Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 66. (Read 9723748 times)

That is a perfectly valid resource, more in front of the influence of BTC on the rest of cryptos. In fact, it is the way the DIF is effectively safeguarding at present its available resources. - by the way, light years from the catastrophic performance of DASH as a Store of value ... wealth deposit that the Mnodes chose incredibly at the start of this department ( what, beyond particular preferences and after managing to "set aside" those assets , logically condemned the savings donated to the DIF to the same speculative threats that the entire ecosystem suffered, which was a complete attack to the most elemental logic ...as usual) -. And by the way, casually, an approach suggested by afbitcoins here for a few weeks ... that you said you would approve if it were proposed for DASH.  

Anyway...this is all so simple and obvious ... and your gratuitous sermons (and previously, the endorsement of your assertions with monosyllables that meant absolutely nothing) are so out of place, that I can't help but understand perfectly that your trolls and tax interest poorly concealed they preside over each of their posts.

Who can be surprised, in those terms, of the unfortunate disaster that this jewel has suffered. What we are seeing is no accident ... but the totally logical culmination of a process developed over years.

This is not a cryptocurrency. It's a blockchain hosted security which is the worst of all worlds. A signed paper contract is far more secure for this type of asset.

You have a stable coin between your eyebrows and I do not suggest that by any means, I have already told you days before. It is absolutely evident that a Reserves strategy does not imply that any bank, for example, - which has usually assumed these strategies for centuries - does not aspire that its Gold Reserves are the only key to the growth of this entity, sería ridículo ...and it's hard to believe that someone interprets that like this. For me, everything is a question of proportions and in fact, there are no major differences from the approaches that DASH already adopts in its current model. I think it was quite clear, although at some time, in the run, perhaps he has explained little to me.

This comment is from almost a month ago.



When I refer to Reserves and to show a 1: 1 ratio in a fork that leaves from ZERO, I mean a discovery of "inalienable wealth" of the cap ... of some "minimums" that can never be extracted from the project by speculative movements . Really, it would be a partial endorsement. But even those Reserves would be understood to be subject to interesting investments for the benefit of the project (although with the established dogma that "The Mnodes do not optimize financing / investments", it would subject any movement to analysis of the utmost rigor ... and if those tests are not passed, the Reserves are fine where they are. And working while nothing is done ... but it is a good measure not to give away money - better than to dump it to particular benefits of the MNodes, as some suggest now -)

It could, in any case, be seen as a "Hybrid" approach, but never renounce fundamentals of the project such as technological development and others, which obviously would add value to the price defined by the pure accumulation of Reserves ... that would be ridiculous. I do not understand DASH without contributions to its development ... nor that development is worth ZERO. In fact, this "hybrid" strategy would be a very good claim for a "secured" investment in a currency that, in addition, obviously has other fundamentals, like so many other proposals in the crypto ranking.

It's a no-brainer, but just in case and seeing your perspective, I clarify it.


And, of course, I continue to maintain that a fork of those characteristics "nested or" linked "to DASH, would help to achieve greater rigor in the original project and would even invite support, otherwise, actions from that new approach - that his reservations, he could, of course, consider positions in Mnodes that would provide a more relevant collective voice in the "original" DASH -. And of course, from a much more inclusive project and representative of ALL its community from day one ... that would secure HODL positions in defense of the asset that today in DASH have simply been discarded due to contempt for the more modest holders beyond the Mnodes owners, which I have always considered an arrogant and unacceptable nonsense and greatly aggravates a Stock to Flow that at these levels of movement eat the price of the central asset by the foot ... which is absolutely terrifying to look at that chart.

Release Announcement: Dash Platform v0.17 & DashPay on Testnet
Source : https://blog.dash.org/release-announcement-dash-platform-v0-17-dashpay-on-testnet-13a85225902e



From an idea, to a concept, to code, to adjustments, to devnet & evonet, to a stable alpha codebase, to be released on Testnet.
This is an important milestone for Dash.


Important Github release notes links that just came alive :


Lets all test the hell out of it on Testnet.

I am waiting on some instructions or clarification on how to test Dash Platform (or specific parts of Dash Platform) on Testnet.
The DashPay Wallet Dapp seems more easy to test, it has already an Alpha Program running through https://www.dash.org/dashpay-alpha-program/ and will be updated in the following days.

Dash is a bitcoin clone. It inherits the bitcoin protocol.

There are 2 fundamental types of monetary asset:

 • commodity money (sometimes called "hard money") that has a capped supply and which requires effort to create
 • contractural money (including currencies) that has an uncapped supply and requires no effort to create

Digital assets are all synthesised forms of these. Being synthesised they require a monetary archetype to inform their functional priorities. i.e. the rule-base that governs their issuance and subsequent use-cases.

With the commodity money archetype, the value comes from the limited supply and effort required to generate it. Both of these two need to be coupled for the intrinsic value to be present. Limited supply on its own isn't enough because without the accompanying effort factor there's nothing to distinguish it from anything else of limited supply (e.g. 4 matchsticks with my fingerprint on them). Nor is the "effort-factor" alone enough because without the associated limited supply it cannot reflect the value of competition for that supply and therefore will only ever be a low-fidelity version of the hard money archetype.

With the contractural money archetype the value is not instrinsic. Instead it comes from some contractual counterparty backing. No effort is needed and no limited supply as long as the contract is in place. For example a ticket for a Gold safe in Singapore draws its value from the contract of ownership, not from possession. Ownership is assigned.

So if you want to create coins backed by some other commodity, e.g. gold, silver, even securities like currencies or equities, then you need a type of blockchain who's design supports and adheres to the contractural money archetype and that's capable of issuing securities. This type of blockchain is also more suited to redistributive type protocols where there's some kind of equitable "allocation" planned other than simply those with most hashpower.

Dash is not such a blockchain. It's firmly of type-1 commodity money and no amount of bashing it around with "forks" or any other protocol modifications will change that.

OK ... an example, in your opinion, thanks.

However, I am referring to the limitations of using DASH open source, supposedly for public use, as a tool to launch such a project.

Because you claim that this is not possible. Why exactly?

Tezos.

So what about? Where are the limitations for it?

What is the profile in which you think that type of approach fits?

No.

That is not a question of the type of entity and / or the jurisdiction chosen to establish it?

It's a mined digital asset, not a securitisation tool.

You're looking for a securitisation platform.

By the way ... what is your point of view for that statement? What kinds of obstacles do you see? That interests me, thanks.

Date: 30 December - 31 December
BTT username: Lost Stories
Link to BTT: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=27332741
Telegram username: @loststoryi
BetFury nickname: LiamArlo
1.Shares: https://vaihagise.medium.com/u-k-authorizes-covid-19-vaccine-from-oxford-and-astrazeneca-3792260e5724
2.Shares: https://vaihagise.medium.com/first-u-s-case-of-highly-contagious-coronavirus-variant-is-found-in-colorado-5db606bcf21e
Twitter campaign :
Twitter profile link : https://twitter.com/IIHF2021Live

WHERE? 0.0034

Why look for vague, subjective reasons which are shared with other coins when an unambiguous source of capital depletion is staring you right in the face that's unique to Dash amongst all its mined competitors ?

Dash isn't where it is for want of marketing IMO. It's had at least as much marketing as any of its competitors if not more, in fact it garnered a reputation throughout the whole sector for being one of the most marketed coins out there. And it wasn't just promotion, it had top 10 marketcap status, early listings on the biggest exchanges back in the day such as BTCe and Bitfinex, headlined at conferences, was widely reported in the press, had a massive revaluation upwards, listed on Coinbase etc etc.

This shit has already touched 0.0034 Where is the Dash / DashPay platform? Fucking scam

A lot of  you are quite the supporters of a more effective marketing as an arrangement to this.

Imo, DASH is VERY well known to the crypto community, at least on the terms that they deem appropriate for their particular investment valuations. And the problem is that enough is known ... to roundly despise it as an option.

Marketing will be able to attract people on time, ok ... but imo, very few people in relation to a brutal and inexorable process of destruction of wealth that the only thing that will do is appropriate the trusted and delivered capital and reaffirm its suicidal tendency ( In fact, even if it were a LOT of newcomers, the drainage capacity for private benefit is so excessive that the trend would remain the same ).

If we want to say that Dash has failed economically compared to BTC, we are within our right.

It has done really badly and anyone who traded their BTC for Dash months ago has lost a good chunk of capital.

what could have happened?

We can blame mining on masternodes, Core, competitors ... but I personally would simplify it and reduce it to something like "fame"

We can all see how every day or every week a coin takes off and makes a 2X, 3X, 5X ... and then, is when we look at it, and analyze it.

Sometimes we find that the raise is a pump & dump, but sometimes the advertising of doing a 3X reveals a good coin that can do interesting things.

Dash has no one to make it fashionable.

Bad internet marketing, bad public relations from Core. Little presence in the media.

It is better to spend the budget on paying famous youtubers who attract thousands of looks, than to waste that same capital in Venezuela that will end up being converted into $ in the blink of an eye.


If every month that marketing budget focuses on these media influential people, and those people talk about everything Dash is already doing today, and everything it will be able to do in the future, Dash could become all the rage.

And if Dash does a 3X, 4X or 10X, each time the stares will get stronger and stronger.

I always say it, we are on the horizon of events, and if we do not do something radical to get out of this black hole we will fall into oblivion.

With a Dash at $ 10 you can give up the project for lost, there will be no development, no marketing or anything that allows you to escape from gravity.

greetings and cheers

I know perfectly well how a cryptocurrency works: Accepting, de facto, a standard that is considered "apart" ... when it is precisely the opposite: The assumption of a deep dependence on a distortion in cascade by a totally extractive standard. As soon as you see the first Reserves supported in BTC that are a simple matter of time,you will have it in your nose... either for cryptos or any other economic structure outside of crypto (Reserves of some small comercial bank, probably - by the way, very effectively and without mining appearing anywhere as a primary element in the equation, i already anticipate you   -) .

Your position, anyway, is within logic. Mnodes will always look for an inbred measure that preserves their reduced advantageous frame. But that won't work. Centralization is the basis of the problem. Anyway, to act , it takesa degree of passion for a COLECTIVE mutilated project that exceeds  , relatively and only in the beginning, the particular interest ... to reach a framework that allows the natural optimization of DASH. I propose it ... and there , each one choose .

I know that this forum is not ideal ... but not because of what you say, but because those who are here are mostly benefiting from the imbalance (in reality, no one is, as this is a intensive tremendous process of  wealth destruction). The biggest problem is that the real DASH community no longer exists, has been ruined and marginalized ... and what little there is, much less with the motivation to try other avenues. So really, there is no such thing as an "ideal forum".

So each exhibition is, at least, a point of reflection. It's frustrating, but it can be all to hope for, being practical.

By the way, beyond ICOs, which are perfectly avoidable, implementing it in another chain is perfectly accessible, i already count with that. Placing the debate here is a matter of sheer inertia, I would even say that a "debt owed", by a ruined and abused real community ... although I know perfectly well the added problems that it entails.

...............