https://www.transifex.com/dash/dash/dash_ents/
Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 1972. (Read 9723748 times)
August 08, 2015, 08:16:46 PM
Few strings were updated 2 days ago (typos etc)... wondering if no Polish, German and French members are subscribed for updates
https://www.transifex.com/dash/dash/dash_ents/
https://www.transifex.com/dash/dash/dash_ents/
August 08, 2015, 06:50:35 PM
@Sub-Ether
I think we both lose our bet
What do we do with the pot?
I think we both lose our bet
What do we do with the pot?
August 08, 2015, 06:31:18 PM
The reality about altcoin competition
"If you see fraud and don't shout fraud, you are a fraud" -- Nassim Taleb
"If you see fraud and don't shout fraud, you are a fraud" -- Nassim Taleb
This has been my belief for a long time.
I agree. The 'accidental' Dash premine stinks to high heaven, and we should all shout fraud when we see something like that.
There is absolutely no excuse for a coin's actual emission to differ so wildly from its schedule, especially when only the insiders benefited.
Any legit coin with competent core devs would have relaunched after such an embarrassing disaster.
August 08, 2015, 06:30:35 PM
I see 3018 masternodes up.
August 08, 2015, 05:56:39 PM
The reality about altcoin competition
You know what, thinking about it, I feel antagonizing with another project and tying your success or failure to what happens to a different project is deep down just an excuse to ignore the fact that no altcoin project is close to getting any meaningful adoption yet. Is easier to go to coinmarketcap.com as a measure of success and say we are in X place and we just went pass Y project. How does that matter? It does not, is just an excuse because the reality is no altcoin project is known in the real world in any substantial way and that is the real challenge for people that will never participate in crypto forums or invest in altcoin projects to at least know about other alternatives to BTC.
We should measure our success in that direction. Measure public awareness, adoption, accessibility to coins, partnerships and integration to services. Every 6 month or so we should ask ourselves:
1) Is public awareness of our project increasing? Are people more informed and understand better what we are doing? Do they know us more outside of the crypto circles?
2) Is adoption increasing? Are there more services and ways to use Dash for end users?
4) Are our added value features more robust and easy to use than they were 6 months ago?
5) Is it easier to buy coins with FIAT? Are there more vehicles for the public to get access to coins if they wanted to buy some?
We should revise progress on these questions every few months and our actions and energy should be directed to improving those performance indicators. Everything else and all the forum interaction between different altcoin camps is just a distraction and a big waste of time. This applies to all coins, it would be much more productive if we all faced reality and measure success in a way that matters instead of hiding behind coinmarketcap rankings that at this point in time mean nothing to any project other than Bitcoin.
Keep it real.
You know what, thinking about it, I feel antagonizing with another project and tying your success or failure to what happens to a different project is deep down just an excuse to ignore the fact that no altcoin project is close to getting any meaningful adoption yet. Is easier to go to coinmarketcap.com as a measure of success and say we are in X place and we just went pass Y project. How does that matter? It does not, is just an excuse because the reality is no altcoin project is known in the real world in any substantial way and that is the real challenge for people that will never participate in crypto forums or invest in altcoin projects to at least know about other alternatives to BTC.
We should measure our success in that direction. Measure public awareness, adoption, accessibility to coins, partnerships and integration to services. Every 6 month or so we should ask ourselves:
1) Is public awareness of our project increasing? Are people more informed and understand better what we are doing? Do they know us more outside of the crypto circles?
2) Is adoption increasing? Are there more services and ways to use Dash for end users?
4) Are our added value features more robust and easy to use than they were 6 months ago?
5) Is it easier to buy coins with FIAT? Are there more vehicles for the public to get access to coins if they wanted to buy some?
We should revise progress on these questions every few months and our actions and energy should be directed to improving those performance indicators. Everything else and all the forum interaction between different altcoin camps is just a distraction and a big waste of time. This applies to all coins, it would be much more productive if we all faced reality and measure success in a way that matters instead of hiding behind coinmarketcap rankings that at this point in time mean nothing to any project other than Bitcoin.
Keep it real.
This has been my belief for a long time.
August 08, 2015, 04:49:14 PM
The reality about altcoin competition
You know what, thinking about it, I feel antagonizing with another project and tying your success or failure to what happens to a different project is deep down just an excuse to ignore the fact that no altcoin project is close to getting any meaningful adoption yet. Is easier to go to coinmarketcap.com as a measure of success and say we are in X place and we just went pass Y project. How does that matter? It does not, is just an excuse because the reality is no altcoin project is known in the real world in any substantial way and that is the real challenge for people that will never participate in crypto forums or invest in altcoin projects to at least know about other alternatives to BTC.
We should measure our success in that direction. Measure public awareness, adoption, accessibility to coins, partnerships and integration to services. Every 6 month or so we should ask ourselves:
1) Is public awareness of our project increasing? Are people more informed and understand better what we are doing? Do they know us more outside of the crypto circles?
2) Is adoption increasing? Are there more services and ways to use Dash for end users?
4) Are our added value features more robust and easy to use than they were 6 months ago?
5) Is it easier to buy coins with FIAT? Are there more vehicles for the public to get access to coins if they wanted to buy some?
We should revise progress on these questions every few months and our actions and energy should be directed to improving those performance indicators. Everything else and all the forum interaction between different altcoin camps is just a distraction and a big waste of time. This applies to all coins, it would be much more productive if we all faced reality and measure success in a way that matters instead of hiding behind coinmarketcap rankings that at this point in time mean nothing to any project other than Bitcoin.
Keep it real.
You know what, thinking about it, I feel antagonizing with another project and tying your success or failure to what happens to a different project is deep down just an excuse to ignore the fact that no altcoin project is close to getting any meaningful adoption yet. Is easier to go to coinmarketcap.com as a measure of success and say we are in X place and we just went pass Y project. How does that matter? It does not, is just an excuse because the reality is no altcoin project is known in the real world in any substantial way and that is the real challenge for people that will never participate in crypto forums or invest in altcoin projects to at least know about other alternatives to BTC.
We should measure our success in that direction. Measure public awareness, adoption, accessibility to coins, partnerships and integration to services. Every 6 month or so we should ask ourselves:
1) Is public awareness of our project increasing? Are people more informed and understand better what we are doing? Do they know us more outside of the crypto circles?
2) Is adoption increasing? Are there more services and ways to use Dash for end users?
4) Are our added value features more robust and easy to use than they were 6 months ago?
5) Is it easier to buy coins with FIAT? Are there more vehicles for the public to get access to coins if they wanted to buy some?
We should revise progress on these questions every few months and our actions and energy should be directed to improving those performance indicators. Everything else and all the forum interaction between different altcoin camps is just a distraction and a big waste of time. This applies to all coins, it would be much more productive if we all faced reality and measure success in a way that matters instead of hiding behind coinmarketcap rankings that at this point in time mean nothing to any project other than Bitcoin.
Keep it real.
It's one of the best posts I ever read in years. Thanks for sharing your opinion. I wonder how many people will open their eyes if they could read this post.
August 08, 2015, 04:41:33 PM
I dont know what you guys think but I suspect this Bitcoin drop is Ethereum cashing out coins to continue to fund that heavy overhead they have with those big salaries. Just a feeling.
I thought they already sold what was funded back when it was initially raised (at the very least, a substantial portion).
Yes they did sell the ICO coins but as far as I understand they already spent most of that money, so in order to continue they need more funds. Where are those funds going to come from if not from selling ETH for BTC and then FIAT?
We are talking about 150K - 190K /year salaries for their team, which I think is excessive, it will be interesting to see how it develops.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/39ujsp/founder_salaries/
That's right, they can continue to issue ETH as needed I think.
No they cannot...the presale agreement doesn't allow it, and the protocol is already launched so there's no way to issue more.
I think a lot...a LOT...of money will flow in and out of various cryptos over the coming weeks to deal with ETH. Very interesting...another great project I think.
This is the last I read about it and I moved on: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ethereum-maximum-number-of-coins-737234
August 08, 2015, 04:22:28 PM
... if there would be a vote on that possible? I would set up a masternode for it
Set up a masternode,
Submit a proposal that has Zero DASH allocated to it that says roughly "Let's change the name back",
Try and persuade people to vote for it.
I would certainly vote no, but you have every right to give it a shot.
you seem like a wise man, looking forward until it's up and running but I won't be persuading anybody....
darkcoin is the perfect name for a privacy focused crypto currency, maybe I am the only one who sees that at this moment...
Dash is no longer solely a privacy-focused crypto. It has extended beyond that with the addition of IX and blockchain governance. Keep living in your nostalgic world of rainbows and butterflies.
+1
Blockchain governance is the most important advancement Dash is gonna give to the entire bitcoin and alt community. I am sure more projects will follow this path .
And the funding will be discussed and voted by the community, even with only one vote you can convince the entire community providing the best reasoning and the best people to do the job.
As I said in the thread about it in dashtalk.org I will propose the funding for a dev to fix and improve the code to p2p mining. Not only for Dash but for the entire crypto economy projects.
August 08, 2015, 04:21:30 PM
I dont know what you guys think but I suspect this Bitcoin drop is Ethereum cashing out coins to continue to fund that heavy overhead they have with those big salaries. Just a feeling.
I thought they already sold what was funded back when it was initially raised (at the very least, a substantial portion).
Yes they did sell the ICO coins but as far as I understand they already spent most of that money, so in order to continue they need more funds. Where are those funds going to come from if not from selling ETH for BTC and then FIAT?
We are talking about 150K - 190K /year salaries for their team, which I think is excessive, it will be interesting to see how it develops.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/39ujsp/founder_salaries/
That's right, they can continue to issue ETH as needed I think.
No they cannot...the presale agreement doesn't allow it, and the protocol is already launched so there's no way to issue more.
I think a lot...a LOT...of money will flow in and out of various cryptos over the coming weeks to deal with ETH. Very interesting...another great project I think.
August 08, 2015, 03:25:45 PM
I dont know what you guys think but I suspect this Bitcoin drop is Ethereum cashing out coins to continue to fund that heavy overhead they have with those big salaries. Just a feeling.
I thought they already sold what was funded back when it was initially raised (at the very least, a substantial portion).
Yes they did sell the ICO coins but as far as I understand they already spent most of that money, so in order to continue they need more funds. Where are those funds going to come from if not from selling ETH for BTC and then FIAT?
We are talking about 150K - 190K /year salaries for their team, which I think is excessive, it will be interesting to see how it develops.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/39ujsp/founder_salaries/
That's right, they can continue to issue ETH as needed I think.
August 08, 2015, 03:24:39 PM
... if there would be a vote on that possible? I would set up a masternode for it
Set up a masternode,
Submit a proposal that has Zero DASH allocated to it that says roughly "Let's change the name back",
Try and persuade people to vote for it.
I would certainly vote no, but you have every right to give it a shot.
you seem like a wise man, looking forward until it's up and running but I won't be persuading anybody....
darkcoin is the perfect name for a privacy focused crypto currency, maybe I am the only one who sees that at this moment...
Dash is no longer solely a privacy-focused crypto. It has extended beyond that with the addition of IX and blockchain governance. Keep living in your nostalgic world of rainbows and butterflies.
August 08, 2015, 03:22:35 PM
I dont know what you guys think but I suspect this Bitcoin drop is Ethereum cashing out coins to continue to fund that heavy overhead they have with those big salaries. Just a feeling.
I thought they already sold what was funded back when it was initially raised (at the very least, a substantial portion).
Yes they did sell the ICO coins but as far as I understand they already spent most of that money, so in order to continue they need more funds. Where are those funds going to come from if not from selling ETH for BTC and then FIAT?
We are talking about 150K - 190K /year salaries for their team, which I think is excessive, it will be interesting to see how it develops.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/39ujsp/founder_salaries/
August 08, 2015, 03:17:30 PM
Blockchain Governance has the purpose of determining development and functionality decisions, none of which apply to the mere name of the project. That's the reason people need Masternodes to vote: Because Masternodes are affected by the decisions made.
You can't buy a skyscraper and then ask the mayor to change the name of the city.
Let me play Devil's Advocate for a minute.
The term "Development" has not yet been defined. I personally see no problem with such a foolish proposal. He could argue that a name change IS a development issue. Nobody that has thought this through would vote for it, but who here hasn't tried something in their life that was a lost cause. If he feels strongly about it, I say let him try. Isn't that what the Blockchain Governance functionality was built for?
Just for clarification, he would have to calculate how much time and effort would be required to change and test all the code. He would then have to propose funding such an action. Would it require 10 DASH? 100? 1000? 10,000?
Censorship of ideas is not the answer.
This has nothing to do with censorship. He may do whatever he pleases.
I was simply outlining my understanding of the purpose of the whole blockchain governance idea.
"Development" is easily defined within our context (we're talking about software development after all): Adding functionality to the codebase, eradicating bugs and errors, fixing vulnerabilities and similiar actions.
The name of a variable (projectname := "DASH" | projectname := "Darkcoin") has no impact on the development of the coin.
Despite all this you're right anyway: His proposal can be filed under "Marketing", an area I missed when I wrote my previous post. Marketing of course affects Masternode operators as well.
August 08, 2015, 03:12:45 PM
... if there would be a vote on that possible? I would set up a masternode for it
Set up a masternode,
Submit a proposal that has Zero DASH allocated to it that says roughly "Let's change the name back",
Try and persuade people to vote for it.
I would certainly vote no, but you have every right to give it a shot.
What's the point? Otoh will certainly vote no, and he has the majority of the votes. Great coin! ROFL
August 08, 2015, 03:08:20 PM
Blockchain Governance has the purpose of determining development and functionality decisions, none of which apply to the mere name of the project. That's the reason people need Masternodes to vote: Because Masternodes are affected by the decisions made.
You can't buy a skyscraper and then ask the mayor to change the name of the city.
Let me play Devil's Advocate for a minute.
The term "Development" has not yet been defined. I personally see no problem with such a foolish proposal. He could argue that a name change IS a development issue. Nobody that has thought this through would vote for it, but who here hasn't tried something in their life that was a lost cause. If he feels strongly about it, I say let him try. Isn't that what the Blockchain Governance functionality was built for?
Just for clarification, he would have to calculate how much time and effort would be required to change and test all the code. He would then have to propose funding such an action. Would it require 10 DASH? 100? 1000? 10,000?
Censorship of ideas is not the answer.
August 08, 2015, 03:02:51 PM
... if there would be a vote on that possible? I would set up a masternode for it
Set up a masternode,
Submit a proposal that has Zero DASH allocated to it that says roughly "Let's change the name back",
Try and persuade people to vote for it.
I would certainly vote no, but you have every right to give it a shot.
you seem like a wise man, looking forward until it's up and running but I won't be persuading anybody....
darkcoin is the perfect name for a privacy focused crypto currency, maybe I am the only one who sees that at this moment...
August 08, 2015, 02:56:03 PM
I own more than a 1000 dark :-*coins
does the proposal system mean I can vote to stop the nonsense and get my darkcoin back? (bit-lite-dark, any fool sees it makes sense)
I cast my vote for that anyway
all those in favor say aye
does the proposal system mean I can vote to stop the nonsense and get my darkcoin back? (bit-lite-dark, any fool sees it makes sense)
I cast my vote for that anyway
all those in favor say aye
No, back peddling on branding would cause even more confusion. If you want Darkcoin so bad, rename your shortcut, replace the shortcut icon, and start changing instances of Dash to Darkcoin in the code before building. Other than that, grow up and look at the bigger picture.
People who grow up realize they made mistakes and this seems one to me
but I asked if there would be a vote on that possible? I would set up a masternode for it
Blockchain Governance has the purpose of determining development and functionality decisions, none of which apply to the mere name of the project. That's the reason people need Masternodes to vote: Because Masternodes are affected by the decisions made.
You can't buy a skyscraper and then ask the mayor to change the name of the city.
August 08, 2015, 02:54:40 PM
... if there would be a vote on that possible? I would set up a masternode for it
Set up a masternode,
Submit a proposal that has Zero DASH allocated to it that says roughly "Let's change the name back",
Try and persuade people to vote for it.
I would certainly vote no, but you have every right to give it a shot.
August 08, 2015, 02:39:30 PM
I own more than a 1000 dark :-*coins
does the proposal system mean I can vote to stop the nonsense and get my darkcoin back? (bit-lite-dark, any fool sees it makes sense)
I cast my vote for that anyway
all those in favor say aye
does the proposal system mean I can vote to stop the nonsense and get my darkcoin back? (bit-lite-dark, any fool sees it makes sense)
I cast my vote for that anyway
all those in favor say aye
No, back peddling on branding would cause even more confusion. If you want Darkcoin so bad, rename your shortcut, replace the shortcut icon, and start changing instances of Dash to Darkcoin in the code before building. Other than that, grow up and look at the bigger picture.
People who grow up realize they made mistakes and this seems one to me
but I asked if there would be a vote on that possible? I would set up a masternode for it
August 08, 2015, 02:18:08 PM
I own more than a 1000 dark :-*coins
does the proposal system mean I can vote to stop the nonsense and get my darkcoin back? (bit-lite-dark, any fool sees it makes sense)
I cast my vote for that anyway
all those in favor say aye
does the proposal system mean I can vote to stop the nonsense and get my darkcoin back? (bit-lite-dark, any fool sees it makes sense)
I cast my vote for that anyway
all those in favor say aye
No, back peddling on branding would cause even more confusion. If you want Darkcoin so bad, rename your shortcut, replace the shortcut icon, and start changing instances of Dash to Darkcoin in the code before building. Other than that, grow up and look at the bigger picture.
Jump to: