Topic: [POLL] - What is the ultimate price of Litecoin? (Read 4759 times)

Right which is why no exchange allows you to withdraw until you have 1 (possibly more) confirmations.

Really the only transactions which are vulnerable to Finney attack are
a) very large in value
b) irrevocable and instantaneous.
c) doesn't require 1 confirmation.

I don't know of any transaction like that which exists.  A business just need to evaluate their risks.

No, but they will transfer hundreds of thousands of LTC into exchanges, sell it and withdraw, then rewrite the chain. But true, it's not worth for small business amounts to wait hours for lot of confirmations.

Doubtful.  I thought the point of Litecoin was for small purchases.  No need for confirmation is small purchases.  A non-finney double spend is essentially impossible to pull off if the seller simply waits 60 seconds or so.

A seller accepting 0-confirm sales is vulnerable to a Finney attack but given the staggering amount of hashing power required to even attempt that nobody is going to spend $80,000 to build a hashing farm to double spend a 1BTC copy of angry birds.

because of the faster confirmations of litecoin, it may be adopted easier for purchases

I hear that said a lot without explanation. 

If someone has value stored in Bitcoins why wouldn't they simply use Bitcoin for large and small transactions?

I can see litecoin being adopted for small sales..  bitcoin being a store of value, transfer larger amounts.

litecoin compliments bitcoin very nicely.

Someone needs to start a new fork ... and soon .

Thank you !

I think any successful money performs 3 functions relatively well: medium of exchange, unit of account and store of value. Any crypto-currency can serve well as a unit of account, they are just numbers with lots of decimal places. With no or low increases in supply crypto-currencies could be a good store of value. But the make or break test is "are many people using it as a medium of exchange?" Bitcoin has some merchants that accept BTC as payment but this will need to grow dramatically if BTC is to succeed in the long run. BTC is walking now. LTC and other crypto-currencies need to walk before they run. With a market capitalization of $24 million, BTC has a big head start on the other crypto-currencies. Being first is a big advantage in many markets. But then again, the only contant in this world is change. For example, who would have thought that Internet Explorer market share would fall to less than 40%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_market_share

I didn't mean to say whether or not SC 2 is nice, my point was just that shorter retargets aren't a problem.
And as for the scheduled variation in block reward, it's already in the Bitcoin protocol.

Making a trivial adjustment such as a retarget every 100 blocks during the first 5000 blocks doesn't really sound like a sophisticated scheme to me.

Don't get me started on SC2. Anyone participating it that is really doing a pump&dump, I can't believe anyone seriously "invests long term" in SC.
Bitcoin has been very seriously thought out, any deviation from its protocol must be very carefully considered. The differences in Litecoin are minimal enough to gain my trust, easily.

I'm not saying other, more sophisticated schemes are a bad idea ... just that they need more convincing, and real reasons behind them. I haven't found any reasons that merit such changes.

Care to explain why? I don't see how this makes less sense than adjusting the late blocks reward... And as for the retargets, SC 2 is doing fine with much more frequent retargets.

This is true for any successful venture. By the time it's successful, it's perceived as "too late to invest" by some, because most of the profit went to those investing in the early days of the venture. Hindsight is always 20-20, right?

It's not useless to mine now, I'm mining solo and getting 50 BTC every few days. I'm not getting rich from mining, but I'm getting something, that I believe will be worth a lot more in the future (because BTC-USD will soar, not because the LTC-BTC rate).


To me, the fact the Litecoin protocol follows Bitcoin almost exactly is important. The less it differs, the better. Adjusting the early block reward/retargets wouldn't have made any sense.

As always, if you disagree, launch YetAnotherCoin with whatever parameters you wish. I doubt there will be much adoption of new AltCoins, except ones that bring something concrete to the table (e.g. Namecoin). Bitcoin and Litecoin got it covered.

It the market thinks "Bitcoin/Litecoin won't succeed because it's overpriced, and early adopters got a huge chunk of the pile", then the market will adjust the price of Bitcoin/Litecoin until they're "cheap enough". Early adopters will sell earlier than they had originally intended to, thus distributing the coins. I believe that this is what's happening right now with Bitcoin ... simple redistribution of wealth.

This doesn't change the fact that for those people mining now is useless compared to mining then. They are filthy rich compared to anyone joining now. Which means that joining now is pointless, which means... so much for mass adoption.

Always the same argument... it would have been so simple to configure retargets to happen much more often of the early blocks, or to make the early blocks worth fewer coins.

The Litecoin launch was extremely well communicated and planned in advance. Testnet was setup.
Everybody who was interested could have verified his setup days before launch.

I admit, there were some technical issues for me on Windows, as the final config file didn't work for me for a few hours ... and it took me a while to realize the problem was with different line breaks on Windows. But other than that, I don't think you could have asked for a fairer release process.

The difficulty on a new coin can't be set very high, because if you don't have enough miners the network would be stuck. The difficulty self-adjusted quickly enough. Anyone who wanted to be there on release day ... was there.

Unfortunately, since the initial hashrate was very poorly configured on purpose, that's not entirely true. Something like 500,000 LTC were spread amongst the people who mined during the first 48h. That's still better than SC2 or BTC, but not quite awesome though. I don't believe a fork can be entirely successful if mining during the first 2 days gives you a lifetime mining worth of riches. Too many people sitting on big stashes while those who joined a week later mine for peanuts and see prices fluctuating as early adopters play day-trading. When the next fork pops up, early adopters jump on it because they are rich enough in LTC, and late adopters jump on it too because they'll be able to mine more on it... leaving LTC like TBX. IMO the only reason why LTC is doing so well is because for some reason no one yet started a new fork.

While I don't think litecoin would be at 0.25 btc at its ultimate price it could shoot over it for a short time.

Ultimately I think it might be about the historical gold/silver price ratio of 1/15.

I agree with you but, BTC and LTC can coexist.

LTC can be used to buy oranges and breads at the corner... Or even in a web supermarket... At a nightclub or at a new DisnayLand... Litecoins for litethings...   

BTC can be used to buy a entire container of products made on China!

But, one point makes me think, the CPU miner is much more "democratic", almost everybody owns a CPU these days... But who owns 100 * 5870?!

Long life to CryptoCurrencies! I go for BTC and LTC. There is space for both. In fact, I think it is better to have two great cryptocurrencies out there... Not only one.

I hate banks and governments. They will lose. People will win!

I'm one of the 99%!

My guess is:

1 BTC = U$~2.000,00 - total of 21.000.000 BTC = ~52.500.000.000,00 USD
1 LTC = U$~500,00    - total of 84.000.000 LTC = ~42.000.000.000,00 USD

In five years or less... AND, if things continues to go bad in our world, as we see today, the LTC/BTC can be much more valuable. Simple because the FED is printing more USDs... So, each dollar looses value, BTC/LTC don't. At least not this way.

I think that the Greece citizens should use Bitcoins/Litecoins TODAY! And say: Fuck you gov!!

Best!
Thiago

I think litecoin even has the potential to replace bitcoin. Dropping the BTC value dramaticaly.
It solves one of the biggest issues technically and emotionally.

Shorter block times somewhat increase the time it takes for a transaction to be verified decently.
This also speeds up the adjusting of the difficulty, something that i still see as a potential problem for bitcoin.
More user-friendly GUI.
Announced before release, 'no' premined coins, no small group of early adopters.
CPU mining makes it slightly more fair as the hashrate doesn't increase as extreme with newer CPU's as with GPU's.
(I do see this as a temporary situation, at some point GPU's will be able to work scrypt)

The argument that LTC is to BTC as Silver is to Gold is complete nonsense imo. Why? Because there are more LTC in the end?

There is less Silver in the world then Gold currently, the only reason Silver is Gold for the poor is because poor can't even afford one Oz. of Gold. There's no technical reason, it's convenience and price related.
Since BTC are extremely dividable this makes no sense at all. If you're poor and want to buy BTC @ $2.000,00/BTC then just buy 0.0005 BTC for a buck. Try doing that with Gold, find somebody to sell you 0.0005 Oz. of Gold     After that, find somebody to accept it or buy it back!

LTC improves on BTC imho.
BTC has the advantage of being already established somewhat, there are applications for it and there's an active economy.

Seriously? I think all answers are correct. Bitcoin = 0$, Litecoin = 0 - +∞ BTC. But I hope I'm wrong

This thread makes no sense if you compare it with another cryptocurrency.