Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 62. (Read 387552 times)

It's kind of separate issues as to: 1) whether it becomes a winner-take-all (or close) market; and 2) if so, what determines the winner. If it does turn into WTA then I also agree with you that technical superiority (if that is even objectively meaningful) is very unlikely to determine the winner.

I actually HOPE I'm wrong, coz having coins dominate for reasons other than tech superiority is depressing, but that's what history shows. Advertising is extremely powerful.

One example to illustrate this power, In my country after shave 'Old Spice' got a big sales boost after a TV add from another country went viral on the internet - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owGykVbfgUE - usage boost of over 25%, and that add didn't even show in my country on TV.

IMO one of the biggest factors that will decide which version of which code base is successful 'could' come down to who makes the best funny add that goes viral. That's probably a bigger factor than blockchain bloat, anon, or even transaction speed. Who makes the best TV advert.

I've made these sorts of arguments before.

Historically money has had a huge network effect, because exchanging it has been impractical, inconvenient, or expensive. With crypto-to-crypto exchanges (including those built into payment networks you mention), this is no longer the case.

There is still some network effect, but it seems much smaller than before, and this may well lead to a different outcome

I think consensus opinion from most reptiles in this altcoin observer thread is that there will end up being only one anon coin that survives due to network effect. Why is this opinion so strongly held? I don't see how this logic works, but I do see many counter argument though, that suggest many alt coins will compete eternally, just like products in other markets.

Fiat has government monopoly backed by the police & army, so we're all used to living with one major currency in each country (usually, there are exceptions), but with crypto being above/below the law, I think there can be many long term currencies existing together forever. Relative positions will always be changing, but there will never be a definitive winner, just endless jockeying. That is how markets work.

I think this dominant attitude - 'network effect will eventually lead to only bitcoin and a single anon coin' sounds like when the IBM guy said 'people will never wants computers in their homes' or Bill Gates (supposedly) said 'internet wont be that big a deal'. Famous last words, like 'network effect will kill all altcoins except bitcoin & one anon coin'.

I think once crypto is more user friendly we will see many long term alt survivors that compete on the same basis as other products in other markets where basic product is very similar. Marketing, branding, sponsorship, celebrity endorsement, trinket giveaways etc All the fluff that dominates modern market economy (depressing in many ways, but still likely outcome IMO).

Advertising hasn't had any effect on crypto adoption yet, but it probably will soon. When it does consumer choice fueled by marketing will take over. Barriers to entry are so low, much lower than in any other product almost. We all see that now with so many cone alt coins, but it's been done by amateurs so far.

When pro 'madmen' marketers launch a coin it will blow away all competition from identical clones that don't follow suit. If Don Draper works for Boolberry monero is dead lol If Don Draper works for Monero, boolberry is dead!

I think there is plenty of reasons to think many alts will survive. Liquidity is not a problem with payment networks existing like Ripple & Stellar. Those two versions of that tech might be corrupt and fail, but I have used them like many others, and they work, so the power of consumer choice to pick & pay in the currency of their choice will lead to mass marketing of coins, and IMO consumer love for options, and marketers love for advertising crap will overpower network effect. A Ripple clone (minus the 100 Billion premine) makes all currencies interchangeable, so liquidity will flow for many coins, not just one or two.

For example, I live in small/medium country that had regulated banks & phone companies for decades, so natural monopoly argument would have suggested new entrants would not survive, and so new entrants would not start up after deregulation. But, after deregulation that was not the case, and many small and medium entrants DID enter the market - many new banks, many new phone companies. Why?

Because consumers like choice, and new entrants can always attract customers away from existing operators for many reasons other than basic fundamentals of the tech. Advertising, marketing ... put David Beckman on a billboard with a phone from ACME phone Co. and some people will buy that phone over another phone, even at a premium, even if they are the same phone.

Consumers aren't logical, most marketing people know that. Branding and advertising spin work, and I think they will play a dominant roll in crypto adoption now that the basic proof of concept has shown the money is 'real'.

All phones connect to a federated network, all bank payments are connected to a federated network too, so consumer can choose which provider they use, and they can still phone anyone they want across all netorks, or use any ATM machine or point-of-sale terminal. So the network effect that would make one super bank, or one super phone company did not end up occurring as many thought.

Wont this also happen with currency too? The network effect idea comes from analogies like Facebook (if all my friends are using FB I can't use another social network, coz my buddies are already on the super network, and no other social network has a chance). BUT Facebook is closed network, but banking, phones ... and crypto currencies are federated networks, like email.

