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

[Pansyfaust]

So no one cares that one pool controls 50% of the network hashrate?

Wow.

[reflexmk]

http://178.254.18.153/~pub/masternode_count.png

3021

[iCEBREAKER]

So no one cares that one pool controls 50% of the network hashrate?

Wow.

If security was a priority for Dash

-Masternode blinding would be a high priority, instead of a forgotten thing of the past

-"bad crypto" like trusted 3rd party Masternodes would be phased in favor of good crypto, like ring signatures

-the botched launch would be redone in a fair manner, so one entity is not in control of 2+ million coins

-I2P integration would be a high priority, instead of a forgotten thing of the past

Conclusion: Dash is about marketing "snake oil" to gullible rubes, not security.

[Sub-Ether]

http://178.254.18.153/~pub/masternode_count.png
3021

haha, Lebubar bet me 1 Dash we would hit 3000 within the first week of september and I bet on the second week, looks like all bets are off, it came much earlier than expected, lol  

Edit: or do we only count the actives? bet could still be on 

[reflexmk]

http://178.254.18.153/~pub/masternode_count.png

3021

Is that total or actives?

From dashninja:

Total Masternodes: 3045 = 2964 actives + 81 inactives [2792 unique IPs] (Last refresh: Wed Aug 12 2015 19:11:49)

It's a mystery to me why these numbers never match. Maybe someone more skilled can explain.

[GhostPlayer]

 To whom it may concern.

 Where is your talk about the horrible monster called "reference node" ? Why the sudden silence?

 Dash development is always under constant and strict scrutiny. Since basically forever, detractors have constantly been trying to defame Dash, desperately pointing out it's "flaws".

 Not that Dash is perfect, heck, with every problem numerous features flourished! It´s been a constant thing with Dash... always improving and getting rid of such "flaws" in order to stay true to the crypto ethos set in place by Satoshi.

 From the closed-source days, to risky-hot-Masternodes, to the dreaded monster of the reference node, and copious amounts of other examples... The development roadmap has been basically spot on since the beginning.

 Fear tactics are amongst the lowest of the low in term of efficacy when there is github to look at and a fully fledged community/forum packed with resources over at dashtalk.org.

 Where

 - Masternode blinding is on the list, certainly not forgotten.
 - There are no 3rd party Masternodes. Masternodes are fully fledged full nodes, like any Bitcoin full node, except they are incentivized by the network itself for their service.
 - The launch was not perfect, nothing was hidden, Evan wanted a relaunch but the community said no. Why don't you complain about the Satoshi mega addresses in Bitcoin? Far far faaar worse scenario.
 - I2P is certainly not forgotten. It is just not priority at the moment. There are some problems with I2P to start with, and you're absolutely welcome to dig into the code and submit the project. Heck, you could even apply for blockchain funding in v.12 and get payed for such an effort.

 Conclusion: Dash delivers. The code is there. It works. You can look at it. You can join testnet and try everything risk free.

 I fail to see any valid argument except obsessive compulsive fear tactical trolling ad nauseum

 

[Sub-Ether]

http://178.254.18.153/~pub/masternode_count.png
3021

Is that total or actives?

From dashninja:
Total Masternodes: 3045 = 2964 actives + 81 inactives [2792 unique IPs] (Last refresh: Wed Aug 12 2015 19:11:49)

It's a mystery to me why these numbers never match. Maybe someone more skilled can explain.

Not sure how the services work but might lag between updates if the services are pulling data?

Well for my wallet, masternode count =2932
someone could do a word count for 'enabled' on the command list in console of 'masternode list full' to see how many ?

[LiteMine]

Well said, GhostPlayer!

After v12 release, anyone can be a dev and get paid for introducing code changes as part of a voted-for project. I would vote for masternode blinding or I2P integration in a heartbeat, then trolls will need to put up or shut up.

But as we know, the FUD is all part of a very cynical game, so we'll probably get more of the same from the troll-factory.

[noobtrader]

So no one cares that one pool controls 50% of the network hashrate?

Wow.

i think masternode prevent any probability of double spend anyway, so no problem with that

[GhostPlayer]

So no one cares that one pool controls 50% of the network hashrate?

Wow.

i think masternode prevent any probability of double spend anyway, so no problem with that

 OMG !! I hadn't thought of that !! Woooow... if that is technically correct, Dash has eliminated one of the major problems with blockchain technology.

 Pinging our devs and will report back.

EDIT: hold on... that is possibly only true for InstantX tx'es, but will inquire anyway

[klee]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151078.0

[Pansyfaust]

So no one cares that one pool controls 50% of the network hashrate?

Wow.

i think masternode prevent any probability of double spend anyway, so no problem with that

Pretty sure double-spending is only one of the concerns of controlling 50% of the network hashrate....

[dazbarlby]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151078.0

Please vote... It never hurts and it's only 3 clicks to support DASH :-)

[poiuty]

51% HASHRATE COINMINE.PL !!!
https://www2.coinmine.pl/dash/index.php?page=statistics&action=pool

[GhostPlayer]

So no one cares that one pool controls 50% of the network hashrate?

Wow.

i think masternode prevent any probability of double spend anyway, so no problem with that

Pretty sure double-spending is only one of the concerns of controlling 50% of the network hashrate....

 Pretty much think it is. After a 51%, the only thing you can do is inject fake blocks to perform a double spend- After that, the network reconciliates and orphans them. If the attacker persists in injecting, basically he creates a continuous fork and forces the longest chain, essentially controlling the blockchain with continuous conflicting block generation.

 The rest of the network would promptly find out and red flags would fly all over the place. If the network does not reconcile naturally after a few blocks, everyone would just temporarily freeze everything leaving the attacker to mine for himself. The tremendous amount of money required to perform a 51% will make him bankrupt because all of a sudden that chain has zero value. No one except himself would accept it.

 It really only is a risk for double-spending, or premeditated and ludicrously expensive network destruction ... until a new build is released by the core devs, the rest of the network updates and life goes on.

Too much paranoia, but yeah, definitely what we don't like to see. I still dream of a p2pool network blockchain incentive, over pools.

[unununium]

To whom it may concern.

 Where is your talk about the horrible monster called "reference node" ? Why the sudden silence?

The big step of this update
 
Go dash!!!

[ddink7]

So no one cares that one pool controls 50% of the network hashrate?

Wow.

i think masternode prevent any probability of double spend anyway, so no problem with that

Pretty sure double-spending is only one of the concerns of controlling 50% of the network hashrate....

 Pretty much think it is. After a 51%, the only thing you can do is inject fake blocks to perform a double spend- After that, the network reconciliates and orphans them. If the attacker persists in injecting, basically he creates a continuous fork and forces the longest chain, essentially controlling the blockchain with continuous conflicting block generation.

 The rest of the network would promptly find out and red flags would fly all over the place. If the network does not reconcile naturally after a few blocks, everyone would just temporarily freeze everything leaving the attacker to mine for himself. The tremendous amount of money required to perform a 51% will make him bankrupt because all of a sudden that chain has zero value. No one except himself would accept it.

 It really only is a risk for double-spending, or premeditated and ludicrously expensive network destruction ... until a new build is released by the core devs, the rest of the network updates and life goes on.

Too much paranoia, but yeah, definitely what we don't like to see. I still dream of a p2pool network blockchain incentive, over pools.

Technically there is a strong chance of succeeding at double spending when your combined hashrate exceeds 40-45%. There's a chart somewhere, but I forget where.

[Pansyfaust]

Yeah, but according to Coinmine's website, they have 45GH out of a total network hashrate of 68GH-- that is well over 50%.

Malicious pool or not, this is not great, regardless of how the network would recover if a fork were to occur....

[GhostPlayer]

So no one cares that one pool controls 50% of the network hashrate?

Wow.

i think masternode prevent any probability of double spend anyway, so no problem with that

Pretty sure double-spending is only one of the concerns of controlling 50% of the network hashrate....

 Pretty much think it is. After a 51%, the only thing you can do is inject fake blocks to perform a double spend- After that, the network reconciliates and orphans them. If the attacker persists in injecting, basically he creates a continuous fork and forces the longest chain, essentially controlling the blockchain with continuous conflicting block generation.

 The rest of the network would promptly find out and red flags would fly all over the place. If the network does not reconcile naturally after a few blocks, everyone would just temporarily freeze everything leaving the attacker to mine for himself. The tremendous amount of money required to perform a 51% will make him bankrupt because all of a sudden that chain has zero value. No one except himself would accept it.

 It really only is a risk for double-spending, or premeditated and ludicrously expensive network destruction ... until a new build is released by the core devs, the rest of the network updates and life goes on.

Too much paranoia, but yeah, definitely what we don't like to see. I still dream of a p2pool network blockchain incentive, over pools.

Technically there is a strong chance of succeeding at double spending when your combined hashrate exceeds 40-45%. There's a chart somewhere, but I forget where.

 True, that's when you're statistically confident you own the majority of the hashrate. 51% is the mathematical certainty.

 Use InstantX by default and it's impossible to perform this attack  

[GhostPlayer]

Yeah, but according to Coinmine's website, they have 45GH out of a total network hashrate of 68GH-- that is well over 50%.

Malicious pool or not, this is not great, regardless of how the network would recover if a fork were to occur....

 Absolutely agree. But it's not a major problem.

 For those who where there in the early RC days (and 2 and 3 and 4 and 5 loool) when mainnet forked, it's no big deal... but boy was that freaky scary to live through!!  

 We didn't have a forum and IRC was the only hub for communication!

I remember sending 1.5k to an exchange down the wrong fork ...  crypto noob as I was, barely could read an explorer... pissed my pants, almost literally! I knew I'd get my coins back safe and sound, even still those were quite some stressful few hours...

 After that, no fork could possibly scare me.