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

[goin2mars]

mining this coin seems to be awfully unprofitable and also the diff is the 2nd highest after doge.

cant seem to figure out why.

Probably because you're comparing it with a 1:1 ratio. For a rough estimate of the difficulty normalized to Scrypt, you'd need to divide the difficulty by around 2.47. This gives a difficulty of 133.6 as I write this. The reason you need to normalize is because you do much more hashes for this coin than with scrypt . . for me it's 2.47x more hashes. Nova, Aurora and Feathercoin have higher difficulties. Catcoin and Tagcoin are pretty close to this too. Vertcoin is beating this coin as well, with a 300 normalized difficulty (you just double what it's at right now).

Also, not every person in the world is after maximum profitability per day. A lot of miners will just point their rigs at coins that are damn worth it, because when they wake up in the morning their coins won't be worth 10% of what they were when they went to sleep, or because they really think this is a fantastic coin. It shows a lot that profitability is low for this and it's at such a high difficulty. I hope you can find something you think you can really get behind soon enough and stick with it.

[dime]

Do people REALLY not understand why and how the price is kept low?

The answer has been brought up several times and it's obvious to everyone except the people who start their question with "dark is the best thing in my life and can do no wrong.. but...?"

I expected people involved in crypto to think for themselves just a bit more.
^Now this was facetious, especially considering the previous 399 pages of this post.

[ImI]

Do people REALLY not understand why and how the price is kept low?

The answer has been brought up several times and it's obvious to everyone except the people who start their question with "dark is the best thing in my life and can do no wrong.. but...?"

I expected people involved in crypto to think for themselves just a bit more.
^Now this was facetious, especially considering the previous 399 pages of this post.

now i am curious...

[goin2mars]

Do people REALLY not understand why and how the price is kept low?

The answer has been brought up several times and it's obvious to everyone except the people who start their question with "dark is the best thing in my life and can do no wrong.. but...?"

I expected people involved in crypto to think for themselves just a bit more.
^Now this was facetious, especially considering the previous 399 pages of this post.

What post? I think you forgot to quote.

[BelStar]

Official fundraiser for Darkcoin marketing & branding

Since Darkcoin was 0% premined, we will be doing this the old fashioned way, with a fundraiser. Many people in the community have expressed an interest in pushing our marketing effort along. We wanted to make sure the time was right, while Evan sorted out the kinks in the Darksend code. But we are nearly ready to show Darkcoin and Darksend to the world, so let's get this moving.

I will release a list of bounties for marketing & branding in the next day or so when I have a bit of spare time. For now, you may donate to the official fundraising wallet (anonymously if you like!). You can also PM me with your donation details and I'll keep some accounting, if only for the sake of making sure your donation is accounted for and spent appropriately.

As always, you are a fantastic community and we appreciate your support!

Fundraising wallet: Xc8xGSP7FwWGPQpgw298z7NYdA8xJK8ooh

Sent 50 DRK.

Tx: 25f9a798ce7f842c04efbd338caba130949fb407eceb0181ce7593c8ac559b3e

[sukottosan_d]

DRK has two big issues that I see:

(1) Because the power draw is only 60% of scrypt, large GPU farms that mine altcoins and dump them for BTC/fiat have an incentive to target DRK. More profit even at price parity due to lower electricity costs. This will keep market supply high perpetually and hence keep the price low.

(2) The legions of unremarkable clone-coins will implement DarkSend once it's open-sourced. See how zero-talent "devs" are copy-pasting Vertcoin's anti-ASIC adaptive N algorithm.

For both (1) and (2) the solution is greater adoption. In the case of (1) it reduces these quasi-commercial dumpers to a smaller proportion of the market. In the case of (2), it allows DRK to achieve escape velocity and get to a point where a competing clone coin can't catch up due to lacking the network effect.

So I see "marketing" as crucial, even in the short-term. In any case, DarkSend should probably be kept closed-source before hitting at least Bter and BTC38 (not that I'm in any position to advise devs). Call it an extended mandatory beta or something.

I agree, well said.

Personally, I don't think DarkSend should ever be open sourced. All it will result in are a ton of junk coins implementing it, and basically a ton of coins piggybacking on the dev's code here. Yes, if adoption was greater, then perhaps it'd make sense to open source. But to me, adoption means something like being able to be used for actual purchases somewhere.

So if DarkCoin turned into Bitcoin, sure, consider open source. But that sort of adoption would take years. Instead, if it was me, perhaps a verified 3rd party could look at the code for safety types of reasons every so often, rather than just release all of the code for free.

If the code is released, I expect the coin to drop in price ... a lot.

At this point I absolutely agree.  We have no brand awareness and as my favorite saying goes... " never forsake the real for the ideal!"   DarkCoins world needs to be tightly branded and every kink work out.  It would be suicidal to release anything until this coin is burned into peoples mind as the "NAME" in crypto security.

No Cryptoanarchist worth their salt would put their privacy and security in trust of any software that was closed-source.  You just don't get the idea why opensource software is so much more secure than anything closed-source.  

I think we should first get DarkSend working properly, release a stable binary version, then we'll find a few researchers/software developers to do an audit of the code. This way we can build a community and establish ourselves so we'll have the network to support the coin after DarkSend is open-sourced.

You "cryptoanarchists" are over doing it with wantinbg everything to be open soucre, I agree that Darkcoin should be Closed Source until it has a huge user base like Bitcoin does, then you can open source, if the devs open source Darkxoin before that, this coin will become.overlooked and useless as others mimic Darksend.

Bitcoin only succeeded and had such strong grass-roots support from the very start.  As it was always 100% opensource from day one.  If Darkcoin thinks it can only succeed by going closed-source.  Then I for one will lose all confidence in the coin and will look for an alternative privacy aware coin to support.  They want to try and stay ahead of the game by leading innovation.  Not by trying to hide the source from newbies.  The software will be cracked on day one anyway by hackers and if they want to clone it they will still anyway.  Does the Darkcoin dev team really have the funds and time for a very a lengthy and expensive patent trial.  So nothing will be gained by using the closed source model but a lot of trust will be lost.

This coin doesn't have the community yet, one large enough. Yes, Bitcoin started grassroots, you forget though, it wasn't built in an environment that already has bitcoin in it. It was the only one at the time so it had the time to develop first. Now, in the crypto-currency world, everything moves really fast because everyone is aware of it and working to make money off of it.
Darkcoin will become open source - but too early and it will be pounced upon - is what the community is saying - and I think they are right to be cautious. I'm not saying it's the right decision or the wrong - I'm saying your above comparison is irrelevant because its out of context.

[dime]

What post? I think you forgot to quote.

There's no post. There's no post with the subject: "Hey all, everyone got together and thought about it and agreed that this is the reason why the price is so low."

Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, there are shills who vehemently deny it until any real talk eventually gets drowned out in the sea of clueless cheerleading.

I know this sounds trollish. But I'm a supporter of dark, despite these flaws. If you want to understand as well, I would suggest taking an afternoon and reading back, or doing the math behind the price. There's no need to keep rehashing the same old argument that people don't want to have.

I could bother to type out a coherent, well formatted post, only to have 10 other people whose interests it hurts pick apart my post with half truths or bullish pitches. And it would have the opposite effect that I would like. I'd like people to think for themselves and not rely on the most recent page for what they should be thinking, or more importantly, what they should be doing with their money.

[n00bnoxious]

Closed source is a terrible plan - by going closed source, you're only going to hurt the entire crypto ecosystem. Open code reviews are crucial to keeping your coin at the forefront of technology. Ok, so other coins can copy your idea - then don't be a one-trick pony. Make sure you're always developing NEW privacy-centric systems instead of trying to effectively patent your own. If you stay as the only coin that gives two hoots about REAL privacy and anonymity then you can't go wrong. If you get competition, then GOOD. Competition drives innovation.

[goin2mars]

What post? I think you forgot to quote.

There's no post. There's no post with the subject: "Hey all, everyone got together and thought about it and agreed that this is the reason why the price is so low."

Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, there are shills who vehemently deny it until any real talk eventually gets drowned out in the sea of clueless cheerleading.

I know this sounds trollish. But I'm a supporter of dark, despite these flaws. If you want to understand as well, I would suggest taking an afternoon and reading back, or doing the math behind the price. There's no need to keep rehashing the same old argument that people don't want to have.

I could bother to type out a coherent, well formatted post, only to have 10 other people whose interests it hurts pick apart my post with half truths or bullish pitches. And it would have the opposite effect that I would like. I'd like people to think for themselves and not rely on the most recent page for what they should be thinking, or more importantly, what they should be doing with their money.

It sound like you're not giving people enough credit. If you have an opinion ffs share it with people. Nobody can read your mind. Everyone comes to their own conclusions . . and chances are they're gonna be different than yours. What you would like and what needs to be happen might be different in this case, or the same.

IMHO you're sounding like you don't have enough faith in your own opinion . . whatever it is I have no idea . . to debate it with people. That's fine, but I'd sure like to hear it when you're ready to share.

[matthewh3]

DRK has two big issues that I see:

(1) Because the power draw is only 60% of scrypt, large GPU farms that mine altcoins and dump them for BTC/fiat have an incentive to target DRK. More profit even at price parity due to lower electricity costs. This will keep market supply high perpetually and hence keep the price low.

(2) The legions of unremarkable clone-coins will implement DarkSend once it's open-sourced. See how zero-talent "devs" are copy-pasting Vertcoin's anti-ASIC adaptive N algorithm.

For both (1) and (2) the solution is greater adoption. In the case of (1) it reduces these quasi-commercial dumpers to a smaller proportion of the market. In the case of (2), it allows DRK to achieve escape velocity and get to a point where a competing clone coin can't catch up due to lacking the network effect.

So I see "marketing" as crucial, even in the short-term. In any case, DarkSend should probably be kept closed-source before hitting at least Bter and BTC38 (not that I'm in any position to advise devs). Call it an extended mandatory beta or something.

I agree, well said.

Personally, I don't think DarkSend should ever be open sourced. All it will result in are a ton of junk coins implementing it, and basically a ton of coins piggybacking on the dev's code here. Yes, if adoption was greater, then perhaps it'd make sense to open source. But to me, adoption means something like being able to be used for actual purchases somewhere.

So if DarkCoin turned into Bitcoin, sure, consider open source. But that sort of adoption would take years. Instead, if it was me, perhaps a verified 3rd party could look at the code for safety types of reasons every so often, rather than just release all of the code for free.

If the code is released, I expect the coin to drop in price ... a lot.

At this point I absolutely agree.  We have no brand awareness and as my favorite saying goes... " never forsake the real for the ideal!"   DarkCoins world needs to be tightly branded and every kink work out.  It would be suicidal to release anything until this coin is burned into peoples mind as the "NAME" in crypto security.

No Cryptoanarchist worth their salt would put their privacy and security in trust of any software that was closed-source.  You just don't get the idea why opensource software is so much more secure than anything closed-source.  

I think we should first get DarkSend working properly, release a stable binary version, then we'll find a few researchers/software developers to do an audit of the code. This way we can build a community and establish ourselves so we'll have the network to support the coin after DarkSend is open-sourced.

You "cryptoanarchists" are over doing it with wantinbg everything to be open soucre, I agree that Darkcoin should be Closed Source until it has a huge user base like Bitcoin does, then you can open source, if the devs open source Darkxoin before that, this coin will become.overlooked and useless as others mimic Darksend.

Bitcoin only succeeded and had such strong grass-roots support from the very start.  As it was always 100% opensource from day one.  If Darkcoin thinks it can only succeed by going closed-source.  Then I for one will lose all confidence in the coin and will look for an alternative privacy aware coin to support.  They want to try and stay ahead of the game by leading innovation.  Not by trying to hide the source from newbies.  The software will be cracked on day one anyway by hackers and if they want to clone it they will still anyway.  Does the Darkcoin dev team really have the funds and time for a very a lengthy and expensive patent trial.  So nothing will be gained by using the closed source model but a lot of trust will be lost.

This coin doesn't have the community yet, one large enough. Yes, Bitcoin started grassroots, you forget though, it wasn't built in an environment that already has bitcoin in it. It was the only one at the time so it had the time to develop first. Now, in the crypto-currency world, everything moves really fast because everyone is aware of it and working to make money off of it.
Darkcoin will become open source - but too early and it will be pounced upon - is what the community is saying - and I think they are right to be cautious. I'm not saying it's the right decision or the wrong - I'm saying your above comparison is irrelevant because its out of context.

If it DRK becomes closed-source it will lose its badge of merit amongst the hacker community and is dead in the water if you ask me.  No one who know's anything worthy about cryptology or online privacy would put their trust in anything closed-source.  If this is the way the coin is heading I'm dumping now and putting my GPU's on Anoncoin.  You can't expect eco-system support from freelance dev's to a closed-source project.  Any eco-system development beyond the core dev team would die a quick death.  As I said going closed-source won't stop hackers cracking the source and cloning it.  Unless the DRK dev-team want to take any clones to court for patent abuses.  Also that wouldn't stop the Chinese or a truly anonymous dev-team from cloning it.  While any opensource clones will gain support from the hacker and opensource communities that DRK would lose.

[sukottosan_d]

For the record - I think open source is the only way to go - however, again, I think it matters how that is done - it's not as simple as saying - "open source it".

I believe the plan - as per the dev - is to open it once DarkSend has been fully debugged - which I think is entirely reasonable. I think others want it to have a little more momentum in the market and with adoption before it goes open source - which I don't think is unreasonable either. However, it's ultimately the developer's choice - I'm sure though that he will take the input of the community seriously.

I know he has said that closed source is NOT an option in this thread - however, is this on any of the sites so its known to new users?
Because, the community knows that closed source was never an option - but I don't think others do.

[HammerHedd]

On the another note, Eduffield are you still planning to attend the New York conference?   Didn't quite get a clear picture on what your intention was due to some changes.  

No, I was struggling to figure out how to do that with some family stuff that came up. Plus they downsized it to a couple hundred seats and it was really expensive to get there and the tickets are really expensive ($200) so I'm not sure how much impact it would have actually have had. I'd much rather speak at another conference, maybe one in Cali.

Since you won't be attending the convention you could do a video presentation explaining Darksend, put it on youtube and link/post it to other DarkCoin related sites.  Same content that you would have presented at the convention.  



Or maybe a live online Q&A

How about a Youtube livestream? Ha! or a TED talk?

[GreekBitcoin]

i agree that it must be open source. If it is good it is up to the community to decide if this coin will succeed and help make it better.

people must understand that they should stop supporting stupid clones with nothing new except name and actually support new ideas.

[matthewh3]

For the record - I think open source is the only way to go - however, again, I think it matters how that is done - it's not as simple as saying - "open source it".

I believe the plan - as per the dev - is to open it once DarkSend has been fully debugged - which I think is entirely reasonable. I think others want it to have a little more momentum in the market and with adoption before it goes open source - which I don't think is unreasonable either. However, it's ultimately the developer's choice - I'm sure though that he will take the input of the community seriously.

I know he has said that closed source is NOT an option in this thread - however, is this on any of the sites so its known to new users?
Because, the community knows that closed source was never an option - but I don't think others do.

Well I know a dev working on paper wallets and brain wallets for DRK.  They are unsure on releasing their work to the wild on the idea DRK may be going to use a closed-source model.  That's one example alone of the effect using a closed-source model would have on eco-system development outside of the core dev-team.  Not publicly releasing your code until your happy with it is one thing but to try and patent it and go closed-source is another.  Hopefully the ideas on using a closed model are just that ideas from some guy on the internet and not hints by the dev team testing the water.

[HammerHedd]

I think more useful would be the ability to also send small, twitter-sized messages instead of just transactions via darksend. Imagine that you could combine a transaction with a message or something like that. Hash the characters together and send it like a transaction, and all of a sudden, you have a really well encrypted, anonymous message system that overlays on an existing network.

This compromises anonymity (unless the message is utterly generic, in which case there's no reason to send it). You could argue that it's one person voluntarily compromising his/her own anonymity but because of the way DarkSend works, they're chipping away at the anonymity of everyone else involved in the mixing.

I don't think it would have to compromise anonymity. Unless you mean that the sender and receiver would not know each other - in which case, that might be true. However, if you are sending a coin transaction, you presumably have some idea who is on in other end.

What I mean is that a short message (eduffield would have to address a proper length) would be broken down just like a transaction, and sent like a transaction. After all, data is just data. There would be a reassembling and decoding at the other end. You are already processing cryptographic codes - why not use some of that hashing for encrypting a message?

It seems to me that an addition like that would allow you to further obfuscate the transactions because some of what is sent is no longer a "transaction" it is a message that is treated like a transaction.

The more traffic you have, the harder it is to follow the red car.

[Kai Proctor]

The raised money can be used to hire a good writer and pay for a press release explaining why that cryptocurrency will be the reference in the near future and the benefices of anonymity with DarkSend.

[HammerHedd]

Official fundraiser for Darkcoin marketing & branding

Since Darkcoin was 0% premined, we will be doing this the old fashioned way, with a fundraiser. Many people in the community have expressed an interest in pushing our marketing effort along. We wanted to make sure the time was right, while Evan sorted out the kinks in the Darksend code. But we are nearly ready to show Darkcoin and Darksend to the world, so let's get this moving.

I will release a list of bounties for marketing & branding in the next day or so when I have a bit of spare time. For now, you may donate to the official fundraising wallet (anonymously if you like!). You can also PM me with your donation details and I'll keep some accounting, if only for the sake of making sure your donation is accounted for and spent appropriately.

As always, you are a fantastic community and we appreciate your support!

Fundraising wallet: Xc8xGSP7FwWGPQpgw298z7NYdA8xJK8ooh

1. Sent 84 drk [2 x the answer to everything]
May the force be with their marketing activity.

2. I think the idea of a fundraiser is great, BUT from my experience it also encourages people to send some coins, sit back as viewers, and simply wait for someone to propel something. This is what i felt when Litecoin did its fundraising a year ago, and it felt very bad to sit and wait for someone to do something.

I believe, in parallel to the organized campaign above, we should ALL declare that each of us is hereafter committed to doing one thing, whatever he/she chooses, to progress the coin.
One will decide to make a video for youtube. another will at his free time write something on their blog. a third might make a list of relevant bloggers and post it here. Another can send emails, and another can declare that he/she will bring 10 new users to darkcoin, family, friends, etc.
Everything is progress, as long as it's not just sitting back and waiting... or looking at the price stagnation all day.
imho, if each and every one of us does just one thing for this coin, it will move way faster than any "organized" campaign.
I am going to write a one-pager for darkcoin. Like an executive summary, for bloggers, journalists, etc..

Who else will commit to do something?

I'll continue working the wikipedia page -

Also, I'm always looking for new information... Is there a good explanation of how denominate works?

[bigrcanada]

OK...Please Let's end this discussion once and for all.  Evan has said that DarkCoin will be open sourced... once Darksend is out of beta. The plan is to be open sourced.  I'm am very certain that Mr. Eduffield is aware that this is and will be an on going evolution with many more features to be added with time.  I for one am quite confident that Evan and Ape have taken the time to consider the route they wish for this coin. it would far more productive if we could come up with a wish list of additional features that people would think as cutting edge.  

[Kai Proctor]

i agree that it must be open source. If it is good it is up to the community to decide if this coin will succeed and help make it better.

people must understand that they should stop supporting stupid clones with nothing new except name and actually support new ideas.

They will not understand. As soon as the code is available I already imagine that some will create a Ninja coin and Hide coin...  

[chompyZ]

I'll continue working the wikipedia page -

Also, I'm always looking for new information... Is there a good explanation of how denominate works?

Can you give me the link to the wikipedia page?
I'll also need it for the one-page summary
thnx.