Agree that mixing isnt great but adopting shadow cash sounds like relaunching the whole project.
Not really. It would actually be sticking to the goals and values of what the project started with. The shadowcash code is already written. It is not like current devs need to spend a lot of time of new code and inventing the concept. The hard work was already done by the Shadowcash team.Agree that mixing isnt great but adopting shadow cash sounds like relaunching the whole project.
(in response to the question "Is there any advantage to offering standard, non-private transactions?")1) Yes, though it is rare. The only advantage would be if irrefutable proof that a payment was sent was needed from one identifiable address to another (think of a contract that specified this). That is the only instance I can think of and it would be an edge case. It is rare enough that I personally think removing non-private transactions (not even making it an option) is best.
I would not agree with this statement. I see the Coinfirm partnership as a move in the right direction. I am not a core team member. However, your post does bring up some interesting concerns. Was the partnership voted on? Should it have been voted on? Should all partnerships, even those that do not require funding, be voted on?We should de-fund the core team and stop this ridiculous work
Dash will evolve over the years. I don't expect it to remain perfectly true to its original ideas. Bitcoin can stay stuck in the mud and we will see if that is a strength or a weakness in the coming years. I suppose it will be a weakness as Dash continues to improve.completely opposite now to how dash started out.
I do not agree with this statement. It's like saying, "US dollars will evolve over the years"... yeah, got that right, that's exactly why we're here, because the rules of the game kept changing... off the gold standard and subject to continuous manipulation / devaluation. The so called "limited supply" of crypto does not add value, more that the constant changing of properties can also devalue... geeks are the new bankers, changing the rules.Dash will evolve over the years. I don't expect it to remain perfectly true to its original ideas. Bitcoin can stay stuck in the mud and we will see if that is a strength or a weakness in the coming years. I suppose it will be a weakness as Dash continues to improve.
So, you are against the new release of "Dash Evolution" because it is a change, an addition of features?I do not agree with this statement. It's like saying, "US dollars will evolve over the years"... yeah, got that right
Indeed, the voting system wasn't robust enough to protect against rogue actors infiltrating dash and carrying out work without approval e.g. Coinfirm integration.So, you are against the new release of "Dash Evolution" because it is a change, an addition of features?
Wasn't the ability to vote an added feature? Are you against voting?
"Mass Acceptance" should always be the #1 priority (I AGREE). Without it, a coin has no value whatsoever. To get there, Dash needs to be easy to use, easier and thus more convenient than any competitor.mass acceptance
Doesn't work that way. You will pay your bullion dealer with dash and they will claim it's recent history shows mixing and, therefore, unreliable. They won't give you the money back because it's now a matter for the police (or other agencies) to investigate. Is this different to paying them using other methods? - no, they will still keep the money and refuse service. So why did you use "digital cash" when you could of used a debit card funded via bitcoin?Does partner with confirm make DASH transaction have less privacy. No
Because If U use PrivateSend , which is still there , you will still have the privacy.
The problem here is the merchants (e.g. bullion dealer) who have to follow strict rules about AML/KYC regulation. If the merchants don't have the information about the transaction, they will not accept it.
You have the right to use PrivateSend but the merchants have the right to decide whether they should accept those transaction or not. It is fair.
As GrandMasterDash pointed out, fungibliity does not work that way. Once you can have coins that are linked with real IDs and ones that are unlinked, then it creates an attack vector. Government or even people voluntarily can start to discriminate some coins versus others. In other words, it creates two currencies. It is like trying to give merchants a ripped bill. Some will accept it and some will not.Does partner with confirm make DASH transaction have less privacy. No
Because If U use PrivateSend , which is still there , you will still have the privacy.
The problem here is the merchants (e.g. bullion dealer) who have to follow strict rules about AML/KYC regulation. If the merchants don't have the information about the transaction, they will not accept it.
You have the right to use PrivateSend but the merchants have the right to decide whether they should accept those transaction or not. It is fair.
Not at all. I have been clear with the benefits of Dash: 1) Governance model 2) Based on bitcoin. As I have stated many times, monero is not built on bitcoin base. As a result, adopting it requries complete retooling and it does not benefit from bitcoin development. That is a big drawback.I'm starting to think OP is perhaps in the wrong forum, OP should be looking for the Monero forum and post in there.
By the way OP draws so many wrong conclusions about the values of Dash, that he is starting to sound like a certain USA presidential candidate. Unfortunetely i dont have the time or energy to create a website to
rebuff them one by one.
In the recent past, there have been some issues (legitimate or otherwise) which were beaten to death - over and over, in a troll-like manner.Why is it that anyone who wants to see Dash improve is essentially called a troll or crazy?
This is a problem.In the recent past, there have been some issues (legitimate or otherwise) which were beaten to death - over and over, in a troll-like manner.
Find me a core member that is willing and able to get a Shadowcash-like technology into dash and I'll vote yes and I'll also make a good financial donationThis is a problem.
Those issues should have been voted, instead of been beat to death over and over again in a troll-like manner.
STOP TALKING, START VOTING!
I second that.Find me a core member that is willing and able to get a Shadowcash-like technology into dash and I'll vote yes and I'll also make a good financial donation
This time I actually agree with demo, we should stop trolling over and over and over and over....This is a problem.
Those issues should have been voted, instead of been beat to death over and over again in a troll-like manner.
STOP TALKING, START VOTING!
Why ask and beg the core members to implement shadowcast.Find me a core member that is willing and able to get a Shadowcash-like technology into dash and I'll vote yes and I'll also make a good financial donation
I am telling you the same thing that I told to @GrandMasterDash.I second that.
Dash has the governance and instant send advantage.
But shadowcash privacy looks superior. The Umbra client is also very sexy.
Come on core team! Please share ur thoughts!
a) We need someone(s) that can actually do the jobWhy ask and beg the core members to implement shadowcast.
You have better propose this into the budget.
Or even better offer a boutny to whoever can implement such a thing.
And then you should force the core team to merge the shadowcash branch to the main version of dash.
The amount of bounty defined in the budget should be voted up (or down) (YES, ONCE AGAIN, YOU SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO VOTE WITH NUMBERS !!!a) We need someone(s) that can actually do the job
b) A rough guesstimate for the budget and timeline
c) A successful vote
d) An agreement from the core team that they will actually implement it
It's (d) that concerns me. They could simply refuse even if the vote is successful. So, at some level it needs their approval. There are many things they don't ask our approval for, but still, hopefully they will agree if there is a successful vote.
With this in mind, once implemented, I would donate some money to the developer(s) in addition to the budget itself... call it a bonus, a thank you.
And how is it possible to define a bounty proposal into the budget? How can this bounty become dynamic and change in time? How can you define a vote type where a Masternode vote means that he gives X dash coins as a bounty to the person that is able to implement something? The bounty reward system (althought absolutely usefull) is impossible to be defined in the current budget system that the core team implemented.With this in mind, once implemented, I would donate some money to the developer(s) in addition to the budget itself... call it a bonus, a thank you.