Topic: Dash numbers (Read 1219 times)
Isn't the most relevant number going to be number of charges, prosecutions, fines and years in jail for illegal securities activities?
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
45% goes to the masternodes and another 10% to the general treasury, of which distribution is voted on by the masternodes, so totaling 55%. How is this not centralization?
The most logical explanation is these monies are being used to buy dash and is causing the pump.
But all scammy behavior aside, has dash created the perfect storm to suck in more suckers? Ie: are we going to see dash stay at these high levels as it is just too easy for dash crew to manipulate price? But then again maybe manipulation could be a good thing, if it could keep the price stable, then dash could be used as a store of value. Im not saying i trust dash. But I could see a large number of ignorant indifferent users giving their trust.
And lets face it, they might be marketing geniuses. Digital cash... Perfect name for the general population who can barely understand bitcoin, who can barely turn on a computer, and barely manage a smart phone.
Manipulation cannot lead to a stable price unless DASH has underlying value. Because if people are buying due to manipulation, once they find out, they get out, and the price plummets (definition of a bubble).
I don't like the fact that it requires a large amount of capital to buy/operate a masternode. This is automatically a centralising feature. But the other question is, how do the incentives for masternodes work? The more that get in on it, the less each person should make (eg in bitcoin, the more miners, the harder the difficulty of the problem, the more ppl trying to get the same number of fixed bitcoins). Is it the same for masternodes? So that it would not benefit all the current masternode holders if more ppl got in?
If the reverse is true, if it benefits the current masternode holders as more ppl get in, then this is a Ponzi scheme. Is there a fixed number of people who can operate masternodes, or is the supply unlimited?
As more people get in, there is an incentive to ddos attack other nodes--some may point that usage may increase to cover these costs, but actual tx per day has remained flat for the coin's life and its supposed marketing genius has only lured more speculator's and not consumer's money into the pot. Apparently it's like the King and Duke in Huckleberry Finn--conmen who put on a shitty play and get a bunch of towns folk to buy tickets, but rather than run the men out of town--likely out of embarrassment as the story indicates or more likely Twain's ability to put common happenings into satirical light--the townsfolk brag about the play and a new bunch of people are scammed by a poor show (IIRC there isn't a third show, but it's likely dash can keep doing this until it runs out of dumb money, gets actual usage and the third doesn't happen, or an interested government agency takes action).
The most logical explanation is these monies are being used to buy dash and is causing the pump.
You can't use Dash to buy Dash. So that isn't the most logical explanation.
The most "logical explanation" is in fact that 3 years of development, trading and distribution are being priced in. Previous "large holders" are no longer in possession of what they started off with and OTC sales have dried up.
Secondly, the Dash technical and monetary model has been successful in that it it's been made to work not only for miners and merchants but holders as well. (See stakeholders: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14584154).
You don't need 1000 Dash to benefit from this. There are no loads of investors who have their holdings invested in shared node collateral. Albeit these are 3rd party services at the moment but trustless ones are on the roadmap.
See more here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12549331
One thing most people don't understand is that most of the tokens are locked up in Masternode and that create artificial scarcity in the market.
1. The tokens aren't "locked up"
2. The scarcity isn't "artificial", it's real
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
45% goes to the masternodes and another 10% to the general treasury, of which distribution is voted on by the masternodes, so totaling 55%. How is this not centralization?
The most logical explanation is these monies are being used to buy dash and is causing the pump.
But all scammy behavior aside, has dash created the perfect storm to suck in more suckers? Ie: are we going to see dash stay at these high levels as it is just too easy for dash crew to manipulate price? But then again maybe manipulation could be a good thing, if it could keep the price stable, then dash could be used as a store of value. Im not saying i trust dash. But I could see a large number of ignorant indifferent users giving their trust.
And lets face it, they might be marketing geniuses. Digital cash... Perfect name for the general population who can barely understand bitcoin, who can barely turn on a computer, and barely manage a smart phone.
Manipulation cannot lead to a stable price unless DASH has underlying value. Because if people are buying due to manipulation, once they find out, they get out, and the price plummets (definition of a bubble).
I don't like the fact that it requires a large amount of capital to buy/operate a masternode. This is automatically a centralising feature. But the other question is, how do the incentives for masternodes work? The more that get in on it, the less each person should make (eg in bitcoin, the more miners, the harder the difficulty of the problem, the more ppl trying to get the same number of fixed bitcoins). Is it the same for masternodes? So that it would not benefit all the current masternode holders if more ppl got in?
If the reverse is true, if it benefits the current masternode holders as more ppl get in, then this is a Ponzi scheme. Is there a fixed number of people who can operate masternodes, or is the supply unlimited?
I think the part of the strategy is to maintain a good price. Atleast the dev team isnt being a complete scam to the early investors!!
With the master node, the amount of circulation is reduced. So the price can be manipulated more easily.
Interesting observation. I'd agree.
I think the part of the strategy is to maintain a good price. Atleast the dev team isnt being a complete scam to the early investors!!
With the master node, the amount of circulation is reduced. So the price can be manipulated more easily.
I think the part of the strategy is to maintain a good price. Atleast the dev team isnt being a complete scam to the early investors!!
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
This level of compensation to masternodes is ludicrous, with a total of $25,000 per day going to a handful of server operators. The truth of it is that this is a scheme to further remunerate the founder of Dash, Evan Duffield, since it is thought that the majority of these masternodes are controlled by him and others close to him.
Now, I'm looking for some insight on incentives of attacks. Is the Dash network at extremely high risk? I was looking at dash DDoS report https://www.dash.org/2017/03/08/DDoSReport.html showing 500 masternodes disabled by the attack. 10% of the network down from a DDoS originating from only 2000 IPs. In reality, does this mean a cheap $1,000 +/- leased botnet is capable of taking down millions in hardware?
This level of compensation to masternodes is ludicrous, with a total of $25,000 per day going to a handful of server operators. The truth of it is that this is a scheme to further remunerate the founder of Dash, Evan Duffield, since it is thought that the majority of these masternodes are controlled by him and others close to him.
Now, I'm looking for some insight on incentives of attacks. Is the Dash network at extremely high risk? I was looking at dash DDoS report https://www.dash.org/2017/03/08/DDoSReport.html showing 500 masternodes disabled by the attack. 10% of the network down from a DDoS originating from only 2000 IPs. In reality, does this mean a cheap $1,000 +/- leased botnet is capable of taking down millions in hardware?
Oh, wow, that is indeed a ludicrous amount of money going to Evan on a daily basis. In spite of all the people providing relevant information to stay away from this coin as it is one of the most well-thought money making scheme for its developer, many people are still being sucked in to this "digital cash". Some are blindly going there hoping to make some cash by trading. Well, we'll just have to see in the future if it can sustain its numbers.
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
45% goes to the masternodes and another 10% to the general treasury, of which distribution is voted on by the masternodes, so totaling 55%. How is this not centralization?
The most logical explanation is these monies are being used to buy dash and is causing the pump.
But all scammy behavior aside, has dash created the perfect storm to suck in more suckers? Ie: are we going to see dash stay at these high levels as it is just too easy for dash crew to manipulate price? But then again maybe manipulation could be a good thing, if it could keep the price stable, then dash could be used as a store of value. Im not saying i trust dash. But I could see a large number of ignorant indifferent users giving their trust.
And lets face it, they might be marketing geniuses. Digital cash... Perfect name for the general population who can barely understand bitcoin, who can barely turn on a computer, and barely manage a smart phone.
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
45% goes to the masternodes and another 10% to the general treasury, of which distribution is voted on by the masternodes, so totaling 55%. How is this not centralization?
I don't like Dash and I believe this is a perfected scam with good money available for marketing purpose, but one thing I'm tired of is the hypocrisy on people's part, do you want to tell me you will have at least 1000Dash tokens today and be calling it scam. I know soon Monero to would be pumped to reach parity with Dash price this is the market we are now.
One thing most people don't understand is that most of the tokens are locked up in Masternode and that create artificial scarcity in the market.
Why would you own 1000 of something you think is a scam? At that point you are only betting on when others will figure it out.
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
45% goes to the masternodes and another 10% to the general treasury, of which distribution is voted on by the masternodes, so totaling 55%. How is this not centralization?
I don't like Dash and I believe this is a perfected scam with good money available for marketing purpose, but one thing I'm tired of is the hypocrisy on people's part, do you want to tell me you will have at least 1000Dash tokens today and be calling it scam. I know soon Monero to would be pumped to reach parity with Dash price this is the market we are now.
One thing most people don't understand is that most of the tokens are locked up in Masternode and that create artificial scarcity in the market.
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
45% goes to the masternodes and another 10% to the general treasury, of which distribution is voted on by the masternodes, so totaling 55%. How is this not centralization?
Couldn't agree more. CENTRALIZATION!
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
45% goes to the masternodes and another 10% to the general treasury, of which distribution is voted on by the masternodes, so totaling 55%. How is this not centralization?
Because MASTERnode payouts are directly proportional to hand-wavy-ness
D
definition
of centralized
its Ripple-Lite
definition
of centralized
its Ripple-Lite
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
45% goes to the masternodes and another 10% to the general treasury, of which distribution is voted on by the masternodes, so totaling 55%. How is this not centralization?
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
This level of compensation to masternodes is ludicrous, with a total of $25,000 per day going to a handful of server operators. The truth of it is that this is a scheme to further remunerate the founder of Dash, Evan Duffield, since it is thought that the majority of these masternodes are controlled by him and others close to him.
Now, I'm looking for some insight on incentives of attacks. Is the Dash network at extremely high risk? I was looking at dash DDoS report https://www.dash.org/2017/03/08/DDoSReport.html showing 500 masternodes disabled by the attack. 10% of the network down from a DDoS originating from only 2000 IPs. In reality, does this mean a cheap $1,000 +/- leased botnet is capable of taking down millions in hardware?
This level of compensation to masternodes is ludicrous, with a total of $25,000 per day going to a handful of server operators. The truth of it is that this is a scheme to further remunerate the founder of Dash, Evan Duffield, since it is thought that the majority of these masternodes are controlled by him and others close to him.
Now, I'm looking for some insight on incentives of attacks. Is the Dash network at extremely high risk? I was looking at dash DDoS report https://www.dash.org/2017/03/08/DDoSReport.html showing 500 masternodes disabled by the attack. 10% of the network down from a DDoS originating from only 2000 IPs. In reality, does this mean a cheap $1,000 +/- leased botnet is capable of taking down millions in hardware?
That DDoS was a good wake up call where I would say most MNs now have DDoS protection and beefy servers. If you miss a payment because you saved money on a cheap server now...there is no excuse!
The more the price rises, each Masternode could be its own datacenter soon.
10% of the block reward goes directly to the Dash general treasury. This equals $10,000+ per day. Another 45% goes to large holders of Dash called masternodes who provide a mixing service representing about 2% of the total transactions on the network.
This level of compensation to masternodes is ludicrous, with a total of $25,000 per day going to a handful of server operators. The truth of it is that this is a scheme to further remunerate the founder of Dash, Evan Duffield, since it is thought that the majority of these masternodes are controlled by him and others close to him.
Now, I'm looking for some insight on incentives of attacks. Is the Dash network at extremely high risk? I was looking at dash DDoS report https://www.dash.org/2017/03/08/DDoSReport.html showing 500 masternodes disabled by the attack. 10% of the network down from a DDoS originating from only 2000 IPs. In reality, does this mean a cheap $1,000 +/- leased botnet is capable of taking down millions in hardware?
This level of compensation to masternodes is ludicrous, with a total of $25,000 per day going to a handful of server operators. The truth of it is that this is a scheme to further remunerate the founder of Dash, Evan Duffield, since it is thought that the majority of these masternodes are controlled by him and others close to him.
Now, I'm looking for some insight on incentives of attacks. Is the Dash network at extremely high risk? I was looking at dash DDoS report https://www.dash.org/2017/03/08/DDoSReport.html showing 500 masternodes disabled by the attack. 10% of the network down from a DDoS originating from only 2000 IPs. In reality, does this mean a cheap $1,000 +/- leased botnet is capable of taking down millions in hardware?
Jump to: