Quote from: 9600 on September 24, 2018, 11:30:19 PM

Quote from: lncm on September 24, 2018, 05:45:48 PM

Quote from: OvErLoDe1 on September 24, 2018, 05:41:04 PM

The thing I am struggling with is these accusations that the algo was "abused". How is it being abused if someone has a large amount of hash power that NO ONE has absolutely any proof was not paid for?

Well, there was no proof that monero v6 algo was "abused"...

The term "Abused" may not be the right term. Most people are simply referring to the massive drop in hash rate caused by the switch to V7.
Logic dictates that the V6 ASICs dropped off the network.

https://www.trustnodes.com/2018/04/09/moneros-hashrate-plunges-80-asics-hardfork

https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/monero-hashrate.html

Pretty easy to see.

Monero devs knew that an imminent update was necessary to protect their investors from the asic influence. Aro devs were aware that one acct was controlling over 50% of the hashrate in a supposedly decentralized mainframe and did nothing for a really long time. even when it was apparent that the individual responsible was destroying the coin's value.

Again if they had an actual financial investment in the project, they wouldn't have let the coin fall from a stable 1k sat to lower 200 sat before updating the limitation to the algo.

By also waiting they gave this guy a chance to accumulate so much coin that not only did he bank from severely dumping the coin but also has the ability to manipulate the price for a really long time. In any other sector, this guys will be investigated for collusion.