Recent content by Magnus

I didn't particularly follow much of that. Dash does have a larger network by every metric I can see: devs, market cap, transaction volume, liquidity, integrations, brand awareness, etc. I guess there's a tiny overlap due to the shared history. That "P" sure looks like a "D" with a stick on it...

Culture is just people, and crypto is meant to be for the whole world to use, not just the people you like or agree with, but you are right that it's clearly the main sticking point right now. If people don't want to merge then that's that. In terms of regulation, exchange listings, and...

Because that wouldn't expand the network, market cap, or community. It's the positive sum aspects of merging that are the draw from what I can tell. Dash is always improving its tech given the resources, but that's neither here nor there. Many hands make light work, and tend to get more work done.

These are all questions for the whole community(s) to answer once we have worked out a way to preserve the basic economics and the logic to ensure a simultaneous switch. I would personally want to move to proof-of-stake with slashing if we are continuing with chain-locks, but if that proves...

Dash has had many masternode activated hard-forks with significant changes to the consensus and protocol, moving to a new chain is relatively straightforward on this side. The tricky bit would be finding a set of specifics that naturally preserve the relative stakes of all participants and the...

Jesus Christ. Nobody here is buying PIVX, ironically or otherwise. Politely, very few people anywhere outside of your community gives much of a crap about PIVX as a standalone project. No one who want privacy thinks about PIVX, and almost no-one even knows that PIVX exists outside of maybe some...

Cool, but again, I don't think many (really any) people here are looking to exit, and even fewer (if possible) are looking to jump to a coin that's over 500 places lower in market rank, and yet that's facing most of the same issues. This isn't really about comapring the projects anyway, that's...

Well, I can't speak for anyone else here, but I've never EVER, in all my years heard anyone in the Dash community even mention the idea of selling DASH to buy PIVX, so I can't imagine anyone is planning to move projects anytime soon. My assumption would be that no one here thinks PIVX is in a...

PIVX is #737 terms of market capitalization. It's down 97% from it's ATH in 2018 (six years ago). Let's not pretend everything is going perfectly according to plan for either project. I'm glad PIVX had a better year in relative terms though. The MNO and POS rewards come directly from inflation...

I think slashing is critically important, perhaps even the defining aspect that separates a crypto-currency from a digital asset, and given that chain-locks complicate this for proof-of-work, I'm very happy to move over to proof-of-stake through a merger, or otherwise, if slashing is...

Hi Evan, how's the super computer going? It would be great to learn some of the syntax if that's still on the cards. Some documentation for Austrian economists would be cool too.

The perception is a problem, but the intent is more of one. I think when people start to say that voters deserve a larger share of other network members hard-coded inflation money to compensate them for their time and effort at a price that they themselves are determining, then we have strayed...

No worries. For what it's worth the idea of changing the hard coded emission scheduled and allocation to pay a certain group of people within the network with intent to incentivise holding sends chills down my spine. It sounds a lot like a kind of central planning that would scare off a lot of...

It's not a question of someones definition of "fair", it's a question of what incentives actually create the best decisions given the system we have in place. The misalignment that makes the system terrible at the moment can also be over-corrected. If you want to compensate masternodes more than...

In short, yes. But if we went down that road it might also be better to weight one side of the allocation because allocation to masternodes benefits them, but the allocation to the burned/not-created option actually benefits both the non-masternodes and the masternodes again, so masternode...