No, the market and the multisig system is not dependent on the masternodes.  Currently the masternodes are only acting as a way to put up collateral and earn a piece of the network stake earnings, as an incentive to have more nodes.

There's a fair amount of questionable stuff in DarkCoin's masternode code, and I don't trust it.  InstantX for instance is in my opinion poorly conceived and just ripe for exploitation.  DarkSend has a few issues that I would like to revisit and maybe find a way to re-architect.  One really surprising thing that shocked me is that <snip>.  This seems to me to be...an unwise point of centralization Wink  So, this is why right now I hid and disabled all of the darksend and instantx functionality for the moment.

After I get through the current Roadmap 2, then I will circle back around and figure out a better way to make darksend work.  There is also a lot of room for optimization of the network loop for the masternodes.  It currently takes a sledgehammer approach and saturates the network every 5 seconds with broadcasts.  I have a feeling this is why some people are reporting strange issues with their masternodes dropping in and out of the list and spotty payments.  I think their bandwidth is getting saturated.  So there will be some tweaks for that in the next update.

The whole thing can be made to work a lot more efficiently and safer.  I'm actually really surprised it is as hacked together as it is given the market cap of DRK (or dash or dashpay or whatever).  If you read through the code and come up with any architecture ideas that would be great.  <snip>

As far as the multisig system, it is basically an API and a graphical interface on top of it for creating, circulating and executing multi-sig transactions.  The piece I am working through now is whether to use an Inventory relaying mechanism or a side-channel messaging mechanism (similar to the encrypted messaging in SDC for instance) for communicating the packets/payloads between the parties.

guys you know the masternodes rewards. 0.66 is given to nodes where does the rest go

Wrong.We have huge issue but everybody scare talk about it.I've already shoot down four masternodes  and left two of them .Reason is only one.I don't want to get stress because all my masternodes stop produce coins.Last  0.6666666 I've seen  69 hours ago  at one of the six masternodes.All of them was listed and active for few hours and disappear from list and again come back for few hours and disappearand again show up at list for 69 hours but no payment at all. Here what I found in debug console and this happen after last wallet update.If anybody can help ?? I can have 10 or more masternodes but if i got problem with 6 so ..I don't see any reason to continue masternodes in my systems.
socket recv error 10054
Misbehaving: [2001:0:9d38:90d7:288b:30e5:9333:bce9]:30104 (0 -> 1)
ProcessMessage(dseep, 116 bytes) FAILED
Misbehaving: 92.31.187.182:30104 (6 -> 7)
ProcessMessage(dseep, 116 bytes) FAILED
socket recv error 10054
Misbehaving: [2001:0:9d38:90d7:288b:30e5:9333:bce9]:30104 (1 -> 2)
ProcessMessage(dseep, 116 bytes) FAILED
I think that  error socket recv 10054 is the main problem .I understand, the connection was interrupted by the receiving process.And sometime  can happen when dowloaded program ( like Crave wallet update ) wrote to appdata directory to many times.We got two updates in 3 or 4 days..So I think that I know what happen but I don't know how to fix that .Clean Roaming folder and download new wallet isn't help.I did that 4 times  with the same error .Again..Anybody can help????Thank you

Well a community technically does own a coin, but anyways.. Maybe once we hit one million coins, I would be in favor of halving the block reward, and continuing to half every year.

ICM, we would like to keep this coin rare. If you disagree, the community has already taken off and could fork if we so chose.

Personally i like to invest in projects that have a long term vision, if this project does not care about what happens in 10 years from now then i would also care a lot less about this project. I want to like CRAVE though, since so many coins are trying to be mainstream and are distancing them selfs from the dark markets. CRAVE is doing the opposite i think that is cool.

So please ICM cap the block reward at 2%, so it cannot go below that percentage. It would hugely increase my confidence in this project and I am sure there are many silent investors out there that feel the same way that i do.

So whats stopping anyone from creating a market/forum that accepts crave in return for products and services with a middle man handling the crave? No need for 10,000 coin collateral. And if no one decides to create a market then this coin effectively fails, this doesnt make sense to me. Your roadmap is made with the assumption that someone is going to create this "URGE market" and follow your roadmap 2 to set it up.

ICM if I do work something out with this dev for the side projects did you want in on discussion/development or do you prefer just to let the community handle it? I'm not trying to step on your toes or anything I just really like crave and want to see it succeed and I figured these are two less things you gotta worry about.

That seems a bit strange to me, if it is blur that is supposed to be used for the markets, this takes away from the value proposition of crave. I would think that we should be able to burn crave for blur at anytime. Since this would mean people are expected to burn their crave in the first month of such a speculative project, considering that we can not even sell blur at this point, this is almost the same as burning money, we can not expect people to do this, it does not make sense for the long term or the present. I will say it here, I think we should be able to burn CRAVE for BLUR for the entire lifetime of this coin.

 ICM hi! Question this guy miss and he's lost in previous pages

I would imagine primary developer is doing back end framework code and having apk compiled by another involved party

Yep needs polishing can't read alot of text when Navagating throughout the app. This is very discouraging in terms of the devs skills.

yup because each coins weight will only ever be = to "1 weight" you'd literally have to buy over 51% of staking coins to be able to even attempt it... were as other coins with no "max age" the attack can be done with much less % of coins

Some man have error.

If he try to start mastenode from new wallet he have this error:


How to fix it?

Thanks!

sourse (rus) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1006631.msg11097875#msg11097875

Benthatch is an idiot. No one should listen to him. Same goes about emilliomann, neither can read code they are just good at spouting off bs and SLINGing mud around.

The crave dev has delivered so far and thats a good thing.

But until you people stop calling out coins as fudders instead of individuals all your doing is inviting the attacks and perpetuating the ongoing hostilities.

So grow up a little maybe?

Greetings Crave community,

And congratulations on what looks like a powerful, well-conceived project, solidly executed so far. Being from Blackcoin myself, I'm always intrigued by new coins choosing to build on rat4's Blackcoin PoS 2.0 - but not always very impressed as most are just repaints done for a quick money-grab. I'm happy to be able to say Crave falls in a different category, bringing an intriguing new spin and set of ideas, and frankly a nice shot-in-the-arm to the altcoin market.

I have been playing around with the qt-client, and will set up a masternode today so I can do a full test drive of your stuff. One peculiarity I've experienced seems to be that fully confirmed stake payments aren't all reflected in total coins on dashboard view. Any idea what's up with that?

Anyway, nice work. And enjoy getting through a sea of FUD and jerk-offs. It's inevitable, and the better you are the more you have to endure. We've been there to the extreme ourselves. It will never go away completely, but it does die down a bit (eventually).