12.1 Announcement / Finalized Date / Project Update
- Thread starter eduffield
- Start date
Was calling it what it is; If we're going to replace bankers with New Geek Bankers then I fail to see the point of using crypto, except for making a fast buck. Whether it's sporks in dash or rollbacks in Ethereum, the highest priorities should be to maintain integrity.
demo
Well-known member
I think that the vast majority of the masternode operators have only the fast buck into their mind. So they speak a different language than the one you are speaking.
If you dont like the masternodes who have a fast buck instead of a head, then keep revealing their secret thoughts at any chance.
Last edited:
demo
Well-known member
I repeat my proposition here, hoping someone will add an appropriate proposal into the budget (as long as I am not a masternode myself so I cannot add proposals)
You should follow a similar to this procedure in order to define a bounty for whoever developer manages to code for Dash the blockchain that governs the software updates.
Several proposals should be added:
Prop 1) Do you want the masternode software updates to be governed by the blockchain? (yes/no) (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
Prop 2) In case of a yes in the proposal 1, do you agree to pay 150 dash to the one who will code it? (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
Prop 3) In case of a yes in the proposal 2, do you agree to pay another 200 dash to the one who will code it? (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
Prop 4) In case of a yes in the proposal 3, do you agree to pay another 200 dash to the one who will code it? (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
e.t.c.
With this method, an amount of money will be allocated and be ready to be given to the developer that will finish the job. If nobody is interested to code it, then more money can be allocated, until the motivation is strong enough for a competent developer to start coding it.
If there is a NO at the first proposal, this means that the masternodes dont like to decide about the updates, and that they blindly believe and trust to whatever the core team authority does.
You should follow a similar to this procedure in order to define a bounty for whoever developer manages to code for Dash the blockchain that governs the software updates.
Several proposals should be added:
Prop 1) Do you want the masternode software updates to be governed by the blockchain? (yes/no) (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
Prop 2) In case of a yes in the proposal 1, do you agree to pay 150 dash to the one who will code it? (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
Prop 3) In case of a yes in the proposal 2, do you agree to pay another 200 dash to the one who will code it? (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
Prop 4) In case of a yes in the proposal 3, do you agree to pay another 200 dash to the one who will code it? (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
e.t.c.
With this method, an amount of money will be allocated and be ready to be given to the developer that will finish the job. If nobody is interested to code it, then more money can be allocated, until the motivation is strong enough for a competent developer to start coding it.
If there is a NO at the first proposal, this means that the masternodes dont like to decide about the updates, and that they blindly believe and trust to whatever the core team authority does.
Last edited:
TroyDASH
Well-known member
If you think that controlling sporks is equivalent to being a banker, and that being a banker is bad, and that being a banker is so bad that you don't want to have anything to do with it, then maybe Dash isn't the best fit for you. Or, stay and help us improve it to make it more autonomous. But if you're just going to condemn the system and keep saying we're doing it so wrong that there isn't even a point to using it, then I'm not sure what you are doing here. If you have an idea for how to make it better, then feel free to put it out there and ask for feedback.
TroyDASH
Well-known member
I will invent the cure for cancer if you vote to give me 5000 dash in next month's budget. If you vote against then clearly you are blindly trusting what they are telling you.
demo
Well-known member
The allocated Dash will not be given to you at the end of the month. They will remain locked into a wallet address, ready to be given to you, or to any other researcher manages to find the cure. The person(s) responsible to unlock the funds and give them to the one who discovered the cure of cancer, may also be voted by the masternodes.
So here it is a variation of the procedure:
Several proposals should be added:
Prop 1) Do you want the masternode software updates to be governed by the blockchain? (yes/no) (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
Prop 2) In case of a yes in the proposal 1, do you agree to pay 150 dash to the one who will code it and let @demo be responsible to unlock the funds from the given payment address and give them to the winner? (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
Prop 3) In case of a yes in the proposal 2, do you agree to pay another 200 dash to the one who will code it and let @TroyDASH be responsible to unlock the funds from the given payment address and give them to the winner? (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
Prop 4) In case of a yes in the proposal 3, do you agree to pay another 200 dash to the one who will code it, and let @GrandMasterDash be responsible to unlock the funds from the given payment address and give them to the winner? (in case of a yes result, the 5 dash proposal fee is reimbursed)
e.t.c.
In the future multisig wallet payment addresses may be supported also, so more than one persons may be responsible to give to the winner the bounty(ies).
Last edited:
TroyDASH
Well-known member
Sounds good. What you're describing doesn't even sound all too far apart from some of the things I have heard floating around with regard to the new functionality that might be possible with Sentinel, governance objects and project managers. Just, not with the vote the numbers method
demo
Well-known member
Sounds good. What you're describing doesn't even sound all too far apart from some of the things I have heard floating around with regard to the new functionality that might be possible with Sentinel, governance objects and project managers. Just, not with the vote the numbers method
You dont have to wait for the Sentinel new functionality that may arrive.
You can follow the procedure right now, into the current budget system.
And of course...
Last edited:
demo
Well-known member
There is yet another big advantage (which I forgot to mention) when following the above mentioned procedure.
Suppose someone discovers the cure of cancer and claims the allocated funds. He then sends a message to the responsible who holds the locked funds, asking him to sign the recipe (an encrypted version of it) by using a blind signature. Then the inventor sends the unencrypted recipe only to the person who holds the locked funds asking for the bounty.
If the responsible who holds the funds reveals the recipe as being his own recipe and claim the bounty for himself, then the inventor can reveal the blind signature, and expose him. If the responsible person denies that the cure of cancer has been discovered, then the inventor publishes the cure of cancer along with the blind signature of the fund holder, and exposes him publicly as being someone who refused to accept the truth and save the world.
So the person responsible to unlock the cure of cancer funds and give the bounty to the winner, by following the procedure along with an appropriate blind signature scheme, he is somehow forced to accept the correct solution as long as he cares to remain a credible judge.
Additionaly , credible judges should be elected by the masternodes, and should be paid for their judgement services from the budget system with a monthly salary.
Suppose someone discovers the cure of cancer and claims the allocated funds. He then sends a message to the responsible who holds the locked funds, asking him to sign the recipe (an encrypted version of it) by using a blind signature. Then the inventor sends the unencrypted recipe only to the person who holds the locked funds asking for the bounty.
If the responsible who holds the funds reveals the recipe as being his own recipe and claim the bounty for himself, then the inventor can reveal the blind signature, and expose him. If the responsible person denies that the cure of cancer has been discovered, then the inventor publishes the cure of cancer along with the blind signature of the fund holder, and exposes him publicly as being someone who refused to accept the truth and save the world.
So the person responsible to unlock the cure of cancer funds and give the bounty to the winner, by following the procedure along with an appropriate blind signature scheme, he is somehow forced to accept the correct solution as long as he cares to remain a credible judge.
Additionaly , credible judges should be elected by the masternodes, and should be paid for their judgement services from the budget system with a monthly salary.
Last edited:
demo
Well-known member
Apart from the advertising that intrigued you, all the remaining usefull and essential information can be found in the opensource code.
So instead of ears, you should have eyes and mind.
Last edited:
ScioMind
Active member
This is very true, of course. My mind and eyes are sharp. Time, however, is precious. Deciphering the code would be extremely time consuming. If anyone who is familiar with this would be willing to share some info, or point me in the right direction, I would be most appreciative.
demo
Well-known member
@paragon paid 44 dash for someone to explain him some simple masternodes administrative tasks.
How much do you pay for an independent reviewer to explain you the real essence of the sentinel code?
Last edited:
You've misinterpreted both what I've said and my intentions.
There already exists a mechanism for MNOs to vote on critical issues, but during all this development it has almost never been used for the actual governance of the project. At various times, key strategic decisions and functional decisions have been conveniently bypassed. MNOs have been spoon fed one proposal at a time without a single strategic decision being put to them. At a strategic level, who voted for fiat gateways and transaction analysis? At a functional level, who voted to stop MN payments? - Evil Evan and the Miners (rock group?) did that one, but certainly not a single MNO. It might well be that MNOs agree with Evan 100%, but it was never verified.
Presently, MNOs can't stop Evil Evan and the Miners from halting payments to the entire masternode network.. and it seems he's going to ask (or not) at his own discretion. I suggest that such trust is foolish and should be given more consideration by MNOs. Even without bad intent, what's the backup plan in the event of a fatal accident, an act of God, or malicious actors targeting this small group of people wielding such powers? How cool will Evolution be if hackers target this blatantly obvious weakness?
TroyDASH
Well-known member
I would agree that it has been somewhat arbitrary which key decisions are posed to the MNs versus which are just done on their own. However it is also true that if someone feels strongly about an issue, they can create a topic and/or proposal about it. If it is a popular idea then there should be no problem raising the funds for the proposal fee. This is not binding on anyone but if the MNs come down strongly to send a message about something, it will draw attention to it.
Your point about sporks is not bad in my opinion and probably deserves its own thread. It just seemed a little random to me that you would pick this thread to argue it, since it is something that has been done a few times before. I don't see it as a critical, urgent problem but sporks are one of the things I think the dash community might not be as informed about, and could benefit from a more thorough analysis of why we have the sporks and the plans we need to put in place for the future, to both facilitate the rapid adaptibility of the network and to make it as autonomous as possible.
demo
Well-known member
The sporks are somehow global network variables which the Dash developers can change them (currently switch them on/off), and that way they can change the behavior of the every Dash software that runs in the Dash network. Sporks can be used for example to force software updates to all the masternodes that run in the network.
The developers should not be allowed to change the sporks without control. Thats why there is a plan for the sporks to be allowed to change after a multisignature procedure, among developers.
And (let me give some hints about sentinel to @ScioMind ) the spork triggering (on/off) in the future may also be done by a vote among mastertnodes , into the sentinel code (where some spork objects will be defined and be allowed to be voted).
You can see here the list of the current sporks.
And here the list of sporks in the future 12.1 version where the SPORK_7_MASTERNODE_SCANNING and the SPORK_11_RESET_BUDGET are not used anymore.
Unfortunately there is no plan yet to vote the spork numbers.
Last edited:
ScioMind
Active member
I created the website PlanetCrypton.com some time ago, as a means for explaining to other how to perform certain DASH and crypto tasks (with a focus on setting up a masternode). I did this for free. Some people gave small tips, but this was definitely not required to use the information which I freely provided.
When I ask for directions in a strange city, I would be taken aback if the person I asked put his hand out for a donation. In a similar fashion, I am a bit taken aback by your attitude regarding my simple request for more information. If you have no information to share, or simply don't want to share, that's fine. There is certainly no need for put downs or any sort of negativity, however.
And I am not looking for someone to painstakingly write out detailed instructions for me. I would, however, appreciate being pointed to any sources of useful and easily digestible information as may exist. If none exists at this time, then eventually it will, and perhaps that's when I my curiosity will be satisfied.
demo
Well-known member
I think there is no easily digestible information around, regarding sentinel . Although the term "easily digestible" is relative. Someone may say to you, here is the code, and it is an easy code, it is not rocket science. So it is easily digestible.
When in this strange city, some people get paid for just smiling and for just being beautifull, then you should expect that those who are giving you directions will want to get paid too. If you think it is negative to pay people that are helping you, then you are out of the spirit of the Dash Timocracy.
This is the city of Dash, this is what you pay for being a citizent of a Timocracy. This city unfortunately changed a lot since the days you used to offer information and work for free. You did it for free, but nowdays people get paid for that.
Last edited: