Interesting criticisms of DASH. Thoughts?

This is probably one of the better formed criticisms of DASH that I've seen, in that it seems like they put more than 2 seconds of thought into it. Very old though so many of these have probably been hashed and rehashed :p
I would be interested in hearing responses to the criticisms anyway though, without getting sidetracked into Monero bashing.
 
VERY old and mostly wrong. For instance, blanket statements like this one: " The entire basis for "anonymising" transactions is based on clients being online at a given point in time, which means that those clients are also open to leaking information via temporal association." or this one: "This means that it is trivially easy to disrupt every InstantX transaction".

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/21/Appeal_to_Authority
 
I think it's easy to find criticisms from the other side of the wall. That Dev in particular, didn't he start the dash collapsing monero up thread about the same time on bitcointalk? He managed to structure his arguments well but there isn't any way for him to shake his biased nature. He came to a Dash thread to do it. Seems like a push to take adopters for his own gain.

The US had many structured arguments on why they needed to invade this country or that country. Doesn't mean they were correct, nor valid arguments. They just needed to make them sound good and intelligent. (Sorry to our US friends here, was thinking of an analogy and that was the first thing to mind)

Any issues I've found, always has shown the core devs to be quick, decisive and efficient. This is a strong point for the security of a coin for me. Never have I seen the devs or foundation members here take the time to go out, and bash anyone or any other project because they're too busy doing what they love. That is working on and supporting Dash.
 
TroyDASH said:
I would be interested in hearing responses to the criticisms anyway though, without getting sidetracked into Monero bashing.
Click to expand...

I repeat...

I am kind of tired of the dismissive mentality that is pervasive towards anything that has anything to do with Monero. Not every criticism is automatically 100% meritless just because it comes from people who are already against DASH. I don't really care about the intentions of people who praise or criticise our network.

These are old criticisms but if anyone on the outside sees it and then also sees that the DASH community doesn't want the discussion about it to see the light of day, that isn't a good impression.
 
That may be true TroyDASH, but I really got tired of answering over and over again. They were wearing me down emotionally too, so I had to put 'em all on ignore. I figure, in the end, we'll have a product that works and works excellently well, and those fools can't stop this train.

But when there are valid questions, really, they can come here and ask in a respectful manner and I know they'll get a respectful response. For someone asking to learn or even bring up flaws, etc.... they have always been met with polite explanations rebuttals, or someone runs immediately to a developer to ensure they take a look at a potential issue. Indeed many issues were brought to the developer's attention this way.

I don't know if I'm like most people, but when I go to a thread and I want to learn about a project, such as Bitshares, I read and try to figure out how they are doing things, and along the way I see the same kind of trolls. I don't even need to read 3 words before I realize / recognize what they are, and I ignore anything they have to say. I honestly think most people do the same when investigating a project. The Troll's ultimate goal is to get under your skin, and frankly each of us have the power to keep them outside our brains, and only let relevant things take up space in our heads :) :)
 
From my experience in crypto and the altcoin markets. People get rather nationalistic about their currency, protective and they should. The problem and risk I see is that they become blind to legitimate criticism and this will sometimes come from competitors.

I'm not accusing anyone of being blind to legitimate criticism, to be perfectly clear. Just wanted to get people's thoughts on this in general, since its clear that there's drama between monero and dash.

A fair question is if I have any particular quotes from that link I'm curious about. I'll look into it again when the time comes and bring the questions here.

Doing a bit of research on Monero so that I don't start getting shit thrown at me as being biased. Also because they make so many claims and there's enough support for it that its worth looking into. But from the little I've seen they not really a very strong contender yet, even if ring signatures are indeed superior. There is much more in the ways of ease of use and governance etc etc that DASH has achieved.

I'll post my major questions or concerns here in the future.
 
JuanSGalt said:
From my experience in crypto and the altcoin markets. People get rather nationalistic about their currency, protective and they should. The problem and risk I see is that they become blind to legitimate criticism and this will sometimes come from competitors.

I'm not accusing anyone of being blind to legitimate criticism, to be perfectly clear. Just wanted to get people's thoughts on this in general, since its clear that there's drama between monero and dash.

A fair question is if I have any particular quotes from that link I'm curious about. I'll look into it again when the time comes and bring the questions here.

Doing a bit of research on Monero so that I don't start getting shit thrown at me as being biased. Also because they make so many claims and there's enough support for it that its worth looking into. But from the little I've seen they not really a very strong contender yet, even if ring signatures are indeed superior. There is much more in the ways of ease of use and governance etc etc that DASH has achieved.

I'll post my major questions or concerns here in the future.
Click to expand...
We have found in the past that these Monero characters have bended the truth to serve their interests. Dash would love to improve, and if these criticisms have any merit, we will be that much further ahead by fixing them. However, their insight into Dash's inner workings is tenous at best, and is prone to spin.

Ring signatures are a different method of anonymity, not superior, IMHO. You are either anonymous or you're not. There are no levels of anonymity. And like you said, we have a lot more than just anonymity going on here, so it is them that would like to drag us into this comparison battle, wheras the Dash community has moved on from that narrative a long time ago.

With all that being said, bring on the questions and concerns! Let's see if they have any merit. :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TaoOfSatoshi

Ring Signatures have the advantage of not requiring mixing and works out of the box, so to speak. One should note, though, Monero is a Cryponote clone. There are more than 10 anon coins out there just like monero based on cryptonote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryptoNote In other words, Monero didn't innovate at all.

Even though ring signatures don't require mixing and are in theory more convenient, the lack of a user friendly interface means Monero's not yet ready to embrace the less tech savvy people out there. Monero's very much pre-alpha at this point. I believe there's also the risk of de-anonymizing the whole thing if that encryption is broken. That would be harder to do due to how the Masternode anonymization system works.

Mixing will be greatly improved in the next version, time to mix the coins will be reduced significantly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ring signatures are superior to mixing for anonymity. However, mixing is more practical at this stage and mixing is "good enough" at this stage. If master nodes were bad actors and someone owned enough of them (or enough communicated) it could break the anonymity of mixing.

The problem with ring signatures is that they produce a tremendous amount of bloat. There are algos that are more compact than what Monero uses, but so far they are not in the wild.

However, Dash is not ONLY anonymity. The two-tier network and instantX in addition to anonymity are huge. And, with Evolutions distributed storage for block chain it will enable the use of ring signatures without a huge burden.

So, my ultimate dream is that after evolution is launched that Dash will adopt a ring signature type implementation. It can continue with current-day mixing too. This would provide maximum anonymity. The trade-off of ring signatures being increased block chain bloat (mixing also causes this, btw) will be much smaller issue with evolutions distributed storage.

As of now I doubt it is top priority for the dash team as the privacy aspect is good enough at this time and there are other higher development priorities.

Cryptonote also has "adaptive limits" where the block size is adjusted based on recent network demand. It essentially takes the average block size in the last X blocks and then multiplies it by some factor. This ensures that someone cannot start spamming the network with 1000x transaction increase immediately, but at the same time will respond to the organic growth of the coin. I also hope that Dash will implement these.

Most of these features are things that can be quite easily implemented in dash. The adaptive block size would probably take the developer 1-2 days to do. For these coins to implement the upcoming features in Evolution though would be a massive project. For that reason I am confident in Dash future.
 
JuanSGalt said:
From my experience in crypto and the altcoin markets. People get rather nationalistic about their currency, protective and they should. The problem and risk I see is that they become blind to legitimate criticism and this will sometimes come from competitors.

I'm not accusing anyone of being blind to legitimate criticism, to be perfectly clear. Just wanted to get people's thoughts on this in general, since its clear that there's drama between monero and dash.

A fair question is if I have any particular quotes from that link I'm curious about. I'll look into it again when the time comes and bring the questions here.

Doing a bit of research on Monero so that I don't start getting shit thrown at me as being biased. Also because they make so many claims and there's enough support for it that its worth looking into. But from the little I've seen they not really a very strong contender yet, even if ring signatures are indeed superior. There is much more in the ways of ease of use and governance etc etc that DASH has achieved.

I'll post my major questions or concerns here in the future.
Click to expand...

It's true, and as you can see, I'm an admitted cheerleader for Dash. However, anyone like you, I am happy to answer to the best of my abilities any questions you find or have here :) I don't really mind talking about issues, I just don't like forums or threads where people are so disrespectful, nasty and rude. I think I'm just too old, and my skin is too thin :) So please do ask here and I'm sure I won't be the only one willing to give an answer :)
 
The bottom line is that blonero's claims are just that. If these sounds-good-to-the-clueless claims were real, then why has it never happened?

Because its bullshit.

If it is trivially easy to disrupt all IXes, then fuckin' do it! Why talk?

Remember when hacker found a way to funnel all mn payments to himself once? How long before it was fixed?

If DASH has these weaknesses and exploits, why earen't they happening?

If the sky is falling, why is the sky not falling?

If captain blonero is so right, why doesn't he do it instead of just talking shit? No matter how you fancy it up, shit-talking is still shit-talking. For all the effort he puts into his shit-talking, he could proven it by doing it with a fraction of the effort, by his own description, and have irrefutable proof, yet hasn't done it...

This guy has had a hate fest of trying to strip away adopters by dazzling them with bullshit since day one. None of his claims have ever proved out. Because he's bullshit. If its so easy, why hasn't he, or anyone else, done it?
 
xdashguy said:
Most of these features are things that can be quite easily implemented in dash. The adaptive block size would probably take the developer 1-2 days to do. For these coins to implement the upcoming features in Evolution though would be a massive project. For that reason I am confident in Dash future.
Click to expand...

Bitpay created adaptive/dynamic blockchain code. Dash just needs to implement it. This is one of beauties of using Bitcoin code, a big advantage Dash has over Monero. https://dashtalk.org/threads/why-no...ck-size-fork-instead-of-the-2mb-classic.8017/
 
dashpissonxmr.png
 
camosoul said:
The bottom line is that blonero's claims are just that. If these sounds-good-to-the-clueless claims were real, then why has it never happened?

Because its bullshit.

If it is trivially easy to disrupt all IXes, then fuckin' do it! Why talk?

Remember when hacker found a way to funnel all mn payments to himself once? How long before it was fixed?

If DASH has these weaknesses and exploits, why earen't they happening?

If the sky is falling, why is the sky not falling?

If captain blonero is so right, why doesn't he do it instead of just talking shit? No matter how you fancy it up, shit-talking is still shit-talking. For all the effort he puts into his shit-talking, he could proven it by doing it with a fraction of the effort, by his own description, and have irrefutable proof, yet hasn't done it...

This guy has had a hate fest of trying to strip away adopters by dazzling them with bullshit since day one. None of his claims have ever proved out. Because he's bullshit. If its so easy, why hasn't he, or anyone else, done it?
Click to expand...

I don't have the technical knowledge nor the means to hack into much of anything. It doesn't follow that all systems have no vulnerabilities and that I am incapable of identifying any in theory.
The fact that a system hasn't been broken yet, especially if there is an incentive to break it, does build confidence the longer it goes, but it doesn't prove anything.
For any particular theoretical criticism, it can be refuted in theory, or by actually attempting to exploit the weakness that it claims is there. If either of these have already been explored, then we can point to where that information is. Criticisms don't get refuted by attacking the motives of the person making the claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top