Topic: [ANN] ¤ DMD Diamond 3.0 | Scarce ¤ Valuable ¤ Secure | PoS 3.0 | Masternodes 65% - page 323. (Read 1260624 times)

All coins now on sale.
But where is the bottom for ours?

Okay. .. Don't you have something better to day trade or whatever your strategy is...

Ha ha ha! Very funny! How do you like'em 0.0005 coins??? Buy them now and cry later as I slowly drive the price down to 0.00001. Please keep buying, I dare y'all!!!

I have thousands more to waste. I don't care, I got enough bitcoins, even if I throw a few dozen btc worth of dmd away, I still have hundreds of btc.

Looks like Christmas came early

Massive dump going on and I have no BTC to buy with 

if the amount of transactions require a adaption of blocksize
u can be sure DMD Diamond Foundation would manage a decision and release update in like 14 days
and not is paralyzed like bitcoin about this simple question

the transactions we manage now with our network we could have a blocktime of 1 hour and still manage them all and more easy

I want to remind you that the increase in the time between the blocks will also affect the network bandwidth.
one block of 600 seconds this is 7 transactions per second (that  from this is now suffering Bitcoin) it is better to provide for this moment.
If we have time for the block thereof in one minute, this corresponds to 70 transactions per second.

A lot of mobile devices has already possibility to keep a wallet and run it/stake coins on it. I would say the future of the staking will be on mobile devices where the space is limited. So in my eyes, a smaller blockchain size with a faster synchronization is necessary. 100-150 sec block time is ok I would say.

I think that the time for a single block shall not exceed 1 minute (60 seconds).
This is the current standard speed for the best coins

what is ur opionion to block time versus blockchain size and synctime

u would love a smaller chain and faster sync and accept slower blocktime?

we run now average 52sec blocktime
one of the fastest coins

but i have to say from my perspective we see not much advantage to be faster than others
beside faster raise of blockchain size and longer sync times for people who open wallet just once every 14 days

i full agree 10 min blocktime like bitcoin have is stoneage

what u think would be a good blocktime and keep in mind slower is always more slim chain and faster sync time


52 sec (like now)
100 sec
150 sec (like LTC)
300 sec
600 sec (like BTC)

this is wrong
constant decreasing inflation
it is the reason why DMD stay at a stable $ value around 30 cents

look around all the hyperinflation coins who failed
because their plan was never designed to cover more than a half year or a year income for people
and then a collapse of price was clear as a market response to craizy raising amounts of daily new created coins

and galactus ur opinion is important to us like any others even utahs

it will have impact on the final dmd 3.0 coin specs

over all people can expect to see if they behave as they do already and stake twice a month
no significant change in POS income

less frequent staking will earn a bit less

more frequent staking will earn a bit more

just a little incentive for network support

nothing big

this topic is closed for now i want to open a new one in next posting

Ditto   Raise any objections and u are silenced or told to leave ... Why have a discussion at all if you are going to do it anyway ...

I do not support POS increase to 50%
But I also do not support changing an existing plan in which currently provides 25% of the POS for all and everyone!
I'm for the preservation of the existing plan that is displayed on the first page.
As we can see a reduction of up to 25 per cent did not produce a significant effect on the value of the coin.
Why to reduce annual percent over and above the plan? Nobody answered this question.
Why developer impose community and makes a bow to him without explaining the real reasons why this is done?
The developer invited us to a theoretical discussion, but at the same time aggressively defends its position without explaining the reasons. The developer does not know why need to change the annual interest rate?
If the reason is to find more online wallets, it is generally not a problem for 99.9% of the community.
Must be online every 30 or 14 days? No problems! Even once a week is not a significant problem, a disadvantage.
But is not the question. In what it? Don't explain to us.

We know that make a vote or what the topic should be specific arguments for why we need these changes, instead of keeping them secret.
For this reason there are various ambiguous versions why these changes are offered.
This lack of coordination or the shortcomings of developers, and not the fault of individuals in our community.
Openness and explanatory work with clear arguments necessary in order to then don't do guilty for his version of any John, Ivan, Guangming, Vikram or Pedro

Similar happens in Germany (Hanover). Where people protesting against TTIP (Transatlantic trade and investment partnership).
Discussions are taking place in secret between the Governments of Europe and the United States, so people don't like it and they go to the demonstrations.
People fear that this could lead to a decrease in the quality of consumer goods, environmental degradation and labor protection conditions.
And this despite the fact that people chose this government and the logically must trust their government.
After all the government has to care of each individual... But as we know it far from truth


And for two years, developers need to know and get used to that when people feel a threat to their funds because of the lack of information they show discontent.

Also it is happening in the DMD community - people have apprehension...

If decisions are made exclusively community, rather than a separate group, I would like to see more opinions on this issue.
Of course, after the specific explanations for why these changes are necessary.
but if the decisions are made by a small group of people, then ... Down with democracy, long live totalitarianism!

But there are other versions...

 

well spoken

POS as a way of energy saving secure the blockchain together with  hybrid POW
with low rewards to not attract to much energy waste on POW side too

DMD Diamond concept is really designed with a limited amount of coins and constant decreasing inflation

because POS timebombs that explore in hyperinflation where enough on market and we survived them all and are more successful than them

because their concept is shortterm

and ours not

with DMD 3.0 we will go the next step and add even more industry leading additional security features

and much more

The truth is that some people just sit and wait for the pump or dump.
They can not imagine that there are people who want for the Diamond that was something more than than just another coin.
Of course, you would have been nice if the DMD will have all the time 50% of POS revenue.
But then it lost the meaning of this coin.
This market is already have unlimited coins that have a constant income POS and do not have a clear number of coins in the system.
You can choose what is right for you in the hope to get rich quick 

I personally believe that the real price for the Diamond comes after the emergence of a significant change in a future version 3.0.
But not the fact that someone is again for you will return 50% of the annual POS income 

And they are so paralyzed everyone keeps their wallet closed?
Ridiculous argument.
The Proof of stake is what separates us from BTC.
Thats our advantage.
BTC has purchasing power.
We do not. Thats their advantage.
Changing the rules to gain that advantage has not worked.
How many times do you change it with no apparent gain in value?
If the reactor had achieved this, we would all be clapping you on the back.
But it didnt.
Select few gained a bigger pile but did not gain value per unit.
Historically only the Pump and dumpers have gained value as they jump ship.
Our highest value was achieved when someone's wallet got ripped off.
When I seen the value rising to 50-60 cents that day, I was stoked.
Finally some movement.
But  it was a thief who filled the sails and then pulled the plug inless than
24 hours.
All the fancy math in the world won't fix what has historically happened.
Mining for a 1/5 of a diamond, a fifth of a unit is a waste.
Going from 50% to 25 % was a mistake. Its backwards.
And then giving the select few a higher rate with the reactor
Proves my point.
The future holds less and less incentive as the coinroll out is
totally backwards.
You were hoping the value would be the incentive.
Big Mistake.

What? Your already being rewarded. Now you want more?

litte update from wallet 2.1

good news one blocking issue fixed
one more to go

we did run this weekend tests again
we confirmed one blocking issue fixed
we detected a second one which was not detectable before the first one fixed

any issue found while in testing lab have to be seen as success
if we learned one thing the last few years
that testing is the most important part of develop a cryptocoin wallet

Totally out of order, John! 

I've been thinking quite a bit about your proposed changes cryptonit. In my opinion the grace period should be at least 21 or even 28 days, in case of holidays, hardware failures, family issues, etc.. After this period of time not staking, a wallet could be considered as not participating in Proof of Node. Maybe a third shift after a much longer timeframe, like 180 days, could also be implemented.

Another thing that came to my mind would be a small bonus for people who are activly minting and mining, one could call it Proof of Merit.

Keep up the good work popshot, cryptonit and all the others!