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

[coins101]

I just downloaded windows zip file of the .23 wallet from Dashpay.io, or what I thought was Dashpay.io anyway, and when I run the dash-qt.exe in the 64 bit folder I get a message that says "Windows protected your PC." "Windows SmartScreen prevented an unrecognized app from starting. Running this app may put your PC at risk." When I click "more info" it says the publisher is unknown. I'm using windows 8.1 64-bit and have always used the 64-bit version of the wallet with no issues. My unzipped wallet is 28,113 KB, is that the same as some of you guys?

Download a tool which can create MD5 or SHA-256 hashes for files, like http://code.kliu.org/hashcheck/ or something similar.

Create the hash (it's saved in a new file)  and check against the ones provided here: https://www.dashpay.io/downloads/

If they are identical, you're fine.

If not, DON'T RUN/EXECUTE THAT FILE.

Delete it, someone has changed it.

Who did the how to videos? - Another one for you!

[Minotaur26]

I just downloaded windows zip file of the .23 wallet from Dashpay.io, or what I thought was Dashpay.io anyway, and when I run the dash-qt.exe in the 64 bit folder I get a message that says "Windows protected your PC." "Windows SmartScreen prevented an unrecognized app from starting. Running this app may put your PC at risk." When I click "more info" it says the publisher is unknown. I'm using windows 8.1 64-bit and have always used the 64-bit version of the wallet with no issues. My unzipped wallet is 28,113 KB, is that the same as some of you guys?

Download a tool which can create MD5 or SHA-256 hashes for files, like http://code.kliu.org/hashcheck/ or something similar.

Create the hash (it's saved in a new file)  and check against the ones provided here: https://www.dashpay.io/downloads/

If they are identical, you're fine.

If not, DON'T RUN/EXECUTE THAT FILE.

Delete it, someone has changed it.

Who did the how to videos? - Another one for you!

Dash - Checksum - PC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7ZZqnkrj48


Dash - Checksum - Mac

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2egLW8UfYm4


Dash - Checksum - Linux

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeLeNdWeCJQ

All credit to Buster and team

[MasterMined710]

-snip-
This is the decentralized vision that I see.  
Each project owner controls his/her own wallet with the funds.  Each project is directly paid similar to masternodes getting payments over time from block rewards, only the project owner receives and controls the funds.  Quick, simple, no 'central fund' at risk, no fund manager/s.  Each project would get paid their specific % of the block rewards they request so there isn't any funds sitting in a queue waiting accumulate before they can be sent out each month.  The funding mechanism would also be the voting mechanism.  51% yes votes gets a project in the queue, and highest yes% gets priority until the 10% cap is reached.  Projects get voted in every 3 months and each project has a set limit for 3 months of block rewards.

unless i'm missing something this seems like a much better/easier way to at least start this new system. the new/latest proposal seems very complicated but is probably the best for a long term plan as it allows more precision but at the cost of (temporary?) centralization.
i guess the main complaint about evans original plan was that a project could be over funded. i see that as a small sacrifice to preserve a more decentralized system. seems like the dev could just return extra funds to a advertising wallet or something like that. if they did not they would be cut off.
it's all pretty complicated so i could be wrong.

[coins101]

....
All credit to Buster and team

Monster Props to all!

[Sub-Ether]

....
All credit to Buster and team

Monster Props to all!

+1

Thanks.

[kadrek]

I just downloaded windows zip file of the .23 wallet from Dashpay.io, or what I thought was Dashpay.io anyway, and when I run the dash-qt.exe in the 64 bit folder I get a message that says "Windows protected your PC." "Windows SmartScreen prevented an unrecognized app from starting. Running this app may put your PC at risk." When I click "more info" it says the publisher is unknown. I'm using windows 8.1 64-bit and have always used the 64-bit version of the wallet with no issues. My unzipped wallet is 28,113 KB, is that the same as some of you guys?

Download a tool which can create MD5 or SHA-256 hashes for files, like http://code.kliu.org/hashcheck/ or something similar.

Create the hash (it's saved in a new file)  and check against the ones provided here: https://www.dashpay.io/downloads/

If they are identical, you're fine.

If not, DON'T RUN/EXECUTE THAT FILE.

Delete it, someone has changed it.

Hmmm. I deleted that one and downloaded it from dashpay.io again and created the hash. I was just supposed to right click on the zip file and clicking create checksum file right? This is what I got 

[eduffield]

I just downloaded windows zip file of the .23 wallet from Dashpay.io, or what I thought was Dashpay.io anyway, and when I run the dash-qt.exe in the 64 bit folder I get a message that says "Windows protected your PC." "Windows SmartScreen prevented an unrecognized app from starting. Running this app may put your PC at risk." When I click "more info" it says the publisher is unknown. I'm using windows 8.1 64-bit and have always used the 64-bit version of the wallet with no issues. My unzipped wallet is 28,113 KB, is that the same as some of you guys?

Download a tool which can create MD5 or SHA-256 hashes for files, like http://code.kliu.org/hashcheck/ or something similar.

Create the hash (it's saved in a new file)  and check against the ones provided here: https://www.dashpay.io/downloads/

If they are identical, you're fine.

If not, DON'T RUN/EXECUTE THAT FILE.

Delete it, someone has changed it.

Hmmm. I deleted that one and downloaded it from dashpay.io again and created the hash. I was just supposed to right click on the zip file and clicking create checksum file right? This is what I got  

It looks OK to me

>> cat dash-0.11.2.23-win.zip.DIGESTS.txt
# MD5 hash
04c2f0405d258416c161467a01c6ab4c  dash-0.11.2.23-win.zip
# SHA-256 hash
f3d7128eb8106b715daa7931f5de66e6d19cee179d5f2494542a3297fcaaad28  dash-0.11.2.23-win.zip

--

>> sha256sum dash-0.11.2.23-win.zip
f3d7128eb8106b715daa7931f5de66e6d19cee179d5f2494542a3297fcaaad28  dash-0.11.2.23-win.zip

>> md5sum dash-0.11.2.23-win.zip
04c2f0405d258416c161467a01c6ab4c  dash-0.11.2.23-win.zip


I definitely wouldn't run the files inside if they don't match...

[g4q34g4qg47ww]

It looks like kadrek is checking the hash of a "dash*****.zip.md5" file, not the actual "dash*****.zip"

[kadrek]

It looks like kadrek is checking the hash of a "dash*****.zip.md5" file, not the actual "dash*****.zip"

YES! Ugh haha, I thought I had to check the properties of the .md5 file, I didn't know I had to double click it. I wonder why I'm getting a warning now, maybe something to do with windows updates. Thanks 

[Solarminer]

-snip-
This is the decentralized vision that I see.  
Each project owner controls his/her own wallet with the funds.  Each project is directly paid similar to masternodes getting payments over time from block rewards, only the project owner receives and controls the funds.  Quick, simple, no 'central fund' at risk, no fund manager/s.  Each project would get paid their specific % of the block rewards they request so there isn't any funds sitting in a queue waiting accumulate before they can be sent out each month.  The funding mechanism would also be the voting mechanism.  51% yes votes gets a project in the queue, and highest yes% gets priority until the 10% cap is reached.  Projects get voted in every 3 months and each project has a set limit for 3 months of block rewards.

unless i'm missing something this seems like a much better/easier way to at least start this new system. the new/latest proposal seems very complicated but is probably the best for a long term plan as it allows more precision but at the cost of (temporary?) centralization.
i guess the main complaint about evans original plan was that a project could be over funded. i see that as a small sacrifice to preserve a more decentralized system. seems like the dev could just return extra funds to a advertising wallet or something like that. if they did not they would be cut off.
it's all pretty complicated so i could be wrong.

My 2 Main concerns.  A mandatory 10% tax will eventually turn into pork barrel projects along with an incentive for those getting the funding to increase that tax.  A central escrow/wallet for projects will cause problems with theft/loss/confiscation/tax.  These will be bigger problems as time goes on and it makes a lot more sense to get around these issues now.  The blockchain is forever so any mistakes that happen now could be traced back in the future.

Switching to the voting system today....This masternode voting system is bulletproof.  I moved a masternode to a different IP address to see if it was possible to manipulate extra votes.  It turns out as soon as the old node stops, that vote gets deleted.  Even trying to use the same masternode key on 2 nodes didn't fool it.  I am totally impressed!

[TanteStefana2]

I just downloaded windows zip file of the .23 wallet from Dashpay.io, or what I thought was Dashpay.io anyway, and when I run the dash-qt.exe in the 64 bit folder I get a message that says "Windows protected your PC." "Windows SmartScreen prevented an unrecognized app from starting. Running this app may put your PC at risk." When I click "more info" it says the publisher is unknown. I'm using windows 8.1 64-bit and have always used the 64-bit version of the wallet with no issues. My unzipped wallet is 28,113 KB, is that the same as some of you guys?

Download a tool which can create MD5 or SHA-256 hashes for files, like http://code.kliu.org/hashcheck/ or something similar.

Create the hash (it's saved in a new file)  and check against the ones provided here: https://www.dashpay.io/downloads/

If they are identical, you're fine.

If not, DON'T RUN/EXECUTE THAT FILE.

Delete it, someone has changed it.

I've always wanted to do this, but haven't figured out how yet.  Now I've downloaded HashCheck and I'm wondering how to use it?  Do I download the wallet file first, then run hashcheck in a cmd window just before executing it?  

Just saw the post for video tutorials, thanks!

So cool, I finally know how to do that, and I feel infinity more secure down loadng!

[olcaytu2005]

Hi community. I know it s too late but i am in

[Lebubar]

Hi community. I know it s too late but i am in

It's never too late...
Welcome on board.

[eduffield]

-snip-
This is the decentralized vision that I see.  
Each project owner controls his/her own wallet with the funds.  Each project is directly paid similar to masternodes getting payments over time from block rewards, only the project owner receives and controls the funds.  Quick, simple, no 'central fund' at risk, no fund manager/s.  Each project would get paid their specific % of the block rewards they request so there isn't any funds sitting in a queue waiting accumulate before they can be sent out each month.  The funding mechanism would also be the voting mechanism.  51% yes votes gets a project in the queue, and highest yes% gets priority until the 10% cap is reached.  Projects get voted in every 3 months and each project has a set limit for 3 months of block rewards.

unless i'm missing something this seems like a much better/easier way to at least start this new system. the new/latest proposal seems very complicated but is probably the best for a long term plan as it allows more precision but at the cost of (temporary?) centralization.
i guess the main complaint about evans original plan was that a project could be over funded. i see that as a small sacrifice to preserve a more decentralized system. seems like the dev could just return extra funds to a advertising wallet or something like that. if they did not they would be cut off.
it's all pretty complicated so i could be wrong.

My 2 Main concerns.  A mandatory 10% tax will eventually turn into pork barrel projects along with an incentive for those getting the funding to increase that tax.  A central escrow/wallet for projects will cause problems with theft/loss/confiscation/tax.  These will be bigger problems as time goes on and it makes a lot more sense to get around these issues now.  The blockchain is forever so any mistakes that happen now could be traced back in the future.

Switching to the voting system today....This masternode voting system is bulletproof.  I moved a masternode to a different IP address to see if it was possible to manipulate extra votes.  It turns out as soon as the old node stops, that vote gets deleted.  Even trying to use the same masternode key on 2 nodes didn't fool it.  I am totally impressed!

The system is designed to be highly resistant to waste. I think once we get something on testnet and show how it will work and how these issues have been resolved, people will realize it should work pretty efficiently. The starting version is going to have a very low amount of money to be used, so the priorities of that money are going to be on things that are more urgent in nature. After a few iterations we should have something humming along, that has very few downsides and can react pretty quickly to waste and eliminate it.

As for your concerns with theft/loss/confiscation/tax, the way we'd implement multi-sig is highly secure and not subject to theft or loss. I think we can also work around possible confiscation/tax issues (which we could discuss later if we end up doing it). However, I think I've come up with a solution that gives the best of both worlds, exact payments directly from the blockchain. You know the mantra around here, nothing is ever written in stone. I'll write something up tomorrow.

[bigrcanada]

-snip-
This is the decentralized vision that I see.  
Each project owner controls his/her own wallet with the funds.  Each project is directly paid similar to masternodes getting payments over time from block rewards, only the project owner receives and controls the funds.  Quick, simple, no 'central fund' at risk, no fund manager/s.  Each project would get paid their specific % of the block rewards they request so there isn't any funds sitting in a queue waiting accumulate before they can be sent out each month.  The funding mechanism would also be the voting mechanism.  51% yes votes gets a project in the queue, and highest yes% gets priority until the 10% cap is reached.  Projects get voted in every 3 months and each project has a set limit for 3 months of block rewards.

unless i'm missing something this seems like a much better/easier way to at least start this new system. the new/latest proposal seems very complicated but is probably the best for a long term plan as it allows more precision but at the cost of (temporary?) centralization.
i guess the main complaint about evans original plan was that a project could be over funded. i see that as a small sacrifice to preserve a more decentralized system. seems like the dev could just return extra funds to a advertising wallet or something like that. if they did not they would be cut off.
it's all pretty complicated so i could be wrong.

My 2 Main concerns.  A mandatory 10% tax will eventually turn into pork barrel projects along with an incentive for those getting the funding to increase that tax.  A central escrow/wallet for projects will cause problems with theft/loss/confiscation/tax.  These will be bigger problems as time goes on and it makes a lot more sense to get around these issues now.  The blockchain is forever so any mistakes that happen now could be traced back in the future.

Switching to the voting system today....This masternode voting system is bulletproof.  I moved a masternode to a different IP address to see if it was possible to manipulate extra votes.  It turns out as soon as the old node stops, that vote gets deleted.  Even trying to use the same masternode key on 2 nodes didn't fool it.  I am totally impressed!

The system is designed to be highly resistant to waste. I think once we get something on testnet and show how it will work and how these issues have been resolved, people will realize it should work pretty efficiently. The starting version is going to have a very low amount of money to be used, so the priorities of that money are going to be on things that are more urgent in nature. After a few iterations we should have something humming along, that has very few downsides and can react pretty quickly to waste and eliminate it.

As for your concerns with theft/loss/confiscation/tax, the way we'd implement multi-sig is highly secure and not subject to theft or loss. I think we can also work around possible confiscation/tax issues (which we could discuss later if we end up doing it). However, I think I've come up with a solution that gives the best of both worlds, exact payments directly from the blockchain. You know the mantra around here, nothing is ever written in stone. I'll write something up tomorrow.

Nice!  Looking forward to reading more.

[JGCMiner]

My 2 Main concerns.  A mandatory 10% tax will eventually turn into pork barrel projects along with an incentive for those getting the funding to increase that tax. 

Your post is pretty misleading. One -- calling it a "tax" is VERY debatable and two -- it will not be 10% until 4/2016.   We are starting out at a measly 1.25%.  If you are right and this does turn out to be wasteful then there is plenty of time to change things before it is a big problem.  As Evan says, there is nothing set in stone.  If something doesn't work as intended then it will be fixed.  That has been the mantra of this project since day 1 and the main reason why I still support the devs.  They are always improving.

A central escrow/wallet for projects will cause problems with theft/loss/confiscation/tax. 

Multisig in general is VERY secure and is proven in Bitcoin. Thus the temp implementation of having 7~10/15 multisig will not suffer from this problem.  As for future implementations... well we have testnet.  I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill on this theft/loss issue.   

[Mrpumperitis]

guys if i abstain from voting does it count as a no?

[Lebubar]

guys if i abstain from voting does it count as a no?

Well as I understood, as we need 51% (of total MN) of Yes, abstain is like a no in fact...

[bigrcanada]

guys if i abstain from voting does it count as a no?

I believe so....

[Mrpumperitis]

cheers guys, im really not keen on this wallet holding funds, so prob will abstain from this one, alot of problems could arise. Also does this mean when evans 2 yr period with dash ends we might have to pay him for doing work on the coin? or has evan added more time to the project?