Its not a popularity contest between Ryan Taylor and Toknormal. Maybe it help if you explain why you put more weight? What is toknormal (and I presume myself) judging badly?

I can't really do any better than toknormals excellent post above about primay market. So trying to be devils advocate and arguing firstly from Ryan Taylors point of view. (as I understand it)

• Miners (or mining pools) are seen as contractors who are paid in dash for services to the network, mainly for creating blocks of transactions. They are paid (by the network) 45% of the block rewards for this service.
• Masternode operators are contractors too who provide services to the network, namely providing a reliable, fast network of nodes which are utilized to provide coin mixing, and instantsend/chainlocks, soon the dash platform aswell. They are paid 45% of the block rewards.
• The treasury provides funding for development (and leadership?), and other things which 'hopefully' benefit the network. They are paid 10% of the block rewards.

Technically the miners mint the whole 100% of the block reward. It is a competition to receive that block reward, those with the best hash power take most the earnings. As a miner you have to constantly find ways to increase your hash power to achieve some earnings. This also means you have to pay more in energy terms in your electricity bills if you are mining. This causes 'difficulty' adjustments to increase, (it also causes miners to become more cost effective in areas of cheap electricity). If miners leave the network the difficulty drops and it becomes slightly easier for miners to achieve earnings with less hash rate.

High or increasing hash rate generally means the network is considered much more secure than low or dropping hashrate. The energy cost to rewrite the block chain or reverse transactions or do any other malicious thing on the network is all that much more 'expensive' to achieve. It is a sign that miners are willing to pay more (in terms of increasing their hardware capability and their increased electricity bills and their time) in order to earn more dash rewards. This may be because they are in profit, or a speculative bet that they think dash will go up in value. One can only guess the motives of any investor category.

(I think) Ryan Taylor  sees it this way... If you decrease the miner share, and miners leave the network. Then the hashrate will drop. But that wouldn't matter because chainlocks secure the network after 1 block anyway. He thinks that chainlocks has made hashrate less important for dash than other PoW coins. Regardless of the hashrate the supply is designed to stay constant.  With that portion of the block reward that came from the miners share you can distribute that to ordinary users who will be 'stakers' rewards for holding dash. So Ryan Taylor thinks that decreasing miner share won't have a negative impact  on security. And then there will be increased demand from stakers who may want to try and earn dash by holding it. He is trying to influence the supply versus demand dynamics of the market to increase demand without affecting supply.  

--

I think where I start to disagree is viewing miners as contractors. To me it seems they do the 'work', meaning work in the sense of physics and thermodynamics, using time and energy. Masternode owners do not do any comparable work in that physical sense. Who pays the miners? No-one? The network? They earned the dash with real time and energy. But who pays the masternode owners and the treasury? Is it the network that paid them? Or it is the miners that paid them isn't it? Maybe this is just some question of semantics and does or doesn't matter, but to me seems an important distinction. I see miners as the ones who really create and maintain the blockchain. The masternodes and treasury as more like contractors providing services to the network. The masternodes are paid very lucratively really. With no 'work' they receive a very large share of the spoils.

I also do not think dropping hashrate will definitely not be seen as unimportant by the wider market even with chainlocks.  Hashrate is synonymous with network security. Hashrate is often viewed as a leading indicator of price. Maybe I am underestimating the impact of chainlocks I don't know. I did expect a bit of a positive reaction in the market when it was released. So far that didn't seem to occur. You can move to a complete proof of stake model and get rid of hashrate completely. There are many coins that have tried that or similar. I dont see many of them in the top 10, unlike bitcoin, bicoin cash, litecoin and bitcoin sv. The proof of work is all. Just like it takes work to dig up gold. The mining metaphor is very accurate. These things are valuable because of the work that went into it.

Markets are all about supply and demand but it is far too easy to dream up reasons for who is behind the supply and who is going to be in demand and then think you know the reality. Will staking increase demand? Maybe it will attract a category of investor  ? Maybe it will deter another category of investor, like those who value high hashrate? Maybe the 'earnings' of staking will not be held or spent on ways to benefit the network but go on food, wine and fast cars. Ryan Taylor is only guessing and making assumptions about the market. But that is a risky business. What if he is seriously underestimating the 'work' in proof of work?



  

Its strange not to be on the same page as you qwizzie as I normally always am. But all of your proposed solutions to improve store of value run the risk of taking away value as I see it. It is a risk I don't feel at all comfortable with. Proof of work ensures the authenticity of the blockchain because it would take too much energy to rewrite it (among other things). This has stood trial by fire for over a decade. Even centralised mining pools are powerless to rewrite the blockchain except for maybe attempting to rewrite the last block or two. The market values proof of work very highly. Look at bitcoin, litecoin, bitcoin cash and bitcoin sv, all 100% proof of work and in the top 10 on coinmarket cap. By contrast Dash which on paper is proof of work with more innovations and enhancements has slumped down the rankings.

In the case of Dash 55% of these authentic mined proof of work tokens are given away for free (as toknormal has said) to masternodes and treasury. The market revalues Dash lower to account for that. If the free 'given away' portion is increased even more then the market will act seemlessly to revalue dash even lower. As I see it these proposed ideas will have the opposite effect to improving store of value. You don't get a free lunch. The treasury spending was meant to compensate for this by increasing value more than if there was no treasury. So far the evidence shows this has not been a success. The market has judged that masternodes and treasury are not worth as much as proof of work. At least as things stand in the marketplace today. To take away more proof of work could be heading in the complete wrong direction.

Whats GNSP ?


Ryan Taylor reckons masternode owners are hodlrs and its the miners that are dumping coins

Is there an end in sight to the dash bear market?

Chart shows dashbtc with log price scale, on poloniex exchange, which gives one of the largest timescales to look at. We can see how Dash entered a downtrending channel in the second half of 2017. And has been there ever since, currently mired near the bottom of it.

Looking at technicals Dash is now near levels not seen since 2014 and 2015 This is pretty much a complete retracement of the whole of dash's trading history.  I am hoping that these levels will mark the end of the bear market and support can be found here. (Horizontal dashed line).

Chart

This is depressing stuff. There is a lot of angst in the community. Ryan Taylor of Dash Core group has even suggested penalising miners, taking away yet more of the miner share and giving them the blame for the sell pressure on the market. (really) He points to increasing hash rate coupled with falling price and creates a correlation with no further evidence needed. I would instead consider how much worse price would have fallen if not for the miner hash rate supporting the coin.

Other far less innovative proof of work coins, such as litecoin and bitcoin cash and bitcoin sv do not give portion of block reward for wasteful treasury spending and have benefited by falling less than dash in the bear market.

Even more worryingly some people are calling for Dash to move to a proof of stake or hybrid proof of stake model, to reward (or is that bribe) ordinary users. This will not work, proof of stake is even more prone to centralisation than proof of work. Users will not value their free dash, it will be valued according to free money and sold while it has value, not seen as an investment to hold on to.  

Amanda of Dash Investment Foundation suggests merging with bitcoin cash! While the idea of merging two decentralised communities and blockchains sounds impossible. This is again symptomatic of the soul searching that goes on in the depths of a bear market.

Through all this Dash Core have given dash instant secure, 'on-chain' transactions to the network. Dash still aiming for payments market,to be like paypal. What has been acheived is amazing, and unique in the crypto sphere. Dash now considered a proof of work coin which is 51% attack proof and has respendable after only a few seconds.

But one problem as I see it is dash is hard money, like bitcoin or gold. Maybe payments is not the right goal for hard money? Would you like to spend your gold or your bitcoin or dash on a new gadget? Or just use your credit card and save your precious assets? And, do you want to pay capital gains tax when you buy a coffee?

What is the use case for what we have? The cream of the crop of on-chain transactions unrivaled by other proof of work blockchains? I think the soul searching may have to come up with the answer to this. We are in the same boat as other hard money crypto assets in this regard. Bitcoin has all but ditched payments. Even though Dash has achieved so much maybe  we still don't have the right goal?

There must be some areas of finance that need quick settlements?

Bitcoin can't even agree a block size modification without splitting into multiple parts. In fact BCH and BSV are bitcion. Your idea makes no sense.

Did coindesk publish anything at all about instantsend enabled by default? or about chainlocks ? ....

... anything?

That was really interesting. I guess thanks to whoever loaded the network with these transactions. You made Dash stronger.

CoinDesk is a subsidiary of Digital Currency Group (“DCG”). DCG invests in cryptocurrencies and has ownership stakes in a number of blockchain startups, listed here.
https://dcg.co/portfolio/

(Not to be confused with Dash Core Group, also DCG)

If you wonder why coinbase exchange lists zcash but not dash. Look to Digital Currency Group. If you wonder why positive Dash news is ignored by the coindesk new site, yet negative news is published look to Digital Currency Group.

Coindesk claim to act independently of their owner, Digital Currency Group. Believe that if you may.

Agreed. But I think the airdrops should just be done, no smart contract. Give it to all the holders. At this point any holders left standing are diehard about byteball. Get it over and done with, like ripping off a bandaid. Yes the price might crash more, or maybe not if it really is the diehard holders who would be more likely to hodl. But sfter that all uncertainty of the airdrop is removed. There is no more inflation of supply. The road from there is up.

(ahem not mentioning centralised witnesses at this point)

Bitcoin aren't given away for free you expend a lot of energy to mint new bitcoin. Byteball is a never ending airdrop of a 100% premine at whim of the holder. There is vast difference. Bitconi is predetermined by the protocol. Byteball is .. oh never mind. I've been through this countless times before.

Its laughable that so many are clueless, especially people involved in the project,  why the byteball distribution has been a disaster.

edit. sorry obyte

Just sharing an idea


chart

A quick glance at this thread shows nothing has changed. The focus is still on dribbling out free bytes (in ever smaller amounts) at the complete whim of the coin originator.

The biggest problem with this coin has always been the distribution method, or lack of. That is whats killing it.

I'm not a fan of bitcoin cash. In the beginning it was interesting as a candidate for the version of bitcoin following the original ethos. But that is well and truely dead in the water now. Especially after the damaging Bitcoin SV split. I don't like SV either

Dash has the most interesting approach to mitigate against 51% attacks



Mitigating 51% attacks with LLMQ-based ChainLocks

https://blog.dash.org/mitigating-51-attacks-with-llmq-based-chainlocks-7266aa648ec9

Thanks qwizzie

I wonder who was behind that?

 

Its a bit concerning for bitcoin cash that the miners have the power to 51% attack the network so trivially. Even if they seem to have reasons, they shouldn't be able to

I kind of was on topic. Because we were talking about 51% attacks by miners, as happened to a few projects including ETC recently. and how Dash has implemented a solution to that.

Hey thanks Icey, you being here is normally bullish for Dash.

Hows it going with your ETC investments? I remember they had a roadmap you particularly liked. But didn't they suffer a 51% attack ?

Blimey I was only drawing attention to a chart pattern! That was it. I take your point about the chart being a bit messy, there are other lines on it as you correctly observed which were not relevant to my post. However they are useful for me in my own personal chart analysis on bigger timeframes. Perhaps next time I'll spend more time to clean it up.. or not.

The point about the inverse head and shoulders pattern is that it is a good one to look for bearish trend reversal back to bullish, which was the point I was trying to make. It is almost complete. A return to levels of 0.04 is not unreasonable for target

DASH Inverse Head and Shoulders versus bitcoin

Chart

A rebound for Dash in this area will complete a large inverse head and shoulders pattern. Marked in light blue. If this plays out Dash will turn very bullish

Well thats a response I can respect finally, so thank you for that . I don't know what is dishonest about competition though. Bitcoin was made Open Source software. This is an invitation to copy and innovate. The spirit of open source software development. It is alive in bitcoin, for that we are all thankfull.