I have no problem with buying DRK on an exchange.
I have a problem when buying DRK on an exchange is the only option I were given COUPLED with the horror scenario that only Masternode owners were creating coins.
I agree with this. There is a problem when asics come along and suddenly only an elite group has the chance to mine though. Personally, I'd like to see a way to keep a ceiling on ability to garner hash power, such as changing the algo once it becomes clear x11 asics are on their way, and to just keep changing it. But I have no idea what is involved, certainly another hard fork, so maybe that's not possible. Yah, mining and masternodes are hurdles to investing into DRK. In the end though, that's an investor thing and not a user thing. There are other ways of gaining DRK. You can also sell things and accept DRK as payment. Though, at this time, that's not easy. Nobody wants to spend their DRK yet. Adoption is everything. Until DRK becomes widely used and liquid, it'll be so. BTW, I also think that having a dual system can possibly protect against things like 51% attack with some sort of checking system, but again, that would require a hard fork again.... But ASICS when massproduced become very cheap, much cheaper then CPU or GPU, all the cheap USB ASIC miners are proof of that (and they run with 5 Volts). I am looking forward to that! That is just the natural progression of any innovation, we should embrace this, not be afraid of it! Doesn't matter what the unit cost is, rich people will just buy more of them. At bulk discoint. |
|
|
|
Pointed a few rented S3 Antminers your way. They are costing me £12.44 each a week, if they make more than £12.44 worth of DRK I'll be pointing more. Or buying some ASICs of my own.  |
|
|
|
1. I think DRK needs to go after the online porn industry. Right now from what I recall only a handful of sites accept bitcoin payment the majority or the very large ones are reluctant to solely due to how long it takes to confirm a bitcoin transaction. From what I last read sites that did start accepting bitcoin found their revenue increase up to nearly 100 fold. The very large sites are using embarrassingly transparent methods of payment, CC, telephone, wire transfer etc. DRK marketing needs to contact the main players and demonstrate to them how there is no risk to them with immediate confirmation and how it can increase their customers who are wary of even EPOCH or whatever showing up on their CC bill.
2. Which leads me to this: DRK needs to focus on marketing the instant transaction aspect of the coin to mass media. It is all well and good discussing the technicalities of the coin with technical blogs and crypto news sites. The masses are not interested in that, it goes over their heads and is meaningless. You need to set about demonstrating a) how fast the transactions are and b) how anonymous it is and what it means; all in layman terms. To both the masses and online merchants. Technical mumbo jumb is just that.
I particularly agree with #2. Future marketing efforts should focus on mainstream targets, time and money spent on crptognats is completely wasted. |
|
|
|
I enjoy his misery and confusion. then explain it to me are you denying the fact that every major price move in dark is made by a whale/ bot ? its all a fucking teleshopping show : "hey buy my instant transaction and open source" -> dumped on enthusiasts The crypto scene is 98% ADD cretins, 1% botlords, and us.  (Percentages by population, not resources.) Who cares what the current price is? We are building something wonderful, the rewards will come in time. History will remember us because we're going to be the ones left standing to write it. And if not, we're going out in a big fucking pile of empty brass.  |
|
|
|
Is there any chance for reducing masternodes requirements on 500 coins?
Also can somebody tell me how many coins per month (average) can be made with 1 masternode?
Thx
1. It would make no sense from either an economic or security perspective. 2. About 0.6/day, averaged over time, so about 18DRK/month ~ 22% annual ROI. The calculation is ((number of daily blocks/number of masternodes) * (block reward/5)) - so ((576/900) * (5/5)) = 0.64. Since block reward is pretty much going to be 5 for the forseeable, just (576/number of MN's) will give you the rough number. |
|
|
|
I'm amazed that hes not ignored by everybody already!
I enjoy his misery and confusion. |
|
|
|
Neither, Darkcoin can already do multisig and Evan could add timelocks in about an hour. It will take Bitcoin 6-12 months, if they ever get around to it. |
|
|
|
The key is to have as much redundancy as possible.
That's why I cringe when I hear smug masternode holders talk down to miners...
It would be like me trying to get rid of the bacteria in my gut, not realizing that they help me digest food and that I will die without them.
Smug? I mined my first Masternode and bought the rest all the way up to 0.019. If miners whine that Masternodes are 'too profitable,' nobody is stopping them selling some GPU's and buying a Masternode too. They'd also save on electricity! I am questioning the 80/20 split because I think Masternodes bring more to the table than miners do, that's all. What table are you even talking about. I wasn't aware there is a table. We have nothing yet with darkcoin. We need adoption, we need to prove ourselves. We need to become the best security experts of the world (regarding server security), etc... when we reach that point I will accept that there is a "table". Are you joking? Anonymous transactions, forthcoming InstanTX, there's the table. What did miners have to do with that? You know, the whole point of Darkcoin?We will see. Just don't talk down to those gut bacterias man, because we absolutely NEED them. I'm not talking down to anyone, I'm asking miners to come up with sensible arguments as to why they are four times as valuable as Masternodes to the coin. edit: 6am for me, time for bed... thanks for the debate. |
|
|
|
Oh you will come to learn the true costs of running a masternode my friend.
The key thing about the miners is that they simply have to be good at mathematics to prove their worth. They need to hash fast and nothing else.
They don't need to hash fast at all, PoW exists to try and ensure decentralisation of whatever that total hash is, that's all. The remaining coins are scarce, and more and more people want to be the first ones to harvest those coins. That's the simple explanation why miners need to hash faster and faster. Sure, you can hash slow if you like, ok ok! But don't complain when a faster miner eats all the coins away. More Masternodes make those coins even scarcer... and a tiny % of miners having a small advantage over the others doesn't matter IMO, someone always has some advantage somehow, in anything. I am not sure about that. As you said, I could setup and run 2 masternodes in a few hours. But it only takes me a few minutes to withdraw those coins to an exchange and sell them. So those 2000 DRK are not really far removed from the market at all. A masternode is a very volatile form of "fixated asset". It's not a tightly fixated asset like e.g. a house. Far from it. Open your wallet, go to the console, type 'masternode count.' Has that number steadily increased with time or not? Doubling the Masternode count would take another million DRK off the market. |
|
|
|
it just requires everyone to play by the rules, or get off the pitch.
the rules being, hand over 50% their hash power and hand over the 50% of their means to mine the coin when, how and how often they want, hand over the means to save up at the rate they want and buy the MN as and when they like,, FFS it's a free world unless you getting blown apart on the streets you live It's a free world for you to go play tennis while we're playing football too. |
|
|
|
The key is to have as much redundancy as possible.
That's why I cringe when I hear smug masternode holders talk down to miners...
It would be like me trying to get rid of the bacteria in my gut, not realizing that they help me digest food and that I will die without them.
Smug? I mined my first Masternode and bought the rest all the way up to 0.019. If miners whine that Masternodes are 'too profitable,' nobody is stopping them selling some GPU's and buying a Masternode too. They'd also save on electricity! I am questioning the 80/20 split because I think Masternodes bring more to the table than miners do, that's all. What table are you even talking about. I wasn't aware there is a table. We have nothing yet with darkcoin. We need adoption, we need to prove ourselves. We need to become the best security experts of the world (regarding server security), etc... when we reach that point I will accept that there is a "table". Are you joking? Anonymous transactions, forthcoming InstanTX, there's the table. What did miners have to do with that? You know, the whole point of Darkcoin? |
|
|
|
Oh you will come to learn the true costs of running a masternode my friend.
The key thing about the miners is that they simply have to be good at mathematics to prove their worth. They need to hash fast and nothing else.
They don't need to hash fast at all, PoW exists to try and ensure decentralisation of whatever that total hash is, that's all. The remaining coins are scarce, and more and more people want to be the first ones to harvest those coins. That's the simple explanation why miners need to hash faster and faster. Sure, you can hash slow if you like, ok ok! But don't complain when a faster miner eats all the coins away. More Masternodes make those coins even scarcer... and a tiny % of miners having a small advantage over the others doesn't matter IMO, someone always has some advantage somehow, in anything. |
|
|
|
The key is to have as much redundancy as possible.
That's why I cringe when I hear smug masternode holders talk down to miners...
It would be like me trying to get rid of the bacteria in my gut, not realizing that they help me digest food and that I will die without them.
Smug? I mined my first Masternode and bought the rest all the way up to 0.019. If miners whine that Masternodes are 'too profitable,' nobody is stopping them selling some GPU's and buying a Masternode too. They'd also save on electricity! I am questioning the 80/20 split because I think Masternodes bring more to the table than miners do, that's all. |
|
|
|
My proposal is that we have Masternodes running p2pool nodes and miners mine on the Masternode network and nowhere else. Solves the 51% threat, eliminates the need for 'enforcing' MN service fees, and ensures decentralisation. 50/50 split between MNs and miners, with miners who leave a balance on the MNP2pool earning a pro-rata cut of the MN reward as well, and meaning that as long as the total MNP2pool node balance is >1000DRK, the MN op can take out some or all of his initial 1000DRK and set up further MNs...
Sounds like a very centralised banking machine much like HSB paying shit low interest rates. Sounds like you're drunk? Tell me why solving the 51% / centralisation threat by making miners use p2pool, and having those p2pool nodes be Masternodes is a bad idea. Tell me why providing people who don't have enough DRK to run a Masternode a chance to easily have a share in one is a bad idea. Tell me why having more Masternodes as a result of this, and consequently a more robust network is a bad idea. it's not a bad idea build a pool or whatever offer it to ppl as an easy,secure,reliable and competitive way to own some coin tax them 2%,3%,5%,10% even 20% if you think you can get it, but don't tell others they cant do it their own way that just makes it nothing more than centralised. It doesn't make it centralised at all, it just requires everyone to play by the rules, or get off the pitch. |
|
|
|
Oh you will come to learn the true costs of running a masternode my friend.
The key thing about the miners is that they simply have to be good at mathematics to prove their worth. They need to hash fast and nothing else.
They don't need to hash fast at all, PoW exists to try and ensure decentralisation of whatever that total hash is, that's all. But prove to me that every masternode holder truly knows how to secure and maintain a server? Are most masternodes still running on amazon clouds, for crying out loud?
Incompetent MN ops will end up with dead Masternodes, more reward for the competent ones, no problem there. I have the darkcoins to run 2 Masternodes, but I am veeeeeeeeeeeeeery hesitant to do so, exactly because I know how insecure the internets are.
I will operate masternodes eventually, but this strange push to more and more masternodes and more and more rewards for masternodes (at the expense of miners) I find just wrong.
And now even talks questioning the validity of mining itself? LMAO!
We should be careful is all I am saying, don't let it go to your head.
Strong wallet passpword. Nobody has ever bruteforced a decent wallet password. You already have a wallet somewhere, right? You might as well be running your 2 Masternodes then. |
|
|
|
2. Why can't a single crappy CPU process a few transactions per minute and broadcast them to the network? In what way exactly am I wrong about that?
What If I decide to buy lots and lots of those CPUs, what if I try to corrupt the system, make double spends, etc.. Go for it. You just need a Masternode wrapped around each one. |
|
|
|
Sounds like you're drunk?
another presumptuous comment rolled out, dear me you seem proper full of them, I guess it would be an attempt at wit. Try answering my points? |
|
|
|
Without mining, most of us wouldn't be vested in crypto.
Good point it's a lot easier to get average 9 to 5 worker into mining a few DRK than it is to get them to go out and buy them with $ and that's what it's about getting folk into DRK getting them to realise DRK as part of their own life, getting them to spread the word You really think it's easier for someone who wants a means of keeping their finances private to get into mining than to simply buy enough DRK for their needs? Do you grow all your own food, brew your own booze, fabricate your own vehicles, etc. ? If you do then great, but if I need a warn coat I go to the shop, I don't shear a sheep and start carding wool. |
|
|
|
Darkcoins come into existence thru mining. And only thru mining.
Evan Duffield and team, and the whole Masternode concept had nothing to do with it? Just miners? Everybody you mentioned here had to mine to get to some darkcoins, don't you agree? What do you even say here? Did they just push a button? The miners share a few of their new found coins with the masternodes.
Mining is not only about maintaining the blockchain.
Even if there are no transactions for days, it doesn't matter. If there are NO transactions for days, then THAT'S the state of blockchain that has to be integrated and shared for everybody to accept.
A single old Celeron can do all that. You are dellusional. The amount of transactions (low or high or whatever) has nothing to do with the validity of mining. It just is what is. What does that even mean? Even if we have no transactions for a while, the integrity of the blockchain would still need to be maintained. You made it sound like it matters how many transactions go thru when in fact the amount of transactions is completely irrelevant to the integrity of the blockchain. As I said, if there were for some reason NO transactions for a period of time, then this state of blockchain would still need to be checked and shared by everybody in the network. 1. Mining was part of the evolutionary process, sure, but that doesn't mean we have to be stuck with it forever. Not that I'm advocating getting rid of it, I just think it's not as important as it used to be given the Masternode tech we now have. 2. Why can't a single crappy CPU process a few transactions per minute and broadcast them to the network? In what way exactly am I wrong about that? 3. See #2. |
|
|
|
My proposal is that we have Masternodes running p2pool nodes and miners mine on the Masternode network and nowhere else. Solves the 51% threat, eliminates the need for 'enforcing' MN service fees, and ensures decentralisation. 50/50 split between MNs and miners, with miners who leave a balance on the MNP2pool earning a pro-rata cut of the MN reward as well, and meaning that as long as the total MNP2pool node balance is >1000DRK, the MN op can take out some or all of his initial 1000DRK and set up further MNs...
Sounds like a very centralised banking machine much like HSB paying shit low interest rates. Sounds like you're drunk? Tell me why solving the 51% / centralisation threat by making miners use p2pool, and having those p2pool nodes be Masternodes is a bad idea. Tell me why providing people who don't have enough DRK to run a Masternode a chance to easily have a share in one is a bad idea. Tell me why having more Masternodes as a result of this, and consequently a more robust network is a bad idea. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
