ANN - LEOcoin - Official announcement regarding LEOcoin from LEOcoin Foundation

[cryptodevil]

LEOcoin is still a POW/POS hybrid. Two recent coin creations:

POW - 20 LEOcoins block reward: http://explorer.leocoin.org/block/00000001c5e84d8d8eeeaacb6a9720fef15c9611d8d0c51a68488f8096d98f9c
POS - 4.7 LEOcoin POS interest: http://explorer.leocoin.org/block/0b13f67ec091769e0a80afbb585d85caadf7cac19d694f13973496bc687e1c70

You again miss the point, it does not require a 'stake' to mine a PoW block. There is no requirement for PoS in a POW/POS hybrid. So if a botnet has >51% hashing power it can double-spend and pretty much dictate the blockchain. How does this pre-mine 'protect' the blockchain from this? Answer: It doesn't, so stop saying it does.

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

You said this fraudulent claim would be removed when I first challenged you on it, but there it still is.

Yes, sorry, but we are busy with other things. At least LEOcoin is not less pseudonymous as others. And, fyi, I did not write that copy.

Hey, Leocoin Foundation, care to explain how this amazing coin achieves this?

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

Because true anonymity is an awfully difficult thing to achieve and the Leocoin github hasn't been updated in over a year, which would surely mean that hidden in its cut-and-paste code is the holy grail of anonymity?

I'm betting it isn't.

You've been that busy for the last six months you couldn't possibly spare any time to address the outright fraudulent lies being spouted on your coin's .org website?

If you cannot communicate in a normal way, without vulgar expressions, you soon can join the 'late parrot group' of users that no longer get a response because they got rude.

It is painfully obvious to anybody else witnessing this conversation that you are desperately clinging to the "if you can't speak nicely then I will ignore you" dishonest response to questions you don't like.

[1713421499]

1713421499

[1713421499]

1713421499

[1713421499]

1713421499

[1713421499]

1713421499

[LEOcoin Foundation]

You again miss the point, it does not require a 'stake' to mine a PoW block. There is no requirement for PoS in a POW/POS hybrid. So if a botnet has >51% hashing power it can double-spend and pretty much dictate the blockchain. How does this pre-mine 'protect' the blockchain from this? Answer: It doesn't, so stop saying it does.

LEOcoin uses a mixed/hybrid proof-of-stake/proof-of-work mechanism: voting power is determined by combining (multiplicatively) your hashrate and stake; meaning that 51% of the total wealth (stake) and 51% of the network hashpower (mining) would be required to create and maintain a fork. You can find a forum discussion thread here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68213.0

[cryptodevil]

And you can find an explanation from rat4 on how he successfully attacked POS/POW Mintcoin here:

Attack II

Current implementation of stake miner gives up if median time of last blocks is in future.
This temporarily makes the whole network PoW-only and opens well known 51% PoW attack.

Attacker needs only 6 of 11 last blocks.

Successfully tested on Mintcoin: no PoS blocks from 203231 up to 203441, more than 1 hour of real time.

Why do you think Mintcoin switched to pure PoS? Your claim that a botnet can't fork the network because of the pre-mine is false. The question is whether you are intentionally making this claim in order to wave off questions about the pre-mine or you are being fed this excuse by the people who hold the pre-mine.

So, again, why is Leocoin still claiming this, six months after I challenged you on it?

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

You can evade the issue by saying you didn't write that, but as "The Leocoin Foundation" you are basically choosing to ignore a fraudulent claim being made to the general public on the actual leocoin.org website!

[wildduck]

LOL "LEOcoin Foundation" is speechless what to do now defend pre-mine or what..

[LEOcoin Foundation]

LOL "LEOcoin Foundation" is speechless what to do now defend pre-mine or what..

Speechless or sleeping ....

[LEOcoin Foundation]

The question is whether you are intentionally making this claim in order to wave off questions about the pre-mine or you are being fed this excuse by the people who hold the pre-mine.

I am not being fed excuses: the premine is distributed amongst the LEO community members, as mentioned so many times by now. Most of them even have no idea what premine is, nor can they setup cgminer of build a rig. With the coming POS it will even become easier to get new LEOcoins, as only a wallet is needed to let it stake.

Whether or not you are comfortable with the premine explanation from LEO Ltd. or not, does not bother me. Repeating your own scepsis does not render it true. As you, I have to rely on statements and explanations from other persons and companies, so it is a matter of trust. I have reasons to trust, you apparently not. The question is whose trust is justified. That we will see in the course of the year.

[cryptodevil]

You were the one making claims about how the pre-mine supposedly protected the network from 51% POW attack, I merely pointed out that assertion was false. Or, to use the dreaded vulgar vernacular, that assertion was indeed bollocks.

So what about the continued lies about anonymity?

Any response yet on why this coin has always been, and is still being, touted as possessing the 'holy-grail' tech of complete anonymity when it clearly does not and never has?

@cryptodevil

good point, I will look into this. Some level of anonymity will be present, I suppose, but not complete anonymity, after all, the internet is involved ...

You said you'd look into why it was being touted as such, did you?

[danandanderson]

You were the one making claims about how the pre-mine supposedly protected the network from 51% POW attack, I merely pointed out that assertion was false. Or, to use the dreaded vulgar vernacular, that assertion was indeed bollocks.

So what about the continued lies about anonymity?

Any response yet on why this coin has always been, and is still being, touted as possessing the 'holy-grail' tech of complete anonymity when it clearly does not and never has?

@cryptodevil

good point, I will look into this. Some level of anonymity will be present, I suppose, but not complete anonymity, after all, the internet is involved ...

You said you'd look into it why it was being touted as such, did you?

Dont waste your time on Leocoin Foundation, he is not capable of answering, he will just write a long text saying nothing and not answering your question.

[LEOcoin Foundation]

You were the one making claims about how the pre-mine supposedly protected the network from 51% POW attack, I merely pointed out that assertion was false. Or, to use the dreaded vulgar vernacular, that assertion was indeed bollocks.

So what about the continued lies about anonymity?

Any response yet on why this coin has always been, and is still being, touted as possessing the 'holy-grail' tech of complete anonymity when it clearly does not and never has?

@cryptodevil

good point, I will look into this. Some level of anonymity will be present, I suppose, but not complete anonymity, after all, the internet is involved ...

You said you'd look into why it was being touted as such, did you?

Your claim of lies is exaggerated. Most, if not all transactions on the internet can be traced back to IP addresses. What you call lies is your assessment based on your view on the meaning of anonymity. I already stated that in my opinion pseudonymity would be a better fit, but when someone can pay without mentioning their name, place, etc. most persons would regard this as anonymous. You obviously don't, which you may, yet lies is too strong a verdict. I will address changing the website statement once again, I am sure it is still on someone's to do list.

[cryptodevil]

Your claim of lies is exaggerated...flim flam fnurgle

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

Which part of that explicit claim is *Not* an outright lie?

"We have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency"

Bollocks.

[LEOcoin Foundation]

Your claim of lies is exaggerated...flim flam fnurgle

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

Which part of that explicit claim is *Not* an outright lie?

"We have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency"

Bollocks.

http://explorer.leocoin.org/address/LLH3y3GzRnQ1AR43Hwssyk3RiKaCnjEaxF

Tell me, who is owning these LEOcoins?

[cryptodevil]

Your claim of lies is exaggerated...flim flam fnurgle

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

Which part of that explicit claim is *Not* an outright lie?

"We have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency"

Bollocks.

http://explorer.leocoin.org/address/LLH3y3GzRnQ1AR43Hwssyk3RiKaCnjEaxF

Tell me, who is owning these LEOcoins?

Why do I need to tell you that? It is an irrelevant question to the indisputable fact that, just like bitcoin, Leocoin is only pseudo-anonymous, it is absolutely not "truly anonymous" as it has an unencrypted public blockchain displaying every single transaction and address from Genesis block to now. Just. Like. Bitcoin.

But, then, I see you are simply reverting to your usual tactic of attempting to obfuscate the issue through deflecting it elsewhere.

So, back to the question you have failed to answer and are attempting to dishonestly avoid;

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

Which part of this statement is *not* a lie?

Let's break it down nice and simple for you so you don't get confused:

"Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods," - This implies the transactions are encrypted, when the truth is only the public/private key process involves encryption. The blockchain, as I mentioned is entirely unencrypted and open to public analysis.

"we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency" - As I already pointed out, LEOcoin is merely pseudo-anonymous, so it is utterly dishonest to claim it is, "truly anonymous".

"in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level" - Remember the term I keep using to describe LEOcoin's true state on this subject, 'pseudo-anonymous'? Yeah, it means that the coin network is only anonymous on a, you guessed it, SUPERFICIAL LEVEL.

So, three assertions, all proven to be lies.

Not only that, I brought this to your attention six months ago. This isn't something you can wave off, it is a fraudulent claim which intentionally misleads the public. Why is it still being touted as true when it is a lie and you know it is a lie?

[LEOcoin Foundation]

So, back to the question you have failed to answer and are attempting to dishonestly avoid;

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

Which part of this statement is *not* a lie?

Let's break it down nice and simple for you so you don't get confused:

"Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods," - This implies the transactions are encrypted, when the truth is only the public/private key process involves encryption. The blockchain, as I mentioned is entirely unencrypted and open to public analysis.

"we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency" - As I already pointed out, LEOcoin is merely pseudo-anonymous, so it is utterly dishonest to claim it is, "truly anonymous".

"in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level" - Remember the term I keep using to describe LEOcoin's true state on this subject, 'pseudo-anonymous'? Yeah, it means that the coin network is only anonymous on a, you guessed it, SUPERFICIAL LEVEL.

So, three assertions, all proven to be lies.

Not only that, I brought this to your attention six months ago. This isn't something you can wave off, it is a fraudulent claim which intentionally misleads the public. Why is it still being touted as true when it is a lie and you know it is a lie?

Again, I have not written that text, so why should I explain why it is phrased as it is? I admitted that LEOcoin is pseudonymous, so I am rather with you as against you. What I however do not see, is your hammering on issues that you put out of the context. For some reason, it seems very important for you that LEOcoin is about lies; which it simply is not.

As stated earlier today, I have again requested the persons managing the LEOcoin.org website to alter the text. Nevertheless, as you wish to go into a text I have not written, in order to be able to call me dishonest, obfuscating, confused etc., and other things, which - to be frank - I do not recognize myself in, I will briefly address some points you make:

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods," - This implies the transactions are encrypted, when the truth is only the public/private key process involves encryption. The blockchain, as I mentioned is entirely unencrypted and open to public analysis.

The LEOcoin ledger is open and transparent by design. We wanted it this way and it should be. I fail to see why when asserting that "the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods" would necessarily imply that the transactions are encrypted. This rather seems your conclusion, or interpretation. All transactions, blocks and addresses are visible in the blockchain, as with most digital currencies. And, to set the record straight, this part of a sentence is not a lie. In fact, epistemologically seen, it never could be a lie, simply because it holds no statement that contains propositional content, which is required to attribute truth value to a justified belief. You calling this a lie, is simply a false assertion on itself. You, see, you lied to us. It this a problem for me? Not at all. We all err, from time to time. You are being pardoned.

we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency" - As I already pointed out, LEOcoin is merely pseudo-anonymous, so it is utterly dishonest to claim it is, "truly anonymous".

As admitted previously and repeated in the first part of this reply, I do not regard LEOcoin as anonymous in the strict sense of the word, but very well in the sense of my question with regard to what address belongs to whom.

http://explorer.leocoin.org/address/LLH3y3GzRnQ1AR43Hwssyk3RiKaCnjEaxF

Tell me, who is owning these LEOcoins?

LEOcoin is pseudonymous, so I am rather with you as against you. There is no problem for LEOcoin being pseudonymous, as - like you say - this is normal for most digital currencies.

Again, I am not going to apologize for copy that I have not written, but I have requested to have this text altered, the first time when you pointed this out, and again today. To what extent this text has been misleading, I cannot say. Most people indeed find transfers without any display of names, addresses or banks rather anonymous. A truly anonymous transaction would perhaps be one without any traces, like donating a dollar in an empty church wearing gloves, because even with a cash payment you are opposing another person that could e.g. recognize you, when someone would show hir a photo. To me it seems that you and I and the person writing the copy for the LEOcoin.org website have simpy different views on what anonymous might be. The meaning of a word is its usage in language. So when you speak to an audience that is not familiar with the ins and outs of cryptocurrencies - e.g. the LEO community at the time this website was published - you will occasionally use a familiar phrase, like anonymous, without any apriori definition with regard to the specifics that may be applicable in another context.

Sparing the forum readers another instance of sophistry, I will let the topic rest. I regard LEOcoin as pseudonymous and thus have requested to have this particular statement on the LEOcoin.org website altered. I trust this will be done - and as such will be an answer. I assume you will regularly check the website in order to see if this has been done indeed, so please keep us posted.

[cryptodevil]

I'm not asking for you to apologise, I'm asking for you to be honest.

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

The statement made on the leocoin.org website is not just misleading, because it is used as a potential selling point, a supposed unique feature of this particular coin which is being promoted to the general public, it is blatantly fraudulent and anybody who understand the technology knows this. So either you are saying the people within your coin network organisation don't understand the technology they are promoting, or they are making false statements they know to be untrue for financial gain.

[LEOcoin Foundation]

I'm not asking for you to apologise, I'm asking for you to be honest.

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

The statement made on the leocoin.org website is not just misleading, because it is used as a potential selling point, a supposed unique feature of this particular coin which is being promoted to the general public, it is blatantly fraudulent and anybody who understand the technology knows this. So either you are saying the people within your coin network organisation don't understand the technology they are promoting, or they are making false statements they know to be untrue for financial gain.

Sorry, but you are repeating yourself. I am honest; again: I have not written that text, so it is not me stating anything in the text you are quoting all the time. Nor is the text of the LEOcoin.org website my responsibility. But, as I agree that LEOcoin is pseudonymous, I requested that the text of the website will be changed. In addition, I still find your interpretation of anonymous extremely narrow, but you are entitled to it. This was essentially all mentioned in the previous post, I hope it is clear now.

[cryptodevil]

I still find your interpretation of anonymous extremely narrow

Wow you are one slippery individual, talk about disingenuous. Stop repeating the same dishonest spin on the definition of the word 'anonymous'.

Bitcoin is not anonymous it is pseudo-anonymous
Leocoin is not anonymous it is pseudo-anonymous

You are attempting to play down the absolutely fraudulent claim towards Leocoin being, in very explicitly stated terms, "truly anonymous", by wanting to pretend that through some sort of magical means, when they say "truly anonymous" they actually mean pseudo-anonymous.

The more you defend and excuse this dishonest claim the more dishonest you yourself appear to be.

[Beave162]

I'm not asking for you to apologise, I'm asking for you to be honest.

Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods, we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency, in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level.

The statement made on the leocoin.org website is not just misleading, because it is used as a potential selling point, a supposed unique feature of this particular coin which is being promoted to the general public, it is blatantly fraudulent and anybody who understand the technology knows this. So either you are saying the people within your coin network organisation don't understand the technology they are promoting, or they are making false statements they know to be untrue for financial gain.

I don't know who you are cryptodevil, but keep doing what you are doing. Very well said.

[wildduck]

Soon to be very very cheap leocoin...LOL

[LEOcoin member]

Hi don't know details, don't mind about being anon or not anon - but still buying LEOcoin - at up to 0.0006BTC right now

thx

[cryptodevil]

don't mind about being anon or not anon

It isn't about whether people mind if it is anonymous or not, it is about blatantly fraudulent claims being made as selling points to the general public. In my experience most people couldn't care less if a coin network is "truly anonymous", but they do care if they are being lied to.