I'm pretty disappointed in Evan and his explanation of Dash's instamine. In the last Fintech he said that bias can be a powerful thing, which is why he changed the name from Darkcoin to Dash. Well, i'd say that having an instamine caused by a "bug" during the time where almost every shitcoin developer was doing shady things to the code in order to get unfairly rewarded, is a more powerful bias than having the former name attached to your project.
I'm afraid that at this point we are talking about "decentralized governance" where more than 51% of the voting/rewarding power is being owned by 2 people, Otoh and Evan. If i recall correctly, Otoh admitted on having 500 masternodes not too long ago, and although the chances of owning even more are pretty high, if we take 500 masternodes and calculate the profit, we would see that those alone are giving birth to 1 masternode every 4 days. We are talking about 100 masternodes being generated every 1.1 years just by 1 guy.
Evan had and still has all the time in the world to restart the blockchain and continue with this innovation the right way, but instead he keeps reminding us how big is his share at this point, otherwise he would have no reasons not do do it.
I'm not saying that the team should work for free, even though Satoshi showed you that the opposite can be possible, without having to rely on IPO/Crowdsale/Premines, but you could've been more upfront with the method of gaining funds in the beginning. Probably the best way would've been to have a development salary proposed every month and have people agree with it via voting. Unfortunately, the idea came too late.
I'm also surprised at the fact that it took almost 1 year for the bubble to deflate. Otoh mentioned countless of times in here that he started manipulating Dash's price since last year when the price was somewhere between 600 and 700k. Sometimes i feel like the delusion is so high in here that the deflation happened because these guys were dumping their masternode revenues and not because of the people realizing that they were holding over-inflated priced coins.
Ouch, that's going to leave a mark. The Duffplanation-loving DashHoles aren't going to be happy with you!  Combined with vertoe's ' fuck this fishy, untransparent, centralized golden donkey pyramid scheme' post, a very nasty picture of what Dash is really about is emerging. |
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/wIvcQIdSbIY?t=546Some people just don't get that these types of questions are only the beginning. Evan could go to Fintech Cuba, Mugamba and San Pedro Sula and his conferences would still be rendered null and void. You could give fancy powerpoint presentation throughout the whole world, but if someone puts this question at the end of each one of them, you can bet your ass that nobody would buy your cryptocurrency after. The last impression at every conference would be Evan Duffield turning into a red crab out of shame for his past actions and the ridiculousness of this launch. It's never late to turn into a hero and just restart the whole god damn thing (13.5M marketcap). Imagine the press you would get after doing a thing like this. If you don't plan on doing it, then it is very possible that Dash will keep on tanking and having all of its features implemented in Bitcoin or cloned in other fair launches. You had a 1 year of biases removed when you re-branded the coin. Now it's the perfect time to remove the 2 year "bias" regarding the launch. Ha, Duffsplanation IRL. "Well the giant instamine of millions of coins was like this thing, where stuff happened, but you know, I was in a hurry, because Dash is sooo coool." His grating voice quivers with slimy dishonesty and sniveling prevarication. The hesitant, grasping tone does not project or engender confidence. Even if he's not a scammer, he sure as hell sounds like one. Any jury would decide he's guilty immediately after the first syllable spoken in that scumbag used car salesman accent. Maybe the community should relaunch Dash without an instamine. What should we call it? Darkcoin2 or Darkcoin+? How about XCoin Pro? |
|
|
|
They have also agreed to keep asking for the white paper
Ask in one hand, spit in the other. See which one fills up first. The papers will be released when the code is. Until it's ready, chill. Regarding the vaporware argument, I can publicly attest that evolution is real and commits are happening daily. Why would you start coding before the whitepaper has been released and the novel, unproven concepts therein subjected to and verified by peer review? This kind of unprofessional, make-it-up-as-you-go, roll your own, homespun approach to security is EXACTLY why Peter Todd says Dash's crypto is "bad" and "snakeoil." It's the patent medicine equivalent of real (ie, mathematically proven) cryptography. "Anybody who thinks they can flesh out a protocol in secret and then deploy it, full-blown and working, is in for a world of hurt."
[Nick Szabo, 1993-8-23] Show us these allegedly "real commits" which you claim "are happening daily." Github or GTFO! |
|
|
|
I think devtome's definitive investigation of altcoin instamines put NXT in the "Extreme Caution: Coins That Are Bad Ideas For Investment or Usage" shit-list.
Classical argumentum ad verecundiam, my favorite logical fallacy! The only reason you resent devtome's expertise and choose to denigrate it as "authority" is because they put NXT on the Bad Idea shit-list. If they had put NXT on the Acceptable white-list, you would be singing their praises. Besides, devtome didn't just say 'believe us because we're devtome.' They laid out the facts to support their conclusions. Here, I'll quote them again. http://devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#nxt NXT had an “IPO” for their coins, for being 100% PoS, they had to distribute their coins somehow. If you send them BTC, they would give you a certain percentage of the coins, that percentage determined by how many people donated by the end of the IPO. The coin creator, BCNext, left a loosely labeled start to the coin at January 3, 2014 and loose instructions that the IPO would continue up until that point. This didn't happen. The IPO was closed around November 18th 79), a full month early. Only 73 people were in the official IPO list, meaning NXT's 1,000,000,000 coin instageneration was distributed amongst these people.
What happened next was absolutely fabulous for those 73 investors. NXT went to the market in a huge way. In under a month, NXT reached a market cap of $80,000,000 or 8 cents a coin (December 26th. Plus it went higher a few days later). When you look at what .01 BTC got you in the IPO, some 500,000 NXT, you begin to grasp what an enormous price jump NXT went through.
NXT reached $80 million market cap on December 26th. Bitcoin was worth around $700 on the same day. At .01 BTC, which is $7 at that time, you could have gotten 500,000 NXT 80). 500,000 x .08 = $40,000. …all from a $7 investment… if someone finds a better profit margin in around the same time frame (1-2 months), notify us. We're pretty sure this is the quickest and best performing investment of all time, especially when you extrapolate the actual value of some of the BTC invested in early November and October (~$120 per BTC. And this wasn't even the top of NXT's growth. It's one thing to profit 2x-10x of your original investment. If you double your money, you should get a pat on your back. If you get 10x your money, you should buy a round for everyone at the bar. What if you do 5,000x better than your investment? You should check your math because something is very wrong.
What does this mean to the investor now? Well, those 73 original IPOs investors are kings of the world, that is for sure. Except now they hold all of the NXT, and if no one uses NXT, the value will go down. So the original holders began giving away NXT by the thousands in an attempt to better circulate the coin.
Just ask yourself if you were an original NXT holder and you make over 5,000x your initial investment. Would your plan be to sell it all, hold it all, or somewhere in between? Considering there is no other example of an IPO in history that has performed this well, only an idiot would continue to hold if they could. The original investors are looking to sell.
Who is going to buy? We are not. #R3KT |
|
|
|
Let's be exceedingly clear with our definitions, instead of arguing at cross purposes. brg444 is correct when he says Fungibility, the property of every unit in the system being indistinguishable & capable of mutual substitution, is an inherent feature of Bitcoin. but the narrow scope of that statement is strictly limited to "the system" of Bitcoin's internal protocol. Most people care/know far more about higher-level socioeconomic systems, wherein Bitcoin taint (distinguishability) destroys mutual substitution. In brg444's conceptual frame, the Holy Protocol is the (sacred) ground on which socioeconomic figures stand. That confuses those who hold the reverse POV, in which Bitcoin protocol is just a tool (figure) that does not supervene on socioeconomic ground. Adam Back captured this linguistic tension in the concept of "weak fungibility." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dAdI3Gzodo&feature=youtu.be&t=28m31sI've proposed the term "exhaustive fungibility" to describe coins which are, by virtue of being indistinguishable, fungible at both the protocol and socioeconomic levels. But perhaps "strong fungibility" is a cleaner fit, as it complements Dr. Back's preexisting terminology. |
|
|
|
LOL. Blockthestream inc. Mike "Final Call + Checkpoints" Hearn and decentralization.
Orwell everywhere.
Fixed it. No charge. |
|
|
|
Please stop confusing fungibility and privacy, two very different things.
Please stop confusing protocol fungibility and socioeconomic fungibility, two very different things. |
|
|
|
some brain gym for you. which one is more stable in terms of average/deviation, what do you think?
hint, one is your monero, the other one is?
I think devtome's definitive investigation of altcoin instamines put NXT in the "Extreme Caution: Coins That Are Bad Ideas For Investment or Usage" shit-list. That same report puts Monero in the "Acceptably Mined" white-list section. http://devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#nxt NXT had an “IPO” for their coins, for being 100% PoS, they had to distribute their coins somehow. If you send them BTC, they would give you a certain percentage of the coins, that percentage determined by how many people donated by the end of the IPO. The coin creator, BCNext, left a loosely labeled start to the coin at January 3, 2014 and loose instructions that the IPO would continue up until that point. This didn't happen. The IPO was closed around November 18th 79), a full month early. Only 73 people were in the official IPO list, meaning NXT's 1,000,000,000 coin instageneration was distributed amongst these people.
What happened next was absolutely fabulous for those 73 investors. NXT went to the market in a huge way. In under a month, NXT reached a market cap of $80,000,000 or 8 cents a coin (December 26th. Plus it went higher a few days later). When you look at what .01 BTC got you in the IPO, some 500,000 NXT, you begin to grasp what an enormous price jump NXT went through.
NXT reached $80 million market cap on December 26th. Bitcoin was worth around $700 on the same day. At .01 BTC, which is $7 at that time, you could have gotten 500,000 NXT 80). 500,000 x .08 = $40,000. …all from a $7 investment… if someone finds a better profit margin in around the same time frame (1-2 months), notify us. We're pretty sure this is the quickest and best performing investment of all time, especially when you extrapolate the actual value of some of the BTC invested in early November and October (~$120 per BTC. And this wasn't even the top of NXT's growth. It's one thing to profit 2x-10x of your original investment. If you double your money, you should get a pat on your back. If you get 10x your money, you should buy a round for everyone at the bar. What if you do 5,000x better than your investment? You should check your math because something is very wrong.
What does this mean to the investor now? Well, those 73 original IPOs investors are kings of the world, that is for sure. Except now they hold all of the NXT, and if no one uses NXT, the value will go down. So the original holders began giving away NXT by the thousands in an attempt to better circulate the coin.
Just ask yourself if you were an original NXT holder and you make over 5,000x your initial investment. Would your plan be to sell it all, hold it all, or somewhere in between? Considering there is no other example of an IPO in history that has performed this well, only an idiot would continue to hold if they could. The original investors are looking to sell.
Who is going to buy? We are not. #R3KT |
|
|
|
Ok let's not speculate, lets rely on data.
So it's safe to say that we probably eliminated all weak hands and opportunists from NXT, and the current core investors are serious about holding it.
So stop FUD trolls, you are just making yourself look like morons. NXT is a stable currency now.
Yes, let's look at the data.  The only sense in which NXT is a "stable currency" is if you consider the stability of its uninterrupted steady decline over the last 15 months. Ethereum and rootstock.io make NXT as obsolete as buggy whips. |
|
|
|
...discusses Peter Todd's preference for Monero's "good crypto" over Dash's "bad crypo."
Well Peter Todd is wrong - as I've explained many times. Far as I can tell Peter Todd is a wanker  On open source, I want these people commenting on DRK:
Greg Maxwell
Andreas Antonopoulos
Amir Taaki
Peter Todd
Before PT called out Dash's "snakeoil" and "bad crypto" his opinion was invited. Ditto for GMAX. Peter Todd @petertoddbtc :
"The uncommented C code #CryptoNote is written in is awful; there's no way this crap doesn't have multiple buffer overflow exploits in it."
RIP Cryptonote coins ?
When PT said something negative about cryptonote's codebase, his opinion was welcomed here with open arms. My, how times change.  |
|
|
|
I kindly suggest Evan to submit his Evolution Whitepaper to Ledger, so we can see if the DASH team is really talented, or it's all air they are selling. I'd just like to bump this since a number of people probably have dnaleor on ignore by now. But publication in a journal would definitely help with "street cred" as well as the PR effort. Evan is going to privately code this so that Dash doesn't get trumped and I fully support this. When it's ready, you will get to know, until then, you have to wait like the rest of us. If you don't trust that he has a real plan, and his past performance isn't enough, then, well, what can I say? Too bad, eh? I want to know as well. Sorry for sounding persnickety, but I've let loose some trolls, and I've gotten in a sour mood, LOL. They're back on ignore. But yah, if we can get it published in a journal, that'd be great, but which one? Well, this thing that he mentioned, Ledger, is a peer-reviewed journal for the cryptocurreny space that was recently announced. So the suggestion makes perfect sense. And it's not about getting advance access, it's about getting this thing looked at from all angles, so that possible problems are discovered before someone has a chance to exploit them on mainnet You'll have to excuse TS, who probably is more familiar with security-in-obscurity secret cookie recipes than coding and the FOSS paradigm. Anybody who
thinks they can flesh out a protocol in secret and then
deploy it, full-blown and working, is in for a world of
hurt."
[Nick Szabo, 1993-8-23] Unlike Dash, legitimated coins are open sourced, test-netted, and peer-reviewed PRIOR to launch. If BTC, LTC, XMR, etc. weren't terrified of being "trumped" then WTF is Dash's major malfunction with regard to public examination of its code? Such a lack of confidence in its ability to withstand public scrutiny doesn't reflect well on any project, but that's especially true for crypto-coins. Closed source is a red flag for scams, bugs, and malware. Closed source feeds the default assumption any new alt is a shitcoin. Closed source means you trust the third party programmer(s). That's a no-no, unless you are a gullible housewife type... |
|
|
|
nah... I'm here to see what it looks like when a scam coin dies.
yeah, like bitcoin i heard so many users calling it a scam but....... look at where it is now.......... Yes, look where Dash is now. At 6 months lows. If you don't count Darkcoin's price history and only look at post-rebrand to Dash prices, it's at an ALL TIME LOW. The price would be 1 satoshi if otoh wasn't keeping the market propped up, so he can slowly dump all the coins his 100s of masternodes excrete. How much lower does the price have to go before Evan Scamfield admits the Dash rebrand was a terrible idea? Maybe he should change the name back to Darkcoin, then work on catching up with Bitcoin's hot new CLTV/CSV technology. |
|
|
|
Here, the subject is Dash so we discuss crypto and computer science. LoL. Computer science Yes, that's right. This thread is about Dash so we discuss its code and (alleged) cryptography, albeit disparagingly. For example,  discusses Dash's snakeoil version of crypto, while  discusses Peter Todd's preference for Monero's "good crypto" over Dash's "bad crypo." |
|
|
|
Another point, what if it was IBM shares instead, or any other stock or bond?
Pecunia non olet.-Vespasian |
|
|
|
Jeff Garzik: Simple math shows bitcoin block size must increase for full Lightning/side chain roll out & adoptionSorry, we're not going to trade our existing precious decentralization for some fantasy of "full" adoption. Simple economics shows transactions not important enough to justify paying competitive BTC fees may fuck off to the nearest altcoin. |
|
|
|
Here...we discuss...computer science. LoL. Computer science The 51% attack in this respect means over 51% of the posts per page are paid spam hidden agenda bitchez. We discuss here as it´s a discussion board, if you don´t like discussions you should close the browser. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin's developers who are out in the open
Satoshi Nakamoto is out in the open? Oh that's right. You are a Newsweek subscriber... All starting to close in on you, isn't it son? All that BTC you stole at Hashfast and it's just dawned on you that you swapped it all for a honeypot currency that you now can't get it out of. How did your interview go today by the way?  Lash out at folks as much as you want, you started this and you'll reap the consequences. DASH is digital cash, can't wait for the next Evolution update. "Honeypot?" "Interview?" "Consequences?" What unsubstantiated lunacy. You're really getting out into the weeds. DASH is digital trash, can't wait for the SEC and FBI's next investigation into that HYIP scam. Evolution is a copy of Ethereum in the way that a cargo cult's bamboo runway is a copy. |
|
|
|
Above comments about CT are correct. However, even with CT, using math an observer can still verify that the coins spent are equal to the coins received. You just can't tell the number.
It's not a bug. It's a feature. An important feature! With Zerocash I believe this is not the case. Not being able to verify the circulation of a currency is a scary thing. In essence it is "TOO DARK" or "TOO PRIVATE". Monero is a good balance of being black and white. Monero follows the middle path of modular optional transparency, between Bitcon's radical transparency (unitary knowledge) and Zerocash's radical opacity (zero knowledge). By doing so, it enables use cases for which Bitcoin's and/or Zerocoin's inherent properties would be sub-optimal or even deal-killers.  The first such use case is for an e-cash composed of indistinguishable (yet miraculously auditable) units, which are thus guaranteed 100% interchangeable for all socioeconomic purposes. Some would call this property ('strong' or 'exhaustive') fungibility, but others feel that term must be reserved solely for describing a feature of low-level protocol interactions. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
