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

[toknormal]

Cant see it now - was it taken down?

No. It's being juggled about. Some of it is now at 12, some at 11.

[1715360108]

1715360108

[1715360108]

1715360108

[1715360108]

1715360108

[1715360108]

1715360108

[Minotaur26]

Remember to check out this proposal.

John Bush of SovereignBTC and Brave New Books is proposing to go on road trip with his family representing Dash in a series of meet-ups and libertarian events. Please read his pre-proposal discussion thread and provide feedback on how he could do it.

I think this is a great initiative, we love to see true libertarians like John get actively involved promoting Dash.

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/pre-proposal-dash-across-america-crypto-only-promotional-road-trip.9751/#post-99448

[Minotaur26]

Dash Business Development Update July 2016

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-business-development-update-july-2016.9766/

[stealth923]

Dash Business Development Update July 2016

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-business-development-update-july-2016.9766/

That's huge. Can we turn this into press releases for wider distribution?

[Minotaur26]

Dash Business Development Update July 2016

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-business-development-update-july-2016.9766/

That's huge. Can we turn this into press releases for wider distribution?

A press release will be going out too, in the meantime check the links there is a lot of information condensed in that update.

I am on the plane waiting for take-off right now looking forward to d10e

[toknormal]

I am on the plane waiting for take-off

You are cleared take-off. Surface wind 220 @ 15.

[arielbit]

The price is holding up very well considering the amount of sell pressure that is being generated by development funding etc. We all like to keep hold of our Dash but people gotta eat(!) so I'd expect a fair amount of Dash a month in sell supply just to fund various USD commitments. The fact that the price is remaining steady (and rising) suggests that for every Dash being spent on development we are seeing an increase in value to the project.

Who knows where the price will be over the next year, but one things for sure... Every ounce of development will keep adding value to the project... so over a 1-5 year period I'd expect Dash to keep steadily gaining in value.

Walter

What ! ? Eddufield is a beggar too ?

Has the fleecing of the noobs really become that easy ?

You are making an intuitive leap here that is inaccurate. Dash is a self-funding DAO, and a portion of the block rewards are allocated to fund budget proposals. Among these proposals are funding to hire developers, establish bounties, and issue deliverable-based contracts. The development happening now is directed toward Evolution, integrations, etc. This is what the above comment was referencing. Exactly zero Dash of the development proposals have been paid to Mr. Duffield, and he certainly isn't begging to anyone.

I guess it really is ! haha..

How is taxing the miners any different ? Beggars and government wannabes both always have their hands out waiting for more.

Its cryptofiat dumbasses like you that have helped the early adopters fuck the crypto movement. WTG !

A reallocation of the block reward is not the same thing as a tax. Economic forces ensure there is ALWAYS an equilibrium level of hash power that will be reached given a certain reward level. If the reward going to miners is 45% of the block reward, a certain amount of hashpower will result that covers the miners costs plus some market-defined level of expected return on capital. If the allocation to miners were increased to say 90% instead of 45% (just picking numbers to make the math easy), mining would become incredibly profitable at the current 45%-equilibrium hashrate and you would see a resulting rush of new investment in ASICs and buildings to house them and electricity to run them... in the end you would end up at a new equilibrium hash rate that was roughly 2x the current level, resulting in some tiny amount of incremental transactional security (e.g., from 99.999% secure to 99.9995% secure after 3 confirmations or something). EDIT: BUT, the expected economic return to the miners would be the same either way... at 90% you simply get twice as much hashrate as you would at 45%. It's simply a question of "how much hashrate should the network buy in order to ensure the desired level of transactional security?"

The beauty of this system is that the network can allocate resources towards activities other than mining... activities that provide more benefit than some insignificant amount of transactional security. For example, funding a code review, testers, or security-related bounties could improve security even more than more hash rate. Or more development resources might find some new way to secure transactions altogether, like InstantSend does. Or funding masternodes might strengthen the number of full nodes on the network and ensures they are professionally hosted. And these are all things that can improve security.

Now start thinking about all the other things that can be funded like marketing, research, business partnerships, integrations, work tools, development software, public relations... the list goes on. All of which provide benefits. Bitcoin's model (and virtually all coins) in which 100% of every block is directed toward only the need of transactional security (and worse, toward only one of many potential approaches to achieving that) is nothing short of stupidity. Even Satoshi recognized the needs for incentivized nodes, for example.

An analogy is imagine a world in which Visa (the first and largest credit card network for several years now) took all of its revenue and directed it ALL at transactional security. They bought the best firewalls, hired security experts, built their own private internet, hired armed guards to surround their datacenter, and generally went NUTS with anything security related. Sure, the network was really slow, it got saturated with transactions during peak periods, it wasn't very user friendly, and they didn't offer support. In order to pay a merchant, consumers had to learn how to use a long cryptographic "public key" that looked like a bunch of gibberish to your average Joe. But the network generally worked better than checks and was accepted at quite a few places and was SUPER secure. Meanwhile, they had no marketing, no PR, no business development, no sales force, no new services being developed, no customer service, and no legal department. Instead, they set up the Visa Foundation to handle that and asked the merchants and payment processors and end users to donate toward those things or perhaps do it on their behalf. Of course, the foundation was usually broke or close to it, so unfortunately, it wasn't that effective.

Meanwhile, a few years after Visa got started, a rival to Visa emerged called Mastercard. Mastercard started out pretty small, wasn't accepted anywhere and didn't have very many cardholders. But it did something Visa wasn't set up to do... it funded ALL its needs. They had a sales department, marketing department, legal department, customer service call center (once they had enough users), etc. They started rolling out new services like speedy transactions, increased transaction capacity, developed entirely new ways to secure transactions, made their product super user friendly, added a rewards program, and (gasp!) actually HELPED merchants get set up on the platform.

Naysayers of Mastercard pointed out how "insecure" their network was. They laughed that it wasn't accepted anywhere. They ridiculed that no one used it for much. They pointed out how puny their marketing budget was. Many, dubbed "Visa-maximalists" even scoffed at the idea that there could be more than one credit card payment network... after all, surely the confusion of TWO payment networks would only confuse customers and slow the adoption of this amazing new technology! And the idea that they want to PAY their developers directly and NOT through a donation-driven foundation? What are those guys over at Mastercard smoking anyways?!?!

Which network do you think survives in this scenario long term? Which one will be forced to adapt or will inevitably fail? In hindsight, it will be blindingly obvious which network should have won all along and how stupid Visa's approach was. When you put the scenario we live in RIGHT NOW in terms of two credit card networks, it suddenly becomes obvious what the better approach for a payment network is, and which project will win and which will fail (or be forced into adaptation). But for some reason, people have their blinders on simply because the underlying technology is different. Why!?!? I don't get how the digital currency world has not woken up to this fact yet.

Give us a few years, then come back and tell us whether we were the "dumbasses".

Amazing write up Ryan, well said!

Yop. Anyone who can kiss eduNOOB's ass for that long without coming up for air, must really know what they are talking about.

Where is the paragraph which details the 14 1.9 million coin easymine and/or the reward manipulation(s) and/or the de-optimized mining software and/or the "x11 is gpu only" disinfo ? hmmm ?

I do know what I'm talking about. I have an MBA with a concentration in Finance and Economics from a top 10 business school, became an associate partner at a worldwide management consulting firm which is widely considered the most prestigious in the industry where I served financial services clients, and most recently led the research and due diligence for the payments sector at a $20 billion investment firm. I am now sought by payments startups to help them with strategy and market positioning. So I'm actually a leading expert in the payments segment.

The paragraph on the "easymine" was not included because you didn't ask about it. But since you are asking now, here is my previous write-up on the subject (updated slightly since the initial post last October).

Let's do some simple math to see whether the early mining data aligns with Evan's claims. Let's assume that Evan (or his colleague) were the ONLY miners for the first 500 blocks (that's the worst case scenario... you can't assume he mined more than 100%). If we simply determine the network hash rate for the first 100 blocks (using the networkhashps command in the Dash wallet), you can see that there was only 12.6kh/s... however, there is a delay between the genesis block and the first "mined" block. If you exclude the genesis block, the hashrate was about 395kh/s. This is probably his hashrate, but let's be conservative and assume it took time to get everything going. From blocks 100-500 the average jumps to 711.2kh/s and appears pretty steady that whole time. Let's assume that this 711.2kh/s is Evan and his friends. They would have gotten about 245,000 of the first 250,000 coins mined (through block 500).

By block 500, things start to change. A few other miners are clearly joining them by this point, but assuming the 711 of the 895 kh/s were theirs from block 500-600, then they still got 79% of those blocks too (worth about 40,000 Dash). If you repeat this process to figure out the share of each block of 100 they got, you get something like the following:

EDIT: The coin start and coin finish are the beginning total coins in circulation and ending coins in circulation for each set of 100 blocks... so the difference is how many were created for each 100 block section... multiply that by the dev's share and you can see where I get the numbers from.


http://imgur.com/Se5USkw

Each row represents 100 blocks. As you can see, by about block 1,000, the hashrate was up dramatically... this is consistent with posts on Bitcointalk of many other miners saying they were up and running. There are a couple of points at which network hash drops, consistent with the fact that a couple of bug fixes went out which probably caused Evan and other miners to stop mining for a brief time to update. By block 2300, Evan and Co's share was probably less than 1% of the network hash rate, by which time these estimates would put them at about 511k coins. After that, there is little chance they got a decent share... maybe another 6,000 coins for the next 1,000 blocks, but basically the party was over by then, so to speak. So if you assume they got about 518k coins by the time they were consistently getting less than 1% of the coins, that represents 7.8% of the current number of coins in circulation... which is very consistent with the statements from Evan that "all of the founders" hold less than 10% of the supply combined as of early 2015 (when the available supply was much lower than even now).

Also, these assumptions are generous to the "instamine" crowd for several reasons:

1) It assumes that Evan was the ONLY miner for the first 500 blocks, which we know isn't true. There was at least one other developer at that time, I believe a friend of Evan's who sold out in the first few months... so the "instamine" would have been split at least between two people
2) It assumes no one else besides those two were mining for the first 500 blocks (which may be the case... we'll never know, but I make this assumption in the interests of being conservative)
3) It assumes that Evan and Co had absolutely no down time for updating their miners when bug fixes came out, which is impossible... any downtime would reduce these assumptions
4) It assumes that once huge amounts of mining power joined beginning at block 500 that Evan didn't start experiencing an elevated level of rejects... this is unlikely as well since blocks were being created so rapidly at that time - literally seconds apart on average - that he and many others reported rejects, getting on wrong chains, having to reset, etc. Evan would have no way to be immune to these issues caused by the rapid creation of the blocks and network latency, so the true "networkhashps" is clearly understated during that period because many blocks were rejected and not counted. This means that my calculations overstate the share of blocks he would have been getting at that time.
5) It assumes that he never sold any Dash

Based on the data, I see no reason to disbelieve Evan and the stated amount of coin that he has. In fact, the data seems to support everything he's said.

As far as the code itself goes, there was no crippled miner (I think you are thinking of Monero). The code that set the mining reward and difficulty was inherited from Litecoin's code and limited the rate that the difficulty and mining reward would change. There is no evidence that it was intentionally planted there, so I tend to believe that Evan just wasn't aware of every line in Litecoin's code when he forked it. Also, Evan never claimed that X11 was GPU only forever. He said it would be ASIC resistant for at least two years, with the intent to follow the same adoption path as Bitcoin (wide distribution through mining, then ASICs later on). That is exactly what happened. No broken promises there. As for why no relaunch or no airdrop of coins or whatever to fix it? All those options were discussed by the community at the time. The community decided those were bad ideas... read the forums from those early days. It was already trading on exchanges and it would have been unfair to those who had purchased coins instead of mining them to reset.

If you want professional discourse and really seek information, I'm happy to provide it. However, this is my last response to you unless you drop loaded language, name calling, swearing, and other unprofessional behavior. Last chance to avoid the ignore button. Actually, I mainly posted here despite your behavior for the benefit of other forum readers... you are spreading misinformation that originated from forum trolls.

great! i got an MBA too (Masters in Bullshit Analogy)

so you are just saying we just take your numbers from your little picture as the truth? nice try though  

you see.. Evan and Co. can get hashes anywhere without you knowing where it came from... my 20 billion cents  

[toknormal]

Now now children.

No need to be feeling idle.

[bigrcanada1]

Now now children.

No need to be feeling idle.

LOL... Great thing it's the same band idiots...so let them bump the thread for us.   People are so used to trolls... This behavior doesn't register with the masses.    So bump away peeps.... It keeps us all top of mind.

[Macno]

Now now children.

No need to be feeling idle.

LOL... Great thing it's the same band idiots...so let them bump the thread for us.   People are so used to trolls... This behavior doesn't register with the masses.    So bump away peeps.... It keeps us all top of mind.

I still prefer ICEY, he`s more classy and smart. I`d upvote him on Steemit. He keeps tickling brilliant responses out you guys.

BTW, has this been discussed?

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@juansgalt/hey-monero-fans-here-s-how-to-get-to-the-top-of-coinmarketcap

[pille]

Anyone has issues with poloniex too? My margin balance went to zero, had some Dash there. Deposit and withdrawal history shows only few entrys from 2014. Same with Trade history.

(Price/Share 0.00175000  )

[afbitcoins]

Anyone has issues with poloniex too? My margin balance went to zero, had some Dash there. Deposit and withdrawal history shows only few entrys from 2014. Same with Trade history.

(Price/Share 0.00175000  )

Seems ok to me at the moment

[Macno]

Anyone has issues with poloniex too? My margin balance went to zero, had some Dash there. Deposit and withdrawal history shows only few entrys from 2014. Same with Trade history.

(Price/Share 0.00175000  )

Seems ok to me at the moment

Ok here as well.

[pille]

They also foreced me to enter my full name, before they let me continue margin trading. Maybe has to do something with that.

[xxxgoodgirls]

Dash is consolidating day by day! Awesome.

[qwizzie]

Dash is consolidating day by day! Awesome.

Yeah, it is really nice to observe
It is also freaking out some trolls, which is nice too

[stealth923]

When the M0nero gang start showing up in this thread in numbers (Usually its just pathetic IceTroll trying to get his 1XMR per troll post), you know its time to buy..

They are scared little boys trying to do what little they can to save their one trick pony coin.

Business as usual here in the Dash house, now ready to be on all Lamassu ATMs across the globe~! Cant wait.

Also looks like we are being integrated with ProtonMail - which is massive credibility.

Edit: Also dont forget to watch livestream of the Dash Team at d10e conference
http://www.dashnation.com/video/d10e-live-stream-starting-july-19th-2016/

[Taylor05]

I love seeing responses like this one and the ones from arielbit (who is already on ignore, but which I saw from Hippie Tech's post). If they hadn't replied at all, I could have reasonably concluded that they may have simply failed to view my post. But by actually responding with posts like these, it illustrates for all readers here the complete absence of substance in their arguments. In the face of facts and figures, the best responses they can muster are ridiculing my masters degree to attempt to discredit these facts (a VERY weak attempt at that), and assertions that Evan could have mined all he wanted (a ridiculous assertion given that the code was freely available and clearly being mined by many posters to this thread the first hours of its existence). Thank you, therefore, for validating that there isn't a better response than name calling!

FYI... I've added you to ignore, Hippie Tech.

[arielbit]

I love seeing responses like this one and the ones from arielbit (who is already on ignore, but which I saw from Hippie Tech's post). If they hadn't replied at all, I could have reasonably concluded that they may have simply failed to view my post. But by actually responding with posts like these, it illustrates for all readers here the complete absence of substance in their arguments. In the face of facts and figures, the best responses they can muster are ridiculing my masters degree to attempt to discredit these facts (a VERY weak attempt at that), and assertions that Evan could have mined all he wanted (a ridiculous assertion given that the code was freely available and clearly being mined by many posters to this thread the first hours of its existence). Thank you, therefore, for validating that there isn't a better response than name calling!

FYI... I've added you to ignore, Hippie Tech.

aaaaand i love the crock of shit that comes out of your mouth...it is so amusing

saying "I love seeing responses like this one and the ones from arielbit".... BUT you ignore arielbit LOL!

here..some facts....an example that Evan knows a place where he could get some hashes...he and his friends did get a lot in the instamining phase.

...an 8 CPU is only doing 200KH/s which is around $160 a month.

Where do you obtain these numbers from?

There aren't still any websites where you can trade XCO / DRK so, what is the value you are assuming for this coin?

Hey I was just doing some math with VPS costs to mine it.

https://www.digitalocean.com/pricing

Here's the current cost
$640
$0.941
64GB
20 Cores
640GB SSD
9TB

Running 7 of these is netting about 3,327KH/s =  1,820.340 DRK

7 x $.0941 = $6.58 an hour
$6.58 x 24hours = $157.92 per day

Should give a base value of $.0867 per coin

So, using a c1.xlarge spot instance on EC2, I was getting these stats:

Currently the network is producing 68,640 DRK per day (143 per block * 20 blocks an hour * 24 hours)
1 instance runs at 140Kh/s , for $0.07/hr

There for you can calculate the coins per day to from the Kh, (140/35000.0)*68640

Coins per day = 274.56

Daily cost is 0.07*24, or $1.68 per instance.

Which brings the coin cost to... (0.07*24)/274.56

$0.0061

see.. some people are just talking about "where can we get some hashes?" .... another person says i'm doing some maths...

Evan says...I'm already doing it suckers  

[xxxgoodgirls]

Also looks like we are being integrated with ProtonMail - which is massive credibility.

-there was some rumours on this, has it been confirmed? It would be a great achievement.