Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 09:03:40 AM *
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  All
  Print  
Author Topic: BCX Statement (confirmed)  (Read 3735 times)
johnj
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
October 12, 2011, 10:07:33 PM
 #1

First thing, Coinhunter you got your ass kicked and you know it!

Second Thing
DoubleC can verify this my post as my emails to him are from Justin Guss and Gmail.

Status update.

The reason that difficulty is only 25% of what it should be after 75 increases is real simple. I haven't let up LOL  Grin Grin Grin
So I am telling you this BEFORE it happens that my now 600+ EC2 instances will reach the max cycles of free usage and start dropping off. I expect full drop off to occur by in about 12 hours after this post. What you will see is the complete and utter freezing of SC 2.0, think Namecoin but a lot worse. A 16,000 difficulty on CPU only chain, cracks me up. LOL No way in hell an average user can mine this solo.

Trusted Nodes My Ass

The trusted nodes are controllers and gateways in addition to being profit generators for CH! When I started consolidating some of the wallets a strange phenomena occurred. After about 25 or so wallets sending to the primary address the transactions slowed down to about 20 minutes each, I suspect manual approval. A while latter the address received none of the transactions it was sent from other wallets. Furthermore the sending wallets could no longer send. Let me clarify, they sent but the funds were never recieved more than likely going to CPF.

Repeated the same thing with 30 more new wallets and a primary address.

I suspect Coinhunter contacted his huge miners and verified it wasn't them and logically concluded the only other HUGE miner out there is me. Coinhunter has the ability to regulate the transfer, track it and kill individual users and transactions at will.

Forewarned
I made a preview post of Solidcoin 2.0 and just about everything I predicted has come true including this. In that post I told you how a pissed off private beta tester was remotely killed by Coinhunter after asking some the questions that revealed themselves. This is the real world application of that control.

We will NEVER see the source released.

Bad news though, there are some working on dis-assembly as we speak. Coinhunter your only choice is to pull the plug and attempt a restart.

Looking forward to playing with Solidcoin 3.0  Grin Grin Grin

~BCX~


No idea if it's legit, but it does appear to be in the same tone of BCX's previous posts.

I guess we'll see in 12hrs or so.

1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym
TradeHill Referral TH-R120549
1481360620
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481360620

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481360620
Reply with quote  #2

1481360620
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
coblee
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


firstbits.com/1ce5j


View Profile WWW
October 12, 2011, 10:16:25 PM
 #2

The trusted nodes are controllers and gateways in addition to being profit generators for CH! When I started consolidating some of the wallets a strange phenomena occurred. After about 25 or so wallets sending to the primary address the transactions slowed down to about 20 minutes each, I suspect manual approval. A while latter the address received none of the transactions it was sent from other wallets. Furthermore the sending wallets could no longer send. Let me clarify, they sent but the funds were never recieved more than likely going to CPF.

If this is true, that is really scary.

bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
October 12, 2011, 10:40:07 PM
 #3

Just unban the guy. He will be back anyways. Makes life easier for all of us. Better to hear it from the horse's mouth rather than from some obscure account claiming to be the real BCX etc.

Thank you !
bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
October 12, 2011, 10:45:53 PM
 #4

Just unban the guy. He will be back anyways. Makes life easier for all of us. Better to hear it from the horse's mouth rather than from some obscure account claiming to be the real BCX etc.

Thank you !


If DoubleC confirms it, it's not a supposed account is it?

I don't trust him. Let the original account back. Hate dealing with all this sock puppet accounts.
johnj
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
October 12, 2011, 10:46:59 PM
 #5

I don't beleive it until some verification, weather from an unbanned BCX, DoubelC, or if the SC network freezes.

Sure will be interesting to see how this pans out.  Indeed, a 16000 difficulty on a CPU chain is quite high.

Guess that makes my previous poll more relevant Wink

1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym
TradeHill Referral TH-R120549
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484



View Profile
October 12, 2011, 11:04:22 PM
 #6

How the hell does one go about "disassembling" a binary to get the source code? As far as I know that's impossible.

Actually, the SC2 source code decompiles pretty well with REC Studio.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
grod
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
October 12, 2011, 11:06:30 PM
 #7

How the hell does one go about "disassembling" a binary to get the source code? As far as I know that's impossible.

Then I suggest you google for "disassembler."  It is very much possible, especially if you know what compiler was used to generate the code (most likely gcc on linux and of only a few likely versions).   The reverse engineered code, like all machine generated code, is absolutely awful.  But once you start "cleaning it up" and re-writing it to be more readable you can get to a good enough state to figure out algorithms.  Well, ok, maybe not you or me -- but people with the skills and practice to do this demonstrably exist.  Even for code run through an obfuscator.

This, by the way, is how many games get "cracked."  Binaries get analyzed, decompiled and poked at until the security mechanism is well understood.  It is then replaced.

bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
October 12, 2011, 11:10:37 PM
 #8

17375 difficulty Sad No blocks for me Sad Damn BCX and all his crap. Bet he is the one who DDOS the btcguild and deepbit pools and as soon as he can, he will steal all BTC coins too in a 51% as price falls lower and lower and miners drop out etc. Bad news.
doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
October 12, 2011, 11:27:25 PM
 #9

DoubleC can you verify?
Yes, I received emails from BitcoinExpress from a gmail address with the name "Justin Guss" in the past.
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


Wat


View Profile WWW
October 12, 2011, 11:33:58 PM
 #10

I think he needs to be let back in. If he has cracked sc2 then it doesnt deserve to stand.

The idea of someone remotely killing things sounds like sony.

 Smiley

johnj
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
October 12, 2011, 11:56:01 PM
 #11

Quote
The trusted nodes are controllers and gateways in addition to being profit generators for CH! When I started consolidating some of the wallets a strange phenomena occurred. After about 25 or so wallets sending to the primary address the transactions slowed down to about 20 minutes each, I suspect manual approval. A while latter the address received none of the transactions it was sent from other wallets. Furthermore the sending wallets could no longer send. Let me clarify, they sent but the funds were never recieved more than likely going to CPF.

Question: Is this theft? Regardless of where the coins end up (CPF, destroyed, etc), CH&Co taking other peoples coins at will... sounds like theft. I'll be the first to admit though many of the technical details are over my head, but when someone takes/destroys something that doesn't belong to them... i'm not sure what else to call that. Especially when (allegedly) the coins were mined legitimately in the first place.

Of course, this is contingent on being verified in the first place.

1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym
TradeHill Referral TH-R120549
johnj
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
October 13, 2011, 12:00:20 AM
 #12

This type of activity is very Paypal like. All he would have to say is he suspected "Fraudulent" activity.

Well, a charge back would mean that BCX would eventually get the coins back, since he was both the sender and receiver.  If CH decides to never release the coins to either party...


1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym
TradeHill Referral TH-R120549
pbj sammich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 272


Fighting Liquid with Liquid


View Profile
October 13, 2011, 12:01:53 AM
 #13


Trusted Nodes My Ass

The trusted nodes are controllers and gateways in addition to being profit generators for CH! When I started consolidating some of the wallets a strange phenomena occurred. After about 25 or so wallets sending to the primary address the transactions slowed down to about 20 minutes each, I suspect manual approval. A while latter the address received none of the transactions it was sent from other wallets. Furthermore the sending wallets could no longer send. Let me clarify, they sent but the funds were never recieved more than likely going to CPF.

Repeated the same thing with 30 more new wallets and a primary address.

I suspect Coinhunter contacted his huge miners and verified it wasn't them and logically concluded the only other HUGE miner out there is me. Coinhunter has the ability to regulate the transfer, track it and kill individual users and transactions at will.


Am I the only one who after reading this thought - ok so the proof he could easily show, ie... the 8 bazillion SC coins he generated has now been conveniently confiscated by Coinhunter. And why would you repeat the same thing 30 separate times after the first transaction if you suspected that Huh

I guess like johnj says we'll see in 12 hours or so.

Personally I think CH and BCX are both full of shit
pbj sammich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 272


Fighting Liquid with Liquid


View Profile
October 13, 2011, 12:13:05 AM
 #14


Ladies and Gentlemen behold another incarnation of an SC KoolAid drinker....

BCX never said CH confiscated anything other than the attempted consolidation.

Releasing the code solves all of this.

Reading comprehension fail ftw

Honestly some of you can't look at both sides in your rabid fervor of trouncing the other side.

Again, i think there both full of shit.

I don't mine SC and won't install any closed source nonsense either. That said I don't really believe BCX either.

pbj sammich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 272


Fighting Liquid with Liquid


View Profile
October 13, 2011, 12:18:09 AM
 #15

^ Thanks

Either way though, the next couple days will certainly be entertaining Grin
johnj
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
October 13, 2011, 12:29:10 AM
 #16

Small update:

I've been noting the difficulty changes every so often.  All (the ones I noted) were within +12-13% increases, which is I believe the max increase per adjustment.

The most recent increase is 8%, which signals that indeed the network is leveling out.  Whether or not this is due to BCX pulling out is unknown, but the predictions are on course.

1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym
TradeHill Referral TH-R120549
bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
October 13, 2011, 12:49:09 AM
 #17

Me thinks that BitcoinEXpress is like Agent Smith in the Matrix, he is getting stronger and will soon exceed the control of the machine.

DoubleC just took a cheap shot at BCX in another thread. But he forgets that just the threat of BCX hitting Namecoin sent him scurrying like a rabbit along with Ruxum. There was statement in big red letters for almost two weeks that BCX was the reason he closed his NMC exchange.

Actions speak louder than words.

Conspiracy much ? I think Litecoin will be his next victim. Just wait and see.
doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
October 13, 2011, 12:50:38 AM
 #18

DoubleC just took a cheap shot at BCX in another thread. But he forgets that just the threat of BCX hitting Namecoin sent him scurrying like a rabbit along with Ruxum. There was statement in big red letters for almost two weeks that BCX was the reason he closed his NMC exchange.
It was a shot at you, not at BCX. You're the one that listed those claims, not BCX. Unless you're BCX of course.
Deprived
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


View Profile
October 13, 2011, 12:52:40 AM
 #19

DoubleC just took a cheap shot at BCX in another thread. But he forgets that just the threat of BCX hitting Namecoin sent him scurrying like a rabbit along with Ruxum. There was statement in big red letters for almost two weeks that BCX was the reason he closed his NMC exchange.
It was a shot at you, not at BCX. You're the one that listed those claims, not BCX. Unless you're BCX of course.
Which doesn't seem all that unlikely - if he isn't BCX then he's definitely hanging off his dick.
bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
October 13, 2011, 12:58:41 AM
 #20

Two posters above me ^^ Thank you for stating the obvious. It seems like CoinHumper's account got hacked and BitcoinExpress is now also known as CoinHumper.

Just look at how many posts about SC2 this goon started and how before getting hacked he was a totally different person.

We are not idiots BCX. Come out in the open please.
Pages: [1] 2  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!