Topic: Altcoins are killing Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency as a whole - page 4. (Read 9749 times)

No, you seem to be under the impression their exists no other implementations. You do understand their are multiple software stacks that interact with the Bitcoin Blockchain right? Bitcoin Core is just one of them. These aren't "third party" as such a statement is asinine when talking about an open source decentralized project. "Bitcoin core" has the same access and privileges as libbitcoin, btcd, Bits of Proof, bitcoinj, picocoin, caesure, ect...

Again , "third party" doesn't mean anything in an open source decentralized project.


Obviously, you are not a software developer as you would understand that we do consider Github contributors as software developers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_developer

1) For Christ Sakes, a Bitcoin Core Developer as shown on: https://bitcoin.org/en/development, are those that determine what gets added to the Bitcoin code and what doesn't. I never said anything about "software developers". A Contributor is NOT a core developer, I can contribute, so can you, that just makes me a contributor, this Bitcoin is Open-Sourced. What don't you understand?

2) I already explained the reason why there are more developers working on Bitcoin is because Bitcoin came out long before most altcoins today, and thus has much wider adoptance. You're just saying the same things over and over again.

You're probably confused on the point that a contributor who gets their request accepted on Github, can be incorrectly claimed as a "Core Developer" because their code got accepted to "Bitcoin Core", on Github...In other words, the "Core" in their name references to the name found in Github, "Bitcoin Core". A Bitcoin Core Developer and a "Bitcoin Core"(Github) Contributor are two very different things.

If you seriously can't understand the difference between a Core Bitcoin Developer that determines what gets added to the Bitcoin codebase and what doesn't, from a Contributor who puts out pull requests on Github because after all, Bitcoin is open sourced, then I don't know what more to tell you...

Re-read my posts:


"Bitcoin Core" developers is not the same thing as "Core Developers working on Bitcoin Core".

You don't seem to understand that contributors who write code that get accepted to a project are indeed software developers.


There are more developers working on Bitcoin projects than all other alts combined right now. It isn't merely a historical legacy of past contributions. You just don't understand how many projects are being worked on at the moment for the Bitcoin blockchain and are very confused into thinking that Bitcoin QT and Bitcoin Core are the only projects worth considering. You have no idea why modularity is superior and why keeping Bitcoin Core simple is wise and prudent.

1) So now you've backed off you're original claim of the Bitcoin Core Developers working for DarkWallet. Exactly why have you included this info "There are many Bitcoin projects , implementations, and stacks. Bitcoin Core is one of them, here is the github -

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin". How is that relevant to what's being discussed at all?

It's plain and simple, as shown here: https://bitcoin.org/en/development, and here: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bitcoin-dark-wallet. There are no Core Bitcoin Developers who are also on the Development Team of DarkWallet, which you claimed there were. Also, these projects are open sourced, as I said multiple times in my previous posts, so Anyone can contribute. Someone contributing to a project does not make them a core developer. Core Developers are the ones who make the final decision on what gets accepted, so there may be Amir Taaki contributing to the Bitcoin Code, but he is not a core developer as he doesn't determine what pull requests actually get accepted.

2) As I said a million times, Bitcoin has much larger adoption than other cryptocurrencies because it came way before most of the altcoins out here today. Bitcoin for ex has a 4 year headstart on Bitshares, so obviously it will have more contributers on Github for the time being.

There are many Bitcoin projects , implementations, and stacks. Bitcoin Core is one of them, here is the github -

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

Notice how at the top it says -
Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree

A Bitcoin Core Developer is also a Bitcoin Core Contributor. The 5 people you cited are "Core developers" of Bitcoin Core. "Developers" is a term used in programming of someone who writes code , or contributes code to a project.



Show me any other alt with anywhere near as many developers or if you prefer "contributors" writing code for their project....

So it seems you have different meaning of what makes someone a core developer? According to https://bitcoin.org/en/development, "The Bitcoin system was originally designed by Satoshi Nakamoto. His original Bitcoin codebase is now being maintained as Bitcoin Core by the following developers and a community of volunteer", and the names petertodd, fanquake, and kdomanski do not appear anywhere on the list of Bitcoin's Core Developers.

If you're talking about Contributors to the Bitcoin Core on Github, then Anyone can contribute! That's the whole point of Bitcoin being open sourced....Christ Sakes.

You are mistakenly conflating "Bitcoin Core" Core Developers with "Bitcoin Core" Developers.

Here are 3 "Bitcoin Core" developers working on both projects:

https://github.com/petertodd
https://github.com/fanquake
https://github.com/kdomanski

Go back and read my posts and see I am talking about Bitcoin Core Developers(aka contributors) and not Core Developers working on Bitcoin Core.

The github project called Bitcoin is now known as "Bitcoin Core" if you have been paying attention.

Why are you switching up topics all the time? We were obviously talking about DarkWallet's Development Team, and how you claimed that Bitcoin core developers were working on it, to which I claimed that they weren't apart of DarkWallet's Development Team( I'm sure the term working on it means they are spending a large portion of their time dedicated to the creation/improvement of DarkWallet --as anyone can submit a pull request on Github as DarkWallet is opensource--- , which would make them part of DarkWallet's development team, to which they aren't), as shown in my posts above, and to which I'm correct...You seem to be incapable of differentiating between what makes someone a Core Developer who has the last say on what gets added to Bitcoin and what doesn't, from a regular Developer who just submits pull requests for the code since Bitcoin is opensourced. God.

I'm not talking about Bitshares. But, Obviously, Bitcoin will have more pull requests, more updates, more development, because it's been around much longer than other alts and has wider adoption.

Please do some more research before spreading FUD. You are quite naive.
That projected I cited on Github is called "Bitcoin Core" and that is what I was talking about if you read my past posts.

There are 255 developers who have contributed code that has been commited in Github to Bitcoin Core.

Now lets compare this to one of the largest alts out there with the most developers out of any alt- Bitshares--

https://github.com/BitShares/qt_wallet
15 devs there

I just said that Github is opensource(read my above comments for christ sakes). Obviously ANYONE can contribute. It's up to the core developers however to accept a pull request and actually add a feature into bitcoin and that what's distinguishes them from any other developer...You've been spilling gibberish this whole time..

Nope. You are very confused. "Core developer" is not the same as Bitcoin Core developer. Those 5 devs you mention are fullfilling leadership positions within a team of 255 developers.

This is the Github for "Bitcoin Core" -
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

These are the 255 devs working on code for "Bitcoin Core"
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/graphs/contributors

You have no idea what you are talking about.

1) Alright, let's compare the facts here. According to https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bitcoin-dark-wallet, Dark Wallet's development team is composed of, Vitalik Buterin, Janislav Malahov, Cody Wilson, Pieter Hintjens, Amir Taaki, Pablo Martin, Mihai Alisie, Santiago Mendez , and Robert Williamson. And, according to Bitcoin.org, Wladimir J. van der Laan, Gavin Andresen, Jeff Garzik, Gregory Maxwell, and Pieter Wuille are the core developers for Bitcoin.

That means that there are no Bitcoin core developers who are also a part of DarkWallet's development team. I'm obviously not talking about who's contributing, anyone can contribute, it's Github, it's opensourece. I'm talking about the Core Teams of each. Get it now? I feel like I'm speaking with a child...

The only points you've raised so far is that Bitcoin's massive headstart and subsequent larger adoption is what sets it apart from other alts at this time. Obviously that is true. What you can't seem to understand though, is that Bitcoin is trying to break into the mainstream market, is that Bitcoin can't do anything seem as "illegal" or "shady" as that would set it behind in getting adopted by the average joe. That's where Altcoins come in, they can innovate in all the areas that Bitcoin can't. Stop being in denial.

There are 3 developers who have made many contributions to Bitcoin Core that are actively working on Dark Wallet. Notice how you simply sidestep them and focus on Amir Taaki who has indeed contributed much to Bitcoin as I have proved. Yes, he hasn't submitted any code for Bitcoin Core , but that is only because he has done something far more important like created a whole new implementation called libbitcoin to interact with the bitcoin blockchain.


Nope. You are very confused. "Core developer" is not the same as Bitcoin Core developer.
This is the Github for "Bitcoin Core" -
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

These are the 255 devs working on code for "Bitcoin Core"
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/graphs/contributors


Have you been hitting the crack pipe? Bitcoin Core has 255 devs contributing alone , not including other stacks or implementations which work with tha Bitcoin blockchain. Bitcoin has thousands of devs working on code right now.

The Bitcoin marketplace has more developers working on code that interacts with the Bitcoin Blockchain than all other alts combined. How many wallets , APIs, projects, implementations, stacks does bitcoin have? Compare that to the average 1-3 devs working on each alt (with many alts be recreated pump and dump scams from previous devs )

Even the largest alts have only a few developers. Bitshares has probably the most developers of any alt and it has about 18 devs working on it.

1) Again, are we not talking about the Core Development Team? Are you confusing yourself? Amir Taaki, the lead developer for Dark Wallet is not a core developer for Bitcoin, as seen here...: https://bitcoin.org/en/development. According to Bitcoin.org, Wladimir J. van der Laan, Gavin Andresen, Jeff Garzik, Gregory Maxwell, and Pieter Wuille are the core developers for Bitcoin atm.

2) Again what are you talking about...I never mentioned Bitcoin having " many options and so much development it is too fragmented and confusing". My point is that Altcoins will always have an advantage when it comes to new features and innovation compared to Bitcoin, because Bitcoin's size and goal(trying to get mainstream adoption) stunts it's ability to try out new features/implement them on the mainnet. The Bitcoin core team is also composed of a few people and truthfully can't compete with the sheer amount of altcoin devs making features for their coin...So Obviously, altcoins will be able to have things that Bitcoin can't, this is especially true for coins that don't use the Bitcoin codebase, or have heavily modified it. The features I described(Decentralized casinos, Decentralized gaming, Mini Blockchain Scheme), are old ideas that already interact and work with the Bitcoin blockchain? Now I know you're just spewing complete crap out. The mini blockchain specifically can't be incorporated into Bitcoin without seriously changing Bitcoin's core code..and all those "2.0" coins that are made from scratch can't have their features incorporated into Bitcoin either, and etc etc.

Why are you spreading FUD? There are multiple Bitcoin Core devs working on Dark Wallet and Amir has contributed a lot to Bitcoin -
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_Improvement_Proposals

1    BIP Purpose and Guidelines    Amir Taaki    Active
15    Aliases    Amir Taaki    Withdrawn
33    Stratized Nodes    Amir Taaki    Draft
60    Fixed Length "version" Message (Relay-Transactions Field)    Amir Taaki    Draft

Other Darkwallet /Bitcoin Core devs -
https://github.com/petertodd
https://github.com/fanquake
https://github.com/kdomanski


You understand that modularity is superior to having one large bloated app with coding, right? You guys are missing the point of what the blockchain is supposed to accomplish and its role within Bitcoin. So your argument is that because bitcoin has so many options and so much development it is too fragmented and confusing?

All those features you described interact and work with the Bitcoin blockchain already (Some of them may be old ideas that are merely tweaked however).

Altcoins can't kill bitcoin, at least not not the alts we have now. Bitcoin is the foundation of cryptos. People invest in alts to make a profit, not because they think the alts can kill bitcoin one day.

1) The leader of the Darkwallet development team is Amir Taaki, who is not a bitcoin core developer. https://bitcoin.org/en/development

2) Altcoins can accomplish a plethora of things that Bitcoin can't because of it's huge size and that incorporating features into Bitcoin would require deep thought since the entire purpose of cryptocurrencies is to get the public to accept them, so btc can't just addon every feature. Specifically, only 3rd parties can accomplish things relating to Bitcoin(such as the decentralized marketplace you mentioned, OpenBazaar, or stealth addresses). With many altcoins however, these things are embedded into the coin, such as Ring Signatures being apart of Cryptonote coins and not a 3rd party addon....etc etc(Some altcoins are creating chatrooms, voice calling features, decentralized gaming, decentralized casinos, etc) Not to mention that altcoins with heavily modified, or entirely different code bases, cannot have their features incorporated into Bitcoin, like the mini blockchain for ex.

3rd party?
Dark wallet is created by the some of the same developers who work on Bitcoin Core. Trust should be placed with trusted developers and by looking at the source code yourself. I trust Darkwallet devs much more than many alt devs. Dark wallet has more dev support and peer review than many alts do. 


What features or abilities can be accomplished with alts that Bitcoin cannot also accomplish?

1) 3rd party wallets/addons just shouldn't be trusted. You shouldn't need a 3rd party if you want to be anonymous on the blockchain without doing inconvenient things like it is with Bitcoin.

2) I was referring to how altcoins are "easier on the eyes" to buy than bitcoin because of their relatively low prices compared to bitcoin's price.

3) Same goes for Bitcoin, anyone who bought Bitcoin during the November bullrun saw their bitcoin's drop in price by 400%. Both altcoins and Bitcoin's are a huge gamble, just that altcoins are more risky(depending on the altcoin).

4) As I said before, altcoins have the potential to go up in price tremendously more than Bitcoin does, altcoins also have the freedom to engage in new features and ideas, of which Bitcoin is restricted because of it's large presence. "If bitcoin fails with all of its advantages"...Bitcoin's only advantages at this point over any altcoins with more features is a larger, stronger community and larger adoption due to the network effect... Yes, Bitcoin is clearly the undeniable leader at this time, but it would be unwise not to think that a "alt"coin may someday compete with Bitcoin in certain sectors/niches.
     

Darkwallet is switching to coinshuffle to increase security.  Why cannot we discuss other wallets outside of bitcoin QT for solving security concerns?


This is non-nonsensical as you can buy any dollar amount of bitcoins. You can buy milibits for 34 cents right now. With an alt you typically have to buy bitcoin first anyways.



Certainly with altcoins you can possibly make more money as an investor if you get in at the IPO price as adoption grows. This is akin to gambling however as many altcoins lose almost all value quickly, and the rest haven't performed anywhere near as well as bitcoin.


Sure, but there are many more exchanges and sellers for BTC which makes the statement that its easier to invest in an alt ridiculous.

If bitcoin fails with all of its advantages than that will lead to a general distrust of all crypto-currencies in general. Bitcoin is an open source project so should be able to be changed and modified as needed. Anyone buying an alt is wasting their time and merely fooled by marketing or hopes into getting in at the ground floor not realizing the ground floor is Bitcoin.