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

[elishagh1]

Lots of threads springing up about the new BTC slowness. DASH could benefit from this, but there seems to be an awareness issue. For example:

"Altcoins recommended for payouts
Postby Steve Sokolowski » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:43 pm
The bitcoin network has maxed out its capacity and, as a result, the transaction we sent this morning to pay users remains unconfirmed after 16 hours."

https://forum.safenetwork.io/t/altcoins-recommended-for-payouts/7554

The poster goes on to list several candidate alt coins, but DASH is not among them (yet).

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cce96EmWwAAUBmg.jpg

[1714827190]

1714827190

[1714827190]

1714827190

[qwizzie]

 

[aigeezer]

Lots of threads springing up about the new BTC slowness. DASH could benefit from this, but there seems to be an awareness issue. For example:

"Altcoins recommended for payouts
Postby Steve Sokolowski » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:43 pm
The bitcoin network has maxed out its capacity and, as a result, the transaction we sent this morning to pay users remains unconfirmed after 16 hours."

https://forum.safenetwork.io/t/altcoins-recommended-for-payouts/7554

The poster goes on to list several candidate alt coins, but DASH is not among them (yet).

That's a very compelling list in your jpg, elishagh1.

I had not thought through the implications of my safenetwork example (above) - it was just an arbitrary choice to show reaction to the new BTC slowdown. I say "new" because at first glance BTC version 0.12.0 seemed to kick speed issues down the road a bit. For example, I found I could run a full node again without losing all other Net activity. It turns out the speed/confirmation issues have become really serious despite that. Anyway, on looking more closely at the safenetwork situation (maidsafecoin), the plot thickens.

Splawik21 posted at their forum a suggestion to use DASH in response to their urging users to use alts because BTC had become too slow.

His post received "This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden." I don't know if they perceived it as spam or if this is some kind of enemy action from a competitor, but it got me thinking about the underlying issue which is that maidsafecoin (as I understand it) piggybacks on the BTC blockchain in a very literal way, and so I imagine that a serious BTC slowdown becomes a serious maidsafecoin slowdown. Since DASH potentially could resolve this elegantly (see elishagh1's jpg) then I'm wondering if there is interest in some kind of dev-level cooperation between DASH and the safenetwork communities.

I am out of my depth on the tech issues involved, and am just sensing a possible opportunity. I have no ego investment in the notion - if it's a dumb idea, feel free to tell me.

Oh, I hold DASH but do not hold maidsafecoin. I thought about it but decided their ecosystem was still "too alpha" for my purposes.

One last thing, the "temporarily hidden" status of splawik21's post can be over-ridden by clicking on a View Hidden Content button. What human being could resist the temptation?     

[AlexGR]

Bitcoin is not what it was if you can't move it. Time to move on. Cryptoworld gonna change.

Yep. It really looks like it's finally happening. We are going to start getting the overflow of crypto traffic. Here's why:

- Blocks are already full (take into account the 700kb mempool limitation for some of the miners)
- Block halving is coming, which will cause lower throughput in blocks, somewhere between 400kb and 760kb*
- Segwit - 2x throughput
- Compressed signature scheme - 2x-5x throughput (I forget the name of this ?)
- 2MB blocksize - 2x throughput  
- 4MB blocksize - 2x throughput
- 8MB blocksize - 2x throughput

All combined we'll have 40x throughput onchain and infinite off-chain, however the tx volume historically has growth 2-3x per year. Can they keep up until lightning is online with wallets? At 2x growth we'll need 8MB throughput at the end of three years (2018). At 3x growth we'll need 27MB throughput... Also consider the fact that hardforks without a governance method take about 1 year to deploy. It's going to be a hard couple years for the Bitcoin project it looks like.

Where's the rest going to go? Fiat?

We also have a governance and budgeting scheme. We're golden to build something much more scalable and decentralized than Bitcoin. I've never been so optimistic than now about our place in the ecosystem. There's only a small percentage that even understands that we've solved all of this already and the information is getting out.

If you build it... they will come.. right?

* If blocks are full and 10% of the miners turn off at the halving, it actually causes theoretical limitation of blocks to be about 10% less each. That creates a backlog, which will cause problems for the network, making it harder to transact on. Thus, that volume will leave the ecosystem. This is why it's so important to have a good difficulty algorithm backing your currency. We are immune to this.

BTC historic trends are highly affected by spammy operations with satoshi dice, faucets, idiots spamming the network for the lolz, etc. That's why even now, when "blocks are full", and a congestion problem is said to exist, the fees are still very low at 4-5-6 cents per tx for high priority and are extremely low (1-2 cents) for low priority txs that can be included in a few hours or within the day.

That's why both Andersen and Hearn's predictions about the coming catastrophy (Hearn expected bitcoin to "crash") never materialized. They did a quantity analysis but left out the quality data. So the only thing that happened, even at stress-test levels (which were more serious than what we have right now), was that people bypassed the queue with a few cents more in fees. And bitcoin became more resilient with 0.12 and the mempool limits. That's the reality of it despite the negativity flowing around.

Now, from our perspective, DASH's effective size per tx is higher due to mixing overhead - so we need to be able to scale multiple times more than BTC in terms of tx/s and max throughput to even get at the same level (for mixed txs that is). So it'll be a challenge for sure.

[qwizzie]

welcome back ATH

[novag]

Dash i think can really grow on 50-125%

[qwizzie]

an interesting poll from Juan S Galt : https://dashtalk.org/threads/budget-proposal-peter-todd-to-review-instant-x.8186/

edit : that should make certain trolls either very nervous or very happy or both 

[qwizzie]

Dash i think can really grow on 50-125%

I have personally seen it rise from 0.0047 (aug 2014) to current price (92.7%)
but then again i have also seen it fall from 0.026 (may 2014) to current price (-65%)

It is a very volatile cryptocurrency in nature, but i do feel with all the work that has been put into Dash,
the community it managed to form and the ambitious roadmap it has set out for itself, we will indeed
see some very nice grow moments in the future.

We went from hype to reality and are now setting up the building blocks towards building a better future for Dash.  
It will just take time and effort and energy, which is why so many of us here think of Dash as a longterm investment.
  


 

 

[drakoin]

[23:35] == drakoin [] has joined #dashpay
[23:35] <drakoin> hi guys
[23:35] <drakoin> is there a bootstrap file for downloading the whole dash blockchain?
[23:36] <drakoin> I still had DarkCoin, but just copying the files over did not help. The wallet insists to be "2 years and 6 weeks" behind ;-(
[23:37] <drakoin> the downloads page https://www.dash.org/downloads/
[23:38] <drakoin> needs a "download the whole blockchain as one file" link.

[qwizzie]

[23:35] == drakoin [] has joined #dashpay
[23:35] <drakoin> hi guys
[23:35] <drakoin> is there a bootstrap file for downloading the whole dash blockchain?
[23:36] <drakoin> I still had DarkCoin, but just copying the files over did not help. The wallet insists to be "2 years and 6 weeks" behind ;-(
[23:37] <drakoin> the downloads page https://www.dash.org/downloads/
[23:38] <drakoin> needs a "download the whole blockchain as one file" link.

https://github.com/UdjinM6/dash-bootstrap

FYI : the syncing of masternodes for DS mixing & InstantX will take some time, just give it the necessary time (10 minutes my rough guess)

[drakoin]

[23:35] == drakoin [] has joined #dashpay
[23:35] <drakoin> hi guys
[23:35] <drakoin> is there a bootstrap file for downloading the whole dash blockchain?
[23:36] <drakoin> I still had DarkCoin, but just copying the files over did not help. The wallet insists to be "2 years and 6 weeks" behind ;-(
[23:37] <drakoin> the downloads page https://www.dash.org/downloads/
[23:38] <drakoin> needs a "download the whole blockchain as one file" link.

https://github.com/UdjinM6/dash-bootstrap

Superb :-) Thanks.
 
I could not have imagined that this doesn't exist for a CMC #7 coin.

i.e. I knew it :-)

But ... it was not possible to find it, even after a lot of googling.


Please put that link

• into the OP#1
• + onto https://www.dash.org/downloads/
• + on a separate HTML page which is SEO'ed.

Thanks!

 


EDIT: Synced. What an ordeal       XsRFvj2hGPpGzRSA11q1xE8XzADryd1GYS    Thanks a lot!

[toknormal]

It really looks like it's finally happening. We are going to start getting the overflow of crypto traffic.

GMaxwell says it's a non-event:

None of this is especially interesting: one should always assume that the number of transactions at a fee of 0 is effectively infinite.

The spammers moved to paying more than 1e-8 BTC per byte; which is still much lower than most ordinary transactions; but high enough to move the needle on tradeblock... this lets people spin a bunch of FUD.  Meanwhile for most people transactions continue to function like normal: a total non-event.

This is an interesting contrast of views. Maxwell sees the low fee transactions as kind of "invisible" background, not much different from empty block space because that space is always available to a higher fee transaction. Fair enough, he has a point there, but I just see that leading to a bidding war that ends up in commercial monopolies and tiered access.

I'm not sure if the Transmission Control Protocol that the internet runs on works like this - I thought it just worked on a first come first served basis, but I may be wrong.

This is why I see a diversity of technologies emerging in cryptocurrencies, not just one.

[AlexGR]

It really looks like it's finally happening. We are going to start getting the overflow of crypto traffic.

GMaxwell says it's a non-event:

None of this is especially interesting: one should always assume that the number of transactions at a fee of 0 is effectively infinite.

The spammers moved to paying more than 1e-8 BTC per byte; which is still much lower than most ordinary transactions; but high enough to move the needle on tradeblock... this lets people spin a bunch of FUD.  Meanwhile for most people transactions continue to function like normal: a total non-event.

This is an interesting contrast of views. Maxwell sees the low fee transactions as kind of "invisible" background, not much different from empty block space because that space is always available to a higher fee transaction. Fair enough, he has a point there, but I just see that leading to a bidding war that ends up in commercial monopolies and tiered access.

https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

That's BTC/day in fees... considering that the network is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees, and given that almost 75% of the monetary base has been distributed, fees are way behind compared to what they should be to keep the network sustainable after the halvings.

If fees don't rise *significantly*, then either we need a very serious btc price spike to compensate, or, ideas like endless inflation to secure the blockchain will start floating around as "better alternatives" to tx fees. And while it can't be marketed as "let's change the 21mn coin limit", it can be marketed by populists in ways like "we need to ensure that everyone can transact economically, so we'll ensure everybody has low fees (and endless inflation)".

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

--- DASH TECH FEATURED AT EXMO, PLEASE MOVE YOUR TRADING FROM POLONIEX! ---

https://exmo.com

An improved trading experience awaits Dash traders:

http://youtu.be/40n6joIOkVg

If you care about Dash, please move your trading to https://exmo.com. They are supporting Dash technology by enabling InstantX, and they are not a base for rival coins such as Monero on Poloniex.

Plus, the site is pretty slick!

Thanks and please bump,

Tao

Deservedly, EXMO reaches #2 in Dash trading volume. A depth chart will be introduced, and I've got to say, these guys are great to deal with. Still trading on Poloniex?

[toknormal]

That's BTC/day in fees... considering that the network is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees, and given that almost 75% of the monetary base has been distributed, fees are way behind compared to what they should be to keep the network sustainable after the halvings.

Thanks for posting that. I wasn't aware of that relationship.

[smooth]

https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

That's BTC/day in fees... considering that the network is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees, and given that almost 75% of the monetary base has been distributed, fees are way behind compared to what they should be to keep the network sustainable after the halvings.

It is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees at some unspecified time, probably in the reasonably-distant future when BTC subsidy is much smaller than it is today. There is zero evidence it was ever designed to replace for example 3600 BTC/day in subsidy.

I had a 24 hour confirm receiving a transaction that was sent by another ordinary user (with a fee that would under previously-normal conditions nearly-always result in 1st- or 2nd-block confirmation), and that placed me in a position of providing poor service to my customer by waiting a lot time to deliver, or assume the risk of transaction reversal. From my perspective as an ordinary user, Bitcoin is starting to fail as a transactional medium.

[AlexGR]

https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

That's BTC/day in fees... considering that the network is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees, and given that almost 75% of the monetary base has been distributed, fees are way behind compared to what they should be to keep the network sustainable after the halvings.

It is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees at some unspecified time, probably in the reasonably-distant future when BTC subsidy is much smaller than it is today. There is zero evidence it was ever designed to replace for example 3600 BTC/day in subsidy.

This can only be a gradual process / not an on-off switch where fees suddenly spike upwards 100x....

I had a 24 hour confirm receiving a transaction that was sent by another ordinary user (with a fee that would under previously-normal conditions nearly-always result in 1st- or 2nd-block confirmation), and that placed me in a position of providing poor service to my customer by waiting a lot time to deliver, or assume the risk of transaction reversal. From my perspective as an ordinary user, Bitcoin is starting to fail as a transactional medium.

Bitcoin, as a network, is operating fine. Your customer's wallet software failed him in that it used a very low fee.

In this regard, wallet software must have two features:

1) Good fee estimation
2) An option to rebroadcast the tx with higher fee

[smooth]

https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

That's BTC/day in fees... considering that the network is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees, and given that almost 75% of the monetary base has been distributed, fees are way behind compared to what they should be to keep the network sustainable after the halvings.

It is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees at some unspecified time, probably in the reasonably-distant future when BTC subsidy is much smaller than it is today. There is zero evidence it was ever designed to replace for example 3600 BTC/day in subsidy.

This can only be a gradual process / not an on-off switch where fees suddenly spike upwards 100x....

Yes but your comment that fees need to rise (as denominated in BTC) is not supported by any evidence, including the chart you linked.

I had a 24 hour confirm receiving a transaction that was sent by another ordinary user (with a fee that would under previously-normal conditions nearly-always result in 1st- or 2nd-block confirmation), and that placed me in a position of providing poor service to my customer by waiting a lot time to deliver, or assume the risk of transaction reversal. From my perspective as an ordinary user, Bitcoin is starting to fail as a transactional medium.

Bitcoin, as a network, is operating fine. Your customer's wallet software failed him in that it used a very low fee.

In this regard, wallet software must have two features:

1) Good fee estimation
2) An option to rebroadcast the tx with higher fee

Do you understand that wallet software and even user education, are part of the system?

Yes it is possible to develop improvements that deal better with fee volatility. Those don't exist (in a well-deployed manner) today, which means there is a mismatch and dysfunction.

As an ordinary user who is in no position to fix these things, the system is starting to fail.

EDIT: Also, the wallet didn't use "a very low fee". It used 0.0001/KB which has been a very common fee calculation that has provided high priority service (1-2 blocks usually) for at least the past 2 years. It was only slightly below (maybe 20-30% below) what was needed to clear the transaction in a few hours, but remained below for 24 hours.

[AlexGR]

https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

That's BTC/day in fees... considering that the network is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees, and given that almost 75% of the monetary base has been distributed, fees are way behind compared to what they should be to keep the network sustainable after the halvings.

It is designed to replace BTC subsidy with fees at some unspecified time, probably in the reasonably-distant future when BTC subsidy is much smaller than it is today. There is zero evidence it was ever designed to replace for example 3600 BTC/day in subsidy.

This can only be a gradual process / not an on-off switch where fees suddenly spike upwards 100x....

Yes but your comment that fees need to rise (as denominated in BTC) is not supported by any evidence, including the chart you linked.

I don't follow... What evidence do you need? That's the design of BTC: Fees have to take over from subsidy. It is a known element of how it works.

There is a glide path in place in reducing subsidy so that fee increases don't go from zero to max overnight when coin distribution is (practically) over. If the designer of the system felt that subsidy must be replaced at an end point, and only then, there would be no glide path in diminishing subsidy. Emission would be flat, at a certain rate, until the last coins are issued.

Do you understand that wallet software and even user education, are part of the system?

If you take the broader view, how about taking an even broader view:

Do you understand that trial and error represent a lesson in user education?

Every user at some point will have a moment where his tx takes a long time because he forgot to pay fees, clicked the "send as zero fee if possible" etc etc. That's the moment when he learned why fees are useful. That's part of his learning.

Now... if that happened once and he thought it won't happen because now he paid 0.0001 / KB, which is 0.01$ for a 250byte tx, then he has something more to learn: It's not only about paying the fee, but how much you pay.

So, taking this even broader view, your client may have learned yet another lesson into how to properly use bitcoin. So the ecosystem improved by improving user education / giving him lessons the hard way.

It's like forgetting your money in your pocket and putting your pants in the washing machine - destroying the paper notes. I'm not going to blame the destructible nature of paper money for that one but I will sure make a mental note to check my pockets in the future, before throwing the pants in the washing machine. Lessons everywhere

Yes it is possible to develop improvements that deal better with fee volatility. Those don't exist (in a well-deployed manner) today, which means there is a mismatch and dysfunction.

Fee calculation is a relatively trivial issue. If wallet devs can't fix it, they better use fixed fees that are more expensive than what should be normally expected but at least ensure first priority for those who desire it.

As an ordinary user who is in no position to fix these things, the system is starting to fail.

EDIT: Also, the wallet didn't use "a very low fee". It used 0.0001/KB which has been a very common fee calculation for at least the past 2 years. It was only slightly below (maybe 20-30% below) what was needed to clear the transaction in a few hours, but remained below for 24 hours.

0.0001/KB = 0.01$ for a 250b tx. It's an extremely low fee and there is no way to spin it around that it isn't.

[UdjinM6]

.....
.....
....
Do you understand that wallet software and even user education, are part of the system?

If you take the broader view, how about taking an even broader view:

Do you understand that trial and error represent a lesson in user education?

Every user at some point will have a moment where his tx takes a long time because he forgot to pay fees, clicked the "send as zero fee if possible" etc etc. That's the moment when he learned why fees are useful. That's part of his learning.

Now... if that happened once and he thought it won't happen because now he paid 0.0001 / KB, which is 0.01$ for a 250byte tx, then he has something more to learn: It's not only about paying the fee, but how much you pay.

So, taking this even broader view, your client may have learned yet another lesson into how to properly use bitcoin. So the ecosystem improved by improving user education / giving him lessons the hard way.

It's like forgetting your money in your pocket and putting your pants in the washing machine - destroying the paper notes. I'm not going to blame the destructible nature of paper money for that one but I will sure make a mental note to check my pockets in the future, before throwing the pants in the washing machine. Lessons everywhere
...

Well, I have to support smooth in this...    Imo there is a very small amount of users who would like to learn by trial and errors. Most of users want everything right here right now and "in one click' or otherwise - "it's broken, nothing to see here, let's move on to another option". There is no way my mom could go somewhere to figure out what size of a fee is recommended right now, is there any attack on network or smth like that. She would be like  "err, what???"   Just no way. There should be only simple steps: 1) Select who to pay (hopefully by name via address book or smth), 2) enter amount, 3) click send (and confirm a fee if it's ok). That's it. Or else - "paypal always worked well for me..." and you might never see that user again
With this in mind - there is a lot to improve.

EDIT:
PS. But since we are still not that far away from "sending emails via cmd line" in the crypto currency history it's not a big deal for current users who are mostly geeks. Future users still have to wait for "an iPhone" in crypto to "send their emails".