I sold all my Dash. Here is why and my view on the state of Dash

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
I think they will keep it. Even if slips a bit. You can see the changes made to it here https://v.cash/forum/threads/12-month-timeline.349/

Development pace is very rapid and in general the team keeps to their roadmaps. It is not like Dash where it takes 6 months to get 12.1 out the door

What makes you believe they will keep their roadmap regarding the "Vcash Decentralised Governance Protocol"?

According to their current timeline, the "Vcash Decentralised Governance Protocol" was 6th in the row. They implemented 1,2,3,4,5, they ignored the 6th, then they implemented 7,8,9,10 and they are currently stopped by finishing the 13th. With the 11th being "Fix any known bugs and memory leaks" and the 12th being "Patents and Trademarks".

Additionaly the current majority in Vcash seems to be against the Decentralised Governance Protocol.
 
Last edited:

xdashguy

Member
Feb 9, 2016
86
50
58
Because the timeline is a todo list. It does not specify the exact order it must be completed. The poll you listed was whether it should be the first priority not whether it should be done. Even I don't think it should be the first priority. The coin is already progressing rapidly. The developer codes like a machine. Governance is good once its foundation is built as it will primarily be used for marketing. Give the track record of Dash's governance the value it offers is unknown and its value seems to be to attract development when development has stalled (which it has not been close to stalling at vcash) or in trying to create a marketing platform.

It will get done. Reserve your criticism for when the time line expires if it is not done.
 
Last edited:

xdashguy

Member
Feb 9, 2016
86
50
58
Btw, I just want to add, I am not sure any of these coins (even vcash or dash) will ever be used mainstream. Right now the most important feature in crypto is scalability. I have not seen any coin that could scale to even a single state using it. So, ultimately, that is currently the bottleneck of crypto is its scalability. Dash does not solve this. Ethereum does not solve this. Vcash does not solve this. Ultimately, these coins can NEVER be used as "digital cash" because doing so would hit the limits of their scalability and they would become unusable Implying that they could be is being dishonest regarding the technology.

The only thing that might solve this is mimblewimble which would probably need to be its own alt-coin or side chain. However, a blockchain based on that would not have some of the more advanced features of bitcoin (like advanced smart contracts). On the other hand, it would be much, much more private than bitcoin.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Give the track record of Dash's governance the value it offers is unknown and its value seems to be to attract development when development has stalled (which it has not been close to stalling at vcash) or in trying to create a marketing platform.
The governance is not created solely for marketing issues, the governance is the essence for every coin. The cryptocoins, whatever their design may be, they remain (or they aspire to become) money. And money cannot exist without some form of politics, and politics is of course almost the same as governance. Because the politics defines what is money, and the money that lack politics they cannot be considered as real money. Thats why governance should be the first priority. Cryptocoins without some kind of governance will not be able to survive in the future.

If Vcash people are unable or unwilling to define their governance system now that they are a few and their task is easy, how is it possible they will manage to define their governance system when they will become many and their task will be more hard? They will not have governance experience , and they will collapse.

Of course the Dash governance system is also imperfect. What is needed (in order to encourage development) is an alternative bounty enabled budget system.
 
Last edited:

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Because the timeline is a todo list. It does not specify the exact order it must be completed. The poll you listed was whether it should be the first priority not whether it should be done. Even I don't think it should be the first priority. The coin is already progressing rapidly. The developer codes like a machine. Governance is good once its foundation is built as it will primarily be used for marketing. Give the track record of Dash's governance the value it offers is unknown and its value seems to be to attract development when development has stalled (which it has not been close to stalling at vcash) or in trying to create a marketing platform.

It will get done. Reserve your criticism for when the time line expires if it is not done.
Even if it will get done, it will have nothing to do with governance!!

Have a look at the answer they gave in their forum. They voted down unanimously (like an army of orcs) the Decentralized Governance poll , they locked the thread and censored the discussion, and their priest said:
Vcash's priest said:
...while at the same time everybody in the world (wikipedia included) defines governance as:

"governance is the processes of interaction and decision-making among the actors involved in a collective problem that lead to the creation, reinforcement, or reproduction of social norms and institutions."
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


Dashers are not very clever, but Vcashers are worse. So I stay in dash as the the less bad.
 
Last edited:

xdashguy

Member
Feb 9, 2016
86
50
58
Read the threat again. Decentralized governance is coming. John is stating that decision making does not depend on it. He does not see value until the coin is at least $0.50. until then, decisions will be made via other models.

If you think decentralized governance is the most important thing, then certainly stay in Dash. IMO, it is not the most important thing though it is important. The reasons are as follows:

1) Coins without decentralized blockchain based governance have far less adoption and market cap than coins that do 2) The coin best known for it, Dash, has not really accomplished much with their decentralized governance. Considering decisions still come top-down (just look at this poll), it has the same effect.

The only benefit that may be seen is that Dash has a bounty program. Which is what the governance model has turned into. Core makes all the decisions, but masternodes pay people who have interesting projects in a bounty-type system.

This, to me, is not actually a benefit. As previously stated, the end result has been few people want to volunteer. Why volunteer my time if I can be paid for it? If people refuse to pay me, then I feel cheated as they pay others or I feel demotivated as they must not like my idea, etc. Hell, I see governance proposals that are using it like kickstarter "Hey, fund my startup because I am not even passionate enough to fund it myself".

So, decentralized governance while a great theory has not proven itself in practice.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Read the threat again. Decentralized governance is coming. John is stating that decision making does not depend on it. .
No he didnt said that. He said :

"Lastly, Decentralized Governance has nothing to do with decision making so you are very confused here."

and he locked the thread.

It is an obvious wrong quote, and as long as it remains like that and he does not delete it, it shows the quality of his brain, and the brain of his followers that tolerate him when talking nonsense and locking threads so that nobody can answer to him and reveal his wrong way of thinking.
 
Last edited:

xdashguy

Member
Feb 9, 2016
86
50
58
Just some current example of showing the governance model corruption and these are just from current funded ones (not previously funded):

https://www.dashcentral.org/p/localbitcoins4dash - Why is Dash governance being used to fund a private commercial venture? Did localbitcoin need funding from bitcoin in order to start? Nope! Because a motivated person who sees an opportunity will do it on their own if they see profit. What a misallocation.

https://www.dashcentral.org/p/lamassu-integration - Why is Dash paying Lammasu to do something that is Lammasu's best interest? Did Ethereum have to pay Lammasu to integrate Ethereum? Of course not! This is just a company robbing the Dash network.

https://www.dashcentral.org/p/bsdev-wocoins-201611 - Again, why is the Dash network funding this private companies development? You know they will use the Dash money to abstractize their code to more easily add any alt currency. Then, they will add a lot more than just Dash. This company is exploiting the governance system to make $$$. In addition, the site is a privacy mess. It refuses to work unless you give permission to let it access your location via the browser and it requires your phone number. Definitely against the ideals of Dash, IMO. Something like bitsquare.io would have been a much better decentralized exchange to fund. But, you know what, there is no reason to, Dash is already supported!
 

xdashguy

Member
Feb 9, 2016
86
50
58
It is an obvious wrong quote, and as long as it remains like that and he does not delete it, it shows the quality of his brain, and the brain of his followers.
I am not sure if english is not your first language or if you are trolling. You asked him "In the absence of governance, who takes the decisions here?" and he correctly replied "DG has nothing to do with decision making so you are very confused here." Meaning, without saying it, HE is the one that makes decisions.

Just like with Dash, the decision model of VCash is the core (John in this case) makes the decisions. People accept it or not by whether they use the software or fork it. If other people want to do work they can do work independently. They can also compete competing clients if they want.
 

splawik21

Yeah, it's me....
Dash Core Group
Foundation Member
Dash Support Group
Apr 8, 2014
1,969
1,335
1,283
I`m sure you are awared that since yesterday evening you`ve already posted 6 times on the same thread?(In fact it was 7 as you`ve posted already another one during my writing)
Quite spamming for a person who "sold all his dash" and does not care anymore even if you have some more or less valid points to say, in your opinion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bhkien

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
I am not sure if english is not your first language or if you are trolling. You asked him "In the absence of governance, who takes the decisions here?" and he correctly replied "DG has nothing to do with decision making so you are very confused here." Meaning, without saying it, HE is the one that makes decisions.
Governance has to do with decision making. Period. Everybody knows that, native english speakers or not.

