[OLD] Eligius: ASIC, no registration, no fee CPPSRB BTC + 105% PPS NMC, 877 #

[imsaguy]

Luke, How does your users at Eligius pool feel about you misusing their hash power to vandalize and steal from an alt chain?

how was it stealing?  did he take coins from you?

[imsaguy]

Luke, How does your users at Eligius pool feel about you misusing their hash power to vandalize and steal from an alt chain?

how was it stealing?  did he take coins from you?

Nope, but people have lost electricity/computer life and there was BTC trading taking place already.  But that doesn't make it right that it wasn't me hurt directly.

so what actually happened, blocks were orphaned?  Can't that happen with any block chain?

[gmaxwell]

so what actually happened, blocks were orphaned?  Can't that happen with any block chain?

He mined a bunch of blocks drove the difficulty into the stratosphere and didn't process transactions, etc. In other words, behavior like some bitcoin miners— except in bitcoin they're not >>>>50% of the total hash power, etc. 

You'll note the lack of links to the relevant thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56675.0), presumably because the accusations sound much better without the factual information behind them, or the posts pointing out the extreme scammyness  of a bitcoin-clone opening  with exchange support on day 0, and the touting of unfinished pre-release features from the reference bitcoin client as major innovations.

I'm all for interesting altchains that serve real purposes, like namecoin— but so far the currency like ones mostly seem to be ponzi schemes which risk hurting bitcoin's credibility if they have any effect at all.   At least we can learn from their security challenges even if we don't learn anything from their absent innovation.

[bitlane]

so what actually happened, blocks were orphaned?  Can't that happen with any block chain?

He mined a bunch of blocks drove the difficulty into the stratosphere and didn't process transactions, etc. In other words, behavior like some bitcoin miners— except in bitcoin they're not >>>>50% of the total hash power, etc. 

You'll note the lack of links to the relevant thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56675.0), presumably because the accusations sound much better without the factual information behind them, or the posts pointing out the extreme scammyness  of a bitcoin-clone opening  with exchange support on day 0, and the touting of unfinished pre-release features from the reference bitcoin client as major innovations.

I'm all for interesting altchains that serve real purposes, like namecoin— but so far the currency like ones mostly seem to be ponzi schemes which risk hurting bitcoin's credibility if they have any effect at all.   At least we can learn from their security challenges even if we don't learn anything from their absent innovation.

It's great to know that we have good people like Luke watching out for us.

I'm still trying to figure out what happened to the 20-odd blocks I lost that all had numerous confirmations from the network, yet turned invalid....and still continue, as I am keeping my miners up.

[gmaxwell]

It's great to know that we have good people like Luke watching out for us.

I'm still trying to figure out what happened to the 20-odd blocks I lost that all had numerous confirmations from the network, yet turned invalid....and still continue, as I am keeping my miners up.

You're getting orphaned. Standard bitcoin chain decision code won't switch off your own chain and onto something else unless the something else is _longer_, being tied isn't enough.  If someone outpaces the reset of the network by enough of a factor it's unlikely anyone else will get any blocks in even without any modification to ignore third party blocks.

DoubleC's pool benefited from supermajority induced orphaning during big pre-MM NMC boom when it was >>50%, and I had a great many orphans in my solo mining. This was on a 10 minute chain which is less subject to orphaning, and on a chain that was worth non-trivial money at the time. ::shrugs::

[bitlane]

It's great to know that we have good people like Luke watching out for us.

I'm still trying to figure out what happened to the 20-odd blocks I lost that all had numerous confirmations from the network, yet turned invalid....and still continue, as I am keeping my miners up.

You're getting orphaned. Standard bitcoin chain decision code won't switch off your own chain and onto something else unless the something else is _longer_, being tied isn't enough.  If someone outpaces the reset of the network by enough of a factor it's unlikely anyone else will get any blocks in even without any modification to ignore third party blocks.

DoubleC's pool benefited from supermajority induced orphaning during big pre-MM NMC boom when it was >>50%, and I had a great many orphans in my solo mining. This was on a 10 minute chain which is less subject to orphaning, and on a chain that was worth non-trivial money at the time. ::shrugs::

Jesus Christ. He bragged about killing it on purpose...in public, then SPAM'd the exchange (where he was banned). This had NOTHING to do with merged mining. It was malicious intent to kill off the new Alt.

[doublec]

DoubleC's pool benefited from supermajority induced orphaning during big pre-MM NMC boom when it was >>50%, and I had a great many orphans in my solo mining. This was on a 10 minute chain which is less subject to orphaning, and on a chain that was worth non-trivial money at the time. ::shrugs::

Please don't try to make it look like that situation was the same as the one here. I ran a stock standard pool that did nothing to change block propagation in any way. The situation here is a majority pool actively refusing other blocks and this is not the same.

[gmaxwell]

DoubleC's pool benefited from supermajority induced orphaning during big pre-MM NMC boom when it was >>50%, and I had a great many orphans in my solo mining. This was on a 10 minute chain which is less subject to orphaning, and on a chain that was worth non-trivial money at the time. ::shrugs::

Please don't try to make it look like that situation was the same as the one here. I ran a stock standard pool that did nothing to change block propagation in any way. The situation here is a majority pool actively refusing other blocks and this is not the same.

You say this, I can't tell. My orphan rate was high enough that you could have been excluding other blocks— though I trust that you weren't and that it was normal performance problems plus the fact that there was high latency between my nodes and yours (and that if you where there was _nothing_ I could do about it).  The point I was attempting to make was that a pile of orphaned blocks is perfectly expected in a natural supermajority case, especially when the blocks are being solved very fast. (appears like we were talking 10seconds).

Where are your helpful corrections for the people claiming that he's 'attacking' i0 and ix too or the claims that he was breaking the bitparking pool? (as far as I can tell these are outrageous lies)  [Edit: I included a barb here that doublec didn't deserve]

[doublec]

Where are your helpful corrections for the people claiming that he's 'attacking' i0 and ix too? (as far as I can tell this is an outrageous lie)   Or do the corrections only come for the details which are in your financial best interest?  :-/

That's a pretty uncalled for comment. [thanks for removing the barb]. The only thing I know Luke-Jr to be doing with i0coin/ixcoin is mining them and selling them with the intent to crash the price . I know this because Luke told me in #namecoin IRC. [logs removed due to objection from luke]. I don't know anything about the bitparking pool clams. Luke has definitely not done anything to bitparking.

[gmaxwell]

Well that is the first thing I thought of when I seen all them blocks starting to fly by when he pulled a scumbag slush move by secretly starting to mine with massive hash power, when people start doing things undercover on the down low they usually have something to hide. And there he is claiming to be a god faring man, yeah right.

I'm not aware of any "undercover on the downlow"  Luke was pretty up front about it.  If he hadn't come right out and said what he was doing I'm guessing that most people simply wouldn't know at this point, I guess doublec would be figuring it out by now (esp given what luke has been saying lately about MM alts).  Obviously you didn't see any big discussion about CoiledCoin because the whole chain appeared out of nowhere a few hours ago with an exchange and such.

The religious thing is tired trolling.

[bitlane]

Well that is the first thing I thought of when I seen all them blocks starting to fly by when he pulled a scumbag slush move by secretly starting to mine with massive hash power, when people start doing things undercover on the down low they usually have something to hide. And there he is claiming to be a god faring man, yeah right.

I'm not aware of any "undercover on the downlow"  Luke was pretty up front about it.  If he hadn't come right out and said what he was doing I'm guessing that most people simply wouldn't know at this point, I guess doublec would be figuring it out by now (esp given what luke has been saying lately about MM alts).  Obviously you didn't see any big discussion about CoiledCoin because the whole chain appeared out of nowhere a few hours ago with an exchange and such.

The religious thing is tired trolling.

You should also lose your position as MOD, as you are completely unable to be objective and clearly and openly are siding with a scumbag, while making further excuses to aid in his cause.

[gmaxwell]

You should also lose your position as MOD, as you are completely unable to be objective and clearly and openly are siding with a scumbag, while making further excuses to aid in his cause.

And I'll second that one as well, didn't realize he was mod until you mentioned it but does seem like strange behaviour for one.

Just in case the people following along at home are getting confused — Apparently, because I have the mod bit set I'm not allowed to participate in a discussion and disagree with people.  At least according to the above.

