Bitcoin problems are pushing me to Dash ! Thanks Amanda Johnson

[arielbit]

I do not know how Evan Duffield can still get away with his secret premine. Now we have someone posting a thread about the inability of bitcoin to solve its scaling problems while he is also trying to say that Dash is the better cryptocoin. Amusing.

Evan goes to conferences and organizes some of them right? What do you the people say to him? Do they tell him what he is doing is wrong?

Monero tried that once, they sent dnaleor to a Bitcoin event in october 2015 where Dash held a presentation when the budget system just
became operational (Dash had a marketcap of 14 million back then).

For me that was the first time it became evident how fanatic some of these Monero trolls really are. And not just on this
forum but also in real life. We got a good laugh out of it though (i was there too).

Its kinda hard to tell someone what he is doing is wrong when it is crystal clear what he does is actually pretty darn good,
something the market is noticing and rewarding accordingly.

To OP : welcome to Dash, feel free to visit us in our Dash ANN thread or in our Dash.org/forum and also i think the problems that
you encountered with Bitcoin are exactly the same problems that made Amanda switch from Bitcoin to Dash (that and the digital cash
aspects in Dash and its governance system which Amanda seems to find intriguing).

what i find more intriguing is Amanda (a DASH propagandist) is getting paid by for her services.

not that I'm against somebody having a source of income...i say, go Amanda and earn, you are good at marketing.

[iamnotback]

I do not know how Evan Duffield can still get away with his secret premine. Now we have someone posting a thread about the inability of bitcoin to solve its scaling problems while he is also trying to say that Dash is the better cryptocoin. Amusing.

Evan goes to conferences and organizes some of them right? What do you the people say to him? Do they tell him what he is doing is wrong?

Monero tried that once, they sent dnaleor to a Bitcoin event in october 2015 where Dash held a presentation when the budget system just
became operational (Dash had a marketcap of 14 million back then).

I remember that YouTube video of the Evolution pre-announcement in the Netherlands and Evan's eyes began blinking like crazy when the question was posed, as it is the case when someone is lying. And the stone cold look on Evan's face when the question was dropped on him and he couldn't respond.

The at some later conference we had a photo of him and fluffypony arms over each other's shoulders as best buddies. Hmmm.

Apparently he is an amiable guy in person.

When (was that 2014?) I as @AnonyMint went into the Darkcoin forum to tell Evan that CoinJoin could be jammed (given I was the person who had afaik first told the core Bitcoin developer @gmaxwell that his idea of blacklisting jammers was nonsense because the entire point of mixing was to prevent the ability to track users in any blacklist, duh), I was not in an amiable mood. I thought Evan was creating BS technology. He then offered the spontaneous idea of masternodes to prevent the jamming. He was so amiable, that I just backed off. The community interpreted this as my endorsement, and at that time I didn't think I should interfere so I just STFU. So I sort of am a tiny bit involved (a pivotal factor in the history) for enabling this outcome.

At that time, @AnonyMint (myself) was pushing very hard for anonymity to be prioritized. And I was one of the guys since 2013 that had popularized the concept of anonymity. That was aided when Hearn proposed redlisting for Bitcoin. And then the anonymous coins came to fruition in 2014. Obviously others such as the Cryptonote developers had been working on anonymity behind the scenes. So actually I was just a tiny factor overall for anonymity (although I don't know to what extent my public posting had motivated those others or if I was influenced by others such as anoncoin and Gmaxwell), but apparently I was a pivotal one in Dash's Darkcoin inception.

@dinofelis' summary of the history is also an excellent distilled, retrospective.

The soap opera of crypto. And we aren't tired of it yet.  

[qwizzie]

Here is an interesting comparison between Dash and Bitcoin, i must warn you all though its a bit .. uhm .. lengthy :

[iamnotback]

The elegance of the marketing of the masternode scam to foolish speculators is quite impressive. But it doesn't create any paradigm-shift to help you with real adoption, unless one can argue that fooled speculators will work tirelessly to create adoption (which might be true to some small extent but is not likely to be a viral, naturally in demand phenomenon). I admit speculators will be hoodwinked by the masternode bullet points (even though they obscure the scam of it).

By "scam", what your detractors allege is that the insiders are ostensibly always siphoning off the lion's share of the capital and investing in more masternodes as necessary to maintain their lion's share. (There is no way to prove they are not doing this, so why wouldn't they?) Thus Dash is a centralized ledger with 3000+ replicated copies of masternode software mostly run by a few guys all named Evan, Inc. (and perhaps all on the same cloud providers such as Azure or Amazon AWS thus Jeff Bezos and his employees can de-anonymize everything easily because the anonymous data is unencrypted on the masternode servers and all the data on all the masternodes is visible to a couple or few cloud service providers):

This means that in the long run, a PoW coin with tail emission doesn't really care about any "initial unfairness", while a "sound money" coin with PoS can only get worse that way.

With DASH, this poses the extra problem of the potential collusion of masternodes.  I have to say that I don't know how severe this problem is.  But the day that Evan is made "an offer he can't refuse" to hand over all masternodes under his control, directly or indirectly, to TPTB, I don't know how much of DASH's anon remains.

Btw, you could have done us the favor of making it not more lengthy than it needs to be for legibility.

Here is an interesting comparison between Dash and Bitcoin, i must warn you all though its a bit .. uhm .. lengthy :

[generalizethis]

You could have done us the favor of making it not more lengthy than it needs to be for legibility.

Here is an interesting comparison between Dash and Bitcoin, i must warn you all though its a bit .. uhm .. lengthy :

Could have also thought about and analyzed some of the claims for legitimacy.

[qwizzie]

You could have done us the favor of making it not more lengthy than it needs to be for legibility.

Here is an interesting comparison between Dash and Bitcoin, i must warn you all though its a bit .. uhm ..

I did not create this comparison overview, i just stumbled upon it  in our ANN thread and barely read it
at first. But when i did read it i came to like it .. eventhough its lengthy.

Anyways it shows some key points of difference between Dash and Bitcoin in an easy to read format.

[aolley]

Hi all !

ATTENTION !

Due to Bitcoin community stupidity, lack of progress, and on-going scalability problems of the Bitcoin Network, I have decided to sell a large chunk of my
Bitcoin holdings for a combination of cash, Dash and Ethereum. (--mostly Dash)

This came after few days ago several of my Bitcoin transactions took 3 hours to complete rather than 10 minutes normally (and one transaction
took as long as 26 (!!!) hours to complete due to an artificially limited block size in Bitcoin.

I see the problem as a very fundamental problem in the Bitcoin network, that might resolve itself, or it might not. In which case bitcoin Network will go the Way of The Nokia. There is a theoretical technical solution to this problem (just like Nokia could turn-around itself during 2011/2012 era, but didn't), but politics and dumbness of the Bitcoin community prevent solution from happening.

More info:
https://medium.com/@ViaBTC/why-we-must-increase-the-block-size-and-why-i-support-bitcoin-unlimited-90b114b3ef4a

Bitcoin’s Transaction Backlog Hits All-Time High
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoins-transaction-backlog-hits-all-time-high/

Former Bitcoin Developer Hearn Calls Bitcoin A Failure, Sells All Coins
http://allcoinsnews.com/2016/01/15/former-bitcoin-developer-hearn-calls-bitcoin-a-failure-sells-all-coins/
https://blog.plan99.net/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experiment-dabb30201f7#.pijdkhwd4

--
-"Technologov"

Additionally: I really like "Amanda Johnson" and her Dash school on YouTube. She convinced me to invest in Dash and give it a chance. (Without her I would go more into Litecoin, Ethereum and Fiat dollars)

Here is a Dash channel on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAzD2v9Yx4a4iS2_-unODkA

I was aware of Dash since 2014 (Darkcoin back then), but didn't pay too much attention, because it's only feature over Bitcoin at the time was coin-mixing, a feature I wasn't interested in, at the time.

When did other features appeared ?

paying to full nodes ?

voting by Master-nodes ?

paying to employees ?

instantSend ?

Additionally, I'm willing to invest in Dash-Electrum development. (Since I'm a Bitcoin Electrum user right now, and like SPV light wallets in general) How is that proceeding, and what it's status ? Would a donation help to develop it faster ?
For me, the Bitcoin slow transaction debacle is a catastrophe, but perhaps also a new beginning...

Plus I'm calling a large blocks solution for Bitcoin -- be it classic, XT, Unlimited or whatever else. Bigger blocks is a must !

Problem are real, it is hard to decide what to do and harder to do anything with an effect. But I suppose it is worse not to try.

[mike77777]

and in a few months: DASH problems are pushing me to...  
dash is a huge scam

[qwizzie]

Looks like Amanda B Johnson reached Roger Ver as well :
Welcome to Dash .. Roger Ver

Here's @rogerkver list of #Bitcoin competitors he diversified into for better privacy & cheaper transaction costs as of 6m ago #anarchapulco
https://twitter.com/ToneVays/status/835233366203072513

[topesis]

I think their is need know the amount of Dash tokens that are being held in their so called master node for me it is a POS coin, the amount of Dash available for trading is very low, so it is very easy to pump a very low volume coin. Dash ponzi scheme might last for more time and even hit $100 before the ponzi burst.

[qwizzie]

I think their is need know the amount of Dash tokens that are being held in their so called master node for me it is a POS coin, the amount of Dash available for trading is very low, so it is very easy to pump a very low volume coin. Dash ponzi scheme might last for more time and even hit $100 before the ponzi burst.

Each masternode needs to have 1000 Dash in collateral (which can be kept in a personal cold wallet). The transaction of that 1000 Dash is to be verified by the network
at all times. Move any of that collateral and the network will not consider that masternode operational anymore and it will not receive any masternode payments.

Available Supply / Combined Masternode Collateral



http://178.254.23.111/~pub/masternode_count.png
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dash/

I have been pointing to masternodes and why they are so very important since 2014, and there are plenty of times when Dash was at a very very low price point at which people could buy-in.

Dash's Masternodes, what are they ? how many are there ? why should i care? --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=860067.0
Date : 17 november 2014

Dash just like any cryptocurrency could be considered a scheme but it is not a ponzi scheme, just like Bitcoin is not a ponzi scheme.
Dash does have economic aspects that i suspect will play a much larger role in the future :

* Annual 7% decrease in block rewards (coming up in a few weeks actually)
* Dash has a second tier (masternodes) that is rewarded for the services it provides for the network. This will provide a strong and secure network, possible prevent heavy price fluctuations in the future
and attracts longterm investors.
* Blockrewards are influenced by number of masternodes and hashrate : if they get lower the blockrewards go up, if they go higher the blockrewards will go lower till they reach minimal level
(Dash has been on those minimal blockrewards for sometime now).
* Dash has a decentralized budget system that is funded directly from the blockchain. Budget proposals are voted on by masternodes. Independance of budget and governance enables Dash
to create its own ecosystem and expand drastically from there.  
 
  

[iamnotback]

* Dash has a decentralized budget system that is funded directly from the blockchain. Budget proposals are voted on by masternodes. Independance of budget and governance enables Dash
to create its own ecosystem and expand drastically from there.  

You can't prove it is decentralized, because you can't prove there isn't a Sybil attack on the ownership of masternodes. Given the skewed distribution of tokens at the start due to the sneaky "bug" instamine, it is sensible to expect that most (let's guessestimate a majority or supermajority) of the masternodes are owned by "Evan Inc.". Why would the insiders give up control of such a marvelous alleged "scam", especially given that speculators apparently keep feeding Evan Inc. more money (unless the market liquidity is Evan, Inc buying tokens from himself to fake the liquidity and manipulate the price upwards)?

Decentralized is not the same as distributed or replicated. Please consult the dictionary if you disagree.

I've been thinking more about what Evan Inc. could in theory do to the market place if the float was only a tiny fraction of the insider controlled money supply. It means that any selloff by any person who owns Dash will only cause a short-term drop in the price, because the insiders can buy tokens from themselves and raise the price back up again. This gives the illusion that there is liquidity for those Dash holders who want to sell. If anyone with large holdings (e.g. $100,000 of it) wanted to sell Dash, they would crash the price. If 10 guys with $10,000 each of Dash tried to sell, they would probably crash the price. I VERY MUCH DOUBT YOU CAN SELL DASH WHEN YOU NEED TO.

It is possible the Evan Inc. might try to absorb your selling if he felt it was just a test. But sustained selling of only very tiny amounts of the marketcap would I bet crash the price.

And this is why I think you are crazy to sell Bitcoin and buy Dash. Bitcoin has liquidity. Dash I bet doesn't (but I can't prove it without doing a test).

If there is a way to short Dash, someone may want to do this test and make a lot of money if the hypothesis is correct.    You could force the insiders to buy at lower prices to stop you from covering your shorts, which they might do so that you lose and they lose also. So you might need very deep pockets to win this war. You'd probably also want to make sure you are anonymous, because it is not beyond the realm of plausibility to ponder if this group could possibly have ties to mafia and retaliate bodily.

[doc12]

Lol seriously you delusional Dash supporters, please stop promoting this pemined scamcoin.

Lets have a look at TX count : https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-dash.html

So your shitty litte network is processing about 1.5k TX per day, not growing with time .... and you want tell us something about scaleability. Lets talk, when you reach Bitcoins TX count of todays, (prop around year 2300) and else STFU. Then we will see how your network scales, but I doubt you will reach 350k TX per day in our lifetime, because there is absolutely no growth. Bitcoin is processing more transaction in 6 minutes then the Dash network in the whole day ....

Please people dont sell your precious bitcoin for this premined shitcoin. Just look at the network TX count, its not growing over time -> no adoption at all. Just a bunch of scammers taking you bitcoins away.

Even DOGE! has 7 times the TX-Rate per day on avarage compared to Dash !  Think about that ...

[qwizzie]

* Dash has a decentralized budget system that is funded directly from the blockchain. Budget proposals are voted on by masternodes. Independance of budget and governance enables Dash
to create its own ecosystem and expand drastically from there.  

You can't prove it is decentralized, because you can't prove there isn't a Sybil attack on the ownership of masternodes. Given the skewed distribution of tokens at the start due to the sneaky "bug" instamine, it is sensible to expect that most (let's guessestimate a majority or supermajority) of the masternodes are owned by "Evan Inc.". Why would the insiders give up control of such a marvelous alleged "scam", especially given that speculators apparently keep feeding Evan Inc. more money (unless the market liquidity is Evan, Inc buying tokens from himself to fake the liquidity and manipulate the price upwards)?

Decentralized is not the same as distributed or replicated. Please consult the dictionary if you disagree.

I've been thinking more about what Evan Inc. could in theory do to the market place if the float was only a tiny fraction of the insider controlled money supply. It means that any selloff by any person who owns Dash will only cause a short-term drop in the price, because the insiders can buy tokens from themselves and raise the price back up again. This gives the illusion that there is liquidity for those Dash holders who want to sell. If anyone with large holdings (e.g. $100,000 of it) wanted to sell Dash, they would crash the price. If 10 guys with $10,000 each of Dash tried to sell, they would probably crash the price. I VERY MUCH DOUBT YOU CAN SELL DASH WHEN YOU NEED TO.

It is possible the Evan Inc. might try to absorb your selling if he felt it was just a test. But sustained selling of only very tiny amounts of the marketcap would I bet crash the price.

And this is why I think you are crazy to sell Bitcoin and buy Dash. Bitcoin has liquidity. Dash I bet doesn't (but I can't prove it without doing a test).

If there is a way to short Dash, someone may want to do this test and make a lot of money if the hypothesis is correct.    You could force the insiders to buy at lower prices to stop you from covering your shorts, which they might do so that you lose and they lose also. So you might need very deep pockets to win this war. You'd probably also want to make sure you are anonymous, because it is not beyond the realm of plausibility to ponder if this group could possibly have ties to mafia and retaliate bodily.

You could talk to iCEBREAKER, he is known to have shorted Dash in the past .. this could totally be his thing.

[iamnotback]

* Dash has a decentralized budget system that is funded directly from the blockchain. Budget proposals are voted on by masternodes. Independance of budget and governance enables Dash
to create its own ecosystem and expand drastically from there.  

You can't prove it is decentralized, because you can't prove there isn't a Sybil attack on the ownership of masternodes. Given the skewed distribution of tokens at the start due to the sneaky "bug" instamine, it is sensible to expect that most (let's guessestimate a majority or supermajority) of the masternodes are owned by "Evan Inc.". Why would the insiders give up control of such a marvelous alleged "scam", especially given that speculators apparently keep feeding Evan Inc. more money (unless the market liquidity is Evan, Inc buying tokens from himself to fake the liquidity and manipulate the price upwards)?

Decentralized is not the same as distributed or replicated. Please consult the dictionary if you disagree.

I've been thinking more about what Evan Inc. could in theory do to the market place if the float was only a tiny fraction of the insider controlled money supply. It means that any selloff by any person who owns Dash will only cause a short-term drop in the price, because the insiders can buy tokens from themselves and raise the price back up again. This gives the illusion that there is liquidity for those Dash holders who want to sell. If anyone with large holdings (e.g. $100,000 of it) wanted to sell Dash, they would crash the price. If 10 guys with $10,000 each of Dash tried to sell, they would probably crash the price. I VERY MUCH DOUBT YOU CAN SELL DASH WHEN YOU NEED TO.

It is possible the Evan Inc. might try to absorb your selling if he felt it was just a test. But sustained selling of only very tiny amounts of the marketcap would I bet crash the price.

And this is why I think you are crazy to sell Bitcoin and buy Dash. Bitcoin has liquidity. Dash I bet doesn't (but I can't prove it without doing a test).

If there is a way to short Dash, someone may want to do this test and make a lot of money if the hypothesis is correct.    You could force the insiders to buy at lower prices to stop you from covering your shorts, which they might do so that you lose and they lose also. So you might need very deep pockets to win this war. You'd probably also want to make sure you are anonymous, because it is not beyond the realm of plausibility to ponder if this group could possibly have ties to mafia and retaliate bodily.

You could talk to iCEBREAKER, he is known to have shorted Dash in the past .. this could totally be his thing.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that the liquidity is real, with sufficient speculators being enamored with Dash's marketing to provide an aggregate market.

Maybe ICEBREAKER needs to wait and short when the Dash "reality distortion field" has been busted by a project that is actually gaining the real world adoption that Dash only talks about.

[qwizzie]

* Dash has a decentralized budget system that is funded directly from the blockchain. Budget proposals are voted on by masternodes. Independance of budget and governance enables Dash
to create its own ecosystem and expand drastically from there.  

You can't prove it is decentralized, because you can't prove there isn't a Sybil attack on the ownership of masternodes. Given the skewed distribution of tokens at the start due to the sneaky "bug" instamine, it is sensible to expect that most (let's guessestimate a majority or supermajority) of the masternodes are owned by "Evan Inc.". Why would the insiders give up control of such a marvelous alleged "scam", especially given that speculators apparently keep feeding Evan Inc. more money (unless the market liquidity is Evan, Inc buying tokens from himself to fake the liquidity and manipulate the price upwards)?

Decentralized is not the same as distributed or replicated. Please consult the dictionary if you disagree.

I've been thinking more about what Evan Inc. could in theory do to the market place if the float was only a tiny fraction of the insider controlled money supply. It means that any selloff by any person who owns Dash will only cause a short-term drop in the price, because the insiders can buy tokens from themselves and raise the price back up again. This gives the illusion that there is liquidity for those Dash holders who want to sell. If anyone with large holdings (e.g. $100,000 of it) wanted to sell Dash, they would crash the price. If 10 guys with $10,000 each of Dash tried to sell, they would probably crash the price. I VERY MUCH DOUBT YOU CAN SELL DASH WHEN YOU NEED TO.

It is possible the Evan Inc. might try to absorb your selling if he felt it was just a test. But sustained selling of only very tiny amounts of the marketcap would I bet crash the price.

And this is why I think you are crazy to sell Bitcoin and buy Dash. Bitcoin has liquidity. Dash I bet doesn't (but I can't prove it without doing a test).

If there is a way to short Dash, someone may want to do this test and make a lot of money if the hypothesis is correct.    You could force the insiders to buy at lower prices to stop you from covering your shorts, which they might do so that you lose and they lose also. So you might need very deep pockets to win this war. You'd probably also want to make sure you are anonymous, because it is not beyond the realm of plausibility to ponder if this group could possibly have ties to mafia and retaliate bodily.

You could talk to iCEBREAKER, he is known to have shorted Dash in the past .. this could totally be his thing.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that the liquidity is real, with sufficient speculators being enamored with Dash's marketing to provide an aggregate market.

Maybe ICEBREAKER needs to wait and short when the Dash "reality distortion field" has been busted by a project that is actually gaining the real world adoption that Dash only talks about.

wait wait wait, you are not talking about Zcash here.. are you ? 

[iamnotback]

wait wait wait, you are not talking about Zcash here.. are you ?  

Neither Zcash nor Monero (nor Zcoin or any coin that current exists, except maybe Steem but I think it is probably doomed by its whale heavy distribution). I'll let this be my last reply unless some new issue of discussion is raised.

P.S. Afair I don't know anything about Zcoin, unless it was that coin I had looked at long ago that was based on the original Zerocoin accumulator.

[qwizzie]

wait wait wait, you are not talking about Zcash here.. are you ? 

Neither Zcash nor Monero. I'll let this be my last reply unless some new issue of discussion is raised.

Must be that Zcoin that Roger Ver invested in (rank 58 i think)....

[iamnotback]

Let's assume for the sake of argument that the liquidity is real, with sufficient speculators being enamored with Dash's marketing to provide an aggregate market.

Without real adoption, Dash's marketing to fools may dry up soon due to competition from ICO developers:

Re: Stay away from ICO

Yes, stay away so i can get more of the ICO for myself

That was a good attitude before when there were only a few ICOs. Now we have a new ICO every week or day.

Instead of there being any money to make prices go up in the future, all our BTC will be in the pockets of ICO developers. An ICO graveyard is coming where 100s of ICOs are buried. You are destroying Dash's speculator market. Soon there won't be any more dumb speculators.

There is no way all these 100s of ICOs are all going to go up in price.

Yeah you do that. Please put all your BTC into ICOs because we need smart people like you to lose all your BTC, so our ecosystem can get dumber.

Added the following. Note there is one counter-argument I can make to myself, which is if this proliferation of ICOs can bring more new money into our ecosystem, then my fear of losing the aftermarket may be incorrect.

Regarding the upthread post wherein I alleged that Ethereum can't scale (and tangentially I also alleged smart contracts on a Turing-complete blockchain are another DAO attack waiting to happen), I was asked to provide some more details.

(Additionally I have recently explained that the 10s (coming to 100s?) of ICOs being launched every year now because of this Ethereum smart contract nonsense which enables rapid prototyping of 1000s of hair-brained ideas that will probably never achieve any serious adoption, because again Ethereum can't scale and another smart contract attack means all smart contracts become untrustable, means we likely have a coming ICO graveyard where our ecosystem has died. Thanks to greedy developers who want to cash out after making a fancy presentation and thus don't develop first and launch without an ICO and really don't have much incentive to develop anything at all after they raise $millions to party with, especially young guys who have a lot of energy for conferences, dinners, parties, fancy hotels, etc.. What happened to my generation of startups where we developed them from our bedroom while living at our parents' hose.

The low marginal cost of preparing the snazzy website, whitepaper and perhaps even a barely functional smart contract demo is minimal, perhaps < $5000 or even less. Yet these ICOs can easily raise 100s or 1000s of BTC. So the supply of ICOs rises to meet the demand from gullible speculators who all "want to buy earlier than each other" so they all end up buying ICOs, thus none of them buy earlier than each other and the ICO developers walk away with the Bitcoins and the speculators will be left penniless in the coming ICO oversupply graveyard because all the demand will have been transferred to ICO developers who don't buy in the aftermarket.)

Re: HumanIQ has a technically flawed design?

I just dont think a de-centralized system is capable of vetting people for loans and i'm nearly positive it isnt any good at prosecuting those who dont repay them.

You are thinking of WeTrust, as HumanIQ has nothing to do with loans.

There are too many ICOs. Nobody can keep track of them in their mind. That is why these ICOs are all going to fail and end up in an ICO oversupply graveyard with no buyers in the aftermarket. We are being saturated with too many ICOs. None of them can get enough mindshare. Our minds are overloaded.

Besides The Founder, What is Wrong With Qtum?

Qtum does a few things right. The developers designed a competent website and wrote two interesting whitepapers. Digging a bit deeper, reveals some troubling issues.

With legit ICOs like Chronobank dumping, what more with an ICO that's shrouded with shady players.

Speculators are attempting to know what is impossible to know too early. And thus they are being taken in by 100s of ICOs and going to end up in an ICO graveyard.

It used to be that speculators could perhaps gauge which ICOs had a superior level of hype and marketing, so they could speculate not on actuated creative technological achievement, but on the ICO being the actual launch of the manipulation of the minds of speculators (aka "mining the speculators"). But now we are entering a new phase where there will be an an oversupply (market saturation) of ICOs which have copied that "the ICO is the launch of the reality distortion field" paradigm. Ethereum is spawning offspring (i.e. smart contract) copycats of its own reality distortion field business model, which may cannabalize ETH itself.

[pao_de_lo]

 DASH, good choice. 

 Amanda Johnson  is beautiful.