osensei
Member
 Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
https://monerohash.com
|
 |
June 18, 2015, 02:28:01 PM |
|
Regarding running bitmonerod through Tor, I can run it just fine with torsocks. When launching bitmonerod I get a bunch of libtorsocks(6718): WARNING: The symbol res_query() was not found in any shared library with the reported error: Not Found!
Also, we failed to find the symbol __res_query() with the reported error: Not Found and a bunch of libtorsocks(6716): sendto: Connection is a UDP or ICMP stream, may be a DNS request or other form of leak: rejecting. but it runs well and syncs properly after that. All connected peers are reported as 127.0.0.1:9050. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin mining is now a specialized and very risky industry, just like gold mining. Amateur miners are unlikely to make much money, and may even lose money. Bitcoin is much more than just mining, though!
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
ArticMine
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1050
Monero Core Team
|
|
June 18, 2015, 02:52:07 PM |
|
a "darknet" exchange without any cryptonote coin sounds like a big red flag to me, its funny people complain about polo and the KYC trap but Monero (and the other cryptonotes) are the only coin that protect individual privacy even in these cases, sure they can know how much you bought and what is your address but thats it, using a darknet exchange will not make any bitcoin clone fungible.
The more interesting question is would there be a spread in the XMR/XBT exchange rates between a "darknet" and "regulated" exchange? In theory if fungibility of XBT is an issue there should be a spread. Edit: As for a spread in the DASH/XMR exchange rate that would be really more interesting. |
|
|
|
|
florida.haunted
|
|
June 18, 2015, 03:56:46 PM |
|
Good news for Monero - bitcoin.org votes against any hard Bitcoin forks Bitcoin.org Hard Fork Policy
Contentious hard forks are bad for Bitcoin. At the very best, a contentious hard fork will leave people who chose the losing side of the fork feeling disenfranchised. At the very worst, it will make bitcoins permanently lose their value. In between are many possible outcomes, but none of them are good.
The danger of a contentious hard fork is potentially so significant that Bitcoin.org has decided to adopt a new policy:
Bitcoin.org will not promote software or services that will leave the previous consensus because of an intentional and contentious hard fork attempt.
This policy applies to full node software, such as Bitcoin Core, software forks of Bitcoin Core, and alternative full node implementations.
It also applies to wallets and services that have the ability to detect the contentious hard fork, and which release code or make announcements indicating that they will cease operating on the side of the previous consensus. It does not apply to software that cannot detect the contentious hard fork and which continues doing whatever it would’ve done anyway.
To be clear, we encourage wallet authors and service providers to offer their opinions on hard fork proposals, and we will not penalize anyone for contributing to a discussion. We will only stop promoting particular wallets and services if they plan to move their users onto a contentious hard fork by default.
Posted to the Bitcoin.org Site Blog on 16 June 2015
https://bitcoin.org/en/posts/hard-fork-policyThis official bitcoin.org note is important for Monero world. Thereby, Bitcoin remains with 1M block size, and will be suitable for low number of transactions per block. So that leads for block to contain large transactions only or transactions with large fees only. And we can promote Monero as direct Bitcoin counterpart for unlimited number of transactions per block with additional great bonus of academical-proven anonymity. |
|
|
|
|
Hueristic
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3808
Merit: 4893
Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it
|
|
June 18, 2015, 04:43:09 PM |
|
Good news for Monero - bitcoin.org votes against any hard Bitcoin forks Bitcoin.org Hard Fork Policy
Contentious hard forks are bad for Bitcoin. At the very best, a contentious hard fork will leave people who chose the losing side of the fork feeling disenfranchised. At the very worst, it will make bitcoins permanently lose their value. In between are many possible outcomes, but none of them are good.
The danger of a contentious hard fork is potentially so significant that Bitcoin.org has decided to adopt a new policy:
Bitcoin.org will not promote software or services that will leave the previous consensus because of an intentional and contentious hard fork attempt.
This policy applies to full node software, such as Bitcoin Core, software forks of Bitcoin Core, and alternative full node implementations.
It also applies to wallets and services that have the ability to detect the contentious hard fork, and which release code or make announcements indicating that they will cease operating on the side of the previous consensus. It does not apply to software that cannot detect the contentious hard fork and which continues doing whatever it would’ve done anyway.
To be clear, we encourage wallet authors and service providers to offer their opinions on hard fork proposals, and we will not penalize anyone for contributing to a discussion. We will only stop promoting particular wallets and services if they plan to move their users onto a contentious hard fork by default.
Posted to the Bitcoin.org Site Blog on 16 June 2015
https://bitcoin.org/en/posts/hard-fork-policyThis official bitcoin.org note is important for Monero world. Thereby, Bitcoin remains with 1M block size, and will be suitable for low number of transactions per block. So that leads for block to contain large transactions only or transactions with large fees only. And we can promote Monero as direct Bitcoin counterpart for unlimited number of transactions per block with additional great bonus of academical-proven anonymity. Good for alts in general. |
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
|
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
June 18, 2015, 07:54:30 PM |
|
Probably not a monolithic group. Some smart cryptographers, etc., some altcoin hidden premine, fraud, etc. scammers. Or for that matter the same person/people could be both too, although that seems moderately less likely (of course I'm just guessing). One does not preclude the other, really. Some smart people have been some pretty big scumbags many times before (see Enron, etc.). |
|
|
|
|
|
Wanderlust
|
|
June 18, 2015, 08:19:38 PM |
|
Probably not a monolithic group. Some smart cryptographers, etc., some altcoin hidden premine, fraud, etc. scammers. Or for that matter the same person/people could be both too, although that seems moderately less likely (of course I'm just guessing). One does not preclude the other, really. Some smart people have been some pretty big scumbags many times before (see Enron, etc.). AS i continue to research this fasinating topic, ( i am currently reading thru https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0 ) there is a palpable irony in the air re XMR and BCN. U owe ur existence to them and yet u risk "biting the hand that (at some time) feeds you". I can quite understand and fully respect the XMR line, but cannot help wondering whether something has been missed from this story. Worse still has XMR possibly gone too far in denouncing BCN, esp without more complete info on the subject? appreciate ur thoughts, no shitstirring intended (altho inevitable accusations i guess) merci |
|
|
|
|
|
kazuki49
|
|
June 18, 2015, 08:21:51 PM |
|
a "darknet" exchange without any cryptonote coin sounds like a big red flag to me, its funny people complain about polo and the KYC trap but Monero (and the other cryptonotes) are the only coin that protect individual privacy even in these cases, sure they can know how much you bought and what is your address but thats it, using a darknet exchange will not make any bitcoin clone fungible.
The more interesting question is would there be a spread in the XMR/XBT exchange rates between a "darknet" and "regulated" exchange? In theory if fungibility of XBT is an issue there should be a spread. Edit: As for a spread in the DASH/XMR exchange rate that would be really more interesting. If you mean the original and only dash then yes, I agree with you. |
|
|
|
|
ArticMine
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1050
Monero Core Team
|
|
June 18, 2015, 08:34:05 PM |
|
a "darknet" exchange without any cryptonote coin sounds like a big red flag to me, its funny people complain about polo and the KYC trap but Monero (and the other cryptonotes) are the only coin that protect individual privacy even in these cases, sure they can know how much you bought and what is your address but thats it, using a darknet exchange will not make any bitcoin clone fungible.
The more interesting question is would there be a spread in the XMR/XBT exchange rates between a "darknet" and "regulated" exchange? In theory if fungibility of XBT is an issue there should be a spread. Edit: As for a spread in the DASH/XMR exchange rate that would be really more interesting. If you mean the original and only dash then yes, I agree with you. The real significance here will come after Monero implements MRL-0004, since we are comparing two Cryptonote coins. Edit: It is important to consider that Monero has and is diverging significantly from the Cryptonote/Bytecoin code while Dashcoin is an automated fork of Bytecoin by design, so in principle the trading spread could be a measure of the market's opinion on the security / privacy improvements in MRL-0004. |
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
June 18, 2015, 08:46:18 PM |
|
I can quite understand and fully respect the XMR line, but cannot help wondering whether something has been missed from this story.
Do tell then. If you don't have any new relevant info then you are just yet another in the endless parade of Newbie accounts claiming to be "researching" the BCN situation. We've been here before. U owe ur existence to them Not only that but we owe our existence to their fraud! If not for that, we'd have just stuck with BCN. The unclean hand created the biting teeth. |
|
|
|
|
|
Johnny Mnemonic
|
|
June 18, 2015, 09:27:15 PM |
|
I also struggled with the idea that someone could care enough about privacy and decentralization to develop such a technology, only to resort to such an unambitious (and relatively unlucrative) scam. But I had the wrong perspective... it's not about money at all. Bytecoin was a trojan horse... a power play for control. The unpolished tech didn't just appear out of nowhere by accident. It was underdeveloped by design... marketed directly to the hackers and the underground. Think about it... the black, 90s-style web site with the spooky MIDI music... the mysterious little encryption puzzles... These guys were trying to create a movement. "Let the anarchists and freedom fighters believe they can operate outside the system. Let them think they're anonymous. The joke is on them." They planted a seed that they expected to grow like wildfire, only it didn't. Had bytecoin taken off as quickly as its developers had planned, the fraud would have been buried. Dark net markets all over the web would've picked it up, and the two year fake block chain would never have been discovered. |
|
|
|
|
|
entertheabyss
|
|
June 18, 2015, 09:28:21 PM |
|
a "darknet" exchange without any cryptonote coin sounds like a big red flag to me, its funny people complain about polo and the KYC trap but Monero (and the other cryptonotes) are the only coin that protect individual privacy even in these cases, sure they can know how much you bought and what is your address but thats it, using a darknet exchange will not make any bitcoin clone fungible.
The concern with poloniex and other clearnet exchanges is one day you try to log into your account and its frozen due to "suspicious activity" ie using tor to log in and they need you to send in ID scans to verify. For some people its a pita but for others is an invasion of privacy. This happens all the time and its only going to get worse. Now with the Bitlicance and other draconian regulation from various entities, whose to say soon all exchanges trading anonymous coins will be forces to require ID to get an account for anti-money-laundering purposes. Cant have the drugdealing, terrorist, pedophile, mafia be enabled by whatever service. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_InfocalypseDont get Goxxed: http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/05/30/not-so-anonymous-bitcoin-exchange-mt-gox-tightens-identity-requirement/Anyways. The exchange will accept monero. I just need to mess around with it some more. Im glad the community over here is taking interest in exchange.i2p . I hope we can meet all your expectations and provide a seamless service |
|
|
|
elrippo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1001
|
|
June 19, 2015, 06:10:10 AM |
|
Regarding running bitmonerod through Tor, I can run it just fine with torsocks. When launching bitmonerod I get a bunch of libtorsocks(6718): WARNING: The symbol res_query() was not found in any shared library with the reported error: Not Found!
Also, we failed to find the symbol __res_query() with the reported error: Not Found and a bunch of libtorsocks(6716): sendto: Connection is a UDP or ICMP stream, may be a DNS request or other form of leak: rejecting. but it runs well and syncs properly after that. All connected peers are reported as 127.0.0.1:9050. I am not a friend of torsocks. I rather use TOR as a transparent proxy with this function embedded in TOR. I want to share the "how to" for the usecase of a transparent proxy https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/TransparentProxy on the local machine, where every TCP connection gets tunneled trough TOR and the Monero wallet gets it's connection through TOR, not a MINER! This is intended for UNIX users, as MS does not support this function. What we need is an up to date UNIX system, i run a Debian derivat. You can use the TOR version of your Distro, i may propose to use the TOR repo. 1.) Go to the TOR homepage and add the TOR repo according to your distro https://www.torproject.org/docs/installguide.html.enIf you use DEBIAN or UBUNTUlikish systems, go to https://www.torproject.org/docs/debian.html.en and choose your Distro. After that, update your package management system 2.) Install the package TOR 3.) Add these lines in your , on DEBIAN found at VirtualAddrNetworkIPv4 172.16.0.0/12
TransPort 9040
DNSPort 9053
4.) Now we build two little scripts. The first one will reroute all traffic using iptables, the second one will establish the default settings. 5.) First script for rerouting everything through tor. (I recommend to place it at /etc/tor/....) I will call it transparent.bash, make it executable and run it with superuser priviliges. #!/bin/bash
# Let us call this script transparent.bash and do some netfilter rules on the local machine.
/etc/init.d/tor restart
# Load the Kernel modules
modprobe ip_tables
modprobe ip_nat_ftp
modprobe ip_nat_irc
modprobe ip_conntrack_irc
modprobe ip_conntrack_ftp
modprobe iptable_filter
modprobe iptable_nat
modprobe ipt_REJECT
modprobe xt_recent
modprobe ipt_mac
# Remove all rules
iptables -F
iptables -t nat -F
iptables -X
# Default Policy
iptables -P INPUT DROP
iptables -P OUTPUT DROP
iptables -P FORWARD DROP
# Allow Established and Related connetcions
iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -i wlan0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A OUTPUT -o wlan0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -i usb0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A OUTPUT -o usb0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -i ppp0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A OUTPUT -o ppp0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
# Allow localhostloop
iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT
iptables -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT
# Ruleset for Tor Transparent Proxy
iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -o lo -j RETURN
iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -m owner --uid-owner "debian-tor" -j RETURN
iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 53 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 9053
for NET in 127.0.0.0/9 127.128.0.0/10; do
iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -d $NET -j RETURN
done
iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p tcp --syn -j REDIRECT --to-ports 9040
iptables -A OUTPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --uid-owner "debian-tor" -j ACCEPT
for NET in 127.0.0.0/8; do
iptables -A OUTPUT -d $NET -j ACCEPT
done
iptables -A OUTPUT -j REJECT
6.) Second script one will establish the default settings, i will call it , make it executable and run it with superuser priviliges. #!/bin/bash
/etc/init.d/tor stop
# Remove all rules
iptables -F
iptables -t nat -F
iptables -X
# Set the default policies
iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT
iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT
iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT
7.) Now we are done and we can start the transparent proxy with sudo /etc/tor/trasnparent.bash 8.) Check your network for listening ports ...
...
...
tor 2626 debian-tor 7u IPv4 20176 0t0 TCP 127.0.0.1:9050 (LISTEN)
tor 2626 debian-tor 9u IPv4 20178 0t0 TCP 127.0.0.1:9040 (LISTEN)
tor 2626 debian-tor 10u IPv4 20179 0t0 TCP 127.0.0.1:9051 (LISTEN)
...
...
...
9.) Now run your Monero wallet, the output should look like this 2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.372705 Starting...
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.392937 bitmonero v0.8.8.6-release
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.394039 Module folder: ./bitmonerod
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.407926 Initializing P2P server...
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.463532 Binding on 0.0.0.0:18080
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.463802 Net service bound to 0.0.0.0:18080
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.463935 Attempting to add IGD port mapping.
sendto: Operation not permitted
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.464228 No IGD was found.
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.464295 P2P server initialized OK
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.464359 Initializing protocol...
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.464418 Protocol initialized OK
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.464477 Initializing core RPC server...
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.465166 Binding on 127.0.0.1:18081
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.465324 Core RPC server initialized OK on port: 18081
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.465439 Initializing core...
2015-Jun-19 08:04:54.476060 Loading blockchain...
2015-Jun-19 08:06:28.846042 Blockchain initialized. last block: 613635, d0.h13.m51.s3 time ago, current difficulty: 851672124
2015-Jun-19 08:06:28.855596 Core initialized OK
2015-Jun-19 08:06:28.855788 Starting core RPC server...
2015-Jun-19 08:06:28.855870 Run net_service loop( 2 threads)...
2015-Jun-19 08:06:28.858551 [SRV_MAIN]Core RPC server started ok
2015-Jun-19 08:06:28.858653 [SRV_MAIN]Starting P2P net loop...
2015-Jun-19 08:06:28.861161 [SRV_MAIN]Run net_service loop( 10 threads)...
2015-Jun-19 08:06:29.863692 [P2P9]
**********************************************************************
The daemon will start synchronizing with the network. It may take up to several hours.
You can set the level of process detailization* through "set_log <level>" command*, where <level> is between 0 (no details) and 4 (very verbose).
Use "help" command to see the list of available commands.
Note: in case you need to interrupt the process, use "exit" command. Otherwise, the current progress won't be saved.
**********************************************************************
2015-Jun-19 08:06:35.981690 [P2P8][37.113.141.135:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 613636 -> 614335 [699 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2015-Jun-19 08:06:59.457405 [P2P8][176.212.88.35:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 613836 -> 614335 [499 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2015-Jun-19 08:07:10.183810 [P2P7][91.153.201.68:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 613974 -> 614335 [361 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2015-Jun-19 08:07:10.690990 [P2P7][62.210.113.107:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 613981 -> 614335 [354 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2015-Jun-19 08:07:16.540999 [P2P4][108.24.83.254:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 614053 -> 614335 [282 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2015-Jun-19 08:07:17.144109 [P2P6][192.99.2.33:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 614062 -> 614335 [273 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2015-Jun-19 08:07:17.812554 [P2P4][109.254.61.223:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 614067 -> 614335 [268 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2015-Jun-19 08:07:36.303158 [P2P8][95.67.238.92:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 614314 -> 614335 [21 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2015-Jun-19 08:07:37.678838 [P2P4][37.113.141.135:18080 OUT] SYNCHRONIZED OK
2015-Jun-19 08:07:37.680811 [P2P4]
**********************************************************************
You are now synchronized with the network. You may now start simplewallet.
Please note, that the blockchain will be saved only after you quit the daemon with "exit" command or if you use "save" command.
Otherwise, you will possibly need to synchronize the blockchain again.
Use "help" command to see the list of available commands.
********************************************************************** 10.) You should be safe from getting your errors from torsocks and run TOR and the wallet properly. 11.) If you want to stop the transparent proy, just run Your listening ports should not indicate any TOR connection Happy Moneroj with TOR  |
For Advertisement. PM me to discuss.
|
|
|
|
Wanderlust
|
|
June 19, 2015, 07:25:27 AM |
|
I can quite understand and fully respect the XMR line, but cannot help wondering whether something has been missed from this story.
Do tell then. If you don't have any new relevant info then you are just yet another in the endless parade of Newbie accounts claiming to be "researching" the BCN situation. We've been here before. U owe ur existence to them Not only that but we owe our existence to their fraud! If not for that, we'd have just stuck with BCN. The unclean hand created the biting teeth. You may have been here before but not with me. The "deception" as u describe it may not have been at the hand of the NSA, academics or cypherpunks. The motivation u point to is greed and whilst all humans r weak it doesnt seem likely that any of the three groups likely to have created CN and BCN would be motivated by greed alone. Equally all members of BCN are cast in the same light. Who's to know what internal politics/feuds exist within the BCN team. Indeed such a feud might have helped create the confusion. And there's still a chance that the BCN version of events are true/true-ish Never mind all that for now, will XMR copy the new BCN code? my understanding is that technically they've upped the game for CN coins with their new roadmap, wallets and merchant tools. |
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
June 19, 2015, 07:43:47 AM |
|
I can quite understand and fully respect the XMR line, but cannot help wondering whether something has been missed from this story.
Do tell then. If you don't have any new relevant info then you are just yet another in the endless parade of Newbie accounts claiming to be "researching" the BCN situation. We've been here before. U owe ur existence to them Not only that but we owe our existence to their fraud! If not for that, we'd have just stuck with BCN. The unclean hand created the biting teeth. You may have been here before but not with me. The "deception" as u describe it may not have been at the hand of the NSA, academics or cypherpunks. There is no actual evidence that any of NSA, academics, or cypherpunks were involved. That is entirely speculation. Even (or especially) the claims of the BCN developers themselves are highly suspect at best. They had listed a Princeton academic on their team page. I researched it, and rethink-your-strategy who coincidentally (and bad luck for the BCN liars, it seems) is/was apparently a student at Princeton, did as well, and we both found that no such person fitting the description given by them ever even existed. will XMR copy the new BCN code? my understanding is that technically they've upped the game for CN coins with their new roadmap, wallets and merchant tools.
There are no plans to copy merchant tools and wallets from BCN. We have our own development plans which address these use cases as well if not better in my opinion: https://getmonero.org/design-goals/Quote edited for brevity. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wanderlust
|
|
June 19, 2015, 09:22:53 AM |
|
I can quite understand and fully respect the XMR line, but cannot help wondering whether something has been missed from this story.
Do tell then. If you don't have any new relevant info then you are just yet another in the endless parade of Newbie accounts claiming to be "researching" the BCN situation. We've been here before. U owe ur existence to them Not only that but we owe our existence to their fraud! If not for that, we'd have just stuck with BCN. The unclean hand created the biting teeth. You may have been here before but not with me. The "deception" as u describe it may not have been at the hand of the NSA, academics or cypherpunks. There is no actual evidence that any of NSA, academics, or cypherpunks were involved. That is entirely speculation. Even (or especially) the claims of the BCN developers themselves are highly suspect at best. They had listed a Princeton academic on their team page. I researched it, and rethink-your-strategy who coincidentally (and bad luck for the BCN liars, it seems) is/was apparently a student at Princeton, did as well, and we both found that no such person fitting the description given by them ever even existed. will XMR copy the new BCN code? my understanding is that technically they've upped the game for CN coins with their new roadmap, wallets and merchant tools.
There are no plans to copy merchant tools and wallets from BCN. We have our own development plans which address these use cases as well if not better in my opinion: https://getmonero.org/design-goals/Quote edited for brevity. "There is no actual evidence that any of NSA, academics, or cypherpunks were involved. That is entirely speculation." Mu understanding is that CN is a cryptographic tour de force which likely required some brilliant minds to create. Do you agree? If so how could such great minds be such lousy scammers? They would have forged the whitepapers dates correctly (assuming they were deliberately forged to deceive) Therefor the likely 3 groups named above. btw some russian hacker is mentioned in "opening the lid of BCN". Noted his name's initials also spell NSA* All the Princeton stuff might have been "for fun", teasing the crypto-community yet more (obv that was never gonna hold water). It's all very odd. thx for the replies smooth, much obliged. *Andrey N. Sabelnikov |
|
|
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
June 19, 2015, 10:04:20 AM |
|
Mu understanding is that CN is a cryptographic tour de force which likely required some brilliant minds to create. Do you agree?
Sure If so how could such great minds be such lousy scammers? They would have forged the whitepapers dates correctly (assuming they were deliberately forged to deceive)
Smart people do dumb things all the time. Here's a nice list for a start: http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/10-smart-people-dumb-things.htmAll the Princeton stuff might have been "for fun", teasing the crypto-community yet more (obv that was never gonna hold water). It's all very odd.
If the "just kidding" defense worked, it would be a get-out-of-jail-free card for every fraudster in history. There was no "for fun" involved there. It was part of a list of credential-heavy bios (the others likely embellished or completely made up as well) obviously intended to boost the reputation of the team and the coin. Unfortunately it did the opposite. |
|
|
|
|
|
kazuki49
|
|
June 19, 2015, 10:10:39 AM |
|
BCN
what is your point? Just go use Bytecoin then and be part of their community, I'm sure they will welcome you with open arms. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wanderlust
|
|
June 19, 2015, 11:42:49 AM |
|
CN author Nicolas van Saberhagen. I dont suppose the N in Andrey N. Sabelnikov stands for Nikolai? He may have legally changed name's at some point or have multiple ID's. A guy like that sure might be able to. Mu understanding is that CN is a cryptographic tour de force which likely required some brilliant minds to create. Do you agree?
Sure If so how could such great minds be such lousy scammers? They would have forged the whitepapers dates correctly (assuming they were deliberately forged to deceive)
Smart people do dumb things all the time. Here's a nice list for a start: http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/10-smart-people-dumb-things.htmAll the Princeton stuff might have been "for fun", teasing the crypto-community yet more (obv that was never gonna hold water). It's all very odd.
If the "just kidding" defense worked, it would be a get-out-of-jail-free card for every fraudster in history. There was no "for fun" involved there. It was part of a list of credential-heavy bios (the others likely embellished or completely made up as well) obviously intended to boost the reputation of the team and the coin. Unfortunately it did the opposite. If only the "smart people do dumb things" argument satisfied me. This Harry Ullo chap from BCN is very clear that all members of the Team value their privacy and remain anonymous. Having a team bio page at all is presumably a joke for those who are supposedly cypherpunk anarchists at heart. BCN
what is your point? Just go use Bytecoin then and be part of their community, I'm sure they will welcome you with open arms. I'm just peeling the onion (trying to). No offence meant. If (and that's a big IF) different mining groups have mined BCN from the beginning and IF over 100+ individuals hold large amounts of BCN (and not <10) then maybe the origin story doesnt matter. It is poetic that the anon nature of this beast prevents us from verifying this one way or the other. |
|
|
|
|
|
