snip...
Please address the unresolved issue of Dash claiming to be decentralized while relying on unspecified engineers, rather than block height, to trigger a hard fork.
Did Masternodes vote to put anonymous engineers in charge of deciding fork timing, or was it a unilateral move by Evan.....
"In Bitcoin, one person (Jihan Wu) can prevent changes to the consensus algorithm" m301888 "In the future, as the team has expressed in our slack and elsewhere, those keys will be put into the hands of the network enabling the Masternodes to control enforcement, decentralizing the decision to spork the network. For now the advantages outweigh the hazards, of which we are aware" macrochip https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/5t6vjk/100_hrs_after_dash_121_launch_98_100_miner_support/So Dash isn't decentralized now, but Evan promises it will be... "in the future."Ok, got it. Thanks for clarifying. |
|
|
|
Fungibilty Social scalability is Monero's killer app. It will slowly infect everything and explode when reaching critical mass.
Fixed it for you.  |
|
|
|
Another landmark essay from wise master Szaboshi.  Money, blockchains, and social scalabilityhttp://unenumerated.blogspot.hr/2017/02/money-blockchains-and-social-scalability.htmlthe secret to Bitcoin’s success is that its prolific resource consumption and poor computational scalability is buying something even more valuable: social scalability. Social scalability is the ability of an institution –- a relationship or shared endeavor, in which multiple people repeatedly participate, and featuring customs, rules, or other features which constrain or motivate participants’ behaviors -- to overcome shortcomings in human minds and in the motivating or constraining aspects of said institution that limit who or how many can successfully participate. Social scalability is about the ways and extents to which participants can think about and respond to institutions and fellow participants as the variety and numbers of participants in those institutions or relationships grow. It's about human limitations, not about technological limitations or physical resource constraints. There are separate engineering disciplines, such as computer science, for assessing the physical limitations of a technology itself, including the resource capacities needed for a technology to handle a greater number of users or a greater rate of use. Even though social scalability is about the cognitive limitations and behavior tendencies of minds, not about the physical resource limitations of machines, it makes eminent sense, and indeed is often crucial, to think and talk about the social scalability of a technology that facilitates an institution. The social scalability of an institutional technology depends on how that technology constrains or motivates participation in that institution, including protection of participants and the institution itself from harmful participation or attack. One way to estimate the social scalability of an institutional technology is by the number of people who can beneficially participate in the institution. Another way to estimate social scalability is by the extra benefits and harms an institution bestows or imposes on participants, before, for cognitive or behavioral reasons, the expected costs and other harms of participating in an institution grow faster than its benefits. The cultural and jurisdictional diversity of people who can beneficially participate in an institution is also often important, especially in the global Internet context. The more an institution depends on local laws, customs, or language, the less socially scalable it is. Modern information technology (IT), especially by making use of the historically recent discoveries of computer science, can often discover many more mutually beneficial matches, can improve motivations for information quality, and can reduce the need for trust within certain kinds of institutional transactions, with respect to an increasingly large number and variety of people, thereby further increasing social scalability in some very important ways. Whereas the main social scalability benefit of the Internet has been matchmaking, the predominant direct social scalability benefit of blockchains is trust minimization. A blockchain can reduce vulnerability by locking in the integrity of some important performances (such as the creation and payment of money) and some important information flows, and in the future may reduce the vulnerability of the integrity of some important matchmaking functions. Two things about Nick's latest blast of penetrating insight and Monero. 1. Monero protocol facilitates mutually beneficial matchmaking by picking a tx's ring signature inputs from the set of other people's TXO. Schooling instinct; safety in numbers. 2. Fungibility plays a huge role in the social scalability of e-cash, because (for just one example) in non-fungible systems you must trust the sender to give you untainted coins and/or trust the coins' future recipient(s) will accept them (with their provenance) from you. Fungibility --> trust minimization --> more/better matchmaking --> social scalability --> MONERO WINS |
|
|
|
My speculation is that their canary died and they needed to come up for air.
Yes, the coincidental timing of the FBI's disclosure of interest and Jaxx's sudden lack of interest fairly reeks of malfeasance. But let's not forget what happened the first time jackbooted thugs tried poking Honey Badger with a stick....  Just wait for Schumer Effect to kick in! Bitcoin: With Enemies Like Schumer, Who Needs Friends? June 7th, 2011 "Actually, Schumer’s Barney Fife act could be the best thing that ever happened to Bitcoin. Back in March, an earlier target of Schumer’s grandstanding was Fuzz Alert, a smartphone application that alerts drivers to speed traps, speeding and red light cameras, and sobriety checkpoints. After Schumer drew attention to the app, its sales doubled.
Maybe he can do a similar favor for the darknet economy. The more he vents his impotent rage, the more public attention he draws to the fact that government attempts to suppress Silk Road and Bitcoin are, well, impotent.
A lot of people out there would like to engage in peaceful trade — even in violation of government commands to “touch not, taste not, handle not” — without the state’s permission, surveillance or taxation, who may not yet be aware things like Bitcoin and Silk Road exist. The more and more loudly you protest, Senator Schumer, the more economic activity will move beyond the reach of the corporate state. So by all means, bluster on! Command the waves to advance no further. Show people everywhere, beyond the shadow of a doubt, just how contemptible your so-called laws really are." 6 months later.... THANK YOU SCHUMER January 26, 2012For those of us who had been with bitcoin since early on, we would become excited at the smallest appearance of bitcoin in the press. We all knew the amazing ramifications of this cryptocurrency (or commodity), and were awaiting that inevitable breakthrough that came a few years early with Schumer’s announcement. It was not the right kind of press we were hoping for, but press is press. And while dealing with the moral panic, it gave you a platform for expounding on the social benefits of bitcoin. |
|
|
|
this company still owes me BTC14.5 for a never delivered Baby Jet Upgrade Kit – $3.75/Ghash!
Your fuked.......no one will ever see anything from these guys ever  Don't worry the lawyers are getting paid.  "The most important thing isn't getting our refunds, it's that Hashfast was run out of business." -cedivad basically |
|
|
|
How long do we have till our master notes must be updated?
Version 12.1 Release https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/version-12-1-release.12985End users, miners, pool operators, exchanges, and masternode owners have until Sunday, February 12th to update. After that date, we will switch completely to the new version as soon as our engineers determine it is safe to do so, and older versions of the software will drop off the network. What an incredibly short period of time in which to impose a hard fork! Imagine if Bitcoin released a new version with 2MB blocks and only gave everyone one week to update, or be kicked off the network. Oh wait, we can't imagine that because Bitcoin would never do anything so foolish. That's how you run a shabby hobby coin, not a production system.
we will switch completely to the new version as soon as our engineers determine it is safe to do so
WTF? Some unnamed "engineers" make at some unknown time the final, arbitrary decision based on their personal whims? What if these mysterious anonymous engineers get hit by a bus? Will 12.1 never activate? That's why Bitcoin forks are scheduled in advance for a specific block height and triggered by code, not two random dude's psychic powers or tingling spidey-sense or whatever. And DashHoles have the nerve to tell people this is a DECENTRALIZED project? That's a fucking lie, and you know it, and this proves it. How dare you? Have you no decency? Have you no shame?  |
|
|
|
That's a strange definition of flawless. Usually a "flawless" transition does not entail ugly, damaging quick fixes which the devs themselves characterize as "controversial" and only acceptable out of necessity "until we have a better solution." Usually a "flawless" transition does not entail losing connectivity with standard modern internetworking protocols, resulting in ~$1.5 million dollars worth of nodes being rudely tossed out of the system with no say in the matter (and taking their diversity/diffusivity with them). Masternodes should be allowed to annonce ipv4 addresses only from now ^That's what normal people would call a flaw in the transition. I can't believe your response to the question of "Why didn't Masternodes hold a vote on banning IPv6?" is to throw out some red herring about Americans and illegals. Talk about hand waving! WTF are you really that stupid? Or are you just that committed to white knighting for Even The Instaminer, to the point where you will defend his unilateral actions and consistently false pretensions about governance theater no matter how blatantly centralized, retrograde, arbitrary, and authoritarian they become? Do you have any idea what a huge security issue it is for every Masternode to be tied to a static IPv4 address? Obviously you do not, otherwise you'd have chosen to describe 12.1 with a more appropriate term than "flawless." "Flawless" sounds like some Evan Can Do No Wrong cheerleading from a Kool-Aid drinking bagholder, not an honest critical appraisal respectful of all the facts. Of course given Dash's MO is "Marketing Over Technology" I'm not surprised you prefer to paint the situation in rosy terms rather than address the reasons why Bitcoin would never in a million years kick its IPv6 nodes out, much less have the chutzpah to describe such a Pyrrhic "quick win" as "flawless." Is it asking too much for Evan to stop breaking features Bitcoin devs worked hard to implement? If your name is Lukas_Jackson, the answer is "yes!"  The irony is stunning. 12.1 is being hyped as "Evolution" despite it breaking existing functionality and moving Dash back into the Bronze Age of networking. IPv4 = tech from 1981 IPv6 = tech from 1999 What the diff? Glad you asked! While increasing the pool of addresses is one of the most often-talked about benefit of IPv6, there are other important technological changes in IPv6 that will improve the IP protocol:
- No more NAT (Network Address Translation)
- Auto-configuration
- No more private address collisions
- Better multicast routing
- Simpler header format
- Simplified, more efficient routing
- True quality of service (QoS), also called "flow labeling"
- Built-in authentication and privacy support
- Flexible options and extensions
- Easier administration (say good-bye to DHCP)
|
|
|
|
You changed your tone aSSBREAKER.
In other words, you have no explanation for why IPv6 is broken in today's craptastic 12.1 "upgrade" and can't defend Dash's negative progress in network diversity/diffuseness. It's 2017, and Dash has no IPv6 support despite being forked from Bitcoin, which fully supports it. Welcome back to 2010.  If the only contribution to the thread you can make is an ambiguous comment on my "tone" and a silly insult, I feel sorry for you. Why don't you try addressing the content of my post instead of straining to hear tones over the internet and calling childish names? Why weren't Masternodes allowed to vote on whether or not to disable IPv6 and thereby kick 140 of their own off the network? Is that how "distributed democracy by blockchain" is supposed to work? What's the point of Dash's governance structure and voting when it's funding scams while Evan makes all the important decisions? Masternodes should be allowed to annonce ipv4 addresses only from now See ^^that? Pretending this is no big deal only demonstrates what liars and charlatans Dash pumpers are. The hubris of people who believe Dash may overtake Bitcoin while Evan can't even keep IPv6 working is unbelievable. Bitcoin would never kick all its IPv6 nodes off the network, for reasons obvious to everyone except Evan Scamfield and his cargo cult. |
|
|
|
Oh my, what an unforgivable oversight! Deepest apologies m'lud.   |
|
|
|
This is from today. Despite the much-hyped launch of a "major upgrade" for Dash, the exchange rate is still looking like a dismal situation for the Evan's Gate cult.  Here's what you need to know about Dash's so-called "upgrade." 1. Dash removed RBF (replace by fee), an important innovation inherited from Bitcoin that allows users to replace a stuck tx's uncompetitive fee with a higher one. 2. No stakeholders voted to remove RBF. It was done at the discretion of Evan Duffield without any input from the Masternode's governance theater. 3. 12.1 breaks compatibility with IPv6, another very usefule feature inherited from Bitcoin that's important for keeping the network diffuse and diverse. 4. 12.1 kicks 140 Masternodes off the network because they are using IPv6. 5. These 140 Masternodes didn't get to vote on removing IPv6. Evan Duffield decided for them, because he is Dash's Dictator For Life. So much for 'governance by blockchain.' 6. NOBODY CARES, basically. For a supposedly "major upgrade" not many people noticed or commented. Compare the response to Dash's latest version with the response to Monero's:   |
|
|
|
If you BU guys want to sit around spewing invalid blocks on each other all day, be my guest. But please leave the rest of us out of that sticky situation.
reject that was rejected in 3 seconds before needing the ban hammer.. but core nodes went anal by blocking nodes. this in short is core triggering what could have ended up as a core caused bilateral fork. due to core rules. it was a non event because it was a 3 second reject. but core nodes made a mountain out of a mole hill with such silly banscore settings. there was no intention by any non-core node to cause a bilateral split and if core were unbiased they would have updated the banscore code to be fair to how to treat the network properly. in laymens "oh look a reject, lets bin it and move on with our lives" instead of "oh look a reject, lets lock all the doors and close all the windows and scream on forums that apocalypse nearly occured" i call that desparation "Desperation?" LOL, the Bitcoin network barely noticed BU's attack, only briefly paying enough attention to reflexively mitigate Known Bad sources of invalid blocks. Most block explorers didn't even see the invalid block, and the only reason we know it happened was some sharp-eyed observers noticed all the incompatible-and-therefore-adversarial BU nodes getting BTFO. After the fact whining about "silly banscore settings" is just fake 20/20 hindsight and clumsy deflection. It's very simple. You don't get to submit invalid blocks to the network and then stay on the network.If you BU guys want want to enjoy more permissive badscore settings and sit around spewing invalid blocks on each other all day, be my guest. But please leave the rest of us out of that sticky situation. |
|
|
|
Something is going on with the massive Polo volume over the last few days. I know it is a captive market, but still. It is far from dead, just don't know if there will be a fork or battle like ETH/ETC, which I think would be bad for the coin. It doesn't need any more drama, does it?
Dead coins pump on Polo all the time. BBR is the prime example. XCN as well. Even dead, useless proven scams like jl777hodl, XC, and BlockNet were victims of Polo necromancy at one time or another. Here's what's going on.  The frog is long gone from this world, but its body may be animated by application of artificial external stimulus. |
|
|
|
This is great. Nice to see this time they used a camera instead of a potato. |
|
|
|
When BU nodes started attacking the network, they were automatically blocked by Bitcoin's built-in shit filter. No human intervention was required. You don't get to submit invalid blocks to the network and then stay on the network, you get banhammered at the protocol level. If you BU guys want to sit around spewing invalid blocks on each other all day, be my guest. But please leave the rest of us out of that sticky situation. |
|
|
|
when will dash evolution roll out?  December 2017 Will Dash be able to use IPv6 by then? It seems ridiculous for Dash to fork Bitcoin and then load on so much extra crap that IPv6 functionality is broken forever. That's not good for the network's diffuse/diverse properties. Any attack that only works on IPv4 takes out 100& of all Masternodes instead of only most of them. You're right! I think we should build our own mesh network because any attack that only works on the Internet will take out 100% of all nodes. Or even use some sort of quantum communications in case they'll come up with EM jamming. I think Dash should be able to maintain the IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity it inherited from Bitcoin. Maybe even bolt on i2p when Monero is done with Kovri. Altcoins are supposed to push the envelope, not regress. Do you want Dash to also abandon IPv4 and to back to SmallTalk, or perhaps ARPANET NCP? Kicking 140 Masternodes off the network just because Evan broke IPv6 compatibility is asinine. That kind of hideous kludge solution might be OK for a testnet but not the real thing. Those Masternode owners collectively paid ~$16 million USD to put their money in a HYIP that is suddenly and arbitrarily being ordered by a centralized authority to function differently than as originally sold. Why weren't Masternodes allowed to vote on whether or not to disable IPv6 and thereby kick 140 of their own off the network? Is that how "distributed democracy by blockchain" is supposed to work? What's the point of Dash's governance structure and voting when it's funding scams while Evan makes all the important decisions? |
|
|
|
when will dash evolution roll out? December 2017 Will Dash be able to use IPv6 by then? It seems ridiculous for Dash to fork Bitcoin and then load on so much extra crap that IPv6 functionality is broken forever. That's not good for the network's diffuse/diverse properties. Any attack that only works on IPv4 takes out 100& of all Masternodes instead of only most of them. |
|
|
|
Crytoscam video is quite amusing in how amateurish it is. But more to the point it didn't seem objective to me in the slightest. fluffy pony is a monero dev isn't he? Says it all.  That doesn't really say it all. For one thing, nobody has answered fluffy's very important question about the pointlessness of a voting/governance system that funds scams. The very first thing they disclose and discuss is fluffy's main project and Tone's Bitcoin maximalist supremacist (with the former exception of Dash) paradigm. They conclude Fluffy's expertise in crypto and specialized altcoin knowledge makes him an ideal person to analyze Dash, especially given the widespread perception of competition between Dash and Fluffy's project. Don't you believe in the adversarial process? Do you really want to only hear pro-Dash opinions with which you already agree? Groupthink and cult doctrine enforcement isn't a good approach to developing software people can trust with their money and security. Maybe this "says it all." Tone is a really cool guy.
Or maybe this "says it all." |
|
|
|
So who the hell is still supporting BU? I support BU. Bitcoin Unlimited is a tool to allow node operators and miners to more easily configure their nodes' blocksize limits and signal their preferences to the network. This is what we need right now. That's a good start, but in the spirit of honoring Satoshi we must make BU as unlimited in as many ways as possible. Miners should also be allowed to vote on changing the block reward, the block time, and the PoW. Those three things are still based on magic numbers and arbitrary choices imposed by the crippling tyranny of BlockStreamCore, so we must abolish them ASAP. During times of high traffic (Black Friday->Cyber Monday, Xmas Eve), higher block rewards and lower block times will help relieve congestion so Bitcoin Unlimited will function as digital p2p ecash. Miners must also be able to vote on changing the PoW to PoS, so the environment will start being saved from catastrophic climate changes caused by greedy ASIC capitalist fossil fuel consumption. |
|
|
|
Dang it guys, who CARES! Seriously! <--- Your Logical Fallacy Is: argumentum ad ignorantiam These people are negative losers and nobody will remember them 5 years from now. <--- Your Logical Fallacies Are: argumentum ad populum + argumentum ad hominem Nobody who matters listens to them. <--- Your Logical Fallacy Is: argumentum ad populum They just pat each other on the back and reassure themselves that they're just as smart as Evan et al, and could have been successful too, if only they "cared" to do so. <--- Your Logical Fallacy Is: tu quoque Seriously, again, nobody who is anybody in business, who wants to do business with Dash, CARES! <--- Your Logical Fallacy Is: argumentum ad ignorantiam If they did listen to such losers, they'd be fools and wouldn't be someone who mattered to us either. <--- Your Logical Fallacy Is: modus ponens Do you remember how everyone hated Bill Gates? How evil windows is (OK, it's evil, LOL) but did that slow him down? No! Because he was the mover and shaker. Same with Steve Jobs, Same with Thomas Edison. Sure they all had their faults (personal) and we have our faults (crappy launch) but we have a fantastic team and great people with great vision. THAT is all that matters. These little snipers only win if they get under your skin, and you're letting them! Don't watch the stupid show, don't give them the time of day. Just put our heads to the grind stone, keep moving forward and staying positive, and Dash will do fantastic! <--- Your Logical Fallacy Is: post hoc ergo propter hoc On a happy note, Happy Update Day!!! It'll be many hours from now, but heck, it's TODAY!!! YAAAAYYY! <--- Your Logical Fallacy Is: Cheerleading for an Instamined scamcoin |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
