[ANN] Luckycoin LKY | New Official Thread | Get Lucky!

[lkyinvestor]

Luckycoin is listed on the reputable block explorer service:

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/lky

Their block explorer is on the longest LKY chain, historical, original one.

Since when an original LKY block explorer was announced, gaps between blocks had started.

If you are interested, please support the original chain with mining LKY.
You can mine directly from the v.1.0.1 GUI wallet, just by clicking '>>' in the Wallet Menu, then 'Mining',
Server: 127.0.0.1, port: 9918, use any strong username and a password and click 'Start Mining'

luckycoin.conf:
addnode=46.101.15.97
addnode=75.82.185.108

These nodes are on v.1.0.1 from https://chainz.cryptoid.info/lky/#!network:

A link to wallets is available in the first post of this thread.

[lkyinvestor]

I was able to completely sync my node to v1.0.1 and start mining original Luckycoin.
It still works.
The restart was a sham.
Only made to benefit the early miners and double spend old coins.
https://x.com/ZachZwei/status/1873286349232783824
See screenshot of miner running OG v1.0.1
https://imgur.com/a/CgP3RbS

That's true.
V1.0.1 is on the original chain, it synchs up to block 1'607'182 at the moment, which was mined today:
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/lky/block.dws?1607182.htm
But there are gaps between blocks due to low number of miners and due to negative impact of new chain, which is currently on a block ~251'150.
They saved only ~5 percent of original chain (first 81'743 blocks), so they have only a 5 percent share of original LKY.

Be careful. They try to sell to you something what is going to be very diluted.
For instance, investment-quality gold bars must be at least 99.5% pure gold. If they contain 5% only, it's fake what you buy.

[nutildah]

I was able to completely sync my node to v1.0.1 and start mining original Luckycoin.
It still works.
The restart was a sham.

Can you explain why this is a sham but Bells isn't?

Very weird of you to spend so much time fudding this other coin when you said this:

Just to let you know, I am merely a holder and understands what I have bought into.

You're not "merely" a Bells holder. You're a fudding machine, and I guess you do understand what you bought, which is why you constantly have to lie about it. And its just weird to think that if you fud this coin, somehow it will help make the fraud you are involved with less fraudulent. It does not.

[LKYWhale]

From the start this was advertised as Luckycoin restarted at block XXXXX because the chain had essentially been mined by one person for the majority of the last decade, correct? So why after someone on twitter discovered they were able to sync the longer chain did all exchanges freeze deposits and blame some replay attack? The exchanges are older than the fork, there is no risk to them. They just stopped deposits, crashed the market and are killing this coin because they didn't research what they were listing?


There doesn't even seem to be a replay attack just a few transactions that coins be rebroadcast from old wallets. From our perspective, there is some coordination to only let certain people sell this coin.

[lkyinvestor]

From the start this was advertised as Luckycoin restarted at block XXXXX because the chain had essentially been mined by one person for the majority of the last decade, correct? So why after someone on twitter discovered they were able to sync the longer chain did all exchanges freeze deposits and blame some replay attack? The exchanges are older than the fork, there is no risk to them. They just stopped deposits, crashed the market and are killing this coin because they didn't research what they were listing?


There doesn't even seem to be a replay attack just a few transactions that coins be rebroadcast from old wallets. From our perspective, there is some coordination to only let certain people sell this coin.

If we look at charts, the chain was pretty active after the block 81'743 (Nov 25, 2013) chosen for "restarting":
https://web.archive.org/web/20160413155222/http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?blockexplorer=LKY&charts
Max 7'193 transactions on Dec, 22, 2013, up to 3'224 transactions per day in 2014, more than 1'000 (average per day) in 2015-2016.

In May, 2014 Luckycoin was mentioned by CNN (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=568287.msg6678487#msg6678487).

LKY was listed on exchanges and people were buying it in 2014-2018:
https://web.archive.org/web/20141030230840/https://www.cryptsy.com/markets/view/LKY_BTC
https://web.archive.org/web/20150908014821/https://www.coingather.com/exchange/LKY/BTC
https://web.archive.org/web/20150323145721/https://comkort.com/trade/lky_btc
https://web.archive.org/web/20150319003658/https://www.cryptsy.com/markets/view/LKY_BTC
https://web.archive.org/web/20160309020416/http://btcpool.exchange/Market?pair=LKY/BTC
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=568287.msg41528390#msg41528390

If you make all these people have zero balance of their wallets (all coins that were accumulated since November, 25, 2013 by miners and by investors - disappeared in a new chain), why do you expect that exchanges have to be happy with this "revival"?
Agree that they had to do their research before listing.

It is dishonest - if someone tries to erase all these years, no matter, replay attacks happened, or not, no matter, the original wallet synchs, or not.

[LKYWhale]

From the start this was advertised as Luckycoin restarted at block XXXXX because the chain had essentially been mined by one person for the majority of the last decade, correct? So why after someone on twitter discovered they were able to sync the longer chain did all exchanges freeze deposits and blame some replay attack? The exchanges are older than the fork, there is no risk to them. They just stopped deposits, crashed the market and are killing this coin because they didn't research what they were listing?


There doesn't even seem to be a replay attack just a few transactions that coins be rebroadcast from old wallets. From our perspective, there is some coordination to only let certain people sell this coin.

If we look at charts, the chain was pretty active after the block 81'743 (Nov 25, 2013) chosen for "restarting":
https://web.archive.org/web/20160413155222/http://www.[Suspicious link removed]/index.php?blockexplorer=LKY&charts
Max 7'193 transactions on Dec, 22, 2013, up to 3'224 transactions per day in 2014, more than 1'000 (average per day) in 2015-2016.

In May, 2014 Luckycoin was mentioned by CNN (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=568287.msg6678487#msg6678487).

LKY was listed on exchanges and people were buying it in 2014-2018:
https://web.archive.org/web/20141030230840/https://www.cryptsy.com/markets/view/LKY_BTC
https://web.archive.org/web/20150908014821/https://www.coingather.com/exchange/LKY/BTC
https://web.archive.org/web/20150323145721/https://comkort.com/trade/lky_btc
https://web.archive.org/web/20150319003658/https://www.cryptsy.com/markets/view/LKY_BTC
https://web.archive.org/web/20160309020416/http://btcpool.exchange/Market?pair=LKY/BTC
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=568287.msg41528390#msg41528390

If you make all these people have zero balance of their wallets (all coins that were accumulated since November, 25, 2013 by miners and by investors - disappeared in a new chain), why do you expect that exchanges have to be happy with this "revival"?
Agree that they had to do their research before listing.

It is dishonest - if someone tries to erase all these years, no matter, replay attacks happened, or not, no matter, the original wallet synchs, or not.

It makes no sense to kill off a coin your customers bought in order to save some people who likely don't even know the coin still exists. They spent an unknown amount of money years ago and had years to sell or do what they want with their coin. Exchange customers spent millions over the last month buying it, EVERY DAY

You opened a market, people spent millions buying it and then some bad forensics by some troll on X led to all exchanges locking the coin and crashing its value by 90%. You didnt know what you were listing and now that some troll says its bad you listen? Exchanges are robbing their customers.

[melander81]

From the start this was advertised as Luckycoin restarted at block XXXXX because the chain had essentially been mined by one person for the majority of the last decade, correct? So why after someone on twitter discovered they were able to sync the longer chain did all exchanges freeze deposits and blame some replay attack? The exchanges are older than the fork, there is no risk to them. They just stopped deposits, crashed the market and are killing this coin because they didn't research what they were listing?


There doesn't even seem to be a replay attack just a few transactions that coins be rebroadcast from old wallets. From our perspective, there is some coordination to only let certain people sell this coin.

In case you missed it, the thread I created to document the revival of the OG Lucky was dated 12/28.
Someone saw my post and was able to sync to it much earlier than me.
He started mining from Block 1604978
Check the link:
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/lky/block.dws?1604978.htm
It is dated 12/28/2024, 6:31:20 PM (UTC+8:00)

The replay attacks happened as early as around 12/26.
It was around this Block 237849. Timestamp: 2024-12-26 17:20:42
https://luckyscan.org/block/700e6328d657a919ad0fd83f71a6ce2b03cc87edb619cc3f251d94e32f3539d2

All timestamps are there.

So why blame me for exchanges closing deposits?
A coordinated attack, are you sure?
Show some proof first, don't just spit nonsense.

[LKYWhale]

In case you missed it, the thread I created to document the revival of the OG Lucky was dated 12/28.
Someone saw my post and was able to sync to it much earlier than me.
He started mining from Block 1604978

Do you want a cookie? Nobody every said you couldn't sync the longer chain. The block explorer that was "discovered" was there the entire time had anyone bothered to look. This revial was restarted from a previous block and that was never hidden. The other chain means nothing

The replay attacks happened as early as around 12/26.
It was around this Block 237849. Timestamp: 2024-12-26 17:20:42
https://luckyscan.org/block/700e6328d657a919ad0fd83f71a6ce2b03cc87edb619cc3f251d94e32f3539d2

All timestamps are there.

So why blame me for exchanges closing deposits?
A coordinated attack, are you sure?
Show some proof first, don't just spit nonsense.

There is no risk to exchanges. Their wallets don't exist when the transactions were created. The only people at risk are those who have not moved coins for 11 years. They are not being stolen, they are replicating what they chose to do 11 years ago. There is no way for them to profit. Just old transactions from old wallets. Bad forensics.

Closing deposits makes no sense. The only reason is to prevent selling. Give another reason for them to cost their customers millions of dollars?

I could mine with pentium cpu for 11 years and my chain would be longer. Why does that erase the decision whoever revived the chain made? Launch your own luckycoin revival, Im sure your employer will list it.

[melander81]

If you really want to find an answer to your question why they closed deposits, then you should ask them (exchanges) directly.
And if you still think I know anyone from these exchanges, then you are totally mistaken(you have no tangible proof).

I merely shared public information based on what I can see online.
I have no insider info or anything, heck not even a dev.
I rely on ChatGPT most of the time.

In any case, this does not concern me anymore.
Have a nice day and good luck.

[nutildah]

There is no risk to exchanges. Their wallets don't exist when the transactions were created. The only people at risk are those who have not moved coins for 11 years. They are not being stolen, they are replicating what they chose to do 11 years ago. There is no way for them to profit. Just old transactions from old wallets. Bad forensics.

True, its weird an exchange would close deposits based on a faulty assumption. It doesn't cost them money. Maybe they were just wary of having newly-awakened wallets threatening the dominance of their coin stash, IDK.

I could mine with pentium cpu for 11 years and my chain would be longer. Why does that erase the decision whoever revived the chain made?

It doesn't.

Launch your own luckycoin revival, Im sure your employer will list it.

He won't. He's only here because Bells is trash and he thinks that shitting on Lucky somehow helps Bells (it does not -- both coins are headed to zero with haste, because they were built on false narratives... sorry I don't make the rules).

[LKYWhale]

If you really want to find an answer to your question why they closed deposits, then you should ask them (exchanges) directly.
And if you still think I know anyone from these exchanges, then you are totally mistaken(you have no tangible proof).

I merely shared public information based on what I can see online.
I have no insider info or anything, heck not even a dev.
I rely on ChatGPT most of the time.

In any case, this does not concern me anymore.
Have a nice day and good luck.

Your employer has stolen our coins. They have now delisted LKY on completely false pretenses because you don't understand how blockhain and old wallets work. There is no "replay attack". When I opened my wallet my old deposits to cryptsy were sent again. You claim as some attack, stop talking about what you do not understand. There is nothing to be gained from an 11 year old replay attack. 100 percent FUD

Explorer is not broken, just rich list. Can you really run exchange if you cannot see this?

They FUD, Crash market and steal coins. Best not to be in business with them anymore.

[lkyinvestor]

The main problem with this "revival" is:
if it is New Lucky, then it is incorrect to use the same name, symbol, logo and story.
It is incorrect to take over old Luckycoin web domains and edit old Coinmarketcap listing.
If the coin is new, then it is dishonest that domains, story, name, logo are not new and the same one with original LKY.

Not sure how many persons mined original LKY in 2017-2024, but in 2014-2016 it was quite active:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160413155222/http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?blockexplorer=LKY&charts

If there is a blockchain, there are certain immutable rules, no matter 1 person mines or 1 million.
If it is not premine, it is fair, all people have the opportunity.
If a small number of miners mine fairly, no matter - it is their own business.
They accept risks and have hope, expecting profit.

However, there are not miners only, but also people who were buying LKY on exchanges.
If someone makes their funds disappear in the new chain, it is a problem which will last.
The simple solution could be to make a revival from the latest block of the longest chain, and almost everyone here including nutildah and melander81 agreed with that.
It absolutely made no sense to make two chains instead of continuing the original one, there could be a fork to fix mining rewards or anything outdated, okay, but then forking from the latest block obviously.

[lkyinvestor]

If at some point in the future, crypto community returns to fairness - to the original chain, that will mean losses for current buyers of fake LKY.
There is a big everlasting risk, and obviously smart exchanges or pools will not participate in supporting of forked chain.
Anyway, of course, there will be pools and exchanges who will support it. Then just imagine that someone with huge resources (for instance, someone like Binance owner) will make another "revival" from the block #1, happened in May, 2013.
Buyers of new LKY then would be in the same boat with buyers of original LKY - their funds would disappear in the 3rd chain of another LKY, which would be present on Binance, and no one would care about LKY listed on small nonkyc-like exchanges, people would prefer to deal with new one, from Binance.

As one man said on the similar point:

Precisely the kind of thing blockchain was intended to prevent.


-MarkM-

Buyers of new LKY could also be interested in saving the original chain. If there is one chain and all funds are safe, all is fair - then there is no risk, no fraud, and no negative emotions from crypto community - then the future of project could be really bright.
Technically it could be done through a chain which could be based on the original one, saving all blocks until a point in 2024, when a new chain was started, or until the latest block, with an airdrop to new LKY addresses, taking into account a snapshot of their balances before exchanges stopped deposits and withdrawals, or on the latest date, depending on what is more comfortable for majority of holders. Then holders of new LKY would have all their balances safe, and holders of original LKY would have all their funds safe, and the issue would be solved.

[nutildah]

It absolutely made no sense to make two chains instead of continuing the original one, there could be a fork to fix mining rewards or anything outdated, okay, but then forking from the latest block obviously.

Why didn't the New Bells do this when it would have been extraordinarily easy to do so? Forking Dogecoin and calling it "Bellscoin" is also an extremely lame grift. Is it not?

If at some point in the future, crypto community returns to fairness - to the original chain, that will mean losses for current buyers of fake LKY.

Sure, but that will never happen because it takes $$ to list a coin on exchange, hire influencers, marketers, and non-stop fudding sycophants.

[lkyinvestor]

I am an original Luckycoin holder,
however I was investing not only in LKY, but also in BTC in 2014, so I don't need to post here for money.
You will be surprised, but I am ready to spend money for listing original LKY on normal exchanges and on pools.
I have a thought of hiring lawyers to check if everything is okay with this "revival", when funds disappear.
However, for now I am just trying to find a normal solution, which could take into account interests of majority of holders, including buyers of new LKY.

If Bells did the same "revival"  (don't know much about it though), I agree that it was a fraud too. When we were talking with you in another thread, you agreed that this LKY "revival" is "garbage" and you told that you're not involved with that:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6017.msg64850582#msg64850582

[nutildah]

I am an original Luckycoin holder,
however I was investing not only in LKY, but also in BTC in 2014, so I don't need to post here for money like you are saying.
You will be surprised, but I am ready to spend money for listing original LKY on normal exchanges and on pools.
I have a thought of hiring lawyers to check if everything is okay with this "revival", when funds disappear.
However, for now I am just trying to find a normal solution, which could take into account interests of majority of holders, including buyers of new LKY.

If Bells did the same "revival"  (don't know much about it though), I agree that it was a fraud too. When we were talking with you in another thread, you agreed that this LKY "revival" is "garbage" and you told that you're not involved with that:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6017.msg64850582#msg64850582

I said ALL the revivals were garbage, not just LKY.

LKY was just slightly better than Bells as they at least tried to incorporate some old history into it, whereas everything about Bells is 100% brand new.

[LKYWhale]

BELL Chain has spam attack. Trading should be stopped at all exchanges as fake LKY "Replay attack"

[melander81]

I am an original Luckycoin holder,
however I was investing not only in LKY, but also in BTC in 2014, so I don't need to post here for money.
You will be surprised, but I am ready to spend money for listing original LKY on normal exchanges and on pools.
I have a thought of hiring lawyers to check if everything is okay with this "revival", when funds disappear.
However, for now I am just trying to find a normal solution, which could take into account interests of majority of holders, including buyers of new LKY.

If Bells did the same "revival"  (don't know much about it though), I agree that it was a fraud too. When we were talking with you in another thread, you agreed that this LKY "revival" is "garbage" and you told that you're not involved with that:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6017.msg64850582#msg64850582

Let's not forget that he promoted it too.
It might be indirect, but the LKY revivers who also ran OPNET leveraged his post.
See tweet here:
https://x.com/LuckyCoinProj/status/1844540427178856927
Reference post here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=214614.msg64614545#msg64614545

Uploaded image incase it gets "deleted":
https://imgur.com/a/DeDoSyy

[nutildah]

I stand by everything I said:

My final conclusion about this coin is that its relaunch is a relatively valiant attempt compared to everything else in its category. Its all relative, and it managed to incorporate a good stretch of old blocks before the relaunch, which puts it above stuff like $BELLS, IMO.

Both "revivals" are new coins. The only difference is the New Lucky at least tried to incorporate a chunk of the Old Lucky blockchain, which makes it infinitely more legit than New Bells, as everything is relative. Don't know why this is so difficult to understand.