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

[MisfiringNeuron]

I don't like the idea of more maintenance.

I do like the idea of a Darkcoin price spike though.   

[1714668844]

1714668844

[1714668844]

1714668844

[1714668844]

1714668844

[tungfa]

ShapeShift Releases New Tool Allowing Merchants to Accept Payments in 10+ Cryptocurrencies
(DRK mentioned)
 
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113260/shapeshift-releases-new-tool-allowing-merchants-to-accept-payments-in-10-cryptocurrencies

[MisfiringNeuron]

ShapeShift Releases New Tool Allowing Merchants to Accept Payments in 10+ Cryptocurrencies
(DRK mentioned)
 
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113260/shapeshift-releases-new-tool-allowing-merchants-to-accept-payments-in-10-cryptocurrencies

Anyone know how widely adopted Shapeshift is?

[Jesse Livermore]

I don't like the idea at all.... Causes more maintenance for. Masternode owners and potential for people to lose their masternode if they can't afford to buy more Spr.  So basically it's forcing ppl to buy more, causing the price to inflate... Ha another circle jerk.  I'll keep my DRK masternodes and not have to worry about buying more unless I want more nodes.

Causing the price to inflate by requiring ownership of X amount of coins is exactly the genius idea that Evan came up with first though to keep nefarious actors like the NSA from gobbling up the vast majority of coins and completely de-anonymizing transactions. Evan's idea of a static requirement (1,000 DRK) though is too arbitrary when it could very well be a dynamic 'moving target' like this 'Mr. Spread' has come up with and might very well lead to more price appreciation than what DRK initially saw early last year.

More maintenance? Perhaps. I wouldn't count on it though. This Mr. Spread has some pretty ingenious solutions going so far. And even so, I don't think slightly more maintenance for masternode owners should be a deterrent to maximizing network anonymization.

JL

[tungfa]

ShapeShift Releases New Tool Allowing Merchants to Accept Payments in 10+ Cryptocurrencies
(DRK mentioned)
 
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113260/shapeshift-releases-new-tool-allowing-merchants-to-accept-payments-in-10-cryptocurrencies

Anyone know how widely adopted Shapeshift is?

I know a bunch of guys who used it to buy quick DRK
they had a low output but now that is up to 2.5 BTC i think

that new button is pretty cool
sure we want everybody to stay in our (or BTC or whatnot system)
but I think for none techie adopters this is a good start !

[MakingMoneyHoney]

hey cafe press
i do not understand,
you page does not accept BTC or DRK ?!?!?!
You are 'promoting' cryptos but do not accept them ?!
Strange !
Please ping me and i can help you getting set up with DRK
tx
 

Hello. Thanks for your interest.

I, personally, don't make the products. I don't have access to the products at all. CafePress has the products and they apply the designs (pictures I submit) when someone clicks the buy button on a particular item.

If you know of someone who has products, (shirts, mugs, posters, bumper stickers, etc) that will apply my designs and also take DRK, let me know.

A couple of us are trying to convince Cafe Press to accept crypto payments, but no progress so far.

[MisfiringNeuron]

I don't like the idea at all.... Causes more maintenance for. Masternode owners and potential for people to lose their masternode if they can't afford to buy more Spr.  So basically it's forcing ppl to buy more, causing the price to inflate... Ha another circle jerk.  I'll keep my DRK masternodes and not have to worry about buying more unless I want more nodes.

Causing the price to inflate by requiring ownership of X amount of coins is exactly the genius idea that Evan came up with first though to keep nefarious actors like the NSA from gobbling up the vast majority of coins and completely de-anonymizing transactions. Evan's idea of a static requirement (1,000 DRK) though is too arbitrary when it could very well be a dynamic 'moving target' like this 'Mr. Spread' has come up with and might very well lead to more price appreciation than what DRK initially saw early last year.

More maintenance? Perhaps. I wouldn't count on it though. This Mr. Spread has some pretty ingenious solutions going so far. And even so, I don't think slightly more maintenance for masternode owners should be a deterrent to maximizing network anonymization.

Do you think a "dynamic" requirement is better?  If so, why?  And do you think DRK should adopt it?

[r-ando]

A New Darkcoin Charity

I have the great pleasure of announcing the creation of a new charity: The Rava World Conservation.

I would like to thank the Darkcoin development team for making this possible by creating such a wonderful coin. I would also like to thank the people involved in areas other than core development. I see their true passion and commitment every day.

The Rava World Conservation will operate Darkcoin masternodes. The charity will assign and distribute proceeds of these nodes to every child that is born.

Y nodes will assign Darkcoin (DRK) to each child. This coin will then be placed into X nodes which serve to increase the original allocated amount over time, ensuring that each person will have a reliable and sustainable source of Darkcoin to use during the course of their life.

Z nodes will serve to protect the habitats we live in as well as the life that shares them with us.

One day every single person on Earth will own Darkcoin, that is simple math.

The white paper can be found in the details section of the website. Individual percentages are variable to allow for increased allocation to specific growth areas (classes of nodes) if this is ever deemed necessary for sustainable development.

Please let me know if you find any mistakes and I will strive to correct them promptly. If you have any questions you can email me at raphael@ravawc.org or send a letter to my attention at the charity mailing address. We welcome your support and it will be a pleasure to answer you in kind.

Thank you to all who have made this possible. I would also like to send a special thanks to the private member from the Darkcoin community who helped with the website. Sometimes the silent heroes make as great a mark as those who howl.

Let there be Darkcoin!



Raphael McEwen-Lachance
Rava World Conservation
www.ravawc.org

[toknormal]

It looks like they're going to have the number of coins required for a masternode be determined by market forces....Is this a good or bad idea?

I know it sounds a bit tribal and predictable to criticise that approach in the DRK thread - diversity is always interesting - but I can think of a few problems with it.

For a start, it doesn't make for a very attractive investment proposition if your ROI is completely undeterminable like that. Think about it - you sit and do the calculations of whether it's worth it to invest in a masternode at current prices and you decide that you'll be in 'profit' in say 6 months, so you go and purchase $1500 worth of coin or whatever it is.

But then just a week after setting up your masternode, learning Linux, pissing about with permissions, node hardening, hosting services etc, your masternode gets kicked offline because somebody came along with more money than you.

How would you feel about that ?

If wanted to design a 'cryptocoin-mechanism' for generating ill will amongst masternode holders, anxiety, mean-spiritidness and competitive rather than co-operative spirit, you couldn't do much better than with this approach. No-one would want to help each other with technical stuff because there'd such a strong financial incentive to inhibit any new masternode holders.

On the other hand, look at how the Darkcoin network has evolved - there is a huge amount of co-operation and mutual support. There is predictable ROI - you pay your money and your node's secure for as long as you've got your 1000 DRK parked. The devs tweak the network parameters, not some bunch of baying wolf, tongues dangling on the floor investors who haven't a clue how to decide what number of masternodes is healthy for the network.

I think I've just convinced myself that it's a...

bad idea

 

[Jeff8247]

I agree with you tok, but I suppose good luck to them. I guess we'll find out how it goes.

Either way I'll still buy some for now.

[MisfiringNeuron]

Thanks tok, that makes me feel a bit better

With DRK, I don't know my ROI either since the number of masternodes can keep going up.  But the more masternodes, the more the price goes up (in theory).

It'll be interesting to see how fierce the competition becomes.  Heheheh.

[OnetyOne]

Could someone please share the masternode payout/date chart?

Thank you!

Darkcoin.cm is a good source 

[toknormal]

With DRK, I don't know my ROI either since the number of masternodes can keep going up.  But the more masternodes, the more the price goes up (in theory).

At least you know you will *have* an ROI and that the work you do to maintain your masternode will not be wasted by your masternode going up in smoke any second. Also, as you've pointed out, the reduction in ROI measured in DRK is offset by the supply reduction so it's maintained in as narrow band as possible if measured against, say $USD.

There are other things you have to factor in - Darkcoin is a cryptocurrency "original", not a clone. Clones are lucky if they ever reach a tenth of the market cap of the original. It doesn't matter how many bells and whistles they stick on them, it's just a rule of economics. The market is already invested and it needs a huge incentive to de-invest and re-invest in another asset that basically does the same thing. It just doesn't happen unless there's some kind of technical catastrophe with the original.

Witness Bitcoin vs Litecoin, NXT vs NAS / NEM / Quora, Peercoin vs Blackcoin / CINNI.

I can't think of any examples where a clone has ever got anywhere near the marketcap of the original - not least one as successful and innovative on an ongoing basis as DRK.

[MyFarm]

It looks like they're going to have the number of coins required for a masternode be determined by market forces....Is this a good or bad idea?

I know it sounds a bit tribal and predictable to criticise that approach in the DRK thread - diversity is always interesting - but I can think of a few problems with it.

For a start, it doesn't make for a very attractive investment proposition if your ROI is completely undeterminable like that. Think about it - you sit and do the calculations of whether it's worth it to invest in a masternode at current prices and you decide that you'll be in 'profit' in say 6 months, so you go and purchase $1500 worth of coin or whatever it is.

But then just a week after setting up your masternode, learning Linux, pissing about with permissions, node hardening, hosting services etc, your masternode gets kicked offline because somebody came along with more money than you.

How would you feel about that ?

If wanted to design a 'cryptocoin-mechanism' for generating ill will amongst masternode holders, anxiety, mean-spiritidness and competitive rather than co-operative spirit, you couldn't do much better than with this approach. No-one would want to help each other with technical stuff because there'd such a strong financial incentive to inhibit any new masternode holders.

On the other hand, look at how the Darkcoin network has evolved - there is a huge amount of co-operation and mutual support. There is predictable ROI - you pay your money and your node's secure for as long as you've got your 1000 DRK parked. The devs tweak the network parameters, not some bunch of baying wolf, tongues dangling on the floor investors who haven't a clue how to decide what number of masternodes is healthy for the network.

You make a strong argument but I believe you are incorrect.  I own both Darkcoin and Spreadcoin and understand what you are saying about fierce competition for masternodes with Spreadcoin but I love it and here's why.

I am going to support my Spreadcoin masternode, "Competitors" like there's no tomorrow.  Why?  Because I am a huge supported or decentralization of currency and the free market. If the cost for a Spread Masternode goes from 100 to 500 over the course of the week, that's great because it means the price SPR has gone up as well because of that competition.  If it goes from 500 to 2000?  You're going to see some people selling a lot of SPR to buy a house.  And what will that do?  Reduce the price of masternodes and SPR because people will be cashing out.  The unit cost for a masternode then goes down to 600.  People buy because hey, it's a bargain.  Rinse, repeat, through natural cycles creating liquidity along the way.  At some point in the distant future, I believe this will lead to much greater long term price stability as it is a price the market has determined through quantification of countless variables.

Evan choosing 1,000 is like the Federal Reserve setting interest rates.  In my opinion, the market should decide.

[illodin]

I thought the reward you're getting depending on the number of masternodes already took care of all that.

[stealth923]

It looks like they're going to have the number of coins required for a masternode be determined by market forces....Is this a good or bad idea?

I know it sounds a bit tribal and predictable to criticise that approach in the DRK thread - diversity is always interesting - but I can think of a few problems with it.

For a start, it doesn't make for a very attractive investment proposition if your ROI is completely undeterminable like that. Think about it - you sit and do the calculations of whether it's worth it to invest in a masternode at current prices and you decide that you'll be in 'profit' in say 6 months, so you go and purchase $1500 worth of coin or whatever it is.

But then just a week after setting up your masternode, learning Linux, pissing about with permissions, node hardening, hosting services etc, your masternode gets kicked offline because somebody came along with more money than you.

How would you feel about that ?

If wanted to design a 'cryptocoin-mechanism' for generating ill will amongst masternode holders, anxiety, mean-spiritidness and competitive rather than co-operative spirit, you couldn't do much better than with this approach. No-one would want to help each other with technical stuff because there'd such a strong financial incentive to inhibit any new masternode holders.

On the other hand, look at how the Darkcoin network has evolved - there is a huge amount of co-operation and mutual support. There is predictable ROI - you pay your money and your node's secure for as long as you've got your 1000 DRK parked. The devs tweak the network parameters, not some bunch of baying wolf, tongues dangling on the floor investors who haven't a clue how to decide what number of masternodes is healthy for the network.

You make a strong argument but I believe you are incorrect.  I own both Darkcoin and Spreadcoin and understand what you are saying about fierce competition for masternodes with Spreadcoin but I love it and here's why.

I am going to support my Spreadcoin masternode, "Competitors" like there's no tomorrow.  Why?  Because I am a huge supported or decentralization of currency and the free market. If the cost for a Spread Masternode goes from 100 to 500 over the course of the week, that's great because it means the price SPR has gone up as well because of that competition.  If it goes from 500 to 2000?  You're going to see some people selling a lot of SPR to buy a house.  And what will that do?  Reduce the price of masternodes and SPR because people will be cashing out.  The unit cost for a masternode then goes down to 600.  People buy because hey, it's a bargain.  Rinse, repeat, through natural cycles creating liquidity along the way.  At some point in the distant future, I believe this will lead to much greater long term price stability as it is a price the market has determined through quantification of countless variables.

Evan choosing 1,000 is like the Federal Reserve setting interest rates.  In my opinion, the market should decide.

Coins required  for a Masternodes should not be treated as a dynamic market priced asset, like shares etc....they are a service providing component which provides core functionality and stability to the asset, that being the coin. You want decentralisation through a strong network and community(Darkcoin), not through competition and dynamic market manipulation (Spreadcoin)

Its not going to work - you sound like a die hard spread supporter when the majority of people are just investors looking to make money....you are the minority.

[toknormal]

Evan choosing 1,000 is like the Federal Reserve setting interest rates.  In my opinion, the market should decide.

LoL.

No, it's not like the "Fed setting interest rates".

It's simply a technical property of the network. There are a million other such properties that devs set - that doesn't make it decentralised because the currency as a whole is traded against other currencies. No need to make markets within markets within markets like Russian dolls.

Investors are not developers.

Markets are for determining value, not technical design specifications. In a true decentralised network, a node should be like a fungible coin - i.e. no distinction should be made between one node and another. They therefore need to be presented to the market as having a consistent value.

[pandher]

So this scam coin hasnt died yet?

[crowning]

[...]Spreadcoin [...] the number of coins required for a masternode be determined by market forces: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=715435.msg10076444#msg10076444

I think the idea itself is brilliant (hey, I LOVE self-regulating systems), but it's not a good idea for Darkcoin.

Right now, an institution (Government, some billionaire, some agency) can buy whatever they want number of Masternodes and there are still "free" Masternodes owned by you and me to secure the anonymity.

If driven by market-force, they could buy-out EVERYONE else and get 100% control.

[OnetyOne]

So this scam coin hasnt died yet?

It won't die from your overly constructive comments thats for sure.
Any reason to your DRK discomfort you would like to share or are you just chasing the dragon here?

seems like you....can't stand the light of dark?