Topic: The most unique coin. - page 2. (Read 287 times)

Nobody trusts a poster contradicting himself.

Bitcoin is a new monetary experiment with a predictable and hard-cap max supply. It's great and full of innovation, but it's not the only experiment that's new and worth trying.


An emission equal across time creates a time-cap max supply which is predictable and new too. It's also a lot simpler and more intuitive because it does away with halvings.


I think a big drawback here is the social side of it. Everyone's focused on experiments that improve the system by adding new op codes and very few try to improve it under today's constraints. This in turn creates politics and conflicts around which op codes should be added which I don't find particularly productive.

I don't think it is the most unique coin, but I think it has something unique. That's Monero, a coin that has private transactions so no one can track you. It has pros and cons, but for me, I like it.

Nobody trusts a coin with failed trasnactions and full of wallet bugs since genesis block. All wallet developers left GRIN.

It seems that before bitcoin there were other coins, but the concept was not as good as bitcoin so they failed. The most unique coin is just bitcoin, the rest are just imitations of bitcoin. Concept and uniqueness are only important to increase public trust so that coins can sell on the market. So the most important thing is people's trust in coins

I think so, and maybe my opinion is wrong

We can be in full control and not also exhibits the evidence required because we're facing FUD which have attached most traders to be relenting. We have huge goals to accomplish this season, only finding important means to enact the big winnings this season. What are you trying to put up in the portrait? There's no significance altcoins can make other trends in the market narratives, unlike Bitcoin that have always been there to apprehend the bull and bear season in crypto, bitcoin is regarded as the top project in the market.

With 100% of coins being mined, and difficulty starting sky high, "the team" can do no better than mine like others, or buy on the open market like others.
PoW coins have no voting for development anyway. Only non-controversial consensus changes should be made, just as with bitcoin.

It can get simpler: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5309951

Exactly; and a fixed reward, like one coin per second forever, is the most equal of opportunities, even across generations.

Is there even a cryptocurrency outside of stablecoins(some even debate that it's not a "cryptocurrency") that is simpler than Bitcoin? I don't think it gets any simpler than this.


I don't think decentralizing wealth was the plan nor is possible in the first place. The most we can have is equal opportunity; fair distribution of wealth is a pipe dream.

It’s true that new altcoins can have a unique feature that Bitcoin can’t have because it’s already developed but other altcoin can’t copy the Bitcoin uniqueness which is the most important in cryptocurrency which is the real decentralization.

No coins can achieve it because all of them has a centralized control over the chain through the team that hold most of the coin supply which affects the voting for the development. Most of the project that has a DAO feature is just lying about complete decentralized mechanisms while the team itself has the huge voting power including other entities which invested heavily paying the team huge some of money during private investment.

Bitcoin is certainly unique in being the first cryptocurrency.

But other coins can have unique qualities that Bitcoin can never adopt.

One such quality is simplicity. Although Bitcoin may be far less complex than some other chain like Ethereum, it still contains a nontrivial amount of complexity in itself, as witnessed by the over 10,000 lines of code in libbitcoin-consensus.
Learning all the Bitcoin consensus rules in detail is quite a challenge, one that not many people have undertaken.
A lot of complexity resides in its Bitcoin Script language, even though none of that is needed to support
the vast majority of transactions. Even things like multisig, atomic swaps, discreet log contracts, and bidirectional payment channels can be implemented with just Schnorr signatures and timelocks.
Consensus rules can only ever grow in complexity, since they must be used to verify the full transaction history.

Another such quality is fair distribution. While Bitcoin had a relatively fair one, with no premine, it still did not decentralize wealth as much as one might like. Or rather, as future generations might like, since each successive generation only gets to mine 1/32 time as much as the previous one.
Of course, the huge advantage given to early miners/adopters, and lack of dilution, is great for speculation. But perhaps less so for actual use as currency.

Only one cryptocurrency combines a unique focus on simplicity with a uniquely fair coin distribution of 1 coin per second forever.

It also happens to feature a unique spam resistance; only a few bytes of arbitrary data can be inscribed into the chain with each transaction.

Of course, its uniquely high dilution (in initial decades) also make it uniquely uninteresting for the readers in this forum, that are almost exclusively interested only in speculation.