Topic: The only reason Bitcoin is more valuable then other altcoins (Read 5716 times)

No. Price reflects the network strength. Bitcoin hashing network is worth tens of millions. Altcoin - thousands dollars, not dedicated.

Price is decided by demand in market, and the amount in circulation , not on the basis of what you said

By the way these two guys never answered my questions:

The only alt coins that may have a chance to become a possible contender to Bitcoin would be a new alt that is actually much better than Bitcoin and uses this method for its initial coin distribution:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/rfc-aethereum-a-turing-complete-coin-distributed-as-per-bitcoins-blockchain-563925

In this post Peter may have singlehandedly killed off all past, current and future alts that do not use this method of initial coin distribution, including  Ethereum.  He is my new hero!

His post also has the potential of eliminating almost all of the incentive to make new alts for the "pump and dump of it" and reducing the entire alt space to serious condenders only.

If you want to know if any alt is going to succeed just ask these two questions:

    1) Is it better than Bitcoin in a market defining way?

    2) Does it implement the method of initial coin distribution suggested in that thread?

If the answer is yes to both questions then it has a chance of becoming something.

Couple of alt coins leeching off of of Bitcoin to be able to be spent wherever Bitcoin is accepted. Veribit, Vertverser etc. Bitcoin is absolutely the best coin for storing your wealth, and it will continue to be that. Though there's room for other coins too. Ethereum is exciting and I think the speed of PoS is very appealing. What alt coin has seen very good success?',. Litecoin must be considered a very good success with a 190million market cap?

What Altcoin has seen very good success? Keep in mind if I can't spend it without converting to fiat, the success level is still at zero

What happened to the Model T? The Model T spent several decades as the dominant automobile in the marketplace.

Bitcoin/sha 256 is the Model-t of virtual currencies. What happened to the Model-t? What is going to happen with bitcoin?

Agreed,
while some other coins do seam to have some rather intreeding options, you cant deny the bitcoin support, adoption and most importantly the infrastructure behind it.
This being said, its obvious that there is no replacement for bitcoin in the form of another crypt coin.

The main reason other coins have any interest is the fact that short term profits are more easily made on them, but if one is searching for safety, bitcoin is the way to go.

Well, they came up with the technology first, so they have the trust, they have the big network, they have the powerful mining hashing power already. It's plain dumb wanting to use another coin at this point. At this point is get in or miss the boat type even more of scenareo.

I mined with GPUs and ASICs.  GPU mining was very profitable for me mostly because I was in early enough and had lots of system engineering skills to build good rigs.  I was barely profitable with ASIC (first generation).  After that nothing was viable.  Why would a company make a mining device that can profitably generate $10K over its useful lifespan and sell it to others for say $5,000...  Initially there were a few "community" projects that did it to get the start up capital required.  Not the case anymore.  Big players with financing have moved in.  Individuals are largely out.  Now we will watch the competing chip makers battle it out which will lead to more consolidation with fewer players.  I don't think its healthy for bitcoin.

I get your perspective and respect it.  I still have great concern that several core tenants of bitcoin's original intent have drifted off course and if not corrected will probably open the door to something else that is a 2.0.  Hopefully bitcoin doesn't get stifled by banking and governmental forces.  There are a LOT powerful of interests that would like the concept of bitcoin to go away.

I understand mining enough to know that it is a good way to lose a lot of money.  I also understand that in the years I have been here it has always been more profitable to just buy the BTC than to mine it.  That did not stop me from mining in the GPU era and paying for my equipment plus a little bit - but I still lost relative to just buying the BTC and holding them for the same time period.

I never said it was profitable. I said there are more people mining now than a few years ago.  I don't see a way to force it to be profitable at all for people that paid too much for their mining equipment and/or pay too much for electricity.

The best way to make money on mining is to design, build, run, then sell mining equipment.  It might be profitable to do a 14nm miner.  I would just have to convince my boss to divert resources to the project.  Hey, that is not a bad idea...

I don't think you have a good handle on the current state of mining.  Mining is no longer profitable for an average user.  Has not been for at least half a year and unlikely that any company that makes profitable mining equipment will sell those devices to people for less than what they could make mining with them themselves.

Spend some time in this area of the forum and update your understating of mining profitability and decentralization.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=81.0

It make insider and early investor richer. PoS coin also subjected to central authority which can force transaction to reverse.

I understand your concern but I would almost bet there are more miners now than a few years ago.  Sure there are some big players but the overall number of miners has increased due to the availability of cheap ASIC miners.

Yes, that is my point exactly.  It is only 20GB and will only be 40GB in the next 8 months.  Even 100GB is basically noise and nothing to worry about.  I am currently working on the development of very inexpensive multiple TB drives so, being in the disk drive industry and seeing the roadmaps, I don't see the concern here.

I did mean increased centralization...  I initially got involved with bitcoin as a miner.  I loved the idea of a non-governmental peer to peer digital currency.  I had the technical background to be comfortable building GPU rigs.  At that time things were decentralized and bitcoin was more like a movement.  Something to shake up the status quo as it relates to money transfer fees, banking, and governmental control of the money supply.  Most mining was done by individuals and it was a peer to peer system.  As things have evolved off of the personal computer and on to specialized ASIC devices it has become increasingly centralized with a few large players and consolidation is likely to continue.  This centralization will lead to more and more control by a few large players.  Not at all what was intended.  Why is that not being address? 

I'm sure you know the block chain is currently about 20GB doubling every 8 months at present but will accelerate if their is more adoption.
http://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

You mean increased centralization, right?  Do you mean large mining pools?  If the miners care they can move to other pools and spread out the hashing power, but, obviously they don't seem to care.

TPS, need larger block sizes, would require a fork to go past the current limit, but we are not using the current max block size so this is not an issue yet.

blockchain size, checkpointing and pruning, but what is the current size?  How much does a 5 TB drive cost now?  Not a problem yet.

It is open source so you/anyone who thinks things are moving too slowly can pitch in any time and help out.

A few people have responded more or less "the bitcoin core is fine" implying that concerns such as increasing decentralization, TPS limitations, and blockchain size are nothing to worry about.

I'm sorry those three are all really significant.  Worse, they have been understood for sometime and yet there does not appear to be a consensus on how or when they will be addressed.  Show me the core development road map that lays out in broad strokes the next 12 months...

Core development is not happening.  Bitcoin has some amount of critical mass but if they don't shore up the foundation(pun intended) this momentum will be lost.

Security is not the goal of proof of work, and anyone who talks about it is missing the point.

Proof of work is a method for a network of independent nodes can arrive at a consensus without any privileged decision maker, a.k.a "distributed consensus."

Distributed consensus is impossible in proof of stake systems.

Everybody gets the same amount of interest on their coins, so it's false to say that only the rich get richer.

Plus, the same criticism could be made about Bitcoin because of deflation.

Doesn't PoS just make the rich richer?

PoS has been proven to be quite secure by now. The only reason Bitcoin doesn't change, is because miners would not agree since it would make their hundred of millions of dollars worth of equipment obsolete.

Please describe in detail your "top 10 list" of these "awesome and cool features" from among the "tons" of new features "a lot of these new altcoins have".  Thanks.

I think it's more about actually putting its features to the test. A lot of these new altcoins have tons of awesome and cool features but they are just so new and untested.

Bitcoin has a network and that makes it valuable.  When another altcoin gets a bigger network because it is serving some function, then it will be worth something.  Right now most alts don't really bring that much innovation though they claim they do.  I think NXT is doing okay.  They have a semi-trustless exchange, digital goods store, messaging, as well as fast block times and a smooth client. 

I am also fond of what NEM will bring.  It just released its code and it hasn't even had its official release.  As far as I know this is a first in the alt world. 

If there was good solution to 51% problem, dont you think Bitcoin would use it already?

If anything this would actually make demand to be less then it otherwise would be (supply is actually higher but the net effect is the same). When MtGox gave out coins that people did not pay for, the people who received them now would either want to sell more then they otherwise would or would buy less then they otherwise would.

The people who kept their coins on the exchange that did not actually "have" the coins they thought they owed did not buy coins that they otherwise would (they thought they already had them).

Are you suggesting there is a decentralized alt crypto currency out there that does not use some sort of mining?  I do not believe you.  Post a reference/link.

Can you list five from your long laundry list that can safely be added with no fork?

Right now, the way i see it...the user acceptance is the "something more"

Any body that would dispute this premise has their eyes closed.   All coins at risk of 51% will ultimately be replaced including bitcoin.

Just like all of those beautiful homes in southern California sitting on earthquake faults, it is just a matter of time.

And of our kids will say, "You mean you used to mine virtual currencies??!"

First mover advantage?

Nope....i believe it is the user acceptance, and the popularity BTC receive (even from ill-fated activities) thats what made BTC shine in the eyes on the world.

Right on.  Cheers!

I think I would have recognized [/thread] or or \end{thread}.  lol

it means "End Of Thread", as in what you said was the be all end all of the subject and there was no possible rebuttal to your post

I don't know exactly what this is supposed to mean. If you're referring to fluctations in the market price of bitcoin, they're expected.  If you're acting like it's going down the tube long-term, I think you couldn't be more wrong.

Bitcoin is going down like every other altcoins out there.

the brilliance in Bitcoin lies in it's simplicity.
I think your wrong and by a long shot.

Think of it this way.. adoption is tantamount to a currency so we need something that will appeal to all demographics
such as my mom or grand mother LOL

My less PC savvy brother had his truck idling in my driveway way back
and he had to leave quick but i wanted to give him about $1,000 worth of BTC to get him started.
being able to show him a web site or two so he can make a bookmark on his laptop he brought
and then being able to grab MultiBit was perfect.
I sent him Bitcoin and he was off and said he'd Google it later.. done !

So i say it's pretty much got what it needs feature wise and Bitcoins simplicity is underrated.

Most altcoins have superficial features that in reality mean squat.
They are all features tacked on so they can claim it's not a CLONE coin.
Or they simply have flat out bad ideas.. like any coin with an IPO for example. lol

IMHO main reason for the high value is MtGox "losing" loads of coins.
basically demand is higher than supply, if there were more coins in circulation, then supply would be higher compared to what it is now, hence the lower price.

What does it mean when you say "/thread"?  It reminds of LaTeX, but with wrong slash.

Skyrocket? It is to laugh.

You explain to me how the piddly <5% additional cap that would come from each and every alt coin liquidating and going into bitcoin would cause more than a whimper in bitcoin cap! and I'll pay attention. Otherwise, you're just pissing in the wind.

/thread

I think he is turning an insightful eye towards the fact that most of these "innovations" are mere headlines designed to attract the attention of the easy marks.  It really is like san franscisco in 1849.  There were a few dudes who hit gold and made good money in 1848.  By the time 1849 rolled around, the scene was full of vultures and speculators and theives and the only ones making money were the ones selling picks and shovels.

You can call this the "first mover" advantage if you want.  But none of these altcoins have a large enough community to matter.  In fact, if you say btc is slow to innovate the protocol consider the fact that the bitcoin community is large enough that any changes have to be resonably consider and carefully considered because there is a lot of work that has been done and no one wants to screw that up because of an ill-thought out idea which seemed like an "improvement" untill it was realized that it wasn't one all too late.

Value is derived from the demand of the users.

Having better infrastructure and network/wallet security in place is probably one good reason it has value.

Network effect - Bitcoin is best because most use it. Here come the value, and it will be very hard to change Bitcoin #1 position in near future.

I think this is a big part of it, however it is also really the best designed crypto out there. It is much better then other coins in terms of likely percentage of blocks orphaned, potential attacks on the network, ect.

It also has a huge advantage of the fact that it's network is the most secure.

I see a lot of absolutes in this thread, but people would do well to remember that nothing is set in stone.  No one knows with any certainty what the future holds.  The "it's good enough" comparisons drawn between Bitcoin and IPv4 may turn out to be right.  It's certainly possible that Bitcoin does everything we need it to already and the slowing development won't turn out to be a problem.  But it might not.  As Bitcoin itself has proven time and time again, anything can happen.  I can't in all honesty foresee a situation where Bitcoin won't be around, but it's not guaranteed to hold the top spot forever.  We'll have to wait and see how things progress over the coming years.

While it's true to say that -most- alts are probably just pump and dumps, it doesn't mean they all are.  Why not experiment with new features?  Why not test new ideas?  Amid all the noise and hype, some people are working diligently behind the scenes and coming up with some clever stuff.  Altcoins aren't hurting you unless you're worried about them diluting the fiat value of your bitcoins or you bought one that got dumped, so it's disingenuous to tar all coins with the same brush.

Can't agree more.

I already got into bitcoin, which is risky enough. I do not have time nor money to care for hundreds of altcoins. Especially, when most of them a pumps'n'dumps.

I have never owned any altcoin. Few time I considered buying some, but I didn't. And lucky me that I didn't.

Also, currently I use bitcoin as store of value and method of payment. What altcoins bring to the table here?

I agree, and first mover advantage does mean a lot though.  You suggest Bitcoin changes to make it better, but I THINK part of the things people like about Bitcoin is that you can't really mess with it, or change it, without getting most people on board.

Bitcoin was a first mover yes. So was Microsoft and it became a huge thing and is still there. So guess what man? It is probably going to always be there. Think of bitcoin like that. As long as microsoft is managed properly it is going to be at the top in its respective industry for a long time.

so will bitcoin

No LiteCoins?

Most of the alts I have seen are a product of find & replace coding of Satoshi's code. It's like finger painting a corvette and saying "look at this awesome car I invented!!"

The infrastructure for bitcoin is magnitudes more solid than alt-coins. I had several alt-coins but those communities are full of scams and speculators, no one cares about the development of alt-coin, just pump and dump

I only choose bitcoin because:

1) It's not a scam
2) It's not maleware
3) It has everything it needs to be money
4)...
543)...

No altcoin could come before bitcoin, except in some alternate universe where logic does not exist.

I only choose bitcoin because:

1) It's more widely known.
2) It's more widely accepted.
3) IMHO all other altcoins are copiers.

This.

Most all of the alt coins are junk copies with added crap. 

If another altcoin were to have come before bitcoin then it would likely have value as well. I think the majority of the coins that have some level of value have value because of speculators.

Many alt-coins do appear to be scams. Somebody was good enough to Write up a guide for spotting them.
Edit2: A guide investigating Insta-mines.

I have been told the the innovative cryptonote-based bytecoin appears to be a scam (80% pre-mine with false history of "stealth mining"). I hope to investigate how true that allegation is when I have time because I like the innovation. (Ring signatures being used to provide privacy.)

Edit: I should add that Bitcoin is still an experiment. Major changes to the protocol may invalidate any experimental results. One question Bitcoin should answer within the next 15 years is: "Is it possible to have a secure networked application?"

Bitcoin isn't lacking heavily on technology... Bitcoin IS the technology. First one in existence and the first one out of the gate. Most all of the alt coins are junk copies with added crap. Only a handful actually serve a purpose and will survive over the next couple years. Bitcoin could be changed but why? Its trusted and well known the way it is. We will have Bitcoin for normal everyday use and Darkcoin for anonymous transactions. Thats all we will need.

Yep.  I've been saying this for months.  And getting poo-poo'd.  As the protocol sits with very little enhancement after an entire year now.  As Gavin stated recently:  Development has come nearly grounding to a halt due to bickering and differences of opinion.   Thats super.  Not like its the most important financial innovation of the last 500 years or anything.  

The excuse that it cant be modified heavily because its such an important piece of software is only going to be a valid excuse for so long.  (the whole "enhancing a plane while in flight" reference too).  

And forget the other alt coins.  Bitcoin needs features that make it usable to the various financial industries.  Or some solution which allows for extending its capabilities to usurp those industries.   But alas, this suggestion, like all the others, is met with shrugged shoulders as far as I can tell.  Tree Chains, Sidechains, whatever ... someone needs to take the reigns and get development moving.  Now.  Fast.  Not next year.  Not in five years.  Fewer excuses.  More action.

It doesn't matter how much we love bitcoin.  If its not in a usable form to the various financial services out there, its simply not going to be used.  And there go all your hopes of "to the moon".  Whether we admit it or not, we are all relying on Bitcoins "Programmability".  Its ability to be enhanced.  But its not being enhanced.  (!!!).  And all talk of enhancements are "years off".   If people in these industries have a first glance at Bitcoin and see an insanely limited, basic feature set, they will simply walk away.  Some already have.

There is a laundry list of features that could be safely added to Bitcoin which would make it usable in numerous financial industries.  And the items on that list simply aren't being added.  This is my biggest and only concern about the long term viability of Bitcoin.

-B-

Winner takes it all. Besides, all the altcoins are inflation in crytocurrency world, this is directly against the fundamental purpose of bitcoin - anti-inflation

Because someone paid him. You could pay me to use altcoins. Otherwise, I'm not interested in any current altcoin as a serious alternative to bitcoin.

The only reason altcoins have any value > 0 is BECAUSE bitcoin came first.

Bitcoin is valuable because it's an sufficiently large improvement over what came before, invented by someone who understood money and cryptography both at the same time.

None of the altcoins have all three of those qualities at the same time.

Most of them are monuments to ignorance about cryptography, or money, or both.

If that's the case then why do you have this in your signature?: BTCinstant.com - BUY GiftCards with AltCoins!

Lol so much irony.

Like what does this even mean? ^^   what does it lack ? All the other alt coins are basically scams.

Interesting that nobody repeats what Andreas Antonopoulus says about other crypto-currencies. He has said that he thinks there might be millions of crypto-coins being used in the coming decades. HE is the Bitcoin Guy. The Host of Lets talk Bitcoin, perhaps he knows a thing or two. It is sad that so many are quick to judge based on charts and forum posts. Is it really appropriate to call other crypto-currencies scams when are current economic system is already scamming us? I would take any crypto-coin in the #20 spots on coinmarketcap.com over fiat.  

Have you guys heard we are due for a "Global Reset"? Newsflash banks do whatever they want. fiat=scam

Liquidity.  Bitcoin has the most liquidity of any cryptocurrency by 1 -2 orders of magnitude.  That is because it was the first technology to address the problem of decentralized trust.

It will be very hard, if not impossible, for any new coin to surpass bitcoin in terms of liquidity.

The other thing to consider is that bitcoin was allowed to incubate in relative obscurity for the first couple of years, well before 0.1% of humanity had ever heard of such a concept.  Any new coins will have to attain their liquidity in a very different environment.

So yes, it is the most valuable because it was first.  But do not underestimate the importance of being first.

I guess you found this thread through lycos or maybe altavista... 

obviously it is because it was the first one
but that is obvious,it happens with many things
it is the oldest one and the biggest community

Yep it has the infrastructure built in and the code is very solid
And regardless of how much we rail on the dev team they do try to improve upon it with BIP's
For now Bitcoin has utility and I don't see that changing any time in the future
After all a proven case is needed for others to spring forth and Bitcoin is serving that role in crytocurrencies.

It appears to me the only benefit that you get from first mover advantage is the network effect, and the network effect alone can be used to account for the value to date by applying Metcalfe's Law .

That said, spin-offs allow innovative alts to leverage Bitcoin's network effect.

Rather than put all the innovation in Bitcoin it's more practical to distribute the risk and and reward and leverage the Bitcoin network which represents the most effective distribution of crypto coins to date.

Bitcoin will always be the one, but free market innovation will find solutions to problems Bitcoin can't solve. So given the opportunity for an infinite number of alts, creating a launch cost that leverages innovation and not wealth is the only way alts will grow, but they don't take market away from Bitcoin but add to the overall effect.

I 'm not talking about tps scalability and how the network can handle it. I 'm talking about other issues like the db size that can somewhat reduce decentralization. Nothing critical though and if you could post that link it would be nice...

market is much too small to support value for multiple altcoins. I could invent an altcoin in about 10 minutes and it wouldn't be worth half a farthing ...

then purposefully open my eyes,, come on in your opinion what is the top altcoin that is considered a proper contender to bitcoin that has atlast 20 different uses, and atleast try listing as many of those uses,,,

Network effect, media attention and merchant acceptance advantage from bitcoin far outweigh protocol and innovation being made on other coins.

Beside, users in general do not react to change positively and other coins change far too often.

Namecoin has a different purpose than Bitcoin. It's not an improvement, but a different product. As simple as that.

I think your purposefully turning a blind eye to the innovation happening with altcoins.

The few that add real anonymity (well will add at least)?
But for the most part there is no improvement. Having a faster block time/transaction time isn't one of those as people tend to suggest.

yeah but thats not a reason to discount/discredit namecoin.  Hopefully those default settings will change and .bit gets easier.
Btw, I try not to use Google Chrome.  Google has too much centralized power already.  This is a perfect example of
why we shouldn't be giving them any more power by using their browser.  Also, chrome is probably reporting
every page you visit back to Google.

The saying, "If ain't broke, don't fix it", comes to mind here. Though these "insecure bastardizations of the bitcoin protocol" have been, and will continue to be, extremely entertaining and profitable ventures to a few. I don't see them going away anytime soon, though a small handful continue to be a good test bed for innovation in cryptocurrency.

after 3 years of litecoin and 2 years of lots of altcoins, all i see is pump and dump coins that last 3-6 months, and a bunch of dice games.

I don't think you really understand Bitcoin.  and contrary to your statement, no altcoin is an improvement.  they are scams.  designed to enrich someone or some group.

And that was all made possible because bitcoin had first mover advantage, use your head man.

It's called innovation and sooner or later an altcoin is going to make it big on innovation because bitcoin is to scared to. Some altcoins have already seen very good success, Bitcoin could increase it's worth past the point that it's already at if it just accepted this.

although namecoin is good in concept. its not like google chrome, firefox, internet explorer, etc have the namecoin dns lookup installed by default. thus average joe blogs cant simply type in a .bit address

if average joe could go to a .bit address without needed to mess with settings, or atleast without searching for where to find what the settings changes that were needed are. then namecoin would have more promise.

but because it involves people knowing that a dot bit address is part of namecoin and then having to search 'namecoin dns settings' makes it a hindrance. in 99% of cases if someone handed a stranger a dot bit address, the person will just see a blank page and simply move on with their lives finding a dot com address.

would you honestly give a stranger a web address on your business card and then say, "oh by the way to get to my site you need to go to tools-> settings-> blah blah blah" .. um no, very unprofessional.

unless Firefox chrome IE Oprah etc all have namecoin dns lookup in their default listing without users needing to do anything, namecoin would just remain a good concept and not a useful tool

about scalability non-issue... there was a post couple days ago on reditt about it...

because no one cares about decentralized dns.
we already have tor hidden services that provide that plus anonymity.

I've had similar thoughts but I also wonder if it is just not wanting to do anything to derail Bitcoin.  I also don't see coins like Namecoin making huge leaps and bounds and I'm scratching my head trying to understand why that is.

The reason is because Bitcoin comes first and already attracted some Billions on investiments, and the market yet to see a reason to do the same with another crypto.

Also add funny features on bitcoin, like domain register, would need a strong consensus, and it is hard to impossible to achieve it at this point, unless for strong security reasons. The Bitcoin's inertia is too big at the moment.

OP thinks bitcoin is only big because its first. ha ha ha ha ha

what a narrow minded idea.

the truth is that bitcoin is more successful because more then a few thousand people are being paid wages purely in bitcoin,
the truth is that bitcoin is more successful because more then a 100,000 merchants accepting bitcoin
the truth is that bitcoin is more successful because more then 50 separate ways to get bitcoin<->FIAT
 
its called infrastructure, now name me one altcoin that has this usefulness!!

Namecoin had a huge innovation on its hands with its integrated domain system that could lead to the web becoming decentralized. Imagine if bitcoin integrated something like that, we would see massive growth. However it seems many people in the Bitcoin community look down on any new innovation and don't want to see the protocol progress.

Well i agree bitcoin is king and will stay there but Vertcoin does have a few improvements. 1.Stealth Address 2.Vertverser (spend vertcoin anywhere bitcoin is accepted (Not exactly an upgrade but definitely innovative) 3. More Decentralization

but its at .11$ a coin and has dropped from a high of 13$ a coin, it is more how many people use it and trust it, i trust bitcoin more and would/will put my investments into it and not vertcoin.

Bitcoin is more valuable (some might say that it is the only valuable cc) because it does everything that is supposed to do.
Of course it has some issues (scalability etc.) but i don't see any of those issues addressed by any alt coin.

Don't expect a coin to overthrow bitcoin because it has pos vs pow, or because it is 100% premined, or because it is written from scratch etc...

I haven't seen any altcoins with any improvements yet.  Perhaps one came along while I wasn't paying attention.  Would you mind explaining which "improvement" you were thinking of?

you forgot to add "scams"

That's one opinion. Another opinion might be that the these supposedly "superior" or "innovative" altcoins are in fact dangerously insecure bastardizations of the bitcoin protocol.

price is determined by supply/demand, not mimicking an alt to influence price.  also, your assumption of advantage is fundamentally wrong.

changing block time or pre-mine amount or total circulation is nothing but a copy designed to scam people.  etc... etc... etc...

The only reason Bitcoin is more valuable then other altcoins is first mover advantage. It's the truth if you compare bitcoin to a lot of alt coins on the technical side Bitcoin is lacking heavily. If the Protocol was updated to do something more like a lot of altcoins do I feel this is what would truly make the Bitcoin price sky rocket.