Bitcoin Forum
November 23, 2017, 10:32:36 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 [40] 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [NEW CURRENCY] Maria 2.0 was banned, here is her proof. The birth of Bytecoin!  (Read 102214 times)
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
June 02, 2013, 10:49:31 PM
 #781

I'm not interested in setting up another p2pool.

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511476356
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511476356

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511476356
Reply with quote  #2

1511476356
Report to moderator
1511476356
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511476356

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511476356
Reply with quote  #2

1511476356
Report to moderator
1511476356
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511476356

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511476356
Reply with quote  #2

1511476356
Report to moderator
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
June 02, 2013, 10:49:53 PM
 #782

I am offering 2,000 BTE for a merged mining patch bounty and for everyone to agree on the fork.
All of you will need to setup your own p2pool to merged mine. Or pools like Bitparking will likely join VERY quickly. You can't use mine since mine will only pay in BTC. And help me fork the blockchain.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=223904.0

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
jaywaka2713
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


aka 7Strykes


View Profile
June 02, 2013, 10:52:38 PM
 #783

I am offering 2,000 BTE for a merged mining patch bounty and for everyone to agree on the fork.

What changes would be in the fork? Does BTE need to be forked to merge mine?

bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
June 02, 2013, 10:53:17 PM
 #784

Yes the blockchain must be modified and forked. NMC had to go through this when merged mining was invented.

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
BladeRunner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 204

Cheif Oompa Loompa.


View Profile
June 02, 2013, 10:56:10 PM
 #785

Yes the blockchain must be modified and forked. NMC had to go through this when merged mining was invented.

well that explains why you would want to fork it.
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
June 02, 2013, 10:58:19 PM
 #786

Join me https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=223904.0

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
Walter Rothbard
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


Bytecoin: 8VofSsbQvTd8YwAcxiCcxrqZ9MnGPjaAQm


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2013, 03:38:54 AM
 #787

I will be sticking with original Bytecoin and will not go to any forks of the code; the only code changes I will accept are updates from the main Bitcoin source.

bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2013, 03:54:57 AM
 #788

The coin will be dead and all you can think about is losing customers from your Google exchange once we get a real exchange.

I will be sticking with original Bytecoin and will not go to any forks of the code; the only code changes I will accept are updates from the main Bitcoin source.

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
jaywaka2713
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


aka 7Strykes


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 04:06:07 AM
 #789

I will be sticking with original Bytecoin and will not go to any forks of the code; the only code changes I will accept are updates from the main Bitcoin source.

Then don't include the patch into your bytecoin software.

bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2013, 04:09:45 AM
 #790

Well he has a right. Our blockchains will just fight. Depending on how many people join me. This is democracy and Bitcoin thought of everything. If he isn't putting money where his mouth is and mining, he will lose.

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
ProfMac
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 854



View Profile
June 03, 2013, 06:07:08 AM
 #791

I will be sticking with original Bytecoin and will not go to any forks of the code; the only code changes I will accept are updates from the main Bitcoin source.

I will have some hashing power in a few weeks.
I don't see a reason to fork the code.

I try to be respectful and informed.
Walter Rothbard
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


Bytecoin: 8VofSsbQvTd8YwAcxiCcxrqZ9MnGPjaAQm


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2013, 01:54:05 PM
 #792

The coin will be dead and all you can think about is losing customers from your Google exchange once we get a real exchange.

I will be sticking with original Bytecoin and will not go to any forks of the code; the only code changes I will accept are updates from the main Bitcoin source.

What customers?  Nobody's PMed me about RBCex in three weeks. Cheesy

My support for Bytecoin comes from the fact that the code is identical to Bitcoin.  If the coin forks, my support for the new fork will not equal my support for the current chain.

Whether I trade it on RBCex or not is a separate decision.  I might happily trade both, come to think of it, but I'll use "Bytecoin" to refer to the original Bytecoin, thank you very much.

jaywaka2713
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


aka 7Strykes


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 03:05:50 PM
 #793

Did you even read his post about WHY he wants to fork the code? Merged mining. If we can merge mine this coin with Bitcoin, and had pools like bitparking.com take it up, imagine the value skyrocket. Bitcoin has Master merge mining code already so if anything, it's getting closer to bitcoin, not farther. This is so far behind bitcoin it might still be using Berkley DB.

Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
June 03, 2013, 04:40:56 PM
 #794

I would go with the fork because it will help to accomplish what i saw is the point of bytecoin which is to allow room for capital that cant fit on the bitcoin blockchain with out contriving a bunch of arbitrary little changes to the properties that dont actually improve the utility. If we can do that without sucking resources away from the security of bitcoin than i think that is a much better option than weakening bitcoin.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
ProfMac
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 854



View Profile
June 03, 2013, 05:56:06 PM
 #795

Did you even read his post about WHY he wants to fork the code? Merged mining. If we can merge mine this coin with Bitcoin, and had pools like bitparking.com take it up, imagine the value skyrocket. Bitcoin has Master merge mining code already so if anything, it's getting closer to bitcoin, not farther. This is so far behind bitcoin it might still be using Berkley DB.

One of the developers did a pull and ran a diff on the source code, a prudent security precaution.  The differences were the coin prefix, the genesis block hash, and the BTE/BTC string replacements.  At the time of it's release, it was exactly current with bitcoin.  It is within a week or so of the current bitcoin release.

It is a peer to bitcoin.  I see it's strength as a place where either micro-transactions can aggregate, or where a narrow industry group can focus their transactions.  I think several of them operating in parallel can help with the "scale" problem as the number of users grow.

There is yet another new chip for the sex industry.  This is an example of a narrow industry focus where Bytecoin could find a niche.  My own interests, for example, might be in the worldwide coffee trade.  


I try to be respectful and informed.
ProfMac
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 854



View Profile
June 03, 2013, 05:59:42 PM
 #796

I will be sticking with original Bytecoin and will not go to any forks of the code; the only code changes I will accept are updates from the main Bitcoin source.

I will have some hashing power in a few weeks.
I don't see a reason to fork the code.


I don't understand what merged mining is, or what the advantage is to support it.
Where we are now, could we simply set up 1 pool and benefit from it?

I assume that the current problem is that some people with a lot of hashpower mined very fast, raised the difficulty, then went away.  Is that the consensus opinion?


I try to be respectful and informed.
movellan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 235


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 10:35:04 PM
 #797

I will be sticking with original Bytecoin and will not go to any forks of the code; the only code changes I will accept are updates from the main Bitcoin source.

I will have some hashing power in a few weeks.
I don't see a reason to fork the code.


I don't understand what merged mining is, or what the advantage is to support it.
Where we are now, could we simply set up 1 pool and benefit from it?

I assume that the current problem is that some people with a lot of hashpower mined very fast, raised the difficulty, then went away.  Is that the consensus opinion?



ProfMac,

Correct. The evidence suggests that someone with an ASIC/serverfarm has kicked the difficulty up at least twice, once on 4-08 at block 14112, where diff jumped from 4096.032 to 16384.25, and again on 5-06 at block 18144 where diff jumped from 8948.631 to it's present 35794.675.

What this new group proposes to do by forking the blockchain is to form a pool that gives them the advantage in mining and leaves the rest of us with our fly unzipped and nowhere to go.
jaywaka2713
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


aka 7Strykes


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 11:06:23 PM
 #798

The whole purpose of this fork is to enable merged mining. It will not weaken the security of bitcoin, affect the bitcoin blockchain, or do anything to bitcoin at all for that matter. All this "merged mining" patch will do is allow us to mine bytecoin alongside bitcoin and namecoin on pools like bitparking.com. If people could mine bytecoin and bitcoin, it will keep the network alive, and get bytecoin's name out there. THAT is what this is about. We need the network to stay stable. All this patch really does is allow bytecoin to stay perfectly in sync with the bitcoin blockchain. The chains won't become the same, but they run in tandem. Allows hashes to be submitted to both chains and come back valid.

bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2013, 11:10:22 PM
 #799

I am the ONLY one who mined 3 blocks in the last 3 days. Without merged mining transactions can't even happen. Asic users will continue to attack bytecoin and no one will be mining bytecoin. How exactly will you use bytecoin without transactions being able to confirm? It is useless. Right now I am putting 1.2 ghs for respect but if merged mining fails, I will be removing it. Attacks will continue and no one will be mining bytecoin when they can mine btc, nmc, ixc and nmc all together as I do.

This is a last ditch effort to save bytecoin. Again, how will you use it when no one is mining? You can't send bytecoin without blocks. Forking sounds bad I know, but you don't lose your bytecoin! All we get is massive mining and much fairer. Pools will work better when blocks are found every 10 minutes. Difficulty won't raise much. It's already raised because of the attacks.

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
jaywaka2713
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


aka 7Strykes


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 11:11:35 PM
 #800

I am the ONLY one who mined 3 blocks in the last 3 days. Without merged mining transactions can't even happen. Asic users will continue to attack bytecoin and no one will be mining bytecoin. How exactly will you use bytecoin without transactions being able to confirm? It is useless. Right now I am putting 1.2 ghs for respect but if merged mining fails, I will be removing it. Attacks will continue and no one will be mining bytecoin when they can mine btc, nmc, ixc and nmc all together as I do.

This is a last ditch effort to save bytecoin. Again, how will you use it when no one is mining? You can't send bytecoin without blocks.

Wait are you the network's only hashpower? I will gladly mine some too if you are.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 [40] 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!