[Brilliantrocket]

Despite what the detractors on this thread say, I like Evan far more than any other coin dev. He has the balls to do what needs to be done to bring profits to investors. I'll take profits over whatever the Monero guys are selling, thanks.

[paratox]

Is it really that hard to read the topic title and post ontopic stuff? There is a dedicated thread about the "Monero Scam" so please go there if you want to criticise monero.

This thread is about the "X11/DRK/DASH instamine".

I think we all can agree that the way this coin launched was at least questionable.

Does Evan regret it? I honestly don't think so.
Is he a scammer? I don't think so.
Was he greedy? How he handled the launch make it appear so.

What is done is done. It's his creation, so it was his decision how to handle the situation. If it was the right or wrong thing to do, doesn't really matter now. More important is, his actions reflect his personality. Some may say he acted in a devious way, some may say he was just incompetent,  some think it was acceptable that he gave himself an advantage.

Each of these views a equally valid.

If people want to support this coin, they generally inform themselves about the people behind it. If they deem the developer as support worthy, it's their rightful choice to make.

You cannot impose your believes of what is good and what is bad onto others. That will never work.  You can try to make people think about it by bringing arguments to the table, like some people did in the case of the DRK. Arguments which are supported by evidence everyone can see. It may help some people who are in the process of forming their opinion. But someone who already has decided, wont change their mind most of the time.

The point I am trying to bring across is, that people are drawn to the things which are compatible to their own mindset. What that exactly means in the case of the "X11/DRK/DASH instamine" is your guess.

Personally, I have a hard time to identify myself with Evans personality/behaviour/views, that's why I don't support him and his creation.


 

[Prosperityforall]

Despite what the detractors on this thread say, I like Evan far more than any other coin dev. He has the balls to do what needs to be done to bring profits to investors. I'll take profits over whatever the Monero guys are selling, thanks.

Short term or 'long term'? If you believe crypto has any chance of succeeding post this bitcointalk forum, then your view on "doing what needs to be done to bring profits to investors" such as premining or instamining won't look good in the eyes of the average person, especially since the founder of cryptocurrencies, Satoshi Nakamoto, has publically stated in one of his posts about how things such as block reward, coin supply, and others that compromise the coins core parameters should never be changed i.e "set in stone"

Short term, near fraudulent actions such as instamining to one's benefit may help bolster a cryptocurrency and ensure easier profits(motivation to make the stash worth more), but long term such things will never work(assuming that in the "long term", cryptos would be used and available to a much larger audience, not just the few thousand people that frequent this small forum, and also assuming that crypto would be slightly regulated so things like the instamine that occured with Dash wouldn't happen).

[spatula]

This thread is about smearing Evan.

There is no smear unless the statements are untrue.

Which statements are untrue? Did he release code (after he was asked to take his time and fix it) that had bugs creating extra coins, and then keep those coins? Did he post misleading statements about the launch time? Did he mine himself during the first hours of the instamine? Did he cut the supply by 75% later?

The answers are all yes, and all of these are well documented.

You're just upset because you don't like the reality of it and for whatever reason you have committed yourself emotionally to a coin regardless of the horribly shady behavior of its developer (described above), so you lash out at Monero.

It doesn't help justify Evan's actions. I wonder if he regrets those actions.

Do you regret releasing a scam miner for the monero launch? Do you regret not taking more time to actually evaluate the code of the coin you took over or did you profit greatly from the scam as well? I wonder if you regret those actions.

Your upset because you dev a coin that is not doing well compared to its competitors. Instead of actually competing, you decide to sling mud.

Smooth, why didn't you re-release Monero once you found out about the scam miner? Also, do you regret the scam miner? I'ts just a simple question, as simple as the one asked in this OP.

[Brilliantrocket]

Do you regret releasing a scam miner for the monero launch? Do you regret not taking more time to actually evaluate the code of the coin you took over or did you profit greatly from the scam as well? I wonder if you regret those actions.

Your upset because you dev a coin that is not doing well compared to its competitors. Instead of actually competing, you decide to sling mud.

Smooth, why didn't you re-release Monero once you found out about the scam miner? Also, do you regret the scam miner? I'ts just a simple question, as simple as the one asked in this OP.

He can say that he doesn't regret it, because officially it was TFT who started Monero. By having his confederate (or alter ego?) do the deed, Smooth has removed himself from overt blame. Relaunch it? No, because then all of his scammed coins would disappear.

[spatula]

Do you regret releasing a scam miner for the monero launch? Do you regret not taking more time to actually evaluate the code of the coin you took over or did you profit greatly from the scam as well? I wonder if you regret those actions.

Your upset because you dev a coin that is not doing well compared to its competitors. Instead of actually competing, you decide to sling mud.

Smooth, why didn't you re-release Monero once you found out about the scam miner? Also, do you regret the scam miner? I'ts just a simple question, as simple as the one asked in this OP.

He can say that he doesn't regret it, because officially it was TFT who started Monero. By having his confederate (or alter ego?) do the deed, Smooth has removed himself from overt blame.

But he still took over the coin. Does he regret not starting with a fresh blockchain after "discovering" the embedded scam?

[smooth]

This thread is about smearing Evan.

There is no smear unless the statements are untrue.

Which statements are untrue? Did he release code (after he was asked to take his time and fix it) that had bugs creating extra coins, and then keep those coins? Did he post misleading statements about the launch time? Did he mine himself during the first hours of the instamine? Did he cut the supply by 75% later?

The answers are all yes, and all of these are well documented.

You're just upset because you don't like the reality of it and for whatever reason you have committed yourself emotionally to a coin regardless of the horribly shady behavior of its developer (described above), so you lash out at Monero.

It doesn't help justify Evan's actions. I wonder if he regrets those actions.

Do you regret releasing a scam miner for the monero launch?

I didn't, this statement is untrue.

Do you regret not taking more time to actually evaluate the code of the coin you took over

No. We worked as quickly as we could under the circumstances and had no reason to believe any more was needed, but in any case as volunteers with no premine/instamine/ICO we weren't going to put even more time into the project than we did.

or did you profit greatly from the scam as well? I wonder if you regret those actions.

No, I didn't profit greatly (or at all) from the (Bytecoin, and possibly Monero) miner scam. If TFT scammed me and others, that's unfortunate, but not something I can reasonably regret. More likely I'd be angry with him for ripping me off, if I thought it was actually significant in magnitude (it wasn't).

If you want to know about regret for releasing it or from using it to scam (if he even did), you would you would have to ask him.

Smooth, why didn't you re-release Monero once you found out about the scam miner?

Many reasons including that it was already being widely mined and used, and because we didn't really understand the that it was crippled it at the time, just slower than necessary  (and NoodleDoodle speed it up -- we and everyone were grateful to him for doing it). The full understanding, including its connection to the Bytecoin premine, only came later (largely it was rethink-your-strategy who put all the pieces together, and his post wasn't until August -- 3-4 months later).

Also, do you regret the scam miner?

No I had nothing to do with it. I can't regret something I didn't do.

Evan did instamine Dash. He did mislead people about the launch time. He did cut the coin supply by 75%. I wonder if he regrets that.

Please try to stay on topic though, and not engage in deflection. That would be the Dash instamine.