Pages:
Author

Topic: The future of cryptocurrencies - page 2. (Read 1891 times)

hero member
Activity: 672
Merit: 500
February 14, 2015, 07:26:08 PM
#3
No alt can challenge the bitcoin and no matter how advance altcoins are, it is useless without a large enough community. I think they are a good testing ground for devs and the features they innovate can be implemented into bitcoin when they mature.
member
Activity: 82
Merit: 10
February 14, 2015, 05:42:15 PM
#2
This is a divided issue with the community... should the Bitcoin Blockchain be the *only* blockchain?

Altcoins run the same basic code as Bitcoin with minor tweaks - nothing earth-shattering there.  For an altcoin to become bigger than Bitcoin it has to be as disruptive to Bitcoin as Bitcoin is to the current financial system.  Minor tweaks won't replace Bitcoin.

However, altcoins can be compared to gift cards - retailers can offer their own currency.  The benefits are discounts offered (i.e. 10% off all purchases if you use our currency... it gets customers back in the door with a discount AND they have to spend it there).

There are two ways of implementing this, 1) sidechains, or 2) stand-alone cryptocurrencies.  There are mixed opinions on both.
VOR
newbie
Activity: 21
Merit: 0
February 14, 2015, 04:46:59 PM
#1
re: Bitcoin, Darkcoin, Ethereum, Ripple, et al..

I was listening to a podcast yesterday with one of the Ripple guys.  I know almost nothing about Ethereum but I'm assuming its similar to Ripple.  That's to say, a massive system that makes it possible to transfer assets globally, be it currency, contracts, whatever.

Here's what I don't get.  Why the need for a native Ripple currency inside this system, if the stated purpose is a system to make it safe for transfering BTC, dollars, etc..  What would be the point of the "native" ripple currency?  What's the point of "Ethers" in ethereum?  What's the point in having 500 different "altcoins"?

People don't understand technology.  I know this, because I'm having hard time understanding why anyone would be against the 20MB fork in bitcoin, i feel completely out of my depth reading these threads, yet my friends think I'm like Neo because I can set up their wifi for them.  They are clueless, as are like 98.5% of everyone everywhere when it comes to technology.  Having 500 different coins and whatever will keep the masses AWAY from cryptocurrencies, until one or perhaps a handful clearly emerges as the dominant and most widely accepted one.

Also, you will NEVER convince granddad that something called ZIFTERcoin is money.  You will never convince someone who doesn't have a deep understanding of technology that it is safe to use something called DARKcoin.  It sounds like it was created specifically for buying drugs on the internet.  Computer geeks understand what the "dark" in darkcoin is supposed to mean, but we are an extreme minority in that regard.  I think these coins will fail ultimately just due to their silly names, regardless of how good the underlying technology might be.  Bitcoin at least sounds legit.


Anyways, pardon the rambling, i've never been much of a writer, but I guess what I'm asking is, what do you guys think will happen to Bitcoin because of all this.  As someone who doesn't even fully understand Bitcoin yet, let alone ripple, ethereum, etc.. it seems like we're gonna end up with the same shit we have now.  A thousand disparate choices for payment, and exchange fees out the wazoo when I want to buy something on Amazon with my XYZcoins but amazon only take ABCcoins etc..  Aside from the underlying technology, how is this any better?
Pages:
Jump to: