Topic: Litecoin is a ponzi, a pyramid and a pump and dump scheme and crap, too - page 2. (Read 7808 times)

Perhaps future updates will enforce some breakaway from the bitcoin model (although I assume its built on BitcoinJS, so it can only go so far) and give it some viability in the sense you discuss. Otherwise I think it will at the very least be a haven for outdated BTC miners and clandestine activities if/when BTC becomes too hot for certain activities. After that IDRK. again thnks great points bud

Thanks.

It's possible, but I think that the likelihood of an altcoin with a similar hash-based proof of work security model being immune to an attack that worked against bitcoin is small, and the risks of the bitcoin community fracturing along different blockchains, and the whole idea of cryptocurrency losing credibility as a result, is greater than the risk of not having a fall back cryptocurrency.

All fair points.

The only thing I can respond with is this: because widespread adoption of BTC has only scratched the surface, there are many 'unkowns' in respect to how it will evolve and what shape it will take in the global economy. As such I can only assume there exists some possible outcome that necessitates the adoption of a similarly structured yet independently operated alt coin.

I'm not going to try and weigh in as to what might cause such an occurrence, but it seems like a possibility to me. No?

The USD has exclusionary rights to tax the US economy, and other national currencies have comparable rights in their own countries.

When they have competed head on, like as an international reserve currency, the USD for a long time dominated the foreign exchange reserves of foreign central banks, because it's less convenient to juggle and trade in a handful of small cap currencies than one large cap currency. It's only starting to see competition now because the US economy is no longer dominant in the world.

The competition for global reserve currency was between currencies with very different traits, owing to their different tax-bases, and countries still settled on one currency. A bitcoin near-clone is going to be operating in the same global internet market, and will therefore have nothing to differentiate it from other bitcoin-variants.

The free market demands alternative currencies that serve different needs, like being able to pay taxes in Great Britain, or taxes in the US, not nearly identical currencies with smaller market caps. Starting new blockchains using virtually identical code is just inflation. It could be lucrative for miners, but I think it's bad for cryptocurrency.

Here is an argument I'm not sure I understand in full; just look at the global economy: there are many players in the currency game (USD, EUR, YEN, etc...) and they all operate under the similar philosophies of a transactional economy. So even if they are similar (see your 99.9% argument), history shows that such a reality is not a barrier to entry.

So regardless of their similarity in use-value and backend, the free market demands alternative currencies; the same logic applies to the alternatives to the alternative currencies. There are glass ceilings of course, but given the limited number of viable alt alt currencies atm, LC and at least a few others are here to stay.

I'm going to keep repeating it. You shouldn't mind since it won't have an effect.

Litecoins aren't going anywhere and you are now repeating the same arguments because you've got nothing left to cling to but false hope. When they hit one dollar, you are going to see an epic bull rush. Mark my words  

It's not only not better, it's worse. You can purchase $10 worth of a more stable, widely accepted bitcoin, or $10 worth of a more volatile, less accepted copy-cat of bitcoin.

Yes it could gain traction because of hype and ignorance, but I'm hoping its traction can be checked if people become more well-informed about the fact that altcoins are 99.9% identical to bitcoin and offer nothing new and much less.

Litecoin doesn't have to be 'better' to have value. You're fighting a losing battle with this argument because Litecoin has simply gained too much traction now. Too many people have decided to give it value and it's trending upwards massively in google searches.

Bitcoin is better than the dollar for many current uses (international remittance, micropayments, etc). Bitcoin near-clones are not better than bitcoin for any use, and to the extent that bitcoin users accept them as viable blockchains, they undermine the whole idea of bitcoin (and any thing like it) having a supply limit of 21 million coins.

Now I don't believe this is the case for either coin, but as soon as I hear people start to attack Litecoin it just seems like they are throwing stones while living in a glass house.

It's in the interest of the bitcoin community to put its focus on one network, not two networks running virtually identical code.

"Yea bitcoin has a cap of 21 million coins, unless you create a copy blockchain with another 21 million coins" suddenly becomes a lot more of a threat to the viability of cryptocurrency when members of the bitcoin community promote identical blockchains as viable additions to the money supply.

I don't think litecoin is a scam, but I do believe that all of the arguments made for its adoption have fault.

How does using a network that has a tiny fraction of the hash-rate, the liquidity, and the market cap of another network, and that uses exactly the same processes for transactions, make sense for any one?

Only those who are ignorant of how bitcoin works, and are unware that altcoins are virtually identical to it, could be compelled to buy into one. Any thing you can buy with a copy-cat altcoin, you can buy with bitcoin much more easily. Any transaction you can make with an altcoin, you can make through the bitcoin network with less risk from price volatility.

The only motive I can imagine for people promoting an altcoin is profiting off of un-earned hype.

That being said, it's a complex world, and we should not presume to know all. People have a right to create and promote any open source currency they want, I just personally won't be involved, and I'll give my recommendation against it.

You are probably not well informed. There are services, search and you'll find the appropriate topic. There is also a great update in the code itself in the near future. Your hate is pointless. Stop flaming, if you dont like it do not support it. But stop giving false information.

For more see these topics: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1699934,https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/upcoming-litecoin-accepting-services-and-trends-157492

When you read these, you will see that you are wrong,

Litecoin may even surpass bitcoin. I mean, who knows?

You're peddling the same anti-Litecoin arguments that people would use against Bitcoin when it was in it's infancy at 50 cents.

The free markets will decide Litecoin's value. 

Classic LiteCoin reasoning there then. Tell me what a mountain is worth if no-one wants to buy it? Now tell me what a LiteCoin is worth if no-one wants to buy it? Here is a hint, it's zero.

LiteCoin has no goods, no services, no shops, and no possible market segments except those already filled by BitCoin. There is no reason for any merchant to accept LiteCoin when they could accept BitCoin. The only thing driving the LiteCoin price is a bunch of people trying to get rich quick by selling it to each other and trying to hook in as many newbies as possible to do the same.

So now supply and demand is one sided? Its worth what a buyer and seller agrees on. Meaning if you are offering 1$ and I am not willing to sell for 1$. No value has been established. That value will change depending on how many mountains are available (as one factor out of many).

And the scarcity is indeed a complicated concept to understand. But more different sellers in a limited supply market will tend to increase value. Mostly because of opportunity cost and limited availability making it less desirable to sell at lower margin because it cannot be compensated with sale volume for total profit. In a non-limited supply, sellers will thrive to sell more at less volume. Those facts have an inverse effect approach monopoly (thus the reason why monopoly is generally illegal).

But hey, if being wrong makes you feel like a great mind, be my guess, but that's not why historical great minds were challenged on their ideas.

There is some truth in this. I'm getting bored of hearing LiteCoin fans saying that LiteCoin now is anything lite BitCoin was when it was new. I don't think they are even convincing themselves.

I think Litecoin is a knee-jerk reaction to people who missed out on Bitcoin and want to be early adopters. TBH I don't think it's different enough than Bitcoin though to have a major impact in the long run. I would rather throw my money behind something like PPC, which I know is unique enough to have a chance

Litecoin has gained too much traction to disappear now. It's many times bigger than all the other alternate currencies put together. Too many services are being built around Litecoin for it to plummet in value. Trust me when I say this, Litecoin is currently underpriced... you'll see in the next 3 months.

I also see PPCoin having a promising future too, with it's innovations and energy saving premise. Plus even better, it's developer Sunnyking is very talented and highly active in it's development. He even fixes vulnerabilities he finds in other coins (e.g. Terracoin).

Well, I just found out there is now a new Silkroad style market for litecoin. It's here to stay. 'Nuff Said.