Bitcoin Forum

Disclosure of Dash Evolution : https://www.dash.org/evolution/

https://i.imgur.com/ISdxQXS.png

Dash Evolution creates a new type of cryptographic currency with various advanced features that assist in the creation of decentralized technology. Dash introduces a tiered network design, which allows users to do various jobs for the network, along with decentralized API access and a decentralized file system.

We will be writing the software for this project in stages, the first stage will take about 2 months to have a very early prototype for Dash Evolution that includes a basic implementation of DashDrive, Primitives, DAPI and a simple T3 wallet. In six to eight months, we should be entering testnet phase with most basic functionality. In 12-18 months, we plan for the first release version (a stable prototype).

Included below is our current work on Evolution, that adds many components such as:

• DashDrive – A decentralized shared file system that lives on the second tier network
• DAPI – A decentralized API which allows third tier users to access the network securely
• DashPay Decentralized Wallets – These wallets are light clients connected to the network via DAPI and run on various platforms
• Second Tier – The masternode network, which provides compensated infrastructure for the project
• Budgets – The second tier is given voting power to allocate funds for specific projects on the network via the budget system
• Governance – The second tier is given voting power to govern the currency and chart the course the currency takes
• Quorum Chain – This feature introduces a permanent stable masternode list, which can be used to calculate past and present quorums
• Primitives – We introduce Users, Groups and Accounts which allow a common way of interacting with the network.
• Social Wallet – By utilizing primitives, we introduce a social wallet, which allows friends lists, grouping of users and shared accounts.
• DSQL – A query language for administering the network via majority quorums (banning users, setting important network variables such as sporks on/off, etc)

Evolution Documentation Release

We’re going to try something different with the development of Dash Evolution. This is a social experiment on building an entire currency completely in the open, with extreme transparency, as such, things will change constantly. This is intended to be an open discovery process that helps us to create the best possible implementation, GUI and feature set for Dash Evolution.  Help us to flesh out these documents by editing, correcting or even coming up with new ideas that we could work into the system.

The documentation below is intended to be very high level, which should give a clear understanding of how to build and secure such a system. These aren’t really intended to be whitepapers, just simple technical documents showing the design choices and structures.

Many of these documents are outlines of ideas of how different pieces of Dash Evolution will work, they aren’t complete, feel free to add to these as well. To help us, simply click the “EDIT” button, then request access to the given documents. Please do not edit the documents directly, instead use the google docs “Suggest” feature. This is intended to be an open discussion of the technology in the documents, that will evolve with the project.

Thanks!

Evan Duffield

—

We will be releasing many more documents not here yet in the near future, please keep coming back to see updates and progress of Evolution.

Releases: Last Updated – December 4th, 2015

https://i.imgur.com/agNvVND.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/HRISuc5.jpg

Teaser screenshot
https://i.imgur.com/H7S6f8o.jpg

(Dash Evolution is Dash's next major upgrade v13)

Will Dash Evolution revolutionize cryptocurrency ? Please discuss.....

Warning : Stay on topic  

 

What I really don't get is the 35TB Blockchain storage capacity line. Does that mean that the blockchain has a size limit for some reason? Or does it mean that this is available storage space for people to use? If it's the latter, 35TB isn't all that much. The hard drives I have lying around my place already have about 6TB in total capacity, so 35 won't do much if you try to build a Dropbox replacement.

I wonder where that "700 million users" figure comes from. It's an odd number, so I suppose it's based on calculations with the current Masternode count. Can't wait to read the white papers  ;D

The 1500 transaction per second and 700 million users is for starters, its infinitely scalable.

Oh, true! I just noticed the footnote "1" with "initial estimates..." is also next to those two bullet points. Awesome! :D

I suspect it has something to do with using full quorums on the masternode network (or perhaps on protocol level) and also
converting the anonymity (Darksend) and InstantX aspects (currently run by masternodes) towards
protocol level but i still have difficulty wrapping my head around it..    

Evan dropped some hints that the protocol would work and could be called upon for every part of Dash .. or something like that.

Just leave the topic to where it is.

DASH coin uses tor, and that is that.

First of all its Dash, not Dash coin (a totally different cryptocurrency)
Secondly i dont get your post, all posts so far are relevant to first post.. 

here is a link towards an explanation (and use of) quorums, credits to dazbarlby : http://www.eurecom.fr/~vukolic/QuorumsOrigin.pdf

The image shows this as "estimated initial capacity" so I'm going to guess it is based on the current number of masternodes and storage being shared between masternodes with some amount per node, or something along those lines.

Maybe  I should just post my questions here :)

Is there a link about this on dashtalk?

https://dashtalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-19-2015.6429/
The picture is getting a little bit more clear :



* qwizzie : this should be the correct dates of the Miami Bitcoin Event in January 2016
** qwizzie : small correction in date

Evan Duffield Explains Dash Technology and Announces Evolution at Bitcoin Wednesday

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Jw5Gk-iuy0


Q&A session

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5sNx7SMTP8

Well Evan is apparently implementing CoinShuffle in Dash:

https://youtu.be/x5sNx7SMTP8?t=128

https://youtu.be/x5sNx7SMTP8?t=1138

I wrote up an explanation (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1211093.msg12747750#msg12747750) of what I expect Evan is designing.

I think the key point is that this is not block chain scaling, i.e. he isn't reducing and probably instead increasing the load of what has to be stored on the block chain and propagated in winning blocks, because the multi-sigs from the quorum of masternodes has to be recorded on the block chain for each instantly confirmed transaction.

Also I disagree with his claim of 51% attack immunity. Because even if he intends to attain this by having the quorum multi-sig be the objective reality, the problem is many of masternodes can be under control of the same adversary and the masternodes are not required to respond to an instant transaction request, so by refusing to sign the multi-sig they can force instant transactions onto the block chain where the objective reality can be altered by the 51% attack. Also since a 51% attack reorganization can erase a prior chain hash, then any multi-sig issued from a prior chain hash would be illegal in the longer chain and there is no objective reality any more. One can't determine if communication failure or manipulation is the true cause of the reorganization.

Also since the masternodes that are chosen for each transactions are determined on block hash, the spender of the instant transaction has no recourse if the masternodes aren't responding, other than waiting until the next block, which defies the entire point of instant transactions.

I will probably find many other problems in this design.

How can I know these things as if I am reading his mind? Because I designed a decentralized block scaling solution so I know what the issues entail and so I can instantly guess his design and all the holes in his design.

Dash is that the instamined coin where the instamine grows continuously with the aid of the "masternode" scam.
   

How do you prove the masternode received your InstantX communication  ;) Thus who is lying the masternode or you?


I know. Because I know what is possible within his current design. Watch in January. He will read my post and try to correct the issues, but he can't. It is fundamental to his design choices that were made long ago. No turning back now.

This screenshot tells me absolutely nothing besides the fact there will be deterministic nodes to increase TPS and it appears he's going to ask supernode operators to act as price feeds or conflict resolution in gambling results.

Wow that idea sounds horrible (if it isnt yet already implemented).

Only master nodes could mine? Hmm that sounds pretty centralized and gives no reason to have people join mining because they would have this barrier to entry (1000 dash) plus specialized hardware a specific caliber before you could mine.

Sure you can call it "distributed" but if someone owns a majority of the masternodes because they own a fuckton of Dash then you now have a problem.

Masternode could sign the "I have received an InstantX request with ID x" message using its private key?

Agreed fully.

Dash only pays lip service (for marketing purposes) to the ideal of decentraliztion.  They don't really GAF or understand the concept.

That's why vertoe blew the whistle on the scam, and left the Cult of the Golden Donkey to work on less centralized projects.


As for Evolution, the DashHoles' latest blue-sky unicorn project, it has no chance in hell against ETH and rootstock.io.   8)

The analysis is fundamentally flawed, anonymint / TPTB_need_war will agree i am sure. Claiming that someone has just a fixed number of hashrate in times of cloud computing is stupid and naive or a plain lie to trick people into it that don´t know how mining is done. As the code didn´t even compile in the first hours theres it´s highly unlikely that someone else did it.

As proven here every CPU coin gets mined with cloud instances in the beginning http://da-data.blogspot.de/2014/08/minting-money-with-monero-and-cpu.html
You setup one AWS or Azure or whatever cloud image, clone it and spin it up x hundred times (or even more).


The hashing code btw in dash is still not optimized so even for cpu miners who know what they do there were big improvements possible. This is due to a fact that a standard crypto library called sph is used http://www.saphir2.com/sphlib/ which is unoptimized C code.

And if they refuse to sign how do you prove they refused to sign  ;)

They could argue you never sent the request to them or their connection was offline.

What you can do is build up witnesses who also try to submit to the same masternode and establish a pattern for many different transactions over a longer window of time. But the problem is the masternode may sign some transactions and not others, e.g. maybe it signs its own transactions or only the ones that have KYC identification attached to them, depending on what their driving motivation is for denial-of-service. There are many game theories and scenarios.

Instead of solving this problem that way which is very complex and probably unprovable in the holistic game theory if the entire design, I invert the paradigm in my design, but details are withheld at this time.

Exactly. A truly decentralized (as opposed to top-down distributed) system can't easily prove the masternode is being intentionally uncooperative and ban it. And now instant transactions are broken for those who the masternodes wish to target, for what ever motivation. See also my post of how this interacts holistically with the intention to be immune to 51% attacks and thus why it fails in Dash's proposed design.

I have much more detailed analysis of scenarios and attacks, but I will reserve that for the appropriate time. If I spill too many beans now, it is a disadvantage for myself and my work.

TIL. And they complain that Monero didn't have optimized code for a few weeks after launch? Yikes.

Hello? Building fault tolerate decentralized systems is an extremely hard problem.

I'm a long term supporter of Dash and whilst I ceased involvement some time ago for unfortunate reasons I hope the longer standing members of the community know that I still support Dash as a project.

However, the information about Evolution that has been released so far has left me feeling unexcited.  There is no meat on the bones.  I believe that the dev team are saying that further details will be restricted for a while for reasons of commercial protection which they are quite entitled to do. Unfortunately this doesn't quite add up for me.  

I look forward to reading the whitepaper when it is released. As it stands, the information released so far is uncharacteristically vague compared to the innovation announcements that the Dash team have made over previous years.  There are perfectly reasonable explanations for this but for the first time in a long time I'm not completely sold on what is going on.

Time will tell.

Killed it.

If you review the quotes of Evan I dug up and if you understand how he implemented InstantX, then you can deduce very obviously how he is intending to implement faster TPS, as I explained. To resummarize, the block chain hash combined mathematically (hashed?) with the inputs to a transaction is used to determine which quorum of masternodes can sign the transaction, then if M of N of them sign, this is broadcast to the block chain and the transaction is considered confirmed even before the block chain has produced the next block. Note Evan specifically stated inputs and not outputs and I assume the reason is so you can't game which masternodes can be the quorum, but then each input needs to reach a mathematically determined quorum separately (don't know if he has realized that yet), and thus the number of signatures on the block chain will increase by the average number of inputs per transaction (multiplied by N!).

Thus the negative implications of this increased TPS and instant confirmations (which will be realized in his design) are as I stated upthread:

• Block chain becomes more bloated due to N times more signatures, not less.
• Immunity to 51% attack is an incorrect claim, because the block chain hash determines which quorum, thus a chain reorganization can rewrite which quorum was authorized to M of N sign.
• The instant confirmations can not be trusted because if they are on an orphaned chain (not 51% attack but just the normal process of orphan rate or even 25 - 33% selfish mining attack), then they can be reversed. This is the same reason the prior InstantX (a more limited scope for instant confirmations than Evolution because the inputs had to precommitted to the quorum yet this committed could still be overturned by an orphaned chain, a.k.a. chain reorganization) was a technical failure.
• If the masternodes collude to refuse your M of N (and they don't need to be a majority of masternodes, just when ever they control an M of N, then your instant confirmation can not be routed to other masternodes until the next block thus no longer instant so even with a minority they can wreck havoc for example to cause a price decline where they could repurchase before the "fix" and next pump), they can remove your ability to do instant transactions. Remember masternodes are run by real people potentially with agendas and complicity with other motivations (e.g. selling out to the government to enforce KYC on all transactions or colluding to block transactions on decentralized exchanges to aid manipulations of clearing and market price movements or a zillion other things you can think of because top-down distributed is not the same as trustless decentralization. Bottom line is the masternode is not fungible!)

There are other issues. I am just touching the tip of the iceberg of hurt potentially lurking. Apparently not that many people actually use Dash (other than investing it and even then it is suspect how many people use it versus how many TXs are just fictional volume created by the insiders to make it look like the coin is widely used), so perhaps nothing gets really fully stress tested so this enables releasing stuff that wouldn't work in a widely used scenario but under reduced usership works well enough that people think the designs are solid when they aren't. Even Evan said in the Q & A session in the linked video that he has no idea how many users there are of Dash.

Btw, I am not a hater of Dash. I am forced to comment because I have a competing design in development and so I want people to start to think about the technical issues rationally. I will not comment a lot more about this. I would rather release a correct design and take the positive route of introducing solutions rather than analyzing the faults of other designs. I will not be sitting in Dash threads repeating these points. Investors have free will and if they choose to ignore my expertise, that is their prerogative. So let this be my last comments on this. At least I have given you some insight. And also Evan can read this and perhaps he can devise solutions to those weaknesses. So actually I should have shut my mouth. Last time I opened my mouth to explain to Evan in his thread the problems with his implementation of CoinJoin, then masternode concept was born as a way to address my technical points. So seems I am having $millions of influence on the crypto markets, yet haven't yet released a coin myself. This need to change.

Of course it is, but you can join the crazy club of masternodders obeying the church of evan for just 2400 usd currently.
30 % of them are at OVH, 17% at Choopa LLC....

No ponders you called them like Kim Kardashians Boutique stores (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3032841/Kourtney-Khloe-Kardashian-lead-celebrations-DASH-store-goes-online.html),

With DASH it´s even better, the rich get richer and richer as they rake in the most masternode rewards and can launch new masternodes faster thus owning a bigger percent of the network faster and faster, such decentralziation.
Compound intersted is a bankers or dashers wet dream i guess.

Effectively you have a proof of stake system in it´s most pervers form ever.
And with this switch to a PoS system you also inherited all the problems too... in a PoW system you have a healthy split of powers between miners and investors/users/merchants where both have to cooperate or all will lose, you just got rid of it and investors control everything now. congratulations.
What happens if someone confiscated a big amount of BTC or steals them? Yeah really, you are fucked.


 
Let´s not even get into the jurisdical problem running one of those nodes can bring you...

The older ones here know your "masternode" concept already. We called them Supernodes back in the day. Even Skype was sooo cool to use them.
Gnutella has/had (didn´t study it since years) the same flaws.

Anything different than a pure P2P, any model with relaxed rules can and will be used to attack the network more effectively. Randomization is the most important design principle in a fault tolerant p2p network. Some learned it the hard way (Kazaa).

Apologies for being clueless, and I see you said that would be your last comment on this, but perhaps you or someone else can still answer - InstantX could take a hash of a block that is old enough to be considered safe from reorg, wouldn't this solve the issue?

doesnt matter how many masternodes. You are trusting another person to make sure your transaction is handled correctly or that the VPS provider doesn't just F up the nodes they have on their platform/servers.

You could have 10,000 masternodes and those issues still exist.

Even Evan said he is trying to bring it to the protocol level as opposed to masternodes. I think it is too late at this point. His design is probably too far gone to get it to that point without starting completely over.

Why too late? The only coin where it seems to be too late to change anything is Bitcoin.

It took Evan quite a while to figure out that the masternode concept is broken one And that he needed to implement privacy tech into the protocol itself.

The Q&A video he mentions that he wants to get away from the masternode concept.

Why even go towards that route if you now want to distance yourself from it?

Seems like he did not think that through very well.

So much for decentralization if you rely on Evan to do pretty much all the hard work.

What if he were to be hit by a bus tomorrow? How would the project move on?

Doesnt it seem odd that there is no decentralized core team for dash development? Just one man? <---am I wrong?

I'm not sure which question you're answering to, but I asked why it's too late? It could be changed to a clone of DOGE next week if enough people wanted it.

You compel me to reply because that is a strong idea.

That will likely open up new game theory scenarios since you know a priori which quorum will receive which inputs in which future blocks. Perhaps an adversary can try to create masternodes to target inputs to accept or deny signing.

As for the claimed 51% immunity, how can one assume if the 51% that owns the mining power doesn't also own a large chunk of the masternodes thus can wreck havoc on any minority chain which desires to respect the signatures of other masternodes for which the 51% attack is not, i.e. a war between groups of masternodes.

Thus the masternodes could be restarted to by your change to infiltrate the quorums of the minority masternodes (up to the N - M + 1 threshold, another reason to set M very close to N  ;)), so they can remove instant transactions from the minority chain, thus making the claim of 51% immunity false.

Game theory is complex. There are likely many other scenarios of attacks.

The basic problem is using a hash to determine which masternodes are authorized (which is either subject to chain reorg or subject to game theory due to being known well in advance) combined with the fact that masternodes are not fungible but rather are entities owned and with motivation to maximize their gains.

Now having said that, masternodes earn very high payments from the block chain (I saw some chart Evan published that showed up to 50% per annum interest payments) thus I think for now the incentive is for masternodes to be cooperative. Afaics, Dash is basically designed (whether consciously or by serendipity) to funnel all the coins to the insiders over time.

But we are also discussing in the context of what would be the correct design for a coin that was not designed to be unfair and award an advantage to a few entrenched owners of the coin supply. In that case, we'd have to dump the masternodes and find a more fungible design that doesn't have these vulnerabilities. Dash may not actually have these vulnerabilities because the masternodes are making a killing by just cooperating. In a coin design where masternodes weren't leeching most of the coins away, then these game theory vulnerabilities would come into play because the masternodes would have an incentive to collude in other ways to maximize their profits. Yeah we can buy the illusion of decentralization and robust design by paying some masternodes all our coins over time. That works.

Lending Dash from the masternodes who are accumulating all the coins over time (because the interest rates paid are higher than the debasement rate) could probably drive more usership which might expand network effects value, but the problem is that interest rate paid to masternodes must be less than the debasement rate otherwise mathematically eventually all loans can't be paid back (eventually everything loaned is for making interest payments then the Minsky Moment arrives if not sooner due to stampede of confidence).

You have indicated how Dash could basically become the same fiat economy we've always had, where a group of insiders leech away our production on the debasement-debt hamster wheel.

I may be wrong, but I tend to think that most people entered crypto not only to make a buck, but also because they really want a new paradigm of decentralized, permission-less commerce and not an extension of the debt-debasement hamster wheel society is stuck in. Thus I tend to think most users (and thus network effects) are only going to get really excited about a design that doesn't have anything like a masternode or a delegated-proof-of-share paying an inordinate interest rate to those who can amass large quantity of coins to be one of the masternodes or delegates. For example even though PoW encourages centralization via mining pools, these pools don't earn incredible returns because this is a competitive market where any miner can choose any pool they want at any time. Whereas these masternodes and delegates design take a finite resource of the coin and use that to leech over time all the coins to those who were in this preestablished position (whom ever got the instamine, and I am not going to point fingers, let the SEC do that which I expect they may in due time or not if the culpable parties are also insiders from the financial industry (https://youtu.be/0Jw5Gk-iuy0?t=122)).

Note it is possible to lend any crypto coin, but this is different from lending a coin where the insiders get replenished with all the coins over time. That is a Too Big To Fail model. It is the same model we have that is destroying our society. Debt default losses are socialized and paid by everyone, while the insiders keep getting fatter and fatter. Thus I entirely expect the wider crypto market to reject Dash and it has no chance in hell of becoming the leader for a new paradigm of block chaining scaling.

Also as I said, afaics Evan is bloating the block chain, while increasing instant TPS. The block chain still have to keep up with this proliferation of signatures (N x number of inputs more) which is unscalable decentralized (the problem Bitcoin is facing now but Dash doesn't have this problem yet because user adoption is no where near Bitcoin's modest adoption).

Do you really think Dash will become widely adopted for micropayments with these issues? Okay I hope to shut up now.

Go waste gamble on Monero Dice since this is the only thing you're good at over there.
Monero haters with no good but to cry*p*to here...should at least work on ur coin instead. Dash is way above you it is not the reason why ur doing so shitty on the marketcap...maybe it's because u and ur developers wasting time on forums and not doing any marketing *Unless you call spreading flyers on DASH presentations is actually PR/Marketing LOL* OR any development so you cry out loud on anything Evan and he's team does I bet if Evan says tomorrow I'll do xyz you will still be here saying NOOOO you can't do this because because ...we jealous.

Dash - Starts with 'D', ends with 'evolution'

Brilliant marketing. Didn't even have to hand you the noose.

Personally, I like Devolution better than Dashed. Little bit more relatable for the rest of the board here.

There sure are some serious thinkers on bitcointalk  ::)

What a clueless noob!  No wonder you are easy, low-information prey for the DashHole cult.   :D

I guess you missed today's news about CLTV.  Does Dash support CLTV?  No.  Will it support CSV?  No.

So, no Lightning-type payment channels or Liquid-type sidechains for poor old Dash.

CLTV = CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY is an opcode need to implement Lightning Networks on Bitcoin.

Hope you read my assessment of Lightning Networks (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1153740.msg12759454#msg12759454). This will destroy (wreck havoc on) Bitcoin. I hope they implement it faster.

Please do give Gmaxwell more free reign so he can destroy Bitcoin with side-chains and other hair-brained ideas.

My development efforts are irrelevant to the argument that LN and side-chains will wreck havoc on Bitcoin. (I edited my prior post)

P.S. when I need you to have faith, then I will need to convince you. I don't need you to yet. Nothing is coded.

I explained in detail in private messages why I can be pretty sure that is what he means and documented (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1203793.msg12759644#msg12759644) upthread that Evan is implementing CoinShuffle and will indeed remove the ability of the masternode to spy on the anonymity. We need to be honest here. I am trying to be objective in spite of having some conflict of interest due to developing also a block scaling solution.


Already provided it.

It certainly took you long enough to notice the things that vertoe called "fishy, intransparent and rely on a single entity. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg10925445#msg10925445)"  But better late than never.

As for Evan Scamfield's ostensible "reasons of commercial protection," Nick Szabo already busted that myth, long ago.

Hello!

I'm glad to see you're still around and looking at some of the more advanced issues within the space. I'm really liking how you laid out the issues and the trouble with this type of implementation. These are the exact issues that I've been thinking about solutions to over the last year and I finally found a strategy that has none of these issues mentioned.


However, signatures only need to be stored for a few thousand blocks. There's simply no chance of a reorg rearranging days of transactions unless something went terribly wrong with the network. In that case, the Bitcoin code is actually setup to halt, which is better than having two competing chains for that long. So in this case, bloat is not an issue.

Also, instant transactions are now a natural result of the evolution design, not something build on top as they are currently. Instant transactions built in this way also are anonymous. We're talking about a different technology.


The proof of work hashes we use are buried deeper in the blockchain for Evolution, beyond the reach of chain reorganization. It's also multiple hashes that will decide the quorum structure, we're calling this technology the quorum-chain.


In Evolution, miners don't decide which transactions are mined, the masternode network does via Quorum technology.

Well done Sir othe; a most excellent debunking of the cargo cult's decentralization myth and cherished golden donkey fetish.

The DashHoles are just making stuff up as they go along.

Case in point, unknown to just about everyone, Masternode payments are sometimes doubled at random.


So much for predictable emission.  Can you imagine a legitmate coin like BTC, LTC, or XMR ever pulling crap like that to tempt gamblers?   :P

It's OK to laugh at BagHolder.  Humor is how we cope with most of humanity's overwhelming stupidity and herd instincts.

The only "potentials" $10 DashBags had was to sink like the Titanic.

As for the 'BTC isn't updated' meme, all I have to say is

CLTV.

When will Dash support CLTV and CSV?  Right after it succeeds where ETH failed?  Only in BagHolder's dreams!    :D

I can't wait for the Duffsplanations of the form 'Dash doesn't need Lightning or Sidechains, Because Masternodes' to begin....   ;D ;D ;D

Offhand capitalization of the word Quorum and making outlandish blue-sky promises of crypto-unicorns doesn't count.

Bacteria have been using quorum sensing for millions of years; Mr. Scamfield didn't invent it, he just made it into a marketing gimmick.

When I said "Duffsplanations" I meant the kind of in-depth hand-waving apologetics which he used to Duff-splain away the insta-mine (https://dashtalk.org/threads/instamine.5040/#post-55415).

LOL - HashFast failed and is being investigated. I guess you anticipate the same will happen with DASH. It would explain why you're so eager to mislead new buyers by constantly spamming DASH propaganda in every thread imaginable. Those bags getting heavy yet?

Of course they are anticipating arrests.  Just look at this feature below included in Devolution.

Come on.  Lighten up man that's some funny shit right there.  What the hell is merchant getaway support?

Actually I'm a real account. But feel free to post any proof you have of this. You won't though, because your only answer to the obvious fraud perpetuated by the coin you're shilling for is to attack the attacker. Good luck with that!

HF actually made (to spec) the ASIC they said they would make (at TSMC (http://www.tsmc.com/english/dedicatedFoundry/manufacturing/locations.htm) no less).  It failed due to external business conditions and litigious scumbags, but not for lack of best effort.

DashHole cult leader Mr. Scamfield said Dash would support I2P, masternode blinding, ring signatures, etc. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6831798#msg6831798)  When did that happen?

BTC hardware is not relevant here, it's just a distraction being used for the DashHoles' attack-the-attacker cult-defense reaction.

Hello Evan! It has been more than a year since we exchanged words.

Aren't you a bit amazed that I can deduce and describe much of your design details without ever being informed of them?  8)

Last time we interacted, the masternode concept was borne. I wonder what might be hatched during this interaction.


So long-term bloat is not an issue by essentially employing the conceptual equivalent of checkpoints. But there is a serious issue with large blocks which Bitcoin is having intense struggle over, as it forces centralization of mining whether you use IBLT or whatever, because otherwise the propagation delay of large blocks leads to high orphan rates and exacerbates attacks vectors such as selfish mining. Since Dash doesn't have any where near Bitcoin's volume, this is unlikely to be real world issue for Dash any time soon. But if we were applying your design to a very high volume coin, then we'd have a problem with this design. I won't rehash all the details about the block size debate. There are ample other threads and news sites to explain about that in detail. Any way, sounds like you don't have to solve that issue before January. You can focus on your other core priorities I suppose, since this issue isn't one Dash needs to address until volume increases very significantly. And if volume if ever increases that much Dash will have a much larger market cap and more reason to invest again in further development.


Yeah it is clear to me how you were creating a unifying design.


Well this means masternodes can plan well in advance if for complex game theory. I haven't tried to work out all possible game theories. But any way as I stated up thread, it is unlikely the masternodes have an incentive to conspire to that degree because for one reason they are paid very well apparently. So although this design doesn't appear to be applicable to a coin that despises the concept of the 50% per annum ROI masternode, it may be (somewhat paradoxically to the chagrin of haters) be effectively "secure" in Dash.


Okay then essentially the same argument again which is that for as long as we can assume masternodes are so well paid that they don't have incentive to explore ways to conspire, then pseudo-randomness can appear to be equivalent to randomness.

Wow so this guy had DASH on mintpal and spent $150,000 on dash when they were above $10 each?

Nick Szabo the prophet?  ;D

Duffield needs to rethink his extreme compound interest node system.  The Hobonickel and it's interest were considered kind of sketchy, and it's nowhere near as sketchy as Dash.  For coins like the Hobonickel, you got huge interest if nobody staked, but it goes down to like 1% if everyone stakes.  The stakers and miners are also all competing for the same pie with no distinction between the two.  In Dashcoin, you have tons of people staking, yet everyone appears to be making huge gains.  Something doesn't quite add up here.

In the Hobonickel, someone gaining more stake just increased their mining power, but giving people huge compound interest in Dashcoin is completely different because they're constantly manufacturing new Sybil nodes, thus hurting the integrity of the system.  I'm not going to pretend any system is fully Sybil resistant, but if people want Sybil nodes, you should at least force them to pay for it in the form of mining expenditure or buying on exchange instead of giving it to them for free.  

If you give people compound interest, you should probably be raising the coin requirement for a supernode, but instead, Duffield is talking about lowering it to 500, increasing Sybil count even higher? lol?  Is this coin supposed to be some kind of Sybil manufacturing plant?  The only way a supernode system can work is if you require collateral bids, meaning the top 1000 (or other number) of wallets that choose to lock stake function as the nodes.  There's not enough Sybil prevention in a flat rate system.

https://i.imgur.com/sg0cd1K.jpg

Lowering the amount of collateral is just one of many tools Dash can use if it ever reaches mainstream adoption,
another option involves raising the hardware specs of the masternodes. Evan just mentioned it to indicate we have
tools available to even scale up further if the need ever arises...

@ Othe

1. Investing 150k USD on BTC & DASH is my own choice + if I was in it for the money only I would've taken that free 14.5k I got from Mintpal scam and would not tell anybody about it.
2. You can read about my posts here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=824211.0
3. I truly think joining any scam + promoting scam + paying to troll like XMR doing is not my thing I prefer to have peace in mind and ask God to keep me healthy because doing bad/harming others only comes back to you.
3. Instead of telling everyone else how bad of choice you made and preaching about ur own coin in this case XMR why wouldn't XMR developers work hard into developing their coin instead think of someone like me who can afford that much $$ to enter XMR it will take ur price from 0.0014 btc/ 0.34$ to at least .004BTC, and yes I buy straight up I don't put buy walls.
4. Notice that since October 2014 Dash reached way above the 0.02 levels so getting my money back was not an issue in fact it is play time for me to be involved in crypto and DASH was my choice because Evan and he's team delivers in what they say they will do.
5. I believe you wasted 13k XMR on Monero Dice and ur loling at me all you got is a gambling site + a game. Sure you will reach the top 5 crypto currencies on market cap but from the bottom with that silly development.
6.  Someone like me would never join you just because you are a BTCTALK spam coin.

1. You hypocrite attacked me for gambling, i just returned the favour. What makes your point totally absurd is that i won gambling: http://monerodice.pd.to/user.php?username=othe
    21835.8342592 (Total Profit/Loss)
2. Don´t care.
3. Doesn´t make sense what you say, maybe don´t believe all the bullshit here.
3. This point is twice, learn to count please. Like this? https://github.com/ShenNoether/MiniNero/raw/master/RingCT0.4_copy.pdf
    Believe what you want, your are too narrowminded to make up your own mind and already too influenced from others.
4. We will see.
5. Check 1.
6. I sure hope so. We discuss here as it´s a discussion board, if you don´t like discussions you should close the browser.

Just want to be fair and let others know that Dash discussion leaked into another thread about regulation of "investment securities":

Just want to be fair and let others know that this thread that has a warning in the first post to stay on topic (highlighted in red no less) is getting raped to pieces.
Please stay on topic or start your own thread guys..

To remind anyone with a short memory problem : topic is "Dash Codename "Evolution"





 

I didn't start the side tangent on the instamine. And one of your own stan.distortion came and posted that to my thread, so it seemed like a continuation of the side thread that was ongoing here. And I urged him to not continue that tangent in my thread (which is focused on general issue of securities regulation and not Dash's specific instamine issue), so I wanted to bring him back here where the discussion started.

Apologies. You know how BTT is. Chaos.

No problem, lets just all get back to topic.

Also I conflated issues in my haste. Stan.distortion was raising the issue of unregistered securities law in my thread. Actually in my interpretation of the (at least USA) law, the instamine isn't absolutely necessary to have a violation of that law. Rather there only needs to be that the developers are using funds taken from the common enterprise or shares in it, managing those funds they have received, and the community following them as managers, thus the developers become the backing for the shares providing reasonable expectation of future profits for coin HODLers. This would be the reason Dash and other coins with managing groups are probably in violation of the law (meaning jail time unfortunately for them).

So stan didn't bring the instamine issue to my thread, I replied only that the instamine isn't required to still have a legal problem in my view. My request to stan was not to discuss specific coins but rather just the legal theory, because I didn't want to make the legal theory thread into a flame war between coin proponents. So copied the quoted post over here, so that discussion could be carried on some where else besides my thread and it seemed stan had followed me from this thread to the other one. But really that isn't fair to assume. He just posted in this thread and my other thread.

So my mistake. I conflated. I am just too overloaded. Okay please continue back on topic about the Evolution upgrade coming.

So, now that we all are back on topic .. lets talk about what other parts Dash is planning for "Evolution" as it became clear
that the decentralised API (see screenshot post 1) is only part of Evolution. There were some hints dropped by Evan recentely
when he announced his development update :  https://dashtalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-19-2015.6429/





    

I don't understand how you calculate the ROI to 50% on a masternode?  At most, if I catch good blocks, I'll see 18% this year, and it'll go down from there.  Plus, I have expenses, and time I spend working to keep them up and running and monitoring them.  And that 18% is because there were fewer Masternodes earlier this year, so the ROI then was much better than it is now.  So after expenses and before I "pay myself" you can cut another 6% off the top, and say I net 12%.  I'm also risking that the coins may not hold their value (which lately, they haven't).  But  you're clearly able to read minds so I know you know best :)

LOL, that was a leak, eh?  LOL.  Your information is extremely off and highly inflated

And that there is the most exciting part, IMO.  Also, as I understood it, the wallet will be, basically, always up to date.  So if you save your original wallet, then months later, after using up your addresses many times over, you load that saved wallet, it will update somehow, with no lost information.  Thus your wallets can be on several devices and always be in sync with each other.  This eliminates one fearful way of losing your money. 

More details about Evolution should be available at the Miami Bitcoin Event 21-22 of January 2016
when Dash is holding a presentation there..

Dash Evolution Demonstration / Phase III
https://dashtalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-19-2015.6429/

till then its just hanging in there, trying to absorb as many hints that get leaked as possible.

It was a table published by Evan recently. I believe it required some months of vesting to reach that level and apparently there are two levels with one of the level is double ROI the other and I've read some debate in this thread about how those who get the doubled rate is some mystery and could probably be gamed by those who control the other masternodes. I let the non-dumb investor figure out on their own, the obvious implication.


Leak meaning seeping from this thread into the other thread, not meaning a leak of secret information.

we call it the lottery  ;D So we either get the lottery or we get a few extra days of waiting on MN payments .. both are rare occurrences.

theres lots of sites which wear the dark coin and this implementation of dash its like a new coin no i mean every wallert of dark will remain dark and dash can be traded no and mined soo nice...

Thats true, its still very much mineable with GPU's and Dash itself does what it set out to do : provide fast and anonymous transactions.
Evolution (v13) seems to be moving parts of the current core functions to protocol level, it will be interesting to see where that all leads to. 

Credits to @alex-ru Productions:
Credits to tungfa

"See you in Miami"


https://i.imgur.com/bfrMqYN.png
 (https://www.youtube.com/embed/sAOe7m320Uc)

Another random bug like the instamine and this one never gets fixed.

I would have to study the code before I could determine whether it can be gamed. I will not take your nor Evan's word for it.

Sorry I just have a hard time buying into these sort of denials. Why wouldn't you users demand full investigation and disclosure. Why not hire an independent programmer to go do the research. I think because you don't really want to know.

And so it is not my place to tell you otherwise. Carry on. And I won't reply if you don't reply :)

https://www.dashpay.io/masternodes2/

http://i61.tinypic.com/24vk85d.png

Its not a random bug at all, this was predicted by the developers and is merely a facet of the code, you bleated on about the centralization of the reference node and now thats gone, you bleat on about a 1 in 100 chance of a double payment that evens out in time, sounds like you live in a perfect world which unfortunately the rest of us don't coexist in.
The randomness protects against hacking, and if you ran a masternode you would know it doesn't matter because all the payments balance out in the end, so its not relevent to the masternode holders but only to people like you for some reason.

a few more pieces perhaps of the cryptopuzzle thats called Dash Evolution : http://cointelegraph.com/news/115510/worlds-first-dapi-decentralized-application-programming-interface


Answers can be found in the article.

Note : Decentralised API (or DAPI) is only part of Dash Evolution

"See you in Mexico"
credits : Minotaur

https://i.imgur.com/KN8mc9a.png


More pieces of the puzzle there ? Lets hope so...

https://dashtalk.org/threads/dash-to-speak-and-exhibit-at-the-3rd-latin-american-bitcoin-conference-mexico.6505/
 

Two more clues / discovery's came out today : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg12931574#msg12931574

Sub-Ether :

https://dashtalk.org/threads/introducing-our-new-team-members.7160/


Disclosure of Dash Evolution imminent, T minus 9 days....

Disclosure of Dash Evolution : https://www.dash.org/evolution/

https://i.imgur.com/ISdxQXS.png

Dash Evolution creates a new type of cryptographic currency with various advanced features that assist in the creation of decentralized technology. Dash introduces a tiered network design, which allows users to do various jobs for the network, along with decentralized API access and a decentralized file system.

We will be writing the software for this project in stages, the first stage will take about 2 months to have a very early prototype for Dash Evolution that includes a basic implementation of DashDrive, Primitives, DAPI and a simple T3 wallet. In six to eight months, we should be entering testnet phase with most basic functionality. In 12-18 months, we plan for the first release version (a stable prototype).

Included below is our current work on Evolution, that adds many components such as:

• DashDrive – A decentralized shared file system that lives on the second tier network
• DAPI – A decentralized API which allows third tier users to access the network securely
• DashPay Decentralized Wallets – These wallets are light clients connected to the network via DAPI and run on various platforms
• Second Tier – The masternode network, which provides compensated infrastructure for the project
• Budgets – The second tier is given voting power to allocate funds for specific projects on the network via the budget system
• Governance – The second tier is given voting power to govern the currency and chart the course the currency takes
• Quorum Chain – This feature introduces a permanent stable masternode list, which can be used to calculate past and present quorums
• Primitives – We introduce Users, Groups and Accounts which allow a common way of interacting with the network.
• Social Wallet – By utilizing primitives, we introduce a social wallet, which allows friends lists, grouping of users and shared accounts.
• DSQL – A query language for administering the network via majority quorums (banning users, setting important network variables such as sporks on/off, etc)

Evolution Documentation Release

We’re going to try something different with the development of Dash Evolution. This is a social experiment on building an entire currency completely in the open, with extreme transparency, as such, things will change constantly. This is intended to be an open discovery process that helps us to create the best possible implementation, GUI and feature set for Dash Evolution.  Help us to flesh out these documents by editing, correcting or even coming up with new ideas that we could work into the system.

The documentation below is intended to be very high level, which should give a clear understanding of how to build and secure such a system. These aren’t really intended to be whitepapers, just simple technical documents showing the design choices and structures.

Many of these documents are outlines of ideas of how different pieces of Dash Evolution will work, they aren’t complete, feel free to add to these as well. To help us, simply click the “EDIT” button, then request access to the given documents. Please do not edit the documents directly, instead use the google docs “Suggest” feature. This is intended to be an open discussion of the technology in the documents, that will evolve with the project.

Thanks!

Evan Duffield

—

We will be releasing many more documents not here yet in the near future, please keep coming back to see updates and progress of Evolution.

Releases: Last Updated – December 4th, 2015

https://i.imgur.com/agNvVND.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/HRISuc5.jpg

Will Dash Evolution revolutionize cryptocurrency ? Please discuss.....

what does "Banning Users" mean exactly?

Maybe we'll know in "12-18 months"  ;)

well it sounds like...evan (as one of the biggest holder) may freeze any funds he wants ;-)
that would be the end of dash though

but i'd prefer to hear an explanation... i dont think he would make it THAT obvious that he wants to reduce the money supply even further

In other words - "we failed to implement Masternode Blinding, we have no idea what DASH is anymore except that we instamined a lot of it. So we'll call it a social experiment. Meanwhile, we'll continue collecting daily interest payments on our 1000+ instamined masternodes for the next 12-18+ months"


Wow DarkDASHstorjcoin :(

What makes you think that would be the end?

There is a small group of insiders who appear willing to keep the effort going a while longer, regardless of how absurd a direction it takes or how many times stated development goals are hyped and then largely or entirely abandoned. They most if not all seem to have accounts created within a month or two of Xcoin/darkcoin/Dash launch (excluding obvious later sock puppets), with early posts on the Dash thread immediately or almost immediately. Likely most knew each other already from other "ventures" or perhaps many of those accounts are just sock puppets, it is hard to say which.

Yes, there are a few exceptions, before anyone pops up and claims to be neither an insider nor a sock puppet (not that such claims could be verified anyway), but they are just that, exceptions.

your statements are all correct.
i still think it is the end, because i cant believe they will find buyers for a coin where somebody is able to freeze balances. crypto is about a trustless currency.
IMHO without buyers the insiders will loose interest.

i may be wrong though

but thats all speculation:
IF evan make this change
IF they are able to freeze balances (not sure what they mean by users - maybe its just for the "social part")

and how this all fits together with dashs so called "anonymity" is another thing to see

Speaking of absurd:


Expect the "liquidity provider" and "network administrator" roles to be Sybil attacked until a quorum of adversaries exists.

Of course there is also the possibility the instamine-empowered Core Dev is by default the de facto adversary of the ordinary honest user...

thanks for posting that question as i too was interested in knowing the answer (i posted it on the Dashtalk forum yesterday and got a reply)

https://dashtalk.org/threads/dash-evolution-discussion-thread.7231/
https://i.imgur.com/Cpsl5JF.jpg



i guess i changed that 12-18 months into 1 day for you .. your welcome.

troll fud as usual


Hi Risto .. why am i thinking of your cryptocurrency Monero when you type the above ?

* small group of insiders --> check
* development goals largely abandoned --> check
* a lot of sock poppet accounts --> check
 

I suggest you focus on the official documentation that has been disclosed recentely and not some first rough draft
https://www.dash.org/evolution/

Also remember that Dash now entered a discussion period at which the official documentation is open for change
or addition at any time..
 
Anyways, nice to see all you XMR guys in here supporting my thread, warms my heart.

IMHO that doesnt explain anything.
what is banning? IP-ban? what is attacking dash? maybe ban DarkLover because your community doesnt like the posting?

i just want to know what banning means. if i am banned:
 - am i able to send funds?
 - am i able to run a node?
 - am i able to run a masternode?

Disclaimer: I dont own Dash and dont plan to buy. Just interested.

I'm not totally sure myself but i suspect that banning has to do more with control over masternodes and miners and not to do with the endusers.
I will get back on this... or hopefully someone can comment on this who knows more of the specifics.

ref : https://dashtalk.org/threads/dash-evolution-discussion-thread.7231/page-2#post-75962

Wow, if this really is the real anonymint then that is a big swing around right there.... didn't see that coming did we.
Tough times really do call for tough decisions. You should name your price ...anything less than 100BTC for a clear lead over their competition is not worth it for you. Will be worth way more than that to your own project if you can afford to wait. Depending on how big a deal this really is.

wow indeed... LOL...

well i guess he can make white paper and a proposal on Dash network ?

EDIT:: false alarm LOL...

Is it really him after all that has been said and done? where did the post go?

What happened to the "Dash Evolution Demonstration" which we were told would happen at  the Miami Bitcoin Event in January 2016?

That was over two years ago.  Since then we have seen absolutely nothing concrete regarding Dash EvoluSHAM.  Not a single line of code.  Not even a whitepaper.

Let me be clear.  Dash Evolution is a sham.  There is no evidence to the contrary.  And no (sorry Dash PaidShills), regurgitating the hand-waving blue-sky promises and entreaties of the overpaid and demonstrably incompetent DashCoreGroup does *NOT* count as concrete evidence they have made actual concrete progress towards EvoluSHAM deliverables.

Let's see... no product released, no routing, no Masternode blinding, no Layer 2 solutions, still talking about tests and DIPs, a roadmap and github that are as vaporous as the project they rest with.

Trading check: volume dropped significantly, falling out of the Top 10 due to concerns about the non-utility of the overpaid Dash Core Devs to the project (i.e., there isn't a product released and this thing is no better than a whitepaper bedroom startup. I mean it should be better - you have guys here who are for-real programmers and creators, thinkers; but in evidence, this is operating in a manner becoming a scam).

I go over to the Dash forums ... same conversations about speedy development (men are most vain about the thing that troubles them the most), stretch goals, incredible development towards stated goals, more discussions, closing in on objectives, robust strong team, an expanding team, a team that recently have been doing better and better, 'getting the word out,' getting that messaging happening, process, diligence, meetings, roundtable discussions, useless Quarterly Updates from centralized governance admins, rain panchos, Max Keiser travelogues, sponsoring human cockfighting and air shows, crying about Amanda's Dear Dash letter...

This post hasn't aged well.

The reason Dash was being quiet about Evolution is that fulfilling all of Evan's ancient 2015 promises about masternode blinding, smart contracts, and other cyberpunk vaporware turned out to be beyond the third-rate skill set of Dash's devs.

Where is Tao to hector you about the unsupported speculation in your boisterous claim "by the time everyone realizes what we’re making, we’ll be so far along this path, that no group will be able to implement it fast enough to launch this system before us?"

Your unsupported speculation hasn't aged well and if Tao enforced his rules equally you would not longer be permitted to make it on Dash.org or other forums he controls.

Perhaps I'm not giving you enough credit for managing to get paid so much to produce so little.  After all, your excuse of "it's to our benefit to make sure Dash Evolution is absolutely perfect when we launch" is the (absolutely) perfect way to ensure Dash Evolution will NEVER be launched, so you keep getting paid to look busy while Evolution asymtotically approaches absolute perfection as time approaches infinity...  :D