Topic: Let's Talk about Scamcoins - Researching for Let's Talk Bitcoin! show - page 2. (Read 2820 times)

Well what I'm saying is that if the developers of an alt-coin based on the Bitcoin code base only contribution is to change a few parameters like choice of hash function and block generation time, without closely monitoring the Bitcoin code base and merging any of the bug fixes and useful improvements that would be applicable, then its either a LazyCoin or a ScamCoin.

A legitimate alt-coin will be under constant development and improvement because like you said - Bitcoin hasn't worked out all the technical issues. So if Bitcoin still has work to be done, shouldn't we also expect that the alt-coins are doing similar work? If an alt-coin doesn't get any commit volume past the initial tweaks then as far as I'm concerned its just a toy.

Except they're not learning from Bitcoin's mistakes; how many alt coins have fixed the problems on Bitcoin's hard-fork wish list?

One thing you have to understand is neither Bitcoin's or Litecoin's (or any other coin's) future is on any set in stone course. I amazes me some people seem to think there is some known path of progression for Bitcoin. Satoshi didn't leave any. He didn't know either. The block size issue, for example, validates this. It's a bit of a thorn for the community and until it's resolved one way or another will continue to be one. In other words, we're making things up as we go.

Development of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general is experimental and fluid. Bitcoin hasn't worked out all technical issues, so how could anything else? Indeed, what if Litecoin died before going above $0.04? Should it have mirrored every development as it happened? I don't think so.

I see cryptocurrency as a huge and fascinating experiment, one with real world implications, but an experiment nonetheless. Things can go one way or another. It's not paramount any alt-coin solve and implement every technical issue in the near term, just as it's not paramount Bitcoin deal with the block size in the nearest term. Rather, people speculate and make plans on what may happen for everyone's best interest, and that seems to work well enough for now. That's one reason I see alt-coins as strengthening cryptocurrency overall; they can sit back and watch what works and what doesn't for Bitcoin and learn from mistakes.

The min mandatory fee is reduced to 0.0001 BTC in 0.8.2 the fourth such reduction since Bitcoin began.  As for starbucks not being willing to pay 6 cents in processing fees?  Are you kidding?  Their gross profit margin is 44%.  Starbucks gladly pays $0.30 + 2% to VISA.  Bitcoin at <1% is a downright deal.

A continual falsehood you keep repeating even after corrected.  0.8.2 doesn't prevent spending dust it prevents the creation of transactions below the dust threshold.  Miners can set that at whatever value they feel is appropriate.  The default value is 5430 satoshis which prevent creating NEW outputs that are (at < half a US cent in value) uneconomical.  


Businesses do every single day.  Credit card, debit card, checks, ACH, bank wire they all have fees (and fraud costs).  Even cash has transaction fees.  Most business checking account charge a deposit fee of ~0.5% for cash beyond some low threshold that anyone except the smallest mom & pop will exceed.  For larger companies armored car services tend to run 1% to 2%.  Ever wonder why Walmart allows you to get "free" cashback when paying with a debit card.  Some genius realized that is enough customers opt to take this cash off the company hands they could reduce the number of armored car runs and net tens of millions in saving from "free" cashback each year.  Throw in the small but non-zero counterfeit risk and you can see that processing costs are simply a fact of business.  Bitcoin to date is far superior to anything out there.  

My thoughts are that any alt-coin which is 1) Based on the Bitcoin code base and 2) Fails to merge all of Bitcoin's relevant changes is either a scam, or mismanaged.

Litecoin is based on Bitcoin, have they merged all the commits since Litecoin was forked? What happened to the LevelDB versus Berkeley DB issue? What are they doing about dust? etc...

  Why do you want to know?!!.. Just so you can con us with releasing a new one, manipulating our perceptions by subtle semantic tricks and tricks of image?..I don't think we need any new coins, unless there's a serious purpose to them, and lots of strong support from some top members of the 'community'...To succeed, it needs users, as LiteCoin has got, and of course the original, BitCoin. It cannot be premined, like those gambling coins, I forget their name..but you get the idea, we're not interested anymore, let's just have BitCoin and LiteCoin cos' everything's a scam anyway, no matter how well done.

My post in a thread titled The end of Alt-coins pertains to this:


I'm also going to reply to the alt-coin discussion in this Let's Talk Bitcoin thread with Erik Voorhees when I get a chance.

It looks like there's not much to talk about because you pretty much nailed it already.

im not interested in doing a voice interview, but as a written opinion. here goes.

creating a new alt-crypto-coin should not only be for the sake of "pumping and dumping" much like the penny shares of industry do with new businesses that have no infrastructure, but to also have plans and developers/entrepreneurs/infrastructure in place to offer proper products and services for the coin.

this is why namecoin (offering domain names etc) and litecoin (offering a multitude of services on the same scale as bitcoin did in lets say late 2011) are what i would consider proper alt-crypto-currencies. and dare i say it, XRP (used as the stamped envelope/chequebook analogies for exchanging other currencies.)*

i wish to highlight and emphasise the difference between an alt-crypto-currency and an alt-crypto-coin.
an alt-crypto-currency is a item used as a medium of trade of products or services(has a function)
an alt-crypto-coin is just another coin offering nothing more, but speculation.(has no function)

i personally try not to use the term scam-coin as that is a social term used in the chatrooms of BTC-E and IRC for all coins that are not the top 3 alt-currency coins. There are obviously scam coins out there which never intend to offer use as a currency, that have been pre-mined and are only on an exchange as a temporary contract deal.  but they should only be called scam coins after the fact(after being dropped off the exchange). but highlighted as either a future currency tool or just a coin whilst active (based on who is involved and information on projects that are actually going on).

as a comparison, crypto-coins VS the internet. many people in the 1990s created websites, not to provide legitimate services for customers, but to be designed in such a way that gave websites value, such as domain name parking of popular keywords and submitting the domain to every search engine to show a high volume of visitors. purely to sell on for profit.
alt-crypto-coins is just the next generation to what was referred to as the internet bubble of domain parking.

overall opinion is that alt-coins are not necessarily scams if used right and have a proper purpose/function to fill. But i do find that having such a variety of them does dilute the perceived value of bitcoin as being a limited resource, due to the fact that anyone can replicate the bitcoin featuresmaking the hard code 21mill coins. not so hard because people can just flip to a new chain after the 21million is nearing.. which is why natural diamonds do not have the same investment scarcity as gold, because diamonds can be replicated using carbon.

with bitcoin's 6c transaction fee(0.0005btc) to be guaranteed a place in the next block, i can see the bitcoin being easily replaced by a identical coin code and rules. minus the transaction fee's(block reward being the only reward). which would take over the main-streaming projects. due to the fact star bucks wont take on bitcoin for 6c per transaction + 1% bitpay fee. and attempting to buy a candy bar or a loaf of bread is next to impossible now due to the transaction fee, as well as gavin andressens satoshi dust ignore feature in the latest client.

after all would you honestly pay $1 worth of BTC instead of just using 85c FIAT for a 85c candy, knowing that andressens 'feature' plus fee's are pricing small item's 'out of the game'?

---

*xrp is slightly different to crypto-coins as it was never intended to itself hold value purely for trading XRP direct, it was to be a tool such as a stamped envelope to transmit transactions. but even stamps in the real world have value and people trade/hoard for a value, not for the purpose of posting letters through postal services.

Hi everybody,
So we've been seeing quite a few new alt-chains release which is totally great!  Only problem is, it seems like instead of doing innovative things or adding improvements, instead they're just coins that are easy to mine but which don't actually have any advantages besides being new.  

This means they basically have no chance of succeeding, and instead of "IPO" coins where they are pre-mined, then released on one small exchange so "suckers" will buy them hoping to be buying early, but in fact they're buying late.

The miners sell, and this continues until people figure out that the coin doesn't actually have a chance in hell, at which point it collapses and the miners move on to a new coin.

I'm looking for suggestions of what you would consider a "Scam Coin" - What the benefit is of pre-mining, what alt-coins are NOT scamcoins.  Looking for people both for and against various coins, we want to represent a variety of perspectives.

This show will run middle of next month, we'll be recording interviews over skype with stakeholders in the next two weeks.  Please post your interest here, email me at [email protected], or send me a PM.

Thanks,
Adam B. Levine
Editor-in-Chief
Let's Talk Bitcoin!