When Dash transactions get locked (to enable fast transactions and prevent double spending), who or what is in control of the "locking"?
Thanks
A set of 10 (pseudo-) randomly, but deterministically selected Masternodes. Thank you. You're probably not totally surprised  , that that sounds a tad confusing. So they are randomly selected but there is a deterministic component too?  It's based on the blockhash from the proofofwork for a block, and those hashes cannot be predicted before the block is mined, That's the random component. Once a block is found, this hash and some other (Masternode-) attributes are used to compute the 10 Masternodes responsible for locking. This is the deterministic component. |
|
|
|
When Dash transactions get locked (to enable fast transactions and prevent double spending), who or what is in control of the "locking"?
Thanks
A set of 10 (pseudo-) randomly, but deterministically selected Masternodes. |
|
|
|
WTF? Network glitch?  Looks to me like the chart lost contact with the Network - lol The node which creates the stats hung and was auto-restarted. During the re-sync it was queried for the number of active Masternodes and hadn't yet synced them all. From the timing a bit unfortunate and unlikely, but can happen in a complex network. |
|
|
|
This is going fast   in less than 24h... Credits: crowning The chart has me a little confused...what percentage of the network has actually upgraded? I don't know which of the three colored lines to look at! Can somebody explain it? The chart does display how many of the mined blocks were mined with the new v12.1 Dash version during a given time frame (per hour, per day and per week). If e.g. during the last day 450 blocks were minded with the old version and 50 blocks were mind with the new v12.1 version the percentage would be 10% (of all 500 mined blocks) and the blue line in the chart would be at 10%. |
|
|
|
Unfortunate, but happens. My personal record is 20076 blocks (almost 35 days). |
|
|
|
OMG masternode number 4000 !
Sorry to trash the celebrations, but we're still at 3960-something. After running flawlessly for about 6 months the dash-daemon which creates those graphics got a bit confused about the number of running Masternodes and needed a restart. Sorry for the inconveniences... |
|
|
|
Because there ARE not more transactions in the Dash network. In fact on average it's even lower than 0.7 tx/sec. Even Bitcoin (which has about 200 times our market-cap, and has a LOT more merchants who use it) has only 2-3 transactions per second. BTW, 0.7 TX/sec means about 60000 transactions per day. For a currency where most investors just hold their coins that's actually quite good. |
|
|
|
So basically, the devs have released a soft fork to freeze that one contract and keep it from withdrawing the funds after the 27 days elapse. They are also considering a hardfork to reverse that one single transaction The question to me is why would someone invest serious money into DAO when the devs can revert it whenever they want. I don't know much DAO/ETH implementation details so I might be wrong, but if something like this should be possible without 51% consensus it would be terrible. |
|
|
|
Would drinking at one side of the North Atlantic Ocean be acceptable? |
|
|
|
If I'm looking to find a correlation between price and masternode declines, then I can exclude protocol changes, right? I have statistics for almost everything:  Orange: DASH per day per Masternode Blue: Dollar per day per Masternode Grey: Number of Masternodes / 1000 (not 100% what you wanted, but still quite interesting) |
|
|
|
Yep, hardware failure. Working on it. We apologize for the inconvenience... |
|
|
|
What does it mean for masternode operators? Need to install a patch or something? It's an operating-system issue, not a Dash/Bitcoin/WhatEverCoin problem. The operating systems using those glibc versions (means: most Linux distributions) are vulnerable, therefore ALL software not statically linked to a 'safe' glibc version/replacement is vulnerable. Update your Linux once a fix is available and you'll be okay. |
|
|
|
Hey!! Linux ass hat here, Dont really know what to do with this. Hoping some wizard will come to my rescue Do I need to delete some file, becourse there is plenty of disk space on the VPS so I dont get this message when I try to start my node   No space left on device means your disk is full. Delete something that you don't need any more or buy a larger disk. |
|
|
|
Yes same comparaison with the number of masternodes in january 2015 and january 2016
 This is a graph that monitors the growth of masternodes over time. 2015-01-01-00:00:01 : 1662 Masternodes 2016-01-01-00:00:01 : 3427 Masternodes Times are GMT. |
|
|
|
That gives 5*13/14 * 210240 = 976114 new coins per year. Annual decline yields infinite geometric serie and we got approx 976114 * 1/(1-13/14) = 13.6kk additional coins. Add the current supply = 6kk and that result in ~20kk total coins.
What did I miss?
Ignoring the first 5464 blocks where the rewards were computed differently (would adds roughly 2.7 million coins in the worst case): 5*210240 5*13/14*210240 5*13/14*13/14*210240 5*13/14*13/14*13/14*210240 ... I've just thrown the formula above into a little shell script for the next 36 years (because 2050 was mentioned): Computing mined coins for 36 years:
Year: 2014, New coins: 1051200, Sum: 1051200)
Year: 2015, New coins: 976114, Sum: 2027314)
Year: 2016, New coins: 906391, Sum: 2933706)
Year: 2017, New coins: 841649, Sum: 3775355)
Year: 2018, New coins: 781531, Sum: 4556887)
Year: 2019, New coins: 725708, Sum: 5282595)
Year: 2020, New coins: 673871, Sum: 5956467)
Year: 2021, New coins: 625738, Sum: 6582205)
Year: 2022, New coins: 581042, Sum: 7163247)
Year: 2023, New coins: 539539, Sum: 7702787)
Year: 2024, New coins: 501000, Sum: 8203788)
Year: 2025, New coins: 465215, Sum: 8669003)
Year: 2026, New coins: 431985, Sum: 9100988)
Year: 2027, New coins: 401129, Sum: 9502118)
Year: 2028, New coins: 372477, Sum: 9874595)
Year: 2029, New coins: 345871, Sum: 10220467)
Year: 2030, New coins: 321166, Sum: 10541633)
Year: 2031, New coins: 298226, Sum: 10839859)
Year: 2032, New coins: 276924, Sum: 11116784)
Year: 2033, New coins: 257143, Sum: 11373928)
Year: 2034, New coins: 238776, Sum: 11612704)
Year: 2035, New coins: 221721, Sum: 11834425)
Year: 2036, New coins: 205883, Sum: 12040309)
Year: 2037, New coins: 191177, Sum: 12231487)
Year: 2038, New coins: 177522, Sum: 12409009)
Year: 2039, New coins: 164842, Sum: 12573852)
Year: 2040, New coins: 153067, Sum: 12726919)
Year: 2041, New coins: 142134, Sum: 12869054)
Year: 2042, New coins: 131981, Sum: 13001035)
Year: 2043, New coins: 122554, Sum: 13123590)
Year: 2044, New coins: 113800, Sum: 13237391)
Year: 2045, New coins: 105672, Sum: 13343063)
Year: 2046, New coins: 98124, Sum: 13441187)
Year: 2047, New coins: 91115, Sum: 13532302)
Year: 2048, New coins: 84606, Sum: 13616909)
Year: 2049, New coins: 78563, Sum: 13695473)
Year: 2050, New coins: 72951, Sum: 13768424) Easy to see that the lower limit is about 14 million coins, add to that the (worst case) 2.7 millions and you'd have about 16.6 million expected coins. No idea why ~22 millions are mentioned in the source code, maybe Evan assumed some average difficulty back then. But, to be honest, I don't really care. 2 postings here per week are more than enough. |
|
|
|
[ about the expected maximum amount of Dash reduced from ca. 22 millions to ca. 14-18 millions in the announcement post ]
No one answers questions from Dash.. always only changes to benefit the developers
Let me explain this for you: - Dash uses a dynamically calculated block reward. When the global hash-rate is low (means not many people are mining Dash) the reward of coins per found block is higher than with a higher hash-rate. At some times the hash-rate was VERY high, meaning there were fewer coins created than theoretically possible. The idea behind this was to have higher rewards when the hash-rate low, thus creating a higher incentive for miners to mine Dash when the hash-rate is low. This worked perfectly so far.
- No one can predict how much the hash-rate will be at a given time, therefore the initial number of 22 millions Dash was the maximum possible coins in the optimistic case that the hash-rate would stay so low that always the maximum amount per block would be paid. This of course was rarely the case.
- If you estimate the maximum possible coins at a later point in time (where you already know how many coins were created during e.g. the first year) you would of course come to a lower result.
- At one point during the last weeks Evan adjusted the announcement post to reflect this new number
Of course you already knew this, but there might be newcomers who don't know. Now they do. |
|
|
|
Now, it's important to understand why this "spork" nonsense is so fundamentally broken. I've seen arguments centred around the "many-eyes" principle of FOSS, and some based on deterministic builds (which is an idiotic argument, and completely misses the point, so I won't be addressing it).
This is wrong. Maybe Dash's code is a bit too complicated for YOU to understand, but I know at least a dozen or so people who would be VERY alarmed if Evan ever adds code they don't fully understand. But judging from your posting history you're not interested in arguments against your agenda anyway, so I'll leave it at that. BTW, you should also post this over at the main Bitcoin thread, Bitcoin uses the "many-eyes" principle and deterministic builds as well. Someone should warn the investors. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
