Welcome to the Dash Forum!

Please sign up to discuss the most innovative cryptocurrency!

v0.10.15.x Testing

Discussion in 'Testing' started by eduffield, Oct 7, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dr.Crypto

    Dr.Crypto Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    58
    Hi everyone,

    As other people pointed out, the inclusion of 'ubernodes' creates a new argument for trolls that that already attack DRK regarding centralisation. I agree however that this argument can be mitigated by thoroughly explaining that it doesn't endanger the network's security at all.

    Nevertheless, I'd like to point out another recurrent attack on DRK that we also need to prepare against, that is besides centralisation, that DRK was pre-mined and essentially benefited its creator. Now, I know this 'pre-mined' attack is stupid, but I think it will be encouraged by the addition of these 'ubernodes', just like the 'centralisation' argument. The problem is: who is to decide the 'trusted members of the community' that get to run the ubernodes? I'm sure you're one of them Evan, and I won't argue against it, but we need to see that trolls will probably claim that it gives you even greater power and possibilities to fool the system in your advantage. Now, this is wrong in the sense that everybody would be able to detect your treachery, but still, although I trust you with all my heart, I shouldn't need to trust you to use Darkcoin.

    More generally, what would happen if something happened to the trusted members of the community or if they simply decided to stop with darkcoin and go raise sheeps in Wales?

    tl;dr: The solution with ubernodes isn't viable indefinitely, hence it is of vital importance to state in the public release that this is a temporary method and will become fully decentralised in the future.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Dr.Crypto

    Dr.Crypto Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    58
    I'm obviously not Evan, but I think the point is that InstantX can perfectly rely on a randomly subset of RANDOMLY selected masternodes, while being extremely expensive to compromise just like Darksend.

    On the other hand, the point of relying on ubernodes would be to actually fight that randomness and get deterministic masternode payments. Which has nothing to do with the network's security.
     
  3. moli

    moli Grizzled Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    3,261
    Likes Received:
    1,837
    Trophy Points:
    1,183
    Bitcoin was pre-mined, Darkcoin was insta-mined. I think if Evan wanted just profits for himself he wouldn't have stayed on this project this long. Maybe he's crazy for an idealism of helping people to have freedom and privacy, who knows :D
     
  4. Dr.Crypto

    Dr.Crypto Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    58
    I'm not arguing that, and as I said, I fully trust Evan's skills and honesty.
    The point is that trolls gotta troll, and we've got to be prepared because ubernodes gives them new arguments.
     
  5. moli

    moli Grizzled Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    3,261
    Likes Received:
    1,837
    Trophy Points:
    1,183
    Evan said it won't be this way forever: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v0-15-testing.2611/page-28#post-25405
    I think he needs to buy time to get to the next step...
     
  6. bertlebbert

    bertlebbert Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2014
    Messages:
    669
    Likes Received:
    289
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Yeah I think Dr.Crypto is saying we have to be wary of the public's perception
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Dr.Crypto

    Dr.Crypto Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    58
    I know, I've read that :)
    All I was saying in my initial post is that there is a conceptual difference between what is planned to be done, and how it is actually perceived by external observers (including trolls).
    As the next release is to come very soon, I thought it wasn't too early to talk about PR.
     
  8. TsuyokuNaritai

    TsuyokuNaritai Active Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2014
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    103
    FFS can we at least not call them ubernodes! They need to sound as insignificant, non-threatening and non-central-powerish as possible, not like Death Stars orbiting a giant Eye of Sauron.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  9. moli

    moli Grizzled Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    3,261
    Likes Received:
    1,837
    Trophy Points:
    1,183
    Yes, I totally agree with you and understand your concern. What I don't understand is I've seen so many people want their crypto to be perfectly trustless, yet want their MN payment to be like banking savings interest... I think it takes more than just "income" incentive, more like "idealism" incentive, to be a MN owner, someone who understands if you want this system to be trustless, you gotta give up the banking idea in mind... I don't know.. Just what I've seen.... And then there're exploiters, hackers, crackers... and we have to secure the system... I'm sure Evan will come up with the perfect decentralized system somehow.
     
  10. oblox

    oblox Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    537
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Reference nodes.
     
    • Like Like x 6
  11. Stealth923

    Stealth923 Well-known Member
    Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2014
    Messages:
    343
    Likes Received:
    370
    Trophy Points:
    233
    +1 Reference nodes from here on out :)
     
  12. TsuyokuNaritai

    TsuyokuNaritai Active Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2014
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Better if it was something that screams the reasons why it's not really centralization, that it only affects masternode payments and is in no way in possession of special powers that control the user's transactions themselves.
     
  13. thelonecrouton

    thelonecrouton Well-known Member
    Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2014
    Messages:
    1,135
    Likes Received:
    813
    Trophy Points:
    283
    I'm with Cofresi on this, I'm not understanding what the difference is. Fundamentally it's the same thing as far as I can see.

    I'm not following you here. There have been several suggestions for getting even MN payments that don't involve static reference nodes. It boils down to maintaining a distributed list across as many nodes as is deemed necessary. If the entire network is too unwieldy to achieve perfect consensus every block, pick a smaller number and have them do it. LIke, well, reference nodes, just different ones each time.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. oblox

    oblox Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    537
    Trophy Points:
    183
    NINCALSP's

    "Node Is Not Centralized And Lacks Special Powers"

    ;-)
     
    • Like Like x 3
  15. eduffield

    eduffield Core Developer

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2014
    Messages:
    1,084
    Likes Received:
    5,319
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Here's the gist:

    1.) InstantX - A set of deterministic masternodes sign a message, they broadcast a message, which locks a transaction. A miner mines a block, which is a single entity and respects that transaction lock.
    2.) Masternode Payments - A set of deterministic masternodes sign a message, they broadcast a message, which locks a block to a specific payee. In this case the whole network must have 1 specific payee, otherwise there is a blockchain fork. If half the network thinks the payee is one masternode and half thinks it's the other, there's a real problem. Blocks will be rejected by half the network and they'll start working on their own chain.

    TLDR; One relies on mining in the end, one doesn't.
     
  16. eduffield

    eduffield Core Developer

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2014
    Messages:
    1,084
    Likes Received:
    5,319
    Trophy Points:
    183
    +1 Changed the announcement
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. oblox

    oblox Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    537
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Sweet, pen'd onyx and reference nodes. I need to name some more shit.
     
  18. thelonecrouton

    thelonecrouton Well-known Member
    Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2014
    Messages:
    1,135
    Likes Received:
    813
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Damn, so I'm too late with Nice Innocent Peripheral Protocol Layer Extremely Safe?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  19. oblox

    oblox Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    537
    Trophy Points:
    183
    No one is ever late with nipples.
     
  20. Cofresí

    Cofresí Member
    Core Developer

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    79
    Trophy Points:
    58
    Ok, thanks for trying to explain. So if I understand correctly the difference is that in 1.) only a single entity need to respect it, while in 2.) the whole network needs a consensus and we have a byzantine generals problem all over again. Still can't follow you completely. Would need to study the code.

    Fair enough. But why the heck do the reference nodes need to be static? What would be so bad if the reference nodes were dynamic like the last 10 winning masternodes?
     
  21. eduffield

    eduffield Core Developer

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2014
    Messages:
    1,084
    Likes Received:
    5,319
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Dynamic reference nodes could attack the network by delayed the message till the last millisecond it would be accepted. Then half the network is correct and half is set on the wrong node. Fork.

    We'll fix it later. I'm all about incremental improvements. This is a decent improve upon the existing system, but it doesn't fix everything.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  22. thelonecrouton

    thelonecrouton Well-known Member
    Foundation Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2014
    Messages:
    1,135
    Likes Received:
    813
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Onwards then! We can't stop here. This is bat country. :eek:
     
  23. HinnomTX

    HinnomTX Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2014
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Engage, Numba One!
     
  24. TaoOfSatoshi

    TaoOfSatoshi Grizzled Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2014
    Messages:
    2,743
    Likes Received:
    2,615
    Trophy Points:
    1,183
    Hi guys and gals! I have created "TAO'S MASTERNODE GUIDE FOR DUMMIES" a fully step by step, funny, informative Masternode Set-up guide. Check it out here when you get a chance, and spread the word! We have 2,000 Masternodes to create, and this is just the place to send peeps:

    https://darkcointalk.org/threads/taos-masternode-setup-guide-for-dummies.2680/

    Cheers! :D

    EDIT: Can someone who knows how to do so move this thread to the "Guides" section? I messed up and put it under General Support!
     
    #594 TaoOfSatoshi, Oct 16, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2014
    • Like Like x 1
  25. pinestabe

    pinestabe New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I also get stuck in state 7 if "no matching denomiations" happens. to fix it, in the check "CDarkSendPool::CheckTimeout() -- Session timed out (30s).." I had to chage the
    UpdateState(POOL_STATUS_ERROR) line to
    if(fMasterNode) UpdateState(POOL_STATUS_ERROR)
    in order to get the timeout to kick in and put the clients back in state 3.
    I'm not really sure what I'm doing, I just played around a bit till things started working!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  26. coingun

    coingun Active Member
    Masternode Owner/Operator

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    402
    Trophy Points:
    133
    I logged in just to like this.
     
  27. Dr.Crypto

    Dr.Crypto Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    58
    Hey everyone,
    Short question: are the new binaries on GitHub (https://github.com/darkcoinproject/darkcoin-binaries/) for mainnet? They're referenced as Onyx release and were pushed 8 hours ago. I wanted to download the 10.14.1 release with the masternode security update, but it has apparently been replaced.
    Or maybe is everything already ready and we're just waiting for the official announcement from Evan? :D
     
  28. oblox

    oblox Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    537
    Trophy Points:
    183
    The latest is Onyx.
     
  29. coingun

    coingun Active Member
    Masternode Owner/Operator

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    402
    Trophy Points:
    133
    15.13 is the latest. Please update to that.
     
  30. Dr.Crypto

    Dr.Crypto Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    58
    So... it's now running on mainnet, right? (I know it's the testing subforum, but as these binaries replaced the mainnet's masternode security release...)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.