Topic: [DASH] Dash - Building the IoM | Dash Nation Progress Thread - page 19. (Read 41794 times)

DASH was known as X Coin and Darkcoin earlier? All three seem to be cool names, whereas XCoin and Darkcoin seem most mysterious. :>

Man, you guys are ON IT!  Good job!  BTW, you have to seriously wonder about Andy Freer and his abilities, when a genius like Evan lets go of his baby and entrusts it to another guy.  I mean, Andy must be really damn awesome!  Looking forward to both roundtables!   Thanks Buster, Oaxaca and Fernando for making a great show!

Lurk mode OFF.

Dude, you keep labouring the same tired points about masternode rewards increasing centralization.

Node holders are just as likely to sell their reward coins (as miners do) or cash out of the market completely at some point. Nodes earn ~10% pa, so assuming the count doesn't increase (which it will) each node can only foster a new node every ten years. Hardly the centralization clusterfuck you're painting.

Also, the point you so tragically fail to address is that DASH - like most every other cryptocoin, is in DEVELOPMENT. You describe the outcome of DASH with no concession to how it may develop over time.

Now stop fucking posting. We get it already. You hate DASH because if boils your blood to see 1 DASH trading at 6x the value of 1 XMR.

Get the fuck over it and do something positive in your life.

Thank you for introducing this fantastic podcast to the readers. A great example of Dash values in action.

Cheers.

www.dashroundtable.org

www.twitter.com/dashroundtable

Long time comming too!!! Been trying to get that busy man on the air for some time now. We also interview Andy Freer aka Andy 'Dark' on May 8th. (He is the Developer working on Evolution).

thats great news, i love her shows. i will for sure watch it / listen to it.
thanks for the heads-up.

edit : episode 5 is looking to be intriguing as well :

Dash Round Table: Ep.05
Streaming live on April 24, 2016 In Episode five the guys interview eduffield Founder and Lead Developer of DASH. v12.1 is right around the corner and Evan is going to tell us all about the
effort he and the rest of the team have been putting in. He says 'This is turning into a huge deal, it should be exciting.' (More info coming soon).
Time:  1:00 p.m. PST
Information: http://dashroundtable.org/episodes/ep05/

Don't forget everyone. Today myself, fernando and oaxaca will be interviewing Amanda B. Johnson, Host of The Daily Decrypt - We will be discussing a few things:
-DASH
-Libertarian ideas and her past activism
-The Free State Project
-How she came into cryptocurrencies
-Daily workflow/tools to keep up with so many projects
-Burr/Feinstein Proposed Anti Encryption Bill and more.

You can tune in LIVE in about 5 hours. A recording will be made available after the live show. I may be doing another give away during the show. You can tune in at the website link, http://dashroundtable.org/episodes/ep04/ - or you can tune in below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnckbAVvroI

Anything not to help the persistence of topdown systems as we move toward the information age.

So persistent. Thank you so much for the thread bumps. You are a real gentleman.

Which it can't do given the reasons I've explained over and over again, It seems the dashnation is either oblivious to the facts or is purposely ignoring them.


I'll let you get back to your attempt to get more noobs entangled within the controlled environment of the dash network. Or are those links to actual arguments that don't correspond to dash's script?

Good morning everyone. I hope you're enjoying your day/night wherever you happen to be.

I would hope by now that you, the patient readers are starting to see a pattern in this thread, which has quickly reached seventeen pages.

The detractors, who have controlled the Dash narrative through spin and innuendo for the last two years, are desperately trying to keep this control through repetitive posts of exactly the same buzzwords.

Meanwhile, my fellow respected Dash Nation members continue to bring forward useful real information backed up by links where anyone can validate the authenticity.

As you can imagine, this is an exhausting battle, but make no mistake, as I've clearly indicated on page 12, this behavior will not be allowed to dominate the narrative about Dash.

Please, do your own research, and discover what I and all of the members of the Dash Project already know, which is that, despite its beginnings, the facts of which no one is denying, Dash is an innovative, driven and ambitious project. It's goal is to become the digital cash that Satoshi envisioned, the Internet of Money.

Join Dash Nation and help us create a passion around progress, optimism, and decentralized technology.

Thanks again for your time and open minds. We truly appreciate it.

Tao (Dash Nation Campaign Founder)

Doesn't matter if you call them Freedom Points, they cause the same centralization.

