Bitcoin Forum

Naah, just kidding...

Dash team answered about instamine:

https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/display/OC/Dash+Instamine+Issue+Clarification

The Instamine means Dash is a scam, no matter what Duffsplanation your PR team trots out as an excuse.

Calling this attempt at spin a "clarification" is typically asinine, intelligence-insulting, PR happy talk.

Also relevant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Special_Affairs

It's a shame they can't get over the hurdle they constructed ::)

Again, for those noobs who haven't been here long, Evan could have relaunched after the instamine--as they had relaunched less than 24 hours earlier, and the precedent was there--but he chose not to.

I don't care it's scam or not, i rip the profit trading Dash...

P.S
It does not like like scam to me...

Just an observation that I can't help but not ignore.

The Dash team is good at self-incrimination:


It is cryptographically impossible to know if someone sold their coins (i.e. didn't transfer to themself) unless you are the one they sold them to. Hope the implications aren't lost on the readers.

Just keep prodding them to do more release of information which will dig their hole even deeper.

Someone please add to archive.org all the pertinent web documents.

I can't believe people are really saying "oh they put out an explanation, its okay"

How does any sort of explanation make the situation fine. He is literally saying "YUP I DID IT!" and all the dash users are like "aw you didn't mean to, its okay"

instant multi-millionaire

It is not the news at all, Dash has been trolled and blamed for instamine since its first pump, but with large instamine, Dash can be pumped to the moon, because the whales and team controll large percentage of supply in circulation. I am not long term holder for Dash, but only do some short term trading.

that's the problem... it's ok being a short term trader, but how can the project succeed with such instamine? why would someone hold this coin knowing that it could crash at any moment? and to succeed, they need long term investors.

IMO too many small investors got filled when Dash dump, from 2014 to 2017, there are many pump and dump in Dash, you can view the graph in poloniex, Dash's pump created from Mintpal and Cryptsy, but these 2 exchanges do not operate any more. Scam exchanges.

No different than Monero being instamined and the other shit.
Monero has had a cloud of suspicion swirling around it since day one.
It's a millionaires coin funded by him and the original dev was erased long ago with lies.
Kind of odd that the first dev created the coin then wandered off into the sunset never to be heard from again.
THEN ..we get the ole "Community Take-Over" routine  :D

I could go on ;)

Point being is you buddy are a fucking slab of hypocrite bullshit from hell.
You and your Monero cult cohorts are just as guilty.
Monero personifies dishonesty.
It's hard to deny it when you are a pathological / compulsive fucking liar for 3 straight years running.

I have more respect for Dash because they own up to their shit unlike Monero assholes.

I think Roger ver pump is over, the last person Dash team wants on their team is Roger. I believe the Dash instamine is a premeditated scam and the team tried all their best to cover it by rebranding and that is what the team has been doing since, no use case to justified the price and I belief Dash will be history soon.

You see, most people don't care if it was instamine or not.
Most people are here for profit, and if they can make money on Dash they don't give a F*** about instamines.
Topics like this are pointless, people will continue to trade it, some will get burned, some not, nothing is gonna change.

Of course this won't last long though.
As soon as iamnotback gets better and rolls out that perfect coin of his, all other projects will become obsolete, including BTC.

Only then will we see a rebirth of cryptocurrency, and that day is not far away.

Thanks for the no-moderation thread. Basically everything you say against this (D)ASS Coin in the fanboys thread gets deleted.

who cares, instamine, premine, ICO, IPO, Dash, ETH, XMR, LTC,.... these area just words. these coins are good as long as there are traders trading them and they get pumped.
and if you can notice the signs of the pump and act quickly to get in before the pump you can make more of what counts which is more bitcoin in your pocket. otherwise you have to stay on the sides and cry about missing out on the rises and having the same amount of bitcoin you had before.

Oh come on man, you need to lick my boots too, otherwise you just ain't trying hard enough.  :P

Seriously though, Dash is real product and yours truly is talking about vaporware which might never materialize into anything more than just talk.

We can dream, but let's not get too carried away with spouting off about vaporware. It is sort of embarrassing, although I realize it is my fault for initiating that expectation.

How much of the development money is going into slick marketing?

That made me nauseous.

DASH is a total ponzi scam should remove from poloniex

It is no different from get rich-quick scam schemes

Please fill the form-feature request to delist DASH TRASH from POLO ASAP

DASH is a cancer to cryptocurrency

Didn't Evan tell people he would not start mining. Then people went to bed and he instamined it?

That explains it. Thanks.

maybe i'm missed something but wasn't dash a swap coin for darkcoin, so there can't be instamine, if the swapped darkcoin were exchange to dash? investors from darkcoin, were getting all the coin in dash with a fair somehow launch or not?

I'm not a fan of Dash but I think it will pump much higher this year. PR by Dash is very crazy sometimes foolish but it works 100%. Finally, they have Roger Ver on board to pump their coin.

No they just did a rebrand no swap involved.

The "PR" is only as effective as the product.

Dash has been successful because it addressed 3 major issues head on:

 • how to effectively erase transaction history in a transparent blockchain to keep the chain both fungible and authentic
 • how to balance the security (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13328511#msg13328511) at the front end of the confirmation cycle to make low confirmation transactions reliable
 • how to endow the coin supply with a native, base rate of interest in order to support an ROI on trustless holdings

Those three alone are "biggies" and they're being solved without recourse to blockchain obfuscation, loss of Bitcoin compatability or the need for 3rd party lending.

Finally, the fact that Dash's articulated protocol allows nodes to talk actively to "each other" as well as to the client wallet is what will serve as its next "biggy." A whole new wave of user orientated clients to interact with the blockchain.

The "instamine" is what it is. There are markets to price that in just the same as they price everything else in. However, there are far most 'perfect launches' that went straight to zero than 'imperfect launches' that didn't so if you feel safer investing in a Dash clone with a 'perfect launch' be my guest ;)

In my opinion DASH is very dangerous coin.

I never bought DASH. Dash's fallings are as hard as their rise.

Please be very careful.

The worst part is not that initial coins were mined very fast, satoshi also mined a ton of coins very fast. What is very concerning is how in darkcoin they changed the total supply of coins after evan mined all those coins which is a bitch ass move. If they changed the total supply once, that is not something I can trust long term ever again. That is a capital sin in crypto world.

You are right too for long periods.

I mean for short / middle period hard drops.

This drops gives fear and can be cause loss.

Wanna compare to other coins ?
And besides isn't that what you all bitch about anyway ?
You complain the coin is not adopted (any coin) blaming the dev and a lack of a "roadmap" etc.

What is nauseating is watching assholes like the Monero cult pull stunt after stunt and they get a free pass permanently.
Then you all dog pile onto Dash like they are doing something the others are not.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander assholes.

How many fucking god damn times do i have to point out a phone book size list of stunts & bullshit Monero for example has pulled ?
Do i see you same guys bitching about them ?

Those brain dead greedy corrupt lying little idiots are running a for-profit gambling site created by the Monero team.
It got hacked and the cock sucker had the fucking nerve to explain it away as "What Spoetnik said about Monero"
But when i say it ..it's FUD.
When faggotpony says it? it's uber legit leet dev talk.  ::)

What bothers me is your idiotic blind rampant glaring hypocrisy from one end of the scene to the other.
It's "ok" if YOU are the greedy little bullshitting sock-puppet account hopping douche here who is shilling his moldy bags.. otherwise..... scaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam

You don't have any credibility assholes.. go fuck yourselves.

Please Satoshi did not mine his coins in 1 day but in 2 years.  This is huge diference. And he did not change half of supply latter on in PoS so his coins would just make more and DASH instaminers did. If Satoshi would do that now he would own 5-10 milions BTC and doubt we would be here right now since Crypto space would be way less developed, since most people would link ti to ponzi.

My chart's more accurate:

https://i.imgur.com/rAt28dp.png

Yes, he did. I was one of the duped. No doubt in my mind it was intentional.

Of course it was intentional.
And now the coins he premined are worth millions of dollars. Can't really blame anyone for pulling a get-rich-quick scheme.

Whats funny is the rise of Dash is showing how little people actually research before buying a coin, and how advertising is the main ingredient for success.
(See Dash, Zcash, etc)

It is a rererebranded clonecoin with gotta catch them all features for the early few
XCoin as it was called at the time was based off of the Litecoin code base,

I think is currently worthy of the price ...  Even Though it is currently the Enthusiasm of pumping dash is still working xD So wait for the fire to go down then panic will come and we will see a hard crush..

So I wouldn't take a risk for long term but for the time being it is still worth it speculating on dash xD



Still that's my own view :) :)

Damn, look at Dash go !! It is like Dash has forgotten where it put the brakes ???
Sorry guys, i got distracted for a second .. please continue with this very important topic.

Important in the sense that people may finally understand the difference between a premine
and fastmine / instamine once and for all.

Lets face it, people look kinda dumb when they still try to pin down a premine on Dash .. noobish even.
Instamine yes, premine no.

Exactly you are talking about Ethereum for example (ranked as the no.2 coin behind Bitcoin itself)

So you all see how much of a bullshitting load of hypocrites you are ?
I don't think you do which is why i have to harp on it  :D

..just a clown show of blatant idiot shit talkers running their mouth to defend their bags.

NONE OF THEM HONEST  ::)

---

EDIT:

Oh and clearly these other competing assholes are simply jealous.
Look at the prices today.. Dash just broke $50 and everything else is dropping including Bitcoin.

As if a young lady who was penetrated by a 12" dildo is still technically a virgin.  :P

Maybe if we sew (patch it up), nobody will notice.

Ah fuck it, who cares about virginity as long as we can still cum.

But later on in life, when we catch the mother of our kids fucking the postman, we ponder whether it was such a good idea after all.

You have never answered the difference between

1. a captive instamine
2. a premine

do so now so I can laugh at your blathering on.

An announced premine is a far more honest way of taking the coins than a captive instamine.


Tell me now how the result is any different with a premine and a captive instamine where only the devs have a chance of mining and everyone else is held out?

captive instamine = deceptive premine.

Dash dared to call it a fair POW release.


spoetnik was so disgusted he called dash an ultra scammy coin.


although lately has started to refuse to confirm it is a scam which has caused many including myself to speculate that something perhaps a payoff from dash has caused this change of heart.

Dash is still an ultra scam right spoetnik??

why would pro dashers even keep bumping all these threads?? defending this point??  there is no defense.

Why not just say hey it happened no point excusing, denying, twisting, spinning ...

We took the coins in an unfair manner totally opposite to what we said we would do in doing a fair POW coin release.
We admit it. Its done. Its over.

Then perhaps dash can just be allowed to continue without this continually on the main board. It started as a scam if you want to support it in the chance of making money then go ahead. It is boring to even keep talking about it after 2 years nearly 3. Just admit it and move on.

You know people will then bring up the slashing of the minting and magnification of the instmined loot. So why open up the entire can of worms.

When people mention it just say yes its true. You make it worse for yourselves by excusing or denying it or arguing over the exact terminology to describe the same thing.

Arguing over what is bad ?
How about that ideology you love to spout off Troll's ?
Does that include sugar daddy Risto and his centralized control of Monero ?
How about handing your ID to Poloniex to buy anon coins ?
Should i go on ?

I get a kick out of how you choose to exercise your morality.
You all randomly take it out for a walk around the play-pen like hypocritical babies.

When Monero idiots live in a glass house they oughta STFU.
..or don't (you're the ones lookin' like idiots here not me)  :D

Anyone can see the Monero cult idiots are bitter that Dash is $50 a coin.
Hence the massive attacks that keep coming the more the price rises.

Monero tard's don't you have anything better to do with your time ?
Worried about coin prices huh ?
Well maybe you should spend less time here making accounts trolling and get your Dark Market coin adopted ?
Don't be mad at Dash for doing work when you all do fuck all but hang out here whining for years like hypocrites.

xmr is seperate issue........make your own xmr threads.

this is a dash thread.



that's what you said about dash so why defend dash using xmr as an excuse?

its a diversion nothing more.

You are making it too obvious that you're now a dash shill.

Is dash a scam yes or no?

answer that... then if you must talk about monero.

I will be posting your dash is an ultra scam quote on every dash thread I see you protecting it on.

After that if you persist I will make a thread to analyse your change of heart on this matter.

Don't continue shilling for dash else your credibility will be gone and you will simply be discredited and known as a dash shill.

All your previous good work will be lost.

Am I the only one who's enjoying Sputz "FUD first, ask questions later" policy on coins has backfired in dramatic fashion due to his shilling dash? Dude, Sputz, you REKT your own game--hope you are cashing out those dash as quickly as you get them or else you might die under the weight of that greater fool contraption you defend. My guess is the first rat out is lean enough to swim.

In the big scheme of things these "digital pump and dump schemes" have been going on for quite some time, it's no surprise they have now reached an anonymous currency. I would expect to see more of this in the future with the huge influx of different altcoins coming into the market now. Always remember the "it's too good to be true rule." Stay safe out there.

It's also not anonymous. It's coinjoin with "master nodes" that can see inputs and outputs, which does not make it anonymous, in fact in many ways it makes it much easier to track you than plain old bitcoin.

They focus on marketing not technology, and that can fool a lot of people but ultimately when someone uses dash for something that really does need to be private and it takes the cops 2 seconds to catch them it will come crashing back down to like 50 cents overnight.

So their reasoning for instamine is basically this: "Dash is earning its place with no VC funding or ICO"

Translation: According to Dash developers if coin is launching without ICO then some other form of boosting is needed.
Apparently if you want develop honest coins these days you can't do this without some sort shenanigan. Sad.

The butthurt is strong in this thread... Carry on boys, and let Dash be Dash. We'll see you again when we're the world's currency. And you guys will still be yelling scam.

They are piling in because.. $54.26 at 'theCap  :D

And if idiots live in a glass house...

How can you be the worlds currency when millions where unfair mined the first 24 hours and most of the dash is currently locked in masternodes and the market operates with like under 500 000 coins. Do you think someone will ever unblock his stash if dash continues to rise. So you want the "world" to operate with like only thousands of your precious dashes , lol. The money shouldn't be part of the economic, like what do you work? - dash. lol.   The only point of money is initial fair distribution, zero  scam history (and don't tell the usual dash jutification of instamining -"the code was broken because we started the project as a joke, but the community did't want to change it" - wtf does that mean?) Your code is btc/ltc copy paste and you want to be something else than like ltc - a temporary primary pump and dumb btc hedge coin - no way. You dashers are pathetic.
 P.S.  The fact that the btctalk super idiot Spoetnik endorse it should ring a bell too. LOL

Just to clarify. No Dash is "locked in masternodes". This is a fudster myth ;)

(A popular one, but still a myth).

No, it is not a myth.  It is *economically* locked in.  Technically, you can move it, but you lose your master node, and its reward.  So you won't.

If DASH's price rises, you keep it because you get a *higher* (virtual) rise than DASH's rise (you get an extra interest).  And if DASH falls, but less than the reward, you are still on the winning side if you keep it.  This is different with a coin that has no PoS mechanism, which is hence fully liquid.

It's locked because it generates money without any work and no one would unlock/spend a resource that generates money without the smallest effort. Even more if the price of this resource grows.
Do you really think that someone will ever invest in a financial system that benefits only couple of thousands people on the planet who will be like kings for eternity like in the middleages. Where is the fairness here. This is even worse than the middleages.  And only because these several people once had the luck to instamine on a broken code. Oh my little funny dashers, you are delusional. Enjoy the temporary pump of this scam though.

But this is exactly why it will rise like crazy: most coins are not liquid, the "market cap" propaganda works, and tells now to the world that it is 3rd largest crypto, greater fools stream in, pump it even harder.  Evan is a genius.  He will become way more rich than Bill Gates (or go to prison for illegal securities...).  Moreover, being totally centrally controlled, Evan can do what he wants.  No "scaling debate", no "fighting over this or that".  DASH is Evan's coin and it will have a (virtual) market cap that may even one day outperform bitcoin's.  If he dumps slowly enough on all greater fools, he will end up making the DASH market liquid, be immensely rich, financed by all greater fools into Evan's pockets.  Simply a genius.

 • Every coin in every wallet of every crypto where people are holding and not selling is "economically locked in".

 • The world gold supply that sits in vaults with the expectation of value accrual is "economically locked in".

 • 5, 10 and 30 year interest bearing bonds that are not on markets are "economically locked in". (Technically you can sell them but you'll loose your coupon payments, so you won't)

 • All the Bitcoin on orderbooks in the range above the current trading spread is "economically locked in".

The implication of the "Dash is locked in masternodes" FUD is that the supply is blockchain constrained, not "economically constrained" and therefore somehow shouldn't count towards marketcap which is not remotely the case. Here's an example of a coin which does use that approach:

https://i.imgur.com/NXKD4p3.png (http://bitbay.market/bitbay-interview%E2%80%8A-%E2%80%8Aexclusive-qa-with-lead-bay-developer-david-zimbeck/)

I've always said I'm bullish on Dash. But it has a use by date.
I just don't see how it can become "the worlds currency with the instamine incident.  It can be pumped now because 0.001% of the worlds population has heard of bitcoin, and a lot less people have heard of Dash.
It is doing well but I just don't see how it will survive wider scrutiny. 
To become the worlds currency it will have to explain to a wider skeptical audience why Evan told people he wouldn't start mining, only to do so while people weren't expecting it, and to explain why he reduced the number of coins.

I think we all know that it will collapse if it ever tries to get widespread. That said; if people make money before that by finding ä "greater fool" to buy then... good luck to them

No.  At every instant, with a non-interest bearing token, you CAN sell it from the moment you think it will go down.  If you hold it, you think it will go up.  With an interest-bearing token, you include the interest in your calculation.  You only sell if you think that the loss will be higher than the interest it will bring when you do not sell it.

Moreover, if most of the interest-bearing accounts are in the hands of the same entity that manipulates the market, he keeps it locked in to increase his lever on the market of course.

Well done. You're getting there ;)

Partly yes, but only dash wallets generate money while in the wallet. If someone starts buying dash its not to like get 10 dash to pay his bills, but to get to 1000 coins (and that's what the bitcoiners do now) so he can start generating money/economy without actually doing any work. And this is way way more economically "locked"  that you can imagine.

But this means that the market is not liquid, until a "crash threshold" is reached.  Small downward corrections that would normally make people sell and amplify them until new demand is reached, will not happen, because these corrections are smaller than the interest.  In the same vein, "taking profit" is also discouraged, because taking profit by selling should be bigger than keeping and reaping in the interest. 

Which means that "slow pumping" is very easily done: you only have to buy up the small part that is liquid.  Nobody is going to "take profits" because there's more to be had when getting to the interest.  And you can also dump slowly on newcomers, even a small price decrease will not trigger a sell-out because interest compensates.  So as long as you pump slowly enough, and you dump slowly enough, you keep very small market liquidity, which allows you to pump the market to unknown heights.  But the real market cap is just the small amount of liquidity times the price, and not the full stash.  The announced market cap is entirely fake.

And this is just the case with a PoS coin in general.  But if moreover, the pumper is also the owner of most of the coins, this is even worse: of course he's not going to kill of his own dump, or his own pump, with his own coins !

Luckily there are markets to test whether this model works or not.

All we're discussing is the difference between risk assets and fixed income assets - where the lent collateral is "put to work" to earn a regular return. The market decides if that return is worthwhile.

With Dash that "market" is the mining community because they have to supply hashpower to the network AND a portion of the mining revenue. The incentive for doing that is that the NET value of their remaining revenue is increased due to the economic model as a whole supporting a high value coin.

The advantages of this approach are:

 • the miner's income is supported in terms of exchange rate with other assets regardless of yeild per hash in mined currency units
 • the "missing stakeholders (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1433982.msg14584154#msg14584154)" (investors) are given both and economic return and a level of say in the future direction of the coin via the masternode voting system
 • the monetary token is endowed with a native base lending rate that is trustless and which can be enjoyed without engaging with a 3rd party borrower

The tests of success of this approach are:

 • that miners endorse it by supplying hashpower to the network (check - see below)
 • that the market endorses it by supporting the exchange rate with other assets (check (https://i.imgur.com/cMA7dDJ.png))

And finally - despite al of that - NO blockchain liquidity is "locked" in masternodes ;)

It's the Dash economic model. If people don't like it there are about another 500 out there of all different types serving all different priorities. Judging by this thread though, the only criticism I can see is that "...b..b..but it gives economic incentives to buy and hold".

Of course. What do you think a successful store of value is supposed to do ?

https://i.imgur.com/O9Uo9gY.png

So is Dash just meant to be a store of value and nothing else?

I'm not disputing the price of a single DASH.  BTW, there is an automatic relationship between the price of a single dash, the net block reward and the hash rate.  Miners make profits from the moment that the hash rate is lower than the profitable hash rate.

I'm disputing the "market cap" of DASH.  Most coins being locked in, this doesn't mean anything.  If I make an alt coin of which I own myself 9 million coins, and there is 1 million on the market, if the coin is traded for, say, $5, then the actual market cap is only 5 million, and not 50 million dollars.  Because the 9 million are not liquid.  In order to maintain the price, the net mined coins need to be sold to "new money" (or my pump money), but that's peanuts.  People *thinking* there is a market cap of 50 million, will not hesitate buying coins if it is on the rise, because they think that they will be able to sell a reasonable amount of stash without crashing the market.  That's where they are wrong, because the actual market is much, much smaller than what they think it is.

It's interesting that crypto coins have adopted an equity valuation model, which is very inappropriate.

I realise that.

Unfortunately your home-cooked arbitrary definitions of "marketcap" don't count.

The dash destroyer is here. That is a good sign.

Taoway (now taoofscamtoshi)= the reason the dash coin scam was even highlighted. Well done Tao. You have held back dash more than anyone else. Your videos are the icing on the cake dude.

The butthurt = the scammers fav one liner.

Why do we "classify" crypto by market cap ?  Because we somehow think this is a gross measure of the "value pool" of the thing ; in other words, if new economic entities were to "take over" the entire thing, that's more or less what they would pay for it.  So that's "what it is worth".  It also means that if you possess, say, 1/10 of the system, that you will be able to obtain grossly, 1/10 of the market cap if you sell it over a period of a few weeks or months.  (yes, the market will lower a bit, but if it is sufficiently liquid, it will absorb it).

Well, this is not true with DASH.  If you own 1/10 of the DASH stash, you won't be able to sell it for 1/10 of the market cap.  You will simply crash the market.  Because the integrated demand, even over months, is not that big.

So you agree then that the Market Cap means essentially nothing and is easily gamed by scams like dash where a few own all the coins due to taking them all at the start then magnifying their loot with slashing the minting and taking more with masternodes just because they already took the lions share at the start.

that's good to know.

I notice the only people protecting dash are those that have had their noses in the dash trough since the early days and paid dash shills like spoetnik who go from calling it an ultra scam to protecting it over and over by trying to divert to other issues.

You yourself have admitted the instamine (this is good not trying to excuse it at least) but enjoy profiteering from leveraging that scam start. This is fine too since most would do the same in your position really if the truth was known.

However, seeing you always in these threads throwing in red herrings and nonsense in an attempt to stop people seeing it is a scam makes you a scammer.


Some of the biggest dash coin scam protectors have turned anti dash over the years I think there is hope for you too. Sell now at 50 bucks and move to a cleaner project. I would suggest PIVx where you can probably afford to buy up a HUGE share with your masternodes profit.

How many masternodes do you have btw?

Bingo!

Readers raise your hand if you even had a clue what he means.

(where is the ranking by verified unique humans adoption?)


A skyrocketing cost of security unitized per unique user is not a positive attribute.

Cryptocurrencies are not actually a "currency". They are far more like equity than a currency and an equity valuation model isn't inappropriate.

For a start, "currencies" are used to measure value independently of their monetary base. For example, if a regional authority is in the process of commissioning an estuary bridge which takes 4 years to build, it will create work in progress entries in its books which will be monetised by credit markets at discrete points to keep the project financed. (This is the 'creating money out of thin air" aspect of currencies)

Crypto, on the other hand, is simply an electronic asset which markets have decided to endow with tradeable value - the only difference form a peice of rock being that it can travel through wires and therefore can be used to directly exchange for goods and services as if it were 'electronic currency'. That exchange is actually barter because instead of being carried out in abstracted monetary units who's denomination is independent of the material of the trade, it's simply a straight swap.

Not yet.

Excellent !

Personally I want to be onboard the next move from pennies to $130,000. That is only going to happen for the one that becomes a currency.

Don't waste my time with 10 baggers.

What exactly do you understand by the term "currency" out of interest (as distinct from an electronic asset that is deployed as a store of value) ?

Unit-of-exchange. Unit-of-account.

I'd agree with that. But "becoming a currency" doesn't necessarily make an asset more valuable.

Lets say the UK government decided to "adopt" bitcoin overnight by denominating the entire economy in "BTC". So the next day, all prices in supermarkets would be in BTC, national accounts reported in BTC, bank account balances re-denominated in BTC and taxes charged and paid in BTC.

All that would happen is that the payment systems, barcodes, shelf labels and national report generators would be reconfigured (in terms of units) to display BTC instead of Pounds Sterling. The M0 to M4 money supply tiers (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/money-supply-m0) would still exist and continue on at around £2 Trillion. So you'd have an effective broad monetary base of 1000 Billion bitcoins, even though only 15 Million existed on the blockchain.

However, since "currency" as a unit of measure and "monetary assets" as a store of value are distinct concepts, what would happen is that one would simply decouple from the other in terms of value. You can see that's already happened with all fiat currencies since they are mostly named after weights of metals (Peso, Pound etc). Nowadays:

1 Pound of sterling silver metal at spot price = 16 Ounces = £223 Pounds of sterling currency.

The thing is, this deflationary property that the base asset has (i.e. prices measured in pounds of sterling silver decrease while prices in sterling currency inflate) isn't confined to assets who's names happen to be adopted for price denomination. It happens anyway.

So the moral of the story is that cryptocurrencies - if they want to accrue value over time - should NOT model themselves on payment systems or currencies. They should model themselves on hard assets with limited supply that have the added bonus of being mobile on an electronic network and can therefore serve as an electronic "bearer token".

This's what makes them supremely powerful !

@toknormal, unit-of-account means everyone holds that form money as their checking and even savings (reserve) account.

As the US dollar became the global unit-of-account, the total market cap of the currency increased by orders-of-magnitude. The USA citizens ended up consuming 25% of the world's resources with only 5% of the population. The banks who created the US dollar out-of-thin-air (who get the seigniorage) pocketed the $trillions (not the holders of the dollars).

With a crypto-currency which has no seigniorage (e.g. Dash doesn't qualify), then increase in market cap is awarded to those who hold the tokens.

In conclusion, I disagree with you.

I would think that you can talk about a currency, even if it is not a world-wide accepted currency, from the moment that it is used as a currency, that is, as an intermediate asset between providing value, and obtaining value.  Otherwise, most small (?) countries' currencies wouldn't qualify as currencies.   The Australian dollar, the Canadian dollar wouldn't qualify as a currency, because I don't use it, I can't buy bread with it, etc...

In order to talk about a currency, you must be able to use it *in some circles* as a currency, and be able to exchange it for another currency if you "change circles".  You can do that by using a "backbone" currency (what you call a global reserve currency), but that is not necessary.  Currencies do not necessarily have to have a total order (you don't like that, do you) or hierarchy.  

Not really - only in a notional sense.

They hold a diverse range of "forms of money". It's just that they all share the same denomination. (See here: http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/Pages/iadb/notesiadb/m4.aspx).

You're mixing up collateralising assets (or stores of value), units of account and payment systems. These are three distinct aspects of a financial system that can be, and usually are, completely decoupled. All the same they all tend to have the same unbrella term "money" applied.

To illustrate, lets take something that we're familiar with - a cryptocurrency exchange (Poloniex, say).

1. You start with a collateralising asset (100 BTC, blockchain based)

2. You make a deposit.
At this point, there is 200 BTC in circulation. That's because you just "signed" a contract with the exchange to permit them to bring an additional 100 BTC of derivative tokens into existence backed by a line of credit that you give them. The original 100 BTC are still circulating on the blockchain. While you're trading, they may lend them out at interest, buy stuff with them - whatever - depending on the terms of contract for depositing on the exchange.

3. You trade. You are trading with other parties who are all using the same class of "money" (credit backed tokens) but denominated differently - Ethereum, Mooncoin, you name it. Note ! While you are trading, none of the blockchain properties of the respective coins make a damn bit of difference to the trading experience. All trades are instant, support the same level of privacy, etc. That's because your are using a payments system (SQL server in this case) which is independent of the technical properties of the collateralising asset. It's also independent of the blockchain denomination which is an important point (see below).

4. You withdraw funds.
At this point, you may have your balance denominated differently to what you started with which will allow you to exchange your balance for a different blockchain token

You can see from those two examples that price denomination, collateralising capital and payment systems are all distinct. Adopting a "currency" means no more than re-denominating the capital base. "Holding a currency" means holding an asset that's denominated in that currency. (That could just as easily be Bitcoin bonds as a private key to a bitcoin balance, so it doesn't have to be a bearer instrument). "Clearing a trade" means using a payment system to facilitate an asset exchange in an arbitrarily nominated currency. "Holding a collateralising asset" means holding a bearer token or instrument where owner and possesor are indistinct. (i.e. where the denomination is instrinsic e.g. piece of coal, diamond, pound in weight of siliver or Blockchain private key).

These three aspects of monetary media not only are distinct, but actually have conflicting priorities - which is why they are almost never the same medium. If you try to create a crypto that does these three things well it will be a crap crypto because you'd have to create nasty couplings between conflicting objectives:

 • Payment systems need to be currency agnostic whereas blockchains have to be currency native
 • good stores of value need to impose scarcity to deflate prices over time whereas good currencies need to inflate liquidity to keep prices stable
 • currencies must be definable against a heterogeneous background of both payment systems and collateralising assets, whereas payment systems only facilitate the clearing of a trade and represent neither a currency nor an asset

Think of it this way. If a Shakespearean play was performed in different countries around the world, then:

 • the language of the performance would be the currency
 • The village Stage would be the payment system
 • The literary work "Hamlet" would be the collateralising asset

Script translation...$100.
Rental of the stage...$400.
Copyright to the script ? (Priceless...!) ;)

This is a very good analysis.   That said, block chains can take on the role of "small community currencies" where they also perform the function of a payment system.  Using them as a store of value/speculative asset (which is most of crypto these days) is a totally different role.  But you can have many block chains that perform many different functions - what is still not present sufficiently, because of bitcoin's domination, are distributed exchanges that can connect different chains, and as such, form a larger payment system.

Yes, they can.

what about the coin that were swapped from darkcoin? if they were swapped 1:1 that is like instamining, because when dash was rleased the dev instamined a shit load of coin like 1 million but i could be wrong here

Yeah, they just changed the name for xcoin to darkcoin to dash. The crappy parts remain unchanged.

LOL this guy.

I wonder which one he is taking his.. puppet account out for a stroll.
WOWeee you are sooo clevers.
I caen see Monero'z soo'z great'z n0w!!11ONE

Everyone can see these Monero idiots are crying their eyes out and are foaming at the mouth.
Because Dash is over $50 and Monero is dropping like a rock at $12.

Seems to me the market has Spoeken huh MoneroTard's.

Fuck you.
Enjoy your FUD and your low coin prices.
Maybe quit crying or get on the Dash train before it's too late MoneroTard's ?

Spoetnik joined the dash team and of course as proud dasher doubled the fud against monero.

If you "takeover a company"then you have many options. You can break up the business. You can interact with the rest of the economy, as a business.
You can change the business in may ways.
None of this is possible with a block chain.

Is Dash purely POS?
If so you could try to take it over, but only because with a purely POS coin you would control the future emission of coins, if you owned all the coins.  But then what would be the point????  You would own all the coins. ??

Blockchains were designed as decentralised systems. They aren't companies.

Also companies do issue more shares, but only if they get something back. Cash, or performance. So the market cap model makes sense.
Blockchains constantly issue more coins with nothing new being added into that system. So the equity model is inappropriate.

Fly by night mining companies do the same thing.  Evan Scamfield is running a pink sheet boiler room operation in Bitcoin space.

Mining companies burn through capital and goodwill by diluting the stock to nothing, then they change names and do a reverse split before repeating the process.

Gold miner = A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground

Dash shill = A Liar Standing Next to an Instamined Blockchain

Bingo!

National currencies were/are the citizen's unit-of-account because it is very costly store your cash flow in a unit-of-account which is not the predominant unit-of-exchange.

Now that we are transitioning to B2C and P2P (C2C) globalized commerce, we need in some areas (especially intangible Internet commerce) a globalized unit-of-account and exchange.

Read that second sentence again and understand the profound implications. The coming moat is no longer national boundaries but tangible versus intangible (Industrial Age versus Knowledge Age) commerce. Also make sure you read my essay in the Economic Devastation thread.

It doesn't matter what the "unit-of-account and exchange" is, or whether it's globalized or not.

The trade value of a collateralising asset is independent of how it is measured.

Prior to 2009 there were no electronically manifested collateralising assets. That is because such an asset needs to be capable of reconciling two key properties in a single trade:

 • ownership
 • possession

Subsequent to 2009, this was possible and the value will accrue accordingly.

The currency units that are used to measure that value are irrelevant.

I am ignoring you...


You go learn why. Learn about the cost of volatility. Learn why Germany's industry wanted the Euro to eliminate exchange rate risk for their European markets (and how that enslaved the PIIGS who borrowed in Euros but couldn't pay it back in devalued currency).

Please stop conflating investment with cash flow and running a business or your personal income and expenses.


Volatility is relevant. Those who have a unit-of-account which is the same as their unit-of-exchange, have 0 volatility exposure.

The higher the volatility, the greater the cost to hedge it.

There will be only one currency.

"Volatility" (and whether it's favourable or adverse to investors) is a relative thing.

If I'm holding bitcoin as a store of value and it protects me against the collapse of a fiat currency, than that qualifies as "volatility", but I'm on the right side of that volatility by having identified the appropriate monetary priority according to my needs.

If, on the other hand, I'm a motor car manufacturer and have a 6 month time to market, then I need to be on the other side of that "volatility" equation in order to make sure that my revenues are measured in the same units as my budget and I am able to escape the equation with a positive margin.

This is the conflict I was explaining earlier between a currency and a store of value and why if you try to be both you'll end up with a "crap crypto".

Conclusion: Currencies (unit of measure) and Stores of Value are not in conflict as long as you decouple them. They are complimentary. One is needed for commercial operations so the projects don't go bust (due to adverse effects of volatility), the other is needed for storing value BETWEEN commercial operations (accrued from beneficial effects of volatility).


Actually, the Euro was as much an initiative of France as any. Valery Giscard D'Estang proposed it to Germany in 1964 precisely because France was suffering from the adverse "coupling" that I've been describing between stores of value and units of measure.

At that time the post war Western world was operating under the Bretton woods system where currencies were tied to Gold regardless of whether any country had a trade surplus or deficit. This meant that national currencies were conflicted between operating as a unit of measure and store of value and had to go begging the IMF to demand that a neighbouring central bank should purchase more or less of their "currency" just so their population could make ends meet.

You say that Germany wanted to "eliminate exchange rate risk for their European markets". While that may have been a handy bonus for Germany, it wasn't the agenda that created the Euro. That was simply one of globalism - where the US wanted to consolidate Europe into a firewall against the USSR and picked Germany as the seed since it was the primary subject of the post war "carve up".

Anyway, that's all politics.

The monetary lessons are: Don't integrate a store of value with a currency and don't integrate a payments system with either of the other two ;)

Agreed Charles de Gaulle was the fundamental leader of the creation of the 5th republic (https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/french-political-parties-disintegrating/) and his thesis was France (Europe) should be a super power on par with the USA, and not a slave to the USA. So he played right into the trap of Germany's mercantilism.

You may be correct there were other global political players and incentives. I haven't studied it extensively, just an hour or so of googling and reading.


Further explanation which also addresses the unit-of-account = unit-of-exchange point:

Thanks. Will read with interest.

I fully agree that commercially-knit-together communities do not need necessarily to be *geographically* close (even though for most of commerce, that is still the case: the plumber, the groceries, the bread, the car repair, the doctor, the dentist, the leisure.... much commerce remains local).  But usually these communities are not very big even if spread out.  Maybe I trade international post stamps, but the exchanging of post stamps is not related to the community of violins trading internationally.

I very rarely buy stuff abroad directly.  It happens.  Most of the time, I use products that have of course partly foreign origin, and most of the time when I buy "foreign made" stuff, I use a local retailer.  I very rarely buy my oranges directly in South Africa.  I buy oranges in a local grocery shop, who got them there from Morocco or South Africa.  But that's not my problem.  I pay the grocery shop holder in the local currency.   He probably needs to exchange money to buy the oranges.  It is his business.

I bet my let nut i know who you are.. and no that is not a good thing.
And yeah i do enjoy tasting the Monero Tard's tears.  ;D

Since i have never nor will i buy any "anon" coins the price is of little significance to me.
And i say that knowing Ryan at Bittrex etc will know if i am bullshitting looking at my trade history.
I have about $25 worth of LTC and i'd just as soon give them away.
I follow crypto hoping to see a turning point where things will get better.

Unlike 90% of you that couldn't care less and are here to buy garbage with REAL MONEY

..fer teh ROI'z

OR ? Like Mr. Wolf here who is a hired gun who will do *ANYTHING* code wise.. to get paid.
Because as he said.. "He needs to get paid"
For what ? doesn't matter.. he *NEEDS* to get paid.

I would not take the jobs working on shitcoins for bucks.. because i have integrity.

@dinofelis how many social networking apps and accounts do you actively use? Have you used WeChat extensively?

https://steemit.com/life/@sweetsssj/steemit-or-livestreaming-i-choose-steemit-steemit-steemit
https://steemit.com/life/@sweetsssj/wechat-china-s-all-in-one-version-of-whatsapp-whatsapp <--- pay attention to why the West requires a decentralized WeChat!
https://steemit.com/life/@sweetsssj/the-insiders-story-on-china-s-newest-occupation-purchasing-agents

I think you are out-of-touch with what most Millennials do with their time. Many now earn an income online such as for example getting paid for English tutoring on cam, being tipped for doing something outlandish on cam, etc..

For example, in app purchases are a big deal, such as game upgrades (buy a special power to reach the next level, etc).

Google "gamification Farmville" and learn a new field.

That is why I don't think you understand why Bitcoin already had great utility. It enabled me to pay my bills (from funds I had received from people all over the world and had stored in Poloniex or localbitcoins or even a Blockchain.info wallet) without leaving my computer (because I hate to lose hours out in the traffic of SE Asia). If I could, I would purchase everything (even groceries) from my computer.

Here in the Philippines there is so much C2C going on with people buying products from China via dhgate.com, aliexpress.com (and other similar sites) and then reselling it on Facebook, taking COD, bank deposit, and padala (e.g. Western Union) payments. But crypto would be much better for them.

Does the dino in your name mean dinosaur.

No, I don't use centralized social networking things, apart from discussion forums.  I don't even use facebook or twitter. 


Sure.  Soccer too is a big business.  Who cares.
But that doesn't contradict what I aim at.  You can have "millennials-gamer-coin" if you want to.  They can exchange it for "your-town-grocery-coin" if they need groceries.


Of course, but that is a local economy.


A dinofelis was a sabertooth tiger.  Yes, he's dead now, if that's what you mean :)

It doesn't work that way due to the costs of foreign unit-of-accounts, only one will win (https://www.google.com/search?q=moldbug+Monetary+theory+of+money).

If the NWO fiat debt usury industrial age coin wins, you die in a totalitarian dark age.

Any way, you have bigger problems to worry about:

@toknormal this is sort of related to what we've been discussing: