Oh this is wonderful, the XSPEC lot are out in full force with still nothing to disprove me.
This is not a FUD campaign, it's 1 person vs a bunch of XSPEC fan boys who still cannot explain why over 1 year nothing has been done!
Looks more like a save your ass campaign from the XSPEC groupies now.
Any way, let's focus on this
Just to clear up a few things. (I'm @mandica, the founder of XSPEC and still here for anyone new to this)
All the discussions about code snippets and code cloning and implementation of protocols is a bit stagnate. This is the nature of open source development. There is no secret (and never was) that XSPEC was build on SDC. XSPEC never claimed to be proprietary code and is based on Bitcoin in the end as many others are. This point has been laboured ad nauseam and if your objection to a crypto is based on it's Bitcoin / SDC / Monero code provenance then you will seek out other projects. The fact that XSPEC is open source and based on other open source code is not a basis on which to claim a scam if you are a thinking person.
@jbg and Bryce are working on the code and as you all know, not every update is shown on GitHub immediately. GitHub is a not a live window to follow updates. Nobody as forced anyone out and in fact Spectre has very dedicated community and in fact, I would suggest that a dedicated community is what will succeed in driving this forward. XSPEC now also have steady development funding and will hire. The community will make sure that XSPEC will last for years to come and with a solid dev fund we will have the resources to develop the project. The team is together and strong and nobody has left for anything else. I am working on something auxiliary that will benefit XSPEC in the long run but can't say anything right now.
XSPEC is not a scam, we are just trying to provide a quality functional privacy focused cryptocurrency against a tide of FUD and shit and we will succeed. I have nothing more to say and there is nothing to discuss. Adversity brings out the best in us. Discard XSPEC at your peril.
For 1, I've never said open source projects are a scam or a basis to being a scam, majority of crypto coins out there are open source, the joy of being open source is we can actually see the work done in each version, it's also something I look at with other coins to determine they are pulling their weight.
2. Claiming not everything goes up to GitHub immediately is very understandable, but if you can read properly you'll see my findings were against the features that have been developed and have been committed to GitHub, your ring signature change was nothing yet hyped as a big change, your obfs4 implementation was nothing more than calling a TOR executable yet hyped as a huge change, the changes to the wallet startup times were nothing more than changing 500 to 200 (500 millisecond delay to 200) yet also hyped as a big change, the rest is just colour and logo changes, why can no one here give me a reason for this being acceptable?
Simply based on that, even if you are holding back on putting the latest version on GitHub, what's been done to date and released to the community is an absolute joke at best, so you've cleared up nothing here but the same garbage we see from XSPEC, "We have something you can't see yet, it's coming"
History speaks far louder than future promises, your history is full of nothing but a days work being hyped as big change, explain this? it shouldn't be that hard right? it's what I've been asking for from the start but you keep beating around the bush trying to fool non technical people.
Now this one:
I want to give Kudos to OP for showing some actual evidence for his claims (something that the "this-is-not-a-scam" voices fail to do!). It's rational, well written and credible!
HOWEVER: After taking a look at the repository myself, I do find the OP's claims to be exaggerated (while not baseless). I wrote down my more detailed analysis here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3065979.0You made an account yesterday, you've tried to sound a little less shill like by giving me little praise, to sum your thread up, you've done no analysis at all on the code, all you've done is look through a period of commits, seen some activity and said hey! He's wrong.. go through the actual code to see how tiny and meaningless each commit is, nothing more than lots of word changes, a few library updates, updating read me files, and the points I've stated here, the commits are fluff.
The biggest work done which makes up majority of the code change size is the donation system, if you really aren't a shill please look a bit closer, I went through every code commit on there and focused more around the key features XSPEC has brought along and hyped as big change.
Also this from your thread
The negative aspects for me when looking at the git repository are two things:
1. The developer is not good at commenting his commits, and even though the codebase was forked, he should also get better at commenting the code changes he makes
2. There were no commits after January 30st
This thread and these findings are not about these 2 points at all, you do not need comments to read the tiny amount of work done, never did I state anything about lack of comments, as for the "no commits" after Jan 30, my findings were on all the work done prior.
I see a pattern here, they're trying to justify that they've not committed any code recently due to a few "acceptable" reasons and this whole thread is based on their lack of work since Jan, this thread is NOT about that, it's about the lack of work in the committed code since day 1.
Stop trying to spin out of this.
To any one reading this who actually cares for the answers, go and view the post history of every person in this thread defending XSPEC, having an army of 100+ shills does not change what I've found.
