Development Update - Oct 1, 2014

Minotaur

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Apr 7, 2014
452
1,079
263
That's an educated guess, but OK, the MN currently checks one address for a 1000DRK vin - could it simply be made to check say five addresses for five 200DRK vins? Or x addresses for a total of 1000? Seems like that wouldn't be too hard a change to code up?
One last idea I had in favor of trustless masternode pooling, is that it would open up the possibility of existing masternode holders to offer shares, and let people pool with them. For example, if you run 10MN at this time, you could offer 20, 500DRK shares, and run 20MN instead. I would do this and not even charge people anything but just server fees so I could get more coins out of circulation. Since is trustless, and the shareholders control their own coins I would carry no responsibility. With this same rationale you can also offer smaller shares, and actively promote your masternode pool and charge a small fee just like mining pool operators do. I would not dare to do this right now because safe keeping of other people coins is too much responsibility for me, but would happily do it if the option to do it trustless exist.

So yeah masternode count could go substantially up with the creation of masternode pools just like mining pools currently exist. Is actually exactly the same thing joining resources together for a common goal. Miners can take their hashing power to any pool they like, masternode share holders could take their coins to any masternode pool they like too if it is trustless and they keep the control of their coins.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UdjinM6

eduffield

Core Developer
Mar 9, 2014
1,084
5,323
183
If MNs are the mining pools, then nobody can scam it. Anyone can still run one, but it gives the dev control over how it operates.

Or take it further, just mine at the whole MN network and let it sort things out.

Another awesome thing that MNs can do. But, we need to figure out; just because one can do a thing, does not mean one should do that thing. This depends on how it might be implemented. Anyway, kinda off topic...
I like the idea of using POS and POW, I'll see about implementing it.
 

ScioMind

Member
May 28, 2014
183
73
88
Hi all!! An economically healthy way to increase the masternodes is to increase the ROI with adding new services and attract clients. Those cients will buy the services that darkcoin offers and will pay fee. Those fees are the masternodes increasing income. So more services>more new income>higher ROI. So if ROI now is 25% and a new services sends ROI to 45% this will attract new investors to buy dark and set a MN. Then price goes up and the ROI returns to 25% from 45%. And you have more MN's working. I have 2.000 drk but I don't have a masternode because I don't know how to set up the MN. darkcoin web site has no guidance how to do it. So please find a way to help people who have coins to set a MN. Also I want to tell you that ROI is not stable, it is related to risk of an investment. If drk in the future has the growth btc has, then an attractive ROI will be lower because the risk will be lower. Thank you for reading!!!
I have complete, step-by-step guides to setting up a masternode, and also always help those who are having difficulties with my guides. If you are interested, just go to PlanetCrypton.com. If you have any questions let me know.
 

UdjinM6

Official Dash Dev
Core Developer
Dash Core Team
May 20, 2014
3,639
3,537
1,183
One last idea I had in favor of trustless masternode pooling, is that it would open up the possibility of existing masternode holders to offer shares, and let people pool with them. For example, if you run 10MN at this time, you could offer 20, 500DRK shares, and run 20MN instead. I would do this and not even charge people anything but just server fees so I could get more coins out of circulation. Since is trustless, and the shareholders control their own coins I would carry no responsibility. With this same rationale you can also offer smaller shares, and actively promote your masternode pool and charge a small fee just like mining pool operators do. I would not dare to do this right now because safe keeping of other people coins is too much responsibility for me, but would happily do it if the option to do it trustless exist.

So yeah masternode count could go substantially up with the creation of masternode pools just like mining pools currently exist. Is actually exactly the same thing joining resources together for a common goal. Miners can take their hashing power to any pool they like, masternode share holders could take their coins to any masternode pool they like too if it is trustless and they keep the control of their coins.
masternode - a software farm
masternoders - a new kind of miners :)
 

bertlebbert

Active Member
Jul 17, 2014
670
289
133
MN pools have advantages (I gladly pay vertoe his 20% admn fee):
1. Little guy can participate with less than 1000 DRK.
2. No headaches of setup and administration.
3. The "luck" factor of payments gets averaged out right away.
 

camosoul

Grizzled Member
Sep 19, 2014
2,261
1,130
1,183
I like the idea of using POS and POW, I'll see about implementing it.
I think we've become so accustomed to the idea of a mining pool, that we've forgotten that mining pools are an ad-hock band-aid for what is another severe flaw in BTC-centric crypto. MNs can fix this and eliminate the concept of a mining pool altogether.

