Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 854. (Read 9723733 times)
February 14, 2017, 08:34:53 AM
I got to say they looked a lot more comfortable shooting their video from the toilets, maybe time for them to get back to their roots ?
Not surprised to see they are still thinking and talking about Dash, a lot of people have Dash on their mind these days it seems.
February 14, 2017, 08:11:19 AM
Thought some of you may like this:
Sure pleased they found somewhere to collect after their little crisis
February 14, 2017, 07:05:43 AM
February 14, 2017, 06:05:54 AM
Crap in, money out 
Masternode operators ~25% to go, stop procrastinating
Masternode operators ~25% to go, stop procrastinating
February 14, 2017, 05:13:43 AM
Any community members running their MNs on IP6? What are your experiences?
I'm looking into moving my MNs to another datacentre (and beefing them up a bit) and figured I could save a few bucks opting for IP6 if it's working for people. I also want to reduce the amount of times my MNs crash as it seems to be happening every other week now, I can only put this down to performance issues on the current platform... Not so expensive a couple of years ago but at $20 a missed payment lost earnings are starting to rack up!
Walter
I'm looking into moving my MNs to another datacentre (and beefing them up a bit) and figured I could save a few bucks opting for IP6 if it's working for people. I also want to reduce the amount of times my MNs crash as it seems to be happening every other week now, I can only put this down to performance issues on the current platform... Not so expensive a couple of years ago but at $20 a missed payment lost earnings are starting to rack up!
Walter
Not sure about IPv6, I didn't even know it worked in the current stable release.
Yes, you can run your nodes with IPV6.
Nope, not anymore. IPv6 is a thing of the past.
According to the Dash forum, Dash's future is now married to the fate of IPv4.
WTF camosoul? IPv6 works just fine for Bitcoin, Apple, and even the US Govt. Dash is the only supposedly modern cutting-edge project that can't keep up with 1998's hot new networking technology.
February 13, 2017, 10:39:03 PM
February 13, 2017, 09:53:33 PM
If there is no deadline then there is never an incentive to make the change over. Everyone is busy and it could take months to get everyone on-board 12.1 if you let them decide when it needs done.
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time. But not setting a deadline is not a good practice. Procrastinator speaking.
May I respectfully ask if you are new to Dash? Enforcement usually begins roughly two weeks after the new version is officially released. In our entire history, there's never been a situation where the network just waited for weeks and months on folks to upgrade. Everybody is given a reasonable amount of time and then the trigger is pulled.
If you read Evan's 12.1 announcement, you'll note that February 12 is the *earliest* date that enforcement can begin:
Quote
End users, miners, pool operators, exchanges, and masternode owners have until Sunday, February 12th to update. After that date, we will switch completely to the new version as soon as our engineers determine it is safe to do so, and older versions of the software will drop off the network.
(emphasis mine)
At some point AFTER February 12, as soon as it is SAFE to do so, enforcement will be turned on. As Minotaur pointed out above, this is a hard fork. As of a couple days ago, our biggest exchange (Poloniex) hadn't yet updated. It seems unwise to just kick them (and all their users) off the network in a fit of pique.
Quote
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time.
I'm not new to Dash. I was only expressing my thoughts out loud. And as I quoted above I'm really ok with Evan's announcement. That's just wasn't the information I remember reading and now upon reading his quote again, I have no issues.
But, I must admit I am confused now about what "enforcement" means or does. Some people are saying that as of yesterday only 12.1 masternodes are getting paid. I thought in order for that to happen, enforcement has to be activated.
Blocks mined with 12.0 are no longer accepted by the network because of bip65 activation so 12.0 masternodes are no longer payed.
Currently with no enforcement the result is that the miner can choose to pay a 12.1 masternode or keep all the reward to himself.
Okay, that is what i call valuable information. Also interesting is the info that exchange Poloniex still has not updated its Dash exchange wallet to v.0.12.1
That makes it understandable why dev team wants to keep enforcement off a bit longer.
I just wish that was communicated to us more clearly and i also hope Poloniex gets placed on a special attention list or something for future updates,
because it is strange that they still have not updated their Dash exchange wallet .. is that due to technical problems? or due to them not being aware
there is an Dash update in the first place ? (indicating a communication problem somewhere).
Yep. If this table is current
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DOC/Exchanges
we still have 80%+ of trading volume occurring in 12.0 exchanges and Poloniex is just ~20%
The flip of the switch in this case would be very disruptive
This is glaring issue that all crypto's will be facing into the future. Could you imagine if cyrpto was a main stream "currency" it would be pandemonium! I would suggest that in the new DASH administration that the first peeps to get the updates would be the exchanges, in conjunction with the miners and MN holders. Not sure how this could be addressed in the future but this is a serious problem.
If this was a global payment system it would be a big fail for crypto. Again not sure how this can be addressed but as a merchant for example this "fork" idea is a scary proposition, wither its BTC or DASH or whom ever.
Just letting you know that the table is not current, all major exchanges have updated or have confirmed they are on it. Atlassian is a manual process so give a little time for the PMs to update the table. Miners and Masternodes graph can be simply read from the network, while exchanges is manual.
February 13, 2017, 08:40:16 PM
Speaking off Hardware Wallets + Masternodes
please check our Wiki Sections (Guides for TREZOR + KeepKey available now)
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DOC/Hardware+Wallets
Some more recent press:
http://paymentweek.com/2017-2-9-keepkey-announces-dash-integration/
please check our Wiki Sections (Guides for TREZOR + KeepKey available now)
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DOC/Hardware+Wallets
Some more recent press:
http://paymentweek.com/2017-2-9-keepkey-announces-dash-integration/
February 13, 2017, 07:41:18 PM
I spent time and effort, even at night, to stay on pace.
Changing the enforcement would have been on its own a sufficient reason to have my nodes update after a payment, and not on monday (mostly) cause i was sure that if a payment was less than 3 days distant it was possible that i was nonetheless missing it, with a bit of bad luck.
So this costed me money, instead of being prized cause i was doing my best for Dash.
Also, i was confident that if the official communication said "we are enforcing on Sunday" it was... official.
I also totally agree that stability and all it's important; next time i'd re-evaluate the way communications are done, but there is a major downside:
The "ghost" of enforcement was, I think, one of the reason for the very fast upgrade. Next time, people will just say "meh" and wait till it's mandatory, making the whole transaction way slower.
Changing the enforcement would have been on its own a sufficient reason to have my nodes update after a payment, and not on monday (mostly) cause i was sure that if a payment was less than 3 days distant it was possible that i was nonetheless missing it, with a bit of bad luck.
So this costed me money, instead of being prized cause i was doing my best for Dash.
Also, i was confident that if the official communication said "we are enforcing on Sunday" it was... official.
I also totally agree that stability and all it's important; next time i'd re-evaluate the way communications are done, but there is a major downside:
The "ghost" of enforcement was, I think, one of the reason for the very fast upgrade. Next time, people will just say "meh" and wait till it's mandatory, making the whole transaction way slower.
I'm with you on this one. I sacrificed some important time of mine to get this upgrade completed before what I thought was the official enforcement date.
Maybe we should use a budget proposal to let the masternode owners decide when to make the enforcement. I would suspect that the majority would vote to do it now since we've already invested our precious time doing the upgrade.
Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Monero hard forks are triggered by block height, not two random brogrammer dudes acting as Network Dictators by forking at an arbitrary time of their choosing.
That's because fork-trigger-by-block-height is the known Best Practice for that kind of situation.
Dash eschews that known best practice. When I pointed out the vast difference and its significance in terms of centralization, the point was ignored.
Suddenly these unelected Network Dictators arbitrarily changed their minds about the (already arbitrary) fork timing and everyone is crying about it.
Now do you see why clear, objective computer code is better at running a "decentralized" networks than some unpredictable, flighty, unaccountable so-called engineeres?
If you want to be involved in a coin that is run by code and not by people, Dash isn't really a good fit. It's more of personality cult centered around one person, and that Dictator For Life prioritizes marketing over technology.
Evan's 'Marketing Over Technology' tax-and-spend philosophy why Dash has a shiny new high-rent office, but can't
-implement advanced new BTC features like RBF/CPFP, segwit and Lightning
-restore IPv6 functionality to 12.1 (despite Bitcoin supporting it since 2009)
-blind Masternodes (so we don't know how Masternodes voted and whose coins they are laundering)
-get Mycelium integration completed (blown deadline was October 2016)
-get Lamassu ATM integration completed (blown deadline was June 2016)
-hard fork the network using software based block height triggers (instead of confusing/conflicting/manipulative judgement calls)
I agree with your proposal to let the masternode owners decide when to make the enforcement.
That would be actual distributed governance by blockchain, in contrast to the current fake/shitty Decentralization Theater (aka centralized governance by two random brogrammer dudes).
February 13, 2017, 07:17:30 PM
If there is no deadline then there is never an incentive to make the change over. Everyone is busy and it could take months to get everyone on-board 12.1 if you let them decide when it needs done.
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time. But not setting a deadline is not a good practice. Procrastinator speaking.
May I respectfully ask if you are new to Dash? Enforcement usually begins roughly two weeks after the new version is officially released. In our entire history, there's never been a situation where the network just waited for weeks and months on folks to upgrade. Everybody is given a reasonable amount of time and then the trigger is pulled.
If you read Evan's 12.1 announcement, you'll note that February 12 is the *earliest* date that enforcement can begin:
Quote
End users, miners, pool operators, exchanges, and masternode owners have until Sunday, February 12th to update. After that date, we will switch completely to the new version as soon as our engineers determine it is safe to do so, and older versions of the software will drop off the network.
(emphasis mine)
At some point AFTER February 12, as soon as it is SAFE to do so, enforcement will be turned on. As Minotaur pointed out above, this is a hard fork. As of a couple days ago, our biggest exchange (Poloniex) hadn't yet updated. It seems unwise to just kick them (and all their users) off the network in a fit of pique.
Quote
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time.
I'm not new to Dash. I was only expressing my thoughts out loud. And as I quoted above I'm really ok with Evan's announcement. That's just wasn't the information I remember reading and now upon reading his quote again, I have no issues.
But, I must admit I am confused now about what "enforcement" means or does. Some people are saying that as of yesterday only 12.1 masternodes are getting paid. I thought in order for that to happen, enforcement has to be activated.
Blocks mined with 12.0 are no longer accepted by the network because of bip65 activation so 12.0 masternodes are no longer payed.
Currently with no enforcement the result is that the miner can choose to pay a 12.1 masternode or keep all the reward to himself.
Okay, that is what i call valuable information. Also interesting is the info that exchange Poloniex still has not updated its Dash exchange wallet to v.0.12.1
That makes it understandable why dev team wants to keep enforcement off a bit longer.
I just wish that was communicated to us more clearly and i also hope Poloniex gets placed on a special attention list or something for future updates,
because it is strange that they still have not updated their Dash exchange wallet .. is that due to technical problems? or due to them not being aware
there is an Dash update in the first place ? (indicating a communication problem somewhere).
Yep. If this table is current
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DOC/Exchanges
we still have 80%+ of trading volume occurring in 12.0 exchanges and Poloniex is just ~20%
The flip of the switch in this case would be very disruptive
This is glaring issue that all crypto's will be facing into the future. Could you imagine if cyrpto was a main stream "currency" it would be pandemonium! I would suggest that in the new DASH administration that the first peeps to get the updates would be the exchanges, in conjunction with the miners and MN holders. Not sure how this could be addressed in the future but this is a serious problem.
If this was a global payment system it would be a big fail for crypto. Again not sure how this can be addressed but as a merchant for example this "fork" idea is a scary proposition, wither its BTC or DASH or whom ever.
Just letting you know that the table is not current, all major exchanges have updated or have confirmed they are on it. Atlassian is a manual process so give a little time for the PMs to update the table. Miners and Masternodes graph can be simply read from the network, while exchanges is manual.
February 13, 2017, 06:51:12 PM
If there is no deadline then there is never an incentive to make the change over. Everyone is busy and it could take months to get everyone on-board 12.1 if you let them decide when it needs done.
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time. But not setting a deadline is not a good practice. Procrastinator speaking.
May I respectfully ask if you are new to Dash? Enforcement usually begins roughly two weeks after the new version is officially released. In our entire history, there's never been a situation where the network just waited for weeks and months on folks to upgrade. Everybody is given a reasonable amount of time and then the trigger is pulled.
If you read Evan's 12.1 announcement, you'll note that February 12 is the *earliest* date that enforcement can begin:
Quote
End users, miners, pool operators, exchanges, and masternode owners have until Sunday, February 12th to update. After that date, we will switch completely to the new version as soon as our engineers determine it is safe to do so, and older versions of the software will drop off the network.
(emphasis mine)
At some point AFTER February 12, as soon as it is SAFE to do so, enforcement will be turned on. As Minotaur pointed out above, this is a hard fork. As of a couple days ago, our biggest exchange (Poloniex) hadn't yet updated. It seems unwise to just kick them (and all their users) off the network in a fit of pique.
Quote
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time.
I'm not new to Dash. I was only expressing my thoughts out loud. And as I quoted above I'm really ok with Evan's announcement. That's just wasn't the information I remember reading and now upon reading his quote again, I have no issues.
But, I must admit I am confused now about what "enforcement" means or does. Some people are saying that as of yesterday only 12.1 masternodes are getting paid. I thought in order for that to happen, enforcement has to be activated.
Blocks mined with 12.0 are no longer accepted by the network because of bip65 activation so 12.0 masternodes are no longer payed.
Currently with no enforcement the result is that the miner can choose to pay a 12.1 masternode or keep all the reward to himself.
Okay, that is what i call valuable information. Also interesting is the info that exchange Poloniex still has not updated its Dash exchange wallet to v.0.12.1
That makes it understandable why dev team wants to keep enforcement off a bit longer.
I just wish that was communicated to us more clearly and i also hope Poloniex gets placed on a special attention list or something for future updates,
because it is strange that they still have not updated their Dash exchange wallet .. is that due to technical problems? or due to them not being aware
there is an Dash update in the first place ? (indicating a communication problem somewhere).
Yep. If this table is current
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DOC/Exchanges
we still have 80%+ of trading volume occurring in 12.0 exchanges and Poloniex is just ~20%
The flip of the switch in this case would be very disruptive
This is glaring issue that all crypto's will be facing into the future. Could you imagine if cyrpto was a main stream "currency" it would be pandemonium! I would suggest that in the new DASH administration that the first peeps to get the updates would be the exchanges, in conjunction with the miners and MN holders. Not sure how this could be addressed in the future but this is a serious problem.
If this was a global payment system it would be a big fail for crypto. Again not sure how this can be addressed but as a merchant for example this "fork" idea is a scary proposition, wither its BTC or DASH or whom ever.
February 13, 2017, 04:01:26 PM
Exchange LiteBit.eu has upgraded to v0.12.1
February 13, 2017, 03:02:56 PM
Thanks UdjinM6, informativt post to calm down the ranks. Also thank you for providing a clear explaining as to how the sporking works! 
February 13, 2017, 02:53:21 PM
I think this kind of detailed information will calm everybody now.
Thank you
It calmed even our trolls, impressive
February 13, 2017, 11:39:47 AM
There are few things I think I have to clarify to get everyone understand which sporks are important for payments and stability, what incentives are there, why sporks are enabled in this specific order and at some specific time, and "why don't we enable every spork right now?".
So, there is an incentive...
1) to be in first ~1/3 of updated masternodes because they do not lose their place in queue;
2) to update later (i.e. to be in second 1/3) because it's clear that significant portion of mns is already updated and spork10 will be enabled soon (technically speaking, we don't need majority here and could turn spork10 o as soon as 1/3 was updated but clearly it's much better to have more support and fix issues if any at a smaller scale, so we still give mn owners some time to sort things out, get last payment keeping older mn etc. - spork10 was enabled only after ~2/3 of mns were updated);
3) to update in the last 1/3 because at this time spork10 is enabled and you'll get no more payments running old version.
Imo all incentives and times are aligned well enough here.
Now, when most of mns are finally running new version, mn winners list should start to stabilize. That's the thing we use to figure out parts of coinbase txes and we _need_ it to be consistent before enabling spork8 (which most people are referring as simply "enforcement") because otherwise different nodes could arrive at different voting results and will simply reject "wrong" blocks (and ban "wrong" peers), meaning that network can split in 2+ forks which would mean that:
- we'll have to disable it again to resolve forks i.e. it's going to be the same sitataion as it's now (payments wise);
- masternodes on the "wrong" fork are going to expire if fork will last for too long (3h+) i.e. they are going to lose their place in payment queue on the "right" chain and mn owners will have to spend more time on maintaining them and bringing them back online;
- miners on the wrong fork will waste their money for no reward while they did nothing wrong, they just mined the block they thought should be valid as usual.
Think of an upgrade as of a stress event for the network - for stabilization to happen we have to give it some time to "calm down". Miners did their job amazingly fast this time (kudos to them), mn owners seems to be not so good at updates but, hey, it's only a week since the official release and mn owners are less techy in general I guess.
To sum up, I think that network is doing great so far and the least thing we need is to rush now because of the reason that some mn payments are "stolen" by some miners.
So, there is an incentive...
1) to be in first ~1/3 of updated masternodes because they do not lose their place in queue;
2) to update later (i.e. to be in second 1/3) because it's clear that significant portion of mns is already updated and spork10 will be enabled soon (technically speaking, we don't need majority here and could turn spork10 o as soon as 1/3 was updated but clearly it's much better to have more support and fix issues if any at a smaller scale, so we still give mn owners some time to sort things out, get last payment keeping older mn etc. - spork10 was enabled only after ~2/3 of mns were updated);
3) to update in the last 1/3 because at this time spork10 is enabled and you'll get no more payments running old version.
Imo all incentives and times are aligned well enough here.
Now, when most of mns are finally running new version, mn winners list should start to stabilize. That's the thing we use to figure out parts of coinbase txes and we _need_ it to be consistent before enabling spork8 (which most people are referring as simply "enforcement") because otherwise different nodes could arrive at different voting results and will simply reject "wrong" blocks (and ban "wrong" peers), meaning that network can split in 2+ forks which would mean that:
- we'll have to disable it again to resolve forks i.e. it's going to be the same sitataion as it's now (payments wise);
- masternodes on the "wrong" fork are going to expire if fork will last for too long (3h+) i.e. they are going to lose their place in payment queue on the "right" chain and mn owners will have to spend more time on maintaining them and bringing them back online;
- miners on the wrong fork will waste their money for no reward while they did nothing wrong, they just mined the block they thought should be valid as usual.
Think of an upgrade as of a stress event for the network - for stabilization to happen we have to give it some time to "calm down". Miners did their job amazingly fast this time (kudos to them), mn owners seems to be not so good at updates but, hey, it's only a week since the official release and mn owners are less techy in general I guess.
To sum up, I think that network is doing great so far and the least thing we need is to rush now because of the reason that some mn payments are "stolen" by some miners.
I think this kind of detailed information will calm everybody now.
Thank you
February 13, 2017, 11:33:35 AM
There are few things I think I have to clarify to get everyone understand which sporks are important for payments and stability, what incentives are there, why sporks are enabled in this specific order and at some specific time, and "why don't we enable every spork right now?".
So, there is an incentive...
1) to be in first ~1/3 of updated masternodes because they do not lose their place in queue;
2) to update later (i.e. to be in second 1/3) because it's clear that significant portion of mns is already updated and spork10 will be enabled soon (technically speaking, we don't need majority here and could turn spork10 on as soon as 1/3 was updated but clearly it's much better to have more support and fix issues if any at a smaller scale, so we still give mn owners some time to sort things out, get last payment keeping older mn etc. - spork10 was enabled only after ~2/3 of mns were updated);
3) to update in the last 1/3 because at this time spork10 is enabled and you'll get no more payments running old version.
Imo all incentives and times are aligned well enough here.
Now, when most of mns are finally running new version, mn winners list should start to stabilize. That's the thing we use to figure out parts of coinbase txes and we _need_ it to be consistent before enabling spork8 (which most people are referring as simply "enforcement") because otherwise different nodes could arrive at different voting results and will simply reject "wrong" blocks (and ban "wrong" peers), meaning that network can split in 2+ forks which would mean that:
- we'll have to disable it again to resolve forks i.e. it's going to be the same sitataion as it's now (payments wise);
- masternodes on the "wrong" fork are going to expire if fork will last for too long (3h+) i.e. they are going to lose their place in payment queue on the "right" chain and mn owners will have to spend more time on maintaining them and bringing them back online;
- miners on the wrong fork will waste their money for no reward while they did nothing wrong, they just mined the block they thought should be valid as usual.
Think of an upgrade as of a stress event for the network - for stabilization to happen we have to give it some time to "calm down". Miners did their job amazingly fast this time (kudos to them), mn owners seems to be not so good at updates but, hey, it's only a week since the official release and mn owners are less techy in general I guess.
To sum up, I think that network is doing great so far and the least thing we need is to rush now because of the reason that some mn payments are "stolen" by some miners.
So, there is an incentive...
1) to be in first ~1/3 of updated masternodes because they do not lose their place in queue;
2) to update later (i.e. to be in second 1/3) because it's clear that significant portion of mns is already updated and spork10 will be enabled soon (technically speaking, we don't need majority here and could turn spork10 on as soon as 1/3 was updated but clearly it's much better to have more support and fix issues if any at a smaller scale, so we still give mn owners some time to sort things out, get last payment keeping older mn etc. - spork10 was enabled only after ~2/3 of mns were updated);
3) to update in the last 1/3 because at this time spork10 is enabled and you'll get no more payments running old version.
Imo all incentives and times are aligned well enough here.
Now, when most of mns are finally running new version, mn winners list should start to stabilize. That's the thing we use to figure out parts of coinbase txes and we _need_ it to be consistent before enabling spork8 (which most people are referring as simply "enforcement") because otherwise different nodes could arrive at different voting results and will simply reject "wrong" blocks (and ban "wrong" peers), meaning that network can split in 2+ forks which would mean that:
- we'll have to disable it again to resolve forks i.e. it's going to be the same sitataion as it's now (payments wise);
- masternodes on the "wrong" fork are going to expire if fork will last for too long (3h+) i.e. they are going to lose their place in payment queue on the "right" chain and mn owners will have to spend more time on maintaining them and bringing them back online;
- miners on the wrong fork will waste their money for no reward while they did nothing wrong, they just mined the block they thought should be valid as usual.
Think of an upgrade as of a stress event for the network - for stabilization to happen we have to give it some time to "calm down". Miners did their job amazingly fast this time (kudos to them), mn owners seems to be not so good at updates but, hey, it's only a week since the official release and mn owners are less techy in general I guess.
To sum up, I think that network is doing great so far and the least thing we need is to rush now because of the reason that some mn payments are "stolen" by some miners.
February 13, 2017, 11:26:38 AM
If there is no deadline then there is never an incentive to make the change over. Everyone is busy and it could take months to get everyone on-board 12.1 if you let them decide when it needs done.
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time. But not setting a deadline is not a good practice. Procrastinator speaking.
May I respectfully ask if you are new to Dash? Enforcement usually begins roughly two weeks after the new version is officially released. In our entire history, there's never been a situation where the network just waited for weeks and months on folks to upgrade. Everybody is given a reasonable amount of time and then the trigger is pulled.
If you read Evan's 12.1 announcement, you'll note that February 12 is the *earliest* date that enforcement can begin:
Quote
End users, miners, pool operators, exchanges, and masternode owners have until Sunday, February 12th to update. After that date, we will switch completely to the new version as soon as our engineers determine it is safe to do so, and older versions of the software will drop off the network.
(emphasis mine)
At some point AFTER February 12, as soon as it is SAFE to do so, enforcement will be turned on. As Minotaur pointed out above, this is a hard fork. As of a couple days ago, our biggest exchange (Poloniex) hadn't yet updated. It seems unwise to just kick them (and all their users) off the network in a fit of pique.
Quote
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time.
I'm not new to Dash. I was only expressing my thoughts out loud. And as I quoted above I'm really ok with Evan's announcement. That's just wasn't the information I remember reading and now upon reading his quote again, I have no issues.
But, I must admit I am confused now about what "enforcement" means or does. Some people are saying that as of yesterday only 12.1 masternodes are getting paid. I thought in order for that to happen, enforcement has to be activated.
Blocks mined with 12.0 are no longer accepted by the network because of bip65 activation so 12.0 masternodes are no longer payed.
Currently with no enforcement the result is that the miner can choose to pay a 12.1 masternode or keep all the reward to himself.
Okay, that is what i call valuable information. Also interesting is the info that exchange Poloniex still has not updated its Dash exchange wallet to v.0.12.1
That makes it understandable why dev team wants to keep enforcement off a bit longer.
I just wish that was communicated to us more clearly and i also hope Poloniex gets placed on a special attention list or something for future updates,
because it is strange that they still have not updated their Dash exchange wallet .. is that due to technical problems? or due to them not being aware
there is an Dash update in the first place ? (indicating a communication problem somewhere).
Yep. If this table is current
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DOC/Exchanges
we still have 80%+ of trading volume occurring in 12.0 exchanges and Poloniex is just ~20%
The flip of the switch in this case would be very disruptive
February 13, 2017, 11:22:54 AM
If there is no deadline then there is never an incentive to make the change over. Everyone is busy and it could take months to get everyone on-board 12.1 if you let them decide when it needs done.
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time. But not setting a deadline is not a good practice. Procrastinator speaking.
May I respectfully ask if you are new to Dash? Enforcement usually begins roughly two weeks after the new version is officially released. In our entire history, there's never been a situation where the network just waited for weeks and months on folks to upgrade. Everybody is given a reasonable amount of time and then the trigger is pulled.
If you read Evan's 12.1 announcement, you'll note that February 12 is the *earliest* date that enforcement can begin:
Quote
End users, miners, pool operators, exchanges, and masternode owners have until Sunday, February 12th to update. After that date, we will switch completely to the new version as soon as our engineers determine it is safe to do so, and older versions of the software will drop off the network.
(emphasis mine)
At some point AFTER February 12, as soon as it is SAFE to do so, enforcement will be turned on. As Minotaur pointed out above, this is a hard fork. As of a couple days ago, our biggest exchange (Poloniex) hadn't yet updated. It seems unwise to just kick them (and all their users) off the network in a fit of pique.
Quote
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time.
I'm not new to Dash. I was only expressing my thoughts out loud. And as I quoted above I'm really ok with Evan's announcement. That's just wasn't the information I remember reading and now upon reading his quote again, I have no issues.
But, I must admit I am confused now about what "enforcement" means or does. Some people are saying that as of yesterday only 12.1 masternodes are getting paid. I thought in order for that to happen, enforcement has to be activated.
Blocks mined with 12.0 are no longer accepted by the network because of bip65 activation so 12.0 masternodes are no longer payed.
Currently with no enforcement the result is that the miner can choose to pay a 12.1 masternode or keep all the reward to himself.
So since we have 100% pools on 12.1 that is why 12.1 masternodes are only getting paid? And being paid in random since enforcement is off?
Yes and yes.
As far as I know 12.0 masternodes never enter 12.1 list so in practice they don't exist to the 12.1 miner.
Without enforcement the network cannot reject a block with wrong masternode or no masternode payed.
February 13, 2017, 11:19:33 AM
So does 12.1 bring the ability to remote start a masternode from a hardware wallet? If so, can somebody point me to a guide on how to do that?
https://github.com/chaeplin/dashmnb
February 13, 2017, 11:17:05 AM
If there is no deadline then there is never an incentive to make the change over. Everyone is busy and it could take months to get everyone on-board 12.1 if you let them decide when it needs done.
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time. But not setting a deadline is not a good practice. Procrastinator speaking.
May I respectfully ask if you are new to Dash? Enforcement usually begins roughly two weeks after the new version is officially released. In our entire history, there's never been a situation where the network just waited for weeks and months on folks to upgrade. Everybody is given a reasonable amount of time and then the trigger is pulled.
If you read Evan's 12.1 announcement, you'll note that February 12 is the *earliest* date that enforcement can begin:
Quote
End users, miners, pool operators, exchanges, and masternode owners have until Sunday, February 12th to update. After that date, we will switch completely to the new version as soon as our engineers determine it is safe to do so, and older versions of the software will drop off the network.
(emphasis mine)
At some point AFTER February 12, as soon as it is SAFE to do so, enforcement will be turned on. As Minotaur pointed out above, this is a hard fork. As of a couple days ago, our biggest exchange (Poloniex) hadn't yet updated. It seems unwise to just kick them (and all their users) off the network in a fit of pique.
Quote
But if there are a few large players that are having problems then I can see giving them a bit more time.
I'm not new to Dash. I was only expressing my thoughts out loud. And as I quoted above I'm really ok with Evan's announcement. That's just wasn't the information I remember reading and now upon reading his quote again, I have no issues.
But, I must admit I am confused now about what "enforcement" means or does. Some people are saying that as of yesterday only 12.1 masternodes are getting paid. I thought in order for that to happen, enforcement has to be activated.
Blocks mined with 12.0 are no longer accepted by the network because of bip65 activation so 12.0 masternodes are no longer payed.
Currently with no enforcement the result is that the miner can choose to pay a 12.1 masternode or keep all the reward to himself.
Okay, that is what i call valuable information. Also interesting is the info that exchange Poloniex still has not updated its Dash exchange wallet to v.0.12.1
That makes it understandable why dev team wants to keep enforcement off a bit longer.
I just wish that was communicated to us more clearly and i also hope Poloniex gets placed on a special attention list or something for future updates,
because it is strange that they still have not updated their Dash exchange wallet .. is that due to technical problems? or due to them not being aware
there is an Dash update in the first place ? (indicating a communication problem somewhere).
Jump to: