*freezes your account*

[Anonymous No.9939720]

nothing personnel kid

[Anonymous No.9939758]

>>9939720

[Anonymous No.9939842]

>>9939720
you were being mean to people on the internet, EOS has de-platformed you and appropriated your funds.

[Anonymous No.9939860]

>>9939720
if the stake holders decide that you should be out, you should be out. It's their network.

his is 10000x better than bitcoin btc.

It's by design, not a flaw. If you're too dumb to understand that, stay poor and keep buying shitty btc / eth clones.

[Anonymous No.9939886]

>>9939720
Sure is reddit in here

[Anonymous No.9939897]

Follow the EOS way.

[Anonymous No.9939927]

>>9939860

, He says while defending his shitty eth clone

[Anonymous No.9939933]

>>9939886
Anons predicting it's never going to launch were always wrong, but still, it's going to die within a year.
https://hackerone.com/eosio/hacktivity
The network is live and there are security holes found nearly everyday.
The code is shit.
One guy already decided to fuck the network up rather than take $10k. It was shrugged off.
Repeat that two-three times and eos becomes a total laughingstock.
If any bug allows stealing from exchanges (by selling stolen eos for real coins) eos is going to get delisted from all exchanges.

[Anonymous No.9939943]

>>9939933
>copy pasting fud from the other thread
I really hope for your sake that you're being paid for this. It's pretty sad.

[Anonymous No.9939944]

i only have 165 eos. wat do

[Anonymous No.9939973]

>>9939943
>fud
>23 security holes detected during last three weeks

[Anonymous No.9939988]

>>9939943
>copy pasting facts
>facts
>facts
increasingly desperate bagholders call this fud
>not too smart

[Anonymous No.9939994]

>>9939860
if the bps in a conf call decide that you should be out you mean. this slope looks pretty sliperry to me

[Anonymous No.9940024]

>>9939988
>>9939973
According to your link, one bounty has been awarded. Where are these 23 security holes you speak of and why aren't they getting bounties for them?

[Anonymous No.9940078]

>>9939994
*uploads CP to your dapp that can never be removed*
*forks your blockchain and rolls back the last month's worth of transactions because no one considered the possibility that software might have bugs*
nothing personnel kid

[Anonymous No.9940114]

>>9940024
>According to your link, one bounty has been awarded
???
There are 23 $10k bounties paid in total

[Anonymous No.9940133]

>>9940114
You realize that anyone can create a bounty claim for any reason, right? That doesn't mean they actually found a bug. Only one of those bounties was paid.

[Anonymous No.9940151]

>>9940078
fair enough actually, that's unironically a pretty good point

[Anonymous No.9940161]

>>9940133
No they ever hired the guido guy after he made $120k from that side.
https://www.reddit.com/r/eos/comments/8om96j/ethical_hacker_makes_120k_usd_in_one_week_by/
closed means paid, not sure what's the difference between 'bounty awarded' and closed

[Anonymous No.9940171]

>>9940133
The earliest payout for 'yukichen' is for this:
https://thehackernews.com/2018/05/eos-blockchain-smart-contract.html

[Anonymous No.9940176]

>>9940161
I stand corrected, but this just goes to show that they're taking security seriously and hardening the code to the best of their ability. All software has bugs. Ethereum and BTC both had loads of bugs when they were new.

[Anonymous No.9940196]

>>9940176
>but this just goes to show that they're taking security seriously
No it doesn't. They should have delayed the launch three months after the first RCE bug for a thorough security analysis. That would be responsible.
Finding 23 maximum severity security holes in three weeks means it's almost certain there are many more. Simple probability.
>Ethereum and BTC both had loads of bugs when they were new.
Ethereum had zero.

[Anonymous No.9940221]

>>9940196
>They should have delayed the launch three months after the first RCE bug for a thorough security analysis.
They had obligations to their token holders.

>Finding 23 maximum severity security holes in three weeks means it's almost certain there are many more. Simple probability.
It's very likely that these bugs were known about for a long time and only disclosed once the bounty was announced. Also they were not all maximum security bugs. We don't even know the nature of the bugs since the reports aren't disclosed. Why make things up?

>Ethereum had zero
You're either new or delusional. Solidity is written in C++. The chances of someone writing a compiler in C++ with zero vulnerabilities is zero.

[Anonymous No.9940239]

>>9940221
heh. solidity is just an abstract way of connecting to the EVM though. its not a vital part of the ecosystem.

[Anonymous No.9940262]

>>9940221

You're desperation is strong. I won't even feel bad for you when eth is 2500$ and flippening commences while eos heads to the inevitable 0$

[Anonymous No.9940265]

>>9940239
Nice mental gymnastics there bro. A quick google proves you wrong.
https://cryptoslate.com/batchoverflow-exploit-creates-trillions-of-ethereum-tokens/

[Anonymous No.9940275]

>>9940221
>It's very likely that these bugs were known about for a long time and only disclosed once the bounty was announced.
Um... that's why they aren't disclosed.
Larimer had the arrogance to call the Chinese bug report 'FUD'. It turned out to be true.
That bug is what pushed them to make these pitiful bounties.
>The chances of someone writing a compiler in C++ with zero vulnerabilities is zero.
You don't know what you're talking about. Ethereum is a protocol. Solidity is a language that's compiled to EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine). And it's absolutely possible to write secure code in C++ if you know what you're doing.

