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

[georgem]

I'd drop the word "Dark" from the name. Remember that "Darkcoin" will come before the release name. Darkcoin Dark Lithium.

Yes, but Darkcoin Darkhydrogen works for me. (remember, no space between dark and hydrogen, it's DARKHYDROGEN)
Much like Darkcoin DarkVertoe works for me... but Darkcoin Vertoe is just wrong... because we are not talking about the user.

Alice: What kind of Version have you installed?
Bob: DarkHelium. And you?
Alice: I still have DarkHydrogen... shit...

Confusion would arise if we kept the Dark-prefix away. As can be easily demonstrated by using the first proposal (Versions should be named after members of the Darkcoin community)

Alice: What kind of Version have you installed?
Bob: Vertoe. And you?
Vertoe: What? I haven't done anything wrong...
Alice: I told you we shouldn't get rid of the prefix... the version is called DarkVertoe.

Darkcoin is the name of the currency, of the network, of the system itself.
Much like Mac is considered the name of the computer, but the system Versions are called MacOsX Tiger, or MacOsX Leopard.
Nobody says: do you have Mac MacOsX Leopard installed?

[1715498347]

1715498347

[1715498347]

1715498347

[1715498347]

1715498347

[BrainShutdown]

https://drk.mn/masternodes.html

looks strange to me. Is there an MN net attack attempt going on or something?
or one desperatly trying to setup an MN behind a Tor NET? see XwzmEE1cJ6HG84CgJvAt7ADmJ8W9Wh65Tq with ever changeing IP's

Total Masternodes: 1596 = 1415 actives + 181 inactives (Last refresh: Tue Oct 07 2014 19:42:34)
-> 35% unknown masternode version ...


 

balance 10.613 DRK. No chance.

Then how is he being awarded: XwzmEE1cJ6HG84CgJvAt7ADmJ8W9Wh65Tq

+1

This is far more important than release names IMHO

[qwizzie]

http://drk.poolhash.org/masternode.html

[KryptoFoo]

https://drk.mn/masternodes.html

looks strange to me. Is there an MN net attack attempt going on or something?
or one desperatly trying to setup an MN behind a Tor NET? see XwzmEE1cJ6HG84CgJvAt7ADmJ8W9Wh65Tq with ever changeing IP's

Total Masternodes: 1596 = 1415 actives + 181 inactives (Last refresh: Tue Oct 07 2014 19:42:34)
-> 35% unknown masternode version ...


 

balance 10.613 DRK. No chance.

Then how is he being awarded: XwzmEE1cJ6HG84CgJvAt7ADmJ8W9Wh65Tq

+1

This is far more important than release names IMHO

dafuq? how they get roughly 15 of last 50 masternode payments?!?

Edit: and they currently have 556 IP's associated with this address, most of those show as Active

[solo20]

what the hell someone dump a lot of darkcoins

[rickraw]

what the hell someone dump a lot of darkcoins

About 15k, probably due to above conversation...

[gadado]

isn't there a version check integrated that rejects any unknown client?

[splawik21]

LOL that was strange.... Evan have any idea?

[r-ando]

Someone mentioned Darkcoin Gold…. That has a nice ring to it. Name decisions hahaha sometimes it is the easiest things that seem the hardest.

[oblox]

LOL that was strange.... Evan have any idea?

"Current enforcement only checks that a masternode is paid 20%. Good luck tricking the next release though: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-15-testing.2611/"

[crimi]

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/drk/address.dws?XwzmEE1cJ6HG84CgJvAt7ADmJ8W9Wh65Tq.htm

Masternode payments without 1000 drkcoins?

[innergy]

http://drk.poolhash.org/masternode.html?srch&nmstr=XwzmEE1cJ6HG84CgJvAt7ADmJ8W9Wh65Tq

[gadado]

LOL that was strange.... Evan have any idea?

"Current enforcement only checks that a masternode is paid 20%. Good luck tricking the next release though: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-15-testing.2611/"

What I wonder is it just one robbing payments which is annoying but not a real problem/threat or is it maybe a more serious attack attempt.
I think it's the first but do we know?

[roede94105]

https://drk.mn/masternodes.html

looks strange to me. Is there an MN net attack attempt going on or something?
or one desperatly trying to setup an MN behind a Tor NET? see XwzmEE1cJ6HG84CgJvAt7ADmJ8W9Wh65Tq with ever changeing IP's

Total Masternodes: 1596 = 1415 actives + 181 inactives (Last refresh: Tue Oct 07 2014 19:42:34)
-> 35% unknown masternode version ...


 

balance 10.613 DRK. No chance.

Then how is he being awarded: XwzmEE1cJ6HG84CgJvAt7ADmJ8W9Wh65Tq

+1

This is far more important than release names IMHO

dafuq? how they get roughly 15 of last 50 masternode payments?!?

Edit: and they currently have 556 IP's associated with this address, most of those show as Active

So they spam IPs and the network counts them all, as if he had 556 MN active?

[oblox]

LOL that was strange.... Evan have any idea?

"Current enforcement only checks that a masternode is paid 20%. Good luck tricking the next release though: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-15-testing.2611/"

What I wonder is it just one robbing payments which is annoying but not a real problem/threat or is it maybe a more serious attack attempt.
I think it's the first but do we know?

It's probably one person but with 30% of the masternode count in fake MN's, there is less chance for the legit MN's to get paid.

[miningpros]

what the hell someone dump a lot of darkcoins

as MN payments will be increased now price will first be pressed down in order to get more MN for the whales

[rickraw]

LOL that was strange.... Evan have any idea?

"Current enforcement only checks that a masternode is paid 20%. Good luck tricking the next release though: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-15-testing.2611/"

What I wonder is it just one robbing payments which is annoying but not a real problem/threat or is it maybe a more serious attack attempt.
I think it's the first but do we know?

It's probably one person but with 30% of the masternode count in fake MN's, there is less chance for the legit MN's to get paid.

I don't get how they can be considered active masternodes in the first place, without 1000 DRK though?

[chaeplin]

Looks like side effect of open sourced.

Evan, does relay node(masternode reg relay) check 1K holding ?

 

[Jestah]

isn't there a version check integrated that rejects any unknown client?

I run a MN on my local LAN.  The cold/remote wallet is on a different computer.   In order to start my MN, I have to connect to it via the local IP address.  Since whatever checks the version number on the MN accounting server cannot connect to my local LAN, it fails to retrieve the version number.  My MN is not doing anything other than costing me electricity so I don't think kicking me off the network would be a very nice thing to do.

In reference to the above nightmare, the reason it's showing multiple times is because they must be using TOR as their "LAN".   Every time the IP updates, it gives him another spot in the vote.  I'm sure he's only running one MN.  I noticed this behavior when I changed the IP for my MN on my LAN and saw myself listed twice.....which I quickly remedied.

The simple fix is a check that there is no more than one IP per MN address.

[raze182]

10/7   1:03 pm   <evan82>    I confirm, someone found some sort of exploit. I'm patching it and will be releasing another version soon