Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 130 results by Bridgewater
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
New Dash slack chat. Here you can meet developers and ask any kind of questions. Also deep technical support is possible in separate chat.
https://digitalcash24.herokuapp.com/
Welcome!
***
P.S.: this slack chat is open parallel to "Dash Nation" chat and we are not fighting - collaborating.
True. Dash Nation Slack is getting off to a great start with good conversation and a great mod team. Dashbot integration will be coming soon. Make your way there when you have a minute:https://digitalcash24.herokuapp.com/
Welcome!
***
P.S.: this slack chat is open parallel to "Dash Nation" chat and we are not fighting - collaborating.
http://dash-nation-invite.herokuapp.com/
Good luck with yours as well, Melnik.
Cheers,
Tao.
I'm still seeing new members joining the old slack which has turned very negative and dark the last several weeks.
Want more Dash info or help with problems? Join the 2 new slack channels above or visit the Official Dash forum and other links in my sig!
which is weird as CCC is CryptoCoinCollectors Club
(very popular and around forever)
Dash Slack :
https://digitalcash24.herokuapp.com/
http://dash-nation-invite.herokuapp.com/
What happened to the "dashpay" Slack?
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
And soon Dash electrum will support hardware wallets too
It already does.
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
I've been watching recent drama at some of the other "self-governing" crypto (GRC, HODL, and of course the DAO) and I've come to think the risk of poison-pill attack is higher than usually assumed.
Normally, we think that coin-holders (MN-holders in particular) would never vote against their own self-interest, but that hides some subtle variants. For example, what if their perceived self-interest did not match reality - they think they are making a good choice but are not? We also tend to assume that Bad Guys would have to invest so much to buy significant influence that it would not be worth their while.
At those other coins, something like the following happened. A smallish group, very sure of its position, lobbies for a change. A vote eventually occurs, and the small but high-energy group wins. The coin's trajectory changes. People who did not participate for whatever reasons, or who were on the losing side of the vote, react in the usual ways - they drop out, they complain, they rethink their position, they go along - whatever. My point is that a relatively small group of high-energy people can, and does, change policy. This pattern is routine in real-life politics and in corporate battles.
So a coin changes direction, and there is no way of being certain up-front whether the coin will thrive or fail as a result, no matter how strong one's opinions may be. Mr Market decides in time.
Back to Bad Guys and poison pills - presumably there are or will be small high-energy groups of Bad Guys trying to influence changes of direction in any self-governing coin. From time to time they will succeed in changing a coin's direction. Their changes may or may not give the results they want - they may backfire - but sometimes they will make a coin change direction in such a way that the coin never recovers.
The fix to this is not to abandon self-governance - any mode of decision-making risks making bad decisions. Neither is the fix to have extra layers of decision-makers as is usually done in the political realm (House and Senate or Commons and Lords, for example). The flaws in such systems are well-known. I have no fix to offer, I'm just noting a vulnerability, based on observing recent adventures with other coins. Possibly - possibly - the fix is to be sure that all decisions can be re-visited at reasonable intervals, and that most changes can be undone without forking to a new brand name. Bad Guys can exploit this kind of mechanism too, of course. There will always be Bad Guys or Good Guys who guess wrong. The challenge is to minimize damage.
For me as a coin-holder, none of this matters at a deep level. I just add to my supply or sell according to my perception of whether the coin direction change was in my interests. (I recently divested half-a-million of one-of-the-above, suppressing emotion as best I could). For a given coin though, a direction change can be brilliant or fatal or somewhere in between. A Dev risks a lot when he lets "his baby" become self-governing.
I'm still very happy with Dash's direction, in case it's not obvious.
Normally, we think that coin-holders (MN-holders in particular) would never vote against their own self-interest, but that hides some subtle variants. For example, what if their perceived self-interest did not match reality - they think they are making a good choice but are not? We also tend to assume that Bad Guys would have to invest so much to buy significant influence that it would not be worth their while.
At those other coins, something like the following happened. A smallish group, very sure of its position, lobbies for a change. A vote eventually occurs, and the small but high-energy group wins. The coin's trajectory changes. People who did not participate for whatever reasons, or who were on the losing side of the vote, react in the usual ways - they drop out, they complain, they rethink their position, they go along - whatever. My point is that a relatively small group of high-energy people can, and does, change policy. This pattern is routine in real-life politics and in corporate battles.
So a coin changes direction, and there is no way of being certain up-front whether the coin will thrive or fail as a result, no matter how strong one's opinions may be. Mr Market decides in time.
Back to Bad Guys and poison pills - presumably there are or will be small high-energy groups of Bad Guys trying to influence changes of direction in any self-governing coin. From time to time they will succeed in changing a coin's direction. Their changes may or may not give the results they want - they may backfire - but sometimes they will make a coin change direction in such a way that the coin never recovers.
The fix to this is not to abandon self-governance - any mode of decision-making risks making bad decisions. Neither is the fix to have extra layers of decision-makers as is usually done in the political realm (House and Senate or Commons and Lords, for example). The flaws in such systems are well-known. I have no fix to offer, I'm just noting a vulnerability, based on observing recent adventures with other coins. Possibly - possibly - the fix is to be sure that all decisions can be re-visited at reasonable intervals, and that most changes can be undone without forking to a new brand name. Bad Guys can exploit this kind of mechanism too, of course. There will always be Bad Guys or Good Guys who guess wrong. The challenge is to minimize damage.
For me as a coin-holder, none of this matters at a deep level. I just add to my supply or sell according to my perception of whether the coin direction change was in my interests. (I recently divested half-a-million of one-of-the-above, suppressing emotion as best I could). For a given coin though, a direction change can be brilliant or fatal or somewhere in between. A Dev risks a lot when he lets "his baby" become self-governing.
I'm still very happy with Dash's direction, in case it's not obvious.
You should have a little more faith in the voters, who are also the primary investors (the ones with the money).
The "haves" got to be that way because they posses enough sense to filter out most of the "great ideas" championed by the have-nots which would cause them (and the have-nots, by extension) to become poor.
The capitalists are the free thinkers, who can see the big picture (greatest good for themselves AND everyone else) rationally without all the guilt and shame, which makes them the best voters. It is the high-energy Bad Guys who cannot see an accurate big picture because their model does not include individual responsibility and success at its foundation.
-----
Wow, great news on the Dash-Mycellium collaboration! Does this mean we will soon be able to use Dash with Trezor and Ledger hardware wallets on mobile phones?
Re: OVERVIEW: BITCOIN HARDWARE WALLETS █████████████████ Secure your Coins
Are passphrases supported ?
they are but not enabled yet as the stretching still takes about 10 secondsIf passphrase support will be added, can you consider implementing a method to counter potential keylogging on the host computer? Like maybe a scrambled-letter cypher on the Ledger's screen that changes each time?
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
In the long run, MNs have an advantage over miners.
Well the Dash economy still does not reflect that sentiment. If the market thought it was that easy to run masternodes or even partial masternodes, we would see the market cap skyrocket and masternode ROI would be much lower due to a very large number of nodes as people try to get a piece of the "easy ROI." It is no different than mining, economically. It adjusts dynamically.
As an experiment, take all the things you consider to be "effort" and think of them in terms of dollar (Dash) value, and assume the rest of the market treats them as such. First, take away the electricity costs and masternode hosting costs because those are already assumed to be calculated into the ROI comparison.
On the Dash mining side, the effort of babysitting heat-soaked rigs and hardware management, and keeping up with the tech, etc etc, is currently considered to be LESS difficult than masternode management, due to the fact the ROI is much lower if the same $$$ are invested into rigs versus MN. In other words, compared to investing purely in MN, miners are willing to risk their money on hardware that has potentially reduced resale value, and perform all of those difficult tasks you mention for free, and still accept less return than putting money into masternodes.
What this tells me, is that a few factors could be at play. I'll just throw some out, for fun:
1. People are much more comfortable dealing with things in the physical realm, and the learning curve for MN is higher than they are willing to confront, given the current ROI (remember MN started with higher ROI than now, but was also much more difficult to setup back then, but investors took the time to figured it out because they were attracted by the higher profits.
or maybe
2. People see the risk of keeping their money in dash/crypto as higher than keeping their money in depreciating ASICs or difficult-to-resell GPU rigs, so that extra risk is balanced out by the higher Dash ROI.
Those are just guesses. But the point is that you can think of mining and masternoding as being in economic balance. Higher risk always gets you higher reward. The easier or less risky something is perceived to be, the lower the reward.
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
Out of interest, why do whales receive more coins which lets them setup more masternodes? If I own 1 masternode or 10, my share of the supply is increasing at the same rate. Do you mean the whales can get the next node faster? But i can just put the difference into a shared service and take a 20% hit which is not much different?
There's faster compounding interest for whales since the wait time to setup the next MN is shorter. Yes, in theory one can use a fractional MN service to improve returns. In practice I bet it's not done very often due to needing to trust the MN hosting counterparty. And the 20% hit eats returns a little bit. Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
Bitcoins Appeal Rises as Chinese Wallet Apps Will Now Check ID
https://news.bitcoin.com/chinese-wallet-apps-id-bitcoin/
Seems like a great opportunity for Dash to flex its privacy-protecting muscles
https://news.bitcoin.com/chinese-wallet-apps-id-bitcoin/
Seems like a great opportunity for Dash to flex its privacy-protecting muscles
Thanks for the tip. I'll keep trying.
What I'm trying to do is fairly simple. Also, having multiple layers of protection is nothing new in the realm of security.
The biggest selling point of Electrum (for me at least) has always been its ability to use an online watch-only wallet in combination with an offline signing wallet. The only thing Trezor would add in my use case is the ability to store the offline wallet's mnemonics in a much more secure and convenient way than an encrypted private key on the offline computer's hard drive. By comparison, using Trezor directly with an online computer is arguably less secure than the plain Electrum online watch /offline sign method.
FYI, if somebody sells a hammer and includes instructions on how to use it to build a house, it does not mean the hammer can only be used for house-building. Given the open source nature of the Bitcoin ecosystem, I believe that Trezor's creators fully intended people to come up with creative ways to use their product.
All that being said, I'm now looking into multisig to get the extra layer instead.
What I'm trying to do is fairly simple. Also, having multiple layers of protection is nothing new in the realm of security.
The biggest selling point of Electrum (for me at least) has always been its ability to use an online watch-only wallet in combination with an offline signing wallet. The only thing Trezor would add in my use case is the ability to store the offline wallet's mnemonics in a much more secure and convenient way than an encrypted private key on the offline computer's hard drive. By comparison, using Trezor directly with an online computer is arguably less secure than the plain Electrum online watch /offline sign method.
FYI, if somebody sells a hammer and includes instructions on how to use it to build a house, it does not mean the hammer can only be used for house-building. Given the open source nature of the Bitcoin ecosystem, I believe that Trezor's creators fully intended people to come up with creative ways to use their product.
All that being said, I'm now looking into multisig to get the extra layer instead.
Re: [NOW AVAILABLE] BTChip / Ledger HW1 : Bitcoin Hardware Wallet in a USB smartcard
I have an HW.1 that is no longer recognized by the computer. Something must have gone wrong during initialization with Electrum.
I think I had unplugged it as instructed and was trying to display the seed in my text editor on an offline computer, but nothing was ever displayed. Now it is not recognized in ANY computer. I've tried the chrome app, the ledger starter iso, and https://fup.hardwarewallet.com/ledger/, and none of them are aware that I have plugged the device in. My other two HW.1 are detected normally.
Is there any way to recover it? Thanks
I think I had unplugged it as instructed and was trying to display the seed in my text editor on an offline computer, but nothing was ever displayed. Now it is not recognized in ANY computer. I've tried the chrome app, the ledger starter iso, and https://fup.hardwarewallet.com/ledger/, and none of them are aware that I have plugged the device in. My other two HW.1 are detected normally.
Is there any way to recover it? Thanks
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
I also think we should keep "digital cash" or "anonymous" and "instant" in the title. I believe they are more important terms for newcomers, than the current one. More important for the end users. Imagine me as a new user, reading the current thread title, I would skip it. Please qoute this, if you agree.
Indeed. The user doesn't care about self-funding. He cares about what the coin can do for them.
I agree. The concept of self-governing is only marketable to those few users who like to "check under the hood" to see how the magic is achieved and if there are any flaws.
As for development priorities, I think it is a matter of perspective. The governance is only 10% of the ever-decreasing block reward, which is only the currency's emission of new coins, not its entire supply. So that's only 10% of what, 11% annual inflation now? How much importance does this micro-economy deserve, given its relative monetary value?
If my math is right, Dash's internal governance ecosystem is only about 1% of Dash's annual supply--and that's going to decrease over time as the currency matures. I tend to agree with tok and others that when too much effort is seen being put on developing Dash's self-funded/community-directed management system, it could send the wrong message because the goal is to get the outside economy to use Dash.
I think what we're running into here is the fact that self governance is really new, and is something nobody else has ever done before, so it is garnering an inordinate amount of effort and attention. I do not think our priorities have shifted, but rather we're temporarily expending extra effort to hammer down this small part of the system so development on the larger more important parts (anonymity, usability, etc) can get turbo-charged.
Additionally, it looks like the governance tools being developed might also be available for end-users of Dash, as in for anyone who holds Dash and wants to pay a contractor or employee for work. If this is true, then we can rationalize this development effort as not only long-term support infrastructure investment for Dash itself, but also as infrastructure for Dash's usability in the real-world economy.
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
It looks like ShapeShift is back online, and Dash is available to trade again.
Although their "vacation" prompted me to try out that Exmo exchange's support for Dash's instantX (InstantSend?), and now I doubt if I'll use ShapeShift again in the near future. I never thought that it would be faster to send Dash to an exchange, trade it for BTC and then withdraw, but it is. And the exchange rate is better than ShapeShift, too (for small quantities).
Although their "vacation" prompted me to try out that Exmo exchange's support for Dash's instantX (InstantSend?), and now I doubt if I'll use ShapeShift again in the near future. I never thought that it would be faster to send Dash to an exchange, trade it for BTC and then withdraw, but it is. And the exchange rate is better than ShapeShift, too (for small quantities).
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
While I agree that MN voting is a great tool, we don't have to be carried away with it
Competence is hard to develop. We can't be competent in the 100% of the fields - I don't understand a word regarding all the tech stuff but I know about mktg and mgmt.
It's extremely important for a long-term project that we are NOT all expert on anything
Delegate to win
Competence is hard to develop. We can't be competent in the 100% of the fields - I don't understand a word regarding all the tech stuff but I know about mktg and mgmt.
It's extremely important for a long-term project that we are NOT all expert on anything
Delegate to win
This is an excellent post. I agree wholeheartedly. By electing competent managers, the masternode operators would still be, by extension, voting on everything; managers would still ultimately answer to the MN operators. Trust is at the very foundation of civilized society. It is a common misconception that a person delegating his authority has less power than if he did everything himself, when in fact the opposite is true.
I got to the same place with a trezor 
I think the problem is here. It even says "FIXME..."
https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/master/plugins/trezor/plugin.py
Code:
def get_input_tx(self, tx_hash):
# First look up an input transaction in the wallet where it
# will likely be. If co-signing a transaction it may not have
# all the input txs, in which case we ask the network.
tx = self.transactions.get(tx_hash)
if not tx:
request = ('blockchain.transaction.get', [tx_hash])
[b]# FIXME: what if offline?[/b]
tx = Transaction(self.network.synchronous_get(request))
return tx
def sign_transaction(self, tx, password):
if tx.is_complete():
return
# previous transactions used as inputs
prev_tx = {}
# path of the xpubs that are involved
xpub_path = {}
for txin in tx.inputs():
tx_hash = txin['prevout_hash']
prev_tx[tx_hash] = self.get_input_tx(tx_hash)
for x_pubkey in txin['x_pubkeys']:
if not is_extended_pubkey(x_pubkey):
continue
xpub = x_to_xpub(x_pubkey)
for k, v in self.master_public_keys.items():
if v == xpub:
acc_id = re.match("x/(\d+)'", k).group(1)
xpub_path[xpub] = self.account_derivation(acc_id)
self.plugin.sign_transaction(self, tx, prev_tx, xpub_path)
# First look up an input transaction in the wallet where it
# will likely be. If co-signing a transaction it may not have
# all the input txs, in which case we ask the network.
tx = self.transactions.get(tx_hash)
if not tx:
request = ('blockchain.transaction.get', [tx_hash])
[b]# FIXME: what if offline?[/b]
tx = Transaction(self.network.synchronous_get(request))
return tx
def sign_transaction(self, tx, password):
if tx.is_complete():
return
# previous transactions used as inputs
prev_tx = {}
# path of the xpubs that are involved
xpub_path = {}
for txin in tx.inputs():
tx_hash = txin['prevout_hash']
prev_tx[tx_hash] = self.get_input_tx(tx_hash)
for x_pubkey in txin['x_pubkeys']:
if not is_extended_pubkey(x_pubkey):
continue
xpub = x_to_xpub(x_pubkey)
for k, v in self.master_public_keys.items():
if v == xpub:
acc_id = re.match("x/(\d+)'", k).group(1)
xpub_path[xpub] = self.account_derivation(acc_id)
self.plugin.sign_transaction(self, tx, prev_tx, xpub_path)
See how it has to check for transactions before it will sign?
I was finally able to sign a transaction completely offline, but only by painstakingly copying the transaction history from the online watch-only electrum wallet of the same xpub, then copying it into the wallet of the offline electrum.
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
However, drugs that pose a much bigger threat to others are not only legal, but encouraged.
Permanently mind-altering drugs that allow people to appear "functional" in society while harboring dormant psychotic intentions that could manifest any time without remorse or analytical awareness--ssristories.org--are often forcefully administered, and many are coerced or tricked into taking them.
Permanently mind-altering drugs that allow people to appear "functional" in society while harboring dormant psychotic intentions that could manifest any time without remorse or analytical awareness--ssristories.org--are often forcefully administered, and many are coerced or tricked into taking them.
Isn't it interesting that the disease doctors are treating is always an SSRI(depression), Statin(blood pressure), Claritin(Allergies), Corticosteroid(Asthma), or xyz deficiency, but in reality diet, exercise, lifestyle changes are more effective but never suggested.
Yeah, I agree. People are too easily convinced that they don't have control over or responsibility for their own well-being. I don't think the conspiracy theorists are far from the truth with their claims of big pharma being in bed with big gov to enrich themselves through perpetual manipulation of the public.
I still haven't found the cure for masternode addiction. Main symptoms are a constant desire to hoard Dash and put into masternodes along with mood swings of grumpyness when the Dash price falls and euphoria when the Dash price rises.
Hey I can relate to those symptoms! 
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency
Oh f*k. Prince died.
RIP
Yah, he did so many drugs in the 80's, it really shortened his life. My husband is getting depressed with all these people in our generation dying but lets face it, if we abuse our bodies with drugs, that's what happens
And our generation (the tail end of the babyboomers) really abused drugs badly.Like my mom always says, Everything in moderation! Please take heed my young ones
But I ditto that sentiment, Rest in peace dear brilliant man.
Come on - Prince was NOT a big drug user - ugh
That's all. ::hugs:: P.S. I'm mostly talking of cocaine, which really f*cks up your nose and lungs and smoking, which hardens your arteries and can cause cancer, etc... And I'm just being a mommy again, so sorry! Besides, this will be deleted as off topic soon anyway
I do not think drugs should be illegal, though it is better if people understand the consequences of abusing certain substances. I think a world where people choose safer and better drugs, would be a better world. After all almost everyone uses drugs, whether it is alcohol, tobacco, caffeine or even pharmaceuticals, pick your vice.
At least with cryptocurrencies like Dash no one will be able to prohibit the movement of capital for the purpose of free trade. The effects of a population moving away from Fiat currency towards decentralized cryptocurrencies, is more then profound to say the least. Effecting many areas of life including I am sure the movement of narcotics. For someone with anarcho libertarian leanings it feels like we are doing a great amount of good in the world by facilitating freedom.
The US has it completely backwards, unfortunately.
Drugs which are temporarily incapacitating (which are not very threatening to others) are illegal.
However, drugs that pose a much bigger threat to others are not only legal, but encouraged.
Permanently mind-altering drugs that allow people to appear "functional" in society while harboring dormant psychotic intentions that could manifest any time without remorse or analytical awareness--ssristories.org--are often forcefully administered, and many are coerced or tricked into taking them.
Nice segue into on-topic Dash discussion, BTW.
Thanks for the information. I guess I need to spend more time learning Electrum.
After digging into it, it seems Iwas wrong, the Trezor+Electrum 2.6.4 currently does not work for truly offline signing.
When loading a transaction from file/text/whatever to sign with the Trezor, the Electrum plugin checks to see if the necessary inputs are present. In a truly offline Electrum wallet, synchronization will never take place, so the plugin will try to talk to the server and fail instead of simply instructing the hardware wallet to sign the transaction and let the online Electrum reconcile whether or not there's money to spend.
BitcoinNewsMagazine, I understand this is not a standard use case for the Trezor, but if I can get it to work, it will certainly give me an extra bit of security. Peace of mind that my (self-generated) mnemonic will never touch an online computer means I don't have to worry about the unlikely chance of the Trezor getting compromised (however minuscule the chances are)
After digging into it, it seems Iwas wrong, the Trezor+Electrum 2.6.4 currently does not work for truly offline signing.
When loading a transaction from file/text/whatever to sign with the Trezor, the Electrum plugin checks to see if the necessary inputs are present. In a truly offline Electrum wallet, synchronization will never take place, so the plugin will try to talk to the server and fail instead of simply instructing the hardware wallet to sign the transaction and let the online Electrum reconcile whether or not there's money to spend.
BitcoinNewsMagazine, I understand this is not a standard use case for the Trezor, but if I can get it to work, it will certainly give me an extra bit of security. Peace of mind that my (self-generated) mnemonic will never touch an online computer means I don't have to worry about the unlikely chance of the Trezor getting compromised (however minuscule the chances are)
I only setup ONE wallet with the Trezor after initializing it. Why are there two Master Public Keys?
In Electrum, it says I have "Account 1" and "Main Account."
I want to perform offline signing with the Trezor on an airgapped computer, with a watch-only Electrum for broadcasting, and would like to know which master public key to import for the watch-only side and why.
Thanks in advance.
In Electrum, it says I have "Account 1" and "Main Account."
I want to perform offline signing with the Trezor on an airgapped computer, with a watch-only Electrum for broadcasting, and would like to know which master public key to import for the watch-only side and why.
Thanks in advance.
Interesting idea but you are trying to use Trezor with Electrum in a way contrary to instructions in the user manual. A developer would have to chime in here.
Well I got it to work on Electrum 2.6.4 by importing the "Main Account" xpub on the watch-only Electrum on the online computer. Created transaction there, then loaded it up on the offline computer, plugged my Trezor in and signed it, then copied the signed transaction back to the watch-only Electrum to broadcast it. Still not sure where the "Account 1" xpub comes from or what it is for though.
Interestingly, my KeepKey did not work this way, while the Trezor did.
I've set up an online watch-only Electrum (2.6.4) with the xpub from my offline Electrum+KeepKey walet, created a transaction and loaded it into my offline Electrum to try to sign it with the KeepKey.
The problem is my offline Electrum tries to connect to server instead of instructing the KeepKey to sign the transaction. It gives me a "Server did not answer" message and fails.
I tried this with a Trezor and it works fine, but not KeepKey for some reason.
Edit:
I was wrong, offline signing does not work even with the Trezor, either.
I thought it worked but the test was not fair because i simply unplugged the internet from a synced wallet to test it. If the offline Electrum is not synced when trying to sign a loaded transaction, the Electrum keepkey/trezor plugin tries to connect to the server instead of simply instructing the hardware wallet to sign the loaded transaction.
The problem is my offline Electrum tries to connect to server instead of instructing the KeepKey to sign the transaction. It gives me a "Server did not answer" message and fails.
I tried this with a Trezor and it works fine, but not KeepKey for some reason.
Edit:
I was wrong, offline signing does not work even with the Trezor, either.
I thought it worked but the test was not fair because i simply unplugged the internet from a synced wallet to test it. If the offline Electrum is not synced when trying to sign a loaded transaction, the Electrum keepkey/trezor plugin tries to connect to the server instead of simply instructing the hardware wallet to sign the loaded transaction.