Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 08:04:56 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: deleted  (Read 13035 times)
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414

Newbie


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 02:39:50 PM
 #81

Real question is, why hasn't the exchange halted trading then if they stand to lose?

They'll lose only if someone transfers LTC to/from exchange's account. Trading inside an exchange is safe.
"Apparently, so I am told, there exist "people" who prefer to wipe sitting down. From the front. Initial research indicates it could be up to half the population." -- benjamindees
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481184296
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481184296

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481184296
Reply with quote  #2

1481184296
Report to moderator
1481184296
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481184296

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481184296
Reply with quote  #2

1481184296
Report to moderator
Smoovious
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504

Scattering my bits around the net since 1980


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 04:27:51 PM
 #82

Real question is, why hasn't the exchange halted trading then if they stand to lose?

They'll lose only if someone transfers LTC to/from exchange's account. Trading inside an exchange is safe.
Well... relatively safe...

Funds deposited into the exchange during the forking period, may become invalid, so the exchange ends up with more LTC trading in the system, than it took in through deposits, post-fork.

Since we're talking a 3-day period that is being attempted, and the fact LTC's value is still so low, they may not think of that as a big enough deal to audit it, and just balance it out themselves with their own funds.

My opinion if I was in their position... .. .

-- Smoov

ps: need a failover? feel free to add my public node, below. I've set the fee to 0% for the time being. There are a few other public LTC p2pools, can be found on the p2pmine list and the P2pool Server List thread.

use your LTC address that you want coins generated to, as your username... password can be anything.

AMD FTW
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 167


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 06:09:00 PM
 #83

I'm surprised why the Admins even let BitcoinEXpress post here. They should ban his account indefinitely. On a side note, there are numerous people that have either invested money via electricity and depreciating hardware costs or people that have purchased Litecoins on the market. Why would you impose any hardship on these people? Any money that people have invested believed that they could have a decent return. You are essentially stealing from them and there families in hopes of what; making your future brighter. At what time does your moral code/compass or ethics tell you what your doing is wrong?

I for one think he's just trying to instill panic. Stand firm Guys
k9quaint
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190



View Profile
July 25, 2012, 06:17:00 PM
 #84

I'm surprised why the Admins even let BitcoinEXpress post here. They should ban his account indefinitely. On a side note, there are numerous people that have either invested money via electricity and depreciating hardware costs or people that have purchased Litecoins on the market. Why would you impose any hardship on these people? Any money that people have invested believed that they could have a decent return. You are essentially stealing from them and there families in hopes of what; making your future brighter. At what time does your moral code/compass or ethics tell you what your doing is wrong?

I for one think he's just trying to instill panic. Stand firm Guys

Just because people are putting money in does not mean it is worthwhile. Lots of people had invested money in Bernie Madoff for instance.
Litecoin stands or falls on its design, not on what people wish it could be.
Would you keep your money in a bank that left it lying on the floor, depending only on internet forum posts to deter thieves from taking it? Of course not.

It looks like the value of Litecoin has outstripped it's hash-rates ability to defend the block chain. The proper response for people who have invested in Litecoin is to engage more hash power to defend their value store or sell their Litecoin to reduce it's value. Either action make it less attractive to attack the block chain.

Bitcoin is backed by the full faith and credit of YouTube comments.
EskimoBob
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 06:26:23 PM
 #85

I'm surprised why the Admins even let BitcoinEXpress post here. They should ban his account indefinitely. On a side note, there are numerous people that have either invested money via electricity and depreciating hardware costs or people that have purchased Litecoins on the market. Why would you impose any hardship on these people? Any money that people have invested believed that they could have a decent return. You are essentially stealing from them and there families in hopes of what; making your future brighter. At what time does your moral code/compass or ethics tell you what your doing is wrong?

I for one think he's just trying to instill panic. Stand firm Guys

+1

...and all those delusional bcx sock puppets, please see a specialist and take your pathetic master with you!


While reading what I wrote, use the most friendliest and relaxing voice in your head.
BTW, Things in BTC bubble universes are getting ugly....
ElectricMucus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540


Drama Junkie


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 06:36:43 PM
 #86

I'm surprised why the Admins even let BitcoinEXpress post here. They should ban his account indefinitely. On a side note, there are numerous people that have either invested money via electricity and depreciating hardware costs or people that have purchased Litecoins on the market. Why would you impose any hardship on these people? Any money that people have invested believed that they could have a decent return. You are essentially stealing from them and there families in hopes of what; making your future brighter. At what time does your moral code/compass or ethics tell you what your doing is wrong?

I for one think he's just trying to instill panic. Stand firm Guys

Just because people are putting money in does not mean it is worthwhile. Lots of people had invested money in Bernie Madoff for instance.
Litecoin stands or falls on its design, not on what people wish it could be.
Would you keep your money in a bank that left it lying on the floor, depending only on internet forum posts to deter thieves from taking it? Of course not.

It looks like the value of Litecoin has outstripped it's hash-rates ability to defend the block chain. The proper response for people who have invested in Litecoin is to engage more hash power to defend their value store or sell their Litecoin to reduce it's value. Either action make it less attractive to attack the block chain.

FYI every the LTC network does 0.238 GH that's x1100 about 260 GH in the Bitcoin world. If you look back what BTC was worth when hashing power was at that value LTC is safer than BTC was back then.
According to this calculation (which may be off because LTC mining performs different on Tesla GPUs which are used for the attack) BTC would only need 53x more funds to be attacked this way, right now.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they keep laughing, then they start choking on their laughter, and then they go and catch their breath. Then they start laughing even more.
koin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 874


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 07:16:25 PM
 #87

BTC would only need 53x more funds to be attacked this way, right now.

using a rough estimate, let's say all hardware for mining bitcoin costs about $10 million today.  so to 51% attack, it would require investment of $10 million (using today's technology, well actually much less as pools can be ddos'd to require a lesser amount of equipment) -- an amount beyond the range a sole actor would likely have access to.  a bigger factor, is that the amount of equipment needed (again, using technology that is readily available today) couldn't be acquired without there being knowledge that this is happening, well in advance.

even if there wasn't the benefit to the attacker where the pools get ddos'd, the hardware for reaching 51% on litecoin could be obtained  with a little over a $100k investment.  that's within the reach of a single individual, and that amount of hardware is readily available.  because litecoin can mined using temporary resources purchased as-needed from the cloud, the actual cost is much, much less.

this doesn't mean bitcoin is invulnerable.  an asic developer willing to piss away the investment could do a 51% attack.   fpgas are available in sufficient quantity
to do a 51% against bitcoin.  the market is saying because there isn't an economic incentive to do so (no chance to profit by double spending after reaching 51%) , the risk of this occurring can be discounted.

this alleged attack against litecoin isn't being done for economic benefit.  the value of all litecoins at the current market exchange rate totals under $50k, $400k so there's not much incentive to do an attack with the intent to double spend.   and it wouldn't be announced in advance if double spending with the intent to defraud was the reason for the attack.

bitcoin got a free pass simply because it was the first.  there is the desire by people that would like to see bitcoin go down, but there's not millions of dollars worth of this desire.  litecoin isn't as fortunate.
BlackBison
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 253



View Profile
July 25, 2012, 07:24:47 PM
 #88

koin you are out by a factor of 10 its about 400k ltc market cap

k9quaint
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190



View Profile
July 25, 2012, 07:26:57 PM
 #89

I'm surprised why the Admins even let BitcoinEXpress post here. They should ban his account indefinitely. On a side note, there are numerous people that have either invested money via electricity and depreciating hardware costs or people that have purchased Litecoins on the market. Why would you impose any hardship on these people? Any money that people have invested believed that they could have a decent return. You are essentially stealing from them and there families in hopes of what; making your future brighter. At what time does your moral code/compass or ethics tell you what your doing is wrong?

I for one think he's just trying to instill panic. Stand firm Guys

Just because people are putting money in does not mean it is worthwhile. Lots of people had invested money in Bernie Madoff for instance.
Litecoin stands or falls on its design, not on what people wish it could be.
Would you keep your money in a bank that left it lying on the floor, depending only on internet forum posts to deter thieves from taking it? Of course not.

It looks like the value of Litecoin has outstripped it's hash-rates ability to defend the block chain. The proper response for people who have invested in Litecoin is to engage more hash power to defend their value store or sell their Litecoin to reduce it's value. Either action make it less attractive to attack the block chain.

FYI every the LTC network does 0.238 GH that's x1100 about 260 GH in the Bitcoin world. If you look back what BTC was worth when hashing power was at that value LTC is safer than BTC was back then.
According to this calculation (which may be off because LTC mining performs different on Tesla GPUs which are used for the attack) BTC would only need 53x more funds to be attacked this way, right now.

You need to look at how many BTC were in existence and multiply that by how much they were each worth and then determine hashes defending per dollar of cryptocurrency. That is the true cumulative worth of the block chain (from an attacker's point of view). Also, BTC had the advantage of being the first. The only people who put any store in it's value were people who believed in it. Now that BTC has paved that road, other cryptocurrencies cannot rely on being under the "hackers radar" when they launch. They either need additional protections to defend against a 51% attack early in their lifecycle, or they need to have very little value to discourage people from attacking the chain until there is enough hash power & resources to defend it.

Your comparison of hash strength of the two chains is also off since it has been shown that GPUs performance on LTC mining is not well bounded.

No matter the outcome, the proponents of Litecoin need to be prepared to spend money to put hashes behind their blockchain. Otherwise, it is vulnerable to bad actors and thus not a proper value store.


Bitcoin is backed by the full faith and credit of YouTube comments.
koin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 874


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 07:27:31 PM
 #90

Read it and weep


http://pool-x.eu/net

if that capacity is working on a fork of the blockchain, shouldn't that capacity have dropped out by now?  the start time on the fork was hours ago.
ElectricMucus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540


Drama Junkie


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 07:33:45 PM
 #91

The estimations in a previous posts for the costs are something like 1200x2.2$/hour which makes this x24x3=190,080$ which corresponds with your post. It is said that BTC will be used to finance it, that's 22k BTC atm, looking at the markets I haven't noticed any sale like that.

As long as this doesn't happen I don't think we ought to take the threat as serious as it is made out to be.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they keep laughing, then they start choking on their laughter, and then they go and catch their breath. Then they start laughing even more.
wndrbr3d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 295


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 07:47:12 PM
 #92

The estimations in a previous posts for the costs are something like 1200x2.2$/hour which makes this x24x3=190,080$ which corresponds with your post. It is said that BTC will be used to finance it, that's 22k BTC atm, looking at the markets I haven't noticed any sale like that.

As long as this doesn't happen I don't think we ought to take the threat as serious as it is made out to be.

^-- this x 1000

this threat is nothing more than paranoia. all he's been able to prove is that he has (or his other script kiddie friends) have access to some bandwidth to throw a couple DoS's.

the amount of fear and misinformation being circulated is staggering.

andervol
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 415


BFL asiс-лохотрон(личное мнение)


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 08:47:35 PM
 #93

Is the BitcoinEXpress woman? Ябывдул!

Smile, be happy!
The Koolio
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560


Minds are like parachutes they work best when open


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2012, 10:31:06 PM
 #94



Blah blah blah...... and I'm gonna fuck a Super Model

Just get it over with already. I am so fucking tired of this threat, that I am about to fucking SHOOT MYSELF....WAS THAT YOUR PLAN ? To get ME to shoot myself ?

I'll tell you what - there's a better chance of THAT, than you taking over Litecoin, now get back to your retarded kid, disability, or whatever it was that Coinhumper dug up on you way back when he DOX'd you, that got under your skin initially, to make you such a Public Forum Douche Nozzle.



The time line has been explained, but check this out.

http://pool-x.eu/net

YOU MUST BE AN UGLY BITCH... YOUR MOMMA MUST BE SHAMED

1. Litecoin 2. Bitcoin 3. Any of the Anon coins
HauntingShade
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 10:47:57 PM
 #95

YOU MUST BE AN UGLY BITCH... YOUR MOMMA MUST BE SHAVED
Shocked Shocked Shocked
illpoet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 341


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 11:52:56 PM
 #96

isn't this the same thing coinhunter was ranting about a few months ago?  iunno i just remember a bunch of FUDand litecoin x links.

Tym's Get Rich Slow scheme: plse send .00001 to
btc: 1DKRaNUnMQkeby6Dk1d8e6fRczSrTEhd8p ltc: LV4Udu7x9aLs28MoMCzsvVGKJbSmrHESnt
thank you.
Simran
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile WWW
July 25, 2012, 11:53:44 PM
 #97

isn't this the same thing coinhunter was ranting about a few months ago?  iunno i just remember a bunch of FUDand litecoin x links.

History repeats itself.....

*Image Removed*
Donate LTC: LRgbgTa3XNQSEUhnwC6Ye2vjiCV2CNRpib
Donate BTC: 1AGP6xPTRvsAVhsRsBX13NUH6p6LJjyeiA
terrytibbs
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560



View Profile
July 26, 2012, 12:23:57 AM
 #98

Just a demonstration for the non believers. Trust me I have 51% down  Wink
Also known as DDOSing the pools in order to make everyone's miners fallback to solo mining so that you can claim a large portion of the newly increased unknown portion of the network? Yeah... no.
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414

Newbie


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 03:36:52 AM
 #99

Ябывдул!

Hahahahahaha
coblee
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


firstbits.com/1ce5j


View Profile WWW
July 26, 2012, 08:01:47 AM
 #100

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=47417.msg1055265#msg1055265

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!