Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 02:45:43 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 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: What effect will changing the block size from 32 to 5 have on SC?  (Read 7404 times)
3phase
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 313


Third score


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 04:32:39 PM
 #41

There is nothing wrong about people having profit as a motive. You would probably agree however, in the majority of cases, that this leads them into malign attitudes. Everybody always starts with the best intentions.

This same benign initial motivation, having turned malign and metastasized, is right now destroying whole countries and nations of old. Just look around you.

But to keep things fair, the greed of BTCEX is the least of the world's problems right now  Wink

Psy would have to verify...

but I think what he meant to convey is how BCX has been shown to mine BTC when it is unprofitable but is now complaining as that being a flaw to SC to further spread deceit and her agenda.

So it's not necessarily bad to be profit motivated, but it is bad to do one thing and say another for sake of ridiculous propaganda. i.e. Warren Buffet making claims the rich should pay more in taxes when he is involved in near permanent state of litigation to get out of paying taxes (which would be unnecessary if he just paid what he is supposed to) and his business thrives on the death of other businesses.

+1.

And I didn't catch it, if that was what Psy meant.

Fiat no more.
Δοκιμάστε το http://multibit.org - Bitcoin client τώρα και στα Ελληνικά
1481208343
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481208343

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481208343
Reply with quote  #2

1481208343
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
November 03, 2011, 07:48:10 PM
 #42

There is nothing wrong about people having profit as a motive. You would probably agree however, in the majority of cases, that this leads them into malign attitudes. Everybody always starts with the best intentions.

This same benign initial motivation, having turned malign and metastasized, is right now destroying whole countries and nations of old. Just look around you.

But to keep things fair, the greed of BTCEX is the least of the world's problems right now  Wink

Psy would have to verify...

but I think what he meant to convey is how BCX has been shown to mine BTC when it is unprofitable but is now complaining as that being a flaw to SC to further spread deceit and her agenda.

So it's not necessarily bad to be profit motivated, but it is bad to do one thing and say another for sake of ridiculous propaganda. i.e. Warren Buffet making claims the rich should pay more in taxes when he is involved in near permanent state of litigation to get out of paying taxes (which would be unnecessary if he just paid what he is supposed to) and his business thrives on the death of other businesses.

+1.

And I didn't catch it, if that was what Psy meant.

Exactly what I meant... Both of you are right, you just described it more eloquently than me.
How was BCX coping with his losses when mining BTC was not profitable? Is it consistent with his current views? You know what they say about the noveau-riches...

PS: I have this way of saying things that leaves a lot to understand between the lines to the ones that really care. If they don't understand, well, that probably says more about them than it says about myself.
And using BCX arguments: Coinhunter started ignoring peoples' questions when he was caught lying.
So, should we conclude that BCX also ignores people because he knows that we, the ones who speak against him, are right and he can't possibly say anything to defend himself? <--- Just another contradiction... Look at the ignore list that he so proudly shows in his signature!

HolodeckJizzmopper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 07:52:59 PM
 #43

So, should we conclude that BCX also ignores people because he knows that we, the ones who speak against him, are right and he can't possibly say anything to defend himself? <--- Just another contradiction...

 ... kinda like CH/RS ignores people / bans from his forums / BK's from IRC channel when people bring up that he's a charlatan for insisting his is a decentralized currency ?
Bobnova
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 07:56:10 PM
 #44

The pot can call the kettle black and still be correct.  The fact that the pot is black as well doesn't change the kettles color.

BTC:  1AURXf66t7pw65NwRiKukwPq1hLSiYLqbP
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
November 03, 2011, 07:58:32 PM
 #45

So, should we conclude that BCX also ignores people because he knows that we, the ones who speak against him, are right and he can't possibly say anything to defend himself? <--- Just another contradiction...

 ... kinda like CH/RS ignores people / bans from his forums / BK's from IRC channel when people bring up that he's a charlatan for insisting his is a decentralized currency ?

Yes, kinda like that.

BCX is only fighting against himself. He pretends to be the righteous guy, but he's no better than the persons he fight against, so he should probably just STFU.

The pot can call the kettle black and still be correct.  The fact that the pot is black as well doesn't change the kettles color.

That's correct. And the opposite is also correct, the fact that the kettle talks back despite being black, doesn't change the pot color... so, draw your own conclusions.

HolodeckJizzmopper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:06:20 PM
 #46

Yes, kinda like that.
BCX is only fighting against himself. He pretends to be the righteous guy, but he's no better than the persons he fight against, so he should probably just STFU.

 I'm either convinced you are truly retarded, or you have no idea what arguments you are making or lack the foresight to play more than 1 move ahead in chess.

 SC2 is not decentralized. I fail to see how BCX is fighting against himself. Please elaborate.

Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:13:07 PM
 #47

@Psy and Viper Lemon Bitch,

1) I mostly traded in 2009, very little cpu mining on a couple of machines. Anyone with any sense could see BTC was cutting edge even its early days and it was going to increase. I bought regularly in mid to late 2009. Started mining in January 2010. Heavy GPU mining in August 2010.

2) I haven't really mined at all in the past few months. No need to.

3) Have acquired 35,000 NMC and nearly 5000 BTC with various methods over the past Several months.

4) Mined the hell out of IXC/I0C with my paid for 68GH /s  raked in over 850 BTC with pump and dump in the first few days of launch. Sold a lot of both to stupid people.

I have NEVER been in a loss situation with BTC or any coin for that matter, BTC could fall to a $0.00 value and I would simply sit on it with already realized huge gains. I think what burns your ass more than anything is that I sit in a rock solid place of security with BTC, which reflects my financial stance in the real world.

Thank you. Finally you admitted the real you it so everybody can see with their own eyes. All in the same post...

Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:14:48 PM
 #48

Yes, kinda like that.
BCX is only fighting against himself. He pretends to be the righteous guy, but he's no better than the persons he fight against, so he should probably just STFU.

 I'm either convinced you are truly retarded, or you have no idea what arguments you are making or lack the foresight to play more than 1 move ahead in chess.

 SC2 is not decentralized. I fail to see how BCX is fighting against himself. Please elaborate.

And who gives a fuck about SC not being decentralized? I don't, BCX doesn't, also... But you do. Stop being a puppet, you fool! It seems the one who can't see 1 move ahead is you and not me... or maybe you are just truly retarded!

johnj
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:18:06 PM
 #49



So you were lying most of the time. Thank you. Finally you admitted it so everybody can see with their own eyes.


1) Why do you have such a hardon for BCX?
B) I still don't see how BCX has 'lied' from that statement.
2) Why do you care so much if BCX lies?  If lies bother you, there are plenty of other bigger liars around these parts which probably deserve your attention more.  If BCX bothers you, I think you've already made that point clear
3) This post and the others have nothing to do with the topic.  Take your crush to meta if you want to continue.

1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym
TradeHill Referral TH-R120549
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:19:15 PM
 #50

What exactly am I lying about Psy? I know you like to play word games, same as your other puppets of CH, so let me clarify for you.

I haven't really mined in the past few months with the intention of making any profit. I have mined a bit for the purpose of wrecjking alt chains, experimenting on them, performing various attacks and raping new alt coins.

Is that clear enough?

So clear I'm quoting it... And leaving to others to compare what you said in your last post, about pum'n'dump of alt chains and profiting with it, to the statements in this post.

HolodeckJizzmopper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:21:04 PM
 #51

Stop being a puppet, you fool! It seems the one who can't see 1 move ahead is you and not me...

 
johnj
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:29:02 PM
 #52

Let's get back on TOPIC, The whole purpose of this Coinhunter Sock Puppet is to derail this thread.


Coinhunter's plan to force a rise in price failed.

Here's what I can tell:

RS saw that LTC was gaining on SC
RS saw that 1m+ SC had already been distributed
RS thought that he was savvy enough to manipulate the system by reducing the block reward
RS is now fretting that the value has dropped
RS then applies the 'PowerBlock' gimmick
Gimmick doesn't work
Kool-Aid drinkers are now finally seeing that SC is a joke, hashrate plummets
RS says "Oh we dont need those miners"
RS releases (partial) source hoping to gain legitimacy


But at the end of the day, no one really cares about SC anymore.  I mean, it's funny to laugh at, but I'm starting to feel like we're picking on the handicap kid.  RS can't help but eat glue.

1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym
TradeHill Referral TH-R120549
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:31:32 PM
 #53

Depends on what the plan was.  It reduces the number of SC generated over the next year to <2 mil.    More than 1M were generated in first 24hours mostly due to him and his cronies using GPU before the suckers.  

The price did rise.  It went from roughly $0.02 to $0.03.  A nice 50% boost for those who got easy to mine (especially w/ GPU) early coins.  Granted for new miners the sitatuation is abysmall.  Price would need to be $0.14 just to break even compared to prior to the change.  

It also solves another problem.  There will be no "SC millionaires" for years now.  The rate of coin generation is too low.  Even if someone (other than King RealScam) amassed 10% of all coins available (huge concentration of wealth) in one years time with new generation that would be ~400K.

So yeah if his goal was to create a vibrant upwardly sloping economy he failed and failed hard however if it was yet another bait & switch (I think last time I counted there were 7? 8?) to lock in more control and profits for himself then I would say it worked decently.  The bad news for King RealScam is that LTC hit the ground at roughly the same time.  I provides a stark contrast one that my guess the plan was to avoid by making ScamCoin CPU based (i.e. capture 100% of CPU market because there was no other viable coin).

One last funny thing.  King RealScam has dropped so low as to explain that miners leaving don't matter because they are "parasites" that the ScamCoin economy will somehow be better if there are less people mining it.
HolodeckJizzmopper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:34:08 PM
 #54

But at the end of the day, no one really cares about SC anymore.  I mean, it's funny to laugh at, but I'm starting to feel like we're picking on the handicap kid.  RS can't help but eat glue.

 The problem here is that the handicapped kids just don't have the higher-brain functions to know when they are out-classed or have had enough, and they keep posting their inanities.
makomk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:41:34 PM
 #55

1) I mostly traded in 2009, very little cpu mining on a couple of machines. Anyone with any sense could see BTC was cutting edge even its early days and it was going to increase. I bought regularly in mid to late 2009. Started mining in January 2010. Heavy GPU mining in August 2010.
Well, it wasn't that obvious it was going to increase in my opinion, but you're right. What people have got to remember is that when Bitcoin first came out it was pretty much unique - there were other previous cryptocurrencies, but they had problems that Bitcoin managed to avoid such as requring central issuing of currency or not actually being able to prevent double-spends. Solidcoin is just the latest in a long series of near-clones of Bitcoin, several of which are also based on CPU mining. Why would it succeed rather than one of the others?

Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so.
SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS
johnj
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 08:43:26 PM
 #56

One last funny thing.  King RealScam has dropped so low as to explain that miners leaving don't matter because they are "parasites" that the ScamCoin economy will somehow be better if there are less people mining it.

I read that too.  Which brought me to another question:

Decentralized mining is a means of 1) coin distribution, and 2) security in BTC.

If SC 'solves' the security by centralizing it, mining as a means of distribution seems irrelevant, and quite frankly a waste of resources (electricity, wear-tear on hardware, etc).

But we see he has no problem cutting distribution.  At what point will he cut out distribution completely?

1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym
TradeHill Referral TH-R120549
coblee
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


firstbits.com/1ce5j


View Profile WWW
November 03, 2011, 08:44:16 PM
 #57

One last funny thing.  King RealScam has dropped so low as to explain that miners leaving don't matter because they are "parasites" that the ScamCoin economy will somehow be better if there are less people mining it.

SolidCoin is not a cryptocurrency, or at least by most people's definition of cryptocurrency. There's really no need for miners. SC miners do not secure the chain. That is already done by the trusted nodes. So miners are basically wasting their electricity.

Think about it this way... with Bitcoin, miners hash to secure the network and they get rewarded for the security that they are adding to the network. With SolidCoin, miners are just wasting electricity because RealSolid thinks that this is a fair way to handout SCs. It's similar to a King asking his peasants to run around in circles. The faster they run, the more coins they get. So of course, profit-driven peasants will run around in circles, which adds no value to anything. King RealSolid realized that he is passing out too many solidcoins this way, which will dilute his own holdings. So guess what, he decided to pass out only 5 SC (instead of 32 SC) to his loyal peasants for each circle they complete. Then what happens? Well there are less peasants running around in circles b/c it's not worth it anymore. But that doesn't matter to RealSolid, because peasants running around in circles doesn't add any value in the first place. Hmm...

Also, since the trusted nodes controls 50% of the blocks, by definition, you cannot do a 51% attack unless you have control of a trusted node.

It's great when you create all the rules for your own realm AND you actually find suckers willing to follow you.

dree12
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232



View Profile
November 03, 2011, 09:47:38 PM
 #58

One last funny thing.  King RealScam has dropped so low as to explain that miners leaving don't matter because they are "parasites" that the ScamCoin economy will somehow be better if there are less people mining it.

SolidCoin is not a cryptocurrency, or at least by most people's definition of cryptocurrency. There's really no need for miners. SC miners do not secure the chain. That is already done by the trusted nodes. So miners are basically wasting their electricity.

Think about it this way... with Bitcoin, miners hash to secure the network and they get rewarded for the security that they are adding to the network. With SolidCoin, miners are just wasting electricity because RealSolid thinks that this is a fair way to handout SCs. It's similar to a King asking his peasants to run around in circles. The faster they run, the more coins they get. So of course, profit-driven peasants will run around in circles, which adds no value to anything. King RealSolid realized that he is passing out too many solidcoins this way, which will dilute his own holdings. So guess what, he decided to pass out only 5 SC (instead of 32 SC) to his loyal peasants for each circle they complete. Then what happens? Well there are less peasants running around in circles b/c it's not worth it anymore. But that doesn't matter to RealSolid, because peasants running around in circles doesn't add any value in the first place. Hmm...

Also, since the trusted nodes controls 50% of the blocks, by definition, you cannot do a 51% attack unless you have control of a trusted node.

It's great when you create all the rules for your own realm AND you actually find suckers willing to follow you.
King RealSolid's trusted node idea has not garnered much support from me, but remember that the miners still have the power to check the trusted nodes (securing the "trusted" nodes).
johnj
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 09:54:14 PM
 #59

King RealSolid's trusted node idea has not garnered much support from me, but remember that the miners still have the power to check the trusted nodes (securing the "trusted" nodes).

Wha?

If you're refering to the block explorer, that only tells you what HAS happened, it gives no protection of what WILL happen.  Also anyone can use the block explorer, not just miners.

In SC, miners have zero authority.

1AeW7QK59HvEJwiyMztFH1ubWPSLLKx5ym
TradeHill Referral TH-R120549
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
November 03, 2011, 09:57:26 PM
 #60

King RealSolid's trusted node idea has not garnered much support from me, but remember that the miners still have the power to check the trusted nodes (securing the "trusted" nodes).

No they don't.  King RealScam cut wages to all the miners by 87%.  If you didn't accept then the control nodes rejected your blocks.  So what exactly could the miners do?  The Control Nodes are complete and absolute control over the network both now and into the future.

Any change King RealScam decides to impose on his subjects will be enforced by the ControlNodes.  There is no way around them.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 »  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!