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

[toknormal]

Actually no    It's nowhere near enough.

Seriously, the coin is technically better than litecoin and if the market was information efficient, should've already replaced litecoin in terms of marketcap. Litecoin's key advantages over Btc were faster transaction times and decentralised mining.

Drk does the same thing plus provides transaction privacy. IMHO (and I know this is controversial and some might hate me for saying this) I think the name is holding back the Drk. If it was called PrivacyCoin, I think the optics would have been much better. More of the media would've got behind it.

Markets don't work like that.

No coin in crypto has a high value because of technical superiority. If that were so, you'd see a whole different league table than what we see today.

The properties that support most of DRK's valuation at the moment are:

 - it's considered an "original" by many in this market sector. That always appears to sustain the asset for a long time (see Peercoin for example)

 - it just moved into a new development phase recently (i.e. Darksend going live) so there's been a flurry of news

However, in crypto, the market prices things in way in advance of them actually happening. So over the last few weeks the market's been anticipating Darksend, anticipating masternode payments, anticipating the new exchange etc. Now there's nothing left to anticipate so it's going to take profits for a while in a kind of orgasmic gush which will flood people's wallets with actual BTC that was only theoretical up till now.

Don't worry. I agree with you that DRK ultimately has a good chance of replacing Litecoin as the number 2 crypto and so I'm still long (just not as long as I was before). But it isn't going to get there in a straight line that's all.

[JGCMiner]

Automatic checkpointing?! NICE.

From what I understand about BTCs checkpointing, it is manually added by core devs.  IMO, automatic is much better than relying on core devs to decide and add manually.

moreover,

Code:

Automatic Checkpointing
fe82e51d3a Browse code 
HiroSatou authored yesterday at 10:29 PM
 Evan Duffield committed 3 hours ago

HiroSatou is Hirocoin Dev.

Are you implying that he joined the dev team?  Should that be a big deal 

Hiro helping out Darkcoin can only be a good thing. He knows his stuff.

Not trying to bash, but what did he do other than hirocoin?  As I understood it... that coin had no innovation on top of x11 which he got from DRK. I am wrong?

Also, I think the name issue will go away eventually.  As the marketcap gets larger and larger people will stop caring.

Also you should have explained to the guy that banning a certain crypto will be very difficult and if they do the first coin they will go after is obviously the one that has been used for the most illegal activity and would also have the biggest impact if brought down.. BITCOIN.

[kaleruka]

FUDy lay down

you can talk all day, all of you... against darkcoin... but that will NOT DRINK WATTER

only a retard could dump this coin now when all eyes are on him... and he is still EXPERIMENTAL!!!!!!!

Thank you for reminding me
You are a good man
Thank you for your advice
 

[T.Stuart]

...take profits for a while in a kind of orgasmic gush... I'm still long (just not as long as I was before)...

OK I get it.  

[kaleruka]

I would rather hold darkcoin then bitcoin any day. 1. Much faster transaction times 2. Anonymous with darksand. No brainer

It seems that you to darkcoin full of confidence
I am willing to walk with you
 

[toknormal]

...take profits for a while in a kind of orgasmic gush... I'm still long (just not as long as I was before)...

OK I get it.  

LoL !!  Touché. Don't think I'll ever live that one down. Too late to delete  

[Ozziecoin]

Hiro helping out Darkcoin can only be a good thing. He knows his stuff.

Not trying to bash, but what did he do other than hirocoin?  As I understood it... that coin had no innovation on top of x11 which he got from DRK. I am wrong?

Also, I think the name issue will go away eventually.  As the marketcap gets larger and larger people will stop caring.

Also you should have explained to the guy that banning a certain crypto will be very difficult and if they do the first coin they will go after is obviously the one that has been used for the most illegal activity and would also have the biggest impact if brought down.. BITCOIN.

Hiro knows the protocol really, really well and can troubleshoot it. He built Hirocoin x11 on a very fundamental base from scratch off the litecoin base. Not many people can do that. He didn't innovate because he wanted to build a strong, reliable coin. I think if he wanted to, he could've modified the protocol to do anything he wanted.

Yes, I agree the name issue will go away eventually.  But it was an avoidable problem in my view.

[hartvercoint]

I never understood why 6 votes were needed. I think you could strip it out and award the coin mixing reward randomly and it'd still work. My two cents of course.

Do you really think, someone would come up with a rather complicated mechanism if it was actually as easy as random rewarding?
The crux is forcing miners by design to pay a provably random someone rather than themselves.

[Ozziecoin]

I never understood why 6 votes were needed. I think you could strip it out and award the coin mixing reward randomly and it'd still work. My two cents of course.

Do you really think, someone would come up with a rather complicated mechanism if it was actually as easy as random rewarding?
The crux is forcing miners by design to pay a provably random someone rather than themselves.

If you cannot control the voting of the 6 votes because it is random, then why can't you also force payment of a random reward?

[chaeplin]

Automatic checkpointing?! NICE.

From what I understand about BTCs checkpointing, it is manually added by core devs.  IMO, automatic is much better than relying on core devs to decide and add manually.

moreover,

Code:

Automatic Checkpointing
fe82e51d3a Browse code 
HiroSatou authored yesterday at 10:29 PM
 Evan Duffield committed 3 hours ago

HiroSatou is Hirocoin Dev.

Are you implying that he joined the dev team?  Should that be a big deal 

Hiro helping out Darkcoin can only be a good thing. He knows his stuff.

Not trying to bash, but what did he do other than hirocoin?  As I understood it... that coin had no innovation on top of x11 which he got from DRK. I am wrong?

Also, I think the name issue will go away eventually.  As the marketcap gets larger and larger people will stop caring.

Also you should have explained to the guy that banning a certain crypto will be very difficult and if they do the first coin they will go after is obviously the one that has been used for the most illegal activity and would also have the biggest impact if brought down.. BITCOIN.

https://github.com/HiroSatou/Hirocoin/commit/dd5b8bec94b0694b365a4dabe5eeb9b78d025b6d

Code:

Hirocoin: Automatic Checkpointing
 master-0.8.6   v0.8.6.3 
…
 0.8.6.2
commit dd5b8bec94b0694b365a4dabe5eeb9b78d025b6d 1 parent 1688b00
HiroSatou HiroSatou authored on Mar 13

March...

[Macno]

Could anyone please explain this forkfix stuff in laymen terms? How is it good if the blockchain cannot be forked again? Don`t you need those forks if you want to implement something new?

[blueforever]

Actually no    It's nowhere near enough.

Seriously, the coin is technically better than litecoin and if the market was information efficient, should've already replaced litecoin in terms of marketcap. Litecoin's key advantages over Btc were faster transaction times and decentralised mining.

Drk does the same thing plus provides transaction privacy. IMHO (and I know this is controversial and some might hate me for saying this) I think the name is holding back the Drk. If it was called PrivacyCoin, I think the optics would have been much better. More of the media would've got behind it.

Markets don't work like that.

...

However, in crypto, the market prices things in way in advance of them actually happening. So over the last few weeks the market's been anticipating Darksend, anticipating masternode payments, anticipating the new exchange etc. Now there's nothing left to anticipate so it's going to take profits for a while in a kind of orgasmic gush which will flood people's wallets with actual BTC that was only theoretical up till now.

Not only crypto, equity markets work the same way. It's all about future expectations. You see AAPL announce earnings, the price moves a bit, then the guidance comes, and the market moves some more. Then as time passes and more information becomes available, the price moves some more.

The price is the price, but if we're speculating why the price is where it is, there's some risk here. Some cutting edge portions of DRK is not yet open sourced. MNs are not yet working in production. We as investors are shouldering the risk and expect to be compensated when these issues are worked out. If you waited until technology is matured, then you accept less risk for a smaller return. That's just how it is. No one accepts more risk for less return.

[Ozziecoin]

Markets don't work like that.

No coin in crypto has a high value because of technical superiority. If that were so, you'd see a whole different league table than what we see today.

The properties that support most of DRK's valuation at the moment are:

 - it's considered an "original" by many in this market sector. That always appears to sustain the asset for a long time (see Peercoin for example)

 - it just moved into a new development phase recently (i.e. Darksend going live) so there's been a flurry of news

However, in crypto, the market prices things in way in advance of them actually happening. So over the last few weeks the market's been anticipating Darksend, anticipating masternode payments, anticipating the new exchange etc. Now there's nothing left to anticipate so it's going to take profits for a while in a kind of orgasmic gush which will flood people's wallets with actual BTC that was only theoretical up till now.

Don't worry. I agree with you that DRK ultimately has a good chance of replacing Litecoin as the number 2 crypto and so I'm still long (just not as long as I was before). But it isn't going to get there in a straight line that's all.

The two critical things you need in crypto in my view are:

1. The blockchain (which everyone has)
2. Transaction privacy, which darkcoin has

Litecoin was just like a defense mechanism against ASIC centralisation in bitcoin. I have only ever invested in Btc, Ltc, Vtc and Drk.  I diversified to Ltc because of ASIC centralisation. I diversified to Vtc because they promised ASIC resistance plus zerocoin protocol but they dropped the ball on that. So, I diversified into Darkcoin because, to me, it appeared the perfect technical solution to the crypto puzzle. The only issue I had with Darkcoin was the name.

I have never sold a single Darkcoin in my life.

[ImI]

Could anyone please explain this forkfix stuff in laymen terms? How is it good if the blockchain cannot be forked again? Don`t you need those forks if you want to implement something new?

you have to differentiate between a software-fork and a blockchain-fork

those are to different things

[chaeplin]

Could anyone please explain this forkfix stuff in laymen terms? How is it good if the blockchain cannot be forked again? Don`t you need those forks if you want to implement something new?

My english is not so good.

This will be more clear

Code:

+// Copyright (c) 2012-2013 PPCoin developers
 +// Copyright (c) 2013 Primecoin developers
 +// Distributed under conditional MIT/X11 software license,
 +// see the accompanying file COPYING
 +//
 +// The synchronized checkpoint system is first developed by Sunny King for
 +// ppcoin network in 2012, giving cryptocurrency developers a tool to gain
 +// additional network protection against 51% attack.
 +//
 +// Primecoin also adopts this security mechanism, and the enforcement of
 +// checkpoints is explicitly granted by user, thus granting only temporary
 +// consensual central control to developer at the threats of 51% attack.
 +//
 +// Concepts
 +//
 +// In the network there can be a privileged node known as 'checkpoint master'.
 +// This node can send out checkpoint messages signed by the checkpoint master
 +// key. Each checkpoint is a block hash, representing a block on the blockchain
 +// that the network should reach consensus on.
 +//
 +// Besides verifying signatures of checkpoint messages, each node also verifies
 +// the consistency of the checkpoints. If a conflicting checkpoint is received,
 +// it means either the checkpoint master key is compromised, or there is an
 +// operator mistake. In this situation the node would discard the conflicting
 +// checkpoint message and display a warning message. This precaution controls
 +// the damage to network caused by operator mistake or compromised key.
 +//
 +// Operations
 +//
 +// Checkpoint master key can be established by using the 'makekeypair' command
 +// The public key in source code should then be updated and private key kept
 +// in a safe place.
 +//
 +// Any node can be turned into checkpoint master by setting the 'checkpointkey'
 +// configuration parameter with the private key of the checkpoint master key.
 +// Operator should exercise caution such that at any moment there is at most
 +// one node operating as checkpoint master. When switching master node, the
 +// recommended procedure is to shutdown the master node and restart as
 +// regular node, note down the current checkpoint by 'getcheckpoint', then
 +// compare to the checkpoint at the new node to be upgraded to master node.
 +// When the checkpoint on both nodes match then it is safe to switch the new
 +// node to checkpoint master.
 +//
 +// The configuration parameter 'checkpointdepth' specifies how many blocks
 +// should the checkpoints lag behind the latest block in auto checkpoint mode.
 +// A depth of 0 is the strongest auto checkpoint policy and offers the greatest
 +// protection against 51% attack. A negative depth means that the checkpoints
 +// should not be automatically generated by the checkpoint master, but instead
 +// be manually entered by operator via the 'sendcheckpoint' command. The manual
 +// mode is also the default mode (default value -1 for checkpointdepth).
 +//
 +// Command 'enforcecheckpoint' and configuration parameter 'checkpointenforce'
 +// are for the users to explicitly consent to enforce the checkpoints issued
 +// from checkpoint master. To enforce checkpoint, user needs to either issue
 +// command 'enforcecheckpoint true', or set configuration parameter
 +// checkpointenforce=1. The current enforcement setting can be queried via
 +// command 'getcheckpoint', where 'subscribemode' displays either 'enforce'
 +// or 'advisory'. The 'enforce' mode of subscribemode means checkpoints are
 +// enforced. The 'advisory' mode of subscribemode means checkpoints are not
 +// enforced but a warning message would be displayed if the node is on a 
 +// different blockchain fork from the checkpoint, and this is the default mode.
 +//

[Ozziecoin]

Could anyone please explain this forkfix stuff in laymen terms? How is it good if the blockchain cannot be forked again? Don`t you need those forks if you want to implement something new?

You fork it once and then the checkpoint server ensures the blockchain stays true.

[raganius]

anyone here experience same problem ?  

No, but I think there may be something much more sinister behind all the "being hacked" stories.
I think they have been short selling against their customers and got squeezed.

Just a gut feeling, though.

Yes, I agree that being hacked IS something that an exchange cannot afford. They MUST take every single measure to be protected. Still, it's possible to happen for it's a business risk. Now the difference is: a good, serious exchange will never have this business risk affect it's clients lest loosing reputation. In the maket, no reputation means no deals.

I've never had a problem with them despite what everyone was saying, but I have just zeroed all my balances there. I had started their verification process because I wanted to trade DRK/USD if it is ever available. The response I've got is so lame that it almost feels like a joke:



BTW, they have lowered their withdrawal fee for DRK from 0.1 to a more reasonable 0.01.

Hi, Fernando.

I don't have any balance left there also (but only for about 235DOGE left that I have not been interested in withdrawing). So it's been quite a long time I don't visit Cryptsy.

I believe they really have to comply with some goverment rules and from your case it seems that governments, eager to implement their biometric scheme, are imposing that exchanges have their clients face scanned (please, notice that my intention here is not to FUD, but I'm afraid it cannot be avoided in this situation, because indeed, governments want to f#&k up with our privacy)

[hartvercoint]

I never understood why 6 votes were needed. I think you could strip it out and award the coin mixing reward randomly and it'd still work. My two cents of course.

Do you really think, someone would come up with a rather complicated mechanism if it was actually as easy as random rewarding?
The crux is forcing miners by design to pay a provably random someone rather than themselves.

If you cannot control the voting of the 6 votes because it is random, then why can't you also force payment of a random reward?

I don't know anything more specific. Check the source.

Randomly paying yourself out of 500MNs once has a realistic probability (1:500) to actually happen. How would you tell if this was legit or manipulated?
Randomly voting for yourself 6 times in a row has a probability of 1:15,625,000,000,000,000 meaning it's practically impossible and easily spotted.

[Macno]

Could anyone please explain this forkfix stuff in laymen terms? How is it good if the blockchain cannot be forked again? Don`t you need those forks if you want to implement something new?

You fork it once and then the checkpoint server ensures the blockchain stays true.

Thanks to all of you! @chaeplin: I`m not native in english neither, but "layman`s term" means this http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=layman%27s%20terms  but thanks nevertheless for the effort, I read what you posted and thought "well, it somehow sounds good"

[chaeplin]

Could anyone please explain this forkfix stuff in laymen terms? How is it good if the blockchain cannot be forked again? Don`t you need those forks if you want to implement something new?

You fork it once and then the checkpoint server ensures the blockchain stays true.

Thanks to all of you! @chaeplin: I`m not native in english neither, but "layman`s term" means this http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=layman%27s%20terms  but thanks nevertheless for the effort, I read what you posted and thought "well, it somehow sounds good"

Source descriptions is more clear and easy to me LOL..