At the beginning of 2016, the masternodes that make up Dash's governance system overwhelmingly voted (99% of the network) for the upgrade to 2 MB of blocks. Many people in the world of cryptocurrency have seen this as a gadget implementation to attract attention, while Dash's development priorities were focused on other points. However, with the recent release of version 12.2 of Dash, it seems that larger blocks will soon be implemented.
The update to version 12.2 is one more step for the evolution of the protocol. Dash aims to make the use of digital currencies simple, so that even your grandmother can use them.
The main changes made to DASH:
- Implementation of the DIP0001 (which is an update to increase the blocks to 2MB)
- Reduction of transaction fees divided by 10 (via activation of DIP0001)
- Fixed InstantSend vulnerability (activated via DIP0001 lock)
- Improvement of PrivateSend which should allow the user to have mixed funds more quickly
- Various changes to the CPP
- Backports of Bitcoin Core and the reworking of their own code which should improve performance and make the code
more reliable and easier to consult - Experimental HD Wallet with BIP39 / BIP44 support.
Is increasing the size of DASH blocks useful?
Of course, increasing the size of the blocks is not necessary yet, because the cryptocurrency does not yet deal enough transactions to fill its current blocks. However, this increase in block size follows the chain staggering plan announced by founder Evan Duffield earlier this year. Duffield also announced that by using dedicated hardware, Dash will create a network that can scale to a large number of transactions using large blocks.
"Many projects believe that scaling is impossible. This is simply because they have not explored alternative P2P architectures for superior performance. We intend to show how far motivated second-level architecture [masternode] can lead a project like Dash. Said Duffield.
There are several solutions for scaling cryptocurrencies
Bitcoin
Bitcoin, chose to follow another path. With the planned SegWit2x upgrade and dead in the bud, the currency is now firmly on the way to off-chain, through the Lightning Network or similar solutions. The Lightning Network is intended to operate by moving transactions on off-line "payment channels" in order to "settle" these transactions only periodically on the Bitcoin blockchain.
For example, suppose that Jacquie pays Michel 1 BTC, then pays him 2 BTC and finally sends him 1.5 BTC, which is three separate transactions that must be recorded in the Bitcoin blockchain. With the Lightning Network, only a "total" transaction will be recorded in the blockchain once the payment channel is closed. In our example, a single transaction would be counted for a total of 4.5 BTCs sent from Jacquie to Michel.
Critics have wondered how often payment channels will actually be used, but until the network is deployed, it is impossible to say precisely. Others say that moving transactions out of the main blockchain could damage the decentralized and immutable nature of Bitcoin. Supporters point out that transactions are always off-line, for example on the stock markets. No Bitcoin trading platform records a separate transaction on the Blockchain whenever funds are moved internally. Only the end result is counted, often when a user withdraws funds.
Ethereum
The Ethereum development team is also working on a scaling solution. They plan to implement the "Raiden Network" which will use payment channels similar to those proposed by Bitcoin.
Dash: Hard Forks friendly?
While on Bitcoin hard forks are scary because often contentious, Dash welcomes them with pleasure. The key to the Dash upgrade strategy is the "spork", a mechanism to disable parts of the upgrade if there is a problem on the network. The Dash network normally requires miners to share the reward of mined blocks with master nodes. Minors who try to keep the entire reward for themselves will have their blocks rejected by the network.
However, during an upgrade, the application must be disabled. This allows miners and master nodes to have a reasonable amount of time to upgrade their software while eliminating the risk of uncontrollable forks caused by one part of the network rejecting the other party.
What is the best approach?
It remains to be seen whether Bitcoin, Ethereum or Dash will solve the problem of scalability. The methods of scaling via "payment channels" or "big blocks" are both criticized, and none has yet been subjected to extensive scrutiny. It is possible that another solution may emerge in the meantime, and / or that both solutions are viable.
One thing is certain, for digital currency to become a real force in the world, tens of thousands of people will need to be able to trade at the same time. A successful consumer cryptocurrency needs to evolve to levels similar to Visa's, or even beyond.
Proof-Of-Stake cryptos surely have a much easier path when viewing scalability? With stakers not having to worry about electricity costs like miners do, they are incentivised by merely holding the currency in an unlocked wallet.
While I don't think any current POS system is perfect, my favourite so far is PIVX (a code fork of DASH). They have a seesaw profitability algorithm that makes both staking and running a masternode the most profitable way to secure the network at different times. Most interestingly, they burn all transaction fees which in the medium-long run aims to make the coin inflation-neutral.
Great post about one of the biggest issues facing the crypto world today. It feels like we're so close to mass adoption, so I'm hoping the big boys get their act together!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit