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

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Adding1kDash said:
No it is not, the trigger that made Satoshi nakamto build bitcoin was because of the abuse of the centralized powers during 2008 banking crisis.
It seems like Dash its leadership has lost it's roots completely, decentralisation just seems like a marketing term at this point, and Dash is really not going to get away with it with just 180HP masternodes, 450 does not sound much better either.

If you study some ancient history you would know that people where able to all work together in community's round about 100 people.
Everyone that has lived in small villages knows that everone knows every one. As these villages grow people start to lose track, I can tell from my own experciences and the people around me (I have lived in a village all my life, and have friends in multiple villages around me). That as that numbers goes up it's hard to keep track, once it's gets into a couple of 1000's this no longer is the case.

This is where Evan Duffield was aiming at when he decided on the number a 1000Dash. A number to high to cause centralisation, but low enough that it would still be fast enough to serve the whole world one day.

Stop thinking with just your logical part of the brain, use your emotional part of the brain, research and realize that what I am saying has been proven to be truth time and time again.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like I want less nodes because I want to have the consensus of Dash Platform in the hands of less people. This can not be further from the case.

First I need to make sure you realize that the chain used for payments stays with 1000s of nodes?

I am not against 1000s of nodes for Platform once we have sharding, but we will need to get there, and we won't have sharding for at LEAST another year most likely two under normal circumstances.
 
qwizzie said:
So has consensus been reached among DCG with regards to HPM's ? There was an internal poll going on that had some initial votes from devs, but because it was weekend that was just the initial outcome. What was the final outcome ?

The reason i ask is because Sam mentioned earlier that a decission proposal woulds only be prepared by DCG, if there was internal DCG consensus for a HPM solution.
Click to expand...

Let me check this real quick.
 
4K nodes won by 3 votes, then " HPMN 4k or 10k (doesn’t matter)" is second. Then all the other options had the same number of votes.
 
virgile said:
4K nodes won by 3 votes, then " HPMN 4k or 10k (doesn’t matter)" is second. Then all the other options had the same number of votes.
Click to expand...

Is there still consensus if 1 dev voted for Platform on all nodes ?
Or is there only consensus if all devs voted for HPM's ?

And did all devs voted for the HPM's solution (either 4k or 10K) ? Or did 1 dev (or more) voted for the Platform on all nodes solution ?
 
qwizzie said:
That clears that up then. Pretty much the same result as the initial outcome of the poll.
See : https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/...gh-performance-nodes.53374/page-3#post-232226
Click to expand...

Cool, i hope you have a better view of why we are polling. To us, it seems that HPM seem like the lesser evil, but we know it has drawbacks and that the community must ultimately have the say on what is going on. Not black and white :b

I have a document i need to work on, i'll get back to check if there are new messages in a few hours.
 
virgile said:
No dev voted for all nodes "run platform". So yes, all the votes were for HPM's.
Click to expand...

There was one dev vote for "All choices work for me".
 
QuantumExplorer said:
Anyone can run a platform node, though you would only get *direct* rewards from Platform if you have the collateral of 4k Dash.
Click to expand...

Is it possible to complement a shortage of collateralized nodes with voluntary nodes, in particular when bootstrapping the platform network?
And continuing on that thought, do voluntary nodes create attack vectors to collateralized nodes?
 
Knipsel.JPG


peter said:
I would like to know this too...
Click to expand...


From another thread and from QE :
Right now we pseudorandomly choose 100 members out of the DML (deterministic masternode list) to form a quorum. Quorums currently last for 1 day, and we have 24 of them. Pretty much 1 is created every hour. Because of quorums being completely destroyed after a day it's very hard to do sharding.
Click to expand...

Source :

Distributed platform storage (avoids High Performance nodes)
www.dash.org/forum/threads/distributed-platform-storage-avoids-high-performance-nodes.53400/#post-232436

Not sure though if that answer also applies to stopping a (Platform ?) quorum and the impact of that. And not sure if a stopped (Platform ?) quorum then self-correct or needs a reset from MNO's nodes. This really does need an answer directly from a dev.
 
Last edited:
qwizzie said:
So some answers, but not all answers to above questions.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I don't understand/find the answers.
For how long: perhaps maximum 24h, because this is the maximal duration of the quorum?
Impact: perhaps no impact at all, because there are 23 other quorums, that could to the job?
Self-correct: perhaps yes, after one hour (new quorum appears), or yes after one day?

Further question: how bad would be the impact? No more Platform service at all? Just some users concerned (1/24 of all users)? Just some delays (client must look for another quorum)?
I think, it's important to know the impact, because if the impact is really bad for Platform and the users (I guess no), then we should, as I understand, use the 10k HPMN solution.
 
virgile said:
We are polling the community to know what the community want. We haven't taken a decision to push 180 or 450 nodes. If anything, it proves that we are trying to do our best to stick to the community's values if you ask me.
Click to expand...

That's just the very typical attempts to avoid responsibility you and @QuantumExplorer show all these days! "That's not us! We only do the proposals! Network decides!!"

That's so nooooo... Every dev (not to say a CTO!) has a VERY strong voice in community. And now these voices persuade us to increase the collateral for Platform nodes without technical necessity to do so. There are hundreds of MNOs, most of them doesn't have a clue in math and coding, absolutely most of them mute. Even without any node at hands, dev team has a lot of power in leading the project. I think no whale has such an influence as Sam alone. Brave it with pride - both of you DO decide what's going on. And right now both of you lead Dash to centralization and censorship.
 
Semarg said:
That's just the very typical attempts to avoid responsibility you and @QuantumExplorer show all these days! "That's not us! We only do the proposals! Network decides!!"

That's so nooooo... Every dev (not to say a CTO!) has a VERY strong voice in community. And now these voices persuade us to increase the collateral for Platform nodes without technical necessity to do so. There are hundreds of MNOs, most of them doesn't have a clue in math and coding, absolutely most of them mute. Even without any node at hands, dev team has a lot of power in leading the project. I think no whale has such an influence as Sam alone. Brave it with pride - both of you DO decide what's going on. And right now both of you lead Dash to centralization and censorship.
Click to expand...

I'm currently trying to work on something else, so i will wait to have more time to answer the real questions with proper look at numbers. But such an ad hominem though, i can't let it there for long without answering, you are forcing my hand. It's cutting my work midway and reduces efficency by a bunch.

We came up with multiple choices and had no strong opinion. From there we could:
  1. ask the community to voice their opinion <- you state we try to avoid responsability.
  2. have decided by ourselves <- I am rather certain would have been called tyrants that gave no mind about what you guys want.
I am asking you for the future. In case of such scenario, how do you think we should proceed like? This is a real question, and i expect an answer: i wish to know how to do better next time, in your eyes.

persuade us to increase the collateral for Platform nodes without technical necessity to do so
Click to expand...

I invite you to watch the presentation by QE or read my comments, we have covered the why of this poll rather extensively. I repeated in this conversation also a few of the necessities. I hope that you, from the talk here i had with mostly qwizzie, can see that i infact don't especially lean toward a way or another, as long as some nodes do not support Platform. I think some parameters are better yes. Now you can trust the math or you don't, that's another story.

I am flattered though that you do think i seem to be so influencial.
 
GrandMasterDash said:
Just curious about the recent uptick in active masternodes:

If this number continues upwards as we go into voting... is there a possibility of collusion to try and swing votes? I mean to say, can someone at MNOWatch fingerprint recently activated nodes? Maybe I'm just being paranoid.
Click to expand...

another quick answer, i have not followed that actively, but i think there is a whale/exchange which has lagged behind on the last big update, maybe it is related?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top