• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Pre-Proposal: Would you like DASH to leave blockhain technology and pass to Blockchain 2.0?

Pre-Proposal: Would you like DASH to leave blockhain technology and pass to Blockchain 2.0?

  • yes

    Votes: 1 11.1%

  • no

    Votes: 4 44.4%

  • other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Unicorn Rainbo Ass.

    Votes: 4 44.4%
  • Total voters
    9
demo

demo

Well-known member
According to this article, blockchain technology cannot scale, so it cannot be used as the database of the winner digital coin of the future. There are some alternatives that can solve the scalability problem, like Interledger, Stellar SCP , Tendermint or Hyperledger. All of them are also often called blockchain 2.0

Taking into account that you do believe that dash is going to be the winner coin of the future, you have to plan today the porting of dash to blockchain 2.0.

This is a pre-proposal, I am asking you if you want someone to investigate the possibilities and finnaly port dash into blockchain 2.0

<vote history>
Pre-Proposal: Would you like DASH to leave blockhain technology and pass to Blockchain 2.0? yes 1 vote(s) 100.0%, no 0 vote(s) 0.0%, other 0 vote(s) 0.0%
</vote history>
 
Last edited:
You'll need to define these terms before I can make a useful decision about them.

Add a 4th option: Unicorn Rainbo Ass.
 
camosoul said:
You'll need to define these terms before I can make a useful decision about them.
Click to expand...

Read the article.

It explains many of the things I wanted to say and it provides links to other info. I am not an advertiser so I dont like to repeat things already said and present them as mine in order to impress you. Whatever I will post here it is gonna be original research, it is gonna be my own thoughts and my own code (or code commits). I am not planning to copy paste things.

If you are capable to understand the article, and if you agree with it, then cast your "yes" vote here. Otherwise if you are a bad faith evangelist, or an advertiser, or a lawyer, then buzz off. This thread is not for you. This is a thread for people who are searching the truth, like coders do. Because the truth is in the code, and not in the nicely presented youtube videos of the advertisers.

camosoul said:
Add a 4th option: Unicorn Rainbo Ass.
Click to expand...
As you wish.

<vote history>
Pre-Proposal: Would you like DASH to leave blockhain technology and pass to Blockchain 2.0? *yes 1 vote(s) 50.0%, no 0 vote(s) 0.0%, other 1 vote(s) 50.0%, Unicorn Rainbo Ass. 0 vote(s) 0.0%
</vote history>
 
Last edited:
I agree in premise, but not in practice.

This resembles PeerCoin... It's an answer, but it's an incomplete answer. Proof of Hoard was and is counter productive. Until DASH took and and turned Proof of Stake into Proof of Service, it was a bad idea.

Even a good idea is a bad idea if it's only half there, or not combined with other elements.

There are a lot of good ideas in crypto that are useless by themselves.

As described, this is one of them. Something is still missing...
 
camosoul said:
I agree in premise, but not in practice.
This resembles PeerCoin... It's an answer, but it's an incomplete answer. Proof of Hoard was and is counter productive. Until DASH took and and turned Proof of Stake into Proof of Service, it was a bad idea.
Even a good idea is a bad idea if it's only half there, or not combined with other elements.
There are a lot of good ideas in crypto that are useless by themselves.
As described, this is one of them. Something is still missing...
Click to expand...

Of course something is still missing.

But on the other hand DASH uses bitcoin's blockchain which is not scalable (as explained in the article). DASH's bugdet voting system, which is a good idea, is badly designed and offers neither scalability nor granularity. And of course dash is built similarly to the bitcoin pyramid. It is a space-time assymetric coin which is a major philosophical flaw.

DASH has severe deficiencies both techical and philosophical, and its only hope in order to win a place in the future is for the whales to turn rational and fix the deficiencies and flaws by voting the appropriate projects into the budget.

The deficiencies can be fixed only if DASH community focus on research and development. Unfortunately this is not happening. Instead of coders, dash attracts advertisers and the whales are paying them, instead of paying the researchers/developers. At this phase, where scalability is not ensured, it is the quality of the community that matters, not the quantity. If this continues, and if the advertisers cancer augments, DASH is doomed. Many people will arrive, DASH will fail to scale, and it will collapse. At the time of collapse, some people at the top of the pyramid (mostly the whales that are inviting and paying the advertisers) will be already rich. But the vast majority of the DASH community, those who are in the base of the pyramid, will lose.

Something is still missing in the theory , but the deficiencies of DASH are much more than this missed theoretical thing.

<vote history>
Pre-Proposal: Would you like DASH to leave blockhain technology and pass to Blockchain 2.0? yes 1 vote(s) 33.3%, no 0 vote(s) 0.0%, other 0 vote(s) 0.0%, Unicorn Rainbo Ass. 2 vote(s) 66.7%
</vote history>
 
Last edited:
I think Dash needs an open ledger to be a real currency replacement. The services Dash is planning on providing with Evolution, which are essential to commerce require a readable ledger. However, I'm not adverse to having a limit to the accessibility to this information. Say 6 or 10 years worth of information is open on the chain, but anything older could be truncated into combined transactions, total amounts in and out, cryptographically verified, keeping the chain verifiable. People will simply have to make a copy of their wallet transactions and store them themselves at some point or lose the history. But the way Evolution is planned, there should be no scaling issues short term. With incentivized nodes, we are in no danger of running out of space to store a large blockchain and when that becomes a problem, I'm sure a solution to truncating the blockchain will already have been found.

But this isn't possible at this point, as we've set our direction with Evolution. We have to finish Evolution then we can start concentrating on solving some of these other long term issues. There are many ways to resolve this, and as time goes by, more ideas are revealed. So locking in at this point wouldn't be a good idea anyway as there is no immediate need.

Imagine having a block chain. At some point in time, say 12 years in the future, you have a chain that goes in two directions:

genesis <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< X(the last detailed block) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current block. What if something were created where X is a floating spot, that constantly moves forward with every block found. It sits 6 years in the past. Everything before it has been re-encrypted / combined and has a new cryptographic proof. I really don't know if this can be done, as it's just an idea. But it could make a blockchain self cleaning. Of course, only zero'd out accounts would be included, so this whole idea wouldn't be so simple...? But again, I'm sure a solution will come up before it's needed, as there are already so many solutions that have been proposed. We simply can't prepare for this at this point because there are only so many resources and we need to get our product out there and adopted first.
 
TanteStefana said:
Imagine having a block chain. At some point in time, say 12 years in the future, you have a chain that goes in two directions:

genesis <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< X(the last detailed block) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current block. What if something were created where X is a floating spot, that constantly moves forward with every block found. It sits 6 years in the past. Everything before it has been re-encrypted / combined and has a new cryptographic proof. I really don't know if this can be done, as it's just an idea. But it could make a blockchain self cleaning. Of course, only zero'd out accounts would be included, so this whole idea wouldn't be so simple...?
Click to expand...

If this is your own idea, this is what DASH really needs. Original ideas. I really appreciate original research ideas in all fields, and wherever they come from. Your idea may be considered as a Blockchain 2.0 idea, as long as it is not the classic blockchain 1.0 .

But most ideas (blockhain 1.0 or 2.0 included) often have hardcoded magic numbers inside.

The "12 years" of your theory is also an awful hardcoded magic number. Hardcoded numbers with no theory behind, are always wrong and always should be voted. This 12 number should be voted too. And of course as long as the theory requires that a minimum and a maximum to be set when voting with numbers, the minimum vote should be allowed to be 0 years, and the maximum vote should be allowed to be the (expected) lifetime (approx. 80 years) of a person (additionaly, if someone dies-disappears in the meantime, the vote he casted is archived and the result is recalculated).

Who decides what the maximum or the minimum of a number vote is? Logic of course! In your theory, you cannot delete the logs faster than time zero! And of course, you are not allowed to vote something to stay valid beyond your own death!

The result of the vote could be extracted using the average, the majority, unanimity, or whatever rule someone may proposes, as long as this rule is also voted (yes the decision rules used to extract the results are also voted, there is no authority that decides what the decision rule should be!) and as long as the voted-winner decision rule respects its own definition, according to the bold rule.

See how the voting number theory converges? See how you can take decisions using only voting and logic? See how no authority exists to decide the hardcoded numbers? I hope you can see it, but if you cannot I can post a series of votes that apply to your theory, for you to understand how the decisions are made.

<vote history>
Pre-Proposal: Would you like DASH to leave blockhain technology and pass to Blockchain 2.0? yes 1 vote(s) 16.7%, no 1 vote(s) 16.7%, other 0 vote(s) 0.0%, Unicorn Rainbo Ass. 4 vote(s) 66.7%
</vote history>
 
Last edited:
raganius said:
We already have IOTA.
Click to expand...
What is this ? Can you explain this to us in technical terms? What are they trying to accomplish? I tried to understand what exactly it does but I failed, mostly because they use their own terminology. For example they say "tangle" instead of Directed acyclic graph. They say "tip", but they define it differently than the original tip everyone of us know is. Changing words' meaning is a bad practice.

Whatever IOTA is, it seems to be yet another time-space asymmetric coin, a "get quick rich" and a "whoever comes first wins" pyramid , like bitcoin or dash is. Or is this "get money now" thing an alternative to the universal dividend? Who knows? He seems to be involved somehow, and many of us know who he is.

raganius said:
Scalability limits
Some cryptocurrencies have hard limits on the maximum transaction rate and this limits cannot be removed in a decentralized manner. A magic number of a limit set before the launch cannot satisfy requirements of a system unless it is set by a person with extraordinary prediction skill. A too low value may hinder growth of the userbase, a too high value may open system to different kinds of attacks.
Click to expand...

And how do they plan to solve that problem? Voting with numbers maybe? If not then what is their solution for magic numbers? Do they have magic numbers in their code, or is their code magic number free?

<vote history>
Pre-Proposal: Would you like DASH to leave blockhain technology and pass to Blockchain 2.0? yes 1 vote(s) 12.5% ,no 3 vote(s) 37.5% ,other 0 vote(s) 0.0% ,Unicorn Rainbo Ass. 4 vote(s) 50.0%
</vote history>
 
Last edited:
demo said:
You are right in a sense, but what I consider as blockchain 2 is (above all) something that can SCALE.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Dash can scale. Evolution will store the blockchain on the masternodes. The user wallets won't need the blockchain. This allows for large block sizes and transaction/s exceeding the payment systems we use today.
 
Solarminer said:
Dash has already passed blockchain 1.0 or 2.0. It is actually fungible AND instant.
Click to expand...

Yep, Dash is using the blockchain to do what it's extremely good at, a distributed and infallible ledger. Trying to get something as slow and bulky as a blockchain to do more than that is like trying to turn an accounts book into a debit card, additional layers optimised for the necessary functions are the correct way implement things like privacy and instant transactions. One of the basic and fundamental rules of software development, KIS (keep it simple).
 
Solarminer said:
Yeah, Dash can scale. Evolution will store the blockchain on the masternodes. The user wallets won't need the blockchain. This allows for large block sizes and transaction/s exceeding the payment systems we use today.
Click to expand...

If you store the blockchain only to the masternodes and not to the wallets, then there is no real decentralization. The blockchain will increase, and this will require bigger and bigger masternodes, which means fewer and fewer masternodes, so that way you become more and more centralized. Banks are also scalable, but they are highly centralized! We are asking for scalability, without of course sacrifying decentralization!

Actually the FIRST value is decentralization, and then scalability follows. If you revert the order of the values, then you are not what we are looking for.
 
Last edited:
demo said:
If you store the blockchain on the masternodes, the there is no real decentralization. The blockchain will increase, this will require bigger and bigger masternodes, so that way you become more and more centralized.
Banks are scalable, but they are also centralized!
We are asking for scalability, without of course sacrifying decentralization!
Click to expand...

DashDrive uses sharding, kind of like distributed RAID. Sure, it gets bigger but I think the current capacity based on low end hardware is around 600 terrabytes and masternode operators are well aware they'll need quite high spec hardware for Evolutions capabilities so 100 times that capacity is well within scope. That's before the option of reducing masternode collateral requirements btw, cut that to 100 and 1 exabyte is well within scope, a million terrabytes.
 
stan.distortion said:
masternode operators are well aware they'll need quite high spec hardware for Evolutions capabilities .
Click to expand...

Well , this is a major problem. The higher hardware specs you require, the less masternode operators you have capable to fullfil the requirements, so the more centralized you become. If you sacrifice decentralization in favor of scalability, this is a problem.

This is the problem IOTA are trying to solve, with a database that resides into the internet of things. The internet of things is suppposed to be low spec hardware. Implementing a scalable database into low spec hardware, this is what fulfills both decentralization and scalability initial goals most cryptocoins have.
 
Last edited:
demo said:
What is this ? Can you explain this to us in technical terms? What are they trying to accomplish? I tried to understand what exactly it does but I failed, mostly because they use their own terminology. For example they say "tangle" instead of Directed acyclic graph. They say "tip", but they define it differently than the original tip everyone of us know is. Changing words' meaning is a bad practice.

Whatever IOTA is, it seems to be yet another time-space asymmetric coin, a "get quick rich" and a "whoever comes first wins" pyramid , like bitcoin or dash is. Or is this "get money now" thing an alternative to the universal dividend? Who knows? He seems to be involved somehow, and many of us know who he is.



And how do they plan to solve that problem? Voting with numbers maybe? If not then what is their solution for magic numbers? Do they have magic numbers in their code, or is their code magic number free?

<vote history>
Pre-Proposal: Would you like DASH to leave blockhain technology and pass to Blockchain 2.0? yes 1 vote(s) 12.5% ,no 3 vote(s) 37.5% ,other 0 vote(s) 0.0% ,Unicorn Rainbo Ass. 4 vote(s) 50.0%
</vote history>
Click to expand...

I suggest starting by the whitepaper: https://iotatoken.com/IOTA_Whitepaper.pdf as it explains in details, and in an accessible way, the technology.

1*nbybAXt1wOXE4OJ6vh_OPA.jpeg
 
demo said:
Well , this is the problem. The higher hardware specs you require, the less masternode operators you have, so the more centralized you become.
Click to expand...

That doesn't follow logically. Firstly, current masternode returns would allow for much higher spec hardware while still returning a safe profit so there's very little incentive to shut down and secondly, the top end of Evolutions specifications are in the region of visa and mastercards total transaction volume combined so if hardware to handle those top end specs was needed Dashes market cap (and masternode returns) would be orders of magnitude higher than present.
 
stan.distortion said:
That doesn't follow logically. Firstly, current masternode returns would allow for much higher spec hardware while still returning a safe profit so there's very little incentive to shut down and secondly, the top end of Evolutions specifications are in the region of visa and mastercards total transaction volume combined so if hardware to handle those top end specs was needed Dashes market cap (and masternode returns) would be orders of magnitude higher than present.
Click to expand...

My point of view is simple.
What is the cost of a masternode? It is masternode_fee+hardware_cost.
If hardware cost increases, then the masternode cost increases.
If the masternode cost increases then fewer persons can handle that cost.
So fewer persons become masternodes, so the dash network becomes more and more centralized.

You have to remember that decentralization is counted in unique persons, not in number of machines!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top