Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 150. (Read 9723733 times)

Well that explains that then 

Seems like it was a good move on your part. How long after that event did you get involved with Dash?

Very interesting post.

It was in my own country, and i live near Amsterdam. Easy decision to make 

ETC's problem is not BTC or DASH. All 3 have different hash algorithms. The problem with ETC is that it uses Ethash and the dominant chain that uses Ethash is ETH. So, someone can easily rent Ethash from a cloud service and redirect it from ETH to ETC and own 51%+ of the hash rate for ETC. This allows them to send ETC to an exchange on the known chain and sell them all the while mining a longer chain in secret. On the secret chain they never sent their ETC anywhere. Then they reveal the secret chain and because it's the longer chain it wins, erasing the previously known chain from the record. That way they have sold their coins and kept them at the same time. The exchange (or users) no longer have access to the ETC they thought they bought.

This is a 51% attack... not a replay attack... a replay attack is where 2 chains share the same digital signature (typically when one chain forks off another, and replay protection is not coded in - ie: slightly modifying the digital signature so they are different between chains). Because of this, if you send from one chain, someone can take the digital signature and replay it on the other chain, thus stealing coins from the 2nd chain (note it can only send the same number of coins to the same address on both chains).  Replay protection was implemented for ETH and ETC as well as BTC and BCH... not sure about BSV.

DASH uses X11 and is the dominant chain for this hash algorithm. Because of that I'm not sure you could easily rent enough X11 hash in the first place to own 51% simply because it is unlikely to be available. And now because of DASH's chainlocks, it doesn't matter anyway, even if you have 51% of the hashrate and mine in secret, once you reveal your longer chain it would be rejected because chainlocks locks in the known chain anyway.

Regarding ETC, only reason I think it hasn't completely died already from these repeated double-spend attacks is because once ETH goes POS, ETC will become the dominant Ethash chain and will in all likelihood spike up in price.

Double spend and replay attacks are more possible with altcoins because their total network hashrates are not high as of bitcoin. Last 2 weeks, ETC had a replay attack and it is a warning for altcoin enthusiasts. DASH is good in term of security but even with the security I won't put all my money into DASH. It is a basic thing to remember and apply.

Thank you for the article.

Who would have thought all those years ago Dash would have had an all time high price of over $1400 and market cap of over $11 billion and even today trades at over $95 and has a market cap of over $900 million.

What promoted you to go along to that conference in Amsterdam back in 2015 when Dash got a chance to make their presentation?

How Dash Has Great Security



Security is a highly important thing in the cryptocurrency space. If a blockchain is not secure there could be possible vulnerabilities that allow malicious actors to mine more coins that there should be or even perform a double spend attack. A double spend attack is where a person is able to spend the same amount of currency twice, for example if a malicious actor had 2 Dash and was able to double spend it they could send the 2 Dash to two new addresses, effectively allowing them to own 4 Dash instead of 2...

Read more: https://www.dashnation.com/voices-of-dash-nation/how-dash-has-great-security/

Thanks for reading!

That's very constructive of you.

How about simply addressing the material of the issue at hand. For example you could have said:

"...but Tok, your point about the "cost" of MN reward being additional to mining cost is flawed because the superblock and blocks containing MN reward are automatically generated and their cost is not borne by miners" (Because I'm not actually sure if they are or not and I could have been wrong about the granular mechanism by which the reward split is invoked which would at least mitigate the adverse impact that MN rewards have on our marketcap) And that could have lead to an illuminating exchange about the granular economics of the protocol

or...

"...but Tok, you know that we're still in the speculative "pricing in" phase. When Dash platform arrives there will be service demand that leads to the need for costly service provision. This will bring MN and mining margins into parity and create demand for utility at the same time. We are seeing this now being priced in"...which would have lead to an illuminating discussion about the type, quantity and value of services that "platform" could potentially attract

or...

"...but Tok, your theory about supernormal profits is misplaced. It applies to competing businesses in a common commercial sector and cannot be similarly applied to mining margin vs masternode margin"...in which case an instructive debate about whether MN and miner economic priorities interact in a complimentary or adverse way to support the capital value of the coin

or...

"...but Tok, that's all very well, but none of us give a sh* about optimally tuning the fundamental mechanics of this coin's economics, nor understanding it. We just want the thing to pump to kingdom come so we can get out of here and retire, so stfu"

But instead it's down to a question of whether I'm "wrong or right". Well there's nothing to be wrong or right about - the numbers are there staring us in the face. Likeways the results of 6 years of trading. I personally like to understand the mechanics of these things even if others can't be bothered and prefer to just sit on their hides with their thumbs in their mouths while waiting for a pump to turn up & save their *sses.

There's likely to be a Miner/MN ratio "sweet spot" and the danger of not identifying it categorically is that anywhere outside it will simply stall the growth of the coin entirely (relative to competing 100% mined offerings). I gave my opinion on where I think that "sweet spot" is in the previous post: margin parity. Ryan has given his based on optimising masternode incentives. My problem with that approach is that he's using the wrong units to identify key parameters like supply to markets & ROI since they don't take into account capital gains/losses. That and the fact it has not demonstrated success in 5 years of trading so we're too far over to the right IMO and now we're moving even further to the right that places us potentially in chronic negative growth territory (relative to competing 100% mined assets).

Yep. I still remember going to Dash first (budget funded) conference in The Netherlands (Amsterdam) early 2015.
It was a Bitcoin-organised weekly meet-up that would also let Altcoin projects give a presentation there, which is what Dash (Evan Duffield and some other team members) was doing there.
I remember the Bitcoin organizer being so impressed with Dash growth and marketcap of 14 million USD at the time, that he specifically mentioned it in his Dash introduction.

Now Dash has a marketcap of 919 million USD and made all these technical advancements, integrations, expansions and partnerships. Dash userbase has also grown considerably since 2015.
It is almost surreal if you think about it, how fast things can move in this crypto space.

Lets be clear here, if Dash continues performing as it has been performing since January 2020 through long term upward momentum and at some point passes Monero in marketcap
(or passes any other PoW project that Dash according toknormal has been underperforming to), then toknormal's whole market understanding and how Dash fits in there,
will have proven to be completely and totally wrong. And all his posts about it (which were nothing more then unproven assumptions anyways), will have been incorrect from the start.  

There is no dodging that, no blaming it on some accidental spike.
The question is, will he acknowledge that when that happens ?

  

I wouldn't object to that at all. The reward ratio could be disastrously wrong and we could still spike up in spite of it. The Russian's used to put cast iron into Space and I'm sure the market could lift 5000 nodes, passively leaching millions of dollars of value per week out of the ecosystem.

The question is, for how long ?

Well, what can I say? You keep repeating the same old tired circular logic. Let me attempt to sum up your doctrine: "DASH is not competitive because of masternode rewards and because of masternode rewards DASH is not competitive."

Ok then, I'm bored of this. I'll remind you when DASH's marketcap is double that of XMR's. I also fully expect DASH to easily hit 0.03 BTC within the next year and if it can break past that will spike up to unstable values of 0.07 BTC and above.


Were LTC miners profitable? How about XMR miners? I don't think so either... DASH went thru exactly one true bull market so far. It is quite common for an asset to retrace all the way back to its starting point before starting the next cycle. If I look at XMR's chart it's not too dissimilar... it took longer in the beginning for people to pick up on this coin but basically 0.005 BTC was its starting point before the bull market and it retraced all the way back before starting its next cycle. LTC has 2 bull markets behind it, and reached a lower high the second time but perhaps the good news for it is that it reached a higher low this last bear market. Against the USD I predict all 3 coins will almost certainly reach ATH's in the coming year or so. These speculative cycles will continue to be extreme until something closer to mass adoption is achieved or a coin gradually dies and fades away.

Regarding the centralization... I think DASH needs to have trustless shared masternodes and/or savings accounts for regular DASH holders to earn (and vote) too. Not only would this help with decentralization, it would likely create a new wave of interest for DASH.


Is this just conjecture on your part or do you have hard evidence that DASH miners are setting up masternodes? Perhaps it didn't happen as you expected because exchanges like Binance are setting up masternodes with their users' coins.


Short term, crypto is not a good store of value, sure. But holders of DASH, XMR, LTC since 2014-2016 are all doing much better than if they stayed in USD. I would argue stablecoins might be the worst store of value long term but good to ride out a crypto bear market. Fiat currencies are meant to be spent as soon as possible because they consistently lose value (in fact are designed to lose value). Saving cash under your mattress is one of the worst ways to save money since at least 1970.

As long as BTC can continue its bullish trend, alts will increasingly recover. Once BTC hits it's previous ATH and hovers and stalls around there for awhile, the good alts will within months reach their own previous ATH's (USD-wise anyway). Then it will be interesting to see how high this goes. Could be a mega-bullrun if mass adoption is on the way or could be another bubble which pops with 70-90+% pullback again.

I also think that 45% is way too much reward for masternodes and it made some unwanted concentracion of power. You said in one of yours previous posts,how miners during bear market even sell at lose.Yes,but 99% of them can do it for a very,very short period of time.If you take a look at DASH mining profitability you can clearly see that DASH miners is in deep loss for a long period of time(even with cheap electricity of $0.05/kWh),but it seems that it does not effect miners too much or hash power.Even with price of electricity of $0.03 DASH miners will be at big loss.

Are these miners crazy and mining DASH at loss for a such long time? I dont think so.Only way to keep mining of DASH profitable during prolonged bear market is combination of very cheap electricity and possesion of masternodes in percentage which is at least equal miners percentage in hashrate.Miners can held some portion of mined coins for some time during bull market and sell them later,but during bear market they dont take chances and sell them almost at once.So in DASH case ,these miners are no regular miners at all,but big whale speculators which thanks to 45% free reward for masternodes pushed price down,deep in unprofitable zone for regular miners,removing them from market to create artificially low price for a long time,getting in possesion of extremely cheap coins from desperate investors forced to sell coins to just get away from huge losses.

Such extreme market squeeze(Dash/BTC pair fell to value very close to ATL of 0.0055 BTC for 1 DASH,which as i know not at one big and medium size coin didnt reach)  is possible because present of excessive reward for masternodes.Without it ,big holders-whales will be forced to keep price enough profitable for majority of regular miners just to keep network safe.That made this unhealthy combination of speculator&miner which is holding DASH to the ground through combination of combined market/miner power.

From about May till today we saw how number of masternodes increased for about 400 - so 400.000 DASH needed for it, should be removed from market and we should see quite price rise (whole sum of sell orders on few main exchanges is about 25.000 coins).That didnt happen ,because big speculator/miners used mined coins to get additional masternodes and make theirs grip on coin network even stronger.


Technically,not just Dash,but all crypto coins,except stablecoins cant be considered as a store of value due to excessive volatility.Yes,you are right ,BTC and ETH are only coins which entered bull market. ZEC is very close,XMR also,DASH and LTC not so close.From mine experience altcons can be considered in bull phase before on 2W  chart coin/BTC pair,  EMA-7 and EMA-30 make confirmed cross above. Coin/USD pair 2W cross cant be considered reliable,but can be precursor of major push when 2W coin/BTC pair are closing crossing too.

For DASH/USD pair, 2W crossing is very close after 2 failed attempt in previous months.In next 2,max. 4 weeks, it will be crossed,possible with enough momentum to make DASH/BTC 2W cross too.We will see.

Well that's good then, because it won't !  

(It is however the basis of the protocol revision being made to improve "store of value").


Well it's like this: If your protocol dictates that you require to draw up to twice as much fiat from markets to keep your coin alive compared to competitors then maybe that explains why it only has a quarter to half the value that they do. So you're right it's only my opinion, but only in the same sense that if I look out the window and see a wet road, I assume it's been raining = "only my opinion" but the leading logical candidate all the same.

Trading Cycles do not remotely account for this. They operate in channels and you're being generous in even including us in the same channel as them as we long since dropped out of it.

Well, you said DASH is less competitive than some of the other POW coins because its marketcap is less than theirs and because DASH has too high masternode rewards. This connection you made of course is your opinion as there's nothing factual you've presented to prove it's not something else instead.

I said doing a market comparison only for today is arbitrary because DASH is at a different point in its market cycle than these other coins. And in fact, even so, YTD, DASH is very competitive.

I never stated that a reduction in the proportion of mined supply will improve DASH's store of value. I said the change is negligible and I don't think it will improve or hurt DASH's store of value.

I have no issue with your opinion on masternode rewards being too high. My issue is you present your opinion as fact mostly because you say so.

I also never said that DASH's marketcap should be higher than what it actually is, nor that our "real" ranking based on marketcap is somehow higher. I said that it will be higher and will recover faster and pass other POW coins like XMR in due time (2021 almost for sure)

Maybe I'm wrong... you can call me out then I guess. But even then you still only have assumptions as to why DASH might not be as competitive (even though it is so far for 2020)

You make a great job of defending against a line of argument I'm not making.

How does any of that support the idea that a REDUCTION in the proportion of mined supply is going to improve our store of value (Given that we already have only half of what other coins do) ?

I really don't agree with your reasoning which I think is simply technical hand waving over cycles. There's no "cycle" by which our "real" ranking is somehow arguably higher than what our current markcetcap says it is.

I don't think DASH has any store of value problems and I never stated that it did...

I've made clear that my position on the reward redistribution is that it is negligible.

Chainlink is in a bull market, has no resistances to break thru and will likely at least 10x from where it is in the next year if it does not somehow collapse on some major bad news.

BTC and ETH are in bull markets, but are still fighting thru resistances to break their previous ATH's. Once they do their prices will explode. This could happen end of this year.

DASH is still in a technical bear market both against BTC and the USD. However, DASH is holding support above the 100 day MA against BTC and might have the 50 day cross above the 100 day by the end of the month. I would not expect DASH to enter a bull market against BTC until October or November this year.

Against USD, DASH may enter a technical bull market as early as this week, Aug 19th or 20th... this could accelerate DASH's recovery against BTC.

XMR is ahead of DASH in recovery, it's already in a bull market vs USD for some time now and arguably just entered a bull market vs BTC over the last 24 hours...

LTC is only slightly ahead of DASH but more or less in a similar position as far as recovery is concerned.

All that said, BTC is trying to break resistance at $12K again and if it succeeds this time could easily jump to $14K, and slightly delay or temporarily reverse altcoin's recovery vs BTC...

That's why it's arbitrary to only do your comparison for just today. Each crypto is in a different part of its own market cycle.

Not if it's a flash in the pan. Chainlink is this years "Dash 2017" so I wouldn't hold my breath for one of those. We've had 6 years of track record to measure. I think that's a fair amount of time to judge whether diluting the proportion of the supply that's competitively mined favourably impacts our store of value performance compared to similar generation coins.

It clearly doesn't.

So why dilute it even more ?

As long as there isn't broad parity of margin between mining and masternode hosting, the market will simply trash that (empty) margin until there is, taking the capital value of the whole chain with it. That's how you know where to optimally set the masternode margin. If the nodes have a lot to do such that they require to be heavily funded - sure set the reward ratio appropriately. If they don't then set it at parity with mining (or some notional approximation) so we're not having to draw fiat from markets that doesn't go directly into the coin value. That excess is pure overhead that acts to decapitalise Dash as an asset relative to our fully mined competitors. This is exactly what we've seen happening during Dash's lifetime. The massive pump we had wasn't sustainable and we sailed straight back to a nearer equilibrium position after it.

I don't really subscribe to the "...but all other coins lost value too" argument either. I think that is a poor excuse against the background of the split reward ratio being held up as the "answer" to Dash's store of value problems IMO.

Your snapshot is just as arbitrary. Why today? Why not tomorrow?

So, when DASH passes XMR's marketcap will you still insist that DASH is less competitive than XMR?