IOTA - Unmoderated thread

[altcoinUK]

I don't understand why would you choose the default port to be value below 1024 which means you cannot run this on unix system without super user privileges.

Even when I change the port in the config file, it still tries to bind to 999 so the server crashes.

Java Security Manager is PITA, if you run Java app with reduced privileges be ready to face a lot of unexpected problems caused by JSM. Being a reference implementation, IRI has as much error handling stripped out as possible. Together with JSM in paranoic mode this would make the testing a nightmare.

Port in the config file is for API only.

What a wanker and what a BS. No wonder NXT is used by nobody in real world, no wonder they delivered nothing with JINN.

And then a "reference implementation" is released to end users - obviously without any QA test - with a hard coded port numbers and by violating basic security requirements to run the system with root privilege, because there are "unexpected problems" and "the testing a nightmare". Will the idiots understand that they got a bogus and disturbingly poorly written "reference implementation" after 5 months and for $500k? Probably not.

[1714279552]

1714279552

[1714279552]

1714279552

[1714279552]

1714279552

[Come-from-Beyond]

What a wanker and what a BS. No wonder NXT is used by nobody in real world, no wonder they delivered nothing with JINN.

And then a "reference implementation" is released to end users - obviously without any QA test - with a hard coded port numbers and by violating basic security requirements to run the system with root privilege, because there are "unexpected problems" and "the testing a nightmare". Will the idiots understand that they got a bogus and disturbingly poorly written "reference implementation" after 5 months and for $500k? Probably not.

I guess "IMHO" is the only argument you have.

[Netzer]

What a wanker and what a BS. No wonder NXT is used by nobody in real world, no wonder they delivered nothing with JINN.

And then a "reference implementation" is released to end users - obviously without any QA test - with a hard coded port numbers and by violating basic security requirements to run the system with root privilege, because there are "unexpected problems" and "the testing a nightmare". Will the idiots understand that they got a bogus and disturbingly poorly written "reference implementation" after 5 months and for $500k? Probably not.

I guess "IMHO" is the only argument you have.

I completed only one year in a community college information technology course. I have never worked as a programmer, but this is embarrassing in your code:

static final int PORT = 999;
(Node.java, line 15)

Programmers should never hard code the port number. It should be in configuration file. You could just say, sorry guys, I made a mistake, I will fix it. The trolling won't get you a good software.

[Come-from-Beyond]

I completed only one year in a community college information technology course. I have never worked as a programmer, but this is embarrassing in your code:

static final int PORT = 999;
(Node.java, line 15)

Programmers should never hard code the port number. It should be in configuration file. You could just say, sorry guys, I made a mistake, I will fix it. The trolling won't get you a good software.

It's an interesting claim. Do you know how to write a reference implementation?

[Netzer]

I completed only one year in a community college information technology course. I have never worked as a programmer, but this is embarrassing in your code:

static final int PORT = 999;
(Node.java, line 15)

Programmers should never hard code the port number. It should be in configuration file. You could just say, sorry guys, I made a mistake, I will fix it. The trolling won't get you a good software.

It's an interesting claim. Do you know how to write a reference implementation?

Is it interesting claim that you mustn't hard code configuration related settings in the source code? I read this rule in my first year programming text book in the community college.

Please listen me. We gave you money. You have released very little and what you gave us is not even usable and secure. Only root user can run the software, which is useless. It is not secure design. You have fun and troll all day TPTB_need_war and altcoinuk while the investors have been waiting the launch of IOTA for 4 months. Please sort out the software.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Is it interesting claim that you mustn't hard code configuration related settings in the source code? I read this rule in my first year programming text book in the community college.

I think colleges don't teach nuances of programming, they cover only basics. I can't explain you differences between reference and production code, this will take too much time. Use Google and you'll see why you were wrong in your assumption that PORT should be set via configurations. That declaration is the only right way in our case, unless you want to add spaghetti or (even worse) Indian style into the code to make it look bigger.

Please listen me. We gave you money. You have released very little and what you gave us is not even usable and secure. Only root user can run the software, which is useless. It is not secure design. You have fun and troll all day TPTB_need_war and altcoinuk while the investors have been waiting the launch of IOTA for 4 months. Please sort out the software.

Please, check main Iota thread that explains why we need root users to run the software. Don't worry, right before the production configurability will be extended. I won't comment on "4 months", it shows that you bought iotas for quick buck, such buyers are not welcome in our community. There might be special conditions (necessity to pay for college, etc.) that made you make such step, well, if it's a question of life and death you can always sell your iotas to someone else. The buyer may even cover 100% of your expenses.

[iotatoken]

Please listen me. We gave you money. You have released very little and what you gave us is not even usable and secure. Only root user can run the software, which is useless. It is not secure design. You have fun and troll all day TPTB_need_war and altcoinuk while the investors have been waiting the launch of IOTA for 4 months. Please sort out the software.

Alright, first of all: there are no investors in IOTA. There are software purchasers, software which has been available for testing since January. Secondly the sale ended at Christmas, it has barely been over 2 months and you claim this is 4 months. Seems the strategy of all trolls is to be as loose with facts as possible.

[altcoinUK]

@netzer

That's what you have got for $500K: a poorly written "reference implementation" software (see my above posts about that), which - despite of the promises of the IOTA scammers - has nothing to do with Internet of Things.
Of course there is no IoT device handling nor device discovery functions, not even IoT authentication or access control. There is nothing - not even a basic one. David boy the scammer will blame the IOTA community, he will say - in fact he has already started to say - that he sold a software and the community should create the IoT ecosystem. In fact he sold a coin and an illegal investment security product by facilitating a P&D.

Send me your personal details and I forward it to law enforcements. More victims of the scam report financial loss, the jail sentence will be bigger for these fucking scammers.

[smooth]

Thank you for satisfying my request

Terms and Risk paper that outlined that it is in no way, shape or form an investment.

Alright, first of all: there are no investors in IOTA.

Dude, nobody believes that, and nobody believes that you believe that. Saying it 100 or a 1000 or a million times will not make it true. It just makes you look like more and more desperate to sell that ridiculous spin.

[altcoinUK]

SEC sent out a warning in January 2016. Hope the pumpers are preparing for their jail time:

There is a reason why the SEC issued a warning about Crypto coins calling them scams.. 90% are !
I was doing research early this year when i stumbled onto their press release by accident (same day it was posted)
I then posted it in the Bitcoin section where everyone said it was good news AHAHHAHAHHA
It even mentioned an unnamed forum which was totally obvious they meant Bitcointalk.
Read it yourselves.. https://www.sec.gov/investor/alerts/ia_virtualcurrencies.pdf (Issued Jan 4th 2016)

And of course this apply to IOTA, LISK and all other ICO/IPO scams.  

[smooth]

https://www.sec.gov/investor/alerts/ia_virtualcurrencies.pdf (Issued Jan 4th 2016)

"As with many frauds, Ponzi scheme organizers often use the latest innovation, technology, product or growth industry to entice investors and give their scheme the promise of high returns. "

"these schemes often promise high returns for getting in on the ground floor of a growing Internet phenomenon"

Sound familiar?

[altcoinUK]

Dude, nobody believes that, and nobody believes that you believe that. Saying it 100 or a 1000 or a million times will not make it true. It just makes you look like more and more desperate to sell that ridiculous spin.

Precisely that's what happening: he is just desperate to sell his story. But he is not even consistent, and when he wants to convince noobs and naive users to buy into the scam then he admits that IOTA is an investment ponzi:

I am seeing 10-15x ROI after 2 months, even without a beta! That outperforms any other investment you can even imagine.

Here we go, IOTA magically transformed from software into an "investment"  ... that according to the organizer of the IOTA scam "outperforms any other investment you can even imagine".

[Come-from-Beyond]

a poorly written "reference implementation" software

Anything specific or is the every single line poorly written (even spacers, lol)?

[Come-from-Beyond]

Dude, nobody believes that, and nobody believes that you believe that. Saying it 100 or a 1000 or a million times will not make it true. It just makes you look like more and more desperate to sell that ridiculous spin.

I think you shouldn't pose yourself as an oracle of the public opinion, this is a cheap trick, master trolls like you don't hesitate to show their ultimate powers. Appear in your final form, please.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Precisely that's what happening: he is just desperate to sell his story. But he is not even consistent, and when he wants to convince noobs and naive users to buy into the scam then he admits that IOTA is an investment ponzi...

Nay, "ROI" is a slang word. Try harder.

[smooth]

Precisely that's what happening: he is just desperate to sell his story. But he is not even consistent, and when he wants to convince noobs and naive users to buy into the scam then he admits that IOTA is an investment ponzi...

Nay, "ROI" is a slang word. Try harder.

That portion of the quote is not the relevant one

I am seeing 10-15x ROI after 2 months, even without a beta! That outperforms any other investment you can even imagine.

[CIYAM]

So if according to their own twists "there are no investors" then I would hope that "no-one has been stupid enough to invest anything" in it.

(it would seem they have actually admitted that it is a failure from an investment perspective as an investment would require investors which it apparently doesn't even have)

So we have have a *cough* coin with no investors that hasn't promised anything to anyone - and yet we have a bunch of idiots shilling about it here. Why?

[iotatoken]

Precisely that's what happening: he is just desperate to sell his story. But he is not even consistent, and when he wants to convince noobs and naive users to buy into the scam then he admits that IOTA is an investment ponzi...

Nay, "ROI" is a slang word. Try harder.

That portion of the quote is not the relevant one

I am seeing 10-15x ROI after 2 months, even without a beta! That outperforms any other investment you can even imagine.

Try again, I was replying to someone who referred to the 'markets' and showed how unsubstantiated his concerns were. We never sold IOTA as a asset/security/investment. We never told anyone it would appreciate in value. The fact that is has after our sale does not retroactively affect what we have done. At this point I am convinced smooth is altcoinUK, there's no way there are 2 troll this pathetic on the same planet.

But I'm busy doing something productive with my life, so enjoy the envy-party guys

[iotatoken]

So if according to their own twists "there are no investors" then I would hope that "no-one has been stupid enough to invest anything" in it.

(it would seem they have actually admitted that it is a failure from an investment perspective as an investment would require investors which it apparently doesn't have)

Oh hey Mr. Alcoholic, how's your liver?

[CIYAM]

So if according to their own twists "there are no investors" then I would hope that "no-one has been stupid enough to invest anything" in it.

(it would seem they have actually admitted that it is a failure from an investment perspective as an investment would require investors which it apparently doesn't have)

Oh hey Mr. Alcoholic, how's your liver?

Is that the best you can do? Rather pathetic IMO (you already tried that line of attack before and it didn't work).

Why don't you try "answering a question" instead of being an asshole?