This shitty community eagerly awaits your proof. You're in danger getting blamed for what you criticized us.
You got a negative trust rating because you've hyped bogus and deceptive security claims multiple times and tried to charge people for exploit tools that didn't. But hey, you could still collect on that 50 BTC bounty I offered you for your last set of claims, and I'll even remove the negative trust to boot.
What you do not seem to understand at all, is that these claim i make are not bogus. Just because you cannot understand them, this doesn't mean they are not present.
I cannot judge to what degree this is a potential thread, whan I can say is that all I am saying is 100% right.
You seem to be a very arrogant person, who blames anyone who has contrary opinions to you. Not sure why you are this way, but this disencourages people to help auditing the bitcoin code at all (even if they are wrong sometimes).
If all bitcoin-qt developers are so ignorant and arrogant like you are, I am not surprised why the transaction malleability was ignored for such a long time causing users to lose over 800000 BTC. Maybe you just ignored it because you felt that all "code auditers" where just spreading FUD and should therefore just shut the fuck up. I mean this issue was known for a long time, did it?
I understand that you might have some problem accepting people thinking differently than you do, but don't you think that you have some kind of responsibility (to the users) to listen to everyone and (more importantly) be thankful to anyone trying to help, instead of seeing you as the king and looking down on everyone else?
What would SHA256 has anything to do with this? This is curve related (secp256k1)
the crypographic tenderfoots thank Eadeqa for pointing out this difference technologique