One of the things that made ixcoin popular (even if only briefly) is the fact that it has a GUI. Namecoin still does not have this and it does make interest harder to capture when everything is command line.
User-friendliness & Usability is one of the goals of any software project.
Topic: [ANNOUNCE] Ixcoin - a new Bitcoin fork - page 23. (Read 128457 times)
I threw this together real quick. I think it works.
it's like blockexplorer but for ixcoin. all the links say 'bitcoin' but i pointed it at the ixcoin chain so its actually showing ixcoin info.
http://buttoncommand.net:2750/
Neat! http://ixcoin.net/ will point there for a little while.it's like blockexplorer but for ixcoin. all the links say 'bitcoin' but i pointed it at the ixcoin chain so its actually showing ixcoin info.
http://buttoncommand.net:2750/
It's called an iframe
lolAnyways, I've changed the references to ixcoin. nethash is currently not working...it locks up the server for some reason.
After thinking about it, the reality is that I have way more ixcoins than I have bitcoins. So why should I want bitcoins to succeed over ixcoins, even if the creator of ixcoins didn't really add any value, and he reserved a huge chunk for himself? Ixcoins are functionally no worse than bitcoins.
Except that Metcalfe's Law says that bitcoin is functionally vastly superior.
Metcalfe's Law is often used in a figurative sense, even though he was talking about physical boxes trading bits with each other.
The analogy is pretty easy to figure out. The network I'm talking about here isn't just the nodes pushing blocks and transactions around, it is the network of people and businesses that grew up around the software network.
Good point. How many merchants accept bitcion currently?
After thinking about it, the reality is that I have way more ixcoins than I have bitcoins. So why should I want bitcoins to succeed over ixcoins, even if the creator of ixcoins didn't really add any value, and he reserved a huge chunk for himself? Ixcoins are functionally no worse than bitcoins.
Except that Metcalfe's Law says that bitcoin is functionally vastly superior.
Metcalfe's Law is often used in a figurative sense, even though he was talking about physical boxes trading bits with each other.
The analogy is pretty easy to figure out. The network I'm talking about here isn't just the nodes pushing blocks and transactions around, it is the network of people and businesses that grew up around the software network.
After thinking about it, the reality is that I have way more ixcoins than I have bitcoins. So why should I want bitcoins to succeed over ixcoins, even if the creator of ixcoins didn't really add any value, and he reserved a huge chunk for himself? Ixcoins are functionally no worse than bitcoins.
Except that Metcalfe's Law says that bitcoin is functionally vastly superior.
Metcalfe's Law is often used in a figurative sense, even though he was talking about physical boxes trading bits with each other.
The analogy is pretty easy to figure out. The network I'm talking about here isn't just the nodes pushing blocks and transactions around, it is the network of people and businesses that grew up around the software network.
Couple of things:
First, I want to squash the "Satoshi mined a bunch of bitcoins on his own before releasing the bitcoin chain" idea. He publicly announced bitcoin version 0.1 six days after he generated the genesis block: January 9, 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg10142.html
According to the block chain history, he generated about 10 blocks total before the announcement. And we know that he didn't pre-generate blocks because the genesis block contains a quote from the January 3rd Financial Times newspaper.
Second, I have no problem with alternative block chains, I just don't personally like how this particular alternative block chain is being promoted and developed and introduced. In particular, I think it is unfair to keep hundreds of thousands of whatever-coins for yourself, and it is unwise to think that a bitcoin variation that is "almost exactly like bitcoin, only different because... well, just because" will ever have anything more than speculative value.
First, I want to squash the "Satoshi mined a bunch of bitcoins on his own before releasing the bitcoin chain" idea. He publicly announced bitcoin version 0.1 six days after he generated the genesis block: January 9, 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg10142.html
According to the block chain history, he generated about 10 blocks total before the announcement. And we know that he didn't pre-generate blocks because the genesis block contains a quote from the January 3rd Financial Times newspaper.
Second, I have no problem with alternative block chains, I just don't personally like how this particular alternative block chain is being promoted and developed and introduced. In particular, I think it is unfair to keep hundreds of thousands of whatever-coins for yourself, and it is unwise to think that a bitcoin variation that is "almost exactly like bitcoin, only different because... well, just because" will ever have anything more than speculative value.
Perhaps then Satoshi could donate some of his stash of bitcoins to help fund bounties for bitcoin as did Thomas?
?Don't you think that designing, creating and programming bitcoin from scratch was not enough donation ?
Nope.
Couple of things:
First, I want to squash the "Satoshi mined a bunch of bitcoins on his own before releasing the bitcoin chain" idea. He publicly announced bitcoin version 0.1 six days after he generated the genesis block: January 9, 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg10142.html
According to the block chain history, he generated about 10 blocks total before the announcement. And we know that he didn't pre-generate blocks because the genesis block contains a quote from the January 3rd Financial Times newspaper.
Second, I have no problem with alternative block chains, I just don't personally like how this particular alternative block chain is being promoted and developed and introduced. In particular, I think it is unfair to keep hundreds of thousands of whatever-coins for yourself, and it is unwise to think that a bitcoin variation that is "almost exactly like bitcoin, only different because... well, just because" will ever have anything more than speculative value.
First, I want to squash the "Satoshi mined a bunch of bitcoins on his own before releasing the bitcoin chain" idea. He publicly announced bitcoin version 0.1 six days after he generated the genesis block: January 9, 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg10142.html
According to the block chain history, he generated about 10 blocks total before the announcement. And we know that he didn't pre-generate blocks because the genesis block contains a quote from the January 3rd Financial Times newspaper.
Second, I have no problem with alternative block chains, I just don't personally like how this particular alternative block chain is being promoted and developed and introduced. In particular, I think it is unfair to keep hundreds of thousands of whatever-coins for yourself, and it is unwise to think that a bitcoin variation that is "almost exactly like bitcoin, only different because... well, just because" will ever have anything more than speculative value.
Perhaps then Satoshi could donate some of his stash of bitcoins to help fund bounties for bitcoin as did Thomas?
?Don't you think that designing, creating and programming bitcoin from scratch was not enough donation ?
After thinking about it, the reality is that I have way more ixcoins than I have bitcoins. So why should I want bitcoins to succeed over ixcoins, even if the creator of ixcoins didn't really add any value, and he reserved a huge chunk for himself? Ixcoins are functionally no worse than bitcoins.
Except that Metcalfe's Law says that bitcoin is functionally vastly superior.
I like that link. Indeed, the power of any virtual currency is the network. What good is a currency (virtual or otherwise) if you can't spend it?
The value here is in the size of the network of merchants that accept the currency as payment. Although bitcoin has way more users, it has relatively few merchants anyway, although obviously more than ixcoin. What really needs to be done is to get merchants accepting these types of currencies, instead of just creating a new one.
After thinking about it, the reality is that I have way more ixcoins than I have bitcoins. So why should I want bitcoins to succeed over ixcoins, even if the creator of ixcoins didn't really add any value, and he reserved a huge chunk for himself? Ixcoins are functionally no worse than bitcoins.
Except that Metcalfe's Law says that bitcoin is functionally vastly superior.
I like that link. Indeed, the power of any virtual currency is the network. What good is a currency (virtual or otherwise) if you can't spend it?
After thinking about it, the reality is that I have way more ixcoins than I have bitcoins. So why should I want bitcoins to succeed over ixcoins, even if the creator of ixcoins didn't really add any value, and he reserved a huge chunk for himself? Ixcoins are functionally no worse than bitcoins.
Except that Metcalfe's Law says that bitcoin is functionally vastly superior.
It might serve as an interesting test, though. I'd be interested to know precisely how many participants p (over time) BTC, NMC and IXC have and compare the exchange rates to the relative values p(B)^2, p(N)^2 and p(I)^2 expressed in Metcalfe's Law. It would at least be an interesting exercise (if I could find the data)
After thinking about it, the reality is that I have way more ixcoins than I have bitcoins. So why should I want bitcoins to succeed over ixcoins, even if the creator of ixcoins didn't really add any value, and he reserved a huge chunk for himself? Ixcoins are functionally no worse than bitcoins.
Except that Metcalfe's Law says that bitcoin is functionally vastly superior.
After thinking about it, the reality is that I have way more ixcoins than I have bitcoins. So why should I want bitcoins to succeed over ixcoins, even if the creator of ixcoins didn't really add any value, and he reserved a huge chunk for himself? Ixcoins are functionally no worse than bitcoins.
Except that Metcalfe's Law says that bitcoin is functionally vastly superior.
After thinking about it, the reality is that I have way more ixcoins than I have bitcoins. So why should I want bitcoins to succeed over ixcoins, even if the creator of ixcoins didn't really add any value, and he reserved a huge chunk for himself? Ixcoins are functionally no worse than bitcoins.
Couple of things:
First, I want to squash the "Satoshi mined a bunch of bitcoins on his own before releasing the bitcoin chain" idea. He publicly announced bitcoin version 0.1 six days after he generated the genesis block: January 9, 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg10142.html
According to the block chain history, he generated about 10 blocks total before the announcement. And we know that he didn't pre-generate blocks because the genesis block contains a quote from the January 3rd Financial Times newspaper.
Second, I have no problem with alternative block chains, I just don't personally like how this particular alternative block chain is being promoted and developed and introduced. In particular, I think it is unfair to keep hundreds of thousands of whatever-coins for yourself, and it is unwise to think that a bitcoin variation that is "almost exactly like bitcoin, only different because... well, just because" will ever have anything more than speculative value.
First, I want to squash the "Satoshi mined a bunch of bitcoins on his own before releasing the bitcoin chain" idea. He publicly announced bitcoin version 0.1 six days after he generated the genesis block: January 9, 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg10142.html
According to the block chain history, he generated about 10 blocks total before the announcement. And we know that he didn't pre-generate blocks because the genesis block contains a quote from the January 3rd Financial Times newspaper.
Second, I have no problem with alternative block chains, I just don't personally like how this particular alternative block chain is being promoted and developed and introduced. In particular, I think it is unfair to keep hundreds of thousands of whatever-coins for yourself, and it is unwise to think that a bitcoin variation that is "almost exactly like bitcoin, only different because... well, just because" will ever have anything more than speculative value.
Perhaps then Satoshi could donate some of his stash of bitcoins to help fund bounties for bitcoin as did Thomas?
?
Hey
Today we have introduced ixcoins support in Coinotron.
In order to start mining ixcoins you must go to page "My account" and change worker type to IXC. That is all!
You can switch between mining different coin types whenever you want.
So please join Coinotron and help us solve many ixcoin blocks
Today we have introduced ixcoins support in Coinotron.
In order to start mining ixcoins you must go to page "My account" and change worker type to IXC. That is all!
You can switch between mining different coin types whenever you want.
So please join Coinotron and help us solve many ixcoin blocks
I threw this together real quick. I think it works.
it's like blockexplorer but for ixcoin. all the links say 'bitcoin' but i pointed it at the ixcoin chain so its actually showing ixcoin info.
http://buttoncommand.net:2750/
Neat! http://ixcoin.net/ will point there for a little while.it's like blockexplorer but for ixcoin. all the links say 'bitcoin' but i pointed it at the ixcoin chain so its actually showing ixcoin info.
http://buttoncommand.net:2750/
It's called an iframe
lol I threw this together real quick. I think it works.
it's like blockexplorer but for ixcoin. all the links say 'bitcoin' but i pointed it at the ixcoin chain so its actually showing ixcoin info.
http://buttoncommand.net:2750/
Neat! http://ixcoin.net/ will point there for a little while.it's like blockexplorer but for ixcoin. all the links say 'bitcoin' but i pointed it at the ixcoin chain so its actually showing ixcoin info.
http://buttoncommand.net:2750/
At least this guy is better manager than Satoshi 
. I like the idea of allocating large initial chunk of coins to develop the product.
. I like the idea of allocating large initial chunk of coins to develop the product.Good point why doesn't Satoshi offer bounties for objectives for bitcoins to complete? Maybe some goals he would like bitcoin to achieve?
Again with the people seeking higher purposes and making obvious fallacies: "why do we need another blockchain?" we don't, necessarily NEED another blockchain, but someone thought bitcoin would be better with a steeper initial rise so we get to the deflationary fun faster so they made one simple change. "But we're diluting the bitcoin brand by allowing IXCoin to exist!" Maybe there's *some* truth to that one, but in the long run is FireFox a better or worse product when it must compete with Chrome, Opera, Safari, IE etc? Is there a need for silver bullion when we have gold? Do we really need as many varieties of sliced white sandwich bread as I see in the supermarket? And how many kinds of toilet paper can one grocery store possibly sell? Competition isn't a bad thing and not every competitor need offer a drastically different product.
Edit: and while I was posting, dancupid said it much more eloquently and with fewer words
Edit: and while I was posting, dancupid said it much more eloquently and with fewer words
Unfortunately, it isn't Firefox vs Chrome, its VHS vs. Betamax.
When trying to drive the adoption of a new technology, having alternatives available hurts adoption because people adopt a 'wait and see' attitude.
Imagine if someone (Microsoft) came out with an alternative to HTML right after NCSA released Mosaic. Now a website designer has two completely different standards (and browsers) to support. Do you invest the money in one and hope you are correct? Or do you sit on the sidelines until the problem gets resolved. The technologically superior solution doesn't always win (Beta is much better than VHS in terms of image quality.)
Besides, IXCoin is a money grab by the OP and you are a fool to invest anything into.
Jump to: