Should Platform run on all nodes or should Platform run only on High Performance nodes ?

[vazaki3]

MNOwatch has a page that lists every OP_RETURN ever created, what can you find in the data, anything illegal?

https://mnowatch.org/history/

Plausible deniability.

The Dashplatform is something similar to the OP_return mnowatch page. The Dashplatform is a blockchain, like bitcoin or dash is, but extremely searchable (in contrast to bitcoin or dash). Of course people could search extremely the blockchain in privacy, as you did, and in that case the extreme searching capabilities of DashPlatform may be considered as obsolete. But are they? DashPlatform makes the blockchain searching public, available to anyone and most importantly offers a public search that is irrefutable and uncensorable .

Searching in Mnowatch OP_RETURN page is not irrefutable, because someone may claim that not all OP_RETURN content resides in mnowatch, and that some content have been excluded from the search.

This property of irrefutable uncensorable public search that Dashplatform offers, gives an advantage over any other search engine (google included)

 

[GrandMasterDash]

Indeed, a mistake. Our positive feedback is dominated by a very negative minority.
It seems, that it needs to be spelled out in bold and all upper case: POSITIVE FEEDBACK.

With all the very good explanations from Sam, the 10k-HPMN solution seems to be the best choice for the first release. The DCG guys are smart and very patient. They listen to all feedback and try their best to evaluate other ideas. Delays are quite normal in such field of software development.

Again, keep up DCG! You DTRT!

Thanks for your efforts!
Peter

Having a majority does not grant permission for the potentially illegal use of the DAO. DCG are promoting a significant change to the topology of the network and have effectively said legally established consensus rules will not apply.

 

[TheNetworkIsBiggerThanYou]

Plausible deniability.

The Dashplatform is something similar to the OP_return mnowatch page.
The Dashplatform is a blockchain, like bitcoin or dash is, but extremely searchable (in contrast to bitcoin or dash).
Of course people could search extremely the blockchain in privacy, as you did, and in that case the extreme searching capabilities of DashPlatform are obsolete.
But DashPlatform makes this search public, available to anyone and most important irrefutable .

Searching in Mnowatch OP_RETURN page is not irrefutable, because someone may claim that not all OP_RETURN content resides in mnowatch, and that some content have been excluded from the search.

MNO Watch is the application pulling data from the Network (core, platform, doesn't matter). If we wanted any messed up things not to be displayed we'd go to the MNOWatch operator to add moderation features. If he didn't, it would be up to authorities to go after him (supposing their goal is to prevent the dissemination of vile contet).

 

[GrandMasterDash]

It would be interesting to observe what the actual voting response will be, once the DCG decision proposals hit the Dash network and masternode owners need to vote on them.

Also, it will be very interesting to see how CrowdNode users vote. I'm hoping DCG will DTRT and void all votes if there is a large discrepancy in how CrowdNode users vote. That would be clear evidence of how impactful centralized voting is.

 

[vazaki3]

MNO Watch is the application pulling data from the Network (core, platform, doesn't matter). If we wanted any messed up things not to be displayed we'd go to the MNOWatch operator to add moderation features. If he didn't, it would be up to authorities to go after him (supposing their goal is to prevent the dissemination of vile contet).

Yes, but someone may create a private mnowatch op_return page . Or someone else may opensource the code used to create the mnowatch op_return page for private usage. In that case, even if we go to the mnowatch operator and add moderation features on his search engine, the one who searches for illegal content can still find it.

In contrast to mnowatch op_return page, that offers private or public (but potentially censorable) searching capabilities, the dashplatform (through groveDB) offers a public, irrefutable and unsencored searching of the blockchain (provided of course that all possible keys are indexed as groveDB claims).

So groveDB facilitates the discovery of illegal content that may hurt people, so I wonder whether @QuantumExplorer really opposes to the idea people to be hurted, or whether deep inside he likes the idea. If not, then why did he created groveDB, in the first place?

 

[GrandMasterDash]

598 MN-votes (approximately 76 individuals) acknowledge the work of DCG, but not necessarily the work of DashPlatform.

If DCG really wants to discover the truth, then they should split their next DCG-COMP-JAN-MAR23 into DASHPAY-COMP-JAN-MAR23 and DASHPLATFORM-COMP-JAN-MAR23 .

But I am afraid they will not, because truth hurts.

Damn it, this is 100% spot on. They never had the balls to put their money where their mouth is. They just played us with lies.

Members of DCG are distancing themselves from Duffield's vision when the truth is, in all of 7 years, not one person notified MNOs that there were too many masternodes and only a few would be able to participate in Platform. NOT ONE!

It's called lies by omission.

Now they are claiming there is only one solution with two parameters (4K/10K). They tell us that 1K Platform is insecure and at risk of centralization.

 

[TheNetworkIsBiggerThanYou]

yes someone else may create OTHER apps. Those people will need to be held accountable.

 

[vazaki3]

yes someone else may create OTHER apps. Those people will need to be held accountable.

So you imply that whoever creates apps that are searching the blockchain (or even more apps, that are searching the blockhain in an irrefutable uncensorable way) these persons should be held accountable ?

Well, this is also the case of Dashplatform, and its groveDB database which is the ultimate searching tool for blockchains.
Is it maybe NOT a good idea to thoroughly search the blockchain, in fear that illegal content may become public?

Nine months ago.................................................................................................................................................
...after draining for 6 years all the money from the stupid masternodes, the GroveDB baby was born.

.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

Before you do this please consult legal council. I imagine explicitly welcoming specific content is different legally than welcoming all content. It could be a situation where you open the network up to liability.

Indeed, this is exactly how it works. If you censor content, even just once ("oh, it's just this one thing that is quite obviously illegal and immoral"), you will be held responsible to censor all content.

If, OTOH, you never censor content, and if you are a large well funded organization, you can push the blame on to others. For example, ISPs aren't generally liable, though they do perform tasks to catch low hanging fruit.

As a DAO that a government can't tame or coerce, dash would be persecuted, de-listed and punished like monero and others. If we're de-listed for coinjoin, what kind of party are we going to have with this?

 

[DASHvestor]

Anybody voting on the 4K or 10K "solutions" will ultimately vote for more centralization and creating an elitist cartel running Platform exclusively.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but the way they have planned this, those 4K or 10K nodes could use the lamest bandwidth connections and/or high-latency
connections, but as long as they have the collateral, everything is fine. Right?
Higher collateral doesn't guarantee better service, especially not in an environment which has no PoSe. Can we agree on that?

Then supposedly, they are planning to just payout 4fold or 10fold the MN rewards for such 4K or 10K HPMNs.
But in doing so, they will basically create a second type/category of blockreward or at the very least a variable blockreward, where the amount of the
MN reward is depending on the collateralization of the node, whether its either a regular 1K node or a HPMN. This is going to affect Dash Tokenomics.
Because if a subset of nodes, gets paid 4fold or 10fold on an average 2.625 minute blocktime block, it will mean that the Dash coins still to be mined
until reaching Max Supply, will be mined way faster than planned and outlined in our Tokenomics. One doesn't need to be a math genius to understand that.

They won't give us the opportunity to vote on regular 1K MN with Voluntary Adherence to Platform (with or without Hardware-related competition).
They keep on repeating that it would be unsafe or somehow unsecure, but i don't believe them.
If they would spend only 5% of their effort with which they try to impose 4K or 10K, they would easily find a proper and safe way to do it.
Because it would be the most natural, non-coercive and sensible way to start Platform.

Anyway, its pointless to have this alibi discussion here for them.
Those DCG guys especially QE and Virgile are hell-bent on introducing either 4K or 10K, have already made their mind up, and will stop at nothing.
They will try to arrange the Voting in such a way, that either 4K or 10K comes out winning, perhaps by only a few Yes votes, and then use those Fake Votings
(even if its technically an unpassing Governance proposal with no enacting power whatsoever) as an excuse to impose this abomination.
Unpassing proposals have no merit at all. Unpassing proposals do not show you any direction. Unpassing proposals will not absolve you from your deeds.
Be warned: If you cross this red line, you can expect lawsuits for damages coming your way.

 

[virgile]

You can use a cryptographic protocol in order to reveal the decryption key, without revealing neither the one who reveals the decryption key nor the one who gets the information of the decryption key.
@virgile the cryptographer, can help on it, cant he?

Think for a second about what you propose. you're talking of a square rolling wheel

 

[stan.distortion]

This is not the topic for this thread. I have a feeling when I respond we will go offtopic. I'll respond very succinctly here. If though you want to continue the conversation about it I would suggest making a new thread dedicated to the topic.

We need to start by having a common understanding of what censorship means. According to the dictionary it is defined as to "examine officially and suppress unacceptable parts of it." According to that definition at launch there will be no censorship. Why? Because we are limiting sizes on Dash Platform to things really very small in order to push this problem to a future release. There is no examination of content so there is no censorship, but the goal of suppression of undesirable content is somewhat achieved.

Second we need to understand what the goal is... Platform should not be used as a marketplace for contract killings, terrorism and child pornography (and other things at this level). If anyone thinks it should, then there's nothing I'm willing to debate. However I think most people when talking about censorship are thinking more about people censoring online free speech. I think many here are rational enough to see the difference between someone who wants to participate in child abuse and someone who criticises the government.
...

There is no difference, if one can be censored then so can the other. You use knives, right? But they get used in murders every day! The tool cannot be held accountable for the uses to which it is put and exactly the same thing applies to money, it's part of the definition of money. Why should that be any different for tokens?

You say don't want this issue derailing the thread so I'm guessing you're underestimating it. Tokenisation can replace the www and that's not some vague possibility somewhere on the arse end of the probability scale, when nations realise they can use it to censor every single bit of data that crosses their communications borders then they'll do everything in their power to "embrace the technological revolution". Amazon will be pushing them towards it, so will google, so will meta, so will microsoft... within 10 years practically all data will be tokenised and open communications will be blocked, "approved services only".

And hardly anyone will notice, your browser still works, your messaging apps still work, your games still work and shopping is easier than ever before! Anything "unapproved" gets cancelled and if you complain too much then you get cancelled too.

There's only a small window of opportunity for an alternative and the only path I can see for that is open standards gaining mainstream adoption before corporate offerings take over. It will be extremely difficult to compete with centralised services on cost and performance, not impossible but it has to be done quickly otherwise freedom of information gets cancelled.

 

[QuantumExplorer]

Anybody voting on the 4K or 10K "solutions" will ultimately vote for more centralization and creating an elitist cartel running Platform exclusively.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but the way they have planned this, those 4K or 10K nodes could use the lamest bandwidth connections and/or high-latency
connections, but as long as they have the collateral, everything is fine. Right?
Higher collateral doesn't guarantee better service, especially not in an environment which has no PoSe. Can we agree on that?

Then supposedly, they are planning to just payout 4fold or 10fold the MN rewards for such 4K or 10K HPMNs.
But in doing so, they will basically create a second type/category of blockreward or at the very least a variable blockreward, where the amount of the
MN reward is depending on the collateralization of the node, whether its either a regular 1K node or a HPMN. This is going to affect Dash Tokenomics.
Because if a subset of nodes, gets paid 4fold or 10fold on an average 2.625 minute blocktime block, it will mean that the Dash coins still to be mined
until reaching Max Supply, will be mined way faster than planned and outlined in our Tokenomics. One doesn't need to be a math genius to understand that.

They won't give us the opportunity to vote on regular 1K MN with Voluntary Adherence to Platform (with or without Hardware-related competition).
They keep on repeating that it would be unsafe or somehow unsecure, but i don't believe them.
If they would spend only 5% of their effort with which they try to impose 4K or 10K, they would easily find a proper and safe way to do it.
Because it would be the most natural, non-coercive and sensible way to start Platform.

Anyway, its pointless to have this alibi discussion here for them.
Those DCG guys especially QE and Virgile are hell-bent on introducing either 4K or 10K, have already made their mind up, and will stop at nothing.
They will try to arrange the Voting in such a way, that either 4K or 10K comes out winning, perhaps by only a few Yes votes, and then use those Fake Votings
(even if its technically an unpassing Governance proposal with no enacting power whatsoever) as an excuse to impose this abomination.
Unpassing proposals have no merit at all. Unpassing proposals do not show you any direction. Unpassing proposals will not absolve you from your deeds.
Be warned: If you cross this red line, you can expect lawsuits for damages coming your way.

You are completely wrong on how rewards are distributed. Since I've explained it multiple times already and you still got it wrong, I'll ask you to reread the forum / or rewatch the AMA. If you don't want to do this we will be publishing a FAQ in the next week or so which will explain to you how rewards are distributed. Hint: core block rewards are given to HPMN and MN the same way as before. HPMNS will make less against their collateral on core, but it is offset by making more on platform.

The speed of reaching the Max Supply is exactly the same as well.

 

[DASHvestor]

You are completely wrong on how rewards are distributed. Since I've explained it multiple times already and you still got it wrong, I'll ask you to reread the forum / or rewatch the AMA. If you don't want to do this we will be publishing a FAQ in the next week or so which will explain to you how rewards are distributed. Hint: core block rewards are given to HPMN and MN the same way as before. HPMNS will make less against their collateral on core, but it is offset by making more on platform.

The speed of reaching the Max Supply is exactly the same as well.

Very few MultiMNO could be willing to convert 4 or 10 regular nodes and turn them into a HPMN,
unless you are able to guarantee the same (or higher) compensation, if they decide to run Platform and convert to HPMN.
Can you guarantee Platform rewards?
Because Core rewards are (almost) guaranteed, or say, they are somewhat predictable at least.

 

[QuantumExplorer]

Very few MultiMNO could be willing to convert 4 or 10 regular nodes and turn them into a HPMN,
unless you are able to guarantee the same (or higher) compensation, if they decide to run Platform and convert to HPMN.
Can you guarantee Platform rewards?
Because Core rewards are (almost) guaranteed, or say, they are somewhat predictable at least.

Back in the day (2015) when we rolled out Masternode rewards they were not so predictable. I imagine the same will happen with Platform. Its pseudorandom so sometimes you will get slightly less, sometimes you will get slightly more. Though because there are a lot more blocks in platform, the probability of a HPMN getting anything too outside the ordinary is very low. Let's say there is a 1 in a million chance you will get 50% less or 50% more in a month. I think HPMNs can live with this for some time if it means releasing faster.

 

[DASHvestor]

Back in the day (2015) when we rolled out Masternode rewards they were not so predictable. I imagine the same will happen with Platform. Its pseudorandom so sometimes you will get slightly less, sometimes you will get slightly more. Though because there are a lot more blocks in platform, the probability of a HPMN getting anything too outside the ordinary is very low. Let's say there is a 1 in a million chance you will get 50% less or 50% more in a month. I think HPMNs can live with this for some time if it means releasing faster.

Just saying, if not all of those HPMN will always get at the very least 90% of the Rewards they had gotten running 4 or 10 regular 1K masternodes,
then you would see them flee en masse, word would spread and nobody would convert to HPMN, it wouldn't be economically viable if it pays considerably less.
Hopefully you have done the math that has shown its indeed economically viable.
Frankly, i am wondering where all those Rewards are coming from, because it will be very difficult and extremely tough to compensate HPMN to the same extent
they would be compensated by running multiple regular 1K masternodes.
But i'm sure you guys know what you are doing.

 

[qwizzie]

Back in the day (2015) when we rolled out Masternode rewards they were not so predictable. I imagine the same will happen with Platform. Its pseudorandom so sometimes you will get slightly less, sometimes you will get slightly more. Though because there are a lot more blocks in platform, the probability of a HPMN getting anything too outside the ordinary is very low. Let's say there is a 1 in a million chance you will get 50% less or 50% more in a month. I think HPMNs can live with this for some time if it means releasing faster.

What would be needed to change Platform rewards from probabilistic to deterministic ?
Proof of Service ? Something else ?

Tendermint already has a deterministic protocol, so i never fully understood (even after virgile's explanation) why the Platform rewards are not automatically deterministic of nature as well. Unless Platform rewards and Tendermint / TenderDash are two seperate things and one does not automatically lead to the other.
Or if something is missing that connects the two (Proof of Service for example).

 

[QuantumExplorer]

Just saying, if not all of those HPMN will always get at the very least 90% of the Rewards they had gotten running 4 or 10 regular 1K masternodes,
then you would see them flee en masse, word would spread and nobody would convert to HPMN, it wouldn't be economically viable if it pays considerably less.
Hopefully you have done the math that has shown its indeed economically viable.
Frankly, i am wondering where all those Rewards are coming from, because it will be very difficult and extremely tough to compensate HPMN to the same extent
they would be compensated by running multiple regular 1K masternodes.
But i'm sure you guys know what you are doing.

Imagine there's a bucket of water representing rewards. Now you split the water into two groups, one with with 62.5% of the water (Core Bucket) and the other with 37.5% (Platform bucket), one thing is apparent you have the same amount of water, just in two different containers.

Now let's split the collateral 50/50 between MNs and HPMNs, with 50% of MNs getting 50% of the overall water, but coming from the core bucket. Well 50% of the original collateral getting 50% of the origin rewards they are getting the same amount as before. For the HPMNs they are getting 37.5% from platform and 62.5 - 50 = 12.5% from core, added up they are also getting 50%, so they are getting the same as well. (This is the 4K solution).

 

[QuantumExplorer]

What would be needed to change Platform rewards from probabilistic to deterministic ?
Proof of Service ? Anything else ?

Tendermint already has a deterministic protocol, so i never fully understood (even after virgile's explanation) why the Platform rewards are not automatically deterministic of nature as well. Unless Platform rewards and Tendermint / TenderDash are two seperate things and one does not automatically lead to the other.

Rewards are deterministic in a 100 group quorum, however members for that 100 group quorum are not. It would take 1 dev about 6 weeks to fix this issue (rough estimate). We can get around to it when we have slightly less on our plates. The math shows that there are just so many blocks and quorums in a 18 day period, that almost all the time you will make between 90 and 110% with the average being 100% (of estimated rewards).

 

[qwizzie]

Imagine there's a bucket of water representing rewards. Now you split the water into two groups, one with with 62.5% of the water (Core Bucket) and the other with 37.5% (Platform bucket), one thing is apparent you have the same amount of water, just in two different containers.

Now let's split the collateral 50/50 between MNs and HPMNs, with 50% of MNs getting 50% of the overall water, but coming from the core bucket. Well 50% of the original collateral getting 50% of the origin rewards they are getting the same amount as before. For the HPMNs they are getting 37.5% from platform and 62.5 - 50 = 12.5% from core, added up they are also getting 50%, so they are getting the same as well. (This is the 4K solution).

4K / 10K solution :

What happens to the Platform rewards if Platform itself gets used more and more ? Could that lead to a situation where HPM's could end up receiving more rewards (Core rewards & Platform rewards) then normal masternodes (Core rewards) ?