Mandatory use of p2pool with built-in MN shares. 

That's not an overnight re-write though.

What part of 4 people could fork the blockchain anytime they wanted to or were coerced to do you not grasp?

This is not integrity. This is not security. This is a liability.

The wings are held on by hope. Hope is not a plan.

Hashrate is not everything. Distribution of it is. And currently distribution a joke.

Much larger? I see 10 people voting for the staus quo:


And none of those 10 people have come up with a rational argument as to why miners deserve 4X the block reward of Masternodes, just tears and threats.

In the near future Masternodes will be performing the vast majority of blockchain maintenance. Miners will exist as a backup, and they aren't even a secure backup...

Masternodes are orders of magnitude more decentralised than miners.

Take a look at http://drk.poolhash.org/poolhash.html -

Last 24hrs:
suchpool 19.4%
x11ltcbtccom 17.3%
coinminepl 10.4%
wafflepool 7.2%
miningpoolhub 6.2%
trademybitcom 6%

That's 66.5% of the total hash controlled by 6 individuals. Only takes 4 of them to mount a 51% attack.

A successful attack on the MN network would need way more than 51%. More like 90%+ for any reasonable chance.

More miners = better security is a complete myth when 90%+ of miners use pools instead of p2pool.

'Securing the network' my arse. Miners are in it for the money, all those pools dump DRK straight to BTC, and right now those figures look like a liability to me, not any form of security.

The argument that miners give the coin value because of the electricity/rig costs is also bogus. If that were the case, the vast majority of miners wouldn't be selling their DRK at a loss straight away.

The Litecoin Bagholders HQ is like an infinite stupidity engine. 

This is hopefully going to happen (95%+ TX's being instant via MN DLM) as soon as it's switched on.

In fact it should be 99%+, PoW will only be called upon in case of network glitches or suspected/actual attacks*. Can't wait to try InstanTX on testnet!



*We should really have a more thorough testing methodology that includes deliberate attacks on testnet. There was a little of this with RC5 testing but should be throwing every spanner we can find into the works to see what happens and how we can mitigate. Although just having 'IP-less' Masternodes is going to be a huge improvement.

That ship has sailed. We need more Masternodes, it needs to be economically viable to run them.


If you think most miners have any understanding of the value of DRK, you should go talk to the majority of them who sell it for fiat/BTC as soon as they've mined it. Are buyers of DRK to be dismissed because they choose to buy it and use it instead of mine it?


Are all miners then to keep all the DRK they ever mine? Good luck with that. Are Nike or Dell dead because they don't still own all the shoes and computers they ever made? It's a currency, it's supposed to change hands.

You are making no sense whatsoever.

I could play against my dog and still lose. 

Like this: https://github.com/hippich/Bitcoin-Poker-Room  ?

Looks like it might use the standard bitcoin daemon, in which case a simple find and replace bitcoind/darkcoind and you're nearly there, but there's also a bunch of java backend voodoo here: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/call-for-devs-software-adoption.2195/ - flare has a working Electrum-DRK so I assume that's all good to go too. I know nothing about js though.

I am terrible at poker but would love to play for DRK.

Lot of legal crap to consider though?

Moohla's v2 plan reads just like a shitcoin ANN - "We are going to all this amazing stuff, in a weekend, with no bugs!"

OK.

You've made the shit list mate, time to go dark. 

Cheap BTC means cheap DRK, at least for now. I'm on a buying spree currently - dark (or at least grey) markets are the future, and BTC is busted in that department. And CN clones are just, well, completely shit for real world use. Their bloatchains grow faster than you can download them, and that's with nothing but traders. Forget widespread adoption, ever.

Which leaves DRK.

Plenty of other exchanges... Botpal closes for a week, you'd think the world had come to an end because people aren't getting screwed the way they're used to... 

About once every 6 blue moons, if you're lucky. If you CPU mine you're better off joining a CPU pool, if any still exist, or p2pool.

Are there any true CPU only coins out there apart from the CN clones? I was looking on ebay and you can get complete 24-core servers for the cost of a single GPU. I don't fancy cooking my laptop in exchange for peanuts. 

I think it will be largely self-balancing anyway economically - MN profits behave in exactly the same way as miner profits - the more players the smaller the individual share. Right now there's no economic incentive to double (or more) the MN count, it's going to need a little experimentation to find the optimal solution. Evan is doing the right thing here.

With this you are opening the door to bad actors...  the node fee gets paid to the node operator...  now we are back to trusting whoever owns the node to actually pay out what is owed.  Which is why I moved off the regular pools and set up my own p2pool node.  Its like solo mining without the huge variance and I don't have to trust some unknown person to not shut the pool down without actually paying out and then claiming that they got hacked.
[/quote]

Make it happen down at the protocol level, or use multisig addresses that require users to countersign any movement of funds? Got to be a solution...

Nodes can deduct a fee though - that 'fee' could be pointed to a MN share address and proceed from there? The software already tracks submitted user work, so you could keep track of who's owed what percentage of MN payouts.

Having said that, why not just have the MN network as one big old regular (but distributed) pool? Need to think some more about it.  


Yeah, it had already occurred to me that as and when MNs have the ability to really enforce MN payments, they will almost by default also have the ability to also enforce hash distribution, in that they could monitor pool hash and orphan blocks from any pool approaching or at 50%. (And issue warnings to pools beforehand so that they hopefully wouldn't have to.) Doesn't completely solve the problem as several pools could collude, but it's a step in the right direction.

Don't worry, I check myself whenever there's a reflective surface nearby. Current status: magnificent.  

Not sure what your other comment was about though. Are you a python coder? I ask because I've looked at dstorm's p2pool code and as far as I can see, modifying it to send selected payouts to a node address (and keep a record of that for pro-rata MN reward payouts) that could be used as a feeder for a 1000DRK MN vin wouldn't need that much of a rewrite. And you'd need a bit of new front end stuff to allow users to specify how much they'd like to leave on the node etc. It's not my day job though, maybe there's some shopstopper I'm not seeing.

Seriously, does the prospect of a simple and automatic way of allowing miners who want to to have a stake in the Masternode system seem like such a terrible idea? Seems like plenty of people have been asking for just such a thing...

You're assuming they're sane, but since they wrote the derivatives in the first place and thought that was a good idea... 

Neither camo nor Mangled have advocated abolishing PoW. Neither have I. Would you like a tampon to go with your twisted knickers*?


*'bunched panties' in American I believe?

Give the dark markets some time to get themselves off the ground and start accepting DRK - everyone in that scene knows by now that using BTC is suicide, and there is no goddamn way any merchant on Earth is going to put up with the sluglike pain in the arse that is cryptonote... that leaves us, and we're winning on all technological fronts anyway.