[Anonymous No.9940285]

*moons violently for the nth time in a bear market*
heh, nothing personal, ked.

[Anonymous No.9940287]

>>9940265
That's a bug in a smart contract written by someone, not ethereum.

[Anonymous No.9940303]

>>9940262
>being this delusional
I'm not the one sperging out in every Ethereum thread about how Ethereum is so terrible. That's what really reeks of desperation. You're so afraid for your investment that you're compelled to waste your time spreading FUD about its competition. This is how you spend your time.

>You don't know what you're talking about. Ethereum is a protocol. Solidity is a language that's compiled to EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine). And it's absolutely possible to write secure code in C++ if you know what you're doing.
I'm a C coder, I know exactly what I'm talking about. There is no such thing as millions of lines of C++ code free of vulnerabilities. Linux, Windows, various SQL implementations, OSX, they all have had and will continue to have vulnerabilities. Ethereum is not a special snowflake, and neither is EOS.

[Anonymous No.9940306]

>>9940287

This.

Ethereum is proven and so long as scaling is successful it will be unstoppable

[Anonymous No.9940323]

>>9940265
>https://cryptoslate.com/batchoverflow-exploit-creates-trillions-of-ethereum-tokens/
thats not a bug in the actual solidity language. its just a bug that somone made when using solidity in a non-safe way. overflows are common bugs in a lot of languages... its literally just a case of devs being incompetent and not doing
if(x > 0 && x < max) { }

or just using standard safeMath lib that ethereum made themselves.

[Anonymous No.9940325]

>>9940275
I meant this image

[Anonymous No.9940341]

>>9940306
Ethereum is proven what? It's been out for 2 years and the only thing anyone uses it for is pyramid schemes and pump n dump ICO's. Ironically, EOS is probably the most valuable thing that's ever come out of the ethereum ecosystem. And it will never scale. Sharding is about as realistic as the LN.

[Anonymous No.9940349]

>>9940323
Why does solidity allow you to compile code with integer overflows?

[Anonymous No.9940359]

>>9940303
>I'm a C coder, I know exactly what I'm talking about.
No you don't know shit, you don't even know the difference between solidity, evm, ethereum and code written in solidity.
Few hours of programming class that teached you how to write a console calculator doesn't mean you're a 'C coder'.

[Anonymous No.9940374]

>>9940359
I've been writing secure distributed systems software for 5 years. You're just bad at reading.

[Anonymous No.9940377]

The more overboard FUD I see about EOS, the more I am convinced it is the future.

[Anonymous No.9940397]

>>9940374
Yes yes and I'm a Chinese Empress.
No actual coder would make the mistake of calling a bug in someone's smart contract a bug in solidity.

[Anonymous No.9940428]

>>9940397
See: >>9940349
>the efficiency of Java and the safety of C

Hmm let's see if we can find more.

>On June 15th, Dr. Jiang, founder and CEO of PeckShield, announced that PeckShield had found a security breach that could lead to 60% of current Ethereum nodes to crash in seconds.
https://peckshield.com/2018/06/15/EPoD/

[Anonymous No.9940444]

>>9940397
>>9940428
Oh look here's another one

>Developers of Ethereum, the world's No. 2 digital currency by market capitalization, have closed a serious security hole that allowed virtually anyone with an Internet connection to manipulate individual users' access to the publicly accessible ledger.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/03/ethereum-fixes-serious-eclipse-flaw-that-could-be-exploited-by-any-kid/

[Anonymous No.9940479]

>>9940341
t. loser brainlet

[Anonymous No.9940527]

>>9940428
That's something new and there's no information yet.
It's not a network killing bug by their own admission - 40% nodes would remain.
>>9940444
That's also not a network killing bug, it would only impact new nodes trying to connect to the true network. It also required significant mining power to execute.

These bugs are nothing compared to network killing bugs that were found in eos, but even if counted as equivalent, that makes only two bugs over three years. EOS had 23 maximum severity bugs in 17 days.

Btw main ethereum node is written in Go, not C++.

[Anonymous No.9940556]

>>9940527
>making people connect to malicious nodes isn't severe
>taking down 60% of the network isn't network killing
LOL i'm done with you kid. Have fun with your Ethereum bags.

[Anonymous No.9940603]

>>9940556
>making people connect to malicious nodes isn't severe
This isn't EOS, malicious nodes can't change account balances. This attack would only allow double spending.
>taking down 60% of the network isn't network killing
???
It objectively isn't, because the network continues to function. To kill a decentralized network you must take almost everything down. For ethereum that means attacking Parity and Geth nodes at the same time.

That's one of the reasons why EOS is centralized - because it only has 21 nodes, all running same software.