Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 04:22:10 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 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: You cannot really compare SolidCoin to Bitcoin/Litecoin anymore  (Read 4936 times)
Ten98
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 201



View Profile
October 26, 2011, 02:15:05 PM
 #21

What i dont understand is why noone noticed that earnings dropped massivly in the past time.. No not due to diff raise but because of a simple factore.. in the beginning of SC2 the trusted Nodes took but a few seconds to mine their special blocks.. now they take almost a minute. While the chain is waiting for them nothing else gets done hence miners work for nothing, at best, dont mine and hence just waste time.. and this time wasted is but one of the ways to stop the stupid inflation in Solidcoin.. i hope SCs little Botnet wil come out again and drive the diff to more than 100k in order to have more than 64coins per block..

Not sure where you're getting your information, trusted nodes take about 1 second to generate their special blocks and it takes maybe 5-10 seconds for the trusted block to propagate through the network.

If you're saying what I think you are, you're suggesting that we should abandon the entire concept of trusted nodes, which has allowed the network to keep working normally despite being under attack, to gain a 10-20% improvement in mining efficiency? This is not a great suggestion.

There is no SC Botnet, although I have seen this misinformation spread many times throughout this board so I doubt there's much I can say to convince you there isn't. But there just isn't.

There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. Hybrid server-assisted clients like Electrum get a lot of their network information from centralized servers, but they also check the server's results using blockchain header data. This is perhaps somewhat more secure than either server-assisted clients or header-only clients.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481041330
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481041330

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481041330
Reply with quote  #2

1481041330
Report to moderator
wannaBhacker
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 96


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 02:15:50 PM
 #22

If you "underestimated" the number of miners, that means there are people getting access to coins, not less.  All this does is make the early adopters get a MASSIVE boost in what their mining was worth compared to new miners.

Well duh... how is he supposed to get rich unless he makes his millions of coins worth more? BTC, FBX, and LTC don't have that problem. Too bad FPX is kind of abandoned. LTC & BTC FTW.
abracadabra
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 946



View Profile
October 26, 2011, 03:09:52 PM
 #23

Quote
monopoly money for 10 year olds?

lulz! good one!

DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 04:13:19 PM
 #24

The number of miners or amount of hashpower should have no effect on rate of coins being generated.  That is the whole reason for difficulty.  Bitcoin has managed to keep rate of generation generally predictable and even despite massive swings in utilization and hashing power.

The idea that a block chain (any block chain) needs a "glorious leader" with ability to revoke previously generated coins, frack around with generation rate, kill entire network, institute a 10% "king tax", and force mandatory changes is pathetic.

There is no need.  There is no benefit to anyone save the glorious leader.

ScamCoin isn't a crypto-currency.
ScamCoin isn't peer to peer.
ScamCoin has no future.
Syke
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 04:59:51 PM
 #25

BCX and Artforz are failing big time.
I'd say they're succeeding. It's because of them that there is no source code released, even though it was promised a long time ago. CH is scared to death what will happen if the source code is released and real attacks occur.

Buy & Hold
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
October 26, 2011, 05:09:55 PM
 #26

BCX and Artforz are failing big time.
I'd say they're succeeding. It's because of them that there is no source code released, even though it was promised a long time ago. CH is scared to death what will happen if the source code is released and real attacks occur.

No they aren't... If keeping him from releasing the source code is considered a real successfull attack why are you contradicting yourself on your last sentence saying that only when he releases the source code the real attacks will occur?

Logical thinking isn't your thing, is it?

DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 05:12:28 PM
 #27

BCX and Artforz are failing big time.
I'd say they're succeeding. It's because of them that there is no source code released, even though it was promised a long time ago. CH is scared to death what will happen if the source code is released and real attacks occur.

No they aren't... If keeping him from releasing the source code is considered a real successfull attack why are you contradicting yourself on your last sentence saying that only when he releases the source code the real attacks will occur?

Logical thinking isn't your thing, is it?

Maybe it isn't your thing.  Lack of source code means SC has no legitimacy.  Hell it doesn't even have a valid license for the Oracle property it is stealing.

These attacks even without source code have shown flaws in the network.  This likely means the source code will never be released or the release will be further delayed.  That undermines any remaining confidence in the network. 
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
October 26, 2011, 05:15:59 PM
 #28

BCX and Artforz are failing big time.
I'd say they're succeeding. It's because of them that there is no source code released, even though it was promised a long time ago. CH is scared to death what will happen if the source code is released and real attacks occur.

No they aren't... If keeping him from releasing the source code is considered a real successfull attack why are you contradicting yourself on your last sentence saying that only when he releases the source code the real attacks will occur?

Logical thinking isn't your thing, is it?

Maybe it isn't your thing.  Lack of source code means SC has no legitimacy.  Hell it doesn't even have a valid license for the Oracle property it is stealing.

These attacks even without source code have shown flaws in the network.  This likely means the source code will never be released or the release will be further delayed.  That undermines any remaining confidence in the network. 

That's what you say, but looking at what's happening from the outside and whitout having any real interest on the way things unfold, it's not what I see... Only BCX and his puppies, like you, see it that way.
You are all butthurt because Coinhunter doesn't let you guys belong to his little circlejerk, and everyone with half a brain already understood that.

coblee
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


firstbits.com/1ce5j


View Profile WWW
October 26, 2011, 06:22:13 PM
 #29

The rationale, in a nutshell, is that on the current base generation number of 32 there are too many coins being generated too quickly. We underestimated the number of miners there would be in the initial phase of SolidCoin 2.0 and now are in the position where the market is flooded with coins which are being mined for nearly zero cost and for which there are not enough buyers.

SolidCoin aims to achieve a value where 1SLC = $1-2. Even with all the stuff we have planned, this is never going to happen with the current generation rates, so action needs to be taken. Cutting the generation rate increases the cost to produce a SolidCoin and restricts the number of new coins being created.

With regard to being "fair", all I can say to you is that this has been announced in advance with plenty of warning. Everyone still has a chance to become an early adopter right now, and in fact it's much cheaper to become an early adopter now than it has been in the past.

Mining difficulty is relatively low right now and we're chucking out high value blocks like there's no tomorrow. The price of SolidCoin on the exchanges is also extremely low, much lower than it was when the chain was shut down a few weeks ago, so there has never been a better time to become an early adopter, either by mining yourself or buying up huge numbers of cheap coins - take your pick. I can't really see how we could make it any more "fair".

Ten98, this doesn't make any sense whatsoever. There's no reason to target 1SLC = $1-2. What is that a target for a month, a year, 5 years, 100 years? How can you possibly set that target? And why would you when your goal is to replace the dollar? Why not let the market decide? You could easily just call it 1NSC (new solidcoin) where 1NSC = 10SLC and have that be your base coin. Then if a SLC is only worth, $.1-.2, your NSC will be worth $1-2.

This move is made by someone who does not understand economics. CH/RS may be an advanced coder (though I'm starting to doubt that seeing his hashrate bug fix/unfixed/refixed issue), he has no clue about economics and market dynamics. He's manipulating the market and artificially increasing the value of SC (just look at btc-e.com) and totally screwing over any chance of his coin succeeding long term. Yeah sure, it's a GREAT pump and dump scam, but that's about it.

To all SC supporters, make sure you cash out your SC and make some money. CH/RS has rewarded you guys well by effectively made your SC work 4x-5x times. Take advantage of that before SolidCoin dies.

Spacy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 06:31:14 PM
 #30

This move is made by someone who does not understand economics. CH/RS may be an advanced coder (though I'm starting to doubt that seeing his hashrate bug fix/unfixed/refixed issue), he has no clue about economics and market dynamics.

Seems like the economic noob's currency is still much more successful than the one from the pro  Wink
coblee
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


firstbits.com/1ce5j


View Profile WWW
October 26, 2011, 06:40:13 PM
 #31

This move is made by someone who does not understand economics. CH/RS may be an advanced coder (though I'm starting to doubt that seeing his hashrate bug fix/unfixed/refixed issue), he has no clue about economics and market dynamics.

Seems like the economic noob's currency is still much more successful than the one from the pro  Wink

Please define success. Does the price on btc-e define success?

Bernie Madoff made a ton of money before he was put in jail. Was his business a success before it all fell apart?

Spacy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 06:46:15 PM
 #32

Please define success. Does the price on btc-e define success?

Bernie Madoff made a ton of money before he was put in jail. Was his business a success before it all fell apart?

You are right, we should only consider long term... But why then everybody here states, that SC failed?  Huh
grndzero
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 06:49:58 PM
 #33

I wonder what happens if the majority of people don't download the update with the change?

Does the non updated client generate 32 coins or do the central nodes smack the end nodes down and only award 5 coins or invalidate their blocks completely?

Gotta love the total lack of democracy, no opinion, just I'm going to do it, and even worse if you can't vote with your client like bitcoin.

All the fervent solidcoin supporters seem very sheepish anyway.


Ubuntu Desktop x64 -  HD5850 Reference - 400Mh/s w/ cgminer  @ 975C/325M/1.175V - 11.6/2.1 SDK
Donate if you find this helpful: 1NimouHg2acbXNfMt5waJ7ohKs2TtYHePy
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484



View Profile
October 26, 2011, 06:50:15 PM
 #34

1. Premine 13 million SC
2. Arbitrarily raise difficulty to make SC more expensive
3. Sell premined coins
4. Massive temporary profits

Would you buy from the Central Bank of Hugo Chavez or the Central Bank of Robert Mugabe?  CH thinks you will.  This is amazing.  Instead of printing his own money (inflation), CH thinks that by deflating his currency he can in effect do the same thing to the market and not have it collapse.

Well, good luck with that.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 06:55:55 PM
 #35

I wonder what happens if the majority of people don't download the update with the change?

Does the non updated client generate 32 coins or do the central nodes smack the end nodes down and only award 5 coins or invalidate their blocks completely?

Gotta love the total lack of democracy, no opinion, just I'm going to do it, and even worse if you can't vote with your client like bitcoin.

All the fervent solidcoin supporters seem very sheepish anyway.



The trusted nodes (which really should be called the RealSolid fiat nodes) will not validate any block it considers invalid (and thus goes against RealSolid rather fickle and every changing wishes).  Thus you can mine forever and even periodically find blocks but those blocks will not become part of the valid chain and thus are worthless.

Even worse if somehow you did get a block signed it appears RealSolid can simply retroactively invalidate that block and make the coins generated worthless.
grndzero
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 07:05:24 PM
 #36

I wonder what happens if the majority of people don't download the update with the change?

Does the non updated client generate 32 coins or do the central nodes smack the end nodes down and only award 5 coins or invalidate their blocks completely?

Gotta love the total lack of democracy, no opinion, just I'm going to do it, and even worse if you can't vote with your client like bitcoin.

All the fervent solidcoin supporters seem very sheepish anyway.



The trusted nodes (which really should be called the RealSolid fiat nodes) will not validate any block it considers invalid (and thus goes against RealSolid rather fickle and every changing wishes).  Thus you can mine forever and even periodically find blocks but those blocks will not become part of the valid chain and thus are worthless.

Even worse if somehow you did get a block signed it appears RealSolid can simply retroactively invalidate that block and make the coins generated worthless.


Sounds like it's perfect for the likes of North Korea, Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela. Maybe that's his target market. Make the leader and his preferred cronies rich (doled out over time and can be switched on a leader's whim). Change the rules without any democratic process. Kill any success of any unwanted individuals. Forget scamcoin, how about dictatorcoin? 

Ubuntu Desktop x64 -  HD5850 Reference - 400Mh/s w/ cgminer  @ 975C/325M/1.175V - 11.6/2.1 SDK
Donate if you find this helpful: 1NimouHg2acbXNfMt5waJ7ohKs2TtYHePy
wknight
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 889


Bitcoin calls me an Orphan


View Profile WWW
October 26, 2011, 07:15:35 PM
 #37

Hi My name is RealSolid aka Ben Bernanke. I can make as many coins as I want.

In fact.. my buddy and I would like to go to Vegas and blow my money on Blow and hookers. Who is to stop me? I print money and make coins however I see fit

Mining Both Bitcoin and Litecoin.
grndzero
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 07:21:40 PM
 #38


I like FiatCoin.  RealSolid managed to invent digital fiat money except it isn't even backed by the sovreign power of a nation. 

I mean I trust the Federal Reserve more than I trust RealSolid. 

Agreed. You may not agree with the economics, but at least there's economics behind it other than 'let's change the output to try to jack up the price'.

Fiatcoin is ok, but it's lacking a very much needed socialist/tyrannical spin. I never though I would have need for a rabid conservative opinionist, but they are great at that stuff.

Ubuntu Desktop x64 -  HD5850 Reference - 400Mh/s w/ cgminer  @ 975C/325M/1.175V - 11.6/2.1 SDK
Donate if you find this helpful: 1NimouHg2acbXNfMt5waJ7ohKs2TtYHePy
grndzero
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392


View Profile
October 26, 2011, 07:26:42 PM
 #39

Hi My name is RealSolid aka Ben Bernanke. I can make as many coins as I want.

In fact.. my buddy and I would like to go to Vegas and blow my money on Blow and hookers. Who is to stop me? I print money and make coins however I see fit

The difference is Ben Bernake doesn't get to decide that he needs a better pay check or an all expenses paid hookers and blow Vegas trip and start stuffing his pockets with freshly minted cash as it comes off the presses. He also doesn't get to put them into a special coffer that only he gets to manage and promise everyone that they will be doled out to him incrementally over time while the coffer is kept topped off by a tax on the entire economy for an annual all expenses paid hookers and blow Vegas trip.

Ubuntu Desktop x64 -  HD5850 Reference - 400Mh/s w/ cgminer  @ 975C/325M/1.175V - 11.6/2.1 SDK
Donate if you find this helpful: 1NimouHg2acbXNfMt5waJ7ohKs2TtYHePy
Deprived
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


View Profile
October 27, 2011, 06:13:48 PM
 #40

The trusted nodes (which really should be called the RealSolid fiat nodes) will not validate any block it considers invalid (and thus goes against RealSolid rather fickle and every changing wishes).  Thus you can mine forever and even periodically find blocks but those blocks will not become part of the valid chain and thus are worthless.

Even worse if somehow you did get a block signed it appears RealSolid can simply retroactively invalidate that block and make the coins generated worthless.


In theory someone who became a trusted node through having a wallet balance > 1 million could opt not to update their client and continue validating old blocks.

Of course there's two problems with that:

1.  I'd bet the code doesn't actually support people becoming trusted nodes based on wallet balance - i.e. if you got your wallet balance over 1 million you'#d still not generate the even blocks.
2.  Reducing the production per block helps ensure noone other than RS/cronies will get to be a trusted node in the forseeable future.

And of course the above is part of the reason he can't release source because:

1.  It would make clear point 1 above,
2.  People could make modified clients to get around some of his rules.
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »  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!