Topic: Has Dash the unlicensed pyramid game run its course? - page 5. (Read 8086 times)

Good answer! Quite a work kill Dash in your gameplay, right? NSA, Secret Service, Patriot Act and threaten Evan. All without a single leak of information.  Not bad!

Assuming your scenario, let me tell you a little secret: Evan is not alone anymore. UdjinM6 is a core developer from Russia, and he is as much talented as Evan (you can check Github about that). And I am not sure UdjinM6 would agree about spying for the NSA. You know, russians are tough guys.

And I am not sure NSA can go to Russia and force UdjinM6 to cooperate to control Dash, you know Putin is a person of temper.


Dash is open source! And Dash is not Evan.  Evan can write it, but you can check and review the code. UdjinM6, Flare, Crowning, elbereth, Francis, etc. All the members of the Dash community and the general public can check the code.
And this is bad for backdoors and is good for transparency.


(excuse my grammar and vocabulary mistakes, english is my third language)

why dont you guys stop being stupid and just spend some time looking at Shadowcash!

Also, the NSA works with other agencies in other countries as well such as England for ex, Edward Snowden revealed all that. So again, Dash's masternodes are just generally a bad idea for a cryptocurrency. It adds very unnecessary security complications, centralization, and is just plain unpractical.

Some European countries share meta data with US agencies and even have more power to capture data than even the US due to less strict rules on spying agencies, but that doesn't diminish that foreign servers are sometimes owned by American companies already working with the US government or that can be forced, coerced, or bribed into supplying information.  Never mind that Dash's Dev Evan has too much power over Dash's direction (and its assets) and can be coerced by US operations to help or hinder Dash with the mere threat of a FinCen investigation or a compliance document similar to those that were used in Prism to get some of the biggest companies in the world to hand over unbridled access to data--either you don't get how much of a vestige interest all countries have in controlling information and finances or you overestimate Dash's ability to cope with these measures.

How would you realize the network is compromised if Evan was coerced into working with investigators? Cut the head off the snake and it dies, control it and you can decide where the venom goes.

Here would be my gameplan if I wanted to control Dash:

If Patriot Act rules are engaged, I would send a letter of complicity to Evan and have him work with my agency to glean as much information from the network while also creating more backdoors to glean information. If he chooses to fight the complicity order, I would green light a FinCen or SEC or FBI investigation with the power and scope of this investigation dependent on if he plays ball or not. If there weren't Patriot Act rules in play, I would move immediately to step two. The goal would be to control Dash, not to destroy it.  

I don't know the other players in Dash, but thanks to the instamine, they seem like a small group and most likely could be gotten to and forced to comply. To put the risk to US power in perspective: Gadaffi had an army and lived in his own country and had vast personal wealth, but was expelled from power and put to death after he talked about not accepting US dollars for oil. Do you think you can pin your replacing-all-the-world's-currency hopes on a guy who lives in Arizona, couldn't get the details of his coin launch in order, doesn't understand  (or care) that masternodes are a major attack vector for a cryptocurrency, and renames his coin every five months? That guy can be gotten to and i'm pretty sure it doesn't take a needlessly expensive revolution to do it.

This is an interesting debate.

I agree that the NSA can kill Dash, and Dash is finished. And I am sure they can kill Bitcoin too, but I am sure they cannot control Dash without we would realize. I am not so sure about Bitcoin.

Check the masternodes/country here:

http://www.dashnodes.com/index/charts

26% US
25% Germany
20% France
13% Netherlands
etc.

With all US masternodes under control the NSA cannot denonimize the transactions. Let's do alternative scenarios:

1.- They buy XXXX Dash to create new masternodes (we can do the math to find the exact number is necessary to do it, it's a lot). The market goes crazy, we would realize. They control the network but they can't know past transactions (Masternodes don't do that, users are secure). Dash is finished

2.- They can "invade" or "hack" us the poor Europeans (France, Germany, Netherlands, etc.) get access to our accounts in our european servers. We would realize (yes, we would), they can control the network, they can't control the past transactions (Masternodes don't do that, users are secure). Dash is finished

I think the NSA can kill, but they can't control the Dash network. How you see it?



(excuse my grammar and vocabulary mistakes, english is my third language)

Points bolded taken in order:

--The NSA alone has an 8 billion dollar budget. TOR is a way bigger and more expensive target than dash and it is being done to TOR. Also, there's an economic incentive for masternodes to attack each other to get the number of nodes to 1000*--an NSA operation would definitely disable other masternodes to funnel transactions to the masternodes they control.


--would anyone notice if the NSA held a FinCen investigation over the biggest holder of dash's head and gleaned information from his masternodes while simultaneously attacking other masternodes to funnel the majority of transactions through the compromised nodes--I get the feeling you dashers don't wander much further than the marketcap listings for your cryptosystem research.

*this is from dash's frontpage

these are legitimate concerns. And I can understand that.

Nobody can't afford to buy enough master nodes, it's too expensive (and the price would escalate), and we would notice that. Instead they can create bitcoin nodes (for free) to do the same.

The initial distribution was not definitely under the radar of the NSA. Just because the masternodes didn't exist, not even the project or the intention of doing something like that. Just check the main thread. As I said in other threads, Darkcoin was just another shitcoin at the begining (with a very skilled dev behind).

Edit. As I said we can move the masternodes to Iceland, France and other countries and wait for your NSA.

They can take us and torture us to use our masternodes, yes. And send us to the Guantanamo prison, yes.  But for now I am not worried

Why do dashers not think people get masternodes and that's why they think they are awful for privacy? If a governmental agency can afford to buy enough nodes to break TOR's anonymity (they did and can), why couldn't they afford to buy enough masternodes to break dash's anonymity, buy or intimidate the people who already own them, or go to Amazon (who they already work with) and get information from the hosts themselves on who is running the masternodes and where to "contact" them. If dash ever got close to Bitcoin's level this would be the easiest way to break dash's anonymity and comes straight from the NSA's thin-thread playbook--apparently Evan and his Devs skipped a few chapters in Cryptocurrency for Dummies.

As a rational and adult people we are, yes. It's better to talk and disagree without insults.

thank you.




(excuse my grammar and vocabulary mistakes, english is my third language)

I understand masternodes can be a concern for some users. Let me clarify about it:
 
Masternodes:

Darksend's mixing is performed by Masternodes, servers operating on a decentralized volunteer network which have the responsibility of signing the transactions. For each round of Darksend, the user selects two to eight (or even more) rounds of mixing which vary the degree of anonymity achieved. Random Masternodes are then elected to perform the coin mixing. Masternodes are trust-less, in the sense that they cannot steal user coins, and the combination of multiple Masternodes ensures that no single node has full knowledge of both inputs and outputs in the transaction process.

To avoid a "bad actor" scenario, in which many Masternodes are operated by an adversary who wants to de-anonymize transactions, a deterrent has been put in place in which 1000 Dash are required to own and operate a Masternode. As an incentive for operating a Masternode, chosen nodes currently earn 45% of the mining rewards.

More info:

http://www.dashnodes.com/index/masternodes
http://www.dashnodes.com/index/masternodes_map

I see in the charts more than 2500 masternodes placed in more than 30 countries. Centralization? Some people are early adopters, we can't change that. With 8 rounds of random mixing through masternodes, do your math to understand what you need to control the network.

And we can move masternodes easily from one country to another if we need to. The world is bigger than the US.

The masternode system provides also an instant transaction system, a governance system, and the possibility to build other stuff on top of it.  Personally i think the new "governance system" or the instant transactions are far more important than anonymity.

Dash system is not completed yet, it's a work in progress. We had forks and all kind of issues in the past and of course we will have problems in the future. It is a risk investment.

Some people think cryptonote system is better, maybe it is. Do your own research.

It is legitimate to dislike the masternode system, of course. Insults (see Adam post above) are not.


Thread about masternode system in dashtalk:
https://dashtalk.org/threads/which-masternode-model-should-we-implement.4115

(excuse my grammar and vocabulary mistakes, english is my third language)

You are very very right... but there's a difference between a decentralising intention and not succeeding all the way, and no decentralising intention at all or even installing the opposite of decentralisation...

Very few coins are truly decentralized (including Bitcoin). Just look at what is happening to Bitcoin with the departure of Gavin. Decentralization is a worthy goal, but we're not there yet.

I'd add the centralisation with the masternodes is really their biggest 'current' problem...

- Instamine/premine, ok, it can happen, if people still trust it and believe the developers reasons, it can work out if the technology is good...
- Branding, whatever, marketing here and there and what's the coins name is the choice of the developers, that's ok if the technology is good
- But the masternode-system is so obviously flawed: centralisation, compromised anonimity just because of that centralisation, developing dash-aristocracy...

Without the masternode-system I actually might have supported DASH, but now it's a big no-no to me... the masternodes go against every principle of a decentralised cryptocurrency...

But still, people need to make their own choices, if it has better marketeering, if people don't really care THAT much about privacy, if they like a nice look and feel... then yes, by all means, you can use DASH...

the problem is:

1. their anon tech sucks so its just "another" altcoin these days
2. their branding to Dash .. Dash , really?
3. instamine

+1 to last posts, i like when guys talk with sense

nobody is forcing nobody to mine or buy some coins... you do research, you do the math

+1
I wish people here were like you, it's annoying how ppl cry about something that they have nothing to do with.

So ... To answer the above question.  There was a glitch in Darkcoins release that let almost half the current coins in circulation be mined by the original miners in a short period (week?).  If you choose to put parentheses around the glitch largely depends on how you feel about the developer.

Also later coin supply was significantly cut to stabilize price.

I own Monero because I like the technology behind it much better than DASH.

I do think the instant transactions, rebranding from Darkcoin and significantly rewarding the mixers (if thats the route you take to anonymize ), and able to afford dedicated 100% development are all great moves.

There is plenty of information out there about ANY coin.  If you don't know then its your own damn fault.

I simply don't care due to the coins history - it puts it in an auto "not interested" category for me.  It has lasted much longer than I thought it would ... Very very few altcoins have managed to stay in the top 10 as long as darkcoin has.  And I don't believe any other anon coin has over taken it cap wise.  So its actually doing insanely well.

If darkcoin is overtaken by two anon coins for a month you can start using "dying" in your title

You'll have a lot to wade through, but what it boils down to is lots of people hate Dash because of its relative success (especially compared to their own favored coin, especially the rival monero-cultists). The bottom line is that if Dash were really a scam the market as a whole would have figured this out a long time ago and the value would have long since plummeted to (near) zero.

Disclaimer: I own a bit of dash. I also own a bit of monero. A pox on the cultists though.

http://wiki.dashpay.io/display/DRK/Dash+Documentation+Home
http://wiki.dashpay.io/display/DRK/Legacy+FAQ

https://www.dashpay.io
https://dashtalk.org

https://dashtalk.org/forums/official-announcements.54
https://dashtalk.org/threads/the-birth-of-darkcoin.162

In the alt-community you can find all kind of opinions. You have tons of critical posts in this forum.


Do your own research