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

[qwizzie]

New Budget Proposal : DASH Ads on Disruptek Media content. Anarchapulco interviews. Juan S. Glat
https://dashtalk.org/threads/budget-proposal-dash-sponsored-interviews-anarchapulco-juan-s-galt.8051/#post-84496
https://www.dashwhale.org/p/DASH_ads_Juan_Galt



First interview with Dash ads : http://bravenewcoin.com/news/roger-ver-on-who-gets-to-decide-how-bitcoin-moves-forward-2/
edit : i just watched that video, well done Juan !!

Lets see if we can get Juan funded with the next superblock ! This means voting within the next 4 days.

[spatula]

New Budget Proposal : DASH Ads on Disruptek Media content. Anarchapulco interviews. Juan S. Glat
https://dashtalk.org/threads/budget-proposal-dash-sponsored-interviews-anarchapulco-juan-s-galt.8051/#post-84496
https://www.dashwhale.org/p/DASH_ads_Juan_Galt



First interview with Dash ads : http://bravenewcoin.com/news/roger-ver-on-who-gets-to-decide-how-bitcoin-moves-forward-2/

Lets see if we can get Juan funded with the next superblock ! This means voting within the next 4 days.

This looks good and a very reasonable cost. I will vote yes as soon as I get home tonight.

[qwizzie]

Open invitation to all reading this : Dash blockchain-funding, where showing initiative gets rewarded


Are you either a writer, a singer, a philosopher, a creator, a developer, a manufacturer, a researcher, a technocrat,
an intellectual or a dreamer with a dream waiting to be fulfilled and have something to offer that benefits both yourself and Dash ?



Register at our Dashtalk.org forum and create a well thought-out and detailed budget proposal topic in the General Discussion section
so you can engage the Dash community and get a feeling if what you have to offer is of interest and acceptable to the
Dash community. Engage the Dash community on either :

https://www.dashwhale.org/budget
https://dashtalk.org/forums/general-discussion.2/
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.0

Afterwards you can setup a budget proposal through our blockchain and masternode owners will vote over your budget proposal.
If your budget proposal passes, you will receive funding directly from the Dash blockchain.

      

[Shunak]

http://78.254.18.153/~pub/masternode_count.png

is it broken?

[dihydrogenmonoxide]

http://78.254.18.153/~pub/masternode_count.png

is it broken?

No, your URL is wrong: http://178.254.18.153/~pub/masternode_count.png

[Shunak]

http://78.254.18.153/~pub/masternode_count.png

is it broken?

No, your URL is wrong: http://178.254.18.153/~pub/masternode_count.png

Thank you! i copy it again

[eduffield]

March 2016 Budget Proposal

https://dashtalk.org/threads/march-2016-budget-proposal.8198/

Note: Sorry, I realize I am really late getting to this! We need better systems, this is way too much work to do manually.

[novag]

March 2016 Budget Proposal

https://dashtalk.org/threads/march-2016-budget-proposal.8198/

Note: Sorry, I realize I am really late getting to this! We need better systems, this is way too much work to do manually.

I think everything will be good and on time.

[smooth]

I actually don't think there's anything wrong with SPV or the current state of the ecosystem (minus some centralization concerns, but that's for another time)! How many transactions could the current ecosystem handle if we utilized every blockchain at once. This is going to be much easier to explain if we start using daily throughput instead of MB per block, which is a terrible metric.

I'm sort of agnostic on this but the standard argument against is that it loses on network effect both protocol-wise and in terms of unit of account. If you are a Bitcoin user and you want to pay a Litecoin user that means doing an exchange, which adds many kinds of overhead. This puts this sort of heterogenous solution at a competitive disadvantage to a single network that is able to service both customers.

Likewise if you slice the other way and say that every user is both a Bitcoin and Litecoin user (meaning you can just choose any chain to transact), again that adds (slightly different) overhead.

Certainly if you have infinite chains you can have infinite total capacity but that also creates infinite overhead.

As for "Digital Gold", he didn't coin the phrase, but he set the expectation that it works like gold:  "The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation"

Cherry picking his quotes is not really helpful. He also said:

The bandwidth might not be as prohibitive as you think.  A typical transaction would be about 400 bytes (ECC is nicely compact).  Each transaction has to be broadcast twice, so lets say 1KB per transaction.  Visa processed 37 billion transactions in FY2008, or an average of 100 million transactions per day.  That many transactions would take 100GB of bandwidth, or the size of 12 DVD or 2 HD quality movies, or about $18 worth of bandwidth at current prices.

If the network were to get that big, it would take several years, and by then, sending 2 HD movies over the Internet would probably not seem like a big deal.

and (pre-SPV)

The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale.  That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server.  The design supports letting users just be users.  The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be.  Those few nodes will be big server farms.  The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate.

and

I anticipate there will never be more than 100K nodes, probably less.  It will reach an equilibrium where it's not worth it for more nodes to join in.  The rest will be lightweight clients, which could be millions.

and

Forgot to add the good part about micropayments.  While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall.  If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time.  Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms.  Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical.  I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial.

all of which, among others, make it clear he expected Bitcoin to scale and be used for many routine transactions, including increasingly-small micropayments, by millions of users, not just settlements between gold vaults. He may have been wrong, but that was his expectation.

[Solarminer]

And maybe they learn that Bitcoin is a pain in the ass, is unreliable and complicated, and go elsewhere.

I'm not saying that the system has failed or that it will definitely fail. I'm saying that it is starting to fail right now, because there is a mismatch between the infrastructure and user-education requirements of the system and its ability to function effectively. That is absolutely the case. At best it is poor planning and deployment.

Bitcoin needs to just accept it can't grow fast enough to do everything for everyone in the entire ecosystem. Satoshi said it was suppose to be a type of Digital Gold, maybe we need to go back to that way of thinking. That's a great accomplishment... but, when you have gold, you don't move it around all of the time. Why can't Bitcoin handle the larger value transactions in the space and all of the alts can handle the smaller day-to-day transactions.

The ecosystem is already setup to scale to infinity. Everyone wins.

It could, but it is currently out of step with that vision. SPV wallets were built up (in part by Satoshi, by the way) as a way to make the system easily accessible to people making routine transactions including buying coffee and using vending machines (plus many others of course). So you have have many end users doing exactly that, having adopted Bitcoin as a transactional medium, not something limited to high powered bankers and cryptocurrency experts. Perhaps that was a bad idea, but it's too late to erase that from history.

That worked just fine until very recently, and now you still have those users trying to transact but without the tools to do so effectively. Even if one fully buys in to your Evolution concept (as one example of several), and believes that Evolution is the way that the ecosystem will scale to infinity, Evolution isn't here. Even Bitcoin wallets with the ability to effectively set fees and increase fees if needed after the fact don't exist in any widely-deployed form.

So the whole thing is quite a mess right now. In the future I have no doubt it will get better, but where we are today is not pretty. Either an earlier and more effective push should have been made to get the tools out there faster to manage block space scarcity and shift transactions off the Bitcoin main chain, or there should have been some sort of block size increase to buy the time that is needed. Having done neither is an objectively poor outcome, and therefore one must fairly rate the process of having reached this outcome as ineffective.

......
I just looked at the last few blocks for each of these and we all basically have very low usage. How big can we scale, if the Bitcoin ecosystem were inclusive rather than trying to keep everything to itself? All they have to do is add the rest of the main alternative coins to all of the main sites like  Bitstamp, Coinbase, Bitpay, etc. That would allow the free flow of money through the entire ecosystem then, we wouldn't be in this situation at all. The theoretical limitation of the current ecosystem is at least 100-1000x that of the Bitcoin blockchain at this point and it will expand much faster and deal with the exponential growth much better than they will because they're a million programmers out here just waiting for the opportunity.
.......

Bitcoin will continue to have transaction fees increase unless they have some big changes fast.  This will force all low value transactions out.  It will be something like this, where transactions lower than these amounts would be better to use fiat/credit cards. 
$1 or less will only be reasonable with a 24hr wait.
$5 or less will be reasonable with a 10-30 minute wait.

Dash should be promoting low cost transactions(under $5) with InstantX - low fee and no wait.  This seems like the perfect opportunity to take this market share.  So how do we do that?  Maybe we should ask for some budget proposals to implement these:

• Tip and donation services
• Dice and other Games.
• Online content - downloads.
  
• Web plugins that use Dash
• Purse.io with Dash

I don't think you can just add a coin to Coinbase, Bitpay, etc.  They are totally setup for Bitcoin with licensing, wallets, nodes, etc.  Adding a coin is going to require a way to trade between and adapt to the new coin.  Plus they have investors that paid based on Bitcoin functionality.  Part of the issue is so much money went into services for Bitcoin without thinking about alternatives.  Maybe I am wrong... I hope I am.

Bitcoin/Litecoin/Dogecoin(bitclones) are not fungible so they don't work with the free flowing sharing concept.  Governments will track these and could require exchanges(think Coinbase) to track them too.  Eventually these coins will be stopped/avoided/taxed.

I think the long term solution is a decentralized exchange.  OpenBazzar just released their testing release.  I see this as the future.  The long term crypto(s) will be fungible and able to adapt and grow.  I know of one that fit's the bill.

[smooth]

Bitcoin will continue to have transaction fees increase unless they have some big changes fast.  This will force all low value transactions out. 

It doesn't necessarily bother me if Bitcoin wants to force out low value transactions. If it wants to become digital gold or fedwire, that's perfectly fine. Just do a good job with the implementation and the transition. That it isn't doing so is my criticism.

Their poor execution is making life easier for other solutions like Dash, no question about that.

[eduffield]

I actually don't think there's anything wrong with SPV or the current state of the ecosystem (minus some centralization concerns, but that's for another time)! How many transactions could the current ecosystem handle if we utilized every blockchain at once. This is going to be much easier to explain if we start using daily throughput instead of MB per block, which is a terrible metric.

I'm sort of agnostic on this but the standard argument against is that it loses on network effect both protocol-wise and in terms of unit of account. If you are a Bitcoin user and you want to pay a Litecoin user that means doing an exchange, which adds many kinds of overhead. This puts this sort of heterogenous solution at a competitive disadvantage to a single network that is able to service both customers.

Likewise if you slice the other way and say that every user is both a Bitcoin and Litecoin user (meaning you can just choose any chain to transact), again that adds (slightly different) overhead.

Certainly if you have infinite chains you can have infinite total capacity but that also creates infinite overhead.

As for "Digital Gold", he didn't coin the phrase, but he set the expectation that it works like gold:  "The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation"

Cherry picking his quotes is not really helpful. He also said:

The bandwidth might not be as prohibitive as you think.  A typical transaction would be about 400 bytes (ECC is nicely compact).  Each transaction has to be broadcast twice, so lets say 1KB per transaction.  Visa processed 37 billion transactions in FY2008, or an average of 100 million transactions per day.  That many transactions would take 100GB of bandwidth, or the size of 12 DVD or 2 HD quality movies, or about $18 worth of bandwidth at current prices.

If the network were to get that big, it would take several years, and by then, sending 2 HD movies over the Internet would probably not seem like a big deal.

and (pre-SPV)

The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale.  That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server.  The design supports letting users just be users.  The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be.  Those few nodes will be big server farms.  The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate.

and

I anticipate there will never be more than 100K nodes, probably less.  It will reach an equilibrium where it's not worth it for more nodes to join in.  The rest will be lightweight clients, which could be millions.

and

Forgot to add the good part about micropayments.  While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall.  If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time.  Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms.  Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical.  I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial.

all of which, among others, make it clear he expected Bitcoin to scale and be used for many routine transactions, including increasingly-small micropayments, by millions of users, not just settlements between gold vaults. He may have been wrong, but that was his expectation.

Ha. You completely misunderstood me. I didn't quote satoshi's argument, merely how he set up Bitcoin. I'm saying it was setup to mimick the Gold industry, therefore it's core attribute is being gold-like. He most definitely did not intend it to become a merely a mechanism to transfer value like Gold, but that seems to be what it's best at.

So what about transaction volumes any way? The traits of a gold-like instrument and low transaction volumes are not mutually inclusive.

[Macrochip]

Bitcoin will continue to have transaction fees increase unless they have some big changes fast.

Status quo is the plan:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/48nnaw/the_truth_comes_out_core_devs_have_convinced/

[eduffield]

Bitcoin will continue to have transaction fees increase unless they have some big changes fast.  This will force all low value transactions out. 

It doesn't necessarily bother me if Bitcoin wants to force out low value transactions. If it wants to become digital gold or fedwire, that's perfectly fine. Just do a good job with the implementation and the transition. That it isn't doing so is my criticism.

Their poor execution is making life easier for other solutions like Dash, no question about that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/48nnaw/the_truth_comes_out_core_devs_have_convinced/d0lgsgj

[stan.distortion]

A good read, some of the figures being bounced around for future capacity requirements are way off the mark though, transactions per second for visa, etc bare no relation to future requirements. Magic internet money allows machines to pay each other for each kB of data on a connection, cuts out a middle for high frequency trading, all sorts of direct and more efficient routes and there is no upper limit on that, no matter what capacity is available, if it's cheap and efficient it'll be filled

It also looks like the trolls are getting mighty subtle in their methods judging by that thread, lots of seeds of misdirection being sown.

[moocowmoo]

[23:35] == drakoin [] has joined #dashpay
[23:35] <drakoin> hi guys
[23:35] <drakoin> is there a bootstrap file for downloading the whole dash blockchain?
[23:36] <drakoin> I still had DarkCoin, but just copying the files over did not help. The wallet insists to be "2 years and 6 weeks" behind ;-(
[23:37] <drakoin> the downloads page https://www.dash.org/downloads/
[23:38] <drakoin> needs a "download the whole blockchain as one file" link.

https://github.com/UdjinM6/dash-bootstrap

FYI : the syncing of masternodes for DS mixing & InstantX will take some time, just give it the necessary time (10 minutes my rough guess)

I'm a little late to the party, but here's part of a script I built for dashvend for downloading and extracting the latest mainnet bootstrap.dat from udjinm6's github.

Code:

git clone https://gist.github.com/moocowmoo/98045e9a653f5eddfd8d
98045e9a653f5eddfd8d/get_dash_bootstrap.sh

the code:

Code:

#!/bin/bash

# automatically download latest mainnet blockchain bootstrap file

cd ~/.dash

if [ ! -e bootstrap.dat ]; then
    wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/UdjinM6/dash-bootstrap/master/links.md -O links.md
    MAINNET_BOOTSTRAP_FILE=$(head -1 links.md | awk '{print $11}' | sed 's/.*\(http.*\.zip\).*/\1/')
    wget $MAINNET_BOOTSTRAP_FILE
    unzip ${MAINNET_BOOTSTRAP_FILE##*/}
    rm links.md bootstrap.dat*.zip
fi

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

--- DASH TECH FEATURED AT EXMO, PLEASE MOVE YOUR TRADING FROM POLONIEX! ---

https://exmo.com

An improved trading experience awaits Dash traders:

http://youtu.be/40n6joIOkVg

If you care about Dash, please move your trading to https://exmo.com. They are supporting Dash technology by enabling InstantX, and they are not a base for rival coins such as Monero on Poloniex.

Plus, the site is pretty slick!

Thanks and please bump,

Tao

Buy side up over 50 BTC. (Don't know how they got them to the exchange right now (wink, wink). Thanks to all who have switched. Please, if you have a suggestion to change or improve anything, just ask them. You'll get a response quickly.

[alex-ru]

--- DASH TECH FEATURED AT EXMO, PLEASE MOVE YOUR TRADING FROM POLONIEX! ---

https://exmo.com

An improved trading experience awaits Dash traders:

http://youtu.be/40n6joIOkVg

If you care about Dash, please move your trading to https://exmo.com. They are supporting Dash technology by enabling InstantX, and they are not a base for rival coins such as Monero on Poloniex.

Plus, the site is pretty slick!

Thanks and please bump,

Tao

Buy side up over 50 BTC. (Don't know how they got them to the exchange right now (wink, wink). Thanks to all who have switched. Please, if you have a suggestion to change or improve anything, just ask them. You'll get a response quickly.

Dash depositing takes less than 12 seconds on EXMO when you use InstantX (looks very cool in comparison with 12 confirmations that requires poloniex).
It is great for everyone who uses Exchanges as a simplified "mixer"-anonymizer through altcoins.
You can quickly deposit Dash - "launder" money through the EXMO - and can withdraw them quickly (including Fiat currencies)!

[GhostPlayer]

Dash depositing takes less than 12 seconds (looks very cool in comparison with 12 confirmations that requires poloniex).
It is great for everyone who uses Exchanges as a simplified "mixer"-anonymizer through altcoins.
You can quickly deposit Dash - "launder" money through the EXMO - and can withdraw them quickly (including Fiat currencies)!

 Neat little feature, but not the best marketing copywrite alex  

 "launder" and "exhcange =  gasoline + fire 

[Macno]

Dash depositing takes less than 12 seconds (looks very cool in comparison with 12 confirmations that requires poloniex).
It is great for everyone who uses Exchanges as a simplified "mixer"-anonymizer through altcoins.
You can quickly deposit Dash - "launder" money through the EXMO - and can withdraw them quickly (including Fiat currencies)!

 Neat little feature, but not the best marketing copywrite alex  

 "launder" and "exhcange =  gasoline + fire 

I`ve never understood that. I`ve heard people using tumblers and mixers when they want more anonymity, when they could go to some exchange and trade BTC for XY and back again. So I thought that exchanges somehow keep track of it.
How is it?