February 2016 Budget Proposal

InTheWoods said:
Because they could divest from Bitcoin gradually, especially if they manage to understand how undervalued DASH is currently considering what it brings to the table.
Click to expand...

I thought the reason they wanted sidechains in the first place was to absorb altcoin tech though? Right? That seems to be my understanding...
 
TheDashGuy said:
And if they only want to see BTC grow? I mean these guys are the top dogs in BTC.... why would they have any reason to stifle Bitcoins innovation by promoting something arguably better?
Click to expand...

Because they could divest from Bitcoin gradually, especially if they manage to understand how undervalued DASH is currently considering what it brings to the table.
TheDashGuy said:
I thought the reason they wanted sidechains in the first place was to absorb altcoin tech though? Right? That seems to be my understanding...
Click to expand...

Omni ex-Mastercoin was the first sidechain and more like Colored Coins and Counterparty followed but I don't think there will be more sidechains. Bitcoin has been pretty hostile to sidechain coins. Creating an altcoin on Bitcoin is like wearing a straitjacket. You would depend a lot on what features the Bitcoin devs implement or don't implement like OP_Return which allows for smart contracts. Bitcoin devs have lowered OP_Return size and this purposefully hindering development of sidechain coins for quite some time. It was only recently increased to 80 bytes after being reduced to 40 bytes back in 2014

Now, people that have Bitcoin related jobs like the Bitcoin consultants that are over their neck in Bitcoin, professionally invested so to speak like Andreas Antonopolous, who makes money from being a Bitcoin consultant, will try to push this sidechain narrative and how Bitcoin is better than all the rest. They will tell you how 1st mover advantage is so important and so on, which is BS of course. They probably don't believe it themselves and if they do it's just wishful thinking.

On the other hand, people like Roger Ver or Erik Vorhees can easily divest from Bitcoin without much to lose. Eric Vorhees, for example, already changed his stance on alt coins. He initially thought the 1st mover advantage is such a big thing and came to realize that was total BS. Ended up starting Shapeshift.io.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
InTheWoods said:
Because they could divest from Bitcoin gradually, especially if they manage to understand how undervalued DASH is currently considering what it brings to the table.


Omni ex-Mastercoin was the first sidechain and more like Counterparty followed but I don't think there will be more sidechains. Bitcoin has been pretty hostile to sidechain coins. Creating an altcoin on Bitcoin is like wearing a straitjacket. You would depend a lot on what features the Bitcoin devs implement or don't implement like OP_Return which allows for smart contracts. Bitcoin devs were opposed to increasing OP_Return size and this hindered development of sidechain coins for quite some time. It was only recently increased to 80 bytes.

Now, people that have Bitcoin related jobs like the Bitcoin consultants that are over their neck in Bitcoin, professionally invested so to speak like Andreas Antonopolous, who makes money from being a Bitcoin consultant, will try to push this sidechain narrative and how Bitcoin is better than all the rest. They will tell you how 1st mover advantage is so important and so on, which is BS of course. They probably don't believe it themselves and if they do it's just wishful thinking.

On the other hand, people like Roger Ver or Erik Vorhees can easily divest from Bitcoin without much to lose. Eric Vorhees, for example, already changed his stance on alt coins. He initially thought the 1st mover advantage is such a big thing and came to realize that was total BS. Ended up starting Shapeshift.io.
Click to expand...

Quality content sir. Thats an idea that makes quite a bit of sense in that light.

Still worries me a bit to be giving away our tips n tricks to such influential people without any sort of benefits being presented upfront. I'm struggling to see how being in a room with these individuals is going to change their attitude of Dash, and if they don't already understand the concepts out there regarding the one of the top10 altcoins, they aren't doing their homework.


Idk, I just feel like that kinda of money could be so much better used right now. I guess we'll see how it plays out though.
 
TheDashGuy said:
Quality content sir. Thats an idea that makes quite a bit of sense in that light.

Still worries me a bit to be giving away our tips n tricks to such influential people without any sort of benefits being presented upfront. I'm struggling to see how being in a room with these individuals is going to change their attitude of Dash, and if they don't already understand the concepts out there regarding the one of the top10 altcoins, they aren't doing their homework.


Idk, I just feel like that kinda of money could be so much better used right now. I guess we'll see how it plays out though.
Click to expand...

Some are just too focused on all things surrounding Bitcoin to pay attention to other projects. Their whole space becomes an echo chamber. Dash runs the same risk which is why I think it's a good idea to look into what others are doing as well so that you're not taken by surprise.

Honestly, if I were to worry about something I'd be more worried about Z.Cash (ex zerocoin). Some of the guys present at this Roundtable like Roger Ver have invested in Z.Cash, which is a direct DASH competitor just like Monero. Z.Cash (ex Zerocoin) already copied the Cash part from Dash, Digital Cash and they will probably try and clone other stuff as well.
 
InTheWoods said:
Some are just too focused on all things surrounding Bitcoin to pay attention to other projects. Their whole space becomes an echo chamber. Dash runs the same risk which is why I think it's a good idea to look into what others are doing as well so that you're not taken by surprise.

Honestly, if I were to worry about something I'd be more worried about Z.Cash (ex zerocoin). Some of the guys present at this Roundtable like Roger Ver have invested in Z.Cash, which is a direct DASH competitor just like Monero. Z.Cash (ex Zerocoin) already copied the Cash part from Dash, Digital Cash and they will probably try and clone other stuff as well.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

I honeslty don't have time to research every single coin out there, as I want to be a useful part of the ecosystem not just a bagholder. Why are those 2 even a threat? And if they are, why isn't our daily goal to nullify said threats?

I feel like the budget system should be primarily used for ensuring the future of dash before we start worrying about funding our principle ideas and island vacations, but thats just me obviously. Everyone has an opinion, so take it lightly.

For example; why are we not emplying a grassroots campaign and tipping everyone everytime they post a flyer somewhere useful/go to a big business and pitch them on dash/ or some other useful REAL life example of Dash?

Wouldn't that be the best way to get this movement kickstarted and ignore the "opposition" if you will?

We should honestly try and pick out how Obama won his campaign, because that shit was a historical moment in politics, the man HARNESSED the internet to become president essentially.

edit: I mean we can add new features all day long, but until people know aboutt hem, the features aren't very useful, eh? So we need a balance of dev work and public exposure. And currently it seems all the effort is on the dev work side of things...
 
TheDashGuy said:
Fair enough.

I honeslty don't have time to research every single coin out there, as I want to be a useful part of the ecosystem not just a bagholder. Why are those 2 even a threat? And if they are, why isn't our daily goal to nullify said threats?

I feel like the budget system should be primarily used for ensuring the future of dash before we start worrying about funding our principle ideas and island vacations, but thats just me obviously. Everyone has an opinion, so take it lightly.

For example; why are we not emplying a grassroots campaign and tipping everyone everytime they post a flyer somewhere useful/go to a big business and pitch them on dash/ or some other useful REAL life example of Dash?

Wouldn't that be the best way to get this movement kickstarted and ignore the "opposition" if you will?

We should honestly try and pick out how Obama won his campaign, because that shit was a historical moment in politics, the man HARNESSED the internet to become president essentially.

edit: I mean we can add new features all day long, but until people know aboutt hem, the features aren't very useful, eh? So we need a balance of dev work and public exposure. And currently it seems all the effort is on the dev work side of things...
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe every little bit helps, even a small tip here and there, writing an article, talking to someone about DASH, making a video and so on. The butterfly effect is an interesting thing. You never know what kinda` chain reaction you can trigger.
 
InTheWoods said:
Yes, I believe every little bit helps, even a small tip here and there, writing an article, talking to someone about DASH, making a video and so on. The butterfly effect is an interesting thing. You never know what kinda` chain reaction you can trigger.
Click to expand...

We should all take a second to read this type of information over:

http://brandongaille.com/11-fanstastic-grassroots-marketing-examples/
http://www.rasmussen.edu/degrees/business/blog/guerrilla-marketing-campaigns/
http://blog.hubspot.com/blog/tabid/...kable-Marketing-Campaigns-EVER-Slideshow.aspx

about obamas campaign:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/business/media/10carr.html
 
Just curious, but how does the roundtable work, do they charge a fee? Because if so it's genius. They basically just invite 50 devs to somewhere sunny (that could have been done anywhere) and clothe it in exclusivity.
 
pbleak said:
Just curious, but how does the roundtable work, do they charge a fee? Because if so it's genius. They basically just invite 50 devs to somewhere sunny (that could have been done anywhere) and clothe it in exclusivity.
Click to expand...

Yep! They have a fee. Anyone "exclusive" enough to get invited still has to pay.
 
pbleak said:
Just curious, but how does the roundtable work, do they charge a fee? Because if so it's genius. They basically just invite 50 devs to somewhere sunny (that could have been done anywhere) and clothe it in exclusivity.
Click to expand...

Yes, there's an entry fee. :) It's based on the idea that you always chase what moves away from you not that which is easily accessible.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TheDashGuy said:
Quality content sir. Thats an idea that makes quite a bit of sense in that light.

Still worries me a bit to be giving away our tips n tricks to such influential people without any sort of benefits being presented upfront. I'm struggling to see how being in a room with these individuals is going to change their attitude of Dash, and if they don't already understand the concepts out there regarding the one of the top10 altcoins, they aren't doing their homework.


Idk, I just feel like that kinda of money could be so much better used right now. I guess we'll see how it plays out though.
Click to expand...

Something I forgot to touch on in the previous post and it's kinda` interesting when you think about it.

Back in 2014 Bitcoin was sooo cocky, the price going up in erect fashion hitting an all time high. When the first sidechains, smart contract coins came out, Omni (ex-Mastercoin), Colored Coins, Counterparty, the core Bitcoin devs were like: "Screw you guys, don't spam our precious blockchain with bullshit extra data and fill up the blocks." and so they've moved to reduce OP_RETURN from 80 bytes to 40 bytes a move which annoyed lots of smart contracts folks. The Ethereum idea got traction as a result of this crappy move Bitcoin devs made.

Now fast forward one year, it's 2015 and Bitcoin price`s going to shit, nodes start dropping off and the infrastructure suddenly doesn't look as solid as before. The cockiness starts to look more flacid all of a sudden and what do Bitcoin devs do? They start chasing the smart contracts skirts, not the other way around, begging them to come back to Bitcoin since they now need their help to resurrect their dying network and so they've changed back the OP_RETURN to 80 bytes. Idea here being that once sidechains are allowed to flourish on top of Bitcoin, those projects will have a direct incentive to support the network with nodes and such. So the story changed from "Screw you guys" to "Please screw me".

Bottom-line here is - Bitcoin's beginning to look desperate and the narrative is changing. Antonopolous doesn't sound as secure as he used to. This whole 1st mover advantage idea is beginning to crumble. Some of the smart guys like Erik Vorhees have sensed that things are quickly changing and jumped ship hedging his bets with Shapeshift.io. Expect many more Bitcoin evangelists to follow. Now there's news Roger Ver, owner of Bitcoin.com and Panthera Capital invested in Z.Cash which is a direct competitor to Dash, which will only go live in 6 months, maybe more. Now why would they invest in such a project if Bitcoin is all sound and good? I mean you have bitcoin mixers right? Why bother with some anonymity coin? What's the freaking point? Is it because perhaps Bitcoin's not fungible at all and starting to increasingly show structural weakness? Bitcoin is neither here nor there. It's somewhere in between Dash and Ripple which is a lame place to be. Has anonymity but not really, isn't fungible and yet regulators love an AML/KYC instant coin like Ripple way more and actually a coin like XRP is also fully fungible which sucks even more for Bitcoin. The value proposition starts to fade away. You want full AML/KYC you can go with a bankster coin like XRP or Stelar or you name it. You want anonymity, fast transactions you go with Dash. Why use Bitcoin? Store of value? Not really since the tech kinda` lost its value. The only reason it is a store of value is because the tech was valuable and useful (emphasis on was). The reality check will have to come at some point unless the Bitcoin devs do something radical which I doubt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
InTheWoods said:
Something I forgot to touch on in the previous post and it's kinda` interesting when you think about it.

Back in 2014 Bitcoin was sooo cocky, the price going up in erect fashion hitting an all time high. When the first sidechains, smart contract coins came out, Omni (ex-Mastercoin), Colored Coins, Counterparty, the core Bitcoin devs were like: "Screw you guys, don't spam our precious blockchain with bullshit extra data and fill up the blocks." and so they've moved to reduce OP_RETURN from 80 bytes to 40 bytes a move which annoyed lots of smart contracts folks. The Ethereum idea got traction as a result of this crappy move Bitcoin devs made.

Now fast forward one year, it's 2015 and Bitcoin price`s going to shit, nodes start dropping off and the infrastructure suddenly doesn't look as solid as before. The cockiness starts to look more flacid all of a sudden and what do Bitcoin devs do? They start chasing the smart contracts skirts again, begging them to come back to Bitcoin since they now need their help to resurrect their dying network and so they've changed back the OP_RETURN to 80 bytes. Idea here being that once sidechains are allowed to flourish on top of Bitcoin, those projects will have a direct incentive to support the network with nodes and such. So the story changed from "Screw you guys" to "Please screw me".

Bottom-line here is Bitcoin's beginning to look desperate and the narrative is changing. Antonopolous doesn't sound as secure as he used to. This whole 1st mover advantage idea is beginning to crumble. Some of the smart guys like Erik Vorhees have sensed that things are quickly changing and jumped ship hedging his bets with Shapeshift.io. Expect many more Bitcoin evangelists to follow. Now there's news Roger Ver, owner of Bitcoin.com and Panthera Capital invested in Z.Cash which is a direct competitor to Dash, which will only go live in 6 months, maybe more. Now why would they invest in such a project if Bitcoin is all sound and good. I mean you have bitcoin mixers right? Why bother with some anonymity coin? What's the freaking point? Is it because perhaps Bitcoin's not fungible at all and starting to increasingly show structural weakness? Bitcoin is neither here nor there. It's somewhere in between Dash and Ripple which is a lame place to be. Has anonymity but not really, isn't fungible and yet regulators love an AML/KYC instant coin like Ripple way more and actually a coin like XRP is also fully fungible which sucks even more for Bitcoin. The value proposition starts to fade away. You want full AML/KYC you can go with a bankster coin like XRP or Stelar or you name it, you want anonymity, fast transactions you go with Dash. Why use Bitcoin? Store of value? Not really since the tech kinda` lost its value. The only reason it is a store of value it's because the tech was valuable and useful (emphasis on was). The reality check will have to come at some point unless the Bitcoin devs do something radical which I doubt.
Click to expand...

I take back my calling you a troll.

You just have been around too long and are as irritated as the rest of us.

/bow
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top