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

[thelonecrouton]

My proposal is that we have Masternodes running p2pool nodes and miners mine on the Masternode network and nowhere else. Solves the 51% threat, eliminates the need for 'enforcing' MN service fees, and ensures decentralisation. 50/50 split between MNs and miners, with miners who leave a balance on the MNP2pool earning a pro-rata cut of the MN reward as well, and meaning that as long as the total MNP2pool node balance is >1000DRK, the MN op can take out some or all of his initial 1000DRK and set up further MNs...  

Sounds like a very centralised banking machine much like HSB paying shit low interest rates.

Sounds like you're drunk?  

Tell me why solving the 51% / centralisation threat by making miners use p2pool, and having those p2pool nodes be Masternodes is a bad idea. Tell me why providing people who don't have enough DRK to run a Masternode a chance to easily have a share in one is a bad idea. Tell me why having more Masternodes as a result of this, and consequently a more robust network is a bad idea.

[semajjames]

Without mining, most of us wouldn't be vested in crypto.

Good point it's a lot easier to get average 9 to 5 worker into mining a few DRK than it is to get them to go out and buy them with $ and that's what it's about getting folk into DRK getting them to realise DRK as part of their own life, getting them to spread the word  

[thelonecrouton]

Darkcoins come into existence thru mining. And only thru mining.

Evan Duffield and team, and the whole Masternode concept had nothing to do with it? Just miners?

Everybody you mentioned here had to mine to get to some darkcoins, don't you agree? What do you even say here? Did they just push a button?

The miners share a few of their new found coins with the masternodes.
Mining is not only about maintaining the blockchain.
Even if there are no transactions for days, it doesn't matter. If there are NO transactions for days, then THAT'S the state of blockchain that has to be integrated and shared for everybody to accept.

A single old Celeron can do all that.

You are dellusional.

The amount of transactions (low or high or whatever) has nothing to do with the validity of mining. It just is what is.  

What does that even mean?

Even if we have no transactions for a while, the integrity of the blockchain would still need to be maintained.
You made it sound like it matters how many transactions go thru when in fact the amount of transactions is completely irrelevant to the integrity of the blockchain.
As I said, if there were for some reason NO transactions for a period of time, then this state of blockchain would still need to be checked and shared by everybody in the network.

1. Mining was part of the evolutionary process, sure, but that doesn't mean we have to be stuck with it forever. Not that I'm advocating getting rid of it, I just think it's not as important as it used to be given the Masternode tech we now have.

2. Why can't a single crappy CPU process a few transactions per minute and broadcast them to the network? In what way exactly am I wrong about that?

3. See #2.

[semajjames]

Sounds like you're drunk?  

another presumptuous  comment rolled out, dear me you seem proper full of them, I guess it would be an attempt at wit.

[georgem]

If we only had masternodes... we would basically take darkcoin out of the most insane innovation cycle we have seen in the last decades.
(If only servers had the innovation that miners have, lol   , but how are they going to have innovation without competition? Just masternode holders sitting on their piles of coins is not something that is very "competitive")

So, the key concepts to not forget are: competition creates innovation which in turn creates scarcity (value). Ergo mining.

I'm not actually proposing doing away with miners, but please explain to me what great innovations have come about through chasing pointless hashpower? The Darkcoin developers provide innovation, a bunch of people running up electricity bills in the hope of a quick buck do not.

Oh you will come to learn the true costs of running a masternode my friend.
The key thing about the miners is that they simply have to be good at mathematics to prove their worth. They need to hash fast and nothing else.
That's why they are so valuable, they are pure functional tools, that do only this, and nothing else. It's perfect, like a hammer.
But prove to me that every masternode holder truly knows how to secure and maintain a server? Are most masternodes still running on amazon clouds, for crying out loud?

I have the darkcoins to run 2 Masternodes, but I am veeeeeeeeeeeeeery hesitant to do so, exactly because I know how insecure the internets are.
I will operate masternodes eventually, but this strange push to more and more masternodes and more and more rewards for masternodes (at the expense of miners) I find just wrong.
And now even talks questioning the validity of mining itself? LMAO!
More masternodes will come slowly over time, by market demand. Let the amount of coins rise to 9 million and we can have 2000 masternodes, NOT before.

We should be careful is all I am saying, don't let it go to your head.

[daddeo]

Sounds like you're drunk?


I am. But that's neither here nor there.  

[georgem]

2. Why can't a single crappy CPU process a few transactions per minute and broadcast them to the network? In what way exactly am I wrong about that?

What If I decide to buy lots and lots of those CPUs, what if I try to corrupt the system, make double spends, etc..

we still need someone to hash the timestamps and transactions into the public/anonymous ledger, right?

What, you want to completely do away with this?

Again, it's not just about transactions, its about the ledger.
You have not proven to me that masternodes alone can help guarantee the integrity of the public ledger. I don't think they can. Only hashing mathematics can do that...

[thelonecrouton]

Without mining, most of us wouldn't be vested in crypto.

Good point it's a lot easier to get average 9 to 5 worker into mining a few DRK than it is to get them to go out and buy them with $ and that's what it's about getting folk into DRK getting them to realise DRK as part of their own life, getting them to spread the word  

You really think it's easier for someone who wants a means of keeping their finances private to get into mining than to simply buy enough DRK for their needs?

Do you grow all your own food, brew your own booze, fabricate your own vehicles, etc. ?  If you do then great, but if I need a warn coat I go to the shop, I don't shear a sheep and start carding wool.

[thelonecrouton]

Sounds like you're drunk?  

another presumptuous  comment rolled out, dear me you seem proper full of them, I guess it would be an attempt at wit.

Try answering my points?

[thelonecrouton]

2. Why can't a single crappy CPU process a few transactions per minute and broadcast them to the network? In what way exactly am I wrong about that?

What If I decide to buy lots and lots of those CPUs, what if I try to corrupt the system, make double spends, etc..

Go for it. You just need a Masternode wrapped around each one.  

[daddeo]

I have the darkcoins to run 2 Masternodes, but I am veeeeeeeeeeeeeery hesitant to do so, exactly because I know how insecure the internets are.
I will operate masternodes eventually, but this strange push to more and more masternodes and more and more rewards for masternodes (at the expense of miners) I find just wrong.
And now even talks questioning the validity of mining itself? LMAO!
We should be careful is all I am saying, don't let it go to your head.
[/quote]

I'm in the same boat as you. I haven't started any masternodes yet either. And truth be told, a good portion of the modest stash of DRK I have was acquired by mining. I think it's important to have a system of checks and balances. Any one sided affair gets dangerous. However, having said that, I can understand what sir crouton is saying as well. Just because something has always been done a certain way, doesn't mean that there isn't room for improvement.

[thelonecrouton]

Oh you will come to learn the true costs of running a masternode my friend.
The key thing about the miners is that they simply have to be good at mathematics to prove their worth. They need to hash fast and nothing else.

They don't need to hash fast at all, PoW exists to try and ensure decentralisation of whatever that total hash is, that's all.

But prove to me that every masternode holder truly knows how to secure and maintain a server? Are most masternodes still running on amazon clouds, for crying out loud?

Incompetent MN ops will end up with dead Masternodes, more reward for the competent ones, no problem there.

I have the darkcoins to run 2 Masternodes, but I am veeeeeeeeeeeeeery hesitant to do so, exactly because I know how insecure the internets are.
I will operate masternodes eventually, but this strange push to more and more masternodes and more and more rewards for masternodes (at the expense of miners) I find just wrong.
And now even talks questioning the validity of mining itself? LMAO!
We should be careful is all I am saying, don't let it go to your head.

Strong wallet passpword. Nobody has ever bruteforced a decent wallet password. You already have a wallet somewhere, right? You might as well be running your 2 Masternodes then.

[semajjames]

My proposal is that we have Masternodes running p2pool nodes and miners mine on the Masternode network and nowhere else. Solves the 51% threat, eliminates the need for 'enforcing' MN service fees, and ensures decentralisation. 50/50 split between MNs and miners, with miners who leave a balance on the MNP2pool earning a pro-rata cut of the MN reward as well, and meaning that as long as the total MNP2pool node balance is >1000DRK, the MN op can take out some or all of his initial 1000DRK and set up further MNs...  

Sounds like a very centralised banking machine much like HSB paying shit low interest rates.

Sounds like you're drunk?  

Tell me why solving the 51% / centralisation threat by making miners use p2pool, and having those p2pool nodes be Masternodes is a bad idea. Tell me why providing people who don't have enough DRK to run a Masternode a chance to easily have a share in one is a bad idea. Tell me why having more Masternodes as a result of this, and consequently a more robust network is a bad idea.

it's not a bad idea build a pool or whatever offer it to ppl as an easy,secure,reliable and competitive way to own some coin tax them 2%,3%,5%,10% even 20% if you think you can get it,  but don't tell others they cant do it their own way that just makes it nothing more than centralised.    

[thelonecrouton]

My proposal is that we have Masternodes running p2pool nodes and miners mine on the Masternode network and nowhere else. Solves the 51% threat, eliminates the need for 'enforcing' MN service fees, and ensures decentralisation. 50/50 split between MNs and miners, with miners who leave a balance on the MNP2pool earning a pro-rata cut of the MN reward as well, and meaning that as long as the total MNP2pool node balance is >1000DRK, the MN op can take out some or all of his initial 1000DRK and set up further MNs...  

Sounds like a very centralised banking machine much like HSB paying shit low interest rates.

Sounds like you're drunk?  

Tell me why solving the 51% / centralisation threat by making miners use p2pool, and having those p2pool nodes be Masternodes is a bad idea. Tell me why providing people who don't have enough DRK to run a Masternode a chance to easily have a share in one is a bad idea. Tell me why having more Masternodes as a result of this, and consequently a more robust network is a bad idea.

it's not a bad idea build a pool or whatever offer it to ppl as an easy,secure,reliable and competitive way to own some coin tax them 2%,3%,5%,10% even 20% if you think you can get it,  but don't tell others they cant do it their own way that just makes it nothing more than centralised.    

It doesn't make it centralised at all, it just requires everyone to play by the rules, or get off the pitch.

[georgem]

I have the darkcoins to run 2 Masternodes, but I am veeeeeeeeeeeeeery hesitant to do so, exactly because I know how insecure the internets are.
I will operate masternodes eventually, but this strange push to more and more masternodes and more and more rewards for masternodes (at the expense of miners) I find just wrong.
And now even talks questioning the validity of mining itself? LMAO!
We should be careful is all I am saying, don't let it go to your head.

I'm in the same boat as you. I haven't started any masternodes yet either. And truth be told, a good portion of the modest stash of DRK I have was acquired by mining. I think it's important to have a system of checks and balances. Any one sided affair gets dangerous. However, having said that, I can understand what sir crouton is saying as well. Just because something has always been done a certain way, doesn't mean that there isn't room for improvement.

Don't get me wrong, I will never stop anybody from expressing his ideas, even if I don't like them.

All I am saying is, we need to act more like an evolutionary organism... let's have a little redundancy.
Our bodies have many redundant systems that help them function even when some nutrient is missing or scarce.
We need miners and masternodes, and in the future probably even more new kinds of "workers" that help the system survive, be strong and evolve.

The key is to have as much redundancy as possible.
That's why I cringe when I hear smug masternode holders talk down to miners...
It would be like me trying to get rid of the bacteria in my gut, not realizing that they help me digest food and that I will die without them.

[tungfa]

I have an idea that can make us reach world news all of the world, like prime time news. I don't want to just share it since other coins might steal the idea, it's quite a simple idea, but it has never been done before. Its effects will be enormous I think, but maybe I'm wrong. What would be the best way to discuss this idea with just the most important and influential people of this project?

PM Evan directly and ask his email address, and discuss it with him imo. Do NOT discuss anything important in this forum's PMs.

email me please
press@darkcoin.io
or pm me at darkcointalk
i am curious now !!

[georgem]

Oh you will come to learn the true costs of running a masternode my friend.
The key thing about the miners is that they simply have to be good at mathematics to prove their worth. They need to hash fast and nothing else.

They don't need to hash fast at all, PoW exists to try and ensure decentralisation of whatever that total hash is, that's all.

The remaining coins are scarce, and more and more people want to be the first ones to harvest those coins.
That's the simple explanation why miners need to hash faster and faster.

Sure, you can hash slow if you like, ok ok! But don't complain when a faster miner eats all the coins away. 

[thelonecrouton]

The key is to have as much redundancy as possible.
That's why I cringe when I hear smug masternode holders talk down to miners...
It would be like me trying to get rid of the bacteria in my gut, not realizing that they help me digest food and that I will die without them.

Smug? I mined my first Masternode and bought the rest all the way up to 0.019. If miners whine that Masternodes are 'too profitable,' nobody is stopping them selling some GPU's and buying a Masternode too. They'd also save on electricity!  

I am questioning the 80/20 split because I think Masternodes bring more to the table than miners do, that's all.

[thelonecrouton]

Oh you will come to learn the true costs of running a masternode my friend.
The key thing about the miners is that they simply have to be good at mathematics to prove their worth. They need to hash fast and nothing else.

They don't need to hash fast at all, PoW exists to try and ensure decentralisation of whatever that total hash is, that's all.

The remaining coins are scarce, and more and more people want to be the first ones to harvest those coins.
That's the simple explanation why miners need to hash faster and faster.

Sure, you can hash slow if you like, ok ok! But don't complain when a faster miner eats all the coins away. 

More Masternodes make those coins even scarcer... and a tiny % of miners having a small advantage over the others doesn't matter IMO, someone always has some advantage somehow, in anything.

[georgem]

The key is to have as much redundancy as possible.
That's why I cringe when I hear smug masternode holders talk down to miners...
It would be like me trying to get rid of the bacteria in my gut, not realizing that they help me digest food and that I will die without them.

Smug? I mined my first Masternode and bought the rest all the way up to 0.019. If miners whine that Masternodes are 'too profitable,' nobody is stopping them selling some GPU's and buying a Masternode too. They'd also save on electricity!  

I am questioning the 80/20 split because I think Masternodes bring more to the table than miners do, that's all.

What table are you even talking about. I wasn't aware there is a table. We have nothing yet with darkcoin. We need adoption, we need to prove ourselves.
We need to become the best security experts of the world (regarding server security), etc... when we reach that point I will accept that there is a "table".