Just join a P2P Pool node or start your own node.
P2Pool does not appear to be a solution to the mining pool centralization problem. Almost no one uses it. Maybe if mining pools prove untrustworthy it will be used after that. Still I think my question deserves an answer. If the answer is yes I think it would be quite important. Long term this shouldn't be an issue. Pools that actually make a profit will have higher fees than P2P Nodes. Pools with 0 fees now are not sustainable. |
|
|
|
Anyone know if evolution or the current 2nd tier could support a default "mining pool" so we can eliminate the threat of mining pool centralization?
Just join a P2P Pool node or start your own node. |
|
|
|
I found a release that coinify is accepting 16 different cryptos. I don't think it is a coincidence they are not picking up Dash. Here is the link to the news brief. https://news.coinify.com/coinify-merchants-can-now-accept-16-blockchain-currencies/Check out the fine print under the coins they choose. * An important criteria in the selection of supported currencies has been that they all maintain a high standard of transactional transparency. We reserve the right to alter this list in case of any currency no longer fits this criteria. Are they trying to avoiding drug/gun smuggling by choosing only the trackable coins? Maybe they get a kickback from DEA or ATF on any drug/gun busts. Are merchants scared to accept cash because someone could have been associated with something illegal? No. Why care about the anonymity with crypto? If anything I would want to refuse the trackable currency because the government could confiscate it based on history they find searching the blockchain. |
|
|
|
Actually we are 0.7% of Bitcoin's market cap, or about 1/142.
I make it 0.28% (1/358) Easiest way to remember it is it's just under 3 thousandths. So Dash has about 240X more nodes per market cap than Bitcoin. Nice. I will comment on security by miners. The amount of hashpower(electricity) is proportional to the marketcap(coin price). As Dash price goes up, it is more profitable to mine and more security/miners will be added to the network. The Bitcoin network has about $1,280,000/day in security by miners, Dash has $10,500/day in security. This doesn't include the cost to acquire the miners either which is about 500x the 1 day electric cost. So an attacker would need $640,000,000(1/8 of marketcap) just to get close to 50%, and Dash $5,000,000(1/3 of the marketcap). That does raise the question, if Dash takes off and matches the BTC marketcap now, how much would be spent on miners/security. The answer is $3,759,000/day. We could reduce the miner share of blockrewards so that millions/day are not just thrown at electricity to power miners. This isn't just an ASIC will solve it problem either. Even with ASICs, eventually more ASICs would be added to use the same electric usage as the value of coins produced. And maybe with a $5 billion marketcap a $3.8 million electric bill is the right amount. Personally, I think it would be be more beneficial to move some miners % at that point to the budget and vote on projects for the community. Disclaimers: No ASICs are availabe for Dash, nor do I expect them soon. Actual mining electric cost will be less than the value of coins mined to allow for a profit. Eventually, the miners will come up with the hashes that are used to build the quorums, but will have no control over what is included in the blockchain, thus eliminating the > 50% hash attack vector. The double layer of hash and quorums will be infinitely more secure than POW alone. I don't know how that will play out in hash rate/rewards, but I do see that when ASICs come online, it won't be a threat like it was for Bitcoin and Litecoin, etc... It'll just be a change. I do see an issue though. Who will set the rates for inclusion into the blockchain? With a flexible block size and a network that is paid to store the blockchain in a distributed manner, does it matter? Do we need fees? Hummmm? I guess we do, because no matter how much traffic the network can take, it should have a way to reduce unnecessary spam. But If this is somewhat how it'll go, I wonder if the fee will now be set by the MN quorums? Also, the blocks will get to be huge, and I remember reading that China's miners can't package up a block fast enough because of their limited bandwidth. So question is, will this become a problem? Wow, the more I think about this, the more I see what a challenge all this is  Miners still need to validate transactions that go in a block. If the masternodes order and lock every transaction, there is very little way to game a system like this. Also the 45% block reward for miners could probably be reduced to 5% and still maintain security. Now there is a remaining 40% of block rewards that can be used for something more useful than paying electric bills. With a low mining reward there will probably not be a market to produce and X11 ASIC either. Evan has said the fees are moving to the merchant/receiver end - so maybe it is still per transaction. I haven't heard of china miners not being able to package blocks. Some miners are not validating the transactions in a block, it gives them a few second edge on each block and usually will work. If another pool or wallet rejects a block, then those miners not validating lose that block. It is fun to speculate on the evolution revolution. |
|
|
|
Ok, so for some odd (IE me=dingbat) reason, I kept thinking Dash was about 1/100th of Bitcoin market cap, but it's only 1/1000!
That means, for a network with 1/1000th of Bitcoin's market cap we have over 2/3 as many full nodes! I would have to say that we have nearly 1000 X as secure a network, especially when you consider it's a two tiered network, and I'm not even counting the miner nodes! Amazing!
Actually we are 0.7% of Bitcoin's market cap, or about 1/142. Wait, if they're at 14 billion, and we're at 14 million, that's 0.001 of their market cap, No? or .1% ? Damn, am I still screwing up? Bitcoin is only 5.3 Billion. Coinmarketcap does all the calculations for you. http://coinmarketcap.com/ |
|
|
|
Actually we are 0.7% of Bitcoin's market cap, or about 1/142.
I make it 0.28% (1/358) Easiest way to remember it is it's just under 3 thousandths. So Dash has about 240X more nodes per market cap than Bitcoin. Nice. I will comment on security by miners. The amount of hashpower(electricity) is proportional to the marketcap(coin price). As Dash price goes up, it is more profitable to mine and more security/miners will be added to the network. The Bitcoin network has about $1,280,000/day in security by miners, Dash has $10,500/day in security. This doesn't include the cost to acquire the miners either which is about 500x the 1 day electric cost. So an attacker would need $640,000,000(1/8 of marketcap) just to get close to 50%, and Dash $5,000,000(1/3 of the marketcap). That does raise the question, if Dash takes off and matches the BTC marketcap now, how much would be spent on miners/security. The answer is $3,759,000/day. We could reduce the miner share of blockrewards so that millions/day are not just thrown at electricity to power miners. This isn't just an ASIC will solve it problem either. Even with ASICs, eventually more ASICs would be added to use the same electric usage as the value of coins produced. And maybe with a $5 billion marketcap a $3.8 million electric bill is the right amount. Personally, I think it would be be more beneficial to move some miners % at that point to the budget and vote on projects for the community. Disclaimers: No ASICs are availabe for Dash, nor do I expect them soon. Actual mining electric cost will be less than the value of coins mined to allow for a profit. |
|
|
|
Interesting, it's as if the elite, who are supposed to be experts on finance and economics, still can't understand what Bitcoin is about! Can this be true? Or are they simply playing to their customer base? It's too fundamental a change for them to recognise. They are too far removed from the original concepts that defined money in the first place. A money manager these days just has to know what market he wants his clearing systems to 'clear up' next. Nobody has actually had to worry about this since the gold standard was ditched. For example, take this commentator. She asserts that bitcoin doesn't do anything for economic growth because the coins just sit on the blockchain doing nothing whereas fiat money is "lent out" to grow the economy. Really ? Does the balance of your bank account reduce by the amount that the bank lends. Does the balance of anybody's deposit reduce ? No. Of course it doesn't because the fact is that fiat capital is not lent out - it's simply used as a base from which to lever up new loans which are backed by debt, nothing else. Same with gold - it sits in vaults all day long and is not lent out. Thats the kind of ape-man understanding that modern financial commentators have of finance. They've never had to visit these fundamental concepts in practice because the modern financial system has developed so far beyond them that they are "out of sight" so to speak. Loans and debt. Was it you who linked to an article "only an idiot takes out a loan to start a company"? I've been trying to wrap my head around lending in a Bitcoin economy. I think the goal is to change the "buy now, pay later" mentality. It's actually that mentality that has brought us to where we are, with exorbitant housing prices, etc... But did it also help fuel technological innovation? I'm not sure if we can stick that genie back in the hole? I can see Bitcoin being lent out, but not until the price has flattened out. If Bitcoin does take off, it will increase in real value far faster than a decent loan rate, thus be detrimental to the lender. It's weird. I still can't wrap my head around this! This is a really big deal! The entire fiat system for every country is based on an unlimited expandable quantity currency. Fiat is mostly created by bank loans as toknormal stated above. Supposedly they need 10% of actually currency in reserve, but it is actually less than that with some creative overnight account sweeping and stacking loans. Of course, Quantitative Easing and money printing can also be used to expand the money supply and would be the 'only' way the banksters want you to believe currency is created. The risk to a bank making a loan is very low they either get the asset value back if the customer doesn't pay or get the principle+interest back as total profit. The only risk to the bank is if they don't make enough loans to pay for branch expenses. For a 400BTC equivalent fiat loan, it would be profitable day 1, and profit works out to be 2.15 BTC/mo. OK now look at a non fiat(Bitcoin/Dash) currency loan. The bank has to have 100% of the capital to loan out. They can't just create a line item on a balance sheet like with fiat. The interest rate they charge on the loan has to be high enough to cover the risk of the loan and the opportunity cost of loaning out 100% of the loan amount. So looking at a 400 BTC 5% house loan. It would take 15.5 years to payback the principal and then the remaining 14.5 years to net 373 BTC in profit. Profit works out to 1BTC/mo if the loan goes to full term. I doubt any current bank could afford a 15.5 year payback, so most "banks" would not do BTC loans. Maybe a prosper type online system would work. I see the event to finally replace fiat with crypto is a confidence loss in fiat, governments and banks will not want to switch intentionally. The problem is that we are so levered up with debt, that switching to a non debt based currency would require all large assets to drop by 10X. The entire banking system could not be supported by the loans anymore. Governments couldn't be paid off by banks anymore. Wars would stop, because the loans to the military suppliers couldn't be made. It would be a drastic change from what we have today. I think it will be for the better with a lot less wasted on the financial sector. |
|
|
|
I had a thought during one of my long drives last week. There was a format war between VHS and Betamax(Sony) when VCRs first came out. Some of you may remember Betamax actually came out first and had better video quality. VHS was cheaper and had a longer recording length. More info here: http://www.mediacollege.com/video/format/compare/betamax-vhs.htmlSo the point is, there are a lot of sources that say that VHS won out because the porn industry used VHS (Possibly because of Sony's restrictions). Other sources say that VHS won out due to the longer recording length or cheaper cost. I see Bitcoin like Betamax. It came out first and is getting more and more restricted with licensing(NY, CA). Dash is set to be the VHS(Really more like a DVD in this scenario). Dash has many more features and benefits, but most of all is still not subject to specific license requirements. ...Just to cover all the bases, maybe advancing Dash into payment channels on porn sites wouldn't be a bad idea. Anonymous and Instant would be extremely valuable in this space. |
|
|
|
|
Awww, another troll just got ignored. Tante I think you are on the right track. We probably only need 8 nodes in a quorum.
|
|
|
|
Sometimes it's good to just start fresh, I've made four separate discoveries so far  . I'm sorry, but I've got to agree with the trolls here: Posts like this one contain no useful information and only create the impression that the dev is trying to pump their own coin. So if you're unwilling to share anything of substance, it might be better not to post on the development progress at all. Did I mention that I hate those teaser-based marketing strategies? I was waiting for someone to ask what I discovered... Basically, something called masternode input age based quorum layering. Quorums are created using the age of the masternodes, 25% of the quorums are more than 1.5 years old, the next 25% is more than 1 year old, the next 25% is more than 6 months old, then the final 25% is any masternode that is newer than that. It guarantees, you can't control a quorum by just buying coins from an exchange to make new masternodes, there will always be masternodes that are really, really old. That will create a market for Master Nodes. Maybe instead of using quorums using all 25% of the nodes from the same date range, use an even distribution of nodes from each date range. That would eliminate any specific value to old or new nodes. |
|
|
|
I lost 1.5 BTC on that crash yesterday.
Woke up too late and saw the 4-hour chart starting its correction - even though the market had already lost a lot of value. Didn't properly check the lower order charts, otherwise I'd have thought twice about it. Thought it still had ways to go and cashed out a load, then bought back in as the 1-hour was crossing to the upside and rallied back up to 410...
Damn it, sorry about that-you gotta be watching it 24/7 when like this. I had the Dash sold for an average of $2.87 each so I figured as long it didn't go over that I'd be alright, what nearly got me was that the bitcoin was on a different exchange to the Dash so the transfers were a bitch and the btc/dash ratio was rising all the time, it was a close call. You have any thoughts on the massive volume on the none commission chinese exchanges, fake liquidity- little/some/alot ?! Bummer. There is an app for android called the Bitcoin Checker. You can set alarms when a specific exchange price for BTC/DASH goes above or below your threshold. It is a must have if you are trying to trade these markets. You can use shapeshift.io to convert and lock in a price faster than waiting for transfers to an exchange. |
|
|
|
Actually, Confidential Transactions doesn't do a thing for bitcoin privacy except for those few which are left to 'cook' for a couple of days in order to gain enough 'security' to recast themselves as a new currency and totally blow the coin supply's fungibility to kingdom come in the process. Of course if you need them quickly you can always do a 'swap' with someone who's already 'morphed' theirs, but don't expect any freebies - everything's at a premium. (Wait a minute - scratches head - we now have a distinct currency, with a distinct trading price but with no independent liquidity so it transmits its volatility all over the market including into bitcoin itself ? It's bitcoin's siamese twin ! If bitcoin had been born with such a defect, devs would be falling over themselves working out how to separate them  ).
I am sure the confidential transactions will just get denied by Coinbase, Bitpay, etc. so it really doesn't solve anything. It is interesting that they can encrypting part of the BTC transaction while adding a memo without changing the transaction size. There must be some potential to compress BTC transactions. Maybe DASH could be compressing transactions to reduce size....maybe that's already in place....don't know. |
|
|
|
Speaking of moving users from BTC to DASH. I was thinking we could address the bitcoin lack of nodes with an advertising campaign. Would it be possible to run bitcoin nodes, but instead of just letting standard transactions go through it adds a transaction with a note? Something like this. DASH has Instantx - dashpay.ioLink for how to do it. Maybe this isn't something a node can do without actually initiating a transaction. http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/31972/how-to-add-additional-information-to-transactionOr maybe add a banner to the bitcoin block explorers. So those that keep checking if their transaction is confirmed will see DASH as the faster alternative.
Why wait 10 minutes for a block confirmation? DASH has InstantX.I'm not sure demonizing doe-eyed Chinese Bitcoin investors' shiny new assets is the best way to attract them. You don't want to scare them all the way back to fiat. Rather, the strategic thing to do right now would be to get them keen on diversifying their crypto portfolios without implying bitcoin is a risky investment compared to alts. They already like bitcoin, but it is a safe, one-trick pony. When they get bored they'll be on the hunt for something "different" (not less risky) than bitcoin which offers more features and better short-term growth potential. Lulls in bitcoin growth might be better times to promote Dash's long-term prospects by highlighting bitcoin's drawbacks, as this is most likely when investors start reevaluating their long-term positions. Its lack of full-node incentives, transaction speed limits, fungibility problems and impotent governance means bitcoin's long term future as a singularly powerful end-user world currency is uncertain. When investors are thorougly convinced that bitcoin really works now, but question its future adequacy as an ideal money for everybody--that's the time when Dash's superior monetary properties and killer features will become very attractive to them. Anyway, I think bitcoin is still the gateway into alts I would not want to make new investors feel that bitcoin is unsafe. Dash still needs to ride its coattails for a while. In the meantime, we should be promoting dash's features in the light of "if you think Bitcoin is great, you'll LOVE Dash," and be careful not to stray too far to an image that says "bitcoin will collapse, you should sell it all and buy Dash." I wasn't trying to say Bitcoin was unsafe....just slow...then showing a faster option when the BTC user is feeling the pain while waiting for a block confirmation. We definitely don't want to indicate Bitcoin or crypto is unsafe, then we go backwards. Soon enough the central banks will screw up one last time and the real jump to crypto will happen. Pssst. Ignore the trolls please, even the new one. |
|
|
|
I hate the 12 confirmations for Dash deposits needed on Poloniex. Why?
Forced parity with bitcoin in name of fairness? 3 confirmations * 10 = 30 min 12 confirmations * 2.5 =30 min Damn it, I just got caught out trying to arbitrage an extra 5%, I bought back in at $400 then chased $420 at another exchange, bitcoin took soo long, that I missed the $420 top and had to sell at $385 in the panic dump, and now its gone back upto $396  Bummer. You probably need to have fiat and BTC on both exchanges for it to work. |
|
|
|
Speaking of moving users from BTC to DASH. I was thinking we could address the bitcoin lack of nodes with an advertising campaign. Would it be possible to run bitcoin nodes, but instead of just letting standard transactions go through it adds a transaction with a note? Something like this. DASH has Instantx - dashpay.ioLink for how to do it. Maybe this isn't something a node can do without actually initiating a transaction. http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/31972/how-to-add-additional-information-to-transactionOr maybe add a banner to the bitcoin block explorers. So those that keep checking if their transaction is confirmed will see DASH as the faster alternative.
Why wait 10 minutes for a block confirmation? DASH has InstantX. |
|
|
|
|
We see the BTC price going up, but the upside for DASH is exponentially better. DASH is still up in fiat at $2.87/DASH.
Assuming all mining/masternode rewards are cashed out, BTC needs to have $1.5 Million a day to be pumped in for the price to stay at $420. DASH only needs $8,200/day to keep the price where it is at. Even if 1% move from BTC to DASH, the DASH price will jump 3x. Of course, miners can hold coins and price is more based on buyers interest.
|
|
|
|
Check this out. Kim Dotcom is working on a decentralized internet called MegaNet. It doesn't use IP addresses and in 10 years is expected to run on smartphones. We will need to change the masternode IPs system to work with this if censorship cripples the internet. http://www.hangthebankers.com/meganet-kim-dotcom-uncensored-internet/I get the question all the time, "Bitcoin/Dash won't work when the internet doesn't work." Well now there is a solution with the MegaNet. If this can run on smartphone in a few years, maybe cell phone service would be discounted or free if you run a MegaNet node. Looks interesting. I suspect this is going to work via mesh net technology. Remember FireChat? It's that app Hong Kong protesters used late last year to organise. Every smartphone became a network node and the more people participate the stronger and more efficient it becomes, exactly like a blockchain network with full nodes, so it's highly compatible principle-wise. Building a new network with smartphones is just that: Smart. These small mobile devices are much more proliferated across the globe than access points and laptops. So a mesh network like the open WiFi mesh? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_mesh_networkThe important part here is that he already has $40 million in funding and is on the way to get another $100 million. This should happen much faster than maidsafe or the other community driven projects. It isn't necessarily all about smartphones either, initially he will use standard internet infrastructure but with an alternative to IP addresses. Here is another release. https://hacked.com/meganet-kim-dotcoms-encrypted-networking/I can see a 'Supernode' acting as a Masternode and MegaNet node in the near future. This would enable the Dash network to withstand any internet threat. |
|
|
|
Check this out. Kim Dotcom is working on a decentralized internet called MegaNet. It doesn't use IP addresses and in 10 years is expected to run on smartphones. We will need to change the masternode IPs system to work with this if censorship cripples the internet. http://www.hangthebankers.com/meganet-kim-dotcom-uncensored-internet/I get the question all the time, "Bitcoin/Dash won't work when the internet doesn't work." Well now there is a solution with the MegaNet. If this can run on smartphone in a few years, maybe cell phone service would be discounted or free if you run a MegaNet node. |
|
|
|
This could be a good opportunity to get Dash into the other 99.99% (non-crypto) world. It is Feb 2016 and looks like a lot of the bitcoin guys are going, even though the focus is anarchy. I have no relation to this, just saw this on a podcast and it looked interesting. http://anarchapulco.com/ |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
