Hi! Where can I download cpu miner (win) for DASH? Help, please!
Try Elmad's miner first, happy to answer questions at the end if can, what cpu do you have?https://dashtalk.org/threads/sub-ethers-guide-to-cpu-mining.6170/
Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 1609. (Read 9723926 times)
November 11, 2015, 03:52:57 AM
https://dashtalk.org/threads/sub-ethers-guide-to-cpu-mining.6170/
November 11, 2015, 03:43:57 AM
So if these masternode quorums are assumed to be safe and miners don't have any power on what is included in the blockchain, why not eliminate the X11 DASH mining completely?
As far as I understand miners only choose the quorums. They have no other purpose. Miners are only used as a kind of "independent oracle".
That task can be done using some other external oracle, you don't need to mine a separate blockchain for that.
Maybe use the bitcoin block hashes for this? Hash rate is bigger, so this is very safe.
I don't think DASH needs PoW if masternode quorums are as safe as you guys tell us they are.
Let the Masternodes write the blockchain and double the payments for masternode rewards (90%) and dev (10%) fund!
As far as I understand miners only choose the quorums. They have no other purpose. Miners are only used as a kind of "independent oracle".
That task can be done using some other external oracle, you don't need to mine a separate blockchain for that.
Maybe use the bitcoin block hashes for this? Hash rate is bigger, so this is very safe.
I don't think DASH needs PoW if masternode quorums are as safe as you guys tell us they are.
Let the Masternodes write the blockchain and double the payments for masternode rewards (90%) and dev (10%) fund!
I normally wouldn't talk to you, but since you were quoted and this could be a valid question, though I suspect you know the answer, I'll answer.
The POW hash is what is used to select the Masternode Quorums. The miners also "write" the block onto the chain. It's really simple, complementary and still needed.
Why can't masternodes write the transactions in some kind of blockchain database?
After all, InstantX is safe, no?
The oracle used for selecting the quorums can be anything... Bitcoin block hashes, DASH block hashes or even some university publishing real-time timestamps of radioactive decay.
If there is a DoS attack or some other outage the transactions default back to normal miner confirmations so the attackers won't even bother trying.
Depending on a 3rd party outside DASH itself like you're suggesting seems very bad for a trustless decentralized currency.
November 11, 2015, 02:18:24 AM
Just join a P2P Pool node or start your own node.
P2Pool does not appear to be a solution to the mining pool centralization problem. Almost no one uses it. Maybe if mining pools prove untrustworthy it will be used after that. Still I think my question deserves an answer. If the answer is yes I think it would be quite important.
November 11, 2015, 02:07:10 AM
Just join a P2P Pool node or start your own node.
P2Pool does not appear to be a solution to the mining pool centralization problem. Almost no one uses it. Maybe if mining pools prove untrustworthy it will be used after that. Still I think my question deserves an answer. If the answer is yes I think it would be quite important.
November 11, 2015, 01:28:33 AM
Hi! Where can I download cpu miner (win) for DASH? Help, please!
November 11, 2015, 01:14:02 AM
Anyone know if evolution or the current 2nd tier could support a default "mining pool" so we can eliminate the threat of mining pool centralization?
Just join a P2P Pool node or start your own node. November 11, 2015, 12:50:52 AM
Anyone know if evolution or the current 2nd tier could support a default "mining pool" so we can eliminate the threat of mining pool centralization?
November 10, 2015, 11:37:24 PM
November 10, 2015, 11:35:14 PM
I can't help you with that, couldn't remember that evan told more details about that. We have to be patient I guess. There is still a danger of ideas getting stolen.
Ok. I don't mind it being secret. I just want to make sure i have whatever information is public.
November 10, 2015, 10:41:39 PM
So if these masternode quorums are assumed to be safe and miners don't have any power on what is included in the blockchain, why not eliminate the X11 DASH mining completely?
As far as I understand miners only choose the quorums. They have no other purpose. Miners are only used as a kind of "independent oracle".
That task can be done using some other external oracle, you don't need to mine a separate blockchain for that.
Maybe use the bitcoin block hashes for this? Hash rate is bigger, so this is very safe.
I don't think DASH needs PoW if masternode quorums are as safe as you guys tell us they are.
Let the Masternodes write the blockchain and double the payments for masternode rewards (90%) and dev (10%) fund!
As far as I understand miners only choose the quorums. They have no other purpose. Miners are only used as a kind of "independent oracle".
That task can be done using some other external oracle, you don't need to mine a separate blockchain for that.
Maybe use the bitcoin block hashes for this? Hash rate is bigger, so this is very safe.
I don't think DASH needs PoW if masternode quorums are as safe as you guys tell us they are.
Let the Masternodes write the blockchain and double the payments for masternode rewards (90%) and dev (10%) fund!
I normally wouldn't talk to you, but since you were quoted and this could be a valid question, though I suspect you know the answer, I'll answer.
The POW hash is what is used to select the Masternode Quorums. The miners also "write" the block onto the chain. It's really simple, complementary and still needed.
Why can't masternodes write the transactions in some kind of blockchain database?
After all, InstantX is safe, no?
The oracle used for selecting the quorums can be anything... Bitcoin block hashes, DASH block hashes or even some university publishing real-time timestamps of radioactive decay.
November 10, 2015, 10:16:58 PM
So if these masternode quorums are assumed to be safe and miners don't have any power on what is included in the blockchain, why not eliminate the X11 DASH mining completely?
As far as I understand miners only choose the quorums. They have no other purpose. Miners are only used as a kind of "independent oracle".
That task can be done using some other external oracle, you don't need to mine a separate blockchain for that.
Maybe use the bitcoin block hashes for this? Hash rate is bigger, so this is very safe.
I don't think DASH needs PoW if masternode quorums are as safe as you guys tell us they are.
Let the Masternodes write the blockchain and double the payments for masternode rewards (90%) and dev (10%) fund!
As far as I understand miners only choose the quorums. They have no other purpose. Miners are only used as a kind of "independent oracle".
That task can be done using some other external oracle, you don't need to mine a separate blockchain for that.
Maybe use the bitcoin block hashes for this? Hash rate is bigger, so this is very safe.
I don't think DASH needs PoW if masternode quorums are as safe as you guys tell us they are.
Let the Masternodes write the blockchain and double the payments for masternode rewards (90%) and dev (10%) fund!
I normally wouldn't talk to you, but since you were quoted and this could be a valid question, though I suspect you know the answer, I'll answer.
The POW hash is what is used to select the Masternode Quorums. The miners also "write" the block onto the chain. It's really simple, complementary and still needed.
November 10, 2015, 10:02:12 PM
wow
BTC is down to 310USD
DASH @ 0.0751
BTC is down to 310USD
DASH @ 0.0751
November 10, 2015, 09:51:14 PM
...you guys...
We guys were doing fine without you. Please go home.
November 10, 2015, 09:45:36 PM
Actually we are 0.7% of Bitcoin's market cap, or about 1/142.
I make it 0.28% (1/358)
Easiest way to remember it is it's just under 3 thousandths.
I will comment on security by miners. The amount of hashpower(electricity) is proportional to the marketcap(coin price). As Dash price goes up, it is more profitable to mine and more security/miners will be added to the network. The Bitcoin network has about $1,280,000/day in security by miners, Dash has $10,500/day in security. This doesn't include the cost to acquire the miners either which is about 500x the 1 day electric cost. So an attacker would need $640,000,000(1/8 of marketcap) just to get close to 50%, and Dash $5,000,000(1/3 of the marketcap).
That does raise the question, if Dash takes off and matches the BTC marketcap now, how much would be spent on miners/security. The answer is $3,759,000/day. We could reduce the miner share of blockrewards so that millions/day are not just thrown at electricity to power miners. This isn't just an ASIC will solve it problem either. Even with ASICs, eventually more ASICs would be added to use the same electric usage as the value of coins produced. And maybe with a $5 billion marketcap a $3.8 million electric bill is the right amount. Personally, I think it would be be more beneficial to move some miners % at that point to the budget and vote on projects for the community.
Disclaimers: No ASICs are availabe for Dash, nor do I expect them soon. Actual mining electric cost will be less than the value of coins mined to allow for a profit.
Eventually, the miners will come up with the hashes that are used to build the quorums, but will have no control over what is included in the blockchain, thus eliminating the > 50% hash attack vector. The double layer of hash and quorums will be infinitely more secure than POW alone. I don't know how that will play out in hash rate/rewards, but I do see that when ASICs come online, it won't be a threat like it was for Bitcoin and Litecoin, etc... It'll just be a change.
I do see an issue though. Who will set the rates for inclusion into the blockchain? With a flexible block size and a network that is paid to store the blockchain in a distributed manner, does it matter? Do we need fees? Hummmm?
I guess we do, because no matter how much traffic the network can take, it should have a way to reduce unnecessary spam. But If this is somewhat how it'll go, I wonder if the fee will now be set by the MN quorums? Also, the blocks will get to be huge, and I remember reading that China's miners can't package up a block fast enough because of their limited bandwidth. So question is, will this become a problem?
Wow, the more I think about this, the more I see what a challenge all this is
Evan has said the fees are moving to the merchant/receiver end - so maybe it is still per transaction.
I haven't heard of china miners not being able to package blocks. Some miners are not validating the transactions in a block, it gives them a few second edge on each block and usually will work. If another pool or wallet rejects a block, then those miners not validating lose that block.
It is fun to speculate on the evolution revolution.
So if these masternode quorums are assumed to be safe and miners don't have any power on what is included in the blockchain, why not eliminate the X11 DASH mining completely?
As far as I understand miners only choose the quorums. They have no other purpose. Miners are only used as a kind of "independent oracle".
That task can be done using some other external oracle, you don't need to mine a separate blockchain for that.
Maybe use the bitcoin block hashes for this? Hash rate is bigger, so this is very safe.
I don't think DASH needs PoW if masternode quorums are as safe as you guys tell us they are.
Let the Masternodes write the blockchain and double the payments for masternode rewards (90%) and dev (10%) fund!
I thought you knew how crypto worked...
DASH is and will always be a POW...
Miners will always be with DASH....
November 10, 2015, 08:52:10 PM
Actually we are 0.7% of Bitcoin's market cap, or about 1/142.
I make it 0.28% (1/358)
Easiest way to remember it is it's just under 3 thousandths.
I will comment on security by miners. The amount of hashpower(electricity) is proportional to the marketcap(coin price). As Dash price goes up, it is more profitable to mine and more security/miners will be added to the network. The Bitcoin network has about $1,280,000/day in security by miners, Dash has $10,500/day in security. This doesn't include the cost to acquire the miners either which is about 500x the 1 day electric cost. So an attacker would need $640,000,000(1/8 of marketcap) just to get close to 50%, and Dash $5,000,000(1/3 of the marketcap).
That does raise the question, if Dash takes off and matches the BTC marketcap now, how much would be spent on miners/security. The answer is $3,759,000/day. We could reduce the miner share of blockrewards so that millions/day are not just thrown at electricity to power miners. This isn't just an ASIC will solve it problem either. Even with ASICs, eventually more ASICs would be added to use the same electric usage as the value of coins produced. And maybe with a $5 billion marketcap a $3.8 million electric bill is the right amount. Personally, I think it would be be more beneficial to move some miners % at that point to the budget and vote on projects for the community.
Disclaimers: No ASICs are availabe for Dash, nor do I expect them soon. Actual mining electric cost will be less than the value of coins mined to allow for a profit.
Eventually, the miners will come up with the hashes that are used to build the quorums, but will have no control over what is included in the blockchain, thus eliminating the > 50% hash attack vector. The double layer of hash and quorums will be infinitely more secure than POW alone. I don't know how that will play out in hash rate/rewards, but I do see that when ASICs come online, it won't be a threat like it was for Bitcoin and Litecoin, etc... It'll just be a change.
I do see an issue though. Who will set the rates for inclusion into the blockchain? With a flexible block size and a network that is paid to store the blockchain in a distributed manner, does it matter? Do we need fees? Hummmm?
I guess we do, because no matter how much traffic the network can take, it should have a way to reduce unnecessary spam. But If this is somewhat how it'll go, I wonder if the fee will now be set by the MN quorums? Also, the blocks will get to be huge, and I remember reading that China's miners can't package up a block fast enough because of their limited bandwidth. So question is, will this become a problem?
Wow, the more I think about this, the more I see what a challenge all this is
Evan has said the fees are moving to the merchant/receiver end - so maybe it is still per transaction.
I haven't heard of china miners not being able to package blocks. Some miners are not validating the transactions in a block, it gives them a few second edge on each block and usually will work. If another pool or wallet rejects a block, then those miners not validating lose that block.
It is fun to speculate on the evolution revolution.
So if these masternode quorums are assumed to be safe and miners don't have any power on what is included in the blockchain, why not eliminate the X11 DASH mining completely?
As far as I understand miners only choose the quorums. They have no other purpose. Miners are only used as a kind of "independent oracle".
That task can be done using some other external oracle, you don't need to mine a separate blockchain for that.
Maybe use the bitcoin block hashes for this? Hash rate is bigger, so this is very safe.
I don't think DASH needs PoW if masternode quorums are as safe as you guys tell us they are.
Let the Masternodes write the blockchain and double the payments for masternode rewards (90%) and dev (10%) fund!
November 10, 2015, 08:37:32 PM
UN privacy head slams 'worse than scary' UK surveillance bill
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/10/un_privacy_head_slams_uk_surveillance_bill/
"Giving a presentation at an open forum on the Right to Privacy in The Digital Age...he argued, "we need to do something about protecting privacy"
DASH Evolution can't get here soon enough.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/10/un_privacy_head_slams_uk_surveillance_bill/
"Giving a presentation at an open forum on the Right to Privacy in The Digital Age...he argued, "we need to do something about protecting privacy"
DASH Evolution can't get here soon enough.
November 10, 2015, 08:14:17 PM
Charlie Lee (who, whatever you think of Litecoin, is well known and influential) was talking about how the instamine holds Dash back
But it doesn't 'hold it back'.
Argue it with Charlie Lee, not me. He does how many speaking engagements a year? I do...somewhat less.
It is certainly relevant when someone of that visibility states it to be the case, whether you agree with him or not.
November 10, 2015, 08:05:11 PM
* An important criteria in the selection of supported currencies has been that they all maintain a high standard of transactional transparency
Thats hilarious.
All cryptocurrencies are anonymous. You can't have a high degree of "transactional transparency" unless you stamp people's names on the addresses.
November 10, 2015, 07:38:15 PM
I found a release that coinify is accepting 16 different cryptos. I don't think it is a coincidence they are not picking up Dash. Here is the link to the news brief.
https://news.coinify.com/coinify-merchants-can-now-accept-16-blockchain-currencies/
Check out the fine print under the coins they choose.
* An important criteria in the selection of supported currencies has been that they all maintain a high standard of transactional transparency. We reserve the right to alter this list in case of any currency no longer fits this criteria.
Are they trying to avoiding drug/gun smuggling by choosing only the trackable coins? Maybe they get a kickback from DEA or ATF on any drug/gun busts.
Are merchants scared to accept cash because someone could have been associated with something illegal? No. Why care about the anonymity with crypto? If anything I would want to refuse the trackable currency because the government could confiscate it based on history they find searching the blockchain.
https://news.coinify.com/coinify-merchants-can-now-accept-16-blockchain-currencies/
Check out the fine print under the coins they choose.
* An important criteria in the selection of supported currencies has been that they all maintain a high standard of transactional transparency. We reserve the right to alter this list in case of any currency no longer fits this criteria.
Are they trying to avoiding drug/gun smuggling by choosing only the trackable coins? Maybe they get a kickback from DEA or ATF on any drug/gun busts.
Are merchants scared to accept cash because someone could have been associated with something illegal? No. Why care about the anonymity with crypto? If anything I would want to refuse the trackable currency because the government could confiscate it based on history they find searching the blockchain.
November 10, 2015, 07:08:41 PM
Charlie Lee (who, whatever you think of Litecoin, is well known and influential) was talking about how the instamine holds Dash back
But it doesn't 'hold it back'.
It has fought off every would be competitor there's been for nearly two years. (From X-Coin, Cloakcoin, Vericoin, Cryptonote, you name it - they all came here trolling all year long and saying "Drk/Dash will be gone in a month" now that
Instead it became the third largest marketcap pure-currency crypto in the world.
It's been able to directly address and enhance monetary deficiencies in crypto rather than indirectly.
It is the only articulated blockchain protocol coin outside of distant clones like crave and as such has been able to lever that technology to incentivise and grow the network, start a decentralised governance protocol and acheive unsurpassed transaction performance for a proof of work blockchain.
It has a highly organised, focused and structured development effort which delivers and a roadmap to match.
...if thats what people call being "held back" then the rest of crypto's in shackles.
Jump to: