Me neither!

Thing's gonna drop again like set of car keys down a storm water drain. Might not be for a day or two but when all the BTC-e troll box LT"it's gonna moon again"C biggots stop high fiveing each other, there'll be this sudden realisation it wasn't based on anything fundamental and everyone's going to race for the exit at the same moment (just as a Chinese exchange proprietor LTC whale's dropping out of the sky to squash them).

Excellent!

PrometheusX can we get the download link to the new wallet up on the OP now?

Very interesting observations Tok (the initial volume with no price movement in the first minute). I knew you'd come back with something worth pondering on. Thanks.

I'd have to agree with coingun's comments.

I don't know what's happened to you Mangled. You've been a long time community member here and you've posted lots of interesting and very helpful things since I've been involved in Dash (which goes back to Mar last year). In all that time though I've never seen you posting with such vitriol and acrimony. Are you okay? I know you've either moved to somewhere in South America (or you're about to?....or something?) and perhaps you're under a fair bit of strain but that last vomit session in this thread with the lotto guy is similar to many recent ones, but on-the-whole out of character to how you normally are.

I hope you're okay. If you're struggling and need help PM me (not that I can do too much but I'd hate to think all's not well and we're all just here not really aware of it).

You're one of the good guys.

Tok. What say ye?





And BTC was a cent off $242 on Bitfinex just a moment ago too.

Unfortunately though Fernando, most have their major wealth tied up in 1) their home 2) their superannuation (which is what we call it in Australia; the equivalent of 401K in the U.S.) and both of these are subject to never ending lies, massive over pricing due to the Fed and other govs' central banks' QE and ZIRP policies. The entire asset base of the world is pumped and teetering/wobbling ready for the inevitable fall. And a demographic shift the likes of which has never been seen before (10s and 100s of millions of baby boomers exiting and wanting to sell just about everything to downsize and head into retirement) and you have the makings of a financial super collapse previously unimaginable.

Mr and Mrs average continue to tune in to the main stream media and be told more lies than the naked emperor wandering through his subjects stark naked in the belief he was wearing that spectacular outfit that only he couldn't see (and the 'critical thinking' skills people need to challenge and question are almost completely missing from the masses who're being hypnotized by continuing bread and circuses).

What's coming isn't going to be pretty that's for sure.

Ah Tok, don't get me started on trying to explain such concepts to "family and friends"! The average "regular" citizen in a westernised nation has ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA how any of it works, what money actually is, how their comfortable life is fundamentally rooted in them being closer to the top of the pyramid than most of humanity and why they should switch off their TVs, go and learn about what this thing called "the economy" actually is that we're all involved in rather than sitting around complaining!

Yes, agreed. Wasn't for a moment suggesting some sort of socialistic model would be more appropriate. Anyone with a large investment in a publicly listed entity often ends up with considerable say in the direction/strategy of the entity via a board position or serious levels of proxy to a board position. It's just how it works.

But in the early stages of a crypto project like this, it could be argued that if one entity was able to acquire a very large proportion of the MNs, it "may" (and I stress "may" as any adverse direction/decision that affects the crypto's price will NOT be advantageous to this large holding entity) be less than optimal. For instance if, over time, those MNs were purchased in secret by a government three-letter agency for the purposes of doing damage, voting would (potentially) result in constant stalemates and inability to move forward.

There will be issues and flaws in any model; many of which can't be foreseen. I'm sure most will be dealt with as we move forward.

Good to see C-Cex maintaining their sophisticated customer service, stakeholder management and project status reporting methodologies....

To Wozzek's credit I don't think he's expressing "I have a problem with this" more that he's trying to understand how it works and whether his maths is correct.

What you've said Tok is absolutely correct. The concept of ROI allowing more acquisition of ROI instruments, thereby compounding value or worth, is the same for almost any example across most societies that operate via personal property rights.

The one thing that differs though in Dash's case that may be of cause for concern is (as Wozzek is asking/commenting on) the voting rights.

If I own 1 apartment in a large city and have tenants in that apartment I'm collecting rent from, it will take me a long time to use the rental income to acquire another apartment that I can then rent out (excluding leveraged mortgages and all of those concepts that can't currently be directly compared to the ownership and funding of MNs).

If someone else owns 1000 apartments in a large city, their rental income is likely to provision the acquisition of more income generating apartments far more rapidly than what I can achieve.

So far nothing new under the sun. The rich get richer - the essence of capitalism as we know it.

The big difference is that me with 1 apartment (in theory, but perhaps not in practise where political persuasion can be bought) has the same voting rights to elect my parliamentary representative as the person with 1000 apartments or indeed the tenants renting those apartments.

In the MN realm, voting power is based on MN ownership so "the rich get richer" adage applies AS WELL AS "the rich have more votes" (and again, in some ways, "nothing new under the sun") but it does have the potential for abuse or fracturing of the community's views on what projects/developments should be undertaken.

But I don't think it's a major issue.

Okay. Was trying to comprehend the incomprehensible; why an exchange would offload Dash + write up such a ridiculous reasoning. Ended up down several rabbit holes. Won't be going down them again.

I'm potentially a little confused over this FUD storm (but also potentially not) and thinking Limx dev is also 'Christian' who's running this exchange that's offloading Dash. Sorry for the confusion Limx Dev (if that's the case; still awaiting your subsequent reply to the PM you sent me) but your previous posting seemed to indicate it was you that had written up this appallingly ill-thought-through response. Whoever you are and whoever 'Christian' is (and maybe still you're the same person....that's why anon devs present so much difficulty) assuming everyone here is represented by one person (or even two, three, four or five) when Dash is so much bigger than that is pretty stupid.

I guessed as much. And I'd expect the new wallet would be a major release hence probably 3.0.0 (or something). Thanks.

Has the new wallet been posted in the OP?

The file being linked to is BitcoinTX-qt-2.0.2.rar but there's nothing in the OP to explain if that's the new version or an old one and I failed to check prior to the 6pm deadline to determine if a change has been made.

Can someone please clarify?

I just found your exchange (never been on it before; won't be going there again) and this notice on the Dash/BTC page:





You have got to be kidding! Is this because of Mangled Blue's vomit session in the Limx thread? You're getting rid of one of the most advanced and well-run crypto projects that carries such enormous potential because of one person's posts who you've decided represents the entire Dash community and project team?!!

I'm virtually speechless.



I think you're deluded.

I don't know what happened in your thread or what this is all about but I'm simply astounded that you'd de-list a crypto-currency based on behaviour of an individual (or individuals) who may or may not also be people that post in this thread or have some allegiance here. Of all the flawed logic and emotional knee-jerkism I've seen around in crypto, that would have to be up there as some of the best (or worst depending on how you view it).

There are many dozens of very substantial and very high quality people working on this project and many hundreds or thousands of people who're invested in the technology and the team behind it. I think cutting your customers off from being able to trade Dash on your exchange against the backdrop of all that's good about this project, it's lead developer and all the other key people who've achieved so much since the beginning is unfortunate at best but probably just plain foolish.

I hope you rethink and work through a more sound decision making process.

That's odd. Must be something else not right as I haven't had any syncing problems since the beginning and currently have 49 connections (and no .conf file). Sorry I can't offer any clue or guidance but posting my experience for comparison.

I don't think there's anything untoward happening that's causing this temporary small dump.

Crypto is fickle and many people that 'invest' in crypto are very short-sighted and impatient. There only has to be a week or two go past 'without much happening' and many people will dump and move to somewhere/somecoin they think is more exciting and more 'pumpy'.

It only takes one of these people to sell a reasonable amount and a few others might follow. It happens regularly and (as I've said) I don't think it's particularly significant. Dash is likely to go up again by the same amount within days and then when the new release comes out it's likely to go up substantially more (then come off the boil again).

It's just the up and down nature of the beast; no real rhyme or reason.

Oh that's gorgeous lonecrouton. What colour is that, puce?

Wozzek I've watched your numerous negative comments on the re-branding with considerable interest. There are aspects of what you're saying that I concur with but the overall essence of your reasoning I find to be somewhat lacking in logic and comprehension of how humans think/react/respond to the images and feelings specific words used in brand names conjure.

I agree with you that 'Darkcoin' was a cool name. In the realms of advanced crypto enthusiasts, dark web users (or even just observers), hackers, whackers and criminal jack-asses, Darkcoin (and it's capabilities) is very appealing and offers a whole raft of anon/stay-hidden opportunities that are fundamental. But, like all things of this nature, the other edge of the sword is that these views, and the people that hold them, by default, IMMEDIATELY and without question knocks out the 99.99% of humans that don't identify with any of those things I've written above. The term 'Dark' when attached to web/Internet technology (and we've been over this soooo many times, I'm just a little staggered you can't comprehend the core essence of it), for 99.99% of society, means 'bad', 'criminal', 'underhanded', 'illegal', 'destructive' and 'evil'.

Suggesting that just months after correcting what, for me and many many other people involved in this project was just THE fatal flaw that stopped us from being able to discuss it with almost everyone, there's been no indication of new take up or facilitation by businesses/exchanges now because it's called Dash that previously wouldn't, I think is naive and terribly short sighted.

You can't possibly expect that there will be even measurable take-up that can be directly attributable to Darkcoin now being called Dash! It's way too early within a product name's cycle. Re-branding experts will tell you it takes decades to determine success (or otherwise) of major re-branding initiatives. You can't be serious about expecting to see dramatic evidence after just a few months!

What's been done is that the project's been positioned and prepared for adoption on a scale that simply wouldn't be possible with the name 'Darkcoin'. As digital cash, Dash has all the potential to start being adopted across hundreds of industries and economies BUT with the same key fundamentals around it being 'money' (i.e. fungability, scalability, etc). If we were still 'Darkcoin' we're only ever going to be a very small niche financial tool that appeals to a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of humanity; those that think the 'dark web' and people involved in 'dark' technologies are cool.

(For me) end of story.