Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 1686. (Read 9723706 times)
October 24, 2015, 01:39:52 AM
PROUD MILESTONE: Can you believe I've gotten over 4,000 people listening to my Dash ramblings?
October 24, 2015, 01:06:45 AM
Duffield needs to rethink his extreme compound interest node system. The Hobonickel and it's interest were considered kind of sketchy, and it's nowhere near as sketchy as Dash. For coins like the Hobonickel, you got huge interest if nobody staked, but it goes down to like 1% if everyone stakes. The stakers and miners are also all competing for the same pie with no distinction between the two. In Dashcoin, you have tons of people staking, yet everyone appears to be making huge gains. Something doesn't quite add up here.
In the Hobonickel, someone gaining more stake just increased their mining power, but giving people huge compound interest in Dashcoin is completely different because they're constantly manufacturing new Sybil nodes, thus hurting the integrity of the system. I'm not going to pretend any system is fully Sybil resistant, but if people want Sybil nodes, you should at least force them to pay for it in the form of mining expenditure or buying on exchange instead of giving it to them for free.
If you give people compound interest, you should probably be raising the coin requirement for a supernode, but instead, Duffield is talking about lowering it to 500, increasing Sybil count even higher? lol? Is this coin supposed to be some kind of Sybil manufacturing plant?
In the Hobonickel, someone gaining more stake just increased their mining power, but giving people huge compound interest in Dashcoin is completely different because they're constantly manufacturing new Sybil nodes, thus hurting the integrity of the system. I'm not going to pretend any system is fully Sybil resistant, but if people want Sybil nodes, you should at least force them to pay for it in the form of mining expenditure or buying on exchange instead of giving it to them for free.
If you give people compound interest, you should probably be raising the coin requirement for a supernode, but instead, Duffield is talking about lowering it to 500, increasing Sybil count even higher? lol? Is this coin supposed to be some kind of Sybil manufacturing plant?
Consider the implications in extreme cases for the "1/100 chance of receiving a double payment" "Easter egg."
If you have 100 masternodes, you always get at least 1 double payment/round. If you only have 1, the variance kills you.
It's far easier to go from 100 to 101 (and thus, 100 to 200) masternodes than from 1 to 2 using interest, and the "Easter egg" only compounds that effect. So the richest DashHoles get even richer, faster, depending mostly on how rich they are to begin with.
As with the aborted air-drop attempt to correct the insta-mine's maldistribution, the "Easter egg" is yet another gift to otoh the dash whale. It's actually more of quid pro quo, to repay otoh for single-handedly propping up the price of this dying, obsolete scam and getting new pumps going.
Like Scientology, this cult is run for the benefit of its High Priest, financiers, and enforcers, not the late-comers.
And by late-comer I mean anyone who didn't participate in the first 48 hours of gratuitous instamining.
We'd like to attribute this to incompetence, but the preponderance of evidence for malice is overwhelming.
October 24, 2015, 12:37:19 AM
Dash Social Media Outlets
updated Oct 2015:
(all managed by us)
https://dashtalk.org
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anndash-dash-dashorg-first-self-funding-self-governing-crypto-currency-421615
https://forum.bitcoin.com/dash-f67/
http://mmctalk.com/index.php?forums/dash-ex-darkcoin-forum.60/
https://www.facebook.com/DashPay
https://www.facebook.com/DashBrazil
https://www.facebook.com/Dash.Russia
https://www.facebook.com/groups/DarkcoinVenezuela/
https://www.facebook.com/Darkcoin.Polska
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1127359790623640/
https://www.facebook.com/Dash-Digital-Cash-London-1559503720975382/
https://www.minds.com/Dashpay
https://twitter.com/dashpay
https://plus.google.com/115080614177201373926
https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay
https://instagram.com/dashpay
https://www.youtube.com/DarkcoinTV
https://soundcloud.com/dashpay
https://www.linkedin.com/grp/home?gid=8179817
GitHub: https://github.com/dashpay/dash
QQ:
达世币官方群/DASH.China
419967021
updated Oct 2015:
(all managed by us)
https://dashtalk.org
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anndash-dash-dashorg-first-self-funding-self-governing-crypto-currency-421615
https://forum.bitcoin.com/dash-f67/
http://mmctalk.com/index.php?forums/dash-ex-darkcoin-forum.60/
https://www.facebook.com/DashPay
https://www.facebook.com/DashBrazil
https://www.facebook.com/Dash.Russia
https://www.facebook.com/groups/DarkcoinVenezuela/
https://www.facebook.com/Darkcoin.Polska
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1127359790623640/
https://www.facebook.com/Dash-Digital-Cash-London-1559503720975382/
https://www.minds.com/Dashpay
https://twitter.com/dashpay
https://plus.google.com/115080614177201373926
https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay
https://instagram.com/dashpay
https://www.youtube.com/DarkcoinTV
https://soundcloud.com/dashpay
https://www.linkedin.com/grp/home?gid=8179817
GitHub: https://github.com/dashpay/dash
QQ:
达世币官方群/DASH.China
419967021
October 23, 2015, 11:19:51 PM
PAID SOCK PUPPET & TROLL!
Wow...cant believe how low class and desperate xmrats are. Right from the ghetto.
October 23, 2015, 10:40:33 PM
Adamwhite and his friends need to DASH thread.
I login to see his postings.
Without them, no tension in this thread.
to adam and friends
please put sell wall 10,000 dashes at 0.0060 btc
I login to see his postings.
Without them, no tension in this thread.
to adam and friends
please put sell wall 10,000 dashes at 0.0060 btc
October 23, 2015, 09:38:27 PM
Despite what trolls in this thread would have you believe, the nearest competitor to Dash is not Monero, it's Peercoin.
Marketcap Dash: 49558
Marketcap Peercoin: 28837
Peercoin is a trunk transfer design, high transfer fee cryptocurrency. (The high transfer fee is a design specification. See http://peercoin.net/whitepaper).
Dash is a cash equivalent. Low transfer fee, immediate exchange and maximum anonymity.
October 23, 2015, 09:20:21 PM
nah... I'm here to see what it looks like when a scam coin dies.
No You're not. You're here to drop off idle remarks.
October 23, 2015, 09:09:41 PM
Everyone is in this thread because Dash is the only monetary medium that is starting to equate to cash on an electronic platform.
Even rpietila, iCEBREAKER, Dasher & Co are here.
nah... I'm here to see what it looks like when a scam coin dies.
October 23, 2015, 08:57:45 PM
OK then: How can you still claim, facing this information, that distribution doesn't matter?
Because no-one ever invested in an asset on the basis of its distribution.
October 23, 2015, 08:42:22 PM
What value would a currency have if only 1 person held the entire supply?
Quite a lot actually.
In most assets, the majority share is held by a minority. That's what gives it value. If you distribute stuff widely, it has no value (because it's widely distributed).
However, we've got to look at this in the context of a remark that distributeToMePls made:
Richest 1% to own more than rest of world, Oxfam says
The basis for the asymmetry of wealth in the world is asymmetry in the money creation process. It's nothing to do with politics.
People without a banking licence cannot repay their loans on the same basis as they borrowed (i.e. by levering up liquidity on a fixed asset base). If banking was decentralised you'd be able to pay your mortgage off 10 times faster that you would than with the current system.
Let me explain it another way:
[1] - when you borrow for a mortgage, you are not borrowing PAST wealth. You are borrowing FUTURE wealth (worth nothing)
[2] - when you repay your mortgage, you are paying PAST wealth
Thats the reason for the asymmetrical wealth in the world. To get your hands on any money you need to do work. The lenders only need to print.
************ Solution ***************
There are 2 solutions to this scam. 1 is the old gold standard (which limits the ability of banks to print).
The other is to continue the current banking system but decentralise and granulise it so that people CAN repay their mortgages on the same basis that they borrowed.
Bitcoin and Dash are electronic equivalents of gold. There are no others that closely match the historical properties of money in the top 20 cryptos.
For [2], the solution is Bitshares. Bitshares is a decentralised bank. I have nowhere near the same holdings in BTS as I do in Dash (because it isn't as much fun) but economically. Bitshares is an incredibly liberating concept - probably way ahead of its time - except it actually works now.
It takes the banking model and makes it available to anyone that cares to own a share in that model. Not only that, it establishes a natural commercial interface between the market for risk assets and the market for stable currencies. (See if egg heads like GMaxwell or ABack are even interested in economics. They are not - they are coders).
Dash, on the other hand is a token.
Until 2009 there were no electronic, uncounterfeitable tokens. Now that they've been discovered, their value will follow the classic characteristics of cash: e.g. instant, verifiable, anonymous (not private). Dash is a value basis - like gold nuggets. A very different concept from Bitshares.
October 23, 2015, 08:29:40 PM
) October 23, 2015, 08:28:28 PM
They are a bit behind , but still
Official Bitcoin Wednesday Post:
http://www.bitcoinwednesday.com/evan-duffield-presentation-video/
Official Bitcoin Wednesday Post:
http://www.bitcoinwednesday.com/evan-duffield-presentation-video/
October 23, 2015, 08:26:13 PM
OK then: How can you still claim, facing this information, that distribution doesn't matter? Just because it may be a fact, it's not ok. At all. This fact is the reason Bitcoin was created. To alleviate this very injustice. I feel very much confirmed by this, so thanks for proving my point.
Edit: Just to make clear that I'm not trying to divert from the main argument here: Yes a system like this can have value despite unfair distribution, but anyone can see that this system is a direct path to self-destruction. That's why I mentioned the massive loss of value of the dollar.
I don't think cryptocurrencies are here to help with wealth redistribution. I think crypto is about empowering people and taking control of your own finances, whatever those may be, through the use of decentralized trustless technology.
How can Bitcoin, as a technology, assist in solving wealth distribution? That is a way deeper human issue if one considers it an issue at all. Some people will just consider it a natural consequence of human social interaction not resolvable through technology.
Edit: I also think wealth and value need to be created first not just distributed and that comes from creativity, drive, innovation, opportunity etc which are not parameters that are equally distributed either.
October 23, 2015, 08:12:25 PM
PoW is a lousy way to distribute the coins to any number than at most 100-1,000 holders. But it is flawed to think that market crashes work to this end either. I don't believe that the dilemma of distributing coins has been adequately solved yet, and I do believe that it is an important task to consider if a coins actually aims for global markets, or even a dominant position in them.
I agree that coins are distributed on rallies and not on crashes. When the price is going up is when new people jump in, is just human nature. Fortunately on Dash so far we have had two big ones above 0.02 which helped reach critical mass in terms of community size and now we will continue to grow organically and through face to face interaction.
October 23, 2015, 08:06:54 PM
OK then: How can you still claim, facing this information, that distribution doesn't matter? Just because it may be a fact, it's not ok. At all. This fact is the reason Bitcoin was created. To alleviate this very injustice. I feel very much confirmed by this, so thanks for proving my point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95KTvNVCHY8&feature=youtu.be&t=32m
October 23, 2015, 07:42:02 PM
(Good old c-cex historial)I know the distribution was ok because I was there (unfortunately, that pic was my best buy)
Thousands of DRKs for peanuts in exchanges for months. What haters mostly don't understand is that X-coin (darkcoin later) was just another shitcoin at the beginning. There was no "master plan" to create what we see now. Just a hard-working dev with an amazing talent and a good issue to work on: privacy. What we see now is 2 years of hard work.
Meanwhile our competition instead of working building their communities or developing their coins pay people to FUD us here. So sad.
October 23, 2015, 07:30:52 PM
I thought this was deserving of a crosspost, Evan answering some of Anonymint's questions. These interactions always produce great results. Really good for crypto in general.
Hello!
I'm glad to see you're still around and looking at some of the more advanced issues within the space. I'm really liking how you laid out the issues and the trouble with this type of implementation. These are the exact issues that I've been thinking about solutions to over the last year and I finally found a strategy that has none of these issues mentioned.
However, signatures only need to be stored for a few thousand blocks. There's simply no chance of a reorg rearranging days of transactions unless something went terribly wrong with the network. In that case, the Bitcoin code is actually setup to halt, which is better than having two competing chains for that long. So in this case, bloat is not an issue.
Also, instant transactions are now a natural result of the evolution design, not something build on top as they are currently. Instant transactions built in this way also are anonymous. We're talking about a different technology.
The proof of work hashes we use are buried deeper in the blockchain for Evolution, beyond the reach of chain reorganization. It's also multiple hashes that will decide the quorum structure, we're calling this technology the quorum-chain.
In Evolution, miners don't decide which transactions are mined, the masternode network does via Quorum technology.
I'm glad to see you're still around and looking at some of the more advanced issues within the space. I'm really liking how you laid out the issues and the trouble with this type of implementation. These are the exact issues that I've been thinking about solutions to over the last year and I finally found a strategy that has none of these issues mentioned.
If you review the quotes of Evan I dug up and if you understand how he implemented InstantX, then you can deduce very obviously how he is intending to implement faster TPS, as I explained. To resummarize, the block chain hash combined mathematically (hashed?) with the inputs to a transaction is used to determine which quorum of masternodes can sign the transaction, then if M of N of them sign, this is broadcast to the block chain and the transaction is considered confirmed even before the block chain has produced the next block. Note Evan specifically stated inputs and not outputs and I assume the reason is so you can't game which masternodes can be the quorum, but then each input needs to reach a mathematically determined quorum separately (don't know if he has realized that yet), and thus the number of signatures on the block chain will increase by the average number of inputs per transaction (multiplied by N!).
Thus the negative implications of this increased TPS and instant confirmations (which will be realized in his design) are as I stated upthread:
Block chain becomes more bloated due to N times more signatures, not less.
Thus the negative implications of this increased TPS and instant confirmations (which will be realized in his design) are as I stated upthread:
Block chain becomes more bloated due to N times more signatures, not less.
However, signatures only need to be stored for a few thousand blocks. There's simply no chance of a reorg rearranging days of transactions unless something went terribly wrong with the network. In that case, the Bitcoin code is actually setup to halt, which is better than having two competing chains for that long. So in this case, bloat is not an issue.
Also, instant transactions are now a natural result of the evolution design, not something build on top as they are currently. Instant transactions built in this way also are anonymous. We're talking about a different technology.
Immunity to 51% attack is an incorrect claim, because the block chain hash determines which quorum, thus a chain reorganization can rewrite which quorum was authorized to M of N sign.
The proof of work hashes we use are buried deeper in the blockchain for Evolution, beyond the reach of chain reorganization. It's also multiple hashes that will decide the quorum structure, we're calling this technology the quorum-chain.
The instant confirmations can not be trusted because if they are on an orphaned chain (not 51% attack but just the normal process of orphan rate or even 25 - 33% selfish mining attack), then they can be reversed.
In Evolution, miners don't decide which transactions are mined, the masternode network does via Quorum technology.
October 23, 2015, 07:28:05 PM
October 23, 2015, 07:23:42 PM
no more pumps?
October 23, 2015, 07:19:41 PM
OK then: How can you still claim, facing this information, that distribution doesn't matter? Just because it may be a fact, it's not ok. At all. This fact is the reason Bitcoin was created. To alleviate this very injustice. I feel very much confirmed by this, so thanks for proving my point.
Edit: Just to make clear that I'm not trying to divert from the main argument here: Yes a system like this can have value despite unfair distribution, but anyone can see that this system is a direct path to self-destruction. That's why I mentioned the massive loss of value of the dollar.
Bonus:
iCEsCAMMER under investigation:
January 6, 2014 http://www.coindesk.com/asic-manufacturer-hashfast-faces-legal-action/
May 9, 2014 http://www.coindesk.com/hashfast-cuts-50-of-staff-denies-bankruptcy-rumors/
August 18, 2015 http://www.coindesk.com/judge-approves-fraud-claims-against-bitcoin-mining-firm-hashfast/
lol triple-rekt
Jump to: