Each month, the ten most popular questions submitted by the Dash community at Dash Nation Discord are collected and sent to Dash Core Group for answers. The intention is to select important and well-thought out questions and filter out unpopular questions, questions that have already been answered and other noise. For March, some remaining questions from February were also included, with apologies for the delay. The submissions for March 2019 are as follows: Q: With the recent controversy about Patreon deplatforming Sargon of Akkad there has been a movement searching for a solution to this censorship of money. A lot of popular personalities (Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, Sam Harris etc) that have fans in the numbers of millions are seeking to either find or create alternatives to services like Patreon. This seems like the chance that crypto was waiting for to make it's adoption advance in the Western World since places with financial instability (VZ, Zim) already have reasons enough to use crypto. What is DCG doing to advertise the possibility of using Dash or even collaborating with such efforts? (Ichigo13) A (Ryan): Dash Core Group is focused on developing the core platform and software products to deliver an ideal payments-focused digital currency, and encourage its adoption in a variety of markets. We are designing Dash to be extensible with SDKs that encourage programmers to build on the platform... rather than building services ourselves. If there is a sufficient market for a competitor to Patreon to emerge that leverages digital cash, Dash would offer many advantages that would encourage its adoption, but we cannot be experts and develop solutions for a variety of industries. Our strategy is to focus on a world-class payment solution and leave services on the Dash network to the market to develop. Q: Will the blockchain usernames follow a similar pattern as CashAccounts JohnDoe#100 / [email protected] or a different pattern? Will down the road users be able to register [email protected] or their mobile number in the DashPay App and type the received verification code into DashPay which signs it as a message to confirm ownership? This will be the most PayPal / Venmo like feature which DashPay is regularly compared to. This also enables one to send Dash to an email or mobile number which is not yet registered and the recipient receiving a notification that they can register an account to receive the Dash (the Dash might be staged in DashPay until the account comes online and then the tx is written to the blockchain) which is a great new onboarding vector. (dashameter) A (Ryan): The exact format is not yet final as we are debating the trade-offs inherent in each option. Most likely, the final format will have few restrictions. Similar to a Twitter handle, users will have the option to attach a “nickname” such as ‘Dave Smith’ to enable user-friendly reference and search capabilities. More information will be released as details are finalized on the format and process for claiming a username. Q: Can a Dash Core dev explain in detail the difference between a "data contract" and a "smart contract?" In particular, can you talk about the pros and cons of both and limitations associated with data contracts? (Ageless) A (Liz): Smart contracts are self-executing contracts where the terms of the contract are written directly into the code. A data contract is a schema that provides a structure for how data is exchanged between a service and a client. In my view they aren’t really comparable in a pros/cons sort of way - they serve two different purposes. Whereas a smart contract will execute a coded agreement in a trustless way, a data contract defines data in a structured way. For example, if I created a decentralized Twitter-like application, I might create a data contract that defines fields for a username, a short text bio, a profile photo, and a geographical location. There is also a potential synergy between the two, e.g. a Data Contract can enable a decentralized database for use by a Smart Contract. Q: Will BitGo offer a custodial service for masternode collateral key, while letting reward key and operator key be held by owner? (lukehiggs007) A (Ryan): We continue to engage Bitgo on an ongoing basis about enhancements to the service. This is one of many possibilities we plan to explore going forward, as this level of security may be beneficial - and worth the expense - if the price of Dash were to increase to previous levels. Q: InstantSend has been cited as a value-add for cryptocurrency traders because it is easier to take advantage of arbitrage opportunities if you can move funds quickly between exchanges. However, even with most Dash transactions defaulting to InstantSend, the added benefit for arbitrage traders is lost if the exchange does not detect or trust the InstantSend lock for deposits. For example, Poloniex currently requires 50 confirmations for Dash deposits, which I believe is an even higher bar for security than an InstantSend would be. Does DCG have a strategy for helping businesses to trust InstantSend, and make it easier for them to implement InstantSend detection? (TroyDASH) A (Ryan): This will be a key focus area for DCG after InstantSend is enabled by default. The value of InstantSend to exchanges and businesses honoring incoming transactions will substantially increase after activation occurs on the network in April. We are finalizing outreach plans this month for after the feature is active. In addition, ChainLocks will offer another compelling feature for exchanges and businesses to improve the user experience even for transactions that are not InstantSend. Both features will become a key selling point for Dash, and we plan a campaign specifically aimed at existing services to encourage them to honor these transactions within their services faster. Q: The economic attributes Dash has seem at odds with the desire to be used as a form of payment, in which merchants for example would be hesitant to price or denominate goods and services, due to volatility and illiquidity and the fact that holding is incentivized over spending. Given these economic factors, how is DCG attempting to reconcile its strategic push for or emphasis on Dash and its development as a "payment system" focused project when the economic incentives seem misaligned to that end? Wouldn't the proposed actions of Dash Ventures simply increase the magnitude of these problems by reducing supply and further incentivizing holding? It's theorized that reaching a sufficient volume would mitigate a lot of the liquidity and volatility issues, but doesn't that seem like a chicken/egg problem when the only way to get there is to get people spending Dash en masse over and against the seemingly misaligned economic incentives? (Arthyron) A (Ryan): DCG is focused on adoption in the market segments with the biggest need for alternative payments, in which volatility is a secondary consideration. In addition, efficient fiat onramps and offramps are critical for businesses that don’t wish to accept volatility risks. Dash Ventures is primarily aimed at improving the efficiency of the proposal funding expenditures, but should additionally have a minor stabilizing effect on volatility if it begins generating an independent source of cash flows to the network, by establishing a floor under which the price is unlikely to drop. And yes, Dash does face a chicken and egg problem similar to any new payment mechanism, which is why we are focused on markets which cryptocurrency and Dash in particular is best positioned to compete and establish several bases from which it can continue to grow. Q: The Brave browser has reported that it has an impact of more than 5.5 million users. This project uses the BAT token and has a partnership with Uphold. The browser has an area called: rewards with an internal wallet and the possibility of adding funds, It allow these cryptocurrencies: BAT, Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin. I think that from Global Head of Business Development Department - Bradley could start negotiations using the synergies of parnership with Uphold and Dash can be added in Brave browser. Can Dash Core take this suggestion as a line of work? Thank You (BlockChainTech) A (Ryan): While Uphold can provide access to the Brave team, obviously they are unable to make commitments on behalf of another partner. That said, DCG is currently exploring potential partnership opportunities with Uphold and this is certainly a suggestion that makes sense. Q: Who is in charge of the Dashpay twitter account. Can someone at core help clean up all the fake twitter followers. I’ve discussed with Tungfa about this back in mid 2016 and he said he discussed with Tao but it seems nothing has been done, and it has now gotten out of control. https://www.twitteraudit.com/Dashpay (triptolemoose) A (tungfa): Tungfa (+Fernando + HeyMichael) are in charge of the Twitter account. After the report in 2016 all fake accounts were removed (numbers dropped from 80k to 20/30k). The account was cleaned again following this report, recent numbers are cleaned up and look good. Q: Has there been any consideration given to creating a trading arm under dash ventures? (Ageless) A (Ryan): This will be up to Dash Ventures to decide. After launch, Dash Ventures will be a completely separate entity, and DCG intends to have no direct involvement in its decision making. Should the network wish Dash Ventures to actively trade Dash or any other assets, there is nothing preventing it from doing so. Q: Does core know if the SEC has a deadline to respond to our application like with the ETFs, or can this process essentially take as long as they want as dash is probably not a priority in their books. (stealth923) A (Ryan): The SEC is not under obligation to reply by any specific date. As evidenced by its decision-making regarding Bitcoin ETFs, it has been cautiously approaching decisions. However, the work with the SEC has already yielded significant benefits regardless of when the SEC provides a formal response. DCG has leveraged the legal summaries to address concerns from exchanges and money transmitters that Dash may be a security. In all cases to date, the legal arguments developed for the SEC has addressed these concerns. In addition, the fact that we presented these materials proactively to the SEC provides evidence to market participants that the Dash community will professionally handle these concerns. Q: In the event of a chain split, particularly a contentious one (say without a preceding mno vote), which set of masternodes do the DCG trustees have a fiduciary responsibility towards? As the trustees are relatively centralized and physically identifiable, are there any provisions that stop them simply deciding on a specific chain and directing the pooled resources towards their pick in the event of such a split? (Magnus) A (Ryan): This is an excellent question. It is not defined in the trust. However, the trust protectors would have the ultimate say in the event of a chain split. This could occur based on rules they define ahead of time (e.g., we will follow the chain most masternodes from the original chain continue supporting), based on an internal vote after a split occurs, or based on other criteria defined ahead of a specific planned fork. Of course, we hope that chain splits can be avoided entirely because of Dash’s focus on governance.