Price is collapsing because there is no demand for this useless scam token.

Look at the history of all jl777 scam assets.

They always go to zero eventually, when dumpers run out of greater fools to hold their bags.

Then they are delisted, jl777 creates a new scam asset to sucker in another generation of noobs, and the cycle repeats.

Fixed it for you.  Bitcoin mining is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

I wish you could understand the difference between

A. signaling readiness for a new feature, and
B. voting for a new features

I know it's all very subtle and you don't do nuance, but please stop spreading the lie that miners are in charge of Bitcoin.

They are not and never will be.  That's not how any of this works.

Just because there are armed guards in front of the bank it doesn't mean those armed guards make executive decisions for the bank.

They are just hired muscle and may be fired if they forget their place and get uppity.

The Lottery is a tax on people who are bad at math.

The Dash scam is a tax on people who are bad at math *and* don't understand the role cryptography plays in crypto-currency.   

All it took was a single tiny little pea to take down DashNinja and 12% of all DisasterNodes.  

Sad!  

If only Masternodes could take advantage of IPv6 instead of being stuck back in 1981 with IPv4.

Isn't it great how the incentive for Masternode owners to attack other Masternodes rises with the price of Dash?  Such a well designed incentive structure (not skewered at all!).

If only Evan hadn't lied about Masternode blinding being enabled in 12.1, 500+ Masternodes wouldn't have gotten BTFO and lost their place in the Ponzi payment queue.

Tante, you have no business buying more Dash at the top of the market.

You should be a responsible parent and start taking profit for the sake of your lower middle class family's future.

You are setting a horrible example of fiscal irresponsibility and gambling addiction by acting as if the good times will last forever and no thought need be given to what happens when the music stops.

You are demonstrating exactly why poor people stay poor.  Rather than doing the right thing by mitigating risk via profit taking, you do the opposite and greedily expose yourself to more.

Oh well, at least you'll have a good story about the time you "Could Of/Would Of/Should Of" banked >$100k for the sake of posterity, but instead decided to act like a feckless grasshopper rather than an industrious ant.

The Instamine means Dash is a scam, no matter what Duffsplanation your PR team trots out as an excuse.

Calling this attempt at spin a "clarification" is typically asinine, intelligence-insulting, PR happy talk.

Also relevant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Special_Affairs

Monero is fast.  2 minute minute blocks and flexible block size limit.  Payment channels Soon.

I said "100% fungibility."  You are the only one who brought up "anonymous."  Do you understand they are distinct concepts, despite overlapping?

You underestimate the utility of and demand for fungible digital cash.  And privacy is not just about kids buying dank nugs online.

http://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/1967/what-is-fungibility-and-why-does-it-matter

http://www.ted.com/talks/alessandro_acquisti_why_privacy_matters

http://www.ted.com/talks/glenn_greenwald_why_privacy_matters

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140113044954-2259773-10-reasons-why-privacy-matters

Anybody seen Taboo?  Might give it a look after catching up with The Crown and the new season of Broadchurch.

Why are you telling such ridiculous lies?  Are you really such an idiot that you don't understand the difference between "FUD" and justifiably calling out frauds like Dash/OneCoin/PayCoin/Maidsafe/Nautilus/Vcash?

You exaggerate to the point of falsehood when you moan and cry using such self-indulgent, easily disprovable universal claims about "all other altcoins in the world."  EG, when have Monero people even *MENTIONED* much less accused of scam SIA, or STORJ, or Primecoin, or Peercoin?  That's right, we NEVER HAVE.

Please, be more overwrought and weepy and indignant if such a thing is even possible.  It's really funny to watch you work yourself up into such a hyper-dramatic self-righteous froth over blatantly false accusations.

You are kind of right only in the sense that XMR is thanks to RingCT the best crypto in the world, and the industry-leading 100% fungibility thereby created makes Monero the "altcoin for people who hate altcoins."

OK, sure.  But only if we test the "great" ideas from Unlimite_ on Dash first.   

"Node count" is easily gamed.

"Economic node count" not so much.

You really believe shaolinfry, Cøbra, Adam Back, and I don't know the difference?  Hint: we do, but it seems you don't.

Your presumption that those of us who remember the NotXT and NotClassic and PseudoNode version signaling wars suddenly forgot about sybil attacks is so hideously stupid as to be laughable.  In this very thread, I already posted a *cough* joke *cough* about spinning up "a few proxies."   

