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

[birdonthewire]

Is it futile to talk with people which only goal is to defend present situation at any cost.Any meaningful discussion with them is impossible.Everything you said is assumption,everything they said is a truth by default.People which are trolling all the time, shamelessly accusing you that you are troll,not them.

So,it is obvious that present situation is not some mistake made by DASH team,but carefully constructed situation with longterm goals in the favour of one very small circle.All changes were made to support maximum wealth centralization.And it is going further in the same direction to the final big bang.

Bring someone who knows how to fork and we will fuck these scammers in 3 seconds, whether they like it or not. ... also benefiting the authentic cheated community and intensely optimizing one of the biggest gems on the market to the point of making one of the best projects, if not the best.

For me, even worse than the economic heist of these immoral parasites is the inability for the passionate DASH community to express themselves through the project that seduced them.

[afbitcoins]

I don't block anyone. Although sometimes tempted in the case of qwizzie.

[qwizzie]

Looks like Dash is making another run for that $100, it came pretty close last night.


Source : https://cryptowat.ch/charts/BINANCE:DASH-USDT?period=12h

Price performance of crypto coins


Source : messari.io

Pretty much the same ranking can be found here : https://coinmarketcap.com/coins/
One small difference : Dash is currently above VeChain on coinmarketcap and below VeChain on messari.io

[dafdaf]

the fact that the reward is split between fixed cost operators and variable cost operators

Let's suppose that Dash Platform/Evolution attracts so many new users (thanks to its InstantSend/PrivateSend/Dapps virtues, all things you agree with) that MN operating costs hugely and quickly inflate: urgent need of faster, larger servers, protection against Ddos attacks, etc., you name it.
In your ideal model, MN are supposed to get 10 or 20% of the block reward instead of 50 or 60%. So what happens if the operating costs are wildly increasing, and the small reward part is suddenly not enough to pay those costs? After all, AFAIK, there is much uncertainty surrounding the technical specifications that will be necessary for each MN in the real world, if Platform gains some recognition and usage.

(Honest question, as I do not consider you a troll. A troll is stupid and rude, and you're neither stupid nor rude.)

[toknormal]

Let's suppose that Dash Platform/Evolution attracts so many new users (thanks to its InstantSend/PrivateSend/Dapps virtues, all things you agree with) that MN operating costs hugely and quickly inflate: urgent need of faster, larger servers, protection against Ddos attacks, etc., you name it.
In your ideal model, MN are supposed to get 10 or 20% of the block reward instead of 50 or 60%. So what happens if the operating costs are wildly increasing, and the small reward part is suddenly not enough to pay those costs? After all, AFAIK, there is much uncertainty surrounding the technical specifications that will be necessary for each MN in the real world, if Platform gains some recognition and usage.

(Honest question, as I do not consider you a troll. A troll is stupid and rude, and you're neither stupid nor rude.)

That is a good question and one that I thought about quite a lot.

Lets say price was at $3000. I doubt masternode operating costs would be significantly higher than now since it doesn't require any more hardware performance to accommodate a $2 million transaction than a $2 one. (It's miners that do all the expensive work in that department anyway).

When Dash platform comes along, a more expensive hosting configuration might be required, but the costs are still miniscule compared with mining. They are still fixed so masternodes will always be at a profit above operating costs. This is distinct from miners who need to keep their investment catching up with coin price since competition will increase as soon as there's a disparity between primary ("price" to the miner) and secondary (price to an exchange buyer) markets.

So lets say you set mining reward back at 80%. That would attract back a huge amount of competition for Dash's primary supply (since we would be twice as competitive as we are at the moment compared with other coins at the current Dash price). At the same time masternodes would still receive around $150 or more per month which is 7 times average hosting cost. That profit would only increase then with coin value but it wouldn't eat into the mining competitively nearly as much as it does now, we'd still have a DAO budget and we'd still have all out features.

The thing is, masternodes would probably look at a $150/month revenue and say it's too paultry to be incentivised from. But the point of it is it's far more scaleable than what we have at the moment. (Why ? Because it leaves the majority of the chain mined. Their cost is variable so far more of the chain gets invested in as price rises than does at the moment). We might then have a genuine chance of reaching high valuations at which nodes may become a viable business.

One of the reasons for the antagonism with my perspective on here is that when I use the work "invest" I'm referring to how much effort is invested into the chain to raise the opening price of new blocks. But other people tend to think of "invest" as meaning the secondary market - i.e. exchanges - and controlling price on there. That is too late. It's too far upstream to make a difference because the chain has already issued the coins by that time and the "accounting" for price has started, i.e. half the chain is "issued" at zero price.

[jdmcg]

So, will there be a fork that has the proposed 80/20 split in rewards for miners/masternode owners? Or is this just all talk?

Regarding trustless shared masternodes, I hope this is up next on the roadmap after the release of Dash Platform (DashPay). It seems to me this one thing would alleviate many of the concerns certain people have here. Having said that, StakeHound is a good first step and should help in the interim. Anyone know how that is progressing?

[xkcdd]

So, will there be a fork that has the proposed 80/20 split in rewards for miners/masternode owners? Or is this just all talk?

Regarding trustless shared masternodes, I hope this is up next on the roadmap after the release of Dash Platform (DashPay). It seems to me this one thing would alleviate many of the concerns certain people have here. Having said that, StakeHound is a good first step and should help in the interim. Anyone know how that is progressing?

No this is all talk, a fork to reallocate 80/20 would cause the coin to dump, it has been proven that moving rewards to the masternodes increases the value of the coin and the reverse decreases it.  This was made clear in Ryan's talk where in the early days of DASH Evan was boosting the allocation to mnodes from which Tok and AFBTC greatly benefited from as it caused the price to pump each time.  Recently, we increased the ratio once more and just the news that we were doing so boosted the price from $65 to $93 in a matter of weeks and we we are still 5 days out from the first boost. 

For your shared node, look into crowdnode.io.  I'm sorry, but shared nodes are stupid and lowering the amount needed for a mnode significantly will never happen, we don't need minnows running mnodes, those are for people with serious money to invest, because it is a high risk venture and requires a lot of your attention, the last thing DASH needs is an army of minnows not giving a poop about the DAO because their investment in it is so low.

Also, remember the purpose of a mnode it is to thwat sybil attacks and provide just enough nodes to secure the network and run the services on layer2 without so many that it would delay the propagation of TXes.  5000 nodes is about right, probably with a factor of 2 lee way either side.

[jdmcg]

For your shared node, look into crowdnode.io.  I'm sorry, but shared nodes are stupid and lowering the amount needed for a mnode significantly will never happen, we don't need minnows running mnodes, those are for people with serious money to invest, because it is a high risk venture and requires a lot of your attention, the last thing DASH needs is an army of minnows not giving a poop about the DAO because their investment in it is so low.

Perhaps trustless shared masternodes could be implemented in a way where someone could signal to the network they will run a masternode in need of collateral and anyone with DASH could delegate their share to the masternode collateral contract. Then the masternode owner and everyone who delegated some DASH could get their cut of the reward when the masternode gets paid. Also, voting could be done in a way where everyone could have a voice in proportion to how much DASH they delegated and the masternode would vote on each proposal whichever way the majority of their delegators did.

I think this would be a good solution for Dash.

[qwizzie]

For your shared node, look into crowdnode.io.  I'm sorry, but shared nodes are stupid and lowering the amount needed for a mnode significantly will never happen, we don't need minnows running mnodes, those are for people with serious money to invest, because it is a high risk venture and requires a lot of your attention, the last thing DASH needs is an army of minnows not giving a poop about the DAO because their investment in it is so low.

Perhaps trustless shared masternodes could be implemented in a way where someone could signal to the network they will run a masternode in need of collateral and anyone with DASH could delegate their share to the masternode collateral contract. Then the masternode owner and everyone who delegated some DASH could get their cut of the reward when the masternode gets paid. Also, voting could be done in a way where everyone could have a voice in proportion to how much DASH they delegated and the masternode would vote on each proposal whichever way the majority of their delegators did.

I think this would be a good solution for Dash.

Dash Electrum is also investigating shared masternodes through multisig and pre-sign of refund transactions.This will not be completely trustless of nature, but could be better then our current 'trusted' shared masternodes services.

Source : https://www.dashcentral.org/p/dash-electrum-2020jul (see comments)

[birdonthewire]

One moment, one moment, please ... first this Oscar-worthy troll carnival and then move on to the "human" debate...

... has been proven that moving rewards to the masternodes increases the value of the coin and the reverse decreases it.  This was made clear in Ryan's talk ...

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The expressiveness of these emoticons is VERY short, really.

[birdonthewire]

So, will there be a fork that has the proposed 80/20 split in rewards for miners/masternode owners? Or is this just all talk?

Regarding trustless shared masternodes, I hope this is up next on the roadmap after the release of Dash Platform (DashPay). It seems to me this one thing would alleviate many of the concerns certain people have here. Having said that, StakeHound is a good first step and should help in the interim. Anyone know how that is progressing?

They will not.

The greed of the DAO hijackers is proven ... but beyond that, Shared Mnodes are a casting vote niche that whales won't allow.

The vote exercised by Mnodes of micro-savers will never be able to pursue their particular interest ... because it can never be backed by the mass of powerful Mnodes. However ... the powerful are interested in a voting system that CAN favor their particular interest (either a specific one or the one closest to their position ... either the individual or their profile, observing trends and influencing in them in due time). Therefore ... the powerful will NEVER give up that status of influence: They do not need it and the system cannot force them. (By the way, DASH has yet to live the generalized voting scenario ... which will give the exact measure of ecosystem centralization ... and on that day, modest Mnodes owners, with few devices, can literally shake, because ALL your rights in the network can be put to vote. ALL! - the one who makes the law, create the trap - or mark its door to it - ... and an ecosystem can be fucked in many ways without charging you with the law-code -).

The whales of DASH do not need to give up voting power and will not, the context in their favor is already set. And by the way ... DASH cannot guarantee that their rights as Mnode will be maintained over time to any of those future "rich guardians" that xkcd claims to pursue to its discriminatory ecosystem (and, in terms of decisions, only one discrimination would be positive: that of ALWAYS optimizing the collective interest of the network, precisely the option that is marginalized and despised  ) . Moreover, the concentration of power to which DASH leads, favors that Mnodes with few devices see their rights constantly threatened. A possible bull run, in fact, will make it terrible for them and if it occurs in another correction and subsequent cheap re-accumulation, they will see it quickly.

Finally, it means the insistence of Ryan Taylor, F Gutierrez, etc ... that only 5000 Mnodes are recommendable without saturating the system in any way. Attention, NO mantras are planted in DASH by chance. Let the "modest" Mnodes pray that there are no nodes to spare...because perhaps they see that they have been greasing the weapon of their murderers for a long time (which, as poetic justice would be delicious for these cheats... but being practical and as an optimization of a decentralized project, it would be simply generalized destruction with which no collective wins - I mean, a fucking disaster - )

So if those do not have their security guaranteed ... imagine those of some micro-savers that those Mnodes who currently vote have already fucked blocking their rights obscenely without any shame. (which, i insist,  is throwing stones at its own roof, because that vote "condemned to seek the general interest" would be one of the few solutions to minimize the vote of large owners , the only with voting power enough to impose totally capricious and unilateral norms that no one healthy and heterogeneous collective would approve).

A greeting.

[toknormal]

it has been proven that moving rewards to the masternodes increases the value of the coin and the reverse decreases it.

I think all that was proven was something about turkeys & christmas along these lines of advanced logic:

 • "It's been proven that moving more reward towards me increases the value of Dash".
 • wasteful miners just use Dash to draw fiat from markets and increase the mining difficulty of the new supply
 • I will put the reward to good use by sticking it in my pocket and keeping it away from exchanges (until I need the cash myself)

We're now below where we were when that announcement was made on the:

  • Dash/BTC ratio (100% mined coin, no masternodes)
  • Dash/LTC ratio (100% mined coin, no masternodes)
  • Dash/ETH ratio (100% mined coin, no masternodes)

...I stopped counting there.

[birdonthewire]

........................

[birdonthewire]

No, this is all talk, a fork to remap 80/20 would cause the coin to flip, moving rewards to masternodes has been shown to increase the value of the coin and vice versa decrease it. This was made clear in Ryan's talk, where in the early days of DASH Evan was pushing the allocation to mnodes which Tok and AFBTC benefited greatly from as it caused the price to go up every time. We recently increased the ratio once more and just the news that we were doing it pushed the price from $ 65 to $ 93 in a matter of weeks and we are still 5 days from the first push.

This pamphlet correlation is an integral fallacy (and by the way ... price increases do not generate stability, much less consolidate a store of value. Whoever talks like this, simply does not understand money - something quite common in crypto - or, worse: wants whoever is paying attention to understand nothing).



For your shared node, search crowdnode.io. Sorry, but shared nodes are stupid and the amount needed for a mode will never be significantly reduced, we don't need minnows running mnodes, they are for people with a lot of money to invest, because it is a high risk company and requires a lot of your attention, The last thing DASH needs is an army of minnows that don't care about DAO because their investment in it is so low.

Crownode? I mean ... to optimize DASH ... run away from DASH! Outside they will do what "your" favorite project doesn't do for you.

So ? The DAO lied everyone who bought tokens with that perspective, because they committed to it by advertising with their own funds, media AND REFERRAL PEOPLE on DASH to convey that commitment. Even with estimates of dates (of course, unfulfilled - LOL, we are talking about DASH - ... and several still exposed TODAY in DASH strategic official communication points, to continue to confuse interestedly.

Regarding the "people with a lot of money" that YOU want for a high risk investment - according to you - in such a decentralized and transparent DASH, you should inform them that ALL their rights can be revoked by enough vote in a system with enormous risk of centralization ... and that 5000 Mnodes is possibly a few hundred voters only, don't you think? (By the way, it would not be unnecessary to explain that Duffield admitted almost 300 Mnodes ... claiming that 80% would be donated to the DAO - but that nevertheless, there is no news, years later, of that donation - ... and also warn them of that are already beginning to see "unique clicks" that trigger more than 100 votes). Anyway ... tell that to your dear rich people, tell them ... If you think that fucking that high-net-worth gang is going to be the same as scamming humble Venezuelans or Argentines who bought your tokens for more than a thousand bucks to create the "DASH accounts with rewards" that you are boycotting today, you are dreaming about ... or the deceitful censor Valenzuela must be putting his cock on LSD, glutton

Watch your diet, man.  




Also, remember the purpose of a mnode it is to thwat sybil attacks and provide just enough nodes to secure the network and run the services on layer2 without so many that it would delay the propagation of TXes.  5000 nodes is about right, probably with a factor of 2 lee way either side.

LOL   ... that mantra of the "ideal" 5000 Mnodes - that technically I do not discuss - are going to give us many afternoons of glory soon ... let's give time to time ...

And bring something juicy, do not "discover" us NOW , as a couple of days ago in a display of empathy and self-criticism, that Evolution enters January in its sixth year without mainnet after spending all that time laughing and insulting outraged followers with the intoxicants who have perpetuated such nonsense  out of all limits by censoring and camouflaging information in DASH. A little bit of solvency and intellectual honesty, please.

By the way ... your theory of the minnows, having released it in 2017 instead of "raising funds" ... now you can also put it through the asshole ... although it clearly makes the future in DASH of any holder without 1000 tokens and the position that you have silently extended with interest, with postponements and other manipulations, the real enemies of the real DASH community, which you have been burying ... in case anyone had any doubts.

You are wrong again, what a surprise. But from now on, you know ... don't bother an enemy when he's making a mistake.

[jdmcg]

it has been proven that moving rewards to the masternodes increases the value of the coin and the reverse decreases it.

I think all that was proven was something about turkeys & christmas along these lines of advanced logic:

 • "It's been proven that moving more reward towards me increases the value of Dash".
 • wasteful miners just use Dash to draw fiat from markets and increase the mining difficulty of the new supply
 • I will put the reward to good use by sticking it in my pocket and keeping it away from exchanges (until I need the cash myself)

We're now below where we were when that announcement was made on the:

  • Dash/BTC ratio (100% mined coin, no masternodes)
  • Dash/LTC ratio (100% mined coin, no masternodes)
  • Dash/ETH ratio (100% mined coin, no masternodes)

...I stopped counting there.

Yet still much higher than your $6 prediction.

Do you have a position on trustless shared masternodes? This should increase the number of masternodes and therefore decrease the rewards any one masternode owner gets. I would assume that is something that you would have to back, right?

[toknormal]

Do you have a position on trustless shared masternodes? This should increase the number of masternodes and therefore decrease the rewards any one masternode owner gets. I would assume that is something that you would have to back, right?

I'm not really a fan of trustless shared nodes. It basically means that any amount of Dash can be staked plus you're going to have collateral fragments coming and going all the time, so getting the node to stay up needs some kind of time lock on funds which means they're no longer instantly liquid like they are now. A nightmare for the protocol to manage plus it has to work out where the rewards go etc.

Trusted is better. I think this kind of pooled investment should be pushed into the financial services commercial sector where it belongs and can be properly administered according to the requirements of the local market and regulators, not in the protocol.

[xkcdd]

Do you have a position on trustless shared masternodes? This should increase the number of masternodes and therefore decrease the rewards any one masternode owner gets. I would assume that is something that you would have to back, right?

I'm not really a fan of trustless shared nodes. It basically means that any amount of Dash can be staked plus you're going to have collateral fragments coming and going all the time, so getting the node to stay up needs some kind of time lock on funds which means they're no longer instantly liquid like they are now. A nightmare for the protocol to manage plus it has to work out where the rewards go etc.

Trusted is better. I think this kind of pooled investment should be pushed into the financial services commercial sector where it belongs and can be properly administered according to the requirements of the local market and regulators, not in the protocol.

Finally something we agree on!  That minnows can risk small amounts of cash with established third parties, eg crowdnode.io and for a more substantial investment we have the trustless deterministic masternodes, currently selling for $94K USD (hurry up and grab one before you miss out!).

I do disagree with you on the time_lock feature, it is already part of the protocol and has no added overhead, but it could help DASH improve as a store of value if we were to reward mnodes that time_lock over those that remain oncall.  The idea comes from the ground breaking HEX token which has superior tokenomics to DASH in almost every way.

List a few for starters.

• 100% staked, no miner ransom paid whatsoever!
• Inflation rate (StockToFlow) of maximum 3.69%pa
• Entire inflation paid to stakers, by the following schedule, longer stakes get more, larger stakes get more, earlier stakes get more
• Penalties for early stake termination get distributed to remaining good acting stakers
• Almost 400 billion tokens in circulation solving the unit bias issue, I have a million HEX, though each is worth less than a penny, I feel tremendously wealthy

The list is by no means exhaustive, but it goes a long way to show how POW does not create value in the coin, but rather the coin's features do, it's community does, marketing does and the sentiment on the coin itself does add the value.

[Alexey45]

We watch all competitors fly into space and enjoy the stable bottom of DASH.
Woe to me why I contacted this team. Earlier I liked at least a stationary wallet, it was perfect and beautiful.
Now squalor, like the stupid team itself and all their creation. Price and demand confirm the above. Well, the price does not go up and that's it.
Buyers' hopes for a pump. But market players will bring the price down again. The price will be even lower. Wait

[toknormal]

I do disagree with you on the time_lock feature, it is already part of the protocol and has no added overhead

But how do you deal with staggered arrivals ? (like lets say you have 20 contributors to a node. They won't all turn up at the same time - you need some kind of opening and closing gate that ensures that the collateral is fully populated during a continuous period).

The idea comes from the ground breaking HEX token which has superior tokenomics to DASH in almost every way.

Hex token was launched this year and is currently headed straight to zero. "Features" can't keep a monetary token afloat - they need to actually catalyse some economic activity that's of value to the society.

This is where I depart from many crypto-nerds. They seem to believe that simply by owning a holding in something that should entitle you to a dividend. I think this is because they have legacy banking in their heads where you earn an interest on your holding (or dividend on shares). But this is moronic thinking. They don't take it further to consider where that banking interest or dividend originates. It's only available because it was earned from some additional economic work. The equity you invested in Amazon for example was spent on something which generated growth that came from selling books & PCs to customers. If it did nothing there would be no dividend. If the bank just kept our deposit in reserve instead of using it to monetise construction projects, big tech and big pharma, there would be no interest.

The crypto "staking" idea on the other hand is just a numerical mimicking of this. It takes an existing slice of cake and turns it into two slices, then 4 then 8 etc. But you've still got the same amount of cake. That's what staking is and masternode rewards are simply a version of this as long as they are not deployed in service provision that's demanded by the market. (It's not enough for us to just provide it, the market has to demand and use it).

The only place it works is the Ethereum or Tezos type situation where the tokens themselves are consumed by the blockchain as payment for computing services which generates real commercial demand, even if it's some mad "cryptokitties" thing. Or the tokens can actually backed with some kind of bond by way of a smart contract which turns them into a security.

Cake-slicing dividends = worthless because coin value = fixed marketcap/supply = ever decreasing. Mining on the other hand grows the marketcap simply by increasing competition for the primary supply. Hashrate mediates that competition, it isn't about "securing the network" technologically as much as securing it monetarily. It's the basics and it works.

[xkcdd]

But how do you deal with staggered arrivals ? (like lets say you have 20 contributors to a node. They won't all turn up at the same time - you need some kind of opening and closing gate that ensures that the collateral is fully populated during a continuous period).

I wouldn't. As I said shared MNs service on the protocol level is stupid, let crowdnode manage that.  The time_locking I was referring to was the individually run masternodes, at the time we are filling out the protx ... RPC call, there should be another parameter for the duration of the stake, 0,1,2,3 in years default 0 where if you commit to a length of time the network pays you a small bonus over and above your usual reward and thus improving DASH as a SOV.  Don't worry, this idea is hated by all including the devs and will never come to DASH.  Good news is other tokens have built in and we can diversify into them for SOV and keep DASH for the payments.