On the Solidcoin Economic Changes

[t3a]

For some reason this thread is locked: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61372.0

But I would like to point out that the vast majority of miners will stop mining when the price drops to $0.50, allowing an easy 51% attack.

Miners don't determine the price and a lack of inflation doesn't guarantee a high price.

[1715420651]

1715420651

[1715420651]

1715420651

[1715420651]

1715420651

[1715420651]

1715420651

[k9quaint]

Pump return status 0.
repl>(map solidcoin dump)
nil
repl>

[Ahimoth]

For some reason this thread is locked: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61372.0

But I would like to point out that the vast majority of miners will stop mining when the price drops to $0.50, allowing an easy 51% attack.

Miners don't determine the price and a lack of inflation doesn't guarantee a high price.

If you are concerned about a 51% attack, then you don't know SolidCoin. Read up, or ask in #solidcoin on freenode irc how it all works.

[coblee]

More SolidCoin monetary policy... nice! Horray for early adopters! Wasn't SolidCoin supposed to NOT award early adopters?

[ArtForz]

More SolidCoin monetary policy... nice! Horray for early adopters! Wasn't SolidCoin supposed to NOT award early adopters?

No, it's always been at war with Eurasia.

[coblee]

So RealSolid changed the block rewards from 32 SC to 5 SC last time so that SolidCoin would reach dollar parity. Well, that didn't work. Let's try it again! But this time, he makes it even more drastic and changes it to 0.07 SC. If this doesn't work, I guess he will then have to change it to 0 block rewards. Then guess what... no one mines anymore and only the trusted nodes mine for coins. Hmm, reminds me of something called fiat currency.

Someone tell me again why dollar parity matters for a crypto currency that is ready for bitcoin's collapse and that will replace the dollar?

[Come-from-Beyond]

So RealSolid changed the block rewards from 32 SC to 5 SC last time so that SolidCoin would reach dollar parity. Well, that didn't work. Let's try it again! But this time, he makes it even more drastic and changes it to 0.07 SC. If this doesn't work, I guess he will then have to change it to 0 block rewards. Then guess what... no one mines anymore and only the trusted nodes mine for coins. Hmm, reminds me of something called fiat currency.

Someone tell me again why dollar parity matters for a crypto currency that is ready for bitcoin's collapse and that will replace the dollar?

Everyone here undestands this. But great part of our community r just traders who hope to sell all solidcoins before the system collapses. Recent changes r supposed to make SC to rise in price. If this happens then traders will be happy. If this doesn't happen then traders will just wait next changes in SC economic.

PS: It seems to me that criticism of SC doesn't have any effect, does it?

[Gavin Andresen]

(channelling my inner CoinHunter):

It is SIMPLE ECONOMICS, people!

price = function(supply,demand)

So to create more demand, just fix the price and the supply!  Easy-peasy!

(ok, done, back to reality)

[coblee]

There's another thing I forgot. Now that block rewards will be 0.05-0.07 sc, it will take about a million years before any one person can get a million SC to become a trusted node. Who saw that coming?

[markm]

There's another thing I forgot. Now that block rewards will be 0.05-0.07 sc, it will take about a million years before any one person can get a million SC to become a trusted node. Who saw that coming?

What, SC aren't available for sale on exchanges? How many Martian BotCoins would a million SC cost, anyway? Some puny amount, presumably? Of course one could expect the cost in DeVCoins to be a thousand times higher or so, but hey, whats a few trailing zeros among developers?

-MarkM-

[ineededausername]

Personally, I was enjoying the powerblock lottery, and I'm sad that they're taking it away

no, I don't really mine solidcoin

[coblee]

Personally, I was enjoying the powerblock lottery, and I'm sad that they're taking it away

What they are taking away powerblocks? That's the only reason why I mine solidcoins! I mean what business doesn't like a lottery designed into your currency?!?

[FlipPro]

Viper IDK why you put your neck out the way you do...

Either way I like you buddy..

-_-...

[coblee]

Here's a wild idea. If you really wanted dollar parity, why not just move the decimal point over by 2 places. Just make each SC be worth 100 of the old SCs. Name it NSC if you prefer. That way, it doesn't unfairly benefit the early adopters. And right away, NSC will be worth more than a dollar.

[unabridged]

theres another way to reach dollar parity, just offer to buy all solidcoins at $1

[markm]

Exactly. You don't even need huge capital up front if you

(a) Only issue coins in return for capital to hold as reserves; and

(b) Don't make an accessible blockchain until you have sufficient transaction volume for the transaction fees to sufficiently motivate merged mining.

Welcome to the current "in the absence of freely available high power merged mining" plan of the various Galactic Milieu "national currencies" currently being operated on the Digitalis Open Transactions Server pending solution of the 'how to afford enough merged mining to make release of the blockchains feasible" question.

-MarkM-

[dree12]

It is SIMPLE ECONOMICS, people!

price = function(supply,demand)

So to create more demand, just fix the price and the supply!  Easy-peasy!

Aha! So Gavin = CoinHunter, just as the rumour told.

On topic, I think his purpose in dropping the reward is to stop other millionaires from forming and liberating the SC network...

[markm]

So sheeple get fleeced?

Its not as if they don't have a choice, is it? Isn't it simply their nature to get themselves fleeced, and in fact trying to deny them their right to be fleeced might well even offend them?

I wonder if sheeple actually are generically sheeple, as in maybe there would tend to be high overlap between folks who would chose the highest-fee, most potential danger to the network pool over other pools and people who would choose SolidCoin over other coins - were it not for the unfortunate-for-them problem of that pool not happening to be mining SolidCoin?

Or it is more a kind of sheeple in this matter, non-sheeple in other matters kind of thing so the same folk who seem like sheeple in one matter might well not be in other matters that other sheeple find irresistible?

-MarkM-

[Syke]

Sounds like CoinHunter has enough coins in his personal wallet from the CPF transfers, and now he wants to pump the price up so that he can dump the coins. What a joke!

[tacotime]

Code:

    double dDifficulty = GetDifficulty(dwWorkBits);

    //We need to work out how many years it has been running to calculate estimated
    //electricity price increases and hardware improvements
    double dYearsPassed = ( (double)(nHeight-179999) /(60*24*365));

    //moores law type adjustment. Assume 50% better efficiency per year
    double dKH_Per_Watt = 3.0 * pow(1.50,dYearsPassed);

    //We start at 8c per kilowatt hour, compound increase it 10% per year
    //this is the estimated increased cost of electricity per year
    double dCostPerKiloWattHour = 0.08*pow(1.10,dYearsPassed);
    double dTotalKWh = ((dDifficulty*131)/dKH_Per_Watt) / (3600*1000);

    double dBaseValue = dTotalKWh*dCostPerKiloWattHour;

lol??

[cunicula]

(channelling my inner CoinHunter):

It is SIMPLE ECONOMICS, people!

price = function(supply,demand)

So to create more demand, just fix the price and the supply!  Easy-peasy!

(ok, done, back to reality)

Coinhunter's basic premises are correct in Gavin's (facetious) outline, but the problems he faces aren't touched on.

If he has a price of $0.02 then, he needs to commit to destroy 49 out of every 50 solidcoins to get to dollar parity. So far so good, easy-peasy.

The non-Easy-peasy parts are:

1) He can't commit to do anything because no one trusts him. He can reduce the block reward to zero and everyone will expect him to increase it again if price rises. Given this expectation, there is no reason to anticipate that price will rise due to his rule change.

2) There are already lots of solidcoins out there, so there is no way solidcoin will reach dollar parity given current demand even if the block reward is credibly and permanently reduced to zero.

[Blind]

> You're only doing this to make your own SolidCoin investment higher.
If this was true we would be a pyramid scheme like Bitcoin.

Heh, whenever I see ReallySoiled's avatar on solidcoin forums (Bratt Pitt), all I can think of is Ocean's Eleven.

[steelhouse]

Looks like a cross between Brad Pitt and George Michael.

[k9quaint]

Another really weird thing about this: Coinhunter has been claiming he can't make fiat changes to the currency and that we should all "read the code" to see why.

Then he makes a fiat change to the currency.

Artforz nailed it earlier in the thread. "Solidcoin has always been at war with Eurasia."

[k9quaint]

ScamCoin says they have "solved the 51% problem" when in reality they have merely created a "0.00001% problem".

That is an unfair characterization of Solidcoin. There is no way there are that many solidcoin users. It is more like a 0.1% problem. 

[film2240]

I wonder how Soidcoin is doing?I haven't been able to keep up with the latest news due to lots of work (job wise/academic).I used to be a miner for SC (very briefly due to poor value of each SC but were easy to get lots of.).I ended up trading SC for BTC as I made more BTC that way than mining BTC directly but thanks to RealSolids changes I can no longer work with that currency (I don't care about trust in SC,I just wanna profit whereas I see BTC as a viable idea)

Can't believe that SC went down the drain so fast.I wonder what an SC is valued at to BTC and USD?

[the joint]

For some reason this thread is locked: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61372.0

But I would like to point out that the vast majority of miners will stop mining when the price drops to $0.50, allowing an easy 51% attack.

Miners don't determine the price and a lack of inflation doesn't guarantee a high price.

It's locked because CoinHunter knows people will flame the hell out of his new Solidcoin.

"You're only doing this to make your own SolidCoin investment higher.
If this was true we would be a pyramid scheme like Bitcoin .  Firstly the more people that mine the more coins that are produced, this is the opposite of a pyramid scheme, it basically is democracy relating to currency creation. In regards to the existing 2.7 million coins and the average cost only being 1c to create, that is part of the journey that is establishing a working currency. If we didn't have 2.7 million coins our currency would stagnate and not be very liquid. Either way early adopters and businesses do more than later adopters so this is their reward for their work."  ~ CoinHunter


No thanks.

[Starlightbreaker]

i'm suspicious he does this because someone is close being a trusted node, and unwilling to give up the sole power in the currency.

hmm.

[CoinHunter]

i'm suspicious he does this because someone is close being a trusted node, and unwilling to give up the sole power in the currency.

hmm.

No, the biggest reasons were businesses I spoke to wanted a stable value for the currency, that's what basing it on kilowatt hours attempts to do. Businesses also said they preferred if a SolidCoin was worth about $1 so that their prices could be similar across the board instead of "unknown" things like 500 microsoft points. That said because there's 2+ million SolidCoins don't expect the price to be $1+ overnight, it will take some time, basically it depends on which coins hit the market and the average cost to produce + some other variables.

The largest account holder I'm aware of has about 120K, one of the exchanges has a bit more than that in their "use" wallet. If someone did have close to a million they are hiding it rather well.

[film2240]

This could be a revival of SC.If so I'd look forward to it so I can have a go at trading other P2P currencies (SC) as well as BTC as it seems there's a lot more profit for me to be had by trading multiple currencies.I do wish that SC can help me setup shop like BTC did so I can trade between currencies without issue.

Lets see how SCs changes work out in the mid term.

[tacotime]

This could be a revival of SC.If so I'd look forward to it so I can have a go at trading other P2P currencies (SC) as well as BTC as it seems there's a lot more profit for me to be had by trading multiple currencies.I do wish that SC can help me setup shop like BTC did so I can trade between currencies without issue.

Lets see how SCs changes work out in the mid term.

It will be the death of SC2.  As soon as the currency is worth something it will be shredded by more talented programmers who can find security holes in the trusted node system, or by a simpler sybil attack.

The reason all my money is in LTC is because the system is proven robust as it does not strongly deviate from the original protocol -- with SC2, you're trusting a single person's programming skills with your money.  The fact that the trusted node system has already been attacked successfully should be an ominous sign to anyone who wants to invest their money into SC2.  I think a lot of people in the end are going to get shafted and one person is going to walk away with a lot of everyone else's cash.

[FlipPro]

This could be a revival of SC.If so I'd look forward to it so I can have a go at trading other P2P currencies (SC) as well as BTC as it seems there's a lot more profit for me to be had by trading multiple currencies.I do wish that SC can help me setup shop like BTC did so I can trade between currencies without issue.

Lets see how SCs changes work out in the mid term.

I think a lot of people in the end are going to get shafted and one person is going to walk away with a lot of everyone else's cash.

This..

[CoinHunter]

It will be the death of SC2.  As soon as the currency is worth something it will be shredded by more talented programmers who can find security holes in the trusted node system, or by a simpler sybil attack.

You do know SolidCoin has many more nodes than Litecoin right? Sybil attack is much easier on Litecoin. Either way, the top end SC guys are aware of the risks and have a "backbone" of nodes which will always connect to each other. Are Litecoin developers aware ? It took them 2 days to even notice their network was being spammed. Sounds real proven.

The reason all my money is in LTC is because the system is proven robust as it does not strongly deviate from the original protocol -- with SC2, you're trusting a single person's programming skills with your money.  The fact that the trusted node system has already been attacked successfully should be an ominous sign to anyone who wants to invest their money into SC2.  I think a lot of people in the end are going to get shafted and one person is going to walk away with a lot of everyone else's cash.

Well we have 4 developers now so unfortunately we can't just blame me for all the good (or bad) things . SolidCoin is the most "Wanting to be attacked" chain out there and has survived everything people have thrown at it. Luke-Jr, artforz, large botnets. Maybe we need satoshi to hit it hard? Just get Gavin to give him a call.

All existing SC owners prior to the change can now bail out at a price which is 5 times higher than a week ago. If they want to bail they can do so at a nice profit.

[Starlightbreaker]

All existing SC owners prior to the change can now bail out at a price which is 5 times higher than a week ago. If they want to bail they can do so at a nice profit.

pump and dump.

pretty much like all other alts.

[Syke]

All existing SC owners prior to the change can now bail out at a price which is 5 times higher than a week ago. If they want to bail they can do so at a nice profit.

And it's what, 10 times, 100 times harder to mine (I've heard both .7 sc per block and .07 sc per block, so I'm not sure the correct figure)? Seems like the change only benefited early adapters. But then, that was probably the point to the chain all along.

Edit: Looks like it's about .08 per block, plus a few tx fees, let's say it's .1 sc per block, down from about 7 sc per block. Difficulty goes up 70x, price goes up 5x. I expect network hashrate to plummet once miners figure out they can't get anything anymore from mining. Good thing SC is designed for plummeting hashrate. In a couple weeks it's going to just be the enforcer nodes hashing away.

[CoinHunter]

All existing SC owners prior to the change can now bail out at a price which is 5 times higher than a week ago. If they want to bail they can do so at a nice profit.

And it's what, 10 times, 100 times harder to mine (I've heard both .7 sc per block and .07 sc per block, so I'm not sure the correct figure)? Seems like the change only benefited early adapters. But then, that was probably the point to the chain all along.

Edit: Looks like it's about .08 per block, plus a few tx fees, let's say it's .1 sc per block, down from about 7 sc per block. Difficulty goes up 70x, price goes up 5x. I expect network hashrate to plummet once miners figure out they can't get anything anymore from mining. Good thing SC is designed for plummeting hashrate. In a couple weeks it's going to just be the enforcer nodes hashing away.

I guess that's why SolidCoin is so "Lucky" to be protected against mining attacks eh?

We now aren't flooding the economy with coins. Like you said, I personally don't think price will increase 70x immediately, because it was dropping previously , which indicates too much mining for the amount of investors we had. That's what the change addresses.

It's our luxury with 51% protection that we can have a coin flow based on actual investment and development instead of "heres a fixed coin rate, let the value fluctuate like a wild beast". If you want a currency to work you can't have massive value fluctuations in my opinion. I guess we'll see how this goes over the coming months.

I suspect few people here have actually tried to argue Bitcoins to a business because if you did they would ask things like "What are they worth?" and the answer you give is "depends, $2 a month ago, $5 now, 6 months ago it was $30, 1 year ago it was $1" . We had the same problem with SolidCoin so we are fixing it. Personally I don't think Bitcoin is a currency and it never will be due to issues like this. But it could continue as some sort of "commodity" for a little while longer.

And I think you'll find very few of our investors are going "short solidcoin" we've been at this for 7 months and we want a working, secure currency. Most of the key people aren't profit motivated, we are motivated to get rid of the shitty systems in place like banks and governments having their fingers in each pie. That said I'm sure there are plenty of people in the SC community which are 100% profit driven, that's life I guess.

[grndzero]

So when can we expect V3 of SpongyCoin?

I say it will take a while for most of the non-cultists to stop mining.

Anyone want to future bet what the version will be by the 1 year mark?

[PatrickHarnett]

Fascinating

So the cost of production is going to equal it's price.  Then, the consumer surplus will tend to (price - cost) => zero. 

From an economics point of view, I thought the previous change from 32 to 5 with bonuses was "interesting" and it had all died down a bit.  This one is micro-cosmic monetary policy experiment worth watching.

Wonder if I can sell my 70 virgin SC1.0 coins as collectibles yet?

[cunicula]

Fascinating

So the cost of production is going to equal it's price.  Then, the consumer surplus will tend to (price - cost) => zero. 

From an economics point of view, I thought the previous change from 32 to 5 with bonuses was "interesting" and it had all died down a bit.  This one is micro-cosmic monetary policy experiment worth watching.

Wonder if I can sell my 70 virgin SC1.0 coins as collectibles yet?

Idiot.
Your grade = F.
You know nothing.
You are mis-educating the other idiots.
This only intensifies the already intolerable level of idiocy here.

[PatrickHarnett]

Fascinating

So the cost of production is going to equal it's price.  Then, the consumer surplus will tend to (price - cost) => zero.  

From an economics point of view, I thought the previous change from 32 to 5 with bonuses was "interesting" and it had all died down a bit.  This one is micro-cosmic monetary policy experiment worth watching.

Wonder if I can sell my 70 virgin SC1.0 coins as collectibles yet?

Idiot.
Your grade = F.
You know nothing.
You are mis-educating the other idiots.
This only intensifies the already intolerable level of idiocy here.

yes, what a great response

looking at your post history you are not adding anything of value - why did you bother trolling here?

[Syke]

It's our luxury with 51% protection...

That's like saying PayPal has 51% protection. You might as well run a single enforcer node that processes all transactions. Or is that the plan for SC3 next month?

[CoinHunter]

That's like saying PayPal has 51% protection. You might as well run a single enforcer node that processes all transactions. Or is that the plan for SC3 next month?

Paypal doesn't have a decentralized P2P network, it also doesn't let everyone with a PC create "paypal dollars". As much as you may hate some things in SolidCoin compared to government/central bank controlled money it's leaps and bounds better, and that's good enough for most people. I think you'll find your values are extremely niche, but I can understand that people like yourself will never accept SC due to them and you can continue to use whatever it is you want. We aren't going to force you.

[cunicula]

Fascinating

So the cost of production is going to equal it's price.  Then, the consumer surplus will tend to (price - cost) => zero.  

From an economics point of view, I thought the previous change from 32 to 5 with bonuses was "interesting" and it had all died down a bit.  This one is micro-cosmic monetary policy experiment worth watching.

Wonder if I can sell my 70 virgin SC1.0 coins as collectibles yet?

Idiot.
Your grade = F.
You know nothing.
You are mis-educating the other idiots.
This only intensifies the already intolerable level of idiocy here.

yes, what a great response

looking at your post history you are not adding anything of value - why did you bother trolling here?

I'm avenging your econ 1 teacher.

producer surplus = ∫0_q (equilibrium price - marginal cost(q)) dq
consumer surplus = ∫0_q (demand(q) - equilibrium price) dq

[PatrickHarnett]

Fascinating

So the cost of production is going to equal it's price.  Then, the consumer surplus will tend to (price - cost) => zero.  

From an economics point of view, I thought the previous change from 32 to 5 with bonuses was "interesting" and it had all died down a bit.  This one is micro-cosmic monetary policy experiment worth watching.

Wonder if I can sell my 70 virgin SC1.0 coins as collectibles yet?

Idiot.
Your grade = F.
You know nothing.
You are mis-educating the other idiots.
This only intensifies the already intolerable level of idiocy here.

yes, what a great response

looking at your post history you are not adding anything of value - why did you bother trolling here?

I'm avenging your econ 1 teacher.

producer surplus = ∫0_q (equilibrium price - marginal cost(q)) dq
consumer surplus = ∫0_q (demand(q) - equilibrium price) dq

Much better - thanks. 

[CoinHunter]

And neither does ScamCoin.  There is nothing decentralized about ScamCoin.  The miners are token and provide nothing of value to the network. 

You're wrong. The sad thing is you know it but just like to spread FUD.

[cunicula]

That's like saying PayPal has 51% protection. You might as well run a single enforcer node that processes all transactions. Or is that the plan for SC3 next month?

Paypal doesn't have a decentralized P2P network

And neither does ScamCoin.  There is nothing decentralized about ScamCoin.  The miners are token and provide nothing of value to the network. 

Is this different from bitcoin, where the blockchain checkpoints are hardcoded into the client at regular intervals by the developers?

[Syke]

Is this different from bitcoin, where the blockchain checkpoints are hardcoded into the client at regular intervals by the developers?

Yes, because those checkpoints are entirely optional, as witnessed by the fact that there are alternate clients that don't include those checkpoints. Or you could download the source and remove every checkpoint. Bitcoin will still work perfectly.

[k9quaint]

Okay then, so is it any different from the inevitable release of BIP16 without testing just because one developer thinks that way? And the fact that miners refusing to accept the change themselves get rejected from the network? I had faith in Bitcoin's decentralization before. But unfortunately for me not to accept P2SH is for me to fight a losing battle.

Misinformation. Please get a new source.

Also, please explain the technical issues you have with BIP16.

[Syke]

Okay then, so is it any different from the inevitable release of BIP16 without testing just because one developer thinks that way?

BIP16 isn't inevitable. Gavin implemented BIP16, checked it in, and nothing happened, because Gavin cannot force any change on anybody. Bitcoin is decentralized.

CoinHunter implemented block reward change, pushed it to his enforcer-nodes, and every single SolidCoin user is required to instantly upgrade or their client is completely broken. Yesterday's change broke one of the largest SolidCoin exchanges. Today, btc-e.com still can't process SolidCoin blocks. SolidCoin is centralized.

[makomk]

Okay then, so is it any different from the inevitable release of BIP16 without testing just because one developer thinks that way? And the fact that miners refusing to accept the change themselves get rejected from the network? I had faith in Bitcoin's decentralization before. But unfortunately for me not to accept P2SH is for me to fight a losing battle.

Misinformation. Please get a new source.

In the case of P2SH, the development team could easily deploy this functionality against the will of the miners: they'd simply issue a new client that enforces the BIP16 rule and send an alert which would pop up a message for every bitcoin user telling them to update.  Miners that failed to update would eventually extend a chain containing a contradictory transaction and from that moment they would no longer be miners from the perspective of the majority of Bitcoin users,  no matter how many yottahashes they had.  Done.

(If users reject the change too—well, they can get themselves some new developers, but the miners never come into that picture except as users)

Now, a fun puzzle for you - how can users find out enough information to know whether to reject the changes, given that the Bitcoin developers in general and particularly gmaxwell are opposed to anyone saying anything on here beyond the fact that the developers think this is a good idea?

BIP16 isn't inevitable. Gavin implemented BIP16, checked it in, and nothing happened, because Gavin cannot force any change on anybody. Bitcoin is decentralized.

He probably could, and in fact one of the proposed solutions to BIP 16 missing the deadline involves him doing exactly that, it's just that he's chosen not to approach the problem in that way. So far anyway.

[Syke]

BIP16 isn't inevitable. Gavin implemented BIP16, checked it in, and nothing happened, because Gavin cannot force any change on anybody. Bitcoin is decentralized.

He probably could, and in fact one of the proposed solutions to BIP 16 missing the deadline involves him doing exactly that, it's just that he's chosen not to approach the problem in that way. So far anyway.

No, he cannot make anyone upgrade. Every single miner chooses for himself which version to run. No matter what Gavin does, miners always have the choice whether to download and run the new changes. If 51% of the miners don't do that, then nothing will change.

[makomk]

No, he cannot make anyone upgrade. Every single miner chooses for himself which version to run. No matter what Gavin does, miners always have the choice whether to download and run the new changes. If 51% of the miners don't do that, then nothing will change.

If 51% of the miners don't upgrade, then their blocks will be treated as invalid to those that do upgrade. All the developers need to do is to convince enough of the users that if they don't upgrade they'll be screwed, and they have the advantage of being able to broadcast alerts to them through the client itself.

[eleuthria]

(channelling my inner CoinHunter):

It is SIMPLE ECONOMICS, people!

price = function(supply,demand)

So to create more demand, just fix the price and the supply!  Easy-peasy!

(ok, done, back to reality)

*GASP* Gavin is becoming a troll!  Luke's BIP 16 attacks must be corrupting him.

[Syke]

No, he cannot make anyone upgrade. Every single miner chooses for himself which version to run. No matter what Gavin does, miners always have the choice whether to download and run the new changes. If 51% of the miners don't do that, then nothing will change.

If 51% of the miners don't upgrade, then their blocks will be treated as invalid to those that do upgrade. All the developers need to do is to convince enough of the users that if they don't upgrade they'll be screwed, and they have the advantage of being able to broadcast alerts to them through the client itself.

And that's what we mean by Bitcoin is decentralized. The developers have to convince miners, but the developers cannot compel anyone to do so. The miners chose.

[gmaxwell]

And that's what we mean by Bitcoin is decentralized. The developers have to convince miners, but the developers cannot compel anyone to do so. The miners chose.

The users choose, not the miners.

[CoinHunter]

Yeah it's the old tasty argument of "SolidCoin is centralized Bitcoin isn't" . Like the trust nodes in SolidCoin somehow make it sooooo much different than deepbit and btcguild controlling Bitcoin. Might as well call deepbit trust node 1 and btcguild trust node 2. Because you are trusting them to not attack Bitcoin..

Not that I'm saying deepbit or btcguild will do an attack but if you can't see Bitcoin users are TRUSTING these two pools not to then you can't argue any centralization aspect against SolidCoin with a clear conscience.

There are plenty of things in Bitcoin that are centralized that are essential to its future success. A main website, a main source, main developers, a main forum. Oh and the alert key in Bitcoin too is rather centralized is it not? Who has control of that? One person? Oh nooo King Gavin may shut down Bitcoin ... argggg Bitcoin trolls will have a field day! Oh they won't because when it comes to Bitcoin they are like blind mice following the pied piper or something.

[coblee]

Yeah it's the old tasty argument of "SolidCoin is centralized Bitcoin isn't" . Like the trust nodes in SolidCoin somehow make it sooooo much different than deepbit and btcguild controlling Bitcoin. Might as well call deepbit trust node 1 and btcguild trust node 2. Because you are trusting them to not attack Bitcoin..

Not that I'm saying deepbit or btcguild will do an attack but if you can't see Bitcoin users are TRUSTING these two pools not to then you can't argue any centralization aspect against SolidCoin with a clear conscience.

LOL

Miners actually give the pools their trust when they mine on that pool. If the pool misplaces that trust, miners will leave the pool. This is similar to voting a politician into office to represent the people in a democracy. Just look at the miners that left Eligius when Luke-Jr used it to attack CoiledCoin. Granted since this wasn't an attack on Bitcoin, most of the miners didn't care and stayed with Eligius. If deepbit, or any other pool tries to attack Bitcoin, you can bet that they will lose their hashrate immediately. This is different than solidcoin, where your enforcer nodes have total control to force every miner to use your code or be left out. Pretty similar to a dictatorship if you ask me. You may have some loyal servants willing to be ruled by you, (like Kim Jong-Il: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSWN6Qj98Iw) but most people on this forum don't like enforcer nodes.

[gmaxwell]

Hypothetical situation: Gavin releases BIP 16 anyways, and the merchants download the new client. Some miners also download it, so the old clients become isolated from the new network. How do you cope?

BIP16 transactions are simply accepted as valid by old clients. They can't become isolated due to this.

[dree12]

Hypothetical situation: Gavin releases BIP 16 anyways, and the merchants download the new client. Some miners also download it, so the old clients become isolated from the new network. How do you cope?

BIP16 transactions are simply accepted as valid by old clients. They can't become isolated due to this.

If that's the case, what's stopping anyone from employing P2SH right now by mining their own blocks?

[k9quaint]

Yeah it's the old tasty argument of "SolidCoin is centralized Bitcoin isn't" . Like the trust nodes in SolidCoin somehow make it sooooo much different than deepbit and btcguild controlling Bitcoin. Might as well call deepbit trust node 1 and btcguild trust node 2. Because you are trusting them to not attack Bitcoin..

Lets look at the two scenarios shall we?
Pool bad, people are free to leave the pool. Plus P2Pool is gaining ground so this issue is diminishing not growing.
Enforcer node bad, people are free to make forum posts about how they are trapped in a cryptocurrency controlled by one guy.

Not that I'm saying deepbit or btcguild will do an attack but if you can't see Bitcoin users are TRUSTING these two pools not to then you can't argue any centralization aspect against SolidCoin with a clear conscience.

There are plenty of things in Bitcoin that are centralized that are essential to its future success. A main website, a main source, main developers, a main forum. Oh and the alert key in Bitcoin too is rather centralized is it not? Who has control of that? One person? Oh nooo King Gavin may shut down Bitcoin ... argggg Bitcoin trolls will have a field day! Oh they won't because when it comes to Bitcoin they are like blind mice following the pied piper or something.

Bitcoin has a main website? Which one is it?
Several splinter groups have split off the forums and made their own place to discuss cryptocurrencies (yourself included).
Gavin can't shut down bitcoin with the alert key. He can only suggest that the network be shutdown by using the alert key. Furthermore I have just modded a bitcoin clone that completely ignores alerts. Gavin is now powerless to stop me with alerts. Welcome to free software.

So, that was pretty much a standard Coinhunter post, one composed entirely of failed assertions.

[Syke]

Hypothetical situation: Gavin releases BIP 16 anyways, and the merchants download the new client. Some miners also download it, so the old clients become isolated from the new network. How do you cope?

Developer releases new version, people choose to upgrade? Is that supposed to be scary? That's how Bitcoin has been working all along.

[dree12]

Hypothetical situation: Gavin releases BIP 16 anyways, and the merchants download the new client. Some miners also download it, so the old clients become isolated from the new network. How do you cope?

Developer releases new version, people choose to upgrade? Is that supposed to be scary? That's how Bitcoin has been working all along.

With all the hype, and some posts by theymos and genjix, I was under the impression that BIP16 would bring a chain split. Gmaxwell cleared that up for me, and I apologize for anything negative I might have posted.

[localhost]

Yeah it's the old tasty argument of "SolidCoin is centralized Bitcoin isn't" . Like the trust nodes in SolidCoin somehow make it sooooo much different than deepbit and btcguild controlling Bitcoin. Might as well call deepbit trust node 1 and btcguild trust node 2. Because you are trusting them to not attack Bitcoin..

Not that I'm saying deepbit or btcguild will do an attack but if you can't see Bitcoin users are TRUSTING these two pools not to then you can't argue any centralization aspect against SolidCoin with a clear conscience.

Miners actually give the pools their trust when they mine on that pool. If the pool misplaces that trust, miners will leave the pool. This is similar to voting a politician into office to represent the people in a democracy. Just look at the miners that left Eligius when Luke-Jr used it to attack CoiledCoin. Granted since this wasn't an attack on Bitcoin, most of the miners didn't care and stayed with Eligius. If deepbit, or any other pool tries to attack Bitcoin, you can bet that they will lose their hashrate immediately.

I wouldn't be that sure. There might well be a large bunch of clueless people who just mine there without really caring. If they did care they wouldn't mine in a pool which has enough power to kind of veto the network.

[CoinHunter]

Miners actually give the pools their trust when they mine on that pool. If the pool misplaces that trust, miners will leave the pool. This is similar to voting a politician into office to represent the people in a democracy. Just look at the miners that left Eligius when Luke-Jr used it to attack CoiledCoin. Granted since this wasn't an attack on Bitcoin, most of the miners didn't care and stayed with Eligius. If deepbit, or any other pool tries to attack Bitcoin, you can bet that they will lose their hashrate immediately.

Yes because miners are that mobile.

Let me give you an example, SolidCoin block 180000 info was made public a week ago, and today we still have people unaware about the changes and wondering why their mining earnings are less than usual. Many miners do not check forums or "isbitcoinbeingattacked.com"

People will still be mining deepbit/whatever as it attacks for some length of time. You also won't be able to easily pinpoint which pool is attacking, deepbit could just be having some "maintenance issues" . So try proving that to someone. You must really live in some fantasy land where you think as soon as one bad block hits the network alarm bells will be going off! We know the attacker immediately! All miners will stop immediately! This sounds like 9/11 or something.

Oh and after all this goes down with one bad pool what happens? Well Bitcoin loses a lot of faith, but maybe it continues on like a zombie, just to have another pool claim the #1 throne and there we go again same problem. "But but we have p2poooool" Yeah watch that scale to about 500 clients before it bursts.

You didn't even notice LiteCoin was being "attacked" for 2 days, before criticizing the #2 cryptochain on how it's security works you should make sure your own bases are covered.

[CoinHunter]

Lets look at the two scenarios shall we?
Pool bad, people are free to leave the pool. Plus P2Pool is gaining ground so this issue is diminishing not growing.
Enforcer node bad, people are free to make forum posts about how they are trapped in a cryptocurrency controlled by one guy.

There's no difference to rogue trust nodes than Bitcoins rogue pools or rogue miners, except a rogue SC trust node CANNOT DOUBLE SPEED. The other difference is that to be a trust node you need a lot of investment in SolidCoins, to be a pool operator you need to pay $50 a month. The current people with trust nodes have invested a lot into SolidCoin, whether time, money, development, etc.

Several splinter groups have split off the forums and made their own place to discuss cryptocurrencies (yourself included).
Gavin can't shut down bitcoin with the alert key. He can only suggest that the network be shutdown by using the alert key. Furthermore I have just modded a bitcoin clone that completely ignores alerts. Gavin is now powerless to stop me with alerts. Welcome to free software.

Haha you really are bitter about how SolidCoin is more secure. Firstly why would I want to "shut down SolidCoin" ? I created it and I want it to prosper because it solves many problems facing the human species. The worst I could do is take the CPF money amounting ~130K, I cannot stop the network on my own because others operate nodes and will have to be "in on it" too. I cannot (or any other trust node) double spend because no client will accept it. SolidCoin actually is a good solution unlike Bitcoin, as it's protected against Banks and Governments just walking into a PC shop, buying 10000 GPUs and raping it.

"But they can just take out one guy"  . Firstly the keys are encrypted, the trust node ones in operation may not be but they don't know where the trust nodes are and who is running them. It's not just me. And to capture me , torture me, threaten me, to get the keys and locations is way beyond buying some hardware online. Secondly I have a layer between who they will think is "me" and the real me, I will have a small amount of time upon which I realize I am in danger and take precautions (ie get the F out of dodge). My hope is the NPO is running this risk soon instead of me though, don't get me wrong.

It is so much harder to "order a hit" and torture someone than it is to just spend fiat money they have created out of thin air and buy some GPUs/FPGA. If you can't understand that then there is nothing more to say. Keep living in your delusion where a little bit of money created out of thin air can't just collapse Bitcoin in a minute.

[coblee]

You didn't even notice LiteCoin was being "attacked" for 2 days, before criticizing the #2 cryptochain on how it's security works you should make sure your own bases are covered.

Where did you get this information from? You might want to double check your sources before you spread more FUD. I saw the Litecoin dust spam transactions immediately. It was very soon after gmaxwell's post.

[CoinHunter]

Where did you get this information from? You might want to double check your sources before you spread more FUD. I saw the Litecoin dust spam transactions immediately. It was very soon after gmaxwell's post.

Yah, you know a lot about FUD don't you. I'll have to submit to your excellent knowledge on the subject.

Can you please confirm the date between the first spam attack and that post so the proof is out there?

[coblee]

Where did you get this information from? You might want to double check your sources before you spread more FUD. I saw the Litecoin dust spam transactions immediately. It was very soon after gmaxwell's post.

Yah, you know a lot about FUD don't you. I'll have to submit to your excellent knowledge on the subject.

Can you please confirm the date between the first spam attack and that post so the proof is out there?

So it seems like you know a lot about this attack, huh? I wonder why.

[CoinHunter]

So it seems like you know a lot about this attack, huh? I wonder why.

Sure, because unlike you who doesn't pay attention to their chain this stuff interests me. I like making SolidCoin better, and even changed our max block size after seeing LiteCoin abused. Once that attack became public I looked at when it started and was surprised it was a relatively long time before it was announced, which made me realize you weren't "on the job". It's the truth right? Want to make up some more FUD ?

[coblee]

So it seems like you know a lot about this attack, huh? I wonder why.

Sure, because unlike you who doesn't pay attention to their chain this stuff interests me. I like making SolidCoin better, and even changed our max block size after seeing LiteCoin abused. Once that attack became public I looked at when it started and was surprised it was a relatively long time before it was announced, which made me realize you weren't "on the job". It's the truth right? Want to make up some more FUD ?

The attacker was testing the network for a few days before gmaxwell's post. He was sending various amounts of 0.1337 and some 0.00000001 around. It was after gmaxwell's post (or very close to that time) that his spams really started to impact the network, where he would send tons of 0.00000001 in each transaction. That was when I was alerted to the problem. His previous test transactions did not catch my attention as I don't spend my spare time looking at block explorer. So by your definition, that means I'm not "on the job", huh?

CoinHunter/RealSolid, you're a sad person. I feel sorry for you.

[k9quaint]

Lets look at the two scenarios shall we?
Pool bad, people are free to leave the pool. Plus P2Pool is gaining ground so this issue is diminishing not growing.
Enforcer node bad, people are free to make forum posts about how they are trapped in a cryptocurrency controlled by one guy.

There's no difference to rogue trust nodes than Bitcoins rogue pools or rogue miners, except a rogue SC trust node CANNOT DOUBLE SPEED. The other difference is that to be a trust node you need a lot of investment in SolidCoins, to be a pool operator you need to pay $50 a month. The current people with trust nodes have invested a lot into SolidCoin, whether time, money, development, etc.

Several splinter groups have split off the forums and made their own place to discuss cryptocurrencies (yourself included).
Gavin can't shut down bitcoin with the alert key. He can only suggest that the network be shutdown by using the alert key. Furthermore I have just modded a bitcoin clone that completely ignores alerts. Gavin is now powerless to stop me with alerts. Welcome to free software.

Haha you really are bitter about how SolidCoin is more secure. Firstly why would I want to "shut down SolidCoin" ? I created it and I want it to prosper because it solves many problems facing the human species.

You already shut it down once. It will probably be the same reason as before, a broken protocol due to poor design choices.

"But they can just take out one guy"  . Firstly the keys are encrypted, the trust node ones in operation may not be but they don't know where the trust nodes are and who is running them.It's not just me. And to capture me , torture me, threaten me, to get the keys and locations is way beyond buying some hardware online. Secondly I have a layer between who they will think is "me" and the real me, I will have a small amount of time upon which I realize I am in danger and take precautions (ie get the F out of dodge). My hope is the NPO is running this risk soon instead of me though, don't get me wrong.

It is so much harder to "order a hit" and torture someone than it is to just spend fiat money they have created out of thin air and buy some GPUs/FPGA. If you can't understand that then there is nothing more to say. Keep living in your delusion where a little bit of money created out of thin air can't just collapse Bitcoin in a minute.

Nobody said anything about capture and torture. Someone can just lift the keys off your computer, and *poof* your whole cryptocurrency dies. Oh, and all we have is your word that anyone other than you has control of an enforcer node. Again, it all comes back to just trusting some random dude on the internet. Bitcoin is rooted in mathematics, Solidcoin is rooted in the paranoia of a damaged mind. I prefer math.

[John (John K.)]

Lets look at the two scenarios shall we?
Pool bad, people are free to leave the pool. Plus P2Pool is gaining ground so this issue is diminishing not growing.
Enforcer node bad, people are free to make forum posts about how they are trapped in a cryptocurrency controlled by one guy.

There's no difference to rogue trust nodes than Bitcoins rogue pools or rogue miners, except a rogue SC trust node CANNOT DOUBLE SPEED. The other difference is that to be a trust node you need a lot of investment in SolidCoins, to be a pool operator you need to pay $50 a month. The current people with trust nodes have invested a lot into SolidCoin, whether time, money, development, etc.

Several splinter groups have split off the forums and made their own place to discuss cryptocurrencies (yourself included).
Gavin can't shut down bitcoin with the alert key. He can only suggest that the network be shutdown by using the alert key. Furthermore I have just modded a bitcoin clone that completely ignores alerts. Gavin is now powerless to stop me with alerts. Welcome to free software.

Haha you really are bitter about how SolidCoin is more secure. Firstly why would I want to "shut down SolidCoin" ? I created it and I want it to prosper because it solves many problems facing the human species.

You already shut it down once. It will probably be the same reason as before, a broken protocol due to poor design choices.

"But they can just take out one guy"  . Firstly the keys are encrypted, the trust node ones in operation may not be but they don't know where the trust nodes are and who is running them.It's not just me. And to capture me , torture me, threaten me, to get the keys and locations is way beyond buying some hardware online. Secondly I have a layer between who they will think is "me" and the real me, I will have a small amount of time upon which I realize I am in danger and take precautions (ie get the F out of dodge). My hope is the NPO is running this risk soon instead of me though, don't get me wrong.

It is so much harder to "order a hit" and torture someone than it is to just spend fiat money they have created out of thin air and buy some GPUs/FPGA. If you can't understand that then there is nothing more to say. Keep living in your delusion where a little bit of money created out of thin air can't just collapse Bitcoin in a minute.

Nobody said anything about capture and torture. Someone can just lift the keys off your computer, and *poof* your whole cryptocurrency dies. Oh, and all we have is your word that anyone other than you has control of an enforcer node. Again, it all comes back to just trusting some random dude on the internet. Bitcoin is rooted in mathematics, Solidcoin is rooted in the paranoia of a damaged mind. I prefer math.

One of the most revolutionary feature of Bitcoin is being decentralized and taking down the nodes in one country would only have a minimal inpact in other places. Under SC, there's this inherent problem of you dying suddenly and leaving your cryptocurrency to a certain death. What do you have to make us believe in you such as to base a whole currency after you?

[Explodicle]

Oh we can just ignore that glaring flaw because the NPO will handle it "eventually". Forget trying to find a firm date for that, since CoinHunter has no intention of actually giving up control until after he cashes out.

So either you trust an anonymous (but safe?) guy now, or trust a known and thus vulnerable entity "later". And without a transfer DATE, there is no "later", it's just BS to sidestep the issue and buy time.

[Syke]

Firstly why would I want to "shut down SolidCoin" ?

You've succeeded in driving away 2/3rds of the miners nearly overnight, so you must be trying to shut it down. Congrats, it's working.

[coblee]

Here were my thoughts on this last year:

SolidCoin is not a cryptocurrency, or at least by most people's definition of cryptocurrency. There's really no need for miners. SC miners do not secure the chain. That is already done by the trusted nodes. So miners are basically wasting their electricity.

Think about it this way... with Bitcoin, miners hash to secure the network and they get rewarded for the security that they are adding to the network. With SolidCoin, miners are just wasting electricity because RealSolid thinks that this is a fair way to handout SCs. It's similar to a King asking his peasants to run around in circles. The faster they run, the more coins they get. So of course, profit-driven peasants will run around in circles, which adds no value to anything. King RealSolid realized that he is passing out too many solidcoins this way, which will dilute his own holdings. So guess what, he decided to pass out only 5 SC (instead of 32 SC) to his loyal peasants for each circle they complete. Then what happens? Well there are less peasants running around in circles b/c it's not worth it anymore. But that doesn't matter to RealSolid, because peasants running around in circles doesn't add any value in the first place. Hmm...

Also, since the trusted nodes controls 50% of the blocks, by definition, you cannot do a 51% attack unless you have control of a trusted node.

It's great when you create all the rules for your own realm AND you actually find suckers willing to follow you.

No one should be surprised where it's headed... 32 -> 5 -> 0.07 -> 0

[doublec]

BIP16 transactions are simply accepted as valid by old clients. They can't become isolated due to this.

According to Gavin they can become isolated if someone mines a bad transaction. Is it a temporary isolation (duration only for that block)? Or was that issue fixed?

f an attacker DID manage to create a block with a timestamp after the switchover date and a bad /P2SH/ transaction in it, then some percentage of the network will try to build on that bad block.  Lets say 70% of hashing power supports /P2SH/.  That would mean only 70% of the network was working on a good block-chain, and the result would be transactions taking, on average, about 14 minutes to confirm instead of the usual 10 minutes.

[Starlightbreaker]

the idea of cross-mining pool is interesting though...but, at 50% the pay of btc PPS, and you have no clue where's the rest going to..

lemme guess, his pocket?

[Syke]

All existing SC owners prior to the change can now bail out at a price which is 5 times higher than a week ago. If they want to bail they can do so at a nice profit.

You called it all right. Everyone is bailing out. Here's the latest trades on btc-e.com:

02.02.12 07:59   Sell   0.00742   11.4348   0.08484621
02.02.12 07:59   Sell   0.00743   36   0.26748
02.02.12 07:59   Sell   0.0075   840.66   6.30495
02.02.12 07:58   Sell   0.0075   260.33   1.952475
02.02.12 07:57   Sell   0.0075   1899.01   14.242575
02.02.12 07:57   Sell   0.0075   1400   10.5
02.02.12 07:57   Sell   0.00751   554.345   4.16313095
02.02.12 07:57   Sell   0.0077   1940.22   14.939694
02.02.12 07:56   Sell   0.0077   0.43912   0.00338122
02.02.12 07:55   Sell   0.0077   1059.34   8.156918
02.02.12 07:55   Sell   0.00777   777   6.03729
02.02.12 07:55   Sell   0.007778   284.58   2.21346324
02.02.12 07:55   Sell   0.00781   595.177   4.64833237
02.02.12 07:55   Sell   0.00782   255.028   1.99431896
02.02.12 07:55   Sell   0.00783   28.879   0.22612257
02.02.12 07:55   Sell   0.00783   35   0.27405
02.02.12 07:54   Sell   0.00783   31   0.24273
02.02.12 07:54   Sell   0.00783   22   0.17226
02.02.12 07:53   Sell   0.00783   11   0.08613
02.02.12 07:33   Buy   0.009999   1   0.009999

And slc24.com:

01.02. 20:12:49    sell ►    0.007101    142.6113    1.01268284   
01.02. 18:17:58    sell ►    0.007101    139    0.987039   
01.02. 16:18:55    sell ►    0.007101    33    0.234333   
01.02. 16:17:10    sell ►    0.007101    230    1.63323   
01.02. 15:02:30    sell ►    0.007101    1995.734    14.17170713   
01.02. 15:01:22    sell ►    0.00751    526.9697    3.95754245   
01.02. 15:01:21    sell ►    0.00781    1818.1815    14.19999752   
01.02. 07:12:40    sell ►    0.00819    56    0.45864   
01.02. 03:54:05    sell ►    0.008    27.2044    0.2176352   
01.02. 03:50:34    sell ►    0.00782    166.2404    1.29999993   
01.02. 03:50:31    sell ►    0.00827    573.4949    4.74280282   
01.02. 03:50:29    sell ►    0.0085    117.4127    0.99800795   
01.02. 03:49:56    sell ►    0.00851    300    2.553   
31.01. 19:32:08    sell ►    0.00827    16.04    0.1326508   
31.01. 19:24:01    sell ►    0.00827    15.0737    0.1246595

Game over man, game over.

[Fuzzy]

Well the code has no strength if one person can change the code at will and force those changes unilaterally on the network.

Is every SolidCoin supporter completely retarded, or is it just me?

I hope it is me, because, as I understand it, the SOLE PURPOSE OF CRYPTO-CURRENCY IS DE-CENTRALIZATION.

How did SolidCoin ever gain traction when a single entity has proven capable of changing the fundamental rules of the currency such that a block reward has been reduced from 32 coins to 0.07 coins ( 1 / 457 th of the original ) within 6 months of its release?

What am I missing here?

[cunicula]

How did SolidCoin ever gain traction when a single entity has proven capable of changing the fundamental rules of the currency such that a block reward has been reduced from 32 coins to 0.07 coins ( 1 / 457 th of the original ) within 6 months of its release?

Why did people ever agree to work in the World Trade Towers when a single entity proved capable of destroying them in a matter of minutes?

[Fuzzy]

How did SolidCoin ever gain traction when a single entity has proven capable of changing the fundamental rules of the currency such that a block reward has been reduced from 32 coins to 0.07 coins ( 1 / 457 th of the original ) within 6 months of its release?

Why did people ever agree to work in the World Trade Towers when a single entity proved capable of destroying them in a matter of minutes?

Because, until we are capable of digitizing our consciousness and uploading ourselves into the cloud, decentralizing a human being is not possible, otherwise, I'm sure they would have. Unless of course, they were completely retarded.

Why are these discussions turning so bat shit crazy? I need to get some sleep...

[veebee]

More SolidCoin monetary policy... nice! Horray for early adopters! Wasn't SolidCoin supposed to NOT award early adopters?

[cunicula]

Why are these discussions turning so bat shit crazy? I need to get some sleep...

Usually because they attract cunicula.  When you wake up check his post history, it will make you want to go back to bed.

Many of my posts make light of the fact that the average forum user is not very intelligent. Naturally, the idiots don't like me too much.

[t3a]

Hey im back after four days.

Wft happened to this thread?

[Starlightbreaker]

Why are these discussions turning so bat shit crazy? I need to get some sleep...

Usually because they attract cunicula.  When you wake up check his post history, it will make you want to go back to bed.

Many of my posts make light of the fact that the average forum user is not very intelligent. Naturally, the idiots don't like me too much.

and i can safely assume you're the average forum user too?

i guess the idiots don't like another idiot.

[tacotime]

Hey im back after four days.

Wft happened to this thread?

Coinhunter shit all over everyone's criticism while the price of SC2 plummeted

[Starlightbreaker]

so i saw on their forums, solidcoin v3 is on the works.

lmao.

who win the bet?

[Syke]

No surprise there. He's eliminating miners by what he calls "thin clients". All transaction processing is being moved to the control nodes. With more fees, of course.

[Ahimoth]

the idea of cross-mining pool is interesting though...but, at 50% the pay of btc PPS, and you have no clue where's the rest going to..

lemme guess, his pocket?

Actually the cross-mining pool was my idea, and I run it. I have a partner who has helped by supplying the servers, and making a frontend for it. RealSolid is not directly involced in the pool at all, here merely is advertizing it. We pay 50% of the current market rate to the miner in a pps method, and once a block is found, we cash it out for SC, subtract from it the pps balances we have already committed to, and pay the remainder out in a proportional method based on the shares submitted during the 24 hours prior to the block find.

We actually don't charge any fees currently, and are hoping to not charge any in the future.

[t3a]

Hey im back after four days.

Wft happened to this thread?

Coinhunter shit all over everyone's criticism while the price of SC2 plummeted

wait, does that mean I can take partial credit for the downfall of a scam-currency?

[Starlightbreaker]

the idea of cross-mining pool is interesting though...but, at 50% the pay of btc PPS, and you have no clue where's the rest going to..

lemme guess, his pocket?

Actually the cross-mining pool was my idea, and I run it. I have a partner who has helped by supplying the servers, and making a frontend for it. RealSolid is not directly involced in the pool at all, here merely is advertizing it. We pay 50% of the current market rate to the miner in a pps method, and once a block is found, we cash it out for SC, subtract from it the pps balances we have already committed to, and pay the remainder out in a proportional method based on the shares submitted during the 24 hours prior to the block find.

We actually don't charge any fees currently, and are hoping to not charge any in the future.

50% is paid to the miners in PPS..the other 50% gets paid in a prop method one way or another?

it's like PPS and prop in the same pool?
wut.

that doesn't make any sense.

[Starlightbreaker]

it's fucking trapezoid indeed.