Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 1253. (Read 9723776 times)

its like a certain calmness has landed on this forum, the last 4 / 5 pages had some really interesting discussions
and even smooth's participation was interesting to follow..



if this continues i may even have to adjust my signature  

Agreed, thanks Evan for the graphics and Tok for your explanations and insights  

Amen to that !!

I said as much right here.

I actually don't think there's anything wrong with SPV or the current state of the ecosystem (minus some centralization concerns, but that's for another time)! How many transactions could the current ecosystem handle if we utilized every blockchain at once. This is going to be much easier to explain if we start using daily throughput instead of MB per block, which is a terrible metric.

Here's the currently limit and percentage full:

Name           Throughput per day           Percentage Full
Bitcoin         144MB                              95-100%
Etherium      ?                                      <%
Litecoin        576MB                              <1%    
Dash            576MB                              <1%
Dogecoin      576MB                              <1%
Monero         No Limit                            ~


I just looked at the last few blocks for each of these and we all basically have very low usage. How big can we scale, if the Bitcoin ecosystem were inclusive rather than trying to keep everything to itself? All they have to do is add the rest of the main alternative coins to all of the main sites like  Bitstamp, Coinbase, Bitpay, etc. That would allow the free flow of money through the entire ecosystem then, we wouldn't be in this situation at all. The theoretical limitation of the current ecosystem is at least 100-1000x that of the Bitcoin blockchain at this point and it will expand much faster and deal with the exponential growth much better than they will because they're a million programmers out here just waiting for the opportunity.

As for "Digital Gold", he didn't coin the phrase, but he set the expectation that it works like gold:  "The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation". I think it's time we stop messing with Bitcoin and let it become the protocol for the entire space. We have a good foundation to grow on and the rest of the space just needs to take over development into the million directions we need to go in-order to bring products to users. One product per blockchain, this is the new type of entity the space created... it's a DAC!

So each of these are DACS... right? Bitcoin, Etherium, Litcoin, Dash, Dogecoin, Monero, etc. They are decentralized, organized and each offer some sort of service to users that you can't get in the Bitcoin space. So if someone needs to some completely anonymous transactions they would use Dash, Monero, etc (and who cares which, there's trillions of dollars out there to bring in). If someone wanted to make a contract they use Etherium, if you want to record something on the blockchain... use Factom. We should have competitors, offering the same services too, those are like two competing companies.

I want to see products coming out for using all of this technology, like for example... you could make an amazon AWS by forking Dash and using the masternode system to host VPS sessions. Then you use a brand new token for paying for the service. If you have Dogecoins and want to buy six months VPS time on this network, you could use something like Shapeshift.io to pay from one to the other. I think we're see the birth of this new economic system and it doesn't support this idea of Bitcoin having to do everything. They already did what they were support to do, they created the crypto reserve currency.  

Also, we need to start realizing the economic implications of Bitcoin hegemony. There's only four possible outcomes of playing this game with the ecosystem and they are eventually going to lose. They can't do everything, might as well accept it. There's also only one way everyone wins, it's to be inclusive.  



Also, how does each of these scale. Lets assume "Bitcoin Scaling" means 40x throughput and allowing the alt market to grow means 100x scaling ability. (Rough estimates)



We want the one where, there is no limitation to the amount of money that can come into the space and be used for all sorts of things. We don't want imaginary limitations, which is what we currently have. How do we fix this?

Oh, I didn't realize that could happen.  In that case, they (and maybe we) should put in a kick back system where, if your transaction isn't likely to be included in the blockchain in the next X hours, it gets canceled.

In my opinion, which, granted, isn't worth much, yes, Bitcoin has the highest marketcap by far, and because of that, it can handle very large transactions.  Still, not large enough though.  But the way I see it, Bitcoin will be the way to transfer large sums of value back and forth.  That's why I think it will become the tool for Banks.  Even so they're coming up with their own "blockchains" they can't secure them in such a way as to be trustless / or trusted by all parties.  Unfortunately for them, Bitcoin is still too small.  It has to grow more.  And that growth has to be organic.  They can't just pump a bunch of fiat into the system, because that would only make it more volatile.  So it's sort of a waiting game  And it's being managed by those who see this, IMO, as the future of Bitcoin.

Question: While I agree with GMaxwell in principle, that free transactions are simply an open invitation to Sybil attack and consequently can be disregarded entirely, doesn't that backlog of transactions still eventually risk clogging the mempool and crashing the miners?

From the perspective of Bitcoin's "legitimate" transaction capacity, he's right. The current backlog is irrelevant from that point of view, because the legit (fee paying) transactions are still getting through. But what if these 0-fee transactions end up filling up the mempool and crashing a large number of miners/nodes?

In my opinion, the risk isn't that a legitimate transaction won't go through for three days (five or ten cents will generally get it in a block right away). My concern is that if enough miners crash, it could create big problems!

  Yes. Quite right.

If you are right and Bitcoin eventually loses its use as a transactional medium, does it still have a role as a store of value? I think that would rapidly go too unless the blockchain issues are solved quickly. Are Dash and other similar cryptos ready to step into Bitcoin's shoes? Could they cope with the volume should Bitcoin crash?

FTFY. 

Yah but, really, you need a fee to keep from sybil attacks.  Like he said, 0 transaction fees are limitless, anyone can spam with them and not lose anything.  The fees make it harder to spam, and impossible to really do harm.

However, if they can't expand fast enough and transaction fees for people that really need to move their money becomes the same as using fiat, we lose the advantage.  Also, at that point, only a few could afford to move their coins.  But I think they have time there.  Just not a lot of it.

A timely reminder that there is still a role for cash with Dash. We are being pushed towards bankster digital payments. The refugees in the migrant crisis are not given cash. They are given credits. These credits are the trainining ground for a cashless society. bankster digital cards could be turned off anytime during a crisis.

I love Toknormal's idea of getting some PHD students or Academes to do this.

Well, yes, for the time being. Tried Exmo but the non-zoomable charts (among other things) are annoying. And is there a trade analysis tools like Poloniex?

LoL. Hilarious.

https://twitter.com/TaoOfSatoshi/status/705000060669534209?s=09

The Future of Cash vs. The Future of Money
 

http://dcebrief.com/the-future-of-cash-vs-the-future-of-money/

It could, but it is currently out of step with that vision. SPV wallets were built up (in part by Satoshi, by the way) as a way to make the system easily accessible to people making routine transactions including buying coffee and using vending machines (plus many others of course). So you have have many end users doing exactly that, having adopted Bitcoin as a transactional medium, not something limited to high powered bankers and cryptocurrency experts. Perhaps that was a bad idea, but it's too late to erase that from history.

That worked just fine until very recently, and now you still have those users trying to transact but without the tools to do so effectively. Even if one fully buys in to your Evolution concept (as one example of several), and believes that Evolution is the way that the ecosystem will scale to infinity, Evolution isn't here. Even Bitcoin wallets with the ability to effectively set fees and increase fees if needed after the fact don't exist in any widely-deployed form.

So the whole thing is quite a mess right now. In the future I have no doubt it will get better, but where we are today is not pretty. Either an earlier and more effective push should have been made to get the tools out there faster to manage block space scarcity and shift transactions off the Bitcoin main chain, or there should have been some sort of block size increase to buy the time that is needed. Having done neither is an objectively poor outcome, and therefore one must fairly rate the process of having reached this outcome as ineffective.

EDIT: BTW, Satoshi never said that Bitcoin was supposed to be digital gold (that description was invented later by others). His only mention of gold in the white paper related to the steady release of new coins, and in an email he compared Bitcoin to "base metal as scarce as gold" that could be sent over the internet. It is very clear he intended it to be for end-user payments. Opinions differ over whether that vision has turned out to be impractical or Bitcoin has been hijacked by people who want to develop it in a different direction.

Bitcoin needs to just accept it can't grow fast enough to do everything for everyone in the entire ecosystem. Satoshi said it was suppose to be a type of Digital Gold, maybe we need to go back to that way of thinking. That's a great accomplishment... but, when you have gold, you don't move it around all of the time. Why can't Bitcoin handle the larger value transactions in the space and all of the alts can handle the smaller day-to-day transactions.

The ecosystem is already setup to scale to infinity. Everyone wins.

Yes, but that does not mean that fees have to increase.

Where is your evidence that fees have to increase?


Nearly over? I don't think so. We've had a grand total of one halving. On this chart we are in reward era 2 out of 34.


And maybe they learn that Bitcoin is a pain in the ass, is unreliable and complicated, and go elsewhere.

I'm not saying that the system has failed or that it will definitely fail. I'm saying that it is starting to fail right now, because there is a mismatch between the infrastructure and user-education requirements of the system and its ability to function effectively. That is absolutely the case. At best it is poor planning and deployment.


Actually the very common rule is to set the fee at 0.0001 per any part of a KB. You can see this easily by looking at a block explorer and seeing how many of the transactions have fees of 0.0001, 0.0002, etc.

0.0001 BTC is around 0.04 USD. Whether that is tiny in absolute terms or not is somewhat subjective, but the fact remains that it is not tiny relative to established practice over the past few years (as I said that was consistently a high priority rate until very recently) and for that reason lot of very widely deployed infrastructure is now failing.