Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 5296. (Read 9723768 times)

  I didn't get the joke.

  you're funny dude. Also I want to sell too for 0.099 BTC

NNNNNNNNNNnoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooo, you can sell all you want but not this.

I might sell a few when the price hits $300/DRK.

Few hundred for 0.1 BTC ? Typo ?

Bitfinex data is getting more and more interesting!

Sad news chaps...

I have put a few hundred coins on sale because I will soon need to pay for some bills in July.

They are on the market for 0.1 BTC  

And verily did the BTC-e crowd cast their gaze upon such numbers, and there was wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Why is this stuff becoming more arousing than porn? I think I need to book myself onto a program of some sorts.

Nice volume, more than LTC that's great !

Moving up in the world



edit

Darkcoin has been averaging, guestimate, about $3m / 24hrs in volume over the past 8  weeks ~ $150m - $200m has changed hands.

Hi Icebucket, that's well put, I also liked your entries on the darkcointalk.org forum, that is a simple yet coherent strategy. It's a shame most of the trading platforms/software does not allow custom indicators (not yet:) but one can still use the good old standard indicators such as EMAs. There is no need to make trading complicated, the use of sophisticated indicators/methods may give results contrary to expectations. As I have some experience in trading Forex (started in 2008, started making profits in 2011:) I beg everyone to remember about position-sizing, not to involve too much of one's deposit, too much of risk exposure may be a killer. Buying altcoins is more like buying shares, you buy and eventually the value of your coins will decrease, but you don't get a margin call when you are at minus 70% of your initial balance:) I know investing in crypto-currencies is high risk vs. high reward, so people would split their trading capital into 3 or 4 parts and get into the market with four orders 25% of deposit each (I'm not saying that you are doing that, Icebucket P.S. great nickname, a good idea on a hot friday:) but on Forex such money management would blow up your account in one day. Or if you are lucky, make you rich fast:) All is good as long as you have a sound strategy, and don't get scared when the price does not move in your favour. I find crypto-currency trading very interesting, as many Forex methods also apply here, and the market is fresh and vibrant, with so much energy. Amazing:) I wish you good trading.

you are not buying the coin you are buying the dev... . and in the case of evan i am shure you get the best "quality" possible... thank you so much for your continued efforts in making this happen evan...

Right.  With a centralized server, all nodes have a static reference point to go back to.  Even if they get off on the wrong chain, a static checkpoint server will force them back to the correct one within a minute or two (the average user would most likely never notice anything was wrong).  

If I correctly understand what TsuyokuNaritai describes, if a node got off on the wrong chain, it would verify against a block coming from the wrong chain.  The system would be pointless.

Yes, in the next couple of months there will be a lot of changes. This is just an extra precaution to avoid things going crazy like they did ten days ago if everything fails. As Evan has said, once everything is more stable and we don't introduce features constantly, he will remove it.

That makes sense, thanks.

If I understand what happened last time, a bunch of forks appeared of the updated code. So, while I think Evan believes he's fixed the issues that were causing these forks, checkpointing ensures there can only be one updated fork in case something else unforeseen comes along.

Sorry for my ignorance if this is covered elsewhere, but why is a centralised server necessary? Why couldn't for example new versions of the mining code contain a key which must be included in each solved block after a certain date for that block to be considered valid by those that have updated correctly? Thanks.

thx!

Automatic Checkpoints

This week has been a busy one. As we discussed last week, we’ve come up with a strategy to shield Darkcoin from future issues with unintended blockchain forks by adding an automatic checkpointing system. This will allow us to move ahead quickly with development and innovation without risking the occurrence of another forking event like the one we had at the launch of RC2.

To expedite the implementation of automatic checkpointing, we engaged Hiro, of Hirocoin fame. He had experience with this system and we knew he could implement it quickly and correctly.

We want to make it clear that automatic checkpointing is a temporary solution that will be removed from the code as soon as we feel it is safe to do so. Though it is clearly beneficial for use as a failsafe mechanism while we perfect the code that powers Darksend, in the long term, the presence of a centralized checkpointing server on the network is unacceptable.

Masternode Payment Fix

The Masternode payment system is working nearly perfectly on testnet. Some of the issues we’ve addressed are:

    Ghost Masternodes - Masternodes which the network continued to list as active even after the Masternode had been taken offline
    Instances in which Masternode messages were not fully propagating throughout the network


Modifications were also made which will add some flexibility to the Masternode voting system. This should result in more blocks being paid out to Masternodes.

At present, about 95% of Masternode payments on testnet are executing properly. The remaining 5% are failing due to inconsistencies in the Masternode lists held by individual clients. There could be a few reasons for these inconsistencies, and we should be able to get closer to a 100% success rate after some more debugging.

To see the payments as they happen on testnet, check out: http://tdrk.poolhash.org/

How Masternode Voting Works

We’ve seen some questions asked about the precise manner in which the Masternode voting system functions. Many people don’t realize that we have an innovative system built into the blockchain solely for the purpose of voting on Masternode payouts. It could be thought of as something like a “blockchain within a blockchain”.

Before getting into the nuts and bolts, it should be said that although the word “voting” implies some willful intervention on the part of the user, this is absolutely not the case. Voting is performed by the client software in a fully automated process that is hard-coded into the system. It cannot be manipulated by the user.

The voting system functions as follows:

Block 14217

Blockheight Pubkey Votes
14214 Xaddr1 2
14215 Xaddr2 3
14216 Xaddr3 2
14217 Xaddr4 1

If you mined this block, your client added the pubkey for 14217. It's also allowed to increment each existing vote by one if it agrees with it. So the code goes something like this:

On block 14214 was the pubkey to be paid Xaddr1?

    If yes increment votes from 1 to 2
    If no and votes=1, change pubkey to the correct one and don't vote (this only can happen if no voting has happened and it looks incorrect)

On block 14215 was the pubkey to be paid Xaddr2?

    If yes increment votes from 2 to 3
    If no, don't vote


On block 14216 was the pubkey to be paid Xaddr3?

    If yes increment votes from 1 to 2


Added block 14217, pubkey Xaddr4, votes 1

Timeline Update

At this point we are comfortable setting a firm release date for RC3. Release dates for versions beyond that will be updated as circumstances dictate and as development progresses.

    RC3 (June 18th): Fully implemented Masternode payments (20% of each block), automatic checkpointing, fixes for network forking issues
    RC4 (Mid July): Improved anonymity and removal of 10 DRK Darksend limitation
    Code Audit: We will release details on this as they become available
    RC5: Address any security issues or major bugs discovered in the audit


Assuming all goes well with RC5, we will do a bit more testing and then open source the project.

I'd like to help, but problem is that on internet people are suprisingly clever at making up stories, so I dont know if yours is true and unfortunately cant help.