Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 11:35:20 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Should Proof of Stake be implemented in Litecoin?
Yes, ASAP - 29 (27.6%)
No, Never - 31 (29.5%)
Maybe someday - 16 (15.2%)
Just implement PoS as a separate blockchain - 11 (10.5%)
PoS is not a good idea - 18 (17.1%)
Total Voters: 85

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Poll - Should Proof of Stake be implemented in Litecoin?  (Read 4505 times)
MicroCashMike
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


Microcash, it's just better!


View Profile
August 01, 2012, 11:58:18 PM
 #81



Coblee has already answered you. Obviously because you aren't getting the answer you WANT you keep asking for an answer.

Just STFU.

MicroCash has its own forum to wipe your ass on.

This is the alt currency forum, Microcash is a part of it. Coblee has not answered the question of why he didn't tell people that BCEX had PM'd that it was all a hoax very early on. What his reason behind that?

It's a fair question.

Mike

I thought I already answered this question. Here, let me try again.

I normally don't expose someone's private messages without getting permission from them first. And she did not come out and say that it was a hoax and that she wasn't going to do anything. What she said was: "Geez, don't sweat it, I'm not going to hit it hard enough to hurt it." I still don't understand what that means. Was she going to do a 51% attack but not do a double spend so that "it's not hard enough to hurt it." I sent her a few PMs to ask for clarification, but she did not respond to them. So I had to assume the threat was real, and the PM was just BCX trying to manipulate me. Or maybe she was smart enough to give herself a way out if the attack fails. Who knows. And at that point in time, some of the Litecoin pools were getting DDoS'd. So if it wasn't BCX, someone else might be launching a 51% attack.

So I had to act assuming the threat was real. And that's why I started a channel on IRC to discuss possible ways to defend this attack. And also why I checkpointed the block in the middle of the attack. I spent a lot of time trying to defend against this attack. I definitely did not collude with BCX. I've asked BCX to meet in person so that I can know once and for all who he/she is, but so far she has not responded to that PM. I have a feeling she won't.

I hope I have answered your questions.

Fair enough for the time being.

I still think you should have warned the community and prevented a panic sell, then mounted your defense against a 51% attack. So in effect are you supporting the contention this was designed to protect Litecoin in some sort of twisted BCEX way?

Mike
1513035320
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513035320

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513035320
Reply with quote  #2

1513035320
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513035320
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513035320

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513035320
Reply with quote  #2

1513035320
Report to moderator
coblee
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Creator of Litecoin. Director of Eng at Coinbase.


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 12:07:52 AM
 #82



Coblee has already answered you. Obviously because you aren't getting the answer you WANT you keep asking for an answer.

Just STFU.

MicroCash has its own forum to wipe your ass on.

This is the alt currency forum, Microcash is a part of it. Coblee has not answered the question of why he didn't tell people that BCEX had PM'd that it was all a hoax very early on. What his reason behind that?

It's a fair question.

Mike

I thought I already answered this question. Here, let me try again.

I normally don't expose someone's private messages without getting permission from them first. And she did not come out and say that it was a hoax and that she wasn't going to do anything. What she said was: "Geez, don't sweat it, I'm not going to hit it hard enough to hurt it." I still don't understand what that means. Was she going to do a 51% attack but not do a double spend so that "it's not hard enough to hurt it." I sent her a few PMs to ask for clarification, but she did not respond to them. So I had to assume the threat was real, and the PM was just BCX trying to manipulate me. Or maybe she was smart enough to give herself a way out if the attack fails. Who knows. And at that point in time, some of the Litecoin pools were getting DDoS'd. So if it wasn't BCX, someone else might be launching a 51% attack.

So I had to act assuming the threat was real. And that's why I started a channel on IRC to discuss possible ways to defend this attack. And also why I checkpointed the block in the middle of the attack. I spent a lot of time trying to defend against this attack. I definitely did not collude with BCX. I've asked BCX to meet in person so that I can know once and for all who he/she is, but so far she has not responded to that PM. I have a feeling she won't.

I hope I have answered your questions.

Fair enough for the time being.

I still think you should have warned the community and prevented a panic sell, then mounted your defense against a 51% attack. So in effect are you supporting the contention this was designed to protect Litecoin in some sort of twisted BCEX way?

Mike

I guess that's why they say hindsight is 20/20. If you ask me now, I would tell you yeah I should have just told everyone it was a hoax. Not sure if it would have prevented a panic though. Since BCX would just come out and say that the PM was a lie and that I fell for it.

There's also a small possibility that BCX sent me that PM to give herself a way out. Think about it. If you (if you were BCX) knew that you might not be able to actually get enough hashrate to successfully attack Litecoin, the smartest thing to do is to PM me and tell me that it was a bluff beforehand. If the attack fails, then you can claim that it was all a hoax and that I knew about it all along.


MicroCashMike
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


Microcash, it's just better!


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 12:26:15 AM
 #83



I guess that's why they say hindsight is 20/20. If you ask me now, I would tell you yeah I should have just told everyone it was a hoax. Not sure if it would have prevented a panic though. Since BCX would just come out and say that the PM was a lie and that I fell for it.

There's also a small possibility that BCX sent me that PM to give herself a way out. Think about it. If you (if you were BCX) knew that you might not be able to actually get enough hashrate to successfully attack Litecoin, the smartest thing to do is to PM me and tell me that it was a bluff beforehand. If the attack fails, then you can claim that it was all a hoax and that I knew about it all along.



Thank you for a credible answer and finally owning up that you made a mistake by not telling people.

I accept that answer as I am sure a lot people in the LTC community will.

Topic is closed in my books.



Mike
Ja¥1337
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27



View Profile
August 02, 2012, 01:33:44 AM
 #84

Quote
I guess that's why they say hindsight is 20/20. If you ask me now, I would tell you yeah I should have just told everyone it was a hoax. Not sure if it would have prevented a panic though. Since BCX would just come out and say that the PM was a lie and that I fell for it.

There's also a small possibility that BCX sent me that PM to give herself a way out. Think about it. If you (if you were BCX) knew that you might not be able to actually get enough hashrate to successfully attack Litecoin, the smartest thing to do is to PM me and tell me that it was a bluff beforehand. If the attack fails, then you can claim that it was all a hoax and that I knew about it all along.


Makes total sense to me!

Seems to me that BCX is a very egotistical person, a person that would not take something like losing lightly.. So in this way BCX would cover herself at both ends..  An attempt to make sure she would win.. Basically a backup plan...

And now another backup plan must be in the works because of that very reason stated above^^ Wink

So lets keep on our toes.. Wink
NASDAQEnema
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 02:58:24 AM
 #85





If you feel Universe has trolled you exclusively, please donate to Emergency Butthurt Support Fund:
1Jv4wa1w4Le4Ku9MZRxcobnDFzAUF9aotH
Proceeds go to Emergency Butthurt Escape Pod none of you will be allowed to use. If you have read this far, you must pay Emergency Butthurt Internet Tax.
forzendiablo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


the grandpa of cryptos


View Profile
March 04, 2014, 03:49:06 AM
 #86

add PoS guys!

yolo
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]  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!