I might be 'blind idiot'
--Opensource projects work on donations. --Opensource projects are subject to peer review. --Frauds should be called out for being frauds--wherever, whenever. --When was an official GUI release date built into a social contract? Never read that anywhere. The production dates of the new Blade Runner and Kill Bill 3 keep getting moved back, but I'm not boycotting them over it--in fact, if it makes a better product, I'll gladly wait. So yeah, you're a little from column A and little from column B. bored of arguing. i really don't care about Monero gui or lack of, just trying to show you that your devs aren't really devs because they don't deliver anything. if you can't see this, not my issue.  Don't worry. I'm sure you'll live to troll another day. check my sig and tell me if you think I am the kind of person to come here for trolling...plus I have been in Dash for 12 months already so it's not like I care about Dash price right now...i was calling out Moolah before Green took Mintpal offline (when I figured out he was dumping DRK using an alias on the BCT thread). I am serious about what I am saying here, but think what you like Sig? Personal past? Who cares? Your factual argumentation is weak. I think you believe it, but that is like a size 0 at JC Penny's--not in the plus department. |
|
|
|
I might be 'blind idiot'
--Opensource projects work on donations. --Opensource projects are subject to peer review. --Frauds should be called out for being frauds--wherever, whenever. --When was an official GUI release date built into a social contract? Never read that anywhere. The production dates of the new Blade Runner and Kill Bill 3 keep getting moved back, but I'm not boycotting them over it--in fact, if it makes a better product, I'll gladly wait. So yeah, you're a little from column A and little from column B. bored of arguing. i really don't care about Monero gui or lack of, just trying to show you that your devs aren't really devs because they don't deliver anything. if you can't see this, not my issue. Don't worry. I'm sure you'll live to troll another day. |
|
|
|
I might be 'blind idiot'
--Opensource projects work on donations. --Opensource projects are subject to peer review. --Frauds should be called out for being frauds--wherever, whenever. --When was an official GUI release date built into a social contract? Never read that anywhere. The production dates of the new Blade Runner and Kill Bill 3 keep getting moved back, but I'm not boycotting them over it--in fact, if it makes a better product, I'll gladly wait. So yeah, you're a little from column A and little from column B. |
|
|
|
yup. all 'third party'. I already quizzed 'smooth' on it. if XMR users want to use a mouse, 'just go get a wallet from someone else'. Looks to me like another example of how charlatan XMR devs can't be bothered to even meet their own timescales. Instead they are busy trolling, asking for donations (or not knowing where past donations went), editing Wikipedia to cover up their non-delivery. oh and preaching how cryptographic proof implies system security and blurb on how XMR "isn't about the money" to the faithful while some group is manipulating the price on poloniex every day. And trying to cover up the fact they cut and paste a sh*t load of NSA tech from multiple sources. apart from that, XMR is all great  (guys seriously, i know you love XMR and this whole thread is setup to show that, but doesn't this all show you that something is dodgy here, really?) And here comes more of the same kitchen sink argumentation. Pick one, argue it, and then move onto the next. Also, you didn't answer Toshi's or my own question. So here's Toshi's again: Tok said cryptography 'wasn't a significant part' of cryptocurrencies. He didn't say they don't require them, so what was your point?
Can you (or Tok) point to a part of a cryptocurrency which isn't cryptography? |
|
|
|
ok, so my answer would be that if we accept the hypothesis that all digital currencies require cryptography (which I don't), then by definition all cryptocurrencies will require cryptography to function.
Yes, some day in the future a new type of money may not need cryptography, but (miss context much) your fellow drk supporter was talking directly about cryptocurrencies not being dependent on cryptography which as you just wrote, ." Thank you for making my point. Tok said cryptography 'wasn't a significant part' of cryptocurrencies. He didn't say they don't require them, so what was your point? You can misquote / mislead people for the sake of trying to market xmr? seriously, xmr is the most toxic community in crypto. the worst part is, the trolls genuinely believe they are pious and non-greedy! this is the same as what happened to blackcoin, the community went full tard when other coins with real value started rising...just sayin  So cryptography isn't a significant part of cryptography? Yet , as you just stated, it's a significant part (essential's pretty significant by most estimations): "So asking if any feature within a cryptographic digital currency requires cryptography is nonsensical because the currency itself requires cryptography already" Do things not require essential parts now? |
|
|
|
ok, so my answer would be that if we accept the hypothesis that all digital currencies require cryptography (which I don't), then by definition all cryptocurrencies will require cryptography to function.
Yes, some day in the future a new type of money may not need cryptography, but (miss context much) your fellow drk supporter was talking directly about cryptocurrencies not being dependent on cryptography which as you just wrote, "So asking if any feature within a cryptographic digital currency requires cryptography is nonsensical because the currency itself requires cryptography already." Thank you for making my point. |
|
|
|
|
Again, you don't need to answer for the future, just the present: Do you need cryptography to make a digital currency fungible to the degree that coins are fungible? Fungible to the point that one is as good as another and cannot be discriminated against in a transaction?
*your question doesn't pertain to what I am or was talking about--and you know it.
|
|
|
|
Argument: "It's not even cryptographically secure"
Counter-argument: "We don't even need cryptography!"
This is how greed corrupts one's head into a mush of self-confirming biases based on pseudo-sense. What's sad is that it probably makes perfect sense in his head and he thinks everyone else is crazy. I'll just ask (mostly for entertainment and not seeking a reality based solution): how does one create a fungible cryptocurrency without cryptography? it's a common myth in XMR circles that crytpographic proof means the system is secure or am i wrong? (before you start with the insults / hubris to hide your intellectual inferiority complex, this is a trick question) Do you need cryptography to make a digital currency fungible to the degree that coins are fungible? Fungible to the point that one is as good as another and cannot be discriminated against in a transaction? |
|
|
|
Argument: "It's not even cryptographically secure"
Counter-argument: "We don't even need cryptography!"
This is how greed corrupts one's head into a mush of self-confirming biases based on pseudo-sense. What's sad is that it probably makes perfect sense in his head and he thinks everyone else is crazy. I'll just ask (mostly for entertainment and not seeking a reality based solution): how does one create a fungible cryptocurrency without cryptography? |
|
|
|
Would be interesting to be a fly on the wall when the NSA researchers are talking about this thread in their weekly meeting.
I thought the meetings were flies on the wall? |
|
|
|
Okay, so in the polo trollbox and other places, the question often arises "why is XMR price rising". Here are some possibilities in no particular order XMR provides a valuable service (cryptographically secure private transactions) active core development active ecosystem development (openalias) people that hear about DASH also hear about XMR and decide to buy XMR instead XMR.to allows you to use XMR wherever XBT (BTC) is accepted active community (close to instantaneous responses on forums and IRC) Major XBT market maker said "xmr will now start rising" Recent bitcoin fungibility problem awareness XMR is undervalued XMR was artificially undervalued due to BCX attack threat circa 10/2014 Staying power - been around for almost a year (birthday less than 1 month away) Large consistent market volume The longest and slowest pump 'n dump is underway (price has been rising for a month) I think we're exiting the most linear phase of the ~4 year emission curve - already a 3rd (6 million) of available coins have been emitted false reasons XMR price is rising: XMR devs convincing people to buy monero: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg10893672#msg10893672Monero is a taco  any other things to add to the list? (paraphrasing) Fluffy telling people not to buy Monero if they're just speculating, but only if they believe in the project or are using it--preferably both. I love it when leadership is open and honest and doesn't delude people with false promises or play-up inflated expectations. |
|
|
|
DASH is the new name of darkcoin.
An altcoin can only be successful when there are someone developing it. The devs deserve their coin to maintain interest in developing the coin. Why would anyone work for a coin if there are no reward?
Two problems with this logic: 1. Reward doesn't always mean profit. A dev (or devs) could just as easily be motivated by a problem (like creating a viable e-cash) and therefore look at profit as result of the problem being solved, but profit never being the real motive. It's kind of like sex in this regard. If you marry a women just to have sex with her, the marriage is bound to stagnate and become toxic; whereas if you marry for love and want to build a committed relationship, the sex is a byproduct of a healthy relationship, but never the intended goal. 2. It's not that it was instamined, it's that it was launched surreptitiously (see my first post), that it was covered up in a lie or was an accident that was never turned into a re-launch to avoid the hint of a scam launch--either you own the instamine (500k in first hour) or you fix it, but don't give me some story that doesn't match your actions; I'm not stupid enough fall for this type of spin, and neither should anyone else. Now back to the marriage analogy, how many successful marriages do you know that start with a lie? I know of 0, so I would trade this coin with a short term plan (date, don't marry), or find a coin you can trust and set down for nice long, happy and equally beneficial relationship. |
|
|
|
Lul. Brand new account angry about something that was never a secret.
Check the x-dark-dash site--it is not outlined in detail how this actually went down. Also, noobs can fall for the coinmarketcap bias, "It doesn't have the little * insta/pre-mined on coinmarketcap.com, and they're a "trusted" 3rd party, so it must be legit." It takes a while to dig through the piles of fud in cryptoland and not everyone has been here since 2012 or has the free time to go next level. So yes, it's not a secret to people in the know, but like someone who still thinks masternodes are a good idea, it's a secret to them. |
|
|
|
Find a source for that nsa story besides 'cryptobang' where any troller can pay 1 btc to have some dumb story written. In fact the crypto code in monero comes from DJB the renowned cryptographer who is as close to a mortal enemy of the NSA as you will ever find. The story is ridiculous. It's good trollbait though. If anyone cites it we know they are trolling and not doing any actual research. i can see why you don't like that 'source' and are asking me to find a new one: "It is likely that CN developers deliberately neglected the Bernstein’s rationale in order to make the backdoor possible. By inferring malice aforethought on the CN developer’s part we may as well call them crooks. The vulnerability is exploited by allowing to whoever has the knowledge to recover users’ private keys thereby de-anonymizing them through ring signature and key image compromisation. " What language is that even? A bunch of nonsense but I guess that's what you get for 1 btc Afore I forget, I think the Bernstein bears wrote the article, but to whoever it was, they certainly were compromisationed. Seriously, did Eteque from Polo write this? |
|
|
|
Hey, I'm a cryptocurrency "investor" if you call it that. I was looking for coins to buy in. I already chose Monero and Bitcoindark, then I came across DASH and thought why not. Then I searched more and found out DASH HAD A INSTAMINE??? WTF! Does anyone have more info? I came across 6 threads talking about the instamine, how bad was it? I dont want biased replies from DASH bagholders either.
Is it true? Was 2million fucking DASH coins, 50% of the damn supply mined in the first 48 hours??!! I want fucking answers, finding this out was like getting punched in the gut. If this coin got instamined at its release, fuck this shit!
Here's the long account: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0Here's the short: Dev starts before he said he would, mines 500K first hour (1.5 mill in first 8 hours), and then tells everyone it was a bug, but never relaunches the coin, but does rename it twice (x, dark, dash). |
|
|
|
If it dumps briefly as low as 0.0016 I will support the price. I have some coins in storage waiting from the heavenly rain. I think there is not real dumping at 4 usd. I do not recommend selling any coins before there is massive adaption from noobs that needs coins. We are holding coins for them so when they enter to the markets, I am ready to sell 10-20 xmr to them. That's some strong bullish signal right there, TrueCryptonaire gave up waiting XMR fall into his arms at 0.0005  After all we were pretty close - sub 0.001. If it had touched 0.0005 I would have scooped up some nice number of coins right there. Meanwhile I bought silently on the way down. It was crazy and I felt pretty bad so I did not buy any significiant number of coins at each price point. Nobody seemed to be interested in Monero and it was close to graveyard. I remember reading Warz desperate comments on Polo trollbox while the price kept dropping like a falling knife. I was also trying to do my best to fear mongering - I wanted so badly the coin to drop to 0.0005. I guess I failed my mission.   I remember some of the "don't catch a falling knife" posts (there were a few, don't remember who were the posters) but i made sure to adjust my buying to MORE with every post. I think I posted, "learn to juggle" around .001 and got slammed by the fear patrol.  * The 0.001 lever is broke. New low levels has to be discovered.
I invested 0.12 BTC @ 0.0012 but for now is was not a good choice.
Hopefully is was just a spike below 0.001 but the presure is to high I afraid.
Maybe I buy extra @ 0.0005?
 For now strategy is holding and see where XMR hits the floor. Never try to catch falling knives. "If you can't catch falling knives, you'll never make it as a juggler." --juggler. Stupid, misquoted myself--oh well. |
|
|
|
The concept of changing the block reward must be a complex one. It is not a change when Bitcoin goes from 50 to 25 to 12.5 because that was all stated up front. Same with the <1% inflation block reward in Monero. Won't happen for 7-8 more years or so, and stated up front.
You have to argue this with Joshuar not with me, He was the one who told us that Two things that according to Satoshi should never be touched - NEVER, he said, so its irrelevant if it would be changed in 5 or 10 years. Or it was told upfront. It's Joshuar's argument and you don't agree with it--so... Invalidating Joshuar's argument doesn't validate x-dark-dash coin anymore than validating Joshuar's argument invalidate monero. So... Satoshi isn't sacrosanct. So... thanks for adding nothing ?? Reading is not that easy as it seems ... i don't invalidated his argument - i just tried to follow the herd ... which seems to be the trolls in here. Also i did say nothing about DRK in my comment. Please try reading it again. I thought adding nothing was the intend of this thread or why did i read about 100 times the same, isn't the thread for exactly that? Grammar is not as easy as it seems. Don't play stupid (though you are good at it), saying you are playing troll doesn't excuse you for acting like one anymore than acting rapey excuses you from rape. Why even make a comment you grant yourself is adding nothing of value to the discussion? And why try to invalidate my comment by insisting I have a reading deficiency while at the same time showing that you have a grammar deficiency? Your comment, as you said, added no value and was just ex-daus-troll-machina, so why even bother typing it unless you thought on some primitive level you could cause a rift between monerians or fool some casual reader with cheap debate tricks? |
|
|
|
The concept of changing the block reward must be a complex one. It is not a change when Bitcoin goes from 50 to 25 to 12.5 because that was all stated up front. Same with the <1% inflation block reward in Monero. Won't happen for 7-8 more years or so, and stated up front.
You have to argue this with Joshuar not with me, He was the one who told us that Two things that according to Satoshi should never be touched - NEVER, he said, so its irrelevant if it would be changed in 5 or 10 years. Or it was told upfront. It's Joshuar's argument and you don't agree with it--so... Invalidating Joshuar's argument doesn't validate x-dark-dash coin anymore than validating Joshuar's argument invalidate monero. So... Satoshi isn't sacrosanct. So... thanks for adding nothing |
|
|
|
Ok, I'll just c/p some here, don't have time to make it look pretty.
I'm not here to argue whether the instamined coins are still being held by the instaminers or were sold off. I don' care about that, that doesn't matter, What matters is that the instamine happened anyway and nothing was done to stop it, mainly because Evan benefitted greatly from it(Being the first one there and all). The point is that the instamine happened where over 2million Dashes were mined in less than 2 days, and the block reward and coin supply(Two things that according to Satoshi should never be touched) were absolutely defecated on when they were cut by more than half of their original amounts. That's basically a scam and there's no way around it.
Masternodes undermine the entire point of the blockchain, where activities such as that should be on(Another reason why Coinjoin implemented in the coin is stupid), having such important activities as anonymity being provided by external nodes is just like using mixers for Bitcoins, which makes dash irrelevant.
It's "undermined", no pun intended, because that's the reason the blockchain was created in the first place, to do away with relying on trust aka someone to set up a masternode so you can mix your coins. Dashes entire masternode concept is based upon trust, which Satoshi did away with through Bitcoin. All Dash is doing is reversing that and heading back to centralization and trust. Bitcoin mixers are operated by third parties, so is Dashes masternodes. Point? In fact, there are already plans in the works of creating a decentralized bitcoin mixer, so that itself would make Dash irrelevant as well, since that mixer would deliver the same amount of anonymity that Dash can/could ever deliver(Though it's still less than ring signatures/zeocash).
So after everybody seems to like trolling in here, i should perhaps troll a bit, too ! I hope you are not invested in Monero, because if you are, you should have read at least the ANN Thread of Monero and there you'll find the following: "A minimum subsidy may be implemented in the future with <1% annual inflation to preserve mining incentives." So in the end you could have invested in a coin, which could get defecated in the future (at least thats what you told us about changing the blockreward)! - PoW algorithm: CryptoNight [1]
- Max supply: ~18.4 million [2]
- Block reward: Smoothly varying [3]
- Block time: 60 seconds
- Difficulty: Retargets at every block
[1] CPU + GPU mining (about 1:1 performance for now). Memory-bound by design using AES encryption and several SHA-3 candidates. [2] Actual number of atomic units is M = 2 64 - 1. A minimum subsidy may be implemented in the future with <1% annual inflation to preserve mining incentives.[3] Uses a recurrence relation. Block reward = (M - A) * 2 -20 * 10 -12, where A = current circulation. Roughly 86% mined in 4 years (see graph). See boldedYeah, that's gonna kill a coin: incentivizing miners while adding a paltry inflation.  You're adding 184,000 max a year in mining incentive in the later years, when most likely, quantum money will be coming online and phasing out all current cryptocurrencies. Who gives a shit? Monero is built with privacy now and implementing a system for the near-term future, not a get-quick-rich scheme intended to flush money into the hands of a few without regard to how this affects the network or actual use. What's better for miners? Incentivizing them for as long as they mine or pushing money to masternode (amwaynode) hoarders? |
|
|
|
|
Having to read through five pages of that was painful. But note to Monerians in their exchanges with x-dark-dashians, they tend to base their presumptions about anonymity on most, if not all, masternode operators using best practices, which as we saw with mix-in levels, is rarely the case.
Pretty simple, math is always better at best practices every time than moody humans who might not care or have their mind on something else or be ignorant of said practices...or just have someone else run their node who doesn't care or be in shitty-mode or not even know what best practices are....
Hence, why a coin that assumes people don't use best practices every time and is developed accordingly is better than a coin that assumes humans are acting in the coins best interest and follow best practices every time--so there's no need to bother speculating on how to solve issues of human inconsistency. Practical Paranoia Vs. Chimerical Rationalization.
If you assume everyone is acting in accordance to your wishes, you've presumed you're greater than God.
If you assume everyone is acting against your wishes, you're writing protocol.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
