Quote from: elbowface on April 21, 2016, 10:58:54 AM

Dash has decentralized technology (PoW mining, full nodes, masternodes, blockchain governance). There is no debate here.

The point you're laboring is that there's no way to prove this technology isn't operated/controlled by a handful of people. You claim that because DASH's distribution is unverifiable, it's fatally flawed as a 'cryptosystem'.

For this argument to have any substance, you should demonstrate how competing coins solve the relationship between node/coin distribution & centralization. Bitcoin for example has massive mining centralization and millions of coins held by Satoshi / persons unknown. All PoW coins face mining centralization issues at scale. Monero has a massive whale in Risto who could manipulate/trash the market at any time and arguably kill the coin. Monero's core team could arguably kill the coin if they wanted to. As for governance, explain how DASH's blockchain governance is inferior to other coins where decisions either don't get made (Bitcoin) or there are just a few individuals pulling the strings (Monero).

Basically, make some reasonable, specific arguments instead of just bleating on about the instamine.

What the Bitcoin, Monero and other well designed coins do is allow you to see the centralization as verifiable data, that's the difference that matters. As I pointed out in my second post.

Quote from: generalizethis on April 20, 2016, 04:50:58 AM

Quote from: rdnkjdi on April 20, 2016, 04:32:04 AM

Quote

1. a centralized currency can and will be controlled by a set of people

So like 7 pool operators for instance?

The point is that you can see it for yourself and make your decision based on data rather than hype. Put another way: do you want the kinda-cute puppy that you can see, or the one in a lock-box that the salesman swears is "the best dog ever and has never bitten anyone"?

Now your claim that Risto can destroy the coin by dumping, ect, is conjecture on your part, conjecture I don't agree with, but if he could acquire coins by accruing them through nodes and having voting power through those nodes, I'd agree--in Monero and Bitcoin the governance is done by the miners and miners have a verifiable percentage of power through mining pools. Dash created a new and worse problem by their solution, so not exactly apples to apples. But if you want to argue about mining centralization, there are threads (populated by many members of the Monero and Bitcoin community) for that. This isn't a dash versus xmr or btc thread. It is a thread about dash's failure to make distribution of power a readily available data set that anyone can objectively observe and make fair and honest assessments.

*Also, if something like an algorithm that sells/buys chosen coins based on their centralization levels came into use, then there is no reliable data set I can use to determine a dash percentage, so this type of second tier way to combat mining centralization is useless with dash--though this a second level argument and really doesn't keep with what this thread is about.