Bitcoin Flash: If Bitcoin and Dash had a baby...

ScioMind

ScioMind

Active member
So, on Jan 5, 2018, a new coin, based on the Instant X of Dash, but using the existing Bitcoin blockchain is to be released, to be called "Bitcoin Flash." (BTF) It seems that this new coin is not going to have any anonymity features, at least not for now, although I imagine that this could come along later, after the BTF masternode network gets up and running.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this new coin? Here's its site: https://bitcoinflash.io
 
Well, this is actually a form of flattery. I don't see why would anyone want to use this coin instead of Dash. Only existing Bitcoin holders would actually have any benefit because they would already have some coins, but I'm guessing most of them would probably sell their coins as soon as possible.
It could be a good alternative for Dash miners, though. At least in the short term.
 
Well, it does have "Bitcoin" in the name, which can't hurt. But are there technical reasons to choose one over the other?
 
Well, Dash development team for one.
Yes, they can copy Dash, but I don't see how they can innovate as fast as Dash.
Also, they would be just one of the (now many) Bitcoin forks, or if you look at it another way, one of the copies of Dash. Dash is the original here.
 
You know, I was actually thinking about the Dash development team myself. I've been following cryptos for quite a while, and have been simply blown away by the organization and innovation of the Dash team. I'm also of the mind that Dash is the superior coin, but this is an interesting development, and I naturally was (and still am) curious about any other viewpoints on this.
 
demo said:
Will you vote the numbers in your coin?
Click to expand...
I have seen you talk about "voting the numbers" over and over, all over the forum. There are many ways of voting, and ALL of them have to do with numbers. There are voting systems which require a majority, some which require a super-majority, countless variations of proportional voting systems, and so on.

First, you would have to describe in complete, unambiguous detail, in a way which everyone on here could easily understand, EXACTLY what YOU mean, when you use that very ambiguous phrase, "voting the numbers." Furthermore, it would be helpful if you explained, again as clearly as possible, what the advantage of YOUR "voting the numbers" has over the current system, or even better, why it might be the OPTIMUM system. Then I will be in a better position to answer you, just as clearly.

Also, please see my answer here.
 
ScioMind said:
I have seen you talk about "voting the numbers" over and over, all over the forum. There are many ways of voting, and ALL of them have to do with numbers. There are voting systems which require a majority, some which require a super-majority, countless variations of proportional voting systems, and so on.

First, you would have to describe in complete, unambiguous detail, in a way which everyone on here could easily understand, EXACTLY what YOU mean, when you use that very ambiguous phrase, "voting the numbers." Furthermore, it would be helpful if you explained, again as clearly as possible, what the advantage of YOUR "voting the numbers" has over the current system, or even better, why it might be the OPTIMUM system. Then I will be in a better position to answer you, just as clearly.

Also, please see my answer here.
Click to expand...
Vote the numbers is not a selection process (majority, mean average e.t.c) . Although in order to extract a result form a set of numerical votes you have to choose/vote a selection process . Vote the numbers is just to allow the electorate to vote directly a number, instead of voting yes/no/abstain or rank or range-vote predecided choices (condorcet method or range voting).

I dont care what number you are going to chose to vote. Vote whatever number you like. Vote for the most innocent number. For example, you could vote for the "Adaptive proposal fees" of @GrandMasterDash.

Be the first community in the human history to do that.
 
Last edited:
demo said:
Vote the numbers is not a selection process (majority, mean average e.t.c) . Although in order to extract a result form a set of numerical votes you have to choose/vote a selection process . Vote the numbers is just to allow the electorate to vote directly a number, instead of voting yes/no/abstain or rank or range-vote predecided choices (condorcet method or range voting).

I dont care what number you are going to chose to vote. Vote whatever number you like. Vote for the most innocent number. For example, you could vote for the "Adaptive proposal fees" of @GrandMasterDash.

Be the first community in the human history to do that.
Click to expand...
Focus. I am not asking what vote the numbers is NOT. I am asking you to CLEARLY describe EXACTLY what you mean by "vote the numbers."
 
ScioMind said:
Focus. I am not asking what vote the numbers is NOT. I am asking you to CLEARLY describe EXACTLY what you mean by "vote the numbers."
Click to expand...
Let an electorate vote for all the initial and regulative values of a system. This is "vote the numbers". Depending on the system, you may discover many initial and regulative values to be voted.

In Dash's case, for example, you may vote for the budget which is 45% mnos-45% miners-10% proposals , you may vote for the maximum number of masternodes, vote for the masternodes collateral fee, vote for the network parameters e.t.c. e.t.c.

For begining, you dont have to deal with all of them. Just pick the easiest one which is vote the "Adaptive proposal fees" of @GrandMasterDash.

The code is almost ready. Will you try it?
 
Last edited:
ScioMind said:
Ok, so "vote for the numbers" means "vote for the numbers which control the protocol?"
Click to expand...
Almost that. Additionaly to the numbers which control the protocol, you should vote the numbers which initialize the protocol.
 
Well, we already can vote to change the numbers which control the protocol. That's covered by masternode governance already. In order to make an informed vote, however, one would need evidence regarding what numbers would be optimum. In the absence of such evidence, I would say that the current numbers seem to be working just fine, but I would not be adverse to "tweaking" them, if that seemed to be an improvement.

As for changing the numbers which initialize the protocol, wouldn't that mean creating a new coin from scratch?
 
ScioMind said:
Well, we already can vote to change the numbers which control the protocol. That's covered by masternode governance already. In order to make an informed vote, however, one would need evidence regarding what numbers would be optimum. In the absence of such evidence, I would say that the current numbers seem to be working just fine, but I would not be adverse to "tweaking" them, if that seemed to be an improvement.

As for changing the numbers which initialize the protocol, wouldn't that mean creating a new coin from scratch?
Click to expand...

"Vote the numbers" is a community driven numerical voiting. The community may decide to switch the runtime of its coin, from one coin type to another. This is what numerical voting capability offers. You dont have to re-create the coin from scratch. You can change it in the runtime. "Vote the numbers" refers to the runtime of the coin and of course it is a vote casted by individuals, not a automated vote casted by masternodes/machines/computers.

"Vote the numbers" refers also to a bounded vote, for all the numbers that have no theory behind. For example, there is no reason why you should have maximum 10000 masternodes and not maximum 11000 masternodes or maximum 9999 masternodes. There is no theory behind this initial number. So this number is a candidate to be voted.
 
Last edited:
Votes by Masternodes aren't "automated." They are cast by those who own them.

Also, I can see a danger in changing certain numerical variables in "run time" without testing on testnet first.

So, why do you feel this is such an important issue? No one else seems to, so I would like to know why this is so important in your mind.
 
ScioMind said:
So, why do you feel this is such an important issue? No one else seems to, so I would like to know why this is so important in your mind.
Click to expand...

It is not important only to me. It is important also to 458 masternodes.
Maybe you should ask them first.
I am not a masternode, so what I have in my mind does not count a lot.
 
ScioMind said:
But answer the question: WHY is it so important? Why should I care? This is what I want to know.
Click to expand...

It is a matter of freedom. Some masternodes accept themselves to be the slaves of the core team, while some others want to be free to choose the numbers.
 
demo said:
It is a matter of freedom. Some masternodes accept themselves to be the slaves of the core team, while some others want to be free to choose the numbers.
Click to expand...
It is not a matter of accepting slavery. That would be stupid. It is a matter of thinking that in certain things the core team has more knowledge, and they defer to them for that reason.

Furthermore, Masternode operators are already free to "choose the numbers" for anything they want. All they have to do is make a proposal (or pre-proposal) and vote.

The more you talk about this, and the more I actually understand it, the more it seems like a non issue.

Thanks for clarifying, though. I appreciate it.
 
ScioMind said:
Furthermore, Masternode operators are already free to "choose the numbers" for anything they want. All they have to do is make a proposal (or pre-proposal) and vote.

The more you talk about this, and the more I actually understand it, the more it seems like a non issue.
Click to expand...
The proposals and preproposals are not considered to be in the runtime. They are offline.
Of course vote the numbers can also be applied to proposals in case an alternative budget system is applied.

@UdjinM6 wrote code in order to allow the masternodes to vote the numbers (the core team rejected it), so he thinks it is not an non issue. The same applies also to @Pietro Speroni, or to @GrandMasterDash. As long as it is an issue for at least 4 persons, it is not a non issue.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top