New to the community, but have been lurking for too long. I have an Exodus wallet, with a couple of hundred dollars worth of bitcoin ready to put into an anonymous cryptocurrency. To me, it looks like bitcoin will never fulfill its promise as a p2p internet money. But if it fails, can Dash take over its space?
All those ATMs, slaved to bitcoin – could they be repurposed to dispense Dash? Do you see such a thing happening? I’d like to buy in, after a pullback in price, but see the possible failure of bitcoin as a dark swan pointing a bloody sword at Dash. Or am I off base here?
You have to wonder....my concern about dash is the "bug" that awarded someone 10~20% of supply? |
|
|
|
|
The only thing I can think of Dash has active dev, and can get things done
People are sick of the blocksize debate in btc
Dash has a solution to instant micorpayments now
I don't own any dash as I feel it looks hyperbolic
if Btc could get its act together and put in larger blocks and micro payments via side chains or whatever
|
|
|
|
there is no way this can go to $200 anymore, if you understand how the market work, do you think any person in his mind would sell his bitcoin bought at above $200 or above just because there is a little panic for something that is not certain?
and add to this that going at 200 will destoy mining profitablìily, do you think miners will want this? they want to any move that can lead to a disaster in their business this is guaranteed, that's why they are not deciding anything yet
there was the fat finger crash where some one on finex or something btce ? I can remeber went from about 800 to 200 or so? so it not impossible but it looks like more to error of input |
|
|
|
8mb seems good why does core not release this in the mean time
Node count decrease, skyrocketing orphan rates, huge potential for DOS attack due to quadratic signature hashing. What could possibly go wrong?  I dont see how segwit will not have some type of dao bug in it,,, its just the complexity of it.
Bullshit. The people who complain about Segwit complexity are those that can't even understand a simple Hello World program. 8mb now would clean out the mem pool, raise fees for miners and be a nice compromise and set a precedent for the future, the we can just all go to 16 mb then 32 etc etc
It would drastically lower fees. Heck, it could even make miners lose out on >95% of fees. Why would anyone pay anything with so much empty space per block? were not the 1mb blocks largely empty at one point what happened then? What about 4 MB, See with the current demand, I think 2~4 mb are going to be filled and the spam minimised, It seems to balance out hat the more transaction you can put in, its going to cost more to put lots of spam in. |
|
|
|
I wouldn't even sit on BTC right now.. dump the shit to fuck & back then wait till later for the cheap ETF failed coins.
gotta admit....govt agencies are unlikely to approve anything in one hit even if they do approve, they always require some changes, so in the best case scenerio the eft announcement will be no , you need to do x y z first. the market will go nope and drop, but this will be a bear trap. |
|
|
|
|
I like the icon!
but given the superflat thing understand if they want a rebrand
|
|
|
|
I personally think lsk is quite undervalued the javascript angle plus the rest is very good
Right. At least fund = marketcap  Yes and the seem very responsible with the money....unlike some other "cough" projects that have burnt though their stash and are diluting, and still have no product just endless we are almost there and testing....put the product out already.....cough you know you are... |
|
|
|
|
the icon reminds me of the minerals in starcraft....I keep waiting for an svc to come out etc and take the icon away
|
|
|
|
|
I personally think lsk is quite undervalued the javascript angle plus the rest is very good
|
|
|
|
|
8mb seems good why does core not release this in the mean time
I dont see how segwit will not have some type of dao bug in it,,, its just the complexity of it.
8mb now would clean out the mem pool, raise fees for miners and be a nice compromise and set a precedent for the future, the we can just all go to 16 mb then 32 etc etc
|
|
|
|
So as a legit customer, for the first time I was effected by the BSU (blocksize issue) I paid the fee, and it still did not go through the fee was
This sh*t has to be fixed up and soon. Also I feel segwit seems to not go far enough as to size.
Why are we using a block size that is years out of date given the demand and tech?
I jsut don't get how the miners cannot see this will delay/hamper BTC growth.
The problem seems to be that the Core development team is skittish on implementing a hard fork solution. They want to try Segwit and Lightning network since those are soft fork solutions. Changing the blocksize would only require altering a few lines of code; however, they would then need to coordinate a hard fork. btc did a hard fork back in 2013, with no warning....so it should be ok with plenty of warning |
|
|
|
|
So as a legit customer, for the first time I was effected by the BSU (blocksize issue) I paid the fee, and it still did not go through the fee was
This sh*t has to be fixed up and soon. Also I feel segwit seems to not go far enough as to size.
Why are we using a block size that is years out of date given the demand and tech?
I jsut don't get how the miners cannot see this will delay/hamper BTC growth.
|
|
|
|
|
Given the very dodgey launch of Dash with that bug that saw someone get some very large percentage coins (ghost mine) why has no one forked and relaunched?
|
|
|
|
Dash is sorta like Ripple, in this respect, ig u look at the UNL for ripple and centralised servers of dash...i feel how to be a dash processor is much clearer and fair. how to be a UNL?  ? |
|
|
|
|
I have noticed BTC while overall goes up, in say a run up, it seems to drop really fast....why is this in your opinion?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a Lawyer that sets this up for clients....
This can be quite complex, eg, how do you ensure the receiver even knows how to use BTC eg they end up putting the payment as the fee etc, or some how just delete the wallet, or else seed.
How do you stop Search Results intermediary just absconding with the BTC if you put it in some sort of trust, eg on trust for a child to reach an age of majority.
then there is tax minimization
and so on.....
|
|
|
|
|
I dont get why they just dont make block size 5MB or something now?
HD's have gone up since 2013 x3 or 5 in size, and cost about the same?
Satoshi had 33Mb blocks.
1MB is 1984 much.
why why why?
I mean this thing is supposed to run on fees from blocks,
I know the spam issue, but some spam is ok
|
|
|
|
|
It wont be an "inspection" but some sort of new PBOC or some other Chinese gov realted action, proclamation, btc is now illegal etc.
However the market will become increasing immune to this as it seems the exchanges have no BTC anyway hence the band on withdrawals, and they were likely selling other people BTC to try and keep the market down.
Even if wrong, the market will bore of repeated PBOC whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
there's going to be some more PBOC fud, to get cheap coins for the central bankers, at least 4 x
|
|
|
|
Its seems dash is sorta like ripple with the UNL = The masternodes, then this gets hashed compiled back into the blockchain of dash later?
I don't know but I would like to know, seems like it pumped nicely lately. The problem is, I remember reading that the masternodes model was a great threat model that would be exploitable by an attacker, so I would like to know the details. Actually the masternodes (4480 in total) are the reason why Dash is the most sybil-attack resistant network currently : so these masternodes....how do they keep each other honest? If say volume goes high, thought massive adoption, would they not be doing the lion-shares of volume, while waiting for next block to has everything in? Could you put it in really easy to understand terms.... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
