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

[strix]

v0.10.16.16 is out! Everyone please update

- Found the issue causing "last darksend was too recent"

Mixing should be much faster now.

https://www.darkcoin.io/downloads/

Thank you yet again Evan--will do asap.

[1714987857]

1714987857

[1714987857]

1714987857

[1714987857]

1714987857

[1714987857]

1714987857

[thelonecrouton]

didnt see that ... but thats basically what wallet implementation would mean doesn't it?

Making wallets p2pool nodes themselves = ugly pain in the arse. Enabling wallets to 1-click mine via p2pool nodes = beauty, wonder and joy.

It would probably trigger the Second Coming of Satoshi, to bless Darkcoin for being true to His original vision.

[GhostPlayer]

btw. whats about the idea supporting p2p pools somehow..? masternode donation seems quite interesting..

whats evans opinion?  

As owner of three masternodes I strongly disagree with redistribution of MN income.

Let the market decide whether P2P pool will be used or not - the key is to improve the user experience and make
it accessible to total Linux newbies not to bribe the users to mine there.

 Linux newbies? bribe? say what? ... no way man. In my proposal I merely suggest that a MN owner could choose to contribute and incentivise the use of p2pool. What is wrong with that? Choice, not imposition. I would gladly do it.

 Any serious miner will do p2pool because it is way better and safer and makes the network much more robust. Running a p2pool node, yeah thats a different thing and not for anyone. But without doubt, the best gains come from running and mining from your own node.

 I would gladly give back a few % to the p2pool network. Its decentralised, impossible to 51% attack, impossible to DDoS, no account hacking, no need for logins and 2FA, no bad actors stealing, and without any central authority whatsoever. The only problem is most hobby miners out there dont understand it fully and tend to flip pools or algo's looking for better gains. And the ramp-up really does suck.

 Once you get serious about mining, there is no better experience than p2pool. Payouts just roll without effort, and are statistically better than any central pool. All in all, p2pool is the ultimate solution for ultimate network stability.

[IYFTech]

Donating to p2pool dev would be pointless - forrestv has pretty much abandoned it & no longer participates in any forum discussion. This has been ongoing for nearly a year now, and has been discussed on the p2pool thread over & over again. P2pool not only needs to be updated & worked on, but it also needs a complete re-write in a faster, multithreaded code like C/++. Python is just too slow & can only use one thread. P2pool users have been trying to find someone who will do it for many months now, but it is no small task - although ckolivas has hinted that he'll do it at a price.......but that was before he started his other projects, so it's doubtful he will have the time now.

Anyone fancy a shot at it?

[GhostPlayer]

 not sure if you're referring my proposal, but I dont mean p2pool dev, I mean direct contribution to the p2pool miners to incentivise the use of the p2pool network. DRK could essentially solve yet another of BTC biggest "problems/fears". Remember when Ghash.io crossed the the 50% mark ?  They solved it will good sense and sensibility, but imagine the opposite.

http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-mining-detente-ghash-io-51-issue/

[defunctec]

not sure if you're referring my proposal, but I dont mean p2pool dev, I mean direct contribution to the p2pool miners to incentivise the p2pool network.

Is it possible to allow p2pool miners to earn 5% more by allowing payments to masternodes at 20%?

[salmion]

Donating to p2pool dev would be pointless - forrestv has pretty much abandoned it & no longer participates in any forum discussion. This has been ongoing for nearly a year now, and has been discussed on the p2pool thread over & over again. P2pool not only needs to be updated & worked on, but it also needs a complete re-write in a faster, multithreaded code like C/++. Python is just too slow & can only use one thread. P2pool users have been trying to find someone who will do it for many months now, but it is no small task - although ckolivas has hinted that he'll do it at a price.......but that was before he started his other projects, so it's doubtful he will have the time now.

Anyone fancy a shot at it?

Better software would certainly help. If p2pool could provide measurably better results also if all solo mining was instead p2pool many tiny hashes = mighty hash.

I wonder if Dstorm who modded p2pool for dark is any good at C++?

[GhostPlayer]

not sure if you're referring my proposal, but I dont mean p2pool dev, I mean direct contribution to the p2pool miners to incentivise the p2pool network.

Is it possible to allow p2pool miners to earn 5% more by allowing payments to masternodes at 20%?

 My suggestion is an optional choice to "tip" back the p2pool network, not to redistribute mining earnings. That way incentivising the use of p2pool network. This was back in April when MN earned 10%. I'm not technically savvy to fully propose a valid solution (for example, where would the payment go? a central wallet? thats a very bad idea... ) ... but in essence, p2pool nodes could have could have a "genkey", and participant MN's could send out a % cut, much in the same way MN receive a % cut from mining rewards.

 Like I said, that would seriously work against central ASIC raping and potentially all the centralised issues of mining.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/masternode-donation-to-p2pool.326/

[IYFTech]

Better software would certainly help. If p2pool could provide measurably better results also if all solo mining was instead p2pool many tiny hashes = mighty hash.

I wonder if Dstorm who modded p2pool for dark is any good at C++?

Absolutely. Good call.

[Propulsion]

Couple of issues with P2Pool.

--Memory Leak

The current p2pool software has a memory leak that uses all the available ram until it shuts down. It's an unfortunate pain.

--Hashrate

People go where the hashrate is. There used to be a p2pool.darkcointalk.org but the hashrate just became so miniscule that it had to be shut down. Even the main mpos pool http://mining.darkcointalk.org currently operating doesn't have a hashrate comparable to the top three pools. This is probably because of the misconception that a pool with a higher hashrate pays better when in fact, it pays exactly the same. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=13002.0 (If you do mine, consider mining occasionally on the DCT pool it pays for the forums)

--Dust Payments

When mining on a p2pool, you receive payments in very small inputs over the course of a day. Unlike a traditional pool when you can specify when to withdraw your coins or set up a predetermined withdrawal amount, you have no control over a p2pool payment. After a certain amount of transactions into the wallet, the QT wallet fails to function properly and becomes unusable. (possible bug with qt itself)

--P2pool is unusable for small miners

P2pool works by using a shared chain. It requires a higher hashrate than an MPOS or NOMP pool due to it needing to submit work faster than the latter. This disqualifies cpu miners from ever submitting valid shares in the time frame required of them.  The minimum hashrate for LTC's p2pool is roughly 10MH/s. Before ASIC's I believe it was around 2.5MH/s. Unfortunately, I don't have the information to determine the minimum hashrate needed for a Darkcoin p2pool. Vertoe asked on stackoverflow but the answer was awful. http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/24557/how-to-calculate-the-minum-recommended-hashrate-for-p2pool-network

So there definitely are some drawbacks to p2pool. I think it's a great concept but impractical.

[thelonecrouton]

not sure if you're referring my proposal, but I dont mean p2pool dev, I mean direct contribution to the p2pool miners to incentivise the p2pool network.

Is it possible to allow p2pool miners to earn 5% more by allowing payments to masternodes at 20%?

If MNs are able to differentiate between p2pool nodes and centralised pools, you might as well go the whole hog and make p2pool mandatory.

Nobody loses out, everyone gains.

Centralised pool ops will bitch about it but all they have to do is run p2pool software instead, they'll still be able to take their node cut.

If the problem is that current p2pool software simply won't cope with the load, then yeah we'd need to beef it up (which would cost some money for someone like ckolivas to do it, but the gains would vastly outweigh the outlay IMO) but has that been proven or is it just conjecture?

Another objection I've heard is that 100% p2pool use would cause unacceptable blockchain bloat, but really if a supposedly decentralised currency can't cope with truly decentralised mining then we're all just wasting our time in toytown.

edit: informative post Propulsion, thanks.

[IYFTech]

Couple of issues with P2Pool.

--Memory Leak

The current p2pool software has a memory leak that uses all the available ram until it shuts down. It's an unfortunate pain.

This is absolutely not true.

--Dust Payments

When mining on a p2pool, you receive payments in very small inputs over the course of a day. Unlike a traditional pool when you can specify when to withdraw your coins or set up a predetermined withdrawal amount, you have no control over a p2pool payment. After a certain amount of transactions into the wallet, the QT wallet fails to function properly and becomes unusable. (possible bug with qt itself)

This is absolutely not true.

--P2pool is unusable for small miners

P2pool works by using a shared chain. It requires a higher hashrate than an MPOS or NOMP pool due to it needing to submit work faster than the latter. This disqualifies cpu miners from ever submitting valid shares in the time frame required of them.  The minimum hashrate for LTC's p2pool is roughly 10MH/s. Before ASIC's I believe it was around 2.5MH/s. Unfortunately, I don't have the information to determine the minimum hashrate needed for a Darkcoin p2pool. Vertoe asked on stackoverflow but the answer was awful. http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/24557/how-to-calculate-the-minum-recommended-hashrate-for-p2pool-network

So there definitely are some drawbacks to p2pool. I think it's a great concept but impractical.

This is absolutely not true.

[russianptr]

looking to buy DRK for my BTC (off-exchange trade).
PM me with your offers.

[thelonecrouton]

--Dust Payments

When mining on a p2pool, you receive payments in very small inputs over the course of a day. Unlike a traditional pool when you can specify when to withdraw your coins or set up a predetermined withdrawal amount, you have no control over a p2pool payment. After a certain amount of transactions into the wallet, the QT wallet fails to function properly and becomes unusable. (possible bug with qt itself)

This is absolutely not true.

Sadly this one is currently true, when your wallet.dat grows beyond a certain size, the whole GUI gets unusably sluggish. It wasn't always the case though, some change around mid-August, so whatever it is it's fixable.

QT problem only, deamon unaffected.

[IYFTech]

Ah, never used QT......

[Drobek]

btw. whats about the idea supporting p2p pools somehow..? masternode donation seems quite interesting..

whats evans opinion?  

As owner of three masternodes I strongly disagree with redistribution of MN income.

Let the market decide whether P2P pool will be used or not - the key is to improve the user experience and make
it accessible to total Linux newbies not to bribe the users to mine there.

 Linux newbies? bribe? say what? ... no way man. In my proposal I merely suggest that a MN owner could choose to contribute and incentivise the use of p2pool. What is wrong with that? Choice, not imposition. I would gladly do it.

 Any serious miner will do p2pool because it is way better and safer and makes the network much more robust. Running a p2pool node, yeah thats a different thing and not for anyone. But without doubt, the best gains come from running and mining from your own node.

 I would gladly give back a few % to the p2pool network. Its decentralised, impossible to 51% attack, impossible to DDoS, no account hacking, no need for logins and 2FA, no bad actors stealing, and without any central authority whatsoever. The only problem is most hobby miners out there dont understand it fully and tend to flip pools or algo's looking for better gains. And the ramp-up really does suck.

 Once you get serious about mining, there is no better experience than p2pool. Payouts just roll without effort, and are statistically better than any central pool. All in all, p2pool is the ultimate solution for ultimate network stability.

Agree with most of what you have said. P2P mining = good So when it is so attractive there is no need to give back==incentivise==subsidise it.

[ddink7]

I've really been getting into the idea of enforced p2pool mining. I think it's a fantastic idea...but I think it's also a non-starter. I just realized that everyone (including me) has been ignoring the overarching problem: network consensus.

Let's face it...the big pools make a profit off their operations. Probably a significant profit...and they are not likely to voluntarily accept a mandatory p2pool update. Without support from the very pools we are trying to replace, we won't reach high enough levels of network consensus to safely fork the network to a new p2pool-based protocol.

[thelonecrouton]

I've really been getting into the idea of enforced p2pool mining. I think it's a fantastic idea...but I think it's also a non-starter. I just realized that everyone (including me) has been ignoring the overarching problem: network consensus.

Let's face it...the big pools make a profit off their operations. Probably a significant profit...and they are not likely to voluntarily accept a mandatory p2pool update. Without support from the very pools we are trying to replace, we won't reach high enough levels of network consensus to safely fork the network to a new p2pool-based protocol.

If MNs can enforce p2pool mining via a privkey system like they validate other MNs, what the centralised pools want won't matter. If a mined block isn't signed as coming from a p2pool node, it would get orphaned.



People who run big pools should be able to make the same % running p2pool nodes instead.

[Lauda]

I've really been getting into the idea of enforced p2pool mining. I think it's a fantastic idea...but I think it's also a non-starter. I just realized that everyone (including me) has been ignoring the overarching problem: network consensus.

Let's face it...the big pools make a profit off their operations. Probably a significant profit...and they are not likely to voluntarily accept a mandatory p2pool update. Without support from the very pools we are trying to replace, we won't reach high enough levels of network consensus to safely fork the network to a new p2pool-based protocol.

One should not care about such pools. Force the update on the exchanges, that would leave them with an useless outdated fork.

[thefrog]

btw. whats about the idea supporting p2p pools somehow..? masternode donation seems quite interesting..

whats evans opinion?  

As owner of three masternodes I strongly disagree with redistribution of MN income.

Let the market decide whether P2P pool will be used or not - the key is to improve the user experience and make
it accessible to total Linux newbies not to bribe the users to mine there.

LOL, will be the same discussion as miners strongly disagreeing with MN payments
But I also think that is not the way to go.
In the end, it's miners who should be rewarded for using p2pool nodes.