This message was too old and has been purged

[celestio]

snip

The Monero insiders had nothing to do with the crippled miner, it came from bytecoin and it was Monero who fixed it, but more to the point it didn't affect the supply at all. Unless you were around during the first month or two it doesn't affect you in the slightest. Someone was going to mine those coins in a few months (roughly 5% percent of the total supply, just as planned) after all.

snip

OOH so monero had an unfair launch...  miners with the optimized miner got a ton more coins than miners with the shitty one?  hmmm so someone had an advantage and some one had a disadvantage.... Sounds unfair to me.  Oh, where did all those coins go?

I bought them so its fairly distributed

kuriso is known xmr hater on polo trollbox, stealthcoin is a known xmr hater on this forum and the rest defending this scam are letting their bags talk.

please make it more obvious.

If you look closely you will notice that i don't like Darkcoin either.. but its not about that which matters is Bitcoiners are playing dirty tricks again.

fair enough, market manipulation will always exist, one thing we should not tolerate is emission manipulation.

"one thing we should not tolerate is emission manipulation" True, deliberate emission manipulation is a problem.  Dark launched and had an issue.  They fixed it.  What has to be determined is if that issue was deliberate or a mistake.  No code is ever perfect.  There will always be issues and fixes for those issues.  Was it deliberate?  I honestly don't think so but who am I?  I'm just a monero 'hater' lol (trolling the above label as a xmr hater). 

On the other hand, we know for a fact that monero was launched with a deliberately reduced miner for the general public and an optimized miner for the devs.  The original devs cashed out their huge profits and left the community holding bags.  Luckily a team stepped up to take it over.

Prove DRK's error was a deliberate mistake aimed at ripping off the community and you'll have a case.

Ask yourself, why would a developer purposely release a coin with no future goals or intentions at the time, with 500 coins per block, on a linux only release, then drastically cut the block reward several times over after a few hours have passed, leaving over 2million coins mined by a few individuals in the span of a few hours? The instamine was intended. There is literally no other explanation.

[G2M]

Soooooo..

No proof.

Just FUD, and magic python deanonymizer.

Now just boring rehash of the last year.

To the grey list you go!

[smooth]

There was no premise at all, and no lying about it. WTF, I have no idea where you got that from?

I thought monero was premined, i get all the shitcoins confused. Seems like i saw it was like 2+% premined. Maybe it was another anon shitcoin but pretty sure it was monero. I'll find it.

"Pretty sure" = "dead wrong" in this case.

[smooth]

On the other hand, we know for a fact that monero was launched with a deliberately reduced miner for the general public and an optimized miner for the devs.  The original devs cashed out their huge profits and left the community holding bags.  Luckily a team stepped up to take it over.

There was no "huge profit" for the original devs even. They might have made a little but if you take the total coins mined, subtract those mined by dga, and subtract those mined by people using the public miner (who still did quite well on it), there isn't a whole lot left.

I'm pretty sure the original devs did not expect the community to shove them out and fix the miner within a couple of months the way it played out and were caught unprepared. They likely wanted to use their optimized miner in secret for a long time, or perhaps more likely the whole "bitmonero" project (as with quazarcoin, fantomcoin, etc. etc.) was just a sham to crowd out clones and prop up their real scam, bytecoin (which did have an 82% premine). In fact they intended to merge mine bitmonero with bytecoin.

Still off topic though. Nice job obfuscating DRK's problems by rehashing early cryptonote history guys.

[g4q34g4qg47ww]

I think it is interesting to contrast of how Evan addressed the stated issue in this thread, which is about the coin he works on afterall, asked that the guy continue his work and contact him if he actually has any meaningful results.

By way of contrast, the XMR devs are distracted all day in a thread that is not even about their coin, sqauking like a bunch of jelly-jerkoffs.

I bought quite a pile of monero when its trading symbol was still MRO, was not on poloniex yet, and this was the only exchange: https://cryptonote.exchange.to/

I sold at quite a profit about 2 weeks after it hit poloniex and never bought more.

I noticed that its price was back to its pre-poloniex days recently and was considering buying back in. I stopped by the thread and noticed smooth was handling some FUD that day, was being patient with trolls and basically trying to keep the ship sailing, was pretty impressed at the time and remained open to buying back in, but don't like the emmission curve or liklihood of any significant adoption for years. Fluffypony always comes off bad but tacotime is usually alright and i had a decent impression of smooth.

But, you guys are ridiculous! Totally unprofessional and you wear your jealousy on your face! Get to work on your coin! Why are you still here???

[smooth]

Im going to be launching DarkMonero soon, its a clean relaunch of Monero because I feel that Monero's launch wasnt fair and that its inflation is hurting investors, if Monero is going to thrive I feel as though it needs to be relaunched cleanly to ensure investors are not putting their investment at risk.

Sure go ahead, I don't discourage this at all. It was tried with Quazarcoin and that seems to have died, but it may not have been a sincere effort in the first place.

In reality I talk to a lot of people who are considering getting involved with Monero and a few who are evaluating both Monero and DRK, and in practice there is a lot more concern about the DRK instamine, etc. then about some miners who got a portion of the first few percent of coins on the cheap. But if you think this is a big deal and hurts the coin today, go for it!

[smooth]

I noticed that its price was back to its pre-poloniex days recently and was considering buying back in. I stopped by the thread and noticed smooth was handling some FUD that day, was being patient with trolls and basically trying to keep the ship sailing, was pretty impressed at the time and remained open to buying back in, but don't like the emmission curve or liklihood of any significant adoption for years. Fluffypony always comes off bad but tacotime is usually alright and i had a decent impression of smooth.

But, you guys are ridiculous! Totally unprofessional and you wear your jealousy on your face! Get to work on your coin! Why are you still here???

Look, criticism goes both ways and we get more than our fair share of it.

When I post on these things I do so as a long-term cryptocurrency enthusiast whose interests go beyond just Monero.

Also, we actively discourage the cultish sort of dev worship that drives a lot of other coins. Whether you like or dislike the Monero devs is not why we want you to support the coin. Evaluate the technology, the work being done, the economics, etc. If you dislike the emission curve (at least for now), for example, then you probably shouldn't buy, regardless of how much you might like, say, tacotime or perhaps (sometimes?) me. Let the substance speak for itself and leave personalities out of it. Cryptocurrency is not your favorite sports team or singer.

[Kuriso]

So monero had a optimized miner out while roughly 5% of the supply was mined.  Who really knows for sure how much monero was mined with these miners and if any of it is still held.  You believe the words of a scammer and a crook?  Did they end up with more than 2%?   DRK's so called instamine was like 2% i think based on some of the claims I seen.

Monero's community has had many talks about changing the emission.  Unofficial votes have been for it but the devs have been against it (not sure if there were official votes).  They want to sit back on their high horse and be able to say they never messed with their emissions even though they know it needs to be changed.  I believe that some of the monero whales have let the markets plummet in an attempt to build support for the change.  Now they look down on DRK for fixing its issues and think its honorable to do nothing to fix theirs.

Ok, you guys have fun.  I'm done stirring the pot for now.  I'm going out.

[g4q34g4qg47ww]

I think it is interesting to contrast of how Evan addressed the stated issue in this thread, which is about the coin he works on afterall, asked that the guy continue his work and contact him if he actually has any meaningful results.

By way of contrast, the XMR devs are distracted all day in a thread that is not even about their coin, sqauking like a bunch of jelly-jerkoffs.

I bought quite a pile of monero when its trading symbol was still MRO, was not on poloniex yet, and this was the only exchange: https://cryptonote.exchange.to/

I sold at quite a profit about 2 weeks after it hit poloniex and never bought more.

I noticed that its price was back to its pre-poloniex days recently and was considering buying back in. I stopped by the thread and noticed smooth was handling some FUD that day, was being patient with trolls and basically trying to keep the ship sailing, was pretty impressed at the time and remained open to buying back in, but don't like the emmission curve or liklihood of any significant adoption for years. Fluffypony always comes off bad but tacotime is usually alright and i had a decent impression of smooth.

But, you guys are ridiculous! Totally unprofessional and you wear your jealousy on your face! Get to work on your coin! Why are you still here???

Look, criticism goes both ways and we get more than our fair share of it.

When I post on these things I do so as a long-term cryptocurrency enthusiast whose interests go beyond just Monero.

Also, we actively discourage the cultish sort of dev worship that drives a lot of other coins. Whether you like or dislike the Monero devs is not why we want you to support the coin. Evaluate the technology, the work being done, the economics, etc. If you dislike the emission curve (at least for now), for example, then you probably shouldn't buy, regardless of how much you might like, say, tacotime or perhaps (sometimes?) me. Let the substance speak for itself and leave personalities out of it. Cryptocurrency is not your favorite sports team or singer.

I submit that the developement team of a coin is quite an important factor to consider when deciding whether to make an investment.

I am fully aware of your tech, which is why i bought in the past and had considered buying again. I don't think it makes economic sense for anyone to purchase monero at this time because of the reasons i stated, emission curve and no hope of adoption. In addition to those reasons, I now have quite a negative opinion of the dev team and their ability to control themselves. Kudos

[smooth]

I submit that the developement team of a coin is quite an important factor to consider when deciding whether to make an investment.

Interestingly, our development team includes seven core team members and several other developers and important contributors.

There have been many individuals that have contributed to Monero code; a complete list of which can be found on our Github Contributors page.

Some that have made outstanding contributions include: Thomas Winget, mikezackles, oranjuice, warptangent, rfree, moneromooo, jakoblind, and tomerkon.

So you probably shouldn't judge a team or the work on the basis of your opinion of some of our posts. In fact if you are basing your opinion of the team on the relative few of us who do post on bitcointalk at all you are probably getting a very misleading perception (for better or worse) since most do not.

But as I said you should make up your own mind about which coin(s) to support if any. I can't say that your own criteria are incorrect.

[illodin]

Sure there might be other problems, but not that one.

What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch?

Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them.

That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market.

So the concrete and actual problem is FUD. Agreed pretty much.

[nsimmons]

I submit that the developement team of a coin is quite an important factor to consider when deciding whether to make an investment.

Interestingly, our development team includes seven core team members and several other developers and important contributors.

There have been many individuals that have contributed to Monero code; a complete list of which can be found on our Github Contributors page.

Some that have made outstanding contributions include: Thomas Winget, mikezackles, oranjuice, warptangent, rfree, moneromooo, jakoblind, and tomerkon.

So you probably shouldn't judge a team or the work on the basis of your opinion of some of our posts. In fact if you are basing your opinion of the team on the relative few of us who do post on bitcointalk at all you are probably getting a very misleading perception (for better or worse) since most do not.

But as I said you should make up your own mind about which coin(s) to support if any. I can't say that your own criteria are incorrect.

Shouldn't you turds be building a release that doesn't brick my laptop every time i try to open it? You spend a lot of time bitching and not working.

[smooth]

I submit that the developement team of a coin is quite an important factor to consider when deciding whether to make an investment.

Interestingly, our development team includes seven core team members and several other developers and important contributors.

There have been many individuals that have contributed to Monero code; a complete list of which can be found on our Github Contributors page.

Some that have made outstanding contributions include: Thomas Winget, mikezackles, oranjuice, warptangent, rfree, moneromooo, jakoblind, and tomerkon.

So you probably shouldn't judge a team or the work on the basis of your opinion of some of our posts. In fact if you are basing your opinion of the team on the relative few of us who do post on bitcointalk at all you are probably getting a very misleading perception (for better or worse) since most do not.

But as I said you should make up your own mind about which coin(s) to support if any. I can't say that your own criteria are incorrect.

Shouldn't you turds be building a release that doesn't brick my laptop every time i try to open it? You spend a lot of time bitching and not working.

Please post a link where you have reported this "bricking" issue because I'm not familiar with it.

[smooth]

Sure there might be other problems, but not that one.

What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch?

Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them.

That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market.

So the concrete and actual problem is FUD. Agreed pretty much.

FUD is a problem yes, but in this case it is the symptom and not the cause. The cause can only be addressed by moving to a different coin that wasn't instamined. It will forever be the case that people researching dark will hit google and find

this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.0
or this: http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin

You can't put humpty dumpty back together, sorry.

[celestio]

So monero had a optimized miner out while roughly 5% of the supply was mined.  Who really knows for sure how much monero was mined with these miners and if any of it is still held.  You believe the words of a scammer and a crook?  Did they end up with more than 2%?   DRK's so called instamine was like 2% i think based on some of the claims I seen.

Monero's community has had many talks about changing the emission.  Unofficial votes have been for it but the devs have been against it (not sure if there were official votes).  They want to sit back on their high horse and be able to say they never messed with their emissions even though they know it needs to be changed.  I believe that some of the monero whales have let the markets plummet in an attempt to build support for the change.  Now they look down on DRK for fixing its issues and think its honorable to do nothing to fix theirs.

Ok, you guys have fun.  I'm done stirring the pot for now.  I'm going out.

Dgar, the guy who built his own optimized miner, wrote an entire article on it as well as how he sold all of his coins right after he mined them, feel free to look it up(P.S, the same optimized miner thing happened with Bitcoin, as I said earlier, anyone with the know how can create their own optimized miners, look at Bitcoins first GPU's/ASICs).

Also, these coins are supposed to be "currencies", are they not? They are supposed to be "decentralized", are they not? So then why would a developer purposely change their coin's emission rate on their own accord, as well as the total coin supply?(Which is what Darkcoin's developer did several times). The very "social contract" has been violated, since the coin's parameters have been severely changed after conception. That means Darkcoin is not a decentralized cryptocurrency, but a centralized pennystock. Furthermore, Darkcoin's instamine was over 10%, not 2%.

[child_harold]

I agree most of went down here should've been in the DRk vs XMR thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=962235.0
Whilst i enjoyed the popcorn I am none the wiser about the attack vector described in the OP.

I haven't learned much new but have rather been reminded of the (arguable) shortcomings of DRK and XMR respectively.

If building a python script is all it might theoretically take to prove this or not then lots of people here are qualified to do just that.

Do we know if this is a problem for DRK or not? Things r still unclear.

[illodin]

Sure there might be other problems, but not that one.

What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch?

Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them.

That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market.

So the concrete and actual problem is FUD. Agreed pretty much.

FUD is a problem yes, but in this case it is the symptom and not the cause. The cause can only be addressed by moving to a different coin that wasn't instamined. It will forever be the case that people researching dark will hit google and find

this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.0
or this: http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin

You can't put humpty dumpty back together, sorry.

FUD is a symptom of instamine, which won't cause any concrete problems, only FUD. People in the future will find out many coins were mined fast early on, for them it won't make any difference whether they were mined in 2 seconds or in 2 years.

[smooth]

So monero had a optimized miner out while roughly 5% of the supply was mined.  Who really knows for sure how much monero was mined with these miners and if any of it is still held.  You believe the words of a scammer and a crook?  Did they end up with more than 2%?

They had, at most, slightly over 50% of the hash rate for various periods (not the entire time). I can tell you that I mined without the optimized miner and had a good fraction of the hash rate for a while, as did a number of others, so it is clear their share of the 5% was certainly well under 5%, perhaps at most 2.5%, which comes to around 450 000 coins. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars doing this, over a period of months, which even if you don't believe they sold (in large part to pay for the mining) which certainly I do believe, amounts to a major investment, quite possibly higher than the price of the coin even today. They did not mine millions of coins over a couple of days for very little cost.

You're also confusing two totally different issues entirely. No one claims that mining is totally "fair" at all times for everyone. People have ASICs with different efficiencies, different electricity costs, and all manner of optimized GPU miners. That's totally separate issue from the rate of coin distribution and whether or not millions of coins were distributed to a few people in a couple of days.

[smooth]

Sure there might be other problems, but not that one.

What is the concrete problem DRK is having (in addition to constant trolling) now or in the future that is a direct result of the unfortunate launch?

Perpetual criticism that it is the fruit of a poison tree. Meaning either incompetence or fraud, and both are indeed poison to outsiders who dislike both and are structurally unable to distinguish them.

That does not mean zero success, but it will be an unnecessary burden to bear, and that's a tough obstacle in a brutally competitive market.

So the concrete and actual problem is FUD. Agreed pretty much.

FUD is a problem yes, but in this case it is the symptom and not the cause. The cause can only be addressed by moving to a different coin that wasn't instamined. It will forever be the case that people researching dark will hit google and find

this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.0
or this: http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin

You can't put humpty dumpty back together, sorry.

FUD is a symptom of instamine, which won't cause any concrete problems, except FUD. People in the future will find out many coins were mined fast early on, for them it won't make any difference whether they were mined in 2 seconds or in 2 years.

It does make a difference.

There is such a thing as integrity and reputation, and to normal people outside of the sociopaths who are all too common around cryptocurrencies, those do matter, plus as I mentioned before the practical fact that outsiders can't tell the difference between incompetence and fraud, and rationally dislike both. Perhaps the practical consideration might not matter if the original development team were no longer involved at all, but even then the reputation and integrity of the brand would be permanently damaged compared to similar but undamaged ones, which is going to be very hard to overcome in a competitive market.

DRK is indelibly tarnished, and there is no good reason to pick such a coin among a universe of many, unless you are one of the insiders who are benefitting from this. That's not FUD, it is fact.

[smooth]

I agree most of went down here should've been in the DRk vs XMR thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=962235.0
Whilst i enjoyed the popcorn I am none the wiser about the attack vector described in the OP.

I haven't learned much new but have rather been reminded of the (arguable) shortcomings of DRK and XMR respectively.

If building a python script is all it might theoretically take to prove this or not then lots of people here are qualified to do just that.

Do we know if this is a problem for DRK or not? Things r still unclear.

Good question harold. I am interested in further analysis from the OP, if he chooses to do it (or others do)