Pool Ops are now the Alt Currency Police

[k9quaint]

Those individuals can leave those pools at any time and the pool owners will be rendered powerless.

That is the theory in practice next to no one shifts a pool once they are settled on it as this debacle has shown.

Untrue. Users have left pools that provided shoddy or unreliable service. Those pools have withered and died. Just skim through the pool sub-forum of the mining section and you will find a few.

There are certainly improvements that can be made to the pool system in bitcoin, of that there is no doubt. But they are improvements in human behavior, not in computing protocols. For instance, pools that grow large enough to reach 25% of total hash power could close their pools to more work.

[1713244769]

1713244769

[1713244769]

1713244769

[Graet]

might i suggest the title be changed to
Rouge Pool Ops are now the Alt Currency Police

This has all been brought about by one poolop, please do not tar us all with the same brush
thanks
Graet

[kano]

might i suggest the title be changed to
Rouge Pool Ops are now the Alt Currency Police

This has all been brought about by one poolop, please do not tar us all with the same brush
thanks
Graet

However, apparently slush showed support for Luke-jr's actions also ...

... and go back a page and you will find even theymos supporting it:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56791.msg678275#msg678275

[k9quaint]

Those individuals can leave those pools at any time and the pool owners will be rendered powerless.

That is the theory in practice next to no one shifts a pool once they are settled on it as this debacle has shown.

Untrue. Users have left pools that provided shoddy or unreliable service. Those pools have withered and died. Just skim through the pool sub-forum of the mining section and you will find a few.

There are certainly improvements that can be made to the pool system in bitcoin, of that there is no doubt. But they are improvements in human behavior, not in computing protocols. For instance, pools that grow large enough to reach 25% of total hash power could close their pools to more work.

Yeah when it affected the coin return anything else a pool operator does is fair game it seems for these people and I actually now want to see one get larger than 50% so I can watch these same little weasels whine, complain and squirm over it...

Again, why would users whine, complain or squirm? A few need only change the ordering of URLs so the largest pool is no longer their primary. The solution is so simple, and has already been effected in a continuous fashion by many individuals to prevent Deepbit from "controlling" Bitcoin. Not that I have anything against Deepbit, they simply offer an excellent service and are the easy choice for first time miners.

[bitlane]

If you had the personal $$$ to get 80 ghash then how do you know he also doesn't have the $$$ needed as well ? Fail yet again. Please post concrete evidence next time before making random statements.

Actually, I've read his Family Blog and everything points to him being as broke as a joke......quite pathetic actually, so I can see his concerns with maintaining BTC's value, as he must use it to feed his family. It was some of most entertaining 'Coupon Clipping' and Religion garbage that I had ever come across.
I downloaded full mirrors of all of his online personal websites, for future reference.

Unfortunately, everything now seems to be removed from the net, as too many people were given the opportunity to get a glimpse inside the life of such a self-righteous Bible thumper.
He seems to be living on love, prayers and donations from the rest of his family (although with a boycott list, as to which products he will not accept as gifts).
That's right - a real man who let's the rest of his friends & family pay to raise his kids.....CLASSIC. 80 ghash, did you say ?

[BTCHero]

http://eligius.st/~artefact2/

Doesn't seem like this has affected his hashrate at all. 

[CoinHunter]

You don't need to be an engineer to realize that Solidcoin2 is controlled by a single individual. There is nothing a user of Solidcoin2 can do about this.

And what do you base this claim on? I can do the same thing, Bitcoin is controlled by one person. Does it make it true? Usually you need to give the evidence for such bold claims.

SolidCoin's trust nodes aren't operated only by me, others have wallets now that cannot be taken away from them. They are forever out there to be used to sign blocks.

On top of that we have multiple pools creating half the blocks. So if we do the maths :-

SolidCoin . Upto 10 trust nodes can currently operate and create half the blocks (which contain no SC). The other half of the blocks are solved by everyone, and the current breakdown you'd say about 4 big pools or solo operators are there. That's 14 "nodes" solving the majority of SolidCoin blocks.

Bitcoin. Upto 3 nodes creating 90% of the blocks. Everyone else fights over 10% scraps. Since bitcoin security revolves around at least 51% of the power being in "good hands" and 3 people have 90% of the power it puts bitcoins security in a precarious position. Only 2 people in Bitcoin need to decide or have it decided for them (hacked) and bitcoins security is no more.

Bitcoin is so much more centralized than SolidCoin it isn't funny. You have some incorrect belief there is only one person mining or that has control of SolidCoin. Hopefully this shows it's more than one, and less centralization than Bitcoin. Finally there are now 4 developers working on the source code and able to work on it without needing "permission". Everyone else is able to submit pull requests.

https://github.com/solidcoin/solidcoin

If you want to have an opinion on SolidCoin at least make sure it's based in reality and factual eh.

[Luke-Jr]

If you want to have an opinion on SolidCoin at least make sure it's based in reality and factual eh.

Like the fact that #SolidCoin operators (in this case, yourself) kickban people for no reason whatsoever?

[g2x3k]

might i suggest the title be changed to
Rouge Pool Ops are now the Alt Currency Police

This has all been brought about by one poolop, please do not tar us all with the same brush
thanks
Graet

gonna have to vote for that... in end is up to ppl picking a pool & poolop they feel good about

and everyone haveing a go at one, thats to easy this is a p2p experiment and what failed ?... how many of you have tried contacting btc pools and get them to adapt clc as alt chain to improve its hashrate and thereby makeing the attack impossible ?... bit late now i guess since he prob holds quite a bit but option been there but ppl are busy hunting luke-jr facebook profile

my own opion is as said on btc-e chat ealier, theres no need for more gpu coins as it is now i think the efforts would be better spent improveing upon bitcoin, wich code spreads to rest of the altchains and if need shuld arise for alternative gpu later on it gotta be started in coop with other chains to secure a just decent hashrate from start to avoid early apdoption & 51% issues, major job and only worth if brings enough experimental features

dosnt excuse playing police but just keep in mind this is p2p and only have power relative to what you take & give

[k9quaint]

You don't need to be an engineer to realize that Solidcoin2 is controlled by a single individual. There is nothing a user of Solidcoin2 can do about this.

And what do you base this claim on? I can do the same thing, Bitcoin is controlled by one person. Does it make it true? Usually you need to give the evidence for such bold claims.

SolidCoin's trust nodes aren't operated only by me, others have wallets now that cannot be taken away from them. They are forever out there to be used to sign blocks.

On top of that we have multiple pools creating half the blocks. So if we do the maths :-

SolidCoin . Upto 10 trust nodes can currently operate and create half the blocks (which contain no SC). The other half of the blocks are solved by everyone, and the current breakdown you'd say about 4 big pools or solo operators are there. That's 14 "nodes" solving the majority of SolidCoin blocks.

Bitcoin. Upto 3 nodes creating 90% of the blocks. Everyone else fights over 10% scraps. Since bitcoin security revolves around at least 51% of the power being in "good hands" and 3 people have 90% of the power it puts bitcoins security in a precarious position. Only 2 people in Bitcoin need to decide or have it decided for them (hacked) and bitcoins security is no more.

Bitcoin is so much more centralized than SolidCoin it isn't funny. You have some incorrect belief there is only one person mining or that has control of SolidCoin. Hopefully this shows it's more than one, and less centralization than Bitcoin. Finally there are now 4 developers working on the source code and able to work on it without needing "permission". Everyone else is able to submit pull requests.

https://github.com/solidcoin/solidcoin

If you want to have an opinion on SolidCoin at least make sure it's based in reality and factual eh.

The trusted nodes may not be "operated" by you currently, but they are instantiated by you. You can take them away just as quick. It doesn't matter if there are one or ten nodes if you designate what is and what is not trusted. What happens when one of your "trusted" nodes attacks your protocol? You hit the switch and kick it out. What happens when one merely insults you, or says something you don't like? Depends on your mood I suppose.

Your blockchain isn't fixed, it is whatever you want it to be, whenever you want it to be. Users are forced to upgrade by your enforcer nodes, and your enforcer nodes can be decertified by a code update (which your users must adopt or they will be cast out of the blockchain).

4 devs is better than one. Unfortunately, your track record of playing well with others is somewhat bleak. As long as the four of you keep mining, Solidcoin2 will still be alive so there is always hope.

[makomk]

Your blockchain isn't fixed, it is whatever you want it to be, whenever you want it to be. Users are forced to upgrade by your enforcer nodes, and your enforcer nodes can be decertified by a code update (which your users must adopt or they will be cast out of the blockchain).

There's a slight error in your logic here. Nodes can only be forced to adopt an update if CodeHunter's "enforcer nodes" go along with it, and they've got no reason to do this for an update that takes away their power. Assuming that those nodes are genuinely independent of CoinHunter, he doesn't actually have much more control over SolidCoin than the Bitcoin developers have over Bitcoin - if they release a major change and the mining pools go along with it, users pretty much have to go along too.

[Schwede65]

Since you're not a programmer or network engineer you probably don't realize a few things.

If you think SolidCoin is centralized then Bitcoin is even more centralized. Bitcoin has 3 pools which create 90+% of the blocks. SolidCoin has nowhere near this distribution of block creation being centralized.

Game, set, match. I guess.

you may be a programmer, but basic arithmetics are not your favorite ability:

total btc-hashrate: ~ 9,000 GH / atm
deepbit + btc-guild + slush: ~ 6,000 GH / atm

now we calculate the hashing-percentage of the big three: ~ 66.67 % / atm  

Edit: it's much, but far away from 90+%

[k9quaint]

Your blockchain isn't fixed, it is whatever you want it to be, whenever you want it to be. Users are forced to upgrade by your enforcer nodes, and your enforcer nodes can be decertified by a code update (which your users must adopt or they will be cast out of the blockchain).

There's a slight error in your logic here. Nodes can only be forced to adopt an update if CodeHunter's "enforcer nodes" go along with it, and they've got no reason to do this for an update that takes away their power. Assuming that those nodes are genuinely independent of CoinHunter, he doesn't actually have much more control over SolidCoin than the Bitcoin developers have over Bitcoin - if they release a major change and the mining pools go along with it, users pretty much have to go along too.

Let us presume that enforcer node X is compromised and beings attacking the Solidcoin2 network. Coinhunter issues a code update to strip that node of its enforcer status. Some portion of the user base implements this code update, most critically exchanges and pools. Solidcoin has enough enforcer nodes under his direct control to continue the protocol processing until the other enforcers update. The remaining enforcer nodes now have a choice; they can run the old "insecure" client that allows them to be "attacked" by node X, or they can update to the newer more "secure" version.

If they don't update, they will be left behind and eventually become a liability themselves. They can't write their own source to fork because of the following line in license.txt:

"We reserve the right to cancel this open source license to any project which has a negative impact on the SolidCoin network or SolidCoin users."

Of course "negative impact" is defined by Realsolid, and he owns the copyrights to all the code.

[DeathAndTaxes]

total btc-hashrate: ~ 9,000 GH / atm
deepbit + btc-guild + slush: ~ 6,000 GH / atm

now we calculate the hashing-percentage of the big three: ~ 66.67 % / atm 

Edit: it's much, but far away from 90+%

The good news is this trend has been downward at one point Deepbit alone was almost 50% (about 5TH on 10TH network).  Hopefully we reach a point where the big three combined are 49% or less.

[k9quaint]

Since you're not a programmer or network engineer you probably don't realize a few things.

If you think SolidCoin is centralized then Bitcoin is even more centralized. Bitcoin has 3 pools which create 90+% of the blocks. SolidCoin has nowhere near this distribution of block creation being centralized.

Game, set, match. I guess.

you may be a programmer, but basic arithmetics are not your favorite ability:

total btc-hashrate: ~ 9,000 GH / atm
deepbit + btc-guild + slush: ~ 6,000 GH / atm

now we calculate the hashing-percentage of the big three: ~ 66.67 % / atm  

Edit: it's much, but far away from 90+%

Away with you and your facts!! /jazzhands /bugeyes

[Gavin Andresen]

My prediction for 2012:

Peer-to-peer pool technology will mature (will get easier to install and run), and p2pool's will be more than 25% of bitcoin hashing power by the end of the year.

[k9quaint]

My prediction for 2012:

Peer-to-peer pool technology will mature (will get easier to install and run), and p2pool's will be more than 25% of bitcoin hashing power by the end of the year.

But does the end of the year coincide with the end of the world?
Can you trace your ancestry back to the Mayans?
Will the 49ers beat the Saints?

[CoinHunter]

If you want to have an opinion on SolidCoin at least make sure it's based in reality and factual eh.

Like the fact that #SolidCoin operators (in this case, yourself) kickban people for no reason whatsoever?

Pot , kettle? A day before you were banned from #solidcoin for being a liar and thief.

* You were kicked from #eligius by gmaxwell (pretty sure luke would have wanted this: sorry, no scamcoins, please.)

[Luke-Jr]

you were banned from #solidcoin for being a liar and thief.

This is nothing but slander.

[CoinHunter]

Since you're not a programmer or network engineer you probably don't realize a few things.

If you think SolidCoin is centralized then Bitcoin is even more centralized. Bitcoin has 3 pools which create 90+% of the blocks. SolidCoin has nowhere near this distribution of block creation being centralized.

Game, set, match. I guess.

you may be a programmer, but basic arithmetics are not your favorite ability:

total btc-hashrate: ~ 9,000 GH / atm
deepbit + btc-guild + slush: ~ 6,000 GH / atm

now we calculate the hashing-percentage of the big three: ~ 66.67 % / atm  

Edit: it's much, but far away from 90+%

Well I think it varies day to day what the exact makeup of the larger 3 or 4 pools is. Either way, there is less centralization in SolidCoin than bitcoin when using these metrics. We have a much wider distribution of block creation and decentralization than Bitcoin.