The problem is that Satoshi envisioned it as decentralized and technically sound--dash is neither. |
|
|
|
A fair mine is one that distributes over a period of months or years Don't worry. You'll get over it  You can tell when Tok makes a technically-useless, antagonistic comment by the wink. |
|
|
|
In all likelihood, given both coins are launched with similar mining interest, which coin has the better distribution?
What coins are you comparing exactly? Because you just generalized again... I guess you could call comparing like things to arrive at a logical most likely conclusion a generalization, then you can go on say people using math are generalizing. You are generalizing this variable: - similar mining interest It's easy to miss variables I know... if you eliminate all the specifics the conclusion is obvious I stipulated that above--after I realized you couldn't fill in the blanks for yourself. No kid, you've been filling all the blanks to support your argument, but it was fun  Keep it up. Sorry, I assume people know more than they do and don't need their hands held through the process. I'll be sure to remember that you need every little detail spelled out for you. It's really quite funny the things you miss. Keep it up Can you elaborate or is this turning into a pointless back and forth with minimal content and maximum antagonism? IE. trolling. |
|
|
|
In all likelihood, given both coins are launched with similar mining interest, which coin has the better distribution?
What coins are you comparing exactly? Because you just generalized again... I guess you could call comparing like things to arrive at a logical most likely conclusion a generalization, then you can go on say people using math are generalizing. You are generalizing this variable: - similar mining interest It's easy to miss variables I know... if you eliminate all the specifics the conclusion is obvious I stipulated that above--after I realized you couldn't fill in the blanks for yourself. No kid, you've been filling all the blanks to support your argument, but it was fun Keep it up. Sorry, I assume people know more than they do and don't need their hands held through the process. I'll be sure to remember that you need every little detail spelled out for you. |
|
|
|
In all likelihood, given both coins are launched with similar mining interest, which coin has the better distribution?
What coins are you comparing exactly? Because you just generalized again... I guess you could call comparing like things to arrive at a logical most likely conclusion a generalization, then you can go on say people using math are generalizing. You are generalizing this variable: - similar mining interest It's easy to miss variables I know... if you eliminate all the specifics the conclusion is obvious I stipulated that above--after I realized you couldn't fill in the blanks for yourself. But now revisiting the question, I would go through all the coins and rate them on fairness factoring emission time, software available to miners and emission rate. Though sites exist with this info if you're willing to search. |
|
|
|
Lol, way OT but whatever, at least Dash has such amazing innovations as a GUI wallet, several of them even which is several more than another coin being heavily promoted in this thread Want to see real innovation? Read the link in the first post. OMG A GUI! What coin doesn't have one of those? Even the coin you're trying to slam has one--though the developers have wisely adopted the strategy of building the coin to exact specifications before offering an official version. Some developers try and build the thing before they sell the thing--less rationalizing by the community of how great it will be (when it's fixed, err finished), and more observance of what the coin is today, as it stands, without the haze of BS. |
|
|
|
In all likelihood, given both coins are launched with similar mining interest, which coin has the better distribution?
What coins are you comparing exactly? Because you just generalized again... I guess you could call comparing like things to arrive at a logical most likely conclusion a generalization, then you can go on say people using math are generalizing. Dash versus a dash clone would be the best (most fair) comparison, though why anyone would want a clone of a badly designed coin is beyond me. |
|
|
|
That's incorrect. What I'm saying is that due to the circumstances of the instamine, who can tell? Assuming that the dash numbers are all separate miners is absurd, but it's the only way you could assert that dash has an equal to, or greater than, distribution as Bitcoin in the first year--not that that in itself makes dash well distributed (many hate Satoshi's % and will point to that as to why BTC hasn't seen mass adoption).
That's correct, who can tell? Distribution cannot be asserted with confidence in any cryptocurrency and so cannot be used as a negative when making "legitimacy" comparisons. It's really simple. Edit: Except in the case of bitcoin, just a handfull of "known" people Ah, but it can be used to make negative claims for legitimacy. It's really simple, let me dumb it down for you. Coin A's distribution is 10% of total supply over a year's period. Coin B's distribution is 10% of total supply over a day's period. In all likelihood, given both coins are launched with similar mining interest, which coin has the better distribution? Now, what's really funny is that the argument for dash's redistribution is that the coin was cheap and no one wanted it on the exchanges--making the likelihood that there were very few miners more likely. Thanks, brainshutdown, I wouldn't have noticed that logic-fail without your help. |
|
|
|
some nonsense
So you are saying more people (not your kind of miners  ) mined bitcoin in the first year than dash in the first 48h? Hint: A yes or no is enough PS: you just keep confirming your alias over and over.... it's kind of boring after a while That's incorrect. What I'm saying is that due to the circumstances of the instamine, who can tell? Assuming that the dash numbers are all separate miners is absurd, but it's the only way you could assert that dash has an equal to, or greater than, distribution as Bitcoin in the first year--not that that in itself makes dash well distributed (many hate Satoshi's % and will point to that as to why BTC hasn't seen mass adoption). Also, you should probably stop pointing to my name, as yours (and your brainfart assertions) leads one to believe that you are describing yourself---the day nuance equals generalization, is the day you'll have one up on me. |
|
|
|
He applies 'fair' to the availability of the token for purchase on exchanges but neglects the non-availability of the fair availability during the instamining I didn't "neglect" it. I accepted it. Big difference So you accept that dash was neither fairly or transparently launched? |
|
|
|
Yeah... not much point trying to have a sensible discussion with Anonymint around, he seems to be capable of having an argument all by himself in some other dimension where the contents of that post has something to do with buzzwords. Not sure why I even bother replying, posters living in divergent realities is a moderation issue.
Fwiw and to try to get back to at least some connection with the thread topic terms like "the internet of things" piss me off nearly as much as "Bitcoin 2.0" but that's because they're so frequently misused. The idea behind the internet of things is immediately recognisable to any programmer as it's the programming concept of "objects" applied to real world things, their interaction adds a world of complexity to regular programming practices but the principles are just the same and a common platform for handling them is the only real first step that can be taken to develop them.
That's the point of things like Etherium and IOTA, the "world computer" idea but they may be trying to do too much to soon, it's obviously the direction things will take but the route that will take isn't really clear from here. For now the focus with Dash is simply the entities, mainly as the users and the means of handling the interactions we know are needed and with room to expand those interactions in whatever direction they may take. That doesn't mean Dash intends to compete with Etherium btw, it's just a no-brainer that the programming concept of objects will extend to real world things and the obvious first candidate for that is real world users.
You just said absolutely nothing about how dash actually plans to integrate with IOT--explaining IOT in vague manner and implying that (somehow) dash will be able to work with IOT is about as useful as me vaguely explaining spaceflight and intimating that with a 3d printer I could build a spaceship--possibly, someday. Is there a whitepaper? Or is this coffee/water-cooler fantasy? Its covered throughout the Evolution whitepaper and some parts of that are available now with the (experimental) Electrum Dash wallet: https://www.dash.org/binaries/evo/DashPaper-v13-v1.pdf#h.yptb7wvfe8g1EDIT: https://www.dash.org/binaries/evo/DashPaper-v13-v1.pdf#h.j19rjrbvfviuNothing in that paper really goes into detail on "things" because in short that's a buzzword for the programming concept of objects and programmers often have a blindspot when it comes to explaining things they take for granted in programming to none programmers (the "user" in those links is a programming object). That applies from top to bottom with the hype around the internet of things, get to grips with the programming concept of objects and "things" just becomes a (slightly irritating) different term for them. You could have just said coffee/water-cooler fantasy. |
|
|
|
False argument -> "non-availability of the fair availability during the instamining"
It was available to anyone with: - A CPU - Linux SO - Internet connection IQ much? But not for those using windows or were asleep or couldn't get the necessary equipment in Evan's 24 hour window--though he only needed a few of those hours to get enough to equate unfair, but my guess is he only planned for the sleep window and the rest was bonus (like the later emissions cut). You mined bitcoin in the first year or were you sleeping? I was... A year versus a day? I think your comparison is 364X off. I think not. More people (diferent people? decentralized people?) mined Dash in the first 48h than in bitcoin's first year soo... yeah Assuming that each miner is an individual means you are gullible, stupid, ignorant or are conveniently rationalizing the circumstances that equate to a positive outcome for your investment--soooo..... Do you really think anyone is naïve enough to believe this rationale? I mean anyone outside the gates of scientology or dashland? |
|
|
|
False argument -> "non-availability of the fair availability during the instamining"
It was available to anyone with: - A CPU - Linux SO - Internet connection IQ much? But not for those using windows or were asleep or couldn't get the necessary equipment in Evan's 24 hour window--though he only needed a few of those hours to get enough to equate unfair, but my guess is he only planned for the sleep window and the rest was bonus (like the later emissions cut). You mined bitcoin in the first year or were you sleeping? I was... A year versus a day? I think your comparison is 364X off. |
|
|
|
Yeah... not much point trying to have a sensible discussion with Anonymint around, he seems to be capable of having an argument all by himself in some other dimension where the contents of that post has something to do with buzzwords. Not sure why I even bother replying, posters living in divergent realities is a moderation issue.
Fwiw and to try to get back to at least some connection with the thread topic terms like "the internet of things" piss me off nearly as much as "Bitcoin 2.0" but that's because they're so frequently misused. The idea behind the internet of things is immediately recognisable to any programmer as it's the programming concept of "objects" applied to real world things, their interaction adds a world of complexity to regular programming practices but the principles are just the same and a common platform for handling them is the only real first step that can be taken to develop them.
That's the point of things like Etherium and IOTA, the "world computer" idea but they may be trying to do too much to soon, it's obviously the direction things will take but the route that will take isn't really clear from here. For now the focus with Dash is simply the entities, mainly as the users and the means of handling the interactions we know are needed and with room to expand those interactions in whatever direction they may take. That doesn't mean Dash intends to compete with Etherium btw, it's just a no-brainer that the programming concept of objects will extend to real world things and the obvious first candidate for that is real world users.
You just said absolutely nothing about how dash actually plans to integrate with IOT--explaining IOT in vague manner and implying that (somehow) dash will be able to work with IOT is about as useful as me vaguely explaining spaceflight and intimating that with a 3d printer I could build a spaceship--possibly, someday. Is there a whitepaper? Or is this coffee/water-cooler fantasy? |
|
|
|
False argument -> "non-availability of the fair availability during the instamining"
It was available to anyone with: - A CPU - Linux SO - Internet connection IQ much? But not for those using windows or were asleep or couldn't get the necessary equipment in Evan's 24 hour window--though he only needed a few of those hours to get enough to equate unfair, but my guess is he only planned for the sleep window and the rest was bonus (like the later emissions cut). |
|
|
|
fairly and transparently launched Be advised that markets make up their own minds what their definition of "fair" and "transparent" is and don't take their queues from conflicted internet trolls. For my part, "fair" meant I could get my hands on a reasonable amount if I so wished. "Transparent" meant that the project was open sourced, worked on by public, non-anonymous entities, created public roadmaps, delivered on them and featured a transparent, public-consensus blockchain. Sorry that doesn't square with your myopic criteria in valuing an electronic asset, but since investors are spending their own money and not yours, you might just have to swallow it We are still arguing over what Evan did or didn't do during the instamine--nothing transparent about that. But thanks for trying to muddy the waters as always. |
|
|
|
entertainment I. Think. I. Can. Improve. On. Your. Staccato. Paragraph's. Style. And. Content. But can't make a case for dash being fairly and transparently launched, which is what you would need to do to prove that it wasn't breaching truth in advertising. What icebreaker failed to point out was that it isn't necessarily smooth's superior debate capabilities that are making you look petty, ill informed, and just plain wrong, it's that smooth started with the correct assumption, which saves him the time and effort you use to go down paths of argumentation that have little do with the topic or are only put there to distract (emotional ploys, false statements, needless side debates, etc.). Though, if you're getting paid by the word or by how much time you waste, congratulations on an outstanding job. I believe anyone reading the thread's title and the dasher's response will agree that the instamine (at least trying to silence it) matters a lot to the dash community. The only debate is how it effects the future of dash legally, financially, failures of decentralization, ect.... |
|
|
|
Legal and illegal are extremely relative terms, depending one's geographical coordinates.
Bitcoin may be legal somewhere, and somewhere else it may not be.
Mining coins may be legal somewhere, illegal somewhere else, taxable or non-taxable.
Coins could range from legally irrelevant, to currency (legal or illegal), to commodity or something else.
Encryption can also be very relative in terms of its legal status.
You should be concerned with Arizona and US law as that's where Evan lives and lived when he instamined/created dash. He also created a masternode ROI sheet and actively promoted dash as a great investment. Hopium and time will last so long, then you'll have to deal with the reality of a fincen or SEC investigation--that is if dash is ever successful enough to get on their radar (doubtful), but sad to know your success will bring you closer to your downfall as it did with paycoin. |
|
|
|
|
Playing the innovation card isn't going to help your argument as most of those here realize that pseudo-innovations like X11, instantx, and darksend are very poor development choices and don't endear yourself to anyone somewhat knowledgeable about cryptosystems, but none of this dismisses that the dash community continues to promote misleading statements like "fairly and transparently launched." The only reason we're talking about it is that myself and others bring it up--the dash community would be glad to let it slide into oblivion and let people join their ranks ignorant of the coin's beginnings and sketchy claims of fair launches and decentralized governance.
|
|
|
|
|
Was dash "fairly and transparently launched?" Not by a long shot. Doesn't matter if you bought cheap or are happy with dash yourself. As long as it's being advertised as something it's not, it's a scam. Some people like Justin Beiber, but if a friend sold me a Bieber album under the pretense that it was death metal, I was scammed, and even if I liked the album, it still doesn't mean I wasn't scammed.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