Meanwhile, the kind folks here are creating all kinds of great reasons to moderate— including outright libelous stuff, and totally offtopic posts (e.g. posts calling for luke to be banned on bitcointalk in the thread about the pool, posts calling for my mod rights, etc).  I guess the idea behind attacking me here is to somehow attack everyone who could demand civil behavior in the hope of making yourself immune to enforcement.   It won't work, but feel free to try.

(and, I give explicit permission for any moderator cleaning up these threads to move or nuke my posts as required to shepard things things back on topic)

[makomk]

make better alt chains?

Not really practical unfortunately. Bitcoin itself is vulnerable to the exact same attack, you just need more hashpower, and all the solutions that anyone's been able to find just cause worse problems. (Yep, for the low low price of a few million dollars anyone that wants to can completely shut down Bitcoin and stop any transactions from being processed. Thankfully no-one seems to care that much.)

It's great to know that we have good people like Luke watching out for us.

I'm still trying to figure out what happened to the 20-odd blocks I lost that all had numerous confirmations from the network, yet turned invalid....and still continue, as I am keeping my miners up.

You're getting orphaned. Standard bitcoin chain decision code won't switch off your own chain and onto something else unless the something else is _longer_, being tied isn't enough.  If someone outpaces the reset of the network by enough of a factor it's unlikely anyone else will get any blocks in even without any modification to ignore third party blocks.

On the other hand, if he saw multiply confirmed blocks getting orphaned then it pretty much confirms that luke-jr was intentionally rewriting history. That's vanishingly unlikely to happen otherwise even at ludicrous block rates; it's the whole reason that Bitcoin and the other altcoins based on it work in the first place.

[Turbor]

Jesus will watch you closely my friend !  

[cablepair]

Luke-JR

Please answer this letter when you get some time.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56830.0

thank you

[bitlane]

Luke should clear his name before he does get attacked.  

There is no clearing of his name at this point. He provided all of the details himself, as if proud. Well, let him be proud.

I find it hard to believe that if he honestly feels that he did nothing wrong, why did he remove all personal information from his personal websites including his family blog etc ?

That's right. Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

I have been accused of citing libel, but when the proof had been provided by the accused, in the form of chat logs.....how is it libel ?

I have also been accused of being off topic with my accusations. Well, I am posting in THE POOL THREAD because the Pool as a whole was used to maliciously attack other's work. Looks 'On Topic' to me.

Anyone still mining here should give their heads a shake, especially if their comfort in mining in this pool was due to some sort of religious tie - as Luke has proven that means nothing and has clearly shown the limits (or lack there of) of his hypocracy, so others shouldn't feel obligated to stay because of that either.

[imsaguy]

I find it hard to believe that if he honestly feels that he did nothing wrong, why did he remove all personal information from his personal websites including his family blog etc ?

If people were making threats against my actions, whether they were right or wrong, I would remove my personal information from my websites as well.  If you really feel he did something wrong/illegal, please call up law enforcement.

Here are the facts as I see them:

1) Mining for blocks isn't against the rules of bitcoin/its clones.
2) There are no rules regarding how much hash power you may contribute to any of the bitcoin/clone networks.
3) There are no rules mandating which transactions miners have to include in the blocks they mine.
4) As far as I know, he didn't reassign any coins that were mined before he started mining.
5) Luke never made fake transactions to take coins that weren't his.
6) Luke generated a bunch of blocks that became the longest chain and orphaned shorter chains.

Please let me know if any of those 6 facts are wrong.

Edit: and if those 6 facts are indeed correct, then how is what he did wrong?

[bitlane]

I find it hard to believe that if he honestly feels that he did nothing wrong, why did he remove all personal information from his personal websites including his family blog etc ?

If people were making threats against my actions, whether they were right or wrong, I would remove my personal information from my websites as well.  If you really feel he did something wrong/illegal, please call up law enforcement.

Here are the facts as I see them:

1) Mining for blocks isn't against the rules of bitcoin/its clones.
2) There are no rules regarding how much hash power you may contribute to any of the bitcoin/clone networks.
3) There are no rules mandating which transactions miners have to include in the blocks they mine.
4) As far as I know, he didn't reassign any coins that were mined before he started mining.
5) Luke never made fake transactions to take coins that weren't his.
6) Luke generated a bunch of blocks that became the longest chain and orphaned shorter chains.

Please let me know if any of those 6 facts are wrong.

Edit: and if those 6 facts are indeed correct, then how is what he did wrong?

Praise Jebus !

[Turbor]

Code:

[10:31]	luke-jr	coblee: I didn't orphan anything mature
[10:31]	coblee	luke-jr: oh ok
[10:32]	luke-jr	I intentionally avoided anyone actually losing money
[10:32]	coblee	so just mining, not including transactions, and dumping?
[10:33]	luke-jr	coblee: actually, I decided it was better not to dump
[10:33]	luke-jr	coblee: I've also asked BTC-e to reverse the dumping I did earlier
[10:33]	coblee	how would they reverse the dumping?
[10:33]	gmaxwell	presumably the counterparties would rather have their btc back.
[10:34]	gmaxwell	So they could just undo the trades, luke didn't withdraw the bitcoin he got.
[10:34]	luke-jr	coblee: well, presuming by dumping, we mean "selling"
[10:34]	TuxBlackEdo	what happen?
[10:34]	TuxBlackEdo	and why are we still awake?
[10:35]	coblee	this is pretty funny
[10:35]	luke-jr	TuxBlackEdo: I effectively disabled the latest scamcoin
[10:35]	gmaxwell	TuxBlackEdo: a new altcoin showed up out of nowhere.. complete with an exchange and a bunch of eager ponzi pumpers.
[10:35]	_W_	TuxBlackEdo, it's morning here
[10:35]	gmaxwell	TuxBlackEdo: and look took charge of the chain.
[10:35]	TuxBlackEdo	coilcoin, right?
[10:35]	luke-jr	Coiled*
[10:36]	gmaxwell	And some people who were planing to make money fast, are none too happy that they can't get any blocks or txn in, and that luke crashed the price on the market.
[10:36]	luke-jr	why is artforz helping them workaround it?
[10:36]	gmaxwell	Awesome. The race is on.
[10:36]	luke-jr	gmaxwell: well, he's just encouraging them to get BTCGuild onboard "next time" -.-
[10:36]	luke-jr	nothing fancy
[10:37]	TuxBlackEdo	instead of crashing the price of a alt chain we should try to somehow make the price of namecoin go through the roof
[10:37]	gmaxwell	oh. meh, well fine. Its true— but since the cost of setting up more merged chains is still high— good luck with that.
[10:37]	coblee	they are bashing you on btc-e luke-jr lol
[10:37]	TuxBlackEdo	that's pretty cool though, props luke-jr
[10:37]	luke-jr	TuxBlackEdo: pfft, you abuse namecoin anyway
[10:38]	gmaxwell	coblee: it's a little beyond bashing. At least earlier is was pretty scarry.
[10:38]	TuxBlackEdo	how
[10:38]	luke-jr	TuxBlackEdo: you just sell them
[10:38]	TuxBlackEdo	explain how i "abuse" namecoins?
[10:38]	coblee	scary how?
[10:38]	TuxBlackEdo	I never sold a namecoin
[10:38]	TuxBlackEdo	actually i do the opposite
[10:39]	TuxBlackEdo	while everyone was selling i was setting up big buy orders
[10:39]	luke-jr	TuxBlackEdo: then why do you want price up?
[10:39]	TuxBlackEdo	i own a ton of namecoins
[10:40]	TuxBlackEdo	ill move some namecoins right now to prove
[10:40]	gmaxwell	TuxBlackEdo: I'll give you an address to move them to.
[10:40]	TuxBlackEdo	hehe
[10:40]	TuxBlackEdo	ill move them to
[10:40]	luke-jr	lol
[10:41]	TuxBlackEdo	MxbmJyLDcqTmuzcQoGjPen4fW3AdkNLqBP
[10:41]	TuxBlackEdo	done
[10:42]	TuxBlackEdo	a412edf5e41529582f138cbc4bd3991203150fab4797fc472853dedd730b5ca9
[10:43]	gmaxwell	hahah
[10:43]	gmaxwell	castonbtce: so what can we say CLC stands for?
[10:43]	gmaxwell	castonbtce: crazy loser coin?
[10:43]	gmaxwell	k65onyx: catastrophic loss of coins?
[10:43]	gmaxwell	artforz: lol
[10:43]	gmaxwell	castonbtce: cunt luke coin
[10:44]	luke-jr	hmm
[10:44]	luke-jr	just in case I accidentally orphaned some non-generation, I just let them all through a few blocks ago
[10:44]	luke-jr	bet they don't notice <.<
[10:45]	doublec	I saw them
[10:45]	gmaxwell	well they were saying that you'd stopped earlier, so who knows.
[10:47]	TuxBlackEdo	how long is namecoin going to take to generate a block...
[10:48]	JFK911	;;bc,stats
[10:48]	gribble	Current Blocks: 160874 | Current Difficulty: 1159929.4972244 | Next Difficulty At Block: 161279 | Next Difficulty In: 405 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 2 days, 14 hours, 46 minutes, and 30 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1221673.16179828 | Estimated Percent Change: 5.32305323054
[10:51]	luke-jr	reckon I should leave it on overnight?
[10:51]	TuxBlackEdo	luke-jr, http://explorer.dot-bit.org/a/MxbmJyLDcqTmuzcQoGjPen4fW3AdkNLqBP

[imsaguy]

I find it hard to believe that if he honestly feels that he did nothing wrong, why did he remove all personal information from his personal websites including his family blog etc ?

If people were making threats against my actions, whether they were right or wrong, I would remove my personal information from my websites as well.  If you really feel he did something wrong/illegal, please call up law enforcement.

Here are the facts as I see them:

1) Mining for blocks isn't against the rules of bitcoin/its clones.
2) There are no rules regarding how much hash power you may contribute to any of the bitcoin/clone networks.
3) There are no rules mandating which transactions miners have to include in the blocks they mine.
4) As far as I know, he didn't reassign any coins that were mined before he started mining.
5) Luke never made fake transactions to take coins that weren't his.
6) Luke generated a bunch of blocks that became the longest chain and orphaned shorter chains.

Please let me know if any of those 6 facts are wrong.

Edit: and if those 6 facts are indeed correct, then how is what he did wrong?

1) correct
2) correct
3) correct
4) he is "reassigning" all new mined blocks by orphaning them and rejecting them from what I understand - this is mallicious and his intent even in a 51% scenario other blocks can go into the chain, with what he is doing now they can't
5) can't verify
6) See 4

It all boils down to the fact that these chains should live and die by their own merit not have asshats attacking them in childish vendetta wars.  So far none of the alts have truly "lived" very long as compared to bitcoin and are not getting adoption widely as of yet, but each one brings us closer to a better variant of bitcoin... maybe that's why Bitcoin zealots are getting afraid?

CoiledCoin as I see it was an effort to see OP_Eval in action but due to the misuse of eligius hash power it has been set back possibly months or more.

First, thank you for actually responding with something besides

Praise Jebus !

Now on to the discussion:

4) It was my understanding he was simply mining new blocks that built off his previous blocks.  Essentially there was a race condition.. chain1 which included blocks from eligius and chain2 which included blocks from everywhere else.  He/Eligius wasn't reassigning anything, the clients were simply using the chain selection algorithm that picks the longest/most difficult chain which happens to be chain1.  As a result, any work on chain2 keeps getting orphaned.  To combat it, more blocks would need to be found that build on chain2 to overcome chain1's length.

5) What I meant is that if you had sent coins to address1 in block10, eligius started mining in block11.  Essentially, all coin transactions were preserved, only the coin generation coins were lost because the original assigning blocks were orphaned.

6) I think I described this in 4.

It all boils down to the fact that these chains should live and die by their own merit not have asshats attacking them in childish vendetta wars.  So far none of the alts have truly "lived" very long as compared to bitcoin and are not getting adoption widely as of yet, but each one brings us closer to a better variant of bitcoin... maybe that's why Bitcoin zealots are getting afraid?

CoiledCoin as I see it was an effort to see OP_Eval in action but due to the misuse of eligius hash power it has been set back possibly months or more.

I appreciate the alt coins, they show reasons why bitcoin has done well and also illustrate where it can be improved.  I do not like them when all they do is change some vars, uncomment/comment out some code and release.  That isn't innovation. 

I realize that part of the point of coiledcoin was to use op_eval, but I also believe there are ongoing discussions to roll this out to testnet, which means setting up a brand new network isn't needed/warranted.