Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 02:13:01 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: bitcoin vs solidcoin  (Read 18207 times)
CoinHunter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
September 04, 2011, 04:17:47 AM
 #141

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.

Where do you get the idea I don't understand decentralization? What part of the post above makes you believe that?

If you think the only way to defend a network is through centralization you would be wrong. If you think all the smartest ideas in the world are going into Bitcoin you would be wrong.

Anyone that argues "Once you get 51% you can do blah blah with SolidCoin" is someone that doesn't understand the issue. 51% on SC or BTC right now means DEATH. There is nothing worse than DEATH. If they start playing with the timestamps, generating mass coins, double spending, withholding tx etc, people will stop accepting SC or BTC. That is what we call DEATH.

It's like talking to a brick wall with some of the people here.


Try SolidCoin or talk with other SolidCoin supporters here SolidCoin Forums
1481033581
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481033581

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481033581
Reply with quote  #2

1481033581
Report to moderator
1481033581
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481033581

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481033581
Reply with quote  #2

1481033581
Report to moderator
1481033581
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481033581

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481033581
Reply with quote  #2

1481033581
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
ctoon6
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350



View Profile
September 04, 2011, 05:36:51 AM
 #142

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.

Where do you get the idea I don't understand decentralization? What part of the post above makes you believe that?

If you think the only way to defend a network is through centralization you would be wrong. If you think all the smartest ideas in the world are going into Bitcoin you would be wrong.

Anyone that argues "Once you get 51% you can do blah blah with SolidCoin" is someone that doesn't understand the issue. 51% on SC or BTC right now means DEATH. There is nothing worse than DEATH. If they start playing with the timestamps, generating mass coins, double spending, withholding tx etc, people will stop accepting SC or BTC. That is what we call DEATH.

It's like talking to a brick wall with some of the people here.



you have yet to say any solutions to the above problems, and i never said anything about solid coin or bitcoin, the issue is that the system is decentralized. decentralization by nature makes it difficult to identify nodes that are related, in this case, a single entity, for any bitcoin based system. therefore you can never prevent the 51% attack, you can always hard code in exceptions, but that adds centralization to the system.

again, if you have a solution to any of them problems, or are able to attack the network, then by all means.

willphase
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770


View Profile
September 04, 2011, 10:25:29 AM
 #143

Anyone that argues "Once you get 51% you can do blah blah with SolidCoin" is someone that doesn't understand the issue. 51% on SC or BTC right now means DEATH.

The difference is that the compute power for BTC grew organically so there was never a point where any single entity could get anywhere close to the 51% (except, perhaps in May/June when there were fewer pools and some threatened to reach 51%.  However, with SC and these other spinoff currencies, there is a real risk of this happening - all it takes is for a small proportion of the current BTC miners to spin off in a coordinated manner to SC and they could seriously damage the network, and thus damage BTC by proxy.

Will

phelix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


nmc:id/phelix


View Profile
September 04, 2011, 12:04:45 PM
 #144

Anyone that argues "Once you get 51% you can do blah blah with SolidCoin" is someone that doesn't understand the issue. 51% on SC or BTC right now means DEATH.

The difference is that the compute power for BTC grew organically so there was never a point where any single entity could get anywhere close to the 51% (except, perhaps in May/June when there were fewer pools and some threatened to reach 51%.  However, with SC and these other spinoff currencies, there is a real risk of this happening - all it takes is for a small proportion of the current BTC miners to spin off in a coordinated manner to SC and they could seriously damage the network, and thus damage BTC by proxy.

Will

+1  everybody investing in sc needs to be aware of that. there are seven pools or so that could do it within a couple of hours. would the pool miners even notice? ("very bad luck..")

nobody in the world can do this with bitcoin - it is by far the fastest distributed computing network.

blockchained.com ■ bitcointalk top posts
TwistedPair
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 17


Bitminer


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 01:48:23 AM
 #145

If such an attack took place, one possibility would be to submit a patch to the client which includes a block checkpoint to the last known point before the 51% takeover point.

BitcoinNews.com
wolftaur
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 01:58:26 AM
 #146

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?

Well, we're half talking about open source software.

SolidCoin isn't open source any more. CoinHunter decided to throw a hissy fit and blame Bitcoin for something ArtForz did, and SolidCoin's _new_ license says you need his permission to modify the source, and it also expressly prohibits the Bitcoin team from using any "fixes" that CoinHunter makes.

So we're talking about an open-source cryptocurrency, and a closed-source cryptocurrency that is a mostly direct copy of the open-source one. Except for a few "improvements" that turned out to be easily exploitable security screwups.

"MOOOOOOOM! SOME MYTHICAL WOLFBEAST GUY IS MAKING FUN OF ME ON THE INTERNET!!!!"
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
September 05, 2011, 03:57:47 AM
 #147

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?

Well, we're half talking about open source software.

SolidCoin isn't open source any more. CoinHunter decided to throw a hissy fit and blame Bitcoin for something ArtForz did, and SolidCoin's _new_ license says you need his permission to modify the source, and it also expressly prohibits the Bitcoin team from using any "fixes" that CoinHunter makes.

So we're talking about an open-source cryptocurrency, and a closed-source cryptocurrency that is a mostly direct copy of the open-source one. Except for a few "improvements" that turned out to be easily exploitable security screwups.

Considering that he took the source code straight from bitcoin, and has admitted such, he literally is in direct violation of the license that he agreed to by taking bitcoin's source code.  If anyone is getting sued, it's him.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
wolftaur
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 04:07:37 AM
 #148

Considering that he took the source code straight from bitcoin, and has admitted such, he literally is in direct violation of the license that he agreed to by taking bitcoin's source code.  If anyone is getting sued, it's him.

Yeah, especially with that "And the bitcoin people aren't allowed to use any fixes or improvements I make" crap he stuck in the new license agreement, along with removing all the copyright notices that gave Bitcoin any credit, etc.

Now, the question this thread poses is bitcoin vs solidcoin.

I think the fact a single bitcoin buys you over 200 solidcoins and the price of solidcoin has been sinking like a rock ever since two of the exchanges shut down over CoinHunter's code theft, along with the two biggest pools, and one of the block explorers ceasing to function does a good job of answering which one wins. Smiley

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

Activity: 350


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 04:11:26 AM
 #149

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.

The End of Solidcoin. That is all folks.
relmeas
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 125


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 05:00:29 AM
 #150

I think the bitcoin community needs an open source instrument for attacking emerging block chains. I mean, several people would happily lend their hashpower to attack these junkcoins but there is no instrument for them to do so.

Seriously, someone needs to develop an attacking tool to be used as the base for attacks ... Sure, it won't be universal since emerging blockchains may protect against it, but that's why it should be open source - to be able to modify it easily to be used against certain new shitcoin.

This won't be dangerous for the bitcoin since there is no such hashrate to attack it, but new chains would be vulnerable.
wolftaur
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 05:17:00 AM
 #151

I think the bitcoin community needs an open source instrument for attacking emerging block chains. I mean, several people would happily lend their hashpower to attack these junkcoins but there is no instrument for them to do so.

Seriously, someone needs to develop an attacking tool to be used as the base for attacks ... Sure, it won't be universal since emerging blockchains may protect against it, but that's why it should be open source - to be able to modify it easily to be used against certain new shitcoin.

This won't be dangerous for the bitcoin since there is no such hashrate to attack it, but new chains would be vulnerable.

I say we start with rehashing ixcoin back hundreds of blocks and erasing all transactions going back weeks. Smiley

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

Activity: 112


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 07:05:33 AM
 #152

I'd say that if the is how the bitcoin community decides to act and present itself then it is destined for failure, very sad as cryptocurrency had a chance to be the next great thing but until they learn to self police you lot it's f'ed.

This from the guy threatening to put virus signatures in the block chain. Smiley

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

Activity: 112


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 07:14:09 AM
 #153

Considering that he took the source code straight from bitcoin, and has admitted such, he literally is in direct violation of the license that he agreed to by taking bitcoin's source code.  If anyone is getting sued, it's him.

He probably will be, by Oracle. I did a little reading.

CoinHunter's "closed source" client is still using the Berkeley DB library, which is the property of Oracle. They only allow free use in FOSS, not closed source software like SolidCoin.

As soon as CoinHunter closed SolidCoin he owed Oracle money to continue using the library. Given how many SolidCoin-haters there are I'm quite sure that's already been e-mailed to Oracle after I pointed it out over in the alternate-cryptocurrency forum.

"MOOOOOOOM! SOME MYTHICAL WOLFBEAST GUY IS MAKING FUN OF ME ON THE INTERNET!!!!"
ripper234
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260


Ron Gross


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2011, 08:52:26 AM
 #154

He probably will be, by Oracle. I did a little reading.

CoinHunter's "closed source" client is still using the Berkeley DB library, which is the property of Oracle. They only allow free use in FOSS, not closed source software like SolidCoin.

As soon as CoinHunter closed SolidCoin he owed Oracle money to continue using the library. Given how many SolidCoin-haters there are I'm quite sure that's already been e-mailed to Oracle after I pointed it out over in the alternate-cryptocurrency forum.

I was much more open minded about SolidCoin and other alternatives until I took one look at this thread.
SolidCoin will never see a dime of my BTC.

Please do not pm me, use ron@bitcoin.org.il instead
Mastercoin Executive Director
Co-founder of the Israeli Bitcoin Association
wolftaur
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 09:05:11 AM
 #155

I was much more open minded about SolidCoin and other alternatives until I took one look at this thread.
SolidCoin will never see a dime of my BTC.

Yeah, that was exactly what did it for me too. I was talking to CoinHunter back when SC was first released and at first I was interested. My interest faded when I tried seeing if he'd want to talk about ArtForz' disclosure and analyzing if it was an actual problem-- he got really rude to me really fast, which was pretty screwed up given that only a day before he'd just sent me a bunch of SC for the hell of it, and it should have been pretty obvious I wasn't one of his "enemies." At that point I sorta just got a little disinterested. His behavior after that, especially the chat with gavin, well.

CoinHunter's proven what he is.

"MOOOOOOOM! SOME MYTHICAL WOLFBEAST GUY IS MAKING FUN OF ME ON THE INTERNET!!!!"
BitcoinPorn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560


Posts: 69


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2011, 11:41:45 AM
 #156

I'd say that if the is how the bitcoin community decides to act and present itself then it is destined for failure, very sad as cryptocurrency had a chance to be the next great thing but until they learn to self police you lot it's f'ed.
Agreed big time.  I will nearly always check out alternative currencies to Bitcoin just based on having a more progressive user base.   So far nothing beats Bitcoin, but that is just a matter of time regarding what seems to be the initial lump of getting past the users overtaking the network or whatever.

julz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
September 05, 2011, 12:29:37 PM
 #157

I'd say that if the is how the bitcoin community decides to act and present itself then it is destined for failure, very sad as cryptocurrency had a chance to be the next great thing but until they learn to self police you lot it's f'ed.
Agreed big time.  I will nearly always check out alternative currencies to Bitcoin just based on having a more progressive user base.   So far nothing beats Bitcoin, but that is just a matter of time regarding what seems to be the initial lump of getting past the users overtaking the network or whatever.

While I wouldn't encourage vandalism of some other chain - it's also disturbing how little attention you guys give to the dishonesty of some of these alt-chain starters.
(particularly Mr ridiculous: coinhunter - claiming his was 'secure from pools')

If someone starts an alternative chain and has the integrity to explain the risks to their users - they're less likely to invite attack.
You want to start up a system where security is based on mining-power - but gloss over the fact that it's vulnerable in the beginning when trying to get people to risk their money on it?  That's just not decent conduct.

If I were to create an alt chain - I would state these risks openly, and perhaps include extra checkpoints in the blockchain and methods for mining pools to assist in detecting/reporting various types of attack.  A bit of humility in starting these things might go a long way.


@electricwings   BM-GtyD5exuDJ2kvEbr41XchkC8x9hPxdFd
BitcoinPorn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560


Posts: 69


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2011, 12:35:53 PM
 #158

CoinHunter is the 13 year old PR guy from hell lol.  I enjoy his antics from a far, but to realistically invest in SolidCoin at all, which I was in fact looking into, well the technology is going to have to be that much better than his attitude.   I can only look past the childishness for so long before I can see it truly hurting his little Coin.

I do like how it seem people are taking the code out of his hand and creating versions of SolidCoin on their own (or so it seems in threads I am reading).  In a way that does give me faith in the tech reasons why I liked SolidCoin on top of the fresh user base.

Humility doesn't seem to exist in the world of programmers and devs, it's all about breaking other peoples toys and telling them how stupid they are for not making them to their standards.

aq
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
September 05, 2011, 12:51:46 PM
 #159

I'd say that if the is how the bitcoin community decides to act and present itself then it is destined for failure, very sad as cryptocurrency had a chance to be the next great thing but until they learn to self police you lot it's f'ed.

For a cryptocurrency itself it does not matter who is trying to attack it. The only thing that really matters is can the currency withstand such attacks. As gavinandresen wrote "Hackers and script-kiddies are a fact of life". So if a currency has weak points it is best for the currency itself to either fix the weak points or vanish as early as possible. Survival of the fittest.
Bitcoin itself is under continuous attack from black hats, but it is solid Cheesy enough to withstand all those.
BitcoinPorn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560


Posts: 69


View Profile WWW
September 05, 2011, 12:54:56 PM
 #160

Bitcoin itself is under continuous attack from black hats, but it is solid Cheesy enough to withstand all those.
I think it being the biggest one out there, leaves it to attacks that we really don't grasp yet, and that could possibly take it down and thus it would be one of the other alternative currencies that would be able to learn from BTC mistakes.   That is another reason to really keep an eye out on alternative currencies all the time, see what is being offered and why over what is going on with BTC.

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!