Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 2326. (Read 9723858 times)

Greece getting ready to default.

Varoufakis off to New York to talk to world's top sovereign bankrupcy lawyer.

Rating agencies downgrading them at the 11th hour to save their miserable ar*sses in case they get blamed for giving a positive rating to a bankrupt economy.

IMF warning of liquidity shock.

******** Amber Alert **********

I would not be selling anything with a limited supply right now, not even my stock of jokes.

Remember we were discussing about reorg. What Evan explained to me is that blocks with conflicting transactions are rejected by the network the moment they are generated. So approved blocks can't contain conflicting transactions, so the reorg would be only approved blocks. It's like asking how does Bitcoin protect against invalid proof-of-work when doing a re-org, it doesn't consider those blocks for re-org.

I hope this helps.

All P2Pool nodes list => http://p2pool.pl/dash-p2p.php
p2p-nodes source code

Right chaps, I'm taking over.



Yes, I get all that.

But for now, the network needs one voice. Otherwise, you're just considered a bunch of loons by the media.

I've never really understood the obsession with crypto foundations and why people get so riled up about them. The Dash Foundation (same as the Bitcoin Foundation and others) is just a collection of people who are funded by the community to work on certain goals established by the Foundation's board. If the Foundation becomes out of touch with the community, the community stops donating, funds dry up, and the Foundation dies (happening with Bitcoin right now).

In our case, the Dash Foundation happens to be "endorsed" by our lead dev, but so what? You or me or anybody else can do whatever we want to promote Dash however we chose. The Foundation is nothing more than a centralized entity with a little street cred and some cash. They don't have control over anything.

That's another thing--I've seen several posts over the past weeks about people concerned about how much "power" Evan has. Y'all, Evan has as much power as we give him. Don't like an update that he releases? No problem--don't update your client. If enough of the network doesn't update, then he's effectively cut out. Not that there's any foreseeable reason for that to happen, but you get my point. It's the miners, the MN owners, and the users who choose what version of the software to run.

Finally, there's been talk about the "bus factor" (what if Evan gets hit by a bus tomorrow). It's irrelevant. God forbid we lose Evan...but so what? Bitcoin lost Satoshi and they've managed to survive.

The entire point of crypto is to create a decentralized entity that's in the hand of its users. Some of those users and developers band together to form a Foundation. That's great. Help them, or do your own thing. It's up to you.

Buy-in:  You could have a group that is on their own and the Foundation won't listen to a bloody thing they say. If, however, the Foundation says, we like this approach and we will listen and take note of everything, and we won't say 'go away because we didn't think of that first' - then you have buy-in.

Or something like that.

Anybody read the new book "Darknet" by the author of "Cyberstorm?" He's got a lot in there about crypto and DACs. It's actually not too inaccurate so far.

He mentions darkcoins which in his book are abbreviated as "DC" and are worth $500 each and used on black markets.

Talks about Russ Ulbricht and Silk Road, anonymizing browsing through Tor, etc. Kind of interesting so far.

Currently, we're helping out on the promotional video.  What does buy-in mean? 

Bitcoin going sub $210 on this round of dumping.

Cool.

Who were the team leaders, what was the outcome, what level of buy-in did the DASH Foundation have?

We've had a lot of groups form to come up with ways of "getting out there".  Right now, I'm with the DASH Ambassador Group, we've been waiting for you!  Where have you been?  LOL.

Can I suggest a Plan B team? Or they could just simply be an alternative approach team; which may end up being the Plan A team?

We have a DASH Foundation that is working away behind closed doors (well, more practically on IRC) on a Master Plan for mass adoption.

Like the advert says, what's your plan when you run out of water?

In other words, we need a team to independently think about, come up with and put forward a plan for mass adoption.

That way you remove the risk of group think bias when there are one or two people that influence a direction which ultimately doesn't work.

You could extend this concept to three groups, etc. Groups of 3-5 are very effective, any more than that and it gets too complicated.

You could end up with different groups having one or two great ideas and when you merge them all, you get a great master plan.

Ultimately you have to take a pragmatic approach and recognize you need consensus.

My rationale for this is simple - Bitcoin has gone for mass adoption and it has plenty of retailers, gambling sites, exchanges, etc. But it hasn't got mass adoption. Trying to repeat the same steps as Bitcoin but with a shiny new tool is a risk, IMO.

Discuss.

AFAIK, no. If a tx has been baked into the chain by the miners then the MN network will not be able to achieve a conflicting lock. Transaction locking only extends forward from the last mined block.

Thanks for explaining.
But does that mean the transaction locking overrides a previous block with an approved transaction if there is a conflict thus voiding the transactions or is it only delayed?

Someone told her theres going to be a European Army and shes first in line for conscription to be the red shirted cannon fodder
 for 'training Exercises' in the East.

Reorg simply means that another chain is discovered with more proof-of-work than their own. That also means that all blocks in both chains have been approved by the system and do not contain conflicting transactions. In the case that an approved block does contain a conflicting transaction, the client will remove the block when the lock comes in. So there's no case in which you can switch to a chain with a conflict.

I just wanted to note that the upper line was always extremely optimistic/pessimistic (depending on if you'd like more or less coins).  We've had high difficulty since almost the beginning, and  therefore are hugging the lower line.  We're most likely going to have a total supply well under 15 million coins.  But in the end it doesn't really matter, as the coins can be divided infinitely.  I was watching an older video of Andreas, it really is a good one.  He talks about how the future will have many different currencies that will offer different things.  One thing that is important in the surviving coins will be their network. A crypto currency must have a strong network.  I think Dash may have one of the strongest, possibly the strongest next to Bitcoin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KW_wYvZ1eZg


In Spirit

Harder to keep your debt-slaves in oppressed servitude if progress is being made and they are able to buy stuff cheaper.

Sorry for the brief commercial break but this was too hilarious not to interrupt proceedings with.

I have always thought that the obsession with deflation was misplaced. I understand the concept: in theory, people won't pay $10 today for something that will be $9.98 tomorrow.

But that's not true, is it? If it was, the electronics industry would be dead. That TV I just bought for $800 today will be $600 next year and $300 the year after that. That goes for every other piece of technology and gadgetry on the market. So I don't really buy the "deflation is death" thing.

The EU is like "OMG we have 0.5% deflation, quick, create more money." Do you really thing somebody is going to refrain from buying a 20,000 euro car because if they wait a whole year, they can get it for a hundred euros less? Not likely!