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

[AzzAz]

And according to ninja it's 82.6% on new version. Is enforcement still off?

[tungfa]

And according to ninja it's 82.6% on new version. Is enforcement still off?

sais ON here
https://mjsrs.firebaseapp.com
not sure if thats right

[Fatov]

Blokchain investigating is awesome
The person who just sent 2009 dash to cryptsy https://chainz.cryptoid.info/dash/tx.dws?1963024.htm is the same person who mined thousands of coins starting on 21-01-2014 which was 3 days after launch

:/
Dump incoming?
many tx this week

[toknormal]

Dump incoming?

With only 2k Dash ?

See the market depth. Wouldn't move the price a jot.

On the other hand, a 2k buy would bump it quite significantly up the way.

[ddink7]

Dump incoming?

With only 2k Dash ?

See the market depth. Wouldn't move the price a jot.

On the other hand, a 2k buy would bump it quite significantly up the way.

This is what I love about DASH...our order book usually looks really nice =)

[coins101]

Whats the difference between Master Nodes and Lightning network nodes?

https://sites.google.com/site/bitcoinblocksizedebate/in-support-of-a-block-size-increase/lightning-won-t-be-ready-for-a-while-and-it-has-many-drawbacks

One exists, one doesn't.

Lightning is centralized by design. It's something like a centralized ledger that is capable of pushing out finalized transaction states to the real ledger at anytime.

Drawbacks:
- It screws with the UTXO set, because you can't tell where the money actually is in the system
- It's 100% centralized and could be prone to regulation. I've seen them talk about this and they say if the centralized node starts to whitelist addresses or something to that effect, they'll just start another one.
- It's incredibly complicated and will be prone to errors for the first year or two
- It's not really that useful if you're paying different people with every transaction you do. It's more useful for subscriptions or companies that are paying each other all of the time.
- There's probably more, but I lost interest 

The masternode network is decentralized by design and can pretty much do anything a centralized system can do but in a completely decentralized and stable way, including fixing all of these issues with scalability they're having in a much more elegant way.

This is very informative thanks.

+101

It is informative. But still needs some fleshing out.  More on that another day.

@evan, thanks

[TanteStefana2]

all blocks resolved ? :/

you can never resolve all blocks because there were be new transactions always

and there is difficulty to bear in mind... so what are you say is probably impossible, someone correct me if im wrong

yes ,Situation existed that all 22 million coins mined in 6 month by community.

From my understanding it is theoretically possible, BUT at this very moment I dont see super mega advanced revolutionary computing power any near from now.

If that scenario happen it will effect all cryptocurrency, BUT like Rux mentioned difficulty will help things out to once massive computing power is in production, we will have time to adjust algorithm of X11 in order to mitigate all blocks being mined fast...

I really dont see it happening anytime soon... and yes there should be solution if that scenario comes in range of risk management.

but guys, you do realize that even after 22 milion coins were mined, blocks are still ongoing, new transactions need to be confirmed, and train is moving on without mining .... miners wont be miners more, even now its not miners, more like confirmators who get paid in mined coins

im hope im not wrong

First, we're not going to get anywhere near 22 million, my precious coins are getting wiped out everywhere (if we don't fill up our proposals, what isn't used isn't ever mined and proposal fees are destroyed  it's so sad!)  And yes, we'll always have miners.  Eventually, just like with Bitcoin, the rewards from fees will be higher than from mined coins.  Technically, we'll always have mined coins, they just get smaller and smaller at 7%  a year.  My money is on 15 million tops, but that's all speculation and guess work ;P

Also, if there were ever such a huge amount of hash power directed a Dash, it would also have to outpace the difficulty adjustment.  I can't see that happening, ever.

[AlexGR]

Who can explain what happens if Technology to be built for mining and all Dash blocks are resolved in six months.

It can't happen due to the difficulty readjustment.

Even if mining power goes 1000x, difficulty will adjust itself so that blocks keep getting issued at 2.5m.

[bitcreditscc]

Whats the difference between Master Nodes and Lightning network nodes?

https://sites.google.com/site/bitcoinblocksizedebate/in-support-of-a-block-size-increase/lightning-won-t-be-ready-for-a-while-and-it-has-many-drawbacks

One exists, one doesn't.

Lightning is centralized by design. It's something like a centralized ledger that is capable of pushing out finalized transaction states to the real ledger at anytime.

Drawbacks:
- It screws with the UTXO set, because you can't tell where the money actually is in the system
- It's 100% centralized and could be prone to regulation. I've seen them talk about this and they say if the centralized node starts to whitelist addresses or something to that effect, they'll just start another one.
- It's incredibly complicated and will be prone to errors for the first year or two
- It's not really that useful if you're paying different people with every transaction you do. It's more useful for subscriptions or companies that are paying each other all of the time.
- There's probably more, but I lost interest 

The masternode network is decentralized by design and can pretty much do anything a centralized system can do but in a completely decentralized and stable way, including fixing all of these issues with scalability they're having in a much more elegant way.

This is very informative thanks.

+101

It is informative. But still needs some fleshing out.  More on that another day.

@evan, thanks

Some thoughts

Mastenodes are just like any other node on the network + collateral and an extra flag. This means that they function based on the same rules of consensus as the rest as the network. This is cryptographically secure, essentially a trustless system. Furthermore the collateral (and the reward for being a team player) acts as incentive for one to continue to work within the rules, knowing that failure to do so means getting forked out.

Lightning brings in the following

1) Centralization
2) trusting third parties
3) Incredible f*** ton of possible exploits.

In such a system, people are more motivated to find ways to create false tokens/cheat the system than they are to work by the rules. It basically throws out all the meticulous work that goes into ensuring consensus in favour of trusting someone to have your best interests  in mind. Such a system is a design failure from the word go and has no place in a world directed by cryptography and trustless systems. One wrong move and we can have a couple of billion "bitcoins" introduced into the system with no way to verify which one is authentic and which is not.

[Brama Tafel]

I must admit that DASH is my favorite cryptocurrency. I deem it as the best candidate to take over an important role in the economy in the future :-)

[Solarminer]

Thanks Sub-Ether.  Maybe there should be a check of used keys(n) during shutdown.  It adds the keypool=n+1000 in the config file to generate more keys.  If backups are done on startup and each mix uses 200 keys, this should always keep a valid backup(even up to 4 or 5 mix sessions).
EDIT: I added keypool=2000 in my config and it didn't changed my wallet size.  I had to run keypoolrefill to get the wallet to change size. 
Suggestion:  Set keypool as needed to keep 1000 free addresses.  On shutdown run keypoolrefill and backup wallet.

Thats a good idea, have a counter for the number of keys used, and when the limit is near there could be a warning to backup your wallet - useful if doing a lot of mixing.

We had a discussion about the keypool problem here: https://dashtalk.org/threads/darksend-to-seed-or-not-to-seed.4925/#post-54501

Thanks Pille.

It looks like the discussion in May wanted to incorporate a seed for mixing.  Although, this could work it would be changing a lot of how the wallet works.  Now that we have automatic backups, changing the keypool size and refilling keys should be a much simpler change.  There was a term called reserve keys in earlier versions of Bitcoin, but sounds like that is no longer used.  We basically, want 1000 reserve keys and keypoolrefiill to run before backups.  We also need this for merchants with many transactions not just for mixing.

[GhostPlayer]

 Community Funded Video Update!

 remember, there is no fixed release date, but we are counting on mid-late September.

https://dashtalk.org/threads/darkcoin-animated-video.2777/page-6#post-64424

[ddink7]

Whats the difference between Master Nodes and Lightning network nodes?

https://sites.google.com/site/bitcoinblocksizedebate/in-support-of-a-block-size-increase/lightning-won-t-be-ready-for-a-while-and-it-has-many-drawbacks

One exists, one doesn't.

Lightning is centralized by design. It's something like a centralized ledger that is capable of pushing out finalized transaction states to the real ledger at anytime.

Drawbacks:
- It screws with the UTXO set, because you can't tell where the money actually is in the system
- It's 100% centralized and could be prone to regulation. I've seen them talk about this and they say if the centralized node starts to whitelist addresses or something to that effect, they'll just start another one.
- It's incredibly complicated and will be prone to errors for the first year or two
- It's not really that useful if you're paying different people with every transaction you do. It's more useful for subscriptions or companies that are paying each other all of the time.
- There's probably more, but I lost interest 

The masternode network is decentralized by design and can pretty much do anything a centralized system can do but in a completely decentralized and stable way, including fixing all of these issues with scalability they're having in a much more elegant way.

This is very informative thanks.

Mike Hearn just published an excellent OpEd in arstechnica, which in part discusses the Lightning Network:

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/08/op-ed-why-is-bitcoin-forking/

[Minotaur26]

Whats the difference between Master Nodes and Lightning network nodes?

https://sites.google.com/site/bitcoinblocksizedebate/in-support-of-a-block-size-increase/lightning-won-t-be-ready-for-a-while-and-it-has-many-drawbacks

One exists, one doesn't.

Lightning is centralized by design. It's something like a centralized ledger that is capable of pushing out finalized transaction states to the real ledger at anytime.

Drawbacks:
- It screws with the UTXO set, because you can't tell where the money actually is in the system
- It's 100% centralized and could be prone to regulation. I've seen them talk about this and they say if the centralized node starts to whitelist addresses or something to that effect, they'll just start another one.
- It's incredibly complicated and will be prone to errors for the first year or two
- It's not really that useful if you're paying different people with every transaction you do. It's more useful for subscriptions or companies that are paying each other all of the time.
- There's probably more, but I lost interest  

The masternode network is decentralized by design and can pretty much do anything a centralized system can do but in a completely decentralized and stable way, including fixing all of these issues with scalability they're having in a much more elegant way.

This is very informative thanks.

+101

It is informative. But still needs some fleshing out.  More on that another day.

@evan, thanks

Some thoughts

Mastenodes are just like any other node on the network + collateral and an extra flag. This means that they function based on the same rules of consensus as the rest as the network. This is cryptographically secure, essentially a trustless system. Furthermore the collateral (and the reward for being a team player) acts as incentive for one to continue to work within the rules, knowing that failure to do so means getting forked out.

Lightning brings in the following

1) Centralization
2) trusting third parties
3) Incredible f*** ton of possible exploits.

In such a system, people are more motivated to find ways to create false tokens/cheat the system than they are to work by the rules. It basically throws out all the meticulous work that goes into ensuring consensus in favour of trusting someone to have your best interests  in mind. Such a system is a design failure from the word go and has no place in a world directed by cryptography and trustless systems. One wrong move and we can have a couple of billion "bitcoins" introduced into the system with no way to verify which one is authentic and which is not.

This helps me understand thank you, I think it is clear why the larger block camp does not want to go for something like this. I think in the end BTC will have to compromise for a smaller block increase to win some time and look for a better option, because none of the proposed solutions seem ideal.

It is so cool that we have a different approach that does not suffer from this.

[oaxaca]

This helps me understand thank you, I think it is clear why the larger block camp does not want to go for something like this. I think in the end BTC will have to compromise for a smaller block increase to win some time and look for a better option, because none of the proposed solutions seem ideal.

It is so cool that we have a different approach that does not suffer from this.

"Bitcoin’s current design is unlikely to be the last word in making payments. It’s reasonable to think that one day it will be outcompeted or augmented by something else."

-- Mike Hearn
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/08/op-ed-why-is-bitcoin-forking/

DASH perhaps?

[GhostPlayer]

"Bitcoin’s current design is unlikely to be the last word in making payments. It’s reasonable to think that one day it will be outcompeted or augmented by something else."

-- Mike Hearn
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/08/op-ed-why-is-bitcoin-forking/

DASH perhaps?

 What other? That is

 a) Simple to use
 b) faster than all
 c) choice of anonymity
 d) nakamoto consensus
 e) Incentivised dedicated full nodes
 f) Bitcoin codebase
 g) auto-sustained development through democratic blockchain funding
 i) ... just wet myself
 j) dedicated multidisciplinary dev and testing team
 k) I could go on, but this is more than enough for the gist of it.

[toknormal]

European (stock) markets sold into the close.

Pretty hefty sell-offs all around the world.

Only two things can be concluded from this - either it's the top, or it isn't  

The stock market is characterised by these massive periodic craterings from time to time - like it keeps wanting to snap back to its true value (determined by the growth and profitability of the underlying companies, goods and services) but then it gets kicked back into the air again by some kind of central bank jawboning, various forex devaluations and incarnations of QE.

It looks to me like the tank is starting to run dry though.



Sorry for the off-topic. Seems topical today though 

[coins101]

Whats the difference between Master Nodes and Lightning network nodes?

https://sites.google.com/site/bitcoinblocksizedebate/in-support-of-a-block-size-increase/lightning-won-t-be-ready-for-a-while-and-it-has-many-drawbacks

One exists, one doesn't.

Lightning is centralized by design. It's something like a centralized ledger that is capable of pushing out finalized transaction states to the real ledger at anytime.

Drawbacks:
- It screws with the UTXO set, because you can't tell where the money actually is in the system
- It's 100% centralized and could be prone to regulation. I've seen them talk about this and they say if the centralized node starts to whitelist addresses or something to that effect, they'll just start another one.
- It's incredibly complicated and will be prone to errors for the first year or two
- It's not really that useful if you're paying different people with every transaction you do. It's more useful for subscriptions or companies that are paying each other all of the time.
- There's probably more, but I lost interest 

The masternode network is decentralized by design and can pretty much do anything a centralized system can do but in a completely decentralized and stable way, including fixing all of these issues with scalability they're having in a much more elegant way.

This is very informative thanks.

Mike Hearn just published an excellent OpEd in arstechnica, which in part discusses the Lightning Network:

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/08/op-ed-why-is-bitcoin-forking/

Thanks....I found a link to another article on it I hadn't seen before.

https://medium.com/@octskyward/the-capacity-cliff-586d1bf7715e

[DARKHOLDER]

Dump incoming?

With only 2k Dash ?

See the market depth. Wouldn't move the price a jot.

On the other hand, a 2k buy would bump it quite significantly up the way.

Maybe he just wait when price rises and then dumped...

[coins101]

Whats the difference between Master Nodes and Lightning network nodes?

https://sites.google.com/site/bitcoinblocksizedebate/in-support-of-a-block-size-increase/lightning-won-t-be-ready-for-a-while-and-it-has-many-drawbacks

One exists, one doesn't.

Lightning is centralized by design. It's something like a centralized ledger that is capable of pushing out finalized transaction states to the real ledger at anytime.

Drawbacks:
- It screws with the UTXO set, because you can't tell where the money actually is in the system
- It's 100% centralized and could be prone to regulation. I've seen them talk about this and they say if the centralized node starts to whitelist addresses or something to that effect, they'll just start another one.
- It's incredibly complicated and will be prone to errors for the first year or two
- It's not really that useful if you're paying different people with every transaction you do. It's more useful for subscriptions or companies that are paying each other all of the time.
- There's probably more, but I lost interest  

The masternode network is decentralized by design and can pretty much do anything a centralized system can do but in a completely decentralized and stable way, including fixing all of these issues with scalability they're having in a much more elegant way.

This is very informative thanks.

Mike Hearn just published an excellent OpEd in arstechnica, which in part discusses the Lightning Network:

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/08/op-ed-why-is-bitcoin-forking/

Thanks....I found a link to another article on it I hadn't seen before.

https://medium.com/@octskyward/the-capacity-cliff-586d1bf7715e

Actually, the last link is essential reading.

It raised a question or two on some issues I hadn't considered before.  The first one relates to back-ups. Lightning network hubs: what's the fail over plan? Does data just get lost?

What happens to MNs when they are holding a transaction and one or more gets taken down? Nothing, I guess. The MNs just select another group to complete a transaction, because users funds are still in their control during mixing.

Hmm. Interesting.