Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 2245. (Read 9723858 times)

The Trolling
It's just a question of statistics that an unmoderated thread is going to draw posts from a small number of demented nutcases who want to gorge on the available attention at other people's expense.

However there is also another reason. Dash is a controversial project in more ways than one.

The Differences from 'Last Year'
In particular, around this time last year, Dash's unique approach to anonymity (functional diversification of the network) started to emerge as just one of many new innovations going on across the altcoin market of the time. It wasn't particularly notable other than the fact that it supported the 'anonymity' features and it kind of passed under the radar on most other counts.

Over the last year, however, some major evolutions have occurred in the market which people probably did not predict:

[1] - the functional diversification approach that Dash took back then has worked. It's proven to be a generalised solution which immediately delivered 2 further breakthroughs over bitcoin: confirmation time and scaleability

[2] - Dash has emerged from the background in terms of marketcap to establish itself in the top 3 'pure currency' rankings

[3] - Bitcoin itself has prevailed over the flotilla of alts that came it's way. There is now very little, if any, prospect of any alt overturning bitcoin's transparent blockchain classic approach, starting again and gaining mainstream traction. In that respect Dash's remaining competitors in the market (at least in the anonymity sector) have walked straight into a huge cowpat by attempting to do exactly that


The 'Real controversy'
Note that Dash’s functional diversification approach is the one common denominator behind all these breakthroughs:

 - anonymity
 - confirmation time
 - transaction scaleability
 - legacy compliance with the bitcoin architecture

This is the “real” controversy - not the instamine.

'The Decoy'
However, it *is* why the ‘instamine’ has taken on such a huge importance from the perspective of adversaries. They cannot afford for attention to be directed at Dash’s unique technical approach and its benefits because ALL other networks (bar Dash clones and Bitcoin 2.0’s) are still mono-functional. It would suddenly widen the official playing field to a point where they are so far away from the goalposts that many would probably have to throw in the towel.

The only way to keep the spotlight off the “real” controversy is therefore to keep the ‘instamine’ alive and keep throwing it in everybody’s faces to the exclusion of everything else. In fact its impact is of course academic. A market depth chart is a V-shape and will always be a V-shape. What that means is that for every trader that values as asset using a given set of criteria, there is always another trader who prioritises those same criteria differently. It was an unconventional birth but the value could have gone to zero.

It didn’t, and the reason it didn’t is what adversaries would prefer not to discuss.

The Trolling
It's just a question of statistics that an unmoderated thread is going to draw posts from a small number of demented nutcases who want to gorge on the available attention at other people's expense.

However there is also another reason. Dash is a controversial project in more ways than one.

The Differences from 'Last Year'
In particular, around this time last year, Dash's unique approach to anonymity (functional diversification of the network) started to emerge as just one of many new innovations going on across the altcoin market of the time. It wasn't particularly notable other than the fact that it supported the 'anonymity' features and it kind of passed under the radar on most other counts.

Over the last year, however, some major evolutions have occurred in the market which people probably did not predict:

[1] - the functional diversification approach that Dash took back then has worked. It's proven to be a generalised solution which immediately delivered 2 further breakthroughs over bitcoin: confirmation time and scaleability

[2] - Dash has emerged from the background in terms of marketcap to establish itself in the top 3 'pure currency' rankings

[3] - Bitcoin itself has prevailed over the flotilla of alts that came it's way. There is now very little, if any, prospect of any alt overturning bitcoin's transparent blockchain classic approach, starting again and gaining mainstream traction. In that respect Dash's remaining competitors in the market (at least in the anonymity sector) have walked straight into a huge cowpat by attempting to do exactly that


The 'Real controversy'
Note that Dash’s functional diversification approach is the one common denominator behind all these breakthroughs:

 - anonymity
 - confirmation time
 - transaction scaleability
 - legacy compliance with the bitcoin architecture

This is the “real” controversy - not the instamine.

'The Decoy'
However, it *is* why the ‘instamine’ has taken on such a huge importance from the perspective of adversaries. They cannot afford for attention to be directed at Dash’s unique technical approach and its benefits because ALL other networks (bar Dash clones and Bitcoin 2.0’s) are still mono-functional. It would suddenly widen the official playing field to a point where they are so far away from the goalposts that many would probably have to throw in the towel.

The only way to keep the spotlight off the “real” controversy is therefore to keep the ‘instamine’ alive and keep throwing it in everybody’s faces to the exclusion of everything else. In fact its impact is of course academic. A market depth chart is a V-shape and will always be a V-shape. What that means is that for every trader that values as asset using a given set of criteria, there is always another trader who prioritises those same criteria differently. It was an unconventional birth but the value could have gone to zero.

It didn’t, and the reason it didn’t is what adversaries would prefer not to discuss.