here's the catch, DASH is a coin like any other coin example: dashcoin....but if you ask them they will say we are not a coin lol

confusion in the is what they brought upon crypto currency market and why not just rename to DASH without buying dashcoin github and paying dashcoin dev to leave the project? Evan said "this project will not continue". it is an indirect way of killing a coin telling the community in a way to dump and leave.

edit: that's darkcoin/dash greatest technological breakthrough turning a coin into a non-coin 

it is very unlikely that the dev will to go to evan to sell, i think it was evan who made an offer..they know it is open source so maybe they tried to kill it with evan and darkcoin FUD..no matter how small dashcoin is, they underestimated the power of decentralization so dashcoin is till alive, small and without a dev for now.

It's not (just) the critics you should be persuaded by.

It's more about vertoe, the insider-turned-whistleblower, who has confirmed that DarkDash is a scammy shitcoin and doomed to failure:


You, majamina, simply refuse to acknowledge the facts which threaten your goal to "win a gold donkey" and "exploit every possible vector of profit in the coins space."

If a former DRK core dev says "things going on here are fishy, intransparent and rely on a single entity" who are you to argue?

You are obviously not here because darkcoin is something it claims to be.

No it hasn't. Perhaps you can demonstrate how it has, rather than posting a silly meme and making a blanket statement.

Vertoe isn't on any "side."  He's now a neutral observer, albeit one with ultimate insider knowledge of Dash's "fishy and untransparent" activities.

You are holding a dumpster full of DigitalTrash.  All you contribute is your bias and self-interest in winning a gold donkey.

unfortunately, I don't have the chops to address the technical points - I never claimed to. And I hate to pull the dev worship card, but unfortunately those that really have the chops (xmr devs) are discouraged to respond, because they are accused of wasting their time and not developing their coin. So in that sense, this thread ran its course before it even started, because the XMR devs are probably exasperated with the cycle of providing critiques and then getting lambasted for providing critiques. Someone could probably index the existing responses.

I feel this is still relevant: https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/144471.msg9764161#msg9764161

and yes, I just routed that from someone elses post. This one: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2zufu1/a_great_podcast_by_lets_talk_bitcoin_discussing/


As a relative noob, my analysis boils down to this (and I apologize if its just "continuing as above): both of the coins privacy technology, when distilled to a single factor, rely on 1 if-then statement.

DRK: if the masternode network is secure, then my transactions are private
XMR: if the cryptographic mechanism is secure, then my transactions are private

(but I could be totally wrong on either of them - this is just me presenting my formed opinion on the matter)

So, IMO, the DRK if-then is human-centric, whereas the XMR if-then is ... math-centric? cryptography-centric?

basically, you could give 1000 monkeys a bunch of computers with monero installed and if they managed to pound a bunch of keys that sent a transaction, there'd be no way to trace it.

On the other hand, if you gave 1000 monkeys a bunch of computers with DRK DASH installed, you'd have to get them to keep X amount in a cold wallet and make sure their masternode was secure etc etc.


For me, this is the essence of cryptocurrencies - to remove the human element.

I, for one, welcome our algorithmic overlords.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPcB3vWGO9k

Smooth has been responding, up until last night.

Fluffypony was responding earlier. He got it wrong about Darksend and for DASH in general he basically said 'I know it's flaky' but wasn't prepared to define exactly why, saying he can't devote time to it unless he gets paid. Fair enough, but hardly convincing.

Smart as these guys are I don't think they completely understand how DASH works, they just dismiss it out-of-hand because of an elitist opinion of the general architecture.



I agree with you, but when we've got down to the detail nobody has been able to say how masternodes present a realistic risk due to the 'human element'. A recent post from illodin asking what data an attacker would hope to get from a compromised node hasn't been answered.

But I wasn't answered, that's the point.

Just about says it all really.

Will look forward to you linking my post in 6 months when I've lost all my holdings.