Bitcoin Forum
September 27, 2020, 08:37:10 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.20.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 [65] 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] Grin | PoW Mining | Electronic transactions for all. Community driven.  (Read 65560 times)
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2492
Merit: 1716


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
October 10, 2019, 04:52:52 AM
 #1281

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1601239030
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1601239030

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1601239030
Reply with quote  #2

1601239030
Report to moderator
1601239030
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1601239030

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1601239030
Reply with quote  #2

1601239030
Report to moderator
Viper1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 320


View Profile
October 10, 2019, 05:07:00 AM
 #1282

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.
I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.

BTC: 1F8yJqgjeFyX1SX6KJmqYtHiHXJA89ENNT
LTC: LYAEPQeDDM7Y4jbUH2AwhBmkzThAGecNBV
DOGE: DSUsCCdt98PcNgUkFHLDFdQXmPrQBEqXu9
RivAngE
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 168


What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger


View Profile
October 10, 2019, 07:19:20 PM
 #1283

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.
I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.

What is that difference between 1000s of mining ASICs, 10000 of mining GPUs and 5 people controlling half of the coins in a PoS system?

For as long as there are poor and rich people, centralizion will keep occurring in one form on another.
SatoNatomato
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 250


View Profile
October 10, 2019, 08:45:14 PM
 #1284

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.
I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.

What is that difference between 1000s of mining ASICs, 10000 of mining GPUs and 5 people controlling half of the coins in a PoS system?

For as long as there are poor and rich people, centralizion will keep occurring in one form on another.
What is the difference between cryptocurrency and central bankers shitting money out of thin air?

If a currency can not exist without being controlled by a few, then its not a currency, its shit.

Miners, hardware, electricity, ups the stakes significantly compared to PoS, which leads faster to centralization and shitcoins.

Lowsnow
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 21


View Profile
October 11, 2019, 04:21:12 PM
 #1285

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.
I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.
At first, most users would run network nodes, but as the network grows beyond a certain point, it would be left more and more to specialists with server farms of specialized hardware.
The design supports letting users just be users.  The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be.  Those few nodes will be big server farms.  The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don’t generate.
At equilibrium size, many nodes will be server farms with one or two network nodes that feed the rest of the farm over a LAN.
https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/2/
https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/188/
RivAngE
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 168


What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger


View Profile
October 11, 2019, 07:55:04 PM
 #1286

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.
I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.

What is that difference between 1000s of mining ASICs, 10000 of mining GPUs and 5 people controlling half of the coins in a PoS system?

For as long as there are poor and rich people, centralizion will keep occurring in one form on another.
What is the difference between cryptocurrency and central bankers shitting money out of thin air?

If a currency can not exist without being controlled by a few, then its not a currency, its shit.

Miners, hardware, electricity, ups the stakes significantly compared to PoS, which leads faster to centralization and shitcoins.

You might believe Bitcoin is decentralized, but it's not much better than altcoins.
Thanks to BTC's aggressive halvings, the few who knew about BTC in its early days obtained more than half of its supply in less than 4 years... way to go for a system which hopes to stay around for a long time huh?
We've currently mined 85.70% of BTC, what will happen when there'll be no more interest to mine it?

On this regard, GRIN's system is safer and more decentralization-friendly.
bbc.reporter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 659


bustadice.com


View Profile
October 12, 2019, 12:46:55 AM
 #1287

@RivAngE. Also, Grin's monetary policy removes moon math, removes the early holders advantage and makes it more fair for late adopters.

I love bitcoin, however, there might be something in its monetary policy that is preventing it from wider distribution.

..bustadice..         ▄▄████████████▄▄
     ▄▄████████▀▀▀▀████████▄▄
   ▄███████████    ███████████▄
  █████    ████▄▄▄▄████    █████
 ██████    ████████▀▀██    ██████
██████████████████   █████████████
█████████████████▌  ▐█████████████
███    ██████████   ███████    ███
███    ████████▀   ▐███████    ███
██████████████      ██████████████
██████████████      ██████████████
 ██████████████▄▄▄▄██████████████
  ▀████████████████████████████▀
                    ▄▄███████▄▄
                  ▄███████████████▄
   ███████████  ▄████▀▀       ▀▀████▄
               ████▀      ██     ▀████
 ███████████  ████        ██       ████
             ████         ██        ████
███████████  ████     ▄▄▄▄██        ████
             ████     ▀▀▀▀▀▀        ████
 ███████████  ████                 ████
               ████▄             ▄████
   ███████████  ▀████▄▄       ▄▄████▀
                  ▀███████████████▀
                     ▀▀███████▀▀
          ▄██▄
           ████
            ██
            ▀▀
 ▄██████████████████████▄
██████▀▀██████████▀▀██████
█████    ████████    █████
█████▄  ▄████████▄  ▄█████
██████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
    ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
       ████████████
......Play......
AlecMe
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 384
Merit: 159


View Profile
October 13, 2019, 04:01:26 AM
 #1288

One worry arises in my head:

'Grin was launched without a premine, ICO, or founders rewards and relies on donations to support the long-term development of the project.'

So, there is a risk associated with a lack of interest at a point that could jeopardise the whole project?

What am I missing?

Also, 'early holders advantage and makes it fairer for late adopters' what I read is: 'Join later and make more' which could combat the above and maybe hope people will donate and not only profit? Greed goes a long way though  Huh
bbc.reporter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 659


bustadice.com


View Profile
October 15, 2019, 04:03:34 AM
 #1289

@AlecMe. Can you explain join later and make more?

Grin's monetary supply discourages early whales that cause an influence on the supply. It also encourages wider distribution and a more stable price.

How would joining later, make more occur? If it would, it would be occuring under a stable price and less influential whales.

..bustadice..         ▄▄████████████▄▄
     ▄▄████████▀▀▀▀████████▄▄
   ▄███████████    ███████████▄
  █████    ████▄▄▄▄████    █████
 ██████    ████████▀▀██    ██████
██████████████████   █████████████
█████████████████▌  ▐█████████████
███    ██████████   ███████    ███
███    ████████▀   ▐███████    ███
██████████████      ██████████████
██████████████      ██████████████
 ██████████████▄▄▄▄██████████████
  ▀████████████████████████████▀
                    ▄▄███████▄▄
                  ▄███████████████▄
   ███████████  ▄████▀▀       ▀▀████▄
               ████▀      ██     ▀████
 ███████████  ████        ██       ████
             ████         ██        ████
███████████  ████     ▄▄▄▄██        ████
             ████     ▀▀▀▀▀▀        ████
 ███████████  ████                 ████
               ████▄             ▄████
   ███████████  ▀████▄▄       ▄▄████▀
                  ▀███████████████▀
                     ▀▀███████▀▀
          ▄██▄
           ████
            ██
            ▀▀
 ▄██████████████████████▄
██████▀▀██████████▀▀██████
█████    ████████    █████
█████▄  ▄████████▄  ▄█████
██████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
    ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
       ████████████
......Play......
bustedsynx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 857
Merit: 251



View Profile
October 15, 2019, 05:15:03 PM
 #1290

@RivAngE. Also, Grin's monetary policy removes moon math, removes the early holders advantage and makes it more fair for late adopters.

I love bitcoin, however, there might be something in its monetary policy that is preventing it from wider distribution.

Oh, you haven't heard that Bitcoin is digital gold, a store of value that is not really meant for the masses because using it for payments is slow asf. So, it is expected that Bitcoin is not to be spent but to hodl.


▄▄▄███████▄▄▄
▄▄█████▀▀''`▀▀█████▄▄
▄███P'            `YY██▄
▄██P'                  `Y██▄
███'                      `███
███'                         ███
▄██'   ▄█████▄▄  ,▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄p   ███
▄██▀  ,████▀P▀███.`██████████P   ▀██▄
███[ ,████ __. ███.   ,▄████▀    ███
███[ ]████████████[  ▄████▀       ███
███[ `████   ,oo2 ▄████▀'       ,███
▀██▄  `████▄▄█████d███████████   ▄██▀
▀██.   `▀▀▀▀▀▀"  Y▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ,██▀
███.                        ,███
▀██▄                      ▄██▀
▀███▄_                 ,███▀
▀███▄▄_          _▄▄███▀
▀▀████▄▄ooo▄▄█████▀
▀▀███████▀▀'

365

TM

EZ365 is a digital ecosystem that combines
the best aspects of online gaming, cryptocurrency
trading
and blockchain education. ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

..WHITEPAPER..    ..INVESTOR PITCH..

.Telegram     Twitter   Facebook

                       .'M████▀▀██  ██
                      W█Ws'V██  ██▄▄███▀▀█
                     i█████m.~M████▀▀██  ███
                     d███████Ws'V██  ██████
                     ****M██████m.~███f~~__mW█
          ██▀▀▀████████=  Y██▀▀██W ,gm███████
      g█████▄▄▄██   █A~`_WW Y█  ██!,████████
   g▀▀▀███   ████▀▀`_m████i!████P W███  ██
 _███▄▄▄██▀▀▀███Af`_m███   █W ███A ]███  ██
__ ~~~▀▀▀▀▄▄▄█*f_m██████   ██i!██!i███████
Y█████▄▄▄▄__. i██▀▀▀██████████ █!,██████
 8█  █▀▀█████.!██   ██████████i! █████
 '█  █  █   █W M█▄▄▄██████   ██ !██
  !███▄▄█   ██i'██████████   ██
   Y███████████.]██████████████
   █   ███████b ███   ██████
   Y   █   █▀▀█i!██   ████
    V███   █  █W Y█████
      ~~▀███▄▄▄█['███
            ~~*██

Play

            │
    │      ███
    │      ███
    │      ███
    │   │  ███
   ███  │  ███
   ███ ███ ███
 │  ███ ███ ███
███ ███ ███ ███
███ ███  │   │
███ ███  │   │
 │   │
 │

Trade

           __▄▄████▄▄
     __▄▄███████████████▄▄▄
 _▄▄█████████▀▀~`,▄████████████▄▄▄
 ~▀▀████▀▀~`,_▄▄███████████████▀▀▀
   d█~  =▀███████████████▀▀
   ]█! m▄▄ '~▀▀▀████▀▀~~ ,_▄▄
  ,W█. *████▄▄__ '  __▄▄█████
  !██P  █████████████████████
   W█. - ██████████████████▀
  i██[   ~ ▀▀█████████▀▀▀
 g███!
Y███

Learn
Chris!
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1371
Merit: 1096



View Profile
October 16, 2019, 02:38:01 AM
 #1291

https://mwgrinpool.com is shutting down. We'll miss you greatly!

Quote
Although it has been a pleasure offering mining pool services to the GRIN community, it is with great sadness that we must announce that we will be shutting down MWGrinPool in the coming weeks. Our smaller market share has always made us an underdog, but the declining GRIN prices have strengthened our resolve to cut our losses and focus our energy on other endeavors.
Our stratum servers will shut off on November 1st and our wallet will turn off on December 1st. Please be sure to adjust your mining rigs accordingly, and redeem all of your GRIN by the end of November.
Thank you for considering our pool for your GRIN mining, and especially to those of you who stood by us even when the odds were stacked against us. We look forward to seeing many of you in the coming years.
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2492
Merit: 1716


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
October 16, 2019, 03:23:22 AM
 #1292

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.
I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.

I am far more concerned with a bad actor that controls asics than a botnet owner trying to 51%. You see the botnet owner will not kill his income while whoever can afford the asic ranch may very well be an incentivized adversary. You can figure out the rest yourself unless you are the dullard you think i am.

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
bbc.reporter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 659


bustadice.com


View Profile
October 16, 2019, 03:26:55 AM
 #1293

@bustedsynx. That is what Grin's monetary policy and design was created to fix. I am not telling you that it is the best solution, however. But it appears that it might be a contender.

..bustadice..         ▄▄████████████▄▄
     ▄▄████████▀▀▀▀████████▄▄
   ▄███████████    ███████████▄
  █████    ████▄▄▄▄████    █████
 ██████    ████████▀▀██    ██████
██████████████████   █████████████
█████████████████▌  ▐█████████████
███    ██████████   ███████    ███
███    ████████▀   ▐███████    ███
██████████████      ██████████████
██████████████      ██████████████
 ██████████████▄▄▄▄██████████████
  ▀████████████████████████████▀
                    ▄▄███████▄▄
                  ▄███████████████▄
   ███████████  ▄████▀▀       ▀▀████▄
               ████▀      ██     ▀████
 ███████████  ████        ██       ████
             ████         ██        ████
███████████  ████     ▄▄▄▄██        ████
             ████     ▀▀▀▀▀▀        ████
 ███████████  ████                 ████
               ████▄             ▄████
   ███████████  ▀████▄▄       ▄▄████▀
                  ▀███████████████▀
                     ▀▀███████▀▀
          ▄██▄
           ████
            ██
            ▀▀
 ▄██████████████████████▄
██████▀▀██████████▀▀██████
█████    ████████    █████
█████▄  ▄████████▄  ▄█████
██████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
    ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
       ████████████
......Play......
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2492
Merit: 1716


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
October 16, 2019, 03:29:01 AM
 #1294

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.
I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.

What is that difference between 1000s of mining ASICs, 10000 of mining GPUs and 5 people controlling half of the coins in a PoS system?

For as long as there are poor and rich people, centralizion will keep occurring in one form on another.
What is the difference between cryptocurrency and central bankers shitting money out of thin air?

If a currency can not exist without being controlled by a few, then its not a currency, its shit.

Miners, hardware, electricity, ups the stakes significantly compared to PoS, which leads faster to centralization and shitcoins.

You might believe Bitcoin is decentralized, but it's not much better than altcoins.
Thanks to BTC's aggressive halvings, the few who knew about BTC in its early days obtained more than half of its supply in less than 4 years... way to go for a system which hopes to stay around for a long time huh?
We've currently mined 85.70% of BTC, what will happen when there'll be no more interest to mine it?

On this regard, GRIN's system is safer and more decentralization-friendly.

Correct, by the time those that would want to destroy such a system get to the point where they fear it, it will have become massive enough to make that task unpractical (hopefully). Guessing the future is hard enough when dealing with economics let alone fear indexes of global threats.

One worry arises in my head:

'Grin was launched without a premine, ICO, or founders rewards and relies on donations to support the long-term development of the project.'

So, there is a risk associated with a lack of interest at a point that could jeopardise the whole project?

What am I missing?

Also, 'early holders advantage and makes it fairer for late adopters' what I read is: 'Join later and make more' which could combat the above and maybe hope people will donate and not only profit? Greed goes a long way though  Huh

Monero was launched the same way and a large majority of mining pools donate to a Dev fund and there is a community funding system that anyone can make proposals to.

@AlecMe. Can you explain join later and make more?

Grin's monetary supply discourages early whales that cause an influence on the supply. It also encourages wider distribution and a more stable price.

How would joining later, make more occur? If it would, it would be occuring under a stable price and less influential whales.

By using the terms "make more" i think he is referring to increasing profits by purchasing the coin cheaper down the road and therefore when the price rises he will have made more for the same initial investment.

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
Viper1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 320


View Profile
October 16, 2019, 03:30:42 AM
 #1295

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.
I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.

I am far more concerned with a bad actor that controls asics than a botnet owner trying to 51%. You see the botnet owner will not kill his income while whoever can afford the asic ranch may very well be an incentivized adversary. You can figure out the rest yourself unless you are the dullard you think i am.
You said a botnet having 50%+ wasn't centralization. Now you're twisting it into what they'd actually do with that centralized control so you can try and "win" an argument that you just lost with that tactic. We can certainly have a discussion about what someone might do with centralized control. But that's different than the fact that they have it.

BTC: 1F8yJqgjeFyX1SX6KJmqYtHiHXJA89ENNT
LTC: LYAEPQeDDM7Y4jbUH2AwhBmkzThAGecNBV
DOGE: DSUsCCdt98PcNgUkFHLDFdQXmPrQBEqXu9
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2492
Merit: 1716


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
October 16, 2019, 03:41:05 AM
 #1296

They don't cause centralization.
Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.
I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.

I am far more concerned with a bad actor that controls asics than a botnet owner trying to 51%. You see the botnet owner will not kill his income while whoever can afford the asic ranch may very well be an incentivized adversary. You can figure out the rest yourself unless you are the dullard you think i am.
You said a botnet having 50%+ wasn't centralization. Now you're twisting it into what they'd actually do with that centralized control so you can try and "win" an argument that you just lost with that tactic. We can certainly have a discussion about what someone might do with centralized control. But that's different than the fact that they have it.

I do not believe a botnet will ever have a large enough control of the hash but playing devils advocate i stated they were not incentivized to make an attack if they could even get in that position.It's far more likely a pool will achieve the necessary hash than a botnet ever attacking. Botnets comprise very small hash potential (most of the machines are not high hashing machines). They just control alot of them. But there is alot of latency in there as well as it is much more decentralized than most pools as people tend to join pools with low latency.
You should ask the big miners the game theory behind it as i do not claim to be an expert. I am only stating that i believe you have no clue what you are talking about.
And it sounds to me like your just trying to create Fud.

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
Viper1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 320


View Profile
October 16, 2019, 04:02:07 AM
 #1297

i stated they were not incentivized to make an attack if they could even get in that position.
The most obvious one would be to take out your competition which is a pretty big incentive and is the sort of thing that happens all the time when control/power comes into play for those that seek it.

And it sounds to me like your just trying to create Fud.
Why is it when people don't like what someone is saying, they automatically turn to claiming it's "FUD". You simply made a statement that I found fault with and was pointing that out. Nothing more.

BTC: 1F8yJqgjeFyX1SX6KJmqYtHiHXJA89ENNT
LTC: LYAEPQeDDM7Y4jbUH2AwhBmkzThAGecNBV
DOGE: DSUsCCdt98PcNgUkFHLDFdQXmPrQBEqXu9
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2492
Merit: 1716


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
October 16, 2019, 04:15:31 AM
 #1298

i stated they were not incentivized to make an attack if they could even get in that position.
The most obvious one would be to take out your competition which is a pretty big incentive and is the sort of thing that happens all the time when control/power comes into play for those that seek it.

And it sounds to me like your just trying to create Fud.
Why is it when people don't like what someone is saying, they automatically turn to claiming it's "FUD". You simply made a statement that I found fault with and was pointing that out. Nothing more.


FYI BitcoinEXpress already tried this FUD attack and was unable to follow through with his botnet. I would be more worried of your SV getting 51'd.

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
Viper1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 320


View Profile
October 16, 2019, 04:27:58 AM
 #1299

i stated they were not incentivized to make an attack if they could even get in that position.
The most obvious one would be to take out your competition which is a pretty big incentive and is the sort of thing that happens all the time when control/power comes into play for those that seek it.

And it sounds to me like your just trying to create Fud.
Why is it when people don't like what someone is saying, they automatically turn to claiming it's "FUD". You simply made a statement that I found fault with and was pointing that out. Nothing more.

FYI BitcoinEXpress already tried this FUD attack and was unable to follow through with his botnet. I would be more worried of your SV getting 51'd.
Did he? Well he's also the guy that said he would attack Monero and then didn't right? So...... Yeah...

What do you mean "my SV"? You think I support that cause I've posted in there? I think my more recent comment in there sort of shows I don't.

I'd be worried about "all" coins. Bitcoin Cash was attacked and they did a 51% double spend on it rewriting the ledger that isn't supposed to be rewritten. Course they "justified" it.. Didn't ETH do the same thing? And there was another coin that had the same sort of thing didn't they? vertcoin or via or something? These things have already happened and so someone just has to have a good enough reason and they can do it to any coin.

But sure. If you can't argue the issues then say FUD. Sort of says it all right there.

BTC: 1F8yJqgjeFyX1SX6KJmqYtHiHXJA89ENNT
LTC: LYAEPQeDDM7Y4jbUH2AwhBmkzThAGecNBV
DOGE: DSUsCCdt98PcNgUkFHLDFdQXmPrQBEqXu9
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2492
Merit: 1716


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
October 17, 2019, 12:51:07 AM
 #1300

i stated they were not incentivized to make an attack if they could even get in that position.
The most obvious one would be to take out your competition which is a pretty big incentive and is the sort of thing that happens all the time when control/power comes into play for those that seek it.

And it sounds to me like your just trying to create Fud.
Why is it when people don't like what someone is saying, they automatically turn to claiming it's "FUD". You simply made a statement that I found fault with and was pointing that out. Nothing more.

FYI BitcoinEXpress already tried this FUD attack and was unable to follow through with his botnet. I would be more worried of your SV getting 51'd.
Did he? Well he's also the guy that said he would attack Monero and then didn't right? So...... Yeah...

What do you mean "my SV"? You think I support that cause I've posted in there? I think my more recent comment in there sort of shows I don't.

I'd be worried about "all" coins. Bitcoin Cash was attacked and they did a 51% double spend on it rewriting the ledger that isn't supposed to be rewritten. Course they "justified" it.. Didn't ETH do the same thing? And there was another coin that had the same sort of thing didn't they? vertcoin or via or something? These things have already happened and so someone just has to have a good enough reason and they can do it to any coin.

But sure. If you can't argue the issues then say FUD. Sort of says it all right there.

There really is nothing to argue, show me a botnet with the capabilities to 0wn monero's chain.   Please.

I only argued that even if one exists that it has no incentive but you cannot even show one does let alone that it is incentivized to. Not to mention the fact that there are by your own admission botnets that are actively protecting the security of the chain, do you think they would magically disappear when this fantasy attack vector appears?

And FYI BCX was a verified Botnet operator that took down Polo during his FUD campaign and yes he failed in his chain attack.

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
Pages: « 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 [65] 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!