Topic: Will another currency overtake bitcoins? (Read 3372 times)
It has a lot to do with adoption of the community, and at the moment bitcoin fulfills everything it needs to. For another currency to take it's place something drastic would have to change. Banks pushing government regulation or some such thing. Even then it is unlikely if bitcoin were to fail that something even remotely usable would be able to flourish in that ecosystem. Everything points to btc atm.
I'm waiting for a big company to make their own proprietary protocol branded cryptocoin so it can be pumped and then DUMPED.
The drama would be immense if a coin with more centralization overtook Bitcoins popularity in a short amount of time.
Paypalcoin
It would be a massive ponzi in disguise, ideally lasting several years and screwing over hundreds of thousands of people in the crash.
God I miss pirate.
The drama would be immense if a coin with more centralization overtook Bitcoins popularity in a short amount of time.
Paypalcoin
It would be a massive ponzi in disguise, ideally lasting several years and screwing over hundreds of thousands of people in the crash.
God I miss pirate.
Ripple much?
I think that new cryptocoins with some great additional functions will be competitive, not with little changes.
Examples.
Bad:
Litecoin = like Bitcoin, but with 1 minute of transaction confirmation;
Novacoin (PPCoin, ShitCoin, BullshitCoin etc.) = like Bitcoin, but ... (I really don't know how they differ from bitcoin).
Good (just idea):
Freedomizer Coin = like Bitcoin PLUS some functions giving more economic and lifestyle freedom to us.
BTW, I think new cryptocurrencies with great ideas will be the competitors to Bitcoin, but they will not replace it.
Examples.
Bad:
Litecoin = like Bitcoin, but with 1 minute of transaction confirmation;
Novacoin (PPCoin, ShitCoin, BullshitCoin etc.) = like Bitcoin, but ... (I really don't know how they differ from bitcoin).
Good (just idea):
Freedomizer Coin = like Bitcoin PLUS some functions giving more economic and lifestyle freedom to us.
BTW, I think new cryptocurrencies with great ideas will be the competitors to Bitcoin, but they will not replace it.
I'm waiting for a big company to make their own proprietary protocol branded cryptocoin so it can be pumped and then DUMPED.
The drama would be immense if a coin with more centralization overtook Bitcoins popularity in a short amount of time.
Paypalcoin
It would be a massive ponzi in disguise, ideally lasting several years and screwing over hundreds of thousands of people in the crash.
God I miss pirate.
The drama would be immense if a coin with more centralization overtook Bitcoins popularity in a short amount of time.
Paypalcoin
It would be a massive ponzi in disguise, ideally lasting several years and screwing over hundreds of thousands of people in the crash.
God I miss pirate.
Right now there are no coins that offer significant improvements over bitcoin. The cost of switching is too great - bitcoin has proven legitimacy, wide support across merchant platforms (well compared to other coins anyway...), and a much higher market cap allowing for a real economy to take place.
The only way for an alt-coin to replace it will either be a massive technological and/or practical advantage, or backing by a government/bank/other influential entity.
The only way for an alt-coin to replace it will either be a massive technological and/or practical advantage, or backing by a government/bank/other influential entity.
I'm pretty sure PPCoin offers pretty significant improvement over Bitcoin. There's no need for energy wasting PoW mining for starters, plus PPC is nearly impossible to 51% attack unless you hold 51% or more of all PPC in existence, which is not probable due to you will drive up the price so much you won't be able to afford it.
Or if you can get the holders of 51% of the currency to collude. This type of attack is not possible with Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is the one for now, it has a huge adoption problem to overcome; the same problem exists with all other alt coins. So no viable competitor exists yet.
A coin that mines along a normal distribution curve will better match the adoption curve and thus overtake Bitcoin in time. But as that alt coin does not exist Bitcoin will be the one, and given the properties of a normal distribution curve, when it does exist it won't be a treat to Bitcoin for years to come.
A coin that mines along a normal distribution curve will better match the adoption curve and thus overtake Bitcoin in time. But as that alt coin does not exist Bitcoin will be the one, and given the properties of a normal distribution curve, when it does exist it won't be a treat to Bitcoin for years to come.
Bitcoin is a beta, not the paragon of eternal perfection. It may well be good enough for now, for most present users. But it does have potential problems which only a true second-generation cryptocurrency can address in the long term, and honest cryptocurrencies cannot evolve; they can only be forked. Most of the alt-coin systems out there currently are not true second-generation, more like BTC 1.01. But some of them may provide useful testing platforms for future concepts. Several years down the road, I think there will definitely be serious competition; and part of the outcome will hinge on user-friendliness: moving beyond the enthusiast and nerd communities to something Joe Average will be comfortable with. The problem of how a major fork-and-migrate event will play out is uncharted territory.
With the infrastructure slowly being built around it, I doubt BTC will be replaced. Especially if said businesses supporting it's usage grow exponentially after BTC garners more popularity. The only way I could see another crypto overtaking it would be through pure speculative value. However, I could see a similar idea like bitcoin being utilized and controlled by an already existing corporate entity that could successfully transition it to the mainstream. Also, have to factor in whether large corporations adopt bitcoin or whether they would go with this other idea. Right now bitcoin feels like an experiment, and many things can change from beta to alpha. Or whatever arbitrary stage you believe it's at so nobody can answer that question due to all the chaotic variables at play here.
I disagree. I see Ripple as one of bitcoin's biggest threats. Not because it is better, but because it is worse, but in a convenient way.
All the points you mentioned (except for the last one) are irrelevant for consumers (and small businesses) who just want some convenient and cheap way to use "digital money".
The marketing of the Ripple team so far is impressive, and they try to position themselves in such a way that they seem to pose no threat to bitcoin.
In fact, they're actively trying to warm up the bitcoin community for their project -- they sort of want us to think of Ripple as "another layer on top of bitcoin". Maybe that's how it really is. No objection from me then. But I suspect the Ripple people wouldn't exactly object either in case Ripple manages to take the place of bitcoin as an actual currency and store of value.
tl;dr There's something decidedly disinenginous about the way Ripple markets itself, and I'm not completely sure the people behind it won't try, and perhaps even manage, to become a "bitcoin replacement". Don't underestimate them.
All the points you mentioned (except for the last one) are irrelevant for consumers (and small businesses) who just want some convenient and cheap way to use "digital money".
The marketing of the Ripple team so far is impressive, and they try to position themselves in such a way that they seem to pose no threat to bitcoin.
In fact, they're actively trying to warm up the bitcoin community for their project -- they sort of want us to think of Ripple as "another layer on top of bitcoin". Maybe that's how it really is. No objection from me then. But I suspect the Ripple people wouldn't exactly object either in case Ripple manages to take the place of bitcoin as an actual currency and store of value.
tl;dr There's something decidedly disinenginous about the way Ripple markets itself, and I'm not completely sure the people behind it won't try, and perhaps even manage, to become a "bitcoin replacement". Don't underestimate them.
Indeed, I think what avid bitcoiners dislike about Ripple, laymen/prospective bitcoiners don't care all that much about. (eg centralization)
IMO transaction speed and interface are two huge things that Ripple has going for it. I think many people may come to see Ripple as having the novelty of bitcoin (eg being crypto), while maintaining appeal that is more akin to say, Paypal.
Altcoins thus far haven't set themselves apart in any way. But I am not sleeping on Ripple.
No. Bitcoin is the one, IMO. I have zero interest in the alt coins. None of them even remotely approach bitcoin.
Bitcoin removes the need for trust when receiving money.
Ripple puts it back again.
Ripple is pointless. There is already a mechanism for sending 'credits' across the world - it's in the form of electronic, fixed amount, open source, fully divisible money - Bitcoin. BTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
Ripple puts it back again.
Ripple is pointless. There is already a mechanism for sending 'credits' across the world - it's in the form of electronic, fixed amount, open source, fully divisible money - Bitcoin. BTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
But Ripple is instant. Bitcoin needs at least 10 Minutes to be trustless. And a full hour to be even more trustless.
I think Ripple (as well as open transactions and centralized services) is a good complement to bitcoin, but will
never replace it.
Instant that can be reversed, So the point?
Bitcoin removes the need for trust when receiving money.
Ripple puts it back again.
Ripple is pointless. There is already a mechanism for sending 'credits' across the world - it's in the form of electronic, fixed amount, open source, fully divisible money - Bitcoin. BTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
Ripple puts it back again.
Ripple is pointless. There is already a mechanism for sending 'credits' across the world - it's in the form of electronic, fixed amount, open source, fully divisible money - Bitcoin. BTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
But Ripple is instant. Bitcoin needs at least 10 Minutes to be trustless. And a full hour to be even more trustless.
I think Ripple (as well as open transactions and centralized services) is a good complement to bitcoin, but will
never replace it.
The Gyft application will gladly accept zero confirmation transactions. Using only my phone, I can go from bitcoins to Whopper in my mouth less than 10 minutes (assuming an internet connection and fast service). Clearly, the 10 minute confirmation is not a total barrier, since the market is willing to accept the risk for smaller transactions.
(I assume Gyft will wait for confirmations on higher value purchases, or actively pursue anyone who executes a zero-confirmation attack)
Bitcoin removes the need for trust when receiving money.
Ripple puts it back again.
Ripple is pointless. There is already a mechanism for sending 'credits' across the world - it's in the form of electronic, fixed amount, open source, fully divisible money - Bitcoin. BTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
Ripple puts it back again.
Ripple is pointless. There is already a mechanism for sending 'credits' across the world - it's in the form of electronic, fixed amount, open source, fully divisible money - Bitcoin. BTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
But Ripple is instant. Bitcoin needs at least 10 Minutes to be trustless. And a full hour to be even more trustless.
I think Ripple (as well as open transactions and centralized services) is a good complement to bitcoin, but will
never replace it.
Bitcoin removes the need for trust when receiving money.
Ripple puts it back again.
Ripple is pointless. There is already a mechanism for sending 'credits' across the world - it's in the form of electronic, fixed amount, open source, fully divisible money - Bitcoin. BTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
Ripple puts it back again.
Ripple is pointless. There is already a mechanism for sending 'credits' across the world - it's in the form of electronic, fixed amount, open source, fully divisible money - Bitcoin. BTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
I don't think the other currencies available today will replace Bitcoin for the simple reason they don't actually solve problems. (PPC is the only exception, It honestly tried, Its failure needs a whole new thread to discuss).
For example all coins coming up with a "less confirmation time" do not actually solve the confirmation time issue. Because in Bitcoin 6 confirmations are chosen for the fact that an hour is a good estimate of a block being broadcasted to all nodes. Then Litecoin comes and suggest 6 confirmations as well? What do Litecoin use a different faster internet we didn't hear about or something?
Then again others come with larger supply limit -_-!, Guys the supply is fine! it is not about the quantity it is about being finite and well predictable.
I don't want to talk about the coins who gives the developers a percentage per block and rob the balances each blocks because they are just too ridiculous IMO.
As well as some crypto wannabes who are still reluctant to release the friggin source code and wants their system to be adopted by the masses. :S geniuses.
Of course I mine them and trade them! I just don't plan on using them or keeping them long term. They are just a source of good popcorn, coke and speculation for me.
For example all coins coming up with a "less confirmation time" do not actually solve the confirmation time issue. Because in Bitcoin 6 confirmations are chosen for the fact that an hour is a good estimate of a block being broadcasted to all nodes. Then Litecoin comes and suggest 6 confirmations as well? What do Litecoin use a different faster internet we didn't hear about or something?
Then again others come with larger supply limit -_-!, Guys the supply is fine! it is not about the quantity it is about being finite and well predictable.
I don't want to talk about the coins who gives the developers a percentage per block and rob the balances each blocks because they are just too ridiculous IMO.
As well as some crypto wannabes who are still reluctant to release the friggin source code and wants their system to be adopted by the masses. :S geniuses.Of course I mine them and trade them! I just don't plan on using them or keeping them long term. They are just a source of good popcorn, coke and speculation for me.
Right now there are no coins that offer significant improvements over bitcoin. The cost of switching is too great - bitcoin has proven legitimacy, wide support across merchant platforms (well compared to other coins anyway...), and a much higher market cap allowing for a real economy to take place.
The only way for an alt-coin to replace it will either be a massive technological and/or practical advantage, or backing by a government/bank/other influential entity.
The only way for an alt-coin to replace it will either be a massive technological and/or practical advantage, or backing by a government/bank/other influential entity.
I'm pretty sure PPCoin offers pretty significant improvement over Bitcoin. There's no need for energy wasting PoW mining for starters, plus PPC is nearly impossible to 51% attack unless you hold 51% or more of all PPC in existence, which is not probable due to you will drive up the price so much you won't be able to afford it.
Right now there are no coins that offer significant improvements over bitcoin. The cost of switching is too great - bitcoin has proven legitimacy, wide support across merchant platforms (well compared to other coins anyway...), and a much higher market cap allowing for a real economy to take place.
The only way for an alt-coin to replace it will either be a massive technological and/or practical advantage, or backing by a government/bank/other influential entity.
The only way for an alt-coin to replace it will either be a massive technological and/or practical advantage, or backing by a government/bank/other influential entity.
I think it's definitely a viable situation to keep in mind.
However, if so, it's not going to be any time soon. At this rate at least (unless people in high places are secretly working on something to take over with at this very moment
)
However, if so, it's not going to be any time soon. At this rate at least (unless people in high places are secretly working on something to take over with at this very moment
) 
Any decentralized currency that achieves instant (less than a minute) transactions, while remaining without vulnerability, will take off, leaving bitcoin in the dust. Yet there's a good chance that bitcoin might become this currency, or that this currency will not be possible in an ideal way.
Open Transactions as the next layer over bitcoin blockchain will work great.
a) very fast .. under 1 ms
b) does not require transaction in blockchain (OT will use blockchain only for clearing ... 1 transaction daily/weekly/monthly/yearly? .. is enough)
EDIT: it will work even GOVERNMENT ban bitcoin, ... blockchain is your bank / (government can disable new transactions ) but he cannot change history. (already existing transactions)
That's currently the only known method of instant transactions with crypto currencies, and is how Ripple itself works, yet it remains centralized. It can be destroyed, it can become malicious, it is not 100% safe, and won't be largely adopted by bitcoin enthusiasts.
Ripple is excellent example how it will not to work
1. centralized
2. malicious
3. not
4. won't be
... :-)
I disagree. I see Ripple as one of bitcoin's biggest threats. Not because it is better, but because it is worse, but in a convenient way.
All the points you mentioned (except for the last one) are irrelevant for consumers (and small businesses) who just want some convenient and cheap way to use "digital money".
The marketing of the Ripple team so far is impressive, and they try to position themselves in such a way that they seem to pose no threat to bitcoin.
In fact, they're actively trying to warm up the bitcoin community for their project -- they sort of want us to think of Ripple as "another layer on top of bitcoin". Maybe that's how it really is. No objection from me then. But I suspect the Ripple people wouldn't exactly object either in case Ripple manages to take the place of bitcoin as an actual currency and store of value.
tl;dr There's something decidedly disinenginous about the way Ripple markets itself, and I'm not completely sure the people behind it won't try, and perhaps even manage, to become a "bitcoin replacement". Don't underestimate them.
Any decentralized currency that achieves instant (less than a minute) transactions, while remaining without vulnerability, will take off, leaving bitcoin in the dust. Yet there's a good chance that bitcoin might become this currency, or that this currency will not be possible in an ideal way.
Open Transactions as the next layer over bitcoin blockchain will work great.
a) very fast .. under 1 ms
b) does not require transaction in blockchain (OT will use blockchain only for clearing ... 1 transaction daily/weekly/monthly/yearly? .. is enough)
EDIT: it will work even GOVERNMENT ban bitcoin, ... blockchain is your bank / (government can disable new transactions ) but he cannot change history. (already existing transactions)
That's currently the only known method of instant transactions with crypto currencies, and is how Ripple itself works, yet it remains centralized. It can be destroyed, it can become malicious, it is not 100% safe, and won't be largely adopted by bitcoin enthusiasts.
Ripple is excellent example how it will not to work
1. centralized
2. malicious
3. not
4. won't be
... :-)
I see now that it is not based on a centralized model or minority trust. I'll look into it further. Will it be adopted, you think?
In bitcoin community any bitcoin holder can choose how to spend his bitcoins.
EDIT: sell for $115 ($50, ... $1500) or rule the world
I like the idea behind Open Transactions, but it seems very cumbersome and clumsy. Way more hackish than bitcoin itself is. Not that it is without use or potential. But perhaps spread too thin.
Jump to: