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

[Joshuar]

Maybe all the FUD, attacks, etc. in the last month have left me skittish -- but I wonder even in the short term what might happen to the coin if there is an organized effort to hurt DRK based around pools cheating.   If Evan does go through with this then I hope I am just worrying over nothing.  

If? It is a given that at least half the pools and big farms (a lot of them nowadays) won't be paying. So the 20% will be more like 10% for the masternodes, =what they were expecting anyway. But it will be a disproportionate weight to the "fair" pools.

The whole thing to appease investors with "ok guys no hard forks" and bagholders of masternodes with "ok guys you'll get 20%" is sketchy. I know I'm harsh but I like things to go right

Price is price. It'll go up, down, sideways etc. Let it be. All the price attention is having an impact in development.

Development must proceed as planned so we can have the final product, nice and polished - no matter if it takes 1-2-3 or 5 hardforks and no matter if investors are bitching that they are losing masternode income because the implementation is late. Do they want to have masternodes of a coin that is GOOD or do they want to have a masternode of a coin that is doing hack-arounds?

The masternode protocol works, the masternode payments work (we saw them - it's not vapor), it's just that there is something introducing instability which has to be debugged and sorted out. If the origin is difficult to trace, then perhaps a different mechanism can be used for doing the payments (not voluntarily)

We also need improvements in DarkSend. The competition (MRO) is integrating I2P (as we've said) and XC will be using encrypted communication between nodes (as it has been said of DRK's future plans as well).

I know this sounds like a mom's "to-do list" to the child until she gets back home, but priorities are priorities, and price or reaching litecoin immediately are not a priority. If the code is sorted out and the product delivered in final form, LTC will start rolling down. Too fast of a price rise with a half-baked product is problematic.

LTC can't compete anyway in fundamentals like inflation (10x the BTCs to absorb LTC production compared to DRK) or innovation so they will be dead anyway by debasement. #2 is a given. Preserving #2 is not due to the competition. Who is gonna buy 300k USD of LTCs per day? It'll go 0.019 -> 18 -> 17 over time. It doesn't look that "hot" of a property. Only buys will be for cost-averaging buys at 0.025+.

Having said that about the #2 competition, the anonymity competition actually looks pretty lame (BCN and clones too many issues, XC mostly vapor for now but that could change a few months ahead as they seem to have the prospects of delivering a product similar to what Evan has at like 70-80% completion). But we can't base our strategy on others failing or being pumps & dumps that are "threatening" us due to pumps => we must excel and take the market. Then bring V2 for "fatality". Otherwise the risk is there for more serious contenders appearing.

My 2 duffs.

I'm with you. Of course I want my MNs to start paying asap and I want the price to stay high so my kness don't shake. But I prefer to wait for the payments and fear the price if that brings a better built coin. I'm not a coder and I can only imagine the stress of Sunday/Monday mess, but if another hard fork is needed, let's have another hard fork. This time we can prepare better, communicate better and coordinate better. We can have the fucking perfect coin if we are open to some pain along the way.

Personally, I don't give a crap if my MNs ever pay anything at all - that's not why I have them.  I'm far more interested in Darksend and the coin's anonymity features.

However, I also recognize the reality of the situation.  Investors have put the coin where it's at and they want their pound of flesh.  Which is fine, I suppose.  Not ideal from a development standpoint, but that's the way the world works.  Evan seems to be doing his best to find a way to balance everything, and nobody seems to be offering any helpful suggestions on how to do that beyond advocating for their own particular interest.  

Going too far one way or the other is not a luxury the dev has, so maybe focus a little more on helping find a middle ground would be more beneficial than the current tack?  Just my 2 cents.

Maybe you are right and we need to find a middle ground. What I was trying to say is (and I belive that the previous posters were on the same boat): Evan, don't worry about us, we'll be here no matter what happens with the price. Feel free to do hard forks if you feel it is what the coin needs.

Yea Hard Forks aren't a big deal. Bitcoin went through them, every coin went through them...All you have to do is Update your wallet and its good...

[1715491205]

1715491205

[1715491205]

1715491205

[1715491205]

1715491205

[1715491205]

1715491205

[mikemikemike]

That XC feature list as related to this thread just a moment ago is verbal diarrhoea. Enjoy losing your money.

Surprised you are saying these things, Evan is a one man band and I have faith XC is doing some interesting things and is worthy competition which has to be good.. To dismiss the coin like that is childish...  

No one cares. That coin was copied/cloned from Darkcoin. Go away.

Exactly. First mover advantage is huge. XC missed the boat. All the articles in all the major websites are talking about darkcoin as the anonymous coin, not XC. XC will have to be three times the coin darkcoin is to make a name for itself now, and I don't see that happening.

It's funny, I'm pretty sure all the panic sellers who have sold DRK went to buy XC and are now here hyping it to protect their investment and to validate their choice. Seriously, if you believe XC is such a good coin why do you need to come to its bigger brother and brag?

Are there people in the XC thread bragging about DRK? Nope. It's the same reason bitcoin supporters don't go over to litecointalk to tell them about how much better bitcoin is.

[eltito]

Maybe all the FUD, attacks, etc. in the last month have left me skittish -- but I wonder even in the short term what might happen to the coin if there is an organized effort to hurt DRK based around pools cheating.   If Evan does go through with this then I hope I am just worrying over nothing.  

If? It is a given that at least half the pools and big farms (a lot of them nowadays) won't be paying. So the 20% will be more like 10% for the masternodes, =what they were expecting anyway. But it will be a disproportionate weight to the "fair" pools.

The whole thing to appease investors with "ok guys no hard forks" and bagholders of masternodes with "ok guys you'll get 20%" is sketchy. I know I'm harsh but I like things to go right

Price is price. It'll go up, down, sideways etc. Let it be. All the price attention is having an impact in development.

Development must proceed as planned so we can have the final product, nice and polished - no matter if it takes 1-2-3 or 5 hardforks and no matter if investors are bitching that they are losing masternode income because the implementation is late. Do they want to have masternodes of a coin that is GOOD or do they want to have a masternode of a coin that is doing hack-arounds?

The masternode protocol works, the masternode payments work (we saw them - it's not vapor), it's just that there is something introducing instability which has to be debugged and sorted out. If the origin is difficult to trace, then perhaps a different mechanism can be used for doing the payments (not voluntarily)

We also need improvements in DarkSend. The competition (MRO) is integrating I2P (as we've said) and XC will be using encrypted communication between nodes (as it has been said of DRK's future plans as well).

I know this sounds like a mom's "to-do list" to the child until she gets back home, but priorities are priorities, and price or reaching litecoin immediately are not a priority. If the code is sorted out and the product delivered in final form, LTC will start rolling down. Too fast of a price rise with a half-baked product is problematic.

LTC can't compete anyway in fundamentals like inflation (10x the BTCs to absorb LTC production compared to DRK) or innovation so they will be dead anyway by debasement. #2 is a given. Preserving #2 is not due to the competition. Who is gonna buy 300k USD of LTCs per day? It'll go 0.019 -> 18 -> 17 over time. It doesn't look that "hot" of a property. Only buys will be for cost-averaging buys at 0.025+.

Having said that about the #2 competition, the anonymity competition actually looks pretty lame (BCN and clones too many issues, XC mostly vapor for now but that could change a few months ahead as they seem to have the prospects of delivering a product similar to what Evan has at like 70-80% completion). But we can't base our strategy on others failing or being pumps & dumps that are "threatening" us due to pumps => we must excel and take the market. Then bring V2 for "fatality". Otherwise the risk is there for more serious contenders appearing.

My 2 duffs.

I'm with you. Of course I want my MNs to start paying asap and I want the price to stay high so my kness don't shake. But I prefer to wait for the payments and fear the price if that brings a better built coin. I'm not a coder and I can only imagine the stress of Sunday/Monday mess, but if another hard fork is needed, let's have another hard fork. This time we can prepare better, communicate better and coordinate better. We can have the fucking perfect coin if we are open to some pain along the way.

Personally, I don't give a crap if my MNs ever pay anything at all - that's not why I have them.  I'm far more interested in Darksend and the coin's anonymity features.

However, I also recognize the reality of the situation.  Investors have put the coin where it's at and they want their pound of flesh.  Which is fine, I suppose.  Not ideal from a development standpoint, but that's the way the world works.  Evan seems to be doing his best to find a way to balance everything, and nobody seems to be offering any helpful suggestions on how to do that beyond advocating for their own particular interest.  

Going too far one way or the other is not a luxury the dev has, so maybe focus a little more on helping find a middle ground would be more beneficial than the current tack?  Just my 2 cents.

Maybe you are right and we need to find a middle ground. What I was trying to say is (and I belive that the previous posters were on the same boat): Evan, don't worry about us, we'll be here no matter what happens with the price. Feel free to do hard forks if you feel it is what the coin needs.

Yea Hard Forks aren't a big deal. Bitcoin went through them, every coin went through them...All you have to do is Update your wallet and its good...

Sunday and Monday's festivities showed pretty clearly that it's not as benign as you make it out to be...

[HiddenDark]

That XC feature list as related to this thread just a moment ago is verbal diarrhoea. Enjoy losing your money.

Surprised you are saying these things, Evan is a one man band and I have faith XC is doing some interesting things and is worthy competition which has to be good.. To dismiss the coin like that is childish... 

Yes, it shouldn't be dismissed straight away. I however won't be buying any as it is POS.

[hashmoon]

Surprised you are saying these things, Evan is a one man band and I have faith XC is doing some interesting things and is worthy competition which has to be good.. To dismiss the coin like that is childish... 

one man band like satoshi .. no?

[fernando]

Maybe all the FUD, attacks, etc. in the last month have left me skittish -- but I wonder even in the short term what might happen to the coin if there is an organized effort to hurt DRK based around pools cheating.   If Evan does go through with this then I hope I am just worrying over nothing.  

If? It is a given that at least half the pools and big farms (a lot of them nowadays) won't be paying. So the 20% will be more like 10% for the masternodes, =what they were expecting anyway. But it will be a disproportionate weight to the "fair" pools.

The whole thing to appease investors with "ok guys no hard forks" and bagholders of masternodes with "ok guys you'll get 20%" is sketchy. I know I'm harsh but I like things to go right

Price is price. It'll go up, down, sideways etc. Let it be. All the price attention is having an impact in development.

Development must proceed as planned so we can have the final product, nice and polished - no matter if it takes 1-2-3 or 5 hardforks and no matter if investors are bitching that they are losing masternode income because the implementation is late. Do they want to have masternodes of a coin that is GOOD or do they want to have a masternode of a coin that is doing hack-arounds?

The masternode protocol works, the masternode payments work (we saw them - it's not vapor), it's just that there is something introducing instability which has to be debugged and sorted out. If the origin is difficult to trace, then perhaps a different mechanism can be used for doing the payments (not voluntarily)

We also need improvements in DarkSend. The competition (MRO) is integrating I2P (as we've said) and XC will be using encrypted communication between nodes (as it has been said of DRK's future plans as well).

I know this sounds like a mom's "to-do list" to the child until she gets back home, but priorities are priorities, and price or reaching litecoin immediately are not a priority. If the code is sorted out and the product delivered in final form, LTC will start rolling down. Too fast of a price rise with a half-baked product is problematic.

LTC can't compete anyway in fundamentals like inflation (10x the BTCs to absorb LTC production compared to DRK) or innovation so they will be dead anyway by debasement. #2 is a given. Preserving #2 is not due to the competition. Who is gonna buy 300k USD of LTCs per day? It'll go 0.019 -> 18 -> 17 over time. It doesn't look that "hot" of a property. Only buys will be for cost-averaging buys at 0.025+.

Having said that about the #2 competition, the anonymity competition actually looks pretty lame (BCN and clones too many issues, XC mostly vapor for now but that could change a few months ahead as they seem to have the prospects of delivering a product similar to what Evan has at like 70-80% completion). But we can't base our strategy on others failing or being pumps & dumps that are "threatening" us due to pumps => we must excel and take the market. Then bring V2 for "fatality". Otherwise the risk is there for more serious contenders appearing.

My 2 duffs.

I'm with you. Of course I want my MNs to start paying asap and I want the price to stay high so my kness don't shake. But I prefer to wait for the payments and fear the price if that brings a better built coin. I'm not a coder and I can only imagine the stress of Sunday/Monday mess, but if another hard fork is needed, let's have another hard fork. This time we can prepare better, communicate better and coordinate better. We can have the fucking perfect coin if we are open to some pain along the way.

Personally, I don't give a crap if my MNs ever pay anything at all - that's not why I have them.  I'm far more interested in Darksend and the coin's anonymity features.

However, I also recognize the reality of the situation.  Investors have put the coin where it's at and they want their pound of flesh.  Which is fine, I suppose.  Not ideal from a development standpoint, but that's the way the world works.  Evan seems to be doing his best to find a way to balance everything, and nobody seems to be offering any helpful suggestions on how to do that beyond advocating for their own particular interest.  

Going too far one way or the other is not a luxury the dev has, so maybe focus a little more on helping find a middle ground would be more beneficial than the current tack?  Just my 2 cents.

Maybe you are right and we need to find a middle ground. What I was trying to say is (and I belive that the previous posters were on the same boat): Evan, don't worry about us, we'll be here no matter what happens with the price. Feel free to do hard forks if you feel it is what the coin needs.

Yea Hard Forks aren't a big deal. Bitcoin went through them, every coin went through them...All you have to do is Update your wallet and its good...

From a user point of view you only need to do that, but from the coin it is a bit more complex. You need pools and exchanges to update, and that has proven to be not that easy. I'm for them when needed, but they can't be trivialized.

[Terzo]

When the price started to rise from 0.0012 to 0.0055 and then fall to 0.0026 everyone was like "Its a pump and dump" . What happened next ?

[chaeplin]

Start of XC

https://bitcointa.lk/threads/pre-ann-xc-the-x11-coin-hybrid-pow-pos-no-ipo-launchs-today-3pm-est.311177/

I am quickly building a team for this project, including Marketing/PR, Business Advisors and Developers with the goal to make this a store of value and a transaction based coin with unlimited potential.


atcsecure, May 8, 2014

[mikemikemike]

When the price started to rise from 0.0012 to 0.0055 and then fall to 0.0026 everyone was like "Its a pump and dump" . What happened next ?

Exactly. The only difference now is there is wider audience of less informed newbies who are panicking like fuck, last time less people cared because they saw the innovation, all these kids see is price.

[eltito]

I'm going to go ahead and quote myself for effect, because I think this is important:

------

I hate to say this, but handing out an ISO for a MN built by a competent person is in a very real way analogous to handing out condoms to horny teenagers.  You can tell them not to fuck all you want, but they're still going to do it.  At least if they have rubbers they're less likely to get the drip-dick or pregnant.

In this case, if MNs get a rep for being a major Achilles heel to the coin and people start looking elsewhere, we're all screwed.  All of us.

It's not my preference, believe me, but in the bigger picture it may be the safer thing to do.  Anyone who's ever run a business will understand the need to eat a shit sandwich for the greater good now and then.

[HiddenDark]

That XC feature list as related to this thread just a moment ago is verbal diarrhoea. Enjoy losing your money.

Surprised you are saying these things, Evan is a one man band and I have faith XC is doing some interesting things and is worthy competition which has to be good.. To dismiss the coin like that is childish...  

No one cares. That coin was copied/cloned from Darkcoin. Go away.

Exactly. First mover advantage is huge. XC missed the boat. All the articles in all the major websites are talking about darkcoin as the anonymous coin, not XC. XC will have to be three times the coin darkcoin is to make a name for itself now, and I don't see that happening.

It's funny, I'm pretty sure all the panic sellers who have sold DRK went to buy XC and are now here hyping it to protect their investment and to validate their choice. Seriously, if you believe XC is such a good coin why do you need to come to its bigger brother and brag?

Are there people in the XC thread bragging about DRK? Nope. In the same reason bitcoin supporters don't go over to litecointalk to tell them about how much better bitcoin is.

The first move advantage is very small. DRK is only 4x the market cap of XC.

[Donho]

If you really want to run a masternode although you aren't too much into the security stuff (which I advise against!) then you at least might wanna use 2-FA for your SSH access.

Here's a fool-proof (well, there's always a greater fool!) tutorial on how to do that on Ubuntu. http://www.howtogeek.com/121650/how-to-secure-ssh-with-google-authenticators-two-factor-authentication/

edit: btw, the Android Google Authenticator isn't open source anymore! You can download "OTP Authenticator" which is a fork of the last Google Authenticator version that was open source. There's the binaries on the play store, the source is hosted on sourceforge iirc.

tried this, but apparently it doesn't work together with pubkey authentification
pubkey Auth just skips the 2FA. Does anyone know how to get this working together?

got it kind of working. If you have pubkeys auth already enabled and follow this simple guide posted by hartvercoint and add "AuthenticationMethods publickey,keyboard-interactive" to the sshd_config you need the pubkey then the password and then the 2FA code
Super secure!

But I kind of want to eliminate the password and just have pubkey and 2FA
If Anyone knows how. Shoot it!

find the PasswordAuthentication line and change it to no #you might need to uncomment it as well

I have
PasswordAuthentication no
but I guess using
AuthenticationMethods publickey,keyboard-interactive
overwrites that

I'm not sure if it's possible to use 2FA without a password

[7vpo]

That XC feature list as related to this thread just a moment ago is verbal diarrhoea. Enjoy losing your money.

Surprised you are saying these things, Evan is a one man band and I have faith XC is doing some interesting things and is worthy competition which has to be good.. To dismiss the coin like that is childish...  

No one cares. That coin was copied/cloned from Darkcoin. Go away.

XC is not DRK clone. It's Mintcoin clone...

[Joshuar]

That XC feature list as related to this thread just a moment ago is verbal diarrhoea. Enjoy losing your money.

Surprised you are saying these things, Evan is a one man band and I have faith XC is doing some interesting things and is worthy competition which has to be good.. To dismiss the coin like that is childish...  

No one cares. That coin was copied/cloned from Darkcoin. Go away.

Exactly. First mover advantage is huge. XC missed the boat. All the articles in all the major websites are talking about darkcoin as the anonymous coin, not XC. XC will have to be three times the coin darkcoin is to make a name for itself now, and I don't see that happening.

It's funny, I'm pretty sure all the panic sellers who have sold DRK went to buy XC and are now here hyping it to protect their investment and to validate their choice. Seriously, if you believe XC is such a good coin why do you need to come to its bigger brother and brag?

Are there people in the XC thread bragging about DRK? Nope. In the same reason bitcoin supporters don't go over to litecointalk to tell them about how much better bitcoin is.

The first move advantage is very small. DRK is only 4x the market cap of XC.

No it's not LMAO. Bitcoin is the 1st and offers nothing over alt coins such as Dark, yet it's # 1.

XC is a scamcoin, pump and dump, go away with that crap.

[thelonecrouton]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=581065.msg6529403#msg6529403

funny thing about your XC dev is : he was a summercoin fan  .. looks like xc is also made in china

XC - we don't know who our dev is

DRK - Darksend is anonymous, not the dev.  

[Joshuar]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=581065.msg6529403#msg6529403

funny thing about your XC dev is : he was a summercoin fan  .. looks like xc is also made in china

XC - we don't know who our dev is

DRK - Darksend is anonymous, not the dev.  

XC's dev might be Mark Karpeles or Wolong for all I know.

[mikemikemike]

That XC feature list as related to this thread just a moment ago is verbal diarrhoea. Enjoy losing your money.

Surprised you are saying these things, Evan is a one man band and I have faith XC is doing some interesting things and is worthy competition which has to be good.. To dismiss the coin like that is childish...  

No one cares. That coin was copied/cloned from Darkcoin. Go away.

Exactly. First mover advantage is huge. XC missed the boat. All the articles in all the major websites are talking about darkcoin as the anonymous coin, not XC. XC will have to be three times the coin darkcoin is to make a name for itself now, and I don't see that happening.

It's funny, I'm pretty sure all the panic sellers who have sold DRK went to buy XC and are now here hyping it to protect their investment and to validate their choice. Seriously, if you believe XC is such a good coin why do you need to come to its bigger brother and brag?

Are there people in the XC thread bragging about DRK? Nope. In the same reason bitcoin supporters don't go over to litecointalk to tell them about how much better bitcoin is.

The first move advantage is very small. DRK is only 4x the market cap of XC.

Dude. Did you read anything about what I said?

PUBLICITY MOTHERFUCKER. PUBLICITY.

It's considered the first. That's all that matters now the word is out. Come talk to me when XC has been on BBC, Sky and CNN. These organisations arn't going to suddenly now promote the next anonymous coin, it would make them look foolish. You have no idea how this game works if you think market cap means anything. I could make XC overtake DRK on market cap in a matter of minutes, does that suddenly make it better? If you think market cap means anything go buy some LTC and peer coin and hold onto them for a while.

[Joshuar]

When the price started to rise from 0.0012 to 0.0055 and then fall to 0.0026 everyone was like "Its a pump and dump" . What happened next ?

It then went to .006, and from there, flew to .01.

Just like it'll fly to .05 soon

[fernando]

I'm going to go ahead and quote myself for effect, because I think this is important:

------

I hate to say this, but handing out an ISO for a MN built by a competent person is in a very real way analogous to handing out condoms to horny teenagers.  You can tell them not to fuck all you want, but they're still going to do it.  At least if they have rubbers they're less likely to get the drip-dick or pregnant.

In this case, if MNs get a rep for being a major Achilles heel to the coin and people start looking elsewhere, we're all screwed.  All of us.

It's not my preference, believe me, but in the bigger picture it may be the safer thing to do.  Anyone who's ever run a business will understand the need to eat a shit sandwich for the greater good now and then.

And I'll requote you for bigger effect  

I'm not sure if we need an official ISO, or published best practices, or lectures, or whatever. But we need something to avoid people losing coins and damaging our image. I believe that most people who are running masternodes are eager to learn about this if they don't know enough. And no matter how competent each one is, everyone can use some more ideas on how to secure his masternode.

[roede94105]

I'm not tech savvy at all but I'll be really interested in trying to set up my one master node pretty soon.

I guess I'd feel better if my coins stayed in cold storage, then it would remain pretty secure in itself no matter my mistakes (although I'm not doing it if i'm not certain I'm putting enough protections)