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

[illodin]

Dash Price at Continued Risk of Weakness

http://www.newsbtc.com/2015/08/13/dash-price-at-continued-risk-of-weakness/

There is no hope for buyers as of writing, as the hourly RSI and MACD are in the negative zone highlighting weakness

You should write an article about the failed Monero pump as well. If the readers of newsbtc would be interested, then again, they probably aren't.

[Triptolemoose]

To all the newbees in here let me just introduce you guys (and girls) to our three long-overdue residing house pet trolls (and our strong upcoming 4th troll) who have but one single purpose
which is to derail this thread and/or discredit Dash by any means necessary even if that means blattently lying and spreading misinformation about Dash and its community :

AdamWhite  
TheDasher
iCEBREAKER
smooth

This community is however not powerless to these individuals, we have a weapon available and i urge everyone to start using it, it is called the ignore button and it
will have the following powerfull effect :


https://i.imgur.com/qyYYNmT.jpg

and trust me, that can hit harder on trolls then one can imagine ...
 

Thanks for the tip Quizzie! Just did the above and it made a big difference to the readability of the Dash thread.

[RenegadeMan]

In cryptocurrencies, adherence to published emission rates is not something which qualifies an electronic token as 'money'.

Miners complain if a crypto doesn't follow the emission rate but in the case of Dash, a couple of them only started doing so when Dash began acquiring value and that was for reasons of genuine monetary quality, nothing to do with 'emission rates'.

Gold did not follow any particular emission rate either, but it still acquired value. People just wanted to get their hands on it no matter how much anyone else had and that qualified it as 'money'.

It's important for a cryptocurrency to follow a published emission rate so that coin supply is predictable and Dash is doing that, the same as most other crypto's. The fact that it didn't do it in the first few hours is already priced into the market (by virtue of that event having occurred a year and a half ago).

Markets therefore determine what has value and 'emission rates' do not.

A true "sh*tcoin" is not one which deviates from its published emmision rate, rather it's one which claims to be 'money' and isn't according to all historical precedent.

Dash has prioritised its development effort to optimise the monetary properties of an electronic token. i.e. to create a monetary medium which is optimal by historical standards but which functions on an electronic platform without a counterparty.

Thats why it has value.

 

Hey Tok,

Welcome back (yes?)

We've missed your regular reminders of the key properties of 'money'. It's not something most crypto-nerds even think about let alone discuss. In fact it's not something even considered to be relevant or important. But that's part-and-parcel of realms full of people that are obsessed with bleeding edge tech; fundamentals of how humans have interacted for millenniums are thrown out (with the bath water) because the overarching ethos is "oh, it's all completely different now..."

I'm reminded of the madness of the dot-com bubble leading up to April 2000. Weren't those heady days! I remember reading lots of articles in tech magazines where writers who'd become HTML and e-commerce "experts" ventured their narrow-knowledge-base understanding of the world into forecasting how the stock market was being driven by phenomena never seen before in human history and measurements like P/E ratios were becoming obsolete. It facilitated a madness that to this day is still hard to fathom. Basically anyone with a publicly listed company simply had to change their name to have 'web' or anybloodynameaslongasithasadotcominit.com and their stock would soar.

I remember down here in Australia one of our oldest retailing industry stalwarts was just incredulous that on-line retailers were buying up stock of merchandise they thought was hot-to-trot over the counter at regular large chains and then reselling them online for higher prices. And mad it was. And even madder was the way people threw money at it like it didn't matter what price they were buying these stocks for, they "couldn't lose!"

But of course, like EVERYTHING that's ever been and ever will be in this human realm, there are certain rules around liquidity and 'money' and the manner in which mobs of buyers and sellers behave. And as rapidly as the Dow and particularly the Nasdaq went up, they went down even faster when people got a whiff of things not being quite as rosy as they'd been led to believe.

This sort of one-eyed besottedness and investing OCD is clearly playing out in crypto too. And, years from now when the winners and losers of "Coin Wars" are written up in the history books I think there'll be a substantial awareness of the phenomena of techno boffins building amazing things but missing fundamental aspects of human behaviour and how it relates to what's been developed.

Cryptos with invisible or hidden block chains will surely be just such an example. And when the full awareness of why an open and clearly visible public ledger is fundamental to a unit of account being accepted as 'money', there'll also be much amazement and incredulity that there were groups of peopple that actually failed to comprehend this and understand how important it is.

Interesting times...

[RenegadeMan]

In cryptocurrencies, adherence to published emission rates is not something which qualifies an electronic token as 'money'.

Miners complain if a crypto doesn't follow the emission rate but in the case of Dash, a couple of them only started doing so when Dash began acquiring value and that was for reasons of genuine monetary quality, nothing to do with 'emission rates'.

Gold did not follow any particular emission rate either, but it still acquired value. People just wanted to get their hands on it no matter how much anyone else had and that qualified it as 'money'.

It's important for a cryptocurrency to follow a published emission rate so that coin supply is predictable and Dash is doing that, the same as most other crypto's. The fact that it didn't do it in the first few hours is already priced into the market (by virtue of that event having occurred a year and a half ago).

Markets therefore determine what has value and 'emission rates' do not.

A true "sh*tcoin" is not one which deviates from its published emmision rate, rather it's one which claims to be 'money' and isn't according to all historical precedent.

Dash has prioritised its development effort to optimise the monetary properties of an electronic token. i.e. to create a monetary medium which is optimal by historical standards but which functions on an electronic platform without a counterparty.

Thats why it has value.

 

Hey Tok,

Welcome back (yes?)

We've missed your regular reminders of the key properties of 'money'. It's not something most crypto-nerds even think about let alone discuss. In fact it's not something even considered to be relevant or important. But that's part-and-parcel of realms full of people that are obsessed with bleeding edge tech; fundamentals of how humans have interacted for millenniums are thrown out (with the bath water) because the overarching ethos is "oh, it's all completely different now..."

I'm reminded of the madness of the dot-com bubble leading up to April 2000. Weren't those heady days! I remember reading lots of articles in tech magazines where writers who'd become HTML and e-commerce "experts" ventured their narrow-knowledge-base understanding of the world into forecasting how the stock market was being driven by phenomena never seen before in human history and measurements like P/E ratios were becoming obsolete. It facilitated a madness that to this day is still hard to fathom. Basically anyone with a publicly listed company simply had to change their name to have 'web' or anybloodynameaslongasithasadotcominit.com and their stock would soar.

I remember down here in Australia one of our oldest retailing industry stalwarts was just incredulous that on-line retailers were buying up stock of merchandise they thought was hot-to-trot over the counter at regular large chains and then reselling them online for higher prices. And mad it was. And even madder was the way people threw money at it like it didn't matter what price they were buying these stocks for, they "couldn't lose!"

But of course, like EVERYTHING that's ever been and ever will be in this human realm, there are certain rules around liquidity and 'money' and the manner in which mobs of buyers and sellers behave. And as rapidly as the Dow and particularly the Nasdaq went up, they went down even faster when people got a whiff of things not being quite as rosy as they'd been led to believe.

This sort of one-eyed besottedness and investing OCD is clearly playing out in crypto too. And, years from now when the winners and losers of "Coin Wars" are written up in the history books I think there'll be a substantial awareness of the phenomena of techno boffins building amazing things but missing fundamental aspects of human behaviour and how it relates to what's been developed.

Cryptos with invisible or hidden block chains will surely be just such an example. And when the full awareness of why an open and clearly visible public ledger is fundamental to a unit of account being accepted as 'money', there'll also be much amazement and incredulity that there were groups of peopple that actually failed to comprehend this and understand how important it is.

Interesting times...

Gerry Harvey has a hate for on-line retail competition.  Was it Harvey Norman?

Yep. Obviously the guy is a dinosaur and has missed the boat on building an on-line business (but he's still winning because of Sydney's insane real-estate boom and all those store sites he owns outright) but he did make sense about how ridiculous things got during the dot-com bubble.

[Pansyfaust]

Imagine the miners were as committed to the dash project? Coinmine still has over 60% of the hashrate. This could kill all credibility for a coin to consistently have over 60% of it's hashrate generating from one pool.

I recall when BTC had this same issue, the community pulled together and miners started leaving the pool responsible.

All this community seems hell bent on protecting are their own feelings and rationale when called out on instamine etc.

If I were smooth or any of the other dash haters I would simply keep calling the community out on their laggard response to a network hashrate distribution issue.

Buckle up, do something as a community, spread the word to your miner friends on dash and tell them to leave coinmine for the time being and join another pool or go p2p mining(it's so dam easy)

[tungfa]

UdjinM6 in the news + Interview (Russian, sorry)
 
http://habrahabr.ru/post/264723/
 
Tx @alex-ru + @UdjinM6

[RenegadeMan]

Yeah he is old school retail for sure.  

Looking past the retail his business, i think his business is really selling finance to customers punters to buy his goods at high market prices.

Isn't that what they say about General Motors and Co in the Sates?  It's really about selling finance and not veeee-hicles?

Yes, to a degree. He's a clever guy within the realm he knows well; traditional retail. And he's built a lucrative franchising model and (by association) commercial real-estate development business. He gets dramatic pricing and rebates from his suppliers (sort of like Walmart's buying power/dominance but on a smaller scale) so likely experiences the best margins of the big retailers. But, he's gradually losing more and more to the on-line world and retailers that are doing a better job of combining the two. Can't argue his success though (owns more race horses than I do...ha!)

[UdjinM6]

Imagine the miners were as committed to the dash project? Coinmine still has over 60% of the hashrate. This could kill all credibility for a coin to consistently have over 60% of it's hashrate generating from one pool.

I recall when BTC had this same issue, the community pulled together and miners started leaving the pool responsible.

All this community seems hell bent on protecting are their own feelings and rationale when called out on instamine etc.

If I were smooth or any of the other dash haters I would simply keep calling the community out on their laggard response to a network hashrate distribution issue.

Buckle up, do something as a community, spread the word to your miner friends on dash and tell them to leave coinmine for the time being and join another pool or go p2p mining(it's so dam easy)

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/dash/#!extraction
and it's been around 40% for about 12h already
https://dashtalk.org/threads/51-hashrate-coinmine-pl.5860/#post-63095

[Pansyfaust]

Imagine the miners were as committed to the dash project? Coinmine still has over 60% of the hashrate. This could kill all credibility for a coin to consistently have over 60% of it's hashrate generating from one pool.

I recall when BTC had this same issue, the community pulled together and miners started leaving the pool responsible.

All this community seems hell bent on protecting are their own feelings and rationale when called out on instamine etc.

If I were smooth or any of the other dash haters I would simply keep calling the community out on their laggard response to a network hashrate distribution issue.

Buckle up, do something as a community, spread the word to your miner friends on dash and tell them to leave coinmine for the time being and join another pool or go p2p mining(it's so dam easy)

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/dash/#!extraction
and it's been around 40% for about 12h already
https://dashtalk.org/threads/51-hashrate-coinmine-pl.5860/#post-63095

look at pool hashrate vs global, not only total blocks solved over a period of time.

[WastedLTC]

.....looks to be getting close!

--From https://dashninja.pl/
Masternode operators MUST be running 0.12.0.44 or greater!

[dEBRUYNE]

Imagine the miners were as committed to the dash project? Coinmine still has over 60% of the hashrate. This could kill all credibility for a coin to consistently have over 60% of it's hashrate generating from one pool.

I recall when BTC had this same issue, the community pulled together and miners started leaving the pool responsible.

All this community seems hell bent on protecting are their own feelings and rationale when called out on instamine etc.

If I were smooth or any of the other dash haters I would simply keep calling the community out on their laggard response to a network hashrate distribution issue.

Buckle up, do something as a community, spread the word to your miner friends on dash and tell them to leave coinmine for the time being and join another pool or go p2p mining(it's so dam easy)

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/dash/#!extraction
and it's been around 40% for about 12h already
https://dashtalk.org/threads/51-hashrate-coinmine-pl.5860/#post-63095

I don't know which site is reporting the right statistics, but according to this (https://www2.coinmine.pl/dash/index.php?page=statistics&action=pool) the pool is at 42.265 GH/s while the total network speed is 67.724 GH/s accordong to this (https://www.coinmine.pw/poolinfo.php?coinid=53).

42.265 / 67.724 = ~62.4%

[ddink7]

Imagine the miners were as committed to the dash project? Coinmine still has over 60% of the hashrate. This could kill all credibility for a coin to consistently have over 60% of it's hashrate generating from one pool.

I recall when BTC had this same issue, the community pulled together and miners started leaving the pool responsible.

All this community seems hell bent on protecting are their own feelings and rationale when called out on instamine etc.

If I were smooth or any of the other dash haters I would simply keep calling the community out on their laggard response to a network hashrate distribution issue.

Buckle up, do something as a community, spread the word to your miner friends on dash and tell them to leave coinmine for the time being and join another pool or go p2p mining(it's so dam easy)

Several long-time members have see this coming for a long time and have been trying to sound the alarm. Every time we try, we are completely ignored by the devs and largely ignored by the community. I finally just gave up and figured "why bother?"

The possibility of a bad actor launching a "51% attack" against any PoW coin is, to me, doomsday. People like to point out that no rational pool admin would do such a thing, and they are right, for the most part. But what happens if:

a) Pool gets hacked. If Target and God knows how many other major corporations with dekamillion dollar IT budgets can get successfully hacked, do you really thing suchpool (or whomever) can't be?
b) Pool op is irrational/delusional/destructive.
c) Pool op concludes that double spending will net him more income than the pool itself does. Look at exit scams like Evolution--the guy was making insane bank, so stealing everything and shutting down the site seemed irrational. But when he figured out he could make more in one scam than he could in five years of hard work, he took the easy route.

I've practically begged devs to explore another model. Proof of Service runs our masternode network--how come something like that can't run our blockchain? I don't know, maybe it's impossible, but nobody even bothers to respond to my threads on dashtalk, so I don't even make them anymore.

The only good news in this whole deal is that, as far as I know, InstantX transactions cannot be double spent because they are locked by the masternode network. In a worst-case scenario, that might could be used to stabilize the network until the problem could be dealt with.

P.S. A bit of reading between the lines implies that the devs are looking strongly toward the possibility of using the masternode network in their future scalability plans. With the new "sendinstantxto" (or whatever the exact command is), it's now easier to send multiple IX's at the same time. This looks promising.

[coins101]

......The only good news in this whole deal is that, as far as I know, InstantX transactions cannot be double spent because they are locked by the masternode network. In a worst-case scenario, that might could be used to stabilize the network until the problem could be dealt with.
...

I was wondering about this and posted a question a day or two ago. My view is the same as yours.

However, what if someone gains 51% of the network for, say 24 hrs, and uses that time to create a longest chain rule which they switch back and forth.  Instantx transactions would be locked on different chains  

[tungfa]

Evan D. on The Crypto Show !!

https://soundcloud.com/heryptohow/guest-host-neema-the-vedadi-with-dashs-evan-duffield-and-john-ferguson-of-safe-network

16 min 10 sec

it also replays on bitcointalkradio.com Friday night 9 pm est

Bump
 

[aleix]

Imagine the miners were as committed to the dash project? Coinmine still has over 60% of the hashrate. This could kill all credibility for a coin to consistently have over 60% of it's hashrate generating from one pool.

I recall when BTC had this same issue, the community pulled together and miners started leaving the pool responsible.

All this community seems hell bent on protecting are their own feelings and rationale when called out on instamine etc.

If I were smooth or any of the other dash haters I would simply keep calling the community out on their laggard response to a network hashrate distribution issue.

Buckle up, do something as a community, spread the word to your miner friends on dash and tell them to leave coinmine for the time being and join another pool or go p2p mining(it's so dam easy)

Several long-time members have see this coming for a long time and have been trying to sound the alarm. Every time we try, we are completely ignored by the devs and largely ignored by the community. I finally just gave up and figured "why bother?"

The possibility of a bad actor launching a "51% attack" against any PoW coin is, to me, doomsday. People like to point out that no rational pool admin would do such a thing, and they are right, for the most part. But what happens if:

a) Pool gets hacked. If Target and God knows how many other major corporations with dekamillion dollar IT budgets can get successfully hacked, do you really thing suchpool (or whomever) can't be?
b) Pool op is irrational/delusional/destructive.
c) Pool op concludes that double spending will net him more income than the pool itself does. Look at exit scams like Evolution--the guy was making insane bank, so stealing everything and shutting down the site seemed irrational. But when he figured out he could make more in one scam than he could in five years of hard work, he took the easy route.

I've practically begged devs to explore another model. Proof of Service runs our masternode network--how come something like that can't run our blockchain? I don't know, maybe it's impossible, but nobody even bothers to respond to my threads on dashtalk, so I don't even make them anymore.

The only good news in this whole deal is that, as far as I know, InstantX transactions cannot be double spent because they are locked by the masternode network. In a worst-case scenario, that might could be used to stabilize the network until the problem could be dealt with.

P.S. A bit of reading between the lines implies that the devs are looking strongly toward the possibility of using the masternode network in their future scalability plans. With the new "sendinstantxto" (or whatever the exact command is), it's now easier to send multiple IX's at the same time. This looks promising.

As I said in the thread about it in dashtalk.org I will propose the funding for a dev to fix and improve the code to p2p mining. Not only for Dash but for the entire crypto economy projects.

[WastedLTC]

My largest MN payment to date! 5.107 DASH

https://dashninja.pl/mndetails.html?mnpubkey=Xb7qiTRzJJewfby9eXGeAcYMN7RNGgPnBw

[GhostPlayer]

As I said in the thread about it in dashtalk.org I will propose the funding for a dev to fix and improve the code to p2p mining. Not only for Dash but for the entire crypto economy projects.

April 27, 2014

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

[dEBRUYNE]

......The only good news in this whole deal is that, as far as I know, InstantX transactions cannot be double spent because they are locked by the masternode network. In a worst-case scenario, that might could be used to stabilize the network until the problem could be dealt with.
...

I was wondering about this and posted a question a day or two ago. My view is the same as yours.

However, what if someone gains 51% of the network for, say 24 hrs, and uses that time to create a longest chain rule which they switch back and forth.  Instantx transactions would be locked on different chains  

I think that specific pool will still be able to invalidate an InstantX transaction. However, my knowledge of this subject is limited, so I hope someone else will chim in and give a clear answer.

[GhostPlayer]

 Community Funded Video - Update! 

https://dashtalk.org/threads/darkcoin-animated-video.2777/page-6#post-63233

[ddink7]

I realize there's no hurry on V12, but just out of curiosity...we've already blown through two release dates...is there any idea of when this might be released? Reading the test thread it looks like it could be anywhere from hours to days to a week!