[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[smooth]

No unbacked monetary medium in history

No distributed cryptocurrency ever existed in history before 5 1/2 years ago.

No distributed cryptocurrency with transactional privacy ever existed in history before a year and a half ago.

It's quite clear we are in an era of unprecedented rapid change with respect to cryptocurrencies.

You're making up your own theories as you would like things to be, while back in the real world, history is very much in the process of being written.

And its quite obvious, too. You're fooling no one, except maybe yourself.

[1715535282]

1715535282

[1715535282]

1715535282

[1715535282]

1715535282

[toknormal]

No distributed cryptocurrency with transactional privacy ever existed in history before a year and a half ago.

I don't think you realise the fultility of the argument you've just made.

You're basically saying that value comes from privacy. In fact, the exact reverse is true. The need for privacy only arises out of transacting in something of monetary value.

If the priorities which inform cryptonote's design goals were shared by the public then safes would be valued higher than the gold bars they're designed to contain.

It's a question of priorities. Dash wants to be the gold. Cryptonote wants to be the safe. History says you can't be both so take your pick or take the risk of overturning 3000 years of monetary evolution, only remember that you're in sociological territory here, not technical territory so you might find that the little technical factoids that you love to quote are not so effective as you thought they might be.

[coins101]

...

Toknormal's opinions DO matter because they're logical and sensible. When you work though what he's been saying for a long time now about the properties of money it's clearly fundamental, ordered and without the gaping holes you could drive a truck though that characterise much of what you and other Monero people keep pushing.

..

Actually, money is (imo) simply something someone is willing to accept, either as a gift or in exchange for something else.

Think back to movies that show inmates trading with cigarettes. Cigarettes were used as a crude monetary system of exchange.

The issue is not the nature of the monetary instrument (leave aside the nature of having to deal with monetary units of accounts in global financial trade and computer systems), but its acceptance.

The acceptance is usually defined by the confidence the first recipient has that they can use the monetary unit they receive in an onward transaction.

So that is the issue. Who is going to accept either Dash or cryptonote?

The origin of Dash was Bitcoin compatibility. While there is circle jerking going on, cryptonote based coins continue to fall behind Bitcoin at a much faster rate vs Dash as the mother ship maintains and extends its first mover advantage.

Take Backpage.com as an example.  They lost the ability to transact with credit cards, so they reverted to Bitcoin. If the anonymity issues become understood, they would find that switching to a Bitcoin clone much easier than a cryptonote based clone because of all the existing infrastructure that is compatible with Bitcoin.  

[RenegadeMan]

No distributed cryptocurrency with transactional privacy ever existed in history before a year and a half ago.

I don't think you realise the fultility of the argument you've just made.

You're basically saying that value comes from privacy. In fact, the exact reverse is true. The need for privacy only arises out of transacting in something of monetary value.

If the priorities which inform cryptonote's design goals were shared by the public then safes would be valued higher than the gold bars they're designed to contain.

It's a question of priorities. Dash wants to be the gold. Cryptonote wants to be the safe. History says you can't be both so take your pick or take the risk of overturning 3000 years of monetary evolution, only remember that you're in sociological territory here, not technical territory so you might find that the little technical factoids that you love to quote are not so effective as you thought they might be.

I think you're flogging a dead horse here Tok!

Don't you know "it's all different now..." and "the previous rules on human behaviour around the storage of monetary value are being completely rewritten because of crypto...." and " with 'private' crypto those rules are even more unknown...."

Yes sir...the 'laws' on monetary value and key properties like divisibility, fungability, trust, stability and convertability are all going out the window. It's a brave new world....

[smooth]

No distributed cryptocurrency with transactional privacy ever existed in history before a year and a half ago.

I don't think you realise the fultility of the argument you've just made.

You're basically saying that value comes from privacy.

No, I did not say that (nor did I "basically" say that).

You don't get to rewrite what I write and then respond to your rewrite if you want to make a valid argument.

[smooth]

So that is the issue. Who is going to accept either Dash or cryptonote?

The origin of Dash was Bitcoin compatibility. While there is circle jerking going on, cryptonote based coins continue to fall behind Bitcoin at a much faster rate vs Dash as the mother ship maintains and extends its first mover advantage.

Take Backpage.com as an example.  They lost the ability to transact with credit cards, so they reverted to Bitcoin. If the anonymity issues become understood, they would find that switching to a Bitcoin clone much easier than a cryptonote based clone because of all the existing infrastructure that is compatible with Bitcoin.  

I basically agree with this but empirically so far the answer your question in the first quoted paragraph above is neither, and while cryptonote coins are well behind bitcoin, so is dash.

I seriously doubt that the answer will ever rest on toknormal's esoteric, self-created, and largely (to the extent that I can even parse them) incorrect theories on money. It certainly makes more sense that Bitcoin-compatibility matters to merchant acceptance though, to the extent that a few merchants accept Bitcoin. Most don't though.

[TanteStefana2]

But you can see, can't you?  All someone would have to do, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone has already done this, as Monero is loud enough to catch the attention of the crypto section of the goverment, and it'd be so easy to do, is to make a copy of the list as it grows and time stamp it.  Then, you can simply check the 3 possible txids, run them through the algorithm, and find out which one was spent.  So that whole section of their anonymity is, in my opinion, shot.

No. The key images that get added are from old transactions. So the only thing it tells you when something is added to that list is that the key image corresponds to some old transaction output that already exists. Which was pretty obvious to begin with, since even Monero, wonderful though it is, can't quite mange time travel yet!

Maybe you should leave "in my opinion" comments to actual cryptography experts?

My dear Smooth, it would be trivial to record when these numbers are added to the list, trivial.  Just create a side program that time stamps them. And from that point on, it's just a matching game, also trivial to do.

[RenegadeMan]

...

Toknormal's opinions DO matter because they're logical and sensible. When you work though what he's been saying for a long time now about the properties of money it's clearly fundamental, ordered and without the gaping holes you could drive a truck though that characterise much of what you and other Monero people keep pushing.

..

Actually, money is (imo) simply something someone is willing to accept, either as a gift or in exchange for something else.

Think back to movies that show inmates trading with cigarettes. Cigarettes were used as a crude monetary system of exchange.

The issue is not the nature of the monetary instrument (leave aside the nature of having to deal with monetary units of accounts in global financial trade and computer systems), but its acceptance.

The acceptance is usually defined by the confidence the first recipient has that they can use the monetary unit they receive in an onward transaction.

So that is the issue. Who is going to accept either Dash or cryptonote?

The origin of Dash was Bitcoin compatibility. While there is circle jerking going on, cryptonote based coins continue to fall behind Bitcoin at a much faster rate vs Dash as the mother ship maintains and extends its first mover advantage.

Take Backpage.com as an example.  They lost the ability to transact with credit cards, so they reverted to Bitcoin. If the anonymity issues become understood, they would find that switching to a Bitcoin clone much easier than a cryptonote based clone because of all the existing infrastructure that is compatible with Bitcoin.  

Yes agreed...

Actually, money is (imo) simply something someone is willing to accept, either as a gift or in exchange for something else.

...but the key properties I just mentioned (divisibility, fungability, trust, stability and convertability) still apply, even to cigarettes in a jail.

I think the Monero people are just like so many 'technologists' (using that term rather loosely), they get all caught up in the technical aspects of their particular development and get all anal and short-sighted about it with very strong emotional attachment, attacking people that build something different because they're so insecure, and forgetting the main quest and objective we're all trying to achieve.

(the Backpage.com story is fascinating....watching that one.....interestingly they still take credit cards down here in Australia)

[smooth]

Yes sir...the 'laws' on monetary value and key properties like divisibility, fungability, trust, stability and convertability are all going out the window. It's a brave new world....

There is nothing about those rules that is obviously violated by Monero any more than Dash. Stability (especially) and trust are questionable for all cryptos given their short history.

Toknormal wants to invent a new definition that either adds new requirements or changes the requirements for money in a way that requires all transactions to be public. That's nonsense and if you look up any credible definition of money it will include a list similar to yours, all of which apply to Monero pretty much as much as any other cryptocurrency (with small differences on things like store of value stability, etc).

[toknormal]

Yes sir...the 'laws' on monetary value and key properties like divisibility, fungability, trust, stability and convertability are all going out the window. It's a brave new world....

Indeed. Just like the rules of flight were re-written with arrival of the Wright Brothers.

You no longer had to flap your arms so up became down, gravity became lift and a guy called "Bernoulli" put 150 million years of birdlife out of its misery.

[RenegadeMan]

Yes sir...the 'laws' on monetary value and key properties like divisibility, fungability, trust, stability and convertability are all going out the window. It's a brave new world....

Indeed. Just like the rules of flight were re-written with arrival of the Wright Brothers.

You no longer had to flap your arms so up became down, gravity became lift and a guy called "Bernoulli" put 150 million years of birdlife out of its misery.

You are too funny!

[smooth]

But you can see, can't you?  All someone would have to do, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone has already done this, as Monero is loud enough to catch the attention of the crypto section of the goverment, and it'd be so easy to do, is to make a copy of the list as it grows and time stamp it.  Then, you can simply check the 3 possible txids, run them through the algorithm, and find out which one was spent.  So that whole section of their anonymity is, in my opinion, shot.

No. The key images that get added are from old transactions. So the only thing it tells you when something is added to that list is that the key image corresponds to some old transaction output that already exists. Which was pretty obvious to begin with, since even Monero, wonderful though it is, can't quite mange time travel yet!

Maybe you should leave "in my opinion" comments to actual cryptography experts?

My dear Smooth, it would be trivial to record when these numbers are added to the list, trivial.  Just create a side program that time stamps them. And from that point on, it's just a matching game, also trivial to do.

When the numbers are added tells you nothing. They're already included in the transaction that adds them!

You'd need to know when the number that hashes to the key image was added. That's mathematically impossible.

[smooth]

Yes sir...the 'laws' on monetary value and key properties like divisibility, fungability, trust, stability and convertability are all going out the window. It's a brave new world....

Indeed. Just like the rules of flight were re-written with arrival of the Wright Brothers.

You no longer had to flap your arms so up became down, gravity became lift and a guy called "Bernoulli" put 150 million years of birdlife out of its misery.

In a sense that's exactly right. If you had said that winged fight involves flapping, or that humans can't fly because they don't have wings, etc. you would have been correct pre-Wright. After, not so much.

[RenegadeMan]

Yes sir...the 'laws' on monetary value and key properties like divisibility, fungability, trust, stability and convertability are all going out the window. It's a brave new world....

Indeed. Just like the rules of flight were re-written with arrival of the Wright Brothers.

You no longer had to flap your arms so up became down, gravity became lift and a guy called "Bernoulli" put 150 million years of birdlife out of its misery.

In a sense that's exactly right. If you had said that winged fight involves flapping, or that humans can't fly because they don't have wings, etc. you would have been correct pre-Wright. After, not so much.

You are too funny too! (but not in the same way as Toknormal....)

[toknormal]

Toknormal wants to invent a new definition that either adds new requirements or changes the requirements for money in a way that requires all transactions to be public.

No. I didn't say that or even allude to it.

Gold, as a metal, is not "private" in any sense. It is public - lying around on the hills and openly understood, accessible & verifiable in every aspect.  On the other hand, the records of transaction in gold are traditionally private. They can be held in a private ledger or not disclosed at all.

I make a distinction between these two manifestations of "money".

What's happened in the last couple of centuries is that records of transaction have become synonymous with a monetary media itself (as the fiat banking system has). If you are claiming to invent a new money base though, you cannot assume this synonymity. You can't at once assume that because you built the purse, any old coins inside it will have value - people build their own privacy systems once they've made that valuation which, historically at least, takes centuries.

The original satoshi monetary model recognises this fact. Dash also recognises it and has faithfully preserved the model while improving exclusively on fungibility without impacting any other monetary properties which would potentially compromise value according to universally recognised priorities of base monetary media.

[coins101]

What I don't understand is all the time spent on trying to convince people that Dash is not up to the job. Huge amounts of time, just wasted.

The direct approach would be to break Dash and say: See, broke it. Told ya. Move on. Nothing more to see here.

So the more time spent on trying to argue with words rather than with deeds is just a continual stream of validation in favour of Dash.

That's why I thought a $20k break Dash bounty was a good idea, even if it is an extra incentive to non-Monero people who clearly are not up to the job themselves.

[smooth]

Gold, as a metal, is not "private" in any sense. It is public - lying around on the hills and openly understood, accessible & verifiable in every aspect.  On the other hand, the records of transaction in gold are traditionally private. They can be held in a private ledger or not disclosed at all.

My gold is not anything like public, nor is it lying around not he hills, nor is it on a ledger.

GTFO

[BagHolder010]

This is so lame you guys, you know how smooth and Fluffy do crypto by cry'p'to about Evans and other developers work in these forums. When you reply to them it's like giving them something to do since they done copy pasting for now. " they are waiting for other boolbery or byte developers to develop something new LOOL"

[toknormal]

GTFO

And with that I'll probably let you have the last word 

I think you've posted all anyone needs to know about the basis for the faux monetary case you're trying to promote on these forums.

[coins101]

Karples arrested

http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/videonews/fnn?a=20150801-00000990-fnn-soci

Let's hope they release Willy before he gets locked up.