|
Title: Scrypt Clones VS SHA-256 Clones Post by: mistercoin on September 04, 2013, 05:55:09 PM In my opinion--I believe that SHA-256 Clones are much more fun and productive. Think about it, you have alllll these scrypt clones with the same lame-ass description "Revolutionary p2p currency that is a new age discovery" "The most secure coin because it has PoS and cannot be 51%". Ugh... Also, look at the hash rates VS the scrypt hash rates. Don't you like to see that big "M" instead of "K"? at much higher numbers?.
I have no problem with any coin that has been released. Some release them for profit, others for fun, and others for experimentation, and also, of course for a true revolution in p2p currencies. With all the Clones out there now. What would you rather see from now on. Scrypt, Scrypt-jane, SHA-256. I like the SHA-256. Lets get more currencies here that are revolutionary, or even adopting some from the scrypt we've seen here, (PoS, Super-blocks, Transaction comments, Tor proxies, etc) And I know there are a few already like this but lets give the SHA a little love. Poor ol' Bitcoin is being manhandles by these machines xD and we need to show some love to other low diff SHA coins. **IMO** What do you think? Title: Re: Scrypt Clones VS SHA-256 Clones Post by: miffman on September 04, 2013, 05:57:12 PM SHA-256 is nice to mine if you have ASIC's and stuff available. Scrypt is nice because it doesn't have that extreme rapid growth of hash rates
Title: Re: Scrypt Clones VS SHA-256 Clones Post by: mistercoin on September 04, 2013, 06:00:40 PM SHA-256 is nice to mine if you have ASIC's and stuff available. Scrypt is nice because it doesn't have that extreme rapid growth of hash rates True, but if the difficulty paramteres are set to a nice setting, (Zetacoin for example) then it's not so bad. :) Title: Re: Scrypt Clones VS SHA-256 Clones Post by: miffman on September 04, 2013, 06:03:05 PM SHA-256 is nice to mine if you have ASIC's and stuff available. Scrypt is nice because it doesn't have that extreme rapid growth of hash rates True, but if the difficulty paramteres are set to a nice setting, (Zetacoin for example) then it's not so bad. :) I suppose. Title: Re: Scrypt Clones VS SHA-256 Clones Post by: dupee419 on September 04, 2013, 07:43:54 PM SHA-256 is nice to mine if you have ASIC's and stuff available. Scrypt is nice because it doesn't have that extreme rapid growth of hash rates +1 Title: Re: Scrypt Clones VS SHA-256 Clones Post by: tiker on September 04, 2013, 07:55:27 PM The only coins I mine are SHA-256 with merge mining capabilities.
If you look at the number of alt coins (both sha256 and scrypt) that have come and gone in the past couple of years you'll find that most the sha-256 coins that are capable of being mined as a child coin still have a good number of hashes against them because of merge mining. Every time a new scrypt coin comes out people stop mining one coin to start the next. The older coins eventually die off and anyone who invested any sort of resources into that coin ends up losing in some way. Now, if scrypt coins were to start appearing with merge mining support that might change my view on things. Title: Re: Scrypt Clones VS SHA-256 Clones Post by: spoid on September 04, 2013, 08:18:24 PM I think the only argument in that post was that you like M's more than k's
Title: Re: Scrypt Clones VS SHA-256 Clones Post by: CryptoBullion on September 04, 2013, 08:27:56 PM I think the only argument in that post was that you like M's more than k's +1 Title: Re: Scrypt Clones VS SHA-256 Clones Post by: CoinBuzz on September 04, 2013, 08:40:59 PM from crypto currencies view:
We need more than one coin for the world. because one coin centralize crypto world. |