An illegal content can fit in a chain of small binary objects. You do nothing when limiting sizes, you just make it easier for the illegal content to hide.
Should Platform run on all nodes or should Platform run only on High Performance nodes ?
- Thread starter qwizzie
- Start date
Can content still be encrypted before uploading to Platform in that conceptual way of dealing with content ? Or is encryption impossible then ?
Last edited:
They can just vote whether they like encrypted content, or whether they do not like it.
They cannot vote on the content of the encrypted , simply because it is encrypted.
Yes...this is the correct thing you should do. Resign, and come back as anonymous.
Welcome to the club.
MNOwatch has a page that lists every OP_RETURN ever created, what can you find in the data, anything illegal? 
mnowatch.org
DASH History (OP_RETURN)
Dash OP_RETURN decoded - Discover secrets hidden in the blockchain
Encryption of any data is of course possible, but then the only people seeing the content are those with the decryption key.
If the question is if encryption can be used to allow people to offer the categories as mentioned above then no it will not make a difference, because you would be forced to give the decryption key to anyone wanting to see the content.
Once again other thread guys!
I would not be coming back, I would not want to be part of anything that could be used to exploit or hurt people. The goal of Platform is to advance society not bring forward the worst elements of it.
This is not possible, blanket encryption is not possible in decentralized systems like it is in a centralized system (your phone).
Would this censorship mechanism described be part of all the aforementioned setup options, all of them, some more than others?
The network that votes on those three types of content on Platform, are those Platform network masternodes (4K HPM's or 10K HPM's) or all masternodes ?
Before you do this please consult legal council. I imagine explicitly welcoming specific content is different legally than welcoming all content. It could be a situation where you open the network up to liability.
My thoughts on the topic are just not mature enough to answer this, I would have to think about it.
I will not be responding any more on this topic in this thread as to not derail the main conversation.
So difficult not to write something rude right now.
How can you claim this is a derailment. These are topics that by all appearance are causally linked. A misstep early on (gracious wording) can dramatically change the cencorship resistance of the network.
How can you claim this is a derailment. These are topics that by all appearance are causally linked. A misstep early on (gracious wording) can dramatically change the cencorship resistance of the network.
We can talk about it, just in a different thread.
You are already part of everything that could be used to exploit or hurt people. And you will come back, while ensuring you will not. This is the protocol everyone follows.
You will come back maybe because deeply inside you you like people to be hurted and exploited, or maybe because you want to discover whatever exploits or hurt people and smash it. But you will come back. As anonymous this time. Because if you come back as eponymous who likes people to be hurted and exploited you will be smashed. And if you come back as eponymous who wants to discover the bad and smash it then the bad will avoid you and you will never discover it.
Finally if you dont come back while knowing that there is something used to exploit or hurt people, if you really dont care to discover it and smash it, then deeply inside you you accept as normality that people may be hurted or exploited. In that case, in the first place, why did you left ? You left because you do not accept it, and now, with you attitude of not coming back, you accept it. Are you insane?
I hope that you are not insane, and that you understand what I have just said. So welcome to the club.
Last edited:
Plausible deniability.MNOwatch has a page that lists every OP_RETURN ever created, what can you find in the data, anything illegal?
DASH History (OP_RETURN)
Dash OP_RETURN decoded - Discover secrets hidden in the blockchain
The Dashplatform is something similar to the OP_return mnowatch page. The Dashplatform is a blockchain, like bitcoin or dash is, but extremely searchable (in contrast to bitcoin or dash). Of course people could search extremely the blockchain in privacy, as you did, and in that case the extreme searching capabilities of DashPlatform may be considered as obsolete. But are they? DashPlatform makes the blockchain searching public, available to anyone and most importantly offers a public search that is irrefutable and uncensorable .
Searching in Mnowatch OP_RETURN page is not irrefutable, because someone may claim that not all OP_RETURN content resides in mnowatch, and that some content have been excluded from the search.
This property of irrefutable uncensorable public search that Dashplatform offers, gives an advantage over any other search engine (google included)
Last edited:
Having a majority does not grant permission for the potentially illegal use of the DAO. DCG are promoting a significant change to the topology of the network and have effectively said legally established consensus rules will not apply.
MNO Watch is the application pulling data from the Network (core, platform, doesn't matter). If we wanted any messed up things not to be displayed we'd go to the MNOWatch operator to add moderation features. If he didn't, it would be up to authorities to go after him (supposing their goal is to prevent the dissemination of vile contet).Plausible deniability.
The Dashplatform is something similar to the OP_return mnowatch page.
The Dashplatform is a blockchain, like bitcoin or dash is, but extremely searchable (in contrast to bitcoin or dash).
Of course people could search extremely the blockchain in privacy, as you did, and in that case the extreme searching capabilities of DashPlatform are obsolete.
But DashPlatform makes this search public, available to anyone and most important irrefutable .
Searching in Mnowatch OP_RETURN page is not irrefutable, because someone may claim that not all OP_RETURN content resides in mnowatch, and that some content have been excluded from the search.
Also, it will be very interesting to see how CrowdNode users vote. I'm hoping DCG will DTRT and void all votes if there is a large discrepancy in how CrowdNode users vote. That would be clear evidence of how impactful centralized voting is.
Yes, but someone may create a private mnowatch op_return page . Or someone else may opensource the code used to create the mnowatch op_return page for private usage. In that case, even if we go to the mnowatch operator and add moderation features on his search engine, the one who searches for illegal content can still find it.
In contrast to mnowatch op_return page, that offers private or public (but potentially censorable) searching capabilities, the dashplatform (through groveDB) offers a public, irrefutable and unsencored searching of the blockchain (provided of course that all possible keys are indexed as groveDB claims).
So groveDB facilitates the discovery of illegal content that may hurt people, so I wonder whether @QuantumExplorer really opposes to the idea people to be hurted, or whether deep inside he likes the idea. If not, then why did he created groveDB, in the first place?
Last edited:
Damn it, this is 100% spot on. They never had the balls to put their money where their mouth is. They just played us with lies.
Members of DCG are distancing themselves from Duffield's vision when the truth is, in all of 7 years, not one person notified MNOs that there were too many masternodes and only a few would be able to participate in Platform. NOT ONE!
It's called lies by omission.
Now they are claiming there is only one solution with two parameters (4K/10K). They tell us that 1K Platform is insecure and at risk of centralization.
So you imply that whoever creates apps that are searching the blockchain (or even more apps, that are searching the blockhain in an irrefutable uncensorable way) these persons should be held accountable ?
Well, this is also the case of Dashplatform, and its groveDB database which is the ultimate searching tool for blockchains.
Is it maybe NOT a good idea to thoroughly search the blockchain, in fear that illegal content may become public?
Nine months ago.................................................................................................................................................
...after draining for 6 years all the money from the stupid masternodes, the GroveDB baby was born..
Last edited:
Indeed, this is exactly how it works. If you censor content, even just once ("oh, it's just this one thing that is quite obviously illegal and immoral"), you will be held responsible to censor all content.
If, OTOH, you never censor content, and if you are a large well funded organization, you can push the blame on to others. For example, ISPs aren't generally liable, though they do perform tasks to catch low hanging fruit.
As a DAO that a government can't tame or coerce, dash would be persecuted, de-listed and punished like monero and others. If we're de-listed for coinjoin, what kind of party are we going to have with this?
Anybody voting on the 4K or 10K "solutions" will ultimately vote for more centralization and creating an elitist cartel running Platform exclusively.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but the way they have planned this, those 4K or 10K nodes could use the lamest bandwidth connections and/or high-latency
connections, but as long as they have the collateral, everything is fine. Right?
Higher collateral doesn't guarantee better service, especially not in an environment which has no PoSe. Can we agree on that?
Then supposedly, they are planning to just payout 4fold or 10fold the MN rewards for such 4K or 10K HPMNs.
But in doing so, they will basically create a second type/category of blockreward or at the very least a variable blockreward, where the amount of the
MN reward is depending on the collateralization of the node, whether its either a regular 1K node or a HPMN. This is going to affect Dash Tokenomics.
Because if a subset of nodes, gets paid 4fold or 10fold on an average 2.625 minute blocktime block, it will mean that the Dash coins still to be mined
until reaching Max Supply, will be mined way faster than planned and outlined in our Tokenomics. One doesn't need to be a math genius to understand that.
They won't give us the opportunity to vote on regular 1K MN with Voluntary Adherence to Platform (with or without Hardware-related competition).
They keep on repeating that it would be unsafe or somehow unsecure, but i don't believe them.
If they would spend only 5% of their effort with which they try to impose 4K or 10K, they would easily find a proper and safe way to do it.
Because it would be the most natural, non-coercive and sensible way to start Platform.
Anyway, its pointless to have this alibi discussion here for them.
Those DCG guys especially QE and Virgile are hell-bent on introducing either 4K or 10K, have already made their mind up, and will stop at nothing.
They will try to arrange the Voting in such a way, that either 4K or 10K comes out winning, perhaps by only a few Yes votes, and then use those Fake Votings
(even if its technically an unpassing Governance proposal with no enacting power whatsoever) as an excuse to impose this abomination.
Unpassing proposals have no merit at all. Unpassing proposals do not show you any direction. Unpassing proposals will not absolve you from your deeds.
Be warned: If you cross this red line, you can expect lawsuits for damages coming your way.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but the way they have planned this, those 4K or 10K nodes could use the lamest bandwidth connections and/or high-latency
connections, but as long as they have the collateral, everything is fine. Right?
Higher collateral doesn't guarantee better service, especially not in an environment which has no PoSe. Can we agree on that?
Then supposedly, they are planning to just payout 4fold or 10fold the MN rewards for such 4K or 10K HPMNs.
But in doing so, they will basically create a second type/category of blockreward or at the very least a variable blockreward, where the amount of the
MN reward is depending on the collateralization of the node, whether its either a regular 1K node or a HPMN. This is going to affect Dash Tokenomics.
Because if a subset of nodes, gets paid 4fold or 10fold on an average 2.625 minute blocktime block, it will mean that the Dash coins still to be mined
until reaching Max Supply, will be mined way faster than planned and outlined in our Tokenomics. One doesn't need to be a math genius to understand that.
They won't give us the opportunity to vote on regular 1K MN with Voluntary Adherence to Platform (with or without Hardware-related competition).
They keep on repeating that it would be unsafe or somehow unsecure, but i don't believe them.
If they would spend only 5% of their effort with which they try to impose 4K or 10K, they would easily find a proper and safe way to do it.
Because it would be the most natural, non-coercive and sensible way to start Platform.
Anyway, its pointless to have this alibi discussion here for them.
Those DCG guys especially QE and Virgile are hell-bent on introducing either 4K or 10K, have already made their mind up, and will stop at nothing.
They will try to arrange the Voting in such a way, that either 4K or 10K comes out winning, perhaps by only a few Yes votes, and then use those Fake Votings
(even if its technically an unpassing Governance proposal with no enacting power whatsoever) as an excuse to impose this abomination.
Unpassing proposals have no merit at all. Unpassing proposals do not show you any direction. Unpassing proposals will not absolve you from your deeds.
Be warned: If you cross this red line, you can expect lawsuits for damages coming your way.