Thanks for the amazing job but please, can you remove Ripple ? It's a joke right ?
Topic: CoinMarketCap.com - Market Cap Rankings of All Cryptocurrencies! - page 203. (Read 639542 times)
December 30, 2013, 02:39:23 PM
December 30, 2013, 02:22:36 PM
Thank you for catching that 
I meant to say that the market cap information does not sometimes accurately represent what is going on in the market for its investors. The value of the coin increases sometimes much slower than the market cap because the market cap becomes very quickly inflated when a new coin begins seeing hashing power. For this reason, I am wondering if it would be possible to see the percentage by which the value of each coin has changed over the course of 24 hours in addition to the market cap information. I believe this would give investors a more complete picture of what is occurring in the market.
This isn't a problem whatsoever for coins like Bitcoin where coin inflation is minimal and therefore the market cap information yields a very accurate picture of how the market is performing, however with new coins the market cap data can be tens of percent off the appreciation of individual coins.
31 LottoCoin $ 1,193,798 $ 0.00049 2,442,880,245 LOT $ 308,695 +158.19 %
20 EarthCoin $ 3,147,865 $ 0.0062 510,515,161 EAC $ 155,972 +151.02
you're thinking of something and writing something else , but i can't read minds
I meant to say that the market cap information does not sometimes accurately represent what is going on in the market for its investors. The value of the coin increases sometimes much slower than the market cap because the market cap becomes very quickly inflated when a new coin begins seeing hashing power. For this reason, I am wondering if it would be possible to see the percentage by which the value of each coin has changed over the course of 24 hours in addition to the market cap information. I believe this would give investors a more complete picture of what is occurring in the market.
This isn't a problem whatsoever for coins like Bitcoin where coin inflation is minimal and therefore the market cap information yields a very accurate picture of how the market is performing, however with new coins the market cap data can be tens of percent off the appreciation of individual coins.
Would it be possible to report the value of individual coins in BTC or USD? The reason I ask is because some coins like Lotto Coin and Earth Coin have recently surged in value and as a result have seen a large increase in miners. This makes it look like the coin is increasing in value faster than it actually is because new coins are being minted much faster than they should and will continue to be until the difficulty retargets. For example, Lotto Coin has only increased by about 60% in value per coin since being listed on Cryptsy however CoinMarketCap.com reports a market cap increase of 150%.
31 LottoCoin $ 1,193,798 $ 0.00049 2,442,880,245 LOT $ 308,695 +158.19 %
20 EarthCoin $ 3,147,865 $ 0.0062 510,515,161 EAC $ 155,972 +151.02
you're thinking of something and writing something else , but i can't read minds
December 30, 2013, 02:16:09 PM
Would it be possible to report the value of individual coins in BTC or USD? The reason I ask is because some coins like Lotto Coin and Earth Coin have recently surged in value and as a result have seen a large increase in miners. This makes it look like the coin is increasing in value faster than it actually is because new coins are being minted much faster than they should and will continue to be until the difficulty retargets. For example, Lotto Coin has only increased by about 60% in value per coin since being listed on Cryptsy however CoinMarketCap.com reports a market cap increase of 150%.
31 LottoCoin $ 1,193,798 $ 0.00049 2,442,880,245 LOT $ 308,695 +158.19 %
20 EarthCoin $ 3,147,865 $ 0.0062 510,515,161 EAC $ 155,972 +151.02
you're thinking of something and writing something else , but i can't read minds
December 30, 2013, 01:45:00 PM
Would it be possible to report the value of individual coins in BTC or USD? The reason I ask is because some coins like Lotto Coin and Earth Coin have recently surged in value and as a result have seen a large increase in miners. This makes it look like the coin is increasing in value faster than it actually is because new coins are being minted much faster than they should and will continue to be until the difficulty retargets. For example, Lotto Coin has only increased by about 60% in value per coin since being listed on Cryptsy however CoinMarketCap.com reports a market cap increase of 150%.
December 30, 2013, 12:25:41 PM
December 30, 2013, 09:08:43 AM
This is like claiming that the more cars of a certain brand crash and kill their passengers the more successful this manufacturer likely is, since you need to sell more cars to kill more people. I do not like this metric at all, so I guess we have to disagree on that one.
December 30, 2013, 09:01:34 AM
Well the thing is that it would be easy that way to manipulate transaction fee charts in Ripple (since fees there are several orders of magnitude smaller than in PoW coins) and other similar coins and fees there do not necessarily represent the amount of "investedness" into the system. Transaction volume might be another indicator that looks nice at first, still it again can be easily gamed (I can afford to replicate every single transaction ever in all of Bitcoin into Ripple for XRP worth less than 20 USD in fees) in coins that have smaller fees.
That is why I'm saying: I'm not interested in doing something with the transaction volume, but would like to see the amount of money that people spend on transaction fees in total on using each system. You are talking about trying to manipulate daily growth of a single system, but that won't work if Bitcoin already collects $11.000 in fees daily, and you spend an extra 1 XRP ($0.028)
December 30, 2013, 08:51:28 AM
Well the thing is that it would be easy that way to manipulate transaction fee charts in Ripple (since fees there are several orders of magnitude smaller than in PoW coins) and other similar coins and fees there do not necessarily represent the amount of "investedness" into the system. Transaction volume might be another indicator that looks nice at first, still it again can be easily gamed (I can afford to replicate every single transaction ever in all of Bitcoin into Ripple for XRP worth less than 20 USD in fees) in coins that have smaller fees.
December 30, 2013, 08:46:09 AM
For about 2 decades, yes - and I could do it completely for free, as I got my XRP in giveaways.
If this is how you want to spend your money, I am not going to judge you. You make up part of the crowd that is willing to pay for using the transaction network. If people are willing to spend their XRP on that, they will be willing to spend their BTC on that. This ends up being a part of the whole in the total daily transaction fees.
December 30, 2013, 08:35:10 AM
If I destroy 1 XRP for fun as transaction cost, this would have been enough to pay for 100k transactions while costing me about 3 US cents and it would leave quite a spike on that chart.
You can only do that for so long before you run out.Edit:
The main point is that users paying high fees is a poor measure of performance - cash transactions have 0 explicit fees but amount to huge sums compared to BTC or Ripple.
I am for example quite sure that VirWoX with their large markups makes more money in fees than some far larger/higher volume BTC exchanges. Would you consider them "larger" because of that? Ideally there are 0 fees and the closer you get to this ideal, the harder it gets to be considered "large" by you.
December 30, 2013, 08:31:11 AM
If I destroy 1 XRP for fun as transaction cost, this would have been enough to pay for 100k transactions while costing me about 3 US cents and it would leave quite a spike on that chart.
You can only do that for so long before you run out. If you are willing to spend money on that... go ahead, apparently it's worth something to you. The amount of transactions doesn't matter. It's the total amount of money that people are willing to spend on using the payment network, which shows it's value to people's lives. Once $11,000 worth of XRP is being spent every day on transaction fees, I would say it has a larger value than when it has spikes of 1XRP each day. December 30, 2013, 08:12:02 AM
If I destroy 1 XRP for fun as transaction cost, this would have been enough to pay for 100k transactions while costing me about 3 US cents and it would leave quite a spike on that chart.
You could look at the amounts locked away as reserves (both base and variable) as a measure of being "invested" into XRP, still that would have no real equivalence in other coins.
You could look at the amounts locked away as reserves (both base and variable) as a measure of being "invested" into XRP, still that would have no real equivalence in other coins.
December 30, 2013, 07:54:41 AM
If miners get a high subsidy from coinbase transactions, fee markets might not really develop at these early stages, even in PoW coins.
Also you did not answer to the "not every coin needs to pay miners anyways" argument... Fees on Ripple for example are more fighting spam than helping in any measurable way to deflate the money issued.
I understand that subsidy keeps the fees low, but I am talking about the amount of money that people paid for using the network. Same with Ripple. XRP have value on the market, yet people are willing to spend them on transactions. The total amount of money that people are willing to spend using it, seems to me a very strong indicator of the true value that a payment network currently has. Also you did not answer to the "not every coin needs to pay miners anyways" argument... Fees on Ripple for example are more fighting spam than helping in any measurable way to deflate the money issued.
December 30, 2013, 07:53:53 AM
...girlfriend away till tommorow...
U r not a troll. Real trolls don't have girlfriends, that's why they troll.
Well that made me laugh , thanks
)) December 30, 2013, 07:50:52 AM
...girlfriend away till tommorow...
U r not a troll. Real trolls don't have girlfriends, that's why they troll.
December 30, 2013, 07:38:04 AM
If miners get a high subsidy from coinbase transactions, fee markets might not really develop at these early stages, even in PoW coins.
Also you did not answer to the "not every coin needs to pay miners anyways" argument... Fees on Ripple for example are more fighting spam than helping in any measurable way to deflate the money issued.
Amount of coins moved/transacted or "bitcoin days destroyed" kinda metrics might be more useful, but again not even applicable or even possible in all coins.
You talk about the money people HAVE to pay for fees, the amount people WANT to pay for fees is likely 0. If coinbase subsidies are high, few people HAVE to pay for fees, that's why they are ridiculously low in BTC for example. https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction shows to pay for the current hash rate it costs over 60(!) USD per transaction! Only a tiny part of this is paid via fees, the largest part is paid via inflation.
Also you did not answer to the "not every coin needs to pay miners anyways" argument... Fees on Ripple for example are more fighting spam than helping in any measurable way to deflate the money issued.
Amount of coins moved/transacted or "bitcoin days destroyed" kinda metrics might be more useful, but again not even applicable or even possible in all coins.
You talk about the money people HAVE to pay for fees, the amount people WANT to pay for fees is likely 0. If coinbase subsidies are high, few people HAVE to pay for fees, that's why they are ridiculously low in BTC for example. https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction shows to pay for the current hash rate it costs over 60(!) USD per transaction! Only a tiny part of this is paid via fees, the largest part is paid via inflation.
Well , I always looked at comparing coins as comparing vehicles (not cars).
There is no way to find the best coins based of numbers in the specs.
But it's fun to watch some numbers for the sake of comparing things (or wasting time till your movie begins).
December 30, 2013, 07:34:27 AM
niothor, are you still unleashing your inner trolls? Happy new year to you
Happy new year! to you too.
It seems my trolling isn't qualified to be considered real trolling.
It's weak in the daylight =))).
But to be honest , god if I can tell anymore what is a real coin and what is a scam. Probably the cold winter outside , girlfriend away till tommorow, crappy holiday overall , but they all seem like a joke lately.
December 30, 2013, 07:06:42 AM
If miners get a high subsidy from coinbase transactions, fee markets might not really develop at these early stages, even in PoW coins.
Also you did not answer to the "not every coin needs to pay miners anyways" argument... Fees on Ripple for example are more fighting spam than helping in any measurable way to deflate the money issued.
Amount of coins moved/transacted or "bitcoin days destroyed" kinda metrics might be more useful, but again not even applicable or even possible in all coins.
You talk about the money people HAVE to pay for fees, the amount people WANT to pay for fees is likely 0. If coinbase subsidies are high, few people HAVE to pay for fees, that's why they are ridiculously low in BTC for example. https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction shows to pay for the current hash rate it costs over 60(!) USD per transaction! Only a tiny part of this is paid via fees, the largest part is paid via inflation.
Also you did not answer to the "not every coin needs to pay miners anyways" argument... Fees on Ripple for example are more fighting spam than helping in any measurable way to deflate the money issued.
Amount of coins moved/transacted or "bitcoin days destroyed" kinda metrics might be more useful, but again not even applicable or even possible in all coins.
You talk about the money people HAVE to pay for fees, the amount people WANT to pay for fees is likely 0. If coinbase subsidies are high, few people HAVE to pay for fees, that's why they are ridiculously low in BTC for example. https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction shows to pay for the current hash rate it costs over 60(!) USD per transaction! Only a tiny part of this is paid via fees, the largest part is paid via inflation.
December 30, 2013, 06:26:27 AM
This (as well as the amount of transactions) can be easily gamed. Also as long as miners get paid transaction fees AND coinbase transactions, costs per transaction are actually much higher than actual fees.
[...]
I'm only talking about the money people are willing to spend on fees. Whether it is one person spending a lot or lots of people spending a little, should not matter the economic impact is the same. I don't think it can be easily gamed by the users, unless they want to advertise their coin by spending money on transaction fees. They will run out of money eventually. People can either sell their coins or use them. Using them costs money and if they do, apparently that has more added value. People only spend money on transaction fees if they benefit from it in other ways.[...]
Quote
Also the page is called "coinmarketcap", not "coinfeecomparison".
You're right about that. However, I would like to see it displayed to make a more fair comparison. 
December 30, 2013, 06:07:08 AM
niothor, are you still unleashing your inner trolls? Happy new year to you
Jump to: