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

[g4q34g4qg47ww]

Development Update - Oct 1, 2014.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-1-2014.2561/

I'm curious what everyone thinks. 

This is fascinating. The little rusty gears in my head are churning at full speed.

[balu]

Even though the increased percentage is intriguing, I wholeheartedly agree with oblox - balance is essential.

The amount of MNs will decrease in time anyway as the amount of coins in circulation is increasing. We must also make sure to have enough liquidity in the marketplaces, otherwise the value will stay super volatile.
And the most important thing is to reward the miners as well. Imagine a scenario when ASISs are introduced to x11, with darkcoin having an already small fraction of money as mining reward. This would totally centralize mining imho.

On the positive side more masternodes would decrease the available amount on the market, thereby increasing prices.

It should also be considered that even though there are 900 masternodes, these are maintained by 150-200 person max. vertoe alone runs ~10% of the masternodes, which - no offense - is a risk to consider. The more people own a small amount of drk the better it is for the community. If we increase the masternode numbers, will it mean that new people will start running mns? I highly doubt. Many here would add one more to their mns. From this perspective, the system security wouldn't increase at all, despite the increased number of nodes.

I'd say give it some more time. When the currency is more spread, THEN we MAY increase the %, IFF it will seem beneficial. At the moment it would backfire I think.

[coins101]

Even though the increased percentage is intriguing, I wholeheartedly agree with oblox - balance is essential.

The amount of MNs will decrease in time anyway as the amount of coins in circulation is increasing. We must also make sure to have enough liquidity in the marketplaces, otherwise the value will stay super volatile.
And the most important thing is to reward the miners as well. Imagine a scenario when ASISs are introduced to x11, with darkcoin having an already small fraction of money as mining reward. This would totally centralize mining imho.

On the positive side more masternodes would decrease the available amount on the market, thereby increasing prices.

It should also be considered that even though there are 900 masternodes, these are maintained by 150-200 person max. vertoe alone runs ~10% of the masternodes, which - no offense - is a risk to consider. The more people own a small amount of drk the better it is for the community. If we increase the masternode numbers, will it mean that new people will start running mns? I highly doubt. Many here would add one more to their mns. From this perspective, the system security wouldn't increase at all, despite the increased number of nodes.

I'd say give it some more time. When the currency is more spread, THEN we MAY increase the %, IFF it will seem beneficial. At the moment it would backfire I think.

I have to somewhat agree with this.  I was one of the first to put forward suggestions on master nodes as a service to enable non-technical people to participate by paying others to help.

What Vertoe also pointed out yesterday, is that running 70 MNs is a nightmare. This is not like building a cloud mining farm. If you had one organisation with lots of people, then it could be an issue.

Creating a MN package that could be deployed allows non-technical people to participate, but it also makes it easier to centralise.

Tough challenge.

[illodin]

Development Update - Oct 1, 2014.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-1-2014.2561/

I'm curious what everyone thinks. 

In the diagram, where Masternode M1 sends Client F a message, does Client A know that M1 is a masternode?

Regarding adjusting masternode count, if the amount required to run a node is halved to 500, and the number of masternodes doubles as everyone running one splits his nodes, the rewards from running them might not be enough to cover the VPS costs anymore.

Whereas if the reward rises, more coins would be bought / taken away from the sell side of the markets in order to run new masternodes driving the price and profitability of running a masternode (and mining!) up.

[thelonecrouton]

Thing is, I just decided around... two weeks ago or something, "Hey, I feel like fucking around with X11 on AMD." Seeing as I didn't know what GPU code looked like 4 months ago, there obviously are loads of people out there who could hand me my ass when it comes to GPU optimizations, on AMD or otherwise, and it stands to reason that someone has done this shit already.

What do you plan to do about it?

Game theory suggests that there is more benefit to you in releasing your improved code than simply to keep on using it yourself, as the people you claim to have even better miners are currently profiting at your expense, as well as everyone elses. Plus the steps you have taken can then also be improved upon by others, thus further lowering the disparity.

You would sacrifice your gain now for a better net gain in the future.

I don't claim anyone has even better miners - I said I believe it's quite likely. Assuming that is true, they are indeed profiting at my (very slight) expense at the moment. However, the only motive I could possibly have for releasing my current code is malice: that is, simply wanting to lower the amount they are making. Since by keeping it to myself, and VERY few others (about two to three testers and one farmer), I finally am not forced to frantically look for freelance jobs every month until I have money, as my percentage covers my expenses with a little bit extra, I would have to be EXTREMELY irrational to do so. Pretty much anything done to X11 to speed it up can be added to X13 and X15 with minimal effort - which I have, of course, completed. As there are just loads of coins that use X11/X13/X15, and more coming out, this means that for the forseeable future my optimizations will make a good enough profit to keep me above water - and very likely more. (Multipools and NiceHash are pretty much what all farmers I know use.)

Therefore, the suggestion you pose to me is, put simply, to destroy my main source of income in order to fuck over people who are profiting more than I am, for now, who I do not know and actually have no beef with. Oh, and said people may or may not exist.

So in essence you're just bitching that someone else might be doing exactly what you're doing?

Bitching? No, not at all! You've got it wrong - I'm saying that coins should take steps to avoid this type of situation, and that not doing so is extremely bad for it. Haha, I would never demonize someone for acting in a rational manner.

Ah, right, you're not bitching, you're gloating that you're doing something 'extremely bad' for DRK.

[TheTommyD]

Even though the increased percentage is intriguing, I wholeheartedly agree with oblox - balance is essential.

The amount of MNs will decrease in time anyway as the amount of coins in circulation is increasing. We must also make sure to have enough liquidity in the marketplaces, otherwise the value will stay super volatile.
And the most important thing is to reward the miners as well. Imagine a scenario when ASISs are introduced to x11, with darkcoin having an already small fraction of money as mining reward. This would totally centralize mining imho.

On the positive side more masternodes would decrease the available amount on the market, thereby increasing prices.

It should also be considered that even though there are 900 masternodes, these are maintained by 150-200 person max. vertoe alone runs ~10% of the masternodes, which - no offense - is a risk to consider. The more people own a small amount of drk the better it is for the community. If we increase the masternode numbers, will it mean that new people will start running mns? I highly doubt. Many here would add one more to their mns. From this perspective, the system security wouldn't increase at all, despite the increased number of nodes.

I'd say give it some more time. When the currency is more spread, THEN we MAY increase the %, IFF it will seem beneficial. At the moment it would backfire I think.

I have a question? With trading the way it is..... and Master Nodes at 1,000?

One person with 1,000 or Several with thousands could drive the price up substantially.

Are they afraid of the Whales...or they are the Same? Are the Tradeable Coins tied up in Master Nodes? To me fewer tradable coins, lets users with many coins manipulate the Market

"It's the market" not an answer to me, like all coins I feel it's manipulated by a few and that's the chance I take...

Thanks

[thelonecrouton]

Regarding adjusting masternode count, if the amount required to run a node is halved to 500, and the number of masternodes doubles as everyone running one splits his nodes, the rewards from running them might not be enough to cover the VPS costs anymore.

Whereas if the reward rises, more coins would be bought / taken away from the sell side of the markets in order to run new masternodes driving the price and profitability of running a masternode (and mining!) up.

Agreed. People forget that Evan is an economics guy, not 'just' a techie.

The 'liquidity' argument is pure nonsense, we have a decimal point...

[camosoul]

Am I missing something here? Why is Darkcoin the only coin in the top 10 to have dropped significantly over the last 24 hours? Over 5% lost.

You have all these great announcements and features (anonymous sending, open source, instant transactions) and yet the price just either stays the same or goes down.

The volume on fucking Dogecoin (that as far as I can tell offers jack shit) was 6x Darkcoin in the last 24 hours. It's like a bad joke. The market cap too is looking like it will drop below Namecoin.

Before any calls me a "troll" or "hater" (I hate people who do that), you should know I own a pretty significant number of Darkcoins and have for a while. It's the only coin I own aside from Bitcoin, because I believe in the principle of an anonymous currency and I like how Darkcoin has been developed. But what the hell? You have HUGE developments and virtually zero price movement or greater adoption.

I think it's time to face reality... Darkcoin seems unable to break out of a small core group of believers understanders. Something obviously needs to give

This is what I was afraid of way back in March; DRK does so many things that the average cryptotard cannot understand and doesn't even realize they need. DRK is fucking amazing, but no one is smart enough to figure it out.

Most doge holders haven't got any idea what a blockchain is or what keypair encryption is... They have no idea how it works and why it's so terribad for privacy. You can't care if you can't understand.

[camosoul]

Are people in general just that fucking stupid?

No. They're much. much more stupid than you think...

[camosoul]

What's that?  I'm serious when I say I never leave the drk thread, LOL.  I hate it out there, don't even want to know what's going on, thank you, LOL.  I rely on all of you to keep me up to date on important things   (oh, except I usually go vote on coins101's polls, LOL)

Same here. I spent years looking for an altcoin that was actually worth a damn. Now that I found it, why waste my time with any more scam research? They're all bullshit. This is why the BTC zealots are BTC zealots, they're just more closed-minded than I am. I know damn well BTC has fatal flaws, and DRK fixes them and then some. But, who's smart enough to figure it out? DRK is a smart person's coin, and there just aren't that many people smart enough to see it's value. Dumb animals will never use DRK...

I only exit this thread to vote on coin101's polls, too. There just isn't anything out there worth my time. Absolutely nobody is even trying to do what Evan is doing.

[camosoul]

Dude... I mean, DRK is cool and all, don't get me wrong, but there's more things out there in cryptocurrency...

No, there aren't. Only scams for stupid people to fall for.

[karlb187]

I see allot of selling today on bittrex 

prices going down quick....good time to buy buy buy 

[YourMother]

Don't worry, it's sinking because of me. Everytime i buy DRK, it goes down 40-50% in a 3-days window. Usually it recovers immediately after i sell or in 1-2 weeks max if i HODL. Sorry for the panic created.

[maese123]

-20% down price the last 7 days since open source, evan pelase no moré update development 

[pitbullfan]

Don't worry, it's sinking because of me. Everytime i buy DRK, it goes down 40-50% in a 3-days window. Usually it recovers immediately after i sell or in 1-2 weeks max if i HODL. Sorry for the panic created.

Phew...I thought that only happened to me

[pbleak]

Yikes, down, down it goes.

[coinzcoinzcoinz]

Some food for thought:

Thought 1:
Running servers costs money, at least if you own multiple masternodes as you can't stay in your free tier for long (speaking for Amazon AWS users). The higher the price of DRK, the lower our server costs in relation to our masternode profits. Right now, I think about 30% of my masternode profits go straight back to Amazon. If the price of DRK went up, this percentage would decrease.

This means that if the price goes up, I would try to own more masternodes. This should cause the feedback loop, causing the price to go up even higher.

The point I'm trying to make is that we could achieve the required number of masternodes simply through innovation; innovation would make price of DRK go up, which would make people want to own more masternodes.

A possible negative side effect of price of DRK going up would be that the average number of masternodes per masternode owner is likely to go up as well, since it will be relatively cheaper to run servers for big players.

Thought 2:
Miners are more likely to dump their mined coins than masternode owners. Masternode owners have an incentive to keep their coins as dumping their MN profits would put downward pressure on price of DRK, a currency that they own a lot of. In addition, masternode owners might want to try to use their masternode profits to create more masternodes. So taking away more from the miners is likely to have a positive effect on the price of DRK.

Having said all of this, I welcome Evan's proposal. Anything that will help us reach our goal of 3000 masternodes quicker is a good thing. Evan's proposal is very likely to at least double the price of DRK.

[coins101]

http://www.coindesk.com/fincen-director-villainize-bitcoin/

Whose this?  Good answers to the question of over regulation

[camosoul]

Development Update - Oct 1, 2014.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-1-2014.2561/

I'm curious what everyone thinks.  

This is fascinating. The little rusty gears in my head are churning at full speed.

It's a workable plan, but heavy-handed... It leaves me confused about enforcement... If manipulating the coin reward is treated so flippantly, but actually getting those rewards we treat with kid gloves... We're messing with the fundamentals of coin creation and supply way, way too much here.

Sure, it'd probably work, but I think effort should be put into finding a better way. I think that simply decreasing the number of coins needed to run a MN would be a much better way to get more of them. If it only takes 700 DRK instead of 1000, people can still lock away the same amount of DRK that they want into MNs, there's just more of them in a direct and controllable proportion. Why hunt for equilibrium by tampering with the coin supply, when you can very predictably increase MN count by observing current MN count, look at desired MN count, and divide by N. No screwing around with the coin supply needed, nobody can troll about a tax, and you know exactly what you're getting... Both from the dev side and the MN operator side... Predictable, simple, get what you want without dicking around with coin supply... Tell me where I'm wrong?

It seems like an unusually odd choice of path... Almost like it's designed to pump value by driving coins out of circulation in a way that no coin should ever do; tampering with coin supply. And while overlooking a very easy and predictable way of getting more MNs without tampering with coin supply?

[coins101]

How much daily time effort do you think is involved in running one miner, say an AMD 290?

1. checking connections
2. checking payments
3. checking settings
4. checking pools
5......etc...

About 30 minutes during the course of a 24hr period?

I have a few and I know how much time I spend, roughly. Just interested in getting a rough idea of the average.

Thanks to everyone that sent through PMs about the first DRK based franchise I want to set-up.

I will be sending out details later on the best way to communicate the business proposition and how others will start buying DRK so they can access what we will have to sell. It's pretty simple really, a small child could get involved if they could demonstrate ownership of 1000 DRK