Honestly, which is better? Monero or Dash?

[smooth]

B. Masternodes are not decentralized if most of them are hosted on Amazon and other cloud hosting providers. Not to mention some people have offered services to allow small investors to purchase "portions" of a masternode. Thus that is a form of centralization on a different level.

Also one person or group owning many masternodes. If there were some way to ensure that 3000 masternodes were actually owned and controlled by 3000 fully-independent individuals that would be one thing (and somewhat decentralized, even if not really permissionless), but there isn't and they aren't.

[TPTB_need_war]

Why use this complex mixnet stuff (that won't really work well) when Zerocash elegantly solves the problem and is entirely autononomous. To quote smooth (he was referring to Cryptonote but he should have been referring to Zerocash), "a pidgeon could carry your transaction to the block chain and it wouldn't matter". Let me rephrase that, "a truck with your name painted on the side could carry your transaction to the block chain and it wouldn't matter". With Zerocash, everything is hidden so even if you put your name in the transaction packets, it wouldn't affect your anonymity because no one can see any of the details of the transaction. All they will see is you put your name on this encrypted blob of data. So you are worried about the compromised key of Zerocash leading to a hidden inflation of the money supply (I was too), but it doesn't affect the anonymity in any case. Well even that has solutions, e.g. make multiple sets of keys and sign all transactions with more than one signature so you have more assurance that all of the keys weren't fraudulently generated. Or run Zerocash only as a mixer and net out all the coins in/out periodically to be sure it is not creating coins out-of-thin-air.

Well I don't agree with the bolded, and therefore I don't agree with your conclusions about zerocash. Conceding your IP traffic opens you up to a lot of timing and correlation attacks independent of the blockchain. The problem with blockchain analysis is that it can disclose a lot about you even if your net traffic is private. I contend you need both.

I also contend that the point of the pigeon example is that there will always be ways to make your net traffic private (at least what minimal net traffic is needed to send transactions), and even if regular users can't be relied upon to use great opsec, reasonably good opsec and network-level privacy can be automated and hidden where users don't need to know about it, just as end-to-end encryption in messaging apps now make using encryption easy even though using encryption directly (and correctly) can be hard.

Anyway, all that really matters is that people make serious and competent efforts to solve these problems. Even if one project doesn't get everything right immediately, lessons can be learned and applied by others.

EDIT: The above was a bit too extreme. I do somewhat agree with the bold in that identifying one transaction doesn't support blockchain analysis to unravel a large part of the rest, which means the blockchain can't become an amplification of existing surveillance techniques. After all we don't expect that having a private blockchain by itself suddenly blocks all surveillance. I also agree (of course) that Zerocash is more effective in theory at protecting privacy than the techniques currently used in Monero. But then, comparing some future solution and assuming no undiscovered issues against something that exists now and is almost two-years mature is always pretty one-sided. Likely that will apply to what we are now calling Zerocash at some time in the future as well.

Taking your edit into consideration, I don't have any disagreement. I also quoted AnonyMint (myself) yesterday in my thread:

Theoretically all the other anonymity paradigms can be unmasked by correlating IP addresses. That doesn't mean the others are useless, just not as 100% certain as Zerocash.

I want to emphasize the point in your edit that for most of us to maintain perfection on obfuscation of our IP address is really implausible. For example, some of us probably think we can just hop down to our local library or retail outlet and use the unregistered WiFi to escape correlation. But assuming you are hiding from the government and thus the NSA (e.g. taxation or being the developer of an unregistered investment security altcoin) the problem is, you may be the only person in your geographical area doing that, given how small the usage of for example XMR is. And by the time some CN coin is widely used, the governments will have outlawed anonymous WiFi.

If you really have a reason to be anonymous, then the threat level of losing your anonymity is typically measured in jail time. There simply isn't anything you can do to 100% assure your IP address is obfuscated. And the data is likely being saved forever so our future risk is never ameliorated (in spite of recent news that the NSA would delete archives of telephone conversations). Whereas, with Zerocash up to limitation of the failure of number theory, you are 100% protected from your IP address being correlated with your block chain activity. That is not a gradation of difference, rather it is paradigmatic difference:

[...8<...]

Well that is the sort of statistical pattern that I think it implausible to hide if the person who needs to know thus can afford the resources to know.

I don't think in this Technocracy age of Big Data, one can't hope to obscure patterns on large data sets. The generative essence of the implausibility is that the statistical patterns hidden at one layer, leak into the next layer, so it becomes a requirement for a globally leak-proof synergy of activity in cyberspace. It seems futile from that high-level perspective. And I stubbornly didn't want to accept that, but having really looked deeply at the technical issues, I now lean to that being the hard reality.

That is why I posit that the paradigm of wealth stored in forms that others can easily emulate, tax, and expropriate is dying.

[...8<...]

---8<---

...but then the problem is the anonymity leaks as these anonymous mixes are then traded for coins in a system that is used in everyday commerce (e.g. microtransactions).

Granted maybe you can think of scenarios where privacy from other peeping Toms is the only goal and in that case Cryptonote alone (never mind Tor or I2P) is probably sufficient in most cases. But your threat level going forward is likely not just an individual, but rather the big data collection of corporations such as Facebook and Google which track every damn thing we do via cookies, etc.. And the likelihood these behemoths will be forced to cooperate with the NSA in the coming 666 world order that is developing. Have you all not seen the proclamations of the G20 to cooperate on sharing information about tax evaders? Have you all not seen that China has 10 cameras on every rooftop and London apparently the same. And even if one argues these behemoths won't target you as a nobody, don't forget their employees or hackers could obtain the data and blackmail you or what ever.

Zerocash could possibly ameliorate that horrible future (because all incriminating data is entirely encrypted into a featureless blob before it leaves your computer). So I say paradigmatic distinction.

Smooth you and I (and others) are leaders helping to insure privacy of crypto (not just currency but also smart contracts). Let's get this right.

Zerocash can I think be altered to encrypt the smart contract data as well. Also it has paradigmatic advantage over Ethereum in that the contract doesn't have to be rerun on every verification node, as I wrote in 2014:

Yes Ethereum is one of the possible serious challengers to Bitcoin, and I've been aware of it for months behind the scenes. I am doubting the economics of how they tied their scripting into the mining. I fear it may be a fundamental flaw that could cause it to fail over time. Other than that, I think contracts changes everything in the crypto-currency paradigm.

Also IMHO Ethereum's planned IPO model for starting a currency is flawed.

The second link above leads to a post which links to:

Charles & Vitalik,

I agree with the premise of decentralized database of contracts that eliminates centralized trust, but getting there requires we also pay attention to some realities.

As I explained to Charles on the phone last year, there is a fundamental flaw in your design which as far as I can see makes it untenable.

A Turing complete scripting layer run by the full clients (mining nodes) is subject to the Halting problem. You are begging for Murphy's Law due to centralizing chaos. When we run JavaScript in our Chrome browser, we are not requiring Google's servers to run the scripts. I see your mitigation is to charge the contract per line of code executed (beyond 16) for each transaction on the contract. However the cost of execution is "not one size fits all", thus you prevent innovation and bind together that which should be decentralized freedom.

Perhaps the tenable solution will be something along the lines of CoinWitness, where the script is run externally and only the proof is run by the mining nodes. On your blog you mention this technology but not for the purpose of fixing the problem I am claiming.

As I explained to Charles on the phone, I don't think your proof-of-work will remain consumer PC cpu-only.

Also you admit on your blog that you don't address the centralizing of mining.

Interested to see the progress you all make.

Note the technology in CoinWitness is essentially the zk-SNARKs employed in Zerocash.

[smooth]

But your threat level going forward is likely not just an individual, but rather the big data collection of corporations such as Facebook and Google which track every damn thing we do via cookies, etc.. And the likelihood these behemoths will be forced to cooperate with the NSA in the coming 666 world order that is developing. Have you all not seen the proclamations of the G20 to cooperate on sharing information about tax evaders? Have you all not seen that China has 10 cameras on every rooftop and London apparently the same. And even if one argues these behemoths won't target you as a nobody, don't forget their employees or hackers could obtain the data and blackmail you or what ever.

Zerocash could possibly ameliorate that horrible future (because all incriminating data is entirely encrypted into a featureless blob before it leaves your computer). So I say paradigmatic distinction.

The problem is, at that threat level you can't know that any of those 10 cameras on every rooftop along with other such techniques known and unknown aren't shoulder-surfing you before that blob leaves your computer or using some other techniques. It is even possible to use technology to see through walls, so closing the window or staying away from windows may not help you. (Maybe they can't see your screen through walls, but they can see your fingers typing, or eavesdrop as you use a voice interface.)

Guarding against surveillance of all kinds is really extremely difficult. To make any progress you have to narrow the problem, and attack in pieces. Zerocash is no panacea.

[TPTB_need_war]

But your threat level going forward is likely not just an individual, but rather the big data collection of corporations such as Facebook and Google which track every damn thing we do via cookies, etc.. And the likelihood these behemoths will be forced to cooperate with the NSA in the coming 666 world order that is developing. Have you all not seen the proclamations of the G20 to cooperate on sharing information about tax evaders? Have you all not seen that China has 10 cameras on every rooftop and London apparently the same. And even if one argues these behemoths won't target you as a nobody, don't forget their employees or hackers could obtain the data and blackmail you or what ever.

Zerocash could possibly ameliorate that horrible future (because all incriminating data is entirely encrypted into a featureless blob before it leaves your computer). So I say paradigmatic distinction.

The problem is, at that threat level you can't know that any of those 10 cameras on every rooftop along with other such techniques known and unknown aren't shoulder-surfing you before that blob leaves your computer or using some other techniques. It is even possible to technology to see through walls, so closing the window or staying away from windows may not help you. (Maybe they can't see your screen through walls, but they can see your fingers typing, or eavesdrop as you use a voice interface.)

Guarding against surveillance of all kinds is really extremely difficult. To make any progress you have to narrow the problem, and attack in pieces. Zerocash is no panacea.

I will argue that you are equating threats which have a paradigmatic distinction, in that one is globally unbounded and the other is locally bounded (at least at the non-quantum mechanics model). And just as the difference between proof-of-stake and proof-of-proof is fundamental on the distinction between unbounded entropy (and implications thereof such as the ability to defraud with a combination of shorting and stake control as I explained in some comments last month or so responding to older jl777 quotes ... no time to go digging for that now...), I argue this distinction on privacy threats is fundamental.

Obfuscating your IP address can never be provably controlled by you, because the threat is unbounded in entropy. Whereas, the ability to encrypt your blob without someone having access to your private key is a local perimeter threat (and you are incorrect to imply that merely observing whom is encrypting is any form of a threat if you did mean to imply that). As long as you do your encryption inside of a lead and RF shielded case and your private key has not been compromised, then you can be 100% sure that the activity in that encrypted blob is secure (up to the limits of number theory for encryption and the Star Trek-like quantum mechanics threats that science doesn't know about or fully understand yet such as tunneling, many worlds hypothesis, etc..).

You could retort that the number theory of the encryption can also be cracked with unbounded computation, but it is intractable else crypto is intractable. Whereas, IP unmasking is not intractable. Many white papers have been written on various tractable attack threats. My point in saying the threat level is unbounded for IP address, is we can't prove the unmasking is intractable because in one example we can't even know the level of Sybil attack on the anonymity sets. And there are numerous other reasons. I have spun my head around and around on this many times.

[smooth]

As long as you do your encryption inside of a lead and RF shielded case and your private key has not been compromised

1. There is always an analog hole. If you are interacting with a device outside your brain, then whatever you are doing exists in an unencrypted state and can be observed, even if your private key is inside a safe "compartment". Yes, you can interact inside a properly shielded and otherwise uncompromised room, but few people outside of professionals are ever going to do that. More realistic is that you will interact on a smart phone in public (or within sight of a window) and much of what you do will be observed by cameras or other surveillance devices. From there is is a small matter of archiving and search technology to find the recordings of your activity.

2. There are ways of getting your transactions out that don't require direct IP communications at all. The bar to find some way to do that is really very, very low. (As opposed to, say, interactively browsing a web site, which is a much tougher problem to solve.)

3. Monero can be made very resilient to network-level surveillance, because of its end to end properties, similar to Zerocash. It won't be as good in terms of theoretical zero-knowledge properties, but it has a much better cryptographic and engineering margin of safety in practice. Yes there are potential weaknesses but they can be mitigated (for example by being careful how you respend your own change). It is already probably possible to do this with the existing tools as a careful and sophisticated user. We can make it easier for normal users (as in my analogy of how good end-to-end encryption exists today even though most users don't understand how it works or how to do it).

[slapper]

I am not talking about investing, and I didn't mean to say Dash/Monero is a good or bad investment... I am not getting into the middle of this fight.

No one said you were.

I am talking on more on an ideological level. I believe cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology are the future, and that they will improve and take over many different industries. Any innovative development is a good step in that direction, even if people get scammed along the way.

You think that innovation that possibly scams people or misleads people is still a good step in that direction of innovative development?

I strongly disagree with that. If it is avoidable by disallowing scam coins to flourish in the ecosystem based on lies and deceit I think that is a good enough metric to attempt to salvage newbie's from getting conned as opposed to just saying "its a good step even though people get scammed along the way". That essentially down play's people's losses.

You say that "crypto is the future and will improve and take over many different industries..."

Now let's stop for a second and consider that it is possible for a crypto project (not necessarily DASH) can gain mass adoption but also mislead their user base at the same time and possibly strip them of even more of their privacy and rights etc because no one vetted the software and cryptography or just believed that it "works".

As horrible as that sounds... Dashcoin is useful for the "greater good" of the future of cryptocurrencies because of the knowledge gained from the experiment.

I'm not saying there won't be knowledge to be gained from experimenting. In fact that is Bitcoin and altcoins (experiments).

I would probably support DASH if they weren't so shady in addressing concerns/issues and dismissing FACTs as trolling. (not that you want to get into that. I get it).

Two things I am learning from the Dashcoin experiment, although I admit it is still early in the experiment:

A. Investors may be willing to look past premining if the technology is decent enough (as evidenced by ripple as well)
B. Investors may also be willing to look past more centralized features as long as a cryptocurrency is still largely decentralized (masternodes, also evidenced by several other cryptocurrencies...) Most people said Darkcoin would fail because masternodes were too centralized when it came out. It is either a very long con pump and dump or those people have been proven wrong.

Plus they have introduced some neat ideas and code.

I thought you said you weren't talking about investing but now are talking about investors? ...uhh..?

A. Ripple was open about their premine. Dash tried to play a bait and switch calling it "no premine" when it essentially is. Not a good start to gaining trust with the community in general.

B. Masternodes are not decentralized if most of them are hosted on Amazon and other cloud hosting providers. Not to mention some people have offered services to allow small investors to purchase "portions" of a masternode. Thus that is a form of centralization on a different level.

By using masternodes you are trusting some 3rd party to protect your privacy. I think there are better methods than relying on a 3rd party to accomplish that.

I'm not against creativity. I'm against outright lying and deceit on the part of Evan and their inner-circle. It reminds me of Solidcoin and realsolid aka CoinHunter.

Nice post. But it doesn't touch upon probably the biggest concern, something that everyone should be asking,

** Why was the coin supply cut after a few months from 84 million to 2x million.

You just cannot do this, especially if the launch was so bad where it made it look worse than a premine. I already know the answer, it is all in the Darkcoin thread and also when these things were being cheered in the IRC chats.

If I remember correctly, ole Spoetnik doesn't even know these things but there were others who used to torment the Darkcoin thread about the initial mine and the cutting of the coin supply by a factor of 4. Even if they know, right now it is more important to troll Monero because ..... Poloniex chat and over-marketing  

[CoinHoarder]

That attacks as to the centralization of masternodes are reminiscent of people harping on about possible attacks on PoS. Two (ish) years later no successful attacks have been documented. The attack methods, although they technically may be possible, are highly unlikely to ever occur.

You guys also ignore the centralization all PoW coins (which come into play here because the coins you are championing are PoW based) inherently succumb to when it comes to mining and pools.

It's nice you guys want to play crypto currency police, but I feel like it is up to each investor to do the research themselves. This is the internet, people will get scammed daily... it happens. If someone is stupid enough to invest in something without doing extensive research then that is their fault, and perhaps they will learn a good lesson from it that will save them more money in the future.

Cramming this information down people's throat looks like spam considering you guys are pushing a competing alternative cryptocurrency. There are plenty of other scam-like coins in existence, yet you guys focus most of your "policing" on a competing cryptocurrency. It looks more like propaganda considering the circumstances.

[DrkLvr_]

That attacks as to the centralization of masternodes are reminiscent of people harping on about possible attacks on PoS. Two (ish) years later no successful attacks have been documented. The attack methods, although they technically may be possible, are highly unlikely to ever occur.

You guys also ignore the centralization all PoW coins (which come into play here because the coins you are championing are PoW based) inherently succumb to when it comes to mining and pools.

It's nice you guys want to play crypto currency police, but I feel like it is up to each investor to do the research themselves. This is the internet, people will get scammed daily... it happens. If someone is stupid enough to invest in something without doing extensive research then that is their fault, and perhaps they will learn a good lesson from it that will save them more money in the future.

Cramming this information down people's throat looks like spam considering you guys are pushing a competing alternative cryptocurrency. There are plenty of other scam-like coins in existence, yet you guys focus most of your "policing" on a competing cryptocurrency. It looks more like propaganda considering the circumstances.

You don't even need to look at any of the coin's tech to dismiss it as an outright scam. Just look at the actions of the Evan Duffield and his supporting cast of fellow shitcoiners Minotaur26 (Evan's errand boy) and whale manipulator Otoh, along with about 2 dozen sockpuppet accounts bumping/scam defending in the DASHcoin thread day in, day out.

Let's look at just a few of Evan's lies and shady actions:

- lied about the launch date/time
- lied about the instamine
- advertised "0.00000000% pre-mined" like a weasel
- instamined 1.5 million coins in 8 hours
- cut the emission from 500 coins to 5 coins per block when he was done instamining
- lied about starting Xcoin/DRK/DASH as a hobby, when he posted a few weeks before darkcoin launch on the bitcoin-dev mailing list looking for c++ coders for a for profit startup
- lied about masternode blinding being working
- lied about masternode blinding being delayed due to mobile wallets when the real reason is he just wasn't smart enough to figure out how to implement it
- advertises that he's buying coins on the exchange while selling coins OTC


Seems like you're willing to brush all this aside. Are you a scam sympathiser in general or do you just make an exception for Dash?

[CoinHoarder]

Seems like you're willing to brush all this aside. Are you a scam sympathiser in general or do you just make an exception for Dash?

No, I just feel like if someone wants to invest in Dash considering everything you mention then they have a right to do that. Then on the other hand, if they are stupid enough to invest without doing the proper research to find all of that out then it is their fault for being stupid.

I also find it funny that you guys seem obsessed with spreading the word that Dash is a scam considering your Monero allegiances. I don't see you guys policing other scams as religously. You play like white knights yet if you read in between the lines there seems to be at the very least a slight ulterior motive.

[Blawpaw]

I wouldn't go for any of them. But if I was forced to pick one I would go for DASH since there are strong suspicions of Monero being a Scam

[DrkLvr_]

Seems like you're willing to brush all this aside. Are you a scam sympathiser in general or do you just make an exception for Dash?

No, I just feel like if someone wants to invest in Dash considering everything you mention then they have a right to do that. Then on the other hand, if they are stupid enough to invest without doing the proper research to find all of that out then it is their fault for being stupid.

I also find it funny that you guys seem obsessed with spreading the word that Dash is a scam considering your Monero allegiances. I don't see you guys policing other scams as religously. You play like white knights yet if you read in between the lines there seems to be at the very least a slight ulterior motive.

When the information is being actively hidden through misinformation on their ANN page, their various instamine DUFFsplanation websites, and multiple name changes like with DASH where exactly do you expect they'll find it?

You're also making wild generalizations about everyone that has a problem with DASH being involved with Monero. Smoothie has busted scams before DASH such as Solidcoin (before Monero ever existed) so once again your explanation falls flat on its face.

Based on your continued sympathy for this high-profile scam one has to wonder if you're the one with the ulterior motives here.

[CoinHoarder]

Seems like you're willing to brush all this aside. Are you a scam sympathiser in general or do you just make an exception for Dash?

No, I just feel like if someone wants to invest in Dash considering everything you mention then they have a right to do that. Then on the other hand, if they are stupid enough to invest without doing the proper research to find all of that out then it is their fault for being stupid.

I also find it funny that you guys seem obsessed with spreading the word that Dash is a scam considering your Monero allegiances. I don't see you guys policing other scams as religously. You play like white knights yet if you read in between the lines there seems to be at the very least a slight ulterior motive.

When the information is being actively hidden through misinformation on their ANN page, their various instamine DUFFsplanation websites, and multiple name changes like with DASH where exactly do you expect they'll find it?

You're also making wild generalizations about everyone that has a problem with DASH being involved with Monero. Smoothie has busted scams before DASH such as Solidcoin (before Monero ever existed) so once again your explanation falls flat on its face.

Based on your continued sympathy for this high-profile scam one has to wonder if you're the one with the ulterior motives here.

If the only place you look is an ANN thread and the cryptocurrency's Web site when researching a cryptocurrency's to invest in then you are doing it wrong and deserve to lose your money. This information is easily obtainable in just a few minutes on Google. You guys are simply a broken record repeating information about Dash that everyone knows repeatedly for what seems like eternity.

Lol at Smoothies "scam buster" reputation. He has a history of attacking people when it is in his best interest to do so. See the link in my trust rating for an example, one that he refuses to remove even though it is clear I had no intentions of scamming anyone, and all parties involved were happy with the outcome..

My apologies if you're not a Monero cheerleader. Pretty much everyone else that is posting in this thread is, so I found you guilty by association.

[smoothie]

That attacks as to the centralization of masternodes are reminiscent of people harping on about possible attacks on PoS. Two (ish) years later no successful attacks have been documented. The attack methods, although they technically may be possible, are highly unlikely to ever occur.

You seriously need to consider doing your research before speaking. This is the second time in a few months that you've done this. First time in the Monero thread...now here.

Dear Novacoin users, I have to notify you that terrible thing happened. Unfortunately, the Proof-of-Stake difficulty has been dropped as the result of successful attack. In case if attacker would decide to continue generation, please make sure that you're not processing transaction until 8-9 confirmations were achieved. That will protect you against double spending attempts.

Hard fork is necessary to resolve this issue, updated client will be published in the next few days. Please stay tuned.

[vlom]

oh no, not again. please stopp this.

[CoinHoarder]

That attacks as to the centralization of masternodes are reminiscent of people harping on about possible attacks on PoS. Two (ish) years later no successful attacks have been documented. The attack methods, although they technically may be possible, are highly unlikely to ever occur.

You seriously need to consider doing your research before speaking. This is the second time in a few months that you've done this. First time in the Monero thread...now here.

Dear Novacoin users, I have to notify you that terrible thing happened. Unfortunately, the Proof-of-Stake difficulty has been dropped as the result of successful attack. In case if attacker would decide to continue generation, please make sure that you're not processing transaction until 8-9 confirmations were achieved. That will protect you against double spending attempts.

Hard fork is necessary to resolve this issue, updated client will be published in the next few days. Please stay tuned.

There are many Pow coins that have been attacked, it doesn't mean Pow is insecure. I was not aware of this instance, but NC is a long dying cryptocurrency's so I'm not suprised.

[Lebubar]

That attacks as to the centralization of masternodes are reminiscent of people harping on about possible attacks on PoS. Two (ish) years later no successful attacks have been documented. The attack methods, although they technically may be possible, are highly unlikely to ever occur.

You guys also ignore the centralization all PoW coins (which come into play here because the coins you are championing are PoW based) inherently succumb to when it comes to mining and pools.

It's nice you guys want to play crypto currency police, but I feel like it is up to each investor to do the research themselves. This is the internet, people will get scammed daily... it happens. If someone is stupid enough to invest in something without doing extensive research then that is their fault, and perhaps they will learn a good lesson from it that will save them more money in the future.

Cramming this information down people's throat looks like spam considering you guys are pushing a competing alternative cryptocurrency. There are plenty of other scam-like coins in existence, yet you guys focus most of your "policing" on a competing cryptocurrency. It looks more like propaganda considering the circumstances.

Thanks CoinHoarder.
This forum still have inteligent people. 

[smoothie]

That attacks as to the centralization of masternodes are reminiscent of people harping on about possible attacks on PoS. Two (ish) years later no successful attacks have been documented. The attack methods, although they technically may be possible, are highly unlikely to ever occur.

You guys also ignore the centralization all PoW coins (which come into play here because the coins you are championing are PoW based) inherently succumb to when it comes to mining and pools.

It's nice you guys want to play crypto currency police, but I feel like it is up to each investor to do the research themselves. This is the internet, people will get scammed daily... it happens. If someone is stupid enough to invest in something without doing extensive research then that is their fault, and perhaps they will learn a good lesson from it that will save them more money in the future.

Cramming this information down people's throat looks like spam considering you guys are pushing a competing alternative cryptocurrency. There are plenty of other scam-like coins in existence, yet you guys focus most of your "policing" on a competing cryptocurrency. It looks more like propaganda considering the circumstances.

Thanks CoinHoarder.
This forum still have intelligent people.  

FTFY

Oh rly?

CH was just shown to have not done his research before speaking.

[CoinHoarder]

That attacks as to the centralization of masternodes are reminiscent of people harping on about possible attacks on PoS. Two (ish) years later no successful attacks have been documented. The attack methods, although they technically may be possible, are highly unlikely to ever occur.

You guys also ignore the centralization all PoW coins (which come into play here because the coins you are championing are PoW based) inherently succumb to when it comes to mining and pools.

It's nice you guys want to play crypto currency police, but I feel like it is up to each investor to do the research themselves. This is the internet, people will get scammed daily... it happens. If someone is stupid enough to invest in something without doing extensive research then that is their fault, and perhaps they will learn a good lesson from it that will save them more money in the future.

Cramming this information down people's throat looks like spam considering you guys are pushing a competing alternative cryptocurrency. There are plenty of other scam-like coins in existence, yet you guys focus most of your "policing" on a competing cryptocurrency. It looks more like propaganda considering the circumstances.

Thanks CoinHoarder.
This forum still have intelligent people.  

FTFY

Oh rly?

CH was just shown to have not done his research before speaking.

Semantics.. not going to debate them.

[DrkLvr_]

If the only place you look is an ANN thread and the cryptocurrency's Web site when researching a cryptocurrency's to invest in then you are doing it wrong and deserve to lose your money. This information is easily obtainable in just a few minutes on Google. You guys are simply a broken record repeating information about Dash that everyone knows repeatedly for what seems like eternity.

The information that comes up in Google would be the very threads you have a problem with in the first place.

Despite all the threads there are still new investors victims of the Dash Deception who have no idea about its shady history, due to their "sweep it under the rug" tactics, and increasing marketing efforts. There is obviously more work to be done.

[Lebubar]

That attacks as to the centralization of masternodes are reminiscent of people harping on about possible attacks on PoS. Two (ish) years later no successful attacks have been documented. The attack methods, although they technically may be possible, are highly unlikely to ever occur.

You guys also ignore the centralization all PoW coins (which come into play here because the coins you are championing are PoW based) inherently succumb to when it comes to mining and pools.

It's nice you guys want to play crypto currency police, but I feel like it is up to each investor to do the research themselves. This is the internet, people will get scammed daily... it happens. If someone is stupid enough to invest in something without doing extensive research then that is their fault, and perhaps they will learn a good lesson from it that will save them more money in the future.

Cramming this information down people's throat looks like spam considering you guys are pushing a competing alternative cryptocurrency. There are plenty of other scam-like coins in existence, yet you guys focus most of your "policing" on a competing cryptocurrency. It looks more like propaganda considering the circumstances.

Thanks CoinHoarder.
This forum still have intelligent people.  

FTFY

Oh rly?

CH was just shown to have not done his research before speaking.

Thank smoothie,
You show to us that this forum also have stupid people.