Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 168. (Read 387493 times)

Almost every if not every bitcoin fork most certainly is a shitcoin. See post  #1 on this thread and many other discussions.

If fiat collapses globally as much and as quickly as in Argentina, I believe in that environment barter would be better suited for trade, not Bitcoins. Hopefully fiat collapses gradually enough, for crypto currencies to keep purchasing power.

Cross check the dates of the Cyprus Bailout (I am Cypriot btw) and BTC spike.

Was looking more at an Argentina type situation and not a full Walking Dead scenario.  Black markets supposedly popped up very quickly that accepted gold in Argentina when they had their "Chicago boys" incident.  So basically we're looking at a scenario where fiat collapses and each Bitcoin becomes worth $100,000+, or zero.

So doesn't that make about every single Bitcoin fork ever a shitcoin, by your criteria? Judging by these requirements technically Litecoin would have to be considered a shitcoin as well.

Yawn, specs don't matter with no innovation. i.e a cryptonote coin copy paste.

Network effect, frst mover advantage is huge and even more so with nothing new but a changed emmision rate. I mean you cant be serious (other than just as a pump and dump) that a coin called OneEvilCoin will ever be used in a serious enviroment.

NEXT

What actually quite upsets me is the fact fiat currencies are backed by entire armies and very powerful people with agendas and interests. Tell me how are these people going to let BTC defeat the ruling fiat curriencies. Also, no a legitimate total armageddon scenareo I think the guy with the most weapons and safe animals and clean water would win, if you know what I mean.

Since humans are kind of lazy creatures resistant to change, does anyone else think BTC won't gain any real traction without the presence of financial armageddon in the USD or Euro?  Most people here know it seems like mathematical certainty for those fiat currencies to collapse at some point in time, but not many people are good at estimating how long they kick the can down the road.  Some think collapse is imminent, others cite things like Japan and say you can put things off 50 years or more.

What are people's estimates in this thread for when the bread lines start.  Then an even better question, if you're in a system of collapse with things like bread lines and probably martial law, what are the odds cryptocurrency would be utilized at all.  Until local grocery stores accept BTC directly, it seems like there's a long way to go.

I know its not the best of names but the supply is lower than Monero

How would a coin like OEC - OneEvilCoin (New Cryptonote coin) with these specs fair against XMR price

Block reward decreases according to the formula (8265395001600000000 -1 - A) * 2-21 * 10-12, where A = supply mined to date
Total coins: 8 265 395

From my understanding NXT is a useful digital commodity, and as such may be investable.  However it is not a viable global currency for many of the reasons mentioned above.  Thus it lacks the massive upside potential of a primary global currency.  The NXT asset exchange in particular seems like an immediately useful thing, which insures that NXT will always have a non-negligible value floor.  In contrast, even BTC could conceivably be replaced and supplanted entirely by other chains, taking its market value to zero, as it lacks a similarly compelling service offering.

I own some NXT now.  Not much, because I see BTC and XMR as having so much more upside, but enough so that if I need to use it, I won't have to pay more than 7k sat/nxt to do it.  I may buy a liitle  more if it drops below 4k, perhaps doubling my stores with each halving.  I could see a NXT bubble occuring at some point, but probably not a staircase of higher and higher bubbles such as bitcoin has already seen and monero may shortly see.

One reason the daily supply estimate is so difficult to guesstimate is that it will change massively day to day. For example during the first few weeks of OTC and then cryptonote exchange the early miners generally knew where the majority of the hashing power came from and during this time not many of us sold. This understandably means that some of the earliest miners, even after paying bills, have a fairly hefty stash. All it takes is the need/want  of a few people to sell 1-5% of your stash and you could probably double that days supply (if we take 25% daily mined amount is sold just for discussion sake). Again the same applies when the price is rising, during the mintpal voting stage I can almost guarantee that the number of mined coins that day being sold were below what would normally be sold on a 'normal' day.

Ultimately though, this big inflation will benefit everyone in the long run due to more coins being in a larger amount of peoples hands which is the whole idea. If XMR went straight to its potential value, many would struggle to even get in the 10's of coins, at these prices most people have the oppurtunity to own a much higher % of the total supply compared to say their BTC holdings in terms of % of total supply.

Lots of coins have claimed to be widely distributed but not many can show consistently high volumes while having a fast emmision rate and then staying on high volume for a significant amount of time, time will tell but I beleive we will see that.

Speaking of volume, does anybody have an idea of Polo's total XMR volume? There were days of 1000BTC so Im sure its got to be 20k-40k BTC thats some impressive distribution if you ask me.

I said earlier that no one of these is determinative. But as you say people take advantage of the hype and heavily promote coins without any serious assurance (at this point) that the technology is even sound. That is a strong indication of shitcoin status to me.

That's fine. It's still a technology in development. The debate is still on going and interesting. Which is why I'm incredibly suspect of anyone who just outright dismisses it. Having doubts like you do is part of the process. But listing along with things like pre mines and such is either intentionally misleading or cognitive dissonance.

I'd be surprised if one year from now we weren't looking at a generally agreed upon and robust PoS system. There are a lot of great minds working on it right now and on the other end of the spectrum equally great minds criticising it. Which is a good recipe for innovation.

as long as a pos system does not gets the same attention from security specialists as bitcoin i consider it flawed.
security/crypto is not something a programmer can get right without much training in the field

but the main problem (for me with pos) is basic-logic: i dont think its possible to secure a system with itself. bitcoin uses pow: which essentially means you need to get hardware and this hardware needs time to do some work: thats the key. its a physical key which lies outside the system.
my coding experience tells me: it is impossible to build something secure on an insecure base.

What? PoS is potentially the most revolutionary development in cryptocurrency tech since Bitcoin. Just because some people have taken advantage of the hype doesn't automatically brand any PoS coin a 'shitcoin'.

From my understanding, the NXT whales are one of the main reasons why NXT it is excelling and excelling fast! At the same time you can buy cheap coins because of their sell offs Why would I want it any other way

very good post.
but if you honor first-mover that much you should go with bytecoin (just joking).
i cant decide between bbr and xmr yet. i like both...

one difference between the start of cn and bitcoin is, that there is now a big crypto-community.
it took a while for the first bitcoin-alt to come to live.

Actually this is most likely the case, you say this in jest but it's very close to the truth. You might be confused why many people in this thread are not willing to entertain second movers (BBR and LTC) and IPO's and POS. It's because many people in this thread come from Risto's school of thought and under normal circumstances would never invest into alternative coins in the first place. Almost every alternative coin, second mover clone coin with heavy reliance on silly changes to set themselves apart, and the scam IPO and POS rich get richer models are real turn offs, they are not being built with the next 50 years in mind.

However, many of these forward thinking and smart people have now seen a coin that could actually exist alongside Bitcoin and has real reason for its existence, Monero.

Like I have said many times, BBR is pointless, if BBR overtakes Monero I am back to Bitcoin for good as it sets an easy precedent for the next clone coin with small change to overtake BBR, and thus investing in any CryptoNote coin becomes impossible.

It's the same with Litecoin, if Litecoin overtakes Bitcoin in its current state then it's over, most of the money will leave CryptoCoins for good because the precedent is that a real investment can be destroyed by any clone that can market its small irrelevant changes well enough.

Monero is a first mover because the true first mover (Bytecoin) is a scam coin due to the 80% premine.

Ethereum, Monero, Bitcoin, are all first movers. This is why the Ethereum team are spending a long time getting their IPO right. They have made it so that most of the coins in the first 5 years will be mined coins, not IPO coins. Notice that they are not considering IPO and then POS, if they did a clone of Ethereum would then become the true first mover as Ethereum original would be tagged as a scam coin. The Ethereum team are being very careful not to mess the release up, if the market thinks the release is unfair, a clone will take over as primary candidate, like what happened with Bytecoin.

The coin release is as important as the technicals.

Bitcoin had the technicals and fair release.

Monero had the technicals and fair release.

Ethereum has the technicals and looking for the fairest release, if they screw up then they loss.

Also don't even mention Darkcoin, that is a scam through and through.

basically, yes. at least this is the conclusion that i derived from observing the crypto-developement. as a bitcoin holder, i watched the altcoin market as the playground for people who missed btc in its early stages and now desperately trying to mimic the 1000x rise by developing one after another coin without any benefits when compared to bitcoin. its this desperate "but i want to get rich, too" attitude of the people in this subcategory of cryptos that kept me away for most of the time.

i agree to some extent to rptilia when he says, that xrm is the first coin that offers something really worthwhile and at the same time not beeing instamined or whatever scam-deployment of coins you invented. of course, i can't know if the better protocol will win against the other coins offering anonymity by various degrees, history has been full of cases where the non favourable protocol established itself as mainstream (vhs vs betamax anyone?). but i decided to invest some percent to gamble on the most promising horse instead of hoping to get rich quick by betting against all odds

See post #1