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

[qwizzie]

Because you have not provided any statistic or factual support for that little theory of yours.
It is nothing more then a personal opinion, that very few people in this Dash community place any value on.

LoL ! Are you serious ?

What is it about the phrase "we don't need all this hashrate" you don't understand ?

The protocol itself only requires 40% of the chain to be mined. You can switch it around philosophically anyway you like and say (for example) that the entire chain is mined, but then you've got to accept that the cost is borne disproportionally by investors in the primary supply (who finance the mining).

There is no escape and you're going to have to address that disparity because the market sees it and we have our fingers in our ears.

Changing the hashrate does nothing to supply, it certainly does not inflate or deflate supply.The amount of supply generated each day / week / month does not change when there is lower or higher hashrate.
With regards to the market : the market punishes most Altcoins at this stage, not just Dash and it does not exclude PoW coins like Bitcoin Cash or Zcash either.

If the market really values competitive mining over less competitive mining, then it would have valued PoW coins like Bitcoin Cash and Zcash higher. Instead they have the exact same price performance as Dash.

Dash              -95,4% Price Down from ATH
Bitcoin Cash    -93,6% Price Down from ATH
Zcash             -93,2% Price Down from ATH
  
Source : messari.io

[1714804404]

1714804404

[1714804404]

1714804404

[toknormal]

With regards to the market : the market punishes most Altcoins at this stage.

B.S.

We now have 5000 masternodes with ridiculously uneconomic margins to support. They are eating the capital value of the chain like a starving animal that starts to consume its own flesh to survive.

Litecoin now has over 100,000 transactions per day. We were at parity with it only a few months ago. It also has plenty of emission schedule to go so your cake-slicing supply schedule excuses do not carry any weight either.

We're still floundering on 25k transactions. Arguments like "it's ok, pump is coming" and "we have innovation" are slightly pathetic if I may say so against the current background.

[FireFox2020]

Changing the hashrate does nothing to supply, it certainly does not inflate or deflate supply.The amount of supply generated each day / week / month does not change when there is lower or higher hashrate.
With regards to the market : the market punishes most Altcoins at this stage, not just Dash and it does not exclude PoW coins like Bitcoin Cash or Zcash either.

If the market really values competitive mining over less competitive mining, then it would have valued PoW coins like Bitcoin Cash and Zcash higher. Instead they have the exact same price performance as Dash.
  

You're right. Many altcoins are at the bottom right now. But it won't always be that way. Dash is a very promising and lively project. I believe in the success of this cryptocurrency!

[qwizzie]

Look toknormal, you can bring hashrate, number of transactions, number of masternodes to this supply discussion, but that still does not support your claim that without competitive mining, supply
will somehow get additionally inflated. It will not.

There is existing supply, there is max supply and there is our emission rate schedule that determines how much Dash will be generated each day and what the max supply will be.
The supply inflation comes from our emission rate schedule, not from competitive mining.

Changing the hashrate does nothing to supply, it certainly does not inflate or deflate supply.The amount of supply generated each day / week / month does not change when there is lower or higher hashrate.
With regards to the market : the market punishes most Altcoins at this stage, not just Dash and it does not exclude PoW coins like Bitcoin Cash or Zcash either.

If the market really values competitive mining over less competitive mining, then it would have valued PoW coins like Bitcoin Cash and Zcash higher. Instead they have the exact same price performance as Dash.
  

You're right. Many altcoins are at the bottom right now. But it won't always be that way. Dash is a very promising and lively project. I believe in the success of this cryptocurrency!

I believe that too. I am in it for the long term.

[toknormal]

Unfortunately, "promising and lively" is not an adequate counterbalance for an uneconomic model that has so little buoyancy that it sinks like a deadweight in marketcap when compared to other types of protocol more optimised for store of value.

It may be enough for existing holders as comfort blanket value, but markets take a more systematic look at capital flows. Maybe it's time we did too.

How the market sees it:

**** Other Chains ****

We apply our hashrate to all of our blocks .
They therefore come onto the market with a high scarcity value which is monetarily quantifiable.

**** Our Chain ****

We don't need all this hashrate.
We are promising and lively.

[qwizzie]

How the market sees it: How i see it :

Fixed it for you, you are welcome.

[toknormal]

Fixed it for you, you are welcome.

Whether it's how I see it or market sees it, it doesn't stop 5000 masternodes pocketing capital from the chain that should be going towards raising the scarcity value (and therefore opening price) of each new block. That's what other chains are doing and it's the single biggest difference between us and them.

It's also a phenomenon which markets are at liberty to price in as they see fit (and are currently doing so).

[qwizzie]

Fixed it for you, you are welcome.

Whether it's how I see it or market sees it, it doesn't stop 5000 masternodes pocketing capital from the chain that should be going towards raising the scarcity value (and therefore opening price) of each new block. That's what other chains are doing and it's the single biggest difference between us and them.

It's also a phenomenon which markets are at liberty to price in as they see fit (and are currently doing so).

5000 masternodes pocketing capital from the chain versus large whales of various other crypto projects holding huge crypto investments on cold wallets or on exchanges and therefore pocketing capital from the chain.
No difference.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/people/091516/top-5-investors-investing-bitcoin.asp
https://news.bitcoin.com/here-are-the-top-public-companies-that-have-adopted-bitcoin-as-a-reserve-asset/

At least with Dash, the masternode operators (like yourself) have a chance to participate in the Dash governance system (which you don't participate in).

Lets also not forget where most other crypto projects are working towards or have already implemented :

https://www.coindesk.com/tokenized-bitcoin-wrapped-bitcoin-on-ethereum (Bitcoin)
https://newsroom.dash.org/112220-dash-partners-with-stakehound-enabling-ethereum-defi-users-to-earn-rewards-with-stakeddash (Dash)
https://medium.com/@stakehound/nem-group-is-joining-defi-rally-by-launching-stakedxem-with-stakehound-platform-263cb84e84c6 (NEM)
https://decrypt.co/30257/new-defi-protocol-bitcoin-cash-zcash-swaps-ethereum (Bitcoin Cash & Zcash)

[toknormal]

5000 masternodes pocketing capital from the chain versus large whales of various other crypto projects holding huge crypto investments on cold wallets or on exchanges and therefore pocketing capital from the chain.
No difference.

Yes difference. Because the whales of other chains participated in a capital flow which started with an investment directly IN the chain to support the opening price of each block before it was traded. When a Dash masternode reward coin is sold on the other hand there is no such investment in the chain. It's an exchange between 1 holder who acquired their holding with a zero costbase, and a trader who's dollars go straight into that holder's pocket.

[qwizzie]

5000 masternodes pocketing capital from the chain versus large whales of various other crypto projects holding huge crypto investments on cold wallets or on exchanges and therefore pocketing capital from the chain.
No difference.

Yes difference. Because the whales of other chains participated in a capital flow with the chain where they invested their money directly IN the chain to support the opening price of each block. When a Dash masternode reward coin is sold, on the other hand there is no such investment in the chain.

Such old weak repetitive arguments of you. Masternode rewards do have an investment behind them, you just choose to ignore it and place no value to it.
Good luck convincing people of that.

Miners : invested in mining hardware and continue to pay electricity.
Masternodes : invested 1000 Dash directly into the chain and continue to pay server renting costs

This does make me wonder who is more likely to invest their money directly IN the chain : miners who buy their mining hardware equipment on the traditional market (for example https://mineshop.eu/),
or Dash Masternode operators who are forced to buy 1000 Dash on the crypto market ? Difficult, difficult  


 

[toknormal]

Miners : invested in mining hardware and continue to pay electricity.
Masternodes : invested 1000 Dash directly into the chain and continue to pay server renting costs

Again, very deceptive of you as always in deflecting the discussion away from where the problem is to where it isn't.

Firstly, my previous post is concerned with the masternode reward, not the collateral. It's those rewards that arrive with a zero cost base. That leaves the market at liberty to price it as such.

Secondly, the 1000 Dash is not "invested" in the chain. In fact it isn't invested anywhere - the owner continues to hold it and own it. An "investment" is where you swap one form of capital for another, for example when a miner "invests" $USD in raising the scarcity value of the next block and receives coin in return who's opening price is proportional to the hashrate they contributed to the cause.

[qwizzie]

Miners : invested in mining hardware and continue to pay electricity.
Masternodes : invested 1000 Dash directly into the chain and continue to pay server renting costs

Again, very deceptive of you as always in deflecting the discussion away from where the problem is to where it isn't.

Firstly, my previous post is concerned with the masternode reward, not the collateral. It's those rewards that arrive with a zero cost base. That leaves the market at liberty to price it as such.

Secondly, the 1000 Dash is not "invested" in the chain. In fact it isn't invested anywhere - the owner continues to hold it and own it. An "investment" is where you swap one form of capital for another, for example when a miner "invests" $USD in raising the scarcity value of the next block and receives coin in return who's opening price is proportional to the hashrate they contributed to that cause.

You can't look at masternode rewards without also looking at the masternode collateral, because without the masternode collateral you would not have any masternode rewards. Plain and simple.
People swapping Euro / USD / FIAT for Dash to acquire their Dash collateral, pretty much makes them an investor. An investor that invests directly in the chain.

Hashrate unfortunately has no direct relation to price, our constant new hashrate ATH's did not increase our price in any way. All what miners do is provide an abundance of security to our network and provide
a lot of selling power on the crypto market. The abundance is unnecessary and is getting addressed through the blockreward re-allocation proposal, the selling power is hopefully compensated by making the masternodes more attractive to buy (improving Dash store of value), which seems to be working really well already, as the masternodes numbers just had a new ATH.    

Now it is just waiting until this retest of lows (in Dash case the retest of 0.0053) is concluded and the Altcoins market in general starts picking up again.

[toknormal]

You can't look at masternode rewards without also looking at the masternode collateral, because without the masternode collateral you would not have any masternode rewards.

Yes you would. They just wouldn't be called "masternode rewards" but "mining rewards" instead and the fiat they attract on being sold would be directed straight into raising the cost of producing the next block. i.e. increasing its scarcity value which is what store-of-value markets are buying.

People swapping Euro / USD / FIAT for Dash to acquire their Dash collateral, pretty much makes them an investor...

...in holiday cruises for masternodes, not in the mining & difficulty level of the blockchain.

Hashrate unfortunately has no direct relation to price, our constant new hashrate ATH's did not increase our price in any way.

<facepalm> Of course it didn't, because whatever our hashrate is, it's only directed at less than half of the coin supply anyway. And now the market is pricing in an even smaller exposure to mining. The rest of the blocks are generated for free (with a zero cost base. Ask my tax accountant who forces me to sell them to cover the tax for that reason because the liability is generated as soon as you receive the reward).

All what miners do is provide an abundance of security to our network...

Please tell that to the store-of-value market, because it didn't realise it was actually investing in cheaply secured networks. It thought it was buying high scarcity coins emerging from expensive to mine blocks. It (specially the bitcoin market) could have saved itself a lot of time & money.

[qwizzie]

Please tell that to the store-of-value market, because it didn't realise it was actually investing in cheaply secured networks. It thought it was buying high scarcity coins emerging from expensive to mine blocks. It (specially the bitcoin market) could have saved itself a lot of time & money.

I tried to tell the store of-value market about Ethereum Classic (getting 51% attacked three times in a month and all), exposing a very cheaply secured network. It did not react at all
Luckily Dash has ChainLocks and it would not surprise me the least if Dash hashrate will simply continue printing new ATH's, even after the blockreward re-allocation change gets implemented.
 

[toknormal]

it would not surprise me the least if Dash hashrate will simply continue printing new ATH's, even after the blockreward re-allocation change gets implemented.

It wouldn't surprise me either which is why the insanity of firewalling half the supply off from that hashrate and giving it away for free is becoming apparent to all.

[qwizzie]

it would not surprise me the least if Dash hashrate will simply continue printing new ATH's, even after the blockreward re-allocation change gets implemented.

It wouldn't surprise me either which is why the insanity of firewalling half the supply off from that hashrate and giving it away for free is becoming apparent to all.

If you really believe all that nonsense about 'the insanity of firewalling half the supply off from hashrate and giving it away for free', then you should not have invested in Dash in the first place.
It was clearly mentioned in Dash emission rate schedule, how the blockreward allocation pans out for miners and masternodes over time.

You should have left Dash ages ago. You should have left this Dash ANN ages ago. You should have sold your masternode(s) ages ago.
Yet you did not. Your thoughts and opinions about Dash, seem to directly clash with your actions (to stay invested in Dash and keep your masternode(s) running).

From an investor point of view that looks very strange. Suspiciously strange.

[Dahaa]

Soon, soon the dashes will disappear everywhere. qwizzie start looking for a new job

it would not surprise me the least if Dash hashrate will simply continue printing new ATH's, even after the blockreward re-allocation change gets implemented.

It wouldn't surprise me either which is why the insanity of firewalling half the supply off from that hashrate and giving it away for free is becoming apparent to all.

If you really believe all that nonsense about 'firewalling half the supply off from hashrate and giving it away for free', then you should not have invested in Dash in the first place.
It was clearly mentioned in Dash emission rate schedule, how the blockreward allocation pans out for miners and masternodes over time.

You should have left Dash ages ago. You should have left this Dash ANN ages ago. You should have sold your masternode(s) ages ago.
Yet you did not. Your thoughts and opinions about Dash, seem to directly clash with your actions (to stay invested in Dash and keep your masternode(s) running).

From an investor point of view that looks very strange. Suspiciously strange.

[Dahaa]

0.0055 shame my predictions are getting closer

[toknormal]

You should have left Dash ages ago. You should have left this Dash ANN ages ago. You should have sold your masternode(s) ages ago.
Yet you did not. Your thoughts and opinions about Dash, seem to directly clash with your actions (to stay invested in Dash and keep your masternode(s) running).

From an investor point of view that looks very strange. Suspiciously strange.

There's nothing strange about it. I invested in a proof of work coin that inherited bitcoin's protocol and target market, but more versatile than bitcoin at the point of use.

The arguments I've been promoting on here are far more consistent with that principle than yours have been. There's therefore a reason to stay invested because this coin has a governance mechanism and I believe that the community will eventually have to face the fact that the appraisal made last year regarding the economics of the protocol was faulty and that the conclusion drawn was exactly the opposite of the correct one. i.e. it's the masternode margins we can afford to compromise and the hashrate we DO need. (Or at least its restoration to a majority of the coin supply). That is because masternode margins in dollar terms will restore themselves once the chain starts to recapitalise.

It was faulty IMO because it was based on optimising orderbook dynamics instead of aggregate capital flows. It isn't enough just to minimise traffic to orderbooks because it matters what the fiat being drawn from order books is being spent on. If it's being invested in raising the cost base of the primary supply, then coins hitting order books isn't a problem. If it's being wasted on uneconomic margins and drawdowns that leave emerging blocks undercapitalised then it IS a problem. (I don't blame DCG for this b.t.w., it's not their problem, it's the governing community's).

Apart from reasoned accounting, there is anecdotal evidence for this everywhere you look - not least that of the top ten mined coins, 9 of them send ALL of their supply to order books (if not, the miner's own bank account) and all nine, bar one, are capitalised to a greater extent than Dash, in most cases by multiples. This even has a knock-on effect on utility because we're being trounced by litecoin on transaction count now which proves that utility bells and whistles are worthless unless you have the basic mining model well balanced and competitive (with other coins).

So I'm not the contrarian here IMO. The points I've made are exactly the same ones I've made since 2014. Why are they not acceptable now ? Because a vote was taken ? This is a monetary asset, not a golf club. The same market economics apply regardless of what the "committee" says.

[qwizzie]

You should have left Dash ages ago. You should have left this Dash ANN ages ago. You should have sold your masternode(s) ages ago.
Yet you did not. Your thoughts and opinions about Dash, seem to directly clash with your actions (to stay invested in Dash and keep your masternode(s) running).

From an investor point of view that looks very strange. Suspiciously strange.

There's nothing strange about it. I invested in a proof of work coin that inherited bitcoin's protocol and target market, but more versatile than bitcoin at the point of use.

The arguments I've been promoting on here are far more consistent with that principle than yours have been. There's therefore a reason to stay invested because this coin has a governance mechanism and I believe that the community will eventually have to face the fact that the appraisal made last year regarding the economics of the protocol was faulty and that the conclusion drawn exactly the opposite of the correct one. i.e. it's the masternode margins we don't need and the hashrate we DO need. (Or at least its application to a majority of the coin supply needs to be restored).

That is not what you stated earlier, let me quote what you said earlier :  

insanity of firewalling half the supply off from that hashrate and giving it away for free is becoming apparent to all.

With half of the supply off i assume you mean our current blockreward allocation 50% masternodes / 50% miners (or to be precise the 45% / 45% / 10%), not the yet to be activated block reward reallocation change that leads to 60% / 40% (or to be precise 54% / 36% / 10%).

If you are indeed referring to the 50% / 50% blockreward allocation, then i am not sure why you even started with Dash. Why stay so long with a coin that you think is 'insanely firewalling half the supply off from the hashrate and give it away from free' for 6 years already ? While that coin is showing no signs of taking an interest in your point of view ? Why not simply switch 6 years ago to a '100% mining competitive' coin with governance, if the whole thing bothered you so much ? Why setup your own masternode(s) for all those years and not participate in the governance system these last few years, even though you claim to be invested because of that governance mechanism ? Is it then just for collecting the masternode rewards these days ? Why setup masternodes for yourself in the first place, when you claim masternodes cause the 'insanity of firewalling half the supply off from that hashrate and giving it away for free' ?

So many questions and so little answers.