[ANN] [QRK] Quark | Core 0.10 upgrade

[pabloangello]

http://176.221.46.81/address/QRHb2CTvGnwwrf6GHrxgQcH2tTAUoGhnC2

http://www.reddit.com/r/QuarkCoin/comments/1upa4x/someone_or_some_exchange_bought_around_2000000/

[mbenga]

http://176.221.46.81/address/QRHb2CTvGnwwrf6GHrxgQcH2tTAUoGhnC2

http://www.reddit.com/r/QuarkCoin/comments/1upa4x/someone_or_some_exchange_bought_around_2000000/

we had a bump, i think it will pump soon

[cryptohunter]

That must be an exchange buying that 2M. USD

Same thing before btce added xpm.  Some how the price dumps to lowest for ages......then wow huge buy order. Next day or two announcement.  Exchanges make huge bank.

Only good thing is they didn't get my QRK at 7 or 8 cents..  no chance.

[heskey]

We quarkers just follow one elementary rule. HODL!

[Promethium]

We quarkers just follow one elementary rule. HODL!

Everybody HODL

And while you at it take a look at http://forum.qrk.cc/thread/1242/quark-song-contest

[flayway]

Good pump now when there is coming weekend drop soon  Again some trick get price up and dump and buy later better price back.

[Netnox]

New website is up http://www.qrk.cc

[GreenWins]

So after reading about the potential 51% attack on bitcoin. It's good to know quark is more secure because of CPU mining. I think people will finally understand how quarks actually stand out and why our mining period was so rapid.

Quark CPU mining insure that each individual able to securely defend the network and protect it.

[Its About Sharing]

So after reading about the potential 51% attack on bitcoin. It's good to know quark is more secure because of CPU mining. I think people will finally understand how quarks actually stand out and why our mining period was so rapid.

Quark CPU mining insure that each individual able to securely defend the network and protect it.

I'm not sure that is completely true. The problem with Bitcoin and a 51% attack is more about the pools than about ASIC's, though there is something of a potentially centralized problem with ASIC's, yes.

Who has more mining pools, Bitcoin or Quark? I am pretty sure BTC has MANY MANY more pools. So, what that means is, due to Quark having fewer pools, it is even more important to watch for a 51%
attack. You can have good people unknowingly mining in a bad pool - with no idea of the pools intention. I think the Gigahash.io double spend thing is exactly that.

I would suggest some form of protocol for pools to follow that doesn't allow 1 to have more than 25% or some smaller arbitrary amount. A large holder of ASIC's (or CPU's) could still control a few pools in the same way though, so we need to work on this. For sure a single point of failure.

I am a holder of both Quark and BTC, with the latter being much larger than the former. But I have to be honest here, the best Crypto's should win as this is about the people, not the money (per say.)

[Netnox]

So after reading about the potential 51% attack on bitcoin. It's good to know quark is more secure because of CPU mining. I think people will finally understand how quarks actually stand out and why our mining period was so rapid.

Quark CPU mining insure that each individual able to securely defend the network and protect it.

I'm not sure that is completely true. The problem with Bitcoin and a 51% attack is more about the pools than about ASIC's, though there is something of a potentially centralized problem with ASIC's, yes.

Who has more mining pools, Bitcoin or Quark? I am pretty sure BTC has MANY MANY more pools. So, what that means is, due to Quark having fewer pools, it is even more important to watch for a 51%
attack. You can have good people unknowingly mining in a bad pool - with no idea of the pools intention. I think the Gigahash.io double spend thing is exactly that.

I would suggest some form of protocol for pools to follow that doesn't allow 1 to have more than 25% or some smaller arbitrary amount. A large holder of ASIC's (or CPU's) could still control a few pools in the same way though, so we need to work on this. For sure a single point of failure.

I am a holder of both Quark and BTC, with the latter being much larger than the former. But I have to be honest here, the best Crypto's should win as this is about the people, not the money (per say.)

Is it not possible for QRK to use limitations to pools to avoid it from reaching 51%? Something from outside the pool that can stop a particular pool just in case.

[GreenWins]

So after reading about the potential 51% attack on bitcoin. It's good to know quark is more secure because of CPU mining. I think people will finally understand how quarks actually stand out and why our mining period was so rapid.

Quark CPU mining insure that each individual able to securely defend the network and protect it.

I'm not sure that is completely true. The problem with Bitcoin and a 51% attack is more about the pools than about ASIC's, though there is something of a potentially centralized problem with ASIC's, yes.

Who has more mining pools, Bitcoin or Quark? I am pretty sure BTC has MANY MANY more pools. So, what that means is, due to Quark having fewer pools, it is even more important to watch for a 51%
attack. You can have good people unknowingly mining in a bad pool - with no idea of the pools intention. I think the Gigahash.io double spend thing is exactly that.

I would suggest some form of protocol for pools to follow that doesn't allow 1 to have more than 25% or some smaller arbitrary amount. A large holder of ASIC's (or CPU's) could still control a few pools in the same way though, so we need to work on this. For sure a single point of failure.

I am a holder of both Quark and BTC, with the latter being much larger than the former. But I have to be honest here, the best Crypto's should win as this is about the people, not the money (per say.)

I mean that as a solo miner. The average person is able to start mining without specialized hardware like ASIC if a pool starts to get close to 51%. While bitcoiners have no power unless they own ASIC hardware to help the network. This is where quark beauty shines.

[porcupine87]

So after reading about the potential 51% attack on bitcoin. It's good to know quark is more secure because of CPU mining. I think people will finally understand how quarks actually stand out and why our mining period was so rapid.

Quark CPU mining insure that each individual able to securely defend the network and protect it.

I'm not sure that is completely true. The problem with Bitcoin and a 51% attack is more about the pools than about ASIC's, though there is something of a potentially centralized problem with ASIC's, yes.

Who has more mining pools, Bitcoin or Quark? I am pretty sure BTC has MANY MANY more pools. So, what that means is, due to Quark having fewer pools, it is even more important to watch for a 51%
attack. You can have good people unknowingly mining in a bad pool - with no idea of the pools intention. I think the Gigahash.io double spend thing is exactly that.

I would suggest some form of protocol for pools to follow that doesn't allow 1 to have more than 25% or some smaller arbitrary amount. A large holder of ASIC's (or CPU's) could still control a few pools in the same way though, so we need to work on this. For sure a single point of failure.

I am a holder of both Quark and BTC, with the latter being much larger than the former. But I have to be honest here, the best Crypto's should win as this is about the people, not the money (per say.)

I mean that as a solo miner. Average people are able to start mining without specialized hardware like ASIC if a pool starts to get close to 51%. While bitcoiners have no power unless they own ASIC hardware to help the network. This is where quark beauty shines.

I don't know. A pool consists of many individual miners. Therefore they can switch or make the pool even with 50%+ act with the protocol.

Well, if I want to support the network ASICs would be nice, true. But this is not only a disadvantage of Bitcoin. How many computers do I(or one entity) need to infect to get 51%. And with Quarkcoin?

[DarthNoodle]

So after reading about the potential 51% attack on bitcoin. It's good to know quark is more secure because of CPU mining. I think people will finally understand how quarks actually stand out and why our mining period was so rapid.

Quark CPU mining insure that each individual able to securely defend the network and protect it.

I'm not sure that is completely true. The problem with Bitcoin and a 51% attack is more about the pools than about ASIC's, though there is something of a potentially centralized problem with ASIC's, yes.

Who has more mining pools, Bitcoin or Quark? I am pretty sure BTC has MANY MANY more pools. So, what that means is, due to Quark having fewer pools, it is even more important to watch for a 51%
attack. You can have good people unknowingly mining in a bad pool - with no idea of the pools intention. I think the Gigahash.io double spend thing is exactly that.

I would suggest some form of protocol for pools to follow that doesn't allow 1 to have more than 25% or some smaller arbitrary amount. A large holder of ASIC's (or CPU's) could still control a few pools in the same way though, so we need to work on this. For sure a single point of failure.

I am a holder of both Quark and BTC, with the latter being much larger than the former. But I have to be honest here, the best Crypto's should win as this is about the people, not the money (per say.)

