Topic: What 2.0 Currency will be the most successful? - page 14. (Read 17794 times)

bitcoin will always survive as a name
any kind of crypto payment and crypto business will be called bitcoin

same is we talk now about bitcoin 2.0 abilities

but bitcoin dont haven them........


bitcoins fate is a dinosaur not able to adapt stick on old codebase because different powers cant agree on code changes
and deepend on extenal companies to have something like bitcoin 2.0

but example counterparty or any coloured coin solotion could easy switch to another more advanced blockchain without any impact for its userbase

the only area where i can see hope for bitcoin is to be the crypto gold

basical somthing noone move around or utilize but use as a storage of value

in that area bitcoin is now still great because it have the highest liquidity and marketcap

in every other area bitcoin already lost the crown and its ignorrance to not see the facts

Crypti of course

BitShares 2.0

This ignorance is the reason why bitcoin is failing to adapt.

Bitcoin is a great POC which currently has the best adoption, but it has flaws ( mostly mining ). Now bitcoin is like a big ship heading in the wrong direction. While the altcoins may have missed your big ship, some of them are now smaller boats that are still looking for the right direction. Let's talk again in 10 years and see if there is still no altcoin that has surpassed BTC.

I doubt it , but don't understand me wrong, I love BTC. It just wasn't designed to be a blockchain platform.

Of course it's required.  That's like claiming pool mining in Bitcoin isn't required.  It's only not required when the coin price is low per unit and it's being used for virtually nothing, with no widespread distribution or demand (i.e. now).  Hey guys!  I'm not centralized because it's possible to solo mine Bitcoin if I spend $10 million dollars!  

With widespread adoption, you would need tons of cash to solo stake.  Due to the way transparent forging would work, you would most likely not be able to allow hundreds of thousands of people to stake either.  You would probably need to set a minimum stake amount required to be allowed in at all, while culling off all the others.  In this manner you've recreated DPoS except with no sybil protection.  With transparent forging, the need to pool your stake (delegated voting) increases even more as well.

Virtually everything that you complain about for Bitshares claiming it's centralized also applies to NXT and Bitcoin.  They are far more similar than not.  The main difference is, DPoS starts off with the acknowledgement that PoW and PoS both use delegation and engineers the voting process to do so in the protocol itself.  The other two are using a more Rube Goldberg approach to reach the same destination of delegation.

Here's your own hero, "come-from-beyond", telling you NXT isn't going to fit your definition of "decentralized" so you better sell off your NXT now:



See also:

The Bitcoin consensus mechanism is incorrectly labeled Proof of Work

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-bitcoin-consensus-mechanism-is-incorrectly-labeled-proof-of-work-1176835

Satoshi didn't solve the Byzantine generals problem

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/satoshi-didnt-solve-the-byzantine-generals-problem-1183043



DPoS actually scales to world reserve currency better than any other consensus mechanism.  The first transition for DPoS voting would be people like exchange owners and businesses that utilize the platform would run as delegates to make sure the network they depend on is secure.  From there, the actors would just keep scaling larger until you had every nation state as a delegate.  Some people would think this sounds like a bad thing, but unless every nation was colluding with each other, it would get rid of fractional reserve banking at the very least, which is the real root of all problems.

From what im aware, basically its their next generation platform, i believe new devs have taken over and are rewriting the code with a new blockchain to replace the old. They will require everyone to switch over.

You seem to be a serious and intelligent person. I wonder why you never looked deeper into NEM. You should...

of cause Crypti.

You should be familiar with Bitcoin block size fighting, so in DPOS you can control something but for this you should vote, in Bitcoin you can't control anything, big pool owners will think about anything for you and you can only post your personal opinion in the forums and try to protect your investments in Bitcoin.

This.

I don't see any altcoin come as far as bitcoin. They already missed the boat before they even were made.

AFAIK Peercoin has centralized checkpoints during growing period and they will be removed at version 0.5, more info in SunnyKing updates:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12442500

I dislike DPOS because of the necessity for people to vote on delegates. Now this may work perfectly fine in such an enclosed envirement that we're in right now where the userbase is very small but I doubt it'll work very well if any DPOS ever hit's mainstream. No normal user wants to be bothered with stuff like that. They want stuff to just work so the majority of users prob wont vote which kinda defeats the point of the excercise. As always - maybe I'm missing something

AFAIK Peercoin uses centralized checkpoints and opens up the possibility of stake grinding. But I'm not 100% certain. In the end DPoS is probably one of the best PoS integrations, as it scales wonderful and allows the blocktime to be very fast/constant.

Inferior in which area? As I know Peercoin has less theoretical PoS security problems because it's using PoS and PoW simultaneously.

i want next to but have a feeling that bitshares 2.0 will probably be the 2.0 most successful currency. of course assuming that there isnt another 2.0 coin come out in the near future which it no doubt will.

the most successful?
depends on definition of successful

if ya ask which one will increase its value at most because of real world service adaption

the answer is clear NEM / XEM

crazy how undervalued and still a insider hint this coin is

Stake leasing (centralization) isn't required in NXT's PoS.  Delegation (centralization) is required in Bitshares DPoS.  The centralization imposed upon Bitshares' users is deemed "necessary" and "an end game scenario" because of the flawed notion that you espouse that the cost of running a node is unaffordable to the masses.  The reality of the situation is that the costs of running a PoS node is negligible and even more so if you are running a business that utilizes the platform.  Being able to process 100ktps or even 1ktps on any crypto platform is total overkill at this stage in time.  Bitshares is spinning this "DPoS centralization is necessary to increase tx speed" as an excuse to centralize forging away from the home user and into their grasp.  At the time 1ktps or 100ktps is necessary, which will be years and years in the future, consumer grade, retail hardware will most likely be able to handle the load anyway, which will render their "DPoS centralization is necessary" mantra as null and void.


Obviously, PoS started with Peercoin.  There was a reason I ended the sentence with "as it's accepted today".  You should and I know that Peercoin's PoS is inferior to NXT's PoS implementation.

Crypti, clearly.

Crypti! Open beta of its decentralized application platform starts today!

With all my respect to you as Nxt supporter, PoS was developed by SunnyKing in Peercoin, please don't try to mix everything into one big Nxt heap.
Nxt, BitShares and many others has different PoS implementation but all of them based at "Proof of Stake" idea.