I wonder why iCEBREAKER would delete this post from his
self moderated thread ?.....
************************************ DELETED POST ************************************
Although it's possibly true that Dash's beginnings will 'follow it around', this isn't going to prevent people from investing in it, for two reasons:
[1] - the developer didn't slope off and leave the project. He stuck with it - now for nearly 2 years and no sign of stopping - and produced one of the most fundamental innovations in crypto by articulating the blockchain protocol while leaving it decentralised
[2] - the market for wider (mass) adoption isn't a few readers on bitcointalk, it's the uninitiated public 'out there' to whom the whole of crypto is "instamined". Ask any of them if they think bitcoin's distribution is "fair" - I have and the answer's always the same
On that second point, the reason it is so is that miners don't hold their supply - they dump it into markets where the holdings get consolidated. There are even services telling you which
coins to mine-to-dump right now. So, even though I wasn't there at the start, Dash's beginnings didn't affect me and they don't now. I do not regard them as unethical, or even a 'handicap' because I'm not investing in the past, I'm investing in the future and whatever its beginnings there is no alternative to Dash - there's only the one. It's unique.
Thats the reason it's retained its relative marketcap no matter what amount of mundane troll droning goes on in the background from people who claim their noses are out of joint over the launch. Charlie Lee says that Dash's early beginnings make it "difficult to support". Well I can understand such a remark coming from him and it's probably well founded from a coin dev's point of view. But I am an investor and have different priorities, as will every other investor who comes after me.
The merits of the work currently going on in Dash and its potential to further distinguish its market presence now far outweigh the coin supply issues at launch and will only continue to grow in dominance.
As for its 'technology', it has the right technology for the job it's doing which is to address three principle monetary shortfalls while retaining its inheritance of bitcoin's public blockchain protocol:
[1] - the ability of crypto to function as a new form of electronic cash by supporting near instant confirmations
[2] - the ability of crypto to function as a new form of electronic cash by supporting near perfect fungibility
[3] - the ability of crypto to function as a new form of electronic cash by supporting near perfect transparency and accountability
Whatever the shortfalls in Darksend right now and other areas of Dash's performance, it keeps getting closer to those monetary objectives with every 6 months of new revisions. That is progress which is declared and delivered rather than just talked about which is why most of Dash's core investors stick with it.
Bitcoin is not getting closer to thes objectives. Bitcoin 2.0 coins are targeting all kinds of other services aside from currency, and Cryptonote simply picked the wrong monetary model - a credit one instead of a cash one - on which to base its privacy properties which is why it's heading rapidly into oblivion before they can even get to first base in terms of user-oriented adoption tools.
So that leaves Dash as the closest true competitor which inherits bitcoin's codebase while offering a radical and successful alternative approach. It DOES massively improve confirmation time. It DOES resolve the fungibility issue and it DOES maintain bitcoin's level of transparency and accountability.
Having achieved those objectives at all is pretty outstanding. Dash now has the luxury of time with which to improve and consolidate the manner on HOW it achieves them.
Thats what people are going to be investing in from now on.