Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 94. (Read 9723782 times)

They will not.

The greed of the DAO hijackers is proven ... but beyond that, Shared Mnodes are a casting vote niche that whales won't allow.

The vote exercised by Mnodes of micro-savers will never be able to pursue their particular interest ... because it can never be backed by the mass of powerful Mnodes. However ... the powerful are interested in a voting system that CAN favor their particular interest (either a specific one or the one closest to their position ... either the individual or their profile, observing trends and influencing in them in due time). Therefore ... the powerful will NEVER give up that status of influence: They do not need it and the system cannot force them. (By the way, DASH has yet to live the generalized voting scenario ... which will give the exact measure of ecosystem centralization ... and on that day, modest Mnodes owners, with few devices, can literally shake, because ALL your rights in the network can be put to vote. ALL! - the one who makes the law, create the trap - or mark its door to it - ... and an ecosystem can be fucked in many ways without charging you with the law-code -).

The whales of DASH do not need to give up voting power and will not, the context in their favor is already set. And by the way ... DASH cannot guarantee that their rights as Mnode will be maintained over time to any of those future "rich guardians" that xkcd claims to pursue to its discriminatory ecosystem (and, in terms of decisions, only one discrimination would be positive: that of ALWAYS optimizing the collective interest of the network, precisely the option that is marginalized and despised  ) . Moreover, the concentration of power to which DASH leads, favors that Mnodes with few devices see their rights constantly threatened. A possible bull run, in fact, will make it terrible for them and if it occurs in another correction and subsequent cheap re-accumulation, they will see it quickly.

Finally, it means the insistence of Ryan Taylor, F Gutierrez, etc ... that only 5000 Mnodes are recommendable without saturating the system in any way. Attention, NO mantras are planted in DASH by chance. Let the "modest" Mnodes pray that there are no nodes to spare...because perhaps they see that they have been greasing the weapon of their murderers for a long time (which, as poetic justice would be delicious for these cheats... but being practical and as an optimization of a decentralized project, it would be simply generalized destruction with which no collective wins - I mean, a fucking disaster - )

So if those do not have their security guaranteed ... imagine those of some micro-savers that those Mnodes who currently vote have already fucked blocking their rights obscenely without any shame. (which, i insist,  is throwing stones at its own roof, because that vote "condemned to seek the general interest" would be one of the few solutions to minimize the vote of large owners , the only with voting power enough to impose totally capricious and unilateral norms that no one healthy and heterogeneous collective would approve).

A greeting.

One moment, one moment, please ... first this Oscar-worthy troll carnival and then move on to the "human" debate...





 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The expressiveness of these emoticons is VERY short, really.

Dash Electrum is also investigating shared masternodes through multisig and pre-sign of refund transactions.This will not be completely trustless of nature, but could be better then our current 'trusted' shared masternodes services.

Source : https://www.dashcentral.org/p/dash-electrum-2020jul (see comments)

Perhaps trustless shared masternodes could be implemented in a way where someone could signal to the network they will run a masternode in need of collateral and anyone with DASH could delegate their share to the masternode collateral contract. Then the masternode owner and everyone who delegated some DASH could get their cut of the reward when the masternode gets paid. Also, voting could be done in a way where everyone could have a voice in proportion to how much DASH they delegated and the masternode would vote on each proposal whichever way the majority of their delegators did.

I think this would be a good solution for Dash.

No this is all talk, a fork to reallocate 80/20 would cause the coin to dump, it has been proven that moving rewards to the masternodes increases the value of the coin and the reverse decreases it.  This was made clear in Ryan's talk where in the early days of DASH Evan was boosting the allocation to mnodes from which Tok and AFBTC greatly benefited from as it caused the price to pump each time.  Recently, we increased the ratio once more and just the news that we were doing so boosted the price from $65 to $93 in a matter of weeks and we we are still 5 days out from the first boost. 

For your shared node, look into crowdnode.io.  I'm sorry, but shared nodes are stupid and lowering the amount needed for a mnode significantly will never happen, we don't need minnows running mnodes, those are for people with serious money to invest, because it is a high risk venture and requires a lot of your attention, the last thing DASH needs is an army of minnows not giving a poop about the DAO because their investment in it is so low.

Also, remember the purpose of a mnode it is to thwat sybil attacks and provide just enough nodes to secure the network and run the services on layer2 without so many that it would delay the propagation of TXes.  5000 nodes is about right, probably with a factor of 2 lee way either side.

So, will there be a fork that has the proposed 80/20 split in rewards for miners/masternode owners? Or is this just all talk?

Regarding trustless shared masternodes, I hope this is up next on the roadmap after the release of Dash Platform (DashPay). It seems to me this one thing would alleviate many of the concerns certain people have here. Having said that, StakeHound is a good first step and should help in the interim. Anyone know how that is progressing?

That is a good question and one that I thought about quite a lot.

Lets say price was at $3000. I doubt masternode operating costs would be significantly higher than now since it doesn't require any more hardware performance to accommodate a $2 million transaction than a $2 one. (It's miners that do all the expensive work in that department anyway).

When Dash platform comes along, a more expensive hosting configuration might be required, but the costs are still miniscule compared with mining. They are still fixed so masternodes will always be at a profit above operating costs. This is distinct from miners who need to keep their investment catching up with coin price since competition will increase as soon as there's a disparity between primary ("price" to the miner) and secondary (price to an exchange buyer) markets.

So lets say you set mining reward back at 80%. That would attract back a huge amount of competition for Dash's primary supply (since we would be twice as competitive as we are at the moment compared with other coins at the current Dash price). At the same time masternodes would still receive around $150 or more per month which is 7 times average hosting cost. That profit would only increase then with coin value but it wouldn't eat into the mining competitively nearly as much as it does now, we'd still have a DAO budget and we'd still have all out features.

The thing is, masternodes would probably look at a $150/month revenue and say it's too paultry to be incentivised from. But the point of it is it's far more scaleable than what we have at the moment. (Why ? Because it leaves the majority of the chain mined. Their cost is variable so far more of the chain gets invested in as price rises than does at the moment). We might then have a genuine chance of reaching high valuations at which nodes may become a viable business.

One of the reasons for the antagonism with my perspective on here is that when I use the work "invest" I'm referring to how much effort is invested into the chain to raise the opening price of new blocks. But other people tend to think of "invest" as meaning the secondary market - i.e. exchanges - and controlling price on there. That is too late. It's too far upstream to make a difference because the chain has already issued the coins by that time and the "accounting" for price has started, i.e. half the chain is "issued" at zero price.

Let's suppose that Dash Platform/Evolution attracts so many new users (thanks to its InstantSend/PrivateSend/Dapps virtues, all things you agree with) that MN operating costs hugely and quickly inflate: urgent need of faster, larger servers, protection against Ddos attacks, etc., you name it.
In your ideal model, MN are supposed to get 10 or 20% of the block reward instead of 50 or 60%. So what happens if the operating costs are wildly increasing, and the small reward part is suddenly not enough to pay those costs? After all, AFAIK, there is much uncertainty surrounding the technical specifications that will be necessary for each MN in the real world, if Platform gains some recognition and usage.

(Honest question, as I do not consider you a troll. A troll is stupid and rude, and you're neither stupid nor rude.)

Looks like Dash is making another run for that $100, it came pretty close last night.


Source : https://cryptowat.ch/charts/BINANCE:DASH-USDT?period=12h

Price performance of crypto coins


Source : messari.io

Pretty much the same ranking can be found here : https://coinmarketcap.com/coins/
One small difference : Dash is currently above VeChain on coinmarketcap and below VeChain on messari.io

Bring someone who knows how to fork and we will fuck these scammers in 3 seconds, whether they like it or not. ... also benefiting the authentic cheated community and intensely optimizing one of the biggest gems on the market to the point of making one of the best projects, if not the best.

For me, even worse than the economic heist of these immoral parasites is the inability for the passionate DASH community to express themselves through the project that seduced them.

Is it futile to talk with people which only goal is to defend present situation at any cost.Any meaningful discussion with them is impossible.Everything you said is assumption,everything they said is a truth by default.People which are trolling all the time, shamelessly accusing you that you are troll,not them.

So,it is obvious that present situation is not some mistake made by DASH team,but carefully constructed situation with longterm goals in the favour of one very small circle.All changes were made to support maximum wealth centralization.And it is going further in the same direction to the final big bang.

Talking that giving 50% of mined coins with 0 cost to masternode operators does not cause spiral of inflation is ridiculous beyond limits.If that was true ,every government will print money in endless quantities.

Comparing DASH with BCH,forked coin which after fork from BTC forked two more times is insult to the intelligence.

Despite it is obvious that mining of DASH is largely unprofitable for ordinary miners ,so call "defenders of DASH" keep talking that ordinary miners continue to mine it for months making huge losses in progress.Why would  ordinary miners keep mining DASH for months with obvious and big loss,they cant answer.

They are talking that DASH is one truly decentralized coin with almost perfect wealth decentralization.Fact is that 1000 DASH collateral for masternode operators is favouring investors with deep pockets.If goal was decentralization collateral would be 50 or 100 DASH.

Masternode operator monthy income is now about $425.For 5000 masternodes it is $2.125 millions per month.Masternode expenses are about $15 per month or $75000 for 5000 masternodes.Profit which goes monthly to masternode operators is 28.3x bigger than theirs expenses.Income vs expenses gives 96.5% profit margin.

Question is why DASH team gives generously 28x more money than it is really cost of maintaining DASH masternode network? No one will make such thing if it is not in its favour.It is pulling money from the coin like a giant vacuum cleaner. So call "DASH defenders" claim that it has not any profound effect on coin itself. My advice to them is to test it on themselves - to pay something 28x more than its price and see the effect on theirs budget.

Sure,it is possible to change such anomaly,but I think there are 0% will in DASH team for it.They will go in same direction as much as they can(as much as market will allow to them).

I think they are counting to piggyback on BTC and ETH rally,but this time it is different situation than it was in 2017.Then ,the rally was induced by huge number of retail investors,now institutional investors pave the way.Problem is that 99% of them are investing only in BTC and ETH.Will anyone really think they will put millions in DASH without thorough investigation and due diligence?

Apparently toknormal can go lower, i guess i will just have to lower the bar for him.



What is the point of discussing anything with a person, that just gives his own baseless definition to things ? Baseless definitions that are clashing directly with well-established definitions that are used both
within and outside the crypto space ? A person that just gives his own spin on things ? A person that seems to live in his own little world ?

It is pointless, a waste of time and energy. Which means from now on i will start focusing less on toknormal, and more on matters that matter.


 

It's not pathetic and principle isn't dependent on any particular mining profitability. Once again you're groping around in the dark for random aspersions to cast on a very solid principle - the fact that the reward is split between fixed cost operators and variable cost operators.

The mining calculator is irrelevant other than for illustrative purposes. Anyone who receives a masternode reward (yourself in particular) will know it's nearly all profit in the late 90's percentage. There's no speculation about that.


True, they don't mine blocks because they don't need to. But in economic terms they CAN be considered zero-difficulty miners because the reward is not being used for anything else. So they can be modelled as such on an equivalent basis.

Pointing to a mining profit calculator and using that in a baseless assumption that the role of masternodes is somehow that of 'zero difficulty miners' is rather pathetic.
Masternodes validate blocks, support PrivateSend and InstantSend, ChainLocks and also have other tasks. Masternodes do this through Proof of Service, not through Proof of Work.
Masternodes do not mine blocks and can therefore not be considered miners. Nor is its role that of a miner.


Source : https://docs.dash.org/en/stable/masternodes/understanding.html

What it does show, is the length toknormal is willing to go with all his baseless assumptions.
How low can toknormal go ? Stay tuned...

No. Just parasites that have changed the rules mid-game by buying and dumping. Ask in DashTROOLKdiscord to xkcd and the Pig of Canada ... they explain how to squeeze DASH and turn it into an inflatable doll for Trading at the expense of the money of the fools who are tricked into entering this "paradise of freedom where you are your own bank".( coincidentally, here they are all "altruistic decentralizers loyal to the libertarian collective project" ... and "nobody sells"   )




"Active community", scammer?

Less than a thousand votes on average ( and really only a few hundred Mnode owners )  in each vote to decide the "presumably common" Treasury funds in a coin of 1,323,126 addresses?
Is that your "active community"?
Or rather the few hundred owners of ALL the Mnodes who share the monetary issues ... while preventing the Shared Mnodes that DO open DASH to a broad, decentralized and active community, as proposed by Duffield?



Take that photo with the feet crossed in a hammock thanked by the "spontaneous support" of multinicks created to prolong your scam.... and go to a poor neighborhood in Colombia or Venezuela to show it to people who have trusted the advertising created by your parasites and paid for by your DAO of "Accounts with return" (Shared Mnodes) to collect 4 coins with real sacrifice when DASH was $ 1600 ... you'll see the "peace" they give you back, you fucking thief. Go there and remind them how wonderful DASH is going up $ 15, go ...  

Well ... for now, with exposing your scam so you don't screw more people, enough ...

And Ah! ... and of course, we believe you that you do not want to sell ... and that you are not one of those who are going to dump tokens generously as soon as a juicy percentage rises. And that you eat breakfast on Saturn every morning, we believe you too. The bad thing is that xkcd and the pig of Canada, two "idealists" of decentralization and the "community" like you who come here to clean your ass and intoxicate when that "community" you adore turns against you and clearly exposes your scam to new ones who come to read and learn, ...vut "casually" they have been in discord for months claiming that DASH drops to $ 10 ... to load and dump at these prices.

Although surely not ... that now those do not overturn either ... DASH overturns are produced by "the wind" or "climate change".  



By the way ... we are still waiting for your arrogant tone  again  disavowing and slandering "comunity members" ... have you forgotten since I painted that scammer's face in colors? ... or did the cat eat your tongue?  

The role of masternodes as "zero difficulty miners" isn't baseless, it's fact. (Here it is quantified).

That this portion of the reward is used to fund a pure profit margin isn't an assumption, it's fact (again, see above).

That that the mining model uses hashrate to mediate competition for the primary supply and thereby put a price on it isn't an assumption, it's fact. (Even tax authorities see it that way).

The only "assumption" is that is made is that this level of reward ratio is sub-optimal and adversely affects Dash's competitivity. But this assumption isn't baseless. It's exactly what's predicted by the idea that the market simply reprices the uneconomic profit of masternodes. It also explains why our feature superiority has worked in reverse, putting us at such an enormous marketcap deficit compared to competitors which have none of these features. It also completely conflicts with what's argued here about hashrate "not being needed".

So keep posting that these are "not facts" or "baseless" but it would seem to me that that's just chaff because you don't really have any plausable counter arguments.

It certainly comes across as trolling at times. toknormal's habit of presenting his baseless assumptions as facts, does not help either.

Yeah you are right, a SPORK21 was activated last week which started banning Tok's nodes, he is having a hunger strike, his famine starts in 6 days, when the first reallocation occurs and his nodes are instantly forked off.  So far the network is sending out warning signals in the form of POSE scores to the old nodes, anyway, I am keeping an updated list of them here https://mnowatch.org/legacynodes/ you are welcome to check back from time to time to see how long the list is, who got banned, and who spent 1000 DASH.  Maybe they will stake ETH instead? 

Sorry Tok but no. Your baseless obsession (which you are posting daily) is trolling. Baseless assumption with 0 proof btw.
I understand we are under semi - lockdown and under stress lately but please. Stop embarrasing yourself.