bitcoin vs solidcoin

[BitcoinPorn]

I think SolidCoin could survive such a theoretical attack!   There is no way in hell a huge great competitor to Bitcoin could fall prey to some lame brain scheme concocted in some random thread on some unofficial Bitcoin forum.   Prove me wrong guys, prove me wrong

[1714889070]

1714889070

[doublec]

Not to mention that such an attack affects the exchange operator and doesn't affect the creator or developers.

[Vladimir]

Not to mention that such an attack affects the exchange operator and doesn't affect the creator or developers.

Not if you fork the blockhain from block 1. But again  they could hardcode fork prevention into the client. Is it not what all the new updates all about by any chance?

[doublec]

Not if you fork the blockhain from block 1. But again  they could hardcode fork prevention into the client. Is it not what all the new updates all about by any chance?

That still affects the exchange operator in that they have angry clients who lose their solidcoins that they've paid bitcoins for. The first couple of solidcoin releases did include checkpoints btw. Based on my reading the latest only contains the fix to the transaction spam issue.

[aq]

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.

I disagree with you.
Why? Because SolidCoin pretends to be like Bitcoin (digital money), while in fact it is apparently quite unsecure caused by the lack of a huge mining network.
Bitcoin is the reason why we have all this hashing power - bitcoin mining and the bitcoin network grew side by side.
You cannot try to repeat history, and then blame the environment for not being the same as years ago.
So either the SolidCoin fans take their network private, of the have to face the real world.
The good thing about some Vladimir disrupting their network would be that the copycats learn that they have to do more than change 10 lines of code to start a successful digital money network. And that could eventually lead to some competitor.

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.

But look at the world. There are a few exchanges already accepting solidcoins for USD/BTC. I am pretty sure they are not aware of those risks, as they believe solidcoin is as safe as bitcoin - which it is not.

[BitcoinPorn]

Unsure if related:

http://solidcointalk.org/topic/124-103-released-immediate-update-required/

1.03 is out, everyone needs to hop on it to stop the spammers increasing the chain size unnecessarily.

Windows Binaries http://dl.dropbox.com/u/38674765/solidcoin-win-103.zip
Source Code http://dl.dropbox.com/u/38674765/solidcoin-source-103.zip
Linux64 http://www.wuala.com/jbw9/pub/Bitcoin/solidcoin/103/linux64/
Linux32 http://www.wuala.com/jbw9/pub/Bitcoin/solidcoin/103/linux32/

[BitcoinPorn]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=41113.0 lol

[aq]

Apparently the latest update made it unusable for an exchange.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38453.msg501253#msg501253
Frankly, those guys should rename this to ShitCoin, and rather sooner than later

[ArtForz]

Not directly related, but here's an example of "unintended consequences".

The problem with any *coin using a asymmetric difficulty adjustment is, it gets some economic incentives re. mining backwards.
I'll use SCs algo (or the work-alikes like Zombie-i0 and soon ix) as a example.
It's highly profitable for miners to start a "cooperative cartel".
Simplest scenario (again, this is for a SC-like algo with *(10/9) /4 limits):
all miners in the "cartel" add the following new rule for creating and accepting blocks:

if (prevBlock.nHeight % (blocksPerDiffPeriod * 6) < (blocksPerDiffPeriod * 5))
    block must have curblock.nTime == prevBlock.nTime+1
else
    normal block nTime rules apply.

Once the cartel has a hashrate majority, difficulty settles to oscillating around a bit under 1/3 of what it should be given the cartels hashrate and remaining legit miners get zilch (well, they can still get a few blocks in the 1/6 of time where the cartel follows normal rules).
And even if 100% of hashpower switches to the cartel rules, the network will still oscillate around a difficulty 1/3 of where it should be.
So once the cartel miners have enough hashrate to orphan the main chain, it's highly beneficial for all remaining mainchain miners to also follow the cartel rules -> good luck stopping it again.

[BitcoinPorn]

Oh geez, don't make this thread like that one guys.

If you are going to fuck up SolidCoin, ShitCoin or whatever, just do it and don't whine all over the message boards how flawed the world is and etc.   Just break it already and then go outside and fly a kite, you can't honestly be happy in life with yourselves.

[aq]

Not directly related, but here's an example of "unintended consequences".

The problem with any *coin using a asymmetric difficulty adjustment is, it gets some economic incentives re. mining backwards.
I'll use SCs algo (or the work-alikes like Zombie-i0 and soon ix) as a example.
It's highly profitable for miners to start a "cooperative cartel".
Simplest scenario (again, this is for a SC-like algo with *(10/9) /4 limits):
all miners in the "cartel" add the following new rule for creating and accepting blocks:

if (prevBlock.nHeight % (blocksPerDiffPeriod * 6) < (blocksPerDiffPeriod * 5))
    block must have curblock.nTime == prevBlock.nTime+1
else
    normal block nTime rules apply.

Once the cartel has a hashrate majority, difficulty settles to oscillating around a bit under 1/3 of what it should be given the cartels hashrate and remaining legit miners get zilch (well, they can still get a few blocks in the 1/6 of time where the cartel follows normal rules).
And even if 100% of hashpower switches to the cartel rules, the network will still oscillate around a difficulty 1/3 of where it should be.
So once the cartel miners have enough hashrate to orphan the main chain, it's highly beneficial for all remaining mainchain miners to also follow the cartel rules -> good luck stopping it again.

Maybe this is an intended consequence and part of their get rich quick scheme.

[Vladimir]

Indeed, and major miners/pools all know each other, at least by reputation.

Than notice that shitcoins are just fighting the first moat of hash power and network security here. If you ever break through this one, than there is the wall of network effect. Good luck waiting for "bitcoin collapse".

In fact, due to merged mining thing, Bitcoin is not really relying on hash power barrier for entry as a solid defence. It is nothing more than a little harassment of attacking forces. Dealing with the network effect would be much more difficult, however.

For those who do not know what "network effect" is there is always google and wikipedia. Or you could try to start a new auction site which (as a website) much better than ebay and try to get some sellers selling stuff there, report back on your progress with that.

[aq]

Oh geez, don't make this thread like that one guys.

If you are going to fuck up SolidCoin, ShitCoin or whatever, just do it and don't whine all over the message boards how flawed the world is and etc.   Just break it already and then go outside and fly a kite, you can't honestly be happy in life with yourselves.

Maybe I would do it. It would be for my profit and for the greater good of the community. A win-win situation. Unfortunately I don't have the mining power. And Vladimir on the other hand seems to have some different ethics

[Vladimir]

lol, maybe it is only because I do not feel threatened enough, just yet, aq 

[BitcoinPorn]

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.

[aq]

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 ) 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.

[doublec]

b) It seems that coinhunter develops everything "in house". doublec updates the git repo afterwards

Again, just clarifying things. I'm not involved in solidcoin development. I do run an exchange and pool for solidcoin. I created that git repo to make it easy for me to diff and compare new solidcoin changes to make sure nothing bad is embedded before I build and deploy to the exchange and pool. It's not an 'official solidcoin' release source.

[BitcoinPorn]

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 ) 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.

I understand the negativity regarding how the program updates, I don't care for the system you just laid out if that is how it is specifically (which I see doublec already has corrected one part of what you wrote).

I am still confused about how all the things regarding a currency that isn't Bitcoin would effect the Bitcoin community in a good or bad way?

"Act fast, think little, care not" it seems to be the way programmers treat each other now.   SolidCoin could have avoided a lot of this with better PR, the negative attack on Bitcoin has drawn these stupid users to hate on it's flaws and handle them like every other kid on the internet handles bad programming, exploit it.

I still like the ShitCoins, and even after all those points I am not sure their threat to the community.
 

[aq]

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 ) 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.

I understand the negativity regarding how the program updates, I don't care for the system you just laid out if that is how it is specifically (which I see doublec already has corrected one part of what you wrote).

I you read carefully, he acknowledged what I wrote.

I am still confused about how all the things regarding a currency that isn't Bitcoin would effect the Bitcoin community in a good or bad way?

"Act fast, think little, care not" it seems to be the way programmers treat each other now.   SolidCoin could have avoided a lot of this with better PR, the negative attack on Bitcoin has drawn these stupid users to hate on it's flaws and handle them like every other kid on the internet handles bad programming, exploit it.

I still like the ShitCoins, and even after all those points I am not sure their threat to the community.

Maybe you are already too invested?

Imaging thousands and thousands people owning solidcoins. And now someone uses one of those bugs/shortcomings in solidcoin to make those all vanish. The public scream and media reporting would not only destroy solidcoin, it will destroy confidence in p2p currency (and hence bitcoin) for a few years. You know, journalists and the general public see no difference between solidcoin and bitcoin.

[BitcoinPorn]

Maybe you are already too invested?

Imaging thousands and thousands people owning solidcoins. And now someone uses one of those bugs/shortcomings in solidcoin to make those all vanish. The public scream and media reporting would not only destroy solidcoin, it will destroy confidence in p2p currency (and hence bitcoin) for a few years. You know, journalists and the general public see no difference between solidcoin and bitcoin.

I am not highly invested at all, I own under 30SC so far, that is nothing.  No where near what I have in Bitcoin (USD value wise), but not sure why you would ask about my personal investments when we are talking about the community :/

Confidence in P2P currency is already dead, the people using it are only nerds, the general public have made their mind up, it is just the smarter writers that see through the bullshit and keep on pressing on finding ways to keep Bitcoin in the news but not in a negative way.  Sadly the smart writers only pop out something once a month while the negative ones are on Bitcoin weekly pointing out the flaws.

Either way, you are just making prophecies to fulfill them as far as I can tell still.  You rants about community whatever are bullshit so far.  "Maybe you are already too invested" in Bitcoin?