Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 238. (Read 387556 times)

one rule I followed about investing in the "right" alts and I can confirm it always worked with me.... read as much as yo can about the alt, understand and investigate its market, if it scares you (supposedly you are a BTC holder)invest in it.

Actually for now about the GPU friendly I think you are right, with scratchpad now.
About the bloat too also fair point.
I do think the emission curve of BBR is preferable, but people have other opinions like you say

Moving on from CryptoNote coins

I'd be open to listening to any esteemed altcoin speculator or cryptocurrency veteran in this thread who could
debate why CounterParty is not undervalued at this time. With the exception of the argument
that coins aren't being dribbled out by CPU,GPU,FPGA,ASIC or a combination of those over the next 1-25 years
and therefore it's automatically discounted.

So as not to clutter up this thread with what seems like biased promotion, I've given some of my views  on
 why I believe it is indeed undervalued here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7114290

I have argued elsewhere that currency is a natural monopoly within a given market.  The privacy-oriented global instant liquidity market seems well-defined.   Whether to build a currency or to fork it an compete against the original is strongly analogous to a prisoner's dilemma:  Forking is defection.   I consider much of rationally self-interested pro-social morality to be derived from the iterated prisoner's dilemma.  Pro-social moral self-interested action results in win-win conditions.  Forking is anti-social immoral and irrational, unless the fork is substantially superior.  Forking over minor factors is defection.  Defectors must be shot.  The pro-social, morally correct, and rationally self-interested thing to do is to adhere to the leading coin in a given niche, as it is the most likely to attain monopoly over time, and mutual adherence to the coin assures a win-win outcome which much higher confidence.  If the fork adds watershed features which are crucial to fulfilling the niche, or substantially expand the niche, then and only then is it suitable to defect, and switch to the fork.

Only just seen this thread so reserving my spot rpielta

Some good points have been made so far, hopefully this thread can prevent the clusterfuck that normally ensues on an alt thread.

The emissions curve is a matter of debate, but I'm not sure your reduction claim is true. By having transaction outputs that require mandatory mixin levels to spend them, it's more likely that you'll increase bloat in the block chain.

Wild-keccak is actually very GPU friendly from the couple of people I've talked to who do opencl coding, so there's that issue as well. That can go either way, but it could mean that whales have hugely unfair early advantages.

I like the 2nd chart, I generally prefer the higher wicks as tops and not bodies. It does look like a breakout, but if you remember with BTC, the breakout occurred up long after it occurred sideways (almost 2 weeks later)
.
I will have to keep an eye on LTC now. I just sold out 2/3rds at .2...

Here is a line drawn by me on BitcoinWisdom with more care - that still suggests a LTC breakout from the downtrend . . .



Here is a line drawn using the tips of the candle wicks, that suggests LTC will breakout this week . . .

I'm still in LTC but don't like the chart. Your line coming down pierces the wicks yet starts on a wick. To keep it consistent I'd lay it across the top and then you can see it hasn't broken out yet.
I do think LTC will become Wall Street's #2 darling due to the Network growth once those ASIC's come out. The worry is that KNC didn't sell out so I wonder about the overall health going forward.

IAS

Are there any paper wallets available for MRO? I can't find anything and hate keeping them long term on the smaller exchanges.

I'm just a little in MRO and even less in NXT but I want to see where that one goes as well.

Thx in advance,
IAS

Pros (compared with MRO)

- More rational emission curve
- Innovative bloat reduction features
- Increased anonymity
- algo seems (at first glance) to be improvement in comparison to MRO in a number of ways

Cons

- Awful name
- No pool infrastructure as yet, at last check mining was more profitable, and people are ready to dump at small profit
- Community nowhere near as strong as MRO.
- Lacks first mover advantage
- Many users do not like devs 1% 'premine' < heard multiple times
- dismissed as 'clone' < again, heard this many times

It seems it will mostly be a battle of perception. For now MRO has emerged as the leader looking like it's gone straight to being the LTC whilst BCN's TBX, but who knows, BBR or another cryptonote coin could come out as the LTC whilst MRO's the FBX

I realise this was answered.. but also should bring to attention that its not "MRO" any more.

Changed to XMR a short while ago, for ISO Compliance reasons apparently (who knew?)

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7098497


My first thought was "this is bullshit".. but then I read a bit on the X-currencies with reference to the standard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_4217#X_currencies

So I went and checked the reserved codes list for MR and found its Mauritania.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1

This actually shows a bit of forward thinking.. for integration with existing infrastructure and networks (e.g. forex trading), its pretty much mandatory that a currency conform to the standards.  The flip side is a philosophical one.. do we (the people) want that integration?

Maybe a bottom is forming in dollar terms, but I'm pretty sure LTC will continue to go down in BTC terms in the next weeks.
I will buy back some LTC below 12.5 mBTC

it is not exactly a clone - bought the same amount of bool pre exchange as I did with monero.

the developer is given credit by the monero developers.

in case two ring signature projects succeed, for me it is likely that it is monero and boolberry.

It looks to me that Litecoin could follow Bitcoin in the next bubble.

A rise from $11.253 to its previous peak at $48.48 would be a gain of 4.3x. Bitcoin in contrast is at $658 and a rise from here to its previous peak at $1163 would be a gain of 1.76x. Speculators understand that when Litecoin joins the rally, it can appreciate at a faster rate than Bitcoin.

Probably the same circumstances hold for other altcoins.

Here is the one-week resolution chart for Litecoin illustrating that its price has broken through the resistance trendline that I drew from the November peak . . .

Anyone has an opinion on boolberry coin? it seems to be based on bytecoin as well, but it would be a good idea for someone who study other similar coins to compare and it was launched on 17 of may... The price is pretty high in my opinion for less then a month coin, but again I don't really understand pros/cons here...

Thanks! I feel this is really important and confirms my OP. An important thing is that to find a subset of coins that fulfil the following two criteria:
- Fair launch ("economical" would be another word, because that is what matters, not "fairness" per se, but they are essentially the same thing)
- Relevant new features not implementable in Bitcoin

the set consists of exactly one coin: monero.

I could even go so far as to declare that I will buy the next alt that has actual relevant, new features not implementable in Bitcoin and Monero, and has a fair launch. By fair I mean that it must be less than 1% mined when brought to my attention, in addition to the other factors examined in your link. I promise to buy a minimum the same percentage of the eventual coins in circulation that I have of BTC.

I believe a big part in Bitcoin's success, the reason why it can consistently make higher highs, is the fact that all holders have paid the market price for their coins (scams notwithstanding). This ensures that the coin distribution is always optimal and the market action is the process by which it is tending towards more optimality.

It is notable that no coin can survive unless there are both large holders and small holders. But if the large holders have not paid the market price for their coins, their effectiveness is curtailed, "too big boots". If only a fraction of the market cap is actually valued by the market, there are also risks for disturbing and counterproductive market action (pump & especially dump).

I have paid the market price for all of my bitcoins (between $3 and $650) and also for my MROs (BTC0.0018...BTC0.0050). Therefore I am an example of a holder that is responsible, and will only dump the coins if there are declining fundamentals or the price clearly overshoots the level that I believe is medium-term supported by the market.


In a weekly or monthly scale, yes. But I am investing only in coins that have actual staying power. BTC is currently 99%+ of my holdings but even that 1%- is a significant holding.

The death of LTC is being slow and painful.

You can check the charts and watch his unstoppable hemorrhage.

Yeah you can put anything you want in the timestamps. Just scale them all by a factor of 100 and 2 years = 1 week.

How would you generate the blockchain without mining it properly? You mean faking the timestamps in the header or something?

It's not even clear it was two years. (No independent evidence whatsoever of its existence prior to late 2013 is available.) If it really were mined for two years with code implemented as was obviously intended by the design (using AES hardware in Intel CPUs), that would be less than 10 PCs mining it, which is somewhat implausible. It is entirely possible they gened the whole blockchain in a much shorter period of time on a server farm or cloud nodes. The whole thing is extremely shady and totally lacking even if the most basic transparency, which is why bytecoin is essentially dead now, and Monero is thriving.