Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 06:46:45 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: bitcoin vs solidcoin  (Read 18229 times)
defxor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 530


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 03:04:21 PM
 #121

Confidence in P2P currency is already dead, the people using it are only nerds, the general public have made their mind up

The general public has no idea what a "P2P currency" is, but if you give merchants a way to lower prices and makes it easy for consumers to use they'll happily do so.

We're not there yet, but we're moving forwards not backwards. That's good.

1481395605
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481395605

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481395605
Reply with quote  #2

1481395605
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481395605
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481395605

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481395605
Reply with quote  #2

1481395605
Report to moderator
1481395605
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481395605

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481395605
Reply with quote  #2

1481395605
Report to moderator
FlipPro
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
September 03, 2011, 03:08:36 PM
 #122

Maybe I would do it. It would be for my profit and for the greater good of the community.
Please explain the greater good part.

Full disclosure, I like SolidCoins, I like Bitcoins, but if I am missing something about SolidCoin in an overall scheme of things, I am not catching it.

a) Just look at this issue that ArtForz brought up.
b) It seems that coinhunter develops everything "in house". doublec updates the git repo afterwards. so in essence coinhunter can code in whatever he thinks, which in the best case leads to things like (a). having the coding centralized in one single developer, I have to say I rather trust paypal.
c) bitcoin works like this: code -> test -> fix -> test -> release. solidcoin: take bitcoin test version -> release -> daily mandatory bugfix
d) think about the implications if solidcoin would make it to the average joe, and only then "we" (or some black hat Vladimir Smiley ) exploits all those bugs: it could destroy bitcoin as a collateral on its way down, as average joe/media does not see any differences between Bitcoin and solidcoin.

I am pretty sure one could add a lot more points to this list how those half-backed "improvements" could eventually affect the bitcoin community in a bad way.


With this model he positions himself to be able to take down all unprotected bitcoin wallets residing on the same computer as shitcoin code. "Beware greeks bearing gifts". And never ever have such software on the same computer as bitcoin wallet. or on the same network for that matter.

Do not tell me later that you guys were not warned.




You really think Coinhunter is the one out to get us, when ArtFroz is the attacker? WTF?  Tongue

Tweet For Coins http://uptweet.com
doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 03:25:49 PM
 #123

I do not think that he is a bad guy (actually I do not know either way). I am just saying that I trust no one and if you guys want to have some self-updated software controlled by one anonymous guy somewhere on internet next to your bitcoin wallet.dat than be my guest. Also go and ask mybitcoin to restart their service.
Everyone should be aware of this I hope. I'd never run an alt-chain related binary without checking the source compared to a known bitcoin release and analysing the differences then building from source.
bitbitcoincoin
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112



View Profile
September 03, 2011, 04:42:27 PM
 #124

I do not think that he is a bad guy (actually I do not know either way). I am just saying that I trust no one and if you guys want to have some self-updated software controlled by one anonymous guy somewhere on internet next to your bitcoin wallet.dat than be my guest. Also go and ask mybitcoin to restart their service.

There is nothing personal, simply risk assessment.




At least there are a couple people who realize this is only done at best to divide Bitcoin, at worst to steal wallets creating more instability/doubt in digital currency.

Unfortunately it's the miners diving in head first ruled by their greed fueling Solidcoin, which is a brilliant ploy by it's creator.   Miners have been crying about low bit coin profits since they had peaked around 30 and crashed down to 10 a few months back.  This was the perfect opportunity to get those who care nothing about Bitcoin to switch sides to a more profitable money making scheme, regardless of what happens to p2p currency in the process.
JohnDoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
September 03, 2011, 05:23:29 PM
 #125

Deflation does indeed discourage spending but the key issue is that I don't actually think that's a bad thing. It's better for the people if they have more incentive to save money instead of spending it and it's way better for the environment and our sustainability in general. An economic model based on infinite growth is absolutely utopian-ridiculous taking account the current realities so any system based on that is basically doomed, this is one of the main reasons why we're seeing so many problems in the real world right now.

I agree infinite growth is unsustainable. I'm not advocating for inflation, I'm advocating for deflation + demurrage which does not stagnate the economy like pure deflation but is environmentally sustainable because the focus is shifted from short term to long term investment as holding more money than you can spend becomes a waste. So things like cutting down a whole forest and then leaving for an immediate million dollars is no longer preferable to cutting and replanting little by little over the course of many years.

And the thing of it is, even with deflation people will use money to purchase what they need to live. They will even purchase luxuries, you see this very clearly with electronics. Electronics get better (deflate) massively in a very short amount of time but still people keep buying them even if they can get much better ones later with the same amount of money. Deflation is not a serious problem unless it's totally out of control.

Time preference would only help with spending in a deflationary currency if that currency is the only medium of exchange available to people. If there are alternative currencies people will just choose to spend with an inflationary currency and store value with a deflationary one, pretty much like the relationship between dollars and swiss francs.
Blitz­
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596


"Cut Your Loose"


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 05:24:07 PM
 #126

Maybe I would do it. It would be for my profit and for the greater good of the community.
Please explain the greater good part.
I believe it’s because many Bitcoin proponents only want a free market and competition as long as it benefits them. Else, it has to go.

"Bitcoin had been transformed from an anarachistic challenge to the financial status quo, to the crypto spawn of Satan, fuelled by cut-throat greed and delusions of avarice." - MatTheCat
"these people don't seem to want to stop till Bitcoin is completely destroyed and left like an old cum rag in the corner of the room." - ShroomsKit
stryker
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 232


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 05:26:47 PM
 #127

I'm just looking to see how two solidcoin promises pan out.... the super-dooper api and as time goes on the ease of exchange from SC to dollars.... mostly because these two things will drive interest in SC and decouple it from bitcoin so it can stand on its own.... thats where it could become interesting and a little fuzzy.

SC does lead in involving the community and enabling the "common man" to use it so its going to be very interesting.
aq
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 05:39:58 PM
 #128

You really think Coinhunter is the one out to get us, when ArtFroz is the attacker? WTF?  Tongue

I think those solidcoins have brainwashed you too much:
- Coinhunters modification where half-backed.
- Artforz used it within its specifications.
- Coinhunters version failed.
- Coinhunter delivers a fix to fix the fix of a fix for his version
norulezapply
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 475


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 06:14:44 PM
 #129

Bitcoin always wins. Solidcoin is a poor fork with no real advantages and will likely die out soon.

If my post helped, I'll happily accept a few bitmills!   15rGg6A1JFZV3b7TTbtpAaiYGdUD1e1oAm
phelix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


nmc:id/phelix


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 06:21:13 PM
 #130

I bet most  big miners and pool operators are fully aware about this possibility, most probably just cannot be bothered, when the alternative is simply to do nothing and shitcoins will just die out on their own.

But if someone does this it would be technically a very interesting event. Pass the popcorn.

It would also be an asshole move. Of course young projects can easily be trampled to death by cyber bullies. That proofs nothing at all about the technical side of SolidCoin. Even if one day a clearly superior alternative to Bitcoin emerges (and I don't believe SolidCoin to be that), then this SuperiorCoin will most likely go through the same vulnerable phase and it would be a disservice to the progress of crypto-currencies to take advantage of this vulnerability and kill it off early.

If you think, like me, that SolidCoin does not bring enough advantages over Bitcoin to be a serious competitor, then just let them alone and run their course. I don't see it cause much harm. It even provides a nice field test for some of the alternative approaches, like the new difficulty adjustment algorithm. If this turns out to be a worthwhile change, it could be even adopted for Bitcoin in the future, starting from some checkpoint block number, and we would already have a better understanding how that would play out.


could not agree more but: it is better for such an aggressive move to happen early and transparently than later and in the dark. I would consider it a field test for a pirate pool. It would not be necessary to trample a to the ground but some serious double spending would no doubt be interesting.



blockchained.com ■ bitcointalk top posts
phelix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


nmc:id/phelix


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 06:28:16 PM
 #131

btw: does the time triggered retargeting make solidcoin more vulnerable? I think ArtForz indicated something like this. Would it be possible to create your own forked block chain and mess with the timestamps so that difficulty bottoms out and you can create new blocks like crazy? I assume things like these are the problems that come with a real time dependent network algorithm.

blockchained.com ■ bitcointalk top posts
ArtForz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 07:23:34 PM
 #132

Yes. It appears any time-triggered system or asymmetrically adjusting algorithm using block timestamps can be gamed by a 51% attacker.
What's worse, the same thing can be done by a 51% collective of attackers without requiring any central coordination other than agreeing on a starting block and what rules define a "properly fake" block timestamp.

bitcoin: 1Fb77Xq5ePFER8GtKRn2KDbDTVpJKfKmpz
i0coin: jNdvyvd6v6gV3kVJLD7HsB5ZwHyHwAkfdw
phelix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


nmc:id/phelix


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 07:43:36 PM
 #133

Yes. It appears any time-triggered system or asymmetrically adjusting algorithm using block timestamps can be gamed by a 51% attacker.
What's worse, the same thing can be done by a 51% collective of attackers without requiring any central coordination other than agreeing on a starting block and what rules define a "properly fake" block timestamp.
what about using the relationship of hashrate and difficulty as a retargeting condition?

edit: not sure if estimating the hashrate will suffer from the same timestamp problem

blockchained.com ■ bitcointalk top posts
stryker
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 232


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 08:04:27 PM
 #134

vlad, your talking about open source software.... the same goes for all other open source software, its down to peer review..... or is linux/gnu also evil then?
Synaptic
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 08:38:10 PM
 #135

SolidCoin, IXcoin, IOcoin....


They all just show what a gullible community this is. Gullible, or unscrupulous.
BitcoinPorn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560


Posts: 69


View Profile WWW
September 03, 2011, 08:38:15 PM
 #136

Vlad's currently running Bitcoin v0.1 that he got fresh from his cryptography mailing list on this baby



:p

Still like SolidCoin, enjoying seeing this particular one going through growing pains/issues, definitely went ahead and took the clients off my computers to do a little sitting and waiting Smiley

Vladimir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


-


View Profile
September 03, 2011, 08:40:23 PM
 #137

.

-
wolftaur
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
September 04, 2011, 02:28:11 AM
 #138

lol,  Grin

beats being in allinvain's position, though

Ouch. Smiley

"MOOOOOOOM! SOME MYTHICAL WOLFBEAST GUY IS MAKING FUN OF ME ON THE INTERNET!!!!"
CoinHunter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
September 04, 2011, 03:50:30 AM
 #139

Yes. It appears any time-triggered system or asymmetrically adjusting algorithm using block timestamps can be gamed by a 51% attacker.
What's worse, the same thing can be done by a 51% collective of attackers without requiring any central coordination other than agreeing on a starting block and what rules define a "properly fake" block timestamp.

Yes except you're missing the point. This is easily detectable, and if Bitcoin or SolidCoin have a 51% attacker that wants to destroy either chain, they currently can. As soon as I hear someone say "Well if you get to 51%...." it sounds like they have no idea what they are talking about. Assume 51% and malicious means game over.

Unlike Bitcoin I am working on a way to solve the problem of the 51% attacker. And good luck to you personally too..... you mess with thousands of peoples computers, network and investments and you can expect some sort of response.... the people here cheering on this blackhat should also take a look at themselves.

I know numerous vulnerabilites in Bitcoin's chain and if I wanted to do an "artforz" to bitcoin I could. That is the difference between someone that has no intent to harm others and someone that does.

Try SolidCoin or talk with other SolidCoin supporters here SolidCoin Forums
ctoon6
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350



View Profile
September 04, 2011, 04:11:44 AM
 #140

Yes. It appears any time-triggered system or asymmetrically adjusting algorithm using block timestamps can be gamed by a 51% attacker.
What's worse, the same thing can be done by a 51% collective of attackers without requiring any central coordination other than agreeing on a starting block and what rules define a "properly fake" block timestamp.

Yes except you're missing the point. This is easily detectable, and if Bitcoin or SolidCoin have a 51% attacker that wants to destroy either chain, they currently can. As soon as I hear someone say "Well if you get to 51%...." it sounds like they have no idea what they are talking about. Assume 51% and malicious means game over.

Unlike Bitcoin I am working on a way to solve the problem of the 51% attacker. And good luck to you personally too..... you mess with thousands of peoples computers, network and investments and you can expect some sort of response.... the people here cheering on this blackhat should also take a look at themselves.

I know numerous vulnerabilites in Bitcoin's chain and if I wanted to do an "artforz" to bitcoin I could. That is the difference between someone that has no intent to harm others and someone that does.

you don't seem to understand a fundamental issue with decentralization, of course unless you plan to add centralization.

the fundamental problem is that you can not control how a user will interact in the network or use a protocol. of course a 51% attack would be impossible in a perfect world, because the software that is widely used simply does not allow it. however users can write their own software to do different things, therefore if you have a large portion of the network, you have "control" as long as you have custom software to allow it.

also, you cant enforce time stamping to be more than somewhat accurate, because you have no central authority to say if a time stamp was bad or not.

and i challenge you to attack the bitcoin network, since you seem to have figured it out.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 »  All
  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!