Quote from: TanteStefana2 on April 16, 2015, 03:12:10 PM

Quote from: stonehedge on April 16, 2015, 10:27:28 AM

Quote from: vertoe on April 16, 2015, 10:10:16 AM

I was posting it because it is a very interesting pull request from a technological perspective. I'm surprised to see udjin did a dirty merge of the bitcoin master (which is not 0.10.0 but 0.10.99 btw) and it seems to work out. I've been waiting to see the 0.12 wallet. Will test it.

But I have to disappoint you, I will not return or contribute to darkcoin as long as it is nothing more than a company selling a product. And I dont want to offend anyone when I say I simply have to smile when I see that darkcoin wants to take on bitcoin. Bitcoin is a consensus protocol specification, a team of developers maintaining a reference implementation, miners sustaining the consensus throughout the network and a democratic foundation which does nothing than public relations.

Darkcoin has none of this and should take the time to learn why it's important to support decentralization over corporate-like behaviour, why it's important to achieve a network consensus by miners not developers and why it's important to have democratic fallback infrastructure in place in case there are disputes without consensus. darkcoin is competion for paypal, not bitcoin. corporations can fail. cryptocurrencies cant. mistrust authority, promote decentralization.

I agree with most of what vertoe has said here. The technology still has the potential that it always has but DRK/Dash is beginning to lose its way imho. I hope this isn't seen as a bitter post on the basis that I lost all of my DRK. I've spent a lot of time thinking about this project, the amount of work that volunteers put in and the structure of the foundation (even had a fantastic evening chatting it over with Otoh with a few beers and a burger last week). From my perspective it isn't clear to me whether 1 Dash will be a share or a coin in the future.

I'm not sure, but I think what vertoe is referring to is the new voting system. If you own a masternode, you can vote. This is more like voting with your shares, but excludes the little guy and even miners. The intention, I believe, was for voting on things like... i don't know, logo designs, directions to take development, stuff like that. But could it do more harm than good in the future? I'm not sure even where the idea came from, or what prompted it?

Or perhaps it's just that the foundation seems to be making all the decisions instead of the users?

I think one of the goals for the foundation is to pay developers for their work. They even have come up with a system to somewhat objectively decide who has contributed enough to be paid a portion of the developer pot each month.

We are on a tight rope, it's true. The way I see it, unless DASH eventually closes off the core code, makes it completely decentralized and fixed, with all the other services attached from the outside, it'll fail.

In other words, making the wallet pretty should be an outside issue with anyone creating a wallet in the design they like, including making it so the user has no choice but to use darksend and instantX. The simplicity of the wallet could be extreme. But the wallet's functional foundation under the hood is the same, just automated for the user, but by some outside developer. The core of DASH has to be made mature and self sustaining. It has to be finished. Once that is done, then all other ideas should be built on top of the network, and when appropriate, pay the network for it's services.

So something like a simplified wallet would obviously not cost more for people to use, but the developer could charge for downloading it like an application. But if the network could be tapped into to process other things besides DASH transactions, such as a p2p tor like system, with masternode blinding, or whatever technology that would make it desirable, then there could be a way to tap into it for a fee, freeing any entity to expand on DASH as they wish, provided they pay for the use.

But I agree with Vertoe, if this is what he meant. It must be decentralized in every way. I don't see any problem with Masternodes per se, but if they are given more power (voting) than any other user, it starts to get creepy.

Interesting comments, but I do find it hard to take stonehedge "that" seriously after what he did with his DRK and although he may well have enjoyed his reflection time, I think its a bit rich to start spouting all that once he is (against what he wanted) left with no coins...

DASH is going the right way, its one year old and lots more things will happen, the way some people talk its as though this all has to be decided by tomorrow...