Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 5020. (Read 9723858 times)

Please, have a look at this good advice:

Please do your best!
^^

How dare you.

Theoretically, it would increase traffic to collapse if there were all Chiefs and no Indians. Kinda like why the TOR network barely works on 3 hops and it would go completely to hell if there were more hops or noise packets used to decrease the usefulness of traffic analysis. These things could be done and they would help, but the network is already barely working... No incentive to give away bandwidth to make those things possible.

3rd possible use for masternodes: incentivising TOR exit nodes....

Only to the thing with the 4 hours bashing. I am absolutly noob with linux and servers, but with the very good guides from community on darkcointalk and here i got it running. Educate yourself.
Its possible to work it out - for all of us

After updating my masternode and qt to new version i did not receive a payment. Its around 36h now.
I did not generate a new key. Do i have to create a new key ?
As it is listed on the masternodelist with flag 1 i did not see a reason why to create a new one.
Dont get me wrong, i am not whining, only try to help get things together

+1 I learned a lot

new page bump

ccmf

How on earth so ??

This same discussion has already been had several times several thousands pages ago...

They are being taken into consideration. The Spork is how we keep them from destroying the network. It becomes idiot-tolerant. I already explained this a few posts up and it makes perfect sense.

If you want to hand an idiot a tool as complex as this, it needs to be able to survive them having it. RC3's failures-to-launch are a direct result of it. The concept of merging two block issuance metrics was only half solved by the pre-existing PoW verification system. The MN Vote metric isn't idiot-proofed yet. The Spork gives us a way to monitor the idiots and thus create a resistance to them. Once that method of verification exists, there won't be wild forking anymore. No different than the PoW need to verify blocks or else anyone could publish any block they felt like... The MN Vote stack currently does allow many exploits, that's why it kept forking... It's never been done before. Watching the bad actors in the wild is the only way to see what verifications need to be done and how to prevent the bad actors. Most bad actors are not malicious "hackers" but merely stupid people. Thus, we return to the original point; if you're going to hand a tool to a stupid person, you have to make sure it can survive the things the stupid person will do to it. It's impossible for a smart person to predict everything a stupid person will do. Watching them do stupid things in the wild is often the only real tool a developer has. It's why I "people watch." I just plain do not understand the extreme mass stupidity of the human race. I have to go out and watch them destroy themselves from time to time just to see what the hell is going on... I have a brain, use it, and I jsut plain do not act the way so-called "normal" people do... So is the developer of software...

Being closed-source, for now, limits the potential for these bad actors during development. If it were already open-source, my gawd... It'd never get done.

OMGzzz the RC3 has fail, DRK is teh sucks!!! An odd dochotomy of non-reason... Without the volume of adoption DRK currently has, it would be impossible to figure out how this new block verification system would need to be crafted... These RC3 failures were not only inevitable, they were REQUIRED by entropy and fate. It's the only way a clear understanding of the problem would be seen. The problem could then be fixed. You can't create a verification system if you have no idea what you need to verify...

This isn't the end of DRK, it is the beginning. Only a "normal" person loses faith in the very moment when everything finally has a chance to go right... It's like wanting to drive your car to an island, and giving up the moment someone builds the bridge...

People selling post-spork are the dumbest people on Earth.

Remember that too many masternodes is a bad thing. There's a sweet spot and 1000 DRK per node will get us there.

This is the type of stuff we need to hear !

At last I've managed to prise it out of the DRK community - starting to get down to it.

Reminds me of Bioshock, "If I make a cake, is it not mine to keep ? NO, says Peter the parasite..."

I don't think he's trying to offend regarding the benefits of drk. It's just that, like it or not, for the adoption you are talking about to happen on a really wide scale the ignoramuses of this world are going to have to be taken into consideration! 

People should see a tangible benefit? What about anonymity?  The feature that gives its intrinsic value to the coin! Without it the coin anybody holds would be worthless everybody should be thanking masternode ops. Darkcoin has proof of service it is people that provide the service that get compensated, setting up a master node is only 10K a very small investment,  if you are student and cant afford to invest 10K then hold your coins and wait for future appreciation as it gets adopted.  It is a fair system the rules are the same for everybody.

Examine the product closely and the intent becomes clear; MNs have more potential uses than are currently visible. Right now they are the anonymizers. In the future, they will hold the giant-ass blockchain that nobody else wants to host... BTC has experienced a nearly 30% loss of nodes holding blockchain due to light-clients, which are trust-based. Those who trade that convenience by throwing away the trustless nature of having one's own blockchain, blah blah blah... There is a valid reason tho; the blockchain won't fit on my android. I either use a pseudo-trustless cloud wallet like blockchain.info, or I give up altogether... DRK's MNs could be a trustless blockchain repository in a future where the blockchain doesn't fit on our typical machines, or is too much of a pain in the ass to download for similar reasons. How long does it take to sync the BTC blockchain? What if you pay for pipe? Or you're on dial-up? Or...? DRK's MNs solve this unforseeable problem in Satoshi's experiment.

I think this discussion has never happened before because there is no reason for it. The only people who will bring it up are entitled brats who want something for nothing.

"Wha, ASICS stole my GPU money hose." Same old argument... Lazy people want free money hose. Lazy people aren't getting a free money hose. They complain about it, or worse, become trolls about it...

The answers are clear to those that matter. So why talk about it? I may as well bring up a discussion about how important I think Oxygen is to mammals... It's a closed matter any anyone who isn't lazy can and will figure it out on their own pretty easily. Fact Welfare, etc...

Not mocking you, tok, just my usual direct demeanor with no sugar coating... ;-)

Your post style sometimes is a little rude, sometimes I like, sometimes not too much.

The last one is part of the "I like your style".

+1

Yep, it took me manually 1 hour totally, to setup 15 nodes on testnet... and Im working on OVA/OVF appliance to do darkcoin cold/hot automated setup, so it just take minutes.. =D

Explain why this is funny?

DRK MN code is in a state that requires it's operators to "do it right" in order to work. It's exactly like a PoW coin that doesn't perform any block verification. Anyone can publish any block they want. DRK is a PoW and PoS(ervice via manual PoS(take)) coin merged together. The PoS(ervice) part doesn't have the checks and balances needed to prevent wild forking. It's never been done before. Too many variables existed to successfully test the verification system in a sterile environment... In order to add a verification system to this new idea, one must first discover how it might be undermined. The Spork method is the perfect tool for the job. If there were no stupid people, or bad people, there wouldn't be a need to check for bugs in any of this...

Very interesting post. At least we're discussing it now which is a relief to me.

I think it partly revolves around how critical the strategy of masternodes is in the first place and how much value it adds to the network as opposed to a technical anonymising strategy that doesn't involve masternodes. There's probably been a lot of constructive thinking done about this which hasn't reached the public domain. Maybe it's time it did.