Money does need cryptography, how do you think you do online banking without everyone stealing it?
Online banking uses SSL - a transport technology, not a monetary medium. It's an encrypted messaging system which 'carries' the message to be decrypted at the other end.
Digital signatures and hashing on the other hand do not carry the message along with it. They simply generate a hash that uniquely identifies that message which is very different from encrypting it. I realise that the word 'encryption' and 'cryptology' is pretty nebulous and that people use it loosely to cover both technologies but I was using it in the stricter sense to make the point that Dash's approach to fungibility is consistent with Bitcoin's.
That doesn't mean that other approaches aren't viable, but constantly bashing it for not using a cryptographic based method is kind of meaningless unless your prepared to dismiss the rest of its design goals as well - which is conserving the Bitcoin blockchain characteristics, compatibility, etc etc. Thats a whole different argument with its own merits. Obviously if your prepared to reset the goalposts from top to bottom in order to suit the single priority of obfuscation then you might have an advantage in that department.
You've sprouted a lot of inaccurate statements recently, from the lie over the volume of XMR and DASH.....
You seem to confuse trading volume with liquidity. In that discussion we were talking about liquidity and I made the point that liquidity was a question of amount of monetary value available - not the number of coins. It therefore corresponds directly to marketcap and I pointed out to you that in that respect Dash had roughly 5 times that of Monero currently. Trading volume (which you keep bringing up in these debates) is a different thing, that's just how much of the currency was traded in a given 24hour period normalised against a common currency (usually Bitcoin).
....to thinking bitmonerod was a wallet....
Every link that I've ever come across when attempting to download an OS/X wallet ends up at either bitmonerod or simplewallet or both of them paired. I bought my first Monero on the old cryptonote exchange back last Summer and so am not unfamiliar with it. Feel free to show me what I'm missing but for a project that prides itself in security it sure seems to not care much about the biggest security hole of them all - the wallet. Apparently it's "not enough of a priority" and has been left to 3rd parties to sort out. If thats the case then good luck in hitting on one that hasn't got 10 back doors in it. To me, this is what a wallet download page should look like - clear, unambiguous, comes from the project and the only single page on the entire web that's endorsed as genuine:
https://www.dashpay.io/downloads/The 5th time you've said something entirely wrong today. So according to that logic, all of Bitcoin's 3rd party wallets(Of which some are really beautiful, Multibit, Electrum, Armory etc), also show that having a wallet isn't enough of a "priority"?. The success of a system isn't just what the developers do, especially in an open-source environment, it's what the community does as well. That's the entire purpose of Satoshi making Bitcoin open-source, so if the community wants, they could create infrastructure around Bitcoin without relying on centralized authority, quite the opposite to Dash's/DRK's centralization; Evan/others instaming Dash, masternode centralization, changing the name without the community's consent/vote, and also creating the "spork switch".
Yesterday I caught you in a lie or could be a another misunderstanding, again(
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1001642.msg10908170#msg10908170), where you on your own post showed Monero having more liquidity than Dash on March 10th, yet was saying that Dash always had more liquidity. This is the definition of Liquidity: The degree to which an asset or security can be bought or sold in the market without affecting the asset's price. The # of coins and subsequent price per coins determine the marketcap, therefore the # of coins in cryptocurrency has is important in determining it's liquidity. You also seem the confuse the fact that not of all Dash's coins are available on market, more than 50% of all Dash/DRKs are stuck in masternodes. Also, until you start using more denominations regularly, then there's no point in arguing over that fact. Let's not talk "ifs". And, finally, trading volume per day is basically the liquidity of that coin in that specific period of time. A coin with a volume of $100,000 per day, has better liquidity, than a coin with a volume of $100 per day.
It seems you're trying to use subtle manipulation and hoping others won't catch on.