sorry to interrupt guys (and girls) but it looks like the proof of service is getting integrated into v.0.11.2
(which is still in testing phase by the way). https://github.com/darkcoin/darkcoin/commits/v0.11.2.x
Proof of service seems to bring the following (subject to change as its still in testing phase) :
- Ensures ports remain open and client are responsive to IX requests.
- Completely 100% decentralized. This farms out the work of checking the masternode network to the masternode network. 1% of the network is determistically selected to check another 1% of the network each block. It takes six separate checks to deactivate a node, thus making it tamper proof.
- Nodes are kept in the masternode list if they fail enough PoSe checks to deactivate. They will continue to be checked until the operator fixes them. However they will not be paid while they're failing checks.
exciting developments
qwizzie
Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 2675. (Read 9723733 times)
March 16, 2015, 01:55:53 PM
March 16, 2015, 01:52:10 PM
using these products analogy is simply retarded.. crypto currency is closer to stocks than products like big mac, banana etc.
nope, crypto currency is legally property as is a big mac. Neither convey any legal rights other than under property law. Shares on the other hand convey rights under company law including a share of ownership of the actual brand. (look at it like shares are property with additional rights under company law, crypto currencies don't have those as they are just property)
i am not a lawyer..but why do i feel that darkcoin is destroying my property and creating confusion by buying and selling their property under my property's name?
FFS GO AND TALK TO YOUR DEV!!!!!
Dev's done a runner?
Well there's no one to talk to then. This is what happens with anon devs.
DRK is not "destroying your property"!!!
Man oh man...this is just becoming SOOOO tedious!
why buy our dev, github and other accounts? what is the purpose? unless dash dev go out on a selling spree like a sidewalk vendor (slb:dash github for sale..anybody?)
March 16, 2015, 01:48:17 PM
using these products analogy is simply retarded.. crypto currency is closer to stocks than products like big mac, banana etc.
nope, crypto currency is legally property as is a big mac. Neither convey any legal rights other than under property law. Shares on the other hand convey rights under company law including a share of ownership of the actual brand. (look at it like shares are property with additional rights under company law, crypto currencies don't have those as they are just property)
i am not a lawyer..but why do i feel that darkcoin is destroying my property and creating confusion by buying and selling their property under my property's name?
Good thing Darkcoin isn't selling their property under your property's name. DASH =/= Dashcoin. Further, you're free to continue development at your own leisure.
Thats the point, i pointed out a few times, that all these discussions MyFarm and the other trolls are having are pure speculation.
There was no information published what that darkcoin / dashcoin deal was. The only thing we know for sure is that the github of dashcoin changed. - Does this fact makes any change to your dashcoin? NO. (You can trade, own dashcoin nothing changed at all.)
Noone is destroying anything besides the trolls themselfs.
Darkcoin is not even taking the dashcoin name, its named DASH.
(But i guess reading a word with more then 4 characters is to hard for you trolls)
March 16, 2015, 01:47:38 PM
This is clearly coming from someone who understands and has been involved in proper VC funded experiences. This isn't a trolling comment this is actually something every other Suit watching would say if they took the time to read all the crap which they never would.
We have all been acting like kids regarding this. If you are a business man with vision and understanding this comment should sit with you and make you ponder.
i doubt it because one thing VC's aren't is legally-dumb. myfarm has no clue legally what he is talking about. he mentions 'no legal precedent' in every post because he thinks that means he can buy a big mac and then sue McDonalds for using his trademark lol
March 16, 2015, 01:46:54 PM
using these products analogy is simply retarded.. crypto currency is closer to stocks than products like big mac, banana etc.
nope, crypto currency is legally property as is a big mac. Neither convey any legal rights other than under property law. Shares on the other hand convey rights under company law including a share of ownership of the actual brand. (look at it like shares are property with additional rights under company law, crypto currencies don't have those as they are just property)
i am not a lawyer..but why do i feel that darkcoin is destroying my property and creating confusion by buying and selling their property under my property's name?
Good thing Darkcoin isn't selling their property under your property's name. DASH =/= Dashcoin. Further, you're free to continue development at your own leisure.
confusion is the word....calling it "DASH" but it is a coin...please don't tell me it is not a coin lol.
March 16, 2015, 01:40:24 PM
...But what I guarantee you 100% is that...
how are you going to guarantee an opinion by 100%? and you sold most of your dark so how does that look right now at this juncture when you talk about 'business acumen' lol???
My opinion is based upon years of experience. The business world is littered with the charred carcases of companies with excellent technology buy no business acumen. Darkcoin should have brought in someone with substantial business experience many months ago to head things up and improve every important process.
As I said, I still very much believe in Darkcoin technology and Evan as a developer. But the risk at this juncture is far too high for me to invest any substantial capital. Only a business executive I can trust will turn things around would change that. It's time for Darkcoin to grow up. If the correct moves aren't made, it never will.
i think we have completely opposite opinions - To me the rebrand is dark growing up and getting their business hat on... each to their own
I agree that rebranding is/was important and I anticipated it happening at some point. It's how it has been handled that showcases a 5 year old is trying to drive a bulldozer through downtown. Experienced drivers are needed.
This is clearly coming from someone who understands and has been involved in proper VC funded experiences. This isn't a trolling comment this is actually something every other Suit watching would say if they took the time to read all the crap which they never would.
We have all been acting like kids regarding this. If you are a business man with vision and understanding this comment should sit with you and make you ponder.
March 16, 2015, 01:36:40 PM
using these products analogy is simply retarded.. crypto currency is closer to stocks than products like big mac, banana etc.
nope, crypto currency is legally property as is a big mac. Neither convey any legal rights other than under property law. Shares on the other hand convey rights under company law including a share of ownership of the actual brand. (look at it like shares are property with additional rights under company law, crypto currencies don't have those as they are just property)
i am not a lawyer..but why do i feel that darkcoin is destroying my property and creating confusion by buying and selling their property under my property's name?
Good thing Darkcoin isn't selling their property under your property's name. DASH =/= Dashcoin. Further, you're free to continue development at your own leisure.
March 16, 2015, 01:35:35 PM
using these products analogy is simply retarded.. crypto currency is closer to stocks than products like big mac, banana etc.
nope, crypto currency is legally property as is a big mac. Neither convey any legal rights other than under property law. Shares on the other hand convey rights under company law including a share of ownership of the actual brand. (look at it like shares are property with additional rights under company law, crypto currencies don't have those as they are just property)
i am not a lawyer..but why do i feel that darkcoin is destroying my property and creating confusion by buying and selling their property under my property's name?
FFS GO AND TALK TO YOUR DEV!!!!!
Dev's done a runner?
Well there's no one to talk to then. This is what happens with anon devs.
DRK is not "destroying your property"!!!
Man oh man...this is just becoming SOOOO tedious!
March 16, 2015, 01:34:51 PM
At present, the only vulnerable people who are being taken advantage of are the Dashcoin holders who should have been compensated.
No shit. The point is, I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO. If this was done right, none of this bullshit would be transpiring.
Why shouldn't you have to? This is a community effort you know everyone works pro-bono. I think this is the nicest thing you have done for the project and that I really do appreciate.
March 16, 2015, 01:34:23 PM
Adam you're just a joke. Can't you find something more constructive to do with your time?
I'm currently unemployed and nothing else to do
March 16, 2015, 01:33:01 PM
using these products analogy is simply retarded.. crypto currency is closer to stocks than products like big mac, banana etc.
nope, crypto currency is legally property as is a big mac. Neither convey any legal rights other than under property law. Shares on the other hand convey rights under company law including a share of ownership of the actual brand. (look at it like shares are property with additional rights under company law, crypto currencies don't have those as they are just property)
i am not a lawyer..but why do i feel that darkcoin is destroying my property and creating confusion by buying and selling their property under my property's name?
March 16, 2015, 01:29:34 PM
I'm just here for the lulz with MyFarm's circle jerk session.
March 16, 2015, 01:28:03 PM
...
1. The opposing company gets the trademark contesting notice.
...
1. The opposing company gets the trademark contesting notice.
...
This is "the opposing company" https://karmiclabs.com/
One is in-house management/tracking system, the other a crypto-currency.
Zero knowledge of law, but I see no conflict of interest there.
March 16, 2015, 01:22:58 PM
using these products analogy is simply retarded.. crypto currency is closer to stocks than products like big mac, banana etc.
nope, (units of) crypto currency are legally property as is a big mac. Neither convey any legal rights other than under property law. Shares on the other hand convey rights under company law including a share of ownership of the actual brand. (look at it like shares are property with additional rights under company law, crypto currencies don't have those as they are just property)
March 16, 2015, 01:22:55 PM
And that's the main exchange DSH trades on! I think a reality check is needed here. This is major "storm in a tea cup" stuff.
I prefer "infusion in the king's throne"
(that was so mean, I know... )
March 16, 2015, 01:17:36 PM
Sorry guys this has gotten really weird, I'm going cold storage btc for while. Good luck everyone
March 16, 2015, 01:10:43 PM
...
1. The opposing company gets the trademark contesting notice.
...
1. The opposing company gets the trademark contesting notice.
...
This is "the opposing company" https://karmiclabs.com/
March 16, 2015, 01:09:35 PM
My streaming request my favourite DRK spouse to declare launch once again for us..
March 16, 2015, 01:09:14 PM
This discussion around Dashcoin and some of the figures being thrown around (like Dashcoin holder's should be paid out to a value of $1 million to represent their potential market cap) is really out of all kilter with what's actually going on.
I just looked on Poloniex to see what happening in the Dashcoin market. Here's the buy/sells from a few minutes ago:
Now, unless I'm miscalculating, there's a total BUY order book of 1475 XMR (and you can't see it on the screen grab but 1106 XMR total SELLS). At the last price of XMR (also on Polo) of 0.00268269 that represents 3.95 BTC or $1150 at latest BTC/USD price on Bitfinex.
And that's the main exchange DSH trades on! I think a reality check is needed here. This is major "storm in a tea cup" stuff.
I just looked on Poloniex to see what happening in the Dashcoin market. Here's the buy/sells from a few minutes ago:
Now, unless I'm miscalculating, there's a total BUY order book of 1475 XMR (and you can't see it on the screen grab but 1106 XMR total SELLS). At the last price of XMR (also on Polo) of 0.00268269 that represents 3.95 BTC or $1150 at latest BTC/USD price on Bitfinex.
And that's the main exchange DSH trades on! I think a reality check is needed here. This is major "storm in a tea cup" stuff.
March 16, 2015, 01:08:06 PM
Good luck with your taking advantage of those in vulnerable situations it must be great for your spirit.
At present, the only vulnerable people who are being taken advantage of are the Dashcoin holders who should have been compensated. In my opinion, the next most vulnerable people are Darkcoin holders because of how this has all gone down. Allow me to summarize how I see this proceeding:
1. The opposing company gets the trademark contesting notice.
2. They sit around and ask, "What the fuck is a Darkcoin and Dashcoin" and start to do their research. Once they get a feel for what is going on...
3. Their attorneys get giant boners and start to pick out new vacation homes.
4. The most seasoned executives get big smiles.
5. They wait for the Darkcoin to Dashcoin branding to happen later this month so that Darkcoin is caught in a corner.
6. They then begin the fight knowing that they have far deeper pockets and the Darkcoin argument is somewhat dubious. As there is no legal precedent in a case like this (that I'm aware of), they know that a case like this is going to be long and protracted. They know they don't even necessarily have to win, they just have to prolong the fuck out of it so the Darkcoin fanbase gets tired of, "Will you guys please just donate 10 more DRK each to the legal fund?" posts.
7. They realize eventually there will likely be a settlement that doesn't even set legal precedent but it benefits them. Does Darkcoin get to be Dash? Maybe, maybe not. But the settlement will be much bigger if yes.
Or Darkcoin could have properly acquired Dashcoin for likely less than $25,000 in Darkcoin. And this is why Darkcoin needs a seasoned executive on board. Because without one, the Darkcoin base is vulnerable.
Now remind me again how I'm taking advantage of vulnerable people?
you keep not understanding the basics here. There is no fight, because no one who bought or mined a dashcoin from the dashcoin trademark owner has any claim on the dashcoin trademark. The mark owner does who is Evan Duffield.
Like if you bought half the world supply of Big Mac's and then decide to rename them BigFarms, you can't cease and desist McDonalds from using the BigMac name under trademark law
Saying 'yes you can because there is no legal precedent' - you don't understand legal precedents then too
using these products analogy is simply retarded.. crypto currency is closer to stocks than products like big mac, banana etc.
Jump to: