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

[eduffield]

May 2016 Budget Report

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/may-2016-monthly-budget-report.8886/

[1715420813]

1715420813

[1715420813]

1715420813

[aigeezer]

Dismissive generalizations about "programmers" are unhelpful

Ok, slap on the wrist accepted  

I also thought so myself after stumbling across it again have now deleted that post.

I apologise to AlexGR for dismissing his well made point out of hand.

Nicely said. Don't get too gracious though - we still need your probing eye.     

Are there clear areas of specific vulnerability popping up, say in the Wiki description? Any specific lessons for DASH coders - implement this, avoid that because X is expoitable in the following way? I'm not seeing anything, but I'm a tired old man and not to be trusted to catch such things.
 

[superplus]

LOL whats up with Gavin now?  

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36213580

[GhostPlayer]

 We could use a little help with getting Dash on Stack Exchange. We just need 23 more people to lend a hand so we can reach the next milestone. It's only a few minutes out of your time. This would will be really be great for us!

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/getting-into-stack-exchange.8864/

[patrolman]

 We could use a little help with getting Dash on Stack Exchange. We just need 23 more people to lend a hand so we can reach the next milestone. It's only a few minutes out of your time. This would will be really be great for us!

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/getting-into-stack-exchange.8864/

Thanks for the reminder!

I had been planning on signing up to Stack Exchange and following Dash but hadn't got around to it until just now. I've ended up on Stack Exchange sites many times when looking for answers, getting Dash on there would be great!


edit: I've just seen the page number - very close to 6000 pages!

[bigrcanada1]

 We could use a little help with getting Dash on Stack Exchange. We just need 23 more people to lend a hand so we can reach the next milestone. It's only a few minutes out of your time. This would will be really be great for us!

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/getting-into-stack-exchange.8864/

Thanks for the reminder!

I had been planning on signing up to Stack Exchange and following Dash but hadn't got around to it until just now. I've ended up on Stack Exchange sites many times when looking for answers, getting Dash on there would be great!


edit: I've just seen the page number - very close to 6000 pages!

Wow... I feel like a stranger in here... Lol. 6000...its taken awhile.  Looks like I have lots of catching up to do!

[bigrcanada1]

LOL whats up with Gavin now?  

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36213580

Oh brother... What a clown that Wright guy is... Really... "I don't have the courage"?   Lol

[coins101]

He is 100% Satoshi.

Don't be Satoshi denying anything.

I'm sad that Dash doesn't have a machiavellian, loud sock wearing programmer of such ilk.

I'm selling all my Dash.

One is dropping the mic.

[MasterMined710]

Have a read of the chapter in this document entitled "Open loop payment systems with instant availability of funds". The distinction between a monetary medium that separates the settlement layer from the transaction layer, and one that doesn't is adequately made there.

Including the part where it says "Typically, the central bank serves as settlement agent."

There's no central bank here. It's between users. There's no trust, no central bank - third party, no counterparty risk and you are always in control as you can close the channel.

It is a win-win.

I'm not saying thats any kind of disaster. It's the obvious thing to do if you've decided that the protocol is "out of bounds" for further development.

I'm just saying people should be honest about what it is and what it isn't and stop pretending that these technologies "scale" bitcoin in anything other than a pseudo-authentic way that does not necessarily do justice to Satoshi Craig's original vision of an instantly transferrable, anonymous, peer-to-peer tokenised asset.

===>

Bitcoin isn't currently practical for very small micropayments.  Not for things like pay per search or per page view without an aggregating mechanism, not things needing to pay less than 0.01.  The dust spam limit is a first try at intentionally trying to prevent overly small micropayments like that.

Bitcoin is practical for smaller transactions than are practical with existing payment methods.  Small enough to include what you might call the top of the micropayment range.  But it doesn't claim to be practical for arbitrarily small micropayments.

...

Forgot to add the good part about micropayments.  While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall.  If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time.  Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms.  Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical.  I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial.

So, per the creator of the coin:

- you can't have small micropayments right now
- you can have them in the future though with tech progress and cheaper hardware/bandwidth which will allow more on-chain txs
- you could scale to any level, including micropayments, if you altered the decentralized nature of the network into a less p2p and more client/server one by consolidating it into a few server farms.

All of the above make sense in terms of tradeoffs. But as I said earlier, we are not here to make centralized paypal #2. We are here for a p2p protocol. Yes, if Bitcoin was hosted on 1-2-5 servers and everyone connected through a thin client, it would scale to visa levels and beyond right now. But how would that be decentralized? How would it be trustless? How would it be protected from someone going in and shutting it down. It wouldn't. It's very simple really. Why all the hate towards bitcoin devs for trying to find alternatives while keeping the nature of bitcoin decentralized?

There is no change in the nature of money. There is no "multiplication" of bitcoins or fractional reserve. There is no trust or counterparty risk. All you have is "locked" funds between two parties, inside the channel, as they are conducting lots of micropayments between them, funds that can be "unlocked" when they want to close the channel. If this can be used to increase adoption and allow more scaling while keeping decentralization, why not? It's a win-win.

i thought i read somewhere where they admitted if one person did not close the channel or did something like that it could screw things up? they said they were working on a solution but the whole thing is still vaporware right now anyway.

[coins101]

Have a read of the chapter in this document entitled "Open loop payment systems with instant availability of funds". The distinction between a monetary medium that separates the settlement layer from the transaction layer, and one that doesn't is adequately made there.

Including the part where it says "Typically, the central bank serves as settlement agent."

There's no central bank here. It's between users. There's no trust, no central bank - third party, no counterparty risk and you are always in control as you can close the channel.

It is a win-win.

I'm not saying thats any kind of disaster. It's the obvious thing to do if you've decided that the protocol is "out of bounds" for further development.

I'm just saying people should be honest about what it is and what it isn't and stop pretending that these technologies "scale" bitcoin in anything other than a pseudo-authentic way that does not necessarily do justice to Satoshi Craig's original vision of an instantly transferrable, anonymous, peer-to-peer tokenised asset.

===>

Bitcoin isn't currently practical for very small micropayments.  Not for things like pay per search or per page view without an aggregating mechanism, not things needing to pay less than 0.01.  The dust spam limit is a first try at intentionally trying to prevent overly small micropayments like that.

Bitcoin is practical for smaller transactions than are practical with existing payment methods.  Small enough to include what you might call the top of the micropayment range.  But it doesn't claim to be practical for arbitrarily small micropayments.

...

Forgot to add the good part about micropayments.  While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall.  If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time.  Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms.  Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical.  I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial.

So, per the creator of the coin:

- you can't have small micropayments right now
- you can have them in the future though with tech progress and cheaper hardware/bandwidth which will allow more on-chain txs
- you could scale to any level, including micropayments, if you altered the decentralized nature of the network into a less p2p and more client/server one by consolidating it into a few server farms.

All of the above make sense in terms of tradeoffs. But as I said earlier, we are not here to make centralized paypal #2. We are here for a p2p protocol. Yes, if Bitcoin was hosted on 1-2-5 servers and everyone connected through a thin client, it would scale to visa levels and beyond right now. But how would that be decentralized? How would it be trustless? How would it be protected from someone going in and shutting it down. It wouldn't. It's very simple really. Why all the hate towards bitcoin devs for trying to find alternatives while keeping the nature of bitcoin decentralized?

There is no change in the nature of money. There is no "multiplication" of bitcoins or fractional reserve. There is no trust or counterparty risk. All you have is "locked" funds between two parties, inside the channel, as they are conducting lots of micropayments between them, funds that can be "unlocked" when they want to close the channel. If this can be used to increase adoption and allow more scaling while keeping decentralization, why not? It's a win-win.

i thought i read somewhere where they admitted if one person did not close the channel or did something like that it could screw things up? they said they were working on a solution but the whole thing is still vaporware right now anyway.

People are prepared to wait for LN in Bitcoin. The network is showing signs of expansion, but it's not going mainstream just yet. By the time mainstream happens, the second layer solutions will be available in different projects.

This will be an issue for PayPal and other payment services. Not bitcoin vs. Dash or xyz coin.

[coins101]

Gavin back tracking

https://mobile.twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/728316830683639808

[MasterMined710]

Livecoin is #1 in volume, do they support instanTx like exmo?

I never was able to get google 2fa working with exmo. 

[TanteStefana2]

edit :  or until Craig Wright turns out to be right with his satoshi claim.... then its over too   or will it be a new start ?  

Too late - We don't have CW to kick around any more. His 15 minutes of fame are apparently over and he has left the building.

http://bitcoinist.net/craig-wright-exits-the-bitcoin-stage-with-weird-blog-post/

Relevance to DASH? Darned if I know.

what the ...
that is some drama  

Bitcoin expert: It was a mistake to blog about 'creator'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36202904

I'm going to give Mr. Craig Write this:  He is definitely as inspirational as AA in this video :  https://vimeo.com/149035662

On the other hand, he suffers from the smirky face - which is just how he looks and can't help - but always bugs me (like Bruce Willis).  But I'm starting to like him and his vision.  Who cares if he and his friend David are Satoshi or not, I hope he continues with his plans

[dEBRUYNE]

Livecoin is #1 in volume, do they support instanTx like exmo?

I never was able to get google 2fa working with exmo. 

Exmo was the first (larger) exchange to support instantX as far as I know.

[splawik21]

Livecoin is #1 in volume, do they support instanTx like exmo?

I never was able to get google 2fa working with exmo.  

Exmo was the first (larger) exchange to support instantX as far as I know.

The first one ever was dashcurex but with time exmo appeared and took the leaders place.
I have no issues with 2fa there.
Btw. I think this will be the 1st post of 6000 page! Indeed it is
LoL

Edit: my 2fa is based on sms not google auth....

[stealth923]

Welcome 6000 pages and congratulations DASH

[jiggytom]

#6000 who can predict when we will have 6000 nodes?  Bring it on Craig Wright... Your antics won't won't here... Your machines aren't powerful enough.  Can't wait until people realize bitcoin is dead and jump onto the future of money instead.  #DASH

[jiggytom]

Livecoin is #1 in volume, do they support instanTx like exmo?

I never was able to get google 2fa working with exmo.  

Where do you see livecoin is leading in volume?

[qwizzie]

Livecoin is #1 in volume, do they support instanTx like exmo?

I never was able to get google 2fa working with exmo.  

Where do you see livecoin is leading in volume?

http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dash/#markets

[jiggytom]

Livecoin is #1 in volume, do they support instanTx like exmo?

I never was able to get google 2fa working with exmo.  

Where do you see livecoin is leading in volume?

http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dash/#markets

Last time this happened there was a big run up.  Wonder is someone is loading up again?