Fancy a banknode service like the one flare has got for dash, crouton?  what service is this? Someone with 1000DRK (or 250000 BCR) runs 'masternode/banknode genkey' and sends it to you, you do the rest inc. VPS hosting for a monthly fee. Makes more sense with thousands of DRK MNs, not so much with the lower number of BCR BNs. |
|
|
|
Fancy a banknode service like the one flare has got for dash, crouton? I've thought about it, but I reckon my RL prices would put people off... |
|
|
|
@cryptoball To finish, having you or anyone deciding for us how we should name a crypto is not our idea of a decentralized crypto.
Who can argue with this! Here at Crouton's Lampshade Emporium we sell nothing but gerbils, and if our customers don't like our lampshades they can take their money elsewhere! They are also crooks. The way they compute margin resulted in some loses on my end. They never replied to presented evidence etc., so I wish them a slow but sure death  All exchanges are crooks. Can you imagine how much they make from frontrunning big trades alone? |
|
|
|
I have a question. I am running through the colored coin implementation. And there are some questions i'd like to hear your opinions on:
1) should just anyone be able to issue an asset, or should that be a privilege open only to an active BN?
2) should any BN be able to issue assets, or should we impose extra restrictions?
3) should we create a rule that if a BN goes inactive, then all assets issued by the BN are frozen until it is active again?
4) What kind of protections from fraud should we incorporate?
5) Or do you prefer a more centralized asset issuing policy?
Some general opinions, assuming you're talking about assets similar to NXT... 1) + 2) Anyone, but subject to an asset issuance fee or bond of some kind? 3) What would be utterly awesome, and is well above my paygrade as to whether it's even possible, would be a system whereby all BN's could back/host assets in a distributed fashion. Or at least opt in to such a system. 4) Require some collateral in BTC or something else? 5) See 3) One thing I found restrictive when I played briefly with NXT assets last year was the lack of any way of establishing a finite asset lifespan - maybe the IX transaction locking principle could be used to enable this? |
|
|
|
Yes, it's easy, yes, you can close the local wallet after you have started the banknode. To see if your BN is alive you can run 'banknode list | grep 1.2.3.4' (replace 1.2.3.4 with your IP address, or just run 'banknode list' as there aren't that many and you should be able to see yours in the list) from any wallet, or log into your VPS and run 'bitcredit-cli banknode list' or 'bitcredit-cli banknode debug' edit: note that compiling bitcredit needs at least 2GB RAM, if your VPS instance has less than this, you will need to set up some swap space on the VPS - not usually possible on openVZ virtual machines - or compile it on your local box and then scp bitcreditd and bitcrdit-cli (strip them first as per the wiki!, unstripped they are much bigger files) to your VPS. Not sure what you are asking here, sorry. If you are running a BN on your local box then yes you need to have the client (either QT or daemon) running all the time. |
|
|
|
Any guide to do all this using a remote vps thing like with darkcoin?
You can use any of the many Darkcoin guides. Replace any mention of 'darkcoind' with 'bitcreditd' and 'masternode' with 'banknode' basically. https://dashtalk.org/forums/masternode-guides.66/ |
|
|
|
Damn it, BN competition is hotting up.  |
|
|
|
It's a POS coin btw - I know how it works in theory but I'm also interested in how this thing works in code. Maybe one day this will be useful too...  The lone crouton, did you see this? Did you see?  I arched an eyebrow a few minutes back over my morning coffee... do you have my house bugged? PoW is a crap, everyone except the 421 miners left on Earth knows this. The suits certainly know this. It's exclusionary, non-scalable, mindbogglingly inefficient, and too damn slow. Bankers are going to adopt blockchain tech where it suits them, but they certainly aren't going to be pissing about with warehouses full of hardware wasting gigawatts of electricity on make-work. If Evan applied the same PoService principles to blockchain security and coin minting that Masternodes employ, DASH would be almost perfectly decentralised and literally unbreakable while a functioning internet existed, and have vastly greater tx throughput by virtue of latency savings alone. |
|
|
|
Windows users :- 0.30.17-final Let me know if you have problems, i've tested all previous issues and they are gone. Sync'd fine - no problems here Hey, i got it working all good here as well. All issues seem to be resolved. Props to the Dev for weathering that storm, we have all had weeks like that where its only one issue after another, but it looks like we now have a stable network again and the hash-rate is rising quickly. A question though, does the clpts AMD solo-miner no longer work due to block-size change? If so is there a solo miner that works at any efficiency level or is best bet now pool with clpts 2.1? Thanks! i think it works, thanks for the props. I'm going to try and keep improving my methods and releases click on add new recieve address gives u a crash and u have no address for incoming at startup a new wallet where are you finding this button? There is only "request payment" button, and that works just fine. Heh, I was wondering what the blank toolbars at the top of the send/receive page etc. were about... The '.png' suffixes in stylesheet.qss need to be deleted, as they are already aliased in the bitcredit.qrc file - they then show up, but they need to be set initially too. I'll submit a pull tomorrow when I've sorted it out. Unless someone beats me to it.  |
|
|
|
Windows users :- 0.30.17-final Let me know if you have problems, i've tested all previous issues and they are gone. Compiles fine on Xubuntu 14.04/14.10, BN daemon updated. |
|
|
|
Nice clarification / update YEA Even TLC thinks he`s dreaming in the mid day |
|
|
|
As I understand - if after voting MN has gone offline for more than 1 hour - it's vote is canceled and MN operator need to vote again? It's pity we don't see whole list "IPs - actual vote results" so everybody could be sure his vote(-s) is active.  That could open up voting abuse. Voting should have an element of privacy. If I understood something Udjin said recently, all internal identifiers are moving towards pubkeys, not IP addresses, which would be better in a whole lot of ways, not just this. Obviously votes need to be attributable somehow. |
|
|
|
A central escrow/wallet for projects will cause problems with theft/loss/confiscation/tax.
Multisig in general is VERY secure and is proven in Bitcoin. Thus the temp implementation of having 7~10/15 multisig will not suffer from this problem. As for future implementations... well we have testnet. I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill on this theft/loss issue. Multisig means jack shit when the psychopaths who run the asylum decide to ruin or end you. If they want your multisig key you are going to give it to them. They're slightly less likely to ask for it torture it out of you if it doesn't exist in the first place. Or do you think bad things only happen to those nasty brown people, on TV, in the land of Far Away?  |
|
|
|
For the next 24 hours, let us hear arguments and vote on 1) BN payments increase (perhaps a static % for the entire lifetime?, i'd say 40% but don't mind me, i'm a multiple BN owner) 2) Darksend ( i think we should keep InstantX) 1) 40% I can live with. Maybe a voted review every 6 months or something. 2) DS is at best a false sense of security for the few that use it. IX is useful for everyone, all the time. |
|
|
|
Great, great and great!!! I have some vote and I'll vote tonight, ready to begin with the decentralized governance. Carefully read this proposal. It utilizes a commingled project wallet/blockchain store/escrow. I don't see this as a true decentralized system. Other alternatives may work better with less risk. Yes, on my first post I din't had read all the proposal and the remarks yet... So patience we'll see what they will answer to the doubt on dashtalk. Actually, I see no reason why funding the development of the project needs to be purely decentralized. We have very decentralized voting (albeit only Masternode owners), why do we have to have a "decentralized wallet" to deposit coins into. It makes no sense. It isn't functional any other way, and it is still secured by the same decentralized network that secures everyone's wallet. This proposal will force funds into an escrow account exposed to theft/confiscation/loss/tax. The risk is higher with the more account holders, along with additional delays with more signers to get the funds out. Any account holder can be accused of something "illegal" in the eyes of a government entity and it will be traced back to this account. I believe there are also additional tax consequences with block rewards going into a fund and then separated to project owners. Plus a lot will need to be implement to even make this work - multisig masternode controls, budget software, budget voting, masternode approval for funds each month. This proposal also has no mechanism to not fund this account(or return funds), so over time when the best projects are completed and the funds will be spent on poor projects or wasted. A much bigger deal in a few years when DASH is 10x or 100x it's value and 10% of the block rewards is not the $290k/year like it is today.(although the other post of Evan's suggested a way to return funds, it isn't in this proposal) This is the decentralized vision that I see. Each project owner controls his/her own wallet with the funds. Each project is directly paid similar to masternodes getting payments over time from block rewards, only the project owner receives and controls the funds. Quick, simple, no 'central fund' at risk, no fund manager/s. Each project would get paid their specific % of the block rewards they request so there isn't any funds sitting in a queue waiting accumulate before they can be sent out each month. The funding mechanism would also be the voting mechanism. 51% yes votes gets a project in the queue, and highest yes% gets priority until the 10% cap is reached. Projects get voted in every 3 months and each project has a set limit for 3 months of block rewards. Before voting myself I'd like to see more discussion about this. Pros and cons vs current proposition. The wrangling went on here: https://dashtalk.org/threads/self-sustainable-decentralized-governance-by-blockchain.4708/ - but it looks like we're getting the pork barrel. |
|
|
|
Volume is ZERO on bittrex. Do you think to do sonething tribesman. Coin loses itself interest
Someone just scooped a load. |
|
|
|
As far as i am concerned , i would completely deactivate it. Darksend in my opinion is a gimmick.Enough anonymity is already assured by not using the same address for anything other than Bank Tx. And even then i have figure a way that allows users to use different addresses while still maintaining trust rating.
I only made it active after soe users indicated they wanted it. but even on DRK chain, it is barely used.
I would also vote to shelve Darksend, at least for the time being. Use of DS by itself does not remotely guard your privacy from TPTB or any competent sleuth, there are just too may other weak links in the chain, although I suppose it might let you slip a purchase for your mistress past your wife. Even then, I have been asking for over a year now, to no avail, for DRK to implement optional password protection before the wallet will display your balance or transaction history. Sending funds 'anonymously' to your supplier is useless if anyone can come along, glance at your wallet and read "$xxxx.xx to chocolate-covered-nuns.com, 21 Jan 2015" |
|
|
|
bitcreditscc, any ideas why block 107254 has so far taken 1hr42mins? I tried to setgenerate true to hurry it on a bit but got a core dump.  The pools have like 4-5 kh/s. at diff 3k, that should be solved in like 30 seconds ...i think its not on a high diff block so something else is up, as time proceeds i am sure it will illuminate itself. Also, it seems that the new wallet has fixed the syncing issue of yesterday so that's one down. can you post your getblocktemplate? Unfortunately, I still can not send! Any ideas? 07:52:55  getblocktemplate 07:52:55  CreateNewBlock() : TestBlockValidity failed (code -1) Have you unchecked the Darksend box in the Send screen? |
|
|
|
Does anyone have problems with the BN payments schedule? int64_t GetBanknodePayment(int nHeight, int64_t blockValue)
{
int64_t ret = blockValue/5; //20%
if(nHeight > 85000) ret += blockValue / 20; // 25.0%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)* 1)) ret += blockValue / 20; // 30.0%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)* 2)) ret += blockValue / 20; // 35.0%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)* 3)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 37.5%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)* 4)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 40.0%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)* 5)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 42.5%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)* 6)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 45.0%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)* 7)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 47.5%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)* 8)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 50.0%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)* 9)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 52.5%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)*10)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 55.0%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)*11)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 57.5%
if(nHeight > 85000+((1440*30)*12)) ret += blockValue / 40; // 60.0%
return ret;
} Nope, looks fine, if anything I would ramp it forward - lower the 1440 to 800 to better reflect the avg. blocks per day and keep it more or less monthly, and keep the increments at 5%. I never understood why Evan/DRK wanted to stretch the process out for 18 months - MNs and BNs are the core of both currencies, the value added by having them far outweighs any 'loss' to the miners. edit: just read your google spreadsheet, yeah BN reward should increase over time, not decrease! I had been working off just the code above, hadn't taken into account the block reduction... kind of drastically changes the picture for a BN investor... More money held in BNs means greater price stability too. |
|
|
|
Block 107290 has arrived, after 17hrs59mins! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
