Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 14. (Read 387454 times)

jehst:
I think you should do more, deeper and real research on cryptocurrency in general and the altcoin enviroment (incl. at least trying to understand technical backgrounds and how to rate the devs and community behind a coin) before trying predict chances of success of so many different coins and technologies, you talk about in your post.
You made alot very general statements, mostly without giving any reasons for your argument.

To me, it looks like you read some general altcoin news pages and some threads here and now repeated some standard arguments, you heard there. You didn't mentioned any kind of (simple) scientific instrument or methods of analysis you used during your research work (to create valid arguments and reasonings). Some stuff you wrote is ridiculous incorrect and shows you don't really know what you are talking about.

BTW, a currency lives through usage, no coin will just survive on being an "catastrophic hedge" against an BTC failure. There are other tools and ways to do that.
I think this catastrophic hedge-scenario isn't even worth discussing. (It was discussed in 100.000 threads before here on this board. Just research there.)

(No personal attack or hate, just a comment    to improve level of discussion.)

Codebase? Seriously?  
... most customers/users could not even differentiate between two codebases. And when does a codebase qualify as beeing sufficiently different, at all? And for what exactly?

That argument ... fails. And what exactly is a "PoW failure"? And why is "nothing at stake" ... "a crippling potential weakness"? Either is is crippling, or it is potential. Cannot have both.

Well written indeed.  I largely feel the same way about what he wrote, however it would be interesting to hear some counter arguments.

Very well written. Kudos.

http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2014/11/zero-knowledge-proofs-illustrated-primer.html

jehst, what's your opinion on BitShares?

I believe there will be room for another niche. I will call it a "catastrophic hedge niche." This niche would be filled by a coin that would be a hedge against some sort of crippling vulnerability in bitcoin. This coin would need to meet three main requirements:   1) high liquidity, 2) a different codebase, and 3) a different hashing algorithm in( addition to the general requirements of no-premines, instamines, and a fair distribution).

Litecoin partially qualifes based on its high liquidity and different hashing algorithm, but shares basically an identical codebase with bitcoin. Therefore, It fails.

Counterparty uses the bitcoin blockchain so it also fails.

Namecoin, Dogecoin, and Darkcoin use the bitcoin/litecoin codebases so they fail as well.

Peercoin passes (questionably). Peercoin, being a proof-of-stake coin is a hedge against a PoW failure. It has good liquidity and a different codebase. However, a crippling potential weakness has already been identified with pure proof-of-stake coins, which is the "nothing at stake" attack. I am not technically minded enough to say whether this attack vector can be eliminated, but Vitalik Buterin and others have described some potential ways to minimize this problem, so I won't rule Peercoin out as potential leader in the catastrophic hedge niche on this ground.

Another issue is the fastmine:
"Currently, as of April 22nd, 2014, Peercoin has 21,343,191 coins in existence. One really has to look at how nearly 4 million Peercoins were created in the week of August 16-23rd, which comprises nearly 20% of the coins in existence nearly 16 months later."
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#peercoin1

A fastmine is not a pre-mine or an instamine and Peercoin seems to have retained legitimacy despite the fastmine. So I'm going to let Peercoin pass.

NXT, Ethereum, Ripple and Fuelcoin are all pre-"mined"(centrally distributed), so they fail.

Again, we come to XMR. Good liquidity. Different codebase. Different hashing algorithm.  Pre-mine? None. Thus, XMR meets all three requirements, and isn't disqualified on other grounds. It is second only to Peercoin because of Peercoin's superior liquidity. XMR also lacks the PoS "nothing at stake" attack vulnerability.

A potential issue with XMR is blockchain bloat which is a potential threat to scalability. However, ever cheaper storage, ever cheaper RAM, lightweight clients, and other developments will lessen this problem. Thus, I will let XMR pass.

I am not considering other altcoins as serious candidates due to inferior liquidity.

Conclusion: Currently, only Peercoin and XMR can serve as legitimate catastrophic hedges. We can see that XMR is not only a very strong candidate to be #1 in the privacy niche, but also a very strong candidate to be #1 in the catastrophic hedge niche. A small proportion of funds in XMR will occupy two important niches at once (neither of which can be adequately addressed by bitcoin). If we assume that these two niches together should account for 5% of the total cryptocurrency marketcap, XMR seems to be an incredible expected value (EV) play.

Honestly who uses the desktop client to send transactions anyway? Obviously this does not apply to services like coinbase, blockchain.info, etc.

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/11/26/2121214/bitcoin-is-not-anonymous-after-all

Redirect fixed.

If this is really needed, I can ask some people. But just come to IRC, you will see that most nicknames in chatroom are familiar and known not to be related to CN.org.

Maybe my wording above wasn't perfect (including "developers"). We are more inspired by the concept of an classical user group, as defined on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Users%27_group for example.

Like I said, there is currently only the thread for discussion and the chatroom for chat. Nothing more. So we are no real user group at the moment.

- I vouch for the "CryptoNote.eu"-account.
- Also looking at his post history explicit shows his non CN.org-support or relation, look:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8389041
- the redirect will be fixed in the next 30 mins

Most of the people posting on that thread are well-known CN users and developers. It looks like jwinterm created the IRC channel and he's definitely well known. I tried out the channel the other day and it seemed okay, although some there seemed a bit ignorant about "Cryptonote" (the original group) being a bunch of scammers. I can't vouch for this new "CryptoNote.eu" account though.

CryptoNote team trying to create a new identity and leave the old tainted one behind?

Why does CryptoNote.eu redirects to https://cryptonote.org   
Can you cite some of the "CN users and developers, mostly XMR and BBR background" that would vouch for your account?

No, we are the first independent CryptoNote Community. We are just normal CN users and devolopers, mostly with XMR and/or BBR background. But we are open to everbody & would like to welcome people from every CN-based coin or project.
There is no relationship with cryptonote.org-owners or CryptoNote Foundation. We see their actions critically and dissociate from their obvious wrong doings.

Our thread is: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/general-cryptonote-community-thread-658884 , the chatroom is mentioned above. That's all.
The idea is to allow coin-neutral cryptonote-related discussions, independent from the people that call themselves CryptoNote Foundation and their CryptoNote.org forum.

Are you related to the "cryptonote foundation"? To the website https://cryptonotestarter.org/ or https://cryptonotefoundation.org/ ?

If you are interested in general cryptonote-related chat:
Please join the channel #cryptonotes on the Freenode IRC network.

If you are new to Freenode or IRC in general, please see https://freenode.net/ for infos how to join chatroom.

Point!
With a more positive stance, since that quote above was from a thread talking about brand identity, nomen est omen or memorable collectibles. Language has to reach across national or political barriers. You cannot name anything "Somethingparty" and expect reception.
Well maybe they want to relabel that later on.

I was mildly surprised by my own reaction on the label. Perhaps naming a coin is of more importance then it is currently assumed. Anycoin, ShitXShares, Dogefunny are for the trashcan.

Can someone give an explanation for "trivial to dilute it (infinitely)" for non-native speakers?
What does this mean? What is going to be diluted?

I don't understand what you mean regarding that trivial to dilute point. It's trivial to dilute BTC too, what is non-trivial is to make people use your diluted alternative.