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

Dash Needs to Move to Proof Of Stake

Status
Not open for further replies.
GrandMasterDash said:
Ryan mentioned Graphene, which AFAIK is PoS.
Click to expand...
This is interesting. The video says everything needs to be on-chain and that graphene will make it possible because it moves huge amounts of data quickly. Graphene info is here... https://objectcomputing.com/resourc...march-2017-graphene-an-open-source-blockchain I'm not convinced that dash intend to move to POS as part of this initiative though. Graphene code would be plugged into the dash toolset and adapted to our model I expect.
 
There is a fundamental relationship with regards to making the blockchain secure. One cannot make it secure with zero energy/effort invested. The exact method of making it secure, and how efficient that method is, will be studied and tweaked and optimized over time. Ryan spoke of this during the open house as ASU.

I'm not sure everyone realizes how cool the x11 hashing algorithm is. Good background:

https://blockgen.net/sha256-vs-scrypt-vs-x11-algorithms/

I'm sure I read somewhere that x11 is more energy efficient that SHA-256, but I can't put my finger on it.

And don't forget, what is the energy efficiency of the fiat system, where every country has to defend its currency from counterfitting, and unfair trade practices, and enforcing the use of US dollars to purchase oil, and enforcing the use of US dollars as the world's reserve currency. Literal wars have been fought over who gets to run the money. That is energy inefficient.
 
Lets keep it real guys. Wars over fiat are not relevant, I am describing the competition between different cypto-currencies. As for the "2 hop blockchain" described in the paper https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/716.pdf - I think it's interesting, even if it's not really designed with our ecosystem in mind. The important thing to remember is that the work will expand until it becomes only just profitable. If the design gives half as much profit to POW there will be half as much electricity burnt. This is why the efficiency of x11 is also irrelevant. Miners spend more on mining, so the difficulty increases, according to the value of the mining reward. I am looking for a way to reduce POW costs by mixing in some POS - via masternodes. Not completely dissimilar to the 2-hop thingy, but using masternodes as mediators rather than as a second hop.
 
From what I've seen of the distributed MasterNode savings account thing, DASH is moving to proof of stake, and it's a very bad thing.
 
Can we learn from vertcoin, ethereum, monero to be asic resistant?

If I am right all the asic mining is just for competition and only thing it does well is mining in one algorithm.

This leads to lots of outdated asic miners and wasted energy.



I know Dash mining runs cooler than most major crypto, but

If we find a way to change algorithm periodical and automatically, then unnecessary difficulty hike will be much much lower

and more people will be able to mine without asic and high electricity.


I know Its easy to talk then be done, feels like giving out a load to our developing team.

But I do believe is the right way to go if it can be done safely.
 
Yes, the asic mining is something we would probably want to mitigate. TBH I agree that asic mining has flaws but it's not something that I feel we should jump on. If you chase CPU or GPU mining you allow the possibility of ASICs to give a 1,000,000x improvement (or so). So you have to constantly watch and worry. But once ASICs are running you can stop worrying, radical change is less likely. I assume that there will be an equilibrium between the value of mining and the cost in electricity, however it is done, so (if that's true) we are wasting electricity. If the value of mining was reduced (however it is done) the miners would be forced to burn less.
 
PoS failed miserably. DASH evolved the concept with Proof of Service. Why go backwards?

Ever notice the more "mainstream" crypto gets, the dumber the ideas get? They don't even know where it came from...

"Hey, remember that total shit idea that DASH improved upon by leaps and bounds? I think we should toss all that and go back to being shit!"
 
Last edited:
Kevin Stalker said:
Yes, the asic mining is something we would probably want to mitigate.
Click to expand...
Are you talking just to hear yourself talk?

LTC scammed us waayyy back by "developing" an ASIC-inevitable algo and advertising it as the opposite...

Privileged mining is a security measure, not a hippie-love matter. If it has the byproduct of lowering power consumption, that's cute I guess...

It's getting harder and harder to find worthwhile conversation...
 
This idea seems ok, but I'd like to stick with what's working at the moment and let evolution roll out over the next year or two before making major underlying changes.
 
You're saying POS failed miserably, but aren't the masternodes an example of POS? I'm saying that they are, and that they haven't failed, and that they can be used to solve the problem. I am also saying that there is a problem with POW, which is that it costs a lot of electricity, and as a result will be thought of as old fashioned when the world sorts itself out. I don't think I am going backwards, or that I am going to an old fashioned POS model. I'm looking for something new, that's safe, and doesn't cost the earth.
 
W4lterWyte said:
stick with what's working at the moment
Click to expand...
actually, i agree, we should stop this discussion now and leave it for a while. Maybe we can think about it again when evolution is running. This is just to get us thinking, because I think it will take a year or two and things move fast in this industry
 
Wow - I have just heard Ryan Taylor saying that he thinks Dash should reduce its reliance on POW, using masternodes to support the security, etc. This is EXACTLY what I was proposing here. If we can write the code and make it completely reliable, POS is the future. Its not easy, but we are closer than most.
 
PatrickConway said:
Can you write the reason of it? I mean what for should they do it?
Click to expand...
Ryan gave a very detailed reason, and I start this thread with an explanation as to why. Basically because burning energy to create security is wasteful if other methods to keep the blockchain secure are available. In the future POW will look old fashioned.
 
Just to be clear, Ryan put out a couple of solutions for the Dash community to consider and to discuss. One of those solutions was indeed a change from PoW to PoS.
It was also the most drastic solution, that contained the most risk and Ryan himself was not in favor of it.

In Dash case it would be turning from PoW to a BLS-based Proof of Stake, that currently can not be implemented without having something to fall back on (as BLS signatures can still fail).
That something to fall back on, would have to be a reduced form of PoW for Dash (as that still has the most security) or find something else with that kind of security.

After having done further research Ryan came to the conclusion that a simple change in how Dash blockrewards are split over miners / masternodes / decentralized budget would form a better solution.
So he is proposing to change Dash current blockreward split of 45% (miners) / 45% (masternodes) / 10% (decentralized fund) to 36% (miners) / 54% (masternodes) / 10% (decentralized budget).

uVMVOIB.jpg


He is also proposing a more flexible allocation to Dash budget model.

tGST6Ci.jpg


He explained his research and these solutions in more details here :

Dash Core Group Presentation on Dash Economics
 
Last edited:
Yes, I saw this. I'm a fan. Obviously this is an old thread, my original stuff is a bit out of date now. I think the title of the post is catchy so people notice it. I'm on the right track, but Ryan did it better. He doesn't try to jump straight to POS either.

Having said that, I now think you can't attack money head on, you have to find an angle. A vertical that gets you in, then you grow from there. Reducing dependancy on POW is a fine enough idea but it might be a distraction from the more important task of getting people to see what we are so good at.
 
Name3 said:
Collateralized mining is just an idea to my understanding. I would be in favor of collateralized mining or what is suggested above. As long as it works and reduces the electricity that a fully functioning blockchain uses.
Click to expand...
dash needs to be protected against saviours like you who want to destroy it just so you can feel good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top