Looking up that one atm, if I remember correctly the block reward is split up but transaction fees only go to miners and if so neither would be right, it would be "subsidy" rather than "tax".

EDIT: Can't find it but I'm pretty sure the fees only go to miners, either way the fees only make up a small amount of the block rewards so aren't really significant for the mo. Block rewards subsidise masternodes for providing the second tier of the network in the same way as they subsidise mining, 45% mining, 45% masternodes with the other 10% going into the budget system to fund improvements.

Sigh. I can't make it any more simple--it's like they don't grasps that the nodes are bought with dash and earn the dash that can let the operator buy more nodes thus increasing centralization. Or that this is a problem because it requires trust to believe that this very scenario isn't happening.....you can lead a horse to water, but you can't explain the basics of cryptosystems without someway to expand its neural capabilities. Maybe nanabots or direct neural connections to expand brain capacity would help?

Short question, I`ve lost track a little...The masternode block-rewards generalizethis now calls "fees" are what he called "taxes" before, right?
Seems to me like a small but still laudable step in the right direction.

For what ? Governance over how the node-based block reward is spent ?

That isn't "trust", thats called having a f*cking rudder attached to your ship.

Feature? lol

Lets make this simple, though I wonder how much simpler I can make it?

Dash's nodes collect fees, those fees can be used to buy more nodes, which in turn collect more fees, which in turn can buy more nodes and on and on and on....

That should be the end of the argument for someone who actually gets why these systems are built to rely on mathematics rather than protocol, but Tok has proved over and over and over that he doesn't get this little tidbit. So I'll try to dumb it down even more than I have already--though I suspect Tok might just be playing dumb and wants to muddy the waters while he regroups for another game or graphic versus reality. But whatever.

Why this isn't a problem for Bitcoin and is a problem for dash is that dash's nodes are used for goverance, privacy, and an ever growing laundry list of features (probably to validate why they are collecting fees in the first place), it doesn't take a genius to realize that this fails as a trustless system because I must trust that the node holders aren't using their fees to buy more nodes, or engaging in market manipulation to gain more nodes at a cheaper price and thus increasing profit and power at the same time.

It would be severly naïve to think that this isn't happening, but luckily in the world of cryptosystems, these systems are supposed to work in a trustless manner, so I can safely say that dash fails to deliver decentralization because it cannot verify this claim trustlessly.

And why this is important follows, so keep reading....

Dash is useless because it can't work trustlessly, because credit card companies and banks can do the same thing, only better (looks at ripple). It's only trustlessly decentralized systems that can offer something banks and credit card companies can't--a way for instituions, individuals, and citizens to work in conjunction without the threat of manipulation and coercion. Any system that can't offer a trustless means (or at the very least a statistically acceptable risk of decentralization--though that is a risk that is time madated) is doomed because it fails at being of any more use than what already exist.

Now watch half the dashtards scramble to argue why it is decentralized, while the other half argues it doesn't need to be. Or maybe they can just mumble jealousy under their collective breath--though they may need to vote on that.

Ok, I had my entertainment unignoring you after someone quoted you.
Keep your opinion. Don't forget to be everywhere with your paid signature. That speaks for itself.

People can visit http://dash.org or http://dashtalk.org to see what's happenning 

I don't know if I should bother answering this. It's a kind of mickey mouse symbolic characterisation. Symbolically - ok - people 'own' nodes in the sense that they own the coinage at some random blockchain address which collateralises it.

But symbolism is where it ends. I might as well characterise the bitcoin miners as 'trusted' for all the power they have to affect the protocol and for that change to have a practical impact on the network's logical integrity.


Well, the whole point is that they can, so what you see as a "bug" I see as a "feature".

You're confusing a democracy with a capital asset. It remains to be seen how healthy the whole approach is in terms of the long term benefit of the project but one thing they can't do is "vote" the coins out of other people's hands, so what works for large holders has also got to work for small.

Another thing, Dash blockchain governance is only one aspect of "governance". It focuses the voice of one particular set of stakeholders that would not otherwise have a voice. However there are other "quadrants" of stakeholders who are at least equally influential and critical to the buoyancy of the whole asset. Large coin holders have no influence over these. It's a POW coin for a start so the mining majority is one of them. Another is commercial stakeholders such as exchanges and yet another is developers.

So characterising the whole thing as some kind of kind of oligarchy is simply symbolic obfuscation and bluster.