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

[smoothie]

If you want to deal in facts I have presented facts backed up with links.

Care you refute anything I posted in my post above instead of playing on the tune of ethics theatre?

Your claimed facts are wrong

[...]

Interesting when chain coin appears to be using the same 11 algorithms (just in a different order). Note date of launch. About 2 months prior:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=422149.msg4592564#msg4592564

[...]

Both coins were launched on 2014-01-19 - additionally the ChainCoin dev states that the similarity is "purely coincidence".

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=422149.msg4602074#msg4602074

It uses an algorithm similar to XCoin (11 hashes, but in a different order). This is purely coincidence, I already had the client developed a couple of days ago. XCoin uses the Litecoin base afaik and ChainCoin uses a Bitcoin base and includes transaction messages.

Thanks for clarifying. My mistake.

At the same time I still don't think taking 11 other hashes and slapping them sequentially is anything of an "invention".

If so I'm curious why Evan never filed for a patent on X11 if he truly believes it is an invention.

[toknormal]

These guys redefine the term sociapath in the digital context.  it's really sad, I suppose Dash just has to put up with the sideshow clowns

LoL. You should check this thread. It's a positive feeding frenzy  

Reminded me of a bunch of stray dogs scrapping over a bone.

May they find peace in some harbour since it doesn't seem to exist in their own beloved 'privacy' coin.
 

[dihydrogenmonoxide]

Thanks for clarifying. My mistake.

At the same time I still don't think taking 11 other hashes and slapping them sequentially is anything of an "invention".

If so I'm curious why Evan never filed for a patent on X11 if he truly believes it is an invention.

You are welcome.

IMHO slapping existing things together can still be considered to be a invention - one can argue that the novelty standard for something like X11 is low though

Nevertheless there is no law forcing you to file for a patent before calling something a invention. X11 is open source anyway, so there is no point to file for a patent. Use it as is.

[generalizethis]

Maybe because he also feels an instamine is a tool of satan designed to concentrate power into the hands of a small few in the strongest positions. After that its down to who has the deepest pockets. Idk, that's my view anyway and I get the impression Evan's a bloke that thinks along the same lines.

FTFY.

[tungfa]

Fire Destroys Thai Bitcoin Mining Facility
http://www.altcointoday.com/gallery-fire-destroys-thai-bitcoin-mining-facility/
careful with those miners
 

[freedomno1]

Fire Destroys Thai Bitcoin Mining Facility
http://www.altcointoday.com/gallery-fire-destroys-thai-bitcoin-mining-facility/
careful with those miners
 

He-he alt-coin news likes to post old topics as new news in search engines
That fire was last year but it doesn't hurt to be cautious with miners

[dazbarlby]

The G-30 Group Of Central Bankers Warn They Can "No Longer Save The World"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-10-11/g-30-group-central-bankers-warn-they-can-no-longer-save-world

[cryptonewb]

I'm still not clear on this. As I posted before, how are miners forced to reject blocks? They can just mine on a different chain, no?
I just repost what I wrote about it, hopefully can give a good answer to this...

Miners don't reject the blocks, the Masternodes reject them.  Blocks can't go through without the Masternode's ok.  That's the beauty, and difference in our network.  Actually, I think that all nodes have to agree in Bitcoin et al as well

I don't think all nodes need to agree in BTC all the time. What's more: double spends can happen because nodes disagree which transaction is valid. Only after one transaction is added to a block, and when nodes update their blockchain with that new block, it is decided which transaction was valid.
So that's why I asked (and still am asking) how you can force miners to reject a certain transaction/block that contains a transaction that was locked by the masternodes. It's the miners who are writing the history. Masternodes only "lock" transactions, but I don't understand how they can enforce that lock.

Some of my previous questions about DASH are still not answered. To make it less cluttered, I rephrased them and put them in a list:

1) How are the masternode locks enforced in the network? How do you force miners to not mine a double spent transaction?
2) Is it possible that there is a competing locked transaction? If that transaction has a higher fee (double spend attempt), I guess the miners rather confirm the transaction with the higher fee...
3) Masternodes don't get fees to lock transactions? What is the incentive to do the work? How are the masternode rewards distributed? How can the network "know" that masternodes are online and doing the work in stead of just being idle to have a lower bandwidth usage?
4) I wonder how you can have so much transactions per second? (the slide shows 500-1500) I read that bitcoin is limited to 7 transactions per second. I showed that it seems impossible to lock 350 transactions simultaneously with 3500 masternodes, unless you allow overlap. But that should be avoided, because it can happen that a masternode has the power to decide which of the 2 transactions he confirms during a double spend attack.


In other news: my buy orders are filled and I now own 200 DASH When I get more confidence in the technology, I'll probably look for buying at least 800 more, so I can participate in the second tier. I also added a donation address to my profile

[cryptonewb]

DASH build some amazing tools to improve fungibility, but I wouldn't say it's in the protocol...

I suppose that depends what you define as the 'scope' of the protocol. The masternode network are simply peers of the regular network which operate in a an alternate logic mode. Thats why they're often referred to as a second 'tier', or 'tier 2'. Their function is 'protocol level' enough to be subject to the condition of mining majority for successful adoption which I think is the significant criteria in that respect.

As far as I know, it's impossible to have a cryptocoin which doesn't have public balances for addresses

Doesn't Cryptonote do that ? In Cryptonote the balances are not public.

Yup, I think they go only by transaction number?  Or am I remembering incorrectly?  It's a super confusing Blockchain explorer.  I decided above all else, that cryptonote will likely never work because the amount of information each transaction has to be run through is going to become such a large database, it will slow down so badly that it will become a slug.  I can't see how they can possibly trim any of it.  They say they can, but I have other issues I can't figure out, and I've tried.  Still, no gui, a bloated block chain and no real developers working on it makes me think that if it's ever workable, it'll be 20 years in the future.  

Being about 3/4 the age of Dash, almost 5 times the size blockchain, and far far fewer people using it (meaning not nearly as many transactions going through as Dash), their blockchain issues are massive.

Yeah, the "scope of the protocol" is subjective. In my opinion, a masternode that is hosted somewhere else isn't really part of the protocol, but I agree, it's debatable.

Never heard about cryptonote... It seems a lot has changed since I researched BTC in 2012...
It's a bold claim that they have balances which are private. Seems like impossible to do.
But if they have, can this be added to DASH? It would be very good for privacy: people can still see how much is on an address, so when you don't use darksend, people can see what the balance is on the address of your mixed coins.

You mentioned that no real development is happening on the cryptonote coin. So it doesn't seem worth my time...
Also, you say that the coin has a lot of issues (like a large database, being slow and a bloated blockchain), and there are other issues you say.
No GUI isn't really a problem for me, I am used to command line.

Should I check it out or is it a coin that promises a lot but doesn't deliver?


edit: I didn't read all the noise on the next pages, i have better things to do with my time.
All talking about the instamine... I already mentioned that I hope DASH can overcome this issue, because we really need Digital Cash.
I must admit that the fact that it's 1.9 million coins in 24 hours worries me a bit. It's a lot, but as long as this "instamine" wasn't planned, it's ok for me. I don't agree with the statement in the article that it is good for the project... I mean, bitcoin devs worked for free in the first years. When you create value and your project is interesting, I think others will join you and will help you out with developing and/or donations.
But what's done is done, I guess.

[toknormal]

It seems a bold claim....But if they have, can this be added to DASH?

Strangely enough, I'm just after posting on the contrasting approaches in one of the troll threads.

There's also coffee table material if you're in the mood.

And bedtime reading.

[cryptonewb]

It seems a bold claim....But if they have, can this be added to DASH?

Strangely enough, I'm just after posting on the contrasting approaches in one of the troll threads.

There's also coffee table material if you're in the mood.

And bedtime reading.

hmmm, so cryptonote = monero? Seems like a lot of trolling back and forth  

I've read your coffee table material, I have some questions:

The real value is not so much in its technology, but in how it deploys it to create 'perfect asset-based money'.

I think technology is important. I don't like the "fiat banking model" like Ripple.

I don't know enough about monero at the moment to fully understand why you think that it's like fiat, still need to read a lot...
But anyway, I wanted to respond to some bits from your post:

The thing is, unlike fiat, in cryptocurrency there are 2 gearwheels (or ‘slabs’) each of which operates very independently of the other but in complimentary roles. One (the public part) attracts value and engenders confidence. The other supports privacy and anonymity (the global set of private keys). If the former is to perform well as money and have a high value then you can't mess with it. It needs to have as perfect as possible monetary properties

With stealth/cryptonote the mistake that’s made in defining money is to assume that the value comes from the privacy [...] Then another one is made in assuming that in turn, privacy derives from obscurity of the asset. There's no base money in existence that I can think of where this is the case though. Monetary value derives from intrinsic monetary properties whereas privacy is an extrinsic one.

First thing I want to say that I checked the monero blockchain explorer and I see that every transaction has a coinbase transaction. For example this is the first block, you can clearly see the number of new coins (17.5922). So I don't think that the asset is obscured. Fiat has an obscured ledger, that is what makes fractional reserve banking possible... So I don't agree this "monero" is in the fiat category.
I also want to add that a lot of gold in the world is private, meaning that we don't exactly know how much gold there is in the world. Gold has an "obscure" ledger making it vulnerable for "fiat games" like we see at the COMEX. But in the end, if you can't hold you gold, you don't own it. Even if the cryptonote ledger is obscure, if you hold your coins yourself, there is no problem.

Old Fiat Banking Model vs New Crypto Asset Model
(...)
The fiat system doesn’t have this asset-like dual nature because it deploys a trusted counterparty to manage accounts, not assets. In other words it’s a bookkeeping job. As far as “the people” are concerned it is therefore all-private which is why I say Cryptonote/Stealth technology is a fiat business model since it’s trying to make crypto “all-private” as well and what that does is turn it from a base asset in it’s own right into no more than a “bookkeeping job” like banking (Albeit on a clumsy, piecemeal, “you-can-see-this-but-not-that”, censoring kind of basis).

As more evidence of this “personalised account, fiat perspective”, note that CN proponents overwhelmingly tend to use personal pronouns when alluding to blockchain addresses which is a misunderstanding of the their nature and a ‘loaded’ form of vocabulary. Even cryptonote wallets actually encourage us to revert to the old fiat way of thinking where accounts “are” synonymous with people, by making it difficult to create and use new addresses on the fly - thereby diminishing their fungibility.

I just read a few things in the annotated whitepaper you linked. I didn't had time to read it all, but the idea of having only one "personalised account" isn't bad in my opinion, as long as the address has a private balance. I already pointed out that I don't see any issues with having more privacy build into the ledger.

I need to read about this technology some more though, I don't really understand it completely.
And if it's not usable, slow or has a bloated blockchain, well, than it will not be possible for this cryptonote coin to gain any traction.

Still, I think it would be cool to have "private balances" in DASH. I don't know if this is possible? It seems like this cryptonote thing and dash have a different approach to privacy. need to research more now...

[Icebucket]

So I was going to vote and I dont know how, did not find a guide on dashtalk in the guide section,
evan uses this vote many command that i have not setup (have to figure that one out someday)

so im voting on each indivitual masternode,

this does not work: mnbudget vote-many d06d273364938cd2083d6f46264c05d38ff7b96c5705604e709f2b4a0e26e0e3 yes

Do i do this on my cold or hot wallet ?

a idiots guide would be good  

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

So I was going to vote and I dont know how, did not find a guide on dashtalk in the guide section,
evan uses this vote many command that i have not setup (have to figure that one out someday)

so im voting on each indivitual masternode,

this does not work: mnbudget vote-many d06d273364938cd2083d6f46264c05d38ff7b96c5705604e709f2b4a0e26e0e3 yes

Do i do this on my cold or hot wallet ?

a idiots guide would be good  

Hot wallet.

./dash-cli mnbudget vote ... yes/no

Vote-many requires a masternode.conf.

[Icebucket]

So I was going to vote and I dont know how, did not find a guide on dashtalk in the guide section,
evan uses this vote many command that i have not setup (have to figure that one out someday)

so im voting on each indivitual masternode,

this does not work: mnbudget vote-many d06d273364938cd2083d6f46264c05d38ff7b96c5705604e709f2b4a0e26e0e3 yes

Do i do this on my cold or hot wallet ?

a idiots guide would be good  

Hot wallet.

./dash-cli mnbudget vote ... yes/no

Vote-many requires a masternode.conf.

Thanks Tao it worked 

Does anyone know the hash for the dashwhale vote?

[ddink7]

...
I just want to say that Evolution is probably not going to be explained in detail for quite some time.  It might even start out closed sourced just like DarkSend did.
...

Ahem... That's something that would get some seriously bad feeling from some of the geeks amongst us, open source isn't just a method, its a philosophy and there's a strong "us and them" aspect to it. Darksend wasn't released closed source, you and many others wanted the source kept secret on release but Evan went with keeping things open:

So KGW is working great, the fork went off with out a hitch and now we're whale proof! So I want to move on to the next topic. A few days ago I asked if we should open source the technology or not and the vast majority of you all want it to be open source, so we're going to do that. So, that being the case earlier today in #darkcoin we were discussing the anonymous technology (An improved variant of coinjoin built into the client) and we were brain storming names for it.

Since it's going to be opensource we want to brand it, if other coins add it the users will know where it came from. So we have these ideas, we want to do a sort of poll and see what everyone likes.
...

Not meaning to be bitchy about it but it's a much more serious issue than most windows users imagine Its something the FinTec crowd don't get when they're dealing with Bitcoin either, lots are touting their special, propitiatory "secret sauces" in attempts to monopolise the market without realising they're not just cutting themselves off from a seriously smart hivemind of geeks but making targets of themselves in the bargain.

This is not true. Darksend was closed source until RC5 in August/September 2014, when the source code was released. The rest of the Darkcoin source was open, but the Darksend portion was closed until Aug/Sept 2014. I helped write the official press release about Darksend being open-sourced, so I remember it well =)

[qwizzie]

So I was going to vote and I dont know how, did not find a guide on dashtalk in the guide section,
evan uses this vote many command that i have not setup (have to figure that one out someday)

so im voting on each indivitual masternode,

this does not work: mnbudget vote-many d06d273364938cd2083d6f46264c05d38ff7b96c5705604e709f2b4a0e26e0e3 yes

Do i do this on my cold or hot wallet ?

a idiots guide would be good  

Hot wallet.

./dash-cli mnbudget vote ... yes/no

Vote-many requires a masternode.conf.

Thanks Tao it worked  

Does anyone know the hash for the dashwhale vote?

https://dashninja.pl/budgetdetails.html?budgetid=dashwhale-basic

edit : so in short, the hashes of all budget proposals can be found on Dashninja .. which is pretty 

[toknormal]

I also want to add that a lot of gold in the world is private

If you're talking about physical gold, the 'privacy' does not derive from the gold itself. It is not 'private' in any sense.

The records of ownership on the other hand are private. It may be "kept" private by hiding it in a vault, but the privacy is not a property of the monetary media.

There is a lot of confusion between 2 things: Privacy and Anonymity.

Cash is anonymous but it is not private. If someone sees a $1000 note lying on the ground, the lack of 'privacy' of that $1000 monetary media is not going to detract from its attractiveness. It might have had an owner, but the owner's name is not 'stamped' on the note (hence it IS anonymous).

On the other hand, credit money - which is a record keeping exercise - involves records which are kept out of the public view. They are therefore private but not anonymous. They are private (as distinct from 'anonymous') for 2 reasons:

[1] - it is 'backed' money and not base money, which means its only any use if a trusted party is prepared to exchange the numbers in my account ultimately for cash. This leads to the need for a counterparty in the 'trust' relationship and therefore point 2...

[2] - accounts are synonymous with persons, since they (unlike cash) have no value on their own. The credit or debit balance is only meaningful when associated with a legal entity who inherits the obligations represented in the account records

Since cryptocurrency is void of a trusted party (backer), it therefore has to adopt the cash model - not the credit model. We cannot think of blockchain addresses as 'accounts', they must be thought of as being independent of people - like gold nuggets. As such one cannot build a privacy model around obscurity, hence the need for a public fungible blockchain so that there's no conflict between transparency and anonymity.

[ddink7]

...
This is not true. Darksend was closed source until RC5 in August/September 2014, when the source code was released. The rest of the Darkcoin source was open, but the Darksend portion was closed until Aug/Sept 2014. I helped write the official press release about Darksend being open-sourced, so I remember it well =)

Apologies and thanks. I've only read as far as the alpha release of darksend and it was clearly an open source alpha release but hadn't got as far as the final release. I only got interested in mid October 2014 so have a lot of catching up to do...

No problem! While it is not unprecedented, I doubt that Evan would opt for a closed release. I think it's more likely that he will have all the code written and about ready to go to testnet before he releases the relevant whitepapers. This would preserve our competitive advantage without changing the open-source design philosophy.

The only reason Darksend was able to be close-source in the beginning was because it was optional. With the complete re-writing and re-imagining of the Dash codebase that Evolution is going to require, I don't see any way to go with a part-open/part-closed strategy and would imagine the entire thing would remain open-source from the get-go.

Remember that we are in a vastly different competitive environment these days. We are no longer competing with other anonymous coins. Monero and the rest of the cryptonote coins are dead, so there's no real concern about them copying our technology and implementing it themselves. Even if they tried, they don't have the necessary two-tier network architecture.

[TanteStefana2]

How does world population of 9 Billion by 2050 sound?

Apparently 7.3 Billion people as of 2015.

Imagine if Crypto gains a bigger slice of awareness.

Crypto would seem to be the perfect use case for developing countries that are going straight to mobile internet infrastructure rather than investing in the last mile to 'bricks and mortar'.

Remember the A-Team?  "I love it when a plan comes together?"

In a way, I suspect that nobody knew a plan could ever come together for the 3rd world, but it's such a beautiful synchronicity that almost at the same time, we had usable solar power, micro computing and cell phones.  The life in Africa will change. 

Actually, that's kind of scary.  It's already been at war with itself all over the place, caused by trade and money and which tribe gets the money, guns and power.  Ugh, but hopefully, it will also bring in concrete and steel to build reservoirs and irrigation, pipes for clean water distribution.  Much of the money earned from plantations is probably wasted on warring.  Maybe everyone has to go through that?  Europe nearly annihilated itself over a 1000 year period.  Lets hope it doesn't have to take that long for emerging societies to come to terms with each other.

In the mean time, like Andreas is known to say, lets give some of those women the ability to control money via digital crypto currency and see what happens.  He thinks they'll spend it to build infrastructure, clean water, food, safety.  I don't think men are unable or don't want to do the same, they're just constantly under attack.  Women can "disappear" and work behind scenes when nobody is paying attention.  It's kind of a gift   And it's generalized, but kinda true.

And of course, the changes in the first world, to be honest will be the biggest changes if ranked against what most people would consider impossible.  Just wait and see

[TanteStefana2]

That's what I was curious about but I've no idea where to even start when it comes to regionalising IPs. I'd imagine anyone connected was mining, all it takes is setting "setgenerate true" in the client and they'd have made a good stash. I'm mining on Dash's testnet at the mo and it made over 1000 coins overnight on a single CPU core.

As to why no windows client, because he probably couldn't be arsed, I only set up a cross compiling environment for windows binaries once and said "screw windows" after that, not so hard but I really couldn't be bothered with MS products. He was eager to get someone to release a windows binary though, lots of requests for it but any linux users answer to "how do I get this to run on windows?" is "install linux"

And so I installed linux, simple.