I mean that as a solo miner. Average people are able to start mining without specialized hardware like ASIC if a pool starts to get close to 51%. While bitcoiners have no power unless they own ASIC hardware to help the network. This is where quark beauty shines.

I don't know. A pool consists of many individual miners. Therefore they can switch or make the pool even with 50%+ act with the protocol.

Well, if I want to support the network ASICs would be nice, true. But this is not only a disadvantage of Bitcoin. How many computers do I(or one entity) need to infect to get 51%. And with Quarkcoin?

Thats a good point, Quark is not a POS coin so i assume it can get 51% attacked? wonder how many cloud servers it would take if it can be attacked.. especially after the block reward flattens out!

[Its About Sharing]

So after reading about the potential 51% attack on bitcoin. It's good to know quark is more secure because of CPU mining. I think people will finally understand how quarks actually stand out and why our mining period was so rapid.

Quark CPU mining insure that each individual able to securely defend the network and protect it.

I'm not sure that is completely true. The problem with Bitcoin and a 51% attack is more about the pools than about ASIC's, though there is something of a potentially centralized problem with ASIC's, yes.

Who has more mining pools, Bitcoin or Quark? I am pretty sure BTC has MANY MANY more pools. So, what that means is, due to Quark having fewer pools, it is even more important to watch for a 51%
attack. You can have good people unknowingly mining in a bad pool - with no idea of the pools intention. I think the Gigahash.io double spend thing is exactly that.

I would suggest some form of protocol for pools to follow that doesn't allow 1 to have more than 25% or some smaller arbitrary amount. A large holder of ASIC's (or CPU's) could still control a few pools in the same way though, so we need to work on this. For sure a single point of failure.

I am a holder of both Quark and BTC, with the latter being much larger than the former. But I have to be honest here, the best Crypto's should win as this is about the people, not the money (per say.)

I mean that as a solo miner. Average people are able to start mining without specialized hardware like ASIC if a pool starts to get close to 51%. While bitcoiners have no power unless they own ASIC hardware to help the network. This is where quark beauty shines.

I don't know. A pool consists of many individual miners. Therefore they can switch or make the pool even with 50%+ act with the protocol.

Well, if I want to support the network ASICs would be nice, true. But this is not only a disadvantage of Bitcoin. How many computers do I(or one entity) need to infect to get 51%. And with Quarkcoin?

I'm pro Quark, but just thinking about weaknesses in any of the coins I hold is a good practice. A weakness of CPU's are bots. If a competing coin saw Quarks as a threat, what is to stop a fairly wealthy individual from buying some mining bots on Quark (huge amount) and try to get control of the network via a pool then? Not sure how expensive it would be on Quark but stranger things have happened when money is the goal, unfortunately.

Not that I think this would happen, but its good to be ready in the future for any form of attack.

[professorY]

So after reading about the potential 51% attack on bitcoin. It's good to know quark is more secure because of CPU mining. I think people will finally understand how quarks actually stand out and why our mining period was so rapid.

Quark CPU mining insure that each individual able to securely defend the network and protect it.

I'm not sure that is completely true. The problem with Bitcoin and a 51% attack is more about the pools than about ASIC's, though there is something of a potentially centralized problem with ASIC's, yes.

Who has more mining pools, Bitcoin or Quark? I am pretty sure BTC has MANY MANY more pools. So, what that means is, due to Quark having fewer pools, it is even more important to watch for a 51%
attack. You can have good people unknowingly mining in a bad pool - with no idea of the pools intention. I think the Gigahash.io double spend thing is exactly that.

I would suggest some form of protocol for pools to follow that doesn't allow 1 to have more than 25% or some smaller arbitrary amount. A large holder of ASIC's (or CPU's) could still control a few pools in the same way though, so we need to work on this. For sure a single point of failure.

I am a holder of both Quark and BTC, with the latter being much larger than the former. But I have to be honest here, the best Crypto's should win as this is about the people, not the money (per say.)

I mean that as a solo miner. Average people are able to start mining without specialized hardware like ASIC if a pool starts to get close to 51%. While bitcoiners have no power unless they own ASIC hardware to help the network. This is where quark beauty shines.

