Summary

1. Spy is not nice
2. SDC is dead
3. Util is the new XC
4. BlockNet will be pumped
5. The Blonde is the best

Cheers!

I find it useful to keep reminding myself that the map is not the territory and the bitcointalk/github account is not the person.

Co-incidentally, I encountered some interesting relevant info, thought I'd write it up and share it with the discussants here ...

BlockNet is a straightforwardly-rebranded git clone of BitSwift. By “straightforwardly-rebranded”, I mean that, apart from some minimal changes to parameters, the rest of the changes are to the strings carrying the coin's name. This string replacement is often crude, fuzzily focused and inadequately constrained.

Fuzzy focus in BlockNet revealing BitSwift origin https://github.com/atcsecure/blocknet/blob/master/COPYING#L1

The current construction of BlockNet's heritage trail as AGS, DRM, HACK is incomplete and should read BITSWIFT, AGS, DRM, HACK

As a cloneparent, BitSwift itself is a straightforwardly-rebranded git clone of AegisCoin, as revealed by the dog's breakfast that the AegisCoin dev has made of the original carsenk <spit> clone with s/DRM/AGS/g and which, like a treasured family heirloom, has been faithfully preserved all the way down to the BlockNet code:

Example of inadequate constraint inherited from inept ancestor dev https://github.com/atcsecure/blocknet/blob/master/src/addrman.cpp#L9

AegisCoin itself is a clone of DreamCoin, a Carsen Keck <spit> device. The original carsenk <spit> github repo is long gone but I made a fork at the time and the code testifies that the Korean hackcoin dev (who, to give him his due, had successfully created a “best-of” coin which is still prized today) was justified in accusing Carsen Keck <spit> of crass ineptitude:

https://github.com/gjhiggins/dreamcoin/blob/master/COPYING

BlockNet, presented for ICO in Nov 2014, is basically a degraded copy of 6 month-old hackcoin and the identifiable descendants that populate the family tree have all turned out to be black sheep. Using this foul heritage as a foundational codebase for an ambitious project is an inexplicably odd choice for a reputedly savvy dev.

It may be that the choice of initial commit is irrelevant - some devs adopt the tactic of simply obliterating the original commit with a later monolithic commit or even ignoring the open source code entirely and pursuing a V2.0-binary-only release policy, spuriously argued as aimed at protecting IP.


Cheers

Graham

You don't get the point.
It's not about faking the screens, it's about Prometheus speaking bed-time stories.

Dan

No I very well do get the point, But the Blocknet official twitter account is claiming they are faked, others like you claim prom is just speaking BS.

The conversations are true, It'd be easy enough for "The blocknet" to just claim as you do that proms claims are BS rather than insist i faked skype conversations.

This is precisely one of the most suspicious parts of this, the fact that they chose to attack the authenticity of the message rather than the truth of Prometheus's claims.

This was before you released your screenshots so I expect they had no idea that this would backfire on them. It's almost as if this was agreed upon beforehand. It's clear from your logs that Prometheus was afraid you were going to leak the information. It almost looks like the lot of them had already prepared this defence after Prom started threatening you about leaking it. Unfortunately for them I don't think they realised quite how much corroborating evidenence you and others had amassed.

You don't get the point.
It's not about faking the screens, it's about Prometheus speaking bed-time stories.

Dan

A group of Bitcointalk users have modified (or perhaps completely invented) some IRC chat logs and screenshots in order to spread FUD about the Blocknet and XC.