Topic: [ANN][DCR] Decred - Community Governance | Bitcoin Devs | Lightning Network - page 10. (Read 1201436 times)

Thank you very much for all these detailed answers and all the additional info both of you have provided.

I have asked these questions because the explanation that nobody will fork Decred because of the high costs, somehow doesn't convince me.

We have seen already that in crypto space people are able to lose millions of dollars just to stand up and prove something to someone (hash wars).

You have been answered here many times about this question.
Decred devs are no longer coming to bitcointalk for toxicity and trolls.
You can talk to all of them on DCR matrix
 

https://chat.decred.org/#/welcome

Don't do that. I'm debating for learning's sake. There are some people in the Bitcoin community who had been saying that "blockchain governance is a joke". I'm simply trying to find answers.

But I'll try to get answers from some of the developers to simple questions, like what if the motivated minority, comprised of miners and stakers, simply refuse to run the Core developers' software, and develops their own, with their own rules?

Yes, exactly. The possibility is there of course, but it's quite infinitesimally small. Not only is there nothing to be gained, but it would be an unimaginable cost (even at current difficulty, and the difficulty just keeps going up, btw) to execute. We're talking on the level of governments and nation-states.
Honestly, one should be more afraid of the chance solar flares will ruin internet infrastructure before worrying about Decred having a contentious chain split.

===> DECRED TRIED TO TAKE AWAY MY PRIVACY!! <===

YES BITCOIN IS HERE TO HELP ARTISTS, MUSICIANS, & REAL PEOPLE!!!

ALL DECRED IS IS ANOTHER CENTRALIZED SHITCOIN. JUST LOOK AT THE RICHLIST!!! \_@@_/ NO REAL WORLD USE.

Are you a troll?




Yes, we can say that it is impossible to chain split decred without stakeholders agreeing to it.
Atack decred costs 20X more than taking control of bitcoin in a 51% attack.
Why would someone spend 20x more to attack decred, if with 20X less, they can do with bitcoin and earn much more billions of dollars?

https://blog.usejournal.com/apples-to-apples-decred-is-20x-more-expensive-to-attack-than-bitcoin-68bafeb4546f

https://medium.com/decred/decreds-hybrid-protocol-a-superior-deterrent-to-majority-attacks-9421bf486292

https://medium.com/decred/detailed-analysis-of-decred-fork-resistance-93022e0bcde7

I hope you are right and Decred will be strong enough to survive and stay for longer in the crypto space.

Of course, I am researching (refreshing my knowledge) about many projects which were famous in 2017.

I am really shocked that many of them are already dead, abandoned, delisted or just not developed anymore.

Luckily this is not the case for Decred and here the team and community seem to be strong.


I think a motivated minority will be able to cause a chain split.

Decred is developed to make it not possible because it would be very costly to do, but what if some bad actor would be only interested in finishing Decred project by a chain split to prove that on-chain governance is broken and don't think about the cost?

No, in my opinion Decred, with its thesis of on-chain governance, will be a failure if indeed a motivated minority does cause a chain split.

That was at another point in the market. Until 2016 the altcoins market was totally undervalued by the mainstream.
This has changed since 2016 and a lot of money has entered this market.
As I said before, ETH, Dash and monero had their ATH above 0.1 BTC. Decred can do the same or get close if it becomes more popular.
You also forgot to count the amount of coins in the market and the total supply.
Decred has around 10 million units launched of a total of 21 million.
Litecoin and others have 10X, 100X more units.
More units are expected to be worth less.
 



Decred has a very strong community spread across all continents. I just mentioned what is happening in Brazil, which is where I live and the community I belong to. I am sure that in other regions, local communities must be developing the currency ecosystem.




The purpose of decred is to be the best and safest store of value in the market.
In addition it also provides income not only for POW miners, but also for stakeholders through POS, privacy and amazing governance.
Satoshi created bitcoin to fuck the system and the banks.
All coins that appears for another purpose in a beautiful whitepaper turns out to be scam.
Cryptocoins were not created to save the planet, to help musicians, artists, gnomes, urea production and bla bla bla
Can the blockchain be used for other purposes? Yes, but it is up to the community entrepreneurs to start their business and make money from it.
There is no need to find just one utility and create a coin around it. The blockchain is there, use it any way you like.

they both have split, decred hard-fork will be good for ending this nonsense once and for all.    BLACKLIST THE GREEDY RICHLIST! >>>fork this turd already! lol

Remember about Litecoin. Despite everything (second crypto ever, fair launch, LN, etc.) still, the price never reached higher than 0.02BTC.


This is what I wanted to hear and see, which are real use cases for Decred. To be honest this is not much for an almost 4 years old cryptocurrency but is always better than nothing. Let's hope that there will be indeed more companies interested in Decred because this is the only way for this project to survive.


I just can't agree and think that cryptocurrency should at least have a purpose or any use case when developed because we already have more than 2970 cryptocurrencies that are trying to find the place on the market and to be honest without real use cases I don't see this to happen.

As I said we are entering the 2020 year and today is not enough only to launch a cryptocurrency to be successful exactly as until 2017. Today competition is so big that if your crypto is not special and doesn't have any purpose, then there are already hundreds of altcoins like this and they already lost 99% of the value until today.

Seriously? So in your opinion, coins like Bitcoin and Ethereum are not successful?

That's true. But it's only a scam from the standpoint of the original because of different "visions". Plus I'm not convinced that a contentious hard fork is impossible because it's not profitable. The motivated minority can sell Decred from the main chain to support the fork.

I'm a Decred HODLER, but I believe the coin is only successful until that first chain split.

Without PoS votes on the validity of contentious blocks, a sybil attack isn't an actual attack vector in this scenario.
Try again Gem

without replay protection ~ what makes you think the original chain nodes will not be sybil attacked via malicious state actors? weeee

There's one very important nuance though, and that's the difference between a forked repo, and a forked chain. A forked chain that has a contentious hard fork growing on it shares the same previous block history as the "legit" chain.
A forked repo doesn't. The only thing it shares with the "legit" chain is some subset of the source code, and we all know that a successful crypto project is WAYYY more than just its source. Bob and Sally can go fork the Decred repo and name their coin Decred Classic if they wish, but nothing in that chain history will show anything of Decred. It would in fact, just be some other crypto coin. And history has shown us already: copy pasta crypto coins are rarely more than a scam. The market doesn't usually acknowledge such coins. 

time to REBOOT the DECRED blockchain because CENTRALIZED GOVERNANCE !!!    NOOB!!

Dude, you've been answered about it dozens of times but seems that you don't want to see the answer and don't stop repeating that fallacy.

It's not worth it financially for anyone to do in decred what happened to eth/etc and btc/bch when communities splited by centralized decisions and lack of consensus, which makes it "impossible" in DCR.

About copying and pasting the code from github, creating another currency and giving it any name you want, it can be done with any currency.
 It's up to the market to assess whether it deserves any respect or not.
So this is another currency, starting from scratch, there is no link to the previous blockchain. The whole story is deleted. The smart contracts made will not be present, nor will the records in the original blockchain.

Or rename it to Decred Classic, "the real for-the-community Decred". I'm not sure of what's technically possible, but that was the point of the debate. On-chain governance can't stop a community of different standpoints from breaking apart, and splitting away.

Unless a "minority" has sufficient voting power in the form of staked tickets, then no, they can't create a contentious hard fork. Decred is specifically designed to make contentious forks unprofitable, and in fact, costly for a minority to continue operating.
If some group doesn't ultimately agree with the majority of stakeholders, they can fork the github repo, rename it, and release their own coin.

That said, I'm pretty sure Politeia has a 60/40 approval threshold on proposals.