Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 1635. (Read 9723706 times)

TROLL !

"If Evan had described this in a paper, then there would be no confusion." .... yeah if ... you just have to read it ....

https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DOC/Whitepaper

If the description in the whitepaper is not enough and you need further explanation that would be something productive in here ...
But saying it's not in the whitepaper just shows us you didn't even read the whitepaper. Total Troll.

The point of open source software is exactly that - for you to prove that something is broken, because that is your assertion. If you can't prove it, the software is in production so by definition it is working until you break it.

Goodmorning... Mr.  White.  All potential crypto investors are sitting on their seat edges waiting for your informative  Trolling.  Potential investors will surely find your Trolling very beneficial and most informative.  Please lead us from the brink of financial ruin... And possibly making the biggest mistake in our life's.  Please part us with your wisdom.... Lol.  

I only own a small amount at the moment, so I wouldn't represent my holdings a serious investment position.

Asking about good points is a fair question, though. In no particular order:

Releases tend to, you know, get released. The last major release was a significant upgrade and seemed to have relatively few roll out problems. That speaks to the ability of the team to deliver.

It has low inflation, so in a weak market (one driven more by supply considerations than consistent demand) on might expect less price weakness from dumping of new supply than otherwise. I'm not sure about this though, as one can look to something like Nxt which has zero inflation and has still performed terribly, and Dash hasn't retained value all that well either. Nxt lacks Dash's structural incentive to hold though so that may make a difference (you can stake, but the rewards are negligible).

The InstantX system, while flawed, is like most "zero conf" systems in that is sufficient for casual transitions, and is deployed. If there were actually a lot of routine commerce going on with Dash that would be very nice. There isn't, but the feature being there means one obstacle has been removed.

Likewise Darksend is also not perfect, but again for a degree of casual privacy it exists and mostly works. This could until recently be viewed as a clear improvement on Bitcoin, although JoinMarket has come on the scene and is probably about as good as Darksend (which is to say both are flawed, but the flaws are different), so I'm not sure this is true any more. Darksend is still a bit more mature, as JoinMarket hasn't been integrated into any wallets yet, though I do expect that to happen.

In general, I don't like the idea of investing in what is basically a one-man asset, but as leaders go, Evan seems to do a good job and I would rate his day-to-day leadership as apparently favorable (I don't see everything "behind the scenes" of course so I can't say absolutely this is true). I think Dash would do well to develop a broader team of visible people with both leadership and technical skills though.

The idea of (large) coin holders voting to allocate a budget is worth experimenting with.

It has a high market cap ranking which has its own value in terms of visibility.

As a hedge it may be mathematically worth owning some even if you don't think it will succeed (though you do need to believe there is at least some change it will appreciate in value, which I do). There aren't really any other vehicles with directly comparable properties.

No... Your right... It's your job to prove it's broken!

 

Hi Dnaleor, that is a good question. Extracts from the whitepaper:


I think this explains pretty much how it works. Cheers.

it's not my job to prove your system is working.
If Evan had described this in a paper, then there would be no confusion.

Yeah, sorry, I corrected my post while you were replying, here's my adjusted version for readability:

Instead of the current supply, you would have to add the supply at block height 210240 to the series, which is 5 million according to

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/dash/block.dws?00000000000ae5b7e33558e0601f8f1c5cacc6dbc48ac5f90289d71609fa6355.htm

So that would bring the lower bound to approx. 18.6. Theoretically 10% of the future supply may not get issued since it it reserved for the bugeting system and if there are no proposals, those 10% would not get created. But even then, total supply would be above 14.

I find it amusing that trolls claim the system is broken, yet they don't understand how the network actually works.

Try looking at the open source code. Why not even launch your own implementation and try to break it - or should that be, confirm it is broken 

No, I didn't.
13.6 is the total for the serie from the first decline (when reward become 5*13/14) till infinity (not till 2050 because we used to say "total supply").
I can't count the emission when there were bugs. That's why I counted total supply as current emission (6kk) + supply from the first decline till infinity. So only the part of this year from decline till now was counted twice and that's 0.7kk approx (min).

P.S. "// yearly decline of production by 7.1% per year, projected 21.3M coins max by year 2050." - here goes "max"

Well, at least you've counted the emission from launch until now twice. 13.6 is the total for the entire series, so the 6.6 (or at least the part of it that was created according to the current formula) is already included.

EDIT: Took another look and saw that you're series starts after the first reduction, so what I wrote above does not really apply. But you still can't add current supply to the series without counting this year's emission twice. You would have to add the supply at block height 210240, which is 5 million according to

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/dash/block.dws?00000000000ae5b7e33558e0601f8f1c5cacc6dbc48ac5f90289d71609fa6355.htm

So that would bring the lower bound to approx. 18.6. Theoretically 10% of the future supply may not get issued since it it reserved for the bugeting system and if there are no proposals, those 10% would not get created. But even then, total supply would be above 14.

Ignoring the first 5464 blocks where the rewards were computed differently (would adds roughly 2.7 million coins in the worst case):

5*210240
5*13/14*210240
5*13/14*13/14*210240
5*13/14*13/14*13/14*210240
...

I've just thrown the formula above into a little shell script for the next 36 years (because 2050 was mentioned):

Easy to see that the lower limit is about 14 million coins, add to that the (worst case) 2.7 millions and you'd have about 16.6 million expected coins.

No idea why ~22 millions are mentioned in the source code, maybe Evan assumed some average difficulty back then.

But, to be honest, I don't really care. 2 postings here per week are more than enough.

Ok, so DASH devs, please explain me how the network knows that masternodes are actually doing their tasks and are not just idling while still receiving their masternode rewards.

This is an important qustion that needs an answer:
If masternodes can idle and are just being paid for a "ping", then masternodes who are doing the mixing and locking are more centralized then in a situation where they can't idle.
Services like masternodecloud.com could just host all masternodes for their customers and not performing the tasks they are supposed to do.

So please, I really want to know an answer to this.

Nice post. Suggestion: put links to your kind of explicatory material in the OP to plug troll-holes as they come up, then spend less troll-jousting energy by posting links to "Troll-response #54" or whatever.

I wince at every careful reply crafted ab initio for some cut/paste instamine bait (for example). That hard work just scrolls away quickly and the energy level is hard to sustain when serious govcorp-style  DDOR (reality) trolling kicks in.

For those who think a high post count is a good thing - I get it, but remember that one troll technique is to post relentlessly (any content at all, and the longer the better) so that nothing of value is visible for long and so that "normal" viewers give up in disgust because of the clutter.

The M-word troll circus is still very amateurish, and it provides a training environment for whatever is to come. Reinventing money is about as iconoclastic as it gets.

main.cpp
The min reward is 5, annual decline is by 1/14 (mult. by 13/14) and we have 210240 blocks / year.
The current supply is 6kk and we had one annual decline so the min reward is 5*13/14 atm.
That gives 5*13/14 * 210240 = 976114 new coins per year. Annual decline yields infinite geometric serie and we got approx 976114 * 1/(1-13/14) = 13.6kk additional coins. Add the current supply = 6kk and that result in ~20kk total coins.
That's about minimum possible supply that doesn't depend on hashrate (I believe the maximum is five times more). There are super blocks now but it was said that they fit in supply, right?

What did I miss? How do the total supply can be less than 20kk?

Care to switch on the brain before posting?^^

Let me explain this for you:

• Dash uses a dynamically calculated block reward. When the global hash-rate is low (means not many people are mining Dash) the reward of coins per found block is higher than with a higher hash-rate. At some times the hash-rate was VERY high, meaning there were fewer coins created than theoretically possible. The idea behind this was to have higher rewards when the hash-rate low, thus creating a higher incentive for miners to mine Dash when the hash-rate is low. This worked perfectly so far.
• No one can predict how much the hash-rate will be at a given time, therefore the initial number of 22 millions Dash was the maximum possible coins in the optimistic case that the hash-rate would stay so low that always the maximum amount per block would be paid. This of course was rarely the case.
• If you estimate the maximum possible coins at a later point in time (where you already know how many coins were created during e.g. the first year) you would of course come to a lower result.
• At one point during the last weeks Evan adjusted the announcement post to reflect this new number

Of course you already knew this, but there might be newcomers who don't know. Now they do.

Yes i understood very early that to disagree here means troll  No one answers questions from Dash.. always only changes to benefit the developers

Nice to see EvanTheInstaminer implementing some of my suggestions!