Topic: The Serious Altcoin Discussion/News Thread - No FUD, Shilling or Trolling. (Read 5124 times)

Not yet, alt coins are already like small companies. The massive problem in alt coins is POW which will always make your coins less in comparison to the supply and relying on donations for essential services

25hashcoin is now thread banned. He can not post anymore as he is just spreading FUD. However I similarly urge you guys to stop feeding the trolls else you will also be thread banned. I don't like having to delete 5+ posts in a row. Cheers!

If you are going to come to a serious discussion and make dumb comments, at least use your real account.

If you were here to make a real contribution, you would use your real account.

You know what? I hear over and over again that the marketcap is low and it has a huge chance for gain. This I do agree with, however the point I think makes the most sense is who actually made the coin.

Syntaks, the developer that made Neos is a serious alt coin developer, one that is not just here to make a coin, pump it and vanish.

This is someone a thread like this one should be following. I agree with the statement that there are only a couple good and honest developers out there. A developer that actually CARES about the future of cryptocurrency.

We should be making a list of who the "good" or "real" developers are, and follow them and support them. They need our help. They are outnumbered. The are the needle in the haystack and when we find one we should take notice.

Almost all the coin "developers" out there are criminals if you ask me.

Thanks for your response! It's great to get thoughtful replies.


On that point, I'm expecting the usual stampede effect. First no major corporation to speak of, then (after a tipping point) a whole bunch of them pile in.

Q: Why do too many monkeys climb too few trees? A: The monkeys not only like the same trees, they like each other!

Alts have reached a point where you're better off investing in one that has established itself, stuck around for the longer haul, possibly bottomed out, and still have ongoing development. Every niche that can be filled is already filled, by a few alts.

The only reason anyone is buying any new alt right now is to hopefully get rich quick and dump the bags on some poor sucker at a high price. It's not different than it ever was, but the problem now is there's no room left for it. Bittrex volume being significantly down overall lately isn't some coincidence. And Bittrex volume at its peaks weren't anything compared to Mintpal post BlackCoin volume. You're just way too late to the game if you're still chasing the newest alt right now. Especially with BTC trading at $380 and the market just depressed overall, with many whales likely out of the game right now.

Only when BTC recovers, along with a few of the bigger name alts, can this cycle start up once again.

Neoscoin is one of the best new coins lately

I has an honest dev. And as you guys know that is like 1 in 100 these days.

The guy really cares about crypto and is pissed about how it has been corrupted by scammers and scamcoins, this is why he made his coin.

I have a lot of respect for the guy, Syntaks. Look into him.

Before you write this off as just shilling for a coin I own a lot of, think about what I just said. You and count honest coins and honest devs on your ten fingers. He is really trying to make a difference.

He was contracted by a ton of coins that he helped only to see them pump them and leave them for dead. Hes a good guy and will be continuing to develop his coin for many years to come.

He deserves to have his name in a serious discussion thread such as this. This is the kind of person we need to support. And the few that are like him.

And thank you for starting this thread, it is a good one I check up on everyday!!

... to anyone to render for themselves.

The data is retrieved from DOACC via SPARQL queries (posed of a Fuseki-mediated localhost endpoint). A javascript package (sgvizler) handles the posting of the query and generates the charts directly from the SPARQL results, all straightforwardly expressed in HTML. This is the incantation for the above chart with the verbatim SPARQL query highlighted in green ...


It just needs a change to the SPARQL query and a call to google.visualization.PieChart (marked in red) to get the frequency data for the current month for protection schemes, plotted as a pie chart:


For a graph showing the distribution schemes, just replace doacc:protection-scheme with doacc:distribution-scheme, change the title and that's it, job done.



Now, that's what I call Web 3.0.


Cheers,

Graham

Ngaio shares my perception that the altcoin scene is throwing up a few reminders of the early days of the web. If the parallel holds true then corporates will be again be slow on the uptake, mainly because to “get” it requires i) an actual familiarity with the tech and ii) a change in thinking. Both requirements are inherently difficult for corporates to meet.

(A corporate is like a tree of monkeys. Those at the top, looking down, see bright eyes and attentive faces. Those at the bottom, looking up, see only arseholes.)

I wish I had more time to respond, I'm finding this discussion useful because it's prompting me to think more deeply about how cryptocurrency relates to the societal shifts that are occurring both in working life and in what counts as a leisure activity - and that includes taking a broad enough view of the “PnD rush” to put it into the same category as following the horse racing on telly. For at least that aspect of the altcoin scene, the rules are reasonably well-worked out by now - to the extent where I can just about make out the basics of a pitch for a videogame, “Risko-Risto's CryptoCurrency Challenge”. Even when playing with real money, it's arguably better entertainment value and a lot cheaper than dropping £40 on a night out at the cinema.

But the main problem that altcoins present to corporate uptake is the volatility of the market ...

Which leads me to the reason why I'm pressed for time --- I've been busy bringing DOACC up to date with recent launches. It's a bit of a rambling collection of metadata and very patchy in places but I've made an effort to assign at least an “incept” %y-%m date for every single altcoin listed. A few will inevitably be off by a month or three but the vast majority of incept dates are reasonably accurate. Which means I can publish graphs of numbers of altcoin launches by %y-%m ...



Looks like an awful lot of heat has gone out of the market, reflected by a rash of coin creation special offers. During the height of the mid-2014 Cryptocoin Rush, some folks were predicting an after-effect of an increased demand for coins able to demonstrate real longevity. Maybe we should be on the lookout for that or maybe the phenomenon has simply run its course.

A dynamic version of the chart is available on Minkiz (http://minkiz.co/coin/infographics/)

Cheers

Graham

I think all these coins mentioned by you are the same. I think these isn't 'nextgen' coins. neither of them can show any promovation, or unique idea. imo

Well...I suppose I wasn't explicit enough. Comes from me hanging out in several echo chambers, I guess.

If I'm right about mainstreamization: To Joe Average - Joe Sheeple, if you prefer - cryptocurrencies will be nothing more than a neat-o hipster-cool gadget he'd like to brag about to his friends once he's on board. That's all he'll see; that's all he'll care to see.

Obligingly, the executives of those FCMG corporates will instruct their house staff to make (say) "McDonaldsCoin" to be: a) centralized; b) tightly tied to one single exchange - run by none other than McDonald's - that's accessible in-wallet. Essentially this kind of 'cryptocurrency' would be nothing more than a digitized McDonald's gift certificate. But it would be promoted, in McDonald's inimitable way, as hipster, stylish, cool, etc. with a "real cryptocurrency taste" (so to speak.)

And Joe Mainstream will swallow it 100%. Why? because he's pegged the likes of us as nothing more than computer whizzes with a strange but somewhat endearing philosophy that he really doesn't care about. All he'll care about is that we're the early-adopter community with the cool-and-hip gizmos. Do you know any Joe-Mainstream type who gives a fig about the underlying design philosophy held by the engineers of his 72" HDTV? I don't.

Now...in order to gasp my next point, I have to ask you to consider this (real life) case in point. Imagine a stockbroker who's made his career in mining stocks, which necessarily include a lot of gold-mining and gold-mining-exploration stocks, who (when in his cups and relaxing) heaps scorn on those "gold-standard nut-cases."  (Not an exact quote, but it's close enough.) Call him cynical if you will, call him hypocritical if you prefer, but the right call in this context is "businesslike." In order to put food on the table, he has to be discreet about his true political opinions from time to time in order to serve his clients. And, when he's on the job, the clients come first.

Just transfer that businesslike attitude to the executive ranks of (say) McDonald's, JPMorgan, Barclays, and whatnot. They'll peg cryptocurrencies as a hot new gizmo. Their gutting of the true cryptocurrency infrastructure will be pegged by them as sensible and businesslike, and the likes of us will be gushingly flattered by the respective PR departments. We'll get the flattery treatment, which is the standard form of condescension in America. And, if I'm right, we'll get a lot of cachet but our underlying philosophy will just be as fringey as ever.

But we will certainly come into our own, status- and even employment-wise...    

In order to attract the kind of FMCG corporates you mention, I suspect that there'd have to be several orders of magnitude more positive consumer awareness of the real-life practical advantages of using cryptocurrency. And it will be a remarkably brave brand manager who commits the corporation to using a precious (and enormously expensive to maintain) FMCG brand identity to endorse and lend corporate legitimacy to the notion of cryptocurrency. The profit potential would have to be gigantic.

And they'd still have to surmount the profound mismatch of a centralised organisation running a decentralised cryptocurrency. Whose interests are supposed to take priority?


It's just a wild-arsed guess, intended to emphasise the difference that comes with working with eight- and nine-figure budgets that are carefully planned to evolve over time. (The original $100m figure is genuine from 1994 and recent experience informs me that nowt's changed). Everything has to scale, including projects, just to be able to retain control. My out of date experience of the corporate environment contrasts sharply with your description, that's all.

Cheers

Graham

I still care, but only to try to play some of the more established alts to help offset BTC value drop. I have zero interest in any new coin period. Every single niche that can be filled is already filled by multiple coins. But there are a few that have established themselves (and have remained somewhat dormant recently) that I think will be great long term plays if the BTC market can turn around.

Yes, you're right about Ripple. As for the USP, essentially the same as the USP for going online in the first place - which I already explained. I fail to see where you get the $1 billion figure from. An entire cryptocurrency and basic ecosystem can be bought for significantly less than setting up a new branch - which is exactly how any bank executive would see the start-up of a new crypto. A new decentralized "branch," in a new "hip" part of cyberspace, whose one aim is to get more customers and to make the current customers more likely to stick around: nothing more.

Why would $1 billion in new revenue be required for setting up a new branch - or a more-or-less equivalent expenditure, when the "we have to be legal" wing-clips are added to the base code along with tight integration into the bank's standard electronic accounts ledgers?

fwiw, I didn't get the sense of an exchange of swats but otoh, the discussion is meandering a bit.

I mean, if you really want to get serious, I guess you could start by explaining why you consider a multinational bank would be interested in trying to run and control a decentralised cryptocurrency when their entire business rationale is based on centralisation.

Even if the context could be adjusted to fit, the key question they'd be asking is whether it would provide a consistent revenue stream in excess of $1bn because otherwise it would simply be unprofitable for them (*).

In short, what USP does a cryptocurrency offer a multinational bank and how would they cost it?

Edit: Ramamurthi explained to CoinDesk that a key challenge for banks that send cross-border transactions is making sure those who are sending money aren’t on any terrorist or money laundering watch lists. Given the velocity of money flows, this can create operational issues – and higher costs. By using real-time settlement ledgers like the one Ripple offers, Ramamurthi said banks can reduce the friction created when meeting government oversight standards. - http://www.coindesk.com/us-banks-embraced-ripple/

Cheers

Graham


(*) I've allowed for 20 years of inflation ...
GrahamInR&D: Hey, I've got a govt agency interested in buying the environmental modelling package we've written. They want to know when it'll be on the price list!!
BlokeInCorporate: Not interested. You need to show that it'll add better than $100 million to the bottom line to be taken seriously.

I'm the one who mentioned "JPMorgancoin" or suchlike - and got swatted by our resident sooper-genyus, after which I swatted back - but now that someone serious has taken up the topic, I'd like to present two alternate scenarios. First the bad one:

Worst Case: "JPMorgancoin", "Verizoncoin", "McDonald'sCoin" et. al. blow us all away because they're much slicker than the best that all of us can come up with. This is the "Amateur Hour Is Over" scenario, in which ordinary folks decide that the entire crypto-space as it is now, is just too polluted to be bothered with. They trade up to "legitimate" cryptocoins right from the start and we're left behind for the history books that'll be written when we're much older and scattered to the hills.

Best Case: "JPMorgancoin" et. all. legitimizes the entire cryptocurrency scene, including us. We all have new prestige as bona-fide early adopters, and our newfound prestige carries over to our favourite coins. Clever evangelists take the opportunity to debunk the FUD surrounding Bitcoin, et. al., by using this two-pronged technique: the FUD either wasn't true at all, or else it was true but is true no more now that the entire industry is legitimized by the biggies coming in. If they're astute, they will miss no opportunity to show how the "legitimate" alcoins are to the "illegitimate" ones. (Almost certainly, I'll be one of the "they.") Many of our faves won't survive the rush to legitimacy, but it's a sure bet that we as people all will make out like bandits. For example, just think of how hot your resume will become once "JPMorgancoin", "Verizoncoin", "McDonald'sCoin" et. al. become big hiring centres... 

As you might have guessed, my own inclinations lean towards the best-case scenario. But I think my instincts are sound in re my tilt, because early adopters in general do have a prestige - including a real resume prestige for a tech subsector that suddenly becomes hot. When Ruby on Rails became a go-to-platform, early adopters could pretty much write their own ticket when the recruiters came calling...

That said, I fell obliged to present a third scenario. I think it's less likely than either of the two, or a mix of them, but I might as well finish with it:

Curve-Ball Case: Cryptocurrency never takes off and just fades into the sunset. This one seems very unlikely because of the venture capital moving into the Bitcoin space, but it's still possible. VCs have been wrong before.

Why so serious?

lol joking aside, there's no way to keep a thread like this clean from shilling and trolling. It just isn't possible.

I think over the next year the market will mature to a handful of coins that have a strong user community/niche (like Doge, AppleByte, Gulden, some others).

Do not miss the significance of Paypal taking BTC, LTC,  & Doge. People will use the coin they like, simply because they like the community.

And I hope the investors will mature enough to realize that without a real user community (not a crypto geek one) chasing this weeks "breakthrough technology" is a pointless game.

the alt scene is dead, who care anymore

Anyone aware here of MYRiadcoin Simplicity package?

Good post. I agree that security and ease of use are needed for mass adoption.

Pandacoin have a plan in motion that address those issues.