Why Dash is not a scam, but a scheme

[HeroCat]

Dash is quite popular, average user do not care about some technical details 

[1714929926]

1714929926

[1714929926]

1714929926

[1714929926]

1714929926

[wopakee]

Do you believe that dash was fairly launched? If so, I would say that is a faulty claim.

There you go again with your fair launch delusions when 99.9999% of the population isn't even aware coins are being launched every day.

It's not the dev's fault some people want to pay something for the coins thus giving them value. You don't have to buy or mine coins, no one is forcing you, it is not necessary for you to do so. If someone else does though, it's not unfair to you the slightest. If I create a program that generates a million tokens out of thin air and I keep them all to myself, and you for some reason want to buy one of them for $1, all of a sudden I hold $1MM worth of computer data. Was this unfair to someone? Who was scammed? When Gates and Allen founded Microsoft and got most of the shares, was that a fair launch?

I think it's interesting though that even small time miners managed to hit some blocks and buy some coins cheap by being lucky of being there early instead of all the coins going to the same mining farms and whales. The launch was different than Monero's, it's a good thing there is plenty of choice available for everyone to choose what they like.

My point was that if you claimed that dash was launched fairly and the privacy is good, then comparing it to Monero, BBR, the real Dash, and AEON is fair--but if you don't, then your claim that Monero and Dash are competing projects and that it is the source of the criticisms is faulty. My assertion is that it is the false comparison built on Evan's claims that has led to much of the animosity, and if dash was honest with what it is (another shit coin with a terrible launch with faux technological advantages), then no one would bother to criticize it for making faulty claims.

To put it more simply, you would need a fair launch and equal privacy to be in competition with Monero. I don't see it, but you are more than encouraged to make that claim so i or someone else can refute it.

Look, I know you can keep going 24/7 and take turns but I'll just have to stop at some point so I'll just leave these here:

• It's easy to be all good and friendly with "competition" 1% of your size
• If DASH was 1% of your size you wouldn't give a shit
• There is no fair launch, life is not fair
• It's a free world, you're not forced or required to have the same percentage of an asset as everyone else. You can go create your own digital token and assign 99% of it to yourself to balance the irritation all this unfairness has caused you.

True.
Distribution is a huge problem, depending on how you look at it things will appear unfair.
 
My point is that what people mined called Xcoin IS not what we call Dash today. People will continue to argue about this, calling it scam etc, but they cannot provide any good distribution model themselves.
Instamine goes for all coins, it's relative. The people who mined bitmonero the first 24 hours probably got also 100's of thousands monero.
A fair distribution model would adapt to the amount of miners.

But who the fuck wants a fair distribution? It takes away all the fun. This is a gold rush, it's not meant to be fair, suckaz. Thats why we complain on all the coins we missed out on

[generalizethis]

Dash is quite popular, average user do not care about some technical details 

Average user? Or average speculator? I don't think any coin (including Bitcoin) can claim an average user base with any regard to the average person living on earth.

Also, if Evan would admit his privacy scheme is flawed or submit to a rigorous code analysis (anonymint is qualified and has expressed interest) and place the instamine label on his media, then we wouldn't be having this dialogue--apparently those in charge at dash don't share your cynical analysis of the average user (cryptomyopia or otherwise).

[iCEBREAKER]

Dash is quite popular, average user do not care about some technical details 

Average user kept coins on MtGox.

Nice appeal to popularity though.  Try to make it more obvious next time.  I bet you can't!

#rekt

[iCEBREAKER]

My point is that what people mined called Xcoin IS not what we call Dash today.

Good point.  Evan's hobbyist project is an endless rabbit hole.  It keeps changing names/brands, goals, emission, rewards, etc.

A coin should not be re-launched more times than the iPhone.

Bitcoin, Monero, and other legitimate coins' communities would never put up with such blatant disregard for their existing social contracts.

But the DashHoles cheer wildly and clap louder when their centralized leadership tells them what they're doing next.

Why is that?  Is it because anyone like vertoe, who expected consistency and transparency and decentralization, left in disgust long ago?

Is it because the only people left in the Dash cult are the most hopeless of True Believers, ready to guzzle the Kool-Aid on their leader's command?

The people who mined bitmonero the first 24 hours probably got also 100's of thousands monero.

That's completely and demonstrably false; you are just attacking-the-attackers using lies.  Accounting for compression effects, Monero emission has always been well within design parameters.

[smooth]

Instamine goes for all coins, it's relative. The people who mined bitmonero the first 24 hours probably got also 100's of thousands monero.

LOL no.

Relative yes. Comparable to any meaningful extent, no.

Total mined in the first 24 hours of Bitmonero 27,300.456199349552
Total mined in the second 24 hours of Bitmonero 27,206.695525935472
Total mined now per 24 hours (approx): 11,854.01642329008

Total mined in first 24 hours of Dash (approx): 1,500,000
Total mined in second 24 hours of Dash (approx): 500,000
Total mined now per 24 hours (approx): 1,440

The Dash instamine stands alone among coins of any note today. Only the worst of instamined scam shitcoins is even a close. Not a "relative" comparison to be proud of by any means.

[PoS]

Its a Masternode scheme scam where the instamine continuously grows.
Since the masternode payment coming from the instamine coins was always greater than 50% the ratio will only rise until the whole thing collapses.

[wopakee]

Instamine goes for all coins, it's relative. The people who mined bitmonero the first 24 hours probably got also 100's of thousands monero.

LOL no.

Relative yes. Comparable to any meaningful extent, no.

Total mined in the first 24 hours of Bitmonero 27,300.456199349552
Total mined in the second 24 hours of Bitmonero 27,206.695525935472
Total mined now per 24 hours (approx): 11,854.01642329008

Total mined in first 24 hours of Dash (approx): 1,500,000
Total mined in second 24 hours of Dash (approx): 500,000
Total mined now per 24 hours (approx): 1,440

The Dash instamine stands alone among coins of any note today. Only the worst of instamined scam shitcoins is even a close. Not a "relative" comparison to be proud of by any means.

Ok my mistake. But my main point remains, which is that Dash has the most interesting, nondeterministic distribution model.

Who got the millions of Dash at the early stages? No one knows. And these people could not have foreseen that Xcoin(which Dash was built upon) was going to get any value at all. In fact, only very naive people would assume that a bugged coin like that would even make it to an exchange.
We also have to remember that this was launched early 2014, right after the November 2013 mega spike in Bitcoin. During this time coins were launched to left and right, Dash was literally buried by a ton of "well orchestrated" coins. It was considered a piece of garbage for the first 3 months. Even if it would have had a "proper" distribution model, millions of coins would already have been mined and hoarded by the ferocious whales which dominates this market. That's my final assessment.

[smoothie]

Its a Masternode scheme scam where the instamine continuously grows.
Since the masternode payment coming from the instamine coins was always greater than 50% the ratio will only rise until the whole thing collapses.

There is a coming crash in dash and we haven't seen nothing yet. Those large holders will cash out eventually. The masternode system is a broken one, no wonder evan wants to get away from it.

But wasn't the Masternode system touted as the "holy grail" when it was launched? Now Evan wants to distance himself from it by changing it?

SMH

[smoothie]

Instamine goes for all coins, it's relative. The people who mined bitmonero the first 24 hours probably got also 100's of thousands monero.

LOL no.

Relative yes. Comparable to any meaningful extent, no.

Total mined in the first 24 hours of Bitmonero 27,300.456199349552
Total mined in the second 24 hours of Bitmonero 27,206.695525935472
Total mined now per 24 hours (approx): 11,854.01642329008

Total mined in first 24 hours of Dash (approx): 1,500,000
Total mined in second 24 hours of Dash (approx): 500,000
Total mined now per 24 hours (approx): 1,440

The Dash instamine stands alone among coins of any note today. Only the worst of instamined scam shitcoins is even a close. Not a "relative" comparison to be proud of by any means.

Ok my mistake. But my main point remains, which is that Dash has the most interesting, nondeterministic distribution model.

Who got the millions of Dash at the early stages? No one knows. And these people could not have foreseen that Xcoin(which Dash was built upon) was going to get any value at all. In fact, only very naive people would assume that a bugged coin like that would even make it to an exchange.
We also have to remember that this was launched early 2014, right after the November 2013 mega spike in Bitcoin. During this time coins were launched to left and right, Dash was literally buried by a ton of "well orchestrated" coins. It was considered a piece of garbage for the first 3 months. Even if it would have had a "proper" distribution model, millions of coins would already have been mined and hoarded by the ferocious whales which dominates this market. That's my final assessment.

We all know Evan was the first miner and probably had several dozen if not a hundred VPS instances mining XCOIN/dash/dark/watever.

Interesting distribution? Yes in the first 72 hours about half of the current supply was mined (after like 20 months). Not very interesting from an actual distribution point of view...but from a scam point of view it is interesting is why it is so controversial why people do not like dash/dark/whatever you call it.

[illodin]

We all know Evan was the first miner and probably had several dozen if not a hundred VPS instances mining XCOIN/dash/dark/watever.

How do you know Evan mined the first block and not InternetApe?

[smoothie]

We all know Evan was the first miner and probably had several dozen if not a hundred VPS instances mining XCOIN/dash/dark/watever.

How do you know Evan mined the first block and not InternetApe?

Does it matter between the two of them as they were somewhat connected at the hip with this "non-profit venture"?

[illodin]

We all know Evan was the first miner and probably had several dozen if not a hundred VPS instances mining XCOIN/dash/dark/watever.

How do you know Evan mined the first block and not InternetApe?

Does it matter between the two of them as they were somewhat connected at the hip with this "non-profit venture"?

If you assume they split everything 50-50 as a team it makes Evan's cut 50% smaller, and you exaggerate the numbers at least by a factor of 2.

[qwizzie]

Such obsession with the instamine while Dash has moved on and so have their users. Fact is those of us involved with Dash
know about the instamine and just dont care about it anymore.  

For those interested in some facts about the Dash instamine  :

date : 29 march 2014
https://dashtalk.org/threads/the-birth-of-darkcoin.162/



******* Number of times read : 11999 *******

Q: Did the instamine happen?

Evan Duffield:“The instamine happened, there is no one disputing that fact. The crypto-community at large has no problem with this except a few who think it’s trying to be hidden in some way. In fact, I posted multiple times about the instamine, first in “The Birth Of Darkcoin” which is an account of the first few weeks of the launch and the mistakes that were made. Recently I also posted spoke about the Instamine in the video “Virtual Corporation”, which considers the concept that it might have been key to Dash’s success, which I believe now.

date : 11 october 2015
https://dashdot.io/alpha/?page_id=118

date : 21 september 2015
https://www.youtube.com/embed/eEJKZjTx9Bg
time 7:26

I remember buying Dash (Darkcoin back then) in May 2014 at 0.025 & 0.026 BTC with BTC in the $500 range,
do i blame Dash or Bitcoin later on when they both dropped so much in price? No ... i take full responsebility
for my own actions as i was aware about the risks involved with cryptocurrency (central bank's around the world
issued warnings informing us about the risks after all).




      

[PoS]

Re: Why Dash is not a scam, but a scheme

At the end of the day 'schemes' (Ponzi scheme, Pyramid scheme, Masternode scheme....) collapse at the end.

[smoothie]

We all know Evan was the first miner and probably had several dozen if not a hundred VPS instances mining XCOIN/dash/dark/watever.

How do you know Evan mined the first block and not InternetApe?

Does it matter between the two of them as they were somewhat connected at the hip with this "non-profit venture"?

If you assume they split everything 50-50 as a team it makes Evan's cut 50% smaller, and you exaggerate the numbers at least by a factor of 2.

So if they combined mined 1,000,000 dash then each of them got 500,000 in like 2 days of mining.

So does it really change anything if my scenario is true?

500,000 is ~10% of total mining supply.

[smooth]

Who got the millions of Dash at the early stages? No one knows.

It may be true that no one knows but what we do know is that everything happening so quickly gives enormous structural advantage to those who had highly topical inside information.

As you say, we can't really see the outcome, but we can see the structure, so that's the only way to judge. The salient question is not was it cheated in a massive way, but rather, could it have been cheated in a massive way and in the case of Dash the answer is a resounding yes.

There is always inside information of at various times of course, but slowing things down to happen over months, years, or decades means the effect of being in the right place at the right time, either accidentally or more importantly by design, is vastly reduced.

People keep making the correct point that absolute speed of distribution matters, but Dash supporters just don't want to get it. Take Litecoin for example. It had a small instamine because of the fixed-interval difficulty adjustment algorithm that was ubiquitous at the time. but since Litecoin distributes its supply relatively slowly, over years to decades, not hours or days, the effect of that was negligible.

It doesn't even matter (much) whether LTC's instamine was rigged intentionally and grabbed by insiders or an accident and split among many lucky miners, because the relative amount is small, and that is an objective structural fact. As with Dash, distributional outcomes and intentions are not fully knowable, but the resilience and soundness (in the case of Litecoin) or the fragility and unsoundness (in the case of Dash) of the structures are fully knowable and fully known.

And these people could not have foreseen that Xcoin(which Dash was built upon) was going to get any value at all.

That is true for most people. But someone who knew that it had actual development plans would have a far, far better chance to conclude this than people operating in the dark (no pun intended). The only people with this enormous advantage were Evan and people working with Evan.

[toknormal]

but Dash supporters just don't want to get it.

We get it alright. It's just that we attach a price to it as opposed to a judgement.

[1aguar]

Most miners will dump any coin as soon as they are able to. The really "lucky" ones are those who believed in the project from the beginning and held their coins until the end, and probably promoted the coin along the way. When investing in start-ups, one should expect to keep one's money frozen for years. Patience is a virtue. In DASH, one could have made several thousand times the initial investment, but only with patience and belief in the endurance of the project. In hindsight, XCoin was not a bad coin for a small investment (maybe 0.1 BTC, like mentioned in the OP), but in my experience nearly every member on the bitcoin forum is hesitant to risk any amount of funds for the long-term.

[iCEBREAKER]

Who got the millions of Dash at the early stages? No one knows.

It may be true that no one knows but what we do know is that everything happening so quickly gives enormous structural advantage to those who had highly topical inside information.

As you say, we can't really see the outcome, but we can see the structure, so that's the only way to judge. The salient question is not was it cheated in a massive way, but rather, could it have been cheated in a massive way and in the case of Dash the answer is a resounding yes.

There is always inside information of at various times of course, but slowing things down to happen over months, years, or decades means the effect of being in the right place at the right time, either accidentally or more importantly by design, is vastly reduced.

People keep making the correct point that absolute speed of distribution matters, but Dash supporters just don't want to get it. Take Litecoin for example. It had a small instamine because of the fixed-interval difficulty adjustment algorithm that was ubiquitous at the time. but since Litecoin distributes its supply relatively slowly, over years to decades, not hours or days, the effect of that was negligible.

It doesn't even matter (much) whether LTC's instamine was rigged intentionally and grabbed by insiders or an accident and split among many lucky miners, because the relative amount is small, and that is an objective structural fact. As with Dash, distributional outcomes and intentions are not fully knowable, but the resilience and soundness (in the case of Litecoin) or the fragility and unsoundness (in the case of Dash) of the structures are fully knowable and fully known.

And these people could not have foreseen that Xcoin(which Dash was built upon) was going to get any value at all.

That is true for most people. But someone who knew that it had actual development plans would have a far, far better chance to conclude this than people operating in the dark (no pun intended). The only people with this enormous advantage were Evan and people working with Evan.

*awards smoothie Bitcointalk Gold for this post*

Clapping_audience.gif