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

[xkcdd]

Make a Masternode from 100 DASH
And then money will flow like a river, and capitalization will grow!

I like this idea, but I think the collateral amount should be 250 DASH, that would give us about 4x the masternodes which is not too many to slow down the propagation of transactions, while making owning a whole masternode cheap enough for most investors and for those that can't afford a whole one, they can easily risk a few DASH in a custodian staking service like crowdnode.io.

[toknormal]

Make a Masternode from 100 DASH
And then money will flow like a river, and capitalization will grow!

I like this idea, but I think the collateral amount should be 250 DASH, that would give us about 4x the masternodes

I get gobsmacked that you can justify this (which makes no net difference to demand - there are plenty of multiples of $160k floating around looking for a home with a return) yet you can't justify a change which makes a material difference to demand by exposing more of the supply to competitive bidding.

What's the brain block ?

[xkcdd]

I get gobsmacked that you can justify this (which makes no net difference to demand - there are plenty of multiples of $160k floating around looking for a home with a return) yet you can't justify a change which makes a material difference to demand by exposing more of the supply to competitive bidding.

What's the brain block ?

Unit bias, people like to own at least one of something, so by dropping the collateral requirement of owning a MN, to 250D we suddenly give the opportunity of MN ownership to way more people than before and the capital will flood into the network boosting the market cap.  We should also consider re-denominating the value of 1 DASH to under a dollar for the exact same reason, so regular people can easily accumulate DASH and boast they own a whole one, or perhaps several of them.

[toknormal]

Unit bias, people like to own at least one of something

This is making it it up as you go along & clutching at any old thing that springs to mind to arrest the rot. The "people like to own at least one of something" school of financial analysis. Warren Buffet et al sure missed a trick there.

Try simply not dumping 320,000 Dash per annum of unrealised profit on the market and make people bid for it instead.

You'll soon see that make a difference.

[ultiex]

Should i buy Dash?

[WastedLTC]

Try simply not dumping 320,000 Dash per annum of unrealised profit on the market and make people bid for it instead.

......and we are back to this!   lol -- for a little bit I saw some other discussions and was just wondering how long before we returned to the same ol'.

[Alexey45]

Should i buy Dash?

Of course worth buying, the price is small

[toknormal]

......and we are back to this!   lol -- for a little bit I saw some other discussions and was just wondering how long before we returned to the same ol'.

Be my guest. You and anyone else are free to take the discussion anywhere you want it. Promote Dash's "store of value features" and give investors a reason to invest. Preferably an actual monetary mechanism whereby their investment can grow that is, not a bunch of cheap newflashes that might have raised an eyebrow in 2015.

The elephant in the room is that by giving away half the blockchain supply at zero price without asking for anything in return simply forces the secondary market price towards zero and creates huge headwinds for any investor from the consequent chronic profit-realisation pressure. We have no on-chain sink to offset this as De-Fi chains do since Dash is a bitcoin clone where scarcity is the invested-in property.

It doesn't increase demand for masternodes either because the risk of capital loss is so high if the reward ratio is set wrong (which it is at the moment) given that a large amount of capital collateral is required. For example, take the recent price drop from $200 to $165. How long would it take for masternode rewards to recover that capital loss ? Go on, work it out. I calculated it at around 3 years.

3 years to recover a capital loss that occurred in under 10 days.

That's why targeting capital gain instead of Dash-denominated income would be a far more fruitful and optimal route for the Dash protocol to follow. It's a risk asset anyway by any definition, not a fixed income bond. Potential investors know this which is why we're clinging on to the top 70 by the fingernails most of the time and our fully-mined contemporaries get the investment instead.

Until this gets addressed that will be the case long term.

[xkcdd]

For example, take the recent price drop from $200 to $165. How long would it take for masternode rewards to recover that capital loss ? Go on, work it out. I calculated it at around 3 years.

3 years to recover a capital loss that occurred in under 10 days.

This is why it is crucial we shift more of the funds awarded to miners to masternodes.  Recall that miners have expenses to pay, that is electricity, rent, hardware costs and labour costs.  Masternodes pay much less in infrastructure costs and thus the value is retained in the network.  We really need to look at the expenses in running the network and bring them in line with the economics of the coin so we can stop this mindless bleeding out of value!

[toknormal]

Masternodes pay much less in infrastructure costs and thus the value is retained in the network.

The value isn't retained in the network. It's bled from the network and goes straight into masternode pockets.

In accounting terms, "retained profit" is profit that is not paid out in dividends or costs. In Dash, coins that are paid to masternodes are a COST to the network. Their value is not retained. You as a masternode operator are not "the network". You are a private entity and once the coin goes into your pocket at no cost to you, its value is most definitely not "retained by the network" but lost to it.

On the other hand the value of coins that are paid to miners IS retained by the network because their revenue is used by miners to bid up the price in a competitive race against other market players attempting to acquire coins from the primary supply. That costs them money which is why their blockchain reward is justified.

The electricity cost is therefore not an overhead, it's simply the bidding currency of a trustless market. Like you need to convert $USD to Euros to buy a coffee in France, you need to convert $USD to Kilowatt Hours to buy a coin from the primary supply.

The "cost" of those Kilowatt Hours eventually ends up in the price of the coins and consequently the marketcap of the asset. Conversely, the cost of the masternode rewards DRAINS the marketcap of the asset. That's why it should be used sparingly by the protocol, not like a 10kg sack of salt dumped on your lovely Wellington County Beef Tenderloin & Mashed Potato dish.

[hd49728]

DASH is one of the oldest altcoins but it needs to be revolutionized technically to catch new investors. DASH demonstrates that it can survives through many bear markets but to grow more, I think technology should be improved.

I understand many projects from this 2020 and 2021 generation give investors promise about new technology that will change the world. I know many of them will fail after the bull market ends. The same like ICO in 2017 and 2018. However, about DASH, I think something need to be revolutionized in its technology, that is my hope.

[aleix]

Dash Podcast 181: Dash Core Group CEO Ryan Taylor
https://youtu.be/DAjhQQpt7IU

[xkcdd]

The value isn't retained in the network. It's bled from the network and goes straight into masternode pockets.

The value is retained.  The miner is forced to sell to cover expenses, this constant sell pressure drives the price down, they have little choice in this matter, OTOH the masternode owner is not forced to sell and can hold onto those coins keeping them off market.  In practice though, this does not happen because the mood on DASH is bearish and so the masternode owners sell the coins miserably, also we have a large number of masternodes run by exchanges using customer funds, eg Binance and they sell the rewards as additional profit for themselves.

One of the things we can do to improve the mood is the pay more to the masternode owners, in doing so it would make the endeavour of running a mnode more enticing and draw in more investment which would lift the price and improve the mood which would then cause fewer MNOs to sell their rewards, since nothing is forcing them and the price would rise ever more.

However, improving the mood in DASH is very difficult, DCG are tone deaf to the environment and as a software development company they sure do suck at delivering software, Evolution is still nowhere on the horizon, all we know for sure is it won't be delivered this year.  The core wallet team are unable to even keep up with the Bitcoin backports as we are now 2 years behind Bitcoin, their new head of marketing seems unable to bust a move and they seem intently focused on the market in Venezuela which has proven to be a non-starter.

Add to this the competition in the space from DeFi and innovations like HEX which is now the third ranked coin by market cap. and it is little wonder DASH finds itself where it is, sadly without material change in DCG we can expect more the same going forward.

[r_victory]

São Thomé das Letras plans to create the first "crypto" travel itinerary in Brazil and already has 20 more places accepting Dash

The municipality of São Thomé das Letras, in Minas Gerais, has become the paradise of cryptocurrency Dash in Brazil and more than 20 establishments now accept crypto-actives as payment through the Dash Core App.

Read more here (original text in Portuguese): https://cointelegraph.com.br/news/sao-thome-das-letras-becomes-the-paradise-of-dash-in-brazil-and-another-20-places-already-accept-the-cryptocurrency


*If you come to visit this wonderful place, know that your DASH can be used as a form of payment in some establishments, such as inns and restaurants.

[toknormal]

The value is retained.  The miner is forced to sell to cover expenses, this constant sell pressure drives the price down

Wrong.

The miner has to acquire the coin first at a cost. The masternode acquires theirs at zero cost. What you're doing is looking at the secondary market only and pretending the primary doesn't exist. That would be like analysing a currency broker's books and only looking at the sell side and ignoring the buy side and saying "look ! they always have to sell to cover their costs". True, but that cost wasn't an overhead, it was the cost of acquisition so it's a fraudulent if not insane analysis.

Even if it was half right we'd still be reasonably competitive with Litecoin, Monero, Dogue et al because relieving that much sell pressure would make a massive difference to price. Instead we've cratered out of sight. So even the market is telling you it's wrong.

The analysis is precisely 180 degrees out of whack because you're only looking at the sell pressure in one selected market segment instead of the net sell pressure. The net sell pressure is calculated thus:

Sells minus Buys

Or another way of looking at it numerically is that the net sell pressure = profit made by the seller. For example if I acquire a Euro for $10 and sell it for $5 I've contributed $10 of "buy pressure" and $5 of "sell pressure", so $5 of net buy pressure across all markets (balanced by a negative profit of $5). From that you can see that a mined coin generates the least net sell pressure and a masternode the most.

That's why we've been on a continuous slide down the rankings compared with our competitively mined contemporaries. Unsustainable masternode profits, therefore they have to be paid out of capital which is why the marketcap is being drained.

[Pang.]

I have not been here for months and I see that Toknormal continues to fight with his theory in favor of mining and against master nodes.

This is the problem of Dash, that time passes and the currency does not bring anything new to the scene ... as it happens in this forum.

I have a node out there producing Dash, forgotten, I no longer even look at the price, because as I announced months ago, Dash would lose 50 in market cap, and it has been.

Now I announce that if something interesting is not revealed before the end of the year, Dash will lose 100.

The only positive thing I see lately is that the nodes have increased, however the daily transactions have fallen a lot, as well as the hashrate ... even Monero surpasses us, something that had never happened before.

I said it years ago and I repeat it. Nobody knows Dash because nobody does anything to make him known. The rubbish of going to countries with destroyed economies to promote something is absurd ... each Dash given away is converted into dollars, and they don't even stop to see what Dash is.

Do you want Dash up?

Well, encourage it to be used to achieve real ends.

ETH broke its ceiling thanks to DEFI, Dash itself is DEFI without the need for anything else ...

Dash is private, it has a DIF, it is the safest thing in crypto ...

I do not understand how today it is necessary to use a third party so that those who have less than 1000 Dash can access to receive interest.

How is it possible that there is no wallet promoted by DCG so that each user has their Dash there, producing interests and strengthening the network, what have I missed?

I can put $ 50 in AAVE, COMPOUND ... and receive interest immediately ... and Dash has to delegate to third parties.

Well, I'm going where I came from, and I hope that DCG does not continue to bleed the budget to offer nothing in return as it has been doing for years.

For the rest, a greeting to all the holders.

[toknormal]

This is the problem of Dash, that time passes and the currency does not bring anything new to the scene

That isn't the problem at all.

Has Monero "brought anything new to the scene ?"
Has Litecoin "brought anything new to the scene ?"
Has BCH "brought anything new to the scene ?"
Has ETC "brought anything new to the scene ?"
Has DOGE "brought anything new to the scene ?"

Dash is way more sophisticated and capable already technology wise than any of these. It doesn't need any "new to the  scene" shots in the arm to sustain it. What it needs is to stop bleeding its marketcap dry to pay masternode rewards that are unearned. Read those two posts I wrote above and recognise that there are TWO markets = primary and secondary. As long as we pretend that one doesn't exist and keep bludgeoning our price with free handouts of HALF the coin supply we're going to have this problem.

We are short circuiting our primary market where coins are bid for and instead sending them straight to exchanges in the hands of traders who's acquisition price is zero. Address that and we'll also throttle the haemorrhaging of our marketcap.

The crazy thing is that the solution isn't even a compromise for masternodes. A larger part of their reward simply manifests as capital gain instead of income which is far more beneficial as it's not even taxable. We need to start using the reward ratio intelligently instead of just p*ssing out free coins and hoping for the best. The monetary model is the basis of everything. If that doesn't work, nothing works, conversely a high performance store of value makes everything else work. The technology is then complimentary and helps everything along.

[Pang.]

Don't be crazy good man.

You affirm a thousand times that a master node should not receive rewards because it does not expose neither work, nor cost, compared to a miner.

A miner spends $ 1000 and starts mining, and his return is calculated in paying off his miner and electricity.

I can invest $ 1000, even $ 2000 or something more if I know that in a year I pay it off and get 5%, 10% or more depending on my costs.

How much does a master node risk that has bought Dash at $ 500?

and one that you bought for $ 1000?

at $ 300?

Do you think that whoever bought at $ 500 is going to get juicy profits with Dash at $ 150?

How long will it take to recover the $ 500,000 you risked at the time?

It is absurd to launch Dash on the market if a 50% investment is lost compared to the entry price.

For me today it is more risky to invest $ 150,000 in a master node than $ 3,000 in a mining equipment.

But I will not try to make you see otherwise.

In the long run the miner will lose, but he will be able to stop mining and reselling his equipment, but a master node that has lost 50% or more of its value I highly doubt that by selling it will stop shedding tears.

Greetings and I'm glad to read you, your impetus is what Dash is missing.

[toknormal]

A miner spends $ 1000 and starts mining, and his return is calculated in paying off his miner and electricity.

I can invest $ 1000, even $ 2000 or something more if I know that in a year I pay it off and get 5%, 10% or more depending on my costs.

How much does a master node risk that has bought Dash at $ 500?

You've got your accounting logic all screwed up I'm afraid, as has xkcdd above.

In terms of ROI your "risk" is measured in dollars (or other currency) not dash, because that's what you invested. So you need to measure the return in dollars, not Dash. If the level of masternode rewards results in a NEGATIVE return in dollars, EVEN if you are earning 72 Dash per year then that is because the marketcap has been bled and revalued downwards.

So the problem reverts to supporting the price in markets and there we  return to the idea of ALL markets, not just exchanges. Here's how that works:

 • miners support the price in primary markets
 • investors support the price in secondary markets
 • at nodecount equilibrium, masternodes deplete the price anywhere (because they don't have a purchase side to their net transaction & there's no on-chain sink to absorb it like in De-Fi)

That's all anyone needs to know.

Just because the primary market is termed "mining" doesn't change the fact that it's still a market and if you feed out half of your coin supply around it at a zero price instead of exposing it to competitive bidding then you'll tank the price in secondary markets since you're pump-priming so many of its players with so much unrealised gain.

So what are they going to do ? Realise it of course.

Only masternodes themselves seem to be blinded by this glaring conflict of interest. That's because they think they "deserve" a return for having invested 1000 Dash. But nobody "deserves" anything from markets unless the market gets something in return which means that Dash has to function well as a store of value at least and not have its capital value drained to pay out free coins to a select few holders. This doesn't happen in bitcoin even though it has more "hodlers" than Dash. It doesn't happen in Litecoin, it doesn't happen in Monero, BCH, BSV etc.

The wider market seems to understand it without a problem which is why we're trounced by coins that don't do any development but DO expose all of their supply to competitive bidding.

You affirm a thousand times that a master node should not receive rewards because it does not expose neither work, nor cost, compared to a miner.

I don't affirm that masternodes should not receive rewards at all.

I'm saying that the reward ratio should reflect the investment that contributors make to the network in terms of cost and that more of masternodes reward should be experienced as capital gain rather than income. In that regard, the "cost" of the masternode's contribution is not the 1000 Dash. They still have their 1000 Dash just as a Litecoin investor that bought 1000 LTC still has their litecoin. LTC hodlers hold it even though they don't get any free blockchain coins for holding don't they ? The masternode's cost of network contribution is their hosting fee + labour. A couple of hours per month in maintenance maybe.

I'm also saying that we should stop thinking of miners as "miners" and recognise that they are simply buyers in a market. This market sets the opening price of each coin (by definition) which in turn influences the selling price on exchanges. In Dash, the reward ratio is skewed away from that market to a ridiculous extent due to a fundamentally flawed appraisal of how a mined coin's monetary model works. By sliding it back we recover marketcap, improve our store of value performance which will consequently bring back blockchain activity AND improve masternode reward in dollar terms.

[Alexey45]

The roadmap contains two points, it is not clear what they are:
1) Special transaction for fixing assets
OP_ASSET_LOCK to support blockchain ID replenishment on the platform.
2) Backports for Bitcoin v0.18 +
Backports from Bitcoin Core up to BTC v0.18.
Please tell us to the participants and future investors what it is