[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[smoothie]

No way in hell you're getting me to waste my time reading that. I'll never get those 10 minutes back...

Don't read it.

But that's okay as I'm already a "troll" right?

Others may read it some may not...doesn't bother me. I'm just posting facts and my own take on those facts.

Look I understand you have your issues with Dash, I get it, I really do, but I don't understand the crusade?

I know you are reasonable unlike some of the other hardcore haters, so why do you continue to hash over the same stuff over and over. 

I've read it and most of your other posts, yes you have the right to an opinion, but when an opinion turns into a vendetta its just pointless.


Can't we all just get along and go our separate ways? 

 

This is all in your perspective.

Posting facts is not a "vendetta".

[1715700678]

1715700678

[1715700678]

1715700678

[1715700678]

1715700678

[1715700678]

1715700678

[1715700678]

1715700678

[smoothie]

It appears that Dash uses the "attacker economist" approach.

I happened to read the quote, but what exactly are you referring to? What part of DASH implementation uses it and what sub-type of attacker economist logic is used?

Here is another quote of exactly what I am getting at in reference to DASH:

In other words, instead of purposely designing their systems to be cryptographically sound so that the "attacker will definitely fail" or the "attacker will probably fail", they instead (unwittingly?) design it so that "the attacker's expected cost of carrying out an attack exceeds the attacker's expected benefit from doing so."

The unfortunate knock-on effect is that such an approach only works like that for a limited time...as the value of the cryptocurrency grows, so does the level of sophistication of the attackers that find it an interesting target.

Trying to solve the privacy problems in a way that relies on the honesty and opsec of a small group of individuals is simply privacy theatre, no different from those that claim that Bitcoin is private as long as there's no address reuse.

[afbitcoins]

Searching Dash on ixquick it comes up on first page   

[smoothie]

I have a theory that if you guys stop "feeding the trolls" (quit replying to their posts! dont give them the attention they are whining for!)... they will get bored and go trollolol somewhere else...

wanna try?

Nothing can stop the trolls, because Dash thread is the most popular thread on BCT with +5 million views.



If your desperate for attention, Dash thread is the #1 destination, because it has the most eyeballs.   It's that simple.  If you want to spam your sig, or try to get traders to your shitcoin, in the troll's mind, this is the place (because they don't know they look stupid).

It is a big complement to Dash, like Oscar Wilde said, the only thing worse than people talking about you, is no people talking about you

EDIT: maybe that is why the Bitcoin mods are angry too

As usual dash supporters are only partially correct (it is #2 not #1):

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

Searching Dash on ixquick it comes up on first page  

Nice. We're moving up! That's important. 

[Tinkles]

Yep, I like Dash..  This is the Dash thread.  I guess your not a Dash supporter then, your here for the eyeballs

[AlexGR]

It appears that Dash uses the "attacker economist" approach.

I happened to read the quote, but what exactly are you referring to? What part of DASH implementation uses it and what sub-type of attacker economist logic is used?

Here is another quote of exactly what I am getting at in reference to DASH:

In other words, instead of purposely designing their systems to be cryptographically sound so that the "attacker will definitely fail" or the "attacker will probably fail", they instead (unwittingly?) design it so that "the attacker's expected cost of carrying out an attack exceeds the attacker's expected benefit from doing so."

The unfortunate knock-on effect is that such an approach only works like that for a limited time...as the value of the cryptocurrency grows, so does the level of sophistication of the attackers that find it an interesting target.

Trying to solve the privacy problems in a way that relies on the honesty and opsec of a small group of individuals is simply privacy theatre, no different from those that claim that Bitcoin is private as long as there's no address reuse.

IMO you are right on that, however this is a failure of all cryptocurrencies, not DASH exclusively. Cryptocurrencies rely on attacker economist rationale, including Monero, Bitcoin etc. "Honest miners", bloat attacks vs fees increase (Bytecoin attackers (?) on Monero), etc etc.

The mining process itself is one where you expect that the other will not do something stupid to the blockchain, but instead respect his mining costs. But if you are a government and bring an NSA super-farm online, and don't care about "mining costs", well, you can fuck up every PoW blockchain on the planet because cryptocurrencies have not been designed to withstand such an attack. And if you have money to spend, you can fuck up every PoS blockchain. And if you have money to spend, you can also sybil every transaction, including Cryptonote.

Would I like crypto to be more sound? I would. Would I like people to take its security more seriously? I would. That's not what we have though and I'm not seeing many working towards this direction.

[smooth]

No way in hell you're getting me to waste my time reading that. I'll never get those 10 minutes back...

Don't read it.

But that's okay as I'm already a "troll" right?

Others may read it some may not...doesn't bother me. I'm just posting facts and my own take on those facts.

Look I understand you have your issues with Dash, I get it, I really do, but I don't understand the crusade?

I know you are reasonable unlike some of the other hardcore haters, so why do you continue to hash over the same stuff over and over. 

I've read it and most of your other posts, yes you have the right to an opinion, but when an opinion turns into a vendetta its just pointless.


Can't we all just get along and go our separate ways? 

 

This is all in your perspective.

Posting facts is not a "vendetta".

How many times are you going to post the same "facts"

We both know you aren't stupid.

The blog post he quoted was from yesterday. I doubt it had been posted many times before.

Question for you Props: Is there any possible new information or analysis which would cause you to reconsider your opinion about Dash's design?

[toknormal]

So you suggest that grouping DASH is a good idea to increase masternodes.
This introduces counterparty risk and centralization.

great! (or not?)

The thing is, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are *base money*. You can't run a financial system on base money alone - at least not a developed one. It would be like trying to ride the tour-de-france in bottom gear the whole way round, including the mountain stages.

Layers evolve on top of it which disperse the wealth.

For example, lets take a hypothetical scenario where Bitcoin captures 0.1% (one tenth of one percent) or world asset marketcap. Meanwhile, Dash captures one percent (1%) of Bitcoin's marketcap. (It's currently at a quarter of one percent BTC marketcap).

That would put the value of masternode collateral at around half a million dollars ($500,000).

Lets say that's enough of a cap for a certain institutional - such as trade union, pension fund, corporate trust, whatever, to at least hedge into 10 masternodes which would represent a capital sum of $5 million fiat equivalent.

The annualised return on that element of their portfolio (at today's payout levels) would be around $350,000 (350 thousand dollars) if realised, just from blockchain revenue alone.  Remember that masternode revenue as mining revenue is not fiat gain until you cash into dollars and coming against that is a constant increase in coin supply through mining, so it's possibly not as great a return as that but still measurable.

However, the corporate fund has that money invested on behalf of its subscribers who may number in the 100's of thousands. Moreover, although there is "counterparty risk" for the fund subscribers, there is none for the fund (necessarily) since they are at liberty to manage the base asset - the blockchain keys - themselves if they so choose.

* Working

[smoothie]

It appears that Dash uses the "attacker economist" approach.

I happened to read the quote, but what exactly are you referring to? What part of DASH implementation uses it and what sub-type of attacker economist logic is used?

Here is another quote of exactly what I am getting at in reference to DASH:

In other words, instead of purposely designing their systems to be cryptographically sound so that the "attacker will definitely fail" or the "attacker will probably fail", they instead (unwittingly?) design it so that "the attacker's expected cost of carrying out an attack exceeds the attacker's expected benefit from doing so."

The unfortunate knock-on effect is that such an approach only works like that for a limited time...as the value of the cryptocurrency grows, so does the level of sophistication of the attackers that find it an interesting target.

Trying to solve the privacy problems in a way that relies on the honesty and opsec of a small group of individuals is simply privacy theatre, no different from those that claim that Bitcoin is private as long as there's no address reuse.

IMO you are right on that, however this is a failure of all cryptocurrencies, not DASH exclusively. Cryptocurrencies rely on attacker economist rationale, including Monero, Bitcoin etc. "Honest miners", bloat attacks vs fees increase (Bytecoin attackers (?) on Monero), etc etc.

The mining process itself is one where you expect that the other will not do something stupid to the blockchain, but instead respect his mining costs. But if you are a government and bring an NSA super-farm online, and don't care about "mining costs", well, you can fuck up every PoW blockchain on the planet because cryptocurrencies have not been designed to withstand such an attack. And if you have money to spend, you can fuck up every PoS blockchain. And if you have money to spend, you can also sybil every transaction, including Cryptonote.

Would I like crypto to be more sound? I would. Would I like people to take its security more seriously? I would. That's not what we have though and I'm not seeing many working towards this direction.

Yes I agree that at the mining level or forking the block chain with enough computational power is an issue (inherent with any coin using a similar consensus model for verification of transactions), BUT that is not the issue we are discussing as that is merely determining the block/ledger for which a coin stores transactions. The item of topic was "privacy" and how Dash's approach has been an "attacker economist" approach.

The focus of the paper was on breaking cryptographic KEYS and the analogy being used specifically targeting the privacy system Dash has put into place.

Trying to solve the privacy problems in a way that relies on the honesty and opsec of a small group of individuals is simply privacy theatre, no different from those that claim that Bitcoin is private as long as there's no address reuse.

This ^ has really nothing to do with mining. But rather the algorithm put into place being "just good enough" from a "attacker economist" point of view concerning PRIVACY.

[smoothie]

No way in hell you're getting me to waste my time reading that. I'll never get those 10 minutes back...

Don't read it.

But that's okay as I'm already a "troll" right?

Others may read it some may not...doesn't bother me. I'm just posting facts and my own take on those facts.

Look I understand you have your issues with Dash, I get it, I really do, but I don't understand the crusade?

I know you are reasonable unlike some of the other hardcore haters, so why do you continue to hash over the same stuff over and over.  

I've read it and most of your other posts, yes you have the right to an opinion, but when an opinion turns into a vendetta its just pointless.


Can't we all just get along and go our separate ways?  

 

This is all in your perspective.

Posting facts is not a "vendetta".

How many times are you going to post the same "facts"

We both know you aren't stupid.

Hello!

I posted a Daniel J Burnstein blog post that talks about new facts and issues. WRITTEN 2 DAYS AGO. Not very old I'd say.

 Please read it instead of point out that I am "rehashing" old issues. When the topic is actually new issues of discussion.

[bigrcanada]

OK.  So... Can we please stop engaging these individuals?  That would be great.  I asked much as love talking with trolls... I really don't.

[bigrcanada]

Does anyone have any info on what we are to expect with Evolution?

[iCEBREAKER]

It appears that Dash uses the "attacker economist" approach.

I happened to read the quote, but what exactly are you referring to? What part of DASH implementation uses it and what sub-type of attacker economist logic is used?

Here is another quote of exactly what I am getting at in reference to DASH:

In other words, instead of purposely designing their systems to be cryptographically sound so that the "attacker will definitely fail" or the "attacker will probably fail", they instead (unwittingly?) design it so that "the attacker's expected cost of carrying out an attack exceeds the attacker's expected benefit from doing so."

The unfortunate knock-on effect is that such an approach only works like that for a limited time...as the value of the cryptocurrency grows, so does the level of sophistication of the attackers that find it an interesting target.

Trying to solve the privacy problems in a way that relies on the honesty and opsec of a small group of individuals is simply privacy theatre, no different from those that claim that Bitcoin is private as long as there's no address reuse.

"Not (Yet) Worth Attacking" = security in (economic) obscurity

I like how the obviously lying DashHole claims that 1) he read DJB's paper in 10 minutes and 2) it wasn't worth his time.

[bigrcanada]

iPhone DashWallet Release

https://dashtalk.org/threads/iphone-dashwallet-release.7123/

Nice Move~!

Looking forword to the Andriod version.

Congrats from China~!

Sorry... But I didn't find a response to my earlier query... If there was/is a similar wallet available now for Android?

It's a different DASH wallet for Android, but it's also good enough:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=hashengineering.darkcoin.wallet

As far as I know Breadwallet is iPhone only, it'd be nice to have a glitsy Android wallet too but hashengineerings one works well. Both might be old-hat soon enough anyway. DAPI, No need to download an app, just browse and go

I. don't know what DAPI stands for or how that will effect the wallet. Please advise.

It's a feature coming with Evolution. It's a decentralized API that will allow you to safely use the Dash network and maintain your account without hosting a wallet yourself. It other words, no need for wallets at all.

Really?  I'm wondering if I should wait to implement our payment system till  that rolls out.  On second thought...I think I read some where that this feature was not going to be ready till early spring.   We are going to need a wallet I'm assuming if we are accepting BTC...

The details are due for release at the Miami conference in January but the full rollout of Evolution is expected to take 18 months iirc, the DAPI is supposed to come early in that and apparently it's going well, Evan mentioned its turning out nice to work with a week or two ago.

Thanks Stan!

[TanteStefana2]

IMO you are right on that, however this is a failure of all cryptocurrencies, not DASH exclusively. Cryptocurrencies rely on attacker economist rationale, including Monero, Bitcoin etc. "Honest miners", bloat attacks vs fees increase (Bytecoin attackers (?) on Monero), etc etc.

Actually, AlexGR, he isn't at all right.  Mostly because he presents one attack vector, which is nearly impossible to acheive, as the only issue.  The point isn't to get a majority control over all masternodes, but rather a 90%+ minimum for less than 1% chance of deanonymizing a transaction.

It's not a matter of how much it costs to gain control over the MN network enough to either deanonymize a transaction or other malicious actions (such as double spends, etc...) It's a matter of ability, and there is no way any entity can do this without just about everyone selling off their Masternodes, and only to this malicious entity in a free market.  You think that's going to happen?  Heck, it'd be awesome if it would, our coins would be worth tens of thousands of dollars (maybe hundreds of thousands) and we could sell them to the fools, then turn around and start a new coin, abandon the old one to the malicious entities and all be SUPER rich on top of it all.

The trolls don't think this through. 

Where he gets the idea that this situation is limited in time is beyond me.  The more time goes on, the more distribution of the masternodes we get.  More different people buy them, the holders of tons of MNs sell a few, and others buy, etc....  On an open and free market.  It's just not possible.  And it gets more impossible each day.

This does not rely on honesty, this relies on the self interests of all parties.

[TanteStefana2]

Does anyone have any info on what we are to expect with Evolution?

Well, this is what I can remember from what has been told to us:

There will be a DAPI, or a Distributed Applications Programming Layer which will allow developers to develop applications on top of Dash Core.
Every transaction will be an instantX transaction, where miners will no longer make the decision on what to include in the blockchain, but masternode quorums will.
And somehow mixing is supposed to be instant.

I think the first thing that will come out is the DAPI

Everything else is elaboration on the talk Evan gave at Bicoin Wednesday and rampant speculation, which is always fun, but I'm afraid I've done enough of that, and I'll bore everyone again if I go on, LOL.

[tungfa]

Spanish ?

DASH ENTRA AL MERCADO MÓVIL CON UNA WALLET PARA IPHONE
http://bitcoinnewses.com/bitcoinespanol/dash-entra-al-mercado-movil-con-una-wallet-para-iphone/

Portuguese ?

DASH: NOVA CARTEIRA PARA IPHONE, RECEBA 0.5 EM DASH PARA TESTÁ-LA
http://www.bitcoinnews.com.br/bitcoinbrasil/dash-nova-carteira-para-iphone-receba-0-5-em-dash-para-testa-la/

 

[dnaleor]

Does anyone have any info on what we are to expect with Evolution?

I'm guessing some marketing hype terms and "cool features" without real technological innovations.

We already heard that mixing will likely still be done in masternodes, requiring liquidity providers to function (red flag, centralization, weakness in anonymity and usability).
Also, probably no peer reviewed paper when Evolution is announced, making it an attempt to pump vaporware.
 So don't have too high expectations...

Um, masternodes will always do the mixing.  Only now they will do it in quorums.

this is new information...
This is a quote from Evan Duffield
"This system doesn't mix on masternodes at all. It's done on a protocol level.
And so, we actually don't like that we are mixing on masternodes and I wanted to remove that for a long time and I finally figured out how to do it."

[bigrcanada]

Looking forward to all the new features.  Amazing stuff going on... It's great to have our devs coding and developing and not on here wasting time.

It's great when they(devs) are quietly working away... I for one can feel the excitement build.

Can we please have a outline list of all the up coming features? Are these currently being kept quite till roll out date?