GAW / Josh Garza discussion Paycoin XPY xpy.io ION ionomy. ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :)

[ab8989]

They might do a hard fork to add fee collection, but why would they bother? They're swimming in paycoins from the hyper-inflationary stakers.

Let me quote myself from when this same discussion happened earlier.

There is no question about need. Of cource there is none. However it tells something about the nature of people if they even in a case of absolutely no need at all, their nature does not allow them to do the honorable and right thing.

When the traditional way to destroy coins has always been sending them to an random address it is very interesting that they had some need to do something else. The only reason I think it has been done this way with the fees is that their nature is such that they are physically incapable of doing anything right. They always have a need to throw some curveball and fuck up everything in the process. This 'destruction' smells like scammers curveball to satisfy their inner need to feel clever about their scamming. No other purpose.

The other missing features? The features that are missing are never going to happen. The white paper is no longer relevant, not that it had any ideas that were both good and original in the first place.

This whole discussion was based on the premise that 'if paycoin ever takes off' and in that case there is a need to implement a lot of new features. Let us entertain ourselves just for a sake of technical discussion.

Of cource paycoin does not ever take off anywhere else than a long walk off a short pier, but in that case any discussion is totally moot. In that case the coins were destroyed already in GAWs address. So why bother with anything.

[DARKANGEL6415]

This Joshra Ganza bloke sounds real dodgy, imagine moving his "company" over seas or off shore - yeah right, that is where Homero is fleeing too.

If all that you lot say were true , he wouldn't have anywhere to hide now would he?

Why? There are several dozen countries that don't have an extradition treaty with the US.

yeah but those countries are normally places that are below our king homero's standard of living so he will not go there, well i dont think he would he seems like to much of a pretty boy to survive in those countries lol 

[bitpop]

This Joshra Ganza bloke sounds real dodgy, imagine moving his "company" over seas or off shore - yeah right, that is where Homero is fleeing too.

If all that you lot say were true , he wouldn't have anywhere to hide now would he?

Why? There are several dozen countries that don't have an extradition treaty with the US.

yeah but those countries are normally places that are below our king homero's standard of living so he will not go there, well i dont think he would he seems like to much of a pretty boy to survive in those countries lol 

That's hashking ganza to you!

[gawneedstobestopped]

 he seems like to much of a pretty boy to survive in those countries lol 

Have you even seen a picture of Homero....?

lol 

[strangerdanger101]

All this story needs is a murder and drugs and someone can start writing a book.

[kken01]

who is this IngCr3at1on thats doing some menial changes to paycoin source lately

Code:

- if (Checkpoints::IsSyncCheckpointTooOld(60 * 60 * 24 * 30) && !fTestNet)
- {
- nPriority = 100;
- strStatusBar = "WARNING: Checkpoint is too old. Wait for block chain to download, or notify developers of the issue.";
- }
-

got removed. i guess some ppl will be happy  

+paycoin (0.1.2.26) stable; urgency=low
+
+ * Bring package version number inline with application
+
+ -- Nathan Bass (IngCr3at1on) <nathan@btc.com> Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:48:31 -0600
+

interesting email he has

[gawneedstobestopped]

This just in....

Garza plans to bring Paycoin back to life with Paycoin 2.0 .... He's going to base it in Dubai with a business partner by the name of Rishab Jain.




Oh and based on these text messages between Josh Garza and Carlos Garza, Josh has some clever plans for Ponzi 2.0!

http://pastebin.com/GmUCCmkp

TL;DR

I am going to launch hashbase. Which is basically
 
Zencloud on steroids. But base it in Dubai. Imagine having your old sales
 
back

So apparently, Josh is wooing his brother Carlos with all the millions he could make by helping him relaunch Hashbase in Dubai... I guess Rishab Jain probably has something to do with it as well.

WE MUST PUT A STOP TO THIS INTERNATIONAL SCAM!!!!

Carlos apparently thought it was a good idea to get wasted drunk in Miami and leave his phone and iPad floating around with strangers Can't wait to see the rest of this story unfold.

is this real?

This entire thread exists to out the scam that is Josh Garza... The irony is that when actual leaked evidence hits this forum, it gets overlooked or scrutinized... However, sillier and unsubstantiated claims are exchanged constantly.

I am trying to feed you guys what's been given to me from internal sources. If you doubt the authenticity of it, by all means ignore it... Feel free to copy and paste this post to reference back to in a couple months when it all goes public anyway

There's a "rishab" that I posted about a few hundred pages back that has a twitter account that posts nothing but GAW related Homero-dick-sucking. My suspicion was that it was just one of Josh's paid shills. But maybe this person actually exists. IIRC, the person's avatar was a Ferrari, so I figured it may also just be Josh with a fake account. I will go find that account.

Feel free to ask him yourself I encourage EVERYONE to ask Rishab how much he plans to help GAW continue scamming the community.

rishabh@livingstones.in

[bananafana]

Coins only exist at addresses. A transaction takes coins from one address, and sends them to another. If you think these coins still exist, what address do you think they're at?

These were taken from various addresses, and sent nowhere. They aren't in the addresses they came from -- you can check that, the blockchain doesn't lie. They weren't sent to any new address. It's impossible for a new transaction to send them somewhere new, because they don't exist at any address anywhere in the blockchain.

Nothing is impossible. Any new version of paycoin core SW can be programmed to go through blockchain searching for all fees that were ever sent and interpret them belonging to a hardcoded wallet address that represents orion controllers. Imagine this as that the output address is just given later in the paycoin core SW rather than as programmed into the blockchain at the time when the fees were sent in a transaction. Same thing happens, just later.

(1) The coins don't exist at any address. You can't create a transaction that sends them anywhere, because they don't exist at any address that could be an input to the transaction. Anyone who thinks these coins still exist somewhere in the blockchain, go find them in the blockchain and post the address where they can currently be found. But you can't -- they don't exist at any address. Which in blockchain terms means, they don't exist at all.

(2) Nothing is impossible with a hard fork. They could do a hard fork and create special stakers that receive any number of coins they want to create, but those are *new coins*. They could add up the lost fees and create that many *new* coins. They could just as easily create a billion *new* coins.

The second point there is a very real problem, given the degree of centralization. They could do a hard fork any time they wanted (except for the fact that they have no devs left who could actually do the work). But it has nothing to do with the fees.

If paycoin ever takes off there is going to be a need to implement the fee system and the hard fork for it is going to happen. There is no question about that and the centralization guarantees the hard fork will go through. There are going to be a lot of other hard forks as well in addition to this to implement all the other missing features.

The other missing features? The features that are missing are never going to happen. The white paper is no longer relevant, not that it had any ideas that were both good and original in the first place.

They might do a hard fork to add fee collection, but why would they bother? They're swimming in paycoins from the hyper-inflationary stakers.

The fact that they are currently not in any address is totally immaterial. Pretty soon they are back in circulation in orion controllers wallet address like all other fees as well.

The fact that they are currently not in any address = they don't exist. That's relevant. They can't come back into circulation because there's no address for them to come *from*. Whether they destroy them by actually destroying them, so they no longer exist in the blockchain, or do it by making them inaccessible in an address with no private key, they could always come along later and crate the same number of *new* coins in an orion controller or whatever. Or a billion new coins or any number they want. It's a separate issue.

Apparently, you have hard time understanding amazing posts by ab8989
In their Whitepaper one of the features are fees and sooner or later (if Paycoin is to have widespread use) they will have to implement the fees, which in turn will resurface the problem of recently "destroyed" coins.
The coins are not destroyed, they are sitting in the parameter nFees which currently are not awarded to anyone. However, this probably isn't good long-term solution.
Creating new coins in a hard fork is by no means the same as reinstating nFees, which should be an integral part of any coin and was planned to be part of PayCoin.

Sorry but no. The parameter nFees is a variable used by the wallet code in fee calculations. Once a block is generated what was in the variable nFees on whatever computer was running the wallet isn't relevant. It doesn't exist any more. All that exists is what gets confirmed on the blockchain. If the coins don't exist in the blockchain -- and the destroyed coins in this case do not exist in the blockchain, which you can verify yourself -- then they don't exist. That's how blockchains work.

[ncsupanda]

Coins only exist at addresses. A transaction takes coins from one address, and sends them to another. If you think these coins still exist, what address do you think they're at?

These were taken from various addresses, and sent nowhere. They aren't in the addresses they came from -- you can check that, the blockchain doesn't lie. They weren't sent to any new address. It's impossible for a new transaction to send them somewhere new, because they don't exist at any address anywhere in the blockchain.

Nothing is impossible. Any new version of paycoin core SW can be programmed to go through blockchain searching for all fees that were ever sent and interpret them belonging to a hardcoded wallet address that represents orion controllers. Imagine this as that the output address is just given later in the paycoin core SW rather than as programmed into the blockchain at the time when the fees were sent in a transaction. Same thing happens, just later.

(1) The coins don't exist at any address. You can't create a transaction that sends them anywhere, because they don't exist at any address that could be an input to the transaction. Anyone who thinks these coins still exist somewhere in the blockchain, go find them in the blockchain and post the address where they can currently be found. But you can't -- they don't exist at any address. Which in blockchain terms means, they don't exist at all.

(2) Nothing is impossible with a hard fork. They could do a hard fork and create special stakers that receive any number of coins they want to create, but those are *new coins*. They could add up the lost fees and create that many *new* coins. They could just as easily create a billion *new* coins.

The second point there is a very real problem, given the degree of centralization. They could do a hard fork any time they wanted (except for the fact that they have no devs left who could actually do the work). But it has nothing to do with the fees.

If paycoin ever takes off there is going to be a need to implement the fee system and the hard fork for it is going to happen. There is no question about that and the centralization guarantees the hard fork will go through. There are going to be a lot of other hard forks as well in addition to this to implement all the other missing features.

The other missing features? The features that are missing are never going to happen. The white paper is no longer relevant, not that it had any ideas that were both good and original in the first place.

They might do a hard fork to add fee collection, but why would they bother? They're swimming in paycoins from the hyper-inflationary stakers.

The fact that they are currently not in any address is totally immaterial. Pretty soon they are back in circulation in orion controllers wallet address like all other fees as well.

The fact that they are currently not in any address = they don't exist. That's relevant. They can't come back into circulation because there's no address for them to come *from*. Whether they destroy them by actually destroying them, so they no longer exist in the blockchain, or do it by making them inaccessible in an address with no private key, they could always come along later and crate the same number of *new* coins in an orion controller or whatever. Or a billion new coins or any number they want. It's a separate issue.

Apparently, you have hard time understanding amazing posts by ab8989
In their Whitepaper one of the features are fees and sooner or later (if Paycoin is to have widespread use) they will have to implement the fees, which in turn will resurface the problem of recently "destroyed" coins.
The coins are not destroyed, they are sitting in the parameter nFees which currently are not awarded to anyone. However, this probably isn't good long-term solution.
Creating new coins in a hard fork is by no means the same as reinstating nFees, which should be an integral part of any coin and was planned to be part of PayCoin.

Sorry but no. The parameter nFees is a variable used by the wallet code in fee calculations. Once a block is generated what was in the variable nFees on whatever computer was running the wallet isn't relevant. It doesn't exist any more. All that exists is what gets confirmed on the blockchain. If the coins don't exist in the blockchain -- and the destroyed coins in this case do not exist in the blockchain, which you can verify yourself -- then they don't exist. That's how blockchains work.

If the coins are included as nFees inside transactions that get stuck in the mempool and ignored until a certain point, can't this allow them to be picked up later?

http://mempool.info/

Look at coins/fees that have been sitting around for a long time.

[bananafana]

If the coins are included as nFees inside transactions that get stuck in the mempool and ignored until a certain point, can't this allow them to be picked up later?

http://mempool.info/

Look at coins/fees that have been sitting around for a long time.

"These transactions are unconfirmed and should not be trusted until they have been included in a block."

Totally different thing. The transaction that destroyed the coins is a confirmed transaction.

[bananafana]

When the traditional way to destroy coins has always been sending them to an random address it is very interesting that they had some need to do something else. The only reason I think it has been done this way with the fees is that their nature is such that they are physically incapable of doing anything right.

If they sent them to an address with no private key, people who don't understand cryptography would accuse them of secretly knowing the private key. Of course, then the coins would be sitting at an (inaccessible) address so people who were suspicious could watch them and check that they don't move, which of course would never happen because there really is no private key.

The way they burned them makes it even more clear, because the coins literally do not exist anywhere on the blockchain any more, and if they don't exist on the blockchain they don't exist, period. But then people who don't understand blockchains accuse them of being able to recover the coins somehow later, even though that's impossible. Peercoin burns transaction fees, and paycoin is a peercoin clone + hyper-inflation.

They created the PR problem by (1) doing the "testing" on the live network, (2) waiting two months to respond, (3) moving the coins and mingling them with other coins, (4) promising not delivering an analysis of how many coins needed to be destroyed, (5) ignoring the fact that a much larger number of coins need to be destroyed from the hyper-inflationary stakers, and (6) having a history of shady behavior so that every non-transparent thing they do just raises more questions. I'm being generous in that list, because it seems more likely that JG, not understanding blockchains, thought that if he just waited a couple of months people would forget about those "test" coins and he could sell them to try to pay the bills.

But my original point is that the coins are verifiably destroyed. They don't exist anywhere on the blockchain, and because of how blockchains work there is no way to recover them.

[ncsupanda]

If the coins are included as nFees inside transactions that get stuck in the mempool and ignored until a certain point, can't this allow them to be picked up later?

http://mempool.info/

Look at coins/fees that have been sitting around for a long time.

"These transactions are unconfirmed and should not be trusted until they have been included in a block."

Totally different thing. The transaction that destroyed the coins is a confirmed transaction.

Ah, didn't see the transaction.

Still don't believe the coins are fully gone.

[Fargo]

Looks like the leaked email made it to ht https://hashtalk.org/topic/31794/gaw-relocating-outside-the-us/18

[Fargo]

This just in....

Garza plans to bring Paycoin back to life with Paycoin 2.0 .... He's going to base it in Dubai with a business partner by the name of Rishab Jain.




Oh and based on these text messages between Josh Garza and Carlos Garza, Josh has some clever plans for Ponzi 2.0!

http://pastebin.com/GmUCCmkp

TL;DR

I am going to launch hashbase. Which is basically
 
Zencloud on steroids. But base it in Dubai. Imagine having your old sales
 
back

So apparently, Josh is wooing his brother Carlos with all the millions he could make by helping him relaunch Hashbase in Dubai... I guess Rishab Jain probably has something to do with it as well.

WE MUST PUT A STOP TO THIS INTERNATIONAL SCAM!!!!

Carlos apparently thought it was a good idea to get wasted drunk in Miami and leave his phone and iPad floating around with strangers Can't wait to see the rest of this story unfold.

is this real?

This entire thread exists to out the scam that is Josh Garza... The irony is that when actual leaked evidence hits this forum, it gets overlooked or scrutinized... However, sillier and unsubstantiated claims are exchanged constantly.

I am trying to feed you guys what's been given to me from internal sources. If you doubt the authenticity of it, by all means ignore it... Feel free to copy and paste this post to reference back to in a couple months when it all goes public anyway

There's a "rishab" that I posted about a few hundred pages back that has a twitter account that posts nothing but GAW related Homero-dick-sucking. My suspicion was that it was just one of Josh's paid shills. But maybe this person actually exists. IIRC, the person's avatar was a Ferrari, so I figured it may also just be Josh with a fake account. I will go find that account.

Feel free to ask him yourself I encourage EVERYONE to ask Rishab how much he plans to help GAW continue scamming the community.

rishabh@livingstones.in

Re: this text from the pastebin file below, do we know who "DK" and "Alan" are?

> DK is going around asking people where your at. He just asked Alan and he
 
> said Belgium, which DK responded What the hell is he doing there?

______________________
Oh and based on these text messages between Josh Garza and Carlos Garza, Josh has some clever plans for Ponzi 2.0!

http://pastebin.com/GmUCCmkp

https://www.linkedin.com/in/danielkelley1

[jimmothy]

Looks like the leaked email made it to ht https://hashtalk.org/topic/31794/gaw-relocating-outside-the-us/18

I'm honestly amazed there are people who think Josh/GAW fleeing to a 2nd world country as a good thing. He's basically admitting he's guilty of some sort of financial crimes.

It's like they think you can just change the location of your business on some registration papers and the feds will drop the case and leave them all alone. Truly only the sharpest tools in the shed left over there.

[Fargo]

Well, I can confirm this "Rishab Jain" guy seems to exist, or at least someone is responding to emails sent to his address. Here is what he just sent me:

Interesting. Did you send a death threat? haha

[NewJerseyJess]

I'm confused as to why they are happy about josh moving to Dubai and starting a new coin? https://hashtalk.org/topic/31806/paycoin-2-0/2

[gawneedstobestopped]

Well, I can confirm this "Rishab Jain" guy seems to exist, or at least someone is responding to emails sent to his address. Here is what he just sent me:

Just a customer... eh? Do all customers get insider trading tips then?

The big news is we will be honoring the $20 per coin. We have a way to now
 
do it. It's about to be announced

http://pastebin.com/QsNnQwmp

By the way, the emails are DKIM signed Enjoy.

[gawneedstobestopped]

Oh and remember the "leaked" emails that made it onto that story that was crafted to make Josh out to look like some sort of hero?

http://coinbrief.net/gaw-miners-sec-investigation/#Legal-Issues-and-Honors-Program

I have a feeling I know who helped "leak" those emails....

From: Josh
To: Rishab
Subject: between us...

read this
 
https://hashtalk.org/topic/30794/honors-delay-information/2
 
 
 
I attached an email. Just to show you how much I disagreed with the board.

Funny that the exact email Josh sent to Rishab made it onto the article above within 12 hours...

http://pastebin.com/gHTUzAmX

Attachment of the email above -> https://i.imgur.com/DXwhYgL.png

[cryptofunk]

Well, I can confirm this "Rishab Jain" guy seems to exist, or at least someone is responding to emails sent to his address. Here is what he just sent me:

Just a customer... eh? Do all customers get insider trading tips then?

The big news is we will be honoring the $20 per coin. We have a way to now
 
do it. It's about to be announced

http://pastebin.com/QsNnQwmp

By the way, the emails are DKIM signed Enjoy.

How does one goes about to verify a DKIM signed email?