I think those who argue that network effect & liquidity constraints will lead to only one or two dominant coins surviving could be wrong. If I am wrong (which I might be) can someone show me how?

Federated networks and inter-operable protocols suggest many options, coz that is what human consumers like. Not guys on this forum who look under the hood, but the regular people. If an A-list movie star promoted boolberry in a TV advert, and monero didn't respond in kind, boolberry wins, or vice versa too.

XMR looks like it's due to retest 0.004....

Getting into XDN Ducknote in the meantime 

Well it clearly was a scammer. Anyone can name an asset anything. "That thread is littered with dissociated identities" - welcome to bitcointalk.

I love me some crypto-drama.  God forbid divas like DTS take this into account before writing their emotionally overwrought 'I HATE YOUR STUPID FACE' posts:


As for SuperDuperNet, sorry James but this doesn't pass the KISS test.  Distributed oil painting?  Oh brother... 

At least BBR got some well-deserved long-overdue attention out of all the hoopla.   

You'll see when it happens.

James is much smarter than your average pumper, he's playing the long pump.

Acting as a diva is kinda cute  but if James is indeed pumping where is dumping from your statement coming from? You shouldn't feel offended, neither you or James dumped BBR today. Although a certain hologram is posting in this thread 

It seems the only thing going for Boolberry is that James is pumping it, James constantly lies about how much better Boolberry is.

As far as I am concerned, Boolberry is now just a pump and dump until CryptoZoidberg dumps James publically.

Having just wasted 40 minutes of my life reading the entire "SuperNET" thread, I think you were correct about the the sock puppet comment, whatever your evidentiary basis at the time. That thread is littered with dissociated identities. It's hard for me to understand why anyone takes this pump & dumper seriously. Half-way through the thread, someone calls him out on having issued assets on the NXT platform to himself. "James" then asserts that this must have been a scammer trying to make him look bad. See: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8603930

Not reassuring.

I now recall why I avoided alts until Monero.

While I do regret making the sock puppet comment without a sound evidentiary basis (for which I previously, publicly apologized), I doubt that I have any real responsibility for his BBR pump - although it would be a sort of poetic justice for my misstep.

BBR was undervalued, so it was ripe for a pump & dump, and James is definitely the whale to do it. 

I fear CZ may regret making a deal with old scratch before long.

As soon as I saw his posts in XMR threads, that's exactly what I think too.

Nekomata, I think you're being part of the problem here.

First of all, putting jl777 in the same camp as the "everything but bytecoin" shills is both offensive and silly.  He's very obviously his own camp in all of this, with his own goals.  Unless you're trying to make the situation worse.  (Edit:  And, in light of both GreekBitcoin and aminorex's comments, I think that it's actually worth trying to understand what those goals are, instead of conflating him with the massive array of sockpuppets all created on the same day.  grin.  jl777's throwing around enough money, both directly and indirectly, to be worth taking seriously as *something*, and it's always worth trying to understand seriously what's going on when that happens.)

Second, seriously?  Is this 1985?  "sounds like a faggot" is an insult issued by presumed adults in a thread dedicated to intelligent observation and analysis of altcoins?  Chill out - and ditch the homophobic crap.

I recognize that you're *not* one of the "monero camp" (i.e., the Monero developers), but others may not.  Unless you're trying to subliminally hurt XMR, I suggest that you find a dose of politeness and remember that not everyone you're talking with is a paid shill for a currency you don't like.  Some of them are real people, and real people deserve to be treated with respect even if you disagree with their viewpoints.

I agree about BTCD. It's James's pump and his super network IPO is about pumping more coins.

Again, bbr does not need this supernetwork from James, James needs bbr. Remember that.

I think because of the word beginning with a B - and both syllables being a B the only word (I can think of off the top of my head) that is used often with those is BlueBerry.  So the brain tells me it's blueberry even though it reads boolberry.

Thank you for the explanations.  Makes more sense now.

FWIW I do like that both coins don't use "Coin" in the name.

I recall it was just one user, maybe two. But there was no "camp" or something insulting jl777. Like I said before he is exaggerating. Maybe he is pissed no one responded to his teleport idea?

Luca Cardelli, a language typesystem theorist at SRC, used 'bool berry' in his papers as the name of a derived type from 'bool' (boolean).  I drew a cartoon for one of his papers, where that name appears:
http://lucacardelli.name/Artifacts/Drawings/DynamicTypecheck/PolyCandyCartoon.pdf
http://lucacardelli.name/indexArtifacts.html

The cartoon may give an idea of the puns that were intended ('str' was a character string type).

That's true 

I don´t want to shock you too much but actually i talk to zoidberg nearly daily ;-)