1. CN devs actually believe their own spiel, want to broaden adoption and understanding of CN coins. Not entirely implausible. 2. CN devs are attempting to dilute the market of all their cloners, possibly prior to releasing a new coin or new features of their own, as they're still the only ones that actually understand the code. Might have the desired effect and costs nothing. 3. Someone else other than the CN devs is pulling #2. This was my first thought.  4. This is the long awaited 'solution' to the bloatchain - instead of a few big ones, have dozens of smaller ones. No idea. 5. This is prep for a ScamNet style vapourware cross-chain multiphase paradigm warp topology telepod meta-CN 2.0 IPO/ICO/CFC/WTF. You know it's only a matter of time. |
|
|
|
|
LOL, this is news to people?
You don't think those house bots are shorting your coin into fucking oblivion with their own money do you?
Exchanges are the same as casinos/gambling sites: they are all bent. All of them. Every. Single. One.
Hopefully Darkcoin's InstantX will let traders at least get in, trade, and get back out again in a sensibly short time. There will still be thousands of morons who leave balances on exchanges though, and these cretins hurt everyones 'investment'.
|
|
|
|
I sent Jae Kwon a message, he seemed really nice and was interested in drk. I pointed him towards the instantx paper and darkcoin github  Thanks for the link Fernando! That interview is well worth a listen, to put it mildly. Learned that you can FUBAR a PoW blockchain with just 25% of the hash, among other things... We need to get Evan and Jae in a room together for a few hours... |
|
|
|
Sounds uncannily similar to Darkcoin's Proof of Service. Swap 'validator' for 'Masternode'... |
|
|
|
Usually the Dangers of a 51% attack with all Power concentrated in one pool vanishes when the hashes are spread between them, so the easiest would be to simply close registrations for the biggest pool and/or put a Banner on them addressing the Dangers and spreading the miners over to other, smaller pools to even everything out.
This will be a hard one, operators are usually in it to win it. There are also enough which do it because of Enthusiasm and fun Also the ones NOT working with the community are basically shooting in their own foot The intentions of the operators are irrelevant. Most PoW currencies can be severely damaged by someone gaining control of 3-5 servers, whose IP addresses are known and whose operator identities and physical locations are easily discoverable. Big money isn't going to come anywhere near this mickey mouse bullshit. |
|
|
|
This looks like an interesting paper, read the abstract but will read the whole paper this evening when I have a bit of time on my hands! Thanks Crouton Walter Hey Crouton where did you get this paper from ?! Found it floating unloved in the wilds of Alternative cryptocurrencies: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=866460.0 |
|
|
|
Thank you for the kind replies guys, much appreciated, Crouton thanks, much appreciated, I get the whole 'trusted' and 'trustless' thing. The Masternodes being stealthed in the near future seems very interesting. The developers are really doing whatever they can do to make it work, at least that is how it looks from a Newbie point of view.
Do you folks think that the instant transactions will make Dark Coin more apt to be adopted?
Will BitCoin ever be able to complete instant transactions?
Just to get this clear, so, BitCoin will never have the same capability as Dark Coin regarding the anonymity or can that be built in later? Why buy Dark Coin? I have no idea, just attracted to it, the ideas behind it, what it is trying to do. Great logic, no, but it is what I am doing. My original post was partly because I have been considering selling my Dark, but I am now going to keep on my present path, for now. Every month I split only $350 between BitCoin and Dark Coin buys. I like them both for different reasons. Could I lose all of my money in Dark? Sure, but even though I am not rich I thankfully am not poor, a few thousand does not change my life.
If Dark Coin does well then that could be interesting for me though.
OT: The new ALT Coins that keep coming out IMO hurt what BitCoin, Dark Coin and other legit coins are trying to do, it dilutes other coins. It is crazy how many currencies are on Cryptsy.com. Anyone agree or disagree?
I think InstanTX will spur adoption greatly - no more waiting hours to get your money onto an exchange to trade = less money left on exchanges for the exchange owners to abuse with their bots or outright steal, for a start. Makes POS solutions real-world viable. And because the transaction lock can be set long as well as short, it could form the basis for smart contracts too. Darkcoin already does multisig exactly like Bitcoin, add a fancy GUI and you have DarkCounterparty... Bitcoin will never go anon for political reasons, and InstanTX requires a Masternode network, which only DRK has. Darkcoin isn't perfect, but it's evolving at a hell of a rate and doing everything right, openly and transparently. Mistakes and setbacks have happened, and have been learned from. The dev team is growing, hard working, and committed. About market dilution, remember that this piddling little world of ours isn't the real market, this is just the testing ground. The real market is out there in the big bad, Jo Public and Jo's grandma, big business, etc. We have barely begun to scratch the surface of that yet. |
|
|
|
Forgive this if it is a stupid question, things like Dark Coin made me think on it. It is just that I really like the idea of Dark Coin.
Why the hell would you even go near Darkcoin? No offence, but it's kind of like comparing Sean Hannity to Bill O'Reilly.  Birds of a feather: They're both catastrophically awful at anonymity. It's really annoying because you see all these ignorant newbie movements forming that prophesise some vague anti-government pro-libertarian narrative, but which in actuality is just walking straight into the hands of the NSA. Question for you, can any computer that you can actually use and that is online be safe from the NSA? If, so, what kind? Well... nobody really knows because few of us in this game know what kind of tech the NSA or other foreign governments actually use. The only variables we have available to analyse are on our side - that is to say the variables that pertain to the specific system or coin that we are using. And in that department, we have enormous amounts of data and options that (with a healthy dose of reason and rationality) can sort out which are better options and which are demonstrably risky options. It may well be impossible to defeat the technology of any superpower. But that doesn't mean you should ever give up the task of trying to defend yourself as best you can. What cryptographic shennanigans you employ is meaningless the moment TPTB decide they're going to throw you into a hole and introduce you to a pair of pliers. Darkcoin is plenty good enough for 99.999% of use cases and built on the Bitcoin API. Add upcoming instant transactions and it looks like a winner to me. Masternodes are getting stealthed in the near future too. To answer the OP, Dark Wallet is a trusted (meaning, you have to trust them not to fuck up or steal your coins) single point of failure timebomb. Darkcoin is a distributed (over 1000 servers worldwide), trustless (meaning you don't have to trust it, ever, with your money, your money can't get stolen) solution. |
|
|
|
The fundamental difference with DRK is that it is dependent on a limited number of third parties, the masternodes. The masternodes are limited in number by the requirement that they maintain a minimum capitalization of 1000 DRK. This alone, when one considers that there is a finite amount of DRK in the 16 million to 22 million range, ensures that the number of masternodes is limited to a few thousand at most, making them an easy target for regulators. For a comparison of the regulatory risk involved here: There are easily more banks in the world than DRK masternodes.
No amount of ignoring the regulators will address the reality that the regulatory risk for DRK is orders of magnitude higher than for XMR because of the intrinsic designs of DRK and XMR just like the regulatory risk of a bank is orders of magnitude higher than that of XBT.
LOL, this is so mindbogglingly obtuse I don't know where to begin.  |
|
|
|
Does anyone know when the November MN payment increase will occur to 25% or if this is already in affect, is it when it hits a certain block or a certain date? Looking forward to Decembers 30% too 23rd, roughly. main.cpp, from line 1414ish: if(nHeight > 158000) ret += blockValue / 20; //25.0% - 2014-10-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*1)) ret += blockValue / 20; //30.0% - 2014-11-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*2)) ret += blockValue / 20; //35.0% - 2014-12-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*3)) ret += blockValue / 40; //37.5% - 2015-01-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*4)) ret += blockValue / 40; //40.0% - 2015-02-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*5)) ret += blockValue / 40; //42.5% - 2015-03-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*6)) ret += blockValue / 40; //45.0% - 2015-04-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*7)) ret += blockValue / 40; //47.5% - 2015-05-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*9)) ret += blockValue / 40; //50.0% - 2015-07-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*11)) ret += blockValue / 40; //52.5% - 2015-09-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*13)) ret += blockValue / 40; //55.0% - 2015-11-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*15)) ret += blockValue / 40; //57.5% - 2016-01-23
if(nHeight > 158000+((576*30)*17)) ret += blockValue / 40; //60.0% - 2016-03-23
|
|
|
|
Crouton, given your strong views around mining and the benefits of P2pool, I'm surprised you haven't commented on this. I commented a page or three back here (I think it's a good idea, but not ideal) but I missed it on DCT back in April. My stance is pretty simple: I am not comfortable trusting my investment (not Earth-shattering, but more than what I call pocket money) to three doofuses on the intertubes. Imagine you had a $million or two. Would you really be happy putting millions of dollars into a system where your $millions could be rendered worthless overnight by somebody locating and compromising 3 servers or 3 server admins? Because that's the situation right now with PoW coins. You'd have to be actively stupid to trust such a system with any serious amount of investment. It's a joke, it's pure toytown, someone could destroy BTC or DRK for a few thousand bucks tops. |
|
|
|
I've really been getting into the idea of enforced p2pool mining. I think it's a fantastic idea...but I think it's also a non-starter. I just realized that everyone (including me) has been ignoring the overarching problem: network consensus.
Let's face it...the big pools make a profit off their operations. Probably a significant profit...and they are not likely to voluntarily accept a mandatory p2pool update. Without support from the very pools we are trying to replace, we won't reach high enough levels of network consensus to safely fork the network to a new p2pool-based protocol.
If MNs can enforce p2pool mining via a privkey system like they validate other MNs, what the centralised pools want won't matter. If a mined block isn't signed as coming from a p2pool node, it would get orphaned. People who run big pools should be able to make the same % running p2pool nodes instead. |
|
|
|
--Dust Payments
When mining on a p2pool, you receive payments in very small inputs over the course of a day. Unlike a traditional pool when you can specify when to withdraw your coins or set up a predetermined withdrawal amount, you have no control over a p2pool payment. After a certain amount of transactions into the wallet, the QT wallet fails to function properly and becomes unusable. (possible bug with qt itself)
This is absolutely not true. Sadly this one is currently true, when your wallet.dat grows beyond a certain size, the whole GUI gets unusably sluggish. It wasn't always the case though, some change around mid-August, so whatever it is it's fixable. QT problem only, deamon unaffected. |
|
|
|
not sure if you're referring my proposal, but I dont mean p2pool dev, I mean direct contribution to the p2pool miners to incentivise the p2pool network.
Is it possible to allow p2pool miners to earn 5% more by allowing payments to masternodes at 20%? If MNs are able to differentiate between p2pool nodes and centralised pools, you might as well go the whole hog and make p2pool mandatory. Nobody loses out, everyone gains. Centralised pool ops will bitch about it but all they have to do is run p2pool software instead, they'll still be able to take their node cut. If the problem is that current p2pool software simply won't cope with the load, then yeah we'd need to beef it up (which would cost some money for someone like ckolivas to do it, but the gains would vastly outweigh the outlay IMO) but has that been proven or is it just conjecture? Another objection I've heard is that 100% p2pool use would cause unacceptable blockchain bloat, but really if a supposedly decentralised currency can't cope with truly decentralised mining then we're all just wasting our time in toytown. edit: informative post Propulsion, thanks. |
|
|
|
didnt see that ... but thats basically what wallet implementation would mean doesn't it? Making wallets p2pool nodes themselves = ugly pain in the arse. Enabling wallets to 1-click mine via p2pool nodes = beauty, wonder and joy. It would probably trigger the Second Coming of Satoshi, to bless Darkcoin for being true to His original vision. |
|
|
|
i see the point, but in general the network will gain huge advantages from decentralized mining.. Every coin, including btc, is dominated by huge pools. If drkcoin had primarily p2pminers it would be safer than btc from that view.. (this could affect the value of your investment also ) Yeah it would be a big PR win, a market win, and a huge embarrassment to every other centralised PoW coin.  |
|
|
|
Crouton Millionnairenodes updated. |
|
|
|
How hard would it be to add the p2pool server software to wallets?
Not entirely trivial. I've thought about it. p2pool is in python and has a lot of deps, official wallet is c++, result would be unwieldy... I think they are best kept separate for now, but a simple to install (1-click) prepackaged p2pool would be awesome. Someone could even create a vm drop in image with all the stuff needed, so 'end user' needs only to open specific ports, or enable upnp maybe only. Not too complicated, and could be run with for example free vmware player on any platform (although, I prefer virtualbox myself). I would vote against including this in standard wallet. as far as i read there were following suggestions for p2ppool enlargement: - implementing p2pmining in the wallet, which seems to be quite difficult since wallet is written in c++ and p2ppool in python- donations to p2ppool from master nodes - enforcement (?) of p2pmining - oneclick installer for p2pmining imagine, if dark coin network would have more than a half of p2p miners... this would be a huge step for security and the original idea of decentralization. Not sue if you saw my edit, but giving users the option in-wallet to mine via their nearest, or a specified p2pool, rather than solo mine, wouldn't be difficult to implement. |
|
|
|
How hard would it be to add the p2pool server software to wallets?
Not entirely trivial. I've thought about it. p2pool is in python and has a lot of deps, official wallet is c++, result would be unwieldy... I think they are best kept separate for now, but a simple to install (1-click) prepackaged p2pool would be awesome. edit: adding some code to the official wallet to seek out the nearest p2pool node and use that instead of solo mining would be 100x easier.  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
