[ANN][PASL]-[PASCAL Lite]-[The Future is Almost Here]

[anorganix]

Mmmm, what do you make of this?
Tooooooooo much of a coincidence IMHO.

[ocminer]

The dev already stated at slack that he won't going to fix it, it's by design like this.

The code is too new, it's a paradise for exploiters/cheaters

[lehnelora]

how about pascal untill now? i hope, i heard good news from pascal

[anorganix]

The dev already stated at slack that he won't going to fix it, it's by design like this.

The code is too new, it's a paradise for exploiters/cheaters

Yea, when I was mining PASC in the early days, even before the GPU miner was out, this wasn't an issue.
It existed in the code for sure, but the community was fair and mining was pretty much honest (I think).

[WhyMe]

The dev already stated at slack that he won't going to fix it, it's by design like this.

The code is too new, it's a paradise for exploiters/cheaters

That's a bad news

[xiphon]

Having more pools will make network more healthier.
Look at other currencies, we need to have at least 3..5 pools.

[ocminer]

Having more pools will make network more healthier.
Look at other currencies, we need to have at least 3..5 pools.

More pools ? Is there a pool already ?

[code_honesty]

Having more pools will make network more healthier.
Look at other currencies, we need to have at least 3..5 pools.

More pools ? Is there a pool already ?

coincidence or not but it is exactly how nanopool works the way mmcmc attack this chain. mmcmc has a pool but having a hard time cheating when there is a transaction so he retreat back to the modified daemon he is using now. If adaseb would only listen that timestamp is going to be dependent on other nodes and would lock this cheaters account, we could make lite better than orig.

I can only admire how good a coder mmcmc is but sad that he is using it the wrong way. Enough man your sack is full!

[code_honesty]

known bugs:

1.Timestamp field not checked on realtime
   a. solution for now: flood the chain with transaction every 3-4 secs, that way we all have equal chance of finding solution in 3-4secs but actual solution is on 3(c). he cannot time cheat because daemon includes all tx in pow verification.

2.transaction bug -daemon issue new work to miner causing hashing start again from scratch. unlike on getblocktemplate where it works only on what was previously accepted by the mempool.
   b. solution getblocktemplate on walletupgrade -hard to do but mmcmc can do it.

3. time-roll but sbh accepting it. sbh is supposedly the checkpoint.
  c. solution add node consensus on time. nodes will be dependent on peers for timestamp. add node calls and get nodecallreply.timestamp and issue checking sequences on this. once nodes consensus is made on block broadcasted to network, sbh lockdown until another consensus of nodes on the new block. no more rewriting. also will result to proper block spacing dependent on established frequency of nodecalls.

     a. effects: so many fork-off. miners with high hashrate but cheating will fork off as sbh cannot be rewritten. honest nodes will check cheaters block submission but will deny it ofcourse, if cheater has his own hosted supernode, then his wallet and his supernode will fork off as long as masternode and honest node remain uncorrupted. (my thought:so what fuck them off cheaters)

also, penalize the cheaters, on wallet upgrade hard code lock down on cheaters account. bye bye cheater. many days on cheating wasted.  

4. super super stupid difficulty retargeting. -adaseb is also gaming this bug.
  a. solution- copy others. only those succesful coins. (copy/paste)

more bugs to update:

[Amph]

Having more pools will make network more healthier.
Look at other currencies, we need to have at least 3..5 pools.

More pools ? Is there a pool already ?

can you add a pool for this? it's not different than adding it for classic variant

[ocminer]

Having more pools will make network more healthier.
Look at other currencies, we need to have at least 3..5 pools.

More pools ? Is there a pool already ?

can you add a pool for this? it's not different than adding it for classic variant

Absolutely not - there's enough trouble with the other variant. I'm glad when I can shutdown the other pool

[code_honesty]

Having more pools will make network more healthier.
Look at other currencies, we need to have at least 3..5 pools.

More pools ? Is there a pool already ?

can you add a pool for this? it's not different than adding it for classic variant

Absolutely not - there's enough trouble with the other variant. I'm glad when I can shutdown the other pool

@Amp We'll fix it first before we ask ocminer to reconsider. This blockchain is garbage.

[adaseb]

known bugs:

1.Timestamp field not checked on realtime
   a. solution for now: flood the chain with transaction every 3-4 secs, that way we all have equal chance of finding solution in 3-4secs but actual solution is on 3(c). he cannot time cheat because daemon includes all tx in pow verification.

2.transaction bug -daemon issue new work to miner causing hashing start again from scratch. unlike on getblocktemplate where it works only on what was previously accepted by the mempool.
   b. solution getblocktemplate on walletupgrade -hard to do but mmcmc can do it.

3. time-roll but sbh accepting it. sbh is supposedly the checkpoint.
  c. solution add node consensus on time. nodes will be dependent on peers for timestamp. add node calls and get nodecallreply.timestamp and issue checking sequences on this. once nodes consensus is made on block broadcasted to network, sbh lockdown until another consensus of nodes on the new block. no more rewriting. also will result to proper block spacing dependent on established frequency of nodecalls.

     a. effects: so many fork-off. miners with high hashrate but cheating will fork off as sbh cannot be rewritten. honest nodes will check cheaters block submission but will deny it ofcourse, if cheater has his own hosted supernode, then his wallet and his supernode will fork off as long as masternode and honest node remain uncorrupted. (my thought:so what fuck them off cheaters)

also, penalize the cheaters, on wallet upgrade hard code lock down on cheaters account. bye bye cheater. many days on cheating wasted.  

4. super super stupid difficulty retargeting. -adaseb is also gaming this bug.
  a. solution- copy others. only those succesful coins. (copy/paste)

more bugs to update:

Yes I agree that this coin has problems, but if the original developer is not going to address them then that is not much I can do. Like I said before, this requires extensive coding and I don't have the experience for this. I tried to get a hold of "code_honesty" and "xiphon" to see if they want to rewrite the code and they didn't reply my to PM.

Albert replied in my Github for the issue that we opened and he pretty much said everything is normal.

The only issue above I can fix is the difficulty retargeting, I can make it much tighter. However this will require all nodes and clients to upgrade immediately to the latest version to avoid a network fork.

Those blocktimes that the poster above included makes it very fishy to what kind of custom miner software that CMCMC guy is using. And it also seems that nanopool does this from time to time also.

OCminer and poolmn won't launch a pool. I tried to contact both of them by PM and I didn't even get a reply.

[adaseb]

Having more pools will make network more healthier.
Look at other currencies, we need to have at least 3..5 pools.

More pools ? Is there a pool already ?

can you add a pool for this? it's not different than adding it for classic variant

Absolutely not - there's enough trouble with the other variant. I'm glad when I can shutdown the other pool

@Amp We'll fix it first before we ask ocminer to reconsider. This blockchain is garbage.

Who will fix the coding? I already said before I don't have the programming experience to fix all those issues.

Also if you fix the code you are making it mandatory to ban certain accounts under your terms, I don't agree to this. Think "code is law" like it was with ETH-DAO hack.

[ocminer]

Having more pools will make network more healthier.
Look at other currencies, we need to have at least 3..5 pools.

More pools ? Is there a pool already ?

can you add a pool for this? it's not different than adding it for classic variant

Absolutely not - there's enough trouble with the other variant. I'm glad when I can shutdown the other pool

@Amp We'll fix it first before we ask ocminer to reconsider. This blockchain is garbage.

Who will fix the coding? I already said before I don't have the programming experience to fix all those issues.

Also if you fix the code you are making it mandatory to ban certain accounts under your terms, I don't agree to this. Think "code is law" like it was with ETH-DAO hack.

Code is law is good when the code works, but not when it's just a "big bug" and nothing else

[xiphon]

they didn't reply my to PM.

Still cant find you message in my inbox. Will try to send one to you.

[code_honesty]

Having more pools will make network more healthier.
Look at other currencies, we need to have at least 3..5 pools.

More pools ? Is there a pool already ?

can you add a pool for this? it's not different than adding it for classic variant

Absolutely not - there's enough trouble with the other variant. I'm glad when I can shutdown the other pool

@Amp We'll fix it first before we ask ocminer to reconsider. This blockchain is garbage.

Who will fix the coding? I already said before I don't have the programming experience to fix all those issues.

Also if you fix the code you are making it mandatory to ban certain accounts under your terms, I don't agree to this. Think "code is law" like it was with ETH-DAO hack.

Code is law is good when the code works, but not when it's just a "big bug" and nothing else

ocminer dont laugh at us you big dog. 

[adaseb]

they didn't reply my to PM.

Still cant find you message in my inbox. Will try to send one to you.

Sorry I got your nickname confused with some other developer. Send me a PM so we can discuss.

[code_honesty]

they didn't reply my to PM.

Still cant find you message in my inbox. Will try to send one to you.

Sorry I got your nickname confused with some other developer. Send me a PM so we can discuss.

oh wait adaseb, just want to let you know that i feel 99.99% xiphon is mmcmc. just a feeling, could be wrong.

[adaseb]

they didn't reply my to PM.

Still cant find you message in my inbox. Will try to send one to you.

Sorry I got your nickname confused with some other developer. Send me a PM so we can discuss.

oh wait adaseb, just want to let you know that i feel 99.99% xiphon is mmcmc. just a feeling, could be wrong.

I don't know if he is mmcmc. I actually got a PM from mmcmc and he said that he is not cheating and that he is finding all the blocks because he has lots of GPUs pointed to this coin.

A few weeks ago, I got another PM, it was from either RAY____ or that New Node guy and he also said the exact same thing. That he is not cheating and he has many GPUs pointed at the coin. He sent me photos of his farm with 200 GPUs or so.


So I don't know what to believe and that's why I rather not "relaunch" or "ban accounts" since the evidence is non-conclusive.