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

[stonehedge]

I'm going to rudely butt in here and say that I think this discussion is very important for Darkcoin right now.

I am a masternode owner.  I therefore pay to have servers that perform a service at a cost to me.   To pay for that cost, I occasionally get 20% of a mined block. Now that we have RC5, my masternodes cover costs and make a small profit. Right now, electricity prices are so high in most places in the world that mining is becoming a decreasingly viable venture.  We need miners to mine (the more the better!), the network needs masternode (the more the better!).  If we can make mining more profitable by refining the algo for the miners then it is a win win situation.

As a miner I agree, However I read here somewhere of some idea or concept of getting rid of the need for DRK miners as the master nodes could be allocated the job in some way !!

I wouldn't worry about idle speculation.  If anything I get the feeling that the popular consensus is that the masternodes and the miners need each other just as much.

[fernando]

I'm going to rudely butt in here and say that I think this discussion is very important for Darkcoin right now.

I am a masternode owner.  I therefore pay to have servers that perform a service at a cost to me.   To pay for that cost, I occasionally get 20% of a mined block. Now that we have RC5, my masternodes cover costs and make a small profit. Right now, electricity prices are so high in most places in the world that mining is becoming a decreasingly viable venture.  We need miners to mine (the more the better!), the network needs masternode (the more the better!).  If we can make mining more profitable by refining the algo for the miners then it is a win win situation.

As a miner I agree, However I read here somewhere of some idea or concept of getting rid of the need for DRK miners as the master nodes could be allocated the job in some way !!

I wouldn't worry about idle speculation.  If anything I get the feeling that the popular consensus is that the masternodes and the miners need each other just as much.

Absolutely. There will always be people in both extremes, but Darkcoin needs miners and masternodes. All changes will be done with Darkcoin's best interest in mind, not to favour any particular group. If we do this right, the pie to distribute will be much bigger and all parties will be happy.

[Propulsion]

Wow, thanks. Really. I think you're seriously only the second person in this thread that sees I came here to offer them some help and advice - the miner is really beside the point, here to prove I'm not some jackass without a clue wasting their time. And sure, I expected there to be some people irked that I won't release what I have so far, and of course people like BlockaFett (honestly, I'm starting to feel bad - guy legitimately seems like he may be learning disabled or something; he saw that he didn't have anything to argue back with, he just posted that picture, which truly reminds me of chess with a six-year-old: when they realize they're going to lose, they just throw the board.) About the lack of memory usage, you were 100% correct, and I went into that in detail here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg9039501#msg9039501

If you mean that you thought 2x speed was the max, not the min - no. I believe your incorrect assumption was that the code then was using 51% of the GPU in an optimal fashion. In reality, it not only wasn't doing that, it was actually wasting more cycles than it actually used. I strongly suspect this is still the case. About people's reactions... were I to generalize, I would say most of the haters are likely typical miners: they want something for nothing, they value the change in their couch cushions more than developers' time, and if you give them the smallest opportunity, they will take everything you offer, use it to profit, and if they saw you homeless outside in an alley when it was 20 below outside after all of that, I would bet money 90% or more of them wouldn't bother to give you a fucking warm coffee. The people outright rejecting it I would put into one of two categories: the first being the dedicated fangirls who will react violently to any suggestion their beloved coin isn't perfect (real or perceived) - which would be the ones throwing personal insults, and those that have bought into DRK so hard that they don't want to consider there's any issues - more likely to simply disbelieve. Rational people... looks like few of those have showed up so far - but then again, it really hasn't been long. I HOPE there's some more rational DRK supporters, because if there's not, I just wasted a lot of damned time.

I totally understand where you're coming from on your points, but my problem is (and I am not keeping up with the thread, hence this being an older post) that I don't know what you suggest we do?  I mean, I think you are saying we should fund someone to make our miner more efficient, yes that would be nice.  But on the other hand, you are a person who did this work, but you do not want to sell your work.  Hence we're stuck with waiting for someone who wants to do it.  I suppose we should put together a bounty, again, and see if someone claims it, but then we have to say something like "you have to make it xxx% more effective".  Just so you know, we have paid bounties on the GPU miner in the past.  To make one, and then to improve it.  It's not like we haven't gone down that road.  Now most of us are way beyond being able to participate effectively as miners as it takes more than a few regular machines with gaming cards, it takes dedicated equipment to make it worth the electricity.  So the "crowd" here is no longer very interested in such things.  Miners, of course, should be interested, but they probably already also have updated software???  I have no idea.

Anyway, I have given up mining for DRK, and kind of feel bad about that.  I'm on xpool for my antminer, as if that'll get me to a dark, LOL.  But that computer runs our family server anyway, so why not.  Anyway, the main point is, I think you were saying a developer or early adopters ought to pay for upgraded miners, and we actually did that.  How are we to know how well the job was done?  Or how skilled the person who stepped up to he plate is?  In the end, at this point, anyone that can make improvements will now need to sell their miner or use it, IMO.  I just don't see us being successful for the 3/4+ time with another crowd sourcing for miner improvements when so many other projects are also competing for funds.  I might be wrong though??  But it might be easier to get dedicated miners to crowd fund this, ones from all the combined algo cryptos? 

I don't know.  I do understand that we want as many people to mine our coin as possible, but we may have to solve the problem of centralization another way.  Soon there will be ASICs.  The real trick there is how to get them fairly and timely distributed and most of all get the manufacturers not to rape the coin, which creates conditions where the people who purchased the units can't make any money off of them anymore.  The #1 problem with crypto currency in general is all the scammers and unscrupulous people here.  They're so short sighted, or not.  They can't possibly care about the future of cryptos with what they do.  However, on the other hand, they are what will make cryptos stronger.  We must find a way to protect ourselves from such behavior and protect the newbs from such behavior without seeming like zealots, such as the "anti alt coin brigade".

People are attracted to crypto currency #1 because they think they can make a quick buck.  Heck, we were too (hubby and I) But even with us, we were also intrigued with what the whole thing means to the world.  I didn't invest any actual money until April, I believe.  I just mined up until then.  And that was just so I could get my second masternode.  Well, actually, at first it was because it was obvious I couldn't mine much anymore, and I wanted to hit that next 100 coins spot (had like 1475 coins, and wanted to get to 1500, LOL, then I wanted to get my second masternode, LOL)  Anyway, yah, the possibility that a small investment might pay off, seemed like a good idea, but I'm certainly more interested in shaping the future of the world than making money now.... now  Yah, but to be honest, making money got me to actually start messing around with this, and learning.

Ah well, point is, what do you suggest, in plain, direct words, at this point in the maturity of the coin?

You do present an interesting problem, which is how you know the work was well done. I see two solutions for this off the top of my head - one, have it audited by someone, but I think the better option would be two, organize a contest. If you have enough in the prize to get skilled devs interested, they will do this job for you as a function of self-interest.

So by your estimates, how much do you think the current GPU miner could be improved upon in terms of hashing speed; 10%, 50%, 200%?

[stonehedge]

I'm going to rudely butt in here and say that I think this discussion is very important for Darkcoin right now.

I am a masternode owner.  I therefore pay to have servers that perform a service at a cost to me.   To pay for that cost, I occasionally get 20% of a mined block. Now that we have RC5, my masternodes cover costs and make a small profit. Right now, electricity prices are so high in most places in the world that mining is becoming a decreasingly viable venture.  We need miners to mine (the more the better!), the network needs masternode (the more the better!).  If we can make mining more profitable by refining the algo for the miners then it is a win win situation.

As a miner I agree, However I read here somewhere of some idea or concept of getting rid of the need for DRK miners as the master nodes could be allocated the job in some way !!

I wouldn't worry about idle speculation.  If anything I get the feeling that the popular consensus is that the masternodes and the miners need each other just as much.

Absolutely. There will always be people in both extremes, but Darkcoin needs miners and masternodes. All changes will be done with Darkcoin's best interest in mind, not to favour any particular group. If we do this right, the pie to distribute will be much bigger and all parties will be happy.

For a while running a masternode wasn't all that it was supposed to be.  It was possible (indeed likely) that you could run at a loss.  Now that RC5 has seemingly fixed the voting issues and we are getting closer to enforcement things are looking much cheerier for the masternode owners.  

On the basis that power costs in huge swathes of the world prevent viable mining I'd love to see some focus turned towards the miners who are subsidising the services that the masternodes provide.

[g4q34g4qg47ww]

I don't like it when miners are disrespected, but am having a little daydream here. If 100% of blocks were being generated by only masternodes...

- There is a large barrier to entry which is one point in the "Centralized" column
- This top pie chart at http://drk.poolhash.org/poolhash.html would rather than having 15 or so slices of pie, would have perfectly even 900, to possibly 3000 slices of pie. That's gotta be a mark in the "Decentralized" column.

I'm pretty ignorant so if a smarter man or woman wants to jump in and tell me why this is stupid I would appreciate it. Isn't POW block mining sort of an inefficient way to process the info? I was reading a discussion about how POW is kind of silly, but it's just the absolute most secure way to go about supporting networks at the moment?

</daydream>

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

I'm going to rudely butt in here and say that I think this discussion is very important for Darkcoin right now.

I am a masternode owner.  I therefore pay to have servers that perform a service at a cost to me.   To pay for that cost, I occasionally get 20% of a mined block. Now that we have RC5, my masternodes cover costs and make a small profit. Right now, electricity prices are so high in most places in the world that mining is becoming a decreasingly viable venture.  We need miners to mine (the more the better!), the network needs masternode (the more the better!).  If we can make mining more profitable by refining the algo for the miners then it is a win win situation.

As a miner I agree, However I read here somewhere of some idea or concept of getting rid of the need for DRK miners as the master nodes could be allocated the job in some way !!

I wouldn't worry about idle speculation.  If anything I get the feeling that the popular consensus is that the masternodes and the miners need each other just as much.

Absolutely. There will always be people in both extremes, but Darkcoin needs miners and masternodes. All changes will be done with Darkcoin's best interest in mind, not to favour any particular group. If we do this right, the pie to distribute will be much bigger and all parties will be happy.

Fernando, please see my conversation with you on DCT!

EDIT: I saw you already have!  Thanks, man, Cheers!

[stonehedge]

Note to anybody running big C3 instances on AWS.  Don't run darkcoind setgenerate true -1

I never thought 300% CPU util was possible.  

Seriously though, even on the -1 setting my PC works pretty normally.  Running with just 1 core mining is barely noticeable.  I doubt I'll ever make any coins from it but if it helps network health then thats brilliant.

[fernando]

I'm going to rudely butt in here and say that I think this discussion is very important for Darkcoin right now.

I am a masternode owner.  I therefore pay to have servers that perform a service at a cost to me.   To pay for that cost, I occasionally get 20% of a mined block. Now that we have RC5, my masternodes cover costs and make a small profit. Right now, electricity prices are so high in most places in the world that mining is becoming a decreasingly viable venture.  We need miners to mine (the more the better!), the network needs masternode (the more the better!).  If we can make mining more profitable by refining the algo for the miners then it is a win win situation.

As a miner I agree, However I read here somewhere of some idea or concept of getting rid of the need for DRK miners as the master nodes could be allocated the job in some way !!

I wouldn't worry about idle speculation.  If anything I get the feeling that the popular consensus is that the masternodes and the miners need each other just as much.

Absolutely. There will always be people in both extremes, but Darkcoin needs miners and masternodes. All changes will be done with Darkcoin's best interest in mind, not to favour any particular group. If we do this right, the pie to distribute will be much bigger and all parties will be happy.

For a while running a masternode wasn't all that it was supposed to be.  It was possible (indeed likely) that you could run at a loss.  Now that RC5 has seemingly fixed the voting issues and we are getting closer to enforcement things are looking much cheerier for the masternode owners.  

On the basis that power costs in huge swathes of the world prevent viable mining I'd love to see some focus turned towards the miners who are subsidising the services that the masternodes provide.

I don't like the term subsidize because to me it includes being forced, but it is true that sometimes people can lose money. I haven't mined much, but when I have it was not profitable because where I live the electricity is quite expensive and I can compete with other areas of the world. I've also run masternodes for months when there were no payments. But both things I've done because I wanted.

It is possible that at some point in the future (maybe even now!) mining won't be for everyone for whatever reason (cost of electricity, equipment or whatever). Same goes for running a masternode. I think that if any of us is doing something at a loss when someone else is being able to do it profitably, it maybe the time to refocus efforts. I encourage to those who can't mine to set up masternodes instead. And those who can't set up a masternode but can mine profitably, to do it as much as possible. Both things are needed and both things can be profitable under the appropriate circumstances.

[toknormal]

Mintpal re-opening shortly.

What's going to happen to DRK ? The interesting thing is that both Bittrex and Cryptsy are now trading slightly higher than Mintpals suspended animation last trade.

What will happen to the 2489 sellwall ?

Countdown has begun. Mintpal Twitter feed says they've migrated all private keys, balances and addresses (mine amongst them because I've got a good load of DRK and other stuff on there - you know how I like to keep my holdings "safe" on the exchanges).

[stonehedge]

I'm going to rudely butt in here and say that I think this discussion is very important for Darkcoin right now.

I am a masternode owner.  I therefore pay to have servers that perform a service at a cost to me.   To pay for that cost, I occasionally get 20% of a mined block. Now that we have RC5, my masternodes cover costs and make a small profit. Right now, electricity prices are so high in most places in the world that mining is becoming a decreasingly viable venture.  We need miners to mine (the more the better!), the network needs masternode (the more the better!).  If we can make mining more profitable by refining the algo for the miners then it is a win win situation.

As a miner I agree, However I read here somewhere of some idea or concept of getting rid of the need for DRK miners as the master nodes could be allocated the job in some way !!

I wouldn't worry about idle speculation.  If anything I get the feeling that the popular consensus is that the masternodes and the miners need each other just as much.

Absolutely. There will always be people in both extremes, but Darkcoin needs miners and masternodes. All changes will be done with Darkcoin's best interest in mind, not to favour any particular group. If we do this right, the pie to distribute will be much bigger and all parties will be happy.

For a while running a masternode wasn't all that it was supposed to be.  It was possible (indeed likely) that you could run at a loss.  Now that RC5 has seemingly fixed the voting issues and we are getting closer to enforcement things are looking much cheerier for the masternode owners.  

On the basis that power costs in huge swathes of the world prevent viable mining I'd love to see some focus turned towards the miners who are subsidising the services that the masternodes provide.

I don't like the term subsidize because to me it includes being forced, but it is true that sometimes people can lose money. I haven't mined much, but when I have it was not profitable because where I live the electricity is quite expensive and I can compete with other areas of the world. I've also run masternodes for months when there were no payments. But both things I've done because I wanted.

It is possible that at some point in the future (maybe even now!) mining won't be for everyone for whatever reason (cost of electricity, equipment or whatever). Same goes for running a masternode. I think that if any of us is doing something at a loss when someone else is being able to do it profitably, it maybe the time to refocus efforts. I encourage to those who can't mine to set up masternodes instead. And those who can't set up a masternode but can mine profitably, to do it as much as possible. Both things are needed and both things can be profitable under the appropriate circumstances.

I could not agree more.

Now...how about getting a tick box and drop down included in the next QT version so people can opt in to donate some of their CPU cycles to the network?

[x11fpgamininggroup]

Hi, sorry if this is a dumb question, but about the possibilities of X11 FPGA...

How come such a large % of blocks are found by miners not using a known pool?

(from chainz.cryptoid.info)

https://i.imgur.com/mhX4opp.png

Also how come the % has been increasing steadily...

https://i.imgur.com/vDXndj3.png

...when major pools % like SuchPool has been decreasing?

https://i.imgur.com/b2AbGUv.png

Why is it unreasonable to assume the unknown % is FPGA or why is it so high?

Wouldn't this explain the constant dumping?  Is there any info from blockchain analysis about where these coins are going? Or did I miss something obvious....

cheers

I will confirm that our group has been successful in creating an X11 FPGA miner.  We are currently discussing selling these miners or keeping them private.  If we decide to sell we will make a post in the mining thread. 

x11fpgamininggroup

[fernando]

I'm going to rudely butt in here and say that I think this discussion is very important for Darkcoin right now.

I am a masternode owner.  I therefore pay to have servers that perform a service at a cost to me.   To pay for that cost, I occasionally get 20% of a mined block. Now that we have RC5, my masternodes cover costs and make a small profit. Right now, electricity prices are so high in most places in the world that mining is becoming a decreasingly viable venture.  We need miners to mine (the more the better!), the network needs masternode (the more the better!).  If we can make mining more profitable by refining the algo for the miners then it is a win win situation.

As a miner I agree, However I read here somewhere of some idea or concept of getting rid of the need for DRK miners as the master nodes could be allocated the job in some way !!

I wouldn't worry about idle speculation.  If anything I get the feeling that the popular consensus is that the masternodes and the miners need each other just as much.

Absolutely. There will always be people in both extremes, but Darkcoin needs miners and masternodes. All changes will be done with Darkcoin's best interest in mind, not to favour any particular group. If we do this right, the pie to distribute will be much bigger and all parties will be happy.

For a while running a masternode wasn't all that it was supposed to be.  It was possible (indeed likely) that you could run at a loss.  Now that RC5 has seemingly fixed the voting issues and we are getting closer to enforcement things are looking much cheerier for the masternode owners.  

On the basis that power costs in huge swathes of the world prevent viable mining I'd love to see some focus turned towards the miners who are subsidising the services that the masternodes provide.

I don't like the term subsidize because to me it includes being forced, but it is true that sometimes people can lose money. I haven't mined much, but when I have it was not profitable because where I live the electricity is quite expensive and I can compete with other areas of the world. I've also run masternodes for months when there were no payments. But both things I've done because I wanted.

It is possible that at some point in the future (maybe even now!) mining won't be for everyone for whatever reason (cost of electricity, equipment or whatever). Same goes for running a masternode. I think that if any of us is doing something at a loss when someone else is being able to do it profitably, it maybe the time to refocus efforts. I encourage to those who can't mine to set up masternodes instead. And those who can't set up a masternode but can mine profitably, to do it as much as possible. Both things are needed and both things can be profitable under the appropriate circumstances.

I could not agree more.

Now...how about getting a tick box and drop down included in the next QT version so people can opt in to donate some of their CPU cycles to the network?

You tell that to Evan if you want to add items to his tasklist 

[Propulsion]

I will confirm that our group has been successful in creating an X11 FPGA miner.  We are currently discussing selling these miners or keeping them private.  If we decide to sell we will make a post in the mining thread.  

x11fpgamininggroup

Pics or it didn't happen.

[stonehedge]

I will confirm that our group has been successful in creating an X11 FPGA miner.  We are currently discussing selling these miners or keeping them private.  If we decide to sell we will make a post in the mining thread.  

x11fpgamininggroup

Pics or it didn't happen.

I have my suspicions that is how these guys can provide such huge X11 hashing power

https://www.miningrigrentals.com/rigs/6984?

I've rented it.  It works.

[stonehedge]

most miners get a false positive virus detection at virustotal.com

We should not stress the official wallet with that! wallet needs to be 100% clean

We woud not be adding anything new to the wallet.  The functionality is already there.  It is a bitcoin/litecoin remnant that seems to have been lost in history as difficulty levels have increased.

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

FYI TO ALL:

The #getintothedark thread on Darkcointalk has had a name change to "Darkcoin Twitter PR Initiative". This better represents what the campaign is about to newcomers.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/darkcoin-twitter-pr-initiative.2396/

All of my personal links have been changed.

#getintothedark
#buildthedarkness
#DarkcoinChameleon

Thanks for all your support,

@TaoOfSatoshi

[CryptoChronic]

Here is your Bobsurplus aka EMC2WHALE......
(a dark holder doxed him not to long back)



http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/robert-duskes-scamstopperscom/1324-lexington-avenue-286-new-york-10128/robert-duskes-scamstopperscom-robert-bradley-bob-duskes-robert-bradley-duskes-used-to-646481

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

Mintpal re-opening shortly.

What's going to happen to DRK ? The interesting thing is that both Bittrex and Cryptsy are now trading slightly higher than Mintpals suspended animation last trade.

What will happen to the 2489 sellwall ?

Countdown has begun. Mintpal Twitter feed says they've migrated all private keys, balances and addresses (mine amongst them because I've got a good load of DRK and other stuff on there - you know how I like to keep my holdings "safe" on the exchanges).

That's funny...it will be interesting to see what happens....

[illodin]

I will confirm that our group has been successful in creating an X11 FPGA miner.  We are currently discussing selling these miners or keeping them private.  If we decide to sell we will make a post in the mining thread.

Interesting, how's the efficiency currently, what's the hashes/watt?

If DRK changed its algo slightly, how big of an setback do you think it would be for you?


What would happen if we (or Evan, actually) changed the algo a bit every few months, until a reputable company agrees to build an ASIC for people to purchase?

A private efficient miner that's not available to everyone would be a perfect reason to change the algo imo.

[camosoul]

Is there anyway to get free DRK ?

CaMeRoNy

Trust: -1: -1 / +1(1)
Warning: Trade with extreme caution!
Unignore