Topic: Scrypt Bitcoin Threads NOT Allowed - page 4. (Read 12691 times)

One of the biggest issues right now, is with new members. The staff is sort of undecided as to what to do about Alt Currencies and New Members. Right now, many of the alt currency devs are marketing toward new members, which is an issue. People that are totally new to the Bitcoin/Crypto currency scene, that see an article about Bitcoin and come here to find out more about it, don't need to be bombarded by hundreds of other opportunities to get into new coins. We know that most people are smart enough to know the difference between Bitcoin and other Crypto Currencies, however for someone who is totally new to the idea, nothing says, welcome, we will help answer your questions, like introducing thousands of other questions about each and every different coin. The ideal situation would be that they join here, understand the basics, and then adventure into the Alt Currency section on their own.

Now for the most part, people can figure out, Bitcoin is one coin, Xcoin is another coin, etc. However, when there are two Bitcoins, new members could see a thread selling Bitcoins (scrypt) for $100 each and immediately jump at the opportunity to get some cheap coin. The same could happen to anyone who doesn't know that much about alt currencies, and has no idea that there is another Bitcoin.

Another senario, is in the marketplace or in the auctions section. Someone agree to pay a certain price, and then someone trys to scam them by paying in Bitcoins (Scrypt). And with Bets and Bounties, if I say "I agree to pay 100 Bitcoins if I'm wrong" Whats to stop someone from saying, you win, here are your 100 (Scrypt) Bitcoins.

Its just a huge mess of confusion for people who are expecting to come to the Bitcoin forums, and find threads about (Scrypt) Bitcoins.

The first thing I did, was made sure that each (Scrypt) Bitcoin thread had a disclaimer making sure to clarify that it explicitly said it was the Scrypt Version. I then opened the topic up to the rest of the staff as to what they thought, and every single person was against allowing Scrypt Bitcoins here because the mess of confusion would leak out to all of the sections here, believing it was boarder line fraudulent to use Bitcoin's name in such a way.

* The point at which we decided to disallow (Scrypt) Bitcoin threads in general, was after learning that without special precaution, it could overwrite your existing Bitcoin files. At that point, (Scrypt) Bitcoin was incredibly close to what we would consider Malware, whether it intended to cause damage or not.

The why is not real clear. If it was due to possibly being fraudulent, a fraud warning would solve that.

What is thoroughly projected is that Bitcoin SHA256 leadership is threatened by this alt coin, (I seriously doubt is the case) which in its own rite gives a massive amount of validation to it more so than any other shitcoin clone released to date.


~BCX~

The point of the announcement isn't to deprive the coin of attention, its so that people will know why they are having threads/posts removed. It wouldn't be fair to enforce a rule that no one knows about.

However, you are correct, the announcement will be taken down somewhat shortly after it becomes common knowledge.

@SaltySpitoon


The Alt Coin section won't be removed.

This section was created as an alternative trashcan to keep this crap out of the main Bitcoin Forum. Bitcointalk simply does not have enough mods to delete the flow of garbage that would flow into the main forums without it.

As far as Bitcoin Scrypt I couldn't care less as I have zero interest in it but I do know this, by leaving a "Stickied Thread" at the the top of the forum banning all discussion of it, you are creating a hundred times more interest in it than you would if you simply allowed it to die on its own.  

Additionally I can also tell you this for a fact, that *this* "Stickied Thread" (locked or not) is causing Bitcoin SHA-256 to attract some unwanted attention. A friend of mine that freelances and gets published quite regarly for Wired and TechCrunch was asking me about it. Honestly I hadn't looked into it till she asked me about it. She was mentioning something about an "internal strife to get Bitcoin back to its decentralized roots and away from ASIC control" which is not exactly true..... however I don't think that's the desired media attention BTC needs especially with sites of that reach. I have no idea if an article will appear, but people are noticing this thread.

There are two pssible options that would work to minimize BTC2.

1) Delete this thread and every thread that pops up about BTC2. There is nothing wrong with aggressive censorship of fraudulent activity.

or

2) Allow it to run, post a huge red fraud warning at the top of every thread and wait for it to die like every other Alt Piece of Shit.


By publicly banning it, you amplify its popularity 100x.

Again all of this, just opinion.


~BCX~

No one is getting banned for mentioning Scrypt Bitcoin, I'm just giving everyone fair warning that I will be removing threads. This isnt about whether its a good coin or not, its about how making bitcoin2 threads reaches into the rest of the community, increasing the likelyhood that someone gets upset, and has the Alt Currencies section removed all together. There are a hundred alt coins that are out there that I don't support, however I don't really feel its my right to do anything about them, because they don't effect me or anyone else that doesn't support them in any way. Not allowing Scrypt Bitcoin was a decision made by more than a few members of the staff. Not a single person was on board with it, because its somewhat fradulent. I don't know who the dev is, so I can't have any biasses there. I know of two people who have made Scrypt Bitcoin threads, and I can honestly say I had not known them before I asked them to lock their threads. If I'm not disallowing it because I dislike the coin, or because I dislike its users, or because I dislike its dev, wouldn't the next logical step be that I don't dislike anything about Scrypt Bitcoin in general, besides what the staff and I have discussed, ie how its similar name would most certainly be used for fraud, deceit, and because it would just be annoying in general because of its name?

The point of the alt currencies section is that we remain our own secluded section, in the BITCOIN forums. If we start spilling out into the rest of the forums, the section is no longer secluded from the rest of the Bitcoin forums, and annoying the rest of the people who tolerate alt coins because they don't have to have anything to do with them.

I hope you get banned,

We allready have a coin that does this, it's called Litecoin. 

If the creator has such noble intentions, he would have supported Litecoin. This scrypt bitcoin only has one purpose, make the creator money. Nothing more, nothing less.

Bitcoins

All those coins are shitty ideas ...in the end they will go to their endless value => 0

+1
Bitcoin Scrypt is a shitty idea, what comes next. Ripple Scrypt ?

It's always hard to know what factors go into price. Obviously, supply is a key factor. But I think, and hope, that the major driver of value for both Ripple and Bitcoin is the expected long-term utility of those systems. Speculative value -- I want it because it's going up in price because people want it because it's going up in price -- tends to be volatile and unpredictable, reducing the utility of the currency as a means of exchange.

In theory that's fairly easy, the process should utilize as much of the instruction set as possible and reward other things like memory bandwidth and capacity. The scheme should also include rewards for hard-storage capacity and internet bandwidth. At this point the specialized hardware is commodity hardware.

Value still comes from the USD invested into the cryptocurrency, you of all people should realize this. Do you really think ripples would have a theoretical market cap of 1 billion USD right now if they weren't made to be a good deflationary "investment"?

I can't.

KnC, HashFast, Cointerra, Alydian, Bitfury, yeah. BFL? By the time they deliver, based on past performance, ASICS will be at 14nm and the best process available will be at 5nm. Quantum tunneling will be solved with 1nm gates.

Not saying your concern is wrong, I'm just sayin' that particular dog ain't gonna hunt.

It's possible, but very very unlikely, that future schemes may make the difference small enough to not matter. But with scrypt, the distance is already large enough that it might as well be infinite and there's no reason to think it will get any smaller. It's hard to imagine a process that can best be done with random commodity hardware that people happen to tend to have lying around, especially since the capabilities of commodity hardware are changing constantly. Almost anything can be optimized.

In any event, it's academic -- since there's no value created to distribute, the question of the best distribution mechanism is irrelevant. Bitcoin, by offering capabilities not previously available, created new value that its mining scheme distributes. Any future coin that wants to distribute value some particular way must first find a way to create that value.

The point is how far from optimal the average user is, the distance gets larger and larger the more specialised the setup can be. That distance is smaller with scypt and will be even smaller with future proof-of-work schemes should they still be feasible.

It just won't work. It's economically infeasible. If it's profitable to mine under perfect conditions (best power costs, optimal choice of hardware, etcetera) then people will build large mining setups under optimal conditionals to make the unusual profits. This will keep happening until it's barely profitable to mine even under optimal conditions. When that happens, under less than optimal conditions, it will be unprofitable to mine. There is no known way to keep mining decentralized in this sense.

All the switch to scrypt does is make it easier to attack the currency because the currency can be attacked with commodity hardware that retains its value rather than specialized hardware that becomes worthless.

And so..to keep it decentralized Bitcoin Scrypt will do the job as there is no ASIC for it 

Development of the BTC3 is not needed as long as the  script-ASIC's be developed. 

I think that by the time we get to BTC3 or BTC4 most will have already learned to ignore BTCn (where n is anything at all) - I might even consider offering a small bounty for the creation of BTC3 just to kill off this BTC2 and any such future silly rubbish.

This topic, being pinned and all, will give the BTC2 more publicity than 50 random posts about it ever could.