SWUASF may or may not work.  The larger point is it signals a turn in the tide of the battle.  Core is going on the offensive and now Unlimite_ must defend.

Thanks to Ver and Jihan's assclowning, it's clear the future of Bitcoin requires the miners be demoted and letters of reprimand placed in their permanent records.  That will happen sooner with segwit or later with Low-Latency Delayed TXO Commitments.  Doesn't matter; either way the miners are going to be put back in their place, hopefully once and for all.

https://twitter.com/eric_lombrozo/status/838853259318063104
http://pastebin.com/QkDh3Adp


Bringing the Community Back Together

Eric Lombrozo
to Roger
Mar 31, 2016

Roger,

I’m glad we’ve started talking a bit more recently - I feel like for far too long too many parts of the community failed to really talk to one another. It deeply saddens me to see the path things took last year - it’s very unfortunate, we’re all Bitcoiners…we all want the best for Bitcoin. We still face many threats from the outside, if we’re fighting each other from within we don’t stand a chance.

As per our earlier chat, the problems we’re currently facing are rooted not so much in technical disagreement but in personal issues and deep misunderstanding. If we are to make progress in solving these issues, the first thing that needs to take place is we need to stop assuming bad intentions on the part of others - I sincerely believe we’re all trying to do what we think is best for Bitcoin. But there are some serious issues we need to address…and it won’t be easy for everyone. Big mistakes have been made all around and fixing the problems will require accepting this. We must set our ego aside and focus on what’s best for the community and our future.

As a longtime contributor to Bitcoin Core, I see the very hard work and dedication of these guys first-hand - often unappreciated - that ensures the Bitcoin network continues to operate securely and robustly, 24/7. Not only is it very challenging engineering work - it also carries significant responsibility as billions of dollars' worth of other people’s assets rely on all this work. I think I can confidently state that there are a very, very tiny number of people in the world qualified to do this stuff. Furthermore, having worked together with many of these guys for years, we’ve come to know one another well…it’s a very strong team with at least a few dozen highly active contributors.

After the collapse of the Bitcoin Foundation, these guys were left without any political support, without sustainable funding, without capable public relations. Other than MIT DCI, Blockstream, Ciphrex, ChainCode Labs, and perhaps one or two others, NONE of the major companies in this space stepped up to contribute very much. In fact, things went in the exact opposite direction…with a bigger and bigger rift growing between much of industry and the Core devs.

There were numerous discussions by the Core devs on a few technical forums on issues. In particular, there was a super long thread in the mailing list on the issue of increasing the block size in which different views were expressed by a bunch of different people. Unfortunately, it seems much of the industry remained oblivious to this discussion as they were not following and Core lacked proper representation to make sure views got heard.

...

The issue most of the Core devs had was never really about whether we should increase the block size - but how we should do it.

...

Gavin, unfortunately, followed Mike down this very dangerous path which politicized mining.

Politicizing mining is about the single most dangerous thing that can happen to Bitcoin! I CANNOT EMPHASIZE THIS ENOUGH! This issue is SOOO much more of concern than whether blocks are full or fees are high. A key component of Satoshi’s design was that it should be very hard for anyone to be able to control a majority of hashpower lest they attempt to do hostile things to the rest of the network. I would imagine someone like yourself would be very emphatically opposed to doing things in a way that gives entry to hostile entities who want to usurp control over the network. The part of Core that did not include Gavin and Mike was overwhelmingly very much *against* opening up such attack vectors as a matter of principle…and unfortunately the block size issue was thrown in as the wedge.

Bitcoin Core is committed to near-term AND long-term scalability - committed to both on-chain AND off-chain ideas. The reason that many of us got so excited about making segwit the centerpiece of the Core roadmap was because it gave us a way to increase block size while addressing some of the validation cost issues AND solved many important issues with Bitcoin unrelated to block size (i.e. malleability, commitment extensibility, script replacement, perhaps even fraud proofs) AND allowed us to deploy it as a soft fork in many ways quite similar to how we deployed BIP16 meaning there would be no flag day and deployment could proceed incrementally. It seemed like a win-win…everyone gets what they want and we avoid the most problematic aspects pertaining to deployment logistics. Unfortunately, it’s clear not everyone saw it quite like this. There’s obviously still significant misunderstanding in the community, some people are still just too pissed off to want to cooperate, and some people are still looking for a way to save face.

I ask for your help as a fellow Bitcoiner and as a friend to help end this silly dispute that’s been tearing apart our community. I know it won’t be easy to heal wounds, but we’ve got to stop with this petty tit-for-tat proxy war on reddit and we’ve got to stop politicizing mining - we need to find a better way of having all our concerns addressed and resolve issues without having to polarize entire groups of people against one another who, in the end, are not the cause of the problem. It’s not their fault.


- Eric

clue:if you see fraud and don't shout fraud you are a fraud

Exactly.  Honey Badger eats up cupcakes like those two and will be stronger after shitting them out.

If the Gavinistas didn't exist, we'd need to invent them!  

If Bitcoin dies from something as absurd as the Unlimite_ clown fiesta (it won't), we'll simply move on to new and improved versions of the experiment.

Yes, we may(?) to some extent be using Jihan as shorthand for all miners blocking segwit due to Ver's bribes and bamboozling.

I'm correcting your twisted strawman "nonsense" version of what I actually said.

To wit, it makes no sense for me to claim

A. Jihan has no free will (or at minimum lacks agency), and
B. must follow "orders" (your word) from "white Americans" (your other two words), while
C. he is being bribed/bamboozled by Roger Ver (my actual claim).

Do you understand that Roger would not have to bribe/bamboozle (ie influence the free decisions of) Jihan if he could simply issue an anti-segwit order to him instead?

Can you comprehend that I implicitly acknowledged Jihans's free will/agency/"brain" when I accused his decision making process of being unduly/unwisely influenced by Ver's politics and/or $$$$?

That last line though...found the butthurt NeverTrumper!   

The PoW and the code that uses it are two sides of the same coin.  I know that because I've been mining BTC since 2011.

I said Jihan was "bamboozled and/or bribed by the felonious, very white, and formerly American Roger into blocking segwit."

I didn't say Jihan can't make "independent decisions."  I didn't say Jihan has to "follow orders."

If you don't understand the difference between an order and a bamboozle/bribe, GET A FUCKING DICTIONARY AND LEARN IT.

Don't twist and misrepresent what I said ever again.

It's not a "great point" it's a smug, cherry-picked, self-referential list topped with a red herring about "Americans."

If the original Satoshi client never needed anything we wouldn't now be at 0.14.x, dozens of BIPs and thousands of LOCs later.

Nationality and race have nothing to do with it, other than the fact the guy (Jihan) bamboozled and/or bribed by the felonious, very white, and formerly American Roger into blocking segwit happens to be from China.

Dude, what happened to your Vcash shitshow?




There was never any hope for this project.  Failure was the only option ever on the table.
It's hard to believe you are still so hopelessly gullible...

When you disturb a scammer and disrput their scamming, belligerent, disrespectful replies are to be expected.

6000 posts, most of which are low info graphics, price charts, huuuge marketing adverts, deflection from criticism, pump cheerleading, and exhortations to ignore all criticism (including multi-page lists of specific critics).

The most obnoxious thing DashHoles do is gossip endlessly about who they are ostensibly ignoring, as if it's logically/physically possible to ignore someone while responding to and discussing them.   

It would be nice if they used the proper cultist term "shun" rather than the misnomer "ignore."   

That's very interesting, considering

1. Bitcoin is, in fact, the Mother of All Blockchains, and

2. Bitcoin is, by design, the ultimate settlement network.

I conclude that BTC will best approximate ideal money (variance notwithstanding).

But I'm not sure how to incorporate the fungibility issue (and Monero's role) into this rubric.  Any ideas?

Satoshi's coins just sit there.  Unlike Masternodes, they don't bleed a % of every block reward from now until the end of time.

And unlike Masternodes, Satoshi's coins don't vote to fund scams such as Dash's ATM, etc. "projects."

Exactly what "vital services" do Masternodes provide?

Nobody uses Dash as cash (avg. tx is >$10k) so how can you claim anything Masternodes do is "vital?"

Everything Dash does is done by other coins.  But better.

If you disagree, provide one example as a counterargument instead of just making a show of attacking-the-attacker Ignoring The Troll.