[ANN][VRC] VeriCoin Proof of Stake-Time Currency | New Roadmap Released

[mr_random]

Vericoin's statement

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/Statement.pdf

bullshit

This is not even an option.

Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD.

There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts.

There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here.

Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen.

Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock.

Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent.

You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now?

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?"

Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something.

How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete?

Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here.

Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange.

So... what the fuck are you talking about?

I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts.

I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain?

Uhh, because it would result in the needless destruction of an exchange and a currency and the enrichment of a thieving party for no reason other than the preservation of the blockchain, and forking would address that.

Where is the flaw in my logic?

And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover.

What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering.

[1713567432]

1713567432

[1713567432]

1713567432

[1713567432]

1713567432

[1713567432]

1713567432

[1713567432]

1713567432

[majeis]

Vericoin's statement

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/Statement.pdf

bullshit

This is not even an option.

Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD.

There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts.

There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here.

Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen.

Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock.

Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent.

You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now?

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?"

Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something.

How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete?

Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here.

Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange.

So... what the fuck are you talking about?

I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts.

I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain?

Uhh, because it would result in the needless destruction of an exchange and a currency and the enrichment of a thieving party for no reason other than the preservation of the blockchain, and forking would address that.

Where is the flaw in my logic?

And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover.

What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering.

So we're back to my original original question that you never answered:

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

[phzi]

BTC was forked 100 times
LTC  forked many times
DRK forked twice last month

.........................ETC ................


VRC FORKED NOW  . SO WHAT ?

It's not about hard-forking... it's about rolling back the blockchain.  Please show me when BTC and LTC rolled back their blockchains?  As far as I know, there were two cases in bitcoin history - both were due to technical problems caused by updates.  Rolling back a blockchain because coins were stolen is a dangerous precedent, and one I believe strongly will kill this coin if performed.

Someone has 30% of VRC.  DEAL WITH IT.  Don't rollback the blockchain like idiots.  

Make mintpal pay for their mistake.  Devs should not be trying to help an exchange like this.

[CryptoLTD]

BTC was forked 100 times
LTC  forked many times
DRK forked twice last month

.........................ETC ................


VRC FORKED NOW  . SO WHAT ?

It's not about hard-forking... it's about rolling back the blockchain.  Please show me when BTC and LTC rolled back their blockchains?  As far as I know, there were two cases in bitcoin history - both were due to technical problems caused by updates.  Rolling back a blockchain because coins were stolen is a dangerous precedent, and one I believe strongly will kill this coin if performed.

Someone has 30% of VRC.  DEAL WITH IT.  Don't rollback the blockchain like idiots.  

Make mintpal pay for their mistake.  Devs should not be trying to help an exchange like this.

"Just deal with theft" Hell no, not when it can be solved. Go fuck yourself. And believe me Mintpal will be paying HARD CORE FOR IT. WAY WAY WAY worse than if nothing was done.

[mr_random]

Vericoin's statement

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/Statement.pdf

bullshit

This is not even an option.

Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD.

There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts.

There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here.

Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen.

Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock.

Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent.

You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now?

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?"

Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something.

How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete?

Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here.

Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange.

So... what the fuck are you talking about?

I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts.

I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain?

Uhh, because it would result in the needless destruction of an exchange and a currency and the enrichment of a thieving party for no reason other than the preservation of the blockchain, and forking would address that.

Where is the flaw in my logic?

And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover.

What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering.

So we're back to my original original question that you never answered:

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

We are not "back" to your original question. Now that I have destroyed every woefully prepared argument you have put my way, which you conveniently ignore, you have fallen back onto something else.

If someone gained 51% of the network hash of the Bitcoin network, they can change the hash mechanism without violating decentralisation or irreversibility. And other such arguments.

[majeis]

Vericoin's statement

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/Statement.pdf

bullshit

This is not even an option.

Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD.

There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts.

There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here.

Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen.

Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock.

Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent.

You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now?

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?"

Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something.

How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete?

Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here.

Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange.

So... what the fuck are you talking about?

I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts.

I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain?

Uhh, because it would result in the needless destruction of an exchange and a currency and the enrichment of a thieving party for no reason other than the preservation of the blockchain, and forking would address that.

Where is the flaw in my logic?

And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover.

What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering.

So we're back to my original original question that you never answered:

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

We are not "back" to your original question. Now that I have destroyed every woefully prepared argument you have put my way, which you conveniently ignore, you have fallen back onto something else.

If someone gained 51% of the network hash of the Bitcoin network, they can change the hash mechanism without violating decentralisation or irreversibility. And other such arguments.

Destroyed?

Your solution is to let a hacker dump 33% of the coin supply and see what happens.

[mr_random]

BTC was forked 100 times
LTC  forked many times
DRK forked twice last month

.........................ETC ................


VRC FORKED NOW  . SO WHAT ?

It's not about hard-forking... it's about rolling back the blockchain.  Please show me when BTC and LTC rolled back their blockchains?  As far as I know, there were two cases in bitcoin history - both were due to technical problems caused by updates.  Rolling back a blockchain because coins were stolen is a dangerous precedent, and one I believe strongly will kill this coin if performed.

Someone has 30% of VRC.  DEAL WITH IT.  Don't rollback the blockchain like idiots.  

Make mintpal pay for their mistake.  Devs should not be trying to help an exchange like this.

It won't even cost Mintpal that much because the price of Vericoin will plummet fast if VRC devs just suck it up and don't do a rollback.

And Vericoin will recover.

Mtgox was hacked in 2011, 8% of all Bitcoin in existence were dumped through the exchange and the price suffered badly. Where is Bitcoin now? It's a very different case, but it's an example of how things recover.

[Autodidact]

I can't believe how quickly and professionally the dev team acted on this.  A lot of discussion going on here, which is good, but at the end of the day, this is a great team effort and I believe in this coin and cryptocurrencies.

We will not let hackers run this!  Nice work dev team!  I wish mintpal did not have security issues, but getting through tough issues like this will only prove that we can progress forward even stronger than yesterday!

[realestmofo]

Deal with it and no one will buy this coin because of a 51% attack. You only need to control 51% of staking coins. Easy when you have 8 million coins. To prevent that you have to undo this. Either way this is gonna get dumped. https://i.imgur.com/O5TUyGg.jpg

6 million coins removed from staking recently.

[criptix]

We are not "back" to your original question. Now that I have destroyed every woefully prepared argument you have put my way, which you conveniently ignore, you have fallen back onto something else.

If someone gained 51% of the network hash of the Bitcoin network, they can change the hash mechanism without violating decentralisation or irreversibility. And other such arguments.

bullshit. i revoked every of your argument and you just pretend to not see them.

and you still didnt answer his question. you just repeated what he asked you

[Dadams]

I just occurred to me...
if I was the hacker:

I would send most of the coins to an address without keys.
something like: mintpalsucskandhasnosecuritylol

Hacker turned hero?
Shows Mintpal security flaw.
Decreases coin supply.
Keeps small amount as fee.
Price of coin goes up.
?? ?
Profit


Mintpal dies.
Central exchanges die.
Central everything dies.
Distribution lives.
New world.

[mr_random]

Vericoin's statement

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/Statement.pdf

bullshit

This is not even an option.

Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD.

There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts.

There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here.

Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen.

Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock.

Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent.

You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now?

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?"

Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something.

How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete?

Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here.

Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange.

So... what the fuck are you talking about?

I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts.

I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain?

Uhh, because it would result in the needless destruction of an exchange and a currency and the enrichment of a thieving party for no reason other than the preservation of the blockchain, and forking would address that.

Where is the flaw in my logic?

And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover.

What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering.

So we're back to my original original question that you never answered:

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

We are not "back" to your original question. Now that I have destroyed every woefully prepared argument you have put my way, which you conveniently ignore, you have fallen back onto something else.

If someone gained 51% of the network hash of the Bitcoin network, they can change the hash mechanism without violating decentralisation or irreversibility. And other such arguments.

Destroyed?

Your solution is to let a hacker dump 33% of the coin supply and see what happens.

I've already asked you to explain why that is a problem and I addressed your response as follows:

"And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover.

What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering."

I consider a discussion finished when the other party is going around in circles. Have a nice day.

[onsightit]

From Li Zhuan: "We help community propser, not just us. When #vericoin releases new wallet required for hardfork & people adopt,our full force will be shown."

Thanks, Li!

[majeis]

Vericoin's statement

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/Statement.pdf

bullshit

This is not even an option.

Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD.

There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts.

There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here.

Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen.

Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock.

Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent.

You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now?

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?"

Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something.

How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete?

Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here.

Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange.

So... what the fuck are you talking about?

I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts.

I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain?

Uhh, because it would result in the needless destruction of an exchange and a currency and the enrichment of a thieving party for no reason other than the preservation of the blockchain, and forking would address that.

Where is the flaw in my logic?

And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover.

What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering.

So we're back to my original original question that you never answered:

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

We are not "back" to your original question. Now that I have destroyed every woefully prepared argument you have put my way, which you conveniently ignore, you have fallen back onto something else.

If someone gained 51% of the network hash of the Bitcoin network, they can change the hash mechanism without violating decentralisation or irreversibility. And other such arguments.

Destroyed?

Your solution is to let a hacker dump 33% of the coin supply and see what happens.

I've already asked you to explain why that is a problem and I addressed your response:

"And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover.

What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering."

I consider a discussion finished when the other party is going around in circles. Have a nice day.

Show me a coin with market depth that can support a 33% dump.

[btcsnippers]

Vericoin's statement

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/Statement.pdf

bullshit

This is not even an option.

Blame Mintpal not Vericoin. Rollback is a must. If Vericoin doesn't rollback then it will be worth NOTHING. The coin will be DEAD.

There is a reason why Bitcoin transactions aren't arbitrarily reversed after thefts.

There shouldn't be a rollback. A hardfork to undo this is worse than the thief dumping the coins. Mintpal are just trying to erase their losses here.

Apples & oranges @ no time was almost 30% of ALL BTC stolen.

Firstly, it makes no difference just because it's a large number. Decentralisation and irreversibility are the two fundamental underpinning tenets of Bitcoin. I guarantee you, long term, Vericoin price will be hurt more by doing this rollback than just leaving it be. No new future investors will touch a coin that does something like this. Either way the price will be damaged by this, if some of you are naive enough to think a dirty rollback will "fix everything" and the price will carry on as normal, you are going to be in for a shock.

Secondly, there is not much of a difference between doing this once and doing it for every theft. It's a dangerous precedent.

You going to answer my questions or ignore them like EVERYONE ELSE who is FUDDING right now?

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

You think it'd be a better precedent to allow a thief complete control over the network in the name of "fundamental underpinning tenets?"

Listen dumbass. In that situation a hacker isn't going to spend a week fucking around with the network and watching his $2million worth of of Vericoin become worthless as the price bombs on every exchange due to what he is doing. He will sell his Vericoin whilst they are still worth something.

How is the hacker going to sell when no exchange will reopen trading until the fork is complete?

Have you even read the conversation? We are talking about a no fork scenario here.

Yeah, the no-fork scenario that you're a proponent of, yet you're saying that if there wasn't a fork the hacker would dump on every exchange.

So... what the fuck are you talking about?

I'm assuming since you've realised the flaw in your original logic (namely, no hacker would sit around and control the network whilst their coins become worthless), you are now reverting to making nonsensical posts.

I've already explained what I am talking about, very clearly. Of course the hacker will dump his coins on the exchanges. Why is that a problem? Can you explain?

Uhh, because it would result in the needless destruction of an exchange and a currency and the enrichment of a thieving party for no reason other than the preservation of the blockchain, and forking would address that.

Where is the flaw in my logic?

And prove to me why it would destroy Mintpal and Vericoin. You cannot. If Vericoin plummets in price, which it would in this scenario, Mintpal can pay back the stolen Vericoin easily. And eventually Vericoin would find a new equilibrium price and recover.

What you do not like is the thief gaining from this and the price of Vericoin suffering.

So we're back to my original original question that you never answered:

So to put things in perspective, you'd be okay with absolutely nothing being done about a simultaneous 33% acquisition of the bitcoin supply by a malicious thief along with 51% of the network hash by that same person?

We are not "back" to your original question. Now that I have destroyed every woefully prepared argument you have put my way, which you conveniently ignore, you have fallen back onto something else.

If someone gained 51% of the network hash of the Bitcoin network, they can change the hash mechanism without violating decentralisation or irreversibility. And other such arguments.

Destroyed?

Your solution is to let a hacker dump 33% of the coin supply and see what happens.

can u guys please stop with these page fillers and pm eachoter or get a room.

[eiskalt]

Hi all,

just want to show support for the DEVs decision to hardfork the blockchain.

I like it, how finally somebody stands up against all these cryptothefts by protecting the property of community members and investors.

I am all for letting those thieves know, that they cannot screw up the vericoin blockchain. A hardfork will discourage them to try again, because they have nothing to gain. It will in fact protect the integrity of the blockchain, because property rights are respected here.

Bitcoin Foundation and DEVs thought/think they need to protect the integrity of their blockchain by never rolling back transactions even after considerable amounts of BTC were stolen. This only lead to more thefts, scams and fraud - up to the point, when mtgox itself went into bankruptcy under highly suspicious circumstances.
And now $-volume at the exchanges is falling and mainstream is scared away from bitcoin, because of all these thefts.

It is not more than a theory, that you cannot roll back fraudulent transactions, because it will discourage future investors - eventually it will be proven wrong.

That is just my opinion,

Thanx

If vericoin gets dumped, I will buy more.

[majeis]

can u guys please stop with these page fillers and pm eachoter or get a room.

I'll stop because you asked so nicely

[jubalix]

It's hard to see how VRC is going to come out of this well.

consider. Forks in BTC have been for technical reasons asfaik.

[jubalix]

Hi all,

just want to show support for the DEVs decision to hardfork the blockchain.

I like it, how finally somebody stands up against all these cryptothefts by protecting the property of community members and investors.

I am all for letting those thieves know, that they cannot screw up the vericoin blockchain. A hardfork will discourage them to try again, because they have nothing to gain. It will in fact protect the integrity of the blockchain, because property rights are respected here.

Bitcoin Foundation and DEVs thought/think they need to protect the integrity of their blockchain by never rolling back transactions even after considerable amounts of BTC were stolen. This only lead to more thefts, scams and fraud - up to the point, when mtgox itself went into bankruptcy under highly suspicious circumstances.
And now $-volume at the exchanges is falling and mainstream is scared away from bitcoin, because of all these thefts.

It is not more than a theory, that you cannot roll back fraudulent transactions, because it will discourage future investors - eventually it will be proven wrong.

That is just my opinion,

Thanx

If vericoin gets dumped, I will buy more.

so what happens if such a centralized dev team gets leaned upon by gov which includes a gag order not to say they are being leaned upon?

it looks like a single point off failure.

[Dadams]

It's hard to see how VRC is going to come out of this well.

consider. Forks in BTC have been for technical reasons asfaik.

I just occurred to me...
if I was the hacker:

I would send most of the coins to an address without keys.
something like: mintpalsucskandhasnosecuritylol

Hacker turned hero?
Shows Mintpal security flaw.
Decreases coin supply.
Keeps small amount as fee.
Price of coin goes up.
?? ?
Profit


Mintpal dies.
Central exchanges die.
Central everything dies.
Distribution lives.
New world.