Bitcoin could attempt a reverse coup d'état, by fully embracing bits over btc/bitcoin and then attempt to siphon back the usage. But I think this might fail, because essentially they'd be doing advertising for Bits as well. And I am fairly confident about who can out innovate in terms of when users land on something, do they get what they wanted immediately (and don't have to sign up for sn exchange, KYC, and that crap or funding via localbitcoins, coins.ph, quickbit, or what ever using a credit card perhaps).
bits has already been proposed, and on a small scale perhaps even used, as a smaller unit for bitcoin. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rmto3/its_bits/https://blog.coinbase.com/2014/06/20/its-bits/ |
|
|
|
Hey guys, so I think I've asked this once before but still kind of confused on what to do... if I have an old windows that might be a 32-bit computer (still having trouble figuring that out; newb problem, I know) and wanting to run a full node to support the network... would it be beneficial just to wait for the .9 windows release coming up soon? Also, would it be easier to instal Linux to do this stuff? Or, if I do have a 32-bit computer, is it just basically pointless to run these things at all?
I believe it won't work on 32-bit. 0.9 does work on 32 bit (or at least it should). Just for shits and giggles... let's find out if it builds on ARM! It does, and even has some optimized ARM asm code. People run nodes on RPi2 Not stock from git - someone put -maes in the flags without checking CPU arch. Modifying... There is a make target for it. make release-arm7 or make release-arm6 Happily compiled and crashed with illegal instruction. Must be a different arm variant. I think those targets are for rpi/rpi2. The -marm option might need adjusting. |
|
|
|
TanteStefana2, it is pretty well explained in many places that isn't true. Any coin that employs mixing wlll have essentially the same bloat (linear factor expansion of transaction count and/or size), except that the base transaction size in Monero is much smaller than in Bitcoin, so even after applying the relevant multiple, the size may still be smaller. DarkSend specifically suffers from the same bloat as Monero, or worse, in terms of using standardized output denomination sizes (some other coinjoin-based systems don't do this and have other problems).
Dash has fewer/smaller transactions (by smaller I mean making paying fewer payees) on its chain, and many, many fewer using DarkSend (the latter is probably the bigger factor). That is the only reason it's chain is smaller. There is no fundamental technological difference at work.
With Dash it's a choice, that choice has kept our blockchain smaller. I don't see how a smaller blockchain is any benefit at all if it comes from less use rather than a technological advantage. That would make Truckcoin a great coin. In the near future, most wallets won't be using full nodes. Every coin has the potential for thin clients with some (generally reasonable, though somewhat less than full node) degree of security, including Bitcoin and Monero. After reading this thread, I have no doubt that one should stay as far away from Monero as one can. I doubt that you even read the whole thread you would have seen that virtually everything if not everything in the OP was refuted as nonsense. |
|
|
|
illodin, we both know that users pretty much don't exist and won't exist on an economically significant scale until Dash is a whole lot bigger than it is today (even Bitcoin at 300x larger is still largely held by investors, not end users), which means most of the interest in the foreseeable future is going to come (or not come) from investors. All those Bitcoin conferences you're paying Dash representatives to go to, do you think you're going to find 'users' there? That is delusional.
What I said is that emotional "investors" running rampant in these forums care about the butt hurt. If the product is good, users won't. If the business idea is good, rational investors won't. People who don't hate money won't. Naturally investors look at risk factors in making an investment. Sure it isn't the only thing they look at -- "the product" also matters -- but they do look at it. If you assume that every other product is bad, then that might work, but whatever Dash does that is good product-wise, other coins without the magnitude of stigma and reputation risk will do too, and investors go there instead. Why would a rational investor do otherwise? One of the problems Dash faces now (Monero too) is that it is somewhat a "high priced" coin. People looking to make a high risk investment on the remote possibility of widespread adoption (even you must recogniize this is an extreme long shot) face a lot of downside and less upside than in something that isn't so inflated to the benefit of extreme early adoptors/instaminers at such an early stage of practical development. If the product and business ideas are good is another matter, but I didn't say users go to crypto conferences to choose which coin they want to use.
So they are going to recruit investors, who will look at the repetitional risks and also look at how much potential appreciation has already been realized by a tiny number of people. Sounds like a negative. |
|
|
|
...
lastly, monero was launched about 3 months after DASH yet it already has almost twice the amount of coins mined. seems like a highly inflationary ongoing instamine that gives an unfair advantage to those early miners.
my conclusion, there has never been a coin with a perfect launch including bitcoin.
There's perfect, there's scam, and everything in between. Monero is a helluva lot closer to perfect than DASH/Darkcoin/Xcoin could every hope to be. You can look on the block explorer and see the amount of coins emitted at any block. For instance, by block 20000 ( http://moneroblocks.eu/search/20000 ), mined on May 1st, the total number of emitted coins was about 350k or about 3.5% of the total coins that exist today. So, 3.5% of the coins that exist were mined during the period of the crippled miner when a few folks (such as DGA, who is not a member of the development team) were mining with optimized miners. Around May 1st the optimized miner was made public by NoodleDoodle and other members of the actual dev-team that took over the coin from TFT. Compare that with DASH, where around 1/3 of the coins that exist today were mined in the first 48 hours or so, and I think it's pretty plain to see which coin had the more fair launch. (This is not to mention the fact that there was zero windows clients and a promise to relaunch made by the Xcoin developer, while hundreds of AWS and DO nodes mined away). 33% of available coins mined in 2 days, or 3% of available coins mined in a few weeks - I don't think it's much of a comparison. (This is also not to mention the fact that DASH/Darkcoin/Xcoin switched to a quasi-PoS system after their botched launch, allowing large holders to just sit on their coins and grow them, which is obviously not the case for Monero, which is pure PoW, where owning a chunk of coin doesn't allow one to do anything but dump it on an exchange.) Is Monero instant? Does monero have 4X smaller blockchain size despite being 1 1/2 times the age of Dash? Is morano 100% compatible to Bitcoin technology so that it can be used inside current inroads that Bitcoin has made? Does morano have an amazing developer team that constantly rolls out new improvements to the ecosystem? No? Oh no, that's Dash isn't it? Does morono have anything? Oh, a completely obfuscated and bloated blockchain, eh? Sounds useful and completely trustworthy to me! Good for Morono! I didn't even touch the GUI, or lack thereof. Nice job completely avoiding the topic under discussion. Monero does have ring signatures and built in stealth addressing, neither of which DASH possesses. The blockchain is obfuscated, which is the point of ring signatures, however anyone can unveil their transactions by way of their view key if they choose to. IMO, privacy by default with the option to unveil transactions is a better architecture than attempting to tack on a convoluted coinjoin scheme (that oh by the way just happens to enrich large holders, i.e., instaminers) onto the bitcoin client, but to each their own. Monero's privacy comes at a steep cost, block chain bloat. And it's the only thing it offers. It will never be able to keep full nodes running, for lack of incentive and it will always be super slow to load. I don't see any competition myself for Dash in Monero, and after the year+ of trolling from those people, I no longer feel obligated to be nice either. TanteStefana2, it is pretty well explained in many places that isn't true. Any coin that employs mixing wlll have essentially the same bloat (linear factor expansion of transaction count and/or size), except that the base transaction size in Monero is much smaller than in Bitcoin, so even after applying the relevant multiple, the size may still be smaller. DarkSend specifically suffers from the same bloat as Monero, or worse, in terms of using standardized output denomination sizes (some other coinjoin-based systems don't do this and have other problems). Dash has fewer/smaller transactions (by smaller I mean making paying fewer payees) on its chain, and many, many fewer using DarkSend (the latter is probably the bigger factor). That is the only reason it's chain is smaller. There is no fundamental technological difference at work. |
|
|
|
They're all intertwined. Instamine, early launch, coin generation bugs, exceptional number of cheap coins, feature lists deliberately withheld, etc. You can't really separate them, but the all point toward the same "Extreme caution" label that discourages involvement If there's anything around here that needs to be viewed with "extreme caution", it's propaganda from you and your footsoldiers. Keep telling yourself: 1. That I have foot soldiers (persecution delusion) 2. That normal people without an existing financial stake coloring their view don't view instamined altcoins (not to mention the other issues listed above) with a huge cloud of suspicion, and will avoid them 3. That me and my so-called foot soldiers have anything to do with the 'instamine scam' stigma surrounding Dash. |
|
|
|
My opinion....
Smooth...its your opinion! I'm not sure your point but that is a misquote. We will keep funding this because we believe our technology and currancy is better then any other. In fact the more you keep spewing off your non sense the more I'm going to keep donating to the cause...because it proves that you and all the trolls are obviously VERY worried and threatened.
It doesn't, but you know, maybe I'll just keep posting just to encourage you to waste your money  |
|
|
|
|
illodin, we both know that users pretty much don't exist and won't exist on an economically significant scale until Dash is a whole lot bigger than it is today (even Bitcoin at 300x larger is still largely held by investors, not end users), which means most of the interest in the foreseeable future is going to come (or not come) from investors. All those Bitcoin conferences you're paying Dash representatives to go to, do you think you're going to find 'users' there? That is delusional.
|
|
|
|
Well, if it's going to die anyway, there's really no point in wasting your time posting here. Just saying...
Your error is assuming that I'm trying to accomplish something. It is the same sort of paranoid persecution delusion that leads people here to make false accusations of "paid" trolling, when it almost certainly isn't true. (I mean I damn well know I'm not being paid by anyone.) In fact I'm just having a conversation, mostly respectful, with people like bigrcanada, and occasionally correcting some obvious errors like toknormal claiming that Bytecoin was one of "my" coins. If I understand you correctly, it's only the instamine you're concerned about? Because I've seen quite a few posters who will jump from one issue to the next in different comments, and I'm trying to to compile a complete "What's wrong with Dash" list, so is there's anything else, please make yourself heard.
I'm not here to create a list, I'm just having a conversation. If things come up, I might discuss them, or I might not. The instamine seems quite relevant right now since I just noticed that all of the relevant early history has been recently (I don't know exactly when) removed from the OP, making disclosure much worse rather than better. It looks to me like a calculated effort to 'sanitize' Dash's image ahead of the ongoing Evolution sales pitch, which ultimately will backfire when people ask why the history is being hidden. WRT to suggestions I think the problem is that most people here are not overly bothered by it in the first place. I mean, it looks to me as if the biggest issue it creates is daily troll postings on the subject, and the ignore button pretty much fixes that. In your opinion, how exactly does it hurt the cryptocoin community?
You have Dash out there spending money to fly around, etc. and promote itself which means a face of cryptocurrency being put in front of people that has a very questionable history and which is bound to inevitably raise questions of shadiness and potential same, and further reinforce the negative every negative impression of crypto that already exists (mostly with alts but with Bitcoin too). That's exactly the kind of ambassador we don't need. |
|
|
|
The "issue" is people who missed the cheap coins are jelly and butt hurt. That's not the issue because the same can be said for other coins which don't get the same negative reaction. The amount of jelly butt hurt is proportional to the amount of easily amassed cheap coins and their potential profits one has missed. And as you can attest, the amount of cheap coins has been exceptional in case of Dash. Well there you go, if that's the issue, then Dash, specifically, is screwed. I don't agree that is "the" issue, though it may be one of them. They're all intertwined. Instamine, early launch, coin generation bugs, exceptional number of cheap coins, feature lists deliberately withheld, etc. You can't really separate them, but the all point toward the same "Extreme caution" label that discourages involvement and is ultimately untenable, to borrow words from the devtome investigation. Cryptocurrency already faces a million uphill battles. You can't carry that kind of baggage on top of everything else and expect to have much of a chance, no matter what a few dozen wishful bag holders may claim. bigrcanada seems at intelligent enough to figure this out, I'm just a bit confused as to why he pretends not to. |
|
|
|
One more farewell post or more insecure trolling?
Sincere criticism is not trolling. There may be nothing Dash can do to erase its disastrous history, and that ultimately will likely lead to its demise, but there are things it can do now to avoid making matters even worse, which include not trying to hide the disastrous history. Smooth, haven't you said you're done with this tread and will not post here anymore two-or so days ago? No, I never said I won't post here any more. Maybe I said I was done with a particular conversation though. |
|
|
|
The "issue" is people who missed the cheap coins are jelly and butt hurt. That's not the issue because the same can be said for other coins which don't get the same negative reaction. That is also the reason why banks are interested in "blockchain" and not in buying Bitcoins from the early adopters Some people are trying to do that sure, and I'm not sure there is one reason for it either. Some probably want features and characteristics (for example some forms of regulatory compliance, a different security model, etc.) that Bitcoin doesn't offer. I see at the same time a lot of people not terribly concerned about the price being too high and building businesses and services on and around Bitcoin right now. Now I don't really see that with any alt, with the possibly exception of Ethereum, but at least in the case of Bitcoin and a few other coins, people don't come to it with an additional negative perception that encourages building something else or going elsewhere as they do with Dash. But if you really believe 'jelly' is a dominant factor, then Dash is screwed either way. You can't wish away the 'jelly' factor any more than you can wish away the 'instamine scam' disgust factor. It is still part of human nature, even if, again, you, illodin don't consider it the right way to think. If the model is fatally broken, and it is, then it doesn't matter exactly why. Same outcome. |
|
|
|
Okay as long as it doesn't cause banning and the net hash rate is decent then it seems acceptable.
It's not to me. I'll be fixing it. Oh okay, that's even better. I misinterpreted your comment as suggesting it wasn't worth fixing. I look forward to the improved version then. |
|
|
|
One more farewell post or more insecure trolling?
Sincere criticism is not trolling. There may be nothing Dash can do to erase its disastrous history, and that ultimately will likely lead to its demise, but there are things it can do now to avoid making matters even worse, which include not trying to hide the disastrous history. |
|
|
|
Why do you insist it's Dash's responsibility to change whether people view Bitcoin as ponzi or not?
Dash has enough transparency. If you're demanding to know how much each dev owns for example then sorry, I'm afraid it's not gonna happen.
Fairness - very subjective. Life is not fair. Miss the lunch and you miss the lunch. Don't buy cheap and miss the profits. There's always someone to complain about something.
Highest standard of ethics - is that standard defined by you?
Look if you want to deny the issue exists and personalize it as being all about this insignificant smooth guy (or some even smaller coin Monero), that's your prerogative. But the fact is that people who look at Dash see a massive instamine scam as one of the defining characteristics. That devtome investigation had nothing to do with me or Monero (or to my knowledge AdamWhite, etc.). Several of the threads about the instamine had nothing to do with Monero (some predate it). If you talk to people in the crypto community who have nothing to do with either coin if they've heard of it, they are well aware of the "darkcoin instamine" and think it is very shady and a holdover from the worst era of altcoin scams, whether you illodin, think so or not, and whether that is even fair or not. There is no way the stigma is ever going away. All that pushing this project is doing now is making crypto look bad. There is talent in this project, sure, but it's being wasted on a coin that is essentially a dead end beyond the small altcoin world. |
|
|
|
I likewise believe that as long as coins like Dash exist and don't uphold the highest standard of transparency, fairness, and ethics, that will be used to attack crypto generally, setting back the movement overall, rather than helping it. If people even know about coins other than Bitcoin (and possibly Litecoin, maybe Ethereum now), most of what they've heard is that they are a bunch of pump-and-dump premine, instamine, etc. scams and they want nothing to do with it. Dash does not help that cause at all
Hiding behind a bunch of renames and then editing the original parameters and renames out of the OP are not going to fix this problem.
Just out of curiosity: Do you have any specific demands as to what should be changed in Dash so that you can make your peace with it, or is it more a situation where you won't rest until Evan publicly commits seppuku? Talking about suicide is really hyperbolic. People need to keep things in perspective. We're talking about a tiny little toy coin compared to Bitcoin which is itself a tiny little toy coin compared to the fiat financial system. Let's not get some exaggerated sense of what is at stake here. At this point I don't know that there is anything Dash can do. The cryptocoin community just needs to move on to coins that don't have it's baggage, which in time I'm confident will happen, just as the Bitcoin community moved on from most of the worst scams and frauds. If you have constructive suggestions though other than "the instamine happened, get over it", or "we'll just delete everything from the OP and make believe it never happened", both of which I truly do not believe is ever going to work, I'm open to hearing them. |
|
|
|
I'm a member of the crypto community and an owner of DASH posting on an open forum.
And your point is? |
|
|
|
|
Okay as long as it doesn't cause banning and the net hash rate is decent then it seems acceptable.
|
|
|
|
I said why earlier - it says low diff share no matter what, but it's stale.
Does it send significantly more of these than other miners? If so it seems that might fail because if you send enough bad shares you probably get banned? (Mostly guessing as I don't know exactly how the pool software works.) If it is comparable to other miners then I don't see a problem. |
|
|
|
I see this very long thread just got moved from the Bitcoin Discussion forum to the Altcoin Discussion forum. Moving an established thread is very disruptive.
The moderators are really paranoid. This thread discusses how Bitcoin relatives to securities law. The mods have deprived the Bitcoin Discussion readers the information about Bitcoin's legality.
Any way no problem. More motivation.
More likely the reason they moved it is your prominent reference to "Which crypto-tokens" meaning you are discussing various coins, not just Bitcoin specifically. Logic fail. Bitcoin is a subset of crypto-tokens. Bitcoin is not an element of set altcoins. Correct. Discussing the larger set in the Bitcoin section of the forum is obviously seen as off topic, as opposed to discussing Bitcoin specifically. There is no forum for discussing both together, but the topic of alts is barely tolerated at all by the forum mods and operator; they certainly don't want this in the Bitcoin section, and never have. Your somewhat slanderous implication of a redundant thread in the Legal subforum requires a citation on your part, otherwise it can be taken as veiled slander. I don't believe there is such a thread, as I googled this entire site (site:bitcointalk.org securities) before I started my thread.  I'm surprised if there are no threads that discussion Bitcoin and securities law as this is certainly not the first time the topic has come up in the greater Bitcoin community, but if that is the case then perhaps you want to start one. But you should limit (or at least focus) the discussion there to the properties of Bitcoin itself. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
