Masternode Proof of Stake

kryptofoo

kryptofoo

Active member
Folks including myself are getting ever more concerned about centralization of mining operations on Bitcoin and of course in our beloved darkcoin PoW network. Is this community open to even considering moving to a sort of Masternode/Proof of Stake system?

I'm talking about ending PoW and making DRK a PoS coin where staking is done via operating a masternode. We could drop the Masternode cost to allow more democratic distribution. Of course pooled masternode services would lead to centralization analogous to the mining pool problem. But if we could make it easy enough for the average user to operate a masternode, there would be no need for pools.

Why couldn't operating a masternode be done via the qt client? Keep e.g. 500 DRK in local wallet. Unlock wallet for staking only (a.k.a. masternode start). Most folks could run this on their personal PC. If you want to run more than one masternode or need a beefier system, rent a server.

I know many people are opposed to proof of stake coins. One of my own personal complaints against them is that most coin distribution was done via a very short mining period to a few large miners. In the case of darkcoin, distribution is already completed via months of purely democratic market based means.

I just finished listening to Dan Larimer on LTB # 155 and he reinforced my sentiment that PoS offers advantages over PoW, especially in terms of centralization.

Thoughts on this?
 
Interesting idea. Could you outline the disadvantages of keeping the current system and the specific obstacles of implementing PoW?
 
PoW has more credibiity. Proof of Stake will just open us up to other vulnerabilities, and involve more hard forks. Let's get the current system enforced. And keep going. This strikes me as fiddling in the wrong direction.

*edit* Rather make a masternode p2pool network
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We have to take drastic measures without giving a damn about centralization accusations. We all know that maternodes are less centralized than pools. Trolls are gonna troll. It is time to make some bold moves or soon shit might spiral down fast and we will be left scratching our heads.
 
kryptofoo said:
...moving to a sort of Masternode/Proof of Stake system?
Click to expand...

So far EVERY PoS coin I had stakes in (not all of course, so there might be exceptions) because I mined coins went South quickly when the PoW phase finished because the community lost interest in the project because, well, there was nothing to do any more. Watching grass grow is equally entertaining.

This _might_ change in the future, but right now I would never risk this.
 
Anonymity and instant TX is Darkcoin's calling card. How it implements consensus is another matter.

Getting tired of huge pools not updating, having huge share of the network from time to time, and not paying or reluctantly paying masternodes. Give 100% of the reward to masternodes and let them do consensus, then we can achieve the thousands of nodes that Evan needs for instant TX.
 
darkwing said:
PoW has more credibiity. Proof of Stake will just open us up to other vulnerabilities, and involve more hard forks. Let's get the current system enforced. And keep going. This strikes me as fiddling in the wrong direction.

*edit* Rather make a masternode p2pool network
Click to expand...
Can you briefly describe how a masternode p2pool network would work? Am not grokking this idea.

Edit: Doesn't restricting mining to masternodes still leave us with an arms race resulting in large mining operations that can afford high powered equipment? In this case, we would just be adding the additional cost of 1000 DRK to their budget. Or?
 
I'm not fully versed on POS, but it seems to me that the bigger the hash, the bigger the protection.
I can't see 3000-100000 cpu's offering as much blockchain integrity as Gigahashes can.

If we can assess the bandwidth impact, I'm interested in how p2pool could work with masternodes too.
 
kryptofoo said:
Can you briefly describe how a masternode p2pool network would work? Am not grokking this idea.

Edit: Doesn't restricting mining to masternodes still leave us with an arms race resulting in large mining operations that can afford high powered equipment? In this case, we would just be adding the additional cost of 1000 DRK to their budget. Or?
Click to expand...

Anyone can still mine but instead of pools the work goes through the masternode network. So instead of having to update pools and masternode network. Only the masternode network will have to be updated.
 
I just posted this on BCT, but I don't like the idea of MNs controlling the blockchain because you can't tell who owns what with them, and though >50% share doesn't matter much for MN work, it matters a ton with the validity of the block chain. We need to have both. As far as these hard forks are concerned, they won't be necessary anymore soon. The foundation is almost complete and in balance. These are growing pains we simply must endure, IMO. :)
 
moocowmoo said:
I'm not fully versed on POS, but it seems to me that the bigger the hash, the bigger the protection.
I can't see 3000-100000 cpu's offering as much blockchain integrity as Gigahashes can.

If we can assess the bandwidth impact, I'm interested in how p2pool could work with masternodes too.
Click to expand...
No, total hash by itself is meaningless, it needs to be distributed to offer any 'security' and 3 pools owning >50% of the network (the case for BTC, DRK, and most PoW coins) is not security.
 
crowning said:
So far EVERY PoS coin I had stakes in (not all of course, so there might be exceptions) because I mined coins went South quickly when the PoW phase finished because the community lost interest in the project because, well, there was nothing to do any more. Watching grass grow is equally entertaining.

This _might_ change in the future, but right now I would never risk this.
Click to expand...
What did any of those coins do that had real world utility?

Without adoption DRK is just an interesting little experiment. Eventual success has nothing to do with maintaining the interest of a few geeks.
 
We are in Wired Magazine again. But market doesn't give a damn anymore. Last time when Wired had an article price was around 0.020. This mining pool businesses is hurting coins pretty bad. How long we are gonna deny the obvious? In case everyone here is suffering from tunnel vision, I will spell it out again: We need to make some drastic moves or we are seriously in danger of going into the irreversible path.

RQXeoL6.png


http://www.wired.com/2014/11/darkcoin-and-online-drug-dealers/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top