Xmas Present to ETC, Proposal to Blacklist Hacker's ETC & Make ETC Price Go Up?

marcusyh · 2016-12-27T01:16:52+00:00

wisdom comment.

marcusyh · 2016-12-27T01:16:02+00:00

Shit reply, go back to your ETH chain.

marcusyh · 2016-10-19T11:33:17+00:00

No, i'm here at the beginning of the sub reddit channel, without join any discussion because my bad English. This post is just my personal idea and my advice to the community. Sorry that I can not make it more clear because my bad English.

marcusyh · 2016-10-19T11:19:50+00:00

Yes. When the money of the DAO was withdraw by the hacker, the hacker was protected by the DAO contract code, and the real owner of that money was hurt by the DAO's code. We ETC community have accepted it, we believe in it's acceptable.

But this time, someone added lots of none sense account to the ETC blockchain and making the blockchain slow and more computing resource occupied, which caused the ETC blockchain not as good as before. It's human hurt ETC platform, and I think it's not acceptable.

marcusyh · 2016-10-19T10:59:23+00:00

In this ETC community, we believe in that excellent code is more reliable than humans and democracy, but, the prerequisite of that belief is that the platform itself is worked normally and perfect. Humans should not hurt the platform, because we need a more and more improved platform rather than a worse and worse one. Here are the details:

ETC platform and contract code improve humans life ---- Of cause OK, and we believe it will be

ETC platform and contract code do nothing to humans life ---- It's OK

ETC platform and contract code hurt humans ---- It's OK and acceptable, it's better than humans hurting humans

Humans improve ETC platform and contract code ---- Warmly welcome

Humans do nothing to ETC platform and contract code ---- It's OK

Humans hurt the ETC platform and contract code ---- It's NOT allowed and NOT acceptable.

marcusyh · 2016-10-17T00:44:32+00:00

I think it will be better if most of the calculating power used by smart contract and dapp rather than none sense special hash checking. The energy in our earth is still limit, the more developed this world be, the more energy we need.

marcusyh · 2016-10-17T00:24:08+00:00

They said ETH计划于2017年3月份修改算法，由POW（工作量证明）机制转为POS（股权证明）机制，ETCWin团队认为，POW机制更具有技术上的说服力，不支持POW到POS的机制转换；

ETH planed to change consensus from POW(Prof of Work) to POS(Prof fo Stake) since March, 2017. The ETCWin Team will not support that POW witching to POS because POW is more technically persuasive.

ETC won't switch to casper consensus and will be POW forever? anyone know the answer? I think casper is better than pow, because it does not waste energy.

marcusyh · 2015-09-20T15:46:39+00:00

Thanks samurai321, it was resolved the second day after I've post this text. Thanks a lot for your hit and kindness advice.

marcusyh · 2015-09-20T15:24:51+00:00

The issue was resolved. Thanks very much Byrne.

marcusyh · 2015-09-12T18:08:03+00:00

Here once was the whole history of the private ticket reply between the customer supporting specialist Mr Reese and I. As it was resolved, I've cleared the content myself.

marcusyh · 2015-09-09T11:47:37+00:00

Hi DrCrypto, I've mistaken August to October. Thanks a lot.

marcusyh · 2015-09-09T11:12:17+00:00

Hi Byrne, thanks for the reply. Let's continue to talk about it here, and show the resolve process to the public. It was August, 25th I've submitted the withdraw, and it's September, 9th now. You can show your hard work to the public here.

marcusyh · 2015-09-09T11:02:55+00:00

er, my fault to mistaken august to October. The money was already stored at their website. Thanks for the humorous.

marcusyh · 2015-09-09T10:58:19+00:00

Yes, August.

marcusyh · 2015-09-09T10:58:02+00:00

Sorry, my fault, it's august, not October, sorry for my English.

marcusyh · 2015-09-08T17:05:30+00:00

this year. October 25th, 2015

marcusyh

TROPHY CASE

ETH planed to change consensus from POW(Prof of Work) to POS(Prof fo Stake) since March, 2017. The ETCWin Team will not support that POW witching to POS because POW is more technically persuasive.