Simran: No offense, just a guess: you own a lot of litecoins, and is spreading FUD about bitcoin because you then hope the price of litecoin raise?
Bitcoin is a great piece of software for it's time, and it being open source was very helpful. There have been a handful of developers that have taken an advantage of this opportunity to create their own cryptocurrency. Although Bitcoin being the first and dominating currency at the moment, it still suffers from some flaws, or rather features. Along came a crytocurrency called Litecoin, it being based off the Bitcoin source, had some tweaks made to it. Bitcoin using SHA256, this coin [litecoin] uses the algorithm called sCrypt. Aside from that, the confirmations for this coin are faster than Bitcoins. This is a big advantage for merchants(Aside from the current features Bitcoin already offers). Silk Road was another event/service that helped the rise in Bitcoins and gain more attention towards it. Silk Road was a major service that made some of what Bitcoin is, and a service that Litecoin didn't have yet. Bitcoin still suffering from long confirmation times, people thought it would be nice to have a similar website to Silk Road for Litecoin. Atlantis was recently created as a Silk Road to Litecoin. Merchants could move over to Atlantis and enjoy the luxury of faster confirmations.
First, faster block generation = more (and longer) orphaned block (chains) = you need to wait for more "confirms", before a transaction can be trusted.
It is
not like "bitcoin = 10 minutes" but if you use litecoin then you only need to wait 2.5 minutes. <-- in this case, litecoin is A LOT less secure than bitcoin.
And guess what would happen if bitcoin and litecoin would switch in transaction activity, then the litecoin blockchain would way way way more bloated than the bitcoin blockchain is now (because more blocks = more overhead). Do you think the 10 minutes pr block was chosen to annoy bitcoin users?
Also exactly how is scrypt
better than SHA2? The way I see it, then litecoin is WAY MORE vulnerable to anyone renting a botnet and perform a doublespend attack.
You're retarded for thinking a Botnet can do a double attack with a botnet now. You'll need at least $10k now. Now if you were talking about 2-3 weeks ago, a botnet with $500 could have done it, but not now.
I don't believe skynet exist -
yet (I don't think a botnet can do a "double attack" with a botnet)
However, I think a person or a group of persones can rent a botnet and use it to double spend (I don't think we should be affraid of botnets with artificial intelligence).
And before you call me retarded, you might want to look at what yourself wrote 4 days ago:
Right now it'd cost somewhere around $20,000 to buy a botnet capable of performing 51% attacks against the Litecoin network.
However, you could make $200,000 from ripping off BTC-E's LTC/BTC buy orders alone.
$20,000? Have you ever had a botnet? Do you know how much one infected computer costs, especially when spending $500?
If you're spending $500 on installs, it's $0.005 per install. Each will probably get 3-5 kH/s assuming that they're shitty.
$500 is 100,000 installs, yes, 100,000 infected computers to mine for you, getting you the speed of 300,000 - 500,000 kH/s on the whole muthafucking network!
I'm sure $500-$700 of installs could practically destroy LTC [...]
LOLAnd now you are wondering why everyone don't use Litecoin? A currency which four days ago could be destroyed by less than $1000.
Even assuming it would cost $10k today (which it wont), do you think people would feel secure? Secure enough to sell their houses/cars with litecoin? This is something people can with bitcoin.
Simran,
Is there a decent Litecoin SPV client yet, or is the Litecoin client going to suffer inevitably when people use the blockchain for, you know... these things called transactions...
LOL Litecoin can handle way more transactions than Bitcoin can. Like people on the Bitcoin side bitch about SatoshiRoulette spamming the blockchain, that same same "spam" on the Litecoin side leaves us unaffected.
"unaffected" ? No, it would leave you with a even bigger blockchain, which means even longer download time and even longer verification time.
The "2.5 min pr block" (litecoin) = more bloat than bitcoin.
IF people actually started to use litecoin (not like now, with almost none transaction / activity), then all litecoins problem would become clear right away.