camosoul
Well-known member
Instead of jumping to instant conclusion, I like to think things over, even if I end up at the exact same spot.
With the notion that "one blockchain can't do everything" being both unconsidered, and scorned without thought...
If it's true, and it seems obvious that it is... Doesn't taxation that puts a fiscal barrier on every chain move kill the essential foundation of that market's functionality?
If business A has a "smart contract" on BCHSV, but they want to deal with business B on ETH... They're forced to pay Capital Gains just to touch tokens.
Much as we've seen by dirty regulators in the gun business, this creates artificial "winner choosing" and a race to create a product that has no natural cause to exist, and may even be up against natural law (this is again mirrored in the gun business by laws that literally compel defiance of reality).
BCHSV is marketing itself as the perpetual, massive blockchain; "One chain to rule them all." DASH has been grappling with this thought for a while as well.
Even with the long-view in mind, it seems to me that perpetual blockchain is chronic blockchian. Even old-school paper accounting methods of bygone eras seem to recognize that there has to be a record-keeping cut-off point. You can't make blocks bigger than storage medium. You can't stack boxes of reports, receipts and invoices for eternity.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I tend to arrive at the right conclusions years before. I get called names, then, 15 years later, everything I was made fun of for saying comes true... Now, this isn't about me being a sayer of sooths, but that I found in DASH a group of people (the devs) who seem to manage the same thing.
(While I want to avoid this post becoming another one of my "this is an intervention" rants about the leadership, which will inevitably fall on deaf ears anyway, it bears mentioning that I now consider the matter purely academic. I'm sure that DASH's leadership has assured the projects death in spite of the extraordinary efforts of the developers against all odds. While snoflakes may broad-brush my criticisms, I have considerable respect for the devs, and considerable disdain for the rest of the project for shitting on the devs by letting their fruits rot on the vine... The project can't fund itself anymore due to the delays caused by "it's not ready yet" excuses, and the advantages it had 4 years ago are now moot, with no new advantages to be had. As I pointed out regarding DASH Embassy Thailand, bx.in.th's instant-sell feature is far more useful than IX, 0-conf, or anything else, and applies to all coins. High-risk payments are high-risk because of the users' propensity for fraud and abuse. They're not going to throw away their ability to bounce a payment in a transaction which they're only performing because they plan to bounce the payment. DASH nullifies the very reason they're doing it... Great from the vendor perspective, but the users won't touch it for the same reason; they're scammers. This being the entire reason it's a high-risk business in the first place.)
What to do with a chronic blockchain that does everything, supposedly... I don't think that's possible. I don't think multiple chains are the answer, either. I think a roll-forward chain record is needed. there has to be a cut-off point at which a has is signed, anything older than that point is rolled forward, somehow(TM)(C), and that become the new genesis block. This puts the focus on doing more than just being money being a hindrance, again. Sure, there are a lot f features that can be added to a blockchain. But, I rather like my $20 bill because of it lacking a lot of these features, before the hindrances these extra features add to the roll-forward theory are even applied...
But, the more non-monetary use that blockchain has, the more likely such a feature is to be impossible. Not merely planned obsolescence, but guaranteed self-annihilation. There is simply no such thing as infinity storage medium. Even of there were, there's no way to keep something so bulky from fragmenting under the bandwidth load. How do you synchronize infinity? You don't. Assuring me that real smart guyz are on the job, as BCHSV does, only makes me raise an eyebrow of skepticism...
DS already rolls VINs forward. But, it leave behind dust. Which conflationary trolls have tried repeatedly to tell me isn't true to distract from the topic at hand.
1) Including more stuff directly in the blockchain, as Evolution does, seems to paint DASH into a corner. How do you roll-forward all that other stuff being stuck in the blockchain? What happened to DashDrive? What's that morphing into? Haven't heard any details about that in a long while...
2) Dust/Garbage collection in an evolved function of DS seems to be a needed thing. The dust lingers and can't be touched without harming the privacy of the denominations that came from it. there needs to be a DS-esque long-lived broad sweep, not just for improving DS, but to enable an expiration/genesis block.
Now, all of this might be moot in light of the BCHSV move. Most of DASH's core features are no longer unique or particularly advantageous... ChainLocks is nifty, call it overdelivery, but it was a desperate move to remain relevant and make masternodes key to that relevance. As with IX and DS, a cheap imitation "good enough" alternative is not hard to implement, and will leave DASH past the point of diminishing returns with technical perfection that doesn't actually matter in the real world... Not that anything would be done with it in light of the nothing that's been done with it for the past several years... Refusing to sell your Lamborghini to anyone but homeless crack addicts result in not many buyers...
But, I digress. What thoughts can be offered on points 1 and 2. In my belabored efforts to find a way for DASH to be relevant, these are the points I come to...
With the notion that "one blockchain can't do everything" being both unconsidered, and scorned without thought...
If it's true, and it seems obvious that it is... Doesn't taxation that puts a fiscal barrier on every chain move kill the essential foundation of that market's functionality?
If business A has a "smart contract" on BCHSV, but they want to deal with business B on ETH... They're forced to pay Capital Gains just to touch tokens.
Much as we've seen by dirty regulators in the gun business, this creates artificial "winner choosing" and a race to create a product that has no natural cause to exist, and may even be up against natural law (this is again mirrored in the gun business by laws that literally compel defiance of reality).
BCHSV is marketing itself as the perpetual, massive blockchain; "One chain to rule them all." DASH has been grappling with this thought for a while as well.
Even with the long-view in mind, it seems to me that perpetual blockchain is chronic blockchian. Even old-school paper accounting methods of bygone eras seem to recognize that there has to be a record-keeping cut-off point. You can't make blocks bigger than storage medium. You can't stack boxes of reports, receipts and invoices for eternity.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I tend to arrive at the right conclusions years before. I get called names, then, 15 years later, everything I was made fun of for saying comes true... Now, this isn't about me being a sayer of sooths, but that I found in DASH a group of people (the devs) who seem to manage the same thing.
(While I want to avoid this post becoming another one of my "this is an intervention" rants about the leadership, which will inevitably fall on deaf ears anyway, it bears mentioning that I now consider the matter purely academic. I'm sure that DASH's leadership has assured the projects death in spite of the extraordinary efforts of the developers against all odds. While snoflakes may broad-brush my criticisms, I have considerable respect for the devs, and considerable disdain for the rest of the project for shitting on the devs by letting their fruits rot on the vine... The project can't fund itself anymore due to the delays caused by "it's not ready yet" excuses, and the advantages it had 4 years ago are now moot, with no new advantages to be had. As I pointed out regarding DASH Embassy Thailand, bx.in.th's instant-sell feature is far more useful than IX, 0-conf, or anything else, and applies to all coins. High-risk payments are high-risk because of the users' propensity for fraud and abuse. They're not going to throw away their ability to bounce a payment in a transaction which they're only performing because they plan to bounce the payment. DASH nullifies the very reason they're doing it... Great from the vendor perspective, but the users won't touch it for the same reason; they're scammers. This being the entire reason it's a high-risk business in the first place.)
What to do with a chronic blockchain that does everything, supposedly... I don't think that's possible. I don't think multiple chains are the answer, either. I think a roll-forward chain record is needed. there has to be a cut-off point at which a has is signed, anything older than that point is rolled forward, somehow(TM)(C), and that become the new genesis block. This puts the focus on doing more than just being money being a hindrance, again. Sure, there are a lot f features that can be added to a blockchain. But, I rather like my $20 bill because of it lacking a lot of these features, before the hindrances these extra features add to the roll-forward theory are even applied...
But, the more non-monetary use that blockchain has, the more likely such a feature is to be impossible. Not merely planned obsolescence, but guaranteed self-annihilation. There is simply no such thing as infinity storage medium. Even of there were, there's no way to keep something so bulky from fragmenting under the bandwidth load. How do you synchronize infinity? You don't. Assuring me that real smart guyz are on the job, as BCHSV does, only makes me raise an eyebrow of skepticism...
DS already rolls VINs forward. But, it leave behind dust. Which conflationary trolls have tried repeatedly to tell me isn't true to distract from the topic at hand.
1) Including more stuff directly in the blockchain, as Evolution does, seems to paint DASH into a corner. How do you roll-forward all that other stuff being stuck in the blockchain? What happened to DashDrive? What's that morphing into? Haven't heard any details about that in a long while...
2) Dust/Garbage collection in an evolved function of DS seems to be a needed thing. The dust lingers and can't be touched without harming the privacy of the denominations that came from it. there needs to be a DS-esque long-lived broad sweep, not just for improving DS, but to enable an expiration/genesis block.
Now, all of this might be moot in light of the BCHSV move. Most of DASH's core features are no longer unique or particularly advantageous... ChainLocks is nifty, call it overdelivery, but it was a desperate move to remain relevant and make masternodes key to that relevance. As with IX and DS, a cheap imitation "good enough" alternative is not hard to implement, and will leave DASH past the point of diminishing returns with technical perfection that doesn't actually matter in the real world... Not that anything would be done with it in light of the nothing that's been done with it for the past several years... Refusing to sell your Lamborghini to anyone but homeless crack addicts result in not many buyers...
But, I digress. What thoughts can be offered on points 1 and 2. In my belabored efforts to find a way for DASH to be relevant, these are the points I come to...