I would choose None of the above, although I am not tracking Lisk developments so I am more or less ignorant about it. I also stopped tracking Dash's developments.
Monero might have a shot just being a robust highly respected alternative to Bitcoin's scalepocalypse.
Zerotime does not scale.
It scales O(n^2). How many times I pointed that already and I am tired of getting into long fights with all the Vtrash fanboys who apparently don't understand technology yet are so sure that the anonymous "JConner" is phenomenal. Stop fighting with me boys because I am not going to trash your trash again. Waste of my time. Who takes seriously a project with a single anonymous developer who doesn't even write proper white papers. Most all of the altcoins are bad jokes on those gullible enough to purchase them. If you are just speculating on others buying the trash from you at higher prices, okay fine, but pleeeaassse stop with the lies about technology which you don't know enough about.
MaidSafeCoin
I trashed recently.
Ditto Iota. No need to repeat myself.
Posts like this makes everybody hate me. I think I will STFU about other coins, until or if I can offer something which they can also attack.
Sure put zerotime alone and it won't scale the blockchain just by it self. What makes Vcash scalable is the whole package including dynamic block size scaling, nodes that carry the blockchain, udp layer, the fact people no longer need to download the whole blockchain with zeroledger, the way the data is handled and more... If you really think monero has a shot because its respected, your funny... That thing is deprecated.
Sorry you lacking technical comprehension. Zerotime's "
O(n^2)" scaling complexity has nothing to do with blocksize, but rather the communication propagation latency required between nodes for the "instant" confirmation algorithm. Precisely it is probably better than
O(n^2) because not every node has to propagate to every node, but still super-linear which means it won't scale. In other words, the more nodes and/or the more volume of zerotime transactions, the slower confirmation will be.
Also we know from the theory of Byzantine agreement, that 51% agreement is not sufficient. You must have 67% of the nodes agree to prevent the agreement from being jammed unless you have a centralized tally. And Byzantine agreement is impossible when Sybil attacks are possible.
If ever the anonymous "John Conner" writes a proper white paper specification for Zerotime, then the academics can rip it to shreds pointing out the flaws.