[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 3459.

RenegadeMan

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: thelonecrouton on November 19, 2014, 04:45:46 PM

Quote from: RenegadeMan on November 19, 2014, 04:27:43 PM

Quote from: GhostPlayer on November 19, 2014, 07:19:55 AM

Quote from: superplus on November 19, 2014, 06:56:21 AM

btw. whats about the idea supporting p2p pools somehow..? masternode donation seems quite interesting..

whats evans opinion?

I've been pitching this idea for a while now, but didnt get much attention...

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/masternode-donation-to-p2pool.326/

Crouton, given your strong views around mining and the benefits of P2pool, I'm surprised you haven't commented on this.

I commented a page or three back here (I think it's a good idea, but not ideal) but I missed it on DCT back in April.

My stance is pretty simple: I am not comfortable trusting my investment (not Earth-shattering, but more than what I call pocket money) to three doofuses on the intertubes.

Imagine you had a $million or two. Would you really be happy putting millions of dollars into a system where your $millions could be rendered worthless overnight by somebody locating and compromising 3 servers or 3 server admins? Because that's the situation right now with PoW coins. You'd have to be actively stupid to trust such a system with any serious amount of investment.

It's a joke, it's pure toytown, someone could destroy BTC or DRK for a few thousand bucks tops.

Mmm...it's certainly worrying.

I've read the many interactions you've had with pool admins (if it wasn't so serious they'd be pure entertainment!)
I'm not knowledgeable enough on mining and pools to know what's truth/what's fiction.

But the fact that you're so concerned about it and the fact that these large pools (and ASICs) seem to be such a major concern means I'm wondering whether this is an elephant in the room that no one wants to deal with.

If this risk is as real as you're saying:

Quote

It's a joke, it's pure toytown, someone could destroy BTC or DRK for a few thousand bucks tops

then we need more debate and I'd really like Evan to comment and discus it too.

Evan, can you offer any assessment on the risk to Darkcoin in light of Crouton's concerns?

rrodent

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: thelonecrouton on November 19, 2014, 09:44:24 AM

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 09:40:15 AM

How hard would it be to add the p2pool server software to wallets?

Not entirely trivial. I've thought about it. p2pool is in python and has a lot of deps, official wallet is c++, result would be unwieldy...

I think they are best kept separate for now, but a simple to install (1-click) prepackaged p2pool would be awesome.

edit: adding some code to the official wallet to seek out the nearest p2pool node and use that instead of solo mining would be 100x easier. Grin

There already is a simple way to find p2pool nodes... simple google search darkcoin p2pool node finder = p2pools.org/drk

Find the pool node with the lowest latency and go... check your stats on the node by http://whateverpool:7903

couldn't be easier. Setting up a node requires you to at least be a linux noob that can figure out what dependencies are and how to install stuff... took me all of a couple hours at most to figure it out and get my node running.

GhostPlayer

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1000

Quote from: RenegadeMan on November 19, 2014, 04:43:27 PM

Yep.

Here she is in her race heat where she blitzes the field. Listen to the two male commentators trying to describe her warm-up routine and you can hear they're being ever so measured in how they're describing her ("youthful exuberance" says one, on the edge of his seat).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTXwA30Oado

hahaha!! You can literally "hear" the smiles on their "faces" ... Grin

RenegadeMan

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: oblox on November 19, 2014, 04:39:31 PM

Quote from: RenegadeMan on November 19, 2014, 04:36:48 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Drobek on November 19, 2014, 02:36:06 PM

Quote from: splawik21 on November 19, 2014, 02:33:15 PM

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

I do agree, issues of one have no affect on other, thats good.
ASICs? Yes, More hash is out there the better is for all, network secured, less coins for people, price skyrockets, new technology for x11 mining, history of BTC? History like to repeat

Hash is irrelevant. 10,000 cpus with poor hash are better than 10 asics with a huge hash.
Also, btc price did not skyrocketed because of ASICs but due to inflow of Russian after the Cyprian crisis & especially in November/December 2013 because of Chinese funds

Which is why I keep trying to push everybody to solomine with their QT from the console

setgenerate true -1

And every now and then you'll not only hit a block but you'll also pay a MN :-)

What does this "setgenerate true -1" actually do Mangled? I just ran it in my QT. What are the ramifications for performance and should you turn it off if you're doing something requiring heavy processing power on your PC? Are there losses associated with turning it off then back on again (i.e. like when you join a pool there's a ramp-up period)? Is it a very long shot that you'd ever get a block?

Uses your CPU to mine... -1 actually uses the maximum cores in your computer... if anything, use half of what you have in your computer (a quadcore would be fine spending 2 cores mining, setgenerate true 2). Turn it off with setgenerate false. Treat whatever hash you are using as pps, no ramp up or ramp down from a cpu mining solo in the wallet. It's a very very very very long shot of finding a block. Type getmininginfo to see how much you are hashing in comparison to the network hash.

Okay, thanks for the info oblox.

{
"blocks" : 172464,
"currentblocksize" : 2421,
"currentblocktx" : 2,
"difficulty" : 4139.20155433,
"errors" : "",
"generate" : true,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 36534,
"networkhashps" : 111978833981,
"pooledtx" : 3,
"testnet" : false
}

It's not looking too promising is it!

dewdeded

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1011

Monero Evangelist

I came back to this thread because of Michelle Jenneke.

thelonecrouton

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1000

Quote from: RenegadeMan on November 19, 2014, 04:27:43 PM

Quote from: GhostPlayer on November 19, 2014, 07:19:55 AM

Quote from: superplus on November 19, 2014, 06:56:21 AM

btw. whats about the idea supporting p2p pools somehow..? masternode donation seems quite interesting..

whats evans opinion?

I've been pitching this idea for a while now, but didnt get much attention...

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/masternode-donation-to-p2pool.326/

Crouton, given your strong views around mining and the benefits of P2pool, I'm surprised you haven't commented on this.

I commented a page or three back here (I think it's a good idea, but not ideal) but I missed it on DCT back in April.

My stance is pretty simple: I am not comfortable trusting my investment (not Earth-shattering, but more than what I call pocket money) to three doofuses on the intertubes.

Imagine you had a $million or two. Would you really be happy putting millions of dollars into a system where your $millions could be rendered worthless overnight by somebody locating and compromising 3 servers or 3 server admins? Because that's the situation right now with PoW coins. You'd have to be actively stupid to trust such a system with any serious amount of investment.

It's a joke, it's pure toytown, someone could destroy BTC or DRK for a few thousand bucks tops.

RenegadeMan

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: GhostPlayer on November 19, 2014, 04:31:28 PM

Quote from: RenegadeMan on November 19, 2014, 03:07:10 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UEWMdxdk7w

This is totally untypical of me, but damn... she is hot.

Yep.

Here she is in her race heat where she blitzes the field. Listen to the two male commentators trying to describe her warm-up routine and you can hear they're being ever so measured in how they're describing her ("youthful exuberance" says one, on the edge of his seat).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTXwA30Oado

oblox

legendary

Activity: 1442

Merit: 1018

Quote from: RenegadeMan on November 19, 2014, 04:36:48 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Drobek on November 19, 2014, 02:36:06 PM

Quote from: splawik21 on November 19, 2014, 02:33:15 PM

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

I do agree, issues of one have no affect on other, thats good.
ASICs? Yes, More hash is out there the better is for all, network secured, less coins for people, price skyrockets, new technology for x11 mining, history of BTC? History like to repeat

Hash is irrelevant. 10,000 cpus with poor hash are better than 10 asics with a huge hash.
Also, btc price did not skyrocketed because of ASICs but due to inflow of Russian after the Cyprian crisis & especially in November/December 2013 because of Chinese funds

Which is why I keep trying to push everybody to solomine with their QT from the console

setgenerate true -1

And every now and then you'll not only hit a block but you'll also pay a MN :-)

What does this "setgenerate true -1" actually do Mangled? I just ran it in my QT. What are the ramifications for performance and should you turn it off if you're doing something requiring heavy processing power on your PC? Are there losses associated with turning it off then back on again (i.e. like when you join a pool there's a ramp-up period)? Is it a very long shot that you'd ever get a block?

Uses your CPU to mine... -1 actually uses the maximum cores in your computer... if anything, use half of what you have in your computer (a quadcore would be fine spending 2 cores mining, setgenerate true 2). Turn it off with setgenerate false. Treat whatever hash you are using as pps, no ramp up or ramp down from a cpu mining solo in the wallet. It's a very very very very long shot of finding a block. Type getmininginfo to see how much you are hashing in comparison to the network hash.

RenegadeMan

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Drobek on November 19, 2014, 02:36:06 PM

Quote from: splawik21 on November 19, 2014, 02:33:15 PM

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

I do agree, issues of one have no affect on other, thats good.
ASICs? Yes, More hash is out there the better is for all, network secured, less coins for people, price skyrockets, new technology for x11 mining, history of BTC? History like to repeat

Hash is irrelevant. 10,000 cpus with poor hash are better than 10 asics with a huge hash.
Also, btc price did not skyrocketed because of ASICs but due to inflow of Russian after the Cyprian crisis & especially in November/December 2013 because of Chinese funds

Which is why I keep trying to push everybody to solomine with their QT from the console

setgenerate true -1

And every now and then you'll not only hit a block but you'll also pay a MN :-)

What does this "setgenerate true -1" actually do Mangled? I just ran it in my QT. What are the ramifications for performance and should you turn it off if you're doing something requiring heavy processing power on your PC? Are there losses associated with turning it off then back on again (i.e. like when you join a pool there's a ramp-up period)? Is it a very long shot that you'd ever get a block?

GhostPlayer

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1000

Quote from: RenegadeMan on November 19, 2014, 03:07:10 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UEWMdxdk7w

This is totally untypical of me, but damn... she is hot.

RenegadeMan

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: GhostPlayer on November 19, 2014, 07:19:55 AM

Quote from: superplus on November 19, 2014, 06:56:21 AM

btw. whats about the idea supporting p2p pools somehow..? masternode donation seems quite interesting..

whats evans opinion?

I've been pitching this idea for a while now, but didnt get much attention...

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/masternode-donation-to-p2pool.326/

Crouton, given your strong views around mining and the benefits of P2pool, I'm surprised you haven't commented on this.

RenegadeMan

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: avw1982 on November 19, 2014, 07:24:23 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: TsuyokuNaritai on November 19, 2014, 05:47:21 AM

Any updates on when Instant Transaction testing might start?

Michelle Jenneke, Ultrafast DRK Edition

One of Australia's best exports. Watch her responding to the extraordinary avalanche of people watching that video; just beautiful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UEWMdxdk7w

superplus

sr. member

Activity: 475

Merit: 500

Quote from: Drobek on November 19, 2014, 03:02:59 PM

Quote from: k0vic on November 19, 2014, 02:44:12 PM

Quote from: Drobek on November 19, 2014, 02:36:06 PM

Quote from: splawik21 on November 19, 2014, 02:33:15 PM

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

I do agree, issues of one have no affect on other, thats good.
ASICs? Yes, More hash is out there the better is for all, network secured, less coins for people, price skyrockets, new technology for x11 mining, history of BTC? History like to repeat

Hash is irrelevant. 10,000 cpus with poor hash are better than 10 asics with a huge hash.
Also, btc price did not skyrocketed because of ASICs but due to inflow of Russian after the Cyprian crisis & especially in November/December 2013 because of Chinese funds

Hash is relevant considering 10,000 poor hashing CPUs can be taken over by 10 asics with huge hash. The idea is to get enough hashing in the hands of several people so this doesn't happen. Just like BTC and just like what LTC is trying to do. This shouldn't be fought by CPU and GPU miners who don't' want to reinvest in hardware. It should be welcomed esp as this drives innovation and more investments behind the currency.

Also, your points about the skyrocket are both speculation and probably wrong. In all reality it was probably willy.

We were talking about situation WITH or WITHOUT ASICs and my point was ASICs are generally bad for centralisation. That's it.

The points about the price increase are facts. If you had watched coinmarketcap breakdown by currencies you would have seen that influx of Chinese yens skyrocketed the price of BTC

as long as mining is profitable there will be always a business around that, you can't avoid that.
if you compare asics with pools, pools are far worst

Drobek

sr. member

Activity: 504

Merit: 251

Quote from: k0vic on November 19, 2014, 02:44:12 PM

Quote from: Drobek on November 19, 2014, 02:36:06 PM

Quote from: splawik21 on November 19, 2014, 02:33:15 PM

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

I do agree, issues of one have no affect on other, thats good.
ASICs? Yes, More hash is out there the better is for all, network secured, less coins for people, price skyrockets, new technology for x11 mining, history of BTC? History like to repeat

Hash is irrelevant. 10,000 cpus with poor hash are better than 10 asics with a huge hash.
Also, btc price did not skyrocketed because of ASICs but due to inflow of Russian after the Cyprian crisis & especially in November/December 2013 because of Chinese funds

Hash is relevant considering 10,000 poor hashing CPUs can be taken over by 10 asics with huge hash. The idea is to get enough hashing in the hands of several people so this doesn't happen. Just like BTC and just like what LTC is trying to do. This shouldn't be fought by CPU and GPU miners who don't' want to reinvest in hardware. It should be welcomed esp as this drives innovation and more investments behind the currency.

Also, your points about the skyrocket are both speculation and probably wrong. In all reality it was probably willy.

We were talking about situation WITH or WITHOUT ASICs and my point was ASICs are generally bad for centralisation. That's it.

The points about the price increase are facts. If you had watched coinmarketcap breakdown by currencies you would have seen that influx of Chinese yens skyrocketed the price of BTC

superplus

sr. member

Activity: 475

Merit: 500

Quote from: Drobek on November 19, 2014, 02:36:06 PM

Quote from: splawik21 on November 19, 2014, 02:33:15 PM

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

I do agree, issues of one have no affect on other, thats good.
ASICs? Yes, More hash is out there the better is for all, network secured, less coins for people, price skyrockets, new technology for x11 mining, history of BTC? History like to repeat

Hash is irrelevant. 10,000 cpus with poor hash are better than 10 asics with a huge hash.
Also, btc price did not skyrocketed because of ASICs but due to inflow of Russian after the Cyprian crisis & especially in November/December 2013 because of Chinese funds

if the hash rate is low, the security is low... Network could be attacked by people developing private asics or using some big cluster. They are necessary for mainstream usage and its not possible to prohibit the development.

k0vic

member

Activity: 113

Merit: 10

Quote from: Drobek on November 19, 2014, 02:36:06 PM

Quote from: splawik21 on November 19, 2014, 02:33:15 PM

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

I do agree, issues of one have no affect on other, thats good.
ASICs? Yes, More hash is out there the better is for all, network secured, less coins for people, price skyrockets, new technology for x11 mining, history of BTC? History like to repeat

Hash is irrelevant. 10,000 cpus with poor hash are better than 10 asics with a huge hash.
Also, btc price did not skyrocketed because of ASICs but due to inflow of Russian after the Cyprian crisis & especially in November/December 2013 because of Chinese funds

Hash is relevant considering 10,000 poor hashing CPUs can be taken over by 10 asics with huge hash. The idea is to get enough hashing in the hands of several people so this doesn't happen. Just like BTC and just like what LTC is trying to do. This shouldn't be fought by CPU and GPU miners who don't' want to reinvest in hardware. It should be welcomed esp as this drives innovation and more investments behind the currency.

Also, your points about the skyrocket are both speculation and probably wrong. In all reality it was probably willy.

Drobek

sr. member

Activity: 504

Merit: 251

Quote from: splawik21 on November 19, 2014, 02:33:15 PM

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

I do agree, issues of one have no affect on other, thats good.
ASICs? Yes, More hash is out there the better is for all, network secured, less coins for people, price skyrockets, new technology for x11 mining, history of BTC? History like to repeat

Hash is irrelevant. 10,000 cpus with poor hash are better than 10 asics with a huge hash.
Also, btc price did not skyrocketed because of ASICs but due to inflow of Russian after the Cyprian crisis & especially in November/December 2013 because of Chinese funds

splawik21

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1005

DASH is the future of crypto payments!

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

I do agree, issues of one have no affect on other, thats good.
ASICs? Yes, More hash is out there the better is for all, network secured, less coins for people, price skyrockets, new technology for x11 mining, history of BTC? History like to repeat

thefrog

sr. member

Activity: 393

Merit: 250

Quote from: salmion on November 19, 2014, 02:26:46 PM

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

+1
Keep it separate. Anyone can set up a p2pool node. Should not be bound to anything with MNs.

salmion

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 500

masternodes and mining should be separate. They would have to be absolutely bullet proof or knocking out the mn network knocks out mining. At the moment any issue with the mn network just affects mixing, the coin remains secure.

Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 3459. (Read 9723748 times)