Welcome to the Dash Forum!

Please sign up to discuss the most innovative cryptocurrency!

Temporary Measures / Quick Wins

Discussion in 'Dash Economics' started by strophy, Dec 13, 2019.

  1. strophy

    strophy Administrator
    Dash Core Team Dash Support Group Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2016
    Messages:
    684
    Likes Received:
    385
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Key Questions for Discussion
    • What are some temporary and/or quick-win solutions we can implement to address the observed economic issues and improve Dash as a store of value?
    Lire en français
     
    #1 strophy, Dec 13, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  2. AjM

    AjM Well-known Member
    Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2014
    Messages:
    1,332
    Likes Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Small % saving reward for every month for wallets which have 1 to 100 dash end of the month.

    Example 1: wallet have 100 dash last day of the month, 2% reward -> 2 dash.
    Example 2: wallet have 1 dash last day of the month, 1% reward -> 0.01 dash.

    Edit: correction 0.1 -> 0.01
     
    #2 AjM, Dec 13, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2019
  3. qwizzie

    qwizzie Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,515
    Likes Received:
    717
    Trophy Points:
    183
    A quick-win solution could be adjusting the block reward allocation split from 45 (miners) / 45 (masternodes) / 10 (budget)
    to another block reward allocation split, for example 40 / 50 / 10 or 35 / 50 / 15

    Not sure if this is fair to miners though. Although one way or another, miners are currently our focus point it seems.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Dandy

    Dandy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    88
    We could just lower the mining reward, keep MNO rewards and budget the same, and burn the rest. That would effectively raise the value of all Dash in circulation, impacting holders.
    Of course, that's just until we can implement some smarter long term solution.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  5. GaryS

    GaryS New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2019
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    As others have mentioned, just tweak it to reduce the POW awards and increase the MN & budget awards.

    This should reduce the continual market selling by miners, while still keeping the essence of what Dash is.

    Going to POS would be a knee-jerk reaction, one that is poorly thought out and will just make Dash another irrelevant POS coin where everyone gets a participation prize...
     
  6. Semarg

    Semarg New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2017
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Measures must be effective enough to change the balance of market forces.

    10 / 70 / 20
     
  7. blockchaintech

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2017
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    78
    I speak from a greater Store of Value focus .

    The fastest way is to reduce the mining reward and give more % to the treasury and the MNO Network.

    It is evident that the MN nodes have not been reduced until 1 month ago, so we can deduce that the miners are flooding the Dash market 2 years ago.

    1 mining node only does 1 task that is IMPORTANT.
    1 Master Node does several tasks that are IMPORTANT.

    If the miners are not interested they can turning off machines or forking.

    Also, if they (2 dominant mining pools) 'CAN and WANT ' to avoid that change, they just have to pump the Dash value. Easy..
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  8. Semarg

    Semarg New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2017
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    3
    That's what can be done very fast, without vast development efforts.
     
  9. drkrooster

    drkrooster Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2014
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    58
    the way I see it, it is a lack of demand and interest from the market.

    1) reduce the emission rate, and prolong the emission period.
    2) changing the block reward ratio to 35:55:10 for miner:MN: budget.
    the unused budget goes to a locked treasury fund that later can be used.(future voting to release or burn the fund)
     
  10. JOL

    JOL Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    78
    It would seem that if I understood correctly that the MN shared a solution would be quickly implemented.

    With the information provided by Ryan, who if one day we replaced POW mining with a service solution with Dash collateral, the % profitability would be much higher than that received by MN to date.
    And this even if we imagine that all available Dash will be assigned to the collateralisation of this new service.

    It seems possible to me to imagine transferring a % of POW rewards to shared MN

    If our object would be to have 1000 MN shared, it would decrease the profitability of the entire MN by 20%.

    A distribution to support this objective would be:
    35% POW
    10% Budget
    45% Full MN
    10% Share MN

    If the objective were to have 2000 MN shared in addition we would move on to:
    25% POW
    10% Budget
    45% Full MN
    20% Share MN

    For simplification purposes we can do without dissociating the MNs, whether they are Full or Share

    It would appear that Kraken is considering proposing a solution with trust outside the chain to enable it to become share of MN

    It seems interesting to me that exploring this possibility on the Dash chain in a trustless way can only be a plus for dash and hes users in terms of a service that will exist anyway.
     
  11. rick

    rick New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2017
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    The point of a first change is make an assertion and test it. The market tells us if the assertion is right/wrong.

    Testing an assertion about mining buying/selling requires a % reward change. This needs to be committed to over a longer time period for miners to be confident in the change, and the market to price accurately.

    A test on a shorter timeline is staking via trustless MN shares. The market will price this more quickly -- whether that's sell or buying pressure. Either the market uses it or it doesn't. MN rewards and 'staking' rewards are at forced equilibrium, which may highlight differences in demand more quickly.
     
  12. Bitedge

    Bitedge New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    3
  13. Dandy

    Dandy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Unallocated treasury funds were never created, so I don't see what is there to talk about.
     
  14. Bitedge

    Bitedge New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ryan and Evan both said the funds could be created in the future.
     
    #14 Bitedge, Dec 18, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2019
  15. Butcherofballyhoo

    Butcherofballyhoo New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    3
    If this network expands the treasury which is something Core seems to be suggesting I would highly recommend we expand the percentage of yes votes in the same direction. As example, if the treasury budget expands to 20% I think the yes votes needs to be 20% of the MNs. That way only the most essential proposals will pass and the rest would be burned. Core gets a boost but the very few other proposals will be paid thereby reducing the circulating supply from both miners and POs
     
  16. p5yc071c

    p5yc071c New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2016
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    3
    This announcement has caused a huge rift in an otherwise extremely well aligned community, and everyone knows why...and they know why their 'side' is right and the other 'side' is wrong.

    ...wait a minute...how and why did we go from all being aligned to being on a particular side? Well Ryan's identified a problem and proposed a couple solutions. I put some thought into this and followed the chats for a little while and realized that I really didn't know as much as I thought I knew about exactly how crypto-currencies work. That was a pretty painful process, and in the process I was really pissed off that these people could be so silly/dumb. I was using metaphors and the principles of economics to educate my audience, and they wanted to use unrelated or false metaphors/economics to educate me...and of course nobody was interested in being educated. Sound familiar? Sound silly?

    There's a lot lost in the semantics. This fight is about PoS vs PoW. PoW is technically one cpu, one vote, right? Some forms of PoS require having a node running 24/7, so wouldn't that qualify as PoW? Could we just CALL it PoS / PoSE (like the MN Layer)...and hence PoW? Even if the PoSE requirements are extremely low (or just enough to run a node initially) wouldn't both 'sides' of this get onboard with that?

    DASH has been focused on building a community environment and that's the only thing that's going to get us through this...there's already countless forks and founders who've left in super selfish ways....there's not a lot of places where guys have their decision making figured out enough to keep the community together. So if we can do this and make a decision in a relatively short amount of time ...that would be really freaking impressive.
     
    #16 p5yc071c, Dec 19, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2019
  17. AgnewPickens

    AgnewPickens Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2017
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    88

    We could have a two tiered MN system like Horizen, the secure node requires 42 ZEN, the super node requires 500 ZEN, the rest is PoW mined, each MN layer has its own specific tasks it works on, I think super nodes have been set side for the ZEN DEX. Dunno. But we are launching Dash Platform with a dropping MN count and expecting them to do more work for falling rewards? Adding another MN layer to specifically address the new work being put in for Dash Platform seems like a possible solution.
     
    #17 AgnewPickens, Dec 19, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    I would be reluctant to make an abrupt change unless the consensus mechanism changed with it. We've seen what happened in the past... unless it changes SLOWLY to allow for market forces to adjust, reward reallocation can have unintended consequences.
     
  19. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    If
    If we moved to a system that simply deducted approved budgets from the block reward for the following month, the coin supply would be fully utilized either for budget or provided to MNs and miners. In other words, if we did away with the 10% allocation and allowed that to flex and directed everything else toward mining / MNs, that would solve the issue of "rollover" because it wouldn't go "unused".
     
  20. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    1) I'm not sure if by "this" you are referring to the DIF idea or the idea I posed. I personally wouldn't support the DIF, DCG, or any other entity getting all the "unused" funds. It sets up some weird situations like MNOs voting for things they don't support because they don't want the DIF to get it, for example. Also, in an ideal world, I'd like to see competing DIFs in the future so that poor performing ones wouldn't be funded. To answer the question asked, though, I don't think either option would be enough to label Dash a security from a regulatory basis because there are many reasons why it isn't a security. However, it would "nudge" things in that direction for any automated allocation to an entity like the DIF or DCG. On it's own, that wouldn't be sufficient in my opinion however.

    EDIT: 2) I'm not sure what you meant... could you clarify?
     
  21. Geert

    Geert Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2015
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I got the impression from Ryan's presentation that we already have too many masternodes. Therefore...

    1. Do we currently have too many masternodes and do we know the optimal number?

    2. If we have too many, what can we do to lower or cap this number?

    2a. Can we increase the number Dash required for a MN?

    2b. Can we change the protocol to disallow new MN registrations if there are already x masternodes in the current list?
     
  22. DeepBlue

    DeepBlue Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2018
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    68
    We need a automatic lockin to a stable USD and Euro coins for Merchants in the DASH wallet

    I feel the quickest possible improvement to DASH is to provide an option for automatic lock in for USDT and Euros (Statis) in the DASH wallet. Merchants need to have a store of value that does not vary in price. Dash is used for the transaction but the merchant has the option to lock in his earnings to either USD or Euro equivalent. I think we should charge a 1 or 2% fee for this service which and the earnings go to the DIFF. This is competitive to Visa. Merchants need to do accounts for payment of taxes and for purchase of goods they need to have a fixed earnings. Unless DASH is stored instantly in a some form of stable asset then it is practically useless for merchants outside of hyperinflation countries.

    Projects are now building in stable coins e.g. Binance is developing their own stable coin. Omisigo is building in Maker Dai. We need either our own stable coin or we need to use an existing stable coin for merchants. If we do not do this we will be simply overtaken by coins that do offer this service.

    We have a good relationship with uphold. I know we have a link to open an uphold account but perhaps we can build on this in the DASH wallet to incorporate a balance in Euro and Balance in USD and Euro directly in the wallet without having to log into upload?

    Basic Training for Merchants
    The other thing which desperately missing are educational videos showing a online merchant how to setup their website to accept DASH payments. There is absolutely nothing I can see on the Dash youtube channel on this. They need to know how to set it up, how to ensure security, how it would work, what the benefits are for their business over accepting credit cards, how to ensure to meet legislation etc. These are the absolute basic training we must have. I find it unbelievable that we are talking about marketing but haven't even got basic video training to show merchants how to setup to start using DASH. They are not going to spend the time to try and work it out for themselves. Someone at DCG needs to provide this basic training program for merchants.
     
    #22 DeepBlue, Dec 23, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2019
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  23. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    I would say we have "more than we need" but there is little downside to having more than we need. The biggest downside is that the network becomes slightly less scalable and slightly slower the larger it gets. However, the effert is logarithmic rather than linear. This means the impact is pretty limited, and at our current transaction counts this is not an issue that keeps me up at night. So while I eluded to the effect in my presentation, I wouldn't read into that to say reducing the number of MNs needs to be a goal. I think they can be allowed to grow in number quite safely. What I wouldn't do is reduce the MN collateral requirement to intentionally make more, which is something many community members had suggested in the past. Hope that clarifies my statements, or at least puts them into clearer context.
     
  24. Ryan Taylor

    Ryan Taylor Well-known Member
    Dash Core Team Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Miner economics don't really work that way... the "cost" of a transaction to any Bitcoin-based network is the size of the data needing processing and storing. If you price Dash transactions in another way (e.g., as a % of the transaction), then other networks could underprice Dash fees, especially on the larger transaction values, which would deter the most valuable high-volume users from using the network. There may be a time in the future where the value of Dash's network (e.g., the number of services integrated and a high acceptance rate) would enable us to price that way, but in the early stages I think it is better to have attractive transaction fees to help with growth.
     
  25. Bitedge

    Bitedge New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    3
    That would be an improvement and I would support it. We should still define what will happen to the previously unallocated funds from the current system. Its about 60,000 dash!
     
  26. GaryS

    GaryS New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2019
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    When I see the price of DASH mooning again, it makes all of these discussions seem rather silly. Only a few weeks ago we were gonna blow it all up!

    The market gonna do what the market gonna do. Crypto be crypto. DASH will have its day in the sun again.

    Masternodes for the win!
     
  27. forro

    forro New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    You do not understand what happens with unallocated funds. They are simply not created. It is better that they are not created rather than spend on some silly project that will have no impact on adoption.
     
  28. forro

    forro New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    I agree. The somewhat desperate machinations from our community members to me indicates we are at or near the bottom.
     
  29. DeepBlue

    DeepBlue Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2018
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    68
    I would like to point out that my post above mentioned USD and Euro stable coins only as a quick fix. What I really want to see for the longer term is a DASH truly stable coin as I wrote about last year (see link below). This would be a new type of Dash specific super stable coin who's price value is linked directly to a basket of 52,000 everyday items / services which are used to calculate the true cost of living. This would ensure the true purchasing power of DASH stable would always remain the same even after 100 years. In this way the DASH stable coin would be more stable than fiat currency that constantly depreciates with time. This would create a demand for DASH stable coin over depreciating USD or Euro or any other Fiat currency that depreciates with time. Indeed even over current so called "Stable coins" that are pegged to depreciating fiat. DASH stable would be truly stable and more stable than all current stable coins. We would use our current DASH coin as the staking coin that is used to generate the production of new DASH stable - similar to how Maker DAI works but instead of Ethereum for staking we use DASH. This would increase the value of DASH transaction coin (our current coin) and provide many advantages over fiat and current stable coins. In order for DASH to replace fiat we need a solution that is more useful than current fiat. The DASH stable coin would be useful in many industries where price volatility over different currencies is a problem e.g. in the Airline industries where one of their main concerns is currency depreciation on sale purchases since they have to deal in many international currencies. The DASH stable coin would also be useful for Pension Programs to retain value over the long term and could attract the Trillions of dollars of pension fund money. I proposed in the article that DASH stable would increase the value of our current coin. Our current coin would be used primarily for transactional purposes but people holding DASH transactional coin will also see value increase in value as it would needed for staking to create DASH stable.

    DASH true stable coin
    https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/what-dash-needs-to-set-it-above-all-other-cryptos.43036/

    This DASH stable coin would work seamlessly with DASH transactional coin in the DASH core wallet and mobile wallets. Merchants can then lock into the DASH Stable coin so that they can maintain their profits and therefore make it suitable for commerce - this would increase the value of DASH transactional coin since it is required to be staked to create DASH stable coin.
     
    #29 DeepBlue, Jan 10, 2020
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2020
  30. GaryS

    GaryS New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2019
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Dash = $30

    Steal from the miners! Everyone can has master nodes.

    Dash = $70

    Wait guise
     
    • Funny Funny x 1