The one who claims the opposite, either he is stupid or he is trying to change the meaning of the words, in order to confuse and obfuscate the communication.

Meaning, without saying it, HE is the one that makes decisions.
If he is the one who makes the decisions, why he does not saying it clearly? Is he ashamed?
 
Last edited:

xdashguy

Member
Feb 9, 2016
86
50
58
Read it again slowly. He said DG has nothing to do with decision making. DG = decentralized governance. His point is that there are different models to decision making. Vcash currently has a model that works good and it is the same model employed by all the largest coins. When vcash gets to a price of $0.5, then he sees value in adopting a DG model.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Just some current example of showing the governance model corruption and these are just from current funded ones (not previously funded):
Nobody said that the governance model of dash is perfect.
But dash has a governance model. It is not an enlightened absolutism like Vcash.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Read it again slowly. He said DG has nothing to do with decision making. DG = decentralized governance. His point is that there are different models to decision making.
I read it again.

Saying: "decentralized governance has nothing to do with decision making"
is totally different than saying: "there are different models to decision making."

And most important, even if it was a typo, even if he said something and he meant something else, we will never know. He locked the thread. So we cannot ask him for clarification of what he really meant, so that we will understand whether his tongue is a mess or his brain.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
The only benefit that may be seen is that Dash has a bounty program. Which is what the governance model has turned into. Core makes all the decisions, but masternodes pay people who have interesting projects in a bounty-type system.
The Budget system of dash is imperfect. It is not a pure bounty system, as long as the masternodes are not allowed to vote with numbers (as proposed in the alternative budget system.). The one who gives the tip, should be able to define it. Dash budget system claims that the one who receives the tip should define the tip amount, and the one who gives the tip is only allowed to answer a yes or a no. And this is absurd.

This, to me, is not actually a benefit. As previously stated, the end result has been few people want to volunteer. Why volunteer my time if I can be paid for it? If people refuse to pay me, then I feel cheated as they pay others or I feel demotivated as they must not like my idea, etc. Hell, I see governance proposals that are using it like kickstarter "Hey, fund my startup because I am not even passionate enough to fund it myself".
The deficiencies you are mentioning could be diminished or solved, if dash decides to implement the alternative bounty enabled budget system.
 
Last edited:

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Just some current example of showing the governance model corruption and these are just from current funded ones (not previously funded):
  1. https://www.dashcentral.org/p/localbitcoins4dash - Why is Dash governance being used to fund a private commercial venture? Did localbitcoin need funding from bitcoin in order to start? Nope! Because a motivated person who sees an opportunity will do it on their own if they see profit. What a misallocation.
  2. https://www.dashcentral.org/p/lamassu-integration - Why is Dash paying Lammasu to do something that is Lammasu's best interest? Did Ethereum have to pay Lammasu to integrate Ethereum? Of course not! This is just a company robbing the Dash network.
  3. https://www.dashcentral.org/p/bsdev-wocoins-201611 - Again, why is the Dash network funding this private companies development? You know they will use the Dash money to abstractize their code to more easily add any alt currency. Then, they will add a lot more than just Dash. This company is exploiting the governance system to make $$$. In addition, the site is a privacy mess. It refuses to work unless you give permission to let it access your location via the browser and it requires your phone number. Definitely against the ideals of Dash, IMO. Something like bitsquare.io would have been a much better decentralized exchange to fund. But, you know what, there is no reason to, Dash is already supported!
The cases you mention are not considered as problems of the model of the governance of dash. These are problems of the quality of the electorate. This is always the case, the governance models are not wrong or right, the people who implement the models are. Even when there is a lack of a predefinited governance model (which is defined either as absolutism, despotism or as anarchy) it can also be considered as ok, in case the despot or the people are enlightened (which is a very rare case of course).

If the electorate and the decision makers are corrupted, you should not blame the governance model. Whatever the governance model may be, a corrupted electorate will destroy everything, and there is not any governance model that can fit well to corrupted people. In that case you have better either replace the electorate with a new one, or (even better in order to avoid conflicts) to slowly invite more people to participate to the electorate so that the corruption will diminish. Which in dash means in practice, either allow people with less than 1000 dash to be able to vote, or alternative switch from the current dash timocracy to the real democracy.
 
Last edited:

Solarminer

Well-known Member
Apr 4, 2015
762
922
163
Btw, I just want to add, I am not sure any of these coins (even vcash or dash) will ever be used mainstream. Right now the most important feature in crypto is scalability. I have not seen any coin that could scale to even a single state using it. So, ultimately, that is currently the bottleneck of crypto is its scalability. Dash does not solve this. Ethereum does not solve this. Vcash does not solve this. Ultimately, these coins can NEVER be used as "digital cash" because doing so would hit the limits of their scalability and they would become unusable Implying that they could be is being dishonest regarding the technology.

The only thing that might solve this is mimblewimble which would probably need to be its own alt-coin or side chain. However, a blockchain based on that would not have some of the more advanced features of bitcoin (like advanced smart contracts). On the other hand, it would be much, much more private than bitcoin.
Actually, Vcash is able to scale. They already have a variable blocksize. And with the better management of traffic between nodes, they don't spam each node will all the network traffic. They also plan to have 0 fee transactions.

If you look at sending crypto with usernames(emails) coinbase and circle already do this. Oh you want to add escrow like Paypal too, add 1.5% to the transaction and head over to safepaybtc.com. Still, if you look at retail usage, you just scan a QR code and go - no need to mess with usernames for mass adoption. Only online stuff needs usernames.
 

Solarminer

Well-known Member
Apr 4, 2015
762
922
163
The Budget system of dash is imperfect. It is not a pure bounty system, as long as the masternodes are not allowed to vote with numbers (as proposed in the alternative budget system.).
Demo, you think distributed governance is some sort of magic bullet, but it isn't. It is a good way to determine which direction to go, but that only works if the people voting have a clue of consequences and benefits. If the same people with all the voting power are the development team it doesn't make it decentralized. The user doesn't care about the governance structure of a currency. They only care if it is easier, faster, or more secure than what they use today.

Do you go to walmart because of their just in time delivery? No, you go to walmart because they have low prices(which is partly because of their just in time delivery and reduced space for store inventory). Don't try to fix the thing nobody cares about, focus on the stuff that actually makes users prefer your idea.
 

mastermined

Active Member
May 26, 2014
513
391
133
They have a lot of other features. They have an InstantX-like featuer (called ZeroTime) that is superior to instant X. It offers respending within 1 minute (versus Dash's 15 minutes I believe) and is faster than instantX and more scalable.
Pretty sure the respending time in dash is 2.5 minutes or one block. Somebody please correct me if i'm wrong. This was discussed at btctalk a long time ago and someone tried it and at first thought it was instantly respendable, because it takes a minute or so to enter a new address and amount and password. By the time they did all that one block had been mined and the transaction went through. Seems like i tried it too but that was a long time ago and i forget.
 

Solarminer

Well-known Member
Apr 4, 2015
762
922
163
Pretty sure the respending time in dash is 2.5 minutes or one block. Somebody please correct me if i'm wrong. This was discussed at btctalk a long time ago and someone tried it and at first thought it was instantly respendable, because it takes a minute or so to enter a new address and amount and password. By the time they did all that one block had been mined and the transaction went through. Seems like i tried it too but that was a long time ago and i forget.
Instantx requires 6 confirmations before you can
resend another Instantx. A merchant receiving funds can't ix your funds out for 6 confirmations. If you start with all your funds in one address, your transaction puts remaining funds in a change address. So even spending funds you need to wait the 6 confirms between each.

You can send a normal transaction right after an instantx. You can mix your funds so you don't have to wait sending several in a row on a desktop. But mobile phones can't mix so you need to wait. Don't plan on buying that friend a soda, unless you want to wait 15 minutes.
 

UdjinM6

Official Dash Dev
Dash Core Group
May 20, 2014
3,639
3,537
1,183
...
You can send a normal transaction right after an instantx. You can mix your funds so you don't have to wait sending several in a row on a desktop. But mobile phones can't mix so you need to wait. Don't plan on buying that friend a soda, unless you want to wait 15 minutes.
To clarify this: mixing creates a lot of utxo so wallet can choose them instead of using change from previous tx. You can "teach" mobile wallets to break its own funds into multiple utxos too just like desktop wallet does when it's preparing for mixing. That of course would need to be done ahead of time too.
I'm not sure why we have "6 confirmations for re-spend" requirement in the first place, probably smth to do with conflicts resolution in mempool or smth like that - need to revise this again probably.
 

Dworf

Member
Jun 25, 2016
103
37
78
57
I do not like this discussion. VCash is still in the absolute beginnings. They even have no real GUI wallet - that is more a small Dialog with two input fields. They have no market for now. And if they ever will catch up with DASH (or other Cryptos) they will be late. Not to mention all the other cryptos which have similar features: NAV, Viacoin, SDC, ... - and all have the same problem all together: They have no infrastructure.

When you think about it, Evolution is a total scam. It is going to take YEARS to implement and its three primary features are the following: 1) no need to download blockchain (same thing ZeroLedger offers or even an SPV wallet has) 2) Syncing between wallets on different devices (same thing any bitcion HD wallet has) 2) Ability to make payments via email instead of payment address
"no need to download blockchain" >> that is a huge technical advance since the implementation of SPV wallets is not necessary anymore; just use the Core

But as far as I got it it will offer two more points that you left out but which are crucial:
a) anonymization will be done just in time and not with a premixer - maybe that answers another of your questions
b) transaction scalability will rise above what ever will be needed

Maybe you do not see that but it is exactly what will be needed to cover a mass market - secure easy and seamless value transfer. And I see it as one step into a base platform for more applications.

Anyways anybody is free to speculate on whatever currency he personally prefers. If you think that VCash is your favorite then do it and do not waste your time with all this FUD on a field that you left already.
 

xdashguy

Member
Feb 9, 2016
86
50
58
Actually, Vcash is able to scale. They already have a variable blocksize.
I don't consider this scaling. Any code base can change a magic constant to infinity and they can "scale". However, that is not the whole the story. The rest of the story is how much resources are available at a specific transaction level and whether the network could be sustained in that scenario. For example, 4 billion tranasactions were done per day on bitcoin it would cause the blockbloat to increase by 1GB per day. Now, imagine 20 billion or 100 billion transactions. It would quickly outpace the ability for any but the most specialized and well-financed actors to handle for two reasons 1) the storage costs would be too much 2) no one could startup a new full node because when starting a full node you must verify all previous transactions, which could take months (or years).

The end result of this is a system that cannot scale and be decentralized at the same time. As less full nodes are running, then the network has less security (full nodes enforce consensus rules as a check against malicious miners). And, as there are fewer full nodes they become targets to governments (same for mining).

That is why core / blockstream, etc, are trying to prevent the block size increasing too much. They are trying to find alternative ways to scale because in actuality increasing the blocksize is not a scaling solution. It can only go so high, and that number it can go is far below what it would need to be to be a useful currency. So, other solutions are needed. In one respect vcash / dash have an advantage in this because they incentivize full nodes so it solves part of the problem, so certainly they can scale more than bitcoin without having as much of a centralization effect.

The blockchain that has me most interested in regards to scalability is the mimble wimble. With that blockchain only existing addresss need to be kept. As a result, its possible for it to actually shrink when you spend money. This keeps the verification when starting a full node not very intensive and it keeps the storage costs very low. It seems very interesting.
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
The blockchain that has me most interested in regards to scalability is the mimble wimble. With that blockchain only existing addresss need to be kept. As a result, its possible for it to actually shrink when you spend money. This keeps the verification when starting a full node not very intensive and it keeps the storage costs very low. It seems very interesting.
But there is not any implementation of mimble wimble yet... Mimble wimble is only theory ( like the voting with numbers), isnt it?
 

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Demo, you think distributed governance is some sort of magic bullet, but it isn't. It is a good way to determine which direction to go, but that only works if the people voting have a clue of consequences and benefits. If the same people with all the voting power are the development team it doesn't make it decentralized. The user doesn't care about the governance structure of a currency. They only care if it is easier, faster, or more secure than what they use today.

Do you go to walmart because of their just in time delivery? No, you go to walmart because they have low prices(which is partly because of their just in time delivery and reduced space for store inventory). Don't try to fix the thing nobody cares about, focus on the stuff that actually makes users prefer your idea.
 
Last edited:

demo

Well-known Member
Apr 23, 2016
3,113
263
153
Dash Address
XnpT2YQaYpyh7F9twM6EtDMn1TCDCEEgNX
Last edited: