Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 1418. (Read 9723748 times)
January 10, 2016, 04:05:50 PM
Evan, when will we be able to get our hands on the test/alpha version of the DAPI? I can't wait to start experimenting with it.
January 10, 2016, 03:41:14 PM
I don't think so.
He's talking about mining centralisation which affects all POW coins.
That's what I thought, but am I correct in thinking that with the 2nd tier quorum structure DASH will rely far less on POW mining for its security because miners don't have all the power and because DASH is based on X11 we are far less likely to be in the same situation as Bitcoin regarding the centrlisation of mining hardware and the concerns relating to that?
Actually, if you look at the plans for Evolution, which should come out in it's basic form this year, miners will no longer have a say in what goes into blocks. Masternodes will be split into quorums which will decide on inclusion to the blockchain. Miners actually post it into the blockchain's ledger, but if they don't do what the MNs say, or if they try to include anything else, their block will be rejected and the next miner to find a block will get the rewards if he properly builds it.
Will we still need miners? Yes, the mining has is used to randomly group masternodes into groups of quorums which process all transactions.
So, in this way, Dash DOES solve the problem.
Dash's Masternode network will process all transactions in randomly assigned groups called quorums.
Dash's Masternode network is large and very decentralized, with largest holder having around 400 MNs or 11.5% of the MN network. The chances are infinitely small that he will ever get control of a randomly selected quorum. This is much more secure than any mining solution out there. And entropy, the law that states things become more dispersed over time, is actually true, and Masternodes are always changing hands, and those with the most, will undoubtedly sell them off (or their children will inherit and thus distribute, etc...). It's virtually impossible for anyone to collect more than 20% of all Masternodes at this point, and if they did, they would have driven the price up exponentially.
Masternode Quorums are also capable of handling as many transactions as can be thrown at them. At the current size of the Masternode network, Dash can handle as many transactions per second as Visa does. But Dash is infinitely scalable. By reducing the collateral requirement for a Masternode by half, Dash can instantly double the Masternode network and handle twice as many transactions.
What about the cost of bandwidth and storage of this blockchain, which would surely grow? Dash's Masternodes are compensated. They must put up collateral to run a Masternode on the network for security reasons, but in doing so, they earn 45% of the block reward. The miners also earn 45% and the last 10% goes toward the budgeting system.
Now you will ask, surely, with such a huge blockchain, nobody will be able to use a full node in any practical sense. So they'll be forced to use a centralized service with a lite wallet. But you would be partly wrong. Yes, most people, for practical reasons, will use lite wallets. This would be inevitable for any coin. However, Dash lite wallets will be tapping directly into the network, through a decentralized API system, and retrieve their information instantly, securely, and directly from the network through Masternodes, without worrying about using a centralized repository.
I'd like to point out that the subject of the axiom of block size to node distribution size was presented by Evan at the last conference. I'm not sure if he was the first, but I think he was because I remember him collecting information to make a chart.
Now, again, he's calling number of miners withe full nodes "anonymity" he's not talking about personal-user anonymity, but of the anonymity and what I would think is more accurate, autonomy of the miners. Why is relying on Masternodes better than miners? Because, as has been proven since their inception, they have been growing. There are always more and more people buying Masternodes, thus the distribution is getting better and better. Many argue that the biggest holders can quickly earn enough coins to create more masternodes, increasing their share of the system, but this is actually not true. Aside from the fact that they have to run or have someone run for them, high quality servers, use bandwidth, etc... and pay for it, there are a lot more coins comeing into the system than what they're earning, and thus, we can predict that 1/2 of all coins created end up in Masternodes. Evan or someone charted the possibilities and it showed that even our biggest Dash holder, otoh, can not increase his % of the Masternode Network, unless he keeps binging in funds from outside the network (that is, buying up all the coins created)
This presentation actually suggests we create a new Federal Reserve, LOL. Yes, it's the "easy way out" but lets face it. It's a complete failure if "representatives" have to be used to mine blocks. I can't believe anyone that is in Bitcoin could think this way.
Besides that, Dash has solved the problem. Entropy ensures we'll never be more centralized than we are today, but rather that we will become more and more decentralized over time. Market pressures ensure nobody will be able to buy up enough Masternodes to control the system (requires so many, like 90% or more of the network, even in Evolution) that market pressures will ensure that even a country as wealthy as the United States wouldn't be able to buy up enough.
Done.
Dash Evolution is just about perfect.
Thank you for the great explanation. It confirms how I thought the DASH system runs/will be running when evolution is launched.
I was also very surprised at the presenters solution to this problem with Bitcoin.
January 10, 2016, 03:21:19 PM
I don't think so.
He's talking about mining centralisation which affects all POW coins.
That's what I thought, but am I correct in thinking that with the 2nd tier quorum structure DASH will rely far less on POW mining for its security because miners don't have all the power and because DASH is based on X11 we are far less likely to be in the same situation as Bitcoin regarding the centrlisation of mining hardware and the concerns relating to that?
Actually, if you look at the plans for Evolution, which should come out in it's basic form this year, miners will no longer have a say in what goes into blocks. Masternodes will be split into quorums which will decide on inclusion to the blockchain. Miners actually post it into the blockchain's ledger, but if they don't do what the MNs say, or if they try to include anything else, their block will be rejected and the next miner to find a block will get the rewards if he properly builds it.
Will we still need miners? Yes, the mining has is used to randomly group masternodes into groups of quorums which process all transactions.
So, in this way, Dash DOES solve the problem.
Dash's Masternode network will process all transactions in randomly assigned groups called quorums.
Dash's Masternode network is large and very decentralized, with largest holder having around 400 MNs or 11.5% of the MN network. The chances are infinitely small that he will ever get control of a randomly selected quorum. This is much more secure than any mining solution out there. And entropy, the law that states things become more dispersed over time, is actually true, and Masternodes are always changing hands, and those with the most, will undoubtedly sell them off (or their children will inherit and thus distribute, etc...). It's virtually impossible for anyone to collect more than 20% of all Masternodes at this point, and if they did, they would have driven the price up exponentially.
Masternode Quorums are also capable of handling as many transactions as can be thrown at them. At the current size of the Masternode network, Dash can handle as many transactions per second as Visa does. But Dash is infinitely scalable. By reducing the collateral requirement for a Masternode by half, Dash can instantly double the Masternode network and handle twice as many transactions.
What about the cost of bandwidth and storage of this blockchain, which would surely grow? Dash's Masternodes are compensated. They must put up collateral to run a Masternode on the network for security reasons, but in doing so, they earn 45% of the block reward. The miners also earn 45% and the last 10% goes toward the budgeting system.
Now you will ask, surely, with such a huge blockchain, nobody will be able to use a full node in any practical sense. So they'll be forced to use a centralized service with a lite wallet. But you would be partly wrong. Yes, most people, for practical reasons, will use lite wallets. This would be inevitable for any coin. However, Dash lite wallets will be tapping directly into the network, through a decentralized API system, and retrieve their information instantly, securely, and directly from the network through Masternodes, without worrying about using a centralized repository.
I'd like to point out that the subject of the axiom of block size to node distribution size was presented by Evan at the last conference. I'm not sure if he was the first, but I think he was because I remember him collecting information to make a chart.
Now, again, he's calling number of miners withe full nodes "anonymity" he's not talking about personal-user anonymity, but of the anonymity and what I would think is more accurate, autonomy of the miners. Why is relying on Masternodes better than miners? Because, as has been proven since their inception, they have been growing. There are always more and more people buying Masternodes, thus the distribution is getting better and better. Many argue that the biggest holders can quickly earn enough coins to create more masternodes, increasing their share of the system, but this is actually not true. Aside from the fact that they have to run or have someone run for them, high quality servers, use bandwidth, etc... and pay for it, there are a lot more coins comeing into the system than what they're earning, and thus, we can predict that 1/2 of all coins created end up in Masternodes. Evan or someone charted the possibilities and it showed that even our biggest Dash holder, otoh, can not increase his % of the Masternode Network, unless he keeps binging in funds from outside the network (that is, buying up all the coins created)
This presentation actually suggests we create a new Federal Reserve, LOL. Yes, it's the "easy way out" but lets face it. It's a complete failure if "representatives" have to be used to mine blocks. I can't believe anyone that is in Bitcoin could think this way.
Besides that, Dash has solved the problem. Entropy ensures we'll never be more centralized than we are today, but rather that we will become more and more decentralized over time. Market pressures ensure nobody will be able to buy up enough Masternodes to control the system (requires so many, like 90% or more of the network, even in Evolution) that market pressures will ensure that even a country as wealthy as the United States wouldn't be able to buy up enough.
Done.
Dash Evolution is just about perfect.
January 10, 2016, 02:56:17 PM
LOL !!!!!
Someone is dumping hard!
That dumping coincides with the Cryptsy founder Paul Vernon being spotted in China after he left his company HQ unannounced.Someone is dumping hard!
Needs to pay hotel bills, I guess...
Another exit-scam after Mt.Gox, Hashfast, Mintpal and others.
Btw do you know how to convert bitcoin days destroyed into actual bitcoins, if lets say we have 50,000,000 days destroyed?
https://blockchain.info/charts/bitcoin-days-destroyed-min-year
Otoh is part of the news stories!
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3rvl2a/cryptsy_exchange_warning_unable_to_withdrawal/
January 10, 2016, 02:42:18 PM
That's what I thought, but am I correct in thinking that with the 2nd tier quorum structure DASH will rely far less on POW mining for its security because miners don't have all the power and because DASH is based on X11 we are far less likely to be in the same situation as Bitcoin regarding the centrlisation of mining hardware and the concerns relating to that?
I think Dash relies as much as Bitcoin on mining for security. The 2nd tier is more about making coins at given address be almost indistinguishable from coins at another address which is a different thing from what he's talking about I think. As far as security goes, the 2nd tier enhances security for the particular case of zero mining confirmations which is the case that people who use instant transactions are concerned with. Mining confirmations and hashpower are still the primary source of security in the long term.
(By the way, there's a scene in that documentary by the "Supersize Me" guy where he goes into a shop and buys stuff with bitcoin and the transaction is instant. I always wondered how that worked - now I know, they just don't bother waiting for any confirmations).
EDIT: I found the scene. Go to 11:44 to see a real world 0-conf bitcoin transaction in action.
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/198650/Morgan_Spurlock__Living_On_Bitcoin__The_Inside_Man_Bitcoin_CNN_Full_Documentary/
Very risky when RBF reaches mainnet...
The grand plan for evolution is to eventually JUST have miners generate the proof of work hashes, then all of the transactions are scheduled to be added to blocks by the masternode network quorums. So the statement that we rely just as much on mining for security is true, but the roles are split up so miners can't screw with the blocks.
January 10, 2016, 02:29:35 PM
LOL !!!!!
Someone is dumping hard!
That dumping coincides with the Cryptsy founder Paul Vernon being spotted in China after he left his company HQ unannounced.Someone is dumping hard!
Needs to pay hotel bills, I guess...
Another exit-scam after Mt.Gox, Hashfast, Mintpal and others.
Btw do you know how to convert bitcoin days destroyed into actual bitcoins, if lets say we have 50,000,000 days destroyed?
https://blockchain.info/charts/bitcoin-days-destroyed-min-year
January 10, 2016, 02:17:25 PM
The key differentiation in Dash is the better alignment of incentives, inlcuding mining, nodes and governance.
Another key difference is in how Dash approaches the issue of fungibility - its technical objective is to make the coins at distinct addresses as SIMILAR and INDISTINGUISHABLE as possible.
The CT sidechain, on the other hand makes the coins as DIFFERENT and DISTINGUISHABLE as possible by recasting parts of the coin supply with different identities.
I'll leave people to ponder on the various implications of that, the why, what and how etc cos I've already posted the odd rant on this subject. Here's just one example but there are probably several more floating around.
This should be summed up and put into the OP.
https://twitter.com/taoofsatoshi/status/686263414306410496
Well that's not the sum up.
Repeating something I have said in another thread is hardly the same as the cogent argument that Tok has put forward.
Besides, it should be in this OP.
January 10, 2016, 02:11:51 PM
The key differentiation in Dash is the better alignment of incentives, inlcuding mining, nodes and governance.
Another key difference is in how Dash approaches the issue of fungibility - its technical objective is to make the coins at distinct addresses as SIMILAR and INDISTINGUISHABLE as possible.
The CT sidechain, on the other hand makes the coins as DIFFERENT and DISTINGUISHABLE as possible by recasting parts of the coin supply with different identities.
I'll leave people to ponder on the various implications of that, the why, what and how etc cos I've already posted the odd rant on this subject. Here's just one example but there are probably several more floating around.
This should be summed up and put into the OP.
https://twitter.com/taoofsatoshi/status/686263414306410496
January 10, 2016, 02:07:09 PM
The key differentiation in Dash is the better alignment of incentives, inlcuding mining, nodes and governance.
Another key difference is in how Dash approaches the issue of fungibility - its technical objective is to make the coins at distinct addresses as SIMILAR and INDISTINGUISHABLE as possible.
The CT sidechain, on the other hand makes the coins as DIFFERENT and DISTINGUISHABLE as possible by recasting parts of the coin supply with different identities.
I'll leave people to ponder on the various implications of that, the why, what and how etc cos I've already posted the odd rant on this subject. Here's just one example but there are probably several more floating around.
This should be summed up and put into the OP.
January 10, 2016, 02:05:23 PM
LOL !!!!!
Someone is dumping hard!
Someone is dumping hard!
Not wishing to spread any FUD, but the question about bitcoin being able to soft fork crypto note style ring sigs, stupidly called confidential transactions to avoid any darknet labels, needs to be addressed by DASH and every crypto note project.
The confidential transactions soft fork is now being actively discussed. I wouldn't be surprised if people are seeing this as a risk.
Or it could just be someone needing to raise funds - anyone know the cryptsy wallet addresses?
Dash has long expanded from being just a privacy project, privacy is just one feature of the platform. The second tier network of nodes will be offering many decentralized services in the future, specially once the DAPI is running. The key differentiation in Dash is the better alignment of incentives, inlcuding mining, nodes and governance. In fact the governance and funding system is maybe the strongest feature of Dash at the moment and these are not related to any particular user feature. The project will continue to lead innovation imagine all the applications that can be implemented once the DAPI is in place, it could be great for Internet of Things, or big data applications. Dash has by far the strongest second tier network in existence with the masternodes, I see them doing a lot more things in the future specially if commercial applications can be implemented using the DAPI and keeping the protocol stable.
All very interesting, but other services was the reason I have spent time on other things. The primary focus for Dash was intended to be the currency and competing with Bitcoin.
January 10, 2016, 01:52:50 PM
LOL !!!!!
Someone is dumping hard!
Someone is dumping hard!
That dumping coincides with the Cryptsy founder Paul Vernon being spotted in China after he left his company HQ unannounced.
Needs to pay hotel bills, I guess...
Another exit-scam after Mt.Gox, Hashfast, Mintpal and others.
January 10, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
The key differentiation in Dash is the better alignment of incentives, inlcuding mining, nodes and governance.
Another key difference is in how Dash approaches the issue of fungibility - its technical objective is to make the coins at distinct addresses as SIMILAR and INDISTINGUISHABLE as possible.
The CT sidechain, on the other hand makes the coins as DIFFERENT and DISTINGUISHABLE as possible by recasting parts of the coin supply with different identities.
I'll leave people to ponder on the various implications of that, the why, what and how etc cos I've already posted the odd rant on this subject. Here's just one example but there are probably several more floating around.
January 10, 2016, 01:00:27 PM
LOL !!!!!
Someone is dumping hard!
Someone is dumping hard!
Not wishing to spread any FUD, but the question about bitcoin being able to soft fork crypto note style ring sigs, stupidly called confidential transactions to avoid any darknet labels, needs to be addressed by DASH and every crypto note project.
The confidential transactions soft fork is now being actively discussed. I wouldn't be surprised if people are seeing this as a risk.
Or it could just be someone needing to raise funds - anyone know the cryptsy wallet addresses?
Dash has long expanded from being just a privacy project, privacy is just one feature of the platform. The second tier network of nodes will be offering many decentralized services in the future, specially once the DAPI is running. The key differentiation in Dash is the better alignment of incentives, inlcuding mining, nodes and governance. In fact the governance and funding system is maybe the strongest feature of Dash at the moment and these are not related to any particular user feature. The project will continue to lead innovation imagine all the applications that can be implemented once the DAPI is in place, it could be great for Internet of Things, or big data applications. Dash has by far the strongest second tier network in existence with the masternodes, I see them doing a lot more things in the future specially if commercial applications can be implemented using the DAPI and keeping the protocol stable.
January 10, 2016, 12:34:08 PM
Not wishing to spread any FUD, but the question about bitcoin being able to soft fork crypto note style ring sigs, stupidly called confidential transactions to avoid any darknet labels, needs to be addressed by DASH and every crypto note project.
I've addressed this quite a lot over the last 6 months.
January 10, 2016, 12:28:23 PM
anyone know the cryptsy wallet addresses?
Reasons to be cheerful,https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/Cryptsy.com
Edit: Person who just sent 6.5 btc into Cryptsy is going to be particularly chirpy
January 10, 2016, 12:18:30 PM
LOL !!!!!
Someone is dumping hard!
Someone is dumping hard!
Not wishing to spread any FUD, but the question about bitcoin being able to soft fork crypto note style ring sigs, stupidly called confidential transactions to avoid any darknet labels, needs to be addressed by DASH and every crypto note project.
The confidential transactions soft fork is now being actively discussed. I wouldn't be surprised if people are seeing this as a risk.
Or it could just be someone needing to raise funds - anyone know the cryptsy wallet addresses?
January 10, 2016, 10:43:00 AM
That's what I thought, but am I correct in thinking that with the 2nd tier quorum structure DASH will rely far less on POW mining for its security because miners don't have all the power and because DASH is based on X11 we are far less likely to be in the same situation as Bitcoin regarding the centrlisation of mining hardware and the concerns relating to that?
I think Dash relies as much as Bitcoin on mining for security. The 2nd tier is more about making coins at given address be almost indistinguishable from coins at another address which is a different thing from what he's talking about I think. As far as security goes, the 2nd tier enhances security for the particular case of zero mining confirmations which is the case that people who use instant transactions are concerned with. Mining confirmations and hashpower are still the primary source of security in the long term.
(By the way, there's a scene in that documentary by the "Supersize Me" guy where he goes into a shop and buys stuff with bitcoin and the transaction is instant. I always wondered how that worked - now I know, they just don't bother waiting for any confirmations).
EDIT: I found the scene. Go to 11:44 to see a real world 0-conf bitcoin transaction in action.
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/198650/Morgan_Spurlock__Living_On_Bitcoin__The_Inside_Man_Bitcoin_CNN_Full_Documentary/
Very risky when RBF reaches mainnet...
January 10, 2016, 09:45:21 AM
That's what I thought, but am I correct in thinking that with the 2nd tier quorum structure DASH will rely far less on POW mining for its security because miners don't have all the power and because DASH is based on X11 we are far less likely to be in the same situation as Bitcoin regarding the centrlisation of mining hardware and the concerns relating to that?
I think Dash relies as much as Bitcoin on mining for security. The 2nd tier is more about making coins at given address be almost indistinguishable from coins at another address which is a different thing from what he's talking about I think. As far as security goes, the 2nd tier enhances security for the particular case of zero mining confirmations which is the case that people who use instant transactions are concerned with. Mining confirmations and hashpower are still the primary source of security in the long term.
(By the way, there's a scene in that documentary by the "Supersize Me" guy where he goes into a shop and buys stuff with bitcoin and the transaction is instant. I always wondered how that worked - now I know, they just don't bother waiting for any confirmations).
EDIT: I found the scene. Go to 11:44 to see a real world 0-conf bitcoin transaction in action.
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/198650/Morgan_Spurlock__Living_On_Bitcoin__The_Inside_Man_Bitcoin_CNN_Full_Documentary/
January 10, 2016, 09:22:24 AM
I don't think so.
He's talking about mining centralisation which affects all POW coins.
That's what I thought, but am I correct in thinking that with the 2nd tier quorum structure DASH will rely far less on POW mining for its security because miners don't have all the power and because DASH is based on X11 we are far less likely to be in the same situation as Bitcoin regarding the centrlisation of mining hardware and the concerns relating to that?
January 10, 2016, 08:21:19 AM
LOL !!!!!
Someone is dumping hard!
Someone is dumping hard!
someone got a few below '65
wait, i think I'm supposed to say, oh noes, the world is ending, DASH is being dumped, cats & dogs have made peace and are living together and the four horsemen of the apocalypse have been revealed by a hidden message in the BTC block chain.
That is the appropriate re-action, no?
Dash , doge also dumped.
But masternode number go to 3500.
Dumping make the masternode number increase faster.
I added a masternode in recent dumpping.
need to test cryptsy hot,cold. dash,doge wallet transation.
Jump to: