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

[toknormal]

Makes no sense to give miners even more hashrate power by increasing their mining rewards...It will not provide more decentralization to miners and it will not make our network significantly more secure then it already is. All it will do is make our circulating supply growth problem even worse.

The main purpose of "hashrate" is not to secure the network. Never was and if we see that as its primary role we'll end up developing an efficiently secured network that's worthless as a monetary asset.

Why does "difficulty" as a mining property even exist ?

It exists because it's the only way to implement scarcity in a synthesised monetary asset. The more people attempt to acquire the next block the more scarce the protocol makes it, requiring more effort to mine it. The coins then pop out of the block with a pre-determined "price" attached to them which reflects the demand that prevailed at the point of mining. The "price" then goes on to characterise the evolution of the market price since every subsequent trade will incur either a gain or a loss on the previous price.

By reducing the proportion of the coin supply that's subject to this "real" form of scarcity, all you're doing is making the blockchain dysfunctional as a monetary asset.

Take the masternode reward for example. A moment's accounting shows this to be a "scarcity-free" zone in terms of cost of acquisition:

Date                  Narrative                       Amount               Balance (Dash)
*********************************************************
March 2020.       Purchase Node              +1000 Dash          1000 Dash
April   2020.       Reward                         +5 Dash               1005 Dash
May    2020.       Reward                         +5 Dash               1010 Dash
June   2020.       Reward                         +5 Dash               1015 Dash
July.   2020.       Sell Node                      -1000 Dash               15 Dash

I now have 15 Dash that were acquired at effectively zero cost and therefore no value added to the chain. Any price above zero is pure profit which is why the market (which includes holders of those rewards on the sell side) is at liberty to continually value the supply downwards as long as there are people willing to pay hard dollars for something that cost zero dollars to produce.

Scarcity does not mean "low in number". I can create a chain tomorrow that only has 10 coins in it and grows by 1 coin per year and the market can value it at zero. Scarcity - properly synthesised - means "difficult to attain" as in costly to attain. Giving coins away for nothing is simply inviting the market to value them accordingly.

[qwizzie]

well Monero goes away... Not Marketcap, but PRICE. As Talk says WAKE UP!

Here is a chart which compares Dash price in USD (blue) with Monero price in USD (red) over time :


Source : Tradingview, 1W interval, Poloniex

Looking at the chart i think that Dash and Monero are following each other with regards to price pretty closely, ever since late 2019.
This has been going on a long time, not something to suddenly wake up about or stress about.
Price of both coins is basically going sideways.

So Dash was once 10 times more valuable now back to a similar price. Where did Dash go wrong?

Where did all these Altcoins go wrong ?



It is a bit unrealistic from people to expect the price of their crypto project to just continue to rise or stay at a certain price level.
Cryptocurrencies have long term cycles, have bear markets, have corrections, have bull markets. They are cyclical of nature.

[afbitcoins]

Where did peercoin go wrong? Qwizzie, sometimes a project doesn't recover from a bear market. I've seen good projects end up worth nothing, hundreds of places down the rankings. Not dead but not really alive. Dash can fall and fall there is no divine right to recover. Many good projects will not.  If anyone is panicking at the bottom of a bear market it is Ryan and the yes voters. The problem is incorrectly framed as a circulating supply issue. It is not about that. The supply is predetermined. Like any asset all are free to circulate. We shouldn't try to influence free market that way. It never goes as planned. As tok is saying proof of work is not entirely about securing the network. Dash is ignoring well established monetary forces especially scarcity.

[qwizzie]

Where do i find this research? Where did Ryan publish his models of masternode numbers and how adjusting reward allocation influences the curve? I have asked this before. I would like to study the research. All I have seen is handwaving arguments about reducing circulating supply

Ryan did a lot of linking in his proposal description (https://app.dashnexus.org/proposals/decision-proposal-block-reward-reallocation/overview).
The video presentation of his research and the proposed changes can be found here : https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-economics-discussion-series.50278/
If you need more specific sources, then i suggest you ask for that in that thread.

Where did peercoin go wrong? Qwizzie, sometimes a project doesn't recover from a bear market. I've seen good projects end up worth nothing, hundreds of places down the rankings. Not dead but not really alive. Dash can fall and fall there is no divine right to recover. Many good projects will not.  If anyone is panicking at the bottom of a bear market it is Ryan and the yes voters. The problem is incorrectly framed as a circulating supply issue. It is not about that. The supply is predetermined. Like any asset all are free to circulate. We shouldn't try to influence free market that way. It never goes as planned. As tok is saying proof of work is not entirely about securing the network. Dash is ignoring well established monetary forces especially scarcity.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinion. As is Toknormal. I just don't share that opinion and looking at the support that the decision proposal is getting, not a whole lot of people with a staked long term investment in Dash do.

[the_thing]

Dash Next announces the exciting partnership with the TradeX ecosystem & their new sports betting platform. Through this partnership & integration, only Dash users can enjoy up to 10% additional tokens to bet on the TradeXSports app.

TW: https://twitter.com/DashinThailand/status/1283703615085928449

[toknormal]

looking at the support that the decision proposal is getting, not a whole lot of people with a staked long term investment in Dash do.

The more concerning point is, the wider market does share my view. (That the value is in the scarcity and that difficulty isn't irrelevant to scarcity as you seem to be alluding to).

[JollyGood]

How on earth could Monero be considered a serious project for investors when so many browsers have been hijacked with Monero mining bots. Looking at just the statistic they mined over 90% mined in 2018 and estimates fully mined in around 2 years times is appalling.

What functionality does Monero actually have which can be deemed a positive over Dash - none from what I can see.

Who would choose to invest in Monero over Dash?

Indeed.

* More then 90% of Monero was already mined in 2018, scheduled to be fully mined in 2022 --> https://blockmanity.com/news/all-of-monero-xmr-will-be-mined-by-2022-90-already-mined/
* Botnets still rampaging their network --> https://www.welivesecurity.com/2020/04/23/eset-discovery-monero-mining-botnet-disrupted/
* Failed in their main use case, Bitcoin still the dominant cryptocurrency for criminal activities on the dark web --> https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR4418.html
* Unsuccessful at adoption, integration and number of transactions --> https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-xmr-dash.html#3m
* Failed at transaction spendability, their transactions are now time-locked and need a number of confirmations (10 ?) before getting even spendable
* Doing their marketing and promotion now even through hidden messages, inside Twitter hacking schemes --> https://cointelegraph.com/news/hidden-messages-found-in-transactions-to-twitter-hack-bitcoin-address

[NibiruHybrid]

Dash Talk - Ryan Taylor Discusses Network Proposal to Adjust Block Reward Allocation

On today's episode Amanda speaks with Ryan Taylor, Dash Core Group CEO about the decision proposal aiming to adjust the block reward allocation between miners and masternodes.

Watch Now: https://youtu.be/RGLDcLTKF5Q

[jdmcg]

Dash versus bitcoin still deep in bear channel



45% proof of stake not enough. Lets have more proof of stake! Vote yes. More Dash. More proof of Stake. Only then will Dash be a better store of value

    

As depressing as this might seem, almost all established cryptos are in a similar bear channel. ETH is one of the few I think that broke out of it.

And don't get confused on how all these new cryptos are jumping the ranks (like XTZ, LINK and ATOM). They are still in price discovery and in technical bull markets.

Once DASH and other cryptos like LTC and XMR break out of their respective declining channels their bull markets will take off.

Also, just as prices between these 3 contracted to similar values per coin within this bear market, I expect that to correct with DASH outpacing the other 2 in recovery (just like last bear/bull cycle).

Of course past doesn't guarantee the future but it still provides some good insights.

I understand the fear that DASH will follow PPC's path, but at this point there's little evidence for it. It's a poor comparison, DASH is still in line with LTC's growth/adoption.

Anyways, if you feel you're overexposed in established cryptos like DASH, I suggest you diversify a bit into some of these newer projects. Careful though, I suspect you'll be kicking yourself once alt season is here. As good as LINK's chart looks... it's a centralized token... so research what might actually be better 5 years out...

DASH being in a bear channel vs BTC has nothing to do with the allocation between miners and masternodes nor could it possibly have anything to do with the proposal to slightly alter this allocation...

If anything it's likely this allocation is a main factor for why DASH has a more exaggerated price increase in bull markets and a more exaggerated price decrease in bear markets.

All eyes are still on BTC at the moment and alts are just along for the ride. If BTC can secure $9400 and then shortly after that shoot past $10500, the alt market should explode. If not and BTC suffers another dump first, expect all alts to suffer a little while longer...

Now, maybe start exploring Dash Platform a little and stop focusing on the price so much.

[TaoOfSaatoshi]

The second Dash Nation opportunity is now live! Earn Dash for posting if you qualify. Find out how here!



https://www.dashnation.com/opportunities/like-being-social-chat-about-dash-on-discord-you-could-earn-dash-for-doing-what-you-love/

Cheers, Tao.

[toknormal]

Stock buyback economics.

Let the masternodes "suck" the Dash off the market.

What happens when when we hit the next masternode "saturation level" ? Then we'll have, say 6000 nodes, all generating 1.3 coins per week = 7800 free coins being thrown at people per week at a zero cost base, ready for profit taking all the way down to zero.

We need to time our exit to perfection ?

[qwizzie]

Block Reward Reallocation Decision Proposal Status





Voting Participation : 908 votes



Voting Deadline : 10 Days

[Pang.]

Stock buyback economics.

Let the masternodes "suck" the Dash off the market.

What happens when when we hit the next masternode "saturation level" ? Then we'll have, say 6000 nodes, all generating 1.3 coins per week = 7800 free coins being thrown at people per week at a zero cost base, ready for profit taking all the way down to zero.

We need to time our exit to perfection ?

the cost is not really 0.

Doesn't it cost you to keep $ 70,000 that can be quickly converted into $ 60,000?

Risk being hacked, forked, a software problem appears, losing your private keys, all this cost 0?

It has the investment cost, and it has an opportunity cost.

A miner buys hardware, uses it to mine, and then sells it, or simply throws it away.

Most mining is in China, where the price of hardware is different, and electricity is very low.

I am not competitive when it comes to mining, nor my country, nor many others. But nevertheless the hashrate does not stop uploading in Dash.

It is evident that new highly efficient mining machines are being created and that they may not even be put on the market, since it is more profitable to exploit them by selling the newly mined Dash.

The price of Dash and its capitalization are broken because Dash is sold in the market, but that means that at the moment Dash is interesting to be mined, and it is very liquid to be sold.

Will Dash get interest?

This will only happen in these ways:

1- That its price increases and attracts the eyes of speculators, investors or people who stop to really read what Dash is.

2- That a real global marketing campaign be carried out, and not paying fashion influencers who only get absurd likes, or youtubers that nobody looks outside the crypto world.

I see dozens of tweets posted by the Dash media, which have barely 15 retweets ... are we kidding? Why pay for that?


  3-Uphold-style associations (it was a good thing), but with other actors (Kraken, Coinbase, commercial banks, multinationals ...)

I hope that our mothers or grandmothers can soon use Dash to go buy the bread ... that was the promise here, and for now, it's just that.

a greeting

[toknormal]

Doesn't it cost you to keep $ 70,000 that can be quickly converted into $ 60,000?

No. It doesn't.

Opportunity cost is neither accounted for nor "chargeable" in this way. Nor are any of the other "costs" that you mention.

[Pang.]

Doesn't it cost you to keep $ 70,000 that can be quickly converted into $ 60,000?

No. It doesn't.

Opportunity cost is neither accounted for nor "chargeable" in this way.

If you think Dash will go for $ 40, and owning master nodes, you will sell them, and maybe $ 40 again to buy them.

This will avoid potential losses, and the cost that this entails.

Would it be better for Dash if there were only 500 master nodes based on his idea?

Isn't it a cost to lose purchasing power?

Do you consider buying a mining equipment and mining Dash more risky and expensive than buying Dash, and then paying to create a shared node?

Both the miner and the master node holder are exposed to volatility, and volatility itself comes at a cost to both.

I do not see that cost,  that you can see so clearly, but I appreciate your visions of mining and nodes, as there is always a need for a critical vision of what others consider to be good.

Thanks for them

[toknormal]

Would it be better for Dash if there were only 500 master nodes based on his idea?

Isn't it a cost to lose purchasing power?

Do you consider buying a mining equipment and mining Dash more risky and expensive than buying Dash, and then paying to create a shared node?

I don't see "stock buybacks" as a viable business model in corporations and while I do recognise that reducing "circulating supply" in a monetary asset like Dash can be useful for supporting the price, I don't see reward ratio as a way of changing it. The supply is "out there" however it's generated and even entire masternodes are part of the "circulating supply". I dumped half a masternode over a year ago for example. There was no "magic gate" to go through. I simply opened my wallet, sent the appropriate balance to an exchange and sold it. The coins were not "locked up" in my node any more than the rest of my balance was as the wallet balance is a continuum.

Masternode revenues give people an incentive to hold as long as the capital value is rising. But they give an incentive to sell if it's falling because the exposure is far larger. So it's a zero-sum game.

What would make it NOT a zero sum game is if all the coin supply was "doing work" for the network. i.e. if the proportion of the supply that wasn't competitively mined was being invested in some kind of network service. If it isn't it should be subjected to competitive mining to maintain maximum scarcity of the primary supply. This is where we disagree. I see mining as extremely valuable because it acheives scarcity in a way that limiting the numerical supply never can. That's just a denomination. We could re-denominate the entire supply as 5000 coins or 50 million instead of 9 million and it wouldn't change a thing. Wouldn't make the supply any more or less valuable. That's all non-mined "coin" inflation is - a purely numerical exercise just like printing fiat. (See my post above about it).

Bitcoin has 100% mining reward ratio + no node collateral requirement. By the logic of the current proposal it should be losing value at a faster rate than Dash because of so much "circulating supply". But it isn't. It has blown us away on marketcap (how valuable the entire supply is) over the years.

Litecoin has 100% mining reward ratio + no node collateral requirement. It has blown us away successively on marketcap.
Monero has 100% mining reward ratio + no node collateral requirement. It has blown us away on marketcap, going from 1/5th of ours to double.

The theory that moving the reward ratio slider one way or another reduces "circulating supply" in a favourable way only works if you cherry pick your definition of "circulating supply" to make that theory behave the way you want it. Unfortunately the market doesn't do this as the examples above demonstrate.

[afbitcoins]

As depressing as this might seem, almost all established cryptos are in a similar bear channel. ETH is one of the few I think that broke out of it.

And don't get confused on how all these new cryptos are jumping the ranks (like XTZ, LINK and ATOM). They are still in price discovery and in technical bull markets.

Once DASH and other cryptos like LTC and XMR break out of their respective declining channels their bull markets will take off.

Also, just as prices between these 3 contracted to similar values per coin within this bear market, I expect that to correct with DASH outpacing the other 2 in recovery (just like last bear/bull cycle).

Of course past doesn't guarantee the future but it still provides some good insights.

I understand the fear that DASH will follow PPC's path, but at this point there's little evidence for it. It's a poor comparison, DASH is still in line with LTC's growth/adoption.

Anyways, if you feel you're overexposed in established cryptos like DASH, I suggest you diversify a bit into some of these newer projects. Careful though, I suspect you'll be kicking yourself once alt season is here. As good as LINK's chart looks... it's a centralized token... so research what might actually be better 5 years out...

DASH being in a bear channel vs BTC has nothing to do with the allocation between miners and masternodes nor could it possibly have anything to do with the proposal to slightly alter this allocation...

If anything it's likely this allocation is a main factor for why DASH has a more exaggerated price increase in bull markets and a more exaggerated price decrease in bear markets.

All eyes are still on BTC at the moment and alts are just along for the ride. If BTC can secure $9400 and then shortly after that shoot past $10500, the alt market should explode. If not and BTC suffers another dump first, expect all alts to suffer a little while longer...

Now, maybe start exploring Dash Platform a little and stop focusing on the price so much.

I am not a speculator and no thank you, I will not consider your idea of speculating on newer projects at this time. I am primarily interested in hard money alternatives to fiat. I thought for a long time Dash could be it.

Dash is so close to being the one that ticks all the boxes. It is very painful watching this change of direction away from store of value.  Dash has potential to being great. Store of value will not be found in the direction of more proof of stake. 

[qwizzie]

I feel there is little point for me to discuss this any further, people will just have to deal with the outcome of the block reward reallocation decision proposal in their own way.
If people want to ventilate their frustrations about it on this forum that is fine, but personally i'm done with this specific discussion.



It is not a bad thing to re-evaluate a crypto project once awhile, to see if the project goals still aligns with people's own expectations about that crypto project.
I am not sure if now would be such a good time to re-valuate that alignment though, with pretty much all the Altcoins in a bear market and emotions running high.

[jdmcg]

Bitcoin has 100% mining reward ratio + no node collateral requirement. By the logic of the current proposal it should be losing value at a faster rate than Dash because of so much "circulating supply". But it isn't. It has blown us away on marketcap (how valuable the entire supply is) over the years.

Litecoin has 100% mining reward ratio + no node collateral requirement. It has blown us away successively on marketcap.
Monero has 100% mining reward ratio + no node collateral requirement. It has blown us away on marketcap, going from 1/5th of ours to double.

I don't think the current proposal speaks anything about any other crypto but DASH.

And did you expect DASH or any established alt to outperform BTC in a bear market? DASH has retraced to a previous ratio against BTC, so far more or less right on schedule within crypto's (BTC's) 4 year market cycle.

Not sure which date you're picking for marketcap comparisons... Months before the last bull market (Q4 2016/Jan 2017), DASH's marketcap was 1/3 of LTC's and much less than 1/2 of XMR's. Now DASH, months before the next bull market, is in a similar position 1/4 of LTC's marketcap and more than 1/2 of XMR's. All 3 of these cryptos are here to stay at least in the near term (3-5 years). I see nothing that suggests DASH won't recover faster and then increase faster than these other 2 cryptos in the next bull market. Of course it's speculation and everyone should figure it out for themselves.

Perhaps the mistake many make is to think gains in rank during a bull market or loses in rank during a bear market are somehow permanent... especially before mass adoption and while things are still largely speculative.

I am not a speculator and no thank you, I will not consider your idea of speculating on newer projects at this time. I am primarily interested in hard money alternatives to fiat. I thought for a long time Dash could be it.

Dash is so close to being the one that ticks all the boxes. It is very painful watching this change of direction away from store of value.  Dash has potential to being great. Store of value will not be found in the direction of more proof of stake. 

I kind of agree... selling DASH when it's still in a bear market (ie: selling low) and buying newly hyped assets that just hit new ATHs (ie: buying high) is likely a bad idea. Of course if you really think DASH is doomed and going to page 3 of coinmarketcap then you know what to do...

Wish you wouldn't call it proof of stake when it's not. But whatever, how a 10% shift that phases in over 5 years (and coincides exactly with Evan Duffield's original allocation) moves it away from a store of value is beyond me. 

[toknormal]

Wish you wouldn't call it proof of stake when it's not. But whatever, how a 10% shift that phases in over 5 years (and coincides exactly with Evan Duffield's original allocation) moves it away from a store of value is beyond me.

It isn't beyond me.

During this discussion over the last few weeks, 2 ways of "looking at" the non-mined element of the reward have emerged. I initially presented the perspective of the mining cost also accounting for the "cost of production" of the masternode reward, in which case the mining cost of the entire supply is effectively born by the investors who pay the mining cost. ("Investors" in that case being either miners who mine to hold or the segment of the market that gets the mining supply dumped on them).

Then others remarked that they didn't see it that way. They saw 2 distinct segments of the supply. The "mined" part is what miners receive and pay to mine, the balance basically pops out for "free" and is donated to masternodes.

If you take the latter view, there's no distinction with a proof of stake model. It's a straight redenomination of coin supply - a numerical exercise like money printing. You can't have it both ways. In the former perspective, we overdraw mining cost and undersupply mining reward from available market liquidity compared with 100% mined competitors. In the latter we simply inflate the coin supply numerically instead of subjecting it to competitive mining.

Both are toxic & corrosive to marketcap while the masternode reward is simply drawn down for "holiday cruises" instead of being used to add value to the network.

And did you expect DASH or any established alt to outperform BTC in a bear market? .. Months before the last bull market (Q4 2016/Jan 2017), DASH's marketcap was 1/3 of LTC's and much less than 1/2 of XMR's.

I didn't expect it to drop out of the top 20 rankings while Litecoin stayed in the top 10 and XMR in the top 15. If you check back to postings around that period you'll see that most others didn't either. You were very selective about the comparison with Monero from late December. That was a spike that echoed Dash's from 8 months previously. It didn't remotely reflect the long term position over several years which was consistently a 3x to 5x multiple for Dash.

What happened was that Monero had a very high emission rate during those years but it didn't cause their price to tank to the same extent as ours did with a much lower emission rate. So although for a given wallet holding they may not have been higher performing as a savings vehicle, they ended up the more valuable chain.

All of this completely contradicts the logic behind the split reward system beyond what's warranted by measurable added value from the masternode network. (i.e. the margins are not justified, get passed to markets to support who in turn simply devalue the coin relative to competitors to compensate).