Questioning Dash Fundamentals

[Pumba2988]

Hello fellow Dash members,

Just a newbie here asking some highly speculative questions here in regards to dash / dark coin.

1. If all dash coins will be mined out one day in the year 2300 something my question is how do miners and masternodes get paid? Has any thought been put into this.

2. I like the fact that dash is going for the whole decentralised corporation model with the masternodes vote systems and all. But my question is: okay so the development team submits an upgrade proposal to the dash system and a majority vote is then counted by the masternode holders and maximum of 5700MN's ever that means majority of the votes for it to succeed would be just over half. And let's say most of the development team had there hands in dark coin when it first came out they could each potentially have thousands of coins at their disposal hence forth could possibly own majority of the master nodes currently. Therefore could have the majority vote on what they want to implement. So from a normal perspective it could look like a decentralised model but it's kinda not decentralised if you are catching my drift.

Also another question in regards to the previous paragraphs is that there isn't anything stopping Evan Duffield from editing or making changes to the Dash model, like there isn't a system in place that stops changes to the system other than a majority vote from the masternodes. Like is it a trust system like he won't make any changes until majority of the masternodes say yay or nay? Just sounds dodgy imo. I mean if there are technical systems in place why don't we have Amanda explain them to us or someone else it doesn't really matter.

Please don't hate I'm just asking the questions here.

 

[David]

Hello fellow Dash members,

Just a newbie here asking some highly speculative questions here in regards to dash / dark coin.

1. If all dash coins will be mined out one day in the year 2300 something my question is how do miners and masternodes get paid? Has any thought been put into this.

The idea is that masternodes can charge for services they provide to the network. We hope that by the time the block reward has dropped significantly, the userbase will have increased to the point where small fees paid by the users will sustain the network. By that time, masternodes will provide many services beyond what they currently do.

2. I like the fact that dash is going for the whole decentralised corporation model with the masternodes vote systems and all. But my question is: okay so the development team submits an upgrade proposal to the dash system and a majority vote is then counted by the masternode holders and maximum of 5700MN's ever that means majority of the votes for it to succeed would be just over half. And let's say most of the development team had there hands in dark coin when it first came out they could each potentially have thousands of coins at their disposal hence forth could possibly own majority of the master nodes currently. Therefore could have the majority vote on what they want to implement. So from a normal perspective it could look like a decentralised model but it's kinda not decentralised if you are catching my drift.

That's a lot of questions, but I'll see what I can do. When Core Team releases an upgrade, masternodes and miners have to update their software. If they don't, then the update is either unsuccessful or it forks the network. I think you're conflating network upgrades with budget proposals, which are two different things. Yes, some Core Team members have significant Dash holdings, but blockchain analysis suggests that nobody has anywhere close to a majority. The largest holder is Otoh, who has about 5% of the Dash in existence. He's not Core Team, either.

Also another question in regards to the previous paragraphs is that there isn't anything stopping Evan Duffield from editing or making changes to the Dash model, like there isn't a system in place that stops changes to the system other than a majority vote from the masternodes. Like is it a trust system like he won't make any changes until majority of the masternodes say yay or nay? Just sounds dodgy imo. I mean if there are technical systems in place why don't we have Amanda explain them to us or someone else it doesn't really matter.

Please don't hate I'm just asking the questions here.

If Evan decided to make a malicious change, masternodes would not upgrade to the new software version, and the change would not be implemented.

 

[camosoul]

Your questions include "facts" that force a presumption of accuracy in order to respond... Assembled with your other posts, it looks like you're a troll trying desperately not to look like a troll.

The only part that is of concern, is the vote centralization. It is true that roughly 75% of masternodes are owned by a handful of core developers. They rarely vote, and when they do, only just enough to assure things go their way. It's pretty much a form of intervening to assure their desired results and hands off as long as the curated attitude/agenda is being obeyed. Personally, I don't have a problem with it because the "wild" masternode operators are generally too stupid and clueless to make good decisions. You could find more brains and civil, informed behavior on world star... But, it does demonstrate that the "governance" is a sham.

 

[martinf]

It is true that roughly 75% of masternodes are owned by a handful of core developers.

I'd like to hear where you got that number from

 

[demo]

Personally, I don't have a problem with it because the "wild" masternode operators are generally too stupid and clueless to make good decisions. You could find more brains and civil, informed behavior on world star... But, it does demonstrate that the "governance" is a sham.

I would like to hear how you know that the "wild" masternode operators are generally too stupid and clueless to make good decisions, as long as , according to your own says, 75% of the masternodes are controled by a small team, and thus the "wild" masternode operators have never been allowed to decide.