Topic: What is the point of Litecoin if Bitcoin is THE cryptocurrency? - page 3. (Read 8147 times)

LMFAO......so true.

I am the butthurt GPU miner!! 

It's still an open question is BitCoin will turn out to be THE cryptocurrency, only time will tell on that one.

However LiteCoins are just a copy of BitCoin. If BitCoin gets replaced by something it's not going to be with a copy of itself.

I think that would hold true if a Litecoin was identical to a Bitcoin. But Litecoin has properties that give it an advantage over Bitcoin (fairer mining, faster confirmations). So 1 LTC = 0.25BTC may not be the eventual outcome. Of course, I don't hold a crystal ball and can only speculate like anyone else... time will tell

Not really. That's THE biggest issue that has prevented me from investing more into LTC. Many others have same feeling.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" can only help you go that far ...

Not rhetorical: it needs to be fixed, or your blockchain can easily be forked.

Beware of Altchains that are abandoned or neglected by their developers (activity at https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commits/master doesn't look healthy to me... and now y'all are going to accuse me of spreading FUD, so I'll go away and shut up).

What is the point of Japanese Yen if USD is THE world currency?


It's a big world. The more money the merrier.

I agree. I suggest everyone to try it. Believe me, LTC is here to stay.

No need to argue, these coins need the supporters & a better software base, if one coins' software is improved further (that means it becomes more secure, support faster & more transactions), it will have more value.

I think this is a really important point that a lot of people miss when arguing about the future value of litecoins. Now mind you, I mine litecoins and I'm invested in LTC, but I don't really expect them to overtake bitcoins. I really think that litecoins will be silver to BTC's gold. But, maybe I'll be wrong 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_circulating_currencies

Why people are currently using 182 different currencies around the world?

The point of Litecoin is if Bitcoin is'nt THE cryptocurrency

Why in the world would anyone not buy a handful of litecoins at .50 cents after all this isn't an issue of every Bitcoin holder waking up in the morning and thinking I'm selling all my btc for Litecoin, did litecoins recent 10 fold rise impact bitcoin?I think not, is Bitcoin really so fragile that it would fall on its back and kick its legs in the air if litcoin went up another 10 fold?

List of things people do that I have no problem with:

1.  Do not exercise and eat junk food
2.  Smoke cigarette, drink alcohol, use marijuana
3.  Take financial advice from Internet forums and buy penny stocks
4.  Use Bitcoin
5.  Use Litecoin

It's called personal freedom.   

Not trolling, not arguing semantics, and not sold. Guess I'll stick to BTC until you guys can come up with some better reasons.

The numbers are indeed off, it's 1,000% vs 200,000%

I don't disagree with this sentiment, but you need to keep in mind that litecoin has 4x cap of bitcoin so the 50 cents is really $2 if you want to compare it to bitcoin and judge which one is a better value in the long run.

+1

A lot of what you're saying in your responses is focusing on word play/ semantics. For example, when I say Litecoins are considerably more ASIC resistant, you are trying to interpreting that literally as me saying it's not possible to build a chip to solve the hash. I don't know if you're trolling or not, but obviously you can build a chip to run any conventional algorithm. The point is how much of an advantage that chip gives you over miners who can only afford gpus or miners who just want to use their desktop computer to get some extra coins. Bitcoin ASIC's give the holders an enormous advantage over non-holders, with Litecoin unless a computer science breakthrough occurs there will be no similar devices which afford the users ridiculous computational advantages.

You're saying faster confirmations aren't an advantage because of the trade off of 'security'. I'm not noticing any security issues with Litecoin and I don't see anyone else complaining and hundreds of thousands are traded everyday. All I am noticing is my transactions don't take an hour to confirm 

LOL at saying no Litecoins aren't an evolution they are a MUTATION. Ok buddy, I will let you keep on arguing that lol. Fact of the matter is Litecoins use a different algorithm which has benefits and have faster confirmations which also gives benefits. Really not seeing how they are identical. Do you realise if two things have differences they can't be the same? Do you think gold and silver are identical because they are both made from metal?

About early adoption, according to you if I invest in Apple stock today I am still an early adopter. It's pointless debating it, because it's a matter of opinion what is early. All we can say for sure is, getting in at 50 cents is a hell of a lot earlier than getting in for 88 dollars. Let's asume the high point of bitcoins and litecoins will be one thousand dollars. What sounds better, a 1,000% return on investment or a 20,000% return on investment? (mental maths there so approximate figures)

My last point, I said: Litecoins are provably scarce and people are giving them value and creating services around them... at the end of the day that's all that matters.

This doesn't really answer my question. What does that have to do with making it "resistant" to building an application specific chip for it? More importantly, why would an end-user care? If the only reason to use LTC is to help disenfranchised miners, sorry, I'm not buying.

The point of confirmations is security. It doesn't matter that it's faster to get a confirmation if the confirmation means proportionately less security than a BTC confirmation. So this is not an advantage.

You're not addressing my point. Copying Bitcoin and changing the number of confirmations doesn't make it competition. So far it's just a mutation, not an evolution.

This is the same argument people were using at 1$, 5$, 10$, 20$, and even 47$. It's still short sighted, and not an argument for a different coin. People who buy into BTC now can be rewarded for the exact same reason that people who bought in before were. We are nowhere close to Bitcoin market saturation. We are all still early adopters.

Looks that way to me.

They are trying to tune up experimental technology which has some flaws (some of them are know, some are yet unknown). That's why litecoin and other altcoins pop up.

 


No. The Scrypt algorithm was designed so that it is difficult to efficiently parallel compute it. In fact it will take a computer science breakthrough to accomplish this. See the wikipedia page on scrypt - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrypt. Sure GPU's and FGPAs will give an advantage, but it will never be dramatic due to memory constraints of the algorithm. This has been well discussed on this forum.


Not misleading, it is faster. I see no-one complaining about security problems and hundreds of thousands of litecoins get traded everyday.


It's not a 'copy' it's an evolution. Competition being good for markets is simple econ 101. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_(economics)


Come on man... Bitcoins are going for almost $90 a coin. It's all relative, subjective, opinion etc but I think most people would prefer to be an early adopter who got in at under a dollar compared to an 'early adopter' who got in at almost 100 dollars.


Except I don't argue anywhere in my post that scarcity alone is an argument for value. Re-read what I typed out. Or I can bolden certain words you have missed.