Anyway, I think that's a topic for another day. Current fish need frying first. ;-)
 

hard_forker

Member
Jun 20, 2014
41
14
48
Lowering the requirement to 500 drks? No way - would have to run 2 VPSes instead of one, twice the number of updates, twice the cost for running the MN for the same reward? Nope.

I agree with increasing the MN payments. 20% is obviously too little to attract 2000 MNs and equally obviously - 25% won't make a big difference. How about we start with 50% and adjust upward or downward based on the result? The hashrate will drop by 20-70% which is NOT an issue as there are coins with 1% of DRK hashrate that still perform well in terms of securing the coin.

That would also be a price discovery - accelerated one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miner237

jpr

Active Member
May 11, 2014
493
393
133
MN pools have advantages (I gladly pay vertoe his 20% admn fee):
1. Little guy can participate with less than 1000 DRK.
2. No headaches of setup and administration.
3. The "luck" factor of payments gets averaged out right away.
The only problem is the risk of vertoe loosing coins or getting hacked or anything else. He runs a fantastic service but still you have no control of your coins.
 

Ignition75

Active Member
May 25, 2014
332
216
113
Australia
Development Update - October 1, 2014

Darksend seems to be very stable and now that we’re open source and we’ve passed an audit I think it’s time to work on some other functionality. We’re working out of development plan for the next weeks weeks and here’s what we have so far.

Masternode Security

There are a few things that are missing in Darkcoin to properly implement InstantX). One of the greatest objections to InstantX from the Bitcoin community was the possibility to DOS the selected masternodes that are responsible for consensus voting.

This would stop the consensus voting forcing the network to evaluate transactions using the mining network, bring the first confirmation from 10-20 seconds back to 2.5 minutes. While not a terrible issue, it’s something we can deal with by hiding the masternode identities and using a token based routing system to pass messages back and forth. This will be discussed in great detail in the v2 of the Darkcoin whitepaper.

To build a network that can withstand attacks, the masternodes must not publish their IPs. To do this we’re going to utilize a new multipath communication technology. This will add another layer of privacy to the system as it will allow users to communicate with the network securely without exposing their IPs and will also hide the identity of the Darksend mixing nodes making it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for third parties to spy on users information.

It uses multi-path routing so users can send more than one encrypted message using different routes on the mesh network for redundancy. This will allow us quick communication, robustness and anonymous two way communication.

The diagram below shows the new system in action:




Enforcement

Currently there is a very basic version of enforcement that is going to be enabled soon.

The strategy employed by Darkcoin currently to protect masternode payments is definitely not a perfect solution and wasn’t meant to stay in this form forever. While it does make cheating much more difficult, it’s still remains possible.

The next version of enforcement will be a huge improvement over this current version and will introduce much greater security.

Masternode Reward Structure

The Darkcoin network relies heavily on the strength of the Masternode network. They are the foundation of our currency in provide great value to the network. Whether it be serving the blocks to a client that is syncing or proving the services such as Darksend and InstantX.

While writing the whitepaper for InstantX and v2 of Darkcoin, I’ve realized that the network would gain an incredible amount of security by increasing the amount of running Masternodes. When originally envisioned, the target number of masternodes was 2000-3000. I’ve waited some time to see if the amount of active Masternodes will increase alone, but I’m beginning to think some tweaking is in order.

The number of Masternodes reaches an equilibrium with the price of Darkcoin and the ROI of running a node over a period of time. Currently we have about 900 total Masternodes (some haven’t updated to RC5 yet, but you can see the stats here), with this amount of nodes each has a ROI of 23%

It can be calculated with: ((a/b)*c*d*e)/1000)
a is the amount of Masternodes you control
b is the total amount of Masternodes
c is the amount of blocks per day
d is the days in a year
e is payment per block won

So with that in mind the current profitability can be calculated by

((1/900.0)*576*365*(5*.20))/1000 = 0.23 (23% per year ROI in DRK)

The reward of 23% can be thought of as the current equilibrium that the network has found. So it is expected that no matter the reward structure, the network will come to rest as this level.

If our goal is to gain more Masternodes to improve the overall security of the network, I propose increasing the reward structure for Masternodes by 5% every month until the optimal amount of Masternodes is reached. This can be thought of as a type of price discovery. It's also worth noting, by adding 5% rewards per month we'll have a decreasing amount of impact each month thereafter. From 20% to 25% is a 25% change, from 25% to 30% is a 20% change, then 16.6%, 14.2%, 12.5%, etc. This will allow a good deal of reaction time.

This also means that Darkcoin must be purchased in order to start new Masternodes. This doesn’t include Masternodes selling their existing node’s Darkcoin in order to cash out (that wouldn’t change the Masternode total count). Considering this, we should see very long term steady growth, gain a lot of media attention and gain real-world adoption.

I believe this update will be great for Darkcoin by increasing the security of InstantX and Darksend, while providing significant growth for Darkcoin. An update like this requires a very solid version of enforcement along with updates to the daemon to tell the pool operators how much Darkcoin is suppose to be paid to the current Masternode operator.

FAQ:

Can't we just decrease the amount required to run a Masternode: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-1-2014.2561/page-4#post-23297

PS. Thanks to BabyGiraffe for inspiring this conversation about Masternode Payments.
It's bold... It's ballsy... I love it!
 

TsuyokuNaritai

Active Member
May 24, 2014
181
102
103
the strength and stability of the darkcoin network and wallets. With these will come a higher price.
I agree the objective should be getting more MNs, and fundamentals shouldn't be messed with just to pump value, and that strength and stability of the darkcoin network and wallets is vital. But don't for a moment believe that alone will bring people flocking to use or buy DRK. It just removes an obstacle to it.
 

MangledBlue

Well-known Member
Jun 28, 2014
1,246
678
183
USA
eduffield If Evan could develop a mechanism for trustless masternode pooling, it would definitely raise the masternode count substantially, the pools dont need to be big, just a way for 3 or 4 people to pool together to create a masternode. Maybe using the same mechanism that checks for the 1000 DRK stake, you could check for 4 independent 250DRK stakes to validate a masternode, and the shareholders would have to do masternode start from each of their wallets using the same masternode genkey, if one of the 4 shareholders moves the coins the masternode goes offline. It can obviously also be 2 people with 500DRK same principle. This could be huge.

Edit: This would be a very smart move, just like when we introduced cold wallet masternodes, without that, we wouldn’t have half the nodes we have now. Trustless masternode pooling would definitely help, regardless of anything else we do. So if it was technically possible I would do that first to see what impact it could have on the count.
If the MN "key" could be treated as and IP address, so to speak
And at the end you add a multiplier - as if an IP port

Could this not be coded in to function as a mechanism for multi-person/wallet masternodes?

(huge masternode genkey):2
7khvhv8hv8haerv8h8reh0hbh4wb8hwbubq:2 <<<< in wallet 1
7khvhv8hv8haerv8h8reh0hbh4wb8hwbubq:2 <<<< in wallet 2
each person/wallet owning 500DRK

and/or
(huge masternode genkey):4
7kjvbhebrverhbiehborebiwbirgirierigiergerign:4 <<<< in wallet 1
7kjvbhebrverhbiehborebiwbirgirierigiergerign:4 <<<< in wallet 2
7kjvbhebrverhbiehborebiwbirgirierigiergerign:4 <<<< in wallet 3
7kjvbhebrverhbiehborebiwbirgirierigiergerign:4 <<<< in wallet 4
each person/wallet owning 250DRK

masternode genkey:multiplier

masternode genkey multiplier looks at address balance within the wallet and compares the to the other wallets within the MN "unit"

When masternode genkey = 1000DRK, MN = 1
and LOCK the multiplied DRK within coin-control in each wallet
or
When masternode genkey =/< 1000DRK, MN = 1
and LOCK the multiplied DRK within coin-control in each wallet


I hope this make sense - ugh
I can see it in my head - lol - but could it work?


edit: maybe this is a perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

Still does not mean that, what I thought, could not be possible......
I simply try to look at it from another point of view.
If a solution needs to be had, then why not try all the possibilities?
Edison did.... the last one, lit up the room :)

edit: I'm cool with the 20% - no need to rush it - but getting rid of "weak miners" is like turning your back on the poor. Decentralizing is one thing but removing people less fortunate is another. Leave it at 20%. This is a currency. Maximum MN take from miners should be no more then 21%

But I have a feeling that it will eventually end up at 69.3% - a "nuclear constant"
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Red-Shinobi

Member
Apr 9, 2014
117
76
78
Hi all!! An economically healthy way to increase the masternodes is to increase the ROI with adding new services and attract clients. Those cients will buy the services that darkcoin offers and will pay fee. Those fees are the masternodes increasing income. So more services>more new income>higher ROI. So if ROI now is 25% and a new services sends ROI to 45% this will attract new investors to buy dark and set a MN. Then price goes up and the ROI returns to 25% from 45%. And you have more MN's working. I have 2.000 drk but I don't have a masternode because I don't know how to set up the MN. darkcoin web site has no guidance how to do it. So please find a way to help people who have coins to set a MN. Also I want to tell you that ROI is not stable, it is related to risk of an investment. If drk in the future has the growth btc has, then an attractive ROI will be lower because the risk will be lower. Thank you for reading!!!
I'm with the Aethilos approach. Let's make more demand.
The other solutions sound like attempts to manipulate the supply side of the MN equation.
But no matter how we slice the pie we're not going to end up with more pie.

Example: If MN's could host encrypted chat/ messaging for a fee, im using that service and happy to pay for each msg --->NEW income for MN's ---> more demand ---> new MN's set up organically.

Bitcoin has 6600 nodes, Darkcoin having 4000 is maybe biting off more than we can chew. I just dont see where they'd come from right now.
It sounds to me that when instantX happens we could double down on MN's and largely phase mining out.....two birds, one stone......Mining 2.0 as Vertoe calls it.

We still havent seen the pimp hand.
Miners are bullying the network as is...now we're going to attempt to take more??....i dont think so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tungfa

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,899
6,744
1,283
so "dummy" question:
can we run mining over masternodes and cut out the miners all together ?
Is that technically possible ?
 

aethlios

New Member
Aug 31, 2014
4
5
3
I'm with the Aethilos approach. Let's make more demand.
The other solutions sound like attempts to manipulate the supply side of the MN equation.
But no matter how we slice the pie we're not going to end up with more pie.

Example: If MN's could host encrypted chat/ messaging for a fee, im using that service and happy to pay for each msg --->NEW income for MN's ---> more demand ---> new MN's set up organically.

Bitcoin has 6600 nodes, Darkcoin having 4000 is maybe biting off more than we can chew. I just dont see where they'd come from right now.
It sounds to me that when instantX happens we could double down on MN's and largely phase mining out.....two birds, one stone......Mining 2.0 as Vertoe calls it.

We still havent seen the pimp hand.
Miners are bullying the network as is...now we're going to attempt to take more??....i dont think so.
Hi, to add more to my thinking: If you take coins from miners and give more to MN holders, you just redistribute wealth, you don't create more wealth. In order for market cap to go up you need to increase the total income. Dark has a huge asset which is the dev team!! So if the dev team adds more services in the future for individuals and corporations to use, those clients-users will pay fees in drkcoin to the MN holders in order to use the services. each new service adds new value so demand goes up, then price goes up and MN's ROI up and more MN created. Also miners will hold coins more often and wont dump because they will expect more valuable services in the future so a higher market cap. Offering services makes the coin useful. Also this protects drk from clones coins, because a client-user will want the best service and won't buy a clone for a clone-service.
 

aethlios

New Member
Aug 31, 2014
4
5
3
Ok, but what services? Messaging?
Well I don't know what kind of services, but services that have to do with anonymity, I just want to describe generally the strategy that could have drkcoin in the future which is something different from all the other coins.
 

acidburn

Active Member
May 26, 2014
467
175
113
The main issue with services is they have to offer value, and that value has to be sufficient to meet the costs / reward benefit. Adding messages may get used by a handful of us and thus will not generate the capital required.
 

tungfa

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,899
6,744
1,283
I am a bit surprised by this announcement !
Obviously i do not understand enough of the technical side of things !

But i thought with Open Source we are out of Beta and ready for mainstream adoption !?!
But it seems we are still messing around with core technical details of DRK ?!
(sure the more anonymous the better .....>)

Open Bazaar, Wallets for online markets and adoption .. shouldn't that be an important thing to actually get this coin to be used !
Don't we attract more money, users and less volatility in market adoptions ?!

Shouldn't we use the positive PR we have in the moment to get into new markets and adoptions ?
Just my non technical view/questions on things .....>
 
  • Like
Reactions: JGCMiner

Miner237

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
May 28, 2014
515
227
213
Yeah
If the MN "key" could be treated as and IP address, so to speak
And at the end you add a multiplier - as if an IP port

Could this not be coded in to function as a mechanism for multi-person/wallet masternodes?

(huge masternode genkey):2
7khvhv8hv8haerv8h8reh0hbh4wb8hwbubq:2 <<<< in wallet 1
7khvhv8hv8haerv8h8reh0hbh4wb8hwbubq:2 <<<< in wallet 2
each person/wallet owning 500DRK

and/or
(huge masternode genkey):4
7kjvbhebrverhbiehborebiwbirgirierigiergerign:4 <<<< in wallet 1
7kjvbhebrverhbiehborebiwbirgirierigiergerign:4 <<<< in wallet 2
7kjvbhebrverhbiehborebiwbirgirierigiergerign:4 <<<< in wallet 3
7kjvbhebrverhbiehborebiwbirgirierigiergerign:4 <<<< in wallet 4
each person/wallet owning 250DRK

masternode genkey:multiplier

masternode genkey multiplier looks at address balance within the wallet and compares the to the other wallets within the MN "unit"

When masternode genkey = 1000DRK, MN = 1
and LOCK the multiplied DRK within coin-control in each wallet
or
When masternode genkey =/< 1000DRK, MN = 1
and LOCK the multiplied DRK within coin-control in each wallet


I hope this make sense - ugh
I can see it in my head - lol - but could it work?


edit: maybe this is a perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

Still does not mean that, what I thought, could not be possible......
I simply try to look at it from another point of view.
If a solution needs to be had, then why not try all the possibilities?
Edison did.... the last one, lit up the room :)

edit: I'm cool with the 20% - no need to rush it - but getting rid of "weak miners" is like turning your back on the poor. Decentralizing is one thing but removing people less fortunate is another. Leave it at 20%. This is a currency. Maximum MN take from miners should be no more then 21%

But I have a feeling that it will eventually end up at 69.3% - a "nuclear constant"

Who hosts the masternode in this scenario? And what happens when one of those wallets spends the held fund? I would be upset if the MN went down because one of the share holders moved or accidentally spent their coin.
 

acidburn

Active Member
May 26, 2014
467
175
113
I am a bit surprised by this announcement !
Obviously i do not understand enough of the technical side of things !

But i thought with Open Source we are out of Beta and ready for mainstream adoption !?!
But it seems we are still messing around with core technical details of DRK ?!
(sure the more anonymous the better .....>)

Open Bazaar, Wallets for online markets and adoption .. shouldn't that be an important thing to actually get this coin to be used !
Don't we attract more money, users and less volatility in market adoptions ?!

Shouldn't we use the positive PR we have in the moment to get into new markets and adoptions ?
Just my non technical view/questions on things .....>
It'll always be an evolving coin until the developers stop working on it? I thought the beta title belonged to just darksend? I could be wrong though.

Either way we've currently got a problem. I do thing, like you've said we should be trying to get people to use it but I think the focus has been shifted from market adoption to increasing MN count.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tungfa

Miner237

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
May 28, 2014
515
227
213
Lowering the requirement to 500 drks? No way - would have to run 2 VPSes instead of one, twice the number of updates, twice the cost for running the MN for the same reward? Nope.

I agree with increasing the MN payments. 20% is obviously too little to attract 2000 MNs and equally obviously - 25% won't make a big difference. How about we start with 50% and adjust upward or downward based on the result? The hashrate will drop by 20-70% which is NOT an issue as there are coins with 1% of DRK hashrate that still perform well in terms of securing the coin.

That would also be a price discovery - accelerated one.
If has rate drops that much lower won't the reward go up in effect paying the miners who stick around more?
 

fernando

Powered by Dash
Foundation Member
May 9, 2014
1,527
2,059
283
It'll always be an evolving coin until the developers stop working on it? I thought the beta title belonged to just darksend? I could be wrong though.

Either way we've currently got a problem. I do thing, like you've said we should be trying to get people to use it but I think the focus has been shifted from market adoption to increasing MN count.
We can do both things at the same time. If we wait to have the perfect coin to look for adoption we will never have it because there will always be something that can be improved. The time to start using Darkcoin is yesterday!! We have already an anonymous coin that works fine, now go out and preach :) When we get new feature we'll all win, current users and those who we'll convince tomorrow.

Minotaur is doing a great job approaching businesses to talk about Darkcoin. I'm absolutely sure that he'll be the source of many good news in the next few weeks. Anyone wanting to help should go to the thread he started about it to discuss ideas (https://darkcointalk.org/threads/darkcoin-promotion-initiatives.2463/). And if you really want to help and get your hands dirty, just say so, we'll set you up, there is plenty of work to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tungfa

tungfa

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,899
6,744
1,283
We can do both things at the same time. If we wait to have the perfect coin to look for adoption we will never have it because there will always be something that can be improved. The time to start using Darkcoin is yesterday!! We have already an anonymous coin that works fine, now go out and preach :) When we get new feature we'll all win, current users and those who we'll convince tomorrow.

Minotaur is doing a great job approaching businesses to talk about Darkcoin. I'm absolutely sure that he'll be the source of many good news in the next few weeks. Anyone wanting to help should go to the thread he started about it to discuss ideas (https://darkcointalk.org/threads/darkcoin-promotion-initiatives.2463/). And if you really want to help and get your hands dirty, just say so, we'll set you up, there is plenty of work to do.
All right
that's what i needed to hear !
Tx ...>>
 
  • Like
Reactions: fernando