Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Time Online

    10h 49m 4s

Community Reputation

196 Trusted Reputation


About tungfa

  • Rank
    Dash Moderator

Personal Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Country
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

11,300 profile views
  1. The Rewards.com Dash #NASCAR - driven my Timmy Hill - will be racing in the South Point 400 on Sunday Sept 16th at Las Vegas Motor Speedway. Special thanks to Rewards.com for the sponsorship!
  2. https://blog.dash.org/introducing-long-living-masternode-quorums-76ea8b23a85a Introducing Long Living Masternode Quorums We’re very happy to introduce the community to another concept that is currently under development: Long Living Masternode Quorums, or simply LLMQs. These will have quite some influence on Evolution and non-Evolution related topics and features, which you’ll hopefully see after some time. More blog posts are planned which will go into more detail for the specific topics. Links to DIPs and supporting documents DIP6 — Long Living Masternode Quorums DIP7 — LLMQ Signing Requests/Sessions BLS Signature Scheme BLS M-of-N Threshold Scheme and Distributed Key Generation What are Long Living Masternode Quorums? I have already described the quorum system we currently use for InstantSend in a previous post. That post also describes the issues and limitations with the old system and why we can’t use it for new use cases. LLMQs provide a solution to the described problems and will be deployed as part of Evolution. They are long living (as the name implies…) and possibly very large, increasing the security of those. At the same time, they only increase the required resources (CPU, RAM, network) on the members of such quorums, instead of increasing the load on the whole network. Long living means that instead of selecting a fresh quorum on-demand, we build them before we actually need them and then reuse them for a fixed period of time. The reason for this is that a LLMQ performs M-of-N threshold signing sessions to gain majority consensus when decisions need to be made. The new M-of-N scheme requires executing a trustless and distributed key generation (DKG) protocol before actual signing/voting can happen. Since this DKG protocol is quite resource-intensive, we do it in advance and then reuse the keys for multiple signing sessions. Why/How do they solve the limitations? As described in the previous post about quorums, the old system requires propagation of each individual vote of each member of a quorum. Propagation means that the votes are transferred to all nodes in the network which then have to verify and store them. This does not scale well and might also cause a variety of problems with consensus. LLMQs however only require the members of the quorum to perform the propagation and validation of individual votes (signature shares). The final result (recovered signature) is only created and propagated to the remainder of the network when enough votes are collected by any quorum member. Since the final result is the outcome of a BLS based M-of-N threshold signing session, it’s just a single BLS signature. Propagating only this single signature in the network requires a lot less CPU, RAM, and network bandwidth resources. As only the members of the LLMQs perform the hard work and there are multiple LLMQs active simultaneously, the overall network load remains well distributed. Other Advantages Due to the use of BLS, we also get a few more advantages. All BLS signatures are deterministic and unique, which means that there is only one valid signature for every combination of message and keys. This even holds true for M-of-N threshold signatures, which are in the end just normal BLS signatures. The result of a LLMQ signing session is thus deterministic and unique as well. These properties are very important when it comes to storing quorum decisions on-chain. Without these properties, malleability problems would also leak into non-transactional features, e.g. blockchain users and state transitions. By eliminating malleability, Evolution can include features which were previously very hard to implement securely. LLMQs and Verification of Signing Sessions LLMQs are created with the help of a distributed key generation (DKG) protocol. The result of that protocol (the quorum commitment) is mined on-chain before activation and actual use of the LLMQ. This means that there is clear consensus about which LLMQs are active and which masternodes belong to which LLMQ. It also means that, unlike the old quorum system, every quorum signing session can be verified forever. This is very important when quorum decisions are mined on-chain or when SPV (or DAPI in the future) wallets need to verify quorum signatures. Size of LLMQs We will support multiple types of LLMQs, which most importantly differ in size and longevity. We have not decided exactly which sizes to use, but we are open to supporting LLMQs with as many as hundreds (e.g. 400) of members and as few as 10 members. It all depends on the use cases and their needs. Implementation of LLMQs as a Platform The implementation of LLMQs does already exist and is already very advanced (not just a simple proof of concept). It is implemented to be a platform, or base layer, for future use cases which require LLMQs. Basically, the implementation of new use cases should just call a few functions of the LLMQ platform. These functions are in the style of “sign this message”, “do we have majority?” and “is there a conflict?”. This should make it very easy to implement new use cases as they do not have to deal with the internals of LLMQs, DKGs, signing sessions, and so on. Required changes in DIP3 DIP3 will have to be slightly changed to support LLMQs. The DKG process requires BLS public keys to be known and verified before the DKG session can start. This means that we’ll have to use a BLS public key instead of a ECDSA public key for the masternode operator key. DIP3 will be updated when we have made a final decision on which BLS curves to use. Use Cases for LLMQs The first and probably most obvious use case for LLMQs is InstantSend. It can be implemented by simply making LLMQ members threshold sign the inputs of observed transactions. If any member of a LLMQ collects enough threshold shares, they’ll create the final result and propagate it to the whole network. With this, the network will only have to propagate one message per transaction input. If a node observes such a message for each of a transaction’s inputs, it can consider that transaction as InstantSend confirmed. I’ll post an article and another DIP soon which goes into more detail for InstantSend and how we could improve it with LLMQs. Other use cases directly involve Evolution-related features, especially State Transitions. We’re also researching use cases which improve more non-Evolution related features. You’ll see more blog posts and DIPs in the future in regard to all this.
  3. https://youtu.be/4c1sIFno6XE
  4. It’s official! Ethos welcomes Dash to the Universal Wallet. By popular demand, UW users can now store, track, send & receive DASH https://www.ethos.io/universal-wallet/ https://twitter.com/Ethos_io/status/1037069558782287874
  5. https://blog.dash.org/introducing-blockchain-users-428d87a1e87a
  6. https://youtu.be/rhWMRqvB6Rs
  7. Latin Americans provided with Dash ecosystem KRIP phones Share Total: 29 Share Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Digg Del StumbleUpon Tumblr VKontakte Print Email Flattr Reddit Buffer Love...
  8. Keiser Report: Good & bad signs for US economy (E1270 - with Ryan Taylor of Dash) 12:27 min https://youtu.be/iD24sr8CX8U
  9. Quorums in Dash – Dash Blog In this post, I’d like to describe what quorums in Dash are and what they solve. I’d also like to explain the problems with these and why… Quorums in Dash In this post, I’d like to describe what quorums in Dash are and what they solve. I’d also like to explain the problems with these and why we can’t easily scale these or use them for new use cases. Initially, this was part of another post that I’m writing at the same time and which I’m going to release sometime after this one. Basically, in this post I will try to describe what Quorums are, what they are currently used for and what their current limitations are. The next post will then give an answer on how we plan to solve these issues once and for all. What are Quorums? A quorum is a collection of entities that are able to vote on something. Every member is generally allowed to vote only once. If >= 51% vote for the same thing, majority is reached. Something either got the majority of votes or not, there should be nothing in between. This is useful if the likelihood of disagreement is too high, which for example is the case when it comes to propagation of transactions and handling of conflicts if they arise. Bitcoin introduced a policy to handle this, which is the first-seen policy. Dash inherited this policy. It basically means that if a conflict arises (e.g. a double spending transaction) the first seen transaction is the only one a node should accept and propagate while ignoring all others. This removes all ambiguity on a single node, including miners. It also reduces ambiguity on the whole network, as it also means that a transaction that is well propagated can’t be replaced by a conflicting one. If however, a transaction is not well propagated yet, two competing transactions will start to race in the network, resulting in one part of the network seeing one of the transactions first, and the other part of the network seeing the other transaction first. In the end, it’ll be impossible to tell which of both transactions is going to be mined and confirmed on-chain. This is because a single node can not know what the other nodes have seen first. InstantSend Dash has already solved this problem thanks to InstantSend. InstantSend is the first time we used quorums to solve such ambiguity in the network. It works by choosing a new quorum of 10 masternodes per transaction input and letting every member sign and propagate a vote for it. If 6 out of these 10 do this, we can be pretty sure that the majority of the network has also seen this transaction first. If this is the case, a node can safely reject all other transactions conflicting with that one, even if they were locally seen first. If some race had happened between two conflicting transactions, only one of both would have been able to reach more than the other one. Delegating the voting to the quorum is then like a statistical measurement, because what applies to the whole network statistically also applies to a random subgroup of that network. If 3 transactions would race in the same way, it’s still only possible for one to gain majority, but it might happen that no majority at all is gained which means no decision can be made. For InstantSend, this is ok as the worst thing that happens is that the receiver of a transaction does not get the instant assurance of later confirmation and thus has to wait for normal on-chain confirmation. Sybil Attacks and Masternodes You might ask yourself why this solution was not used in other coins, e.g. Bitcoin. The reason is that such a system is only secure if the chance of so called sybil attacks is practically zero. A sybil attack means that a single entity (possibly an adversary) is able to easily create as many entities as needed to increase the chance of him being able to control the outcome of a vote. In cryptocurrencies for example, this means that you can’t simply choose a set of nodes from all known nodes, as any adversary is able to create thousands or even tens of thousands of nodes to increase the likelihood of his nodes being chosen. This means that to make the system secure, the number of possible quorum members must be limited. It must also be relatively expensive to become a member, as otherwise one could cheaply become a member multiple times. There must also be an incentive to behave well, meaning that there must be a risk to lose something in case someone is caught trying to cheat the system. Masternodes in Dash solve all this by requiring a collateral of 1000 Dash and by paying masternode owners a portion of the block reward. This limits the number of possible quorum members and incentivizes Masternodes to behave in a honest way. Someone owning many Masternodes risks losing his rewards when trying to play games with the system. Scaling Quorums and InstantSend Currently, InstantSend is an optional feature that requires paying a higher fee. You basically pay some extra fees so that the receiver of an InstantSend transaction receives the funds faster. There is demand in the community for this to change so that every transaction basically becomes an InstantSend transaction. However, this is not as easy as one might expect. The Quorums behind InstantSend have some overhead on the network as they require to propagate a lot more messages than a normal transaction. Generally, InstantSend requires around 10x as many messages to be fully propagated in the network. InstantSend is also more demanding when it comes to CPU and RAM requirements. The reasons for this is that every quorum member creates one vote per transaction input and then propagates it to the whole network. In the end, 10 messages per transaction input are propagated. A transaction with 10 inputs would already require 100 messages to be propagated. At the same time, every node in the network has to verify these messages and then keep them in-memory until the transaction is mined onto the chain and confirmed by multiple blocks. Imagine what this means if all people in the world start to use Dash… The load on the network would also not only increase hardware and network demands. It would decrease the stability, reliability and security of the whole network. This is because every vote is treated as a single message and only if 6 out of 10 are locally present, majority can be proven. Due to the load, the likelihood of different nodes seeing a different subset of the votes increases, making it easier for adversaries taking advantage of slow and non-deterministic propagation. Using Quorums for new use cases There are many other use cases which would benefit from quorums. Some are even impossible to implement without something like quorums. These would however suffer from the same scalability issues as described for InstantSend, making the current system unsuitable. At the same time, many use cases require a much higher level of security, which can only be achieved by increasing the size of quorums. Increasing the quorum size would however also increase the load on the network. If we for example used 100 members per quorum, 100 votes would have to be propagated for everything that needs to be voted on. Evolution and Quorums Evolution contains some fundamental features which highly rely on majority decisions done by quorums. Initially, the plan was to reuse the existing quorums system for this, but it turned out that we’d hit too many limits with it. Basically the same limits as with scaling InstantSend apply, but also some new limitations came to light. For example, we need to store the results of quorum decisions on-chain so that it can be verified by everyone and forever. However, storing 100 or more ECDSA signatures on-chain each time does not sound as if it would scale well 😉 Conclusion The quorums currently used in Dash are mostly good enough for what they are currently being used. We are however at a point were we need a better solution if we want to continue improving. One of my next posts will describe a solution which we’ve been working on for quite some time now.
  10. A New Signal Of Maturing Cryptocurrency Markets: Corporate And Foundation Investment Arms Despite the current market cap roller coster, cryptocurrency transaction volume is still over $10 billion daily. Companies are flourishing and all this new wealth is driving the creation of investment funds by cryptocurrency companies and cryptocurrency foundations. Despite the current market cap roller coster, there are behind-the-scenes signals showing the strength of the novel cryptocurrency incumbents. Coinbase made $1 billion in 2017, the 13-month old Chinese exchange, Binance, is projected to make $1 billion in 2018, and cryptocurrency foundations, such as Stellar, hold tens of billions in cryptocurrency ready for deployment. All this new wealth is driving the creation of investment funds by cryptocurrency companies and cryptocurrency foundations. I sat down and spoke with three different organizations, BitMEX, ConsenSys, and Dash Core Group Inc, to learn more about why this is happening and what these new kinds of investment funds are seeking. BitMEX, short for Bitcoin Mercantile Exchange, is likely the largest cryptocurrency exchange you have never heard of. Earlier this year, BitMEX had the largest trading volume of any exchange in a single twenty four hour period, with a total of 1MM BTC changing hands. BitMEX is a Bitcoin-only trading exchange, built for experienced traders, with the capability to offer 100x leverage for trades. I spoke with Max Shapiro, a venture associate at BitMEX to learn more about why they created a venture fund. BitMEX LogoHTTPS://WWW.DISRUPTORDAILY.COM/BITMEX-REVIEW-TOP-5-BENEFITS-NEED-KNOW-2017/ Shapiro explains, We created the arm in early 2018 with two goals: 1) Grow the ecosystem focusing on specific themes that are strategic to BitMEX. 2) Understanding all of the opportunities and innovation taking place in this rapidly growing ecosystem MORE FROM FORBES Bitcoin pierced the $600 mark for the first time in two years at the end of 2016 and soared to nearly $20,000 by the end of 2017. Companies like BitMEX and my own company, Bitwage, had a new influx of funds that needed to be put to work. At the same time, the number of new companies entering the industry grew significantly: new startups funded by venture capital or as Initial Coin Offerings, institutional investors entering into the trading market, and enterprises such as CBOE, ICE and Naver Line. Bitcoin companies that were considered startups just two years ago suddenly had the funds and the capabilities to seed new startups. Shapiro goes on to describe the investment areas which are interesting for BitMEX. All of our themes are related to the traditional financial system, typically focused on encouraging institutional participation in the ecosystem. One of the big themes right now everyone is looking into is crypto custody. How can you successfully have custody of funds with the same level of vigor as the traditional financial system? We also will look at investments that are not directly related to cryptocurrency, but are complimentary, such as cyber security and anti-money laundering solutions. While Bitcoin may have been leading the charge in terms of price increase and trading activity, Bitcoin is not the only cryptocurrency ecosystem with corporations building out venture arms. ConsenSys, a thousand person Ethereum consulting, software and infrastructure developing organization, started their venture arm in 2017. I spoke with Kavita Gupta, founder of ConsenSys ventures and previous investment analyst for the World Bank investment arm, to learn mo............https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanchester/2018/08/20/a-new-signal-of-maturing-cryptocurrency-markets-corporate-and-foundation-investment-arms/#5377f0425394 ....... Unlike Bitcoin and Ethereum, the two largest networks by size as well as number of companies working within the ecosystem, there are other public blockchain networks. While not having a plethora of massively profitable companies, they do have a significant amount of value to deploy via their tokens. Dash is one such network. Ryan Taylor, CEO of Dash Core Group Inc.DASH CORE GROUP INC Currently the 13th largest cryptocurrency, with a market cap of $1.2 billion, Dash attempts to differentiate itself via a structured and decentralized governance model, something which Bitcoin and Ethereum lack. I spoke with Ryan Taylor, CEO of Dash Core Group and a former McKinsey associate partner, to learn a bit more about the governance model and how it allows for company investments. Dash was originally a non-profit foundation. Similar to other foundations, such as the BTC and LTC foundations, it was very hard to get donors. In addition to this, once money is donated, by function of being a foundation, the use of funds is quite limited. We created a new structure that has never been done before by creating Dash Core Group Inc., a Delaware C Corp. 100% of the shares in the company are issued to a trust. The beneficiaries of the trust are masternodes, users with over 1000 Dash Tokens who provide governance and maintain the blockchain. This means that Dash Core Group Inc. is owned by the network we serve. Although we are a C-Corp, we have no strong profit motive, and instead, draw our resources from the Dash Treasury System. To describe Dash Treasury, you need to understand how most other cryptocurrency works. Typically 100% of the transaction fees and new coins go to miners. However, in Dash, we realized that while network security is important to incentivize, we also want to incentivize network connectivity, node maintenance and development. In this way, 45% of the fees and new coins goes to miners, 45% goes to master nodes and then the last 10% goes into a treasury once a month. Anyone can submit a proposal to the treasury and the masternodes vote on whether to fund projects, paid out monthly. At the current valuation, $1.5 million in tokens are added to the treasury every month. You can see the current list of proposals at dashvotetracker.com. Dash Core Group is funded almost entirely through the Treasury, which is then able to engage on-behalf of the network like a C-Corp, with business development, software development, marketing, operations and even customer support for users. Taylor goes on to describe how the network funds projects, The current proposals that pass involve lower risk projects. This means funding integrations or marketing costs around the integration of Dash in existing companies. Funding also happens for sponsorships, conferences, radio shows. A few external examples include Alt-36, a cannabis payment gateway in Arizona and Kuvacash, a new electronic payment gateway in Zimbabwe. The Treasury will soon fund Dash Ventures, a new entity being set up by Dash Core Group that will allow for investments into higher risk applications. The venture group is designed in such a way that its income flow from profitable investments can be used to buy Dash with USD. Taylor believes that this should have either stabilization or upward pressure on the currency, which benefits the whole ecosystem. The great thing is that anyone can create a Dash Treasury funded group of their own, so long as the masternodes approve the proposal. We believe there will be several Dash Ventures with different charters. Some may be purely profit motivated, regardless of connection to Dash. Others may be focused on profitable investment involving Dash. A third may just be related to social impact and infrastructure as it relates to the Dash ecosystem. Despite the relatively small market caps of tokens such as Dash, these ecosystems have funds to invest into companies, startups and entrepreneurs. While most eyes have been focused on the shiny Bitcoin price object, that spectacle does not define the sector. Transaction volume is still over $10 billion daily and there are plenty of unexplored niches as well as the capital required to get into them. Speculators may have taken a beating, but those focused on real value are doing just fine.

Cryptocurrenytalk Logo


News, information, and discussions about cryptocurrencies, blockchains, technology, and events. Blockchaintalk is your source for advice on what to mine, technical details, new launch announcements, and advice from trusted members of the community. Cryptocurrencytalk is your source for everything crypto. We love discussing the world of cryptocurrencies.



Important Information

By using CRYPTOCURRENCYTALK.COM, you agree to our Terms of Use.