Quote from: DeepCryptoanalist3 on June 14, 2014, 02:57:08 PM

Quote from: snailbrain on June 14, 2014, 11:04:43 AM

it seems to me that all the maps being completed can be done by humans just as fast

I thought that some of current "bot owner" guys aren't even a bot owners. They have just made this easy map preselection cheat and riding that simple levels by hand.

I think this is unlikely or, at least, didn't last long at all. Possibly (likely?) some of the bot developers started with this approach (I didn't, personally) but if they did such a patch they would've quickly realized that even a trivial automation of "the rest of the work function" would significantly outproduce.

Also, I'm not sure I would even call this "cheating." The only way that we have to define cheating is the protocol itself, and the protocol itself is decided by consensus of miners. This behavior would be entirely "within protocol" so as such this would not fall under the current definition of cheating. (until a patch is adopted, and the majority hashing strength has, so far, agreed that they would accept such a patch.)

Quote

But then time between blocks have tightened to the target time. I am not sure about this now. A good prove that bots are actually exists can be the fact that time between blocks became significantly smaller than the target time. Is this the case now?

Mostly. I don't think the very existence of bots is at all in question, some of the block intervals are clearly not humanly possible.

Quote

Anyway if the coin have been hacked in such a way then it should be abandoned. New version of the coin should have new genesis block. Those who play on this easy maps are went against the rules and they shall not receive the reward for this. If it will not be abandoned then it will be an indisputable sign that some of those cheaters are the coin developers themselves.

I'm all for changing that definition of "cheating" moving forward, however I don't think a hard fork back to block 1 would be appropriate. That, IMO, would be antithetical to the very nature of a block chain consensus. Why even have block chain consensus, then? (Just make the moto game itself hosted on a single central server at the main dev's house, while we're at it!)