I don't know. A pool consists of many individual miners. Therefore they can switch or make the pool even with 50%+ act with the protocol.

Well, if I want to support the network ASICs would be nice, true. But this is not only a disadvantage of Bitcoin. How many computers do I(or one entity) need to infect to get 51%. And with Quarkcoin?

I'm pro Quark, but just thinking about weaknesses in any of the coins I hold is a good practice. A weakness of CPU's are bots. If a competing coin saw Quarks as a threat, what is to stop a fairly wealthy individual from buying some mining bots on Quark (huge amount) and try to get control of the network via a pool then? Not sure how expensive it would be on Quark but stranger things have happened when money is the goal, unfortunately.

Not that I think this would happen, but its good to be ready in the future for any form of attack.

The cost of the attack is not really an issue. Botnets are installed via malware and infect hundreds or thousands or millions of computers. An attacker only needs the will and technical means. Money has nothing to do with it. That is the danger of CPU-only coins.

[cryptohunter]

So after reading about the potential 51% attack on bitcoin. It's good to know quark is more secure because of CPU mining. I think people will finally understand how quarks actually stand out and why our mining period was so rapid.

Quark CPU mining insure that each individual able to securely defend the network and protect it.

I'm not sure that is completely true. The problem with Bitcoin and a 51% attack is more about the pools than about ASIC's, though there is something of a potentially centralized problem with ASIC's, yes.

Who has more mining pools, Bitcoin or Quark? I am pretty sure BTC has MANY MANY more pools. So, what that means is, due to Quark having fewer pools, it is even more important to watch for a 51%
attack. You can have good people unknowingly mining in a bad pool - with no idea of the pools intention. I think the Gigahash.io double spend thing is exactly that.

I would suggest some form of protocol for pools to follow that doesn't allow 1 to have more than 25% or some smaller arbitrary amount. A large holder of ASIC's (or CPU's) could still control a few pools in the same way though, so we need to work on this. For sure a single point of failure.

I am a holder of both Quark and BTC, with the latter being much larger than the former. But I have to be honest here, the best Crypto's should win as this is about the people, not the money (per say.)

I mean that as a solo miner. Average people are able to start mining without specialized hardware like ASIC if a pool starts to get close to 51%. While bitcoiners have no power unless they own ASIC hardware to help the network. This is where quark beauty shines.

I don't know. A pool consists of many individual miners. Therefore they can switch or make the pool even with 50%+ act with the protocol.

Well, if I want to support the network ASICs would be nice, true. But this is not only a disadvantage of Bitcoin. How many computers do I(or one entity) need to infect to get 51%. And with Quarkcoin?

I'm pro Quark, but just thinking about weaknesses in any of the coins I hold is a good practice. A weakness of CPU's are bots. If a competing coin saw Quarks as a threat, what is to stop a fairly wealthy individual from buying some mining bots on Quark (huge amount) and try to get control of the network via a pool then? Not sure how expensive it would be on Quark but stranger things have happened when money is the goal, unfortunately.

Not that I think this would happen, but its good to be ready in the future for any form of attack.

The cost of the attack is not really an issue. Botnets are installed via malware and infect hundreds or thousands or millions of computers. An attacker only needs the will and technical means. Money has nothing to do with it. That is the danger of CPU-only coins.

Botnets are getting much harder to install on peoples pc these days. Everyone i know if freaky anal about antivirus, malwarebytes etc etc, windows is getting pretty secure compared to what it used to be. People running old shit like xp probably don't have their pc on much and the cpu is mostly crap and they will notice if their cycles suddenly get raped. I would guess botnets will be less of a threat in the future. However, would be nice to see QRK have some POS later  just a couple of percent for anti inflation and protection against 51% also..

[aorith]

How hard would be to implement POS in Quark? and what would be (if any) the disadvantages?

[dzejmsdin]

New website is up http://www.qrk.cc

Finally!

[likepeas]

How hard would be to implement POS in Quark? and what would be (if any) the disadvantages?

check this out :

http://quarkpayments.com/

[TBCM]

I made a Quark Faucet

The faucet needs donations to increase the payout amount.